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 this situation came up in a recent Doubles Tournament this weekend

Im using my Space Marines and drop pod my Venerable Dread in a front of the Icarus Quad gun and Aegis line. I deploy my dread on the opposite side of the Drop Pod so Im not facing the Quad Gun thats obviously going to use Intercepter on it. So its Quad gun, drop pod, Dreadnaught in a line for the sake of argument and visualization. So my question then becomes can the Quad gun target/shoot at the Dreadnaught through the drop pod? Per the TO, they gave the option of having my Dread gain a 5+ Cover save and allowing the them to fire through the Drop at my Dread and as the game progressed, there were other incidents where the unit firing behind the Aegis line could only actually see units through the Drop Pod. Im just wondering if this clarification is correct.

The argument brought up by the player shooting through the Drop Pod of how the model is actually constructed came up cause in this case the doors of the drop pod were glued shut, where as in the fluff it says they are blown open so you can actually see throught the other side which is why they could shoot through it. But when then we discussed if a Rhino or Landraider were modelled with the Doors down and you see straight through to model on the other side, they said they couldnt shoot through the Rhino or Land Raider. Im just looking for alittle understanding incase this comes up again the future. Thanks in advance

The game uses TLOS so if you glued to doors up they shouldn't be able to draw LoS.

There is a very common house rule, however, to treat the Drop Pod as open even if glued shut.

@ Rigeid2 you just contradicted yourself with that comment. how would something be open toped if it was completly shut?

Because the rules say it is.
I didn't contradict myself at all. Your refusal to understand the rules has made you assume I've contradicted myself.

drop pods do not block line of sight, once they hit the deck the doors are supposed to be open but the doors are to be ignored for purposes of measurements, LOS and other bits and bobs that involve the vehicle.

they were correct, your dread would recieve the 4+ for 25% (infantry would get the 5+) as your walker is a vehicle and gets the obscured rules for vehicles on the defence vs shooting attacks.

Since a drop pod really should be able to open my local gaming group always allows for LoS to be drawn through drop pods but, as should be obvious, anything you target through a drop pod will get a cover save, ususally we err on a better save. So for your example we would give the dreadnought a 3+ cover save.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
drop pods do not block line of sight, once they hit the deck the doors are supposed to be open but the doors are to be ignored for purposes of measurements, LOS and other bits and bobs that involve the vehicle.

they were correct, your dread would recieve the 4+ for 25% (infantry would get the 5+) as your walker is a vehicle and gets the obscured rules for vehicles on the defence vs shooting attacks.

Obscured isn't 4+ base. That's 5th ed at best.

we play 5+ it doesnt block more than 25% of the facing value unless of course you deploy it in a manner it would cover more that 25%

At our FLGS we also play it as if the doors weren't there, even if they are glued shut.

Helio5287 wrote:
The argument brought up by the player shooting through the Drop Pod of how the model is actually constructed came up cause in this case the doors of the drop pod were glued shut, where as in the fluff it says they are blown open so you can actually see throught the other side which is why they could shoot through it

No, that is not what the rules say at all. The Drop Pod entry notes that the hatches are blown. It does not say blown open anywhere, also that line is fluff and not a rule, unless we are expected to affix explosives or pneumatics to our drop pods to get the hatches "Blown"

 nutty_nutter wrote:
drop pods do not block line of sight,

Yes they do just like everything else in the game. Unless you found a rule stating otherwise, if so Citation please.

once they hit the deck the doors are supposed to be open

This has no basis in the rules. where does it say that the doors are supposed to be open?

but the doors are to be ignored for purposes of measurements, LOS and other bits and bobs that involve the vehicle.

Incorrect again, a Drop pod, like any other vehicle (Or model) will block Line of Sight to things behind the model if it actually blocks Line of Sight.

True Line of Sight is what we use to determine if something is visible to a firing model.

they were correct, your dread would recieve the 4+ for 25% (infantry would get the 5+) as your walker is a vehicle and gets the obscured rules for vehicles on the defence vs shooting attacks.

They were only correct if the dread was actually in Line of Sight.

If the dread was completely out of Line of Sight the gun emplacement would not have been able to fire at the dread at all.

The confusion stems from from the a quarter of a single sentence which states 'doors are blown.'

