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.

Do Models still count as Impassible Teerain, or has that changed from the last edition?

 DeathReaper wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Removing the base fine, knew that rule but still no rule to say two flyers cant be in the same place right?

The Laws of physics say that.

Really, how do plasma cannons work given our current understanding of physics? let alone teleporting, necrons nids etc etc etc etc, very weak comment.

Thanks HawaiiMatt I get it now

MarkyMark wrote:

Really, how do plasma cannons work given our current understanding of physics? let alone teleporting, necrons nids etc etc etc etc, very weak comment.

Sir I tip my hat to you, I managed to turn the sanguinor thread into a quagmire of filth but you sir are the greatest of trolls.

Vendetta gunship
Transport capacity: (1) Vendetta gunship of equal or greater mass.

 DeathReaper wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:
You have permission to put models under a flyer, if they physically fit underneath the flyer. Page 80.
Given that they bothered to put in the limitation that you can only do it if they physically fit, it's pretty obvious you can't do it if they don't fit.
Given that currently all flyer bases are the same height, no flyer can ever be under another flyer.

Interestingly, I couldn't find a rule that says you can't have a dev squad standing on top of a rhino. Might be useful if you need elevation for line of sight.

-Matt

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

This may apply to "live" models, not seen a rule to that effect, but you most definitely can move around on a wrecked one.

barnowl wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

This may apply to "live" models, not seen a rule to that effect, but you most definitely can move around on a wrecked one.

That is because a Wrecked vehicle is diff and dangerous terrain, which you are allowed to move through/into.

MarkyMark wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Removing the base fine, knew that rule but still no rule to say two flyers cant be in the same place right?

The Laws of physics say that.

Really, how do plasma cannons work given our current understanding of physics? let alone teleporting, necrons nids etc etc etc etc, very weak comment.

Thanks HawaiiMatt I get it now

What do plasma cannons, teleporting, necrons nids etc etc etc etc, have to do with physically placing one model where another model is?

Maybe try not to strawman next time.

Two models can not exist within the same physical space, that is just physics.

Plus, it is a permissive ruleset, so it has to say you can do something, otherwise you can not. (This is understood right?)

Therefore your comment of "but still no rule to say two flyers cant be in the same place right" is incorrect, and a "very weak comment."

A lot of people here don't know what intersect means.
It doesn't necessarily mean 'end on the same spot'.

When I leave for work I pull out onto the road and intersect the paths of a few hundred other commuters before me (and after me). But I don't hit any of them cause they happen at different times and are never in the same place at the same time.

psyklone wrote:A lot of people here don't know what intersect means.
It doesn't necessarily mean 'end on the same spot'.

Yes,but OP specified that the paths intersect at the end of the move:

danpieri wrote:You have 2 fliers zooming, so 18" minimum. Their flight paths intersect at the end of them. Can the fliers accidentally crash into each other?

So most people in the thread probably know exactly what intersect means, but as the discussion originally started about the scenario presented by OP, people used the intersect as a short hand for what OP used.

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

The laws of physics say you can not have two models occupy the same space, and the only allowances to move up or down are in terrain of some sort. a vehicle is not terrain until it is wrecked.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

The laws of physics say you can not have two models occupy the same space, and the only allowances to move up or down are in terrain of some sort. a vehicle is not terrain until it is wrecked.

You cannot apply modern, real-world logic or physics to 40k.

Secondly, you have implicit permission to move up and down in the rules that govern movement, as they do not mention terrain at all (I.e. you do not have permission to climb hills, unless you recognize the permission as implicit in the movement phase rules).

The only terrain mentioned are ruins.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

Funnily enough, the only place where that rule exists is in Assault rules nowadays:
All ofthe models in a charging unit make their charge move following the same rules as in the Movement phase, with the exception that they can be moved within 1" of enemy models. ... Charging models still cannot move through friendly or enemy models, cannot pass through gaps narrower than their base... (page 21).

Luide wrote:
Funnily enough, the only place where that rule exists is in Assault rules nowadays:

There's a similar example in the vehicle movement rules.

Luide wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

Funnily enough, the only place where that rule exists is in Assault rules nowadays:
All ofthe models in a charging unit make their charge move following the same rules as in the Movement phase, with the exception that they can be moved within 1" of enemy models. ... Charging models still cannot move through friendly or enemy models, cannot pass through gaps narrower than their base... (page 21).

But a model moving on top of a rhino is not moving through a friendly model.

If I park 2 rhinos side by side between 2 ruins, can a model run from the 2nd floor of one ruin to the 2nd floor of the 2nd ruin? The height is flush so no vertical change is made.
I'd allow it, because it looks cool.

I'd also allow units to be deployed on top of rhinos, but you wouldn't be able to move the rhino until the unit on top got off (movement requires unit movement to be done 1 unit at a time).

I don't think either of these matter, as the odds of them coming up, or being useful in a game are pretty remote.

