Flyers and charging

[MorGrendel]

In addition, this is the same flying rule from at least 6th edition. I admit the previous incarnations provide more explaination, but what is in 8th is literally word for word the rule from 6th. I don't understand the sudden change in interpretation.

Why can't you end your turn over another unit or over a forest? Because you have to land. You've always had to land.

As for the extrapolation of the eye line, it happens all the time and is not as foriegn an element as you suggest. Where do you measure from on warmachines? Not the crew's eyes. What about a unit in a building? You just assume they can see out the widows or slits, and since the rules limit the number of shooters per floor, you roll with it.

Being able to see the entire battlefield far outweighs the risk of losing a 50 point model to shooting.

[MorGrendel]

Let me know the next time you guys play. I wouldn't mind watching to learn.

Jason is always dieing for a game, and I'm game most days, but I need a little advanced notice as my army requires a lot of models. Jason and I also have spare armies; however, I also think Serban's practice of giving you a couple giant's to cause havoc with is also a great way to learn. Maybe after kick ball. Things should free up now that the girls are out of school.

[Titus]

I am moving in two weeks, so my table is going to get tossed. The top, if anyone is interested.

[Fritz]

Empire Gryphon - Rock is on the ground. Not invisible rod.
High Elf Dragon - Touching the ground. Chalk the cheese that the HE ground is 4 inches off the rest of the ground to more HE shenanigans. They get the best of everything.
Undead Ghouls - Touching the ground - measure from eyes. Really, well-postured zombies? Pa-sha!
Wardancers - I would give them their hieght (begrudgingly); however, my experience is that my opponent lays them/him down because they are "sneaking". I seem to only remember one tall model, so again, should one tall model provide an advantage to an entire unit. Seems a bit unbalanced to me. I'd also concede to give the HE wizard on a magical soap box his half inch, I mean why shouldn't the HE wizard be taller than all other wizards.

Got it, so I can just take away the flying stand, model them attached to big rocks or on a floaty box, and I'm good to go. Can't you see how arbitrary your distinctions are? You're adding distinctions of what counts and what doesn't with no rules to support any of it. How the model is positioned is where they are. Period.

Rearing horse - Archeon, of course. That's the model, you expect him to dominate the tablescape. And he's touching the ground. However, for one Empire night in a unit I'd balk if he was less than a 1/4 inch taller than his mates. The same slippery slope applies here. Can't everyone rear up, can't everyone jump. My model is not posed with a pistol in hand, or his lance down, but I can still shoot and charge, why then cant I just rear my horse to gain an extra 1/4 inch. BTW, being on a rearing horse is like sitting on a catapult, you are real busy hanging on for dear life.

You're making my point for me. Of course a fighter on a horse could rear. Of course a guy could jump. Do we care about that? No. All we care about is where the model physically is on the tabletop. The rules say you draw line of sight from the model's eye view. There is no adjusting for actions.

So you contend that if I cast Howling Warpgale (may not fly, must use basic move) or use the Storm Banner (no flying movement allowed across the entire battlefield) that you still measure from the air?

Yup. The model is where the model is. If the base of the model is on the board, the model is "on the ground." In that case the flying stand is nothing but a disadvantage anyway. If those spells are active you wouldn't be able to move or charge over an enemy unit because that action is part of the fly rule. All it does is make it more likely to get shot.

In addition, this is the same flying rule from at least 6th edition. I admit the previous incarnations provide more explaination, but what is in 8th is literally word for word the rule from 6th. I don't understand the sudden change in interpretation.

That's easy. Line of sight changed enormously. 8th edition is true line of sight. 6th and 7th were not. Back in 6th and 7th you had clear cut rules that said one unit could not draw line of sight past an intervening unit. The only exception was large targets. 8th edition has no such rule. If anything the fact that the ground rule is a carbon copy of a rule from 6th edition shows that it is an outdated and archaic rule that has no real place in 8th edition. True line of sight, as a newer rule, takes precedence to me.

As for the extrapolation of the eye line, it happens all the time and is not as foriegn an element as you suggest. Where do you measure from on warmachines? Not the crew's eyes. What about a unit in a building? You just assume they can see out the widows or slits, and since the rules limit the number of shooters per floor, you roll with it.

You're 100% wrong on both counts. They have very specific exceptions that say from where to draw line of sight.

For war machines: "Light of sight is always taken from the chosen firing point (i.e. its muzzle or crossbar, in the same way as for its range)." p. 109

For buildings: "A garrison unit can shoot in the Shooting phase, tracing line of sight from any point on the building. The forward arc of the garrison unit is assumed to be 360 degrees (i.e. all around so we don't need to worry about that either. The range for a garrison's shooting attacks is always measured from the closest point of the building." p. 127.

If you can provide a specific exception that says a flyer does not draw line of sight from its natural position on its base I'll change my mind.

