View Full Version : cover- your opinions

floyd pinkerton
22-03-2007, 19:26
At my local GW we had a necromunda campaign not too long ago, but one issue came up at the end of the campaign- cover.

What do you guys do if a model has a hand or gun end visible? Unfortunately our campaign involved some 'more competitive' gamers, and they simply used a -2 BS modifier. Others let it go; and others shot at -2 BS with a serious wound after the game only applicable to the body part or death.

Just wondered what you guys do for in the future.

22-03-2007, 19:54
I would leave it, but i know what you mean about 'competitive' gamers. It really comes down to what the players think. Allthough I would NEVER allow a gun:- only visable body parts.

22-03-2007, 20:43
We found it made more sense to just agree on a range of heights that terrain could fit in and be classified as certain cover, ie 0-1.3" -1BS, 1.4-2.5" -2Bs 2.6"+ cant be seen.

We found this method, though not the exact heights, solves arguments as my argument otherwise was that, and i showed them the difference,"fine ill take my model off its base lay it on its stomach and play with it constantly like that". That method ensued that anything higher than about 0.5" counted as full cover so we agreed upon the more sensible method.

23-03-2007, 01:31
i believe the rule book states, half the body or over visible is -1, less than half the body visible is -2, hands, feet, sword waving and the like = no shot.
must find my old books to check.

23-03-2007, 03:35
We always played it as no shot unless an actual body part was visible. So if the hand is sticking out, you can shoot, but not if it's a gun or sword.

23-03-2007, 14:21
Well, if only a gun or hand is visible, we don't take the shot. You can't pick on someone just because they pose their models dramatically. An arm or leg is fair game though.

If the "competitive players" keep causing trouble just have a word with the Campaign Arbitrator.

Palatine Katinka
24-03-2007, 06:11
I've had some problems with models like this:


They don't have guns, just body parts going everywhere and in a fairly narrow profile. When I put them standing at a corner, looking round, people can easily claim to see the whole model. Mostly, i've been lenient and thought it my fault for facing the models dramatically but maybe that's why four out of five models died in ten games! Recently i've tried arguing the point that the models would be crouched/ducked round the corner/behind the wall and have even spin models on the spot to show how they could take more cover if I hadn't deployed them facing forwards. When peeking round corners, I feel that the visibility of the base should be considered rather than the model as the base represents the area the model can occupy while the model doesn't accurately represent current stance. Otherwise I may have to make five new spyrers who're all crouched down on one edge of their base. ;)

11-04-2007, 16:47
Tough call. I think you need at least 15% of the body showing in order to shoot them. With a hand or a gun just showing, that would be like 5% showing, and therefore would not be shot at. If you check the rule book, it shows pictures of models in full cover and partial cover. In full cover (-2 BS)it showed just the head, shoulders and some of the arm. Basicly the cover went up his neck area. Anything past his neck area would be considered total cover and couldn't be shot at.

11-04-2007, 18:22
Actually, you play it from the base area.

So if you had a model with his right arm all the way out, he wouldn't be able to shoot his opponent unless he could draw a straight line FROM HIS BASE.

Imagine an upright cyclinder. This is the 3D target area. If it's not in the cylinder (the area of the base) it can't be shot.

This also prevents silly modelling like models crouching in the corner on the very edge of their base.