FAQs, Errata & Clarifications for HeroQuest Classic

[Onan]

MonsterMotor, rules 1-3 provide a simple line of sight mechanism without drawing imaginary lines on the board. Unfortunately if only using rules 1-3, in this picture the wizard would not see the orc:

https://ibb.co/rR5F1mKf

So you need to add rule 4 about the straight line.

You could use only rule 4, but this leads to discussions about lines just scratching occupied squares. For example this picture from the rulebook. I have added a white arrow from the center of the elf's square to the center of the orc's square. I would argue that this arrow scratches the wizard and that the wizard blocks the sight.

https://ibb.co/r2Zp5ZSQ

The guy who drew the picture put the arrow slightly above, and it looks like clear LOS. To avoid discussions it would be great to say: they're in the same passage, sure they see each other.

Rule1 is from the official rules, but there it is only valid for rooms, not passages.

Rule2 is not official, but a simple way to explain what I guess most people do: allow targeting everything inside a room through an open door.

Elegant at first glance, it needs an additional rule 3 to assure mutual visibility.

BHW, here is one more strange situation. Applying rules 1-4, the wizard can see the goblin, but not the orc. But maybe this is acceptable.
https://ibb.co/cKgP7vQs

[MonsterMotor]

Dear Onan, in attempt to close Pandora's box again, I better won't contribute or comment on examples here, except that the one from the official rulebook is indeed unfortunate, if not outright faulty. One could fill threads over threads over threads with discussions on line of sight, etc., and I won't spend my lifetime on this.

But thank you, nevertheless, I was just curious if somebody had worked out something spectacular that could potentially improve my own existing approaches.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

1. All squares in the room or passageway that they are currently in
2. All squares in a room or passageway that they are next to
3. All squares that are next to the room or passage that they are currently in
4. All squares that they have line of sight to.

This list puzzles me. I don't want to enter a detailed discussion with examples here, but each one of these measures can lead to strange happenstances of visibility or non-visibility on the board and, maybe, lengthy discussions. Sight/Line of sight rules generally are quite a mess in practice on HQ-like boards (and I do not have a profound solution here, either), but why not truncate this list before defining "line of sight" in detail? Or more specific, why do you use these 4 points combined and not just point 4 alone (which is what I do in my rules) or just points 1-3.

I will attempt to rise to your challenge of not using a picture to save a thousand words and not using a thousand words, despite the chains with which you have constrained me

In HeroQuest there are TWO DIFFERENT mechanisms in play, in this same conceptual space (a recipe for confusion) and they overlap (practically a guarantee of confusion).

1. What can I target with missile attacks?

The first mechanism has the purpose of addressing the question above. Crossbows, the Hand Axe when thrown, certain spells “magic missile attacks) all use a line of sight rule that is defined in the rules, which I won’t quote fully here due to my chains, but is the “draw an imaginary straight line from the centre of your square to the centre of the target square, if that line is clear i.e. not blocked by any one of various things, then you can target your victim.

This is often referred to as the “line of sight” rule but as you will see shortly that is a somewhat misleading reference.

2. What is visible to me?

The second mechanism has the purpose of addressing the question of what is visible to me, or more accurately my hero character, and other hero characters, for the purposes of determining what is placed on the board. This is where the rules stated in previous posts, 1-3 come into force along with rule 4 which is very similar to, but not the same as, the mechanism discussed above in point 1.

Rule 4 in this instance (also often referred to as the “line of sight rule”) is the same as the rule discussed above under point 1 EXCEPT that any intervening figures are ignored.

This is why rules 1-4 are needed for determining what is visible to the hero characters and therefore what is placed on the board AND a variant of rule 4 only is used to determine what you can target with a missile attack.

Depending on the edition you are using, this matter is further confused (as if any further confusion was needed) by a clarifying diagram that is incorrect and the use of the terms “see”, “seeing” and “line of sight” to refer to either one of or both of the two DIFFERENT mechanisms.

[MonsterMotor]

Thank you very much, chained Bareheaded Warrior, this distinction is perhaps exactly the answer I was looking for. So it is about placing things on the board that cannot yet be targeted with ranged attacks, but they are being spotted already. That is what had confused me. We never used exactly points 1-4 for this in our games, as far as I remember, but something close to that.

Edit once more: Actually, I was getting confused a lot by this clarification document and the discussion around it. Having read it once again, I would advise not to use the word "see" in this context.

[Onan]

OK, so I git it wrong, too. These 4 rules about seeing are about revealing, not targeting. In this case my point that led to rule3 is maybe invalid.

When the wizards steps on the square in front of the junction (where he is in the picture), the corridor with the orc is revealed according to rule 2.
When the barbarian steps on the square on the junction, the corridor with the goblin is not revealed, but according to rule 3 the single square with the goblin is revealed.
https://ibb.co/gLfKp2SM

Is this the way you play, BHW? Or would you keep the goblin hidden when the barbarian steps on the junction?

[Bareheaded Warrior]

When the wizards steps on the square in front of the junction (where he is in the picture), the corridor with the orc is revealed according to rule 2.
When the barbarian steps on the square on the junction, the corridor with the goblin is not revealed, but according to rule 3 the single square with the goblin is revealed.
https://ibb.co/gLfKp2SM

Correct, in both cases.

[Onan]

Some more exercises from the Zargon license test

https://ibb.co/CpvMzWyM

When the wizard steps on square A, do you reveal the goblin? If yes, it is not yet covered by the 4 rules.

When the barbarian opens the door, do you reveal the fimir? If yes, this would also not be covered yet.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

No in both cases

[Onan]

https://ibb.co/S7RphT5T

Ok, this one is a bit artificial, but in the above image, when the opens the door, you would reveal the because of rule 2 and the because of rule 3. But would you reveal the ? It is covered by none of the 4 rules, but it feels like it should be revealed, too.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

You are correct, the wouldn't be revealed, at least not until the moves one square into the passage, as it isn't visible under any of the four rules, but I'm good with that.

More interesting in this example is whether the would be visible, arguably it could be considered visible under #4 (not #3 as you stated, but you may have been referring to the list before it was updated, so lets just call it the last rule for the moment!) but this is one of the grey areas in the original rules that still remains unclarified in my updated version (in terms of both visibility and missile attack targetting).

You can draw an imaginary line from the centre of the square occupied by the to the centre of the square occupied by the and the diagram provided in the rule book indicates that even if that line touches a corner of an occupied square (or wall) it is still visible, which makes sense to me as you can still see half of the square, and as we only have a concept under the simplistic rules of this game that the square is either visible or is not visible (boolean).

However in the rule book diagram no examples are provided that match the situation in your example where the wall next to the blocks half the target square (the left hand side of the target square from the POV of the ) and the corner blocks the other half of the target square (right hand side of the target square from the POV of the ). This isn't covered in the rules as provided at all, but for me, whilst I'm happy with a rule of thumb that says that half of the target being visible is good enough for it to count as being visible, I'm not happy about a rule of thumb that says none of the target being visible is good enough for it to count as being visible. So I would rule in this example that the is NOT visible and would NOT be placed on the board either.

"Rule of thumb: if at least half of a square is visible then the square is visible, if less than half of the square is visible then the square is not visible"