Drop Pod Footprint Question

[VIIILegionaire.]

So I used my first drop pod last night (maintaing a mostly infantry based army for 5th), and we ran into some issues that we couldn't find any clear answeres for, hopefully the frater will be able to help me out here. I didn't glue the doors shut so that I could open them once deployed, now we didn't know how to treat the doors when it came to models and placement, can friendly or enemy models be placed on the doors once their down?  When I deployed the doors down after deep striking, one of them was hitting a wall, should we have moved the pod the minimun distance because that counts as landing in immpossible terrain? Do they count for measuring range to and from hulll?

[Azatoth]

As far as I know it is always the hull for measurements. Doors do not exists in regards to cover, difficult terrain etc.

[Grey Mage]

Ive seen it played both ways, what really matters is that you are consistant, and generally that you arent deploying from the tips of the hatches.

 

Most people seem to play that the area with the thrusters is the hull, the rest is just extra.

[Upstartes]

Related question: does the drop pod block LOS completely? If all the doors are open, it doesn't really block LOS. The rules describe all hatches as being blown on landing, which leads me to believe that you have to treat the pod as if all doors are open, even if you can't open them due to other models.

[Azash]

Related question: does the drop pod block LOS completely? If all the doors are open, it doesn't really block LOS. The rules describe all hatches as being blown on landing, which leads me to believe that you have to treat the pod as if all doors are open, even if you can't open them due to other models.

 

I have always played it and seen it played as it is not a line of sight blocker cause as you stated the doors are blown or should come down at deployment but only if you can draw a direct line of sight from firing model to target model. If the fins block your ML marine from seeing the target then that model can not fire. From then on its standard line of sight rules if you can get direct line of sight on a model/unit then you can fire on that unit regardless of what you may be firing through an area occupied by another unit.

 

However if you are tracking your line of sight through the hull area of the drop pod we have always played that as if you were shooting through another unit thus giving the target unit a cover save (unless its a vehicle of course then vehicle cover rules apply as normal).

[Gentlemanloser]

There are a couple of very long threads on this in the OR.

 

There are really two ways of plaiyng it, with one of them being wrong. :P

 

If you class the doors as part of the hull, then you can disembark 6" fromt the tip of them, they count for DS mishaps, and they can be charged by the enemy (and you cannot place your own minis on top of the doors.)

 

Glueing them shut is then modelling for an advantage, as it makes the DS footprint smaller, and gives you a LoS blocking pillar.

 

 

Or, you can ignore the doors for all purposes.  And if they are glued shut, assume you can shoot through them.

[Grey Mage]

And I disagree with that last statement, as doors arent on the list of things you ignore- whens the last time someone shot through your landraider, rhino, or devilfishes doors?

[Gentlemanloser]

When was the last time a LR doors effected it's DS footprint?

 

Can't have it both ways.

 

Either you ignore the doors totally, in both up and down positions.

 

Or you rule the doors as part of the hull, and as part of the DS footprint, gluing them shut is modelling for an advantage.

 

Glueing shut, and blocking LoS is cake and eat it time.

[Fibonacci]

This is a long debated topic. You will have to discuss this with your gaming group and come to some agreement. It really does nbot matter how you play it as long as you are consistant.

 

Here we play it like the door are terrain. When deploying, the doors can lay out on top of other terrain or even be blocked if against a wall or hill. Either side can walk on the doors, they block LoS, and all that. If a drop pod has its doors glues shut then we play as if shooting through another unit as said above.

 

This is all just house rules though. The details for GW rules are just not there to cover every exception that you get with drop pods.

[Grey Mage]

When was the last time a LR doors effected it's DS footprint?

 

Can't have it both ways.

 

Either you ignore the doors totally, in both up and down positions.

 

Or you rule the doors as part of the hull, and as part of the DS footprint, gluing them shut is modelling for an advantage.

 

Glueing shut, and blocking LoS is cake and eat it time.

You dont have to glue them- they stay up fine on their own... And outside of C:SM theres nothing that says the doors have to be open on your fully articulated model.

 

And 3-d it. If you didnt have anything there you could shoot right through the model, it could be the difference between a coversave from a rhino or not for a taller creature like a wraithlord.

[Gentlemanloser]

 

You dont have to glue them- they stay up fine on their own...

 

Half mine do, half mine can't stay shut if I blu-tac them. But this is purely avoidance of the issue (If they're not glued, you could quite easily pull the doors down.)

 

 

If you accept that the doors are part of the hull and can block LoS, then they should be down. As they effect;

 

Deep Strike Footprint

Disembarkment range

Shooting at/Charging at Range

Movement restrictions (You can't have your own minis on top of the doors, and enemies can't come within 1" of them, unless charging)

 

And by keeping them up, you are modelling for an advantage. For the above *and* to claim your DP now totally blocks LoS.

 

Ignore the doors as 'decorative petals' (to stop discussions about shooting through the sides of Rhinos...), and *all* these issues disappear.

 

You can then model your Drop Pod however you want, and it won't impact the game at all.

[Dam13n]

The way I always play it is that the base pentagonal "hull" of the drop pod counts as the point from which disembarking occurs.

