Switch Theme:

Dense Terrain Question  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Roarin' Runtherd




United Kingdom

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Even if it has a base, you also have to consider the hull, as you have no order of precedence to say you can use one and not the other as you posit above


the rules state by definition -

"Hull = Any part of a model that does not have a base."

this means under current rules a model with a base is considered to NOT have a hull

A model with a base doesn't fit the hull definition above.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/27 22:25:17


SMASH  
   
Made in us
Stoic Grail Knight




 kingbbobb wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
Even if it has a base, you also have to consider the hull, as you have no order of precedence to say you can use one and not the other as you posit above


the rules state by definition -

"Hull = Any part of a model that does not have a base."

this means under current rules a model with a base is considered to NOT have a hull

A model with a base doesn't fit the hull definition above.


Then what do we do with Drukhari Raiders which have a base but also a special rule that all measurements are to be made to/from the hull?
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

Audustum wrote:
 kingbbobb wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
Even if it has a base, you also have to consider the hull, as you have no order of precedence to say you can use one and not the other as you posit above


the rules state by definition -

"Hull = Any part of a model that does not have a base."

this means under current rules a model with a base is considered to NOT have a hull

A model with a base doesn't fit the hull definition above.


Then what do we do with Drukhari Raiders which have a base but also a special rule that all measurements are to be made to/from the hull?

How about the Necron Monolith?

Distances are measured to and from either this model's hull or its base, whichever is the closest.

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





St. Louis, MO

So with all of this, if you ignore the benefits of cover vs a target, does that mean that you ignore the obscuring trait (assuming you can draw TLoS?)

11,100 pts, 7,000 pts
++ Heed my words for I am the Herald and we are the footsteps of doom. Interlopers, do we name you. Defilers of our
sacred earth. We have awoken to your primative species and will not tolerate your presence. Ours is the way of logic,
of cold hard reason: your irrationality, your human disease has no place in the necrontyr. Flesh is weak.
Surrender to the machine incarnate. Surrender and die.
++

Tuagh wrote: If you won't use a wrench, it isn't the bolt's fault that your hammer is useless.
 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





There's a rare rule that defines what "ignoring the benefits of cover" or similar wording does. It ignores the benefits of light cover, heavy cover, and dense cover, but not the Obscuring terrain feature.
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





St. Louis, MO

Gotcha, thanks.

11,100 pts, 7,000 pts
++ Heed my words for I am the Herald and we are the footsteps of doom. Interlopers, do we name you. Defilers of our
sacred earth. We have awoken to your primative species and will not tolerate your presence. Ours is the way of logic,
of cold hard reason: your irrationality, your human disease has no place in the necrontyr. Flesh is weak.
Surrender to the machine incarnate. Surrender and die.
++

Tuagh wrote: If you won't use a wrench, it isn't the bolt's fault that your hammer is useless.
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




For your opponent to claim the cover, they would have to successfully argue why the dense cover should be considered as 'between', because that is the only time dense cover applies.

Intuitively it isn't, so RAI there's no dense cover.

There is no RAW definition for the term, so RAW doesn't actually allow a model to ever claim dense cover.

Your opponent does not get dense cover in this situation.

If you want to agree a definition with your opponent, I would suggest a starting point like 'if any part of the area terrain, or obstacle, is closer to the shooting unit than the closest part of the target model, then the area terrain, or obstacle, is considered to be between the two units.' It still has edge cases, but they're sanded down compared to what we have now.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Worst answer ever.

