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.

If you cannot see the hull of the Ravager can you shoot the crew? I personaly don't think you can as they're not part of the hull, though we played it this way for a game as we wasn't sure. Can any one help?

Are you asking whether seeing part of a crew member counts as being able to see the ravager?

"Crew" or "passangers"? Sorry, don't know the Dark Eldar dex that well.

It's all about TLOS... passengers wouldn't count because you can just move them out the way anytime you want, their actual position is arbitrary, read Wobbly Model Syndrome.

Dedicated crewmembers are probably part of the ship in the same way that artillery crew are also models. Do the crewmembers serve a function other than looks?

Unless there's a special DE rule excepting this.... (tends to happen to me)

Crew models are purely decorative elements and thus ignored for shooting.

htj wrote:Are you asking whether seeing part of a crew member counts as being able to see the ravager?

That's what I am asking....

Sam__theRelentless wrote:"Crew" or "passangers"? Sorry, don't know the Dark Eldar dex that well.

It's all about TLOS... passengers wouldn't count because you can just move them out the way anytime you want, their actual position is arbitrary, read Wobbly Model Syndrome.

Dedicated crewmembers are probably part of the ship in the same way that artillery crew are also models. Do the crewmembers serve a function other than looks?

Unless there's a special DE rule excepting this.... (tends to happen to me)

I don't want to sound funny, but if you won't know the D.E codex I wouldn't bother answering a question about them which you don't really know. I'm not talking about passengers, I am talking about crew.

Jidmah wrote:Crew models are purely decorative elements and thus ignored for shooting.

Thanks man. Wouldn't have made a difference as passed cover saves but I will remember for next time

Cool, thanks for clearing that up for me mercer. I wasn't sure if you were asking whether you could literally shoot at just the crewman, against his toughness and all that. Although the question has since been answered by Jidmah, at least the way I interpret the rules.

For targetting vehicles it is the hull that counts, just like flying monsters where wings do not count.

You need to target the hull to hit the vehicle. Everything else is decorative and is ignored for purposes of line of sight. Neither crew or passengers are hull.

Homer

I do find it silly that wings don't count, considering that wings of a vehicle do.

That aside though only the "Hull" of a vehicle counts not added accessorie like modifications

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:I do find it silly that wings don't count, considering that wings of a vehicle do.

That aside though only the "Hull" of a vehicle counts not added accessorie like modifications

You know, GW even explained why they did implement the rules like that in the BRB. Also, demons/bugs/eldar wing have nothing in common with wings of a plane except the name. If in doubt, look at a bird or bat, and then at a plane.

With the "decorative" rule in mind: does the raider / ravager sail count as hull or decoration?

Decoration, does a sail sound as a hull to you???

ah man hull is hull why are people always discussing that hard about it and tls is tls...

I would count the main body of a ravager or raider...not the side gunners, not the sail, not the crew or passangers. Just the hull...like a LRBT.

Akroma06 wrote:I would count the main body of a ravager or raider...not the side gunners, not the sail, not the crew or passangers. Just the hull...like a LRBT.

Quoted for Truth.

Nothing above the main body of the skimmer counts. Just the fuselage.

not the sail, but the mast eh? lol

Due to the sails being an actual functional part of the vehicle(like tracks or exhausts), they are not purely decorative. As they are not gun barrels or dozer blade-equivalents either, they can be shot.

Jidmah wrote:Due to the sails being an actual functional part of the vehicle(like tracks or exhausts), they are not purely decorative. As they are not gun barrels or dozer blade-equivalents either, they can be shot.

Which is exactly why I asked whether the crewmembers actually serve a function, ie whether not having them there would make a difference. The DE codex makes no difference, evidently; just trying to help.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:I do find it silly that wings don't count, considering that wings of a vehicle do.

That aside though only the "Hull" of a vehicle counts not added accessorie like modifications

Wings of a vehicle do count, see the rulebook FAQ (v1.4).

It's wings of a non-vehicle model that don't count.

Those are lightsails right? So funny how they are so fragile then, another bad vehicle design ftw.

Jidmah wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:I do find it silly that wings don't count, considering that wings of a vehicle do.

You know, GW even explained why they did implement the rules like that in the BRB. Also, demons/bugs/eldar wing have nothing in common with wings of a plane except the name. If in doubt, look at a bird or bat, and then at a plane.

Well I was thinking more along the lines of "if it has wings then it's probably constantly flying, losing one would be bad." Technically the same logic would apply to winged creatures too, but there is no overwatch, and they are almost always considered to be ended on foot.

meh. GW rules clash epically with what should actually happen YET AGAIN!

Fit with the fluff... for shame!

Jidmah wrote:Due to the sails being an actual functional part of the vehicle(like tracks or exhausts), they are not purely decorative. As they are not gun barrels or dozer blade-equivalents either, they can be shot.

No Dark Eldar player would agree with this.

The exact rule was created so that to play competitively, you would not have to make sacrifices in the modelling departament. From what you say, people should not be putting on the sails to receive a better cover save, which is exactly what GW intended to avoid.

Or do you honestly believe that these vehicles use sails to move when having engines?

How about I put an aethersail? Does it stop counting as hull ?

Yes, they do use the sails to move. Read your own fluff, its right in there.

Alkasyn wrote:How about I put an aethersail? Does it stop counting as hull ?

Actually, this interests me. If a player equips Aethersails, do those sails (and the mast) count as visual representation for that upgrade? As such, would that mean, being an upgrade, it doesn't count as hull?

Edit: Oh, hold on, the upgade is "Enhanced Aether Sails", suggesting that the normal craft come with the sails regardless, and that the Aether Sails upgrade is just a different TYPE of Aether Sail. Nevermind then.

