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.
How does a Baneblade with sponsons come in from reserve? It can not fit wholly(sp?) within 6"
3000
3000
2500
on the other hand Nobz they decided it was in the best interest of ork society that they "Go Green" as such they specifically modified their warbikes to not make giant smoke, dust, grit, clouds. Instead they are all about driving with clean air, one might say their bikes Gak out rainbows.
You could get silly and balance it on the table edge so that its front is only at 6" from the edge
Or more reasonably follow the proposal given in the Apocalypse section: deploy it within 6", or if impossible due to size, deploy it with its rear edge along the table edge. Sure, it might spill over 6", but that shouldn't be too much of a problem outside very strict tournament environments.
I know. Its why I asked.
Thought maybe I was missing some rule in CA. Seems odd to have a matched play mission and all of a sudden you lose 1/5 + of your list cause you rolled Roving Patrol.
So an errata is in order then. Until then house rule/use the apoc rule. Got it.
3000
3000
2500
on the other hand Nobz they decided it was in the best interest of ork society that they "Go Green" as such they specifically modified their warbikes to not make giant smoke, dust, grit, clouds. Instead they are all about driving with clean air, one might say their bikes Gak out rainbows.
Pretty sure knights primachs and most other super heavies are less than 6" so if you meant to say maybe gw intended to nerf Baneblades fine.
I would disagree ofc. But yeah raw. I get it.
I wonder if I put a Baneblade on 2-3 flyer bases suspended in air if I would get complaints. His base(s) would fit.
3000
3000
2500
on the other hand Nobz they decided it was in the best interest of ork society that they "Go Green" as such they specifically modified their warbikes to not make giant smoke, dust, grit, clouds. Instead they are all about driving with clean air, one might say their bikes Gak out rainbows.
THE_GODLYNESS wrote: Pretty sure knights primachs and most other super heavies are less than 6" so if you meant to say maybe gw intended to nerf Baneblades fine.
I would disagree ofc. But yeah raw. I get it.
I wonder if I put a Baneblade on 2-3 flyer bases suspended in air if I would get complaints. His base(s) would fit.
It's the "new" Repulsor grav vehicle conversion of the Baneblade. The Primaris Marines decided they wanted a superheavy tank supporting them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/06 20:01:16
Why not just start the Baneblade instead of hiding it in Reserve? You're the one who decides how to divide up your army.... If you do something purposely impossible no amount of Internet feedback will fix it.
Nightlord1987 wrote: Why not just start the Baneblade instead of hiding it in Reserve? You're the one who decides how to divide up your army.... If you do something purposely impossible no amount of Internet feedback will fix it.
Roving Patrol has you split up your army into thirds then randomly deploy only one of those thirds. You can end up with the baneblade in reserves though no choice of your own.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/07 14:51:44
Pretty easy to house-rule between you and your opponent to fix this tbf.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
Hmm. My bad, I only skimmed through the new missions (about 10 times) The old 7th ruling was you can place it, but could not move any further. Personally I would rather there be a rule, No super heavies in reserves. It's a dick move to hide something that takes several turns to kill regularly. But I also hate SHV in general so ignore my bias.
Nightlord1987 wrote: Hmm. My bad, I only skimmed through the new missions (about 10 times) The old 7th ruling was you can place it, but could not move any further. Personally I would rather there be a rule, No super heavies in reserves. It's a dick move to hide something that takes several turns to kill regularly. But I also hate SHV in general so ignore my bias.
I'm curious, how is it a "dick move" when it's randomly determined what part of the army goes into reserve and you don't have control whether it's on the board or in reserve at the start of the game?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/07 17:31:27
Nightlord1987 wrote: Hmm. My bad, I only skimmed through the new missions (about 10 times) The old 7th ruling was you can place it, but could not move any further. Personally I would rather there be a rule, No super heavies in reserves. It's a dick move to hide something that takes several turns to kill regularly. But I also hate SHV in general so ignore my bias.
I'm curious, how is it a "dick move" when it's randomly determined what part of the army goes into reserve and you don't have control whether it's on the board or in reserve at the start of the game?
In this particular case, sure. It's a part of a mission which I'm sure most people will never bother playing anyway. My gaming circle happens to like Narrative game settings. But we also don't schedule matches ahead of time, so someone bringing their Cadians as Tallarn tank company with double baneblades irks me.
In response to the OP, a level of sensibility is needed for anything in the game to work. How many times have I seen an opponent try and stick as many models "within 3 inches or excess are destroyed" go over. It's up to you and your opponents to nitpick details. I also happen to think alot of Dakka rather argue over hypothetical possibilities rather than actual game experience.
If it isn't a tournament, consult your opponent. Consult another player. If it is a tournament, I'm sure the mission type wouldn't even come up.
Nightlord1987 wrote: Hmm. My bad, I only skimmed through the new missions (about 10 times) The old 7th ruling was you can place it, but could not move any further. Personally I would rather there be a rule, No super heavies in reserves. It's a dick move to hide something that takes several turns to kill regularly. But I also hate SHV in general so ignore my bias.
