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.

Essentially, either the DR is part of the hull, in which case the vehicle footprint is that much longer with all of the good and bad that that entails. Or it's a decorative element, and can be ignored for purposes of range, deployment etc.-in other words, you can deploy on top of it. And having it hit something won't count as a ram, you'd have to get the hull to it.

No real advantage I can see either way, but it does seem easier to play if you count the DR as part of the hull.

Ordznik wrote:Essentially, either the DR is part of the hull, in which case the vehicle footprint is that much longer with all of the good and bad that that entails. Or it's a decorative element, and can be ignored for purposes of range, deployment etc.-in other words, you can deploy on top of it. And having it hit something won't count as a ram, you'd have to get the hull to it.

No real advantage I can see either way, but it does seem easier to play if you count the DR as part of the hull.

IIRC, ramming and tank shocking actually specify contact with the model, not the hull, so I'm not sure that is entirely correct.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:And you'd be blatantly breaking the rules, namely "A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model (which is represented by its base or by its hull)" BGB p. 11

It is not moving into or through the hull, it is moving ontop of it.

That is either the stupidest or the the trolliest comment i've read all day.

Canonness Rory wrote:That is either the stupidest or the the trolliest comment i've read all day.

It's also true.

Drunkspleen wrote: And I will deploy my Devestators on top of my rhino so I can drive it 12 inches a turn while they fire off their heavy weapons. Win/Win.

edit: Just to clarify, my point is while there are no rules saying you can't deploy ontop of vehicles to the best of my knowledge, it's commonly accepted that you cannot.

Yes, RAW (not RAP though) you can place the devs on top of the rhino but there are no rule saying that the devs would move if the rhino would move. So if the rhino would move the devs would stay in place, hanging in the air.

Webbe wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote: And I will deploy my Devestators on top of my rhino so I can drive it 12 inches a turn while they fire off their heavy weapons. Win/Win.

edit: Just to clarify, my point is while there are no rules saying you can't deploy ontop of vehicles to the best of my knowledge, it's commonly accepted that you cannot.

Yes, RAW (not RAP though) you can place the devs on top of the rhino but there are no rule saying that the devs would move if the rhino would move. So if the rhino would move the devs would stay in place, hanging in the air.

Yes, of course the point I was making is there's no distinction between hull and not hull in terms of standing on top of it, and so you can't allow standing on the deffrolla unless you are willing to let anyone stand on any vehicle.

GiantKiller wrote:The rules don't prohibit models from deploying on top of or underneath the Deff Rolla. The Deff Rolla isn't hull, so it isn't part of the BattleWagon model for purposes of where you can and can't put models:

"A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model (which is represented by its base or by its hull)" BGB p. 11.

The Deff Rolla is neither base nor hull (it is indeed a decorative element as you've argued), so it is not a space occupied by the BattleWagon. Thus models may be moved into and occupy that space.

Hope this helps.

-GK

This clears it up nicely. Thank you Giantkiller.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Webbe wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote: And I will deploy my Devestators on top of my rhino so I can drive it 12 inches a turn while they fire off their heavy weapons. Win/Win.

edit: Just to clarify, my point is while there are no rules saying you can't deploy ontop of vehicles to the best of my knowledge, it's commonly accepted that you cannot.

Yes, RAW (not RAP though) you can place the devs on top of the rhino but there are no rule saying that the devs would move if the rhino would move. So if the rhino would move the devs would stay in place, hanging in the air.

Yes, of course the point I was making is there's no distinction between hull and not hull in terms of standing on top of it, and so you can't allow standing on the deffrolla unless you are willing to let anyone stand on any vehicle.

You're wrong about there not being a distinction. As Giantkiller has already said, the hull defines the space you can't move "into or through". If the commonly accepted interpretation that you can't stand on top of a hull is based on the "no moving into or through" rule (which I think it pretty plainly is), then the definition of the hull is pretty crucial.

gorkamorka wrote:It does not, since it does not specify.

The rule does not need to specify every possible decorative element in the list of examples because it includes the language "and other decorative elements". See BGB p. 56

gorkamorka wrote:Also because, using your argument in the rolla thread, it is different from the examples given so it is impossible for them to be in the same grouping.
As you said, "Different = not the same. I'm embarrassed for all of us because I feel "different = not the same" actually needs to be stated in this thread."

Thanks.

I believe this failed attempt at trolling is the result of a your fundamental misunderstanding of my argument in the deff rolla thread.

Nowhere did I argue that Tank Shock and Ramming are not part of the same grouping. Indeed they are both part of the 'actions available to tanks' grouping. But being part of the same grouping does not make them the same action, because their rules clearly differentiate the two.

Similarly, a deff rolla is not a dozer blade, because their rules clearly differentiate the two. But that in no way stops them from being part of the same 'decorative elements' grouping.

Hope this helps.

-GK

Ordznik wrote:You're wrong about there not being a distinction. As Giantkiller has already said, the hull defines the space you can't move "into or through". If the commonly accepted interpretation that you can't stand on top of a hull is based on the "no moving into or through" rule (which I think it pretty plainly is), then the definition of the hull is pretty crucial.

Please explain how standing on top of something is "moving into or through" it. The commonly accepted interpretation that you can't stand on top of a hull is based on people tend to play that you can't stand ontop of vehicles because there are no rules to support it, there are also no rules explicitly telling you you cannot stand on top of vehicles, but as this is a permissive ruleset, the lack of rules saying you can stand on other models is sufficient to prevent it, regardless of whether the bit you are standing on is decorative or hull.

OK for anyone who wants to be a part of it, I made a petition on the 40k discussions forum. Dont turn it into a flame fest.

