PDA

View Full Version : Winged = Invisible?



GrandReaper
08-01-2009, 01:08 AM
Hey all. The rules for targeting a model state that you must see a part of the model's body (ie: torso, head, legs, arms, but not counting weapons, banners or wings)

So, if I were to model a Daemon Prince such that his wings were folded around him, concealing him completely, would the rules render him immune to being targeted by shooting?

Then, taking it to absurd lengths, what if I were to have the model with four wings - one pair wrapped around, concealing all targetable body parts and one pair that basically covers everything in my deployment zone from 1/4 inch above the table to 6-8 inches above the table. Then none of my models can see or be seen by anything outside my deployment zone? Plus, if the wings had several points of articulation, their LoS blocking could be customized at will.

Please debunk this for me.

Lerra
08-01-2009, 01:47 AM
I would interpret that rule as "Wings, weapons, and banners don't exist for the purposes of determining LoS" so that they would still be able to see the model. Also, most tournaments ban conversions which provide you with a rules benefit and would never let that fly (no pun intended).

CrusherJoe
08-01-2009, 02:00 AM
BGB, Pg. 16, 3rd Paragraph:

"Sometimes, all that may be visible of a model is a weapon, an antenna, a banner or some other ornament he is wearing or carrying (including its wings and tail, even though they are technically part of its body). In these cases, the model is not visible. These rules are intended to ensure that models don't get penalized for having impressive standards, blades, guns, majestic wings, etc."

Note that the book refers to wings as an "ornament" (calling them out specifically in the parenthetical statement). Since the "ornament" can't be used to draw line of sight to, the ornament itself is invisible, not the rest of the model. Invisible wings would of course let you see the body underneath/behind them, unless you wanted to claim the body was also invisible...in which case, I'd have to say that since it is invisible, that means no actual photons are reaching the eyes of the creature (since light is literally passing right through it, not impacting on any tissue (such as eyeballs, retina, cornea, etc.) and thus, the creature in question is totally blind, and therefore cannot shoot or engage in close combat.

And that, as they say, would be that.

bob
08-01-2009, 08:06 AM
You cannot take cover with you p. 21 mrb

This question is so unsporting it's not funny

GrandReaper
08-01-2009, 08:12 AM
Well, I wasn't implying someone should use it. It's just rather funny. If anyone tried it I would recommend an immediate Dread-Socking.

Crusher Joe: I agree that your interpretation is the correct one, however I don't believe it is in any way backed up by the quote in literal turns. Technically, all that is visible of the model is its wings - thus "the model is not visible". It doesn't say act as if only the wings/ornamentation are invisible.

bob: Well, Wings aren't cover, they're part of the actual model. However, I do think this is the best avenue for fighting it ruleswise.

I love bizarre ambiguities!

BuFFo
08-01-2009, 09:10 AM
So, if I were to model a Daemon Prince such that his wings were folded around him, concealing him completely, would the rules render him immune to being targeted by shooting?

1) If you were to do this, the wings would be the model, and thus its torso.

2) How can 'invisible' wings block LOS to the torso anyway?

Either way, LOS can be traced to the model just fine.

Hal'jin
08-01-2009, 02:09 PM
And if you tried anything like this and argued I think your model could lose wings very fast. Either that or you'd lose opponents very fast.

GrandReaper
08-02-2009, 05:06 PM
This is why I posted it. The answer in all good faith is obvious and trivial, but nothing backs up the conclusion that it's absurd.

BuFFo: 1) No, the wings are not the torso. There's a torso under there, I swear.
2) Nothing in the game ever mentions anything being invisible (maybe my name for the thread has mislead people). The only rule states that, if all you can see are weapons, banners, wings, etc, then the model is NOT visible. Not the wings, but the model. This might prevent it blocking LOS to things behind it under the right interpretation, however.

If anyone has a rule that veto's this, then that's what I'm after and I would love to see it. If not, just say that it's rediculous but doesn't seem to be technically illegal. Just saying it's not allowed without reference is a waste.

