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.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Idolator wrote:

I really don't understand about the base argument. Ruins with or without a base are area terrain.

Here you go. This is the flaw to which all of your other points are wrongfully stemming.

Ruins are not area terrain. Ruins are ruins. If you have a freestanding brick wall, without a base, it is 4+ cover only if it obscures the model. If the shooter moves around the wall and the target is no longer obscured, then there is no cover save. It doesn't matter if the ruin is 1, 2, or 50 levels high. The ruin is a ruin and grants cover saves based on true line of sight and actual obscurement.

Now, if the same brick wall is on a well defined base, then the ruin's base is now area terrain. So, if obscured by the wall, the target receives 4+. If the shooter moves around again and the target is no longer obscured, then the target receives a 5+ for standing on the base and being in area terrain.

All other levels of the ruin are not area terrain, even if they have a floor. They are ruins and only grant cover saves based on true line of sight.

Your point is that only the walls of a ruin provide the 4+ cover save. The rules for ruins clearly state that the rules for ruins are applied to the height and area of a ruin. A wall without the area aspect is just that a wall and not a ruin. There are rules for walls that are separate and district from ruins. Your example is indeed, just that, the rules for walls not ruins.

The rules for ruins also state that certain models can only move on the ground floor of a ruin. You assert that ruins cannot have a ground floor. You also assert that ruins rules don't apply to the area of a ruin.

Did I sum up your point properly?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grrrfranky wrote:
[]
]

That's what people keep telling him, but he doesn't seem to be listening, even with the rules spelling out exactly how to treat a ruin.

What is that people keep telling me, that the rules for ruins only apply to the walls? That you only get cover by being obscured?

Please cite where the rules for ruins state this. I can cite where every other piece of terrain says this.

How about answering this. Do the rules for ruins state that the rules apply to the area of the ruins? What does area mean?

I know what people keep posting, however they neglect the citations.

Picture time!

Below, is a ruin. Note the lack of base. It is walls and a second level with a floor. This piece of terrain is not area terrain. It has absolutely no involvement with any of the area terrain rules in the BRB. It provides a 4+ cover save assuming it obscures line of sight between the shooter and the target. Also, the second level floor is not area terrain. If the target is standing on the ground floor, or the second level floor, and the shooter has an unobscured line of sigh to him, this piece of terrain offers zero cover save.



The next image is a ruin with a base. It is treated the exact same as the above ruin, except that the defined base is also area terrain, granting a 5+. The second and third floor, again, are not area terrain. So if the shooter shoots at a target obscured on the ground floor, the target receives a 4+. If the shooter moves around and the target is now in the open and unobscured, it now receives a 5+, since it is standing in area terrain. If the target is on the second or third floor and obscured, 4+. If the target is on the second or third floor and is not obscured, no cover save.

 deviantduck wrote:
Picture time!

Below, is a ruin. Note the lack of base. It is walls and a second level with a floor. This piece of terrain is not area terrain. It has absolutely no involvement with any of the area terrain rules in the BRB. It provides a 4+ cover save assuming it obscures line of sight between the shooter and the target. Also, the second level floor is not area terrain. If the target is standing on the ground floor, or the second level floor, and the shooter has an unobscured line of sigh to him, this piece of terrain offers zero cover save.

Spoiler:

The next image is a ruin with a base. It is treated the exact same as the above ruin, except that the defined base is also area terrain, granting a 5+. The second and third floor, again, are not area terrain. So if the shooter shoots at a target obscured on the ground floor, the target receives a 4+. If the shooter moves around and the target is now in the open and unobscured, it now receives a 5+, since it is standing in area terrain. If the target is on the second or third floor and obscured, 4+. If the target is on the second or third floor and is not obscured, no cover save.

Spoiler:

Please clarify for me, the second floor that you mentioned. What type of terrain is it? What rules for movement do you use when moving horizontally?

Also, how can a biker model be on the ground floor of a ruin? Seriously. How can a model be on something that you claim doesn't exist?