Besides this kind of attitude being highly toxic to both the game and the forum, you should at least read and quote the rule in question before going full lawful stupid RAW on it.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Removed - BrookM

Obscuring and Dense Cover
Obscuring and Dense Cover are two terrain traits introduced with ninth edition that interact with visibility. These rules do not overwrite the normal rules for determining visibility, though - they are in addition to them. Specifically, even though the Obscuring rules state that AIRCRAFT and models with a Wounds characteristic of 18+ can be seen through Obscuring terrain, they are still only visible (and hence eligible) targets if the firing model can physically see them (so if the terrain in question is solid and opaque, they are still not eligible targets). Also, in the same way that Obscuring terrain ‘blocks’ visibility when it is in between the firing model and its intended target, Dense Cover terrain imposes a hit penalty whenever it is between the firing model and its intended target (with the noted exceptions). It is not required for a unit to be fulfilling the criteria of ‘gaining the benefits of cover’, as described for Obstacles and Area Terrain, for this penalty to hit rolls to apply (but also note that any rule that ignores the benefits of cover, or that ignores the benefits of cover that impose a penalty on hit rolls, would still ignore that penalty).


Look at that word 'between' there. Tell me any way in which only the back (from the point of view of the shooting model) of a model is in dense area terrain and that terrain could be considered 'between' the two.

If you want to RAW a rule, you have to RAW everything.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 16:20:07


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Epic fail. You just quoted an explanatory designer's commentary from a FAQ instead of the actual rule

Dense Cover
If this terrain feature is at least 3" in height, then subtract 1 from the hit roll when resolving an attack with a ranged weapon unless you can draw straight lines, 1mm in thickness, to every part of at least one model’s base (or hull) in the target unit from a single point on the attacking model's base (or hull) without any of those lines passing over or through any part of any terrain feature with this trait. Models that are on or within an Area Terrain feature with this trait do not suffer this penalty if the only terrain feature these lines pass over or through is the terrain feature that the attacking model is on or within. Models within 3" of an Obstacle terrain feature with this trait do not suffer this penalty if the only terrain feature these lines pass over or through is the terrain feature that the attacking model is within 3" of. The height of a terrain feature is measured from the highest point on that terrain feature.

Models do not suffer this penalty to their hit rolls when making an attack with a ranged weapon that targets an AIRCRAFT unit, or a unit that includes any models with a Wounds (W) characteristic of 18 or more, even if this terrain feature is between it and the firing model (note that the reverse is not true).


That's the real rule, by the way, explaining what "between" is.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/06/21 13:50:28


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Ah you're the kind of player who stops reading rules when they get to the bit they like.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/21 14:01:51


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Sorry, weren't you the one claiming that "between" needs to be defined?

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Yes, If you want to play RAW you have to define what is written.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






And you got all the way down to "between"? I thought you were the kind of guy who read all parts of the rules?

dammit wrote:
Obscuring and Dense Cover
Obscuring and Dense Cover are two terrain traits introduced with ninth edition that interact with visibility. These rules do not overwrite the normal rules for determining visibility, though - they are in addition to them. Specifically, even though the Obscuring rules state that AIRCRAFT and models with a Wounds characteristic of 18+ can be seen through Obscuring terrain, they are still only visible (and hence eligible) targets if the firing model can physically see them (so if the terrain in question is solid and opaque, they are still not eligible targets). Also, in the same way that Obscuring terrain ‘blocks’ visibility when it is in between the firing model and its intended target, Dense Cover terrain imposes a hit penalty whenever it is between the firing model and its intended target (with the noted exceptions). It is not required for a unit to be fulfilling the criteria of ‘gaining the benefits of cover’, as described for Obstacles and Area Terrain, for this penalty to hit rolls to apply (but also note that any rule that ignores the benefits of cover, or that ignores the benefits of cover that impose a penalty on hit rolls, would still ignore that penalty).


I took the liberty of marking all undefined words. Oh, no, the game has become unplayable! Who would have though.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Weird way to agree with me.

Like I said, give me an definition of 'between' that covers the scenario in the OP.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/21 15:21:35


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Since seem to be oblivious to how both games and sarcasm works, let me paraphrase:

Any interpretation of the RAW that results in an unplayable game while there is a valid interpretation that results in a playable game is wrong by default.

Anyone claiming that a term which is absolutely clear from context and common understanding needs to be defined is not reading the rules as written, but is twisting them for the sole purpose of being a toxic jerk to people.

