Line of sight

jdizzy001 · **Posted:** Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:07 pm

Here is the scenario:
A warband is closing in on an archer. There is a banner bearer in the warbands second row. The archer wants to shoot the banner bearer. I argue, according to page 33 of the rule book, paragraph 16 that the banner bearer is not an eligible target.

Something like this (A=archer, W=Warrior, B=Banner)

A

WWWWW
WWBWW

Scenario 2:

Exact same situation, except B is no longer a banner bearer but a troll. As the troll is larger than the rest of the warband I would argue he is an eligible target with either no penalty or an in the way save needed. Can someone please quote me the rule that says I am wrong or right?

A

WWWWW
WWTWW

Coenus Scaldingus · **Joined:** Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:14 am **Posts:** 1121

It doesn't matter if the target model is behind 1 or 99 models - what matters is if the archer can see it. If you can draw an uninterrupted line from the model's eye to the target model (excluding weapons etc.), it is an eligible target (p8 and p31). If part of the target model is obscured, it can be targetted, but an 'In the Way' roll will be required. That is, of course, unless a Good model is firing with a friendly model in the way, as he/she/it doesn't want to risk hitting his/her/its friend.

It is highly unlikely that the entire banner bearer will be obscured by the model in front of it, so it can be shot, but with an 'In the Way' roll. The troll will almost definitely be (partially) visible, so it can be a target, but again likely with an 'In the Way' test.

Unless the model behind several ranks is tiny (or wearing an Elven cloak), it will probably be able to be targetted, albeit with a small chance of being hit (due to the 'In the Way' rolls). That's equally true for a hero as it is for a massive monster - a goblin can take an arrow for the Balrog (how nice of him), and vice versa. Doesn't always make sense, but keeps it simple.

undivided · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2014 6:59 pm **Posts:** 57

Jdizzy, I would totally agree with you. That is the way it would seem both logically and by the rul as if you go to table view often that model is completely hidden.

Unfortunatly what coenus says is the usual assumption of the rule because 1 it is so poorly explained in the rule book and 2 someone decided that would be a good interpretation?

Either way this is how people often take it in tournaments so expect for a TA to judge it as an in the way test. That being said I've been in a few circumstances where there are 3-4 other models in the way and I called it as illegal. They knew it was far fetched so played along.

In my mind someone needs to FAQ line of sight drastically..

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

Lots of LOS questions coming up recently but Coenus Scaldingus has it spot on.

The SBG rules are incredibly clear, there's no mention of how much of the model you need to see, all that matters is that you can see some of the limbs, body or head of the target.

It also does not contradict Undivided's first paragraph, if the model's completely obscured then you can't target it.

Get down to the model's eye view, if you can see some of the target you can shoot at him with the necessary number of ITW rolls. It really is as simple as that.

I like it as a rules mechanic, there's no arguing over whether or not you can see 50% of a model or anything like that like you get in other systems. You can either see him or you can't, the rules are very clear, certainly no need for FAQing.

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

But what about the in the way? It isn't that clear in my opinion. It only says you have to look if there is something in the way. But it doesn't say how you determine what is in the way. In the examples it looks like it is determined from base center to base center. For example if there is a line of 4 goblins in front of a dragon and they all obscure a part of the dragon, do you need 4 itw test or only one?

Grungehog · **Posted:** Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:01 pm

you only need to take one ITW per model between your shooting model and you designated target!
if there is one goblin in front of a dragon from the dirrection you are shooting you take a single ITW. likewise if there are 4 goblins in front of the dragon the arrow can only accidentally one goblin in a line, it either hits the dragon or it doesn't if the goblins are like 4 deep then you may roll to see which one it hits or you simply allocate a target goblin.

the rules for LOS are very simple, there is absolutely no need to overcomplicate them

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

Yep, as Grungehog says.

I think I see where you're coming form Frerin but you only have to take an ITW for every model between the missile trajectory from the shooter to the target. If 4 goblins are lined up as below:

Target

G G G G

Shooter

The you would only take one ITW roll. Whereas if they were lined up as below:

Target

G
G
G
G

Shooter

You would take 4.

Make sense?

Grungehog · **Posted:** Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:05 pm

Dr Grant wrote:

The you would only take one ITW roll. Whereas if they were lined up as below:

Target

G
G
G
G

Shooter

You would take 4.

Make sense?

you would take up to four serapate ITW in this case, as you would do the closest one first 4+ the arrows continues towards the original target then second, etc..

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

So in your opinion I have to make a itw roll for the Goblin in this situation

G
Dragon

And for the one in ths situation

_____G
Dragon

But not two for
G_____G
Dragon
?

I don't think this is what the rulebook says. Either are both in the way and you need to take 2 itw rolls or noone (if you determine ist from base Center to base Center) and shoot without itw.

rumtap · **Posted:** Wed Apr 08, 2015 1:37 am

Dr Grant and Grungehog are correct.