I'm curious, how is it a "dick move" when it's randomly determined what part of the army goes into reserve and you don't have control whether it's on the board or in reserve at the start of the game?
In this particular case, sure. It's a part of a mission which I'm sure most people will never bother playing anyway. My gaming circle happens to like Narrative game settings. But we also don't schedule matches ahead of time, so someone bringing their Cadians as Tallarn tank company with double baneblades irks me.
In response to the OP, a level of sensibility is needed for anything in the game to work. How many times have I seen an opponent try and stick as many models "within 3 inches or excess are destroyed" go over. It's up to you and your opponents to nitpick details. I also happen to think alot of Dakka rather argue over hypothetical possibilities rather than actual game experience.
If it isn't a tournament, consult your opponent. Consult another player. If it is a tournament, I'm sure the mission type wouldn't even come up.
Careful with all that rational, sane advice there!
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
Just a thought.
In 8th edition we measure everything from hull (when there is no base) and "hull" refers to the main body of the model and It does not include things such as turrets and
sponsons (Designers Commentary), shuldn't we be allowed to ignore sponsons in such cases?
Now I know that "model" must be wholly within 6" and "model" is not "hull" exactly but rulebook many time refers to model, example:
"In order to target an enemy unit, a model from that unit must be within the Range of the weapon being used (...)"
and yet w don't measure from model itself but from base/hull.
If infantry models hides in ruins and we check if they are "wholly within" the terrain feature do we check are their bases wholly within or do we also check their spreaded arms, bolters or chainswords are wholly within terrain feature?
My idea is that we ignore sponsons in this case, just like sergeant's chainsword pointing at the enemy. We check if hull/base is wholy within 6".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/08 06:41:16
danyboy wrote: Just a thought.
In 8th edition we measure everything from hull (when there is no base) and "hull" refers to the main body of the model and It does not include things such as turrets and
sponsons (Designers Commentary), shuldn't we be allowed to ignore sponsons in such cases?
Now I know that "model" must be wholly within 6" and "model" is not "hull" exactly but rulebook many time refers to model, example:
"In order to target an enemy unit, a model from that unit must be within the Range of the weapon being used (...)"
and yet w don't measure from model itself but from base/hull.
If infantry models hides in ruins and we check if they are "wholly within" the terrain feature do we check are their bases wholly within or do we also check their spreaded arms, bolters or chainswords are wholly within terrain feature?
My idea is that we ignore sponsons in this case, just like sergeant's chainsword pointing at the enemy. We check if hull/base is wholy within 6".
Seems like a plan to fix this. Be wary of extending it to all things though. My opponent tried to use that reasoning once to move his Leman Russ through my models. He said "sponsons don't count", measured the hull and said a 3" gap was enough to pass through... ignoring the fact the sponsons would literally push my models aside. So be clear on the exemption being only for this one (fixing) purpose lest craziness crop up.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
Just wedge it up against the board edge and play on. It's not meant to mean you can't deploy your model, is it?
If it was my baneblade, I might offer to measure it's next move from where it SHOULD be, not where it is. E.g. it gets -2" or whatevs to its move. To make sure there's no "well you couldn't have got in range if you'd been 2" futher away" sour grapes.
TO of Death Before Dishonour - A Warhammer 40k Tournament with a focus on great battles between well painted, thematic armies on tables with full terrain.
Silentz wrote: Just wedge it up against the board edge and play on. It's not meant to mean you can't deploy your model, is it?
If it was my baneblade, I might offer to measure it's next move from where it SHOULD be, not where it is. E.g. it gets -2" or whatevs to its move. To make sure there's no "well you couldn't have got in range if you'd been 2" futher away" sour grapes.
Sounds like another reasonable way to fix it and move on so you can play the game! I do wonder how RAWAT ALL COST types who insist on following easily-fixed broken rule quirks ever get past deployment...
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
First i am a dick cause I am bringing a Baneblade.
Then i am a dick for not having it on the field even though I don't get a choice in the matter.
Then i am told don't be a dick make a house rule.
Which my response above is. Yes i see raw. So till it is errata or faqd it can be placed with house rule. 4th post.
I am amazed and confused.
3000
3000
2500
on the other hand Nobz they decided it was in the best interest of ork society that they "Go Green" as such they specifically modified their warbikes to not make giant smoke, dust, grit, clouds. Instead they are all about driving with clean air, one might say their bikes Gak out rainbows.
First i am a dick cause I am bringing a Baneblade.
Then i am a dick for not having it on the field even though I don't get a choice in the matter.
Then i am told don't be a dick make a house rule.
Which my response above is. Yes i see raw. So till it is errata or faqd it can be placed with house rule. 4th post.
I am amazed and confused.
Don't worry, there are some overly hostile and uppity posters around here. Your question was fine and I'm glad you have answers!
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
3000
3000
2500
