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.

Hi,

My friends and I are fairly new to 40k and sometimes we come across an issue that we can't find a solution/rule for (even with Google's help). This is one of those and I hope I can get some clarification.

During deployment my opponent wanted to deploy a tank on a building. I protested since it would make it harder to reach and would give it cover at certain angles. Also, the tank wouldn't be able to move up to that point during a movement phase... which was countered by the fact that it was dropped there from space (haha). So for the game we compromised. It could be deployed there but it would not get any cover (if you I see any part of it you could fire at it) and could not move at all for the game. This was fine, but during the game I realized that it put the tank out of melta range (unless I wanted to try and climb the building) and it gave the tank an advantage of being able to see over other terrain/buildings on the battlefield to get line of sight across the whole table.

So the question is: Can a tank deploy on a build? or other terrain that it would normally have no way to get reach during a game move? Would this change if it were a skimmer since I would assume a skimmer could land up there (having passed any tests)?

Thanks

You can only deploy where the model could normally reach. If the tank is a skimmer, than it's fair game as it could easily fly up there. A landraider however can't get on top of a building.

Well buildings are usually considered Impassible terrain. But sometimes people play that the building is impassible (You can not move through it) but the roof can be landed upon by jump infantry/Skimmers etc.

If it was a ruin, then the deployment is legal.

Also if the tank is 50% or more obscured from the view of the firing unit, then the tank has cover.

Furthermore if you can see any part* of any unit then you may fire at it.

* Any Targetable part, so head, body, arms, legs...

juraigamer wrote:You can only deploy where the model could normally reach.

That is not true.

The BRB has no such rule.

If it's a ruin, vehicles (except for walkers) can only move on the ground level. So I suppose you could deploy on top of a ruin, but you would not be allowed to move.

Like DeathReaper said, people normally declare buildings to be impassable (including the tops). However, skimmers and jump infantry can end their turn in impassable terrain (and take dangerous terrain tests), if the models can be physically placed there.

DeathReaper wrote:

juraigamer wrote:You can only deploy where the model could normally reach.

That is not true.

The BRB has no such rule.

BRB 14 forbids models from being placed in impassable terrain, unless something says otherwise. So no, you cannot deploy your tanks in impassable terrain.

It talks about being placed in impassible terrain, not on impassible terrain. It also says placed, not deployed.

So you should be able to deploy on a building.

DeathReaper wrote:It talks about being placed in impassible terrain, not on impassible terrain. It also says placed, not deployed.

So you should be able to deploy on a building.

BRB FAQ wrote:
Q: Can a unit deploy in impassable terrain? (p92)
A: Not unless it is specifically allowed to move through
impassable terrain.

Edit:
Most people play that the entire building is impassable (including the top). Otherwise, you and your opponent need to define how to move to and from the top of the building. If only jump infantry and skimmers can get on top of a building, it may as well be impassable.

Again that talks about deploying IN impassible terrain, not on it.

But many people play it differently.

Basically Just come to an agreement pre-game about terrain.

Just to try and cut it off, (better safe then sorry), there are some people who claim, that skimmers cannot land on upper levels of ruins, as the upper level of ruins are not classified as impassable terrain. The rebuttal, of course is that since the upper levels of ruins is impassable terrain for skimmers, they can land there with a Dangerous Terrain test.

Now both sides have been put forth. We don't need another argument of they can/they can't.

Previous posters are correct.

Deploying in impassable terrain is not the same as deploying a unit on the level of a ruin (or building, if the roof is not considered impassable) that it could not normally reach during a movement phase.

This being said, it's pretty and if you do it, expect to get some flak. Unless you have a really good tactical reason, I would probably avoid it.

DoW

Happyjew wrote:Just to try and cut it off, (better safe then sorry), there are some people who claim, that skimmers cannot land on upper levels of ruins, as the upper level of ruins are not classified as impassable terrain. The rebuttal, of course is that since the upper levels of ruins is impassable terrain for skimmers, they can land there with a Dangerous Terrain test.

Now both sides have been put forth. We don't need another argument of they can/they can't.

There really shouldn't be any debate on this one. As silly as it seems, the BRB prohibits vehicles (except for walkers) from moving anywhere but on the ground floor of a ruin. This includes skimmers.

