Line of Sight

[CavemanLogic]

After getting 14 "meaningful" posts on the forums you'll get access to the "Champion" status group and be able to post image attachments (if not, contact a moderator for help). Welcome!

Thanks for the info.

Here is my recent reply in a LoS thread on BGG with my image I tried to upload here. I also discuss revealing rooms vs. revealing corridors, and "Line of Sight" (and my house rules for it) vs. "Field of Vision."

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2834485/article/39709314#39709314

Cheers!

[CavemanLogic]

Hi, thinking again about this diagram... trying to justify what is explained there.


Have you noticed that the Orc in blue is in the line of sight of the Elf if we apply the "looking down a corridor" official rule?

I mean, imagine there is a door and a wall just above de Elf in the picture, in the middle of the corridor as shown below in red colour (imaginary door and wall). If we apply the rule "looking down the corridor", the Orc may be in the line of sight of the Elf without counting as an action so the rulebook picture fits with such rule and the Elf can see the Orc (see green warrow).


I other words, if such Orc could be in the Elf's line of sight if the Elf were inside a room adjacent to a door and the Orc in a corridor, why it should not be in the line of sight if both are in the same corridor? It wouldn't have sense so such orc then may be considered in the line of sight.

The only problem I see is the straight-line-between-squares-centers rule text which is confusing but the rulebook diagram fits with the other "looking" rules described in the rulebook. I think the wording of such "A Good Rule of Thumb" (is it a joke???) in the rulebook may be considered an errata since it does not match with what is indicated in the diagram.

Yes! If only I had read one more page in this thread before originally replying.

The second diagram (with the red wall) can be used to show my LoS house rule. As I allow the Hero (or Monster) to choose the point within their own square from which their LoS line will originate, using this diagram the Elf would choose the Northeast (or even the Northwest) corner of their square. An unobstructed line could then be drawn from that corner of their square to the center of the Orc's square. So the Elf does have LoS to that Orc using my house rule. Thematically speaking, the Elf is leaning towards the door frame to target the Orc down the hallway.

...And of course, even images as part of a quoted reply are not allowed for newbies. The reply which I quoted is the very first message at the top of page four of this thread, to make it easy to go back and look at what I am talking about. Fixed!

[HispaZargon]

Thank you so much, CavemanLogic.

Your BGG analysis is so good. I invite you to also post it here, if you want, but I think you cannot upload pictures here because you have not reached yet the "Champion" status in the Inn. To achieve that, you would only need to write at least 14 posts. Then you will post pictures without problems.

The following picture shows how I interpretate the Line of Sight rule in different situations. As above mentioned, I consider that the miniature who is looking can lean to any point in the perimeter of its square and look from there, however, to succesfuly see a miniature, it is required to trace the line up to the target's center (because the miniature being seen would be probably trying to not be seen, so I assume it does not lean its body to its perimeter). I think this interpretation is the same as you, but correct me if I am wrong.

Line_of_Sight_by_HispaZargon.jpg

[CavemanLogic]

Thank you so much, CavemanLogic.

Your BGG analysis is so good. I invite you to also post it here, if you want, but I think you cannot upload pictures here because you have not reached yet the "Champion" status in the Inn. To achieve that, you would only need to write at least 14 posts. Then you will post pictures without problems.

The following picture shows how I interpretate the Line of Sight rule in different situations. As above mentioned, I consider that the miniature who is looking can lean to any point in the perimeter of its square and look from there, however, to succesfuly see a miniature, it is required to trace the line up to the target's center (because the miniature being seen would be probably trying to not be seen, so I assume it does not lean its body to its perimeter). I think this interpretation is the same as you, but correct me if I am wrong.

Line_of_Sight_by_HispaZargon.jpg

Well, I typed a great response, but YeOldeInn somehow logged me out before I hit Send, and I lost it. And now I have to get ready to leave for work, and can't retype it all...

So, let me just say that, yes, your diagrams show how I handle LoS. But I have also found some instances where using the original rules for LoS (center of square to center of square) are necessary. So the current wording I use for LoS is:

"If you can draw an unobstructed, non zero-width, straight line between *any part* of the attacker’s square to the center of the enemy square, the attacker has Line of Sight (LoS)."

Cheers!

[Bareheaded Warrior]

In response to the OP, I think that the diagram is not correct, but the text describing LOS is correct so that is how I play LOS centre of square to centre of square.

You could argue that the diagram is correct and the text is wrong but I have always assumed (and with game rules that I have written) you do the text first and then add diagrams later for clarity (although in this case the diagram has achieved the opposite effect!)

