PDA

View Full Version : Cover quandaries



Lord Inquisitor
17-08-2010, 23:58
Issue 1

"If the majority of the models in the target unit (or, when firing against a single model, more than half of the target model) is obscured from the shooting model's view by other models (friend or enemy) or by terrain then an additional To Hit modifier is applied."

Okay, for single models, this is pretty clear.

For units does this mean:
The majority of models must be obscured by any amount (i.e. if you cant see the feet of 5 models out of 10, the whole unit is considered obscured)
More than 50% of the cross-sectional area of the enemy unit must be covered in order for the unit to count as in cover
The majority of models in the target unit must be covered by 50% (i.e. if you can see more than half of the bodies of more than half of the unit, it's in cover.)
100% of half of the unit's models must be covered to count as cover

All of these are potentially interpretations of the above sentence - I've already seen discussions on what this actually means over the tabletop by players who assume wildly different interpretations.

The picture on page 41 (and in particular the knights) are in cover despite not entirely obscured so one can probably discount interpretation 4 and perhaps 2 as well, but since the knights are obscured by just under 50% its hard to say exactly what they meant.

Issue 2

"If a firer is shooting at a model that is behind an obstacle and in base contact with it, the target model counts as in cover regardles sof how much of it is visible above the obstacle."

Does this mean

If a model/unit would not gain cover (because the obstacle doesn't cover 50% of their bodies), then they get cover if in contact. Intervening walls not in base contact still provide cover, providing the target is small enough to be obscured by it.
The obstacle ONLY provides cover if you are in base contact with it, but provides cover no matter how big you are.

Obviously large targets aside as they have their own exception.

stripsteak
18-08-2010, 01:31
Issue 1: 'obscured' isn't a quantitative word so really i don't think you can fairly apply a percentage to telling if a unit is obscured and you'll have to handle it case by case. In the case of a single model we are told to use 50% of the model, but aren't given a number for units.

Now for tournaments, or disagreements I would advocate treating each model in the unit as a single model, and if more than half of them can claim a cover save then the unit can...which would be option 3...but i think this is a more strict playing of the rule than is needed for friendly play and pick up games, but provides a consistent ruling for tournaments.

Issue 2: Choice 1. The rule doesn't mention anything about ignoring the normal cover save rules. It just adds a new addendum, this being that you can claim cover if you are touching the obstacle even if you couldn't normally.

Balerion
18-08-2010, 18:45
I'd say a unit is just a grouping of single models, and so each model in the unit needs to be 50% covered.

I'm not convinced that its expressed by the RaW, but it seems to be the intention (and the most elegant/fair solution in the face of the rules vacuum that seems to exist here).

Caladin
18-08-2010, 18:55
I'd say a unit is just a grouping of single models, and so each model in the unit needs to be 50% covered.

No that's can't be right. That would mean that a unit of 5 knights with 4 completly covered and 1 completly exposed would not get a cover save.

Lord Inquisitor
18-08-2010, 21:02
And the picture in the book clearly shows the knights - at the very least the last one on the end is certainly not 50% covered.

I'm leaning towards:
a) At least 50% of the models need to be at least partially obscured
b) At least 50% of the models need to be at least 50% obscured (potentially this means that 75% of the unit is visible)

These are the only options that really work with the knights example.

CGLover
18-08-2010, 21:52
Issue 1 answer 1.
Issue 2 answer 1.

My opinion.