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 I model it with the doors shutpermanently can i block los with these,?

Yes and no. after all you have squads disembarking from them.
So I would say No. at least if you have a disembarking squad.

If you're dropping it empty then Yes.

That is what I play by at least.

Some people say yes, some say no.

I say yes, there is no rules saying you have to open the pod doors (and more importantly many people glue them shut), then it is TLOS.

Whatever you do, at least have all your pods the same. I'd be a bit leery at seeing how the glued-shut pods are dumped in front of my heavy support while the opening ones are dumped where you want LOS.

The rules for Drop Pods specifically state:

Codex: Blood Angels Pg.32, Codex: Dark Angels Pg.42, Codex: Space Marine Pg.69, Codex: Space Wolves Pg.47 wrote:Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal.
Once passengers have disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

Fire Points and Access Points:
Once deployed the Drop Pod is no longer a sealed environment and is therefore counted as being open-topped.

The way I read it, you have no choice - it lands, the doors open.

There is no requirement to have the doors of a transport vehicle physically modelled open in order for troops to disembark.

Models (including the drop pod) block LOS if they physically block LOS.

In the case of the drop pod, leaving the doors shut will mean the pod's weapon can't draw LOS to anything, though.

 Ovion wrote:
The rules for Drop Pods specifically state:

Codex: Blood Angels Pg.32, Codex: Dark Angels Pg.42, Codex: Space Marine Pg.69, Codex: Space Wolves Pg.47 wrote:Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal.
Once passengers have disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

Fire Points and Access Points:
Once deployed the Drop Pod is no longer a sealed environment and is therefore counted as being open-topped.

The way I read it, you have no choice - it lands, the doors open.

The bolded statements are not actually rules.
Do you have your Rhinos, Land Raiders, Wave Serpents, Devilfish, etc all modeled with open doors?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Ovion wrote:
The rules for Drop Pods specifically state:

Codex: Blood Angels Pg.32, Codex: Dark Angels Pg.42, Codex: Space Marine Pg.69, Codex: Space Wolves Pg.47 wrote:Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal.
Once passengers have disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

Fire Points and Access Points:
Once deployed the Drop Pod is no longer a sealed environment and is therefore counted as being open-topped.

The way I read it, you have no choice - it lands, the doors open.

The bolded statements are not actually rules.
Do you have your Rhinos, Land Raiders, Wave Serpents, Devilfish, etc all modeled with open doors?

My Devilfish actually does have a rear door that opens and closes.. so yes.

So you tell others who don't have them modeled to open that they cannot disembark?

 Ovion wrote:
The rules for Drop Pods specifically state:

Codex: Blood Angels Pg.32, Codex: Dark Angels Pg.42, Codex: Space Marine Pg.69, Codex: Space Wolves Pg.47 wrote:Once the Drop Pod has landed, the hatches are blown and all passengers must immediately disembark, as normal.
Once passengers have disembarked, no models can embark on the Drop Pod for the remainder of the game.

Fire Points and Access Points:
Once deployed the Drop Pod is no longer a sealed environment and is therefore counted as being open-topped.

The way I read it, you have no choice - it lands, the doors open.

So when your Drop Pods land they all have explosives that blow the doors open? That I want to see...

I really want to build one of those now. I can picture in my head how to make it work...

Wouldn't this literally be modeling for advantage? It seems like it's a cry to game the system.

In a friendly game you explain how you run it, and if the person doesn't want to play it that, it's up to them to decide if they want to play with you or not.

In a tournament, prepare to understand that you have a 50/50 chance AT BEST, that the TO will side with you. In this case it's best to ask the TO beforehand how he would rule, that way you aren't surprised if he doesn't rule in your favor.

This is a long debated topic on this website, and I doubt we will find an answer this time around. If I could use the search function without getting more results then there are pages, I would simply link you back to the last debate that happened on this matter. That last debate even had a poll to try and see which side had the majority support, but all that proved was the sides are split with enough people on each side to make a 'majority support' argument useless. There is just far to many different views on the matter and not enough rules to state, past a doubt, which one is the correct interpretation.

Personally; I think side stating the doors can remain closed proved their point a little better then the side that states the doors must be opened, which I was a part of at the time. The very absence of rules telling us how to go about blowing hatches was a key element to that debate and one that I couldn't find fault with. There really is an absence of rules or clarification as to what the term 'blown hatches' means, and this is a ongoing problem for a rule as written argument that the doors need to be opened at all. Even the absence of the word 'open' in the single sentence stating hatches are blown creates problems. I still think the intent was for the doors to remain open throughout the game, there is a lot of stuff supporting intent, but from a pure rules as written interpretation I have to give the point to the doors closed side. While it is simple to just open the doors to simulate the 'blowing of hatches,' nothing rule wise tells us to do just that.

