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.

kirsanth wrote:The unit Leman Russ Squadron contains a squadron of units.
The proper name is Leman Russ Squadron.
Squadron is not appended on to the name, it is part of the name.

Still.

shrug

Omg Logic and reasoning? How Dare you! I'm gonna sue you now!

And here, regrettably, we reach impasse. For me, the codex I own clearly tells me I may take a Leman Russ Battle Tank, I find the rules for this thing along with it's points cost in the imperial guard codex. It's that simple and I am following both the rules as read and the intention as written in the codex. I cannot take armoured fist since I cannot find either it's stats or it's points value. Ultimately that is what I see and what I believe a great majority, when presented with this, will do. It is the simplest point from A to B with minimal disruption to army list composition from the codex.

I will leave this discussion now, quite satisfied I am content with my interpretation and that if Gwar and I continue we will be banging our heads against each other's brick walls all day. There is nothing to be gained further here for me.

Instead I will have a moment of clarity about things and go out in the sunshine.

Gwar, I am glad this thing turned alittle more polite than last time.

The codex does not tell you you may take a Leman Russ Battle tank, it says you may take a number of units and lists the NAMES of the units available. The Unit name in the IG codex is Not Leman Russ Battle Tank, any more than a Psyker Battle Squads name is Armoured Fist Squad.

But, I digress. Play however you want. I just want to make sure people realise what the rules actually say.

Gwar! wrote:But, I digress. Play however you want. I just want to make sure people realise what the rules actually say.

I think it is funny how often that is missed.

Gwar! wrote:In case you had not noticed, GW did revoke it, when they changed the IG Codex.

This is purely assumption, because we don't know for certain that was intentional.

The only 'errata' we do have, however, is the 'Ard Boyz errata. The stretch of that errata isn't known for certain either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ MGS - While we are in the same boat, you won't change the mind of someone who doesn't use subtext to infer motive, with subtext to infer motive.

Its Moot.

I don't know how you arrive at Codex> more recent Codex, btw. I think this is just wish fulfilment from you, and, fyi, it doesn't matter what you and your friends play - it matters what a Tournament Organiser is MOST LIKELY to say, assuming he knows the rules. Need I remind you that the Warhammer World Rules Packs specify that Judges are always correct, even when they directly contradict the rules?

You mean the same tournament organizers who allowed WH/DH to take a Leman Russ? Those tournament organizers?

the rulebook wrote: The most important rule then is that the rules aren't all that important! ... After the game you can happily continue your discussion of the finer points of the rules, or agree how you will both interpret them should the same situation happen again.

Gwar, you're disregarding rules. Therefore, by the tone and intention of your posts, all of your minis should be smashed with a hammer. Isn't "I'm gonna wreck your toys if you don't agree with me" a fun argument?



The thing that gets me about this is the sheer vilification of any attempt to discuss the rules by anything other than a RaW standpoint. The vehemence on the RaW crusade is frequently shocking, and makes YMDC a complete non-option for me to look for clarification, since I believe that the GW rules writers are human beings, and therefore both fallible, and inherently relatable. It's not a sin to realize that the rules writers are human beings like ourselves, and therefore aren't unrelatable godlike beings both infallible and unknowable in their workings. But, on these boards, it feels as though it IS. It produces a very hostile atmosphere.

Harkainos wrote:

Gwar! wrote:In case you had not noticed, GW did revoke it, when they changed the IG Codex.

This is purely assumption, because we don't know for certain that was intentional.

The only 'errata' we do have, however, is the 'Ard Boyz errata. The stretch of that errata isn't known for certain either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ MGS - While we are in the same boat, you won't change the mind of someone who doesn't use subtext to infer motive, with subtext to infer motive.

Its Moot.

I'm sorry, but "intent" means nothing. The wording changed. That is all we know. Therefore, because GW did not put out an Errata, it HAS to have been intentional.

@Orkestra: TMIR is to have fun eh? What if I derive fun from burning your miniatures? NO YOU CANT STOP ME TMIR LETS ME!

Harkainos wrote:This is purely assumption, because we don't know for certain that was intentional.

I daresay that assuming the writers and editors and everyone who saw the book before it was released made a mistake is less logical than the idea that they actually meant to write the words as they appear.

Isn't "I'm gonna wreck your toys if you don't agree with me" a fun argument?

Orkestra wrote:

Isn't "I'm gonna wreck your toys if you don't agree with me" a fun argument?

Why yes, it is. I still fail to see how that has any relevance to the topic at hand.

Right. You're absolutely correct. However, if ever you show up to a game and proceed to play the game regularly instead of smashing the other player's minis, you are a hypocrite, and breaking the rules to boot. I said everything I needed to say in my first post. I won't be back in this thread, or indeed the YMDC forum, because it is clearly not meant for people who wish to play by consensus with their opponent, since coming to a consensus with your opponent is, you know, the dirty cancer that's destroying 40K.

The writers are adults. They have some basic writing ability. Therefore, they should be able to write EXACTLY what they mean, if they don't it's EVEN MORE insulting to make up an interpretation and assume we're automatically clever enough to know what they really meant, than it is to play EXACTLY how they tell us to play.

Orkestra wrote:Right. You're absolutely correct. However, if ever you show up to a game and proceed to play the game regularly instead of smashing the other player's minis, you are a hypocrite, and breaking the rules to boot.

Errrmmm... What?

-Mind melts as that make NO sense whatsoever-

Orkestra wrote:Right. You're absolutely correct. However, if ever you show up to a game and proceed to play the game regularly instead of smashing the other player's minis, you are a hypocrite, and breaking the rules to boot. I said everything I needed to say in my first post. I won't be back in this thread, or indeed the YMDC forum, because it is clearly not meant for people who wish to play by consensus with their opponent, since coming to a consensus with your opponent is, you know, the dirty cancer that's destroying 40K.