And as I said, I would never do this, it's just interesting.

BuFFo
08-02-2009, 08:21 PM
This is why I posted it. The answer in all good faith is obvious and trivial, but nothing backs up the conclusion that it's absurd.

BuFFo: 1) No, the wings are not the torso. There's a torso under there, I swear.

If all the model is is a pair of wings, then yes, it is the torso. That is that the model is.


2) Nothing in the game ever mentions anything being invisible (maybe my name for the thread has mislead people). The only rule states that, if all you can see are weapons, banners, wings, etc, then the model is NOT visible. Not the wings, but the model. This might prevent it blocking LOS to things behind it under the right interpretation, however.

When determing LOS to the model, the wings are, for all intent and purposes, ignored completely, which is the same as being invisible.

So yes, a model wrapped in wings can still be seen.


If anyone has a rule that veto's this, then that's what I'm after and I would love to see it.

Page 16, Check Line of Sight & Pick Target, Third Paragraph.

It is quite obvious in plain English wings are ignored for LOS purposes.

If you can convince me that the wings wrapped around a model counts as majestic wings than you got a case. But wings wrapped around a model is not majestic. So unless you got majestic wings which are spread out, you got a visible model. Majestic wings are obviously wings that are spread out as if the model is flying or posing, not wrapped around the model like a bat.

But the second you wrap the wings around a model, the case can be made that the wings ARE the model, since there is nothing under them, and hence the wings ARE the body.


it's just interesting.

No it isn't.

Jwolf
08-02-2009, 09:00 PM
Easter Egg Hunts are sometimes entertaining to do in person, but they lose a lot of the humor value on the internet when there is no ability to interact in person.

An interpretation of LOS that provides invisibility is even worse than Siren was, and thatwas bad enough.

bob
08-02-2009, 09:15 PM
If all the model is is a pair of wings, then yes, it is the torso. That is that the model is.


Think about that, and the meaning of each word in relation to each other, when you realise why I said this you can post again


No it isn't.

Why do you think your allowed decide what other people find interesting

BuFFo
08-02-2009, 10:45 PM
Why do you think your allowed decide what other people find interesting

You are right. I shouldn't have said that.



Think about that, and the meaning of each word in relation to each other, when you realise why I said this you can post again

....

Woah wait a second... I can't tell you if 'something is entertaining', but then you go ahead and feel the need to give me permission to post again?

LOL

Knee deep hypocrisy and irony aside.... A model that is just a wing(s) is a model with NO ornamental additions, as per the rules, so yes, the model can be shot at.

GrandReaper
08-02-2009, 10:57 PM
Okay. For the sake of further argument (I love a good debate and hope no one takes things personally), suppose that you can see a sliver of the torso in the very back of the model between a tiny gap between the wings (say 1/4" gap about 3/4' away from the torso, so a VERY tiny part of the table can see the torso).

So, not completely invisible, but functionally so.

Lord Anubis
08-02-2009, 11:16 PM
By this rationale, except for a few Tyranids and manly Catachans, you can't see any model's torso. Oh, sure, you can see the armor or uniform they're wearing over their torso, but you can't actually see their body, can you?

Therefore, my Space Marines are invisible. Thank you for the Rogue Trader statue.

;)

GrandReaper
08-03-2009, 12:52 AM
An interesting take....

Lancefireball
08-03-2009, 08:16 AM
I think people are kinda missing the whole point of this Thread..

Some people are saying If you have wings around the whole model that the wings become the torso... I don't remember anything like that in the Rule book..

Its like saying if I put an apple in a box that the box becomes an apple. The box is still a box. It just has an apple in it much like the wings are still wings.

If you follow logic and RAW then ya it would work. it follows all logic that it would work people just don't like the idea so they make up reasons for it to not work in there head...

GrandReaper is not bringing up this because he is going to do it.... he is just a guy who likes to figt and annoy people. I should know. I know him in real life lol.

