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.

Bharring wrote:
Which is still putting solid structure between the chargee and the charger.

The idea that we don't hide behind walls simply because things can fly is limited.

What solid structure between the chargee and the charger? Unless the unit in question is inside an indistructable cube, they can and should be charged.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Shoot some dead first, is the answer.

But wait bro, what about when my Boyz only have BS5+ and the units in question have inherent -2 to hit?!?!?12211twoone

*Glances at Dakka! x 3 army-wide rule.

VIIIINNNNDDDIIIICCCCAAAAATTTTIIIIIIIOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN!

They said that they're fixing that in Orktober with the new Codex - Orks will always hit on an unmodified 6.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
It's not gamey at all...it's a viable tactic. If your army can't knock out a few models to make space, then you can't get in that doorway, staircase, etc. There should be a penalty for one-trick pony armies which have no ability to shoot something a few inches away.

There already is a penalty though? It's called having to get within 12" of the enemy and successfully making a charge while allowing them the opportunity to shoot you in the face...
What's the penalty, exactly, for all these 'one-trick pony' armies that only shoot and have no real close quarters units?

You're talking about shooty units on the upper level of a ruin in what we're arguing about here. If they get charged from a lower level of the ruin and the unit isn't visible to them, they don't get to pump any Overwatch fire into the charging unit.

 Galef wrote:
No, I understood what you meant entirely. I was just pointing out how you can still prevent up-level assaults in many situations.
If the enemy is just below the unit and you shoot them to "make room" you can still take casualties that prevents any of your models getting up unless they have FLY or can go around behind the unit.
Remember that nothing can go through walls. Over, sure, but not through.

You better not remember that and read page 248 of the BRB instead. Infantry can move through walls and floors.

So if I have Alaitoc Rangers with some at the edge of the level and a wall behind them, you have to kill enough to force me to take the models that are blocking you. If I can still leave enough models at the edge to block you, unless you have FLY, getting within 12" or being "just underneath" them won't matter. You can't got through them or through the wall behind them.
Situational, yes, but something to keep in mind.

If you take the actual rules "situational" turns into "almost never". A single pathfinder dies, my boss nob will be taking his place, no matter where you pull him. Best part? You can't fall back because the entire ground floor is covered in orks, so I have protection from getting shot next turn.

 doctortom wrote:
They said that they're fixing that in Orktober with the new Codex - Orks will always hit on an unmodified 6.

Do you know the name of that rule? Or what the word "vindication" means? Read my post again.

torblind wrote:
Wasn't there a discussion early in 8th about how a model that had let's say 2" move left when it reaches a wall could be said to continue 2" up, mid air, and continue from there next turn? Not saying I like it or endorse it. (I don't)

That's right - an earlier FAQ made it seem like wobbly model syndrome could always be used to say the attacking models were half way up the wall and 1" away, or something like that. The new update was added relatively recently (was it the Spring FAQ? I can't remember for sure).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I'd agree with your analogy except we aren't talking about castle walls with human vs human combat. We're talking about the 41st Millenium where literal demons run around and hover tanks exist. Also these are ruined buildings, not purpose-built for defending from a close combat encounter. If demons can appear anywhere, including Private Jenkin's head, why wouldn't they appear in a cramped room?

There are lots of rules that prevent units from contacting each other that would otherwise not make sense, except from a game-function perspective. Units can't move within 1" of each other without charging. Units can't deep strike within 9" of an enemy unit. In previous editions, deep striking on top of a unit was instant death, even though units deep striking via jet packs would basically be doing this very same thing the instant they charged. Units don't get to push other units aside. We lost tank shock, which was the only thing that allowed this in previous editions.

You also get cases where units that are just too large to fit through terrain because of their base size (like a gap between buildings that a monster could realistically squeeze through), but most gamers shrug and accept the abstraction that's going on. Yes, a Bloodthirster could probably just rip out a wall, literally push a dozen infantryman aside with sheer bulk and start killing people. OTOH, Bloodthirsters don't have infinite strength and might just bounce off cathedral walls with lots of purity seals (the 41st millennium adapts!). Or it might be tough enough that the Bloodthirster would need several minutes of chopping through steel reinforced future concrete. These are rules for a RPG, not a fairly simple tabletop war game. D&D 3rd edition had rules to cover all these situations, and it was basically a VERY complicated board game as far as combat was concerned.