Gorkamorka wrote:
The rules and conclusions presented in the thread seem to support both the ability to place the rolla past your deployment line and deploy on top of it if it is indeed decorative and not part of the hull. Feel free to point out something that doesn't support it and I'll gladly not do it.

If you really want to steal another inch of deployment that badly, then go right ahead. Good luck finding opponents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Drunkspleen wrote:

Ordznik wrote:You're wrong about there not being a distinction. As Giantkiller has already said, the hull defines the space you can't move "into or through". If the commonly accepted interpretation that you can't stand on top of a hull is based on the "no moving into or through" rule (which I think it pretty plainly is), then the definition of the hull is pretty crucial.

Please explain how standing on top of something is "moving into or through" it. The commonly accepted interpretation that you can't stand on top of a hull is based on people tend to play that you can't stand ontop of vehicles because there are no rules to support it, there are also no rules explicitly telling you you cannot stand on top of vehicles, but as this is a permissive ruleset, the lack of rules saying you can stand on other models is sufficient to prevent it, regardless of whether the bit you are standing on is decorative or hull.

"A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model (which is represented by its base or by its hull)" BGB p. 11.

Moving into - refers usually to area terrain, which the space of a vehicle is. Essentially, it is Impassible Area terrain (until the vehicle moves )

Che-Vito wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:
The rules and conclusions presented in the thread seem to support both the ability to place the rolla past your deployment line and deploy on top of it if it is indeed decorative and not part of the hull. Feel free to point out something that doesn't support it and I'll gladly not do it.

If you really want to steal another inch of deployment that badly, then go right ahead. Good luck finding opponents.

I thought I was on ignore there big guy.

Again, feel free to refute the points presented in the thread with actual rules or facts. Otherwise you're trolling.
If distances (such as those for deployment) are measured to the hull and the deff rolla is not part of the hull as you yourself contend, then I can place it however I please.
The fact that you don't like it has nothing to do with whether or not it is clearly legal to do so. Feel free to throw a fit about thinking I'm a bad sport, you're in the wrong by the rules.

I personally think someone who only follows the rules they like would have a harder time finding an opponent.

When I use a Deathrolla, I count it as part of the hull.
There is no in game advantage that way as all measurement is to it for movement and incoming fire.
It's the simplest way.

You can never stand on any part of another model because they are considered impassible terrain.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:His argument was actually that ludicrous, but that aside is niether here nor there.

Sorry for entertaining the notion that something not specified in the rules might not follow your interpretation automatically.
I'll gladly place my rolla past my deployment line and then disembark on top of it, I suppose. Win/Win.

And I will deploy my Devestators on top of my rhino so I can drive it 12 inches a turn while they fire off their heavy weapons. Win/Win.

edit: Just to clarify, my point is while there are no rules saying you can't deploy ontop of vehicles to the best of my knowledge, it's commonly accepted that you cannot.

Why is it that whenever people start talking about deploying on top of another model, which is deploying into impassible terrain and prohibited by the impassible terrain rules, and instead start talking about the rules prohibiting through the space occupied by another model?

Page 13 says, "Remember that models ... also count as impassible terrain."
Page 14 says, "Models may not be placed in impassible terrain..."

solkan wrote:
Page 13 says, "Remember that models ... also count as impassible terrain."
Page 14 says, "Models may not be placed in impassible terrain..."

Wow, someone who can reference rules in legitimate argument. Guess that settles it then.

A moderator said:

That sort of comment could be read the wrong way.

Let's be a bit more constructive in our criticism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Irdiumstern wrote:I've always played it as "Can't jump over the giant bit of whirling metal"

You rationalists.

One point to consider is that NOT being allowed to deploy through the Deff Rolla supports the idea that the Deff Rolla is mainly an anti-tank weapon (i.e. makes 1D6 hits on Ram attack.) By not allowing disembarkation through the front, the value of the Battlewagon+Deff Rolla is reduced.

I'm not saying it's the rules, just a point worth thinking about.

Overall I see this as another GW hole in the rules, and people should decide either yes or no at the start of the game.

I don't count my deffrolla as part of the hull. As far as I'm concerned, though, if you model it so that it can lift up or somehow get out of the way then you should be able to deploy to the front normally. That should also work if you model the deffrolla small enough so that it allows room in the front to disembark.

Whether or not the deff rolla portion of the model is part of the hull isn't relevant to whether or not models can move through it. What matters is what sort of terrain that portion of the model is classified as. As the rules say, it is important to agree with your opponent on how all of the terrain in play is being classified, and that includes the models in the army.

Using the default guidelines for terrain, all of the models in each army are considered impassible terrain. Yet, despite that fact, lots of people choose to ignore the doors on drop pods and treat them as clear terrain or whatever terrain type in which that portion of the model happens to rest. So, you can either do something similar for the deff rolla, if both players agree, or you can fall back to the default guidelines.

Personally, I'd expect that the deff rolla would be dangerous terrain (at the least) to move through, since I wouldn't expect the driver to bother turning the thing off.

solkan wrote:
Personally, I'd expect that the deff rolla would be dangerous terrain (at the least) to move through, since I wouldn't expect the driver to bother turning the thing off.

I like the way you think...

I'd be deploying outside and around the death roller, but not counting it as part of the hull for range of enemy weaponry or friendly fire out of the vehicle. I field a 15 strong unit of burna boyz in a battlewagon and, although I've not used a BW with a DR for them, when they disembark it's fairly difficult to get them all around the vehicle as it is. So i'd just deploy them around the outside of the roller.
Practicality would be the key factor.