1: if anyone did this in a fun game then they would get laughed at and told to go screw themselfs.
2: if anyone did this in a tourny the judge would laugh and kick them out of it or say to bad..


ppl need to lighten up and relax.. You live longer...

Abominable Plague Marine
08-03-2009, 08:47 AM
ppl need to lighten up and relax.. You live longer...

16 posts..............

BuFFo
08-03-2009, 11:30 AM
I think people are kinda missing the whole point of this Thread..

Some people are saying If you have wings around the whole model that the wings become the torso... I don't remember anything like that in the Rule book..

its nto in the book because its common sense.

If the model is only a pair of wings, then that IS what the model IS. Now, the model would need, as per the rules, ornaments, like another par of majestic wings, otherwise the model itself IS the torso.

That would be the same as creating nothing but gun drones for an adeptus mechanicus army, then claiming the drones have no body since they aren't 'human'. They are only guns.


If you follow logic and RAW then ya it would work. it follows all logic that it would work people just don't like the idea so they make up reasons for it to not work in there head...

Sometime, in a non tournament HOBBY, common sense overrides raw. If all the model is is a pair of wings, or a gun turret, before the game you and your opponent decides what the 'torso' is. If he doesn't want the model to have a torso as per the rules, then per real life he won't get a game. Simple. He can watch two other people play on the table. Maybe eat one of those apples you mentioned.

Simply put, a discussion like this is just a post count modifier on a forum online, but in real life, the idiot trying to pull the stunt won't find anyone to play with.

Dan-e
08-03-2009, 01:59 PM
i say if the player wants to argue that i can't shoot his dudes because their wings wrap around them hence i don't have LoS, then his units can't draw LoS to mine because his wings block LoS from him to my guys... but yeah, this is a gross abuse of the rules and very unsporting.

CrusherJoe
08-03-2009, 08:23 PM
OK guys, either this thread stops teetering on becoming mental and verbal masturbation or it gets the lock.

GrandReaper
08-03-2009, 09:27 PM
You may as well lock it. There is no concrete answer, just speculation, which is what I figured initially. I wasn't trying to irk people, just curious. Like I said, I like ambiguities. Did I pick the right hobby or what? Keep that playtesting to a minimum GW!

Lancefireball
08-03-2009, 09:44 PM
its nto in the book because its common sense.

If the model is only a pair of wings, then that IS what the model IS. Now, the model would need, as per the rules, ornaments, like another par of majestic wings, otherwise the model itself IS the torso

No one is saying that the model is JUST a pair of wings. Its a MODEL with wings surrounding it. I don't understand why this is so hard for ur mind to grasp. Just because you can ONLY see the wings that does not mean that the wings become the body.. There is a model inside there and reaper made a fine point. Maybe you can see a tiny bit of the back of the model like Reaper said.

Also it does not say in the rulebook that wings have to be spread out. They are still an ornament if wrapped around the body. One can even say that the unit is much like a bat. the wings are surrounding it or some kinda vampire that wants to look " spooky " just because wings are spread out most of the time does not mean they have to be spread out. You are simply taking the rules and trying to make them work for you by making statements that make no sense.


in threory yes this does work but you would get punched in the face pretty fast.

BuFFo
08-03-2009, 10:19 PM
It doesn't take a degree in 40k to understand the designer intent here. Wings are not counted as part of the body if they are ornamental and spread out, like all GW wings are sculpted as. All of them. Without exception.

I can simply go to the 'Most Important Rule' and call shenanigans on this whole debate. If you are trying to create a model that cannot be killed through 'clever' modeling, then you are breaking the spirit of the game. Pure and simple. No tournament would allow this, and no opponent with half a brain would allow it either.

I understand the wit in trying to bring this type of 'discussion' here, but please, save this kind of flame bait discussions for other forums.

CrusherJoe
08-04-2009, 12:10 AM
I think the consensus is go ahead and lock it. No offense to anyone, but there's nowhere else for this discussion to go.

Locking.