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 my brother and I had a disagreement yesterday about being able to charge a unit on a level of a building that is above ground level. I argued that if the charging unit could not place their base on the floor where they are charging then they could not make the charge. He argued that wobbly model syndrome would take care of that as long as there is a sliver of the floor left to stand on the rest is his base can hang off the terrain. I countered with saying I'd spread my unit to max coherency so he could not place his models without overlapping the bases of mine. What do you guys think? I'm sure this has come up before.

Edit: I imagined a unit of devastators in a building. When a chaos space marine attempts to climb through a window he gets Sparta kicked back out the window.

From FAQ:


Q: If a unit declares a charge against an enemy unit that is entirely on the upper level of a terrain feature such as a ruin, Sector Mechanicus structure, etc., but it cannot physically end its charge move within 1" of any models from that unit (either because there is not enough room to place the charging unit, or because the charging unit is unable to end its move on the upper levels of that terrain feature because of the expanded terrain rules for it – as with ruins, for example), does that charge fail?
A: Yes.

Me addressing WMS:
And wobbly model syndrome is not flying model syndrome. It requires that you are able to balance the model in place and that both players agree to use it rather than risk models falling over on unstable terrain. Sounds like he can’t balance it in place AND you disagree to using it...
So it can’t be used.

Definitely agree with that interpretation of WMS.

It has to be POSSIBLE to leave the model there, it's just you are not confident about it staying in place.

WMS is to protect your expensive models, not to allow models to levitate.

Thank you both. This is what I thought.

Indeed. WMS doesn't give you carte blanche to start levitating models with only a millimetre of their base on the floor and suchlike. It's merely intended to protect models that are in a precarious position, but they still have to be able to fit there unaided. You then just have to agree its true position with your opponent before putting it somewhere safer.

That being said, having a situation where a unit is essentially unchargeable is a bit crap for gameplay and a lot of events I've been to have house ruled that models can attack 3" vertically i.e. from the level above or below, but supporting attacks aren't allowed. Obviously this isn't RAW but makes for a better gameplay experience imo and might be a good compromise for games with your brother

Do note that if you are playing under ITC rules, this is now the exact opposite: if a model COULD end its charge move anywhere within 1" of an enemy model, it can be placed on a different floor and is still considered to have succeeded the charge and be within 1".

This is due to players placing models on awkward areas of structures by claiming WMS, and then denying WMS to the opponent so that those models could never be reached in melee.

PuppetSoul wrote:
Do note that if you are playing under ITC rules, this is now the exact opposite: if a model COULD end its charge move anywhere within 1" of an enemy model, it can be placed on a different floor and is still considered to have succeeded the charge and be within 1".

This is due to players placing models on awkward areas of structures by claiming WMS, and then denying WMS to the opponent so that those models could never be reached in melee.

I would argue that if you CANT place the model due to there only being a sliver of space and the model
Being too big then what you’re saying doesn’t apply since it’s not somewhere you COULD have placed that model.
GW were direct in the fact that you can block charges by standing on the edges of terrain. We can argue about whether it’s fair but it’s clear and we need to embrace clear rulings when they come. Now I’ve looked at some ITC pages and I can’t find an faq or list of consolidated rulings but I did find a post saying they follow all GW FAQs.
What your talking about seems more geared to allowing more models in a unit to participate in a multilevel right rather than a way to get into combat in the first place.

Gendif wrote:

PuppetSoul wrote:
Do note that if you are playing under ITC rules, this is now the exact opposite: if a model COULD end its charge move anywhere within 1" of an enemy model, it can be placed on a different floor and is still considered to have succeeded the charge and be within 1".

This is due to players placing models on awkward areas of structures by claiming WMS, and then denying WMS to the opponent so that those models could never be reached in melee.

I would argue that if you CANT place the model due to there only being a sliver of space and the model
Being too big then what you’re saying doesn’t apply since it’s not somewhere you COULD have placed that model.
GW were direct in the fact that you can block charges by standing on the edges of terrain. We can argue about whether it’s fair but it’s clear and we need to embrace clear rulings when they come. Now I’ve looked at some ITC pages and I can’t find an faq or list of consolidated rulings but I did find a post saying they follow all GW FAQs.
What your talking about seems more geared to allowing more models in a unit to participate in a multilevel right rather than a way to get into combat in the first place.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/12/16/lvo-40k-update/

 Tonberry7 wrote:
Indeed. WMS doesn't give you carte blanche to start levitating models with only a millimetre of their base on the floor and suchlike. It's merely intended to protect models that are in a precarious position, but they still have to be able to fit there unaided. You then just have to agree its true position with your opponent before putting it somewhere safer.

That being said, having a situation where a unit is essentially unchargeable is a bit crap for gameplay and a lot of events I've been to have house ruled that models can attack 3" vertically i.e. from the level above or below, but supporting attacks aren't allowed. Obviously this isn't RAW but makes for a better gameplay experience imo and might be a good compromise for games with your brother

Actually it was a debate that occurred when I gave him advice about how to deploy his Oblits against someone else who charged him with a mob of ork boys. This all reminds me of king of the hill as a child. We always used something where there was only space for one person to be the king and all challengers had a disadvantage fighting for space. As far as I'm concerned I'm using the GW FAQ ruling and some jerk isn't trying to deploy a leman Russ on a building. If I can't charge a unit then I'll play the objective game and use terrain to protect my units. It isn't always advantageous to stay in that one elevated position. I use bikes and thunderwolves a lot anyway in my space wolves list so they can't fight on other levels without ramps anyway.

