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.

Posted By Strangelooper on 06/16/2006 2:42 PM
Dave: you're not Ed Mauleed, and you're far from a Dakka Toughguy...what's with the 'tude?

I'm not? Damn, I thought I was Mauleed... ok then, because I am not Mauleed I must digress.

Gimme a break man, you know I am right, by RAW and by Fluff. This is probably getting excessive but I have included a bunch of pictures of ruined buildings to prove that by RAW, you can not assault a unit 10' above you, there is not enough rubble in front of ANY of these buildings to 'scamper up' and make an assuault from the outside window.

What is 4' inside the building? Possibly stairs/ladders/rubble/tables & chairs stacked up to make it through a hole to make it up. The idea is that when going UP a floor or two or three in a building, you have to be IN the building to make it up.

Maybe you can come up with a house 'ladder' strategem where your squads carry around ladders to make external assaults on buildings.

For those of you who want to point out AGAIN that real life and fluff have nothing to do with 40k or this argument, by RAW there is NO argument to be had against my point of view, by fluff there is also no basis for assaulting someone 10' above you, the only argument that I can see anyone spouting is "well that's dumb" and that is what holds no water!

Here are the pics.

Real life has nothing to do with this game.

Thanks Snoogums, you are totally right... Which means that there is nothing to fall back on other than RAW, in which case I am still right.

And by RAW, you are not in BTB when you assault someone who is on the other side of a thin low wall, or one step up on a stepped hill. But I don't believe that anyone would claim that assaulters would have to go around the terrain or assault up the other side of the hill.

And around and around we go.

The 'just go around behind' falls apart if the defending unit occupies the entire area of the 2nd floor. They don't even have to be jammed base to base with one another, as long as they're 0.99" apart at most, you can't place another model in contact with them. As for stairs: The stairs in our terrain are too narrow and steep to place a model on, they're for looks only.

Even the 'well there's a little sliver of space due to the shape of the bases' doesn't work, as the defender can always balance his models with the bases sticking over the edge by 49%, such that there is no actual floor space available.

As for 'just shoot a few models off' - the genestealer point is a good one. They can't shoot. So they should be unable to assault one floor up in a ruin?

Also the point about the model sticking out over it's base, so that no one can get in base to base and therefore technically can never assault it. I'll have to put large low spikes on all my gunfexes, sticking out in all directions, so that no model can ever assault it.

All of these things are sufficient to stop a charge per RAW.

And all of them are due to having interestingly posed models and/or interesting, visually appealing terrain.

I think that if someone who tries to claim any of these things should actually prevent an assault wants to play a game, I will insist on using terrain that consists entirely of pieces of white paper with 'ruin' and 'hill' written on them, with the levels drawn in concentric shapes. That will make the game work smoothly.

I like having interesting terrain, but if people can't make the mental leap of abstraction required to use it and still have a workable fun game, it's back to the white paper!

Just out of curiosity, in a game where you reached a friendly consensus to allow such a combat which floor would you count the assaulter as standing on for purposes of subsequent game interactions?

Neil, first off you KNOW I am not a RAW player, I look at the rules as a guideline, not as the word of god written in stone and if the rules are broken somewhere I not only don't mind but I insist that we figure out a way around them for both playability and realism. Otherwise we wouldn't even be having this conversation at all.

My comment to snoogums was simply that if you are going to take realism out of the argument (which is what my basis of this argument is about) then you say that you should fall back on RAW in which case there is no argument to be had.

I posted the pics of ruined buildings to illustrate that you can't hurt someone that it 10' or 12' up from you in a semi closed building with claws/fists/knives. Your last argument in favor of being able to assault while standing outside the building was based on the fact that there is rubble all around and you can scamper up it to make your attack through the window (which also brings up the problem of how can a model on the first floor shoot out then?)

As for what everyone else here thinks, I don't really care because I don't play with them.

I understand where your argument is coming from, you are using other common consensus as prescedent.

My point is that those common consensus are not applicable here, the modelling one in particular because no matter where you are on the board it applies, it would be like me modelling trees on all my kroot bases and saying they are always in jungle terrain and get a 4+ save.

The second common consensus is that if a model is on a peice of area terrain based on a 1/2" stand you can still assault it if it is sitting on the edge of the stand. The basis for that is simply because the terrain needs to have a base or it can't be moved.

The third is the idea of assaulting up a hillside. This one may be where I can show you exactly where I am coming from. There is that peice of grey styrofoam hill terrain that you made a long time ago, we have used it quite regularly and in the last number of games we played with it, about 1/3 is impassable as it was a sharp near 90 degree angle up with a wall at the top, the balance of it is accessable as difficult terrain. We have always played that if you want to assualt troops on that peice of terrain, you must go around. Same as the 'raised ditch' peice that I got with those (useless) injection mold unstandable hills. You can get in by the back but not via the front which is impassable.

My point is, that if you are IN the building, you can go up it and make an assault as there are stairs/ladders/stacked furniture to make it to the second floor.

I would also like to point out that before this had happened, I had NEVER denied you a charge before this, not to units that were intersperced (although I did make you charge the closest unit which I think took us about 30 seconds to come to an agreement on) and not to units that couldn't be reached because of modelling (usually on your part)

d

Posted By happypants on 06/17/2006 8:04 PM


My comment to snoogums was simply that if you are going to take realism out of the argument (which is what my basis of this argument is about) then you say that you should fall back on RAW in which case there is no argument to be had.

