Line of Sight

[Sjeng]

I play by these rules:

HQ-line-of-sight.jpg

But I've recently read somewhere (can't find where, but I think chaoticprime posted it) that when a monster or hero is in a diagonal line of sight, and the line touches an edge on TWO SIDES, then the LOS is blocked... Which kinda makes sense.

In the above picture, that would be for example another Hero standing beneath the top left orc. The Elf should not be able to see the orc, because on one side of the diagonal line there's a Hero (or Monster), and on the other side, there's a wall.

Following this reasoning however, the Wizard in the above picture should NOT be able to attack the diagonal orc in both cases.
The rules state he can however, so can a Hero cast a spell or attack a diagonal enemy even when he is flanked on both sides, or not? I've always played with this to be possible.

[torilen]

Yeah, I would go with that, too.

I've got another example for you, too. If there are two corners or edges, but on the same side:

line of sight.jpg

The x is the monster/target. Now, maybe hero 1 and hero 2 might not pose much of a line of sight issue,
but if they were corners, I would definitely say that hero 3 might have trouble hitting the monster.

[chaoticprime]

Only for Hero and Monster movement is horizontal space quantified abstractly into "squares". For calculating what a Hero can "see," space remains actual--there is no quantum involvement of height and width like there is with distance. Basically, a square occupied by a Hero or Monster is not considered to be a "one-square cube" of obstructed space, and neither would be squares containing furniture. There is no actual width to the imaginary line that you must trace between your Hero and the Monster. As the rule specifies that central mass must be exposed for an action to range on a target, central mass of a miniature would then also be what causes obstruction, save for perhaps bulky Monsters such as Fimirs and Gargoyles.

Now, if the wanted action is an attack with the staff or the longsword, neither weapon truly factors in range, rather they consider adjacency. In the text on the Armory, you are informed that the staff and longsword allow you to attack diagonally. And in the rulebook, it says that attacks are made against adjacent enemies, which normally only considers those orthogonal to you. It also distinctly separates diagonal attacks from ranged ones. What this effectively states, is that if you want to throw a dagger or shoot a crossbow at an enemy in a diagonal square, and there are heroes or monsters in perpendicular squares to yours, it is plausible to be denied confirmation that you can "see" the monster. In the same scenario, however, diagonal attacks do not require you to "see" anything, so there would be no grounds to forbid the attack from taking place. There are diagonal attacks, and there are ranged attacks made against diagonal targets.

[IvenBach]

The idea of LoS came into question with my group and I erred in ruling allowing a spell that the player shouldn't have been able to do. Ended up shafting myself but a few extra traps will remedy that.

What about if you have 2 players diagonally adjacent to one another sandwiching a monster in the corner. Would the wizard be able to cast between them to target the monster if he were strictly diagonal? What is the general consensus? Yea/Nay? Red squares for LoS illustration.

:gargoyle:	:barbarian:
:dwarf:
		:wizard:

[Sjeng]

Well, seeing as an attack is allowed, I'd say a spell is also allowed. A spell should in fact be easier to cast on a partially obstructed enemy than actually trying to hit it with a weapon or arrow.

[chaoticprime]

That would be allowed. Now, if that monster in the corner had a Gargoyle and a Fimir in the squares instead of two heroes, that may be different.

[torilen]

Yes, I'd have to say that certain spells would be allowed, but NOT range weapon attacks, NOR would
I let spells that involve a "range-like" attack. Any sort of ray-type attack, for example, that shoots
from the wizard to the target would not be safe for the two other heroes, and so shouldn't be allowed.

[IvenBach]

Torilen how would you determine that? Figuring out which spells would be rays or may be affected by something blocking them. Once you determine which spells are rays what would you do about them being obstructed? Possibly have it hit the obstructing hero creature on a black shield?

[chaoticprime]

There wouldn't need to be a new rule to cover that. Obstructions do not create chances for failure, they determine whether or not the action may be taken at all. The rules state that you "must be able to "see"" your target to do anything at all.

[Sotiris]

I'll post here too my LOS rule version (for spells+weapons) which, for me at least, solves all kinds of visibility issues.

A target is visible when you have a clear Line Of Sight from your square center to:

• their square center
  (ignore 2nd occasion if target is at a diagonal square, unless LOS stops earlier; it stops at the first square after it has been touched by occupied squares from both sides)
  AND
• any spot (not a corner) of a side of their square
  (ignore 1st occasion if target is within your M.P. area, unless a wall or high furniture cuts LOS)

Wizard may "see" Orcs 2,3 and 4 (bright squares are visible).
Elf may "see" Orcs 3,4 and 9.
Dwarf may "see" Orcs 8 and 9. Orc 5 isn't visible because LOS stops at square D.
Barbarian may only "see" the Goblin. His LOS stops at square B. Without the Goblin he would "see" Orcs 6 and 7.


Wizard may see all but not the greenskins
( 's LOS is lost by the wall, 's LOS is lost by the warriors and it's out of Wizard's M.P. area)
Although wizard has no clear LOS (center to center) with the Chaos Warriors, they are visible because
a) he can see 1 side of their square
b) they are within wizard's M.P.(=6) area
and c) LOS (from center to center) is not lost by a wall or high furniture.