C:SM drop pods

[mughi3]

Something we noticed about the new C:SM drop pod enrty.......

 

it has a BS, but it has no crew to fire it's gun, more importantly it has no POTMS rule in it's entry.....so how exactly does one fire the drop pods weapons once the marines have disembarked? Additionally without the POTMS as it is not classified as a "fast" vehicle since it moves at cruising speed when it arrives it additionally cannot fire any weapons due to movement restrictions on weapons fire.

 

An oversight on GWs part or just idiot rules writing yet again?

[Rain]

Fluffwise, I know that at least deathwinds are automated to just spin their guns and fire in all directions which is why they are launched before the troop bearing pods. Ruleswise, just pretend they have a crew since they don't have the machine spirit rule.

[mughi3]

The problem with that is they are kinda of required to have a crew to fire thier mounted weapons. even rhino's and razorbacks (and every other vehicle in the game actually)are said to have a dedicated crew of 2 (or 3 for land raiders IIRC) space marines who die with the vehicle if it is destroyed.

[Kadaeux]

It's probably just a simple programming. We know it has sensors because they direct themselves to target. And we know it has a weapon.

 

All it'd take is for the programming to be along the lines of "Fire at anything above a certain size that moves and isn't broadcasting Chapter IFF codes."

 

Either that or the weapons are controlled remotely from orbit.

[Rain]

I'm pretty sure that's not so much a rule as a roundabout way of explaining that crew are considered dead upon vehicle destruction and don't just fall out like passangers. If it has a BS it can shoot, abstract out the crew.

[Arschbombe]

The previous codex gave PotMS to drop pods. This is an oversight that will be corrected in a FAQ/errata sheet. It's just a matter of when.

 

Here's another Drop Pod issue in the new dex.

 

Should you model it with doors open or closed? If closed can it still fire and yet block LOS? Or do you assume the doors open and the storm bolter can shoot? If you have the doors open how do they affect LOS and movement?

 

I think GW go so wrapped up in "This is so cool" that they completely forgot about "how does it work."

[Rain]

Honestly I would refuse to play with anyone that didn't just treat it as open when it is shooting, some things should not have to be written to be understood, just like how if you glue they turret of a tank in place it still counts as able to swivel.

[Arschbombe]

Yes, it would be stupid to shoot from the pod with the doors closed, but the rules say it is open-topped. I think maybe the best way to model the kit is just with the doors off.

[Doc Faolan]

Model it however you want, since it's designed for both. I'm doing half and halfs with mine - half open, half closed. Arguing about doors up or not is like saying "oh, you glued your sponsons in place" or "oh, your tank's gun is glued in, so we can't really see where all it can track, so it doesn't have the whole range of sight".

[Kadaeux]

Personally leave the doors unattached if possible, for display you "close" the doors, for gaming you "open" them.... I mean really why wasn't the kit built so the parts could move and have whatever you want?

[maniclurker]

Some things that are on my mind and would like to get a consensus about.

 

1. True LOS: Can you shoot through them?

2. Difficult terrain: Do you take a dangerous terrain test when it lands in difficult terrain?

[Kadaeux]

Some things that are on my mind and would like to get a consensus about.

 

1. True LOS: Can you shoot through them?

2. Difficult terrain: Do you take a dangerous terrain test when it lands in difficult terrain?

 

1: Yes.

2: The rules stipulate that the "scatter" roll is reduced enough so that the Drop Pod doesn't land in difficult terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. (Inertial Guidance Systems, Page 69)

 

The better question would be whether the Doors count as "part of the model" I would personally say not as the fluff describes them being "blown off" ergo the doors are no longer part of the vehicle.

[maniclurker]

2: The rules stipulate that the "scatter" roll is reduced enough so that the Drop Pod doesn't land in difficult terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. (Inertial Guidance Systems, Page 69)

 

No, the rules stipulate that you reduce the scatter roll to prevent you from going into IMPASSIBLE TERRAIN, or within 1" of an enemy model. And that's only if you would land on them/it. If you pass over it, and aren't within 1" of an enemy model, then you land where the scatter takes you.

 

edit- As such, the question still stands... Test or no?

[Kadaeux]

2: The rules stipulate that the "scatter" roll is reduced enough so that the Drop Pod doesn't land in difficult terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. (Inertial Guidance Systems, Page 69)

 

No, the rules stipulate that you reduce the scatter roll to prevent you from going into IMPASSIBLE TERRAIN, or within 1" of an enemy model. And that's only if you would land on them/it. If you pass over it, and aren't within 1" of an enemy model, then you land where the scatter takes you.

 

edit- As such, the question still stands... Test or no?

 

I stand corrected. *Checked again.*

 

Personally I would say no test, its at least a hundred tonnes of metal dropping at near terminal velocity to a dead stop. I doubt a few trees or thick scrub will be bothering it much.

 

But then again it might throw off the final approach enough to scatter the pod across the terrain like Ceramite confetti.

[maniclurker]

Fluff-wise, it only makes too much sense. However, it is a vehicle, and it is going into difficult terrain.

 

I guess the question is, does deepstriking a vehicle (such as speeders, raiders, etc.) into difficult terrain cause you to take a test like you moved into it.

 

If so, then wouldn't a failed result cause the weapon to be destroyed instead? That's not so bad for a measily stormbolter, but that would be a horrible way to lose a deathwind launcher.

[BigJon]

2: The rules stipulate that the "scatter" roll is reduced enough so that the Drop Pod doesn't land in difficult terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. (Inertial Guidance Systems, Page 69)

 

No, the rules stipulate that you reduce the scatter roll to prevent you from going into IMPASSIBLE TERRAIN, or within 1" of an enemy model. And that's only if you would land on them/it. If you pass over it, and aren't within 1" of an enemy model, then you land where the scatter takes you.

 

edit- As such, the question still stands... Test or no?

 

Seeing how a Drop Pod becomes immobilised upon entry, which would be the worst roll on a difficult terrain test

I'm not sure what further result you can get, there are no additional rules for destroying vehicles that enter

difficult terrain. The worst I can think of is your disembarking toops have to take a difficult terrain test

in order to clear the Drop Pod and move out of the terrain feature.

 

BigJon

[Kadaeux]

Fluff-wise, it only makes too much sense. However, it is a vehicle, and it is going into difficult terrain.

 

I guess the question is, does deepstriking a vehicle (such as speeders, raiders, etc.) into difficult terrain cause you to take a test like you moved into it.

 

If so, then wouldn't a failed result cause the weapon to be destroyed instead? That's not so bad for a measily stormbolter, but that would be a horrible way to lose a deathwind launcher.

 

Unfortunately thats where my local group gets sticky too.

 

So the quickest resolution we came to was simple.

 

Solution A: Where the rules are ambiguous and difficult to determine what is right/wrong then fluff takes precedence. This allows our local group to have more "fluffy" games.

 

Solution B: Does Deep Striking count as movement for the resolution of Heavy Weapons? If yes then yes it makes sense that the Drop-pod counts as having moved as well.

 

Solution C: If neither A or B can be agreed upon roll a dice and let it decide. (That is one of our concrete rules with our gaming group. If a decision cannot be reached the Dice Gods will reach a decision for us.)

[Battle-Captain Garro]

Personally I could do with a hand to build the damn thing in the first place. The instructions are crap! From what I've seen of the ones already built in-store the doors open and close after building, they're not supposed to be glued in place.

 

The Drop Pod can't be caught in difficult or dangerous terrain because of the inertial guidance thingumy. As for whether you can shoot through it, what part of true LoS wasn't clear :)

 

As for the Storm Bolter/Deathwind Launchers, of course it has a simple machine spirit for targetting and shooting! A crew?! Honestly ;) Do GW have to state the bleetin' obvious?

[mughi3]

of course it has a simple machine spirit for targeting and shooting! A crew?! Honestly Do GW have to state the bleetin' obvious?

Yes they do. this is a competitive game system nowhere in the stats does it say it has a POTMS as such by RAW it has a BS but cannot shoot as there is no crew to shoot it nor a computer to shoot it. in the background on how the POTMS works it can take over for when there is no crew member able to do the job because they are busy or their ears are ringing. there is no crew there is no POTMS special rule....so how does it shoot?

 

can a bike with no rider shoot? no it can fire 1 bike mounted weapon per rider, SOB repentia have a BS because they used to be SOB, but they carry no guns, only a big freakin chainaxe, can they shoot simply because they have a BS?

 

I think this was on oversight by GW. it would make sense that the pod would have POTMS, but i cannot prove that in the rules.

[SamaNagol]

Don't be asinine. A Bike does not have a BS, the rider does.

 

The Rhino does not have a BS, it's crew does.

 

A Drop Pod does not have any crew, but the construct itself has a BS. There is no conflict or confusion here. Much like there is absolutely no need to discus the effects of difficult terrain.

[Battle-Captain Garro]

My reply was supposed to be a little tongue-in-cheek, so let us all have a big group unclenching of the buttocks (or unbunching of panties);)

 

I play the game for fluff. Tournament play, rules lawyers etc. hold no interest for me at all. In my very simple mind, the drop pods are meant to be throw away vehicles; a cool and bloody fast way to deliver troops into combat. They have a gun that can shoot, a Storm Bolter or missile launcher, neither of which are game winning weapons unless en-masse, assuming ten drop pods! But even then, terrain would undoubtedly get in the way severely limiting the effectiveness of the weapons. The drop pods also have an armour rating so they can be shot at. What's the problem beyond that? I think they're cool and any fiddly details can easily be worked out with one's opponent. There we have it, problem solved.

 

It seems from the thread that the doors can only be modelled open or closed. I'm certain it wouldn't be very hard to hinge them to avoid problems. If you can't be bothered then open would seem to be the best way because that is the state they would be in in-game. Any player that shoots with them but claims that because the doors are modelled closed you can't draw LoS through it should be dragged into the street and shot before he procreates and gives birth to other beardlings! :)

[Blackavar]

I'm pretty sure that the instructions have the "Don't glue this" sign pointing to the door hinges - I was under the distinct impression that the doors were supposed to be able to open/close as desired.

 

I could be completely wrong, thus far I've only clipped/filed my first pod, I was going to start assembly tonight.

[angronn]

Mughi3 is right - it might seem obvious that the Pod should be able to shoot, but according to RAW, no crewman = no weapon firing. The Master of the Ravenwing on jetbike already came a cropper on this one. Of course it seems like he ought to be able to fire both weapons, but he can't.

 

As for difficult terrain... I'm not sure...

[Kadaeux]

Mughi3 is right - it might seem obvious that the Pod should be able to shoot, but according to RAW, no crewman = no weapon firing. The Master of the Ravenwing on jetbike already came a cropper on this one. Of course it seems like he ought to be able to fire both weapons, but he can't.

 

As for difficult terrain... I'm not sure...

 

The rules don't specify whether a Land Raider or Rhino has crew either. In fact how many weapons they can fire is entirely dependant on how they move. For all intents and purposes as far as the rules are concerned the vehicles are uncrewed! Does this mean they cannot move or shoot without transporting a squad. No.

 

There is also nothing in the rules saying you must have crew to operate weapons as crew are non-targetable.

 

(Which brings up an odd point with the Thunderfire as it specifies that the Techmarine doesn't get some of his special abilities unless the gun is destroyed but there are no stats for the gun itself, ergo it cannot be destroyed.

[Battle-Captain Garro]

Mughi3 is right - it might seem obvious that the Pod should be able to shoot, but according to RAW, no crewman = no weapon firing. The Master of the Ravenwing on jetbike already came a cropper on this one. Of course it seems like he ought to be able to fire both weapons, but he can't.

 

As for difficult terrain... I'm not sure...

 

This thread is in danger of sounding like the 'I can use enemy locator beacons' nonsense. It's a drop pod, anyone with half an ounce of sense knows that a drop pod doesn't have a crew! It has an automated landing system and automated defensive weapons. This isn't a difficult concept. While GW are sometimes unclear in their writing, I don't think it's fair to expect them to write for the anally retentive who need to be told that B comes after A, honest guv. They do assume a certain degree of common sense. This thread is typical of the sort of Tournament/Rules lawyers thinking that so worryingly confirms to the world that wargamers should be kept away from anything sharp :D