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.

Had a game today wherein my Land Raider drove up and over a ruin to reach an objective. Rolled for dangerous terrain, all good. The next turn, I tried to pivot to get LoS on some nearby enemy Ravenwing bikes. Rolled for dangerous terrain again, all good.
My opponent had no argument against the LR driving over the ruin in the beginning, but when I pivoted it and left it in the wonky final position pictured below it was brought up that vehicles shouldn't be able to do that.

Question is, anything in the rules in 7th declare whether a vehicle can or cannot move in/over/through ruins?
Thanks.

The picture isn't loading but it doesn't matter because everything can go up the floors of ruins in 7ed because they removed all of the restrictions that had prevented vehicles (and other unit types like bikes) from doing so.

I do believe the rule "Wobbly Model Syndrome" on pg 20, MWB (Medium White Book) apply here. So, yeah, feel free to "park" your lander raider on the 5th floor of that ruin that only has space for a 25mm base. Because, you know, forging the narrative is more important that good rules design.

This pic just makes me lol

Sorry, fixed the img!

Levels don't exist anymore, so it's all fair game, apparently.
Terrible oversight in7th edition. The 6th edition rules for levels and ruins were good.

Speaking of oversights, a player at the FLGS is arguing that the rule that you can be "under" a friendly flier, that means you can stand on it's base as well, since that is considered under it, and the base doesn't count for fliers.

In order to fix this in the future I recommend evoking a very broken rule:
Scratch Built Terrain.

The Rules not only grant us permission to make Datasheets for Terrain, they actually require us to do so. So if we where to field the terrain as '6th Edition Terrain,' or anything bar the name on the standard Datasheet, it would allow us to place any Rule we want onto it. Much recommendation is given to using the literal name of '6th Edition Ruins' and putting all the old Ruin rules back into play, entirely legal by Rule as Written. Now we do advise not being 'that ******* guy' and to discuss this with one's opponent before using the Datasheet in question, but that should be a given.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Levels don't exist anymore, so it's all fair game, apparently.
Terrible oversight in7th edition. The 6th edition rules for levels and ruins were good.

Speaking of oversights, a player at the FLGS is arguing that the rule that you can be "under" a friendly flier, that means you can stand on it's base as well, since that is considered under it, and the base doesn't count for fliers.

The part about the bases do not count is for Flyers and Measuring.

So you ignore a flyers base when measuring, except for the two situations listed, but you do not ignore the base for anything else.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Levels don't exist anymore, so it's all fair game, apparently.
Terrible oversight in7th edition. The 6th edition rules for levels and ruins were good.

Speaking of oversights, a player at the FLGS is arguing that the rule that you can be "under" a friendly flier, that means you can stand on it's base as well, since that is considered under it, and the base doesn't count for fliers.

The part about the bases do not count is for Flyers and Measuring.

So you ignore a flyers base when measuring, except for the two situations listed, but you do not ignore the base for anything else.

Yeah, and the other nifty thing about flyer bases is that you can move over them as well. Heck, you can charge through them if you want to!

Yeah seems like a fair bit of oversight when it comes to terrain in 7th.

So to be clear, Land Raiders SHOULDN'T but CAN climb ruins, yes?

 Laughingcarp wrote:
Yeah seems like a fair bit of oversight when it comes to terrain in 7th.

So to be clear, Land Raiders SHOULDN'T but CAN climb ruins, yes?

I'd clarify the question. Climbing into a higher level of a ruin where theres space, obviously no issue. but should they be able to WMS/balance in hilarious positions they could never actually drive themselves into? (Sadly for immersion, I think this is a yes)

 Tamwulf wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Levels don't exist anymore, so it's all fair game, apparently.
Terrible oversight in7th edition. The 6th edition rules for levels and ruins were good.

Speaking of oversights, a player at the FLGS is arguing that the rule that you can be "under" a friendly flier, that means you can stand on it's base as well, since that is considered under it, and the base doesn't count for fliers.

The part about the bases do not count is for Flyers and Measuring.

So you ignore a flyers base when measuring, except for the two situations listed, but you do not ignore the base for anything else.

Yeah, and the other nifty thing about flyer bases is that you can move over them as well. Heck, you can charge through them if you want to!

No you can not move over them, unless you have a rules allowance that says you can, care to cite that rule?

