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.

 Bobaram wrote:
But the problem is, you're wrong, as stated in my posts. If we can't use stage or phase or time to mean a specific point in a turn I guess everything in the game all happens at the same time?

Citation where I ever said that. Do not put words in my mouth.

And I guess when we spell out the rules word for word and break them down we're all also ignoring the rules themselves? You haven't actually pointed out the parts we're voiding, you just put forth the same argument so I guess that means you win.

I have actually quoted them. "For them the battle is over". Not a single argument you've put forth acknowledges that.

And I suppose if we have a bullet pass through our brain and somehow later we stand back up, that counts exactly the same as grabbing a rope? But wait, it isn't, that is in no way the same as grabbing a rope.

So you are either attempting to mock my examples or didn't read one of them. Neither option is polite so I'll politely suggest you re-read them.

And cool, I reference VP from victory conditions because you reference destruction of a unit, and what you MEANT was VP in a specific mission, The Scouring, as it applies and also from the DE Codex because I guess you forgot to mention that? So somehow I was supposed to know that? If you want to use a specific example, use the words or pages. Don't just throw it out there and then say oh, that's not at all what I meant, read this page out of a book hundreds of pages long and grab an entirely other book.

There's one, single, VP mission; the rest are objective missions. I should have clarified which one I meant (It's Purge The Alien, not The Scouring FYI) - sorry. I brought up the DE thing in addition.

edit: Now that you understand what I was referencing, perhaps you'd like to respond to it?

Ever Living puts a token down once you've been removed as a casualty, yes? Then at the end of the phase, you roll to see if they come back, yada yada yada. Sweeping advance is what got them removed as a casualty. So by the rules of Ever Living, you'd put the token down, roll at the end of the phase. But "for them, the battle is over". We're looking at the dead units, we're putting down the tokens, but because the battle for them is over, we have to remove the tokens. Ever Living performed its function, but SA overruled it, as Ever Living does not state that the counters may remain when the unit has been caught in a sweeping advance. Even if it would seem obvious that they remain because Sweeping Advance only removes as a casualty, they do not, because Sweeping Advance is a very vague rule with very wide implications that necessitate a very specific wording in any rule to save it. It doesn't matter that logically the tokens should remain because of the wording of EL. It doesn't matter that in the fluff it's ridiculous. None of that matters, because SA says "unless otherwise specified". All arguments fail because of those 3 words. For a unit to be removed as a casualty by SA, no other rule may come into effect to save them unless that rule says that it remains in effect when a SA occurs.

Edit: And Bobaram, if you don't want these debates to devolve into insults, then don't perpetuate it with sarcasm and unnecessary rudeness.

 Bobaram wrote:
I hope you enjoyed that response, because it's about the same thing you've been giving everyone arguing with you.

No, it's not. I don't put words in your mouth. I don't ignore parts of the rules even after they're pointed out. I especially do not attempt to side track a discussion based off of a misunderstanding.

It's a horrible way to phrase your arguments and gets nowhere and it honestly makes me never want to ask questions or take part in these rules debates because people come in and immediately start doing this to each other. It fosters quite possibly the worst debating environment I have ever seen. I am officially done with this forum except when I am under extreme duress, as all the arguments devolve into one of a small group of people screaming out they are right and passive aggressively calling everyone else an idiot.

If I want to call you an idiot I'd cal you an idiot (and take whatever punishment the mods deemed necessary). I'm not doing so passive aggressively or not.
I try to be blunt with phrasing because I try to remove any hint of bias from my arguments - it's actually one of the best ways to have a debate.
Honestly it seems like you're getting worked up about nothing.

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
A witch doctor that returns a dead body to life does not save it. He resurrects/reanimates it. Removing a model as a CASUALTY and then returning it to play is by no means "saving" or "rescuing" it.

Bad example, again.
In your example, the thing "returned" is different from the thing that "died". With EL the thing that returns *is* *explicitly* the thing that died.
How many times does this have to be pointed out - in this thread - before you understand that fact?

I never said that the thing returned by the witch doctor is a zombie or anything different. You are putting words in mouth, please stop doing that.

And anyway a warrior getting a direct hit in the chest from a multimelta, vaporizing his body and later returning back to life, is closer to what?
A. Being saved by a doctor
B. Being rescued by a life guard
C. Being resurrected by a witch doctor.

I am sure that 100% will answer C.

EL is not a save nor a rescue and is not affected by SA.

Brilliant assertions, not backed up by actual rules of course

For them the battle is over. You're claiming it isn't. Rule broken with no permission means you are cheating.