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 recently went down to GW and was discussing with my friend the merits of using a Drop Pod and how to best utilise it.

One of the other players came up with a goofy grin and anounced that he used them as drop in cover!

According to the rules he said -> you can deploy the Drop Pod without its men in it (legitemat because troops dont have to start in the dedicated vehicle!)

He then said that because the have not disembarked the Drop Pod that he was allowed to enter the Drop Pod once it had landed because it was not actually
re-embarking (something you cannot do with a Drop Pod).

This he claimed provided excellent cover for his devastator squads and other units as he could place it wherever he wanted.

Now according to RAW this is viable and he noted that accoring to RAI you cant rule either way -> now normally I would be inclined to call it cheating but I am unsure.
I cannot think that GW was actually thinking you may use it as cover, but then again they may just have though of that.

Because it would be more than cover though, until destroyed they would be inside a vehicle and unable to be hit normally until it was destroyed.

Actually, friendly and enemy models are impassible terrain. You may not walk on top of any part of a drop pod unless it is a wreck, in which case it is Dangerous and Difficult terrain.

you should have laughed in this dude's face. That's pretty beardy of him to even suggest.

Do you have a page reference so I can look it up quickly?

With only 10min before I leave work

yeah no way. The thing about it is when it lands all passengers must disembark and no one may rembark on it. I understand the "logic" behind it, "oh there was no one on it so no one has disembarked yet," but there is no way i would let anyone do that.

Lord Kas wrote:Do you have a page reference so I can look it up quickly?

With only 10min before I leave work

Page 11 says that models may not move through or into space occupied by another model.

You cannot stack your dudes on top of each other, on top of their vehicles, or anything in between.

Lord Kas wrote:He then said that because the have not disembarked the Drop Pod that he was allowed to enter the Drop Pod once it had landed because it was not actually
re-embarking (something you cannot do with a Drop Pod).

This guy needs a good kick in the crotch. And you too if you fall for his silly rules abuse. Even if he thinks the fact that no one disembarked means someone can embark... where is the squad he tries to put in the pod? You can't embark on a vehicle unless all models are within 2'' of an entry point.

Further more, page 69 of the space marine codex says that once its landed everyoen has to disembark and no one may embark for the remainder of the game.

Falconlance wrote:page 69 of the space marine codex says that once its landed everyoen has to disembark and no one may embark for the remainder of the game.

It says that once passengers have disembarked no one can embark on it. If there were no passengers no one has disembarked... which is exactly the GW writing loophole that's being proposed for abuse here.

The passengers disembarked from the Drop Pod prior to it deep striking.

/end thread

P.13 RB Terrain - Terrain Types - 3rd bullet wrote:
Impassible terrain cannot be moved across or through

P.13 RB Terrain - Terrain Types - Guidelines on categorizing terrain - 3rd bullet - final sentence wrote:
Remember other models, friends and enemies, also count as impassible terrain.

P.14 RB Impassible terrain wrote:
Models may not be placed in impassible terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule in their profile granting them an exception (like being able to fly above the terrain) or both players agree to it.

Those are the pertinent rules passages.

EDIT: "Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal. Once passengers are disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game."

If there are no passengers, then "everyone" has disembarked as soon as the Pod lands.
Against RAW and I'd bet my life savings that it's against RAI.

The drop pod is open topped once landed, so doesnt NEED firing points.

However you are told noone may embark, even if noone disembarked you are still bound by that restriction.

Yup, the rules in the Space Marine, Dark Angels and Space Wolves Codexes don't say you can't 're-embark'... they say that nobody can embark into the drop pod for the rest of the game.

So no go. Unless you're playing Black Templars... The BT codex does simply state that passengers may not re-embark. In which case, as was discussed back when the codex was released, there is nothing technically stopping other units from climbing aboard.

I doubt you'll find many people who actually play that way, though.

Once again, the Black Templars show they have much Stronger Machine Spirits in their Drop Pods and have also mastered the Heretical Technology of Re-embarking Ramps.

I suggest Extermination!

Che-Vito wrote:EDIT: "Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal. Once passengers are disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game."

If there are no passengers, then "everyone" has disembarked as soon as the Pod lands.
Against RAW and I'd bet my life savings that it's against RAI.

First, I do think that this is a valid loophole in the Drop Pod rules. Second, I'm wholly in the camp of "anyone trying to pull this is not the sort of person one should be having a game with".

That said, I'll re-iterate the relevant part of the quote and make my observations:

"... Once passengers are disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game."

This is a conditional statement. Once A, then B. Where 'A' is "Once passengers are disembarked", and 'B" is "no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game".

In order to satisfy 'A', a Drop Pod must land (i.e., Deep Strike successfully) and passengers (i.e., a unit) must disembark. Specifically, a unit must make use the disembark rules as described in the rulebook. Which in turn means that you can't claim a unit disembarked from the Drop Pod prior Deep Striking. Once this occurs, then and only then, can 'B' come into play.

In short, it is a stupid loophole that shouldn't ever see the light of day. To close this, it should read, "Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal. No models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

-Yad

Yad wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:EDIT: "Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal. Once passengers are disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game."

If there are no passengers, then "everyone" has disembarked as soon as the Pod lands.
Against RAW and I'd bet my life savings that it's against RAI.

First, I do think that this is a valid loophole in the Drop Pod rules. Second, I'm wholly in the camp of "anyone trying to pull this is not the sort of person one should be having a game with".