I agree that it's kind of a crap rule from a fairness perspective, but if the unit 'could' charge in the current situation, how do you determine which units can fight in the fight phase? Do those units on the ground level that are supposed to be up a floor fighting interfere with the movement of other units on the ground level? It gets worse if you have mixed units with different weapons, like Deathwatch Kill Teams. Who gets to fight when you can't get a decent idea of who is engaged with what?

Probably the easiest solution is to allow all terrain to be destroyed. Things like knights and bloodthirsters should be tearing buildings down, not engaging the squishies inside.

Last edition. Buildings could actually be assaulted and the damage from the building goes into the squad that occupied it (to represent the building crumbling as that massive bloodthirster with a titan slaying weapon was cutting the building in half.

I will agree that this was one of the most stupid FAQ's GW has posted. And most umpires and tourney organizers in my area ignore this faq because of how much of an advantage it gives to your opponent.

Sure. people say it can be 'situational', but in my tournament scene it is actually the norm. I have seen at least 8 games where people were using this tactic to stop melee units from charging them in their single floor platform before the tourney organizers just re erata'd the rule.


It's a silly rule, it should of not been a thing

Yes and RAW it still works however they FAQed an answer in contradiction to this so people go with the faq.

People were using wobbly model for ridiculous scenarios.

Now it's only wobbly model if you CAN fit, but choose not to for fear of damaging the model.

But remember. Wobly model is only optional.

Meaning if your opponent says "you can fit there. but i wont let you" you cant do anything

Wobbly Model is not optional. It only requires the two of you to agree where the model is. You're opponent doesn't have the option of agreeing the model will fit but not letting you use WMS.

Yet he can say im not gonna agree to use WMS in the first place.

Hense, it is optional.

The fact that both players have to agree to use it means that if one player knows he's gonna do this tactic he can say "Nah im not allowing WMS" and you cant do squat about it. even if the model could fit but would fall over.

The person would say "okay then. leave the model where it is"

mchammadad wrote:
Yet he can say im not gonna agree to use WMS in the first place.

Hense, it is optional.

By that logic any rules are "optional" because the two players have to agree to play a game, which comes with the rules package. (they can leave out rules if they like, but that needs to be discussed and agreed upon before the game, and it is not really a game of 40K).

You can not arbitrarily decide not to use a rule mid-game if you have agreed to play a game of 40K though.

The fact that both players have to agree to use it...

If you are using the 40K ruleset, WMS is not an optional rule...

means that if one player knows he's gonna do this tactic he can say "Nah im not allowing WMS" and you cant do squat about it. even if the model could fit but would fall over.

Except if both players agree to use the 40K ruleset, then one person says 'Nah im not allowing WMS' the game stops because WMS is not an optional rule.

If you dont use WMS, or leave any other rules out, you are not really playing 40K now are you?

DeathReaper is right. In a organized event game, you get to call over a judge who will rule in your favor. Otherwise, you've found an opponent unworthy of your time.

So how do yoy resolve the wobbly modeling stuff into thin air situations then?
Wobbly model when something can be placed but would likely fall fine, thats the point of the rule.
Wobbly modeling to get into CC while levitating 4 inchs of the table is a richard move.

You cant wobbly model in air. The rule says if you delicately balance your model in place you can use WMS. You cant balance your model in the air.

 John Prins wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
The whole "you can't charge if you can't fit on the same level" of ruins is really dumb and really gamey.

I keep hearing this argument and it still doesn't make any sense. For thousands of years we built castle walls to exploit this very advantage. Stairwells are natural choke points/kill zones and climbing wall to try to get at someone makes you a sitting duck.

