Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
The BRB is pretty vague on the definition of area terrain and it seems to matter alot during games, especially agaisnt nidz. When we play we usually go around classifying things like they say to do in the book haowever i would like to be sure we are classifying things correctly.
For example this terrain here (if this link works) Games Workshop Online Store - CITADEL MODULAR GAMING HILL
Lots of games we would say its area but no cover saves nore difficult/dangerous. Only cover if models are obscured by the hill somehow ie <50% visibility rule
Some games we will give cover or the other clasifications but some how im thinking that this type of terrain is simply just a hill not area not anything just a hill. Terrain classification has boggled my brain since i started playing this game so any help would be much appreciated.
Greetings from Planet X, I hope you enjoy your day.
Join us in the Librarium Online Chatroom
50% sight blockage for a cover save is only required for vehicles / monstrous creatures. Regular models only need to be partially obscured in any fashion to get it.
moob is correct, the cover rules are VERY generous for non-MC/Vehicles. Any obscuring is sufficient for a save, but at least 50% of the squad must be obscured for the unit to benefit.
Blais's Paint Studio-Getting broken armies good soft scores since 2009
There's no reason to think of a plain old hill as area terrain. The purpose of the Area Terrain rules is to cover situations when the physical model is incapable of accurately representing the intended terrain. e.g., if we made an 'accurate' model of a bombed out building, with a 'realistic' amount of rubble, craters, broken girders strewn about, it would be impossible to game with. Models would fall over all the time, accurate measurement is burdensome and impractical, etc etc. So we have a class of terrain called 'Area Terrain' for ruins, put down a couple representational bits of rubble, and imagine the whole area is covered in that.
For something like a hill, an intact bunker, trench, wall, gun emplacement, road, bridge, etc. where the physical model is 'accurate' in its representation of the 'in-game' terrain, there is no reason to use the 'Area Terrain' rules.
There was a school of play in 4E that used the area terrain rules for all pieces of terrain (encouraged by GW staff imo because it was easier and led to fewer arguments). That era is dead and gone, but not everyone is up on 5E yet
The main reason i asked this is the lictor deepstrike rule stating that they must ds onto a piece of area terain. I dont like to be unfair to my apponent but it also feels unfair to myself that everything we put down as terain minus intact buildings and wire etc counts as area. I think there may have been more than this reason for the question but its the one that comes to mind at the moment.
So basicly though not every peice of terain is area. The BRB says pretty much what you have but i was having trouble making out what isnt area terrain. Because of this we have been pretty much playing with everything as area terain.
Last edited by Wolfbastion; January 7th, 2009 at 03:51.