I can only hope the silly raw discussions don't pop up here. Players need a degree of applied common sense.

Welcome to the site.

pointblank wrote:I can only hope the silly raw discussions don't pop up here. Players need a degree of applied common sense.

i think its worth bearing in mind the difference between spotting and discussing a piece of "silly RaW", and how you actually play a rule during a real game. while "common sense" can help people decide whether or not they want to follow a rule, it doesnt change whats written in black and white, and doesnt stop people discussing things either. keep this in mind and im sure you will get along fine despite such discussions taking place.

cheers & welcome to AoS

~ Tim

LordMalekTheRedKnight wrote:

pointblank wrote:I can only hope the silly raw discussions don't pop up here. Players need a degree of applied common sense.

i think its worth bearing in mind the difference between spotting and discussing a piece of "silly RaW", and how you actually play a rule during a real game. while "common sense" can help people decide whether or not they want to follow a rule, it doesnt change whats written in black and white, and doesnt stop people discussing things either. keep this in mind and im sure you will get along fine despite such discussions taking place.

cheers & welcome to AoS

~ Tim

So that means a Necron Warrior doesn't need an Orb's protection when wounded by a Lascannon ?

pointblank wrote:So that means a Necron Warrior doesn't need an Orb's protection when wounded by a Lascannon ?

that depends.

by (perceived) RaI = yes
by GaP = yes
by (silly) RaW = no

its OK that there are different answers to the same question, as long as you put them in context. in a discussion on "silly RaW" and GWs shoddy wording, then we can use one answer. in a discussion on how people actually play the game, we can use the other answer. and neither answer changes the fact that at the tabletop its up to your opponent/the event organiser as to how it can be played, anyway.

~ Tim

I'd say that silly raw is discussed (and evaluated as to how silly it might be and how polite ingame such things may\may not be) about as much as assumptions which might be countered by reading the current book (e.g. i still find loads of folks who have no idea how to play consolidation and sweeping advance moves just because their perception of common sense is that nothing with the same name would change between 3rd ed and 4th ed ).
(Cough like spack did a fortnight ago with S+P )

Basically welcome to the group\site, we'll talk about pretty much anything (and see if its sensible or not )
KMB