 

I feel that the doors should be unfurled once deployed, however they are flat enough for models (of either side) to stand on, so I count them as "open ground"

 

Line of sight is "true" in 6th edition, so you could shoot through the pod if you can see models on the other side, although they'll get a 5+ cover if obscured.

 

To those advocating leaving the doors up in order to block LoS, although there isn't anything to specifically say you can't, I personally would see as it going against the "spirit of the game". After all, how could your models deploy if the doors stay closed?

 

The only exception is if the pod lands adjacent to a building that blocks one or more doors from fully opening, in which case LoS isn't likely to be affected if the obstructed doors stay up.

 

Anyway, this is my interpretation, to me it seems fair and in the spirit of the game. But, as there is no hard rule, the best thing would be to come up with a concensus where you play, so it's fair for everyone.

[Grey Mage]

And for those of you advocating that the doors should be open: what do you do with the old FW/Armorcast drop pods that have no large openable doors but are instead one solid piece? Or the numerous scratchbuilds that were made before the official kit hit? About 2/3rd of my drop pods have no way of physically opening... should half an army using one rule while the other half uses a different one?

 

No one advocates "well just ignore that part of this model for all intents and purposes" with any other vehicle out there, but for some reason some people think its ok with the DP, and I dont understand it.

[Dam13n]

Well in a friendly game you could simply have them count as an earlier/later mark of drop pod which reseals itself once the troops are deployed... of course that raises the problem of the pods weapon (which would be sealed inside).

 

I don't think that there is a clear rule of thumb as the drop pod is (in so many ways) unique to 40k (the way it deploys, the idea of the doors opening - nobody I know opens their rhino doors when the unit inside disembarks, the fact that, when open you can see through it and that the weapon is mounted inside the vehicle).

 

I still maintain that, if the pod can open - it should.  Otherwise it's play it as you see it.  It does raise the issue of people deliberately glueing the doors shut in order to gain an advantage (LoS blockers) but then again, the same issue has been mentioned with regards to mounting a land raiders sponsons on the front instead of the back doors in order to gain an extra inch of range.

 

One way that could balance it would be to house rule that a closed pod may obscure LoS better, however if the doors are down, they count as dangerous terrain to enemy units, thus increasing its "effective" footprint.  But this is of course not an OR, but a HR.

 

The last suggestion I can think of would be that if you have a mix, that you and your opponent decide which is "standard" and simply swap them around as needed when checking things like LoS.

[Gentlemanloser]

And for those of you advocating that the doors should be open: what do you do with the old FW/Armorcast drop pods that have no large openable doors but are instead one solid piece?

 

Ignore the petals.

 

 

Or the numerous scratchbuilds that were made before the official kit hit? About 2/3rd of my drop pods have no way of physically opening... should half an army using one rule while the other half uses a different one?

 

Ignore the petals for them as well.

 

We have the 'official' kit now, no more CD Scythes, or fantasy Thunderwolves.

 

 

No one advocates "well just ignore that part of this model for all intents and purposes" with any other vehicle out there, but for some reason some people think its ok with the DP, and I dont understand it.

 

Yes we do.  *All* decorative parts of vehicles are ignored for all intents and purposes.

 

The Petals of a drop pod are purely decorative.

 

And GM, you really must understand the issue with DS footprints, disembarkation ranges, etc, etc that having the petals be part of the hull causes.  I really don't think you don't understand the issue.

 

 

 the same issue has been mentioned with regards to mounting a land raiders sponsons on the front instead of the back doors in order to gain an extra inch of range.

 

That's not modelling for an advatgae, but rather a tactical trade off.  Do you push back the side acess points to give the tanks weapons some extra range?  Is the LR primarily an assault vehicle or a shooting tank?

 

Edit: IT's not an issue now, with 6th's changes to disembarkation rules, but the old 2" limit could prove difficult to manage if you're trying to fit a 16 mini squad withinin 2" of just the front ramp, and remain in consistency.

[Grey Mage]

I do understand the issue- I also know that declaring them decorative for the sake of simplicity doesnt make them so, and causes other issues... like being able to shoot through the middle of a rhino.

 

Wich is why I play with my DPs 'petals' up, and blocking LOS like any other vehicle. Keeps it consistant, keeps people from placing models on top of it, makes disembarkation a breeze, etc without having to get into an argument with 13 year old kids about how much is obscured by all the harnesses, how tall the internal platform is etc when trying to shoot their hive tyrant- the LOS is exactly what it looks like instead. IE, true LOS.

[Eddie Orlock]

I do understand the issue- I also know that declaring them decorative for the sake of simplicity doesnt make them so, and causes other issues... like being able to shoot through the middle of a rhino.

I have some rhinos specifically modelled with openable side doors. What actually prohibits me from opening them if I found it advantageous to do so? Something about not changing a models shape during the game? What if I then deployed and played the model for the duration of the game with open doors? Further, would the open doors count as part of the hull for other game purposes like blast markers and troop disembarkation?

[Grey Mage]

All valid questions- and theres really nothing other than gentlemans agreements to guide and govern us on this one because GW hasnt and most likely wont say anything about it. Especially such a particular conversion...

