How to counter door blocking + Crossbow LoS issues

[chaoticprime]

Yeah. The rules I quoted were on page 15 or 16 of the NA instructions. My whole point is that if we apply Occam's Razor, you have to suspend less disbelief when you have it so that crossbows cannot magically fire through windows--which is the way I believe the rules were intended to indicate. The larger issue isn't the graphics that depict the lines, its the text that says it originates from the figure and the other text that says it originates from the square.

[cynthialee]

So LOS issues....
The monster just around the corner isn't just sitting there static. Even if he is staying put for tactical reasons he is a dumb monster (or inquisitive hero when the tables are turned). He is gonna peek around the corner eventually at least one time during a turn sequence. As the game is turn based there is no way to simulate that exact second the monster peeks, so we rule the monster can be hit with the crossbow on the turn of the crossbow wielder.
So sometime during the melee the monster peeked and the hero took the shot.

[Anderas]

The Los works in two directions. Just shoot back.

On the other hand, if both adjacent squares are blocked, one by he wall and one by another hero, then there is no LOS anymore.
Additionally you can add, as also the los blocking hero is not static, if any black shield is showing up, all the skulls are resolved against the LOS blocking hero.

[Schmidt]

This is how WHQ handles LoS

image.jpg

[artisturn]

This is how WHQ handles LoS

image.jpg

This sounds very reasonable and would make the crossbow more then a just shoot the monster at the end of the hallway weapon.

[Jafazo]

What are you going on about with inconsistencies? Where?
You can cast spells on things you can "See". Crossbow uses the same keyword so we can safely assume it follows the same rules.
They tell you to draw a straight line from center to center. The "Rule of thumb" is in fact the actual rule.

Originally, I thought there were inconsistencies between the US and UK diagrams showing LoS. There are no inconsistencies though. After a while, I just dropped it though. In HQ, line of sight 'DOES' go past a solid corner, so an Elf 'CAN' shoot into a room diagonally with the Barbarian blocking the doorway. It's in the rules, it's a fact, there's no if's and's or butt's about it so I leave it be.

Some people allow it in their games, some don't. Both are backed with reasonably supportive evidences.

- Climbs the top rope, crowd goes wild, jumps... elbow drops the dead horse! -

[Daedalus]

The Elf isn't allowed to shoot through the Barbarian.

Let me counter the counterargument: He's not allowed to shoot diagonally through the door if the square in front of the door and adjacent to the Elf is occupied.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

The elf shooting isn't really the central problem in door blocking, but interesting issue regardless.

If we assume the rules are the same as Spellcasting, we can all agree you can't stand directly behind the barbarian and shoot straight through the door.
][

But can you stand next to the barbarian and shoot diagonal?
][


The LoS rules doesn't tell, but they certainly allow you to shoot around a corner. Even though though the line is mathematically blocked!

I "see" your mathematical point. Too bad neither the EU or the NA diagram didn't include an Orc just below and adjacent to the Elf, just inside the doorway. That would have better defined line of sight between a wall edge (open-door side) and intervening monster with respect to the south-east Orc.

I'm with Chaotic Prime and knightkrawler (and anyone else so inclined) concerning an Elf not being allowed to shoot between a door edge and the Barbarian positioned right in front of it. This is based off of my own intuitive understanding of the center to center line of sight.



Using either the EU or NA diagrams, consider first Orc around the corner at the top-left that the Elf has clear line of sight to. The Elf can see half of it. Now contrast the Orc around the corner at the top-right that the Elf doesn't have clear line of sight to. That corner blocks the line of sight so that less than half of the Orc is visible to the Elf. From these two cases it can be inferred that at least half of a figure must be visible for it to be targeted.

Now check the Wizard's line of sight to the same top-right Orc. It's a 45-degree diagonal line, so if there wasn't an Orc immediately below, it could be targeted with at least half showing, the same as with the top-left Orc. However, there is an Orc below and it is obstructing what the Wizard would otherwise "see"--the lower-right half of the top Orc. Even though the line of sight appears to be just touching the corner of the wall, it is also touching the corner of the Orc. It is actually passing through an intersection, which no longer satisfies the "just touching a corner" portion for clear line of sight.

I realize others could maintain the wall or monster aren't actually crossed, and that's a fine interpretation, too. My interpretation is based upon at-least-half-of-a-figure-is-visible from both halves at once, not a mathematical point of a corner or a point between two diagonally-connected squares that aren't considered jointly. It's a case of intuitive justification for me--the line of sight is closed off as either diagonal blocked square serves to block off the rest of a figure.

A good reason for accepting this is that it prevents the not-fun door blocking/sniping advantage Goblin King has pointed out. M/Z already has his work cut out for him without having to concern himself with this disadvantage. The reason for purchasing a diagonally-attacking melee weapon is also upheld, as a Hero may attack with it between the wall and Barbarian. A crossbow isn't better if it overlaps this ability, it is instead overpowered.

But again, shooting isn't really the main problem in door-blocking, it just allows you to pick off a few extra monsters if the room is filled.
Main problem is the armored tank blocking so that only a single monster can attack each round.

Don't forget after a [surviving -edit] monster attacks the Barbarian it can vacate the space so that another monster may attack in the same turn, as well.

[mitchiemasha]

I'd say by the rules the Wizard can shoot the Ork top right. The other diagram on page 15, american rules supports this.

I view the 'half visable' as from where the Elf is stud, the Ork (top left) can't fully conceal himself behind the corner. Where as the Ork top right can. It's not the Ork below him blocking LOS.

Judging by the WQ diagram and description the rules are the total opposite. You'd think that GW with the experience with HQ and AHQ would of finally come up with a very specific diagram by WQ as it's still vague.

[Gold Bearer]

I don't think LOS is blocked in that example either. There's nothing to suggest that you need to see at least half of the target. It's much simpler without that. You need to be able to trace a line from the centre of the square you're in to the centre of the target's square without anything in the way.

The reason the crossbow and the longsword are the same price is because the crossbow can't be used against a diagonally adjacent target. This can't be an oversight because it was repeated in the barbarian quest pack, a halberdier and crossbowman cost the same. This implies the makers know about the door guarding tactic and are okay with it. I don't think it's a problem because as has already been pointed out, the monsters can just wait in the room so that the heroes have to enter. The onus is on the heroes to complete the quest and the monsters to try to stop them, there's no reason why the have to play the heroes at that game.

I do think the crossbow should cost more than the longsword though. A simple way to somewhat fix this is to simply make the crossbow two handed like the battleaxe. This also works well for the staff and the spear in the Euro rules. I don't think they priced the Euro equipment properly because you can only have one of each card, so they're all useful, although the handaxe price is ridiculous.

[Daedalus]

I don't think LOS is blocked in that example either. There's nothing to suggest that you need to see at least half of the target. It's much simpler without that. You need to be able to trace a line from the centre of the square you're in to the centre of the target's square without anything in the way.

Since half visable doesn't work for you (fair enough, it's only an observation), think of it this way. You need to be able to trace a line from the center of the square you're in to the center of the target's square without crossing anything in the way, up to the limit of just touching a corner (at any instance.) Tracing a line from a sniping Elf to a monster just inside the doorway simultaneously passes through and contacts the corners of two blocked squares, not one. One square is blocked on a side by the wall while the other is blocked by an occupying Barbarian.

Those corners are there to represent discrete elements of those separate square spaces, and thus aren't best evaluated as the singular intersection of gridded lines. As the line must cross a blocked corner and another blocking corner, the requirement is failed.

Nailing it down to center-to-center is there to statically represent the chaos of combat with a guiding priciple: mostly blocked is blocked, where less-than-mostly is defined as crossing up to a corner, but no more. This means no shooting through a 1-point hole bound by blocking squares. Since the squares are touching at the corners, the point is closed off. This should make intuitive sense in a game with figures that are supposed to be moving about in a life-or-death situation. LOS can't be reliably maintained and exploited with only an imaginary point to show for it.

The reason the crossbow and the longsword are the same price is because the crossbow can't be used against a diagonally adjacent target. This can't be an oversight because it was repeated in the barbarian quest pack, a halberdier and crossbowman cost the same. This implies the makers know about the door guarding tactic and are okay with it....

This is all roughly true, but there is a case where a crossbow may be fired at diagonally "adjacent" or near monster, connected by a common intersection of vertices. To do so, the crossbowman need only fire with one or no blocking squares adjacent to both figures. The EU diagram of line of sight show just such a case where the Elf has clear LOS to an Orc diagonally "adjacent" and just inside a wall:

I don't think it's a problem because as has already been pointed out, the monsters can just wait in the room so that the heroes have to enter. The onus is on the heroes to complete the quest and the monsters to try to stop them, there's no reason why the have to play the heroes at that game.

Amen.

While diagonal attacks from the longsword and such can reach between a blocking adjacent wall and a figure or between two adjacent, blocking figures, there remains a practical restriction not metioned. A longsword attack can't be made diagonally between a combination of an adjacent wall, a blocked square tile, or a falling block trap tile. Quest 13, Quest for the Spirit Blade features an instance of a falling block trap that prevents diagonally attacking a Mummy through the doorway.