Drop Pod Doors

[Tsavong Lah]

Title says it all: what are open Drop Pod doors counted as with respect to movement, both friendly and enemy?

[Valerian]

Title says it all: what are open Drop Pod doors counted as with respect to movement, both friendly and enemy?

 

Go Search in the Official Rules subforum, there are tons of threads that debate this, and related, topic(s).

 

Valerian

[slmellon]

i would say difficult to all but the disembarking unit, until they disembark, then its difficult for them too

[Chapter Master Ignis Domus]

Normally, I just count the as regular open terrain. They're just a step up and down. If the doors land on a unit, that's a different story.

[ORKILL]

The doors are regular terrain. They don't exist for play purposes.

[Skirax]

Normally, I just count the as regular open terrain. They're just a step up and down. If the doors land on a unit, that's a different story.

We play it that if a door would open on a squad, then it just doesn't open. Or, they have the sense to think 'I don't want a heavy ceramite chunk embedded in my forehead' and move out of the way.

[nurglez]

there are many threads in the rule forum about this, and if the doors count for deploying from or not, I only have 1 drop pod and it's not assembled yet, so I have no idea :tu:

[Blarmb]

This is, at best a vague area in the rules. To be honest a very strict reading of the rules make them part of the vehicle that cannot be passed or occupied by any other models. Since what counts as a part of a vehicle is weapons and the hull, but not decorative features. However decorative features is only ever vaguely defined with a list of examples, and hull is never given it's own definition. Failing a 40k specific GW given definition, you're left to fall on the plain english definition of hull which does in fact include the doors of a vehicle. Of course this isn't the way most people play it (is this a legacy thing? I'm a relatively new player, tbh). So what they are (if not part of the hull as most commonly played) be it decorative parts of a vehicle, terrain, a some kind of non-game object on the table is never defined.

 

The most common I've seen is they basically don't exist at all.

 

 

This is why 40k needs better rules writers, editors & playtesters.

[nurglez]

I personally think, that if GW released their rules as a beta and let us play test it, we would sort these things out. beta testing works, and its annoying that GW dont (though I'm sure there are reasons they do it that way, its just so annoying).

[Valerian]

I personally think, that if GW released their rules as a beta and let us play test it, we would sort these things out. beta testing works, and its annoying that GW dont (though I'm sure there are reasons they do it that way, its just so annoying).

 

Or, failing good playtesting in advance, it would be nice if they did routine errata and FAQs to address these issues. They typically make the effort only once and release a single errata/FAQ document per publication per edition, despite the fact that all/most problems and issues are never addressed in that one-time release.

 

V

[wolfpack]

The Rules state the following:

'once deployed, the drop pod is no longer a sealed environment and is therefore counted as open topped'

'once the passengers have disembarked no models can embark on the pod for the rest of the game'

'a drop is is counted as a vehicle that has suffered an immobilized damage result (which can not be repaired in any way)'

 

so...as the doors are part of that vehicle they would count as impassible...as the second rule would apply as well as the vehicle following the rules for immobilized vehicles on page 61 of the BRB

 

unless it was destroyed and removed from play it would constitute a wreck after the weapon systems were disarmed or destroyed. in which case it would follow the rules for wrecks on page 62 of the BRB and become dangerous and difficult terrain

 

...but I don't see where it would count as anything but a large metal chunk in the middle of the battlefield...