Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

For those who use/have faced Drop Pods...
(more specifically, Pod models with disembarking ramps)
I am looking to hear how everyone "categorizes" the disembarking ramps:

Do you consider them part of the vehicle and no enemy model can be within 1" unless assaulting?

If a pod is completely destroyed, do you make the crater left behind the size of the main body or include the ramps as well?

Do the ramps block LOS for troops? Do they block LOS for things bigger than troops?

And if you have any other "rulings" that you have made/use in order to make using drop pods a little more clear, please add them here as well.

This is an attempt to get together some clarification so that I can discuss any problems with opponents before the game.
Thanks for the help.

I've only seen scratch built drop pods, and they have not had the 'open' doors.  I think by the letter of the rules, the doors would count as an 'enemy model', and therefore you could not move within 1" of them.

With regard to LOS, I would play it 'model's eye'.  If you can see the enemy model over, above, past, or under the door, then you can shoot at them.  Same for vehicles. 

For the destroyed result, only the Pen 6 result removes the vehicle.  I would leave a crater the size of the pod base (since very few will have craters that wide in their collections), and otherwise just treat the pod as destroyed (left on table), and acts as difficult terrain (in effect, giving you the same 'footprint' as the model).

Hope that helps, and again, just my .02 cents.  I would also say that any of these could be discussed and agreed to with your opponent before the game.

As with all vehicles, the different parts of the pod block actual model's eye view LOS. Height does not come into consideration as the Pod is neither engaged in CC nor a piece of area terrain.

The crater should be the actual footprint of the entire model. I have not seen it played this strictly in person though. A rough approximation is usually acceptable.

Do you consider them part of the vehicle and no enemy model can be within 1" unless assaulting?

Yes.

 

If a pod is completely destroyed, do you make the crater left behind the size of the main body or include the ramps as well?

Either way.

Do the ramps block LOS for troops?

No.

 

Do they block LOS for things bigger than troops?

No.

i take it your looking at the forge world ones.

this is a transport. think of it as a rhino-as with all vehicles as per the core rules the hull/body constitutes it's base. you would not consider the lowered rear rhino door to be it's base just as you would not on a drop pod.

 

when a pod is detroyed it becomes a piece of size 3 blocking LOS area terrain just like all other vehicles that are destroyed.

when a pod is detroyed it becomes a piece of size 3 blocking LOS area terrain just like all other vehicles that are destroyed.

Except that statement is not backed up by the rules at all. Destroyed vehicles continue to block LOS exactly as they did before they were destroyed; which is that they block LOS based on the actual profile of the model. If you can see an enemy model around or over the vehicle/wreck using a "model's eye view", then you can shoot at it.

Posted By yakface on 05/01/2006 10:05 PM

when a pod is detroyed it becomes a piece of size 3 blocking LOS area terrain just like all other vehicles that are destroyed.

Except that statement is not backed up by the rules at all. Destroyed vehicles continue to block LOS exactly as they did before they were destroyed; which is that they block LOS based on the actual profile of the model. If you can see an enemy model around or over the vehicle/wreck using a "model's eye view", then you can shoot at it.

Actually it doesn't say "blocks based on vehicle's profile" anywhere in the rules either, and 'model's eye view' is a re wording of 'bird's eye view' which is a figure of speech. If you go by the vehicle model definition the hull/main body is the area occupied by the model per page 6, so ramps would not be in the way or block line of sight any more than a banner hanging off the side of a champion model in close combat.

Snoogums,

For the last time. Claiming that Model's eye view is 'just a figure of speech' is simply your opinion and is not backed up by the rules at all.
It is a term defined within the BGB. If you and your gaming group choose to ignore it, fine, that is what we call a house rule. But, don't go around claiming that you house rule is the true state of the rules. It makes you sound ridiculous.

Model's eye view is not defined in the BGB.

Firing from a weapon mount is defined in the BGB, maybe you are confusing the two?

Posted By mughi3 on 05/01/2006 9:59 PM

i take it your looking at the forge world ones.

this is a transport. think of it as a rhino-as with all vehicles as per the core rules the hull/body constitutes it's base. you would not consider the lowered rear rhino door to be it's base just as you would not on a drop pod.

 

when a pod is detroyed it becomes a piece of size 3 blocking LOS area terrain just like all other vehicles that are destroyed.