 

I usually just leave them the same way during the entirety of a game, but Ive had opponents with similarly dynamic models- defilers being fully articulated, other tanks etc... - and the best practice Ive found has been "when that model moves, you decide how its going to be set until the next time it moves." So if you want to open the doors on both side and look through your rhino- fine, and its the same way on my turn.

[Gentlemanloser]

 

I have some rhinos specifically modelled with openable side doors. What
actually prohibits me from opening them if I found it advantageous to do
so? Something about not changing a models shape during the game? What
if I then deployed and played the model for the duration of the game
with open doors? Further, would the open doors count as part of the hull
for other game purposes like blast markers and troop disembarkation?

 

When can you open/close doors?

 

Could I park a Rhino sideways with asquad behind it out of LoS, open the doors to let my Psycannon shoot through my own Rhino, then close the doors to block LoS again?

 

By all means, go for consistency.  But if you rule the petals are hull, then you must play with them down.

 

It's too much of an advantage not to.

[Eddie Orlock]

All valid questions- ... - and the best practice Ive found has been "when that model moves, you decide how its going to be set until the next time it moves." So if you want to open the doors on both side and look through your rhino- fine, and its the same way on my turn.

This is consistent with my own observations and reflects my own practices with articulable models. I tend to regard moving a component on a model as moving the model with the exception that it can usually be done even while imobilised for things like aiming turrets. Being a permissive rules set, unless the rules say you can touch your figure to repose it, hands off.

 

'Course the concept that an imobilised vehicle could open and close its own doors would have 'interesting' interactions with drop pods, allowing chicanery like opening the one petel required to fire the storm bolter while leaving the rest up to block LoS or dropping them to interfere with enemy movement. Such an interpretation would grant some corner case utility to moving pods 'Flat Out' by having them retract the petels in the movement phase to allow passage of friendlies and dropping them to obstruct hostiles. I normally find them played as purely decorative with all measurement done from the pentagon base and the weapon mount as required.

[Gentlemanloser]

How's this for some raw consistency?

 

Defined access points are part of the hull. Which covers rhino doors.

 

As a drop pod has no defined access point, it's petals are purely decorative, and have no impact on the game.

 

Consistent, and avoids all rule issues that might crop up.

[Upstartes]

Since the statement about "hatches being blown when it hits the ground" is actually in the rule description and not the fluff text of the drop pod, I lean towards the notion that the drop pod should always be treated as having all the petals open with respect to line of sight - meaning that it doesn't really block LOS, but does provide a cover save if you're shooting through it. I'd say this should apply to even to models with the doors glued shut or older/3rd-party models that don't have opening doors. GW's model design is clearly intended to be doors-open when on the table, as the guns can't shoot unless the doors are open and the model always appears that way in GW product photos. This is all RAI, but in the absence of clear RAW, it makes the most sense to me.

 

Like all murky rules bits, however, discussion with your opponent pre-game is called for.

[Grey Mage]

Actually that not in all the descriptions- for example while its in C:SM its not in C:SW.

 

I have some rhinos specifically modelled with openable side doors. What

actually prohibits me from opening them if I found it advantageous to do

so? Something about not changing a models shape during the game? What

if I then deployed and played the model for the duration of the game

with open doors? Further, would the open doors count as part of the hull

for other game purposes like blast markers and troop disembarkation?

 

When can you open/close doors?

 

Could I park a Rhino sideways with asquad behind it out of LoS, open the doors to let my Psycannon shoot through my own Rhino, then close the doors to block LoS again?

 

By all means, go for consistency. But if you rule the petals are hull, then you must play with them down.

 

It's too much of an advantage not to.

As opposed to the giant advantages of the area denial that they provide if they are hull/interact with the games movement mechanics? Having played it both ways Its much strong with petals down as part of the hull... huge deployment radius and free terrain that can take 2-3 turns to move past is almost game breakingly good.

[puffin]

Purely out of interest, does anyone actually ever try to shoot through a drop pod?

 

Yes the rules technically say it's possible to shoot if you can see a micron of torso but the feasibility of shooting through that tiny area seems ridiculous and in no way commensurate with the 5+ cover save for being obscured.  It really should be a 2+ cover save if you try that sort of shot - and that would solve the doors issue quite nicely imo as ignoring the doors has less of an effect on shooting. 

[Gentlemanloser]

 

As opposed to the giant advantages of the area denial that they provide
if they are hull/interact with the games movement mechanics?

 

Huge Advanages?

 

The massive area is much more lkely to suffer a DS mishap, which in itself is a negative that stands head an sholders above area denial.  Not even mishap, but the DT test, as it's going to be nearly impossible to find a clear area where the tip of at least one petal doesn't land in terrain.

 

Then you make it easier to be charged/get melta shots in by being able to shoot a petal tip.

 

And the area denial also effect you, as you can't place your own minis on the petals now.  Sure you could abuse this by daisy chaining a series of drop pods in open ground (with a lucky no scatter) with petal tips open and an 1" apart.  To effectively block enemy movement.

 

Or you play them as decorative elements.  Which incurr none of these issues.