The side which argue that doors have to be open state that is part of a sequence of events and all steps have to be followed. The first is to place the model of the table, the second is to 'blow the hatches,' the third is to disembark your troops. As the line 'hatches blown' is a step in the sequence, an action has to be taken when you reach this step, and the only 'logical' conclusion to come is that action involves you opening the hatches/doors and putting them in the downward position. This would allow you to draw line of sight clean through the body of the model, with it being very likely that a bead can be drawn but a 25% obscured cover save will be granted.

The side which argues the doors do not have to be open state that the term 'blown open' does not give us any clear instructions to follow, and therefore can not be part of the sequence and is nothing more then 'fluff.' This is because the term 'blown hatches' does not actually contain any instructions detailing how to go about blowing hatches. It doesn't even mention the word open within the sentence in question! Even if it is a sequence of events, as there is no instructions telling the player to do X or Y, that step would simply be checked off as complete as soon as you come to it. Therefore the only thing directing if the doors are opened or closed is if the player places it on the table with them open or closed.

While I feel the 'doors open' is the intent, the 'door closed' side does have a very strong argument.

JinxDragon wrote:
The confusion stems from from the a quarter of a single sentence which states 'doors are blown.'

The side which argue that doors 'have to be open' state that is part of a sequence of events. The first is to place the model of the table, the second is to 'blow the doors' which must clearly indicate they are opened, the third is to disembark your troops. In this interpretation you would be forced to have all four doors down, with line of sight then drawn through the body as it is unlikely to reach 100% obscured with such a deployment.

The side which argues the doors do not have to be open state that the term 'blown open' does not give us any clear instructions. The term 'blown hatches' does not tell us how to go about blowing hatches, it doesn't even mention the word open within the sentence in question. Because it lacks any instructions telling us what to do, technically there is no requirement that the doors have to be opened. Therefore you draw line of sight through the doors and failure to see the target prevents you from wounding it.

While I feel the 'doors open' is the intent, the 'door closed' side does have a very strong argument.

It does not say that though, it never mentions that the doors are blown...

It says the hatches are blown, which is fluff. it is not rule because we are not told to use explosives or Pneumatics to blow the hatches on the drop pod...

I agree with Jinx on this one. It is quite clear that RAI, the doors should be open. But unfortunately the shoddy writting by GW means the doors can remain closed per the RAW.

Now I wouldn't play a person twice that attempted to keep them closed and refused LoS through it....but that's just my preference. :-)

I am not a Space Marine player, but I am very fascinated by Drop Pods and their design.

Personally, I think it would be pretty awesome if the rules worked like this:
1. The controlling player places the drop-pod, determines scatter, etc.
2. The controlling player chooses which of the 5 doors will be open and which will remain closed. Any models in the way of an opened door should be placed on top of it. A door may not open if terrain blocks the door. At least one door must be chosen to be opened.
3. This configuration may not be altered in subsequent turns or phases. Closed doors will block LOS for both players attempting to fire through it, and the weapons inside the drop pod firing outward. A door must either be completely open or completely closed.
4. A unit embarked in the drop pod may disembark from any open door.

DeathReaper,

Call them Doors or Hatches makes no difference, it is the lack of rules telling us how to go about 'blowing' them that is the problem....

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
I agree with Jinx on this one. It is quite clear that RAI, the doors should be open. But unfortunately the shoddy writting by GW means the doors can remain closed per the RAW.

Now I wouldn't play a person twice that attempted to keep them closed and refused LoS through it....but that's just my preference. :-)

So you would not play a person twice that was following the True Line of Sight rules?

Interesting.

If they modeled the doors on their Land raider open and tried to shoot through the opening would you tell them they could not?

How is a Drop pod any different in this situation?

JinxDragon wrote:
DeathReaper,

Call them Doors or Hatches makes no difference, it is the lack of rules telling us how to go about 'blowing' them that is the problem....

No problem at all. Since there is a "lack of rules telling us how to go about 'blowing' them" then that sentence is just fluff.

Fluff is not rules.

When dealing with drop pods you really need to set up some house rules.
They're just too messy otherwise.

I would like to point out one thing though:

Per Drop Pod Assault from the Lucius pattern Drop Pods (please note that this is a FW unit and the following only applies to this unit):

Imperial Armour Apocalypse wrote:Note: As soon as a Drop Pod is deployed, its doors are automatically opened to their full extent.

 Happyjew wrote:
I would like to point out one thing though:

Per Drop Pod Assault from the Lucius pattern Drop Pods (please note that this is a FW unit and the following only applies to this unit):

Imperial Armour Apocalypse wrote:Note: As soon as a Drop Pod is deployed, its doors are automatically opened to their full extent.

