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.

Custodes jetbikes.

As we know, in 8th, if you can see it you can shoot it.

Is it considered "modeling for advantage" to have their lances down?

The argument is being made that because the box art shows some of them with them up, some of them down, that they need to be built with one of them up as the instructions imply.

To me, this is absurd and isn't even an argument, but I figured we would open up the discussion here as well.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Custodes jetbikes.

As we know, in 8th, if you can see it you can shoot it.

Is it considered "modeling for advantage" to have their lances down?

The argument is being made that because the box art shows some of them with them up, some of them down, that they need to be built with one of them up as the instructions imply.

To me, this is absurd and isn't even an argument, but I figured we would open up the discussion here as well.

Technically, yes. But then again pretty much EVERYTHING is "modelling for advantage", so don't worry about it. Got Manlette Marines with bolters across the chest? MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE it's not as tall as one with bolters pointing up.

Especially since the rules don't care either way.

No, that's not modeling for advantage, that's just assembling the way you want and it just happens to be an advantage.

Examples of modeling for advantage would be like purposefully makeing barrals of guns and tanks shorter as to hide them better. Or cutting off a part of the model that was sticking way out and saying in my dude that lost an arm. Or putting a flyer on a massive flight stand to see everything or putting it really close to the ground to try and hide stuff.

The custodes spear is not modeling for advantage, anyone suggesting so is a TFG

Well if they can see you and shoot you, you can also "see" them with your lance and shoot them.

 skchsan wrote:
Well if they can see you and shoot you, you can also "see" them with your lance and shoot them.

8th edition ladies and gents

It's not about what's right - it's about whats fair!

Yeah, that's the equally silly counter point. If I bring my unit of jetbikes up behind a wall with lances raised, they can shoot their storm bolters over it?

Idk, I just don't see it.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Yeah, that's the equally silly counter point. If I bring my unit of jetbikes up behind a wall with lances raised, they can shoot their storm bolters over it?

Idk, I just don't see it.

Yes, they can. LOS works both ways.

Right, I get that BaconCatBug. I'm just disagreeing on the overall opinion that there is a requirement to build them how the box displays, that's all.

I appreciate your input.

They're _Jetbikes_.
Anyone ridgedly assuming that the exact height of their flying stand is the only height that jetbike is possibly capable of flying at is doing it wrong. It makes complete sense for jetbikes to be able to fire over walls, and indeed, be shot over walls.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
They're _Jetbikes_.
Anyone ridgedly assuming that the exact height of their flying stand is the only height that jetbike is possibly capable of flying at is doing it wrong. It makes complete sense for jetbikes to be able to fire over walls, and indeed, be shot over walls.

I agree, however at the other extreme I would raise an eyebrow if a jetbikes was glued directly to the base with no stand! Even though technically a jetbikes could land.

While my buddies and I don't play to the rules on this point - I'd agree with the "model how you want" approach and if your opponent is going to shoot at a lance tip, you can shoot right back.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Right, I get that BaconCatBug. I'm just disagreeing on the overall opinion that there is a requirement to build them how the box displays, that's all.

I appreciate your input.

First people wanted for models to be painted as the box display if you want your rules. Now they want them build too as the box display? Is people just reaching those levels of "competitive" stupidity or what?

Go play X-wing if you want 0 customization with your models! (I'm not saying this to you Cephalobeard, but the ones that have tell you that)

 Elbows wrote:
While my buddies and I don't play to the rules on this point - I'd agree with the "model how you want" approach and if your opponent is going to shoot at a lance tip, you can shoot right back.

Exactly! RAW you are 100% cool to fire your salvo launcher out of a raised Lance tip.

 Galas wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Right, I get that BaconCatBug. I'm just disagreeing on the overall opinion that there is a requirement to build them how the box displays, that's all.

I appreciate your input.

First people wanted for models to be painted as the box display if you want your rules. Now they want them build too as the box display? Is people just reaching those levels of "competitive" stupidity or what?

Go play X-wing if you want 0 customization with your models! (I'm not saying this to you Cephalobeard, but the ones that have tell you that)

I admin a 10k person Competitive group.

Yes, it's exclusively people viewing it from a highly competitive standpoint.

Seeing my bias as playing custodes, I just want as many opinions as possible.

Can someone point to the reference in the book where it says models have to be built precisely to the instructions?

If it's not there, then we're dealing with whatever whims go on in the heads of tournament organizers, and that's going to be a subjective and personalized assessment.

Anyone you says you can't use your jetbikes because they're modeled with the lance at 90 degrees instead of 45 degrees isn't worth playing, and any TO who insists on it is running an event not worth participating in.

 Asmodai wrote:
Can someone point to the reference in the book where it says models have to be built precisely to the instructions?

If it's not there, then we're dealing with whatever whims go on in the heads of tournament organizers, and that's going to be a subjective and personalized assessment.

Anyone you says you can't use your jetbikes because they're modeled with the lance at 90 degrees instead of 45 degrees isn't worth playing, and any TO who insists on it is running an event not worth participating in.

