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.

That really depends on how you define 'on top'

One Vendetta is clearly partially above the other... but to me, one of them being 'on top' of the other would require one to be physically sitting on the other.

My mug is sitting on top of the desk, while the ceiling is merely above it, not on top of it.

Being above another model is fine. Otherwise you would never be able to have models on different levels in ruins.

This is really the crux of the matter. "On top of" is fairly vague since it can be interpreted, as Insaniak says, to be either above or physically resting upon.

I would personally allow this situation because then you end up a silly double standard. Skimmers that can't end their movement above other models, but other models are perfectly free to end their movement beneath a skimmer. It also makes the Valkyrie (even more) difficult to use in most situations.

Emperors Faithful wrote:That's like saying you can stack Soul Grinders and such on top of each other becuase their legs don't count.

Well, you cannot stack them because the model has to be touching the table. You can place them so the legs overlap just fine, just like you are doing with the valks.

i hope this is all moot and quickly resolved in the faq. otherwise, my nightmare will come true. people will start modeling and converting their entire armies to maximize the loopholes in the rules. oh yeah, they're already doing that. i actually met a dude that was collecting crouching firewarriors because he interpreted the los rules as if you can't see me, you can't shoot me (which is true), but he could still shoot you. i think i'll start converting tanks with twenty inch tall converted armor plates that extend 24 inches from both sides, acting as a massive system of mobile walls that bestow 4+ cover saves to my advancing infantry, and blocking los to my indirect batteries. tank-walls. that's the future.

gothmog wrote:i hope this is all moot and quickly resolved in the faq. otherwise, my nightmare will come true. people will start modeling and converting their entire armies to maximize the loopholes in the rules. oh yeah, they're already doing that. i actually met a dude that was collecting crouching firewarriors because he interpreted the los rules as if you can't see me, you can't shoot me (which is true), but he could still shoot you. i think i'll start converting tanks with twenty inch tall converted armor plates that extend 24 inches from both sides, acting as a massive system of mobile walls that bestow 4+ cover saves to my advancing infantry, and blocking los to my indirect batteries. tank-walls. that's the future.

Modelling for advantage has been around since Before Warhammer 40k even existed

gothmog wrote:i actually met a dude that was collecting crouching firewarriors

Crab People

Taste like crab...


Also, I would not have allowed that move at my 'ard boyz tournament. So no, that is not a legal move.

RxGhost wrote:Taste like crab...


Also, I would not have allowed that move at my 'ard boyz tournament. So no, that is not a legal move.

Thanks for chiming in collective consciousness of GW which is all knowing.

Drunkspleen wrote:Thanks for chiming in collective consciousness of GW which is all knowing.

You Called?

This post has been edited by the Modquisition to avoid a flameout.

People lets all remember rule #1: Be polite. over the top sarcasm or direct unwarranted attacks of other posters is not permitted. Lets try to maintain an air of decorum shall we?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled Crab People.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What? I thought it was funny...come on? Internether regions? That stuff is gold!

I am confused what the issue is here. The Valks are >1" away from enemy models and I can't find a rule saying that models cannot be over other models.
One Valk is over the other, it is not on top of it. Even if it was, is there a rule saying you can't move under it? Thats the only way I can see it having an affect on gameplay.

Pg. 71: "Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models but they cannot end thier move on top of either."

I see multiple violations of that rule in that photo.

RxGhost wrote:Pg. 71: "Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models but they cannot end thier move on top of either."

I see multiple violations of that rule in that photo.

It is not on top of any model, it is above another model. Big Difference. On Top Implies Contact.

You can't end your move on top of another model. That is linked to the rule that you must end the move on the table. Skimmers...skim. Over stuff. But when the movement phase ends, you must be at your minimum hover (flight stem height), with the base sitting on the table.

You can't hold it in the air, and you can't set it down physically on another model. Pieces of the model can certainly be overhead of an enemy, so long as those pieces are one inch minimum away.

That is by the current RAW. You can stack up and leapfrog like the photo shows by RAW, but you can't disembark except to a piece of high terrain, contest flat objectives on the ground, etc. Any house rule to allow that stuff should encompass some way of treating Valkyries like all of others skimmers where this type of thing is very rarely possible.

