Do Shockprows count as part of the hull?

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.

**Grim Smasha**

The point still stands however. If only the wysiwyg portion is not hull, why not just put huge side plates onto your vehicle, as extra armor, like they did in WWII, and just claim "no hull" alllllllllllllllllLLLLLLLllllllllllLLLLLLllllll day long? Essentially, what you're claiming, is that if I do use large extra armor plates, even the ones from forge world, my vehicle is essentially invisible from the sides. This is completely absurd. I think that argument has failed you. Oh, btw, if you think I was being silly with the huge side plate comment, here's something from Forge World, just for you. . . I'd say 100%, or very close to it, it completely covered by those plates. Guess since I cant see hull from the side I can't shoot that rhino can I?. . .Might as well just always turn to to the side when it ends movement so that people can't shoot at my rhino that bought the "upgrade" "extra armor" because upgrades don't count as hull. . .right? I think we can toss your argument about upgrades = no hull right out the window.

**nosferatu1001**

Wow, wall o text rant.

You treat them as if they arent there. When you do that you can see thehull just fine.

It isnt my argument, its GWs. Get over it.

**Grim Smasha**

Where does it say that you treat wysiwyg not present on the physical realm? I also don't think you can claim GW's argument for them. . . at least not without reference.

**Jidmah**

Ignoring non-hull items for shooting means they do not block LoS either. On ork vehicles there are extra bits for extra armor, the battlewagon has those little triangular things hanging in front of the tracks (see my avatar), the trukk has six big glyph plates and a bunch of little ones as armor plates. Also the reinforced ram on battlewagons (the "jaw") blocks a good amount of the front, no one ever implied that you can't shoot through it.

**Grim Smasha**

Or were they just shooting to it?

**Jidmah**

Nope. Actually had a baneblade exactly hitting the front thing, and the player discarded the hit to my confusion. He then pointed me to the very picture on page 3.

**Night's Blood**

Prodigalson wrote:Reviewing the Games Workshop Assembly Guide for the Raider (online version that is the same as the one that comes with the Raider itself)

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=1&aId=12400031a&multiPageMode=true&start=2

Stage 11: "The kit comes with a choice of two prow designs, so simply decide which one you'd like on the Raider."

Stage 12: "Slot the prow into the hole at the front of the kit."

Stage 27: "With all the necessary parts assembled, what follows is all about personalising your Raider. The kit comes with a large range of extra components that can adorn the hull and deck to your liking. We began customising it by placing the three smaller blades in the depressions under the air intake."

These include

Spikes: Stage 28
Chain Snares: Stage 29
Banners: Stage 30
Splinter Rifles: Stage 31
More Spikes: Stage 32

I would submit that all of the above items (Spikes, Chain Snares, Banners, Splinter Rifles, More Spikes) are items that are "purly decorative"

Everyone in my area also plays that the Prow and Shock Prow is part of the hull, f.y.i. I have never had a person tell me that it wasn't part of the hull. I also allow people to shoot the front as well.

The argument that the orignal prow on the vehicle is not hull strikes me as disengenuous. I might as well take the position that any part of any vehicle is 'just for decoration' and not a part of the vehicle hull at all. This is a similar arument to people that claim that the Stormraven/Vendetta/Razorwing's "wings" are purely for decoration and not part of the hull, and therefore you can't measure distance to it. Put your model together, when you are finished putting the base model together (minus, purity seals, banner polls, spikes, heads, skulls (x20)) you have the hull of your vehicle. Everything after that is purely decorative.

In regards to the Shock Prow specifically. I would also state that the fundamental difference between a Shock Prow and Dozer Blade etc... is that the Dozer Blade is an addition to the model itself. It does not replace anything on the model but adds to the model itself. A rhino without a dozer blade is a complete model that may be fielded. A Dark Eldar model without a prow is not finished and model and cannot be fielded. A Shock Prow is a replacement to the model itself and therefore replaces the hull with another hull piece, changing the deminsions of the hull.

IMHO

Quoted for the Truth.

Just give up arguing with Nos, your sanity will thank you

**nosferatu1001**

Nights Blood - so, still no rules then? Are you saying a shock prow isnt similar to a dozer blade?

Still waiting for those rules you've constantly ducked providing.

