40k Terrain Rule Amendments

In the future there is only war... Discuss the Warhammer 40K game right here...
Locked
Ronin
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:45 pm

40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Ronin » Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:16 pm

Hi everyone,

In light of how ambiguous the 40k rulebook leaves terrain rules up to the players, my group (The 40k Parliament) decided to draft up a document that amends the terrain rules for everyone to agree on ahead of time. Have a look, leave comments and suggestions, and feel free to use these at your next game:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PIA ... sp=sharing

Bojazz
Lives, breathes, and eats MiniWarGaming
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:07 am
Location: Near London, Ontario

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Bojazz » Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:12 pm

I don't think woods should block line of sight for a model standing directly behind it, but if they take one step forward suddenly they can see and be seen through those same woods. Providing a cover save to units whose models are 50% obscured should be fine.

Ruins lack rules for beasts. IMO should be treated the same as infantry and swarms.

The rest seems pretty reasonable and follows a lot of common sense. I like it! Although ladders giving all infantry the ability to ignore vertical distance doesn't seem right. A guardsman shouldn't be able to scale a building as quickly as a model with a jump pack, especially if that ladder is tall. I'm not sure how you'd go about needing this without hampering the mobility of the infantry trying to climb.. perhaps you could say any unit that begins their turn within 6" of a ladder which is over 7" in height may declare they are "climbing" the unit may not move that turn in any phase, but may shoot as normal. At the beginning of their next movement phase they may redeploy within 6" of the top of the ladder, and may act normally for the rest of their turn. For the purpose of shooting, they count as having moved. This essentially makes them give up a turn of movement, but you dont need to worry about wobbly model syndrome or breaking a unit up between who can and cannot climb, and they are still decidedly slower than jump infantry.
Craftworld Eldar - Power Level 360
Orks - Power Level 70

Ronin
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:45 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Ronin » Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:28 pm

You weren't the only one who said beasts should be able to move through walls so I'll make that change. The woods blocking line of sight is there because players were concerned about gunlines being powerful so I wanted to give a way for units to sneak up and use terrain more easily, but strategically pop in and out if they feel like there's a good opportunity and it's worth the risk. I actually rarely see ladders, but I think the ignore vertical distance it's a pretty quick and simple rule.

Bojazz
Lives, breathes, and eats MiniWarGaming
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:07 am
Location: Near London, Ontario

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Bojazz » Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:13 am

I see your point with the forests. I haven't had a chance to playtest the new faq rules, but I've got a Warhammer night coming up in the next week or so, so I'll test out these terrain rules and get back to you!
Craftworld Eldar - Power Level 360
Orks - Power Level 70

TheOddOne
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 1:00 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by TheOddOne » Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:49 am

What about Cavalary in ruins? Are they treated as Beasts or Bikes?

Ronin
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:45 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Ronin » Sat Apr 21, 2018 3:09 am

I'd lean bikes. Calvary I wouldn't imagine to be as nimble to control in close quarters as beasts are so trying to get it to jump through a window would be a challenge without some strong encouragement.

User avatar
Koonitz
Mighty Manufactorium of MiniWarGaming Posts
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 8:20 pm
Ribbons Earned: Has Completed 5 Painting PledgesHas Completed 10 Painting Pledges
Location: Grande Prairie, AB, CA

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Koonitz » Sat Apr 21, 2018 8:36 am

Two older, 3rd Ed rules for forests were:

1) Any line of sight measuring through more than 6" of forest is considered blocked.

2) A variant of 1, closer to what you have, is that you can see into a forest up to 6". Any distance more than that is blocked (as above), but also any distance through a forest to the other side, regardless of length, is blocked (similar to what you already have).

Also to comment "magically blocked because you're just past a forest is one of those compromises that you have to accept with the abstract of tabletop. If you're in a ruins, you get cover. If you're magically just touching the ruins, you don't get cover. If you're around a corner, you cannot be seen. If even a sliver of your base is poking out from around that corner, your entire unit is fully visible, no cover granted. I don't really have a problem of "just outside the forest, not visible", along those abstractions. It makes it easier to get more LoS blocking terrain onto the board.
Armies:
40k: Knights Cynosure Iron Hands successor chapter, House Terryn Questor Imperialis, Thousand Sons/Tzeentch Daemons
30k: Thousand Sons
Age of Sigmar: Sylvaneth, Disciples of Tzeentch

mrazek22
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by mrazek22 » Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:46 pm

I'll take a -1 to hit for shooting into forests, but blocked? That seems unfair. I generally give a -1 hit because the Predator still took a round or two during the great Catachan/Predator Gun Line experiment.

Image

Ronin
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:45 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Ronin » Sat Apr 21, 2018 2:23 pm

It only blocks if you're behind the base of the forests, but not if you're in them. If you're in them, it's +1 cover. Terrain wise, someone could argue that a dense forest would block line of sight and even movement for non infantry if you set up enough trees on the base or glue them down. Since our trees are cosmetic, we just imagine the entire base is a dense forest.

Our woods are more like this:

Image

We'll playtest it to see how it works, but I liked the houserule back in 6th and 7th because it made maneuvering against gunlines easier which a lot of folks are concerned about with the FAQ. Also, people can throw down less terrain which is nice for those of us that don't have as many resources.

mrazek22
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by mrazek22 » Sat Apr 21, 2018 2:50 pm

How do you determine how many models in a squad can fit in that forest? For instance, my opponent tried to fit an entire conscript squad into a forest, and I was like, hell no. 10 man squad, sure. 30 man squad? No. What is the will of the council on size of troop units in forests?

Ronin
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:45 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by Ronin » Sat Apr 21, 2018 3:49 pm

Our trees are removable so it's simply as many models as you can fit on the base. Now for woods where the trees are glued, it's trickier to do so you'd probably have to go with the physical limitation of how many models can fit.

mrazek22
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: 40k Terrain Rule Amendments

Post by mrazek22 » Sun Apr 22, 2018 4:35 pm

I thought it might be like Imperial trenches, or other types of GW terrain. 1x squad or 10 units. Unless it's a giant forest, or say like, whatever the model is that's a giant shield/vehicle repair station, which holds up to 3 squads or 35. I like a speedy game, and thank you for drawing up these rules. It certainly saves time!

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest