Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

morgoth wrote:


That's your theory.

Meanwhile, in the real world, GW said codex > BRB, and codex says under the line gets hit.

So you apply this logic here, but not to Kharn's rule vs. Invisibility?

Ohhh...kay....

I applied it to Kharn exactly the same way: Codex says kharn hits on 2+, kharn hits on 2+.

Both are unintended RAW abuse, and both deserve a community FAQ, that's why this thread exists.

Anyway, I can see this thread only attracts people not interested in the topic, I'll just stop following it.

This would probobly be better in 40K General Discussion.

morgoth wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

morgoth wrote:


That's your theory.

Meanwhile, in the real world, GW said codex > BRB, and codex says under the line gets hit.

So you apply this logic here, but not to Kharn's rule vs. Invisibility?

Ohhh...kay....

I applied it to Kharn exactly the same way: Codex says kharn hits on 2+, kharn hits on 2+.

Both are unintended RAW abuse, and both deserve a community FAQ, that's why this thread exists.

Anyway, I can see this thread only attracts people not interested in the topic, I'll just stop following it.

Whose mind are you reading to conclude that RUI is anything other than RAW in this case?

I'm really confused as to the point of this thread.

First of all:

1) Ignoring BRB isn't always bad and doesn't need fixing. In fact, imo the best way to write special rules in a game is "<Unit> ignores <rule>" because it's cheerfully easy to remember (as opposed to <unit> does <special action> resolved by <instructions> ).

2) A lot of the things you list aren't actually problems, and do not require fixing. (OMG KHARN CAN HIT INVISBILE UNITS!? isn't a bad thing, and the rules are quite clear.)

I applied it to Kharn exactly the same way: Codex says kharn hits on 2+, kharn hits on 2+.

Both are unintended RAW abuse, and both deserve a community FAQ, that's why this thread exists.

Citation needed that this was not intended by GW to work this way.

Kharn the Betrayer is, perhaps, the killingest bastard of killingest bastards in the setting. It may very well be intended that he kills mofos he can't even see, because Kharn the Betrayer kills mofos. It's simply what he does.

Anyway, I can see this thread only attracts people not interested in the topic, I'll just stop following it.

It's not that people aren't interested in the topic, it's just that they don't agree with your viewpoints on it... and for reasons which are fairly well-supported.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Whose mind are you reading to conclude that RUI is anything other than RAW in this case?

I'm really confused as to the point of this thread.

You don't need to read minds to do that.

GW intended for planes to be hard to hit, 6 for a normal to hit roll, no hit if no to hit rolls, so they wrote a rule for that, which applies to every 6+ edition codex (surprise).

Unfortunately, an older outdated codex says you can hit no matter what, which is very obviously an inconsistency and in strong contradiction with the more recent v6/7 ruleset.

The obvious conclusion is that the wording of that outdated codex had unforeseen consequences on future rules, and said wording should be normalized to not have said consequences anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:

I applied it to Kharn exactly the same way: Codex says kharn hits on 2+, kharn hits on 2+.

Both are unintended RAW abuse, and both deserve a community FAQ, that's why this thread exists.

Citation needed that this was not intended by GW to work this way.

Kharn the Betrayer is, perhaps, the killingest bastard of killingest bastards in the setting. It may very well be intended that he kills mofos he can't even see, because Kharn the Betrayer kills mofos. It's simply what he does.

There is no citation needed whatsoever.

GW wrote Kharn, when there was no invisibility, so that Kharn would always hit on the best roll (3+), but one better (2+) because he just hits.
GW wrote Invisibility, did not think about the Kharn special case because they just don't have the time to check every special case.
And you now believe that GW intended for Kharn, written even before invisibility was invented, to break the invisibility rules, that nothing in any v7-aware codex can break.


If you really believe that, I don't really care about your opinion.

morgoth wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Whose mind are you reading to conclude that RUI is anything other than RAW in this case?

I'm really confused as to the point of this thread.

You don't need to read minds to do that.

GW intended for planes to be hard to hit, 6 for a normal to hit roll, no hit if no to hit rolls, so they wrote a rule for that, which applies to every 6+ edition codex (surprise).

Unfortunately, an older outdated codex says you can hit no matter what, which is very obviously an inconsistency and in strong contradiction with the more recent v6/7 ruleset.

The obvious conclusion is that the wording of that outdated codex had unforeseen consequences on future rules, and said wording should be normalized to not have said consequences anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:

I applied it to Kharn exactly the same way: Codex says kharn hits on 2+, kharn hits on 2+.

Both are unintended RAW abuse, and both deserve a community FAQ, that's why this thread exists.

Citation needed that this was not intended by GW to work this way.

Kharn the Betrayer is, perhaps, the killingest bastard of killingest bastards in the setting. It may very well be intended that he kills mofos he can't even see, because Kharn the Betrayer kills mofos. It's simply what he does.

There is no citation needed whatsoever.

GW wrote Kharn, when there was no invisibility, so that Kharn would always hit on the best roll (3+), but one better (2+) because he just hits.
GW wrote Invisibility, did not think about the Kharn special case because they just don't have the time to check every special case.
And you now believe that GW intended for Kharn, written even before invisibility was invented, to break the invisibility rules, that nothing in any v7-aware codex can break.


If you really believe that, I don't really care about your opinion.

Opens a discussion thread on public forums. Doesnt care about what others have to say. I am confused.

Please realise that your points are also nothing else than your personal opinion. People have the right on these forums to express their opinion. If you dont like that thats your problem.

Other than assuming what their intent couldve been you have no proof what their intention was. Simple as that. Houserules are fine as long as your opponent agrees. You dont have to convince random people on random forums to use your houserules though.

 Mywik wrote:

Opens a discussion thread on public forums. Doesnt care about what others have to say. I am confused.

Please realise that your points are also nothing else than your personal opinion. People have the right on these forums to express their opinion. If you dont like that thats your problem.

Other than assuming what their intent couldve been you have no proof what their intention was. Simple as that. Houserules are fine as long as your opponent agrees. You dont have to convince random people on random forums to use your houserules though.

If you willingly ignore logic, I don't care about your opinion either.

And you have every right to express it, as I have the right to express to you that it's worthless to me.



There is a world of difference between applying Occam's razor to transfer v5 codex rules written in a v5 BRB context to a v7 adaptation to the context of the v7 BRB, and an opinion like yours or mine:

Opinions are like donkey-caves, everybody's got one.

However, there's just one logical approach to transfer the v5 codex rules, and that is to apply those rules in their context, observe the result, and then from that result deduce the v7 codex rules that would produce the same result, wherever the v5 codex rules conflict with a v7 BRB where they did not conflict with a v5 BRB.

"Logically" speaking, if GW wanted Kharn to hit invisible targets on 6s, they would have included that in the CSM "Official Update for 7th Edition" FAQ published in May.

They did not address the issue, so "logically" they're OK with it as it stands.

It's not about trumping, if two rules can interact together , nothing gets overruled

Death Ray assigns hits through a line, however none get asked to a zooming flyer because they are immune to weapons that don't roll to hit.


It's pretty simp,e. I'm confused that there is even a second interpretation lol.

 SHUPPET wrote:



It's pretty simp,e. I'm confused that there is even a second interpretation lol.

Let's put it this way: it is clear to everyone who wants to play it the correct way, it's not clear to people who prefer their very own interpretation of the rules

In this very case, no rules are conflicting and both can peacefully co-exist. And even if they *did* conflict, which they don't, then Hard to Hit would be more specific because it refers to a special unit type instead of Death Ray referring to every shot regardless of the target.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
"Logically" speaking, if GW wanted Kharn to hit invisible targets on 6s, they would have included that in the CSM "Official Update for 7th Edition" FAQ published in May.

They did not address the issue, so "logically" they're OK with it as it stands.

GW addresses nothing in their FAQ, that's why there's a whole forum section about rules in every 40K forum.

Logically, GW does not dedicate any resources to that topic and they don't care that the game rules are broken.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SHUPPET wrote:
It's not about trumping, if two rules can interact together , nothing gets overruled

Death Ray assigns hits through a line, however none get asked to a zooming flyer because they are immune to weapons that don't roll to hit.


It's pretty simp,e. I'm confused that there is even a second interpretation lol.

Every unit (friendly or enemy) underneath the line suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line

Codex > BRB, a flyer is hit, no matter what rules it has in the BRB.

That's dumb, but it's the only correct application of the rules that follows the guidelines from the author.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:



It's pretty simp,e. I'm confused that there is even a second interpretation lol.