ITC ruled it this way because of the fact the only way to take out the unit was to shoot it.

They didn't want to see a melee based army denied the chance to take out a unit on the second floor building because the person was abusing the rules and errata GW made.

Before that FAQ, people still classified units in CC if they still completed the charge, even if they were on different floors because of the fact that people would place their high damage, long range targets or mob killers on the top floors of the buildings to not only lock down the building, but also kill any and all melee units that decided to try and take them out.

GW errataing this in this way is completely detrimental to melee, and in actual fact all major tournaments that i go to do not use this errata. This is the only errata that is actually excluded from tournaments where i am

If the base could fit, but the model physically cant, that is how I define Wobbly Model.

The previous editions were alot more lenient, I've seen combats taken place with a unit spiderman crawling a wall, fighting 2 different combats, and tyranid monsters hang over building ledges by their toe.

Crappy ruling in the FAQ. Anything that gives 1++ with no 1 to fail sucks. And it also is highly illogical. As if somebody would stop floor below and not go upside and fight his way up? Bah. GW can't write good logical rules that are even close to balance as usual.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
If the base could fit, but the model physically cant, that is how I define Wobbly Model.

Huh. Pretty sure that's not how it's supposed to work. If it can't physically fit, it can't fit. Wobbly Model is for wobbly models - you can put the model there but you aren't confident it will stay there unaided.

tneva82 wrote:
Crappy ruling in the FAQ. Anything that gives 1++ with no 1 to fail sucks. And it also is highly illogical. As if somebody would stop floor below and not go upside and fight his way up? Bah. GW can't write good logical rules that are even close to balance as usual.

Hmm, I wonder if creative use of magnets could work around the issue so you don't have to WMS being upside down?

JakeSiren wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Crappy ruling in the FAQ. Anything that gives 1++ with no 1 to fail sucks. And it also is highly illogical. As if somebody would stop floor below and not go upside and fight his way up? Bah. GW can't write good logical rules that are even close to balance as usual.

Hmm, I wonder if creative use of magnets could work around the issue so you don't have to WMS being upside down?

Blu tac.

TheunlikelyGamer wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:
Indeed. WMS doesn't give you carte blanche to start levitating models with only a millimetre of their base on the floor and suchlike. It's merely intended to protect models that are in a precarious position, but they still have to be able to fit there unaided. You then just have to agree its true position with your opponent before putting it somewhere safer.

That being said, having a situation where a unit is essentially unchargeable is a bit crap for gameplay and a lot of events I've been to have house ruled that models can attack 3" vertically i.e. from the level above or below, but supporting attacks aren't allowed. Obviously this isn't RAW but makes for a better gameplay experience imo and might be a good compromise for games with your brother

Actually it was a debate that occurred when I gave him advice about how to deploy his Oblits against someone else who charged him with a mob of ork boys. This all reminds me of king of the hill as a child. We always used something where there was only space for one person to be the king and all challengers had a disadvantage fighting for space. As far as I'm concerned I'm using the GW FAQ ruling and some jerk isn't trying to deploy a leman Russ on a building. If I can't charge a unit then I'll play the objective game and use terrain to protect my units. It isn't always advantageous to stay in that one elevated position. I use bikes and thunderwolves a lot anyway in my space wolves list so they can't fight on other levels without ramps anyway.

You cannot deploy Vehicles or Monsters on top of buildings or ruins unless they have FLY.

It’s if you define them as Ruins. BUILDINGS (Keyword) are fortifications in this edition. As always, agree how you’ll play all terrain pre-game to avoid arguments and sadness.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It’s if you define them as Ruins. BUILDINGS (Keyword) are fortifications in this edition. As always, agree how you’ll play all terrain pre-game to avoid arguments and sadness.

And you can't put models on top of Fortifications not because of terrain rules but because they are Models, and Models can't be put on top of other Models.

See the Skyshield Landing Pad for when GW forget this rule :p

 Stux wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It’s if you define them as Ruins. BUILDINGS (Keyword) are fortifications in this edition. As always, agree how you’ll play all terrain pre-game to avoid arguments and sadness.

And you can't put models on top of Fortifications not because of terrain rules but because they are Models, and Models can't be put on top of other Models.

See the Skyshield Landing Pad for when GW forget this rule :p

they FAQ'd to add allowance for enemy models to go on top .. but then completely forgot friendly models .. lol

After reading through the thread, I wonder what everyone's thoughts are on:

1) If your Terminator is on the second floor, and the bottom floor is completely filled with Genestealers, can the Terminator engage the Genestealers in melee, assuming he makes the charge roll for the vertical distance?

2) Can flying units stand on one side of a thin, narrow wall, claim that it is on the tippy top of the wall, and do the same to enemies below on the other side of the wall per the previous question?

This is, of course, assuming we use the ITC WMS rules.

 Suzuteo wrote:
After reading through the thread, I wonder what everyone's thoughts are on:

1) If your Terminator is on the second floor, and the bottom floor is completely filled with Genestealers, can the Terminator engage the Genestealers in melee, assuming he makes the charge roll for the vertical distance?

2) Can flying units stand on one side of a thin, narrow wall, claim that it is on the tippy top of the wall, and do the same to enemies below on the other side of the wall per the previous question?

This is, of course, assuming we use the ITC WMS rules.

One part 1 no he can't charge down. All you actually have to do is block the area below the floor he's standing on, and if you stand directly below the floor he also can't shoot through the floor at you. Because he can only move up and down he cannot leap out sideways from the floor. IE Stalemate. On the 2nd one if the model can be placed then it's legal to stand on top of a wall, and deny being charged.