LOL
Just wow.

He (and others!) have said, no one cares what you and your opponent agree to.

Break every rule you want. Just realize you are doing it, and discuss it with your opponent.

Assuming that anyone is willing to let you change the rules will cause more problems than assuming they will not.

Oh well. Enjoy!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Elessar wrote:The writers are adults. They have some basic writing ability. Therefore, they should be able to write EXACTLY what they mean, if they don't it's EVEN MORE insulting to make up an interpretation and assume we're automatically clever enough to know what they really meant, than it is to play EXACTLY how they tell us to play.

Be careful with statements like that.

You may get villified.

Damn. I hope he read my post before he left...no wait, do I care?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Kirshanth:
I think I might just post it in every YMDC thread, try to hammer it home...

Gwar! wrote:I'm sorry, but "intent" means nothing. The wording changed. That is all we know. Therefore, because GW did not put out an Errata, it HAS to have been intentional.

I bolded where your assumption is. Just because they haven't stated it as of right now, doesn't me they intend never to. It is entirely possible they've stopped Errata on the DH/WH because they intend to come out with new Codices...

But again, we are both speculating.

RaW there is no Unit in the FOC titles LRBT - that is where it stays.... everything else beyond that is our interpretation of what it means.

So, if we cannot know what the writers intent is, even when we look at what they actually write, how do we know Space Marines are Intended to have S4 and a 3+ Save?

After all, just because they wrote it in the codex doesn't mean they intended it!

No new Inquisition Codex has been written yet, so it won't be out for 2 years +.

I know that to be true, whether you believe it is your choice.

I am weak, and can't stay away. I'll probably keep this up until I get suspended like Elessar.

TMIR is to have fun eh? What if I derive fun from burning your miniatures?

I'm sure you would have fun doing that. Which is why I said that, from what you've said, if you attempt to play a regular game of 40K instead of destroying your opponent's miniatures, you are breaking TMIR. Since rules are more sacred than anything else on this planet, you would be a hypocrite to break them. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear enough.

The writers are adults. They have some basic writing ability. Therefore, they should be able to write EXACTLY what they mean, if they don't it's EVEN MORE insulting to make up an interpretation and assume we're automatically clever enough to know what they really meant, than it is to play EXACTLY how they tell us to play.

That's an assumption. Assumptions, in this forum, mean that you are going to hell. Enjoy your stay.

kirsanth
Post 2009/08/20 17:54:47 Subject: Re:The Post that Shan't be named OR my two cents worth on a certain tank as a guest + its implications

Orkestra wrote:Right. You're absolutely correct. However, if ever you show up to a game and proceed to play the game regularly instead of smashing the other player's minis, you are a hypocrite, and breaking the rules to boot. I said everything I needed to say in my first post. I won't be back in this thread, or indeed the YMDC forum, because it is clearly not meant for people who wish to play by consensus with their opponent, since coming to a consensus with your opponent is, you know, the dirty cancer that's destroying 40K.



LOL
Just wow.

He (and others!) have said, no one cares what you and your opponent agree to.

Break every rule you want. Just realize you are doing it, and discuss it with your opponent.

Assuming that anyone is willing to let you change the rules will cause more problems than assuming they will not.

Oh well. Enjoy!

This. What I really love is the total elitism of this mentality. The sheer unshakeable faith that everyone but you is a cheater and needs to be burnt at the stake. It's a constant slight to everyone you interact with. Assuming that my opponent is interested in a casual recreational activity clearly makes me TFG. If I show up at a FLGS, and my opponent wants his leaping tyranids to assault twelve inches, I should pack my miniatures up and go home in a huff. But please, continue treating people who are, I dare say, the majority of 40K players as subhuman trash for wanting to follow TMIR. That is the impression you give off.

its like you forget that necron codex is broken and old... lol

WOW...I assume they're adults?

Pretty sure they are, I've seen pictures.

I know they have basic writing ability, because they write things.

Anyway, I'm an Atheist. For me, Hell would be preferable to many things, including many Dakka threads, because at least it's fictional...

Orkestra wrote:I am weak, and can't stay away. I'll probably keep this up until I get suspended like Elessar.
That's an assumption. Assumptions, in this forum, mean that you are going to hell. Enjoy your stay.

This. What I really love is the total elitism of this mentality. The sheer unshakeable faith that everyone but you is a cheater and needs to be burnt at the stake. It's a constant slight to everyone you interact with. Assuming that my opponent is interested in a casual recreational activity clearly makes me TFG. If I show up at a FLGS, and my opponent wants his leaping tyranids to assault twelve inches, I should pack my miniatures up and go home in a huff. But please, continue treating people who are, I dare say, the majority of 40K players as subhuman trash for wanting to follow TMIR. That is the impression you give off.

Way to miss the point.

Discussing rules = discussing the words that make up the rules. Not making up words to discuss rules.

Anything two players agree upon is as valid for their game as anything written. To assume that everyone, or anyone even, will also have your same assumptions WILL cause you problems, eventually.

That is why many of these discussions are about. . . the actual words.

Again, if you read the rules, understand the rules, and then try to play the game differently - without consulting your opponent - you really are cheating. If I take Leaping Tyranids to a game, I let my opponent know the way the rules read, and why I would play otherwise.

As for packing your stuff because the opponent disagrees with you? You actually just tried to do that here. In this forum, not 10 minutes ago. That was your response.

This thread is so closed.