Let's put it this way: it is clear to everyone who wants to play it the correct way, it's not clear to people who prefer their very own interpretation of the rules

In this very case, no rules are conflicting and both can peacefully co-exist. And even if they *did* conflict, which they don't, then Hard to Hit would be more specific because it refers to a special unit type instead of Death Ray referring to every shot regardless of the target.

Codex is always more specific than BRB, in the context of specific > generic as phrased by GW to guide our interpretation of the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So...

GW: Codex>specific BRB>generic BRB
SHUPPET, Sigvatr: BRB wins
NuggzTheNinja: Codex wins

I see that everyone is indeed on the same page.

id ask if you were really serious with this, but it seems you are by the number of times youve repeated CODEX>BRB...

can anyone cume up with a rule that we want to change cos its very adventageous to us that we can try ram down everyones throats?

morgoth wrote:

Every unit (friendly or enemy) underneath the line suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line

Codex > BRB, a flyer is hit, no matter what rules it has in the BRB.

That's dumb, but it's the only correct application of the rules that follows the guidelines from the author.

Here's what the actual rulebook says on Hard to Hit:

Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots (unless the model or weapon has the Skyfire special rule, pg 171). Template and Blast weapons, AND ANY OTHER ATTACKS THAT DON'T ROLL TO HIT CANNOT HIT ZOOMING FLYERS

Note the bold part. So you're shooting with a weapon that doens't roll to hit... Did you snap shoot? Did you roll To Hit? No? Your Death Ray isn't hitting any Flyers in 7th edition then, it specifically forbids the Death Ray from hitting the Flyer, by listing everything the weapon bypasses on normal conditions.

morgoth wrote:


Codex is always more specific than BRB.

You have not understood the most basic way of how to handle the rules

See, you can play the game however you want, as long as you find people who want to play with you, but openly displaying your lack of understanding the rules or rather of how they work / interact achieves nothing but making fun of yourself.

We have repeatedly linked to a thread by yakface that explains in detail how this works. If you refuse to read / understand this, then you refuse to understand how 40k works and, ultimatively, refuse to take part in 40k rules discussions.

 Zewrath wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Every unit (friendly or enemy) underneath the line suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line

Codex > BRB, a flyer is hit, no matter what rules it has in the BRB.

That's dumb, but it's the only correct application of the rules that follows the guidelines from the author.

Here's what the actual rulebook says on Hard to Hit:

Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots (unless the model or weapon has the Skyfire special rule, pg 171). Template and Blast weapons, AND ANY OTHER ATTACKS THAT DON'T ROLL TO HIT CANNOT HIT ZOOMING FLYERS

Note the bold part. So you're shooting with a weapon that doens't roll to hit... Did you snap shoot? Did you roll To Hit? No? Your Death Ray isn't hitting any Flyers in 7th edition then, it specifically forbids the Death Ray from hitting the Flyer, by listing everything the weapon bypasses on normal conditions.

And here's what the actual codex says on Death Ray: I think I pasted that enough times though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:


Codex is always more specific than BRB.

You have not understood the most basic way of how to handle the rules

See, you can play the game however you want, as long as you find people who want to play with you, but openly displaying your lack of understanding the rules or rather of how they work / interact achieves nothing but making fun of yourself.

We have repeatedly linked to a thread by yakface that explains in detail how this works. If you refuse to read / understand this, then you refuse to understand how 40k works and, ultimatively, refuse to take part in 40k rules discussions.

See, you can say whatever you like, every thread I've read in YMDC has used the exact same arguments, and in this very thread there's already dissension between you and the Kharn guy, proving that there is no consensus on that topic.

You can link to yakface as many times as you like, you don't have a point until you have something to counter this very simple argument:
GW said codex > BRB.

Got nothing but somebody else's opinion ? that's what I thought, no facts, no logic, only personal opinions.

Go ahead, go spam YMDC telling them that it's not codex>BRB, here's a link for you: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/615075.page

We have done nothing but posting facts to you.

It isn't codex>BRB, that only applies on rules that conflicts.
Kharn has a rule that says he always hit on 2+, BRB has a spell that says you only hit on 6+. THIS is where the rule of codex>BRB applies.

The Death Ray has NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING that contradicts or overrules the Hard to Hit rule. This is Fact, logic, written in stone and what else you can think of.
We have given you direct quotations on FACTS that PROVES that your interpretation of the rule is flat out false.

