drop pod closed/open both wrong?>

[Chengar Qordath]

whether a LR is modelled to open its doors or not has no bearing on "modelling for gain"

 

It is if you've glued them shut and try to claim the DP now blocks LoS becuase the doors don't open...

Well, if it physically blocks line of sight, then it does. That's TLoS for you.

 

Personally, I don't think it's modeling for advantage as long as the player picks open/closed and uses it consistently. It only gets problematic when players start mix-and-matching for tactical advantage.

[Gentlemanloser]

If the oficial modelling instructions from GW, supplied with the Drop Pod, say to not glue this section shut, to allow the doors to open, and you go against this and glue them shut, and try to claim this changes the rules in any way, shape or form.

 

That's modelling for an advantage.

 

By all means, glue them shut. But play the DP as it was supposed to be played, with doors that open.

[Grey Mage]

If the oficial modelling instructions from GW, supplied with the Drop Pod, say to not glue this section shut, to allow the doors to open, and you go against this and glue them shut, and try to claim this changes the rules in any way, shape or form.

 

That's modelling for an advantage.

 

By all means, glue them shut. But play the DP as it was supposed to be played, with doors that open.

Then don't complain when you can't go within an inch of the petals or someone deploys out of them.

[greatcrusade08]

Then don't complain when you can't go within an inch of the petals or someone deploys out of them.

 

but i would (to the first point), as petals are blatantly not hull.. the only grey area is whether a decorative element such as the 'petal' can be considered part of the vehcile for purposes of disembarking

[Gentlemanloser]

Then don't complain when you can't go within an inch of the petals or someone deploys out of them.

 

I surely won't, as long as your deploy the DP with the petals open, and if the tip touches the board edge you roll for perils...

 

If you want to play them as hull, play them as hull. With *everything* that encompases.

 

Otherwise, don't model for an advantage.

 

And if you've glued your petals shut, well, you won't be able to deploy your DP, as you won't have the exact footprint for it.

 

Or we can just ignore the petals entirely. For LoS and *everything* else. ^_^

[Interrogator Stobz]

Just my 2c,

Pods are open topped right? Sm dexes etc.

Open topped vehicles don't have access points right? p70BrB

Passengers are allowed to disembark from any point of the vehicle right? p70BrB

Access points are defined as "doors, ramps and hatches" used for dis/embarking, p66BrB

The doors count as part of the vehicle model (agreed not hull, but that relates to other measured distances p56BrB)

Then it would seem fair to deploy from the end of the opened doors, (despite the clear picture in the BrB showing distances from/to a Rhino's access points with the doors closed and description on P67) right?

 

I'd rather it be from the 'hull' shape but I got reading BrB just now to clear my head.

 

On the TLOS thing, my 2c would be if they're up they're up, if they're down they're down, good and bad either way. My son broke one of my pod doors and now it's UP always.

 

That begs the further question,

A vehicle for most measurements takes up the space of it's hull, as other models use their base,

An enemy model must keep 1" away from and also not touch an enemy model except in the assault, no enemy my therefore approach the pods doors in the move and shoot phases,

Models may not climb on top of other non destroyed models,

So, what about friendly models walking across the doors?

 

I'd say they can as the doors are not really 'hull' and they can go within the magic 1" but any thoughts?

Do the doors, which are not hull count with regard to touching?

 

stobz

[Chengar Qordath]

Or we can just ignore the petals entirely. For LoS and *everything* else. :)

Except I don't think you can ignore physical obstructions under the TLoS rules. I don't know of any rule that let's you just pretend an obstruction is invisible whenever it suits you.

[Gentlemanloser]

'Decorative' items don't impact LoS in any way. That's already in the TLoS rules.

 

Just rule the petals decorative and we're good to play. No cover, no TLoS, no disembarkation, no perils, no difficult terrain. And no issue if you glue them shut.

 

As long as you allow them to be shot through, as GW instructs them to be modelled.

[greatcrusade08]

'Decorative' items don't impact LoS in any way. That's already in the TLoS rules.

 

Just rule the petals decorative and we're good to play. No cover, no TLoS, no disembarkation, no perils, no difficult terrain. And no issue if you glue them shut.

 

As long as you allow them to be shot through, as GW instructs them to be modelled.

 

tbh any potnential grey areas aside.. thats the best way to house rule drop pods IMO

[Gentlemanloser]

Thinking about my answer, I'm slightly incorrect.

 

You can't use decorative items to shoot at, and you can't claim cover saves for decroative items.

 

But there's no mention in the rules aobut decrative items not blocking LoS to other units.

