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.

I have a GW near me and the transition to LOS is a regular problem.

Example;
The GW store has some great city (ruins) buildings on big bases (from the GW kits) but people are playing LOS for some, and “building rules” and “area terrain” for others. Additionally, discussing “what is what” before a game is pointless, because someone played one way once, and unless they have a perfect memory played another set of rules a second time, etc.? This is very confusing, as all the terrain was fine for 4th edition “area terrain,” but some pieces are useless for 5th.

I have been playing 40k since 1st edition, and LOS is/and has always been a bane/hassle for terrain builders.

Example;

Many terrain builders created the ultimate most awesome looking pieces of terrain ever seen (maybe a thunder-hawk crashed into a war-hound titan). But some pieces (as above) were terrible to play with, in, on, or around, so no one EVER chose them, or ever wanted said pieces to be on the table.

Then, what happened is all the “terrain-smiths” had “Measurement Standards” and standards period for things.


Examples (memory foggy, but you get the idea?);

Floors or Levels in a building or ruin ALL became 2 inches high, for movement sake (2” up plus 1” to place figure on level, being standard base size is 1” and most models are moved forward to move up a level) So, one level took 3" of movement and two levels took 5" of movement.

Doors ALL became 1 ½-2 inches tall and wide.

Walls and Window Sills were all 1 inch or less tall, to allow troops to shoot over them.

Stairs or Steps were at least 1 inch square (each), to allow an “area to place a model.”
This “area to place a model” also denoted how hills, slopes, ruins, and anything with height looked, (strange, with 1 inch square areas for placing models in a pile of rubble).

Terrain represented with a base (or a piece of felt) was “area terrain.” Thus, if it was on a base, ALL the base was that type of terrain. Two trees on a piece of felt was a complete woods.

Vehicles had to be accommodated in a terrain piece also, which was difficult, so very few vehicles were used in past LOS versions (if the players were familiar with the terrain that was going to be used).



So, “Area Terrain” rules were introduced (quite possibly to alleviate these problems).

I am new to Dakka, and do not have the “posting” Savvy of some veterans, so could someone start a “Standard Size” and "standard period" list for terrain (things), as examples above.

Thank you,

Rex

So, what are you saying.... I don't get your point.

Yeah, I'm confused too.

So ummm, make some terrain yourself, and take it in? I have 3 LARGE cardboard boxes full of cityfight style terrain that will completely cover an 8'x4' table with roads and everything. The buildings are anywhere from 1 story to 4 stories high. It's 3 inches a level and doesn't take long to make at all with foamcore.

I am saying many people have a problem transitioning to LOS.

So, make a “Standards” list and/or ruling;

What is terrain what is not? (How to distinguish what is what).

How to make terrain more gameable. (To aid is alleviating confusion).What height should you make a wall? Etc.

Getting an “Eyes view” is tricky (shut one eye will help) and not always possible. I have seen many a time where a player thought he/she had LOS over an obstacle, but with a quick measurement of the “target” models height (1”) and a measurement of the height of the intervening terrain (1”) it was impossible to have LOS. This is not a literal example.

Standards, was my point both in making terrain, and terrain in game play.

BTW, this is not about me (or my garage full of terrain), but about players having a common problem.

I dont agree with your post Rex,

been to my FLGS many times..many people.. many many different terrain pices and never had a dispute. ANy issues is resolved by reading the rule book concerning how to play a pice of terrain.

Area terrain and building terrain are clearly spelled out.

Area terrain in 5th is realy desgned for pices that are two hard to modle.. such as a dense forrest... plasing an area of green felt down and two or three trees is area terrain..

Laser pointer.

Yeah, to be honest I have yet to throw dice on 5ed. However, it has been my experience across a variety of games systems that sometimes when there are serious issues with LOS ( or any other game mechanic or rule), you may need to look at the players rather than the rule book.

I have not started playing 5th ed yet but just reading the way they handle terrain seems like problem.

Are they in a building? Can you see at least one model from your unit's LOS? 4+ save.

Are they in area terrain? 4+ save.

Are they behind a barbed wire fence? 6+ save.

Is the barbed wire in area terrain? 4+ save.

