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.

DeathReaper wrote:Pony, please define "the hatches are blown" in the context of the rulebook. preferably with page references.

If you can't find the rules that tell us what "the hatches are blown" means then you have to accept that it is in fact fluff, and has no bearing on weather the doors need to be up or down.

While entirely correct DeathReaper, that can be argued. If fluff and rules are mixed in, where do the rules start and the fluff ends in the BRB? You need to make that assumption at some point Or at least define what a rule consists of.

Thanks insaniak / mikhaila (and others)... I will likely model mine shut but be open to playing it either way if certain venues rule they always count as open.

I just really don't like the idea of having to put all my models disembarking on top of my (painted) model... and the same for my opponent's models.

WanderingFox wrote:No because that has no bearing on line of sight. Banners and arms don't count (explicitly detailed in the brb when measuring to models).

They count for determining LOS blocked by the model, though. A sergeant with a banner blocks LOS mor eeffectively than a sergeant without one. So by your interpretation, I need to ask my opponent to use... one of those two perfectly valid options. How do we determine which is the 'correct' way to model him then?

As well as the wording of the drop pod itself, which clearly states that it is open topped.

Which has no bearing on the actual model. See Space Marine Landspeeders.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WanderingFox wrote: If fluff and rules are mixed in, where do the rules start and the fluff ends in the BRB?

The rules are the things that have a function within the structure of the game. The rest is fluff.

Being open-topped is something that has a defined effect in the rules. That makes it a rule.
Disembarking is something that has a defined effect in the rules. That makes it a rule.
'The hatches are blown' is a piece of descriptive padding to add colour to the entry. The rules don't cover 'blown hatches' nor do they require doors on the physical model to be open in order for the unit inside to disembark. So that makes it fluff.

For the record I agree with you that there isn't any RAW backing direclty, but for the sake of argument what is stopping 'the hatches are blown open' from not being a rule?

As far as I know there's no rule directly contradicting a model being modified in mid-game, and from there it could simply be a rule phrased in exciting wording (they have done that in several places after all).

While I agree it is fluff, there is nothing that is directly stating it as so.

Hinge the doors at the top then.

They can be blown and stay closed.

WanderingFox wrote:For the record I agree with you that there isn't any RAW backing direclty, but for the sake of argument what is stopping 'the hatches are blown open' from not being a rule?

What is stopping it from being a rule is 'the hatches are blown open' is not a term to define how to take any kind of action within the game.

If we have a fire point, we know we have to measure from the firing point when firing out of a transport because the rules define what a Fire Point does. They do not define what 'the hatches are blown open' does, so in game terms it does nothing, and is fluff.

While I agree with that statement, there is nothing stopping someone from claiming it as a rule. It's not in italics or otherwise set aside from the rest of the rules of the drop pod. This is of course entirely GWs fault for randomly inserting fluff into their rules, but there is no definition of what a rule is vs what fluff is. Are rules only the things that tell you to roll dice? What about all the rules that dictate how to move models? What about the line of sight rules that are completely intangible?

What I'm driving at here is that the only unified definition you can state for all rules is that they have an impact on how the game is played.

Sadly, by that definition so too does the phrase "the hatches are blown open" since hatches is a reference to a specific part of the model and open is an obvious state in which the model should be placed.

Not just 'have an impact on how the game is played' they tell you to take some sort of action.

The rules tell you to Check LoS and give you guidelines to take this action.

The rules tell you to remove casualties and give you guidelines to take this action.

The rules tell you to move and give you guidelines to take this action.

The rules tell you to take saves and give you guidelines to take this action.

See a pattern? Rules tell you how to take some sort of in game action. 'the hatches are blown open' does not tell you to take any action, thus it is fluff.

you keep mentioning "the rules" yet the fluff is contained in the exact same passages as "the rules"

Not once in the BRB is that explicitly mentioned that somethings is fluff or something is rules.

That is an assumption on your part, as much as I happen to agree with that asumption, it still is one.

What I'm trying to get at here is that what is rules or not requires a logical assumption... and that is a matter of opinion.

I make no assumption but I know what 'rules' means.

GW assumes everyone knows what rules means, and once you know what it means then you can tell what is fluff and what is rules.

WanderingFox wrote:you keep mentioning "the rules" yet the fluff is contained in the exact same passages as "the rules"

Not once in the BRB is that explicitly mentioned that somethings is fluff or something is rules.

That is an assumption on your part, as much as I happen to agree with that asumption, it still is one.

What I'm trying to get at here is that what is rules or not requires a logical assumption... and that is a matter of opinion.

Did you ignore his last post?

Every rule has an in game method of accomplishing that directive.
Where is the method of accomplishing the "hatches are blown open" directive?
Where is the method of accomplishing the "unsealed environment" directive?

It's not a logical leap to figure out that those sentences are not rules.

again i agree with him, but it can be insinuated otherwise. That was all I was trying to point out.

On a less hostile note, this is what magnets are for XD

WanderingFox wrote:While I agree with that statement, there is nothing stopping someone from claiming it as a rule.

They can claim it's a rule all they want... but it won't have any effect on the game, since there is no defined effect of the hatches being blown. Within the context of the game rules, it's a meaningless statement.