**Night's Blood**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Nights Blood - so, still no rules then? Are you saying a shock prow isnt similar to a dozer blade?

Still waiting for those rules you've constantly ducked providing.

From page 4. <text redacted; if you can't argue politely, you're going to lose the privilege of doing so --Janthkin>

"t's funny, you still haven't answered my question but simply ask the same one to me. I will answer it because it seems you are unable to.

Page 60 says " when a unit fires at a vehicle it must be able to see its hull or turret (ignoring gun barrels, antennas, or decorative banner poles). "

So, the prow falls into two catagories... one being hull, as an essential part of the vehicle, and the other "gun barrels, antennas, or decorative banner poles". Can you honestly say, without a shadow of a doubt, that the prow honestly is in the same category as antennas ? If so then there is no sense continuing this discussion.

Now, lets see you pull some rules out yourself, or will i have to do that for you too?

**Jidmah**

For measuring, the list includes dozer blades. The Shock prow is a dozer blade.

**cgmckenzie**

You are not using the definition for hull in the measurements section about vehicles. It includes guns, dozer blades, antennae, and decorative items.

I wouldn't say it fits into the same category as antennas, but can comfortably say beyond the shadow of a doubt that they fit into the same area as dozerblades.

-cgmckenzie

**Night's Blood**

Again, dozer blades are a wargear upgrade, while prows are not.

I understand where you are coming from cgm, but i just disagree.

**cgmckenzie**

Being upgrade or not doesn't matter. Things that come standard on vehicles can be not hull while upgrades can be considered hull.

'not hull' standard on vehicles
-all guns
-open hatches
-antenna/vox equipment
-searchlights

'hull' upgrades
-sponsons
-extra armor
-red paint job

-optional turrets(there are a few)

Being an upgrade, wargear, or coming standard on the vehicle has no bearing on its status as 'hull' or 'not hull'. This is hardly a comprehensive list.

-cgmckenzie

**Night's Blood**

True, but the counter would be prodigalson's post.

**Jidmah**

Night's Blood wrote:Again, dozer blades are a wargear upgrade, while prows are not.

I understand where you are coming from cgm, but i just disagree.

Regular prows are hull, because they don't fit in any of the excluded categories. Shock prows do, however.

**Night's Blood**

Night's Blood wrote:
Jidmah wrote:While regular prow is part of the hull, a shock-prow wouldn't be, as it is a vehicle upgrade similar to dozer blades and reinforced rams.

Exactly my view. I think part of the misunderstanding here is between the prow and the shockprow.

We agree.

**Jidmah**

We were all discussing the shock prow on this page

**Night's Blood**

Oh, well, now they know my opinion in that.

**nosferatu1001**

We;ve all been discussing Shock Prows for a while now.

And, sorry to burst your bubble - we've all pulled out rules showing shock prows fall into the same camp as Dozer blades. Repeatedly. You choose to ignore them. Repeatedly.

**Night's Blood**

And i agree that shockprows do not count as hull, you seem to ignore all other opinions that NORMAL prows count as hull.

**nosferatu1001**

No, you just started talking about normal prows in an effort to deflect away from it.

You can argue by extension that it makes sense for aprow to not be hull, and it is logical. There are no rules totally "for" hull on that one.

**Night's Blood**

I've been saying since page 4 that shockprows do not count as hull. But, normal prows do. That is not "deflecting". That is simply my opinion. You can call it whatever you want. i was under the impression you were attempting to claim the normal prow did not count as hull, if that is true i still disagree.
If you thought that me referring to "prows" as "shockprows" than it was simply a misunderstanding.

**aggie0642**

Night's Blood wrote:And i agree that shockprows do not count as hull, you seem to ignore all other opinions that NORMAL prows count as hull.

Obviously GW has made it vague and unclear. But don't you think that GW would intend for regular prows and shockprows to be treated the same? Why would they be different?

So basically you are saying if I buy the upgrade you can't shoot at it, but if I don't buy the upgrade you can. That just doesn't pass the common sense test, especially considering that the shock prow is larger.

**Night's Blood**

Neither does most of GW's rules. However, with the precedent set by other vehicle upgrades such as dozerblades, deffrollas, then the only logical solution is that it does not count as hull.

This issue really needs a FAQ, just like the Valkyrie wing question.

