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.

 Idolator wrote:
so the unique rules no longer apply?

No, the unique rules are listed after the terrain type.

You're still confusing just what the unique rules do. If you're creating your own terrain, then as per the unique rules you sort it out with your opponent. If you are using a piece of pre-made terrain that is classed as unique, the rules unique to that terrain piece are listed on the dataslate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hydrapup wrote:
Yeah im with you with that... but I don't see the need to even raise the issue

You need to raise the issue simply because it's just one of several issues with how the skyshield works that is resolved by the same fix.

I mean if there were models underneath a bridge would people play that a barage blast goes through the bridge hitting models underneath and perhaps on top also regardless of the height of the bridge....

Unless you agree to count the brisdge as having multiple levels as if it was a ruin, yes, that's how the rules work, so that's how it should be played.

Sometimes, the rules don't make a lot of real-world sense. There are any number of examples throughout the rules where something is abstracted for the sake of gameplay.

I think there is plenty enough precedent to say the RAW is that you must be able to see what is under the template and so if you can't see it from above you can't hit it.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
I think there is plenty enough precedent to say the RAW is that you must be able to see what is under the template and so if you can't see it from above you can't hit it.

By that reasoning, though, you would never be able to target the units under the pad with blasts or templates at all.

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
I think there is plenty enough precedent to say the RAW is that you must be able to see what is under the template and so if you can't see it from above you can't hit it.

By that reasoning, though, you would never be able to target the units under the pad with blasts or templates at all.

Very true. RAW means you can't, if we follow them explicitly.

Good old RAW!

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
so the unique rules no longer apply?

No, the unique rules are listed after the terrain type.

You're still confusing just what the unique rules do. If you're creating your own terrain, then as per the unique rules you sort it out with your opponent. If you are using a piece of pre-made terrain that is classed as unique, the rules unique to that terrain piece are listed on the dataslate.

Insaniak answered it as well as I could.

The rules for the unique Skyshield are literally printed in the sentences following Terrain Type: Unique.

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
I think there is plenty enough precedent to say the RAW is that you must be able to see what is under the template and so if you can't see it from above you can't hit it.

By that reasoning, though, you would never be able to target the units under the pad with blasts or templates at all.

No not really. The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above. The same reasoning applies to being able to shoot from a unit underneath the skyshield. You must be able to trace a line from sight to the models' eyes but you cannot practially get your head under the shield to do so.

The rule is to "see" what is under the template, the practicalities of determining that will vary.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

The allowance is made when you can't see the template, not when you can't see anything underneath it.

Uptopdownunder wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

The allowance is made when you can't see the template, not when you can't see anything underneath it.

But you can see the blast marker, just look under the Skyshield...

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

The allowance is made when you can't see the template, not when you can't see anything underneath it.

But you can see the blast marker, just look under the Skyshield...

Then there isn't a problem.

Uptopdownunder wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The template can still be placed over a model underneath the skyshield and allowance made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

The allowance is made when you can't see the template, not when you can't see anything underneath it.

But you can see the blast marker, just look under the Skyshield...

Then there isn't a problem.

You can see the blast marker, you can always see the blast marker. However that does not mean you can determine who is under the blast marker. So an allowance needs to be made for not being able to practically see the template from above.

 insaniak wrote:
So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

So you're asking why if you make an allowance for not being able to see the template from above when you can't see it from above that you don't make an allowance for not being able to see the template from above when you can see it from above..........

If you can't see why that is so I very much doubt that anything I can say will help you work out why you don't make an allowance for a situation when that situation isn't the situation.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
So you're asking why if you make an allowance for not being able to see the template from above when you can't see it from above that you don't make an allowance for not being able to see the template from above when you can see it from above..........

No, I am not asking that at all.

I am saying that In both cases you need to come up with a way to see how many models are under the blast marker.

If the marker is under the Skyshield we can not look down through the marker because the Skyshield is in the way so we can not determine how many models under the Skyshield are hit. In this case we need to find a way to count up how many models are under the marker.

in the case of the marker being above the Skyshield we can not look down through the marker because the Skyshield is in the way so we can not determine how many models under the Skyshield are hit. In this case we also need to find a way to count up how many models are under the marker.

 insaniak wrote:
So why wouldn't you make that same allowance when the template is held above the skyshield?

Because the RAW is clear that the marker causes a hit on every model under the marker after its final position has been determined. How we go about finding this out with a terrain feature like the Skyshield or even a bridge over a river that has models on top of and underneath the bridge, takes some allowances as you can not normally see through solid objects without the aid of a Backscatter X-Ray device.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
so the unique rules no longer apply?

