I always assumed you used the hull when there was no base to the vehicle, and when there was a base you just used that.
I always assumed you used the hull when there was no base to the vehicle, and when there was a base you just used that.
Last edited by lantzkev; 14-04-2012 at 01:53. Reason: of course that's what you get for assuming
Win/Ties/Loss:
Tau 27/2/8 2009, 5/0/2 2012, 1/0/0 2013
Greyknights 17/3/4 2011, 47/4/11 2012
The way the rule is written, the base is also considered part of the hull. The rules for vehicles all refer to the hull. The exception being the use of just the base for determining if a "Flyer" is in difficult/dangerous terrain or not. In that instance, the hull is ignored in favor of the base. I have read that to mean that a "Flyer" uses it's base for arriving from reserves too. It does make the game a lot easier to play, and i'm all for that.
I think it's a reasonable assumption because when you read vehicle rules it states several times thing to the effect of "since there is no base we use the hull" etc. Models aren't usually penalized for extraneous wings/bits/attenae etc, and to make thing simple for the flyers they gave these vehicles bases to consider the game from.
Win/Ties/Loss:
Tau 27/2/8 2009, 5/0/2 2012, 1/0/0 2013
Greyknights 17/3/4 2011, 47/4/11 2012
The problem is there is no consistency. You don't use the base for everyhing.
Normal vehicles use the hull.
Scimmers use the hull mainly but there are some exceptions.
Flyers use the the hull for sme stuff but there are more exceptions.
You do not start by saying you use the base and work from there. You just apply the exceptions.
Example. Because real LoS is measured from the hull (yes even for flyers) and from the weapons (yes even for flyers) you would gain an advantage if startin the vehicle off the table in a way that a wing is overhanging on the table, or the front of the hull is overhanging, but the base is off.
When you start off the table, the whole flyer is off. Because consider the razorwing. It's front cannon is more forward than the base. You would be able to shoot further.
Well since we are discussing the skimmers with the large oval bases, we use the exceptions that are granted to those models.
Yes it can give us some odd interactions with the rules , but that is what we have to work with.
"Do you use the number on the bottom of the die to determine your rolls? Because the book doesn't discuss that the top is the correct side to read, either. Some things are just THAT obvious."
I agree. I don't agree on geting one exception and transforming it to include others as well.
There is no exception that when you start measuring the vehicle when it arrives the whole hull must be off the table. There is one exception covering a mdel getting destroyed. You remove the base (if able) and place it where it is, except if it is over models. The over models part is an exception. The part of the model hanging off the table would be another exception. Since it doesn't exist you can't make it up.
How do you determine that it is off the table? Show me where you measure from. A model cannot be off the table, but the only way to prove that it is off the table is to measure. On "Flyers" this measurement is done from the base only.
Not to get completely off subject but when a Valkyrie/Vendetta/Stormraven drop the troops inside it beside a ruin can they do it on any floor above the first one? We encountered this problem the other day because someone was trying to say that his Death Company Dread should be able to be deployed on the 2nd floor of the ruin because of the height of the Stormraven on its flying base.
I do not believe you are able to deploy from the hull of that transport, as it says that you use the base for all measurments involving disembarking. At least until it loses it base, then I guess you'd use the hull again.
Why not just move the damned thing onto the table so that nothing "overhangs"........problem solved
Because people want to fire all 3 twin linked lascannons on the turn they arrive. I dont have a problem with it. It seems extreme rules lawyering to try and argue the vechile isnt on the table (when it quite clearly is) just because a small part of the tail/wing may hang slightly over the edge.Originally Posted by Major_Manny
Just my opinion
Captain: 14th Sejanian rifles Medusa V Campaign
Uk (london)
W/L: 0/0
If it was a small part, I feel this issue wouldn't even be raised. The fact is, nearly 4" of the vehicle overhangs the edge when it is not moved over 6" from reserve.
The fact of the matter is that GW has not clearly defined what the correct answer is. Therefore, every different group is going to be open to interpretation. In my case, I'm with Axeman on this one...
I would just claim that the wings are not part of the hull, and therefore, you are able to move the whole vehicle on the table.
This thread will have none of your logic, kendaop!!!
Except that they have defined what counts as hull for that vehicle, and the wings do count. LOL. Can't wait for 6th edition.
Yes. The part that the wings are part of the hull is pretty clear. The whole arguement is about measuring.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
