Drop Pod Ramps?

[Agrab]

Not a rant on anyone personally, but seriously guys is it really hard to play a game logically? I mean, a huge banner might block LOS and give you an advantage, but why? Are you really that desperate to win that you have to resort to such outlandish ideas? Would a space marine seriously do that? No. Glitches and exploits are for video games, not table top games.

 

Personally, a drop pod's doors were meant to open. It's these minute details when playing a game that always makes the game seem right and proper. If it gets in the way of a game where it's more work to open the wee little doors and plop it on the ground then fine. Seriously, it may seem very childish to you, but taking away my right to shoot through a drop pod just seems to make the game a little more bland. Anyway I do agree this should be noted upon prior to the game. As long as you told me about your pods then I'd agree because the inside of those things are a hassle to paint! But I'd have to thrash you because you're making the game bland ;)

 

I am arguing that saying i can not shoot through the DP which states the doors blow open is the same as letting me carry a big-ass banner

i agree wiht you, was intentionally showing an insane take on this

[Agrab]

*scratches head* Of course, all of this hypothetical questioning is interesting in all... but its also irrelevant for the most part.

 

Your talking about unusual conversions, and on a banner as large as your talking about - wich also would probly be unstable- Im interested in where you think your going to find a GW banner that big?

combine several

also, no rule stipulating i must use their equipement and can not make my own (or, for that matter, drape an american flag across it)

Yeah.... unless you want legal minis in your tournament- in wich case its 50%+ GW stuff....

 

Still, its also signficantly different to have a problematic conversion, as opposed to using a GW stock model.

 

jw, where is that written

[Zynk Kaladin]

You know what, I think you have a very good argument right there Grey Mage. With that thought alone I'd be more than happy to play against non-opening drop pods.

[Frosty the Pyro]

*scratches head* Of course, all of this hypothetical questioning is interesting in all... but its also irrelevant for the most part.

 

Your talking about unusual conversions, and on a banner as large as your talking about - wich also would probly be unstable- Im interested in where you think your going to find a GW banner that big?

combine several

also, no rule stipulating i must use their equipement and can not make my own (or, for that matter, drape an american flag across it)

Yeah.... unless you want legal minis in your tournament- in wich case its 50%+ GW stuff....

 

Still, its also signficantly different to have a problematic conversion, as opposed to using a GW stock model.

 

jw, where is that written

My understanding is its part of the rules of most (all?) GW sanctioned turnaments. You wont find it in the rulebooks because its not a game rule, but a turnament rule.

[Valerian]

I am arguing that saying i can not shoot through the DP which states the doors blow open is the same as letting me carry a big-ass banner

i agree wiht you, was intentionally showing an insane take on this

 

Agrab,

 

What about Space Wolves Drop Pods? If you look at the codex entry for our Pods, it doesn't mention doors opening at all.

[Grey Mage]

I am arguing that saying i can not shoot through the DP which states the doors blow open is the same as letting me carry a big-ass banner

i agree wiht you, was intentionally showing an insane take on this

 

Agrab,

 

What about Space Wolves Drop Pods? If you look at the codex entry for our Pods, it doesn't mention doors opening at all.

He already admitted we wouldnt have to.

[SeattleDV8]

My understanding is its part of the rules of most (all?) GW sanctioned turnaments. You wont find it in the rulebooks because its not a game rule, but a turnament rule.

For example the INAT

"GEN.01 – Q: Can players convert their models in order to gain an advantage in the game? For example, making tiny models to hide behind scenery, longer barrels on their vehicles to increase the range of their weapons, using shorter/taller flying bases for their models then those supplied, etc?

A: Players may only convert their models for aesthetic purposes. Any players, in the opinion of the Tournament organizers/judges, who have converted their models specifically to gain a gameplay advantage, may be penalized at the whim of the Tournament Organizer. These penalties can be as little as playing the game acting as if the suspect model is the proper dimensions, all the way up to immediate ejection from the tournament [clarification]. When in doubt, always check with the tournament organizer before the tournament begins and then discuss the issue again with each of your opponents before the game starts.

Ref: RB.22A.02

GEN.02 – Q: Can players alter the shape of their models during the game in order to gain an advantage in the game, such as lowering a ramp on a vehicle in order to gain extra disembarking distance?

A: Besides a few noted exceptions in the rules (skimmers removing their flying bases, turrets turning, etc) players may only alter their models during the game for aesthetic purposes. For all aspects of gameplay a model must remain the same dimensions for the entirety of the game [clarification].

Ref: RB.24A.01"

[rat of vengence]

But Ive had more than my fill of a couple of guys trying to say my army is illegal every tournament I bring DPs because they cant beat me on the open field, and even more with told Im being unfluffy because I dont think you can shoot through them.