I ran 7 Vendettas at our local Ard Boyz this weekend. When my opponeent asked how he was supposed to assault them, I refered them to page 71 of the main rule book. If he got a model within the perimeter of any part of the vehicle, he could assualt it. That allowed me to embark and disembark normally. It also prevented him from assualting under the vehicle to the get to the squad behind it unless he assulted the vehicle as well. That wasn't a big deal for him either.

Until there is a FAQ for the Valkyrie/Vendetta I am at the whim of the tournament organizer how they want the model played.

If the organizer says they will rule that I can only disembark via rapid insertion AND cannot pick up my units that's fine. I would take my armoured company Guard.

I have modified my Vendetta flying bases' height so I can stagger the squadron heights. This lowers the board foot print of the squadron in the hopes that GW will treat the model like the Adepticon FAQ for the drop pod, ignoring the wings and tail.

I will say playing this list is one of the most complicated because of the size of of the model its new base and the size of a three model squadron. GW didn't forsee this one coming from the wording on vehicle squadrons. PG 63 of the main rule book; "some small vehicles, examples, operate in units of more than one vehicle, known as squadrons. The Valkyrie is not a small model by any stretch of the imagination.

I just hope they get this all fixed before the release of Dark Eldar. I forsee a lot of issue with Raider squadron stacking.

RxGhost wrote:Pg. 71: "Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models but they cannot end thier move on top of either."

I see multiple violations of that rule in that photo.

I don't see the Valks on top of any models. And it is not left hovering, but the base is indeed on the table satisfying the 2nd part of that rule quoted as well.

AdeptArtificer wrote: If he got a model within the perimeter of any part of the vehicle, he could assualt it.

That's not what it says on page 71, though. It says you can assault it by moving into contact with either the vehicle or the flight base.

Not even sure what you mean by 'perimeter of the vehicle' ... I'm assuming that you're talking about the 2D outline of the vehicle on the table. Which isn't referenced by the rules at all.

That allowed me to embark and disembark normally.

Doesn't actually follow.

Models can assault the vehicle by moving into contact with the base. That has nothing to do with the rules for embarking and disembarking. There are no rules in the core rules fo 40K that allow a squad to disembark or embark at ground level from a Valk on the big flight base.

It also prevented him from assualting under the vehicle to the get to the squad behind it unless he assulted the vehicle as well.

It also doesn't do that. So long as he doesn't move within 1" of the vehicle (measured to the hull, since the base is only considered when assaulting the vehicle) he can move underneath it all he likes.


If the Tournament organiser wants to add rules for the Valk, that's fine (and would certainly be useful to anyone wanting to use them in the manner in which was probably intended)... but the normal 40K rules simply don't allow them to function as you've described.

As you can see he-yah, at points 1, 2 and 3, we have friendly units overlappin' friendlies. That dreadnought is gettin' some fast tail if you get mah drift. And he-yah at points 4 and 5, we see opposing models overlappin' enemies. Now, I can't say 100% because I wasn't there and the angle of this picture may be unfavorable for detectin' work, but I can say that red dreanought did fire the shot that took out president Kennedy*.



* Too soon?

RxGhost wrote:As you can see he-yah, at points 1, 2 and 3, we have friendly units overlappin' friendlies. That dreadnought is gettin' some fast tail if you get mah drift. And he-yah at points 4 and 5, we see opposing models overlappin' enemies.

Which, as has been pointed out, isn't a problem since the rules only forbid being on top of other models, not being over them.

If the Valk was sitting on the dreadnought, that would be a problem.

How is being over them not being on top? That sounds like a semantic argument with no purpose but to squeeze a few extra drops of cheese out of a poor Vendetta, because, you know, they're the real victims here.

RxGhost wrote:How is being over them not being on top?

Already explained earlier. They're two different things.

My coffee cup is on top of the desk. The ceiling is above the desk.

The ceiling is not on top of the desk, as it's not actually sitting on it.



Not just purposeless semantics, because as has also been mentioned, counting 'above' and 'on top' as the same thing prevents models from being on different levels in ruins. That's even assuming that semantics can be purposeless when you're discussing the literal meaning of a given piece of text...

Your coffee cup does not have a gaming rules system that determines how it may or may not be moved underneath your ceiling.

Seriously, I'm not looking at these rules very hard and the message is very clear. You cannot end your turn with the hull of the Valkyrie above (or on top of) another unit, friendly or not.

Now this may not sit well with people who want to flood the board with giant flying monstrosities and still be able to move wherever they want; but them's the breaks. I wish my guys were invisible so no one can draw line of sight to them.

