PDA

View Full Version : More LOS questions :)


Rhetoric
May 25th, 2006, 02:56 PM
My friend and I are having problems with Line of Sight. We may know the answer already but I'd like to be sure we're playing it correctly.

1. Can a character have LOS if another character is directly in the path of the target?

E.g. The attacker and defender are in the same row of hexes and a bystander is between them in the same row. If I look from the attacker's head, I can see the foot of the defender through the legs of the bystander in the middle. Does the attacker have LOS?

2. Does an attacker 20 levels above a defender in an adjacent hex have LOS?

E.g. Attacker is 20 levels up on the edge of a cliff; Defender is ground level against the wall of the rock face. The hexes are adjacent. I'm assuming the same LOS rule applies that if the attacker can see any part of the defender's hit zone, then he's got a shot, and vice versa. Please just correct me if I'm wrong.

3. It seems that either you have LOS from one hex to another or you don't. However, the rules make it sound like the way a character is turned can make all the difference.

E.g. I had a figure that was under an overhang against the wall which I thought could not be seen that was shot by an agent because he could see its elbow. If I had turned my figure an eighth of a turn further when I placed him, he couldn't have been seen. Did we play this right?

Does the direction you figure is facing really have that much of a bearing? If so, why wouldn't it affect things like who you can shoot at similar to the firing arc in Mage Knight?

Thanks for your help with these oh so important questions. ;)

Pilgrim
May 25th, 2006, 02:59 PM
1. Yes
2. It is possible. Like you said, use the LOS determination technique. If you can see part of the hit zone from the target point, then you're good to go.
3. Yes

And facing makes no difference in HS.

EDIT: I BEAT NETHER TOO!!!!!!

LilNewbie
May 25th, 2006, 03:01 PM
1. Yes.
2. Depends if you can see any part of the target that is an attackable part of the target (i.e. the red part on the targetting picture on the unit's card.)
3. Placement of figures during a move is important since you are only allowed to adjust your figures placement within a hex during your turn.
4. The targeting reticle (the green circle) is considered 360 but a figure can block it's own LOS (e.g. Q9's shoulder pads, Mimrings wings, etc.)

The most important thing to remember is to have fun and not get too carried away with LOS and targeting rules.

Newb.

Rhetoric
May 25th, 2006, 03:03 PM
I guess facing doesn't matter but the direction you're turned does since body parts stick out in different directions.

TheRealQ
May 25th, 2006, 03:08 PM
facing matters from a shooters standpoint in that you have to be able to connect the green dot on the card with an imaginary line to the target.

toddrew
May 25th, 2006, 03:13 PM
facing matters from a shooters standpoint in that you have to be able to connect the green dot on the card with an imaginary line to the target.

Newb's post was pretty thorough in few words - I have trouble conceptualizing this a lot also, and still am not sure about Q9, but basically one is to treat the green 'targetting reticle' (great term) as, not the eyes, per se, but a 360 degree point from which LOS is determined, in that sense facing doesn't matter.

O, and also, Rhetoric, careful with the word 'adjacent' - it has special meaning in heroscape. When talking about hexes it has the same meaning, but figures on adjacent hexes aren't necessarily adjacent, they must meet height requirements, i.e. base of a higher figure must be at an elevation equal to or lower than the elevation of the lower figure's base + lower figure's height (indicated on card.)

R˙chean
May 25th, 2006, 04:02 PM
3. Placement of figures during a move is important but you are not allowed to move a figure or figures unless they are the active unit during a turn.

What? Since when? Are you saying you can't swivel your Raelin unless you activated her for that turn?

Rules 2nd edition page 13:

Adjusting figures: A player may touch or move figures only on their turn. For example, a player cannot move his figure out of Line of Sight on an opponent's turn.

It doesn't say anything about it being only the figures you activated on that turn.

On your turn, you can rotate and position every one of your figures on the current hex they are on. You just can't "move" them to another hex unless it is the card you activated.

LilNewbie
May 25th, 2006, 04:15 PM
Good call, Ry. I'll update my answer above to reflect that clarification.

Newb.