You can link to yakface as many times as you like, you don't have a point until you have something to counter this very simple argument:
GW said codex > BRB.

This is not what GW said, and you continually repeating that does not make it true, and your entire argument is based on this erroneous belief, which is why no one is on board with you.

What GW said was "when there is a conflict between rules, the Codex takes precedent over the BRB". In the case of Death Ray vs Fliers, there is no conflict. There is nothing in the rules about Death Ray ignoring the Hard to Hit rule. The Hard to Hit rule grants a specific exception to any attack that does not roll to hit. The Death Ray does not roll to hit.

Furthermore, in the rules for model placement, we are told that fliers are placed as a reference to their location, but the elevation of the model is not its actual elevation. This is why (in most cases and lacking specific exceptions) you can't engage a flier in CC.

Thus, the Flier is never, ever under the line of the Death Ray. It is never touched by the line that represents the Death Ray firing. It doesn't matter that the line passes over the model, because the unit the model represents is not under the line.

Got nothing but somebody else's opinion ? that's what I thought, no facts, no logic, only personal opinions.

Your entire argument is based on your erroneous interpretation of the rules. The Death Ray might pass over the model of the flier, but it does not (as its rules require) pass over the unit that the model represents. Fliers are flying (duh), and are thus above the line of the Death Ray and are, further, immune to attacks from weapons that do not roll to hit. So it is in two ways unaffected by the Death Ray.

 Zewrath wrote:
We have done nothing but posting facts to you.

It isn't codex>BRB, that only applies on rules that conflicts.
Kharn has a rule that says he always hit on 2+, BRB has a spell that says you only hit on 6+. THIS is where the rule of codex>BRB applies.

The Death Ray has NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING that contradicts or overrules the Hard to Hit rule. This is Fact, logic, written in stone and what else you can think of.
We have given you direct quotations on FACTS that PROVES that your interpretation of the rule is flat out false.

Nothing except a rule that says it hits everything under the line.
I gave you direct quotations on facts that prove that your interpretation of the rules is flat out false.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:

You can link to yakface as many times as you like, you don't have a point until you have something to counter this very simple argument:
GW said codex > BRB.

This is not what GW said, and you continually repeating that does not make it true, and your entire argument is based on this erroneous belief, which is why no one is on board with you.

What GW said was "when there is a conflict between rules, the Codex takes precedent over the BRB". In the case of Death Ray vs Fliers, there is no conflict. There is nothing in the rules about Death Ray ignoring the Hard to Hit rule. The Hard to Hit rule grants a specific exception to any attack that does not roll to hit. The Death Ray does not roll to hit.

Furthermore, in the rules for model placement, we are told that fliers are placed as a reference to their location, but the elevation of the model is not its actual elevation. This is why (in most cases and lacking specific exceptions) you can't engage a flier in CC.

Thus, the Flier is never, ever under the line of the Death Ray. It is never touched by the line that represents the Death Ray firing. It doesn't matter that the line passes over the model, because the unit the model represents is not under the line.

Got nothing but somebody else's opinion ? that's what I thought, no facts, no logic, only personal opinions.

Your entire argument is based on your erroneous interpretation of the rules. The Death Ray might pass over the model of the flier, but it does not (as its rules require) pass over the unit that the model represents. Fliers are flying (duh), and are thus above the line of the Death Ray and are, further, immune to attacks from weapons that do not roll to hit. So it is in two ways unaffected by the Death Ray.

There is a conflict between the BRB saying that flyers can't be hit, and the Death Ray saying EVERYTHING can be hit.

You have decided that it's not a conflict for some obscure reason, but it's still there.

Flyers are not "above the line" because the line is not anywhere specific in the z-axis. But since the rule says "underneath the line", it's logical to expect it to be at max Z, i.e. above everything. Or I'll count it as being min Z, i.e. under everything, and it just never hits anything. or just Z=0,0001 so it can't hit my skimmers ...

Okay... I'll try again. Slowly..

Please answer me the following questions, think of it as a pop-quiz.

1. Does your Death Ray roll to hit?

2. Does your Death Ray says it has a way to automatically hit?

3. Can you fire it as a snapshot?

4. Are you physically and mentally capable of reading out loud the sentence where it says "Any other attack that don't roll to hit cannot hit zooming flyers"?

