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.

I'm sorry, you lose credibility when you started suggesting Dr. Suess as a source for 40k. His work is not at 'all' relevant to the discussion we were having here so i can only presume you were joking.

I'm going to respond to your post, but only the parts of it which include content that is actually relevant to the discussion myself and the other posters were having previously.
Point 1:

Jpacka wrote:It is not my reasoning, it is RAW. It is clearly stated that it is ON the battlefield not ABOVE (for a clear distinction look into the placement of blast templates and you will see it references placing the template ABOVE the model).

That is your opinion; apparently based on a fairly unusual interpretation of the word 'on'. It behooves you not to confuse the difference between the two.
Everything 'above' the table but within the table edges is 'on' the table. This includes but is not limited to: Models on flying bases, models on elevated terrain, and models on the 2nd+ floors of multi-level ruins and/or fortifications as well as those on the table surface itself.
Point 2:

Jpacka wrote:beam is capable of going over a portion of the model as it has 1mm cross section

The actual rule for this is: "Then draw a straight line (consided to be 1mm in width) between the two points."
You'll note it says 'width'; not 'cross section' or whatever strange interpretation leads you to believe the line drawn has a specific 3rd dimensional depth to it.
Point 3:

Jpacka wrote:Would you argue that you can place an objective floating in the air 8" above the battefield and have remained within the confines of the BRB stating you have to place it "on" the battlefield?

Yes, that is exactly what i'm saying. Discounting your skills as a wizard, lets say one of us more conventional mortals puts the objective on an 8" tall pillar. By your 'logic' that objective would no longer be 'on' the battlefield correct?
Point 4:

Jpacka wrote:] Please reference the ongoing reserves section and you will see that not being "on" the table does not destroy anything. Indeed if it did I should think all reserves would be destroyed

it is stated in numerous sections that any model entering play which cannot be placed on the board are automatically removed as casualties, but i'll quote the ones from the 'Wrecked Transport', 'Fortification - Leaping Down', and 'Fallback' sections for you: "...If, even by performing an emergency disembarkation, some models are unable to disembark, then any models that cannot disembark are removed as casualties..."
"...Any models that cannot be placed, for whatever reason, are removed as casualties with no saves of any kind allowed..."
"...If any model from a unit that is falling back moves into contact with a table edge, the entire unit is removed from the garne as casualties, as it scatters and flees the battle..."

Oddly enough the only exceptions to the above i was able to locate are for units that are currently in transports, in reserves, or in ongoing reserves.

Ostrakon wrote:

Jpacka wrote:Most of this has been an irrelevant argument. I would like to point out a few things……

1. ‘Death Ray’ line is 1mm in width as per Necron faq (it must be assumed that width refers to the X and Y axis of the beams cross section since no clarification is given)

2. The BRB states on Pg. 80 that a fliers base is effectively ignored except for when the flyer is being assaulted & for the purposes of embarking/disembarking units.

3. The ‘Death Ray’ entry in Codex Necrons states……

“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 between the two points. Every unit (friendly or enemy) UNDERNEATH the line suffers a number of hits equal to…. “ (Bold emphasis mine)

In summary, the line is between two points ON the battle field (not suspended ABOVE the battle field) which works fine against everything……. Except for fliers and interestingly enough skimmers as both of the relevant unit type entries detail how to treat their flying bases. Both saying they are ignored for all purposes except assaults/charges, disembarking/embarking for fliers, and ramming for skimmers (Pg. 83)

I actually laughed out loud reading this.

The line's on the battlefield. Bases rest on top of the battlefield, and are therefore not UNDER the line. So I guess the death ray can't ever hit anything.

lol, ya i agree

The death ray tells you exactly how it works in the codex. That's how I play without trying to apply other rules to it.

Dr. Seuss was sited to help you understand the relation of one object to another, as he has a keen way of expressing complex concepts such as on, in, above, with, etc. in a way almost anyone can understand (there is also excellent illustration). Credibility has nothing to do with what is written in the rules, nor does your opinion of me.
By your explanation I would be within the confines of the rules to hang my models from the ceiling over the table. You can't say your line doesn't have to be touching the table but my model does, unless of course there is some clause stating as such (i.e. "Place the template over the model")

Response to your 2nd point:

When given two dimensions it is much more resonable to infer the third dimension is not infinite. In truth you can no more assume infinite height any more than I could assume it has no height as it's not referenced. Length and width are referenced, it is much more believable that width is equal to height (thus the cross section) than that height is infinite.

Your 3rd point:

The top of the hypothetical pillar would indead be ON the battlefield as there is a surface for the objective to rest on
(Doesn't anyone recall the previous editions rules against suspending models in the air?)

Your 4th point

Your excerpts are in relation to a host of different situations that are all associated with different actions, none of which are the static state of a model in play.
They also state that the unit ir removed/destroyed in the circumstances, it does not state that a model not on the table is destroyed by defacto. It is moot either way as the flier is on the table, BUT its base is ignored. Thus gives a game mechanic whereby it is in play but not effected by what is beneath it (such as impassible terrain).

To summarize the arguments....

You believe the 'death ray' can shoot anything anywhere within 3d6" no matter what, which ignores every targeting restriction in the game as long as it falls within 12"+3d6

I believe the 'death ray" draws a line along the surface of the battlefield impacting such units as it passes over, and ignores those who's bases we are directed to ignore for shooting purposes

I think we will have to agree to disagree untill there is a faq on this. Although I do not believe you are willing to change your perspective on this because you (aswell as others) seem to have an inherent bias in regards to this issue. As I will never be playing with you it matters little, as long as you and your opponents are content to play with it as the only weapon with zero restrictions on it barring range. I find it absurd based on my previous experience with this game, but more importantly with how the codex defines the use of the weapon.

I would challange you though. The next time your setting your cup of coffee on the desk do so 6" higher than the surface of the desk, after all it is within the edges of the desk so everything should work fine.

Jpacka wrote:

I actually laughed out loud reading this.

The line's on the battlefield. Bases rest on top of the battlefield, and are therefore not UNDER the line. So I guess the death ray can't ever hit anything.

I pointed out previously that the 'death ray' can hit models "ON" the table due to the fact that the model must be in contact with the table, the line having defined dimensions is taller than the point of contact between the battlefield and the model, thus allowing the line to travel over a portion of the model.

Your argument as you have conveyed it is if your laser beam isn't infinitely tall then it is infinitely short. (Please reference placement of templates in ruins and hit resolution for a reference of models at differing elevations.)

If you don't agree with this that is fine but that still does not changed what is written in the necron codex, nor does it change the deffinition of the word "on".
RAW is RAW and judging from some of the previous posts made in this thread aswell as others I observe that RAW is far more popular to RAI in this forum.

RAW is more important that RAI in YMDC, especially in cases where RAI is impossible to determine because we don't have a preceding ruling from a prior edition. The only reason any of this is even a debate is because of people injecting RAI.

Also, it says the line is 1mm wide. That doesn't imply that it exists in the third dimension, so by your own ridiculous interpretation the death ray can't hit anything.