 

So feel free to model massive banners on all your troops and use them to block LoS to the rest of your army...

 

 

Edit: In refererence to DPs, the petals would block LoS, if you have a mini small enough to be completely hidden by a petal...

 

But they wouldn't offer a cover save, nor would you be able to shoot a DP if all you cna see is a petal.

[Grey Mage]

Then don't complain when you can't go within an inch of the petals or someone deploys out of them.

 

I surely won't, as long as your deploy the DP with the petals open, and if the tip touches the board edge you roll for perils...

 

If you want to play them as hull, play them as hull. With *everything* that encompases.

 

Otherwise, don't model for an advantage.

 

And if you've glued your petals shut, well, you won't be able to deploy your DP, as you won't have the exact footprint for it.

 

Or we can just ignore the petals entirely. For LoS and *everything* else. :P

Hull or not, you cant be on top of another model.

 

If the model moves- such as a defiler for example, or the turret on a fire prism- that changes the shape of the model. So its arguable that no, no one needs to deploy their pods with the petals open at all.

 

Its also quite clear that you deploy from within 2" of any part of an open topped vehicle. While some people are claiming that the ramp is a decorative element, no one has yet to be able to show this definitively. Since the petals/ramps actually account for a little over half the mass of the model I cant see discounting them as irrelevant/not part of the hull. In fact, with the petals up they also account for over 3/4 of the surface area...

 

And lastly, you cant say that any and all pods with closed petals are going to be modeling for advantage- a number of them cannot be opened *old FW models for starters, but if you foul up the new one it wont open all the way*- and no one claims your modeling for advantage when the turret on your predator, fire prism, etc turns- yet we measure from those gun barrels and it really does add an extra inch, of three, to the distance of the gun.

 

The drawbacks and advantages go both ways- it blocks more LOS with the petals up, sure. It also doesnt cover as much surface area on the ground and is less of a hazard for navigation. Yes, there are pros and cons both ways for each player on the table- but lets not go straight to cries of cheese ok?

[Techmarine Data007]

I personally choose not to shoot through enemy models anyway. Whether it's the open petals of a Pod, or the open doors of a Rhino, or between the legs of a Dreadnought. None of these seem particularly sporting, and I don't even like drawing a bead with a lascannon through three tiny windows and an herb garden.

[greatcrusade08]

While some people are claiming that the ramp is a decorative element, no one has yet to be able to show this definitively.

 

im pretty sure i explained in detail why they cannot be part of the hull?

the drop pod is immobile before they are opened (actually the wording is 'blown') if they are hull, they cannot by RAW be moved

[Grey Mage]

While some people are claiming that the ramp is a decorative element, no one has yet to be able to show this definitively.

 

im pretty sure i explained in detail why they cannot be part of the hull?

the drop pod is immobile before they are opened (actually the wording is 'blown') if they are hull, they cannot by RAW be moved

However I disagree with your assertion.

 

It 'counts as' a vehicle that has suffered an immobilized damage result that cannot be repaired. As people always like to bring up with the Vulkan debates- is counts as the same thing as simply having an immobilized result? Since we are requested to open the petals, is this not an exception? Is that not why it counts-as something instead of simply suffering it?

 

Indeed, since the part of the model that is in contact with the board doesnt move, is it moving at all?

[Interrogator Stobz]

im pretty sure i explained in detail why they cannot be part of the hull?

the drop pod is immobile before they are opened (actually the wording is 'blown') if they are hull, they cannot by RAW be moved

Whilst my opinion sits firmly in the don't deploy from the doors camp, I can't help but read the rules as written.

'Blown open' is a fluff thing, in game terms the hull lands and the doors are opened simultaneously.

-Landed, then blown, then troops disembarked is concidered one event when the pod enters the battle.

-It is different to 'entered the battle' and becomes in ALL respects immobile in that paragraph.

 

s

[greatcrusade08]

Its flimsy and not at all like you, but it is the -OR- and we are required to cross the 'i's and dot the 't's so here goes.

 

It 'counts as' a vehicle that has suffered an immobilized damage result that cannot be repaired.

As people always like to bring up with the Vulkan debates- is counts as the same thing as simply having an immobilized result?

