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.
If a vehicle doesn't have a base then you measure from the closest point on it's hull... but which part of a walker is it's hull? Is it just the body? Are the legs included? Can a Brass Scorpion, for instance, ever get into close combat since it's body is over an 1" off the ground and most of it's body is surrounded by it's legs, preventing it from getting within an 1" of another vehicle.
Anyone come across this before?
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
mrhappyface wrote: If a vehicle doesn't have a base then you measure from the closest point on it's hull... but which part of a walker is it's hull? Is it just the body? Are the legs included? Can a Brass Scorpion, for instance, ever get into close combat since it's body is over an 1" off the ground and most of it's body is surrounded by it's legs, preventing it from getting within an 1" of another vehicle.
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/24 20:41:05
mrhappyface wrote: If a vehicle doesn't have a base then you measure from the closest point on it's hull... but which part of a walker is it's hull? Is it just the body? Are the legs included? Can a Brass Scorpion, for instance, ever get into close combat since it's body is over an 1" off the ground and most of it's body is surrounded by it's legs, preventing it from getting within an 1" of another vehicle.
Anyone come across this before?
Funnily enough, I've had another player pull something similar to this on me (a good friend, but he gets very competitive).
Secure and control. Eldar (me) and Marines vs IG (him) and Ultramarines.
At turn 5 he attempted to swarm our objective with Guardsmen. I had it very well screened using grav tanks that he would basically have to kill to get through, but he pulled out the rulebook. As the grav tanks were more than an inch from the ground, and all distances are measured base to base (or base to hull), he argued that he could move under them even though there was not enough physical space to move underneath. Nothing actually stated in the rules that you cannot physically move through enemy models, just that they have to remain > 1 inch away (bases to hulls) at all times.
Luckily, it went on to turn 6 and we were able to kill off his infantry squads. I have since cut down my flying bases
The rules do actually state you can’t move through models. I’ve had to demonstrate this to my competitive friend on numerous occasions, for example when he has tried to move through a gap that’s too small, or through a Carnifex’s arms.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/24 21:30:46
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
Huh, that paragraph just before didn't jump out at me at the time. End of a long hard fought game I guess. Ah well, shouldn't have any trouble either way from now on.
Spartacus wrote: Nothing actually stated in the rules that you cannot physically move through enemy models, just that they have to remain > 1 inch away (bases to hulls) at all times.
Yes, there is.
Free Battle Primer wrote:Moving A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base (or hull) can move further than this. It cannot be moved through other models or through terrain features such as walls, but can be moved vertically in order to climb or traverse any scenery.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/06/24 22:16:10
Skinnereal wrote: If you can move under a flier's wings, that hang out from the base, walking under a jacked-up skimmer should be OK.
But LOS works like that, too.
But only if the model would fit underneath the skimmer.
Skinnereal wrote: If you can move under a flier's wings, that hang out from the base, walking under a jacked-up skimmer should be OK.
But LOS works like that, too.
But only if the model would fit underneath the skimmer.
So in theory, if I modeled all of my infantries on a 12" pedestals, flyers won't be able to fly "over" my models?
Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
Well it does need defining because, by your definition, a Warhound Titan can never get into combat; you can't get to within 1" of it's hull (by your own words it's legs don't count as a hull).
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
Well it does need defining because, by your definition, a Warhound Titan can never get into combat; you can't get to within 1" of it's hull (by your own words it's legs don't count as a hull).
But it has a base. So you measure 1" from the base.
GW just needs to release bases for all units and get rid of the whole "Hovering" rule.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/25 18:56:52
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
No the tenets are forum rules, as in the rules you should follow if you want to have a discussion on this forum.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
Well it does need defining because, by your definition, a Warhound Titan can never get into combat; you can't get to within 1" of it's hull (by your own words it's legs don't count as a hull).
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
In the common language, does the leg of a futuristic combat walker count as a hull?
No.
It's attached to the hip. Which is part of the body...which is a hull.
ValentineGames wrote: Hull is defined by the English language.
It's the main body of a vehicle everything is attached to.
A chassis or frame.
The rules don't need to define it. Just like they don't define what is a gun or what is a sword.
It's common knowledge.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.
What matters is how the rules define what the main hull is. We have that definition via the Designer's Commentary. The 'real world' definition doesn't apply in this case.
That tenets would be considered a house rule.
So it's useless as far as I care.
Like I said the rules do not define hull for the same reason they do not define a firearm or a blade.
It requires none
No the tenets are forum rules, as in the rules you should follow if you want to have a discussion on this forum.
I see rule 1 ignored constantly...so...
I see plenty of people called chaff. Plebian. Told to git gud or mocked for not dropping equal quantities of money like they do on toys.
The loudest members seem obnoxious as hell
Please do NOT quote entire walls of text to only reply with a single line.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/06/25 19:46:51
Take it from me rule #1 is enforced usually from behind the scenes. Just because you never see it doesn't mean it isn't enforced. If you feel that you have been insulted push the yellow triangle in the upper right hand corner of the post. I bet a mod looks over your complaint within the next 12 hours and if they find your complaint valid they'll act on it on the spot.
And if you don't feel the need to follow the tenets then you will be hearing from the mods soon enough.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/25 19:28:08
It is your problem if you play against someone who's using a walker without a base that you can't charge.
Not an issue.
I only play commen sense. But that has nothing to do with rules.
I avoid playing in any GW. club. Store. Tournament etc and only play solo to avoid idiotic crap like that
It is your problem if you play against someone who's using a walker without a base that you can't charge.
Not an issue.
I only play commen sense.
Would this be the same "common sense" that has you saying the legs of a walker don't count as part of the hull?
Hull = main body
Legs are not a main body, they are attached to it.
Nothing to do with common sense.
Sorry. Don't cry on my shoulders. Work it out with your opponents.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/25 21:37:48
6000 pts - 
4000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
1000 pts