That's going too far. I think you are wrong, but I would still be happy to throw down some dice and get the game going. Dice off if a friendly, and T.O. ruling for a tournament. Whatever the result, I would be happy to game on. It isn't as important as having some fun. :pinch:

 

RoV

[Agrab]

I am arguing that saying i can not shoot through the DP which states the doors blow open is the same as letting me carry a big-ass banner

i agree wiht you, was intentionally showing an insane take on this

 

Agrab,

 

What about Space Wolves Drop Pods? If you look at the codex entry for our Pods, it doesn't mention doors opening at all.

 

I stated that you simply must follow the rules. SW are perfectly fine in not opening their doors

[Aidoneus]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS, models can move up to and over them, etc. My question then is why do people's intuitions on how to count the doors differ when the doors remain shut? Regardless of the angle at which it extends from the vehicle, it either IS decorative or it ISN'T. That would be like saying that a banner counts as decorative if it's unfurled, but not it it's draped around the pole. You can't have it both ways.

 

That would mean one of two things:

1) The doors are part of the hull of the vehicle, and count for true LOS, footprint, and everything else.

2) The doors are decorative, and do not count for true LOS, footprint, or anything else.

 

Given the aforementioned consensus that open doors don't count for LOS or footprint, it seems that (1) produces contradictions. This should lead to us accepting (2) instead, as it produces no problems whatsoever.

 

The practical upshot of this is that it doesn't matter whether the doors are closed or not. Either way, being decorative, you can shoot through them but they provide a 4+ cover save.

 

My $.02

[Agrab]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS, models can move up to and over them, etc. My question then is why do people's intuitions on how to count the doors differ when the doors remain shut? Regardless of the angle at which it extends from the vehicle, it either IS decorative or it ISN'T. That would be like saying that a banner counts as decorative if it's unfurled, but not it it's draped around the pole. You can't have it both ways.

 

That would mean one of two things:

1) The doors are part of the hull of the vehicle, and count for true LOS, footprint, and everything else.

2) The doors are decorative, and do not count for true LOS, footprint, or anything else.

 

Given the aforementioned consensus that open doors don't count for LOS or footprint, it seems that (1) produces contradictions. This should lead to us accepting (2) instead, as it produces no problems whatsoever.

 

The practical upshot of this is that it doesn't matter whether the doors are closed or not. Either way, being decorative, you can shoot through them but they provide a 4+ cover save.

 

My $.02

 

so sayth my roommate, so be the truth

[Grey Mage]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS, models can move up to and over them, etc. My question then is why do people's intuitions on how to count the doors differ when the doors remain shut? Regardless of the angle at which it extends from the vehicle, it either IS decorative or it ISN'T. That would be like saying that a banner counts as decorative if it's unfurled, but not it it's draped around the pole. You can't have it both ways.

 

That would mean one of two things:

1) The doors are part of the hull of the vehicle, and count for true LOS, footprint, and everything else.

2) The doors are decorative, and do not count for true LOS, footprint, or anything else.

 

Given the aforementioned consensus that open doors don't count for LOS or footprint, it seems that (1) produces contradictions. This should lead to us accepting (2) instead, as it produces no problems whatsoever.

 

The practical upshot of this is that it doesn't matter whether the doors are closed or not. Either way, being decorative, you can shoot through them but they provide a 4+ cover save.

 

My $.02

 

so sayth my roommate, so be the truth

It makes no mention of being able to shoot through decorative parts- unless your firing at the vehicle itself- pg. 60 brb.

 

LOS, pg. 16 "Of course models are made of plastic or metal, so they cant tell you what they can see- youll have to work it out for them. In some cases it will be obvious- if there is a hill of a tank blocking their veiw, the enemy may be blatantly out of sight."

No mention of ignoring doors- though it later goes on to say you must be able to see the head, legs or arms and that members of a models own unit cannot block LOS.

 

Pg. 21 does say that decorative elements placed by players on the model are ignored- however the doors of a DP are standard to the kit, not a player add-on.

 

There is no RAW grounds to allow you to fire through a vehicle.

[Gentlemanloser]

Then by RAW, you must allow poeple to deploy from the tips of the doors, and for the doors to be part of the hull for DS mishaps.

 

In which case, glueing them shut is reducing the footprint for DS mishaps, and gaining an unfair advantage.

 

There is no RAW grounds to allow you to fire through a vehicle.

 

The RAW is true line of sight. On any normally constructed DP, you can see through it. TLoS and RAW satisfied.

 

For Tanks, the doors only need to be open for a single phase in your turn, and are closed agian when the oponents gets to shoot. You can't see through them. (And conversely, you should be allowing your opponents to deploy from the lowered, extended front Ramp of a LR, as that's part of the LR's hull)

[Grey Mage]

Then by RAW, you must allow poeple to deploy from the tips of the doors, and for the doors to be part of the hull for DS mishaps.