This is the kind of situation that you and your opponent will have to agree on before the game. I suggest you come up with a list of terrain possibilities to discuss with your opponents.

For example, with my friends the rules for Ruins have a few additions: the walls use the rules for Barricades and Walls; each "floor" of the ruin above ground level is treated as Impassable Terrain for vehicles; and use the rules for placing templates and blast markers within the Ruin from Cities of Death.

In my meta we just call a ruin a 4+ area terrain and move the walls as needed. Fluffwise, no reason to not to ram a landraider through a wall and climb the rubble so I'd be fine with it, as long as you don't immobilize yourself.

Wicked thanks for all the replies folks.

Just for a laugh:
Back in 6th Edition I put together a massive argument on why Vehicles such as Land-Raiders could not 'Embark into Battlements,' this was back when you Embarked into the things. That argument was based around the fact Battlements at the time used rules for Buildings, and we where forbidden from Embarking Tanks into Buildings. Then one of the posters here, Insanak I want to say, pointed out the existence of the Frequently Asked Questions. Within one was a single entry, not even addressing Embarking into Battlements but the cover save granted, that had some very unfortunate wording. The effect of that wording was to strip the Building status from Battlements completely.

At that point there was nothing denying a Tank from moving up to the Battlements access point and then Embarking, access points that often looked like ladders on the physical pieces....
So I spent the rest of the day screaming about Tanks climbing Ladders.

I don't think I've seen a better reason yet to use 6th ed ruin rules.

JinxDragon wrote:
In order to fix this in the future I recommend evoking a very broken rule:
Scratch Built Terrain.

The Rules not only grant us permission to make Datasheets for Terrain, they actually require us to do so. So if we where to field the terrain as '6th Edition Terrain,' or anything bar the name on the standard Datasheet, it would allow us to place any Rule we want onto it. Much recommendation is given to using the literal name of '6th Edition Ruins' and putting all the old Ruin rules back into play, entirely legal by Rule as Written. Now we do advise not being 'that ******* guy' and to discuss this with one's opponent before using the Datasheet in question, but that should be a given.

This is such a simple an brilliant fix for terrain.

i remember reading something in the oldoldfantasy rulebook that gave us an idea...it went something along the lines ofyou can demonstrate combat damage ofdestroyed walls by taking a 2 lb sledgehammer to the model or you can mark it temporarily in some way to demonstrate the damage and play the game as though that section is not there".
in this case, you could have taken a pairof pliars and destroyed your terraign piece to demonstrate the land raider rolling up the slope of debri that led to the second floor (much as our tanks and motercycles and so forth can and do today or you can place it as close as you can. Look at the ruins. They are all destroye and torn up, but you dont see the piles of furniture and the rubble from the destroyed sections. This is one of the ways in which the rules allow for it to be deonstrated in the rules if not on the battlesfield. If the buildings and rubble were as they would actually be, much of it would be useless or innaccessible to us as players in terms of model placement and movement.

I do the personal rule of cats. "If i fits i sits" as silly as it is it pretty much sums up wobbly model thingy someone else pointed out. Spyders being spyders on some ruins is great

Oberron wrote:
I do the personal rule of cats. "If i fits i sits" as silly as it is it pretty much sums up wobbly model thingy someone else pointed out. Spyders being spyders on some ruins is great

This.

JinxDragon wrote:
In order to fix this in the future I recommend evoking a very broken rule:
Scratch Built Terrain.

The Rules not only grant us permission to make Datasheets for Terrain, they actually require us to do so. So if we where to field the terrain as '6th Edition Terrain,' or anything bar the name on the standard Datasheet, it would allow us to place any Rule we want onto it. Much recommendation is given to using the literal name of '6th Edition Ruins' and putting all the old Ruin rules back into play, entirely legal by Rule as Written. Now we do advise not being 'that ******* guy' and to discuss this with one's opponent before using the Datasheet in question, but that should be a given.

This is the best solution I've ever heard of. Exalted, good sir.

I'm in love with that Rule, it is as broken as hell but it is so very useful that I can give that a pass.
Besides it is never going to be an issue at the Table, no one will play with the person who plops down a AV 20, Primary 4, Strength-D, Large Blast "Weapon Platform" before trying to claim you must play with it.