5. Can you answer me, in yes or no, if Death Ray goes under the category of an attack that does not roll to hit?

6 (bonus question). So now that you know the Death Ray isn't able to snapshot and does not roll to hit, just like template/beam, can you explain to me why you think it overwrites the rule of Hard to Hit, when Hard to Hit very specifically mentions weapons that doesn't roll to hit cannot hit.

Flyers are not "above the line" because the line is not anywhere specific in the z-axis. But since the rule says "underneath the line", it's logical to expect it to be at max Z, i.e. above everything. Or I'll count it as being min Z, i.e. under everything, and it just never hits anything. or just Z=0,0001 so it can't hit my skimmers ...

Because that isn't how lines work. What you're describing is a plane... but the rules do not tell us to draw a plane from the model firing the Death Ray to a point we choose within its firing range.

morgoth wrote:

 Mywik wrote:

Opens a discussion thread on public forums. Doesnt care about what others have to say. I am confused.

Please realise that your points are also nothing else than your personal opinion. People have the right on these forums to express their opinion. If you dont like that thats your problem.

Other than assuming what their intent couldve been you have no proof what their intention was. Simple as that. Houserules are fine as long as your opponent agrees. You dont have to convince random people on random forums to use your houserules though.

If you willingly ignore logic, I don't care about your opinion either.

And you have every right to express it, as I have the right to express to you that it's worthless to me.

.

Fine so you dont want a discussion. What do you want from the users of this forum? To hail the all-knowing morgoth and his opinion on the rules? If you dont care about the opinions others have on the points you made in the op why the hell did you open a thread on a public discussion forum? Go play after any houserule you want but dont expect anyone to share your views. Especially when you behave like jerk . This applies to real life also so maybe print it out and tape it to your monitor.

Im done with this pathetic thread

Have a nice day.

 Zewrath wrote:
Okay... I'll try again. Slowly..

Please answer me the following questions, think of it as a pop-quiz.

1. Does your Death Ray roll to hit?

2. Does your Death Ray says it has a way to automatically hit?

3. Can you fire it as a snapshot?

4. Are you physically and mentally capable of reading out loud the sentence where it says "Any other attack that don't roll to hit cannot hit zooming flyers"?

5. Can you answer me, in yes or no, if Death Ray goes under the category of an attack that does not roll to hit?

6 (bonus question). So now that you know the Death Ray isn't able to snapshot and does not roll to hit, just like template/beam, can you explain to me why you think it overwrites the rule of Hard to Hit, when Hard to Hit very specifically mentions weapons that doesn't roll to hit cannot hit.

Codex says: Death ray hits everything under the line.
codex>brb
Plane is hit.
You understand ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:

Flyers are not "above the line" because the line is not anywhere specific in the z-axis. But since the rule says "underneath the line", it's logical to expect it to be at max Z, i.e. above everything. Or I'll count it as being min Z, i.e. under everything, and it just never hits anything. or just Z=0,0001 so it can't hit my skimmers ...

Because that isn't how lines work. What you're describing is a plane... but the rules do not tell us to draw a plane from the model firing the Death Ray to a point we choose within its firing range.

Well, if you're going to take everything that's under a line, you're going to have to use a plane. So... I think you're confused.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mywik wrote:

Fine so you dont want a discussion. What do you want from the users of this forum? To hail the all-knowing morgoth and his opinion on the rules? If you dont care about the opinions others have on the points you made in the op why the hell did you open a thread on a public discussion forum? Go play after any houserule you want but dont expect anyone to share your views. Especially when you behave like jerk . This applies to real life also so maybe print it out and tape it to your monitor.

Im done with this pathetic thread

Have a nice day.

Thanks, no I don't want a discussion with you. Have a nice day.

Then what the hell is the point of the rule saying they can't be hit by things that don't roll to hit? Everything that doesn't roll to hit "assigns auto-hits" as you put it. That would make the rule completely irrelevant. This is a stupid interpretation as a rule like the Death Ray in a permissive ruleset hits everything it is capable of hitting. If it had a rule that says it hits Zooming flyers then it would overwrite that rule book, otherwise, there is no actual rules conflict. You don't just say "well this is the wording in the codex and it doesn't mention any exceptions so let's completely ignore all context of how the core rules operate, and I'm unwilling to allow any discussion on the matter". Your interpretation of how codexes interact with the BRB is flawed, everything plays by the core rules unless there is a conflict to them doing so, that's when the codex takes precedence. You don't just throw all core rules out the window to begin with and work backwards from there.