**Dracos**

Night's Blood wrote:Neither does most of GW's rules. However, with the precedent set by other vehicle upgrades such as dozerblades, deffrollas, then the only logical solution is that it does not count as hull.

This issue really needs a FAQ, just like the Valkyrie wing question.

Just because you say that it is the only logical solution doesn't make it so. The shock prow is not categorically similar to the dozerblade or deffrolla because it does not add another part onto the vehicle, but rather slightly changes the shape of an existing piece. You are not adding a piece onto the vehicle like your examples, making it a different category.

Again there is no standard by which to determine if the prow is hull. I consider it to be hull, but others may not (though everyone I know IRL considers it to be hull). Regardless of whether you consider the prow to be hull or not, the shock hull should follow the same rules you use for the prow as it is essentially the same piece.

**ChrisCP**

Dracos wrote:
Night's Blood wrote:Neither does most of GW's rules. However, with the precedent set by other vehicle upgrades such as dozerblades, deffrollas, then the only logical solution is that it does not count as hull.

This issue really needs a FAQ, just like the Valkyrie wing question.

Just because you say that it is the only logical solution doesn't make it so. The shock prow is not categorically similar to the dozerblade or deffrolla because it does not add another part onto the vehicle, but rather slightly changes the shape of an existing piece. You are not adding a piece onto the vehicle like your examples, making it a different category.

Again there is no standard by which to determine if the prow is hull. I consider it to be hull, but others may not (though everyone I know IRL considers it to be hull). Regardless of whether you consider the prow to be hull or not, the shock hull should follow the same rules you use for the prow as it is essentially the same piece.

It really wouldn't if one was to follow the rules.

And one was never allowed to have parts of a model off the board - every good wargamer know the world ends at the edge of the board

ChrisCP wrote:As optional war gear the only condition in the rules (obviously after dealing with TMIR, which difficulties we ignore for this forum) is that the upgrade be ‘visually represented’ on the model.
"The rule is that such equipment must be visually represented on the model so your opponents can clearly see what they are facing." Page 47.

There are many ways in which to visually represent something – some more inane than others - without altering the dimensions of a model. When one ought to use the altered dimensions of a model, the rules explicitly tell us to use this new set:
“Instead, for distances involving a vehicle, measure to or from their hull (ignore gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners and other decorative elements).
There is however a notable exception, a vehicle’s weaponry. When firing a vehicle’s weapons, ranges are measured from the muzzle of the firing weapon, whilst line of sight is determined from the weapon’s mounting point” Pg 56,

” Sometimes, all that may be visible of a model is a weapon, an antenna, a banner or some other ornament he is wearing or carrying (including its wings and tail, even though they are technically part of its body). In these cases, the model is not visible. These rules are intended to ensure that models don’t get penalized for having impressive standards, blades, guns, majestic wings, etc.” Pg 16.

As such, anything, which alters the basic dimensions for a model is ignored for measurement, unless we have a rule telling us, otherwise, as per the permissive rule-set

If I wished to show my Extra Armour as a piece of paper with that written on it stuck to my vehicle I could - it don't make the paper hull

**Cyberjesus**

I would say that shockprows DO count as part of the hull, as bare in mind, apart from a couple of mm length difference... there is still a prow on the non upgraded raider/ravager

**Night's Blood**

Dracos wrote:
Night's Blood wrote:Neither does most of GW's rules. However, with the precedent set by other vehicle upgrades such as dozerblades, deffrollas, then the only logical solution is that it does not count as hull.

This issue really needs a FAQ, just like the Valkyrie wing question.

Just because you say that it is the only logical solution doesn't make it so. The shock prow is not categorically similar to the dozerblade or deffrolla because it does not add another part onto the vehicle, but rather slightly changes the shape of an existing piece. You are not adding a piece onto the vehicle like your examples, making it a different category.

Again there is no standard by which to determine if the prow is hull. I consider it to be hull, but others may not (though everyone I know IRL considers it to be hull). Regardless of whether you consider the prow to be hull or not, the shock hull should follow the same rules you use for the prow as it is essentially the same piece.

Which is why this is such a contentious issue. IMHO it follows the same reasoning as dozerblades, which are specifically mentioned, however i can understand why some would consider it hull.

I'll repeat, FAQ is needed.