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.

 Void__Dragon wrote:


If there was a failure to communicate I would suggest you word your posts better my son.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Are you talking about actual strength on the tabletop? O_o

I would suggest you reading my posts better, "son"

 krodarklorr wrote:

Zandrahk is actually pretty useful with the ability to pass out special rules, but otherwise pretty useless. Trayzn never dies, but what does he really DO?

Imotehk is my favorite named character, and he's fun as hell to play. And Szeras is good because of his Lance and he can buff a unit.

What is with you people and thinking I'm talking about gameplay in the fluff section of the forum?

 Void__Dragon wrote:
What is with you people and thinking I'm talking about gameplay in the fluff section of the forum?

Because it's utterly inconceivable that someone could dislike Old Man Zandy and Trollzyn's lore.

You could have just answered the question with "No.". It's the internet and sometimes things aren't as clear as you might think they are. Thus people might ask you to make sure they got it right (or not). You usally then quickly answer them and the case's settled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
What is with you people and thinking I'm talking about gameplay in the fluff section of the forum?

Because it's utterly inconceivable that someone could dislike Old Man Zandy and Trollzyn's lore.

Obyron must have the worst job ever. I just imagine them sitting together at dinner, Zahndrekh starting to talk about his war achievements and Obyron being "Not this gak again...".

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:


If there was a failure to communicate I would suggest you word your posts better my son.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Are you talking about actual strength on the tabletop? O_o

I would suggest you reading my posts better, "son"

I understand that English isn't your first language and as such you can't be expected to have as firm a grasp of it as me, even after a sleepless insomnia-ridden night, so allow me to break this down for you.

"Are you talking about actual strength on the tabletop? O_o"

This is the first line of your post. Let's just ignore that there was no reason to assume I was talking about the gameplay for a minute and focus purely on how poorly-worded your post was my son.

"Because Zahndrekh is by far the best character in the entire codex, Obyron is ok, and the rest is terrible."

This was the following line, which was disconnected from the first one.

"Because Zandrekh is by far the best character in the entire codex" only indicates you think he's the "best". Best at what? On the tabletop, or the best of the new special characters?

You think your first line makes this clear, but it really doesn't. Your incredulous first sentence could also mean two things: It could mean that you were incredulous that I'd find Imotekh and Szeras the best-written characters in the fluff (As opposed to Zandrekh) and wondered if I was saying they're best on the tabletop (Which is the interpretation I went with), or it could mean that you are flabbergasted that someone would find them the best on the tabletop as opposed to the apparently superior (I haven't played a game of 40k in years and am not caught up on their meta) Zandrekh.

I went with the former interpretation because I am at heart a kind and gentle soul. The latter interpretation means that, for literally no reason at all, you just assumed I was talking about the gameplay. Why? This is the fluff section of the forum, why on Earth would I be talking about gameplay for no reason at all? The former interpretation assumes that you find my choice of "best characters" so strange that you can only assume I'm talking about gameplay. While arguably an unreasonable train of thought, it's a fairly logical one.

Your wording was very vague and didn't get across your meaning very well, ergo, it was poorly-worded. You're welcome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Because it's utterly inconceivable that someone could dislike Old Man Zandy and Trollzyn's lore.

I stopped liking Power Rangers villains a long time ago.

Dude. On a horse. With an iron sword.

Beat the piss out of it and then dragged it to Mars.

I'm thinking something "else" was involved in that fight, because the first sentence does not match with the second and never has. Unless the Emperor has a Rocket Horse, and facilities pre-built on Mars during medieval Europe?

The Emperor's horse literally dragged the Void Dragon's body.

The Void Dragon is, if I'm remember right, sixty meters long.

That horse is the most powerful being in the setting.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:


If there was a failure to communicate I would suggest you word your posts better my son.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Are you talking about actual strength on the tabletop? O_o

I would suggest you reading my posts better, "son"

I understand that English isn't your first language and as such you can't be expected to have as firm a grasp of it as me, even after a sleepless insomnia-ridden night, so allow me to break this down for you.

So instead of admitting your mistake, you go full ad hominem and make stuff up - looks like someone found his big boy pants!

What happened to the horse, though, after its master died? :O

And since we're at it, let's not forget that the entire fight did not have any eye witnesses. It's extremely vague.

The old fluff was empty and boring. The new fluff actually offers a little fun.

I don't think you know what an ad hominem is.

I explained, in detail, why you're wrong. Whether or not you accept that means nothing to me, lol.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
What is with you people and thinking I'm talking about gameplay in the fluff section of the forum?

Because it's utterly inconceivable that someone could dislike Old Man Zandy and Trollzyn's lore.

I have to admit, even though I'm an Oldcron through and through, Trollzyn and Zanny boy are rather entertaining.

At least something fairly decent came out of the book I suppose.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I don't think you know what an ad hominem is.

I explained, in detail, why you're wrong. Whether or not you accept that means nothing to me, lol.

Keep repeating that in your head and it will come true one day, son

 liquidjoshi wrote:


I have to admit, even though I'm an Oldcron through and through, Trollzyn and Zanny boy are rather entertaining.

At least something fairly decent came out of the book I suppose.

I still can't imagine those two being anything but an old gay couple, bickering all the time in private.