I don't see what's so hard about this. True LOS only really affects monstrous creatures, vehicles, and units behind (not inside of, behind) low barrier terrain being shot at by units from an elevated position. In virtually all other situations infantry will receive a 4+ cover save.

Even if all of your opponents play differently every single game, when you put terrain down on the board talk to your current opponent and agree on what is either area or building/ruins terrain. Then, with that set, point at every other terrain piece and go 'and THIS will grant a 5+ save, because it's chest-high grass. THIS will grant a 3+ save, because it's the adamantine plate from a ruined Imperator Titan. THIS will count as dangerous terrain because sodomites gather here often and your units may be waylaid by a loving pile of well cut men, but it will count as area terrain and grant a 4+ save because they are seriously EVERYWHERE and use protection'. You can even put a die indicating what level of cover each terrain grants. In the latter case you can use Halo Clix figures humping each other on an unused Trojan. It's probably the most use those figs will ever see, not to mention the Trojan.

sourclams wrote:...Even if all of your opponents play differently every single game, when you put terrain down on the board talk to your current opponent and agree on what is either area or building/ruins terrain. Then, with that set, point at every other terrain piece and go 'and THIS will grant a 5+ save, because it's chest-high grass. THIS will grant a 3+ save, because it's the adamantine plate from a ruined Imperator Titan. THIS will count as dangerous terrain because sodomites gather here often and your units may be waylaid by a loving pile of well cut men, but it will count as area terrain and grant a 4+ save because they are seriously EVERYWHERE and use protection'. You can even put a die indicating what level of cover each terrain grants. In the latter case you can use Halo Clix figures humping each other on an unused Trojan. It's probably the most use those figs will ever see, not to mention the Trojan.

Priceless.

I also agree, that it's quite simple to do the following:

1) Read and comprehend the rules for terrain and LOS

2) Communicate with your opponent and come to an understanding on how you will treat the various pieces of terrain on the table.

As somebody who is generally negative on the new LoS rules, I have to say, they're pretty straightforward. I don't get how people would have trouble following them.

I do get why people would find them stupid, annoying, inconsistant, or exploitable, but I don't think that makes them any less comprehensible.

The "agree on what stuff is beforehand" rule is as operative as it ever was. If it's hard to follow, write up little scraps of paper "4+ area", etc. and drop it on the terrain piece. Or just write it on the terrain somewhere inconspicuous. Can't forget then.

It might be a nice modeling project to make little terrain markers with flags on them, to indicate what is what.

Don't make houserules on terrain! All terrain is TLOS. Period. If you don't like the TLOS dimensions of the terrain you're playing on, make new terrain that does. Rinse. Repeat.

our FLGS has a bunch of 2'x2' squares, 6 to a board.

some boards are way too terrain dense, but all of it is short pieces

some are low cut ruins that were cheap to build, but provide no cover for vehicles or MC's

others have rivers with marked areas to represent jungle

before each game we just agree on the following point

"since this board isn't designed for 5th edition TLOS, we can count the ruins or trees in 1 of 2 ways:
1. either we assume that these pieces of terrain if properly modeled WOULD obscure vehicles and give cover to MC's or
2. we just take it as is and neither vehicles or MC's will get cover saves
since this decision helps or hurts us both equally, which way would you prefer? or would you like to roll for it?"

that one short conversation has saved a ton of debate and discussion since the terrain boards are premade

but I lead a push with the FLGS to start some new terrain, brough in my own pieces as examples, and offered to help. they are now producing 6' x 4' naked painted boards, with assorted things to put on them

stepped hills so models can be on them, some area terrain type forests, ruined multi level buildings, intact buildings to use with the new rules, etc

you can make it a problem or you can work with it. its not a "house rule" its an assumption about terrain that was made before 5th edition came out in order to speed up gameplay and reduce complaints or debates during gameplay.

NaZ

OK,

Most terrain that players have now was built for 4E “area terrain” rules (i.e. Cool Stuff mounted on a “Base”).

My examples were ruins/semi-destroyed buildings (from GW kits) mounted on a “Base” some with stairs or open areas surrounding or throughout the building/ruin, so models could be placed there flat. In 4E a model was still in cover if on the open area of the terrains “Base.”

5E has “area terrain” rules as well (if it is “on a base” it is area terrain; pg. 13 second pp; “baseboard” See example on pg. 22, especially example at the bottom in the window), so there should be NO problem, right?