 

it actually doesnt say "counts as", it says "counts in all respects as"

 

lega definition

in all respects preposition absolutely, all-compreeensively, all-inclusively, broad-based, capaciously, commrehensively, consummately, developed, encyclopedically, entirely, exhaustively, expansively, extensively, fully, globally, in all regards, inclusively, overall, sweepingly, thoroughly, totally, unconditionally, undividedly, univerrally, unreduced, utterly, very thoroughly, with every assect considered, with no exception, without omissions,

 

so rather than being one thing counting as another, the wording shows us its unconditionally the same thing.

also the headin is titled "immobile", so its far from a comparison to vulkans gauntlet and a heavy flamer

 

Since we are requested to open the petals, is this not an exception?

actually being a stickler here, id like that quote.. where does it state you 'must' open the petals, or even 'you can' open the petals.

the closest we come is the following

once the drop pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark

 

thats incredibly vague and inconclusive.. and considering the vast meanings of the word "blown", we could equally make the assumption that the hatches are blown 'off' the drop pod and is shown on the model by simply lowering them

considering this nugget is found in the transport section i cant see how it can be considered a direction for lowering petals.. its clearly not what it says

 

Is that not why it counts-as something instead of simply suffering it?

you raise an interesting point, but its pretty much blown away by the wording of the immobile rule

"a drop pod cannot move"

what you have uncovered is perhaps a way to circumvent shifts on the vehicle damage table, since we could infact argue its not technically immobile (but only if you consider my above arguments to be insufficent)

 

Indeed, since the part of the model that is in contact with the board doesnt move, is it moving at all?

if the petals themselves are considered part of the hull then they would be considered to have moved.. becuase parts of thier hull have changed position (and not by te 40k definition of pivoting)

 

indeed if you consider the drop pod to not be technically immobile it may infact pivot on the spot.. if those petals are considered hull, it could be used to tank shock and ram other units despite not being able to actually move.

 

i see why youve picked up these loose threads, but tbh they dont hold up to scrutiny

 

im pretty sure i explained in detail why they cannot be part of the hull?

the drop pod is immobile before they are opened (actually the wording is 'blown') if they are hull, they cannot by RAW be moved

Whilst my opinion sits firmly in the don't deploy from the doors camp, I can't help but read the rules as written.

'Blown open' is a fluff thing, in game terms the hull lands and the doors are opened simultaneously.

-Landed, then blown, then troops disembarked is concidered one event when the pod enters the battle.

-It is different to 'entered the battle' and becomes in ALL respects immobile in that paragraph.

 

it doesnt say blown opne, merely blown..

and they cannot all happen at once becuase thier is movement involved.. a drop pod arriving by deepstrike is a form of movement, and disembarking cannot happen until after it has moved and landed..

at this point it had already entered the battle and is immobile.

you cant disembark from a vehicle unless that vehicle is already in play..

 

edit: for the sake of completeness, i do beleive vulkan fires a heavy flamer and therefore benefits from his own re-rolls

there is also a definition of blown which means to open like a flower, but there are many more commonly used versions of that word that basically means "blown open/destroyed"

whether we accept the former to be true in this case (common sense in interpreting says yes) it doesnt change the fact that it happens after the drop pods arrive and therefore after its immobile

[Interrogator Stobz]

it doesnt say blown opne, merely blown..

and they cannot all happen at once becuase thier is movement involved.. a drop pod arriving by deepstrike is a form of movement, and disembarking cannot happen until after it has moved and landed..

at this point it had already entered the battle and is immobile.

you cant disembark from a vehicle unless that vehicle is already in play..

 

edit: for the sake of completeness, -snip-there is also a definition of blown which means to open like a flower, but there are many more commonly used versions of that word that basically means "blown open/destroyed"

whether we accept the former to be true in this case (common sense in interpreting says yes) it doesnt change the fact that it happens after the drop pods arrive and therefore after its immobile

Sorry GC08 but that doesn't really help your arguement, you confirm the rules say they are 'blown' and that common sense dictates that means open. In game terms (because of the pod exception to the normal immobile rules for moving after becoming immobile) the landing and opening of the doors happens simultaneously, then disembarking must happen as you say.

The rules for disembarking open topped vehicles state that models may disembark from any point of the vehicle (my BrB is at home so I can't quote that) it does not say hull etc. It also states that doors, hatches and accessways are all access point ergo count as part of the vehicle.

 

I thing that when people disembark from the doors they are going outside RAI, but RAW seen clear to me.

There is still a bit of ambiguity with regards to crossing the damned doors when they are down as well. Pods with their doors open have a massive 'footprint' on the tabletop, esp. when there are several in and around a close combat.

 

s

[Gentlemanloser]

We've covered the "any part of the vehicle" above. Where do you measure the disembarkation distance from? The Hull.