We've debated this at length here http://forum.yeoldeinn.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5012&hilit=seeing+sight but in summary I agree with HispaZargon at least in so much as there is a difference between line of sight and seeing but I don't consider that a House Rule, in my opinion it is implicit in the official rules (although not explicitly called out)

For example, according to the official rule book, if you are stood in a corridor adjacent to a closed door to a room and, without moving, you open the door then you can SEE everything in that room but according to the same official rule book you don't necessarily have LOS to everything in that room (according to the rule of thumb and even the otherwise incorrect diagram the Elf wouldn't have LOS to a monster in the top right hand corner of the room below), therefore it is implicit in the official rules that there is a difference between what you can see, and what you have LOS to.

Once you accept that then the only work to do is pick through the rules and differential between where it is talking about SEEING/VISIBLE and where it is referring to LOS (have fun with that, it took me a while!)

[CavemanLogic]

Thank you so much, CavemanLogic.

Your BGG analysis is so good. I invite you to also post it here, if you want, but I think you cannot upload pictures here because you have not reached yet the "Champion" status in the Inn.

Yay, I'm a "Champion" now!!! (well, at least I can post pictures anyway).

In any case, here is a copy/paste of my post on BGG regarding "Line of Sight" for targeting spells and ranged weapons between Heroes and Monsters, and what I call "Field of Vision" for revealing rooms and corridors...



Officially, a corridor isn't revealed until a Hero steps out into that corridor. This always seemed a bit backwards to me, especially when considering how rooms are revealed. So I house rule that Heroes can "peek" around corners. When you open a door to a room, it is assumed you peek your head into the room to look around, thereby allowing the whole room to be laid out for you. It never made sense to me that if you opened a door to a corridor, the whole corridor would not then be laid out for you in the same manner as well. A bit of a double standard there. You should logically be able to treat revealing a room the same as revealing a corridor. When you open a door, either *into* a room, or *out of* a room (into a corridor), or when coming up on a corner to a new stretch of corridor, you should be able to peek around that door frame, or that corner, and have all of the contents of that newly revealed room or corridor section revealed for you. It just makes more sense to me that way. What I want is consistency!

In any case, I use two different rules for vision. There is "Line of Sight" for targeting spells and ranged weapons between Heroes and Monsters, and there is "Field of Vision" for revealing rooms and corridors. Field of Vision disregards Heroes and Monsters when revealing the contents of a room or a new stretch of corridor. There may be an Orc standing in front of a door, but as that Orc shifts around in his square, you can plainly see that there is a door behind him. Using Line of Sight, that Orc would block that door as well as any other Monsters standing behind him. With Field of Vision, the door and the other Monsters are revealed (similar to how a room is revealed using the official rules). Plainly put, Field of Vision allows you to *see* that there are Monsters and a door behind the Orc, but because of Line of Sight you aren't able to *target* them.

And with Line of Sight, I use a modified (house ruled) version. The official rules state that you draw a line from the center of your square to the center of the target square. If that line is unimpeded, or at most touches only the corner of another occupied square, then you have Line of Sight. I prefer drawing an unimpeded non-zero-width line from *anywhere* in your square to the *center* of the target square would grant you Line of Sight. This provides a more thematic realism in the game. You can peek around a corner to gain Line of Sight to a Monster, while that same corner will provide you with cover, preventing the Monster from having Line of Sight back to you.



The Assassin, by peeking around that corner, has a clear Line of Sight to the three others in that room, but due to cover, they would not have a clear Line of Sight to him.



Elf LoS Diagram. The Elf has Line of Sight to the Zombie, the Gargoyle, and the Chaos Warrior. If he "leans" around the Wizard just a bit (calculates Line of Sight from the northeast corner of his square), he also has Line of Sight to the Orc. He does not have Line of Sight to the Skeleton (Barbarian blocks LoS, even when he "leans" to the southeast corner of his square), the Mummy (the closed door blocks LoS), the Goblin (the wall blocks LoS), or the Fimir (the Wizard blocks LoS).



Goblin LoS Diagram. The Goblin just needs to peek around the southwest corner of his square to have LoS to the three Heroes.

Note that in both the original 1989 version and the new 2021 version of HeroQuest, the diagram showing Line of Sight is incorrect.



This diagram from the rulebook shows the Elf as having clear Line of Sight to the middle Orc on the right. We can see that, at the red circle, the line from the Elf to the Orc actually *passes through* a portion of the Wizard's square. That line, according to the Rules As Written, should properly be a dashed "blocked" line. If the Elf (or the right-middle Orc) were instead one square to the left, then the line between the center of her square and the center of that middle Orc's square would just *touch* the corner of the Wizard's square, and the Elf and Orc would then have unimpeded Line of Sight between the two of them.