BRB 83 wrote:
Accordingly, only infantry, jump
infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may
move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the
model can physically be placed there. Other units may
only move on the ground level of the ruin.

You could still probably argue to allow your vehicles to be deployed on top of the ruin, but you wouldn't be able to move them.

DeathReaper wrote:Again that talks about deploying IN impassible terrain, not on it.

I understand the angle you are taking here, but it doesn't quite work. Friendly models are impassable terrain for the purposes of movement -- would you allow a vehicle to be deployed on friendly models?

Area terrain features have boundaries. Models that enter within the boundaries are inside that terrain.

elrabin wrote:

Happyjew wrote:Just to try and cut it off, (better safe then sorry), there are some people who claim, that skimmers cannot land on upper levels of ruins, as the upper level of ruins are not classified as impassable terrain. The rebuttal, of course is that since the upper levels of ruins is impassable terrain for skimmers, they can land there with a Dangerous Terrain test.

Now both sides have been put forth. We don't need another argument of they can/they can't.

There really shouldn't be any debate on this one. As silly as it seems, the BRB prohibits vehicles (except for walkers) from moving anywhere but on the ground floor of a ruin. This includes skimmers.

BRB 83 wrote:
Accordingly, only infantry, jump
infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may
move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the
model can physically be placed there. Other units may
only move on the ground level of the ruin.

Since you're bringing the debate up - what kind of terrain is the top of a ruin, if you're a skimmer?

rigeld2 wrote:
Since you're bringing the debate up - what kind of terrain is the top of a ruin, if you're a skimmer?

BRB 82 defines all ruins, including the base (if mounted on one), as area terrain that is difficult terrain. There is no reason why the top would be any different.

elrabin wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Since you're bringing the debate up - what kind of terrain is the top of a ruin, if you're a skimmer?

BRB 82 defines all ruins, including the base (if mounted on one), as area terrain that is difficult terrain. There is no reason why the top would be any different.

BRB 13 wrote:Impassable terrain cannot be moved across or into.

BRB 14 wrote:Models may not be placed in impassable terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule in their profile granting them an exception (like being able to fly above the terrain) or both players agree to it.

BRB 83 wrote:Accordingly, only infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the model can physically be placed there. Other units may only move on the ground level of the ruin.

Looks like skimmers are forbidden from moving on the top floor of a ruin. Impassable terrain is defined as something you cannot move across or into. Skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain with a dangerous terrain test.

rigeld2 wrote:
Looks like skimmers are forbidden from moving on the top floor of a ruin. Impassable terrain is defined as something you cannot move across or into. Skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain with a dangerous terrain test.

Yes, skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain, but that does not mean that they can land in all places you cannot move across or into.

Impassable Terrain is a class of area terrain.

elrabin wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Looks like skimmers are forbidden from moving on the top floor of a ruin. Impassable terrain is defined as something you cannot move across or into. Skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain with a dangerous terrain test.

Yes, skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain, but that does not mean that they can land in all places you cannot move across or into.

Impassable Terrain is a class of area terrain.

And there's the debate. There are people who disagree with your interpretation.

elrabin wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Again that talks about deploying IN impassible terrain, not on it.

I understand the angle you are taking here, but it doesn't quite work. Friendly models are impassable terrain for the purposes of movement -- would you allow a vehicle to be deployed on friendly models?

Area terrain features have boundaries. Models that enter within the boundaries are inside that terrain.

Area terrain was not mentioned.

Not all Impassible terrain is Area terrain (I don't know of any terrain that is classified as area terrain and Impassible, since being impassible, it is useless to designate it as area terrain).

As for your question, as silly as it seems, yes you could deploy on top of friendly models, but of course, you could not move off of them. (RAW anyway, I would not play like this, and I do not know anyone that would).

rigeld2 wrote:
And there's the debate. There are people who disagree with your interpretation.

I'm not sure I see how this is an interpretation.

If people want to argue that skimmers are allowed to end their movement in places where you cannot (normally) move across or into (but that is not defined as Impassable Terrain), then this would allow skimmers to land within 1" of enemy models. And the same would apply for jump infantry and jetbikes.

elrabin, I brought up this debate precisely because there are two viable views. Some people claim you can, some claim you can't. If it comes up md-game and you can't agree, dice off. RAW doesn't cover this at all, so we are left with HYWPI.