There is no rule stating that ruins aren't area terrain and two very specific instances telling you that they are. Having additional rules do not invalidate the general rules unless the additional rules expressly do so.

Here's a different example of a piece of terrain having additional rules that do not negate it being area terrain: a forest that is a forest, area terrain, difficult terrain, mysterious terrain, and dangerous terrain. ALL AT THE SAME TIME! A shocking concept, I know.

How do you explain the fact that ruins rules expressly say that they apply to the area of the terrain? What do they mean?

Remember that the ruins rules are more specific than the instances saying they are area terrain.

Clearly the "very specific instances telling you that they are" (Area terrain) are talking about the base if it has one, as noted in the full rules for ruins.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Remember that the ruins rules are more specific than the instances saying they are area terrain.

Clearly the "very specific instances telling you that they are" (Area terrain) are talking about the base if it has one, as noted in the full rules for ruins.

Yes, they are more specific. Which one states that aren't area terrain. I have pointed to two instances where they are. Just one will suffice.

A rule stands unless it is specifically countermanded by another rule. Do we agree on this?

There is no countermand to ruins being area terrain.

Yes they are more specific, specifically the ground floor is.

Nothing else is stated as it is area terrain so it is not.

The countermand is that it explains exactly what is area terrain in the ruins rules. no mention of upper floors.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Yes they are more specific, specifically the ground floor is.

Nothing else is stated as it is area terrain so it is not.

The countermand is that it explains exactly what is area terrain in the ruins rules. no mention of upper floors.

So according to you the upper floors are not ruins?

 Idolator wrote:
Please clarify for me, the second floor that you mentioned. What type of terrain is it? What rules for movement do you use when moving horizontally?

All of the upper floors are difficult terrain. 2d6, highest die, like all other difficult terrain.

 Idolator wrote:
Also, how can a biker model be on the ground floor of a ruin? Seriously. How can a model be on something that you claim doesn't exist?

I didn't claim anything doesn't exist, and I don't understand what a biker has to do with anything. The base of a ruin is either a defined base, area terrain, or it is no base, open ground.

 Idolator wrote:
There is no rule stating that ruins aren't area terrain and two very specific instances telling you that they are. Having additional rules do not invalidate the general rules unless the additional rules expressly do so.

True, there isn't a rule stating ruins aren't area terrain, because they're ruins. It would be weird if they listed off all of the things ruins aren't. I just read the area terrain and ruins sections twice. I have no idea what two very specific instances you are referring.

 Idolator wrote:
Here's a different example of a piece of terrain having additional rules that do not negate it being area terrain: a forest that is a forest, area terrain, difficult terrain, mysterious terrain, and dangerous terrain. ALL AT THE SAME TIME! A shocking concept, I know.

That is a great example of something I wasn't talking about.

 Idolator wrote:
How do you explain the fact that ruins rules expressly say that they apply to the area of the terrain? What do they mean?

It means they apply to the physical area of the ruin itself. It applies to the actual model. The area of the terrain is not 'Area Terrain'. It's another example of GW's limited lexicon.

I hate doing multiple quotes so I won't.

So the upper levels are difficult terrain?
Why?

What makes them difficult terrain? Where are the rules stating that they are difficult terrain?

Are they also ruins, or are they something else?

The biker reference is to the moving in ruins section. It relegates certain units, bikers as my example, to the ground level of ruins. You maintain that there are no ground level ruins and that differing levels of ruins don't follow the rules for ruins.

So there is no rule stating that they are anything other than a type of area terrain. There are additional rules, none of which negate the fact that they are listed as area terrain in the area terrain section.

The forest example was just that, another example of a terrain feature that is listed as area terrain that has no rules in the specifics stating that they are area terrain. It is also an example that additional rules do not negate also being another type of terrain.They do have an exception listed stating that they are sometimes not area terrain, which is odd because if we use the logic that it's not ever stated that they are area terrain then this exception would be superfluous.