So the only advise I can give is to talk to the tournament organizers, or your opponents, before you plop a 'closed door' drop pod down on the table.

Happyjew:
Given this is a game, a lot of things are simply 'simulated' without taking extreme extents such as pyrotechnics. The hatches being blown open are easily simulate by opening them up, which the model is clearly designed to do. When you get down to it, the whole game is a simulated event as there are no real people dying, guns do not fire real projectiles and often can't even be pointed at the enemy, the skimmers are still touching the table top instead of hovering under their own power and a wide range of other examples. Personally though, I would love to see hatches blown open through pyrotechnics in the model itself, but that just stems from how 'cool' such a thing would be.

The hatches aren't blown open though, they're blown. Don't add stuff that isn't there.

To the op yes, true line of sight is the rule to follow.

Inari82 wrote:
Wouldn't this literally be modeling for advantage? It seems like it's a cry to game the system.

No more so than choosing to use the kneeling legs for one of your Devastators. You don't need to modify the pod in any way to put it on the table with the doors closed... you just don't open the doors.

Yes, how you choose to assemble your models can affect how they function in the game. That's just a side-effect of the game rules revolving around the physical profile of the model.

Modelling for Advantage is usually applied to people specifically altering a model to change how it functions. Assembling the model straight out of the box, as per the assembly instructions really doesn't fit that definition.

I believe this is MFA.
It's obviously made this way because you want an advantage and you'd have a hard time claiming that it 'looks cool'.

JinxDragon wrote:
Happyjew:
Given this is a game, a lot of things are simply 'simulated' without taking extreme extents such as pyrotechnics. The hatches being blown open are easily simulate by opening them up, which the model is clearly designed to do. When you get down to it, the whole game is a simulated event as there are no real people dying, guns do not fire real projectiles and often can't even be pointed at the enemy, the skimmers are still touching the table top instead of hovering under their own power and a wide range of other examples. Personally though, I would love to see hatches blown open through pyrotechnics in the model itself, but that just stems from how 'cool' such a thing would be.

I really don't care how it is played, as long as the player is consistent. However, when somebody tries to use the phrase "the hatches are blown" to be rules, then I expect them to actually blow the hatches on their models. As far as I'm concerned, the only rules regarding Drop Pods that I care about is that it is open-topped, the unit must immediately disembark, and (with the exception of BT), nobody can embark.

Kangodo wrote:
I believe this is MFA.

Again, no modelling is required. The doors are made to open and close. So leaving them closed is no more modelling for advantage than posing your dreadnought with its arms pointing up or down.

It's obviously made this way because you want an advantage...

Or because you don't want to scratch the doors on terrain every time you put the thing down on the table.
Or because the open doors get in the way, due to covering nearly a square foot of table.
Or because you glued them shut so you didn't have to bother painting the interior of the pod.
Or because you're using a scratch-built pod from the time before there was an actual model, and you didn't see any particular reason to buy new pods.
Or because you're using a Forgeworld pod, which you can't see through even if the doors are opened, so it really makes no difference.

Kangodo wrote:
I believe this is MFA.

Nope, you're wrong. It's like claiming the above mention of the kneeling Devastator legs is 'MFA' because at what point you have him hiding behind wall that a standing marine could be seen over.

And to some of the above silliness - I've glued shut all the doors on my rhinos and land raiders. Does that mean models can't get in or out of them either?

 Bookwrack wrote:
Nope, you're wrong.

MFA is not in the BRB, so I cannot be wrong about it.

 insaniak wrote:
Again, no modelling is required. The doors are made to open and close. So leaving them closed is no more modelling for advantage than posing your dreadnought with its arms pointing up or down.

You make a modelling decision that gives you an advantage.
To me that is MFA.

Or because you don't want to scratch the doors on terrain every time you put the thing down on the table.
Or because the open doors get in the way, due to covering nearly a square foot of table.
Or because you glued them shut so you didn't have to bother painting the interior of the pod.
Or because you're using a scratch-built pod from the time before there was an actual model, and you didn't see any particular reason to buy new pods.
Or because you're using a Forgeworld pod, which you can't see through even if the doors are opened, so it really makes no difference.

In all of those cases you wouldn't mind allowing models to shoot through it, right?
Because you are not looking for an advantage, right?

Kangodo wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Nope, you're wrong.

MFA is not in the BRB, so I cannot be wrong about it.

Wrong.

 insaniak wrote:
Again, no modelling is required. The doors are made to open and close. So leaving them closed is no more modelling for advantage than posing your dreadnought with its arms pointing up or down.

You make a modelling decision that gives you an advantage.
To me that is MFA.