By the way, your ignore list doesn't do anything if you keep clicking the link to read my posts anyways


Automatically Appended Next Post:
dammit wrote:
Like I said, give me an definition of 'between' that covers the scenario in the OP.


Uhh, I already did? First line of the rule that made me look stupid.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2021/06/21 15:33:00


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Obscuring and Dense Cover are two terrain traits introduced with ninth edition that interact with visibility. These rules do not overwrite the normal rules for determining visibility, though - they are in addition to them.


This one? Removed - BrookM

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 16:19:52


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






No, but you complete inability to understand written text is about to give me one.

I think anyone with basic reading comprehension has understood that your argument is absolutely worthless nonsense.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/21 17:20:43


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Nurgle Chosen Marine on a Palanquin





Livermore, Ca

Hey "Dammi" lose the tone and inciteful language please. That's clearly against the forum rules.

In the OP's original diagram, there's no way to draw LOS through the forest before you touch his base/hull, thus no -1 TO HIT.

My thought on turrets not being part of the hull seems to be a carry over from 8th edition, I'm not seeing anything that supports that in 9th.

So no -1 TO HIT from the OP diagram, but if your shooting unit was North, South and definitely West then the -1 TO HIT applies.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 16:29:21


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Sazzlefrats wrote:
Hey "Dammi" lose the tone and inciteful language please. That's clearly against the forum rules.

In the OP's original diagram, there's no way to draw LOS through the forest before you touch his base/hull, thus no -1 TO HIT.

My thought on turrets not being part of the hull seems to be a carry over from 8th edition, I'm not seeing anything that supports that in 9th.

So no -1 TO HIT from the OP diagram, but if your shooting unit was North, South and definitely West then the -1 TO HIT applies.


You are probably thinking of 7th edition and earlier, which always had a list of exceptions for what was not part of the hull. Since that list has always been lacking, they apparently tossed it out with 8th and simply declared everything hull.

Note that the rule requires you to draw the line to every part of the hull, so if any part is on terrain, you would have to draw a line over said terrain to reach it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 18:07:57


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





 Sazzlefrats wrote:
My thought on turrets not being part of the hull seems to be a carry over from 8th edition, I'm not seeing anything that supports that in 9th.

So no -1 TO HIT from the OP diagram, but if your shooting unit was North, South and definitely West then the -1 TO HIT applies.
Definition of what constitutes a hull is irrelevant to the discussion as rules/abilities that specify where you measure to (hull/base/both) affects only the game functions that require you to make measurements.

Obscuring and Dense Cover terrain traits are strictly a TLOS test (which is not a distance test) and therefore is not affected by the rules that define what a hull is. You draw TLOS to ANY PART of the model.

If you need to "look through" a terrain with the trait(s), and "looking through" the terrain piece is the only way you can establish a TLOS, then the traits are in effect. If you can draw a TLOS to any part of the model without having to "look through" the terrain, then the terrain traits are not in effect.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/28 15:24:14


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 skchsan wrote:
 Sazzlefrats wrote:
My thought on turrets not being part of the hull seems to be a carry over from 8th edition, I'm not seeing anything that supports that in 9th.

So no -1 TO HIT from the OP diagram, but if your shooting unit was North, South and definitely West then the -1 TO HIT applies.
Definition of what constitutes a hull is irrelevant to the discussion as rules/abilities that specify where you measure to (hull/base/both) affects only the game functions that require you to make measurements.

Obscuring and Dense Cover terrain traits are strictly a TLOS test (which is not a distance test) and therefore is not affected by the rules that define what a hull is. You draw TLOS to ANY PART of the model.

If you need to "look through" a terrain with the trait(s), and "looking through" the terrain piece is the only way you can establish a TLOS, then the traits are in effect. If you can draw a TLOS to any part of the model without having to "look through" the terrain, then the terrain traits are not in effect.


The terrain rules apply unless you can draw TLOS to “every part” not “any part” of the model without having the TLOS pass through the terrain in question.

Edit: I’m referring to the dense terrain rules. Obscuring is slightly different.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/28 15:41:06


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: