WHFB - 6th Flyers and buildings
- Thread starter FatOlaf
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
How much would this increase field of vision? I thought they had 360 degrees vision already.... You can now watch over units though...And certain hills/forests.
But I think the answer is no...
Though a tower or building with a flat surface should allow Flyers to come on it. Basically buildings who have a flat roof area.
But I think the answer is no...
Though a tower or building with a flat surface should allow Flyers to come on it. Basically buildings who have a flat roof area.
Neffy said:well i might go for it...
think of it as a strigoi with fly.. he flies atop the tower, and can charge from there. seems rather logically to me
But that's a flying hero, not a unit, think there might be different rules involved (even though I agree fluff wise there shouldn't be)
It's a question I wondered (briefly). I thought with the new Watchtower building there might be rules that cover it, or maybe a reference in a recent White Dwarf- but, nothing. So it's really one of those situations you have to go over with your opponent before the game when you define terrain... every single time. So it's up to you. I think letting them go on the flat surface of a Watchtower is fine, some might say that would count as entering the building.
I think that with the release of the 7th ed rulebook, there was a little note that said something like this:
"Although the design team tried to include as much as possible in the book, there will of course be certain scenarios that do not have a clear answer. In those cases we advise players to see for themselves what sounds logical and play it according to their best interpretation."
In other words: What you said about the landing part sounded right, so go for it.
Cheers, Wolfie
"Although the design team tried to include as much as possible in the book, there will of course be certain scenarios that do not have a clear answer. In those cases we advise players to see for themselves what sounds logical and play it according to their best interpretation."
In other words: What you said about the landing part sounded right, so go for it.
Cheers, Wolfie
I would agree with Wolfie on this, looking at the individual circumstance.
You can put as many troops on a castle wall/tower top as fit (there are separate rules for inside) is the way I would play it. How many bats can you fit on the roof/tower (assuming flat and reasonably allowable - worth asking your opponent before deployment whether troops can be put onto the rooftop/inside the tower; he will likely assume that you are planning to occupy the building in the usual manner)? What I would say is that you need to be able to fit the whole unit up there (as having 2 bats in the tower and the rest on the fround would break the 'within 1" ' requirement for skirmishers.
Then, assuming you can manage this, swoop away (beware of BD lord on winged nightmare & death from above
)
You can put as many troops on a castle wall/tower top as fit (there are separate rules for inside) is the way I would play it. How many bats can you fit on the roof/tower (assuming flat and reasonably allowable - worth asking your opponent before deployment whether troops can be put onto the rooftop/inside the tower; he will likely assume that you are planning to occupy the building in the usual manner)? What I would say is that you need to be able to fit the whole unit up there (as having 2 bats in the tower and the rest on the fround would break the 'within 1" ' requirement for skirmishers.
Then, assuming you can manage this, swoop away (beware of BD lord on winged nightmare & death from above
)
I think it's true you simply have to discuss it with your opponent.
Some people don't want to use the normal building rules, but prefer using them as impassable terrain. Others invent new rules for them, which they think are suitable.
You could also agree that certain flying units can land on a forest. I mean, a dragon won't sit in a tree, but harpies, bats, and if the trees are big enough warhawks and such can do so.
As long as you have a nice opponent you can do quite some new things, as long as you both think is right.
Some people don't want to use the normal building rules, but prefer using them as impassable terrain. Others invent new rules for them, which they think are suitable.
You could also agree that certain flying units can land on a forest. I mean, a dragon won't sit in a tree, but harpies, bats, and if the trees are big enough warhawks and such can do so.
As long as you have a nice opponent you can do quite some new things, as long as you both think is right.
Looking at the building rules, technically, flyers cannot enter/land on buildings, as the rulebook states (pp97) "Buildings are impassable to all models except for infantry...".
I agree that it could be argued (and ideally agreed in advance) that tower tops and castle walls, etc, could be an exception to this, as I would say that the rule is designed for entry. However, as it does not specify...
Fatolaf - not quite right. the figure 10 is the maximum unit strength that can be be brought into combat in either assault or defence of a building. The only limitation on occupation is a single infantry unit with US of no more than 30.
I agree that it could be argued (and ideally agreed in advance) that tower tops and castle walls, etc, could be an exception to this, as I would say that the rule is designed for entry. However, as it does not specify...
Fatolaf - not quite right. the figure 10 is the maximum unit strength that can be be brought into combat in either assault or defence of a building. The only limitation on occupation is a single infantry unit with US of no more than 30.
Sibbechai said:
They are, by definition, flyers, and so probably not. Being able to walk and on a small base is not, IMO, sufficiant. Put it down to the wing-span.
It is a little vague. Infantry are defined on page 7, flyers on page 68-9.
Contrary to what I said above, it would appear that they are not mutulaay exclusive (should have read things properly in the first place).
Infantry are a unit type, together with cavalry, war machines, chariots, characters and monsters.
Flyers are a subclass of the above, and "...follow all the rules for normal units, except for the differences described below." I would therefore say that, taking these together, flyers fall into one of the troop types above, and only infantry can enter buildings. Characters are either monsters or infantry, unless following a special rule of some sort (a centaur would be cavalry, for example).
Therefore all flyers can enter a building, subject to usual restrictions (one unit, with max US of 30 - therefore 30 fell bats :question.
Contrary to what I said above, it would appear that they are not mutulaay exclusive (should have read things properly in the first place).
Infantry are a unit type, together with cavalry, war machines, chariots, characters and monsters.
Flyers are a subclass of the above, and "...follow all the rules for normal units, except for the differences described below." I would therefore say that, taking these together, flyers fall into one of the troop types above, and only infantry can enter buildings. Characters are either monsters or infantry, unless following a special rule of some sort (a centaur would be cavalry, for example).
Therefore all flyers can enter a building, subject to usual restrictions (one unit, with max US of 30 - therefore 30 fell bats :question
.
EvC said:
Actually, it would be any flyer expect the 'flying cavalry' as all flyers now count as US1. This was how they nerfed Tzeentch Screamers in a lot of peoples eyes.
Darmort
Grave Guard
*Cough*You Can't Charge Out Of Buildings Anyway*Cough*
Yeah...
Personally, if there's an open top or a flat roof where it would be logical that something such as a harpy or pegasus or whatever can gain access to, then I'd say use the Rule of Common Sense, discuss it with your opponent, and provided that the model can fit in the building, ask if it's okay with him whether or not flyers can access buildings. If the building has a slanted roof, then it would probably be safe to assume that no, you can't fly on it, because you wouldn't be able to take off again.
Being on a crumpled pile of blood, bones and feathers wouldn't help much, of course.
Hopefully, that helps a little...
Yeah...
Personally, if there's an open top or a flat roof where it would be logical that something such as a harpy or pegasus or whatever can gain access to, then I'd say use the Rule of Common Sense, discuss it with your opponent, and provided that the model can fit in the building, ask if it's okay with him whether or not flyers can access buildings. If the building has a slanted roof, then it would probably be safe to assume that no, you can't fly on it, because you wouldn't be able to take off again.
Being on a crumpled pile of blood, bones and feathers wouldn't help much, of course.
Hopefully, that helps a little...
Darmort said:
That is true, and so the same should be true of leaving the roof. Movement is as per retuning onto the table from pursuit.