Still curious to see how this discussion flows in regards to Sails/Masts counting as hull, though.

Although the increased cover save granted to other units by larger sails should not be counted in the case of discount sails as hull.

It works both ways, same as differently-positioned turrets on Ork vehicles, which is quite a MFA point of contestion. What you gain in LOS/cover is lost in LOS/cover from different perspectives in different situations.

Alkasyn wrote:

Jidmah wrote:Due to the sails being an actual functional part of the vehicle(like tracks or exhausts), they are not purely decorative. As they are not gun barrels or dozer blade-equivalents either, they can be shot.

No Dark Eldar player would agree with this.

The exact rule was created so that to play competitively, you would not have to make sacrifices in the modelling departament. From what you say, people should not be putting on the sails to receive a better cover save, which is exactly what GW intended to avoid.

Or do you honestly believe that these vehicles use sails to move when having engines?

How about I put an aethersail? Does it stop counting as hull ?

You may not leave out any part of the model, as this would be modeling for advantage. You can't leave off aethersails anymore than an IG player can leave off the wings of his valkyrie.

The aethersails are used for movement, I even borrowed a DE codex to check whether they were just for decoration. It states that those sails are required to navigate through the webway streams multiple times, which makes them a functional part of the vehicle. The enhanced aethersail is not a dozerblade(or equivalent) and thus part of the hull can be shot. There are no rules that vehicle upgrades are automatically ignored, only if they are dozer blades or similar, as the BRB only ever mentions the dozer blade and reinforced ram. By strict/stupid RAW, all vehicle upgrades other than dozer blades and the ork's reinforced ram would be hull, as they are, per definition, not decorative.

Jidmah wrote:

Alkasyn wrote:

Jidmah wrote:Due to the sails being an actual functional part of the vehicle(like tracks or exhausts), they are not purely decorative. As they are not gun barrels or dozer blade-equivalents either, they can be shot.

No Dark Eldar player would agree with this.

The exact rule was created so that to play competitively, you would not have to make sacrifices in the modelling departament. From what you say, people should not be putting on the sails to receive a better cover save, which is exactly what GW intended to avoid.

Or do you honestly believe that these vehicles use sails to move when having engines?

How about I put an aethersail? Does it stop counting as hull ?

You may not leave out any part of the model, as this would be modeling for advantage. You can't leave off aethersails anymore than an IG player can leave off the wings of his valkyrie.


The aethersails are used for movement, I even borrowed a DE codex to check whether they were just for decoration. It states that those sails are required to navigate through the webway streams multiple times, which makes them a functional part of the vehicle. The enhanced aethersail is not a dozerblade(or equivalent) and thus part of the hull can be shot. There are no rules that vehicle upgrades are automatically ignored, only if they are dozer blades or similar, as the BRB only ever mentions the dozer blade and reinforced ram. By strict/stupid RAW, all vehicle upgrades other than dozer blades and the ork's reinforced ram would be hull, as they are, per definition, not decorative.

The main reason I don't like to use the sail (yes I play DE, but I also play AGAINST them) is that it can be moved. Pivoted from left to right on the front post and could therefore be moved so that it is hidden.
I also remove the sail should it get immobilised as that is the easiest way to represent it, like pulling a gun off for weapon destroyed. I would have no problem letting my opponent claim the mast (part under sail) as part of the hull as if he can see that he most likely can see some other part of my raider. And lets all be honest if you can see an enemy raider and are shooting at it with anything stronger than a bolter its going down. Most DE players run FF anyway and so cover can only increase your save by 1. If all my opponent can see is the top of the saill then no I don't consider that hull much like I didn't count the top wings on the old raiders.
The rules say hull and a sail is not hull. I will give you wings on something as big as a valk or a storm raven...but a sail on a raider? That is a rather small target.

You have no permission to alter the shape of the model midgame, so thats also cheating

Anything that is not a gun barrel, a dozerblade(or simillar) or has any function at all, is hull. Shooting off exhaust pipes, one of the extra wheels, a wrecking ball or grabbin' klaw most likely won't do anything to a 120-ton battlewagon, however real life has no bearing on the game rules.

If the dark eldar put them on their ships because the like the look, it would be a decorative element and thus ignored. But aether sails do serve a function, and thus are hull.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You have no permission to alter the shape of the model midgame, so thats also cheating

But you do, in several circumstances:

Shooting guns that swivel, the guns must be pointed directly at their target(otherwise you cannot determine if they have LOS).

Immobilized Skimmers can be removed from their Flight Stands(and in this case the removal of the Sail while leaving the stand on changes the profile in about the same manner, lowering the overall height but leaving the bulk of the raider/ravager in the air)

Battle damage box-out on page 57 of the BRB suggests removing destroyed weapons.

In short; permission to do everything the poster above you said is granted in the BRB.

Kharrak wrote:

Alkasyn wrote:How about I put an aethersail? Does it stop counting as hull ?

Actually, this interests me. If a player equips Aethersails, do those sails (and the mast) count as visual representation for that upgrade? As such, would that mean, being an upgrade, it doesn't count as hull?

Edit: Oh, hold on, the upgade is "Enhanced Aether Sails", suggesting that the normal craft come with the sails regardless, and that the Aether Sails upgrade is just a different TYPE of Aether Sail. Nevermind then.

Still curious to see how this discussion flows in regards to Sails/Masts counting as hull, though.

The shock prow is a different type of prow, yet people wouldn't count it for the purposes of disembarking. Same for aethersails and enhanced aethersails at least.