Line of Sight

[Kurgan]

It's just how I roll... so since they don't say the Crossbow or Longsword can't be combined with the shield, then I reason they are one handed weapons and in fact don't cause any such conflict (but the Battle Axe and Staff explicitly do).

I'll even take probable oversights like the remake edition's Hand Axe not saying "cannot be used by wizard" and say the Wizard can use it (doesn't break the game...) though the original disallowed him (EU edition infamously allowed the magical weapons and armor "quest treasures" aka artifacts to be used by him as well).

Back to the age old LOS debate/discussion...

The removal of one ray arrow in the Remake's rulebook diagram, to me, didn't really change the LOS rules. It was clarified that Courage's "see/sight" meant line of sight (on the 2021 spell card), but otherwise we've been left pretty much in the same space as before as far as interpreting those mechanics from 1990.

I would point out that the map symbols are circular, but the HeroQuest figures have always used square bases... the Remake being the only exception (yes I know the prototype used round, but that's irrelevant here). For purposes of targeting we're not using any dimensions of the plastic miniature per se (the plastic bases are actually slightly larger than the original board squares '89-91), we're using the entire SQUARE they are standing on. Some have been saying it's easier or better with round base miniatures because you can aim from the exact center of the circle, but whatever, I guess.

Targeting would apply both to Spells (Spell Scrolls are spells for purposes of this mechanic) and to Missile (ranged) weapons. It requires unobstructed line of sight. Furniture also blocks or obstructs LOS because they are figures, even if they only take up a portion of a square, and yes blocked squares, walls and closed doors do as well. Otherwise, spot on.

I would interpret the LOS thing to mean if you trace the line and it is blocked by something, then you can't hit what's on the other side, period. If you are searching for something, then the room (or corridor) has to be free of enemies, period. If you have to "curve" the line you're tracing, then it's a miss. That is the simplest way I would read the rules using the NA set.

Zargon is free to make exceptions, as always the GM's prerogative. Once I had all four heroes in a line in a single corridor. The healer and the one they wanted to heal (badly wounded) were not adjacent in the line-up... so technically the spell shouldn't have worked, but I allowed it.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I too assume that it is an occupied square that counts, partly for the reasons that you have given but also because we don’t know, or need to know without introducing unnecessary complications, exactly where within the 2D confines of the square (or even the 3D confines of the cube) a given figure is located at a given moment in time, pressed flat against the wall, the Dwarf dynamically leaping high in the air to bring a mighty axe blow to the head of an opponent, the Barbarian dropping down on one knee to sweep the legs of an opponent – low blow – and so on but I do accept that is my interpretation of the official rules and isn’t explicitly stated.

I disagree with furniture blocking line of sight for ranged weapons/spells (although if you place tall furniture not against a wall, which I don’t think the original quests did, then yes that would block LOS) partially because it is generally under waist high so falls into the can still see at least 50% principle, but mainly because Dread spell casters (and in my case bow-armed goblin scouts) being able to use furniture to restrict Heroes movement whilst peppering them with ranged attacks is a much needed tactical boost for Zargon, but yes again I accept this is down to interpretation, furniture is not explicitly mentioned in the LOS rules, but could be considered under ‘figures’

But again my issue isn’t really with the LOS rules themselves but with the principle of using them to determine what a Hero can see and therefore what is laid out on the board.

hq los example 1.png

So in the example given above, the numbered positions reflect monsters on the Quest Map

My statements/questions below assume standard US edition rules but feel free to point out differences between various versions (but please state the version to prevent even more confusion on my part!)

The Elf has used his movement roll to move along the corridor from the right / east of the diagram (indicated by the little arrow), reaching the square shown, with a closed door to his north, above him, which he then opens – freeze frame

• I think (hope) that we agree that for monsters 1,2,3 the Elf has a clear LOS to and could target with his crossbow if desired
• I think (hope) that we all agree that monsters 4,5 the Elf’s line of sight is blocked by other figures so he couldn’t target them with his crossbow
• I think (hope) that we all agree that to monsters 6 & 7 the Elf’s line of sight is blocked by a wall

However in terms of what our Hero can see, i.e. what is laid out on the board and when

• Monster 1 would have already been in place as our Hero moved onto the corridor (as he had line of sight – a clear line of sight)
• Monster 2 would have been placed at the point that our Elf moved to his current square (as he had line of sight – a clear line of sight)
• Monster 3 would have been placed at the point that our Elf opened the door (as he had line of sight – a clear line of sight)

Question 1 - would monster 4 be placed at the same time as monster 1 even though the Elf’s line of sight is blocked by another figure (monster 1)?

Question 2 - would monster 5 be placed at the same time as monster 3?

Question 3 - at what point would monster 7 be placed?

Question 4 - at what point would monster 6 be placed?

[Kurgan]

Basically the NA edition has furniture that's too obstructive... I mean you're telling me a little treasure chest (is it just really shiny and the glare throws off your aim?) or a table is going to block line of sight?

But then in the EU edition it's under-restrictive. So you could have a goblin with his back flat against a BOOKCASE and you're on the opposite side from him and somehow you can shoot your crossbow and bulls-eye the little fiend? It might as well not even be there!

Those are the breaks!

But I don't think the intention of the NA edition was that you would be able to just blast past furniture. If you can, why not do the same with living targets? In modifying it for more "realism" or whatever, I guess you can come up with whatever rationalizations you want.

Yeah, yeah, one can make lore-sounding rationalizations all day long. Maybe the magic slips through the keyhole of the closed door... except this door was specially crafted to prevent that... or maybe the Orc crouches behind the furniture and you can't get a clear shot at him. The Dwarf may be short in stature, but his awesome hairstyle/hat more than makes up for it in giving him a large profile! The crossbow bolt glances off the ceiling and makes a fatal plunge into the eye socket of the surprised goblin as he stares up at his doom on the other side of the bookcase!

In an actual game I'm going to lay it out at the start, but in cases of a dispute, if a player can make a plausible explanation, I'll give them a 50/50 shot of success with a die roll. But that's me... other Zargons may not be so forgiving!

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Personally I don’t see any difference between the US and UK/EU rules around furniture blocking or not blocking LOS

The UK/EU edition (I’m using 2nd edition just stating in case there is any confusion) doesn’t mention furniture in connection with LOS, therefore I would assume that furniture doesn’t block LOS in that version, however you have to take into account that (if memory serves me correctly and it often doesn’t) in the original EU/UK quest book that came hand in hand with those rules, the quest designer(s), always placed tall furniture against walls so the LOS rules didn’t really have to take furniture into account as low furniture didn’t block LOS and tall furniture never would, provided everyone stuck to the unwritten rule of quest design and kept it to the edges of the room

I don’t think the US edition changes this in any way, the rules are exactly the same, the use of the word “figure” that you have interpreted to include furniture I don’t think was intended that way.

1. In the contents section of every edition ‘furniture’ is listed as ‘furniture’ whereas ‘figures’ are listed separately as figures (finely crafted figures no less)/monsters/miniatures at no point is furniture in any edition listed under the ‘figures’ heading

2. The US rules explicitly mention “walls, closed doors, heroes and monsters” as potentially blocking LOS, there is no mention of furniture or ‘figures’ at all with regards to blocking LOS

3. As you point out, that interpretation is too restrictive in gameplay if taken that way anyway.

That said I would fully support a modification to say that tall furniture does block LOS (for example for ranged combat) and have included that is my interpretation of the rules already.

[Sotiris]

...

Question 1 - would monster 4 be placed at the same time as monster 1 even though the Elf’s line of sight is blocked by another figure (monster 1)?

Question 2 - would monster 5 be placed at the same time as monster 3?

Question 3 - at what point would monster 7 be placed?

Question 4 - at what point would monster 6 be placed?

1) In the classic NA version monster 4 is still invisible and not placed on the board. In the 2021 and the rest old non-NA versions it is also invisible BUT placed on the board. Actually, the whole corridor shall be revealed until the Elf's LOS hits a door or a closed door.

2 & 3) In all versions when opening a door all contents of the room are placed on the board simultaneously.

4) Monsters 2 and 6 are on a different unexplored corridor than the Elf is, so no part of this corridor should be revealed yet (that's why the image above don't show them). If the Elf "looks" down the corridor (his west square is also part of the double corridor, so i let players "look" corridors like this) both monsters shall be placed on the board BUT monster 6 is not a visible target. In the UK/EU versions, where there is no "look down a corridor" rule, both monsters will be revealed when the Elf steps one square left.

[HispaZargon]

Well... not fully agree about what is being said.

If we strictly follow the rules as written in the official manuals, we could easily see that they include contradictions, so I would try to not take the original texts as hard rules because they are not. In my opinion we can only make interpretations, here are a couple of examples:

1) In the classic NA version monster 4 is still invisible and not placed on the board. In the 2021 and the rest old non-NA versions it is also invisible BUT placed on the board. Actually, the whole corridor shall be revealed until the Elf's LOS hits a door or a closed door.

If we really want to strictly follow the rules as written, I disagree with these assumptions because both NA & UK rules include contradictions, so unfortunately no clear rule can be strictly derived from there.

Both 1st & 2nd editions of UK rules say that the Evil Wizard player should place all the monsters shown in the quest map inside the passage when a hero opens a door which gives access to the passage, but in the rest of situations where heroes "move around the board", the rules say the Evil Wizard should only place those monsters that are "are visible" for the heroes according to the infamous LoS diagram. Has any sense only allowing seeing all the monsters in the corridor only if a door has been opened but not seeing them if the hero is turning a corner from other corridor? Obviously it has no sense, but here we have a contradiction, so the official UK rule is not clear for these cases and needs a homebrew interpretation.

In the other hand, about how you interpretate the classic NA rules you are right if we read them strictly, BUT you are not right if you strictly read the 2021's rules. The section 'How Zargon Reacts to Hero Movement' includes a sligtly difference between bothe editions. Classic NA rules say that Zargon player should place the monsters in a corridor following the LoS rules as per the infamous LoS diagram, however, 2021's rules say something similar but in this edition they do not refer to the LoS diagram, instead of that the text explains "if the line passes through a wall or a closed door then the miniature is not visible" but it does not say anything about other monsters block the line of sight. Of course, later the 2021's edition includes the mosnters as blocking LoS actors when talking about LoS when casting spells, but who knows that rule only apply in that case but not in case of moving the heroes? What if they included such minor change in 2021's text to make clear that the monster 4 should be placed in the board? Who knows, but again, we have contradictions in the same document, so official NA rules are not clear for these cases and also need homebrew interpretations.

My Conclusion is if we strictly read the rules, there are contradictions so we are forced to interpretate them (consciously or unconsciously) and make assumptions for playing. In my opinion, considering that monster 4 is not seen by the Elf is fully unrealistic and non practical. Imagine there are five monsters placed behind monster 1, has any sense the small legs and body of monster 1 are hidding another five monsters behind to not placing them in the board? Has any sense that monster 1 would move to attack the Elf and the other five monsters behind stay quiet because they have not placed in the board but they are there? In my games, I place all of the monsters there, otherwise in my humble opinion is ridiculous. Moreover, see how the Companion App works, it places all the monsters in the corridor, not only the first one. Why? because otherwise it is not practical in the game. It is very easy to check in Kellar's Keep quest #4 just at the begining the corridor block end tile and the door are placed in the board since the Orc does not hide them. The same once you start playing quest #6, if you go to the left hand corridor with one hero, the App places there all the monsters in the corridor once the hero see the first one (the app -and me- interpretates that all the monsters are seen but only the first one is within the LoS).

Let's look at this picture, quest #6 from Kellar's Keep. Does anybody really think has sense that a hero placed in the red X would only notice the presence of the two Fimirs and not the presence of all the other monsters behind them? Are they silent stealth monsters which weapons and armours that do not make any noise? Whatever the rules are written, does anybody think only placing the two Fimirs was the intention of Stephen Baker once he designed the game rules? The common sense I think says No, so I would place all those monsters in the board once the hero steps in the red X.

Line_of_Sight_v3.jpg

4) Monsters 2 and 6 are on a different unexplored corridor than the Elf is, so no part of this corridor should be revealed yet (that's why the image above don't show them). If the Elf "looks" down the corridor (his west square is also part of the double corridor, so i let players "look" corridors like this) both monsters shall be placed on the board BUT monster 6 is not a visible target. In the UK/EU versions, where there is no "look down a corridor" rule, both monsters will be revealed when the Elf steps one square left.

Again, I disagree with your assumption. If we strictly follow the NA rules about "Looking down a corridor", it states that the monsters placed "are directly in your line of sight". This could mean that only monsters in your LoS from the door can be placed, or could also mean that all monsters in the corridors should be placed and they directly are in your LoS, not attending to what the infamous LoS diagram says. The official text does not say that both monsters should be placed in the board but only one is in LoS for the hero, if both are placed, both are in LoS for the text and if only the one in LoS should be placed the other should not be. I am not native English speaker, so maybe I could be wrong, but I guess that, again, the official text is not clear ans it is interpretable or has no sense as it is strictly written.

Then, if we strictly read the rules, there are contradictions so we are forced to interpretate them (consciously or unconsciously) and make assumptions for playing. In my opinion, the "Looking for a corridor" rule is fantastic rule so in my games I allow the hero placed in the door to have clear LoS to both monsters 2 & 6, assuming the hero is in cover but can see both monsters from there just leaning its body, allowing casting spells or shooting with the crossbow to both monsters.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

HispaZargon – the difference/discrepancy that you noted between the NA rules and the 2021 rules (I’ll take your word for it as I don’t have the 2021 rules) is interesting and that is what I was referring to in an earlier post about the UK rules

the text explains "if the line passes through a wall or a closed door then the miniature is not visible" but it does not say anything about other monsters block the line of sight. Of course, later the 2021's edition includes the monsters as blocking LOS actors when talking about LOS when casting spells, but who knows that rule only apply in that case but not in case of moving the heroes? What if they included such minor change in 2021's text to make clear that the monster 4 should be placed in the board?

For example I noticed the same distinction in the UK 2nd Edition
• p15 Under “Missile Fire” – your opponent must be visible, as with casting a spell.
• P11 Under “Casting A Spell” – if the line passes through a wall or a closed door or another miniature then the miniature is not visible [italics in the original]
• And this is followed on the same page by the infamous diagram

However much earlier in the rule book it has already covered seeing in relation to movement

• P9 under the section for “Moving around the board”, sub-section “What can be seen?” - “…visible if you can trace an unobstructed straight line between the two miniatures. If the line passes through a wall or a closed door then the miniature is not visible”

So, I don’t agree with your statement that the UK rules

say the Evil Wizard should only place those monsters that are "are visible" for the heroes according to the infamous LOS diagram.

In my interpretation the UK rules have two slightly different “LOS” rules, one described in the movement section around what can be seen (which excludes other miniatures from the equation) which in context is clearly about movement and revealing miniatures and a second “LOS” rules that is mentioned in the “Casting A Spell” section (and that section is referenced directly by the “Missile Fire”) that specifically includes other miniatures and highlights, through the use of italics, the difference between the two rules (and it is this ranged/magic LOS that is associated with the infamous diagram)

So, I think that movement, visibility and putting miniatures on the board uses LOS that excludes other miniatures but LOS for casting spells and using ranged weapons uses LOS that includes other miniatures

I do agree with your point that “Evil Wizard player should place all the monsters shown in the quest map inside the passage when a hero opens a door which gives access to the passage” seems to introduce a discrepancy between a Hero opening a door to a passageway and being able to see everything (even though he isn’t in the passageway yet, he is only in a square that is adjacent to the passageway and he may not have LOS using either interpretation) and a Hero in an adjacent square to a passageway without a door present (even though he isn’t in the passageway yet, he is only in a square that is adjacent to the passageway and he may not have LOS using either interpretation) and that is a gap/discrepancy that I have covered in my amended rules.

