PDA

View Full Version : Another LOS query!



DeathlessDraich
26-06-2006, 19:02
I've been having LOS problems lately. I need glasses!:D

This is the scenario:

w= woods and C1 and C2 are characters - BOTH characters are wizards who are about 1 and a half inches within each of the 2 woods.

wwwwwww________wwwwwwww
wwwwC1ww_______wwC2wwww
wwwwwwww________wwwwww

Q1. Do they have LOS to each other?


Q2. If LOS is drawn through a hedge to a unit 15" behind it, does it still benefit from soft cover? If not then at what distance must a unit be from a low wall or hedge for it to benefit from soft cover?

mageith
26-06-2006, 22:09
I've been having LOS problems lately. I need glasses!:D

This is the scenario:

w= woods and C1 and C2 are characters - BOTH characters are wizards who are about 1 and a half inches within each of the 2 woods.

wwwwwww________wwwwwwww
wwwwC1ww_______wwC2wwww
wwwwwwww________wwwwww

Q1. Do they have LOS to each other?

Great another original question. I'd say no. There's more than 2 inches of woods between them.




Q2. If LOS is drawn through a hedge to a unit 15" behind it, does it still benefit from soft cover? If not then at what distance must a unit be from a low wall or hedge for it to benefit from soft cover?

If the hedge counts as wall, then there is no LOS. If you are suggesting the hedge is a woods and less than 2 inches, then if the shots go through the hedge it counts as soft cover.

Disclaimer: I've never encountered either of these situations and I think Deathless has too much time on his hands.

Mage Ith

T10
27-06-2006, 00:14
Q1: I'd say yes.

Since a wood of any width (even less than 1") blocks line of sight between models outside it, it is clear that you don't add up the length of your, uh, wood when determining line of sight.

Q2: Obstacles block line of sight unless the target or shooter is touching it, in which case it is hard (walls) or soft (hedges) cover. I've noted that the fact that obstacles block line of sight is frequently ignored, but it's usually no big deal as I usually add walls and stuff mostly to dress the battle field up a bit rather than create some sort of mini-fortress :)

mageith
27-06-2006, 04:03
Q1: I'd say yes.
Since a wood of any width (even less than 1") blocks line of sight between models outside it, it is clear that you don't add up the length of your, uh, wood when determining line of sight.

:wtf: Where does this come from? This is probably a misparaphrase of this? "Woods block line of sight if the shooter and the target are on either side of the wood." (59) This NOT the case under consideration.

In our case both units/models are in woods and looking at and looking in. "So if a model inside a wood is within 2 inches, he can see out...and can also be seen." (59)

In real life, I'm sure, the models could see each other. In game terms "It is only possible to see through up to 2 inches of woodland...." (59) So I'd add the distances and in the case at hand deny the models the ability shoot.

Mage Ith

T10
27-06-2006, 12:10
My point is that if the sum of the distances of the line drawn through woodland terrain was the issue, then drawing line of sight through a 1" wide forest would simply count as looking through 1" of wood in addition to whatever else is along the line of sight. However, that is not the case.

This fits with the approach that each section of wood has an individual effect on line of sight.

Regardless, this is something the players will need to decide between them: there rules simply do not take into account "advanced" situations like this.

-T10

mageith
27-06-2006, 14:25
Regardless, this is something the players will need to decide between them: there rules simply do not take into account "advanced" situations like this.

It does, whether GW intended it to or not:
"It is only possible to see through up to 2 inches of woodland, ...." (59)

The examples the follow this rule do not demonstrate that GW was actually thinking of this situation but examples don't necessarily limit the rule, do they? The rule stands on its own. At least that's my way of interpreting.

As I said, I've never encountered this situation myself so I'm not surprised GW didn't include it in their examples.

gortexgunnerson
27-06-2006, 17:43
Thought that quote form page 59 is incomplete,

"It is only possible to see through up to 2" of woodland, so if a model inside a wood is within 2" of the edge, he can see out and shoot and he can also be seen and shot at"

So the rule counters itself, in this instance I would take the latter sentence as think it is a more sensible ruling. People agree that both mages can be seen and see out of the wood. To then say they cannot see each other seems wrong.

On the principle fo cover, you an only claim cover if you are touching it. Shooting over walls/hedges does not create a modifier

mageith
28-06-2006, 02:53
Thought that quote form page 59 is incomplete,

... That's what the three dots mean.




"It is only possible to see through up to 2" of woodland, so if a model inside a wood is within 2" of the edge, he can see out and shoot and he can also be seen and shot at"

So the rule counters itself,
It doesn't counter itself. This the example of which I spoke earlier. The example doesn't deal with our situation, as I said. Where I come from examples are just that --examples--- and don't replace a rule even if I like them better. ;) Maybe its different where you come from?




in this instance I would take the latter sentence as think it is a more sensible ruling.

Except its neither a rule nor a ruling. It's merely an example. The example is true as far as it goes.



People agree that both mages can be seen and see out of the wood. To then say they cannot see each other seems wrong.

Again, as I said, in real life probably two folks very partially hiding in the woods could probably see each other. In game terms if the woods between them is more than two inches they cannot. That's the rule!

Ganymede
28-06-2006, 04:52
As the terrain rules somehow seem lacking in the BRB, my friends and I took it upon ourselves to compile a set of rules to deal with the situation a while ago.

Rule 1: You can see no further than 2" into a forest.

Rule 2: You can see no further than 2" out of a forest.

Rule 3: You can never see through a forest, no matter how thin.

DeathlessDraich
29-06-2006, 13:52
Thanks for the replies.

Ganymede,
The rules you stated seem to be identical to the rules in the book, except for rule 3.

Gortex,
"you an only claim cover if you are touching it. Shooting over walls/hedges does not create a modifier"
Could you clarify touching it and is this in the rules somewhere? Would a model 1" from a low wall claim soft cover?


:) A contrived situation, just for you Mageith :D :

Suppose in the above situation C1 decides to charge C2.

C2's reaction is stand and shoot.
He is in the middle third of his charge distance when he is in the open.

Assuming the charge is within range and the distance is not half the charge distance etc, will C1 still be able to claim soft cover?

mageith
29-06-2006, 14:02
Ganymede,
Suppose in the above situation C1 decides to charge C2.

C2's reaction is stand and shoot.

Assuming the charge is within range and the distance is not half the charge distance etc, will C1 still be able to claim soft cover?

He is in the middle third of his charge distance when he is in the open.
Logically a charging unit is moving toward the chargee. In a game sense, of course, the charging unit isn't moved until just before it makes contact.

I think the rules say that you count a unit from where it starts its charge. So if the unit starts its charge in soft cover, it can claim soft cover.

However if C1 and C2 are both in the woods and the total distance of the woodland between them is greater than 2 inches, there can't be a charge anyway because there's no line of sight.

Ganymede
29-06-2006, 17:24
Thanks for the replies.

Ganymede,
The rules you stated seem to be identical to the rules in the book, except for rule 3.


without the third rule, every forest on the table has an amorphous, nebulous cloud of semi-LoS around it. Players could graze shots through parts of a forest, as long as it was only two inches of forest. Playing it this way created a lot of awkward situations and required careful, disputable measurements diagonally through the edge of a forest.

Rule three nicely abstracts the forest rules, allowing for better in-game interaction.