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.

Just noticed this and realized that while everybody appears to be using the Expanded terrain rules, nobody is following the rule under Ruins that only Infantry can move through walls, and floors of ruins. IE If your maulerfiend wants to charge a unit standing 2" back from the wall of a ruin. It has to roll high enough to charge all the way around to ruin wall where there is an opening. If the ruin has 4 walls with no opening wide enough it simply cannot charge that unit.

I think with all the debates, and arguments I've seen come up over terrain rules, and what is 50% obscured, etc. At this point to keep the game fun, and fluid I'm just no longer going to use the expanded terrain rules. If it's entirely within terrain it gets cover, and a dreadnaught can charge up 3 levels to assault a squad on the top floor if it wants too. Otherwise the terrain rules seem to be a major problem when trying to have a fair and fluid game.

Just thought I would post this as after several trips to the game store, and watching other people play everybody seems to have unknowingly house ruled that everything can move through the walls of ruins.

That must definitely be a concern localized to your area. Here it is being played as per the rules as written - we saw it from day one and played it as such.

a dreadnaught can charge up 3 levels to assault a squad on the top floor if it wants too. Otherwise the terrain rules seem to be a major problem when trying to have a fair and fluid game.

I'm gonna say no to that, in normal play. Then you're suggesting a Land Raider Crusader could also somehow, go A-Team charging up a skyscraper as well. It's a bit silly. Now, if either the Dreadnought or the Crusader in this case have <FLY>, that's an entirely different story.

A model can be moved in any direction,
to a distance, in inches, equal to or
less than the Move characteristic on its
datasheet. No part of the model’s base
(or hull) can move further than this. It
cannot be moved through other models
or through terrain features such as walls,
but can be moved vertically in order to
climb or traverse any scenery.
If the datasheet for a model says it can
Fly, it can move across models and
terrain as if they were not there.

If the dreadnought however makes a 12" charge move, and the charge move is indeed within 12" vertically, base-to-base to the target unit, the charge is indeed successful provided that

The
first model you move must finish within 1" of an enemy
model from one of the target units. No models in the
charging unit can move within 1" of an enemy unit that
was not a target of its charge. If this is impossible, the
charge fails and no models in the charging unit move
this phase.

With respect to

Wobbly Model
Syndrome
Sometimes you may find
that a particular piece of
terrain makes it hard to
put a model exactly where
you want. If you delicately
balance it in place, it is
very likely to fall as soon
as somebody nudges the
table, leaving your painted
model damaged or even
broken. In cases like this,
we find it is perfectly
acceptable to leave the
model in a safer position,
as long as both players have
agreed and know its ‘actual’
location. If, later on, your
enemy is considering
shooting the model, you
will have to hold it back in
the proper place so they
can check if it is visible.

Which is fluid and mutually agreeable between you and your opponent and the situation. In my humble opinion, if say the 3rd floor of the ruin was 11" off the ground, but was completely full/saturated already with wobbly conscripts say, and the next nearest floor is not even 3" or less* from the nearest enemy base, there's simply no room for the dreadnought to complete the charge.



Seems only fair, even in the 41st millennium, that a player should be able to find SOME situation where they can position themselves in such a way as to not be charged readily.

*From my own fix for this problem here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/735383.page

...how do dreadnaughts climb up buildings?

Watch my game (Chaos vs Space Wolves) on TheBasementCollective's twitch. I make mention of that, moving around my Foetid Bloat-Drone and laughing at how he's "invincible" there, then promptly forget the ENTIRE game that I could pretty much have done the same with just my Infantry!

Overheal wrote:

a dreadnaught can charge up 3 levels to assault a squad on the top floor if it wants too. Otherwise the terrain rules seem to be a major problem when trying to have a fair and fluid game.

If the dreadnought however makes a 12" charge move, and the charge move is indeed within 12" vertically, base-to-base to the target unit, the charge is indeed successful provided that

Vehicles without Fly aren't allowed to go to the 2nd floor of a ruin.

They do a 12" charge vertically up a ruin floor... then stay in the bottom floor and fail their charge because they tried to go somewhere they can't

Sim-Life wrote:...how do dreadnaughts climb up buildings?

They don't

Sim-Life wrote:
...how do dreadnaughts climb up buildings?

Normally a dreadnought would just bring the building down.

This is a good rule. It is completely stupid that things could move through solid walls.

And I know someone is gonna now say 'but certainly a land Raider Could drive through a brick wall?" And perhaps it could. And then the whole building would collapse on top of it and all the sniper scouts in the upper floor would die, and the tank itself would be damaged. Or perhaps it was some metal building that was tank proof. In any case, it's better this way.

Current terrain rules are ridiculous. Terrain and cover are crucial aspects of the game ... And current rules simply neuter both. Fact is that realism is ultimately simpler than unrealistic abstraction. Result being a board game CCG hybrid with monopose models. Eighth edition is turning into a joke. Maybe after two or three iterations of chapter approved rules version 8.5 will be better.

Terrain and their effects do seem to be a common weakness with new rules.

Jeff White is being mainly sarcastic but there is some truth that it will get some attention at least for the more competitive gaming since they will demonstrate how ridiculous some of this is.

 Crimson wrote:
This is a good rule. It is completely stupid that things could move through solid walls.

And I know someone is gonna now say 'but certainly a land Raider Could drive through a brick wall?" And perhaps it could. And then the whole building would collapse on top of it and all the sniper scouts in the upper floor would die, and the tank itself would be damaged. Or perhaps it was some metal building that was tank proof. In any case, it's better this way.

Thanks!
This rule is good as it is and provides infantry a nice advantage.