 

Mughi, can you please just stop posting all together in YMTC? You obviously have no idea what the rules say, and you seem to think there's some sort of prize for being definitively wrong more than anyone else.

There's not. So just stop.

Posted By snooggums on 05/02/2006 9:52 AM

Model's eye view is not defined in the BGB.

Firing from a weapon mount is defined in the BGB, maybe you are confusing the two?

Another person that should not be posting.

BGB, page 20, Line of Site:

"...so players might have to stoop over the table for a models eye view."

So model's eye view is literal? If it is drawn for the model's eyes, then if the model is looking away it cannot see a model behind it to shoot, this would crate a 'facing' rule for models that is not there. This would also make wraithlords unable to shoot because they don't have eyes that I am aware of. Maybe you could come up with some rear view mirror model that would allow a model to look over it's shoulder to shoot maybe.

"Model's eye view" is a figure of speech and talking down to other posters does not make you more correct. You are quoting one line that contradicts the definition of a model, which is size level and base area with a 360 degree view since you are limiting their view to what their eyes can see.

Mughi, can you please just stop posting all together in YMTC? You obviously have no idea what the rules say, and you seem to think there's some sort of prize for being definitively wrong more than anyone else.

There's not. So just stop.

just because the rules don't say what you want them to say  doesn't mean i am going to stop posting. especialy when i have been correct.

you want to know exactly what the rules say?

since your apparently clueless let me show you.

core rulebook p67

"vehicle destroyed! the attack critically damages the vehicle.the vehicle is destroyed and becomes a wreck"

p68

"wrecks- a wrecked vehicle should be marked with some cotton wool smoke and flames and left on the table. it continues to block LOS as if it were intact but counts as difficult terrain for infantry movement. it counts as difficult terrain for vehicles with higher frontal armour but as impassable terrain for other vehicles. it provides a 4+ cover save for models on top of it or looking around it"

it is a size 3 blocking LOS piece of  terrain just like any other piece of area terrain that you either have to be in(within 6") to see into or out of, or move around the edge of to see past.

just like i said.

 

 

Snoogums: perhaps if you read the rest of page 20 you'd see that it's very specific on what a models eye view is. Less posting, more reading will make your contributions to the board much more useful.

Mughi, you're hopeless. You post a couple of quotes then a conclusion that doesn't follow from either of them. The part that makes you hopeless is you actually think that what you wrote makes sense. Please, just stop posting. It hurts my brain every time I see you make these non-sensical statements.

 

Posted By mughi3 on 05/02/2006 10:28 AM

"wrecks- a wrecked vehicle should be marked with some cotton wool smoke and flames and left on the table. it continues to block LOS as if it were intact but counts as difficult terrain for infantry movement. it counts as difficult terrain for vehicles with higher frontal armour but as impassable terrain for other vehicles. it provides a 4+ cover save for models on top of it or looking around it"

it is a size 3 blocking LOS piece of  terrain just like any other piece of area terrain that you either have to be in(within 6") to see into or out of, or move around the edge of to see past.

just like i said.

 

 

Dude, you just completely contradicted yourself. Nowhere in the Wrecks rule does it state that the wreck is "area terrain". The portion that YOU highlighted tells you explcitly that the vehicle wreck "continues to block LOS as if it were intact".

 

How does it block LOS when it is intact?

Model's eye view.

How does if block LOS "as if it were intact"?

Model's eye view.

 

How do you treat the wreck for movement purposes?

"counts as difficult terrain for infantry movement"

Difficult terrain, not area terrain. Not all difficult terrain is area terrain and vice versa.

 

How do you treat the wreck when figuring cover saves?

"it provides a 4+ cover save for models on top of it or looking around it"

Does this have anything to do with LOS?

Only in reference to cover saves.

Snooggums:<?

 

I'm going to have to say that you are way off on this one.  First, you actually confuse "bird's eye view", which represents a top down view of the playing table from an elevated position, with a "model's eye view", which represents the view from the model's perspective.  "Model's eye view" is about as far away from a re-wording of "bird's eye view" as it can get.  It's essentially the difference between a 1st person and 3rd person point of view.

 

Model's eye view is definitely a term defined within the BGB, as shown on page 20.  And no, we are not referring to the vehicle weapon mount line of sight described on page 64, a mere 44 pages further into the book than the text we are talking about.

