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.

Is it possible to place missionsmarkers in buildings? In my flgs they told me that the rules say you cant, but i cant find that rule anywhere.

Mickmann wrote:
Is it possible to place missionsmarkers in buildings? In my flgs they told me that the rules say you cant, but i cant find that rule anywhere.

You mean objectives? The things you fight over and score points?

Yeah, those can be in buildings.Unless the mission you're playing says they cant be.

Yeah sorry, i meant objectives

Thanks for clarification.

Mickmann wrote:
Yeah sorry, i meant objectives

Thanks for clarification.

Usually, exactly where and how the objectives can be placed will be determined in the mission. In some missions, this is just 'put them down some distance away from other objectives" in other missions, it's like "place them exactly here, right in the middle of the board". It's different for each one.

Mickmann wrote:
Is it possible to place missionsmarkers in buildings? In my flgs they told me that the rules say you cant, but i cant find that rule anywhere.

I once played on a table with three guard towers and my opponent put objectives on two them, he then deep struck two culexus on each one. They were out of charge range, couldn't get shot, couldn't be baby smited and gave him d3 VP every turn. terrain can be brutal in w40k sometimes.

There is no rule as far as I am aware preventing objective markers being in ruins etc. As the scotsman pointed out, certain mission types will specify exactly where to place objectives. Others will just require them to be randomly placed a certain distance away from each other etc. All that said, if you are going up against an all Knight list or something on a field with a lot of ruins and what not, hiding all the objective markers you can in places you know the enemy can never reach, is kind of a move. Legal, but not exactly very sporting. In those unique scenarios, it might be best to talk it out with your opponent before hand just to make sure you both can have a fun game.

Mickmann wrote:
In my flgs they told me that the rules say you cant, but i cant find that rule anywhere.

Any time someone references a rule, ask them to show you.

Yep. I've had this happen multiple times at majors / LVO.

And it's a good thing. Setups like this discourage lists like the cancerous 7-Eldar-Flyer list. They also punish lists that build ENTIRELY to shoot their opponent off of the table.

Mickmann wrote:
Is it possible to place missionsmarkers in buildings? In my flgs they told me that the rules say you cant, but i cant find that rule anywhere.

That's not a GW rule, but an ITC rule. It's just so commonly adopted most don't know it's origin.

Isn't the ITC rule that you can't place objectives on any floor except the ground floor of a building? So, you can put an objective in a building. It just has to be on the table rather than on some floor of the building.

ITC objectives can be placed in buildings, they just must be on the ground floor and must not be in entirely enclosed buildings.

It's worth pointing out that in the CA2018 msisions they have you put the objective markers down before setting up terrain, so in this case you can't put them in buildings as there aren't any at that point.

Of course, most people tend to ignore this for obvious reasons.

The funniest thing is: this question came up after a game in an urban conquest campaign. The mission we played had an objective called something like "the highest buildings" or something, and gave you d3 points when you controlled the two highest objectives (furthest away from ground level).

When talking about that game in my flgs i was told that you can never ever place objectives within 3" of any terrain. I asked where I can find that rule, and was told "that's somewhere in one of their errata"....


I think the biggest problem though is people at my flgs think its unfair to use such exotic units as scouts to get an advantage in city fight scenarios.

Mickmann wrote:
The funniest thing is: this question came up after a game in an urban conquest campaign. The mission we played had an objective called something like "the highest buildings" or something, and gave you d3 points when you controlled the two highest objectives (furthest away from ground level).

When talking about that game in my flgs i was told that you can never ever place objectives within 3" of any terrain. I asked where I can find that rule, and was told "that's somewhere in one of their errata"....


I think the biggest problem though is people at my flgs think its unfair to use such exotic units as scouts to get an advantage in city fight scenarios.

Ehm, wait what?
urban conquest and no objecive markers in buildings?

I erm how to put it, is the population of your FLGS a bit daft? "the highest buildings" because that here just screams at you to put the marker on the highest point/ needs to be in Terrain since the average table is completely flat without terrain!

My FLGS basically is *ruled* by some guy. Whatever that guy tells them will be done. If that guy says "imperial guard is too strong, thats why they errata'd em to start with 3 cp less than anyone else", guys at my FLGS wont even care to look in the errata if thats true. If he tells them, objectives cant be in buildings, then they will believe him.



Must be a reason why I prefer playing @home with friends.

Mickmann wrote:
My FLGS basically is *ruled* by some guy. Whatever that guy tells them will be done. If that guy says "imperial guard is too strong, thats why they errata'd em to start with 3 cp less than anyone else", guys at my FLGS wont even care to look in the errata if thats true. If he tells them, objectives cant be in buildings, then they will believe him.



Must be a reason why I prefer playing @home with friends.

I honestly get the urge now to go to your FLG's and troll the poor sod with printed out erratas, etc.

