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.

JinxDragon wrote:
What I am trying to say, which Cowmonaut does better, is gluing the doors shut just to gain an advantage is clearly not playing the game as intended.

Okay, I accept my example was extreme but it still holds the same core element to what they are trying to push here. The argument that LOS can be ignored because the model was modified to prevent a clear LOS. In my opinion it doesn't matter if the modifications where small or outrageous ones, they are still modifications being made to exploit the system.

A drop pod with closed and glued doors is not a model that was modified. It is a stock model assembled.

If you can not gain the advantage using any other standard model of the exact same make, then you should not be given the advantage for 'creative modeling.'

It is not creative modeling, it is gluing some doors shut, which they are modeled in that position when the doors are closed. No 'creative modeling' needed.

Models, that are the same unit purchased in the codex, but are modeled differently, interact with the game differently because of True Line of Sight, it is a consequence of the rules system.

There are models for snipers that are standing, some are kneeling, and some are laying prone.

Case in point: These IG snipers are being sold on the GW website. The prone one, if you used that model for an entire unit of snipers and when coupled with an ADL, would be nigh unkillable as you can not see them behind the ADL as most units would have no way of wounding them as they could not see the models.

The back of my instructions shows an open pod. And I'm not sure, but I believe the instructions themselves show the doors being left open... (someone will have to check me on that though).

If I assembled the bed of a trukk to be vertical instead of horizontal and hid a battle wagon behind it, that would be no more MFA than gluing large doors meant to lay flat in a vertical position.

The instructions also don't tell you to glue the doors shut. The instructions also show the pod doors opening up. By gluing the doors shut, you are 'modifying' the model for advantage. You can't say otherwise while being honest. The doors snap shut nicely if you build the model as the instructions state, so the only reason to glue them shut is to have a tactical advantage (or disadvantage if you needed to shoot through the Drop Pod yourself).

 Lobukia wrote:
The back of my instructions shows an open pod. And I'm not sure, but I believe the instructions themselves show the doors being left open... (someone will have to check me on that though).

The instructions actually show the doors being unglued so that they can be opened and closed.

So arguing that gluing the doors shut is MFA is kind of pointless when you can just leave the unglued doors shut anyway.

Personally I disagree. Every image of a Drop Pod and even the fluff description all make the RAI pretty clear, even if there is no RAW stating the doors have to open outside of MFA arguments.

But hey, if you're cool with me not opening the doors on my drop pod so I can block your fire lanes up then someday if we ever meet and play a game I'll do it for you

I can see my question brought out all the rules lawyers!

Next, for an extra 20pts, is the death wind missile launcher within the drop pod worth it?

Beard wrote:
Next, for an extra 20pts, is the death wind missile launcher within the drop pod worth it?

1) that is more of a tactics question.

2) I never buy it as I find the weapon profile is fairly weak.

I don't really play around with drop pods so I am not the best to talk about this. From seeing it used a few times I am going to lean towards no. In theory, yes, but in practice not so much.

It really is the 12 inch range that kills it. This means that a poorly scatted drop can completely disarm your pod before it gets to fire. You can also bet that no unit is going to stand around within the 12 inch range, so you might get one or two shots off. If you assault with the squad the turn after it lands, that also ensures that the closest enemy unit is going to be an invalid target even if it is in range after the first shot. For me, it is that lack of range that turns me off of the idea but if I have some points left over, I would still consider it.

Now of course, you could get lucky and drop that Large blast template over top of enough units on turn 1 that it does more damage then a storm bolter could. There is also the idea of placing the pod in some way to harass an objective, just to ensure it doesn't fall to the enemy's hands without a fight. In these situations it would start to pay for itself, given it isn't really expensive. It is a gamble thing I guess, like a lot of this game. You just have to be far better then I am when it comes to luck.

It seems like this is very divided, although I am gathering that I am slightly in the minority on this one.

I've started a poll, because I'm interested to see whether or not I could have been getting away with this all this time! Feel free to check it out.

cowmonaut wrote:
Personally I disagree. Every image of a Drop Pod and even the fluff description all make the RAI pretty clear, even if there is no RAW stating the doors have to open outside of MFA arguments.

Every image?


From the Drop Pod listing on the GW website.

But hey, if you're cool with me not opening the doors on my drop pod so I can block your fire lanes up then someday if we ever meet and play a game I'll do it for you

I absolutely would have no problem with you not opening your pods. But then. I played for the edition and a bit when there was no actual model, and people were using pringles cans, soup tins, Megabloks cases or plumbing supplies to make drop pods that didn't open up... So actually running up against pods with functional doors still seems a little weird anyway

IIRC, the doors to pods are considered "decorative" and are not considered for LOS, because this is a model that can be configured either way.