Being able to see the entire battlefield far outweighs the risk of losing a 50 point model to shooting.

Who said anything about the entire battlefield? I'm saying you have line of sight to what you can see from the model's eye view. I'm not arguing for just a 50 point model and the fact that you think that's all I would apply the rule to is incredibly insulting. If Jason was using Pegasus Knights to charge a character of mine that was behind one of my units I'd interpret this rule the exact same way. On the flip side, Jason's Pegasus Knights would be pretty exposed to shooting.

[MorGrendel]

Right, well my footing isn't as strong when you begin debating reductio ad absurdum with statements like whether or not a zombie can stand up straight. I guess I should just use your tact and simply ignore any points that risk not harmonizing with my point.

[Fritz]

Exactly what point of yours have I ignored? I've quoted and hit each of your points head on. You're the one who has yet to point to a single rule that explicitly tells me where I draw line of sight from if not the eyes of the model. This argument simply comes down to whether or not a flying stand counts as part of the model. The Ghoul example was meant to be absurd because it is absurd to adjust line of sight based on action.

[MorGrendel]

You continue to skip over:
Why can't a flyer end the turn over another unit, friend or foe?
I contend because they land, and two things can not occupy the same space at the same time.

I have shown you a rule regarding flyers: p. 70 states "The flyer starts off on the ground, takes off, flies where it wishes to go, and then lands. Flyers, therefore, begin and end their movement on the ground." Since charges are declared before movement, charge distance and LOS are measured from the ground, as are magic and shooting later in the same turn after magic. There is no exception rule stating you measure from the air, because the rules state you are on the ground, just like every other model.

I can find no rule that supposes the height of bases, and the only time the "size area" is discussed (p. 98), it refers to the "footprint", a flat construct, and defers to "common-sense". My opinion is because the height of bases is not covered in the context of the rules, that such a condition can not exist. I feel the purpose of bases to make models dynamic and keep them from falling over, and not a game construct.

[Fritz]

You continue to skip over:
Why can't a flyer end the turn over another unit, friend or foe?
I contend because they land, and two things can not occupy the same space at the same time.

And I would 100% agree. The ground rule is there prevent any clunky "this unit is high above this other unit" shenanigans since we're playing a turn based game. Even though a flyer could definitely orbit the battlefield in reality, the ground rule is there to keep things simpler.

I have shown you a rule regarding flyers: p. 70 states "The flyer starts off on the ground, takes off, flies where it wishes to go, and then lands. Flyers, therefore, begin and end their movement on the ground." Since charges are declared before movement, charge distance and LOS are measured from the ground, as are magic and shooting later in the same turn after magic. There is no exception rule stating you measure from the air, because the rules state you are on the ground, just like every other model.

And I continue to contend that so long as the base is touching the table, the model is on the ground since distinguishing between things that elevate a model is arbitrary. I just can't justify counting a giant rock, but not a flying stand. Hell, some flying stands are shorter than some of the rocks out there. Take a look at the Bretonnian Gryphon and the High Elf Dragon. Those are some big ass rocks. And before you complain about how super cheesy High Elves are yet again, I don't know a single person that wouldn't prefer that 370 point monster to be lower so that it wasn't shot to hell on turn 1. There's a reason they aren't commonly used.

I can find no rule that supposes the height of bases, and the only time the "size area" is discussed (p. 98), it refers to the "footprint", a flat construct, and defers to "common-sense". My opinion is because the height of bases is not covered in the context of the rules, that such a condition can not exist. I feel the purpose of bases to make models dynamic and keep them from falling over, and not a game construct.

Common sense also says that a flyer that spent time in the air would remember what it saw. It would also be vulnerable while airborne since everything can see them. While we play the game in regimented turns, it is meant to represent a fluid battle with things constantly in motion. If a bird takes off from behind a bush and lands behind another bush, I can still see it (and shoot it) while it's in the air.

In my opinion because the height of bases is not covered in the context of the rules you can't deviate from the basic rule of measuring Line of Sight from the eyes of the model to the body of another. A Flyer on the flying stand is both able to see more, but also seen by more.

[MorGrendel]

Just reread what I wrote, and I wanted to clarify that the reference to "common-sense" was a derision towards GW rules-writers. If we are to follow "common-sense" we wouldn't need a rule book. I was not implying you did not have or use common-sense.

[Fritz]

Just reread what I wrote, and I wanted to clarify that the reference to "common-sense" was a derision towards GW rules-writers. If we are to follow "common-sense" we wouldn't need a rule book. I was not implying you did not have or use common-sense.

Don't worry, I didn't take it as any kind of insult. I was just arguing that the common sense clause of the rules in my favor.

[Berserker]

Just to add something here, I asked this question on my ogre board and the concensus is that the standard pin that comes with the model is part of the model and so you draw line of sight with the model on the standard pin (you don't take the model off of the pin).

[Titus]

There are four sizes for the flying pins. FYI.