That was my argument almost to the letter.

Maybe it's an old edition but I thought things like (man sized) weapons and adornments didn't count towar LoS. For example if my model has a flag attached to his back you can't use that to establish LoS. Likewise I can't draw LoS from my back banner's tippy top to your model.

In any event there is nothing saying that you have to build or paint your models in any specific position. If someone insists on you having to build your models in a specific manner ask them to show you the rule that makes it so.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Maybe it's an old edition but I thought things like (man sized) weapons and adornments didn't count towar LoS. For example if my model has a flag attached to his back you can't use that to establish LoS. Likewise I can't draw LoS from my back banner's tippy top to your model.

In any event there is nothing saying that you have to build or paint your models in any specific position. If someone insists on you having to build your models in a specific manner ask them to show you the rule that makes it so.

That's edition lag I'm afraid!

In 8th, all rules for line of sight just talk of drawing a line between any part of one model to any part of another. There are no caveats for antenna, banners, etc. All parts of the model are equal.

While it leads to some odd scenarios for the fantasy of the game, I understand why it works this way. Previously there could be ambiguity over whether a given part of a model should be counted or not, now there is no ambiguity: model is model.

 Asmodai wrote:
Can someone point to the reference in the book where it says models have to be built precisely to the instructions?

If it's not there, then we're dealing with whatever whims go on in the heads of tournament organizers, and that's going to be a subjective and personalized assessment.

Anyone you says you can't use your jetbikes because they're modeled with the lance at 90 degrees instead of 45 degrees isn't worth playing, and any TO who insists on it is running an event not worth participating in.

There isn't even WYSIWYG rule let alone any rules dictating how to assemble them. As it is there's no rules whatsoever as to what models to use...

It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

Which would totally fly in the face of 8th edition design ethos. They don't want to go back to previous editions of exceptions upon exceptions.

8th edition is simple, if you can draw a line from Model A to Model B, you have line of sight. Period. No exceptions.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

Which would totally fly in the face of 8th edition design ethos. They don't want to go back to previous editions of exceptions upon exceptions.

8th edition is simple, if you can draw a line from Model A to Model B, you have line of sight. Period. No exceptions.

I totally agree with BCB here.

It might seem that the rule pitched by AnomanderRake 'fixes' it, but you're actually opening up a whole world of subjectivity to the LoS rules. What should obviously not be counted as part of the model to one person obviously should be counted to another.

If you don't like it, make a house rule with your friends. But I'm glad the base rule are as is on this one.

Un/Foruntunately there is actually a community that has had to deal with this crap before: Age of Sigmar.

Perhaps shoot some of their high-end TOs a mail and see what approach they use? I don't sigmar myself so I have no point of reference there, but it's a thought.

I say build them how you like, it can hardly be called modelling for advantage if you didn't have to trim any parts on the basic kit to make it work!

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

Shall we go back to older editions where you can't shoot a tank if the gun barrel is all you can see of it, but the tank can shoot you drawing LoS from the barrel?

 doctortom wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

Shall we go back to older editions where you can't shoot a tank if the gun barrel is all you can see of it, but the tank can shoot you drawing LoS from the barrel?

If it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight. Period. No "considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight when the model is attacking but not when it's defending", just "not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight".

 AnomanderRake wrote:
If it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight. Period. No "considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight when the model is attacking but not when it's defending", just "not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight".

Which then just leads to bickering over what, exactly, does and doesn't count.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
If it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight. Period. No "considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight when the model is attacking but not when it's defending", just "not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight".

Which then just leads to bickering over what, exactly, does and doesn't count.

Ah,the old "are wings on a Flyer ornamental or part of the hull?" argument from older editions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems like this one's a really easy one-sentence FAQ (banners, weapons, and other decorative elements that protrude significantly beyond the model's normal silhouette are not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight), especially given that everyone I've ever played against plays that way already.

Strict reading of the rules there are no restrictions on how you build your models; using downward lances isn't modeling for advantage any more than using only the shorter base stems would be.

Shall we go back to older editions where you can't shoot a tank if the gun barrel is all you can see of it, but the tank can shoot you drawing LoS from the barrel?

If it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight it isn't considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight. Period. No "considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight when the model is attacking but not when it's defending", just "not considered part of the model for purposes of line of sight".

Wasn't always that way, they had you trace from the gun barrel for vehicles, yet had the claim that you couldn't shoot the vehicle if that's all you can see. As was noted, though, you get the bickering over what counts and what doesn't count.

Of course there's this from the Designer's Commentary:

Q: When a model does not have a base, as is the case with many vehicles, what exactly is the ‘hull’ of the model?

A: The hull of these models refers to the main body of the model. It does not include things such as turrets, sponsons, aerials, banners, spikes etc. If there is still doubt, we recommend both players agree about what constitutes the hull of such models before the battle begins.

Funny enough, Custodes bikes come with two bases per model. One clear flying one, and one bike base.