It is "line" of sight. The arrow travels in a straight line so if the 4 goblins are standing accross the line then only 1 can be in the way. If they line up to target then they are all in the way

Take a ruler line it up from the shooter to the target. The straight line trajectory with the most goblins in the way will determine the number of in the way rolls needed.

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

And where is this in the rules?

rumtap · **Posted:** Wed Apr 08, 2015 6:40 am

Frêrin wrote:

And where is this in the rules?

well, we could rename it zig zag of sight.

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

But where is said that you take the line of sight with the most in the ways? In the example it looks like you take the line from base center to base center and in my opinion this is the only clue the rulebook gives.

Grungehog · **Posted:** Wed Apr 08, 2015 8:26 am

arrows fly straight,you take from the models eye view line up the shot, see if anyone could be on the trajectory (ITW) if no, proceed to take your shot without further complications, otherwise you need to take a test.
It is THAT simple!
The size of the model you are trying to shoot has no consequence on this be it a dragon or a goblin

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

Grungehog wrote:

arrows fly straight,you take from the models eye view line up the shot, see if anyone could be on the trajectory (ITW) if no, proceed to take your shot without further complications, otherwise you need to take a test.
It is THAT simple!
The size of the model you are trying to shoot has no consequence on this be it a dragon or a goblin

I don't think there is anything in the rulebook to back this up. Besides from a logical point of view I don't think the ITW roll determines, wether the arrow pierces the model in the way (on a roll of 4-6) or sticks in it (1-3), BUT wether the arrow takes the line where something is in the way or takes a line where nothing is in the way. So it would make more sense to make 2 itw rolls in the situation
G___G
Dragon
And only one in the situation
__G
__G
Dragon

Besides it's totally illogical that the arrow always searches the way with the most obstacles

Dr Grant · **Joined:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm **Posts:** 1339

To be able to shoot at a target without an ITW you need a clear line of sight to the target. If any other model obscures part of your target then you have to take an ITW roll. However, you don't have to take one for every model that could potentially generate an ITW roll, only those that would affect your trajectory. The rules specifically say to trace a line with a range ruler or tape measure, this line represents the arrow's trajectory and thus determines how many ITW role you need. In the example below, the shot would only pass through one goblin.

Target

GGGG

Shooter

Simples.

The rules often need to be taken with a pinch of common sense, sometimes wordings can be considered ambiguous and you need to discern what is clearly the intention. However, in this case I think that the wording is perfectly clear as it is.

undivided · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2014 6:59 pm **Posts:** 57

Vague and clear aren't the same thing. Just because they are simple doesn't mean it's clear either.

The rule for los is simple but vague. There are so many questions for a reason and that reason is because there is not necessary detail in the rules for this.

That being said there is a common way of interpreting this rule which works. But I would argue that the los rules are really the reason bows are frustrating in the game.

I just think that the mechanic is a bit broken, it is so random. Secondly what happens if you turn your miniature so now he is standing fully bhind the first guy, is that allowed? Does the los have to come from the shooters head? Or weapon? Does a hand mean you can "see the model?"

I am glad we have a rule system that works so we can play tournaments but I do think that the wording of los deserves the questions that it gets.

Frêrin · **Joined:** Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:50 pm **Posts:** 272

Dr Grant wrote:

The rules specifically say to trace a line with a range ruler or tape measure

Yes, but were is said, that you have to trace this line so that there are as many models as possible in the way?! Nowhere and therefore your ruling is just an interpretation. And there is nothing in the rules that support it, while determining it from base center to base center is shown in the pictures in the rulebook.

SouthernDunedain · **Posted:** Wed Apr 08, 2015 4:00 pm

I swear sometimes there are two different rulebooks...

Also whether you take it from the centre of the base to the centre of the base, or edge of the base to edge of the base you still draw a straight line from both models.

I'm not quite sure how
*get down to model level and look to see what is in the way* can be so hard to understand...

undivided · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2014 6:59 pm **Posts:** 57

SouthernDunedain wrote:

I'm not quite sure how
*get down to model level and look to see what is in the way* can be so hard to understand...

A. Ya but then you get into if I turn me model so he is
A
I
T
Instead of

A
-
T

Is that in the way or not? I repeat I have not moved the base only turned the model.. This is a problem.

B. But I think more then this the rule itself makes no sense.. for anything in the way you now have a %50 chance of hitting your target? I think shooting should be more based off skill and less off blind luck.

Part B is IMO. And if you think I am wrong don't worry about. But Part A causes some serious problems.

SouthernDunedain wrote:

Also whether you take it from the centre of the base to the centre of the base, or edge of the base to edge of the base you still draw a straight line from both models.

Last note on this.. this is the point of the discussion the rulebook says straight line, we are saying straight line from what point to what point? Model to model you run into the problem of what counts on a model? And what counts as a model. This is why I think it is vague.

Line of sight

Who is online