Yes, area in this instance is actually the appropriate word. It means that the rules apply to the horizontal plane as well as the vertical. If you need help with that horizontal means the flat parts.

Page 98 of the brb under the specific rules for ruins state under "moving within ruins" infantry: "as ruins are difficult terrain..."

They are difficult terrain because the specific rules for ruins say so. Just like everything else in a permissive ruleset, you need explicit permission to do anything, not permission not to.

 BarBoBot wrote:
Page 98 of the brb under the specific rules for ruins state under "moving within ruins" infantry: "as ruins are difficult terrain..."

They are difficult terrain because the specific rules for ruins say so. Just like everything else in a permissive ruleset, you need explicit permission to do anything, not permission not to.

So we have established the the differing levels of a ruin are in fact also ruins.

Now what are the rules for ruins. It's difficult terrain that provides a 4+ cover.

there is no rule stating that you have to be behind them or obscured by them to receive this cover save.

So you would get the cover save for being on the ruin as well as being obscured by it.

All other bits of terrain clearly note that you only get the cover by being obscured. I can find no such statement in the ruins rules.

So, the only difference, using your logic, between ruins and area terrain is that one gives a 5+ cover with a +2 bonus for going to ground, while the other gives a 4+ cover but only gives a +1 for going to ground. Do I have this right?

 Idolator wrote:
So we have established the the differing levels of a ruin are in fact also ruins.

Correct.

 Idolator wrote:
Now what are the rules for ruins. It's difficult terrain that provides a 4+ cover.

Correct.

 Idolator wrote:
there is no rule stating that you have to be behind them or obscured by them to receive this cover save.

Page 18; Paragraph 2 - Determining cover saves

 Idolator wrote:
So you would get the cover save for being on the ruin as well as being obscured by it.

Obscured only, no cover granted for just being inside.

 Idolator wrote:
All other bits of terrain clearly note that you only get the cover by being obscured. I can find no such statement in the ruins rules.

Page 18; Paragraph 2 - Determining cover saves; the rule for other bits of terrain clearly note and apply to ruins. i'm not sure why you are seperating ruins from regular terrain. ruins are a subcatergory of terrain.

 Idolator wrote:
So, the only difference, using your logic, between ruins and area terrain is that one gives a 5+ cover with a +2 bonus for going to ground, while the other gives a 4+ cover but only gives a +1 for going to ground. Do I have this right?

imo, no, 5+/3+; 4+/2+(if the ruins have an area terrain base); but this point has been beaten to death in multiple forums and needs faq'd.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
So we have established the the differing levels of a ruin are in fact also ruins.

Correct.

 Idolator wrote:
Now what are the rules for ruins. It's difficult terrain that provides a 4+ cover.

Correct.

 Idolator wrote:
there is no rule stating that you have to be behind them or obscured by them to receive this cover save.

Page 18; Paragraph 2 - Determining cover saves

 Idolator wrote:
So you would get the cover save for being on the ruin as well as being obscured by it.

Obscured only, no cover granted for just being inside.

 Idolator wrote:
All other bits of terrain clearly note that you only get the cover by being obscured. I can find no such statement in the ruins rules.

Page 18; Paragraph 2 - Determining cover saves; the rule for other bits of terrain clearly note and apply to ruins. i'm not sure why you are seperating ruins from regular terrain. ruins are a subcatergory of terrain.

 Idolator wrote:
So, the only difference, using your logic, between ruins and area terrain is that one gives a 5+ cover with a +2 bonus for going to ground, while the other gives a 4+ cover but only gives a +1 for going to ground. Do I have this right?

imo, no, 5+/3+; 4+/2+(if the ruins have an area terrain base); but this point has been beaten to death in multiple forums and needs faq'd.

So the rules for cover apply, even though they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, because ruins are mentioned in the rules for cover.

Then rules for area terrain do not apply, because they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, even though ruins are mentioned in the rules for area terrain.

Super awesome!!!!!