Even if you want to apply the real world definition, you can't definitively state that it means the doors must be modelled open. All that you can definitively state is that the pod opens its doors when it lands in order for the embarked unit to disembark. Nothing in the Drop Pod entry says that the pod can't close the doors again after the unit has disembarked, and nothing in the rules states that the doors being opened to disembark means the pod has to be modelled with the doors open when every other transport vehicle in the game functions just fine without open doors on the model.

So just out of curiosity, Insaniak, what does the statement "the hatches are blown" meen to you? What would come to mind if someone were to tell you that "the hatches were blown"?

insaniak wrote:

WanderingFox wrote:While I agree with that statement, there is nothing stopping someone from claiming it as a rule.

They can claim it's a rule all they want... but it won't have any effect on the game, since there is no defined effect of the hatches being blown. Within the context of the game rules, it's a meaningless statement.

Even if you want to apply the real world definition, you can't definitively state that it means the doors must be modelled open. All that you can definitively state is that the pod opens its doors when it lands in order for the embarked unit to disembark. Nothing in the Drop Pod entry says that the pod can't close the doors again after the unit has disembarked, and nothing in the rules states that the doors being opened to disembark means the pod has to be modelled with the doors open when every other transport vehicle in the game functions just fine without open doors on the model.

I dunno the fact that it becomes immobilized and open topped as well as the picture of all the doors being down in the codex give pretty good evidence to the contrary.

gruebot wrote:So just out of curiosity, Insaniak, what does the statement "the hatches are blown" meen to you? What would come to mind if someone were to tell you that "the hatches were blown"?

It doesn't matter what it means to him. All that matters is what it means to the rules of the game which is nothing. Real world definitions have no bearing on the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WanderingFox wrote:
I dunno the fact that it becomes immobilized and open topped as well as the picture of all the doors being down in the codex give pretty good evidence to the contrary.

You don't have to model everyone of your models exactly as the picture in the books.

gruebot wrote:So just out of curiosity, Insaniak, what does the statement "the hatches are blown" meen to you? What would come to mind if someone were to tell you that "the hatches were blown"?

It means the hatches are satisfied and the money is on the counter.

azazel the cat wrote:

gruebot wrote:So just out of curiosity, Insaniak, what does the statement "the hatches are blown" meen to you? What would come to mind if someone were to tell you that "the hatches were blown"?

It means the hatches are satisfied and the money is on the counter.

I can't believe it took 4 pages for a fellatio reference.

Seriously it's a phrase that could have several real world meanings but has no in game definition (go ahead and find "blown hatches" in the index or defined in any section of the BRB) therefore it is not a rule.

gruebot wrote:So just out of curiosity, Insaniak, what does the statement "the hatches are blown" meen to you? What would come to mind if someone were to tell you that "the hatches were blown"?

It means that they blow the hatches open to disembark.

But, as I have already explained, that has no bearing on the rules, since the rules don't require a vehicle model to have the doors physically open in order for the models on board to disembark. There is generally no need to open them, since you measure from the hull of the vehicle regardless of whether the hatch is up or down.

The only reason that this is even an issue is because some people think that it is abusive being able to leave the doors up to block LOS through the pod. In response to that, I would point out that when the drop pod was released, we had whole bunches of people complaining that it was abusive to draw LOS through the pod...

No answer on this is going to satisfy everyone.

Generally, I think that it's one of those cases that should just be determined before the game: either the hatches will be open, or else closed. Just no half measures, and no surprises.

LOL, Yeah, I totaly understand where your comming from.The dex doesn't specificaly say what happens in plain english. I've seen a drop pod with all its doors open, on a flat surface, block LOS from a certain angle. But, luckily this all most never comes up in tournaments. I'm just surprised that it warranted a four page thread.

I didn't vote because I do not think it's legal to block LOS with some of the doors but fully legal to not open the doors. I've seen the horror of building the GW Drop Pods and could never blame anyone for gluing them shut.

That being said, I'm not a wealthy man so I use red Solo cups with foamcore fins as Drop Pods and have always played it as "doors are open and models can be targeted through it but get a cover save". This makes the most sense to me. I can understand why someone would want it to be different from a tactical view, using doors to block line of sight. But I want my Space Marines to be the near-invincible angels of death that the codex describes, but that's not always the case.

I think that it is about the "spirit of the law" and not the "letter of the law". The DP was designed for all of the doors to be blown open. If the guy wants to play like that and win on that, I would not play him again.

"The hatches are blown open...." ....hmmm.

This is fluff.
This is a guideline.
This is the rule.

I think it is all of the above.

DeathReaper wrote:I make no assumption but I know what 'rules' means.

GW assumes everyone knows what rules means, and once you know what it means then you can tell what is fluff and what is rules.

GW mixes what has become fluff with the rules in their material, because they want to give you some in world guidelines to what the rule is representing. That being said, the "fluff" becomes a guideline for folks to use common sense, and thus, a part of the rules. Yes, I know this is not a popular view, but I find that is what makes games fun, using a little common sense when it comes to rule interpretation.