Also CP reduction is the last thing Guard would care about

Not Online!!! wrote:

Also CP reduction is the last thing Guard would care about

That's just an example. My guess is they dont place objectives on buildings because his thunderwolf cavalary just cant get up there...

Mickmann wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Also CP reduction is the last thing Guard would care about

That's just an example. My guess is they dont place objectives on buildings because his thunderwolf cavalary just cant get up there...

Now that is just sad, should i also state that my R&H army get's a 500pts handicap since it is so bad and that that totally is within an Errata somewhere?

Mickmann wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Also CP reduction is the last thing Guard would care about

That's just an example. My guess is they dont place objectives on buildings because his thunderwolf cavalary just cant get up there...

Well, I suppose it is a rule from *somewhere* just not the actual rules of the game - it's a rule from a commonly used tournament ruleset in the USA (at least, I think ITC is only USA?). And the rule isn't that you cannot place them in buildings at all, it's that you have to place them on the ground floor.

At my FLGS we use a different house rule, where we say that all objectives have infinite height, so you can secure them if you are underneath them. That lets us plce them always on the tops of buildings, so players can always see where they are and they don't get hidden underneath.

 Imateria wrote:
It's worth pointing out that in the CA2018 msisions they have you put the objective markers down before setting up terrain, so in this case you can't put them in buildings as there aren't any at that point.

Of course, most people tend to ignore this for obvious reasons.

Yes, those rules are a bit stupid but we use a variation which puts markers down after terrain but limits them to the ground floor, which still captures the intent of the rule. Under those rules you could still have a marker inside a building, on the ground floor.

Quick tip for the OP: if your FLGS is ruled by someone who seems to be TFG my experience has been that you're going to want to try to persuade others who play there to start ignoring TFGs advice and proclamations. These situations tend to end up with a toxic clique that is actively hostile to outsiders. Of course, if you already have plenty of people to play against away form the store you might not care too much about that.

"hostile to outsiders" is the perfect description. It's all nice and good until you say something about how they play.

I can remember a 2on2 Match i had in that flgs back im 7th. my ally was using his imperial knight's invul save in melee, so i told him that the invul was only against shooting. His reaction was shooting at me and calling me a bad sportsman, because i "was only there to ruin his game". So he took his army and left the table. That was the first experience i had with the guy who today is more or less the ruler of our flgs.

Just to let you know what kind of "that guy" he is.

The next time he complains about his rules vs the book rules just tell him "Oh, I thought you wanted to play 40K. I didn't know that you were playing a game that you wrote."

The worst thing that would happen is he bans you from the store (somehow). Based on what you've written it wouldn't be a big loss.

This guy sounds like he just needs somebody to actually challenge his attitude. It's one thing to declare you're changing the rules of the game (house rules have existed as long as games have) but it's completely different to claim your made-up BS is actually an official rule. Another possible route to take is to speak to the store owner. If you point out to him that you, and possibly other gamers you have spoken to, are being driven away from playing at the store by this guy, the owner might step in. If you're not playing in the store you're not spending money in the store.

Of course, many store owners are actually terrible business people and often encourage TFG behaviour and cliques instead of stamping it out but hopefully your FLGS owner is one of the sensible ones.

Mickmann wrote:
"hostile to outsiders" is the perfect description. It's all nice and good until you say something about how they play.

I can remember a 2on2 Match i had in that flgs back im 7th. my ally was using his imperial knight's invul save in melee, so i told him that the invul was only against shooting. His reaction was shooting at me and calling me a bad sportsman, because i "was only there to ruin his game". So he took his army and left the table. That was the first experience i had with the guy who today is more or less the ruler of our flgs.

Just to let you know what kind of "that guy" he is.

Well, next time state that you want to play 40k and not a:
" Märli abhandlig nach sinem Gusto woner a de brüeder Grimm stecke cha "

Yes you can quote me, for those not mighty of the middle german
"not a folktale after his taste that he could sell to the brothers Grimm"
Or basically stop beeing a bloddy lier for personal advantage.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Well, next time state that you want to play 40k and not a:
" Märli abhandlig nach sinem Gusto woner a de brüeder Grimm stecke cha "

Yes you can quote me, for those not mighty of the middle german
"not a folktale after his taste that he could sell to the brothers Grimm"
Or basically stop beeing a bloddy lier for personal advantage.

Actually, I am a german native speaker. Your quote just saved my day

Mickmann wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Well, next time state that you want to play 40k and not a:
" Märli abhandlig nach sinem Gusto woner a de brüeder Grimm stecke cha "

Yes you can quote me, for those not mighty of the middle german
"not a folktale after his taste that he could sell to the brothers Grimm"
Or basically stop beeing a bloddy lier for personal advantage.

Actually, I am a german native speaker. Your quote just saved my day

i know, therefore i said it in german, well middle german allemanic dialect since homo sapiens alpinis, but it was my intention to please.