ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Jolipinator wrote: »

Arena Bosses drop Dremora Motif pages for Bows and Legs

@ZOS_GinaBruno Just to clarify, will any arena boss drop the Dremora Plunder Skull, or does it have to be the final boss?

It's only from the final boss, but can be any difficulty.

That saddens me as I can only get passed the 6th boss. You may want to look at the description in the article linked in the first post as it states "Final Arena Bosses drop Dremora Motif pages for Bows and Legs". I have never done the arena before as I am not into statistics and plans when I game. This is one achievement that I will not be able to achieve

Bucky Balls wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

...implies...

Ah! You're almost there

Proof by analogy is a logical fallacy - all it serves to 'prove' is the analogy and not that which is under scrutiny/discussion.

Ah, funny how you can grasp that context, but the context of the article eludes you.

Everything starts with certain givens, named so because they don't (or at least shouldn't) have to be explicitly specified beforehand. The fact that you understand it is essentially impossible to prove non-existence of something tells me you reasonably shouldn't have had issue figuring out what the post didn't say.

Omission doesn't technically mean the impossibility. However, the context still points that direction.

But carry on, the CSR's will happily tell you the same thing about your 'bug.'

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Ah, funny how you can grasp that context, but the context of the article eludes you.

I have pointed out repeatedly what the article states and how it can clearly be interpreted in distinctly different ways, this is simple semantics which, ironically, you seem to be struggling with despite numerous threads calling for clarification.

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

...The fact that you understand it is essentially impossible to prove non-existence of something tells me you reasonably shouldn't have had issue figuring out what the post didn't say.

I neither said nor implied anything of the kind; I simply pointed out your resorting to a common logical fallacy which, I suspect, you may not fully understand, even contextually.

But go ahead and make stuff up to argue about if it makes you happy.

Bucky Balls wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Ah, funny how you can grasp that context, but the context of the article eludes you.

I have pointed out repeatedly what the article states and how it can clearly be interpreted in distinctly different ways, this is simple semantics which, ironically, you seem to be struggling with despite numerous threads calling for clarification.

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

...The fact that you understand it is essentially impossible to prove non-existence of something tells me you reasonably shouldn't have had issue figuring out what the post didn't say.

I neither said nor implied anything of the kind; I simply pointed out your resorting to a common logical fallacy which, I suspect, you may not fully understand, even contextually.

But go ahead and make stuff up to argue about if it makes you happy.

You're right. Certain parts are not explicit, nor should they have to be.

You're not the first person to not like the design of something and want to twist it in a way that is most beneficial to themselves. You're the one making the assumption it must be able to be completed by all characters in a single iteration. You state this clearly in your "Bug" report. You're trying to add detail where is none. Actual results and lack of Dev indication that it's broken support this.

Which one's more likely?
They misprinted the article, leaving some key piece of information out and this oversight went unnoticed for multiple weeks of PTS cycle (your "bug")? Or is it more likely it works exactly as they intended, even if poorly thought out, and it's just not what you'd have it be?

If you go with the presumption that all relevant facts were included in the article, then anything left out is either not relevant, or not factual.

It's an annual event for a reason. It's not impossible to get on all characters, it's simply impossible to get on all characters in a single year. It may be poorly thought out, but that alone doesn't make it broken.

What you want is possible, just not in your preferred timeframe.

Either way, I'm done with this discussion. If there was confusion on anyone's part, I suspect the actual results have been figured out by now and clarified simply by doing.