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.

Hey Guys,

Haven't been able to find a satisfactory answer to this question about 7th Edition rules (sorry if they seem a bit noobish)

How exactly does Cover work for a Monstrous Creature in 7th edition?

Do MC's get the same cover in Terrain as other troops, even when they are as large as the Terrain piece, or even larger? (The answers I've seen seen on this issue have been confusing, some say 25% of MC has to be covered, others say by just being in the Terrain they get full cover)

Also what counts as being in the Terrain? (I've seen Battle Report videos where only a tiny piece of the figure is on the terrain piece, but they get the full cover save, is that correct?)

Both are true. By default any model needs to be 25% covered, but certain terrain pieces such as ruins will provide a certain cover bonus regardless of being 25% obscured. Those are covered at page 105 onwards.

Vechicles have their own rules, but basically it jsut says they need 25% obscurement regardless of being in terrain.

And does that count even if only a small piece of the unit is in the terrain?

Thanks

Check the rules, it only says you need to be in the terrain and boom :pinky toe 4+ cover gargantuan creature

It is considered one of the more ridiculous things in 7th Edition, but that is Rules as Written.

OK, That answers my questions

Thanks guys

 Avinash_Tyagi wrote:
And does that count even if only a small piece of the unit is in the terrain?

Thanks

Model, not unit. It only applies on a model by model basis. If you have 50 Guardsmen, and 49 are in Cover, if a Wound is allocated to #50, he won't get to use Cover to Save himself.

JinxDragon wrote:
It is considered one of the more ridiculous things in 7th Edition, but that is Rules as Written.

An even more interesting or ridiculous question is that can a FMC in its swooping mode (aka. flying high up in the air) gain 4+ cover save of a ruin (eg. a wrecked bunker on the ground) by just having its base touching it?

I have seen interpretation for both sides. A very NICE Nids player in my local had never claim this kind of cover for his flyrants as he think the FMC is flying high and rule said it is not affected by terrain when swooping. But I also saw other batrep that the FMC can have a toe of its base in terrain and take 4+ cover without jinking.....

Neophyte2012 wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
It is considered one of the more ridiculous things in 7th Edition, but that is Rules as Written.

An even more interesting or ridiculous question is that can a FMC in its swooping mode (aka. flying high up in the air) gain 4+ cover save of a ruin (eg. a wrecked bunker on the ground) by just having its base touching it?

I have seen interpretation for both sides. A very NICE Nids player in my local had never claim this kind of cover for his flyrants as he think the FMC is flying high and rule said it is not affected by terrain when swooping. But I also saw other batrep that the FMC can have a toe of its base in terrain and take 4+ cover without jinking.....

I'd never accept this one. FMCs should come with a flying stand.

However it is precisely as per the rules, so you would hae to request a house rule to change it if you do not like it.

Nurgle DPs jinking for a 2+ cover is also horrific.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
However it is precisely as per the rules, so you would hae to request a house rule to change it if you do not like it.

Nurgle DPs jinking for a 2+ cover is also horrific.

Actually I have absolutely no objection for Nurgle DP (swooping) or swooping Flyrant near a Venomthrope to jink to have 2+ cover, or not jinking to have 4+, because under that situation they clearly have "shrounding" (DP come by defualt, flyrant from supporting unit nearby), I also agree that FMC in gilding to have 4+ when touching terrain. But when a swooping FMC is (gaining no special rule such as shrouding/stealth) and not jinking, do terrain still providing cover for them just because their base is touching it? How is the rule written for FMC in this regard?

Atually I like to say if a Flyrant or any other shooty FMC in swooping can have 4+ cover by just have its base touching the terrain, then therotically no flyers other than a Crisom Hunter formation could stand a chance against Flyrant in aerial combat. Cause the naked FMC can get cover to stay alive while not jinking and not sacrifice their fire power. While flyer "MUST" jink to save themselves. But anyway, we should all respect what the rule says.
So, how say?？

nosferatu1001 wrote:
However it is precisely as per the rules, so you would hae to request a house rule to change it if you do not like it.

Nurgle DPs jinking for a 2+ cover is also horrific.

I also don't like it or any gliding FMC jinxing rules wise, but you could imagine a Daemon Prince/FMC charging across the ground at you at full pace! You fire your Railguns at it and with a flap of its powerful wings, it darts to the side. Dodging your shots.

On a related note I've a question on intervening models. Near as I can tell by RAW the mdel just needs to be obscured...not 25%. Am I missing something? Came up the other day when a wraithknight fired into some big nid creature (I think it was the gaunt maker one) that was "behind" some termigaunts.

A termagant can cover an hive fleet rules wise. You don't even need the termagant, just the "space between unit models" is enough to cover whatever you want.
There was some argument about the interpretation of that rule, but then a white dwarf was nice enough to clear up the rule.

Yep, if there is any 3er unit between the firerer and the target, it get cover 5+... even if that 3rd unit was yours... I think... should check that again (friendly unit also confers cover to enemy)...

If you don't mind what exactly did the white dwarf say on the issue?

Similarly, if a model fires through the gaps between models in an intervening unit, the target is in cover, even if it is completely visible to the firer.
Note that this does not apply if the shots go over the unit, either because the firer has an elevated position or is firing a Barrage weapon, rather than through it.
- Intervening Models

There are two ways this debate can form:
1) The plastic model is 100% visible, so it makes no sense to grant it a cover save
2) There is no method to determine the ballistic path of the shot, so it is not possible to determine if it went through a gap or over it

The first is evidence of why common sense can not be used in a Rule debate, as Rules sometime do things that make no damn sense. We must always remember that this is an abstract system, and many times they are trying to create Rules for things the plastic Models can not physically do themselves. In this situation they are trying to represent the fluid of battle, situations where flesh and blood soldiers would be moving in ways that would block the fire-lines for people behind them. Other Rules related to Cover Saves even goes on to mention that the shot itself, the one we just confirmed hit and wounded but was blocked because of Cover, may not have actually been fired because the shooter didn't want to chance hitting a friendly.

The second point is very interesting and if there is something official that better explains 'Elevated position,' or how to determine the path of the shot, I would like to see it as well.

The plastic models are not all the same size and shape, so many instances exist where it is easily possible to plot at least one Line of Sight from the very top of the Firing Model to the very top of the Target Unit in such a way that it will go over any Intervening Models. However, in the same situation the vast majority of Line of Sight plotting might go through the Intervening Unit, particularly if you measure from the bottom of the Firing Model. The lack of something official telling us how to determine elevation of the firming Model or the 'path of the shot' is why debates will always form in this situation. No one knows if a single Line of Sight over is enough, if the majority has to be over or if all of them must be over. The problem is actually a little worse then that, because we are never told Line of Sight represents Line of Shot to begin with.

We are simply trying to hammer that peg through the hole because it is the only peg we have that remotely fits....