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.

"The winner of a roll-off chooses a point on the table to be an objective" p91 BRB

Can someone place an objective on the 3rd level in buildings?
Doing so would give an advantage to armies with units that can ignore building height. Does 'on the table' count as being literally on the table (or ground level) or does it mean that it can be put on any piece of terrain that is on the table?

Thanks!

Hmmm. Is 40K a 3D game?

/ducks and runs, laughing.

I think you can put the objective on the top of a 400 floor building if you wanted to, though don't expect to be popular.

Putting it up high in a building is fine - while it's difficult to get to, it's not impossible, and as long as you're below it on the 2nd level you'll still take it. Plus it's somewhat hard to defend - if the enemy shoots you out of that building, then you too have to climb to get it, and devote another unit to it.

On top of impassible terrain, though, is a bit of a jerk move.

Well, it does matter in tournaments where you don't get points for being popular.

If your army is, for example, jump pack troops, and your facing footslogging orks, then putting it on the 400th floor is a huge advantage as you guarantee that the orks cannot get to it by the end of the game, where you can reach it whenever you want.

Edit : You cannot put it on impassable terrain. However, if this is the case you COULD put it on the pillars shown on the board below. That would prevent any ground troops from being able to reach the objective, but allow for jump/flying troops to get it with no contest.

Yup, you can put it as high as you want. If its in a ruin, bikes and Beasts are fethed.

Gwar! wrote:Yup, you can put it as high as you want. If its in a ruin, bikes and Beasts are fethed.

and cavalry

Gwar! wrote:Yup, you can put it as high as you want. If its in a ruin, bikes and Beasts are fethed.

Given the board I showed above, that would put any infantry in the role of fethed. The pillars themselves are impassible, but the area on the top is not.
Any models with the ability to deploy up there would be able to grab objectives uncontested.

Wow. Big gap in the rules for GW.

Yay for jump infantry. Its a Blood Angels boost

Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

Point:

4 a : a geometric element that has zero dimensions and a location determinable by an ordered set of coordinates b (1) : a narrowly localized place having a precisely indicated position <walked to a point 50 yards north of the building> (2) : a particular place :

Soooooo... by definition, you can say:

Any point of the table meaning a "particular place" including the 400th floor of a ruin/building.

Or...by an ordered set of coordinates:
Like, X, Y, AND Z.

Striked out, read Gwar!'s post below.

My 7 Cents.

Well, it depends. Did the TOs define the tops as impassable? I have seen that done to prevent such things. And why is it a rules gap? It is a strategic issue. Think of what a plasma blast or battlecannon would do to the troops up there.

jmurph wrote:Well, it depends. Did the TOs define the tops as impassable? I have seen that done to prevent such things. And why is it a rules gap? It is a strategic issue. Think of what a plasma blast or battlecannon would do to the troops up there.

It would do very little to the troops up there -- as it would be easy to put models up there out of LOS of anything on the ground. You could use a vendetta to draw LOS, but thats about it. Placing a tank on the other side of the board would also draw LOS, but that significantly reduces options. Interestingly enough, as the models cannot leave the platforms, they would never fall back very far.

It is a rules gap because it prevents specific armies from claiming the objective. How would an ork player claim any objectives placed on those pillars? Vanilla marines only have 1 option -- scouts in land speeder storms. (Which are rarely used). How does that compare to an mech eldar army, which can deploy easily on those levels?

I define it as a rules gap because there is a gap where rules should have been written to handle that situation. Putting objectives on top of those platforms if you are playing eldar is not clever tactics, its abusing a rules gap IMHO.

Sanctjud wrote:Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

Point:

4 a : a geometric element that has zero dimensions and a location determinable by an ordered set of coordinates b (1) : a narrowly localized place having a precisely indicated position <walked to a point 50 yards north of the building> (2) : a particular place :

Soooooo... by definition, you can say:

Any point of the table meaning a "particular place" including the 400th floor of a ruin/building.

Or...by an ordered set of coordinates:
Like, X, Y, AND Z.

My 7 Cents.

Read before Posting, Especially Point #6

Also, 40k is Written in British English, not American English. Please use an English Dictionary if you have to post definitions.

If the models had to fall back and couldn't they'd be destroyed.