 

In which case, glueing them shut is reducing the footprint for DS mishaps, and gaining an unfair advantage.

Nope, no more than you have to open the ramps on a landraider when it deepstrikes. Or turn a fire prisms turret to see if it could possibly go off the table edge.

 

Though yes, that is the reasoning behind deploying from the ramps- though its not something I think is fair, and Im quite willing to give it up for peace of mind.

 

@Edit: and no, it doesnt work for a landraider- its not open topped.

[Gentlemanloser]

Nope, no more than you have to open the ramps on a landraider when it deepstrikes. Or turn a fire prisms turret to see if it could possibly go off the table edge.

 

You miss that the DP doors have to be open (at least non SW ones), and only BA LR could DS. /shrug sure go ask BA LR to DS with thier ramp down.

 

I'd rather just count DP doors as decorative, and skirt this whole issue anyway.

 

No, you wouldn't have to turn turrets, they don't form part of the hull, you can't measure range *to* them (only from them for shooting), and you can't disempbark from the end of a cannon, even if it was an open topped vehicle.

 

@Edit: and no, it doesnt work for a landraider- its not open topped.

 

Open topped isn't really the issue. The Ramp (like DP doors) forms the Access Point/s.

[Isiah]

Open topped isn't really the issue. The Ramp (like DP doors) forms the Access Point/s.

 

No. Being Open Topped is the whole issue.

 

LRs have specific openings in the hull that are specified as being their access points for measuring/disembarking purposes. The LRs ramp/doors does not count as part of their access point as all distances are measure to their hulls. While Open Topped classified vehicles by RAW have no specific access points and can measure to any part of the vehicle for disembarking purposes.

 

I'd rather just count DP doors as decorative, and skirt this whole issue anyway.

 

I'd agree that this is a solution providing both players are in agreement. However long term for all our sanity's sake the status of DPs doors gamewise needs to be sorted.

[Battleplate]

I'm just laughing at the mental image of a space wolf drop pod landing, followed by a muffled thumping sound on the still closed doors. "Help, let us out!"

[Isiah]

Ruleswise there is nothing anywhere that states doors on any model must be physically opend to let the embarked models out.

 

Cheers

I

[Gentlemanloser]

No. Being Open Topped is the whole issue.

 

LRs have specific openings in the hull that are specified as being their access points for measuring/disembarking purposes. The LRs ramp/doors does not count as part of their access point as all distances are measure to their hulls.

 

Isiah, open or closed, do LR doors count as thier hull? If not, are they purely decorative? Can you draw range and LoS to target a LR from thier open or closed doors?

 

Edit: as an addition to the whole DP doors count as thier hulls, if that's the case, then you can measure range to target the DP from the tip of the petals. Including Melta range. As such, denying your opponent this range by glueing them shut is also gaiming for an advantage.

[Grey Mage]

No. Being Open Topped is the whole issue.

 

LRs have specific openings in the hull that are specified as being their access points for measuring/disembarking purposes. The LRs ramp/doors does not count as part of their access point as all distances are measure to their hulls.

 

Isiah, open or closed, do LR doors count as thier hull? If not, are they purely decorative? Can you draw range and LoS to target a LR from thier open or closed doors?

 

Edit: as an addition to the whole DP doors count as thier hulls, if that's the case, then you can measure range to target the DP from the tip of the petals. Including Melta range. As such, denying your opponent this range by glueing them shut is also gaiming for an advantage.

No, your fishing- its not gaming for advantage, its consistency. The pods footprint when it DSs is a particular area, leaving the doors up keeps it the same area.

 

It also neatly avoids the issue of- what happens when a DPs doors are opened, after a successful deep strike, and some of them go off the table? Its obvious not a misshap- the potential for that is long gone- but it is also obviously illegal as models cannot just go off the board willy-nilly. Do we move the immobile vehicle? What if that puts them in an a similarly illegal postion- those petals are very long after all.

[Gentlemanloser]

No GM, in no way is it fishing...

 

It's the whole piont.

 

Either the doors are decroative, provide no cover, block no LoS (either up or down), don't effect DS or disembarkment.

 

Or

 

They're part of the hull, you can shoot the tips and measure range to them, they have to form part of the DS mishap footprint, you can disembark from them, emeny minis can't move thorugh them, they provide cover.

 

It's a whole package.

 

You can't pick and choose what rules you want to apply to them, just because it benefits you or you think that's how it should work.

 

And if you dissallow your opponent the 'right' to measure range to your pod for shooting, by glueing the doors closed (which is agianst GW design, if you go by the instructions in the box), then you're gaming. You're modelling for an advantage.