I wasn't talking about the base in regards to going to ground. I specifically referred to the upper levels. So you addressed a point that I did not make.

i'm glad you're elated.

i thought you meant the base, so yes, upper floors would be +1 for g2g, since it's not area terrain.

 deviantduck wrote:
i'm glad you're elated.

i thought you meant the base, so yes, upper floors would be +1 for g2g, since it's not area terrain.

I'm always elated when a debate opponent reveals the duplicitous nature of their reasoning.
Those two points function in exact opposition to one another.

I now know for certain that I won't sway you in your opinion, because facts, logic and reason don't play a part in your conclusion.

It was fun though.

ROFL!

At least half a dozen posters have proven you wrong, and your insistence on ignoring the specific rules trump general rules and permissive ruleset have shown that you don't have a single bit of evidence to prove your assertion.

You've had your fingers in your ears screaming lalalala this whole time and you claim it's the OTHER side that isn't using facts and logic?

Good one.

 Idolator wrote:

So the rules for cover apply, even though they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, because ruins are mentioned in the rules for cover.
Then rules for area terrain do not apply, because they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, even though ruins are mentioned in the rules for area terrain.

These two lines have nothing to do with each other. I guess you're elated over a false syllogism.

Cover save rules apply to a wide sweeping array of terrain, from a lone tree, a rock, a giant piece of area terrain, or a smattering of ruins(with, or without an area terrain base). So, of course, cover save rules apply to one of the subsets of terrain, ruins. Therefore it isn't needed to mention them in the subset.

Area terrain and ruins are different subsets of the general terrain rules. So area terrain rules have no bearing on any ruin rules and vice versa.

I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make with the second line.

 BarBoBot wrote:
ROFL!

At least half a dozen posters have proven you wrong, and your insistence on ignoring the specific rules trump general rules and permissive ruleset have shown that you don't have a single bit of evidence to prove your assertion.

You've had your fingers in your ears screaming lalalala this whole time and you claim it's the OTHER side that isn't using facts and logic?

Good one.

Your argument has been singular. That ruins can't be area terrain because they don't say so in the area terrain section. Simple.

The rule book it self states that " where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules."

The rules for ruins state that they are applied to the vertical as well as the horizontal. Then state that they are difficult terrain and provide a 4+ cover.

Since it doesn't mention that the model must be concealed or behind a ruin, this overrides the basic rule stating that it model must be 25% obscured.

Also the only rule of area terrain that is overridden is the cover save provided and nothing else.

As there is no contradiction for any of the other rules for area terrain, this would be the only change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Idolator wrote:

So the rules for cover apply, even though they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, because ruins are mentioned in the rules for cover.
Then rules for area terrain do not apply, because they are not mentioned in the rules for ruins, even though ruins are mentioned in the rules for area terrain.

These two lines have nothing to do with each other. I guess you're elated over a false syllogism.

Cover save rules apply to a wide sweeping array of terrain, from a lone tree, a rock, a giant piece of area terrain, or a smattering of ruins(with, or without an area terrain base). So, of course, cover save rules apply to one of the subsets of terrain, ruins. Therefore it isn't needed to mention them in the subset.

Area terrain and ruins are different subsets of the general terrain rules. So area terrain rules have no bearing on any ruin rules and vice versa.

I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make with the second line.

Negative, they are not different subsets. The rules of area terrain list the types of area terrain on pg 90 and 91. Then there are listings of sub sets starting with buildings on pg 92.

Area terrain rules also apply to a wide sweeping conglomeration of subsets of terrain. It even lists four types. Woods, marshes, ruins and other types of rough ground. There for the rules for area terrain apply to those sub-sets and it doesn't need to be mentioned in the subset.

I now understand why you have everything jumbled together.

There is one set, called Battlefield Terrain. It has many subsets. The table of contents breaks it down perfectly.
- Terrain, such as dragon's teeth, razor wire, craters. And has the following rules - open ground, impassable, difficult, dangerous, lethal, area, mysterious.
- Buildings
- Ruins
- Forests
- Water

The subsets may have many of the properties/rules that are listed under the subset Terrain. For example, a building can be impassible, rivers are lethal and open, Ruins can have area tearrain bases.