That said, I'll re-iterate the relevant part of the quote and make my observations:

"... Once passengers are disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game."

This is a conditional statement. Once A, then B. Where 'A' is "Once passengers are disembarked", and 'B" is "no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game".

In order to satisfy 'A', a Drop Pod must land (i.e., Deep Strike successfully) and passengers (i.e., a unit) must disembark. Specifically, a unit must make use the disembark rules as described in the rulebook. Which in turn means that you can't claim a unit disembarked from the Drop Pod prior Deep Striking. Once this occurs, then and only then, can 'B' come into play.

In short, it is a stupid loophole that shouldn't ever see the light of day. To close this, it should read, "Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal. No models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

-Yad

Read those rules again. Yes, you may embark in a drop pod that landed empty; but as soon as you do, you must immediately disembark again, because the pod has landed.

However, you are not allowed to embark and disembark in the same turn.

PARADOX!

I guess the problem I have with that is that I've always viewed the "passengers must disembark" as being tied to the deployment of the Pod (i.e., the Deep Strike), and not as an on-going affect.

-Yad

Yad wrote:I guess the problem I have with that is that I've always viewed the "passengers must disembark" as being tied to the deployment of the Pod (i.e., the Deep Strike), and not as an on-going affect.

-Yad

It should be. . . but it isn't. All it says is that once the Pod has landed, all passengers must disembark. Well, the pod has landed. Are there passengers in it? If so, they must disembark. The effect is not time-limited.

Falconlance wrote:

Lord Kas wrote:Do you have a page reference so I can look it up quickly?

With only 10min before I leave work

Page 11 says that models may not move through or into space occupied by another model.

You cannot stack your dudes on top of each other, on top of their vehicles, or anything in between.

This is a common misuse and abuse of that rules quote.

That rules quote says nothing about the ability of one model to stand on top of another, as other people have pointed out, that is governed by completely different rules.

The rule you cited simply prevents you from picking up model A on one side of Model B, measuring through Model B, and then placing Model A back down. You need to find a path for the model's movement that won't pass through another model.

The reason I bring this up, is lots of people try to cite that rule and claim that skimmers project some magic cylinder up and down which you cannot pass through, but as long as there is sufficient room to move under the skimmer without moving over the base, that is not the case.

Although the rule should definitely be worded better, it's pretty clear what's intended there, and the abuse mentioned is protected against anyway by not being able to walk on the pod. Definitely deserves a good kick to the crotch on the part of the guy trying to cheat that way.

It's unfortunate that he's caught onto one of the most important uses of a pod, but decided he had to cheat and play unethically to do it. You can usually get pretty good cover by bringing pods down appropriately and hiding out behind them. It doesn't protect from all angles like the bogus scheme, but it works pretty effectively most of the time to protect your guys and get off shots from some good number of them (about as many as you'd be able to do standing them up inside the pod).

Spetulhu wrote:

This guy needs a good kick in the crotch. And you too if you fall for his silly rules abuse.

Bit much there, don't you think?

Alpharius wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:

This guy needs a good kick in the crotch. And you too if you fall for his silly rules abuse.

Bit much there, don't you think?

Hmm... I'll watch it in the future. Not that I actually advocate violence to solve games disputes but that's the sort of silly abuse that I really can't stand to see. It's right up there with players moving a RPJ Battlewagon one inch, then claiming it didn't move for the models inside but is still no longer automatically hit in CC.

Actually I'm fairly sure that's A-okay RAW, it's a "Ork vehicles with Red Paint Jobs add +1 to their movement in the movement phase but do not incur any penalties for this extra inch."
Add +1, so I move 0" add my RPJ, benefits of moving 1" 4+ to hit, penalties such as can't fire all weapons. Drop the penalties done and dusted.

...right?

Hehehehehe

I forgot the Orkimoticon - I was kidding!

I didn't think you were advocating violence, I was commenting on the fact that you seemed to hold the guy who got taken advantage of in the same disregard as the guy who was pulling the 'fast one', is all...

Spetulhu wrote:

Alpharius wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:

This guy needs a good kick in the crotch. And you too if you fall for his silly rules abuse.

Bit much there, don't you think?

Hmm... I'll watch it in the future. Not that I actually advocate violence to solve games disputes but that's the sort of silly abuse that I really can't stand to see. It's right up there with players moving a RPJ Battlewagon one inch, then claiming it didn't move for the models inside but is still no longer automatically hit in CC.

Correct me if I am wrong, and I very well may be, but in the Ork codex p. 93 it states " Ork vehicles with red paint jobs add + 1 to their move in the Movement phase but
do not incur penalties for this extra inch. For example, a vehicle could move 13" and still count as moving 12". Nowhere in there does it say anything about units inside the vehicles.

ChrisCP wrote:Actually I'm fairly sure that's A-okay RAW, it's a "Ork vehicles with Red Paint Jobs add +1 to their movement in the movement phase but do not incur any penalties for this extra inch."
Add +1, so I move 0" add my RPJ, benefits of moving 1" 4+ to hit, penalties such as can't fire all weapons. Drop the penalties done and dusted.

...right?

Hehehehehe

I'm pretty sure you can't add anything to your movement unless you elect to move.

So does that mean that a vehicle with red paint could never move less than an inch?

With the exception of electing not to move at all, of course.

Ah, but what would penalties be for moving an inch?

ChrisCP wrote:Ah, but what would penalties be for moving an inch?

You can't fire more than 1 main weapon? You might have to take a DT test?