-Matt

So you'd allow one unit to stand in the exact same spot, stacked model by model?

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

Up and down is covered, so is distance. Enemy units are restricted. Nothing else is said.
Find permission to deploy in inside a river. You can't. They have general rules for deployment and movement, and specific exceptions.
Deploying on top of a rhino does fit within the rules allowed and isn't listed as one of the specific restrictions.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
So you'd allow one unit to stand in the exact same spot, stacked model by model?

If they are stacked, they aren't in the same spot. One model is above another. I think we've got rules somewhere about bases over-lapping.
Rhino has no base.

-Matt

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

The laws of physics say you can not have two models occupy the same space, and the only allowances to move up or down are in terrain of some sort. a vehicle is not terrain until it is wrecked.

You cannot apply modern, real-world logic or physics to 40k.

Secondly, you have implicit permission to move up and down in the rules that govern movement, as they do not mention terrain at all (I.e. you do not have permission to climb hills, unless you recognize the permission as implicit in the movement phase rules).

The only terrain mentioned are ruins.

Find an allowance to leap over/onto other models.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

You have no allowance to climb the side of the rhino, or land on top of another model.

I don't disagree, I just couldn't find a rule for it. Do you know where it is? Every rule I found was limited to enemy models.

-Matt

You're looking for the wrong thing.
Find permission to end your move on top of a friendly model.

You have permission to move anywhere within your maximum move distance. Find anything that restricts that permission.

The laws of physics say you can not have two models occupy the same space, and the only allowances to move up or down are in terrain of some sort. a vehicle is not terrain until it is wrecked.

You cannot apply modern, real-world logic or physics to 40k.

Secondly, you have implicit permission to move up and down in the rules that govern movement, as they do not mention terrain at all (I.e. you do not have permission to climb hills, unless you recognize the permission as implicit in the movement phase rules).

The only terrain mentioned are ruins.

Find an allowance to leap over/onto other models.

I don't have to for the same reason you don't have to find an allowance to leap over an Aegis line or deploy in a forest. The implicit permission exists, and now there must be a specific exception.

The permissive ruleset tells us what we can do.

If it does not mention stacking models on top of one another, then we can't.

It is really that simple.

Unless you have a rules citation saying we can stack models, then we can not stack them.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The permissive ruleset tells us what we can do.

If it does not mention stacking models on top of one another, then we can't.

It is really that simple.

Unless you have a rules citation saying we can stack models, then we can not stack them.

The permissive ruleset is not all encompassing.
Find a rule that allows you to deploy into a lake. I can find rules to move through, but no rules for deploy into.
Guess that means no deployment inside of lakes, forests, ruins, ect. OR maybe it isn't all that complete.

The fact that they specifically prevent movement into ENEMY units, is an indication that you can move into contact with friendly units. In the rhino example (using rhinos to bridge a gap), no "leap" is required, rhinos are placed side by side and perfectly cover the gap between buildings. The first story is even with the top of the rhino, so walking from one building, across the rhinos to the other building is as smooth as strolling down the street.

-Matt

Lakes etc count as terrain, no? So follow the rules for deep striking into terrain. A deep lake? Then it would be played as Impassible Terrain? Then you mishap.

 Kharrak wrote:
Lakes etc count as terrain, no? So follow the rules for deep striking into terrain. A deep lake? Then it would be played as Impassible Terrain? Then you mishap.

Not deep striking, deploying.

Permission is given to deploy anywhere in your deployment zone, apart from impassable terrain. Thats your permission.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Permission is given to deploy anywhere in your deployment zone, apart from impassable terrain. Thats your permission.

And on top of the rhino is in my deployment zone.

-Matt

The query was whether you could move on top, not deploy there.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The permissive ruleset tells us what we can do.

If it does not mention stacking models on top of one another, then we can't.

It is really that simple.

Unless you have a rules citation saying we can stack models, then we can not stack them.

The fact that they specifically prevent movement into ENEMY units, is an indication that you can move into contact with friendly units. In the rhino example (using rhinos to bridge a gap), no "leap" is required, rhinos are placed side by side and perfectly cover the gap between buildings. The first story is even with the top of the rhino, so walking from one building, across the rhinos to the other building is as smooth as strolling down the street.

-Matt

you can not, as the Rhinos are not terrain. You can not move onto models as models are not terrain.

P.90 (The start of the terrain section) tells us this.

Now I really want to play a multi-level game with vehicles driving around in ditches and trenches to act as mobile bridges for the troops on higher levels. Rules be damned, that sounds really fun given the right set up.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Permission is given to deploy anywhere in your deployment zone, apart from impassable terrain. Thats your permission.

And on top of the rhino is in my deployment zone.

-Matt

That does not work either "The player that goes first then places his entire army on the table in his deployment zone" P.121

Note you deploy your army on the table, on top of a rhino is not "on the table"