Wrong, look at all the posts, there is no consistency.

I play this way, so and so play the other…

This is this and that is that…

Well, just discuss it with your opponent…


None of these “answers” are solutions to “real” problems.

Problems with transitioning to LOS.

Problems designing/modeling terrain that is functional/playable.

Problems with “following the actual rules” consistently.


All I was asking for was;

Standard “sizes” for things when building terrain.

Terrain standards for; what is “LOS terrain" (no base), what is a “building terrain” (a solid building) and what is “area terrain” (on a base period, “no matter if there is open area on the base” pg. 22)

Simple.

RAW

You know Rex, I have read this ENTIRE thread, and due to your lack of grammar, and punctuation, I have absolutely NO idea what you are trying to say. At all. If english is not your first language, I apologize; At the bare minimum, sentences NEED subjects AND verbs to make sense.

there are no standard sizes for terrain. its entirely up to the artistic licence.

models that are supplied by games workshop come in standard sizes that you can measue and look at. non-GW models are again up to the artistic licence of the modeler.

there is little difference in building terrain for 4th and building terrain for 5th (except you may want to have more LOS blocking walls)

ruins/forests/grass/sodomite fields are area terrain, as described in the rule book.

complete buildings/hills/dead titans are not area terrain, also as descibed in the rule book.

of course before the game its an idea to discuss these things with your opponent so there is no confusion.

let me reiterate that

DISCUSS THE TERRAIN WITH YOUR OPPONENT BEFORE THE GAME.

if you are so intorverted that you cant spend 2 minutes doing this then you have more to worry about than terrain.

it might get annoying to do that every single time, but it will get more annoying if you have an argument about it in the middle of every game.

the idea of 5th edition and TLOS was to make it easier. it may not seem that was for old players used to playing 3rd and 4th, but for new players it is. if you can see something you can shoot at it. if you cant see half of it or half of it is in area terrain it gets a cover save. there are 2 rules that deal with most of the problems that will come up.

ulitmately, all the LOS issues are covered in the rulebook (for once)

Surely there are only a few terrain types; areas defined by a base or bounding walls (ruins), intact buildings, hills, and linear features such as walls. These are well defined in the rules and not hard to understand. Obviously the exact playing experience is going to vary considerably, and TLoS solves a helluva lot of problems of defining visibility especially from heights.

The real snag I see is that the new vertical coherency and movement rules make the height of floors in ruins very important. If someone has a lot of ruins with floors 3 inches apart, they can either play them as is, or modify the floors in some way.

Most terrain that players have now was built for 4E “area terrain” rules (i.e. Cool Stuff mounted on a “Base”).

My examples were ruins/semi-destroyed buildings (from GW kits) mounted on a “Base” some with stairs or open areas surrounding or throughout the building/ruin, so models could be placed there flat. In 4E a model was still in cover if on the open area of the terrains “Base.”

5E has “area terrain” rules as well (if it is “on a base” it is area terrain; pg. 13 second pp; “baseboard” See example on pg. 22, especially example at the bottom in the window), so there should be NO problem, right?

Well, I still don't really understand your point, but that may be because your premises are wrong. Also, you seem unclear as to the appropriate times to use "quotes" or Bold

Despite your repeated claims, having a base is *not* the definition of area terrain. Plenty of standard terrain has a base.

Being in the open space of area terrain *does* provide a cover save, in 4E and in 5E, so not sure what you are getting at.


The point of discussing with your opponent, isn't because the rules are unclear, it is to make sure you both feel that a certain piece of terrain is area, or not; or if you can walk through walls, or not; etc. There is flexibility built into the rules, and that is good. But it means you need to take 30 seconds to clarify.

rexscarlet wrote:
All I was asking for was;

Standard “sizes” for things when building terrain.

Terrain standards for; what is “LOS terrain" (no base), what is a “building terrain” (a solid building) and what is “area terrain” (on a base period, “no matter if there is open area on the base” pg. 22)

Simple.

RAW

There are not any standards which you can apply in the way you desire outside of what's RAW. It's a shame neither you nor your FLGS buddies can discern the RAW on terrain in an equitable manner but ultimately the problem is not with RAW concerning terrain but the apparent inability to agree on what that means at your store.

