Moving off a Skyshield

[ShinyRhino]

How are you folks using the Skyshield when it comes to movement?

It's been suggested at our FLGS that you can roll a Difficult Terrain test and simply move directly under the pad, regardless of distance. I'm of the mind that you cannot move through solid terrain features without using an entry of some sort. Yes, if you're on top of the hatches on the pad surface, use 3" of movement to move directly down under the hatch, then outward if you have remaining movement. But essentially teleporting oneself directly under the solid sections of the pad?

[Fire Lord Captain]

How are you folks using the Skyshield when it comes to movement?

It's been suggested at our FLGS that you can roll a Difficult Terrain test and simply move directly under the pad, regardless of distance. I'm of the mind that you cannot move through solid terrain features without using an entry of some sort. Yes, if you're on top of the hatches on the pad surface, use 3" of movement to move directly down under the hatch, then outward if you have remaining movement. But essentially teleporting oneself directly under the solid sections of the pad?

The landing pad supports have ladders moulded on the back of them. Or am I missing the point here?

[ShinyRhino]

How are you folks using the Skyshield when it comes to movement?

It's been suggested at our FLGS that you can roll a Difficult Terrain test and simply move directly under the pad, regardless of distance. I'm of the mind that you cannot move through solid terrain features without using an entry of some sort. Yes, if you're on top of the hatches on the pad surface, use 3" of movement to move directly down under the hatch, then outward if you have remaining movement. But essentially teleporting oneself directly under the solid sections of the pad?

The landing pad supports have ladders moulded on the back of them. Or am I missing the point here?

 

Sort of.

If you're standing dead center on the middleof the landing pad, does a Difficult Terrain test allow you to pick up your model and place it directly UNDER the landing pad in the exact same position? There's no hatch within 4" of your model at that location.

[Panzerbjørn]

I don't have one in front of me, but I would say that normal movement rules apply.

If there is a ladder, you go 3" down it, if there is a ledge you can jump down using the jump rules.

 

If you need to move to get to either a hatch or ledge then you gotta move.

 

To be on the safe side, it's probably a good idea to check with your opponents before the game that you have the same opinion on how it all works.

[Fire Lord Captain]

How are you folks using the Skyshield when it comes to movement?

It's been suggested at our FLGS that you can roll a Difficult Terrain test and simply move directly under the pad, regardless of distance. I'm of the mind that you cannot move through solid terrain features without using an entry of some sort. Yes, if you're on top of the hatches on the pad surface, use 3" of movement to move directly down under the hatch, then outward if you have remaining movement. But essentially teleporting oneself directly under the solid sections of the pad?

The landing pad supports have ladders moulded on the back of them. Or am I missing the point here?

 

Sort of.

If you're standing dead center on the middleof the landing pad, does a Difficult Terrain test allow you to pick up your model and place it directly UNDER the landing pad in the exact same position? There's no hatch within 4" of your model at that location.

Ahh I see! Well personally I wouldn't allow it, as you say, there is no hatch within 4". Unless of course he melta'd a hole through the pad..

[Ming]

I thought I read somewhere that you had to take dangerous terrain checks to jump off it? It was provided as an example either in a WD battle report, or in the BRB...Regardless, if your opponent agrees...whatever you want...there is a guy at my FLGS with a pad, but I doubt I'll play him anytime soon to find out...Nice model for terrain, neat for scenario play, bit wierd to use in tournament play (imagine, you can destroy bastions, but cannot destroy a flimsy portable landing pad?)

 

Nuff said...

[DarkGuard]

That'll be the jumping down mechanic, page 99.

[Seahawk]

I'm of the mind that you cannot move through solid terrain features without using an entry of some sort.

This was your first mistake. :ph34r:

 

"Note that, as part of their move through difficult terrain, models can move through walls, closed doors and windows, and all similarly solid obstacles, unless the players have agreed that a certain wall or obstacle is impassable." (BRB p.90)

 

This means you are fully allowed to simply move up and down at any point through the landing pad; you are not forced to use the ladders unless you and your opponent agree to do so, at which point then you have to. The top and bottom of the pad are open terrain; only up and down is Difficult.

