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.

No. If you land it with the doors down, there is technically no rule that allows you to change the configuration of the model later.

But there is also no requirement in the rules to open the doors in the first place, any more than you need to open the doors on a rhino or land raider when the unit they are carrying disembarks.

Ah. So, for example.

You're playigna game on a city table with quite narrow roads. You coudl deploy the drop pod in the street, thus blocking it off and blocking LOS down the street.

Not open the doors and deploy your unit. Then continue to use the pod as LOS blocker.

Yes, of course.

You could do the same thing by moving any other vehicle to the same spot.

True, but Drop Pods are taller.

edit: didnt saw the second page

But, fluff wise, there is no way for the rop pods door to open and then close back. And a drop pod must have a unit inside IIRC since it is only use das a dedicated transport no?

Serder wrote:But, fluff wise, there is no way for the rop pods door to open and then close back.

What are you basing that on?

And a drop pod must have a unit inside IIRC since it is only use das a dedicated transport no?

There is no requirement for a unit to start in their transport.

The fact that the doors are 'blown' indicates the use of small explosive charges to propel the doors out or otherwise loose them from the main frame of the pod. This would make the drop pods impossible to reuse without reinstalling said explosive bolts. There is no mention of a way(in Codex: SM) to have the door close after the SM pile out, so after taking into account that and the 'blown' point, opening the doors is a one way exercise.

-cgmckenzie

PS- fixed spelling errors. Damn alcohol...

cgmckenzie wrote:The fact that the doors are 'blown' indicates the use of small explosive charges to propel the doors out or otherwise loose them from the main frame of the pod.

That's one possible interpretation.

It could as easily refer simply to the hatches opening rapidly. If you want to stick with the 'explosive' theory, small explosive charge that force the doors open rapidly while not actually tearing them off the pod would also fit the rather limited fluff, and would potentially leave the pod able to be sealed again. This would be similar to real-world space craft having explosive hatches not to blow them right off the ship, but simply to loosen them after they have been warped from temperature extremes.

That's what I was referring to, not having them clear the pod.

SCIENCE TIME!!

The sheer amount of pressure changes and chemical interactions that a drop pod would have to be able to endure to be able to land on any planet would be massive. The doors would have to have an amazing seal to be able to withstand that myriad of possible atmospheric conditions. The easiest way to seal the pod would be to have the doors be a continuation of the hull my bolting or riveting them into the rest of the hull around them, then possibly welded over to ensure a better seal. To remove this seal rapidly, small explosive charges would be use to force the doors to open and allow the deadly, deadly cargo to get out.[/science]

There is no need to have a mechanical system to close the doors again, because the pods are either single use or would require the use of a 2nd vehicle to retrieve them. This second vehicle would most likely consist of a crane, a binding system like ropes or straps, and a bay to hold the pods it collects for continued use. This vehicle can carry the equipment to close the doors much easier than the drop pod, in which every space available is used to prevent the marines from dying.

So that's that. Not really sure how much science got through the liquor, but I think my point is rather well argued.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:There is no need to have a mechanical system to close the doors again, because the pods are either single use or would require the use of a 2nd vehicle to retrieve them.

This, again, is an assumption. I don't recall anything in the fluff detailing how pods are recovered. It's just as possible that they retain enough fuel, or use suspensors to lift themselves back into orbit. They don't even necessarily have to be airtight on the way back up, since power armour is space-worthy.

In a culture that sees machines as somewhat mystical and where the goal is to maintain them in battle-readiness pretty much for eternity, having the pod need to be rebuilt or even need major refurbishment after every use seems completely out of whack.

Why don't you guys continue that discussion over in 40K Background...

It's somewhat relevant to the thread, since people keep insisting that the fluff forces you to open the pod doors.

If you're going to bring fluff into a rules argument, it at least needs to be accurate.

Fluff does talk about them being recovered- they have lifters capable of doing so. The pod itself cannot make orbit.

Are drop pods even sealed and pressurized to begin with? There would not really be a need as Power Armor, Terminator Armor, and Dreads all have contained life support systems.

OK, back to the original question then:

This came up last week and made me ask the question in the first placed.

The drop pod scattered towards enemy units (mine). The two doors on one side could not be deployed (on the model) onto the table without moving models.

So, two of the doors stayed up. I asked if that would then block LoS as his command squad came out the other side and could not see an enemy unit because of said doors.

This made me wonder:
a. Should the scatter have been less to accomodate the footprint of the door (answer I believe is No, hull is all that counts)?

b. Could LoS be drawn through the pod even though doors were up? (Player I was with said yes as doors are technically down, even though the actual model could not deploy)

The only other option was to drop the doors on my models and issue some kind of wound for being hit by a large metal door. We both agreed, while funny, this is not supported by the rules.

svendrex wrote:Are drop pods even sealed and pressurized to begin with? There would not really be a need as Power Armor, Terminator Armor, and Dreads all have contained life support systems.

Yes they are most definitely sealed. Letting superheated air into an environment (reentry) means that, while your suit would be ok, its likely the cooling systems would fail.

Green! -

a) no, not hull so no mishap, so dont reduce mishap
b) if you cannot physically put the doors down, the they block LOS as normal.

Green is Best! wrote:a. Should the scatter have been less to accomodate the footprint of the door (answer I believe is No, hull is all that counts)?

No. The doors are just dressing.

b. Could LoS be drawn through the pod even though doors were up? (Player I was with said yes as doors are technically down, even though the actual model could not deploy)

No. There is no rule that would allow you to shoot through a pod that you can not physically draw LOS through.