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.

This must have been answered elsewhere, but I can't find anything in this forum or on the wider web.

When does a unit count as being "entirely within" a terrain piece? And must the unit be "entirely within" to gain the bonus to its save?

On the one hand, the rulebook states that models must be "entirely within" the terrain piece to gain the bonus. This seems clear enough -- every part of the model must be within the confines of the terrain. (Then there the special types of terrain, but let's leave them out of this.)

However, the Rulebook errata, on page 4, contains this bit of... commentary (FAQ? Something? These documents are abominably organized and poorly defined):

Q: When determining whether a model benefits from cover, does
the model’s entire unit need to be fully on or within terrain, or
just the model making a particular saving throw?

A: All of the models in a unit need to be at least partially
on or within terrain if any of the models are to receive
the +1 bonus to their saving throw.

Yet page 7 contains this:

Q: Can you clarify what the difference is between ‘wholly within’
and ‘within’ for rules purposes?

A: If a rule says it affects models that are ‘wholly within’
then it only applies if every part of the model’s base (or
hull) is within. If a rule says it affects models that are
‘within’, however, then it applies so long as any part of the
model’s base (or hull) is within.

The first comment redefines "entirely within" to mean "every model in the unit is touching terrain." So as long as even a tiny portion of the model's base/hull/whatever is in terrain it gets the bonus. Yet the second comment reinforces the meaning used in the rulebook, requiring the whole base/hull/whatever to be in terrain. Both comments are clear, but in opposition to each other.

How should this be played? Does the second comment provide a general definition of "entirely within," while the first provides an exception for terrain? Is one of them a mistake? Are they both mistakes? Is there some other document somewhere that contains the actual rule?

The rulebook says "If a unit is entirely on or within any terrain feature..." Not if a model is. (Page 7 Battle Primer)


For the FAQ's:

Page 7, right column, first entry.

Also Page 2 right column, 2nd to last entry.


Basically if a unit needs to be "entirely within" the terrain piece to gain the bonus. then all models must be at least touching the terrain piece.

If a model needs to be "entirely within" the terrain piece to gain the bonus, then that model can not be partially within

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/30ead283.pdf

Your getting to a point of contention obviously, but it seems that any time they mention "Wholly within" in any form of context they are talking about certain aura abilities that models have to be completely inside the range of.

"Entirely within" only deals with units of models and terrain. It isn't mentioned for anything else to my knowledge. It could be also used for disembarking ranges I suppose but I cant remember exactly.

"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

This is the conclusion I am inclined to as well, but it leads to several ridiculous outcomes. (I say this not to argue with you, but to further ruminate on the problem.)

1) "Within" and "wholly within" are different terms; well and good. "Entirely within," despite being much closer in meaning to "wholly," instead means "every model at least partially within." Fair enough, I suppose, though this is inferred from the FAQ rather than stated outright.

2) When dealing with generic terrain, even a titan will gain a cover bonus if its toe is touching the terrain. If your Land Raider is nudging a puddle it gets +1. And so on.

3) Generic terrain and most Battlefield Terrain is "entirely within," except for forests which are "wholly within." Suck it, trees.

This result is counter-intuitive, to say the least, which leads me to think it must be the product of error. There are good reasons to define "within," "wholly within," and "entirely within" in the way they appear to be defined in the FAQ, but this makes generic terrain vastly more useful than Battlefield Terrain for non-infantry models.

 Saber wrote:

2) When dealing with generic terrain, even a titan will gain a cover bonus if its toe is touching the terrain. If your Land Raider is nudging a puddle it gets +1. And so on.

Vehicles also need to be at least 50% obscured from the shooters view. But it doesnt matter what obscures the target. It could be a friendly vehicle.

 Saber wrote:

This result is counter-intuitive, to say the least, which leads me to think it must be the product of error. There are good reasons to define "within," "wholly within," and "entirely within" in the way they appear to be defined in the FAQ, but this makes generic terrain vastly more useful than Battlefield Terrain for non-infantry models.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

Come now Mr RAW. Show me where touching counts as in terrain in the 8th rules. That’s some edition lag you have there.

(FWIW it’s worth we play touching=in to speed up play but some part of the model has to be on the terrain feature to count as in, RAW)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Saber wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

This is the conclusion I am inclined to as well, but it leads to several ridiculous outcomes. (I say this not to argue with you, but to further ruminate on the problem.)

1) "Within" and "wholly within" are different terms; well and good. "Entirely within," despite being much closer in meaning to "wholly," instead means "every model at least partially within." Fair enough, I suppose, though this is inferred from the FAQ rather than stated outright.

2) When dealing with generic terrain, even a titan will gain a cover bonus if its toe is touching the terrain. If your Land Raider is nudging a puddle it gets +1. And so on.