 Bookwrack wrote:

Kangodo wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Nope, you're wrong.

MFA is not in the BRB, so I cannot be wrong about it.

Wrong..

In that case please point to a page and paragraph that explains Modelling For Advantage.

MFA is a player convention to prevent a model from gaining some advantage when being modeled differently from the norm.

Okay. Care to explain why it is wrong?
Are you not making a modelling decision that is purely based on the advantage it gives you?

And the "But I cannot shoot through it either, so it's fine!" is nonsense.
People who close the hatches and demand that no-one fires through it usually put melee troops in there and they want to take full advantage of that.

Kangodo wrote:
Okay. Care to explain why it is wrong?
Are you not making a modelling decision that is purely based on the advantage it gives you?

And the "But I cannot shoot through it either, so it's fine!" is nonsense.
People who close the hatches and demand that no-one fires through it usually put melee troops in there and they want to take full advantage of that.

I'm curious. Would you consider the following MFA - a WYSIWYG SM Captain with the following: Thunder Hammer, Lightning Claw, Artificer armour, melta bombs, aux grenade launcher, and SM bike?

Why or why not?

Even if it is only fluff, its obviously meant for drop pods to come down and have their hatch's "blown" open.


This is why they are considered open topped, and why they do not block line of sight.


There isnt a rule for it, but playing it any other way is poor sportsmanship in my opinion and thus should not be sanctioned at any tournament.

 Happyjew wrote:
I really don't care how it is played, as long as the player is consistent. However, when somebody tries to use the phrase "the hatches are blown" to be rules, then I expect them to actually blow the hatches on their models. As far as I'm concerned, the only rules regarding Drop Pods that I care about is that it is open-topped, the unit must immediately disembark, and (with the exception of BT), nobody can embark.

I agree with you that I've never cared either way. Blocking LOS runs both ways. It may work to one sides benefit more than another, but turning an enemies apparent tactical advantage against them is one of the ultimate challenges of an strategy game. However, arguing that the model must actually be able to blow its hatches is a bit specious isn't it? By that logic, models should not be able to shoot, move, or attack without physically being able to shoot, move, or attack.

Or if you want to interpret that statement another way, if I blow on them and they open, does that count now?

Eihnlazer wrote:
Even if it is only fluff, its obviously meant for drop pods to come down and have their hatch's "blown" open.
This is why they are considered open topped, and why they do not block line of sight.
There isnt a rule for it, but playing it any other way is poor sportsmanship in my opinion and thus should not be sanctioned at any tournament.

No, they are Open-topped because the rules say they are Open-topped. Heck, look at Eldar War Walkers. They went from OT to non-OT, back to OT without changing the model.

Purple Saturday wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I really don't care how it is played, as long as the player is consistent. However, when somebody tries to use the phrase "the hatches are blown" to be rules, then I expect them to actually blow the hatches on their models. As far as I'm concerned, the only rules regarding Drop Pods that I care about is that it is open-topped, the unit must immediately disembark, and (with the exception of BT), nobody can embark.

I agree with you that I've never cared either way. Blocking LOS runs both ways. It may work to one sides benefit more than another, but turning an enemies apparent tactical advantage against them is one of the ultimate challenges of an strategy game. However, arguing that the model must actually be able to blow its hatches is a bit specious isn't it? By that logic, models should not be able to shoot, move, or attack without physically being able to shoot, move, or attack.

Or if you want to interpret that statement another way, if I blow on them and they open, does that count now?

As I said, if you want to argue that "the hatches are blown" is actual rules, then I expect you to actually blow the hatches on the model. If you argue that the line is rule and you actually blow the hatches, I'm gonna be all " Dude that was friggin sweet. Do it again." laugh like an idiot, and get back to the game.

 Happyjew wrote:
I'm curious. Would you consider the following MFA - a WYSIWYG SM Captain with the following: Thunder Hammer, Lightning Claw, Artificer armour, melta bombs, aux grenade launcher, and SM bike?
Why or why not?

No, I would consider it MFA if you took the same model and filed it so long that it would only be 1" in height.

Kangodo wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I'm curious. Would you consider the following MFA - a WYSIWYG SM Captain with the following: Thunder Hammer, Lightning Claw, Artificer armour, melta bombs, aux grenade launcher, and SM bike?
Why or why not?

No, I would consider it MFA if you took the same model and filed it so long that it would only be 1" in height.

Why not? I'm making a modeling decision based on the advantage it gives me in the game. The fact that my model can have the upgrades has no bearing. Giving my Captain those items gives him an advantage.

Though if you really want to get technical there is no permission to even assemble the models.

The closest thing to "MFA" in the BRB is regarding models on scenic bases where you are told to treat it as the stock model.