You can see from my "Elf LoS diagram" above, that my house rule actually grants Line of Sight from the Elf to the Orc. The Elf just needs to lean to the northeast, around the Wizard, to properly see the Orc, in order to fire off a spell or a crossbow at him.



Later on in that same thread, another user quoted the "Rule of Thumb" text from the rulebook...

A Good Rule of Thumb: Draw an invisible straight line between the center of the square the spellcaster is on and the center of the square the target is on. If the line does not cross a wall, closed door, hero, or monster, the target is declared visible, even if the line just touches a corner or wall edge.

...and gave his interpretation that the "corner or wall edge" text is referring to the corner of a wall or edge of a wall.

I then replied that I have *always* read that passage as: "even if the line just touches 1) a corner (of an occupied square) or 2) a wall edge."

I.e. the "corner" refers to *all* of the items listed just prior, in that same sentence, which occupy a square (wall, closed door, hero, or monster). So it seems that the word "corner" is referring to the corner of *any* of their squares... But I'm sure that point has been argued to death here in the Inn as well.

So that is my take on the various sight lines in the game. The Rules As Written are a bit inconsistent. House rules can easily be implemented to add consistency, and a bit of thematic realism, to the game.

Thoughts, comments, (constructive) criticisms?

Cheers!

[lestodante]

I see a lot of people tend to overcomplicate LoS rule. You must be more approssimative.
Some random thoughts:
The icons on the map do not reflect correcly the shape of the bodies so they are not a valid reference.
Any hero or monster could stand still or in movement, in the second case it may reveal who's behind them occasionally.
A goblin is shorter than a gargoyle, I don't see how a gargoyle behind a goblin is not visible.
Assasin's Creed pic is wrong. From that position he should not be able to see the three guys. There is a third person camera angle showing a wider area to the player. From his actual position the character could only view up to the first column on the left. If he sneaks out his head he will become visible to the enemies and viceversa.
If you are too much strict with line of sight rules there will be lot of confusion; another example: a spell caster casting a spell with his right hand has a different range than casting a spell with his left hand. You must consider height, LoS beetween open legs, beetween an arm and the chest.... too much stuff to calculate!
There was a generic rule in the UK rulebook saying "Models in the same room as the spell-caster are always visible". I think this solves all the issues.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

CavemanLogic - I agree entirely with your observation that there is a discrepancy between the reveal rules depending on whether the area you are revealing is a room or a corridor and in my house rules the two are treated exactly the same as per your peeking rule, one less inconsistency in the rule book, which I don’t think complicates things on the contrary I think it simplifies things because it means that you have one single rule that covers revealing stuff rather than two different ones depending on the area that you are revealing.

I also agree with your two different rules for vision, I refer to one as LOS as do you for targeting of ranged weapons and the other that you refer to as “field of vision” I just referred to as “see” but I quite like the term field of vision.

You could argue that having two different types of/rules for vision introduces a complication that is not in the official rulebook, however in my opinion, if you read the official rulebook carefully the two different types of vision already exist they are just not stated explicitly. For example if you are standing in a room/corridor adjacent to a door exactly like the Elf in the infamous rulebook diagram then a monster occupying the top right corner square within that room would, in the official rules be revealed and laid out on the board even though, according to the official rules, no line of sight exists which demonstrates to me that there are two different types of vision in the official rules even though that is no stated.

Where we differ I think is just that I apply the LOS rules exactly as stated in the text of the rule book, centre to centre of squares, but you did state that difference was a house rule so that is fine, I just try to minimise changes so I try to keep to the rules exactly as written unless there are inconsistencies or a lack of clarity as in the situation above.

And I also agree with: "even if the line just touches 1) a corner (of an occupied square) or 2) a wall edge." And would just make it explicit that an occupied square would for me include a square occupied by a tall piece of furniture, bookcase, cupboard, or a blocked wall square.

[CavemanLogic]

I see a lot of people tend to overcomplicate LoS rule. You must be more approssimative.

I can foresee a problem with that. One person says “I approximately have LoS around that Goblin and through the legs of the Gargoyle.” The other person says “no you don’t. From that angle, the Goblin blocks LoS between the Gargoyle’s legs.”

In all seriousness though, in my experience, I find it better to have clearly defined rules for things such as Line of Sight. It is great for preventing arguments. Center of square to center of square (i.e. Original HeroQuest LoS rules) is fine. But I prefer the thematic realism, and added strategic opportunities, that my house rule of “any point in your square to center of target square” provides.