So if the doors are glued shut, then their full extent is not moving them at all, since they can't move.

Good to have some guidance on the Forge World model anyway.

There is no permission to assume line of sight if the doors cannot open. RAW the OP's dread was 100% concealed. RAI or HIWPLI is a whole other debate.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I would like to point out one thing though:

Per Drop Pod Assault from the Lucius pattern Drop Pods (please note that this is a FW unit and the following only applies to this unit):

Imperial Armour Apocalypse wrote:Note: As soon as a Drop Pod is deployed, its doors are automatically opened to their full extent.

So if the doors are glued shut, then their full extent is not moving them at all, since they can't move.

Good to have some guidance on the Forge World model anyway.

True, but I would consider that "modeling for advantage" since the assembled, nonconverted model has moveable doors and FW has FAQ the rules on that particular unit to state that the doors should be opened to thier fullest extent.

 wyomingfox wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I would like to point out one thing though:

Per Drop Pod Assault from the Lucius pattern Drop Pods (please note that this is a FW unit and the following only applies to this unit):

Imperial Armour Apocalypse wrote:Note: As soon as a Drop Pod is deployed, its doors are automatically opened to their full extent.

So if the doors are glued shut, then their full extent is not moving them at all, since they can't move.

Good to have some guidance on the Forge World model anyway.

True, but I would consider that "modeling for advantage" since the assembled, nonconverted model has moveable doors and FW has FAQ the rules on that particular unit to state that the doors should be opened to thier fullest extent.

The FW FAQ has no bearing on this however since we're not using the Lucius pattern Drop Pods. I would love to know where it states that you are required to have your doors glue free. Seeing as how no rules have been broken we use TLoS to figure out that since we can't see the dread, we can not interceptor it.

Waiting for the RAW arguement that there is no such thing as modeling for advantage........

There is a reason that most people don't play strick RAW, this is one of them, most people will play that open or not you can see through them.

 wyomingfox wrote:
True, but I would consider that "modeling for advantage" since the assembled, nonconverted model has moveable doors and FW has FAQ the rules on that particular unit to state that the doors should be opened to thier fullest extent.

First, that is not from an FAQ, that is the actual rule from the Drop Pod Assault wording for LDPs.
Second, as I mentioned, this applies only to the LDP and not other Drop Pods, until such a time GW says you must open the doors upon landing.

its considered modeling for an advantage denying your opened a chance to see threw your drop pod. Its like if i built 3 wraith knights and put them in a squatting position so you cant see behind them and its easier to hide him in cover and be able to block line of sight behind him. Also note that the TO ruled you could see threw them this is just for argument sake

 Nettik189 wrote:
its considered modeling for an advantage denying your opened a chance to see threw your drop pod.

Which, of course, is not a rule.

And it is not really MFA, as you can not shoot the weapon inside the pod with the doors closed...

Also note that the TO ruled you could see threw them this is just for argument sake

and that is all well and good for that tournament, of course, the TO went against the RAW when he made that call.

MFA is when you do something knowing its going to impend your opponent(s). If you glue your hatches shut you know your opponent cannot shoot threw them. Hence MFA

Also he was still firing his weapons even though he said we couldnt see threw it.

RAW states the "hatches are blown" its up to the TO to decide the interpretation of the rules and us to follow them.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And it is not really MFA, as you can not shoot the weapon inside the pod with the doors closed...

So if you model it so that you could make a LOS blocker instead of a negligible gun turret that's not modeling it for your advantage?

 DeathReaper wrote:
And it is not really MFA, as you can not shoot the weapon inside the pod with the doors closed...

In my experience, people who model the drop pod with the doors glued shut normally model the gun on the outside as well. Again, there isn't anything illegal in this practice but it does seem to support "modelling for advantage". You are correct that MFA is not RAW, but it is a common HYWPI no-no both in the FGS and the tournie scene.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And it is not really MFA, as you can not shoot the weapon inside the pod with the doors closed...

So if you model it so that you could make a LOS blocker instead of a negligible gun turret that's not modeling it for your advantage?

Opening the doors instead of gluing them shut offers advantages as well...

 Nettik189 wrote:
Also he was still firing his weapons even though he said we couldnt see threw it.

Then he cheated if he said this.

RAW states the "hatches are blown" its up to the TO to decide the interpretation of the rules and us to follow them.

No, that is not at all Rules. That is fluff as there are no rules for having the "Hatches Blown"