Switch Theme:

SkyShield Landing Pad and Cover  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Does the skyshield landing pad count as being cover for units on top of it? I want to drop dev squads or havoc squads on top to get the 5++ but would appreciate it being cover for the 2+ save too. What do you guys think?

Cheers
   
Made in us
Norn Queen






It's terrain. If a unit is in terrain they get cover. Outside of that basic rule what terrain rules are you playing with?


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






ravenerioli wrote:
Does the skyshield landing pad count as being cover for units on top of it? I want to drop dev squads or havoc squads on top to get the 5++ but would appreciate it being cover for the 2+ save too. What do you guys think?

Cheers
You can't place friendly models on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, it's just another model. It's not terrain unless it's been wrecked, as per the errata.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/17 18:51:14


 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You can't place friendly models on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, it's just another model. It's not terrain unless it's been wrecked, as per the errata.

While this may be technically correct, it is obviously wrong. The SLP gives benefit to models on top of it. Why would a model exist that you pay points to include that did absolutely nothing for your units and only helped the enemy?

-

   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




My point exactly guys, and building isn't in the terrain section of the rule book. It would come under 'decide the rules' with your opponent terrain which would be annoying as in a tournament
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Galef wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
You can't place friendly models on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, it's just another model. It's not terrain unless it's been wrecked, as per the errata.

While this may be technically correct, it is obviously wrong. The SLP gives benefit to models on top of it. Why would a model exist that you pay points to include that did absolutely nothing for your units and only helped the enemy?

-
Not my place to question "intent", the rules are clear. Do I like it? No, but disliking a rule doesn't change what it does.
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

Perhaps not, but it is our place as players to see through the nonsense and play the rules as they make sense, rather than following them to such a degree that the intend is universally contradicted in the eyes of 99.99999999999999% of the player base.
It's called using common sense. I have confidence in you to be able to try it out. You might like how it feels.

As I said, something can be technically right, but obviously wrong. When given that choice, most of us would choose not to be obviously wrong.

-

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/05/18 16:45:14


   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




For better or for worse, common sense essentially doesn't exist. Or rather, there are 6 billion different versions of it; one for each person. This is why we need codified rules that make sense.
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

Martel732 wrote:
For better or for worse, common sense essentially doesn't exist. Or rather, there are 6 billion different versions of it; one for each person. This is why we need codified rules that make sense.

Agreed, I guess. My point for this particular issue is that I am not going to be told that I cannot put MY units on MY Landing Pad that I paid MY points to use. I find it hard to believe that any more than *10% of 40K players would feel differently. *90% shared opinion seems like common sense to me.

*percentages used for illustration purposes only and are not meant to reflect any factually obtained data

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/18 17:38:43


   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

 Galef wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
You can't place friendly models on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, it's just another model. It's not terrain unless it's been wrecked, as per the errata.

While this may be technically correct, it is obviously wrong. The SLP gives benefit to models on top of it. Why would a model exist that you pay points to include that did absolutely nothing for your units and only helped the enemy?

-


Do we need another thread where this model is discussed? Plenty of others. It obviously needs house-ruling to function. Let’s not go round and round on this one again!

 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"
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




Another case of GW writing a rules without considering all possible models in the game.
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




I mean having a 2+ 5++ on a bunch of lascannon devs rerolling all misses and wound rolls of 1 is pretty brutal against any army, It's a pretty viable and simple option to play if it is cover, which is how I'd see it
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: