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.

So area terrain doesn't exist as such any longer it seems however if you take the two most common types; woods and ruins how are people proposing to play these? The citadel woods data sheet makes reference to a base but other ruins do not.

Every wood = Citadel Wood.

Ruins = same as before.

My guess would be TLOS....I've never understood why this is such a hard concept to understand.

Scratchbuilt terrain(like a non-citadel forest, or ruins) must have a terrain data sheet written up for it.

Ruins have rule that make them effectively area terrain(called "ruins")

The citadel forest has a rule called "Dense thicket" that does the same thing.

Look at the blurb for "Scratch built Terrain" on 183.

this pretty tells you to use and or combine rules from the data sheets on the next few pages to determine what kind of terrain characteristics to use for the non official citidel peices on the table.

So basically every piece of terrain falls under the listed datasheets, and or multiple data sheets so long as you and your opponent agree on it (which is basically what you did before every game anyway)

So, they're referencing "official" terrain in the rulebook now?
Urgh!

Sort of, there are data sheets for all the official kits that gw sells, and then you are told to use the data sheets to dictate what your scratch built terrain falls under for rules.

Area Terrain does still exist, it simply has to be on the Datasheet being used and it is in play.

It is possible to point to some Terrain Rules that now exist only on Datasheets found elsewhere, which is why the book informs us to look elsewhere for these details. It doesn't even have a fortification section, not even one simply holding examples, because it is built around the concept that Datasheets will hold future instructions. It is possible to acquire a Scenery Piece with instructions stating it grants a 5+ to any model within the terrain, regardless of how obstructed they are, and gain a bonus to going to ground. At that point we have Area Terrain, without the need to justify it by putting Line of Sight blocking tree's on top, and it is entirely legal and intended by the Rule Book.

Besides, I'm not at the book to review things closely but I can think of a few 6th edition Scenery Pieces which are Area Terrain and purchased as fortifications, so likely they are not mentioned at all in the Basic Rule Book, as precedent.

 Da Boss wrote:
So, they're referencing "official" terrain in the rulebook now?
Urgh!

Seems reasonable to me. What if you're a new player buying GW terrain, it might not be obvious which rules you should use for every piece.

Well previously it was obvious you should use the ruins rules for all things looking ruins, forest rules for all things looking like forests..

Only the debates that formed show that that it was not always obvious, the Skyshield being a prime example.

So have we got rid of +2 for gtg in area terrain? Or at least with the use of datasheets for each piece of terrain, got rid of any ambiguity?

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:
So have we got rid of +2 for gtg in area terrain? Or at least with the use of datasheets for each piece of terrain, got rid of any ambiguity?

Cheers

Andrew

Why yes, yes we have!