So "The hatches are blown open..." says to me that this Drop Pod comes screaming out of the sky, charges at the top of the doors go off and blow these hatches open, and ten Space Marines come out and shoot me in the face.

inb4 Common Sense Isn't Common.

You are right that it is fluff.

It may be a guideline, but how do we know if all the charges at the top of the doors actually went off? What if three of them malfunctioned and stayed closed?

It is certainly not rules.

insaniak wrote:"The rules don't require a vehicle model to have the doors physically open in order for the models on board to disembark."

insaniak wrote:"They can claim it's a rule all they want... but it won't have any effect on the game, since there is no defined effect of the hatches being blown."

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Since the hull of the vehicle is defined on p.56 BRB and the rule is that a vehicle can't shoot through its own hull I would think that the doors being closed would block LoS for the built in weapon as well as any troops behind the DP. Otherwise +1.

The Hull of the vehicle is pretty much the main chassis which it is mounted on. Doors are not part of the hull, and I believe that you can fire through them.

Of course, I believe that having part of your vehicle block LoS shouldn't really destroy the outcome. If you had a Land Raider and there were several enemy models hidden under the actual chassis from the multimelta that you had put on top, I think it would be ridiculous just saying that you cannot over 1/2 the models, therefore they get a cover save. So Commander Dante can deep strike with a bunch of Sang. Guard w/ PF right next to you and they get a huge cover save for being close to you...

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Since the hull of the vehicle is defined on p.56 BRB and the rule is that a vehicle can't shoot through its own hull I would think that the doors being closed would block LoS for the built in weapon as well as any troops behind the DP. Otherwise +1.

The Hull of the vehicle is pretty much the main chassis which it is mounted on. Doors are not part of the hull, and I believe that you can fire through them.

Of course, I believe that having part of your vehicle block LoS shouldn't really destroy the outcome. If you had a Land Raider and there were several enemy models hidden under the actual chassis from the multimelta that you had put on top, I think it would be ridiculous just saying that you cannot over 1/2 the models, therefore they get a cover save. So Commander Dante can deep strike with a bunch of Sang. Guard w/ PF right next to you and they get a huge cover save for being close to you...

Yeah, you should totes be able to shoot through your hull and ignore the limitations of the way your vehicle is built. Makes complete sense.

D.Azrinae wrote:"The hatches are blown open...." ....hmmm.

This is fluff.
This is a guideline.
This is the rule.

This is not what it says...

So "The hatches are blown open..." says to me that this Drop Pod comes screaming out of the sky, charges at the top of the doors go off and blow these hatches open, and ten Space Marines come out and shoot me in the face.

Sure. But what about that suggests that the model has to have its doors physically open, when no other transport vehicle in the entire game has to do so?

It's a description of what is happening in the 'real world' when the pod lands. It's not something that has to be represented on the table, because the rules don't say 'The hatches are blown, so the model must be placed with the doors open...'

We don't have to open transport doors for models to get in or out. We don't have to open building doors for the same purpose. Models don't have to actually run across the board. They don't have to actually hit each other with pointy sticks. Vehicles don't need to actually explode when you roll a 6 on the damage chart. Weapons don't actually have to glow, or be possessed by daemons, or have mono-molecular blades that cut through a tomato! A shoe! This anvil!

All of these things are simply fluff descriptions of what is supposedly happening when we pick up a lump of plastic and do something with it.

rigeld2 wrote:

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Since the hull of the vehicle is defined on p.56 BRB and the rule is that a vehicle can't shoot through its own hull I would think that the doors being closed would block LoS for the built in weapon as well as any troops behind the DP. Otherwise +1.

The Hull of the vehicle is pretty much the main chassis which it is mounted on. Doors are not part of the hull, and I believe that you can fire through them.

Of course, I believe that having part of your vehicle block LoS shouldn't really destroy the outcome. If you had a Land Raider and there were several enemy models hidden under the actual chassis from the multimelta that you had put on top, I think it would be ridiculous just saying that you cannot over 1/2 the models, therefore they get a cover save. So Commander Dante can deep strike with a bunch of Sang. Guard w/ PF right next to you and they get a huge cover save for being close to you...

Yeah, you should totes be able to shoot through your hull and ignore the limitations of the way your vehicle is built. Makes complete sense.

This is about the Drop Pod. Anyway, I'm trying to point out how some people may use the limitations on LoS due to the hull to bring about major cheese
I'm talking about having Dante attached to a squad and saying he cannot be hit as you cannot see him, yet you still can draw LoS to the squad he joined.

My point about doors being excluded as part of the hull is sttill valid in my opinion.

BlapBlapBlap wrote:This is about the Drop Pod. Anyway, I'm trying to point out how some people may use the limitations on LoS due to the hull to bring about major cheese
I'm talking about having Dante attached to a squad and saying he cannot be hit as you cannot see him, yet you still can draw LoS to the squad he joined.

You brought up the LR. And the shooting rules say that if he's part of the squad he can be hit - even out of LoS.

My point about doors being excluded as part of the hull is sttill valid in my opinion.

So doors are decorative elements? Because they're not "gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners" so we are not told to ignore them when measuring to/from the hull.