3) Generic terrain and most Battlefield Terrain is "entirely within," except for forests which are "wholly within." Suck it, trees.

This result is counter-intuitive, to say the least, which leads me to think it must be the product of error. There are good reasons to define "within," "wholly within," and "entirely within" in the way they appear to be defined in the FAQ, but this makes generic terrain vastly more useful than Battlefield Terrain for non-infantry models.

Define your terrain pre-game. If your “puddle” is using the Crater rules a VEHICLE can not get cover from it. If your damaged building is a Ruin then INFANTRY benefit for being in them but other stuff needs to be obscured too. The terrain rules are actually fine in practise.

You can house-rule Woods to work the same way for speed without breaking anything. I honestly don’t think most people remember they’re worded differently (any many forget the -2” to Charges!).

 Saber wrote:

How should this be played? Does the second comment provide a general definition of "entirely within," while the first provides an exception for terrain? Is one of them a mistake? Are they both mistakes? Is there some other document somewhere that contains the actual rule?

Remember: Save and allocate damage happens one at a time. Save, apply damage, save, apply damage.

Terrain bonus is checked every time you make a save. So make a save. Is entire unit in terrain? Yes, apply bonus. Roll, apply damage. Repeat process.

The moment last model outside of terrain dies then whole unit is in terrain.

Remember: Saves are rolled one at a time. Well sometimes you can fast roll them together but things like this means you need to roll in bunches(unless you WANT to keep those outside terrain alive. Like they are the units special weapons).

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

Come now Mr RAW. Show me where touching counts as in terrain in the 8th rules. That’s some edition lag you have there.

Umm touching = within because of how the English language works.

A model that is entirely within the terrain must not have any part of its base outside of said terrain.

A model that is within the terrain must have at least a small part of its base touching said terrain.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

Come now Mr RAW. Show me where touching counts as in terrain in the 8th rules. That’s some edition lag you have there.

Umm touching = within because of how the English language works.

A model that is entirely within the terrain must not have any part of its base outside of said terrain.

A model that is within the terrain must have at least a small part of its base touching said terrain.

Being within something implies an area of overlap greater than zero. Touching only implies area of overlap equal to zero.

It all depends whether you define the border as within or not. As English is vague both can be valid definitions.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It all depends whether you define the border as within or not. As English is vague both can be valid definitions.

So you’re saying it depends if you redefine “within” as “adjacent to” instead of its actual meaning. Riiiiiight. English isn’t that vague, pal.

As I said upthread we play touching=in but that’s a house rule. RAW, in 8th, you have to have some part of the model on or in terrain. As the words say when you don’t attempt to redefine them as things they don’t mean.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"Entirely" is not the same as "Wholly".

A unit is "Entirely" on a terrain piece as long as every model of the unit has any part of its model touching the terrain piece.

Come now Mr RAW. Show me where touching counts as in terrain in the 8th rules. That’s some edition lag you have there.

Umm touching = within because of how the English language works.

A model that is entirely within the terrain must not have any part of its base outside of said terrain.

A model that is within the terrain must have at least a small part of its base touching said terrain.

Being within something implies an area of overlap greater than zero. Touching only implies area of overlap equal to zero.

Exactly this. This is one that word-twisting simply won’t work on, especially when both DeathReaper and BaconCatBug rely on misdefining words here. Just contrarian for the sake of it tbh.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It all depends whether you define the border as within or not. As English is vague both can be valid definitions.

So you’re saying it depends if you redefine “within” as “adjacent to” instead of its actual meaning. Riiiiiight. English isn’t that vague, pal.

As I said upthread we play touching=in but that’s a house rule. RAW, in 8th, you have to have some part of the model on or in terrain. As the words say when you don’t attempt to redefine them as things they don’t mean.

Yes, I can't see how "touching" can equate with "within."

That being said, house ruling touching as counting as within makes sense for many pieces of terrain, especially those that lack bases.

 p5freak wrote:

 Saber wrote:

2) When dealing with generic terrain, even a titan will gain a cover bonus if its toe is touching the terrain. If your Land Raider is nudging a puddle it gets +1. And so on.

Vehicles also need to be at least 50% obscured from the shooters view. But it doesnt matter what obscures the target. It could be a friendly vehicle.

This is the case for most pieces of Battlefield Terrain, as defined in Chapter Approved, but not for generic terrain, as defined in the rule book. For generic terrain a unit just needs to be "entirely within" (i.e. every model in the unit needs to be a tiny bit inside the borders of the terrain) to gain the bonus to its save.

I'm not worried about the rule ruining my ability to have a fun game, as any opponent I've ever had will be agree to sensible house rules. But it is more than a little bit ridiculous that the errata has warped the basic rules to produce such a counter-intuitive result.