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.

When placing objectives (Seize Ground and Capture and Control), what kind of terrain are the objectives? Does it depend on what the objective is modeled as?

My friend has objectives featuring Dreadnought sized bases with small dioramas (a Salamander skinning a dragon, for example). I consider objectives to be like enemy models: You can't pass through them, they're impassable and immovable, much like a space marine standing in that location would be.

My friend considers them clear terrain, and any unit (particularly vehicles) can simply park on top of the base of the objective. This has the effect of a large vehicle (like a land raider) preventing anyone from being within 3" of it without some serious work. If the objective is large, my friend may move the objective (along the lines of wobbly model syndrome and place the vehicle in its location).

How do you play it?

Objective markers are not any kind of terrain.

They are Objective markers and have no impact on how models on the table move.

DeathReaper wrote:Objective markers are not any kind of terrain.

They are Objective markers and have no impact on how models on the table move.

So they are clear terrain, as my friend plays it?

Unless the objective markers themselves are placed in difficult/dangerous terrain, then yes, they are essentially clear terrain in that they have no impact on movement whatsoever.

They are, although the game plays much better if you treat them as pseudo Impassable Terrain. Specifically you can move or shoot through them without issue, but can't end your move on top of them. But that is strictly a house rule.

Krall wrote:So they are clear terrain, as my friend plays it?

No, they're markers.

Unless you are choosing piece of terrain as the objective, in which case it counts as whatever sort of terrain you agree to play it as.


A marker is just a marker. The only impact it has on the game is to denote some sort of in-game effect. In this case, they denote the objective... but unless you agree to treat them as a terrain feature, they should have no other impact on the game.

The rulebook describes an objective as a piece of a terrain feature or a designated point on the table. There is no indication that they are meant to be impassible, and the fact that you can designate a part of any piece of terrain indicates to the contrary.

I normally see them played as having no terrain qualities of their own.

Agreed with the rest - I've only ever played them as having no particular terrain qualities. They are just markers, designating a point on the table; nothing more.

That said, as with all terrain questions, you and your opponent are free to make them difficult/dangerous/impassable as you wish. I have seen tournaments that do that as well.