So in essence, to answer my own question, I think all 7 monsters would be placed on the board

Monster 4 would be placed at the same time as Monster 1 because

1. LOS (associated with movement and what you can see) ignores the obstructing miniature so he has LOS (although not for the purposes of magic or ranged combat)
2. the Elf in the corridor can see everything in the corridor

Monster 5 would be placed at the same time as Monster 3 (when the door is opened) because

1. LOS (associated with movement and what you can see) ignores the obstructing miniature so he has LOS (although not for the purposes of magic or ranged combat)
2. the Elf in the corridor can see everything in the room that he is adjacent to

Monster 7 would be placed at the same time as 3 and 5 (when the door is opened) because

1. the Elf in the corridor can see everything in the room that he is adjacent to

Monsters 2 and 6 would be placed at the point the Elf steps into his current square because

1. the Elf in the corridor can see everything in the corner that he is adjacent to
2. At least for Monster 2, LOS (associated with movement and what you can see) ignores the obstructing miniature so he has LOS (although not for the purposes of magic or ranged combat)

And in your example, all those monsters in the corridor would be placed when a Hero stepped onto the square to the right of the red X

[HispaZargon]

In my interpretation the UK rules have two slightly different “LOS” rules, one described in the movement section around what can be seen (which excludes other miniatures from the equation) which in context is clearly about movement and revealing miniatures and a second “LOS” rules that is mentioned in the “Casting A Spell” section (and that section is referenced directly by the “Missile Fire”) that specifically includes other miniatures and highlights, through the use of italics, the difference between the two rules (and it is this ranged/magic LOS that is associated with the infamous diagram)

So, I think that movement, visibility and putting miniatures on the board uses LOS that excludes other miniatures but LOS for casting spells and using ranged weapons uses LOS that includes other miniatures

Yeah, you are right. I also think that rules mainly stablish such difference about 'visible' between moving and shooting, very slight difference, but it is there in UK rulebooks. I think NA rulebook should had also included such difference but unfortunately it also refered to the infamous LoS diagram when explaining the Movement. Fortunately Hasbro written it again in 2021's rules as originaly written in UK ones, so the rule seems to be more consistent, although it continue to be difficult to notice by the reader.

So in essence, to answer my own question, I think all 7 monsters would be placed on the board

Yes, I think so. The Elf will be in a serious troubble.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

The Elf will be in a serious trouble.

On that point, I think we are all agreed!

[Kurgan]

The "monster standing behind a monster" thing was infamously mentioned in the scripted Q&A session for the Remake prior to release. All those years however before they said this we never understood that this was even an issue.

I haven't a doubt that perhaps someone did ask that question at some point (I never even considered the Crossbow debate until I came to this forum!), but it's one of those things that if you assumed the opposite, it really wouldn't make much difference in the game, just make it a little bit goofy, like the misunderstanding our family had when we first played the game that we thought you had to point your finger at every single square you were "looking" at to actually reveal it (glad we realized that wasn't how the game was meant to be played, it took forever!).

Yes of course when you open a door, everything (other than hidden traps, treasure and secret doors) are placed. So it wouldn't matter if a monster was standing behind another monster.

Same with corridors... the entire corridor gets revealed once you touch the square that leads to it, whether there are monsters behind that monster or not.

The only thing that is relevant there is that the monster standing behind the monster is going to have a blocked line of sight to the figure on the other side, which again, we knew. Agreed that "putting it out on the board" is not the same thing as "I can hit it from where my figure is standing."


I agree also that if you played a game as a kid and never really did a wide poll of other players all that time, how would you ever know if there was a controversy? Apparently one of the quest designers got asked a question at a toy convention as to whether having two weapons meant a hero could make multiple attacks (one with each weapon) per turn. Obviously the rules don't account for this, but somebody wondered it, and even bothered to ask a designer (no official answer was given to the public on this, but it's assumed the answer was "no, they can't" as no dual wielding mechanic).

The only big "whoa, I guess I was wrong" moment I have now from those days is the "Mentor not Zargon" intention behind the GM screen. That one blew my mind! (but I still contend the artwork was confusing in 1990, and it really doesn't impact gameplay at all).


PS: And as we all know in the final release of the Remake, this clarification they used as an example wasn't even included anywhere in the documentation! A couple of small tweaks on cards were really all we got. Though I see "New Beginnings" has some "rule clarifications" that are 99% the same as what will undoubtedly appear in the Frozen Horror remake pack (just as it would in the EQP if that one ever gets remade) a la the adjacent heroes being able to give/receive items.