There are many very good opinions and ideas to assist you on this topic already. My favorite is the one where you and you FLGS buddies sit down with all the terrain pieces, point to one and vote by consensus as to what role it fills. Then write that down and move along. Once you have all the terrain 'mapped' with its role in games... mark the pieces somehow to remind you all when a question arises.

If you don't like that idea... or any of the others... figure it out yourself but there's not any 'magic cylinders', 'terrain levels' or 'standard sizes' at all in 5th edition. The closest you'll get would be the RAW on buildings vs. ruins & that's already in the BGB.

I hope you can work it out so everyone at your store can play and enjoy the game but reasonability & RAW are all you have, noone is going to make a 3rd party arbitrary rules set for you & even then I doubt your gaming club would all agree to follow it if they did.

Not sure what the OP is trying to state.

While the new TLOS rules are very straight forward, I wish they could have condensed the building/(area)ruin rules. Just to much going in that whole section.

It can also be difficult at times to really get the true models eye view, even with laser pointers in some terrain elements. You end up having to move the model so you can put the pointer at head level, and with large squads in can be a pain in the ass. I know people say it is the terrains fault, not the rules, but it just seems to slow things in what is meant to be a faster edition.

That's why there are the "fudge it" rules.

Take a quick look at the LoS. If players can't agree, or it's too hard to make a clear decision, give the benefit of the doubt with -1 to the cover save.

Again, this is not about me.

Players are posting on threads quite often questions and issues they are having with the TLOS rules. Why?

Additionally, players at my local store are having issues as well. Why?

I do not need an answer for the above.



Q)

Is it a good idea to make a measurement standards list of; sizes of doors, heights of floors/levels, heights of walls, widths of walkways/parapets, and etc. to aid players in assembling the different types of terrain existing in 5E (i.e. buildings, area terrain, terrain) in order to help make the terrain and the different types of terrain distinguishable and functional?

A list of measurement standards was how it was done before 4E and area terrain to avoid a cool piece of terrain to be left on the shelf forever because it was not functional.

3E Example; Again, this is not a literal example.

A green base of woods 12” X 12” would have a darker green center 6” X 6” to distinguish the 6” from the edge; in order make clear the 6” to shoot out/in rule.



As for my local store, I do not play there very often, because getting the players that frequent the store to actually write down an Army list, is like getting a lunch date with the Pope. So, my store example somewhat answers itself, the players are at fault. But this is nothing new, but players (new and old) are repeatedly soured by these types of incidents, so I was just looking for a simple way to fix (lol) this ONE issue that has arisen with the new 5E rules.



Maybe I made this topic confusing by trying to cover too much or giving too many examples, sorry.

If the grammar is choppy, sorry, I was trying to touch on several response topics. I will just answer all the response threads individually next time.

Opened topped Ork truck painted red, move 19, disembark 2 and 99/100" from the front radiator (pg. 67 see disembarking window; Missle launcher has a 1" base), Whaagh D6", assault 6". 28 and 99/100" to 33 and 99/100" move

The biggest problem I am having with TLOS is with my IG Heavy Weapon Teams. Weapons like the autocannon stick out so far that the gunner is way way behind it and cant actually see anything if in a building even though the gun is sticking a 1" out of the window.

I have been playing it if the weapon barrel can actually draw LOS then so can the guy behind it. Anyone else have some solutions for this?

how about using the "loader" model as a spotter and putting him in the window?

I guess I could do that but I would have to ensure he is in the very front of those large bases. I like TLOS but this is the only thing I have found to be a problem.

It spoils the look but can't you face the gun backwards so the firer's head is at the window?

rexscarlet wrote:A list of measurement standards was how it was done before 4E

It was?

I've been playing since the start of 2nd edition, and have never heard of such a thing.

We just made terrain.


It's up to players, when they are building terrain, to consider how that terrain will interact with the rules... not to limit creativity, but simply to ensure that the terrain piece is functional. But imposing set standard sizing is not the way to do that. That would simply lead to everything looking the same.

Kilkrazy wrote:It spoils the look but can't you face the gun backwards so the firer's head is at the window?

As a house rule that might work... but technically the model is supposed to be turned to face its target in the shooting phase.