No, that doesnt result. You have two seperate prohibitions when moving - impassable terrain and within 1" of enemy models. Skimmers / JI / etc can move onto impassable terrain, but not within 1" of enemy models, as they have no allowance to do so.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, that doesnt result. You have two seperate prohibitions when moving - impassable terrain and within 1" of enemy models. Skimmers / JI / etc can move onto impassable terrain, but not within 1" of enemy models, as they have no allowance to do so.

I agree. And skimmers have no allowance to move onto the top of a ruin. That's all I was trying to illustrate. Just because you are not allowed to move somewhere doesn't make it "Impassable Terrain."

Happyjew wrote:elrabin, I brought up this debate precisely because there are two viable views. Some people claim you can, some claim you can't. If it comes up md-game and you can't agree, dice off. RAW doesn't cover this at all, so we are left with HYWPI.

Personally I think the issue of ruins and skimmers is very clear RAW. Ruins are not impassable, and non-walker vehicles can only move on the ground floor. Skimmers aren't allowed up top, case closed!



Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:
Area terrain was not mentioned.

Not all Impassible terrain is Area terrain (I don't know of any terrain that is classified as area terrain and Impassible, since being impassible, it is useless to designate it as area terrain).

As for your question, as silly as it seems, yes you could deploy on top of friendly models, but of course, you could not move off of them. (RAW anyway, I would not play like this, and I do not know anyone that would).

I think this is ambiguous enough. You and your opponent determine terrain boundaries at the start of the game. To me, the rules seem written to assume that features are "infinitely tall," but it's clear that you view them as ending where the terrain physically ends. After deployment, I don't think this really has an impact on the game. And I think either way it is clear that the intent is you cannot deploy your dudes on top of other dudes.

elrabin wrote:To me, the rules seem written to assume that features are "infinitely tall," but it's clear that you view them as ending where the terrain physically ends.

TLoS tells us that they end where the terrain physically ends.

elrabin wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, that doesnt result. You have two seperate prohibitions when moving - impassable terrain and within 1" of enemy models. Skimmers / JI / etc can move onto impassable terrain, but not within 1" of enemy models, as they have no allowance to do so.

I agree. And skimmers have no allowance to move onto the top of a ruin. That's all I was trying to illustrate. Just because you are not allowed to move somewhere doesn't make it "Impassable Terrain."

Really? I wonder how the BRB defines impassable terrain (ie what it actually means to be impassable)

BRB 13 wrote:
Impassable terrain cannot be moved across or into.

So... You can't move into or across it, but it's not impassable. That's an interesting definition. Surely theres rules support for it though.

Happyjew wrote:elrabin, I brought up this debate precisely because there are two viable views. Some people claim you can, some claim you can't. If it comes up md-game and you can't agree, dice off. RAW doesn't cover this at all, so we are left with HYWPI.

Personally I think the issue of ruins and skimmers is very clear RAW. Ruins are not impassable, and non-walker vehicles can only move on the ground floor. Skimmers aren't allowed up top, case closed!

And I think you're wrong. See how debates work? You're wrong, case closed. See what I did there?

so there is a giant silo in my deployement zone with no way up or down, sure i can depoly up there no i cant move now.

(was a sad day when a CCB swept over me by doing the you on ground floor lol

The problem with how GW wrote the terrain rules is that "in/on" is never used consistently.

The rules are written assuming that you're playing on a flat surface and anything you add to it is then some form of terrain which needs to be defined (difficult/dangerous/area/building/ruin/impassable). The rules don't deal too well with tables that have their own topography because there is no climbing mechanic outside of terrain that is classified as ruins.

When I picture "simple" impassable terrain I envision something like this:



Nothing is ever going to be "in" OR "on" that statue. You simply can't melt through it, you have to go around.

However there is obviously cases where cliffs or elevation changes or buildings are played as impassable but still have a flat surface that can accomodate units like jump infantry, jetbikes or skimmers. And as the brb states if those models can end their movement there they just take a dangerous terrain check.


