FAQs, Errata & Clarifications for HeroQuest Classic

[Onan]

Yes, the fimir should not be visible. Your rule of thumb describes this well. But it only works if everybody knows what "half of the square visible" means.

What I usually do is I don't reveal monsters on the first square in neighboring corridors (= I don't use rule 3). Rule 3 means that you have 2 consecutive reveals: When the hero approaches the junction ("peeks around the corner") you reveal evertything inside the new passage. When he steps one square further onto the junction, you reveal the first squares of neighboring junctions. I think it would be better to interrupt the game only once for revealing.

The only exception I make is for blocked squares. Neighboring junctions that are blocked off on their first square should not trigger an additional reveal (revealing only the blocked square) when the hero approaches, this would be an unnecessary interrupt. So I play that the hero can already see that there is just a wall.

Also, I don't like a forced reveal when the hero approaches the junction. When they approach the junction and ask me to reveal I do so (I let them peek around the corner), but if they don't then I wait until they step onto the junction. Often it doesn't matter, but bravely walking up to the stone just to trigger another stone is mean , especially with 3HP
I think you know which situation I mean:
https://ibb.co/DPvZYjMF

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I get your point about the consecutive reveals, although most of the time this doesn't actually materialise as there is nothing in the squares in question, but I wouldn't consider it an issue, I quite like the HQ approach of step-by-step or at least square-by-square movement in that it might matter which exact route you take (like moving along the left hand side or the right hand side of a double-width passage matters if a trap is on one side) and this seems to fall into that camp for me at least.

The alternative as some have suggested is that you "might as well automatically move the whole party straight to the next door and not bother with all the rolling" but I think in a well designed quest* that is part of the HQ experience.

*Avoid long passages with nothing going on in them, by shortening the passage or placing a trap, secret door, "sentry" monster or similar (although my house rule around Snake Eyes on the movement roll trigerring a WM means even an empty passage can become occupied when you least expect it!)

I agree about blocked squares as those probably would be visible as the whole square is blocked so even seeing the edge/border should give enough information to assume the whole square is blocked.

That said your approach and mine are close enough that I would categorise them as both being valid interpretations or playing styles of the same set of rules, although the reason why mine suits me better is because I have more missile attack capable monsters in my own quests, (Goblin) Skulkers with short bows and the Mummy has a missile-attack like special ability "Dreadful Gaze", which means that placing a monster on the board at the earliest opportunity allows for subsequent positioning for missile attacks is probably more of a feature at my own table then most.

I'll get on with updating the article in light of all the great feedback that you all have given me, and will share the next version shortly.

EDIT: new version is now available, using the same link on the original post, thank you all for your feedback, much appreciated.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

The conversations around visibility/seeing/line of sight continue under the following topics:

Line of Sight

Is "see" the same thing as "line of sight?"

Like for example, the idea of interpreting pits as being spike filled holes is a cool, imaginative solution (referencing the "Trap!" card from the treasure deck, though no indication is given that this is meant to be an identical hazard to the pit tile, which shows no "stakes" or holes for stakes to retract into if you think it's some kind of mechanical trap rather than just a covered hole or trapdoor to a dug-out). Yes, Avalon Hill put spikes in all their "hazard" cards in the treasure deck of the 2021+ edition, but once again they didn't alter the pit tiles or reference spikes in the rules about pit traps. So this is pure homebrew.

Pure homebrew?

1. As far as I am aware the depth of the pit is not specified anywhere in official publications.
2. Pits of Darkness in Against the Ogre Horde state that they are 30 feet deep so it seems safe to assume that standard pits are less than 30ft deep.
3. Using standard weapons, two combatants must be on adjacent squares to fight, so using the above scale, typically ~5ft apart, if one of these combatants is in a pit they can still fight so must still be within ~5ft of their opponent.
3. A square of the board represents ~5ft of in-game distance, if you can climb out of a pit without using even a single point of movement then the depth must be less than ~5ft
5. A figure in a pit still blocks LOS for the purposes of missile attacks so at least 50% of the character must be visible, typically characters are around 4-6ft high so depth of pit can be no more than 2-3ft

I'm not convinced that representing the pit as a shallow pit, ~2-3ft deep, contradicts the officially published standard game. In fact I would argue that the official 30ft deep Pit of Darkness that still allows characters to climb out without any penalty, neither the loss of any movement or using up their action, is more of a contradiction.

Some people argued that a shallow pit wouldn't be capable of inflicting a Body point loss, whilst I'm not sure I agree, I referred them to the fact that at least some of the pits are depicted as containing stakes which would certainly inflict damage.

It is an interpretation or suggestion, of course, but I think it falls short of pure homebrew.