Building rules help

[Guest]

That SA book is super confusing. Issue is that it doesn't include complete building rules, rather, it replaces certain sections of the BRB rules.

 

At this point, I really need a step by step guide to the buildings (something GW doesn't seem to understand that we need). Sort of working though it myself with this post.

 

1) Deployment: Got deploying the fortification figured out, but the wording about deploying on/in the battlements is very lacking. So, the SA book says to treat the battlements as an upper level of a ruin. Does this mean that units, like skimmers, are allowed onto the battlements? The ruin rules are fine with this, but the building rules are very lacking with regards to vehicles. 

 

Ruin rules also permit models like walkers and MCs onto the upper level of a ruin if you an the opponent agree the ruin looks sturdy enough to do it, this one should be fine with just about all the buildings, provided the model fits.

 

2) Movement: Obviously, the fortification doesn't move, but there are some other, more shaky elements of the movement phase regarding buildings. So, does an occupied building count as an enemy model for the purpose of moving within 1" of it? As I read it, answer is no, though only implied.

 

If a model that cannot occupy the building is on the battlements (and not a skimmer/FMC/jump infantry/jet infantry), is only way to get off via using the impact tests for jumping/falling off the battlements? As I read it, yes, though again very vague. An example here would be a walker which started the game deployed onto the battlements or a model like Karamazov, which is specifically restricted on entering buildings. I'm pretty sure you could also disembark a unit via a flyer onto the battlements, just as you can deep strike onto them.

 

I remain unclear about how buildings interact with drop pods (and other DS transports), through present rules in the SA book seem to imply that you could land the pod directly onto a battlement and disembark from it, ample space provided, of course.

 

3) Shooting at buildings. So, the one that has come up a few times is players claiming that buildings aren't vehicles and therefore rules that specifically apply to vehicles do not apply to buildings. I can't find any rules support to suggest this, but it does have rather huge impacts on the game. I do understand rules that specifically apply to the vehicle damage table not applying to the building damage table, as they are different tables.

 

I am curious, though remain unclear, about how rules interact with the rules that prevent shooting at unoccpied buildings. In example, if a unit is in front of a building and placement of the blast I am shooting them with will clip the unoccupied building, can I still fire? If I can fire, does the clip affect the building normally, or is it exempt because it's unoccupied?

 

4) Shooting with buildings. This one creates some interesting rules interactions. Like, in example, my aquilla strongpoint is being raided by CSM raptors. They jump up and clear out my garison on the battlements. I have a unit beneath them in the building. On my turn, I want to fire the main cannon at the raptors, can I? Even if using the D weapon for the smaller blase, a hit on the unit on the battlements means a hit on my own occupied building...Is the building considered mine for the purpose of shooting at the models above?

 

5) assaulting buildings, no questions here.

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

1) Deployment: Got deploying the fortification figured out, but the wording about deploying on/in the battlements is very lacking. So, the SA book says to treat the battlements as an upper level of a ruin. Does this mean that units, like skimmers, are allowed onto the battlements? The ruin rules are fine with this, but the building rules are very lacking with regards to vehicles. 

 

Assuming there is sufficient space to land without resorting to balance shenanigans, yes. Same goes for jump/jetpack infantry, Flying Monstrous Creatures, etc.

 

 

2) Movement: Obviously, the fortification doesn't move, but there are some other, more shaky elements of the movement phase regarding buildings. So, does an occupied building count as an enemy model for the purpose of moving within 1" of it? As I read it, answer is no, though only implied.

 

If a model that cannot occupy the building is on the battlements (and not a skimmer/FMC/jump infantry/jet infantry), is only way to get off via using the impact tests for jumping/falling off the battlements? As I read it, yes, though again very vague. An example here would be a walker which started the game deployed onto the battlements or a model like Karamazov, which is specifically restricted on entering buildings. I'm pretty sure you could also disembark a unit via a flyer onto the battlements, just as you can deep strike onto them.

 

I remain unclear about how buildings interact with drop pods (and other DS transports), through present rules in the SA book seem to imply that you could land the pod directly onto a battlement and disembark from it, ample space provided, of course.

 

Occupied buildings do not qualify for the 1" rule, as best I can tell. You may pass as close to them as you wish.

 

This would be correct, if you can't move through the building itself you'll have to jump down.

 

Since the upper levels of a battlement count as a ruin, you could potentially land a Drop Pod (or other DSing unit) on top of them, on purpose or by accident. (This was actually true for the old building rules as well, at least for DSing units.)

 

 

3) Shooting at buildings. So, the one that has come up a few times is players claiming that buildings aren't vehicles and therefore rules that specifically apply to vehicles do not apply to buildings. I can't find any rules support to suggest this, but it does have rather huge impacts on the game. I do understand rules that specifically apply to the vehicle damage table not applying to the building damage table, as they are different tables.

 

I am curious, though remain unclear, about how rules interact with the rules that prevent shooting at unoccpied buildings. In example, if a unit is in front of a building and placement of the blast I am shooting them with will clip the unoccupied building, can I still fire? If I can fire, does the clip affect the building normally, or is it exempt because it's unoccupied?

 

The building rules themselves actually say "Buildings of all types use aspects of theTransport vehicle rules.The main difference between buildings and actual vehicles is that they can't move, and units from either side can go inside." This, along with GW's FAQs on the subject, strongly imply that buildings, except where otherwise noted, function like "neutral" transports.

 

As of Stronghold Assault, "neutral" buildings largely cease to exist, as if you purchase a building for your army it starts the game "claimed" for your side (and can thus be shot at and assaulted.) If you are actually using buildings-as-battlefield-terrain then there can be neutral buildings; they will be affected normally by shots that hit them incidentally (such as blasts and templates), but you cannot declare them as the target of an attack. Unlike friendly units, you are not prohibited from partially covering a neutral building with a blast/template weapon so long as you follow the other rules for the weapon's shooting.

 

 

 

4) Shooting with buildings. This one creates some interesting rules interactions. Like, in example, my aquilla strongpoint is being raided by CSM raptors. They jump up and clear out my garison on the battlements. I have a unit beneath them in the building. On my turn, I want to fire the main cannon at the raptors, can I? Even if using the D weapon for the smaller blase, a hit on the unit on the battlements means a hit on my own occupied building...Is the building considered mine for the purpose of shooting at the models above?

 

Since you are occupying the building- and thus it is "claimed" for your side- you cannot legally place the blast so that it hits the building. (The Raptors being on the battlements is insufficient to break your claim on the building, as you are still occupying the building itself- if you didn't have the unit on the inside, the enemy would have claimed the building.)

[Threejacks]

 Good topic:)

 

 I know this wasn't one of your questions but I wanted to add some clarification on doing damage to buildings as it seems to come up a lot in games were I bring my forts.

 

   Changes from the BRB building damage table to the SA Building Damage table:

 

 -Buildings no longer have an AV for each facing they simply have an AV that covers the whole building.I bring this up because the BRB damage table implies on the "Breach" result that they do.

 

 -Glancing a building/fortification does not reduce the AV of the building the only thing a glance does is cause a single ap- wound with the ignore`s cover rule on an occupying unit..no occupying unit means a glance does nothing.

 

 - The only way to reduce the AV of a building is to penetrate then roll either a "Breach"( roll 0-1) or "Catastrophic Breach"(roll 5) on the updated building damage table.All other results either outright destroy the building or only affect occupying units or emplaced weapon.

 

 Feel free to correct me if im off on this:)

[Guest]

 Good topic:)

 

 I know this wasn't one of your questions but I wanted to add some clarification on doing damage to buildings as it seems to come up a lot in games were I bring my forts.

 

   Changes from the BRB building damage table to the SA Building Damage table:

 

 -Buildings no longer have an AV for each facing they simply have an AV that covers the whole building.I bring this up because the BRB damage table implies on the "Breach" result that they do.

 

 -Glancing a building/fortification does not reduce the AV of the building the only thing a glance does is cause a single ap- wound with the ignore`s cover rule on an occupying unit..no occupying unit means a glance does nothing.

 

 - The only way to reduce the AV of a building is to penetrate then roll either a "Breach"( roll 0-1) or "Catastrophic Breach"(roll 5) on the updated building damage table.All other results either outright destroy the building or only affect occupying units or emplaced weapon.

 

 Feel free to correct me if im off on this:)

Should also be able to use entrophic strike via necrons to lower AV.

 

Last game I had faced an aquilla strongpoint. Opponent insisted that the aquilla cannon was not an emplaced weapon and therefore could not be removed with a damage result. In re-reading the entry later, after the game, I found that it is listed as an emplaced weapon. Even with the cannon, it was just not the threat that it should be for that cost.

 

I am a huge fan of the vortex missile strongpoint, though I enjoy it in the capacity that I enjoy the Deathstrike or Lukas' last laugh - fun, but probably not the best tactical descision. I like the idea of purposely placing it dead center of the table (or as close as possible) with a skeleton crew and the intention of daring the opponent to destroy it turn 1. In rules, when destroyed it detonates with quite an impressive explosion and has much potential to destroy both armies.

 

Though in rules issues, vortex missile battery is not a barrage weapon, so I remain unclear if it can draw LOS to anything over those walls...

-Pax

[WestRider]

 

 

So, does an occupied building count as an enemy model for the purpose of moving within 1" of it? As I read it, answer is no, though only implied.

 

I figure this one is yes, based on the bit in the Embarking section on Pg. 78 about "If players need to measure a range involving the embarked Unit, measure from the hull." Seems to me like this would qualify as a "range involving the embarked Unit."

[AbusePuppy]

That's a potential argument, but since it's legal for enemy models to land on the battlements of a building while you are occupying it, I was forced to assume that the 1" rule didn't apply. (Otherwise they would... hover just above the battlements somehow?)

[WestRider]

There's a specific exemption allowing them on the Battlements, tho, right? Wouldn't that leave this functioning in the more general case?

[AbusePuppy]

For getting onto the battlements when occupied? Not that I recall offhand, no.

[WestRider]

Then without a specific exemption, what is the basis for them being able to get up there?

[Guest]

As I read it, they can't get onto the battlements unless there is an "access point" that allows entering the battlements without first entering the building. The FSR and Aquilla both have ladders that appear to be for this purpose. Beyond that, somehow landing on the battlements seems the only other option.

 

The book is pretty clear about allowing models to be on the battlements of a building occupied by enemy models.

 

I think the logic is that when approaching the building from the bottom level/side, it's a building, but when on top, it's a ruin. I think the 1" rule applies when the building is a building, but doesn't when it's a ruin.

 

I am beginning to consider an entire home-brewed building rules supplement, as the GW rules seem to create more issues that a simple concept like buildings should generate.

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

Then without a specific exemption, what is the basis for them being able to get up there?

 

The fact that the 1" rule doesn't apply to them.

 

 

As I read it, they can't get onto the battlements unless there is an "access point" that allows entering the battlements without first entering the building. The FSR and Aquilla both have ladders that appear to be for this purpose. Beyond that, somehow landing on the battlements seems the only other option.

 

Yeah, you would need either a side ladder, as some of them have, or jump/jet pack status to get there. That's my point, though- SHA gives specific rules for what you do when an enemy unit is on the battlements and a friendly one is inside the fortification. If the 1" rule applies to fortifications, this situation could never come up because you couldn't legally get onto the battlements while a unit was inside the building.

[Guest]

Yeah, you would need either a side ladder, as some of them have, or jump/jet pack status to get there. That's my point, though- SHA gives specific rules for what you do when an enemy unit is on the battlements and a friendly one is inside the fortification. If the 1" rule applies to fortifications, this situation could never come up because you couldn't legally get onto the battlements while a unit was inside the building.

I always thought the point of the 1" rule was just to seperate units that were in assault from units that weren't. I think in this case, the 1" applies for the purpose of standing outside the building, not for climbing the ladder or being on the battlements. Logic is that models sitting within 1" of the building, but not the battlements, are considered to be assaulting it, while models on the battlements are standing on top. Agree on it being very vague.

-Pax

[WestRider]

Ah, there we go. I was too drunk to dig through the books myself last night :P

 

I think Pax brings up an important point about the purpose of the 1" restriction, given the fact that it is possible to be in an Assault with an enemy-occupied Fortification. The RAW doesn't cover, but that gives a pretty solid indication of the RAI extending in this case.

[AbusePuppy]

Certainly that is the purpose of the 1" rule, but it has a lot of implications beyond that in the game.