 

There's no cherry picking. Either thier's decraotive and don't impact the game in any fashion, up or down. Or they're part of the hull and you have to take every consquence of that. Good (denying LoS thorugh the DP) or bad (all the other stuff above).

[Koremu]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS

I disagree with this statement. IMO the design of the Drop Pod is deliberately such that Infantry can disembark into cover created by the Pod.

 

Note that I do not think that they extend disembarkation, count for Deep Strike mishaps or anything of the sort. It is fairly clear from a simple sanity check that the Pod Deep Strikes before opening the doors, for example.

 

But, as I say, opening the Drop Pod ramps and using them for Infantry Cover is fine in my book - the ramps look deliberately designed for that purpose, and it is hardly modelling for competitive advantage because the Pod model is designed to do that.

 

Essentially, they exist as far as TLOS goes, but are otherwise decorative.

 

It also neatly avoids the issue of- what happens when a DPs doors are opened, after a successful deep strike, and some of them go off the table? Its obvious not a misshap- the potential for that is long gone- but it is also obviously illegal as models cannot just go off the board willy-nilly. Do we move the immobile vehicle? What if that puts them in an a similarly illegal postion- those petals are very long after all.

 

You fudge it :)

[Agrab]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS, models can move up to and over them, etc. My question then is why do people's intuitions on how to count the doors differ when the doors remain shut? Regardless of the angle at which it extends from the vehicle, it either IS decorative or it ISN'T. That would be like saying that a banner counts as decorative if it's unfurled, but not it it's draped around the pole. You can't have it both ways.

 

That would mean one of two things:

1) The doors are part of the hull of the vehicle, and count for true LOS, footprint, and everything else.

2) The doors are decorative, and do not count for true LOS, footprint, or anything else.

 

Given the aforementioned consensus that open doors don't count for LOS or footprint, it seems that (1) produces contradictions. This should lead to us accepting (2) instead, as it produces no problems whatsoever.

 

The practical upshot of this is that it doesn't matter whether the doors are closed or not. Either way, being decorative, you can shoot through them but they provide a 4+ cover save.

 

My $.02

 

so sayth my roommate, so be the truth

It makes no mention of being able to shoot through decorative parts- unless your firing at the vehicle itself- pg. 60 brb.

 

LOS, pg. 16 "Of course models are made of plastic or metal, so they cant tell you what they can see- youll have to work it out for them. In some cases it will be obvious- if there is a hill of a tank blocking their veiw, the enemy may be blatantly out of sight."

No mention of ignoring doors- though it later goes on to say you must be able to see the head, legs or arms and that members of a models own unit cannot block LOS.

 

Pg. 21 does say that decorative elements placed by players on the model are ignored- however the doors of a DP are standard to the kit, not a player add-on.

 

There is no RAW grounds to allow you to fire through a vehicle.

 

So, you are saying that the rules differentiate between different ways of modeling the same vehicle?

[Agrab]

Open topped isn't really the issue. The Ramp (like DP doors) forms the Access Point/s.

 

No. Being Open Topped is the whole issue.

 

LRs have specific openings in the hull that are specified as being their access points for measuring/disembarking purposes. The LRs ramp/doors does not count as part of their access point as all distances are measure to their hulls. While Open Topped classified vehicles by RAW have no specific access points and can measure to any part of the vehicle for disembarking purposes.

 

I'd rather just count DP doors as decorative, and skirt this whole issue anyway.

 

I'd agree that this is a solution providing both players are in agreement. However long term for all our sanity's sake the status of DPs doors gamewise needs to be sorted.

 

Open toppeded does not matter one bit when dealing with DP in this case. Rather, we are arguing over weither you get to pick and chose if the doors are decoration or not

[Agrab]

It seems that there is a near-universal agreement that, if you do open the doors, they count as being purely decorative. They don't block LOS

I disagree with this statement. IMO the design of the Drop Pod is deliberately such that Infantry can disembark into cover created by the Pod.

 

Note that I do not think that they extend disembarkation, count for Deep Strike mishaps or anything of the sort. It is fairly clear from a simple sanity check that the Pod Deep Strikes before opening the doors, for example.

 

But, as I say, opening the Drop Pod ramps and using them for Infantry Cover is fine in my book - the ramps look deliberately designed for that purpose, and it is hardly modelling for competitive advantage because the Pod model is designed to do that.

 

Essentially, they exist as far as TLOS goes, but are otherwise decorative.

 

It also neatly avoids the issue of- what happens when a DPs doors are opened, after a successful deep strike, and some of them go off the table? Its obvious not a misshap- the potential for that is long gone- but it is also obviously illegal as models cannot just go off the board willy-nilly. Do we move the immobile vehicle? What if that puts them in an a similarly illegal postion- those petals are very long after all.

 

You fudge it :)

they provide cover only through the inside, not when shooting around the hull itself