 

You can disembark in an open topped vehicle from any part of the hull, not just an access point. You can't, for example, disembark from the tip of a Turret Weapon on an open topped vehicle.

 

So its arguable that no, no one needs to deploy their pods with the petals open at all.

 

Why and how?

 

And lastly, you cant say that any and all pods with closed petals are going to be modeling for advantage- a number of them cannot be opened *old FW models for starters, but if you foul up the new one it wont open all the way*- and no one claims your modeling for advantage when the turret on your predator, fire prism, etc turns- yet we measure from those gun barrels and it really does add an extra inch, of three, to the distance of the gun.

 

Old FW model, fine. But FW models aren't usually allowed in normal 40k games.

 

As for messing up *your* construction. Not my issue. Do the decent thing and play as if you'd built it correctly and the doors open. Don't say "Guys, I messed up building this, the doors don't open. I didn't do it on purpose, but i'm now gonna use this as a pillar to block all los!".

 

Again, IIRC, the instructions say not to glue them. They are supposed to turn. And you *can* turn them to measure from/take los from.

 

but lets not go straight to cries of cheese ok?

 

It was part of the discussion of official GW modelling instructions, and modelling for an advatnage by *not* following these instructions. You choose not to follow the insructions doesn't allow you to change the rules.

[Grey Mage]

Do your rhinos keep their rear hatches open?

[greatcrusade08]

whether we accept the former to be true in this case (common sense in interpreting says yes)

Sorry GC08 but that doesn't really help your arguement, you confirm the rules say they are 'blown' and that common sense dictates that means open.

 

well thats just bizzare.. you want to take my common sense 'context' (read RAI) and try and suggest its RAW.

im sorry but that just doesnt cut it.. 'blown' can mean an number of things, the opening like a flower is an obscure meaning of the word and many other possible meanings come first.

just becuase i admit to using common sense in my interpretation doesnt change the very bad wording.

'blown' is a far cry from saying "now lower the petals"

 

In game terms (because of the pod exception to the normal immobile rules for moving after becoming immobile) the landing and opening of the doors happens simultaneously, then disembarking must happen as you say.

except the doos being 'blown' is listed as happening at the time of disembarking (or just before in the same sentence).. it doesnt happen until the drop pod has landed and in play.

these things cant happen simultaneously, its a practical impossibility.

the drop pod must land before the hatches are 'blown' and before the troops disembark.. since as soon as it enters the battle its immobile, it must be immobile wen those last two steps occur.

 

i think ive been very clear on this point

 

The rules for disembarking open topped vehicles state that models may disembark from any point of the vehicle (my BrB is at home so I can't quote that) it does not say hull etc. It also states that doors, hatches and accessways are all access point ergo count as part of the vehicle.

 

first point.. all measurements are taken to the hull, so assuming we do count those petals as part of the vehicle, you would still need to measure from the hull when disembarking from them.

second point.. the word 'blown' has a common usage which means destroyed.. if the hatches are destroyed in rule terms then they cant exist in any other form than TLOS on the tabletop

it doesnt matter what i beleive the word 'blown' to mean, its what we can prove since its used in actual RAW (my interpretation is RAI and thats usless)

 

I thing that when people disembark from the doors they are going outside RAI, but RAW seen clear to me.

all measurements are taken to and from the hull.. thats RAW

 

There is still a bit of ambiguity with regards to crossing the damned doors when they are down as well. Pods with their doors open have a massive 'footprint' on the tabletop, esp. when there are several in and around a close combat

 

its weird isnt it, how when a drop pod lands it has a small footprint, but after it lands it opens to have a much larger footprint.. hang on i thought you said landing and opening happened simultaneously.. then why dont we use the larger footprint for landing?

becuase it happens BEFORE you 'open' the pod.. and i repeat for the umpteenth time.. there are no direct instructions to open the pod, only the use of one word... 'blown'

since there is no instruction to open it, then doing so is RAI (in interpreting the word 'blown')

secondly since being 'blown' happens after the drop pod lands, then its done after the pod has been immobilised, and as such would be illegal if the petals are considered part of the hull (because according to the BFRB movement is deemed to have happened by measuring a part of the hull before and after)

 

whether or not petals affect the rest of the game, and how, will depend on how you interpret the rest of the evidence.

 

1: petals are hull:

then assuming your opponent allows you to open them (against RAW),

• you wouldnt be allowed to deploy or move over them.
  