 

As for whether you can see past the wrecked Drop-Pod, use the "model's eye view" to see if that is possible.  The "Vehicle Destroyed" damage result simply states that the model becomes a wreck, shown on page 67.  The wreck blocks line of sight just like the intact model, as shown on page 68.  The only two damage results that change the way you treat the Drop-Pod for line of sight are "Vehicle Explodes" and "Vehicle Annihilated", where the model is actually removed and a piece of difficult terrain replaces the model.

 

Mughi:

 

Your final conclusion was incorrect.  You stated that it blocks line of sight like area terrain, even though you correctly quoted the fact that "It continues to block line of sight as if it were intact but counts as difficult terrain for infantry movement."  So Mauleed and Loki are correct, and I'm not saying this to join their fan clubs, I'm saying this because they are correct.  Some of the comments may be rude, but it doesn't prevent your argument from being incorrect based upon the information you provided.  If you want to see the difference between wrecks blocking line of sight and area terrain blocking line of sight, compare the entry in the BGB on page 20, where vehicle wreck line of sight considerations are shown, and the entry on page 21, where area terrain line of sight considerations are shown.

 

Suppose you had a vehicle that was 12" long, and it became a wreck.  You move some troops on top of it at the far end of the wreck.  An enemy unit wants to shoot at those troops.  The wreck blocks line of sight just like the intact vehicle, so if the enemy troops can see your troops from a "model's eye view" they can be shot at, even if they are more than 6" from the nearest edge of the vehicle, because the wreck is not area terrain.  The wreck provides cover like area terrain, and it affects infantry movement like difficult terrain and vehicle movement like dangerous or impassible terrain, but it blocks line of sight like a vehicle.  Page 68 does not lead to the conclusion that the wreck becomes area terrain.  It gains attributes of area terrain in addition to its vehicle attributes, but it does not become area terrain.  Page 67 and the two damage results shown above represent the only two cases when the destruction of a vehicle results in area terrain.  So when you say it blocks line of sight "just like any other piece of area terrain" in your final conclusion, that is incorrect.

ok so i got the 6" into part wrong, i admit that-my bad, we always hide on the other side of it or jump into it to get the 4+ cover save. so the 6"  thing never came up. i just always considered a wrecked vehicle more terrain

 

i do get things wrong just like anybody else, but this is a forum for discussion and i do happen to know most of the rules pretty darn well and i am not going to stop posting because some other poster thinks they are smarter than anybody else here

So hopefully you see why we get so frustrated with you. You don't read the rules, yet you post and post incorrectly as if this is some sort of reality TV program where you might get a cameo in a crappy movie because you're "the dumb one".

Posted By mauleed on 05/02/2006 11:51 AM
as if this is some sort of reality TV program where you might get a cameo in a crappy movie because you're" the="" dumb="" one="" .="">

And your the insecure "Loser" who has to make himself feel better by putting others down while everbody else just kinda watches and feels sorry for you.

I would not play Disembarking ramps as part of the model as that would make pods way to big. Probably just need to talk about it with your opponent ahead of time and decide.

Gee, I don't know, they might have been reading that great font of wisdom that is this month's White Dwarf, where in the 'Drop Pod Tactics' article, they talk about them being LOS blocking Level 3 Terrain when destroyed.  :S

And we wonder how these rules-abominations get propagated.

And the real reason that people get jumped on in these threads is that this exact topic gets 'discussed' once a month, the same people quote the same incorrect rules and interpretations, and then refuse to accept that they're wrong (yet again).

You also need a certain amount of thick skin for YMTC.

Posted By Cruentus on 05/02/2006 1:03 PM

Gee, I don't know, they might have been reading that great font of wisdom that is this month's White Dwarf, where in the 'Drop Pod Tactics' article, they talk about them being LOS blocking Level 3 Terrain when destroyed.  :S

And we wonder how these rules-abominations get propagated.

And the real reason that people get jumped on in these threads is that this exact topic gets 'discussed' once a month, the same people quote the same incorrect rules and interpretations, and then refuse to accept that they're wrong (yet again).

You also need a certain amount of thick skin for YMTC.

Really.  That will certainly get cited by some people, and disregarded by others.  So sad, a one line reply on an "official" FAQ thread would answer this with effortless ease.

In the real world, I've seen the LOS / level three argument run both ways.  Used LOS to stick a defiler behind the cover of a Leman Russ, and had tourneys run by GW division level persons consider vehicles as  level three to avoid problems (which I was also ok with).