K/H_Addict
May 25th, 2006, 04:43 PM
me and a friend of mine had a dispute about question number 2. my ruling was that if i could connect my laser pointer from my attacking figres's head to his defending figures hit zone, it was clear. his ruling was that you could only peer down a cliff if there was an actual marker (IE the LOS markers on the stone walls from RttFF) indicating where you could look over at....since then we have altered the usual style of our fields from having enormous walls like 20+ levels high down to no more that 11 or so, so it doesnt matter too much...

bobofett
May 25th, 2006, 04:53 PM
Wow i don't follow rules very well. I love pissing of my friends by rotating them on my opponents turn. because i think logically: DW9K has his laser sights on a small part of your body and you see it are you going to
a) stand there and be :johnwoo2: apart
or
b)move just slightly behind the wall (still on the same hex) so he can't see you.

sigmazero13
May 25th, 2006, 07:30 PM
K/H Addict - When you have the "bridge markers", they actually only serve as an "optional" point of view. Figures on a Bridge, for instance, could still use their regular LOS if they wanted.

Thus, a figure on a cliff can use it's own LOS if it wanted. It doesn't have to have a wall marker to peer over the edge, if it can see what it wants to shoot at without one.

Teamski
May 25th, 2006, 07:42 PM
me and a friend of mine had a dispute about question number 2. my ruling was that if i could connect my laser pointer from my attacking figres's head to his defending figures hit zone, it was clear. his ruling was that you could only peer down a cliff if there was an actual marker (IE the LOS markers on the stone walls from RttFF) indicating where you could look over at....since then we have altered the usual style of our fields from having enormous walls like 20+ levels high down to no more that 11 or so, so it doesnt matter too much...

OK, let's sort this out. If you are on a edge of a cliff and are attempting to attack a unit in an "adjoining" hex, you must be able to see it from your "green recticle. What this means is that most 1 hex units will NOT be able to attack a lower unit from a cliff edge from more than 5-6 level up. Beyond that, the base of the upper figure blocks LOS. Other units with range that overhang the edge, will obviously be able to see further down and attack from a higher position. To be honest, I can't think of one right now, hehehe.... Now walls create an exception to thisvery rule by allowing you to attack a Anyways, I hope that clears it up for you.


As mentioned above, you should always use the rulebook definition of the word "adjacent" when describing adjacent hexes, hehehehehe....

-Ski

TheRealQ
May 25th, 2006, 10:31 PM
Newb's post was pretty thorough in few words - I have trouble conceptualizing this a lot also, and still am not sure about Q9, but basically one is to treat the green 'targetting reticle' (great term) as, not the eyes, per se, but a 360 degree point from which LOS is determined, in that sense facing doesn't matter.

I've heard that said many times...I don't know what I was thinking with my post :shrug: but once I get rules in front of me I am going to have to reread them to confirm that either my brain slipped or the rest of the world is wrong and must be destroyed.

ArcBlade
January 11th, 2008, 09:30 PM
my ruling was that if i could connect my laser pointer from my attacking figres's head to his defending figures hit zone, it was clear.

That brings up a question. How many of you use a laser pointer for line of sight? My most common opponent and I have occassionally had disagreements about line of sight and I have considered getting a pointing device for this purpose. Is it not better to have this as opposed to the more subjective.."Yep, I can see Dead Eye Dan's ankle through your Omnicron's legs, prepare to defend." This has been exacerbated by heights and a mistake we made with wall rules. (We for got about the aimin points). It has bugged me that I can have a guy on the bridge 10 levels up and a guy about 3 hexes out from me can see me but when i get my head down behind my figure on the bridge and close one eye I can't see him, the bridge and overhang get in the way. Or when I'm on a cliff I can't see the next two hexes out from the "Behind the head" vantage point. These guys can't look down? It was worse when he drafted Red Skull, I hadn't read his card and he was using the Skull as if his Master Manipulator power allowed him to control ANY hero he could see, including mine, and he designed the board with poison waters and kept trying to move my guys into them. He din't tell me he was fudging the rules until after I had won.

NecroBlade
January 11th, 2008, 09:36 PM
"Behind the head" includes "above the head," so yes, you can look down. As long as the head is in a direct line between you and your target, you're good.

Also, I assume you learned your lesson about reading the cards and not just taking your opponent's word for it. :P

Archkyrie11
January 11th, 2008, 11:14 PM
I don't really care about LOS unless it is way obvios that the figure can't be seen. :roll: