MechSpacewulf Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 OK, I was playing the other day and I have a bunch of homemade drop pods which I made from templates and they are the 3 door FW Dread style. They all have working doors and I made them so that they actually fit 12 troops, 6 Termies or 1 Dread and when I place them the doors open. So I place them during a game and I was playing orks so I deployed on the opposite side since I veered too far away to use my flame throwers. Now older FW DP models have a solid interior and the new GW ones are not. Based on WYSIWYG rule he could clearly target me and he did and since I had opened all 3 doors upon landing ( my hubris in impressing them with my workmanship ) Ork boy could clearly see me so we settled at a 4+ cover save based on pg. 21 and for the sake of getting on quickly with the game. Now that situation brought up a lot of questions. 1. do you have to open all doors upon landing and if you don't can you still deploy at any point within 2'' of the base of the drop pod or just 2'' within the opened door. 2. does a DP count as a 4+ or 3+ cover save... can it be considered a fortification before it is considered wrecked or is it already wrecked in a way 3. should I just glue or tape the doors shut for the sake of confusion? 4. Should I quit whinning like a pup and add detail to the interior ( I was planning on that anyway after that happened ) This should help us all out because if you have a load of the new GW drop pod models and you open them up and your opponent can see one of your Marines through it this might help to keep the game flowing and end an argument before it begins... forewarned is forearmed. La Galaksen Brenne (Viking= Let the Galaxy Burn) Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawks Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 1 - see this thread: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=157305 2 - cover saves are usually 4+. the DP is immobilized, NOT wrecked until is is attacked and it is destroyed. 3 - this is addressed in the link from 1. there's no simple, easy answer that pleases everyone. 4 - if you want to. there is no requirement, and technically your model is questionable anyhow as it is non-official GW. this shouldn't be an issue in most friendly games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jubei124 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I am pretty sure it's against forum rules to post a link to copyrighted stuff on this site. It is a GW copyrighted template. I would check the rules to be sure but you may want to edit your post. Otherwise it will probably get melta'd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawks Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Posting that violates GW Intellectual Property is not permitted. I have removed the offending post. please re-read the Rules of the B&C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morticon Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 There was an interesting compromise in the INAT FAQ that dakka publish for use with Adepticon (and other tournies). If memory serves they suggest that if you cant open the doors, then you cant fire the weapon of the pod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechSpacewulf Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 Here is the latest Adepticon FAQ on that topic that you can find on pg. 60 in the Space marine section SM.69A.01 – Q: When a player deploys a Drop Pod can he choose to keep the doors open or closed? If the Drop Pod doors are deployed open can models deploy within 2” of them? A: Once the Drop Pod lands, the doors remain open for the rest of the game. However, all measurements to and from the Drop Pod, besides firing its weapon, are done based on the hull of the Drop Pod (its shape when the doors are closed). This means, for example, that friendly and enemy models will be able to move on top of the open doors [clarification]. If the doors cannot be opened (they are glued in place or a player is using a model that doesn’t have doors that open/has a solid core), both players must agree before the game to either pretend, to the best of their abilities, that the doors are open and both players can see ‘through’ the core for line of sight purposes, or they can play that the model blocks line of sight ‘as is’ in which case the Space Marine player will be unable to fire the Drop Pod’s weapon (a trade-off for the improved line of sight blocking ability of the model) [rules change]. Ref: BT.22B.04, BA.26C.03, DA.35B.02 We have been trying to go WYSIWYG above all else, we have even fabricated an inverted periscope that eliminates all doubts when we have been unable to actualy get behind the models because of terrain or other models. Thanks for the great feedback! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jubei124 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 We have been trying to go WYSIWYG above all else, we have even fabricated an inverted periscope that eliminates all doubts when we have been unable to actualy get behind the models because of terrain or other models. Off topic but is this used for 'friendly' games? Seems a bit OTT for me. If you are going to keep using this template drop pod IMHO the best thing to do is just leave the doors up and say it blocks line of sight. But you really should get the drop pod model since there readily available from GW. Granted you spent the time to make the doors open it is still a illegal model and with 5th ed. relying on TLOS you really need the actual models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelmage99 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I dont agree. I dont feel he is forced to get the actual models. If the homemade Drop Pod is about the same size as the official one, then I dont think we should punish those that have made their own ones (back when one wasnt available) or just wish to save some cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawks Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 outside of tourneys and whatever official rules they impose for parity, I agree with Steelmage. I have a few of the austrailian miniature scenery pods that predate the GW plastics - they are awesome for what they are. I figgure the home-made pods are roughly the size of the FW pods, which should be legal in any tournament, so I wouldn't have a problem with them. Ork Battlewagons will soon be having these same issues - now with an official model as they have never (to my knowledge) had - and there are PLENTY of scratchbuilt wagons floating around out there with footprints all over the map - most of which I have seen are larger than the offical model, and I think that they will have a hard time in the tournament circuit with those models, which is a shame as there are a bunch of very nice ones and the offical model is far from awesome, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Race Bannon Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 There was an original GW design ... http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e241/zenidi/Gray%20Death/untitled.jpg And here is one with the hull sealed for some effect but shows a size comparison to the standard round base ... http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e241/zenidi/Gray%20Death/badmoon.jpg FW did a HUGE disservice (IMO) by creating the behemoth they did. But I digress. Concerning the OP, unless it's a touny, I'd just settle it in house. There is no good answer based on the link provided by nighthawks. If it is a tourny then settle it with the organizers. It's the best advice to follow. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.