 

To the actual query - pods act as vehicles for LOS etc.  just as any other rhino/landraider.  Absent a specific statement in the drop pod rules (don't remember there being one) hatches operate just as any other vehicle.

I certainly wasn't looking to start a fight, what I hope comes of this post is that I can come up with the most "appropriately applied rules" for the drop pods I have. My pods will be modeled in the ramp down position, this seems the most appropriate for me (and unfortunately the most difficult to model) given my understanding of how drop pods work in 40k. Of course I appreciate hearing the pros and cons of both sides here, otherwise I would not have posted.
I think what it will come down to is going over the pods and their perceived "characteristics" before the game starts so there are no problems once they make planetfall.

On a real world basis, you can model them with the ramps down (always looking excellent).  However, if you argue LOS is blocked by those hatches - whether correctly or erroneously - you are going to get chewed on as that will most likely create a substantially larger LOS blocking feature.

the dred pod i made out of spare bits doesn't even have doors on it. mainly because i figured they would blow the doors as soon as they landed and i couldn't find anything in my bits box that i felt made a good door.

I have had the chance to play a couple of games now with these pod "ramp rules":

Pod ramps do not block LOS.
Ramps offer cover save where appropriate.
Enemy cannot be within 1" of pod body and ramps unless assaulting.
Ramps do not count as difficult terrain for movement
When pod is destroyed , ramps are included in effects.
When pod explodes, all that is left is crater the size of the main body.

Opponents haven't had any problems with these rules yet. One thing I found was some difficulty in landing pods exactly where I wanted, due to the ramps being down and their overall footprint on the table. It is quite possible to box in the enemy now and make them have to fight their way out of interlocked pods.

Regarding whether or not lowered ramps blocks LOS, I suggest that those of you who cannot figure it out - read Yakface's Warhammer 40,000 rule #1.

Unless your ramps are 30mm thick or more, its not going to be a problem as vehicles block Model's eye view LOS.

If you can see over it, you can see over it.


Ron,
The only problem I see with the way you played it is that you are not allowing models to come within 1" of the ramps, yet you are not representing this area with the crater template. They should really be the same size.

Personally, I'd just ignore the existance of the ramps for gaming purposes and stick with the main body.

Gee, I don't know, they might have been reading that great font of wisdom that is this month's White Dwarf, where in the 'Drop Pod Tactics' article, they talk about them being LOS blocking Level 3 Terrain when destroyed.

And we wonder how these rules-abominations get propagated.

And the real reason that people get jumped on in these threads is that this exact topic gets 'discussed' once a month, the same people quote the same incorrect rules and interpretations, and then refuse to accept that they're wrong (yet again).

You also need a certain amount of thick skin for YMTC.

I couldnt agree more. I know for a fact that the may's WD says just that, and it was the first thing I thought of when Mughi posted.

The lesson here (and most times here on this board) is to check what the actual rule book says, instead of quoting out of white dwarf. Question everything that comes out of our favorite propaganda rag. Its the only way to keep GW on their toes.

As to the original questions:

Simply put, if the model can see over it or through it (lots of space inside that pod), it can draw line of sight.

As far as deployment and movemnt of enemy models within1" of the ramps, thats a tough one. It depends on how literal the game group is. As of right now, there is no official model made by Citadel to represent either of the two drop pods.

Because of that, I would say "No. The ramps do not ninder movement within 1" of the ramps. It only hinders movement within 1" of the general form (the main body, if you will) of the drop pod". There is no official model for us to scrutinze and compare to. So that leaves us being as reasonable as possible when conveying the actual outline of this model.

Simply put, if the model can see over it or through it (lots of space inside that pod), it can draw line of sight.

except the fact that a pod is vehicle that blocks LOS as a vehicle . even though the doors may be down and there may be space inside you still  use the hull/main body of the model as it's base and since the frame/body/hull  of the vehicle is used for LOS blocking purposes you could not shoot through a pod with open doors any more than you could shoot through one with closed doors.

you still use the hull/main body of the model as it's base and since the frame/body/hull of the vehicle is used for LOS blocking purposes you could not shoot through a pod with open doors any more than you could shoot through one with closed doors.

Of course you can. Unless you subscribe to the 'Magic Cylinder' myth, which has no basis in actual rules.

You draw LOS past vehicles using a model's eye view. If you can see it, you can shoot it. It's that simple.