I've played games where both myself and my opponent agreed that a unit could be deployed atop a large terrain piece or building which is generally played as impassable in so much as there is no way to drive up or scale up to the top (as they are not ruins). Essentially rendering them un-assaultable unless by jetbike or jump ifantry. Either that unit can never get down and if it flees it's wiped OR we make it so that if the unit decides to descend the terrain piece (either electively or by fleeing) that each model must take a dangerous terrain check. It's important to talk about terrain before the game though so that you're both on the same page.

In many ways, I like the idea of a unit atop such a high terrain piece that they're pretty much un-assaultable. It makes snipers and infantry based heavy weapons a lot better, it also makes abilites to move like jump infantry and jetbikes more meaningful.

Thanks for all the info everyone. I didn't mean to start a debate, but I think I've learned that we simply have to define out terrain areas better before starting.

We played 2 large foam blocks (diagonally mirrored table) as "buildings" or "bases" I deployed Dark Reapers on mine and he deployed a Tank and a squad of Terminators on his. He then moved a skimmer up there on turn 1. The skimmer I was fine with as I would assume skimmers and jump infantry could scale the building.

I had no problem with Infantry deployment on the building, so I guess since I let units that could not move there in a game turn from the ground deploy there I really didn't have much of an argument for letting a tank deploy there too?

Personally I think it's (especially since it had line of sight over everything up there) but I couldn't find an rule saying it wasn't aloud.

If you let infantry deploy there without question, then the tank is fair game as well.

DeathReaper wrote:.The BRB has no such rule.

Why would the fantasy rulebook have a rule for that?

rigeld2 wrote:

elrabin wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Since you're bringing the debate up - what kind of terrain is the top of a ruin, if you're a skimmer?

BRB 82 defines all ruins, including the base (if mounted on one), as area terrain that is difficult terrain. There is no reason why the top would be any different.

BRB 13 wrote:Impassable terrain cannot be moved across or into.

BRB 14 wrote:Models may not be placed in impassable terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule in their profile granting them an exception (like being able to fly above the terrain) or both players agree to it.

BRB 83 wrote:Accordingly, only infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the model can physically be placed there. Other units may only move on the ground level of the ruin.

Looks like skimmers are forbidden from moving on the top floor of a ruin. Impassable terrain is defined as something you cannot move across or into. Skimmers can land on Impassable Terrain with a dangerous terrain test.

You're not allowed to MOVE there, but you are allowed to DEPLOY there, as there is no such rule saying that you cannot place it on a floor of a ruin as it does not count as moving, so sure, it's legal but it's a beardy tactic that will draw a lot of hate. Show me where in the BGB that it says you can't deploy on a building

frarlkanz wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:.The BRB has no such rule.

Why would the fantasy rulebook have a rule for that?

"BRB" is also used for 40k, because of the prominent red colour (though obviously not as prominent as the WHFB rulebook!). Someone should probably edit that acronym tooltip to clarify that...but then we probably only have a few short months of the red rulebook left, so it might not matter.

(Couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic or not, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt )

As to the main topic...

Models may not be "placed in impassable terrain" (we can only assume that "in" in this case means "within the boundaries of", or "on", since we obviously cannot merge our models into the terrain piece itself). To me, this would include deployment, as "placing" a model doesn't just refer to movement. After all, if you deploy a model somewhere, then you have literally "placed" it there.

That said, I don't think inaccessible areas should necessarily be considered impassable. The impassable terrain rules state that models may not be placed on it, but that does not necessarily mean that all terrain that is inaccessible is defined as "impassable terrain" in rulebook terms. You'd have to agree with your opponent that it is classified as impassable terrain before the game starts for it to be considered as such.

If you find it hard to get your head around, imagine that the tank was airlifted to that position before the battle began. Or maybe it was dropped into position with grav chutes (Blood Angels-style) and had the misfortune of landing in that position, but the battle began before it could be recovered.

Cheexsta wrote:

frarlkanz wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:.The BRB has no such rule.

Why would the fantasy rulebook have a rule for that?

"BRB" is also used for 40k, because of the prominent red colour (though obviously not as prominent as the WHFB rulebook!). Someone should probably edit that acronym tooltip to clarify that...but then we probably only have a few short months of the red rulebook left, so it might not matter.

(Couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic or not, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt )

How do you know this? Are you a member of the GW Development Team?