No, the unique rules are listed after the terrain type.

You're still confusing just what the unique rules do. If you're creating your own terrain, then as per the unique rules you sort it out with your opponent. If you are using a piece of pre-made terrain that is classed as unique, the rules unique to that terrain piece are listed on the dataslate.

Insaniak answered it as well as I could.

The rules for the unique Skyshield are literally printed in the sentences following Terrain Type: Unique.

So, going by the list of fortification rules which state:
Terrain type: This tells you what part of the terrain rules you'll need to refer to when using your fortification. This can be anything from a line of barricades to a large building. Pg 114

So the terrain type listed tells us three things. 1. The terrain type is unique and follows all the rules for unique terrain 2. The top surface is open terrain. 3. Moving onto or off the landing pad counts as moving through difficult terrain.

It's so cool. It tells us to reference Unique terrain, Open ground, and difficult terrain.

Three different sentences that stand alone. The word unique is not followed by a colon nor is it bolded nor is it a bullet point with further rules. The words terrain type are followed by a colon are bolded, all three sentences are stand alone and are attributed to the terrain type.

If you are to follow the rules as written, you must refer back to the rules for unique terrain. You then have to follow those rules when using a piece of unique terrain. Those rules don't just allow, they encourage you to make unique terrain to your liking. You can house rule that it has no more than what is written, you can house rule it to make some form of sense, or you could make it what ever else you wanted and still be following the rules. YAY!

Edit: just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

The only allowance that needs be made is when the template is targetted under the shield but your head isn't small enough to fit between the shield and the template and be able to look down on the template from above.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

The only allowance that needs be made is when the template is targetted under the shield but your head isn't small enough to fit between the shield and the template and be able to look down on the template from above.

I edited this in my last post, but I thought that it would make a good companion to this fellows post.

just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

(Emphasis mine)

Citation needed for the underlined.

I do not see that entry in my rule book anywhere.

 Idolator wrote:
I edited this in my last post, but I thought that it would make a good companion to this fellows post.

just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

You do not need to move the Skyshield at all, there are ways of taking "a good look from above" without moving it.

Mirrors or a camera would do the trick.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

(Emphasis mine)

Citation needed for the underlined.

I do not see that entry in my rule book anywhere.

 Idolator wrote:
I edited this in my last post, but I thought that it would make a good companion to this fellows post.

just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

You do not need to move the Skyshield at all, there are ways of taking "a good look from above" without moving it.

Mirrors or a camera would do the trick.

Can you cite the rules that allow the use of a mirror or camera? Heck could you even explain the physics of it?

 Idolator wrote:
So the terrain type listed tells us three things. 1. The terrain type is unique and follows all the rules for unique terrain

...which are that you make it up with your opponent, unless it's a piece of pre-made Unique terrain in which case the rules for that terrain piece are on the datasheet...

Those rules don't just allow, they encourage you to make unique terrain to your liking.

Unless it is a pre-made terrain piece, in which case the rules for it are on the datasheet.

Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits.

Yes, I already mentioned that.

Apparently, the answer is that you can ignore that the skyshield is there, but only sometimes.

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
So the terrain type listed tells us three things. 1. The terrain type is unique and follows all the rules for unique terrain

...which are that you make it up with your opponent, unless it's a piece of pre-made Unique terrain in which case the rules for that terrain piece are on the datasheet...

Those rules don't just allow, they encourage you to make unique terrain to your liking.

Unless it is a pre-made terrain piece, in which case the rules for it are on the datasheet.

Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits.

Yes, I already mentioned that.

Apparently, the answer is that you can ignore that the skyshield is there, but only sometimes.

So, since the rules tell us the manner in which we must decide who is or is not under a template the rules as written prevent any hits from a blast template to be allocated to a unit underneath a skyshield landing pad.

While I do agree that all the rules needed to play that piece of terrain are indeed on that datasheet, it is only due to the inclusion of...Terrain type:unique. Which directs you back the rules for unique terrain and how to handle unique terrain, which is wholly up to the players.

 Idolator wrote:
Which directs you back the rules for unique terrain and how to handle unique terrain, which is wholly up to the players.

...unless the terrain in question is a premade terrain piece, in which case you just refer to the datasheet.

Seriously, go back and have another read of the last paragraph in the Unique Terrain section.

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
Which directs you back the rules for unique terrain and how to handle unique terrain, which is wholly up to the players.