Morgoth is NOT looking for a RAW / RAI answer.

Morgoth is trying to bend, and actually break, the rules in order to justify his (false) way of playing the game to give himself an advantage.

The point of this thread is self-affirmation, not information.

morgoth wrote:

Codex says: Death ray hits everything under the line.
codex>brb
Plane is hit.
You understand ?

I understand that you don't understand the rules of this game

Dark Reaver Jetbikes hits FMC under their line of Bladevanes because you know, codex> BRB amirite?

Dark Eldar Splintershard also hits FMC under their weapon's template and force them to take a toughness test because you know, codex> BRB amirite?

The Blood Angels Furiouso Librarian's Blood Lance (before the power was removed) hit FMC/flyers too, because it was under the line because you know, codex> BRB amirite?

The Tzeentch Screamers hit FMC/flyers because they move over them because you know, codex> BRB amirite?

The answer is no to all of them.
What, you think the Death Ray is some kind of special snowflake with no other weapons in the game that acts with similar mechanics? You think GW wrote the BRB, forgetting that all these kinds of weapons exist?
The fact is they didn't, and they wrote the Hard to Hit rule in order to specifically forbid any weapon that acts like the Death Ray to ever function on zooming/swooping targets like flyers and FMC.
I'm also done with this thread, you bring nothing to back up your claims, except from being dismissive about actual facts and hostility towards anyone who doesn't agree with you.

 SHUPPET wrote:
Then what the hell is the point of the rule saying they can't be hit by things that don't roll to hit? Everything that doesn't roll to hit "assigns auto-hits" as you put it. That would make the rule completely irrelevant. This is a stupid interpretation as a rule like the Death Ray in a permissive ruleset hits everything it is capable of hitting. If it had a rule that says it hits Zooming flyers then it would overwrite that rule book, otherwise, there is no actual rules conflict. You don't just say "well this is the wording in the codex and it doesn't mention any exceptions so let's completely ignore all context of how the core rules operate, and I'm unwilling to allow any discussion on the matter". Your interpretation of how codexes interact with the BRB is flawed, everything plays by the core rules unless there is a conflict to them doing so, that's when the codex takes precedence. You don't just throw all core rules out the window to begin with and work backwards from there.

RAW is always a stupid interpretation.

morgoth wrote:

Death ray: To fire the death ray, nominate a point on the battlefield anywhere within the weapon's range, then
nominate a second point within 3D6” of the first. Then, draw a straight line (considered to be 1mm in width) between the two points. Every unit (friendly or
enemy) underneath the line suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line. If the vehicle's other weaponry is fired in the same shooting phase, it must be fired at one of the units hit by the death ray.

Death Ray says it hits anything underneath the line, which means it hits a zooming flyer no matter what rules it has, because it's underneath the line.

The word you seem to be ignoring the meaning of is "underneath". It roughly means "below". Fliers are above the line, and therefore cannot be hit.
Yes, Death Ray does appear to create a geometric plane with the straight line being the top, reaching down, along its length.
Fluff-wise, this rule is silly, as a ray is a line, not a plane. but TLOS would make it less useful than as RAW.

All of this doesn't detract from the point that Death Ray is more similar to the blast rules than anything else in either the BRB or the codex. As such, the Hard To Hit rules allow, and fliers cannot be targeted or affected by Death Ray.

morgoth wrote:
RAW is always a stupid interpretation.

This is your entire premise, and your whole argument for the Death Ray to hit fliers. If you don't go with RAW, you may as well give in.
Codex > BRB, within reason, not blindly like you are taking it.

So basically, if you say "RAW is stupid", you say "The entire rulebook is stupid!". Seems legit.

RAW means "Rules as Written". Everything in any GW / FW publication is RAW. Everything with zero exception. There would not be a game without RAW.

morgoth wrote:
RAW is always a stupid interpretation.

And now for the counter-point. Codex trumps BRB is RAW. RAW is a stupid interpretation. Therefore, Codex>BRB is a stupid interpretation.

Congratulations, you just made your favorite argument a stupid interpretation.