If you and another player want to agree to do something else, that's awesome, that's in the rule book too! Do whatever you do to have fun.

Also, the miniatures in your gallerly look very nice.

My examples were what was played at the tournament. In a tournament setting it is more important to know how you are going to be ruled than what the rules actually say. Sad but true.

Now if I were playing you in a friendly game then my guys would only be able to deploy via rapid insertion or onto an appropiate height piece of terrain. No problem or gripe from me on that either. I prefer to play by the rules but when going to a tournament I play how I am going to be judged.

RxGhost wrote:Your coffee cup does not have a gaming rules system that determines how it may or may not be moved underneath your ceiling.

Seriously, I'm not looking at these rules very hard and the message is very clear. You cannot end your turn with the hull of the Valkyrie above (or on top of) another unit, friendly or not.

Now this may not sit well with people who want to flood the board with giant flying monstrosities and still be able to move wherever they want; but them's the breaks. I wish my guys were invisible so no one can draw line of sight to them.

If you and another player want to agree to do something else, that's awesome, that's in the rule book too! Do whatever you do to have fun.

Also, the miniatures in your gallerly look very nice.

So are you also claiming you cannot end your move over another model in a ruin?

I was the person that had to deal with the situation.

There were two questions that had to be addressed. The first was overlap, the second was measuring the distance between models in a squadron for unit coherency. My decision was based on a couple of things, first and foremost giving the players a way to get on with the game, and second, a way to use the valkry model and not make it so difficult to move in the game that it never gets used again. The hull and cockpit portion of the vehicle is nearly the size of a landraider, the wings and tail making giving it a much bigger footprint. Looks cool on the table, takes up too much room for most 40k battle, IMHO.

I ruled that measurement to other units, and measurement for unit coherency would use the hull and cockpit, and treat the wings and tail as not there. Measure from weapon mounts for shooting, measure to the hull for shooting at it. Disembark from the base, assault to the base.

Both players were asked if this works, both said yes. If one had said no, I would have gone back to square one, and tried to figure something else out that worked for both people.

If GW comes up with a ruling by regionals, I'll gladly go with whatever they say. In the middle of turn 2, game 3, I had to make a ruling.

At the end of the day it comes down to the judge who probably doesnt even play 40k except for ultramarines every 2 years :p (no offense to anyone just every single judge ive seen in my area or store owner plays ultramarines and only once every edition)

I know you're not addressing this personally at me, and it's sad that your judges don't play much. Out of 7 40k armies I own, none are ultramarines, and I get in a minimum of a game a week, for the last 17 years.

RxGhost wrote:Your coffee cup does not have a gaming rules system that determines how it may or may not be moved underneath your ceiling.

It doesn't need one. Since the rulebook doesn't define the word 'above' or the phrase 'on top of' in specific 40K terms, we use their real world meanings.

Seriously, I'm not looking at these rules very hard and the message is very clear. You cannot end your turn with the hull of the Valkyrie above (or on top of) another unit, friendly or not.

Except that's not what the rules say.

That's like insisting that the Rapid Fire rules actually mean that a model firing 2 shots can actually fire 12 (or 13) inches ... because 12 and 13 are reasonably similar.

'Above' and 'on top' are not the same thing.


I notice you ignored the bit about Ruins...

Also, the miniatures in your gallerly look very nice.

Well thank you, kind sir...

I ignored the part with the ruins since the book is pretty clear on how units function inside of them; it seem unessesary to address.

Page #11 (Rulebook) - A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model.
Page #71 (Rulebook) - Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either.

To me, these mandates above are very simplistic and leave no ambiguity in terms of what they mean. It is what it is so to speak.

NotThisTime wrote:Page #11 (Rulebook) - A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model.

This prevents models from moving through spaces between other models that are physically too small for them.

It doesn't stop one model from being partially above another.

Some players take the view that the 'space occupied by another model' includes the volume of space above the model's base, to an infinite height. This view is not actually backed up by the rules.

Page #71 (Rulebook) - Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either.

Already answered.

To me, these mandates above are very simplistic and leave no ambiguity in terms of what they mean. It is what it is so to speak.

Indeed.

insaniak wrote:
Indeed.

Yet still, you persist?

I suspect you misunderstood...

I think that the rules very clearly back up my point of view. So yes, I persist when people question that point of view, or post something that I feel is clearly false without addressing the previous arguments that already addressed that particular point.