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.

Is there a rule or something somewhere that tells you the trees on the Sylvaneth Wyldwoods are supposed to be permanently attached to the bases on the three spots? If so, are they then blocking all movement and LoS? Anything else I need to know that's not spelled out in the Wyldwood Warscroll?

Not that I know of. I think whoever deployed the Wyldwood could say that the trees are/aren't removable. The trees only block what line of sight they physically block on the board (since it's true line of sight) and while they can be moved over the vertical distance would have to be measured, making it much more efficient to go around.

I thought it was part of the terrain rules, I play it as if its getting too crowded on it take the trees off but no one can stand in the spaces for the trees. If someone goes to shoot at stuff in there then you should try to put the trees back to check LoS.

Its just some models can physically fit on it just fine, but its the branches that make it awkward as they hook onto things.

I personally would never move onto the tree spots - but lots of my opponents do. It's not that much of a game breaker for me to make a comment, and as it's a hang up from 8th I just accept it.

For me the trees being removable is the same as a building with a removable roof. You wouldn't presume that because you can take it off that models can jump over the walls to land in the building. It's just there for ease of access. So that's why I would also prefer to play that trees can be removed but the spots cannot be moved over.

Also, technically you should try and remember the exact angle each tree was positioned so when put back in it has the same bearing on LOS. That would be a pain if you really wanted to stick that closely to the rules.

So one yes, one no, and one I don't but let others?

There's two things at play here.
1) Simply being on the base of the Wood means you're in cover.
2), the actual trees function for blocking LOS.
(It took me a long time to get my head around the concept of LOS and cover not being linked)

So the relevant factor for me is if a model has *deliberately* positioned itself so that it's LOS is blocked, it's a bit weird to remove the tree that's doing it.
So broadly speaking, I'm okay with the idea of removing trees to your disadvantage, but not acceptable if it's done to the disadvantage of your opponent. Although this will rarely be an issue as it's pretty much only characters on foot who would experience this.

This came up in a game a couple weeks back, where the Sylvaneth player was struggling to get her models through her Citadel Woods, and I told her she should just take the trees off. She asked if that was ok and I said sure, we already know those 20 Dryads are getting cover + all their buffs because of the template, and the trees themselves aren't doing anything for them or the Treeman looming behind. At which a guy on the next table sneered something about somebody clearly being a Fantasy Vet

From my experience, casually blocking LOS in AOS is pretty difficult, and generally requires very large, solid terrain (i.e. buildings and very large rocks) or small, single targets (i.e. heroes), and which point it's pretty clear what's happening. Those Citadel trees might come into play for the latter part, but I think it'd be pretty clear what was up, and the physical tree would just be put back in.

- Salvage

I will remove them for moving models since I am fairly clumsy and can't move them with the trees without tossing everything around. We do play that you cannot occupy the space where the tree is supposed to go though because they do block LoS and if there is combat in the woods they effect who can attack in the combat and such.

Generally, since this is not a historic super accurate war gaming, the terrain pieces are representations of larger more complex terrain.

3-4 trees signify a forest, a piece of blue felt is a meters deep body of water.

Those evil looking rocks are cursed and break knee caps.

Moving the fake not to scale trees out of the way is not that big a deal, counting them as LOS should be dependent on what they represent. An outcropping of trees? Probably not LOS. A massive dense forest that eats models? Ok, maybe LOS blocking depending on how think they are.