Your right that their is no argument, all of the conditions of charging can be met so the unit can be charged. Nothing in RAW for charging says the model can't charge if it can't be set next to the model, it just has be be able to reach it. Taking the scenery and using it in a manner not intended is cheating and I sure as hell wouldn't ever play you again if you pulled something like that.

"I'm immune to charging duurrrr!!"

And for "real world examples", a genestrealer shouldnt have any problems scaling a wall and attacking with his two remaining limbs anyway, but your solution is to deny any charge. Of course your area terrain shoud be modelled to allow models to move around freely so you shouldn't have large mounds of rubble than make moving through it difficult even if it shows a hill to climb or whatever crap you were saying earlier, the terrain should make gameplay easier.

Snoogums, the conditions for charging are that you have to make base to base contact. They can not be met. I don't understand how you can even begin to argue from a RAW perspective on this. It is the same thing as interspercing units, by RAW you can NOT charge because you will be within 1" of a model in a unit that you are not engaged with.

You keep on trying to bring RAW in to this to support the charge taking place, if you can find me a line ANYWHERE in the BGB that says anything like "if you have enough distance to charge but can't make base to base the charge still takes place" I will:

1. Drop this
2. Kiss Neils bare @ss and beg for forgiveness
3. Paypal you $100

How to charge:

1) Declare charge.
2) Make difficult terrain test (to move up)
3) Measure distance.
-  If distance is enough I have successfully charged : at this point I have charged, this is where you are trying to break the rules by saying that you can use terrain in a manor not intended in the rules, in this case denying a charge with terrain not intended to deny a charge. Nothing says the charge fails if the model cannot be placed, it is sucessful when the distance is close enough. If there isn't enough distance that is the only time it lists as failing.
4) Move into base to base.

Since your opponent already has a sucessful charge, you and your opponent have to work out how to handle this terrain problem which is why most people leave the charging model on the level below to count it as charging. Nothing in the charge section tells you what to do if you can sucessfully charge but cannot place the model. You are cheating plain and simple.

Snoogums man, please look at page 37, it notes on page 37 paragraph 2 sentace 3 that you must make contact. Not just that you must have enough movement to make it.

Again, I don't really think there is anywhere to go on this from RAW but that has little to do with the argument because there are at least 4 other situations where I would have no issue with a model not making it in to BtB engaging in combat. (Modelling, terrain base, thin wall/barrels/barricade etc getting in the way, and a difficult terrain hill that is modelled in such a way that you can not sit a model at a 45 degree or steeper angle) I am quite sure that Strangelooper doesn't think this is a RAW issue either (Please correct me if I am wrong Neil)

d

No, I don't think this is a RAW issue. As I have pointed out, under RAW it is impossible to charge models that are filling up a step of a stepped hill, or models that are flush with a low wall that is too thin to balance a model upon.

This is an issue of playability and common conventions, like taking models off the table when embarking on transports, treating units on the other side of a thin wall as effectively in base-to-base, etc. I think we're all in agreement that RAW are insufficient for a playable game, due to the lack of editing and writing skills at GW.

It's a playability thing. I don't think that just because a unit occupies the entirety of a floor of a city ruin, it should be unassaultable, even if that's what the RAW says, due to the common conventions used in other similar situations regarding terrain and model placement. Nor do I think that stunned vehicles should give up half vps. That sort of rules-lawyering really detracts from the playability of the game. And more importanly, pulling stuff like that out in mid-game really makes the game a lot less fun.

"'fish of fury' tactic, where one will make thier firewarriors unassaultable by getting out of the back of devilfish about 12" away from enemy models and rapid fire and making the enemy models go around the devilfish to assault them. "

Why not? I know that you cannot go within 1" of a unit you re not intending to charge, but doesn't the 'fish block LOS for the FW? I just cannot wrap my head around this for some inane reason.....

Skimmers don't block LOS.

Did you have to drag back up a 2 month old thread to ask that question?

Not this again...quick to the escape pod!


Capt K

thanks! and two month old? i simply searched for 'fish of fury'... so nyah nyah!

Thanks Chris, I was waiting for that.

There's another one on google images, but I can't get it bigger than a thumbnail.

this is so way off topic

this is so way off topic

If you think this is OT then you've never seen a thread OT on Dakka.

This is a tough one. Normally as I play and read the rules, terrain is a very abstract form on the baord. The reason the rules have gone to area terrain is because in the vast majority of cases, it really does streamline and speed up play. However, you need to suspend your disbelief when situations in game come up that fly in the face of "reality"

for example, when a tank drives into area terrain and due to terrain limitations, can not fit on the bottom floor and as such you place it on the top floor because, RAW state that a model may move as many inches vertically as it can horizontally. Obviously this would be immpossible in reality, but in order to facilitate game play you allow it. now, when a unit charges this tank, which for the sake of the example now takes up the entire top floor of the building, you would technically have to make base to base contact in order to assault that unit, even though now, according to RAW, it would be impossible to do so.
obviously this is a different situation in the details but esentially it is describing the same thing.

the game is an abstraction of reality and as such any real world comparisons really just fall short.

I would say that the best way to interpret this would be to go by the following reading:

the BGB states that a model must MAKE it into base to base contact, not that the model actually has to stay in that position. so, if a model has the movement to make contact, then i would say that he would be able to complete the charge and engage into HtH.

rationalize this by saying that the attackers barrel into, through or over obstacles as they assault the enemy, and for the sake of playability, you place the models ehreever it is convienant.