Some random thoughts:
The icons on the map do not reflect correcly the shape of the bodies so they are not a valid reference.
Any hero or monster could stand still or in movement, in the second case it may reveal who's behind them occasionally.
A goblin is shorter than a gargoyle, I don't see how a gargoyle behind a goblin is not visible…

...If you are too much strict with line of sight rules there will be lot of confusion; another example: a spell caster casting a spell with his right hand has a different range than casting a spell with his left hand. You must consider height, LoS beetween open legs, beetween an arm and the chest.... too much stuff to calculate!

I wonder if you are not confusing my terminology here. "Field of Vision" is used strictly for revealing new rooms and corridors (when Zargon/Morcar places Monsters and furniture on the board). Field of Vision absolutely *does* take into account the ability to see that Gargoyle standing behind that Goblin. "Line of Sight," on the other hand, is *only* used for targeting an enemy square with a ranged weapon or a spell, and may not pass through any part of an occupied square. The Gargoyle may be much larger than the Goblin standing in front of him, but there is *always* a chance that your ranged weapon attack or your spell may hit the Goblin instead of (or as well as) the Gargoyle you are aiming at. What chance do I have of only hitting the Gargoyle? What is the size ratio of the Goblin mini to the Gargoyle mini? Rather than unnecessarily adding complicated calculations such as those to the game, I choose to use the interpretation of the original rules (North American rules at least) that require LoS to pass through unoccupied squares only. Simple and easy, while maintaining thematic realism and a bit of strategy!

My aim is to both streamline the game, while at the same time adding that aforementioned thematic realism. If something is too generic to make sense, and there is a simple way to make it more realistic, that’s what I try to do. By using the interpretation of the original rules that LoS can only touch the corner of, but not pass through ANY PART OF, any occupied square, you are not having to determine LoS “between open legs” or “between an arm and a chest.” If there is an unobstructed path between your square and the target square, then you can target that square with a spell or a ranged weapon. I just prefer the option to “lean” within your own square so that you can target *around* an intervening occupied square (such as the Elf leaning around the Wizard to get a shot off against the Orc in my image from my previous reply above, or the Goblin leaning around the corner of the wall to target the Barbarian, Elf, or Wizard).


I modified the above image with a solid green arrow line to make it clear *which* Line of Sight I was referring to. The Elf, by leaning towards the northeast corner of his square (i.e. by determining LoS as if it originated from that corner of his square), has a clear, unobstructed Line of Sight to the Orc on the right. That line only crosses open ground, and does not pass through *any part of* any occupied squares.


Similarly, the Goblin, by leaning towards the southwest corner of his square (and thereby "peeking" around that corner), has a clear, unobstructed Line of Sight to any of the three Heroes.

Assasin's Creed pic is wrong. From that position he should not be able to see the three guys. There is a third person camera angle showing a wider area to the player. From his actual position the character could only view up to the first column on the left. If he sneaks out his head he will become visible to the enemies and viceversa.

Well, yes. If you take just that static, unchanging image, then yes the Assassin can’t see all three of them. The point is though, that with anyone "taking cover," they are able to peek their head out to see and target their enemies. But then they are able to duck back behind cover so that their enemies are not able to target them. The image itself is static, but the Heroes and Monsters on their turn are able to move about in their square and peek around the corner. In this fashion, the Assassin can absolutely see all three of his targets.

And yes, the three others are also able to "see" the Assassin (using *Field of Vision*), but only the Assassin would be able to "target" his enemies with ranged weapons and spells (using *Line of Sight*). The other three may know he is there (if he was a HeroQuest Monster, his figure would be placed on the board), but they do not have *LoS* to him, and can’t shoot a crossbow bolt, or cast a spell, at him. But using my house rule...

If you can draw an unimpeded non-zero-width line from *anywhere* in your square to the *center* of your target square, then you have Line of Sight to that square.

...the Assassin can certainly “peek” around the corner, and lean out from cover long enough to target them, before retreating back to the safety of his corner. I find it interesting that the 3D image of the Assassin is a *somewhat* decent (but not perfect) rendering of the layout that the Goblin would see in the image above, in terms of the position of the three heroes at least.

There was a generic rule in the UK rulebook saying "Models in the same room as the spell-caster are always visible". I think this solve all the issues.

I personally would not want to use that generic rule. It takes what little strategy that remains in the game completely out, which is absolutely not to my liking. My house rule attempts to do the opposite, by easily and elegantly adding a bit more of that strategy back in.

I hope I explained myself a bit better here.

Cheers!

[lestodante]

I only split rules for casting a spell or ranged attacks.
In one of the pictures you posted, the Elf LoS to the Fimir is blocked by the wizard.
For me a spell casting against that Fimir is permitted as I only need to know where the target is located and partially visible, but a ranged attack will not, as the weapon trajectory will be interrupted by the Wizard, hitting him instead of the Fimir or will require an extra skill.