I'd also go with "if the closed doors block LOS, the unit in the Pod can't disembark without also granting LOS as if the doors weren't closed". Which means, sure, spend the points on the pod to drop it as semi-mobile (not really, its only Move is a single vertical drop when deployed)... but if I can't shoot through it, neither can you.

And if you look at the top of the model pictured above, it is very obvious that the model, itself, is not open-topped, so the only way it possibly gets the Open Topped Vehicle rule is by opening its doors... which means the doors no longer block LOS.

 Psienesis wrote:
IIRC, the doors to pods are considered "decorative" and are not considered for LOS, because this is a model that can be configured either way.

I'd also go with "if the closed doors block LOS, the unit in the Pod can't disembark without also granting LOS as if the doors weren't closed". Which means, sure, spend the points on the pod to drop it as semi-mobile (not really, its only Move is a single vertical drop when deployed)... but if I can't shoot through it, neither can you.

And if you look at the top of the model pictured above, it is very obvious that the model, itself, is not open-topped, so the only way it possibly gets the Open Topped Vehicle rule is by opening its doors... which means the doors no longer block LOS.

Decorative? Never seen that, it's like an internet myth. We all assume it however it's nowhere.

If closed doors block LOS and disembarking, I say you cannot disembark your rhino ^^

DE Raiders don't appear "open" yet they are.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
IIRC, the doors to pods are considered "decorative" and are not considered for LOS, because this is a model that can be configured either way.

I'd also go with "if the closed doors block LOS, the unit in the Pod can't disembark without also granting LOS as if the doors weren't closed". Which means, sure, spend the points on the pod to drop it as semi-mobile (not really, its only Move is a single vertical drop when deployed)... but if I can't shoot through it, neither can you.

And if you look at the top of the model pictured above, it is very obvious that the model, itself, is not open-topped, so the only way it possibly gets the Open Topped Vehicle rule is by opening its doors... which means the doors no longer block LOS.

Decorative? Never seen that, it's like an internet myth. We all assume it however it's nowhere.

If closed doors block LOS and disembarking, I say you cannot disembark your rhino ^^

DE Raiders don't appear "open" yet they are.

Wha?



... that's "open" as all feth.

 Psienesis wrote:
And if you look at the top of the model pictured above, it is very obvious that the model, itself, is not open-topped, so the only way it possibly gets the Open Topped Vehicle rule is by opening its doors... which means the doors no longer block LOS.

A couple of editions ago, rhinos that had models shooting out of their top hatch were open-topped for the following enemy shooting phase. Oddly enough, I don't recall anyone ever arguing that this would only apply if you physically opened the top hatch on the model...

But no one ever argued that you couldn't grenade the vehicle because the hatch was closed, either.

 insaniak wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
And if you look at the top of the model pictured above, it is very obvious that the model, itself, is not open-topped, so the only way it possibly gets the Open Topped Vehicle rule is by opening its doors... which means the doors no longer block LOS.

A couple of editions ago, rhinos that had models shooting out of their top hatch were open-topped for the following enemy shooting phase. Oddly enough, I don't recall anyone ever arguing that this would only apply if you physically opened the top hatch on the model...

Rhinos have a mechanism to close or encapsulate their buds.

Looking at how drop pods are always pictured when IN PLAY for GW stuff, they are opened. Every open topped vehicle I can think of has no covering for it's dudes on the inside.

Firm camp of MFA if you glue 'em shut and say I can't shoot through 'em. While I don't always agree with all the major tournament FAQs, they are all in agreement that drop pods are open upon arrival. They are meant to be open and don't retract, else there'd be rules telling us how that worked... oh wait, "Dudes can never get back in." Seems clear to me.

Sadly the RAW does not cover needing models to have open or closed doors, and they do not cover weather to count the doors as a part of the Hull.

That said the doors block Line of Sight just like every other model in the game will block Line of Sight.

Models, that are the same unit purchased in the codex, but are modeled differently, interact with the game differently because of True Line of Sight, it is a consequence of the rules system and If/until TLoS changes to something more abstract then TLoS is the rule and we play that way.

 TheKbob wrote:
Firm camp of MFA if you glue 'em shut and say I can't shoot through 'em.

What if I glue them shut and say they can't be shot through... and you're playing an assault heavy army against my shooty marines?

As someone pointed out in the poll thread, MFA does not automatically mean 'the model is different to normal'... and changing a model from the perceived norm does not automatically grant an advantage.

Then I'd walk around the pod, because the doors are closed and you can't shoot out of the pod. Depending on where it ended up landing, I might even use it for cover myself, though that's going to depend on the table's current layout and such.