Also, I thought beasts could still get up there, because they move like infantry?

Saying hormagaunts can't get to the second level of a building is silly.

They cannot get to the second level of ruins.

Buildings cannot have Beasts inside anyway.

Ruins is what I meant.

Well screw that. Around here they can. Lithe and agile hormagaunts looking on forlornly as their bulkier, doofier cousins the termagaunts crawl all over is just silly.

Man, RAW land sucks. I can imagine everyone sitting around, bored, confused, scratching their heads and crying over all the lost abilities of the various units due to RAW screwage, but to have one guy in the corner with a gavel and a wig saying "But we're playing by the RULES here!"

Terrain is determined by the players before the match. I would class the tops of those pillars as impassible terrain. Jump infantry and skimmers have their own rules for landing on top of impassible terrain that it is physically possible to place the models on.

@Labmouse: I don't think that mechanized Eldar would have any easier time with objectives on the tops of those pillars: you still have to disembark within 2" of an access point.

I've always placed my hand on the table and declared that the tip of my pinky was an objective. Amazingly, at the end of the game, it always seems to be within 3" of my troops.

@Gwar!:
Thank, crossed that part out.

@Topic:
Just talk with the opponent/TO how this will pan out.

At the end of the day, the easiest thing to do (but not necessarily accomplish) is to kill the unit on said objective.

The point of this game is to allow everyone/list a chance of winning, which is why the wipe out condition exists. Not likely but it’s there.

Taking an all biker list entitles you to all the pros AND cons of that type of list. But generally putting an objective in an inaccessible portion of the board with only enough space for a single units to hold with no LoS to is pretty bad setup of the game/board/deciding of rules before hand (unless you have guess weaponry).

/shrug.

My 7 Cents.

I don't think this kind of objective deployment is really a gap in the rules. Armies like the Eldar have an advantage in this situation, because of their wide range of skimmers and jump troops. However, I think it fits greatly in the Eldar theme - they are fast, they are agile and in this special case, their skimmers and jump troops have an additional advantage. It's not a bigger advantage than...than...paying only 6pts for a T4 model with S4 and 4 attacks on the charge, for example, I think. It is just a nuance of gameplay that is rather rarely analyzed.

Furthermore, this would be a nice opportunity to use Swooping Hawks for a change.

kirsanth wrote:They cannot get to the second level of ruins.

Buildings cannot have Beasts inside anyway.

What if they have Flesh Hooks, can they get "on top" of the buildings?

FoolWhip wrote:

kirsanth wrote:They cannot get to the second level of ruins.

Buildings cannot have Beasts inside anyway.

What if they have Flesh Hooks, can they get "on top" of the buildings?

No, Buildings are treated as Transport Vehicles. Flesh Hooks don't let you climb on top of my Rhino do they?

Gwar! wrote:

FoolWhip wrote:

kirsanth wrote:They cannot get to the second level of ruins.

Buildings cannot have Beasts inside anyway.

What if they have Flesh Hooks, can they get "on top" of the buildings?

No, Buildings are treated as Transport Vehicles. Flesh Hooks don't let you climb on top of my Rhino do they?

And if you meant Ruins, see Page 83 of the main rules, first paragraph.
Unless you are in the "Well screw that" camp with Spellbound, in which case you should REALLY inform your opponents that rules are not your style before you start to play a game.

kirsanth wrote:Unless you are in the "Well screw that" camp with Spellbound, in which case you should REALLY inform your opponents that rules are not your style before you start to play a game.

Rules? Psssh, why would anyone need rules!

Can someone help me make this clear?

Lets say I have this
___O__ [ ] [ ] [ ] M M M M M [ ] ________________________ Key M-Marine []-Building O-Objective

Lets say it is 1000000 feet above the marines, but is 3" length wise away. Am I still contesting it?

Edit-Its a little messed up

As long as the building itself is not the objective and the objective is an object on TOP of that building only, then you are not contesting it. Because 5th edition 40k is a three-dimensional game. (Which causes valkyriesque problems in some situations, of course...)

1)Take a ruler or measuring tape that measures 3".

2)Attempt to touch the model and the objective with measuring device.

3)???

4)Profit

Remember that not all terrain features are buildings.

No, the models are 1m feet away from the objective.