• the enemy couldnt approach within an inch unless assaulting the drop pod
  
• if they open onto impassable terrain, enemy/friendly models or the edge of the board then they would have to take a DS mishap test
  
• they would offer cover to other units
  
• you can draw LOS to them in order to shoot the drop pod
  

 

2: petals are decorative

the either drop from the hull, or are considered to have been blown clear of the drop pod

• they wouldnt offer cover
  
• they wouldnt hamper movement, all units friendly and enemy could move over/through them
  

 

3: petals cannot open

becuase of modelling (glued shut) or you follow strict RAW that there is no direction to open them

• you cannot draw LOS through the drop pod
  

 

 

in summation, whilst i agree drop pods are meant to be opened, there is no actual direction to do so (poor wording and usage)

i believe the rules show that if you want to open the pods, the petals cannot be considered part of the hull.. treating them as hull creates too many rules clashes and secondary issues.

all measurements are taken to and from the hull (all inclusive, meaning disembarking aswell), i realise the disembark rules for open topped says 2" from any part of the vehicle, but its not mutually exclusive from the more generic measure from the hull rule.

the reasoning behind that is that open topped transports differ from regular transports as they dont require access points, hence dismebarking from any point (from the hull)

 

Do your rhinos keep their rear hatches open?

do we have instruction to open them in the first place?

[Gentlemanloser]

Do your rhinos keep their rear hatches open?

 

What's the relevance here?

 

Sure, you could go down the route of claiming you could shoot through enemy Land Raiders, as both thier 'doors' shouldn't block LoS. But then those doors are Access Points of the Hull (and the Hull blocks LoS), and can be shut. Again IIRC the official instruction is to not glue them, so you can open/close them if you wish.

 

DP, being open topped, have no access points.

[greatcrusade08]

DP, being open topped, have no access points.

 

actually thats incredibly relevant, how many times have we heard the argument that the petals are hatches, hence access points and part of the hull..

put the kaibosh on that.

[Grimtooth]

Some amazing rules lawyering a semantic hoop jumping going on this thread.

 

Regarding the fluff description of "blown", when combined with how the actual model is designed, it is crystal clear that "blown" does indeed mean the doors open and lay down. To insist on the ambiguity of "blown" without taking into account the actual mechanical design of the drop pod is being disingenuous.

 

As for coorelating opening of the petals with model movement when prohibited by being immobilized is being something that I would be banned for saying here. The footprint of the model has indeed changed by the petals being lowered, however that has not "moved the model. To keep trying to break the process down into micro managed steps where you are able to cry foul at your given point of defense is not how the game works.

 

We know that the drop pod is not done moving until the unit inside is allowed to disembark. The unit can only disembark once the petals have been lowered. The petals are lowered because they are "blown" which when viewed in light of the mechanics and design of the model entails them being lowered on their hinge. Thus we know that a drop pod is not considered done moving until after the embabrked unit has disembarked which is after the doors have been "blown". At that point it is considered to be done and is then immobilized.

[greatcrusade08]

i agree with most of what you said brother ramses, normally i dont get into semantics.. but when people make sensationalist claims like being able to deploy from the tip of the 'petal' then i feel the need t break down RAw toexplain why they cant..

apparently common sense wasnt good enough so it forced my hand

 

edit: actually i feel a little insulted here, not anyones fault.. but i had to fight fire with fire in order to prevent some serious abuse of drop pods, and yet i feel like ive been accused of being a rules lawyer... strange!

anyhoo, we all know you deploy from the main stem of the drop pod and the majority of us play that you can deploy on the petals.. even GW pics show men standing on them.. this clearly indicates they cannot be hull.

 

but again as mentioned, this is the -OR- and common sense does not belong here (or at least it doesnt when i bring it up)

[Grimtooth]

i agree with most of what you said brother ramses, normally i dont get into semantics.. but when people make sensationalist claims like being able to deploy from the tip of the 'petal' then i feel the need t break down RAw toexplain why they cant..

apparently common sense wasnt good enough so it forced my hand

 

edit: actually i feel a little insulted here, not anyones fault.. but i had to fight fire with fire in order to prevent some serious abuse of drop pods, and yet i feel like ive been accused of being a rules lawyer... strange!

anyhoo, we all know you deploy from the main stem of the drop pod and the majority of us play that you can deploy on the petals.. even GW pics show men standing on them.. this clearly indicates they cannot be hull.

 

but again as mentioned, this is the -OR- and common sense does not belong here (or at least it doesnt when i bring it up)

 

However it is balanced by the other side of the coin,

 

Disembarking from the tip of the petal also allows shooting and assaulting TO the tip of the petal. Examining the scenarios involved with recognizing the petals I see balance.