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!
Looking through the V4 book again and came across an interesting sentence on page 6 under bases.
Basically it states that a model is considered to occupy the area of its base. It also states that for vehicles without a base use the hull. So is the stand just to hold it up to simulate anti-grav or is it a "base". Interpreting it this way could mean that the Raider won't get shot down if it's nose is sticking out from behind a treeline or hill. Of course on the down side when measuring distance for weapons fire, or dismounting for that Incubi/Wyche assault you'd have to dismount and measure from the base also.
Its the hull. Always measure from the hull. The base IS just to hold her up and make it look cool.
"That is the sound of inevitability"
Originally posted by Bigshindig@Oct 19 2004, 22:15
Its the hull. Always measure from the hull. The base IS just to hold her up and make it look cool.[snapback]233717[/snapback]
Not disagreeing with you but if you take a look at the paragraph entitled "Bases" on page 6 you could make a valid argument for the other way also.
You measure the distance to the base, the rules are perfectly clear about that - but this doesn't necessarily mean that you determine LOS only to the base too.
There is a rule stating at least for infantry that LOS is determined to the "body" of the model. If that body occupies more space than the base, then that's bad luck for you.
Similarly, since the hull of a raider is bigger than the base, there is few reason to assume that you wouldn't determine LOS using the shape of the hull.
i think the rule refering to bases is for dreadnaughts, kans, sentinels and stuff like that that isnt flying
what a long strange trip its been