Personally, I'd rather simulate this problem with some sort of high-ground advantage in assault, but I don't feel that the current rules are terribly unrealistic, or that there are no solutions - it may force a 1 turn delay to an assault, forcing you to get in the lower floors before assault is a viable option, and if you don't have shooting to open holes, well, some units and tactics have hard counters, and that's okay, it keeps people from building one trick pony armies.

Those stairways didn't make you 100% invulnerable for assaulting though. As funny enough, opponent could actually come through stairways and hack at you at the doorway.

And besides 1++ is bad for game anyway.

 p5freak wrote:
You cant wobbly model in air. The rule says if you delicately balance your model in place you can use WMS. You cant balance your model in the air.

I agree it was more people saying it is not optional, I wanted to know what they do when someone is being a Richard and claiming levitating models Wobbly Model?

 p5freak wrote:
You cant wobbly model in air. The rule says if you delicately balance your model in place you can use WMS. You cant balance your model in the air.

Could you hang your model from a wall? I.e. there are 5 rangers hiding on the top floor of a ruin. I have genestealers or hormagaunts with claws perfectly capable of delicately hanging off the edge of the wall by their claws without falling down. Would that be legal?

Malachon wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
You cant wobbly model in air. The rule says if you delicately balance your model in place you can use WMS. You cant balance your model in the air.

Could you hang your model from a wall? I.e. there are 5 rangers hiding on the top floor of a ruin. I have genestealers or hormagaunts with claws perfectly capable of delicately hanging off the edge of the wall by their claws without falling down. Would that be legal?

Well, the rules dont say anything about the orientation of a model, so you could do that. But its somewhat of a TFG move.

If a model always stands on its base until you find you can’t do the thing you want, so you suggest hanging it like Barrel Of Monkeys... eh, just don’t be that guy. Just don’t.

As someone who likes melee armies this is one of the most important, and confusing things (WMS, multi level buildings). This kind of rules wokiness is also something that keeps me from wanting to play strangers at my FLGS.

Would be good to get example questions together and email GW faq: 40kfaq@gwplc.com

Maybe we can get it addressed instead of vagueness that causes arguments.

I understand why GW chose the ruling they have here, it's the most simple - if you can't fit, you can't fight.

I'm all for the simplification of this Edition compared to the last too, but this for me is too far. I'm sure it wouldn't be game breaking or particularly complex to allow keyword infantry, bikes, vehicles, monsters and titanic units to interact with units in buildings in some way in cqc. It might be the same way for all, or some might be different, but there should be an interaction there.

As I said earlier, placing models on top of a building so that they can't be assaulted is not in any way a skillful action.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
They said that they're fixing that in Orktober with the new Codex - Orks will always hit on an unmodified 6.

Do you know the name of that rule? Or what the word "vindication" means? Read my post again.

Sorry, was too busy drooling over the new Hq on the wartrike.

 doctortom wrote:
Sorry, was too busy drooling over the new Hq on the wartrike.

I can't blame you for that, drool away!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
English,
But just how big a wall/fortification can a Bloodthirster actually smash through? Something like "Can engage models within 3" of building edge"? How does that vary compared to a Dreadnaught? To a Phantom Titan?

Nothing has changed. You normally cant attack terrain. Only models who are fortifications. If the base of your model can't fit within 1" you can't charge, you can't attack. Imperial knights have a stratagem to fix that mistake. GW is well aware of that issue. Maybe it will be fixed in the upcominf FAQ, maybe not.

It is also important to note that if a vehicle does not have a base, then its assault range is measured from its hull.

This comes into play for Defilres, and IIRC Soul Grinders, Which do not come with bases in their box- partly due to the huge spindly legs on them.

So if any part of your Defiler is within 1 inch of a unit in a ruin, the Defiler can assault them. Drain that smirk off your opponents face when you pile some dumpster claws into them.

Make sure you model stairs onto your ruins for upper floor access.
Or a lift.

Or I guess you could just move a shooty unit into a good view of the unit on the top floor and dakka them to death.

This base and no base rule is ridiculous. A defiler can charge models on the upper floors of ruins and a knight normally cant. This ruling must disappear.