Falling debris?

Okay, so I've googled (albeit I might not have googled hard enough) rules for falling debris.
As in pushing down heavy objects/other enemies onto passing/charging/loitering enemies.
So far I havent found anything, We used to play it by making a strenght test for the object itself and
a "countering movement test" for lack of a more vague description.

Basically, if the base of the object is as large as the base of the character/monster pushing it then it will fall (assuming its a. not a fixed location like a finely masoned chimney thats been refurbished after the comet or B. a crate full of antimatter ) as long as the character/monster passes his strength test.
If the character was in transit you made a movement test based on the enemy's movement to determine if you either make a wet misty cloud of the henchman, miss him completely (item gets stuck on the edge and falls down only seconds after he passes)
or blocks his path and in essence create a piece of difficult/impassable terrain only a hair in front of his nose.
This works fine but if there is an official ruling or a more streamlined version of this I'd be glad to hear it!

It would be house rule of course, but I would think Initiative test on the model that is being targeted would prevent it from being 'crushed'. Also, perhaps Strength test against the object being pushed over as well. Just my two groats...

1) Model make an initiative test
2) Must be "X" amount of inches within edge to be pushed (4 inches).
3) Must be a object that all agree can be moved.
4) Works like a diving charge..roll a 4+ to score a hit.
5) Work out normall wounding and saves.

We are talking about things that are already on the edge, such as makeshift barricades etc.
These are pieces of movable terrain, a half a tonne broken bronze statue of a mounted knight just doesnt disappear into thin air, and you loose that LOS protection.

Diving charge is a martrix move for dealing with entering CC from above as in negatable characters falling full throttle screaming GERONIMO/SQUEE FOR ESHIN!

When standing still it is ruled as a large improvised projectile in a general blunderbus direction (ie more a question of timing than of aiming.)

There that problem endeth.

The movement part is like a vertical version of a running tackle intercept and can very well be judged by initiative vs initiative although that removes some survivability and some of the spontanious chuck norrisism of it.
a more attentive and perhaps more authentic test would be basic movement vs strength (as in is guy X strong enough to push it over the edge faster than guy Y gets into CC with guy Z)
the movement vs. D6 is quite fair in my opinion as it brings out the reaction/timing+strength vs. speed element. this said Id probably be willing to play against any of these rulings.

I have a vague memory of a trap from an annual used during intercept, any one remember the wording on that one?

EDIT:
Does any one have more "Chuck Norrisisms"? as in rules for using modular terrain to the fullest?

MonkeyShaman wrote:

Does any one have more "Chuck Norrisisms"? as in rules for using modular terrain to the fullest?

Chuck Norris can re-roll a re-roll.

Does that count?

When catapults and trebuchets fired their loads of stone block would shatter on impact. The chips of flying rock did more damage than the rock did as it landed. This varied depending on the surface on which the missile landed: soft mud: possibly no break up at-all, to: stone: breaks into a bizzilion flying chips each capable of killing.

@ Identity: lol, gonna have to wait for that DP, "Walker Tilean Road Warden"
(Albeit an awesome idea, as the one who invented the character would of course be god/honorary Chuck) I was thinking more like AOT improvised shields, table kicking and general scenerery demolition
Sort of like the endless action packed fun of an ogre kicking a halfling out the window in CC with a critical hit making him paint the house across the street red.

@ Chad: Of course if you push a badly masoned decrepid piece of wall section from the top floor of a cathedral
the effects might be different, Siege engines aren´t really my strong point as I have only used them with fleshier materials

About the I vs. I test:
I thought it sounded mighty familiar, and as I was doing some light reading yesterday and looked at the the skill lists and found the skill lightning reflexes.
As it is a skill I think it would be wierd to apply it on this situation for anyone without the skill?

Not necesarily, a block of masonry is more likely to break up than a a solid block.

That it is, but as most ruined buildings are a 1-3 storey affair(since we are so lazy) this isnt much of an issue, I think the whole deal gets a lot more complex with larger buildings as there is a lower probability of proper LOS and the fact that things will hit harder from a larger distance to adress, things I dont feel so readily versed in to adress.

This is more 'Rules concerning massive/super heavy object intended to crush enemies on impact'.
This is a simplified version as to not halt the game to much and we made the rules under
the (at times) logical standpoint that if I have a brace of guns and good cover I would rather use them
than lob that flimsy barstool and lose my cover and be discovered by a now rather angry dire wolf/marksman.

I'm sure you can adapt and make rules for throwing of loose individual bricks but this is a more no questions asked approach to crushing enemies, I'd love to see notes on adaptations for shrapnel spread caused by dropping things from high placed (or trebuchets for that matter ) (A new use for nurglings perhaps?)
As Im also a big fan of encampment sieges
(might even find a use for them barnyard cows and those plastic giants...)

MonkeyShaman wrote:

I'd love to see notes on adaptations for shrapnel spread caused by dropping things from high placed (or trebuchets for that matter )

Try checking WHFB, stone throwers use round templates with a hole in the middle, anyone under the template takes a hit, anyone under the hole takes a really powerful hit.