...unless the terrain in question is a premade terrain piece, in which case you just refer to the datasheet.

Seriously, go back and have another read of the last paragraph in the Unique Terrain section.

When you use an imperial bastion, do you use all the listed rules for buildings or do you just use the rules listed for medium buildings (armor 14)?

I'm guessing that you use them all.

It's the same for unique terrain. You use all the rules for unique terrain.

It's a standard "catch all" rule. It's literally impossible to have missing rules to play if the terrain type is listed as UNIQUE. Everything after the terrain type could be ink stains and chicken scratch and it would still have all the rules needed to play.

 Idolator wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

(Emphasis mine)

Citation needed for the underlined.

I do not see that entry in my rule book anywhere.

 Idolator wrote:
I edited this in my last post, but I thought that it would make a good companion to this fellows post.

just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

You do not need to move the Skyshield at all, there are ways of taking "a good look from above" without moving it.

Mirrors or a camera would do the trick.

Can you cite the rules that allow the use of a mirror or camera? Heck could you even explain the physics of it?

Yes, you cited them...

"take a good look from above"

A mirror would give you "a good look from above" as would a camera.

Because using the naked eye would not give you "a good look from above" in the skyshield's case as it covers the marker that is under it.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Idolator wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

(Emphasis mine)

Citation needed for the underlined.

I do not see that entry in my rule book anywhere.

 Idolator wrote:
I edited this in my last post, but I thought that it would make a good companion to this fellows post.

just for funzies I went back and looked at the rules for blast. It tells you that once you have determined the final position of the blast marker to "take a good look from above" and each model suffers a hit if covered or partially covered. Now, since you cannot determine which (or even if any) models under the sky shield are covered or partially covered by looking at it from above, there is no way to even assign hits. You would have to move the sky shield off of the table to make this determination. Could someone give me the rule for removing a piece of unique terrain?

You do not need to move the Skyshield at all, there are ways of taking "a good look from above" without moving it.

Mirrors or a camera would do the trick.

Can you cite the rules that allow the use of a mirror or camera? Heck could you even explain the physics of it?

Yes, you cited them...

"take a good look from above"

A mirror would give you "a good look from above" as would a camera.

Because using the naked eye would not give you "a good look from above" in the skyshield's case as it covers the marker that is under it.

Take a good look from above =/= use a device to determine.
You're the one that always calls it a permissive rule set and claim that something must be written to use or act. There is a list of devices that you may use to play the game. There's permissions to use dice, tape measures, measuring stick, models, terrain features, templates, paint and even your eyes! But no cameras or mirrors.

Edit: The physicality seems to be a bit of a difficulty for you. See, you have to use the final position of the template. Meaning that you would have to hold the template above the the landing pad while simultaneously holding a mirror above the guys underneath. Now a mirror or a camera will indeed confirm the fact that, "YES! There are models underneath the landing pad!" it in no way informs you to the positioning of the template in relation to said models.

So your reasoning doesn't just fail the "permissive rules" test, it fails at viable existence.

 Idolator wrote:
Take a good look from above =/= use a device to determine.

It does when there is a Skyshield blocking your view.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
Take a good look from above =/= use a device to determine.

It does when there is a Skyshield blocking your view.

Still having problems with that whole physical possibility part, I see.

Heck, still having problems with the Rules as Written part too! As you can't state that mirrors or camera use is written into the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A fellow( maybe the only fellow whose opinion that you respect) wrote this.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Permissive ruleset is the correct term.

However, the fact remains that you may only do things you are expressly allowed to do and you are not allowed to do anything else. this is undeniably true no matter how many times you say it is not.

This is true no matter what you think. All games ever use a permissive rules set, because that's literally the only way to write games. .

I say MAYBE the only fellows opinion that you respect because you have disagreed with this guys assertions before.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Uptopdownunder wrote:
You won't need an allowance when the template is targetted above the skyshield because the blast only hits models that are under the template and can be seen to be so. The skyshield itself blocks the models underneath from being seen and therefor hit.

(Emphasis mine)

Citation needed for the underlined.

I do not see that entry in my rule book anywhere.

"take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker"

Take a "good look" does not require them to be seen - the actual rule is "beneath the blast marker" - however you determine that is valid.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Take a "good look" does not require them to be seen

I must visit your Universe some time, it sounds like a hoot.

Insulting again? Useful. Oh, and seelctive quoting. A GREAT tactic to remove context from an argument.

The actual rule is pretty clear - are tehy beneath the marker? Yes or No?

Found a rules argument yet?