[ShinyRhino]

Ah, I see. I was applying a global FLGS "common sense" approach to rules. it's always been an unspoken agreement that if it's a solid wall, it's solid. We've never, EVER allowed folks to walk through walls, warp through floors, or phase through rock. We now have players who are new to the crowd and are attempting to circumvent that age-old agreement. Legal, sure, but not in keeping with consistent, established play.

[Seahawk]

They don't know it to be consistent, mind. They're just following the rules, and they're completely in the right. One must agree to not being able to move through walls. Since one has been able to move through walls since 3rd edition, and the fluff provides many reasons why you can, I'd say that it's counterlogic that you can't move through walls. :)

[ShinyRhino]

They doj'f know it to be consistent , mind. Theuy're just following the rules, and they're completely in the right. One must agree to not being abl eto move through walls. Since one has been able to move through walls since 3rd edition, and the fluff provides many reasons why tou can, I'd say that it's counterlogic that you can't move through walls. ;)

 

Yeah, it was my mistake. Just a very long-standing house rule that was always there and never questioned. I belive it started in response to folks parking tanks behind solid objects, and then moving them fractons of an inch forward to only present gun barrels through the wall for firing shots. Example: a Predator that makes a terrain test, rotates the turret, and pokes only its barrel "through" the wall for a shot. Since you can't shoot gun barrels, it was essentially an indestructible tank until you managed to walk through the same wall, or make an end-around across the entire table to reach the open side of the obstacle. it was also a sanity-preserver when folks attempted the same thing with Vindicators that were 100% out of LOS in the same "three-sided box" wall structure. They'd be moved 1" forward, but left inside the structure (and still behind the walls) to fire. Instead of attempting to mark phantom locations with dice and whatnot, or picking up the terrain and putting it on top of the Vindicators in their proper locations, it was enforced that we just didn't do that.

 

We'll hash it out at the FLGS for future generations.

[Seahawk]

Oi, fast typing on a tablet produces some wacky words.

 

It seems you have some ridiculously gamey players at your place! It was also illegal play, but ho hey let's not go there, eh?

[ShinyRhino]

It seems you have some ridiculously gamey players at your place! It was also illegal play, but ho hey let's not go there, eh?

 

Indeed. There's always that ten percent in every crowd. :D

[Gentlemanloser]

Why is it illegal?

 

If you have a flat wall (that was large enough) with no LoS thorugh it, and 'park' a Pred sideways next to it, that would obscure the entire Pred. Now if you rotate the Turret to the side, so that the end of the barrel is now on the other side of the wall, and LoS/Range is traced form the end of the barrel, surely the Pred would be allowed to shot, would it not.

 

As you can't target the barrel, you would be unable to return fire.

 

What's illegal here?

[Seahawk]

Can't put a model where it physically can't fit, including "barrels through solid bits". I suppose one could be a real gameyer and claim "Wobbly Model", but egh...

[Gentlemanloser]

So what happens if you've got say a Dreadnought with two TL Autocannon arms pointing out to the front?

 

These stick out further than it's base.

 

If you walk up to a wall, do you *have* to stop your movement before your base gets there, because your gun barrels touch it? Even though the base isn't near it?

 

It's one of the cases where difficult terrain, true line of sight and modelling for an advantage fail.

 

(Not a great example as the range of Walkers guns are measured from the base, but I hope you get the drift. :D )

 

Edit:

 

A mate used to have a similiar problem when playing Chaos Daemons. He was physically unable to deploy his Bloodletters in a deep strike circle, becuase of the massive swords at odd angles they had.

 

Edit2: And all the spikey bits. Of course. :P

[Seahawk]

Yep, stops short. Alternatively, he turns around to get that extra 1/4" or whatever. Since he's not getting shot anyway, this is no big deal. Next turn he busts through the wall facing forward again.

 

The only, only, only time we ever "assume the position" (ha! :P) of a unit is with a sloping hill where the model would just slide down it due to weight or hill construction (lookin' at you, GW plastic hills! :D). Otherwise, we follow the rulebook of "if it can't fit, it can't go there".

[Gentlemanloser]

Yep, stops short.

 

so modelling your tl autos in a downwards position is modelling for an advantage, as you should have them pointing straight out and restricting your movement.

 

As for not being able to be in the same space, I can't see anything against this (for non impassable terrain) in either the terrain or movement sections of the brb.

 

The only mention is for higher levels of ruins. if you can't be placed on levels above ground, you can't go there.

 

For other parts, there's no restriction (and evern the 'wobbly' box), and the idea is that you're brute forcing or cutting your way through.

 

it's seems feasible that a dreadnought has the "brute force" to punch thier weapons through a ruined wall, while remaining on the other side.

[Grey Mage]

Yep, stops short.

 

so modelling your tl autos in a downwards position is modelling for an advantage, as you should have them pointing straight out and restricting your movement.

Or you could keep the models as is, and be able to rotate the shoulders so this isnt a problem, ever. No modeling for advantage there man.

[Seahawk]

so modelling your tl autos in a downwards position is modelling for an advantage, as you should have them pointing straight out and restricting your movement.

Of course not. Like I said, I turn my dudes around so that I follow the rules...or I just rotate them, as said.

 

Well, until you can produce some material-phasing models so that they can move through solid objects, if you're on the wrong side of the wall then tough beans no shot, because that's how the rules work with vehicle shooting.

[Gentlemanloser]

wobbly mini. ;)

 

You're allowed to 'punch' through non impassible walls. you're not restriced on having to move fully through a bit of terrain.

 

Therefore there's nothing wrong with having a bit of you mini poking thorugh.

 

Obvisouly, you don't want to start poking holes in other folks scenary. ;) so 'wobbly mini'.

 

i can't find any raw to stop this, i feel like i'm missing something. :/

 

Or you could keep the models as is, and be able to rotate the shoulders so this isnt a problem, ever. No modeling for advantage there man.

 

I glued the arms of my first dread on.

 

I was nieve. ;)

 

and I don't want to turn around, and put rear armour potentially on show! ;)

 

My little girl has got something stuck under my shift keys. /sigh

[Seahawk]

Well...if the wall is solid then nothing will show so turning the back is fine. If the wall is not solid, then there are holes for the guns. Again, no problem either way.

[Ming]

What an interesting thread and I'm glad its not my FLGS...just my LGS.

 

Where it is important, I tell my opponent that they cannot shoot or move through solid walls when we look at terrain before deployment. Yep, the rules are clear you can move through a solid brick wall. I'd negotiate that we won't for game purposes. I have been in games where people have done all sorts of weird things, like stacked wrecked landraiders 3 high, rhinos deployed on roofs, etc. Some can be funny, some just suck the fun word out of the game.

 

However, it is not clear you can shoot through said solid wall. If you cannot see through it, you cannot shoot through it because you cannot actually see your target. Poke the barrel through, fire at a target you cannot see, and either of two things happen: you miss, or get shivved out back behind the store. Terrain should be something that adds to the tactical elements of the game, not something that is gamed or advantaged just for your win.

 

I can imagine if an opponent wanted to do this (fire through a solid wall) I'd say fine, but I'd get to shoot back at a vehicle in cover. If it was a really fun game with building rules in play, they might have to see if poking through a ruin's wall might just collapse the ruin...

[Ming]

What an interesting thread and I'm glad its not my FLGS...just my LGS.

 

Where it is important, I tell my opponent that they cannot shoot or move through solid walls when we look at terrain before deployment. Yep, the rules are clear you can move through a solid brick wall. I'd negotiate that we won't for game purposes. I have been in games where people have done all sorts of weird things, like stacked wrecked landraiders 3 high, rhinos deployed on roofs, etc. Some can be funny, some just suck the fun word out of the game.

 

However, it is not clear you can shoot through said solid wall. If you cannot see through it, you cannot shoot through it because you cannot actually see your target. Poke the barrel through, fire at a target you cannot see, and either of two things happen: you miss, or get shivved out back behind the store. Terrain should be something that adds to the tactical elements of the game, not something that is gamed or advantaged just for your win.

 

I can imagine if an opponent wanted to do this (fire through a solid wall) I'd say fine, but I'd get to shoot back at a vehicle in cover. If it was a really fun game with building rules in play, they might have to see if poking through a ruin's wall might just collapse the ruin...

[Gentlemanloser]

Isn't LoS still taken form the end of the gun barrel though?

 

And to agree (apart form house rules) that you can't move through a wall, you have to make that wall impassable terrain, right? could properly mess up things like deep strike...

 

As per the BRB you trace LoS from the weapon mounting, along the barrel, to see if the shot is blocked by terrain.

 

as the end of the barrel isn't blocked by the terrain it's poking through, that should allow the shot, right?