Area Terrain?

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.

**BoomWolf**

This might be a silly question, but a recent game had me wondering after a scout pylon got a cover save from pretty much everything becuase it had a toe touching a piece of area terrain.

What does it mean to be "in" area terrain?

Any part of the model?
Half the model?
The entire model?

I think 3 makes most sense, but conformation would be nice.

**rigeld2**

Any part of a (non-vehicle) model in area terrain allows the cover save.
FMCs standing in area terrain get a cover save, even if they're Swooping.

**Fragile**

If your model moves, would you have to take a difficult terrain test ? If yes, then you are 'in" area terrain.

**Neorealist**

Unless it's a vehicle; their 25% coverage requirement takes precedence. The necron sentry pylon is not so yes the barest, tiniest, fractional portion of it in area terrain is sufficient for a cover save equal to what the area terrain provides.

**PrinceRaven**

No, they're still in area terrain, they just don't get the cover save without obscurement.

**nosferatu1001**

We had this debate down the club - does a based ruin only grant Area Terrain on the base (which I think the urles say) or is the requirement of being "in" the area terrain satisfied by being on the upper floors of a based ruin?

It is based on being unclear as to whether "above" counts as "in" - as in, "in" could be seen as a 2 dimensional requirement, not 3.

**JinxDragon**

It is one of the issues I have too, Nosferatu1001, as the rules have clearly have not been written well when it comes to dealing with the third dimension. They even go out of the way to say it would be a rare occurrence for your models to have to fire in the vertical plane, within the section of rules detailing the whole 22.5 degree thing very poorly, as if they never intended for such an occurrence. It is as if the third dimension just popped into existence during play testing to the shock of everyone involved.

Personally: I want the model to be physically touching the terrain it is 'in;' if your giant Wraith-thingy is going to get a cover save thanks to crushing a bush under it's foot I want that bush crushed damn it!

**PrinceRaven**

Well, common sense says that if only the base is area terrain, then if you're not on the base you're not in area terrain.

**DJGietzen**

I think how high area terrain extends has got to be determined on a case by case basis. I've used a green paper plate to represent a forest. The trees can be awfully tall and reasonably obscure models several inches above the table. But I've also used that same paper plate to represent brush near a stream and deciding you had to be at ground level to benefit from it.

**nosferatu1001**

PrinceRaven wrote:
Well, common sense says that if only the base is area terrain, then if you're not on the base you're not in area terrain.

Then you look down from above, and from above you are in(side) the area delimited byt eh base; its called area terrain, not volumetric terrain, implying a 2D consideration to it.

**PrinceRaven**

But the model does not exist on that plane, therefore it is not in the area.

**nosferatu1001**

The model does exist in that plane, from above. From the side, they are in two different planes.

**majendie**

I've always house-ruled it to say that forests and whatnot get the full region as area terrain, while ruins get the actual obscured LoS.

And that to get the benefit, you have to have the whole base inside the area. Part of the base is absolute BS imo, and a clear attempt to take advantage of poor rule wording. Don't like it at all.

**PrinceRaven**

nosferatu1001 wrote:The model does exist in that plane, from above. From the side, they are in two different planes.

In that case I shall now claim all my models are in a single piece of area terrain, because from the right angle they are within the boundary.

majendie wrote:I've always house-ruled it to say that forests and whatnot get the full region as area terrain, while ruins get the actual obscured LoS.

And that to get the benefit, you have to have the whole base inside the area. Part of the base is absolute BS imo, and a clear attempt to take advantage of poor rule wording. Don't like it at all.

You say take advantage of poor rules, I say consistently apply the difference between "within" and "wholly within" they clearly distinguish in the rules.

**nosferatu1001**

Prince - which is my point.

When they say "in", what do they mean by this? I am within the boundaries of the area terrain, as the area terrain rules do not give a limit on the boundaries "height"

**BoomWolf**

Wait. Wait...
How did it get to height question?

I was referring to the partial/entirely within the area, and so far I see people argue both ways and no qoute to anything that answer when does a model counts "in" the terrain.

**PrinceRaven**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Prince - which is my point.

When they say "in", what do they mean by this? I am within the boundaries of the area terrain, as the area terrain rules do not give a limit on the boundaries "height"

We are playing a 3-dimensional game with 3-dimensional models using 3-dimensional cover rules in a 3-dimensional reality, why would the restriction on area terrain boundary arbitrarily only affect 2 dimensions?

BoomWolf wrote:Wait. Wait...
How did it get to height question?

I was referring to the partial/entirely within the area, and so far I see people argue both ways and no qoute to anything that answer when does a model counts "in" the terrain.

The rulebook's pretty clear that there's a difference between "wholly within" and "within". Every time any rule is referring to the entire base being in the are it says wholly within (disembarking, leaping down, setting up fortifications, etc.).
Also, on page 4:

Distances between models and all other objects (which can be other models, terrain features and so on) are always rneasured from closest point on one base to the closest point on the other
base. Distances between units are always measured to and from the closest models in each of the units (see diagram below).

For example, if any part of a model's base is within 6" of the base of an enemy model, the two models are said to be within 6" of each other.

**nosferatu1001**

PR - blast markers. Wholly 2D, until you get to the ruins exception.