A Forest may be mysterious and lethal.
A Water may have parts that are open ground.
A Ruin may have parts that is area terrain, but area terrain never has parts of it that are a ruin.

 deviantduck wrote:
I now understand why you have everything jumbled together.

There is one set, called Battlefield Terrain. It has many subsets. The table of contents breaks it down perfectly.
- Terrain, such as dragon's teeth, razor wire, craters. And has the following rules - open ground, impassable, difficult, dangerous, lethal, area, mysterious.
- Buildings
- Ruins
- Forests
- Water

The subsets may have many of the properties/rules that are listed under the subset Terrain. For example, a building can be impassible, rivers are lethal and open, Ruins can have area tearrain bases.

A Forest may be mysterious and lethal.
A Water may have parts that are open ground.
A Ruin may have parts that is area terrain, but area terrain never has parts of it that are a ruin.

The rules for forest states that they are usually area terrain. But provide no rules in the forest subsets for any of them to be area terrain. Can they be area terrain?

Ruins don't need a base to be ruins. So lets ignore whatever base you put them on.
A ruin without a base is still a type of area terrain.

Edit: enough people have looked or are currently looking at this. The real way to end the dispute is to send a simple question to GW.

Are ruins a type of area terrain?

Enough people ask the question...it gets addressed.

If I was wrong...hey, bad on me. I feel that I have nothing to lose and everything to gain by receiving clarity, either way it goes.

The usual statement made by those that are afraid of being wrong is this: "I don't need to ask because I already know."

 Idolator wrote:
The rules for forest states that they are usually area terrain. But provide no rules in the forest subsets for any of them to be area terrain. Can they be area terrain?

Yes. But they don't have to be.

 Idolator wrote:
A ruin without a base is still a type of area terrain.

100% incorrect. There are no 'types' of area terrain. Area terrain is just a rule that can be used by actual types of terrain (General Terrain, Water, Ruins, Forests, Buildings) to determine borders.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
The rules for forest states that they are usually area terrain. But provide no rules in the forest subsets for any of them to be area terrain. Can they be area terrain?

Yes. But they don't have to be.

 Idolator wrote:
A ruin without a base is still a type of area terrain.

100% incorrect. There are no 'types' of area terrain. Area terrain is just a rule that can be used by actual types of terrain (General Terrain, Water, Ruins, Forests, Buildings) to determine borders.

Like I said, I don't hold any aspirations that I can sway your opinion. I made my case, you've made yours.

That's about it.

The only real way to settle the dispute is with a FAQ entry from GW. Here's the link to send the question.

Gamefaqs@gwplc.com

I sent my question in four days ago. It was "Are ruins a type of area terrain?"

Asking can't hurt anything.

Have you read the tenants of YMDC?

Specifically this?

2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs. Emails from Games Workshop are easily spoofed and are notorious for being inconsistent and so should not be relied on.

Emailing GW has no sway in YMDC.

 BarBoBot wrote:
Have you read the tenants of YMDC?

Specifically this?

2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs. Emails from Games Workshop are easily spoofed and are notorious for being inconsistent and so should not be relied on.

Emailing GW has no sway in YMDC.

Unless of course the email address that I gave was not in order to get a direct response.

What if it's the email address that GW uses in order to compile questions that they later address in their FAQs??.?.???.

So, I guess I did follow the tenets. I also gather that email address, since its a source for the questions addressed in their FAQs, does indeed have a lot of sway in YMDC.

So you assumed that it was something that it was not and based on that made an incorrect statement, it's okay.

So here it is again. This is where you submit questions to GW. They may address them in their FAQs.
Gamefaqs@gwplc.com

Notice how f a q is right there in the address!

Here's a great question that they have yet to address: Are ruins a type of area terrain?

Edit: I posted it because there are many people (such as yourself) that didn't know how to submit their questions to GW. It a public service that I provided. Your welcome.