True Line of Sight...

[Cam2Designs]

This weekend we had a bit of "rules lawyering" and debate about True Line of Sight as it pertains to a model's pose. The main incident was involving Ratling Snipers in the third storey of a standard GW ruined building. The snipers technically couldn't see anything really because even the bottom of the window openings was above or even with their tiny kneeling heads. I would say that the shooting angle from their location to the target was about 20 degrees or so. Now, if the models were "real" beings in that kind of cover, you would have to assume that they would safely stand to a height that would afford them the best firing arc and still keep them in the relative safety of the cover. The same logic would apply to a squad of 10 space marines on the second floor of the same ruined building. Technically only 1 marine model would fit in the window space on that level...of which there are two, possbily three. In "reality", they would take up the best firing positions and could probably get three marines minimum in each window opening...two side by side and one back firing between the front two. I don't think a model's pose should keep them from seeing a target if it is obvious that, if they were posed differently, they could see. Of course, I mean firing model's in cover that would be firing through windows, over walls, through holes, etc. I mean, models can pass through ruins' walls with a difficult terrain roll, so why couldn't they move so as to have the best firing position available?

 

Thoughts?

[Frosty the Pyro]

True line of sight is True line of sight, you just have to live with it. However if you look at pg 22, fireing over a barier, you may be able to swing those who where equal with the window being able to fire. Note that this is not a 100% argument as the rule is in reference to cover.

[Grey Mage]

Id say if your going to deny them the shots your being a bit anal retentive... on the other hand if you choose to shoot with them out of the window Id feel that I was perfectly in the rights to fire right back at them *with a standard 4+ base cover save of course*.

 

Of course thats just a houserule to continue play in the spirit of the game.

[rat of vengence]

Hey! Grey Mage and I agree! It had to happen one day... :P

 

Yeah, I go with exactly what he said. It's about playing the game, and the oft quoted number one rule.

 

RoV

[Cam2Designs]

Id say if your going to deny them the shots your being a bit anal retentive... on the other hand if you choose to shoot with them out of the window Id feel that I was perfectly in the rights to fire right back at them *with a standard 4+ base cover save of course*.

 

Of course thats just a houserule to continue play in the spirit of the game.

 

I was on the side of the Ratlings in the megabattle and it was an opponent that was arguing that the Ratlings couldn't see thus couldn't shoot. I think that it is a given that if you have models in a ruin/area terrain that shoot that the target unit would get to fire back and that the shooting unit would get the 4+ cover save. This was a disagreement based on a single opposing player's objection to the snipers shooting from the third floor down onto his bikers. This kind of thing comes up in Planetstrike games where a target unit would claim that models on top of a Bastion couldn't fire down onto units below them. There, since a unit occupying a Bastion can't be targeted or assaulted, the argument gets hazier.

[Altered_Soul]

Every time I have played with my Marine Sniper Scouts inside ruins, they have always been treated as being able to see out no problem as long as there were windows/holes/gaps, but they can be shot at as if the ruin wall wasn't there (with the cover save as normal). Even playing against the store owner this was assumed, and works nicely. If the Ratling-using player wanted to shoot but not get shot at, then that's not balanced from my experience.

[Grey Mage]

Hey! Grey Mage and I agree! It had to happen one day... B)

 

Yeah, I go with exactly what he said. It's about playing the game, and the oft quoted number one rule.

 

RoV

Actually I agree with You quite a bit ROV, its just you usually have the situation taken care of then so I dont speak up ;).

 

OO! If your opponent was claiming that though Cam2 Id suggest just putting down a couple of quarters underneath them- nothing says you cant modify your models in the middle of the game *though Id only bring this up in such cases of AR... its horribly unsporting*

[OwlandMoonGuy]

Just by way of reminder, the BRB rules are very clear on this subject. On pg 16 it states, “Line of sight must be traced from the eyes of the firing model to any part of the body of at least one of the models in the target unit.” The only exception to this rule relates to other models in the shooters own unit.

 

All exceptions based on the terrain models used or the size, shape, position, etc. of the shooting models are effectively house rules. Being lenient is very nice and sportsman like but in opposition to the spirit of “Ture” LoS.

 

So agree with your opponent on this up front but I wouldn’t expect this to fly during a competitive event, IMO.

 

-OMG

[Grey Mage]

Out of curiosity... what happens if a model has no eyes?

[Vincent Black Shadow]

I'd say whether or not the snipers can shoot also determines whether or not they can be shot at. Rule as written says true LOS, so ratlings couldn't shoot. But also they can't be shot at if they are out of LOS. I think your opponent was technically right, but in the interest of fair play, could have made the concession on this issue. You'd set up the ratlings there in order to fire from cover, not in order to stay out of sight. If it were tournament finals or something, I could see him having a case, but in a friendly game, if he's insisting on you wasting 2 turns of intended shooting from snipers because the terrain windows are at marine height rather than ratling height, you should consider not playing with him again until he realizes that it's a game.

[OwlandMoonGuy]

Out of curiosity... what happens if a model has no eyes?

Not sure. I think you only find that rule in the copies they print in Braille.

 

-OMG

[Arikel]

I don't have my rulebook with me at the moment but i remember it also being stated very clearly that a dynamically posed model model has no effect on los. To determine whether it can be see or be seen you can use a normally posed model of that type. This means you don't get any benefit, or drawbacks from having a model that is kneeling or lying down(no extra cover saves for you or the opponent trying to hit you)

[OwlandMoonGuy]

I believe the rules you are referring to are on pg. 3, “Some players like to mount their models on impressive scenic bases. As mounting your models on different sized bases might affect the way they interact with the rules, make sure before the game that your opponent does not mind this.”

 

There is also another mention on pg. 16, “Sometimes, all that may be visible of a model is a weapon, an antenna, a banner or some other ornament he is wearing or carrying (including its wings and tail, even though they are technically part of its body). In these cases, the model is not visible. These rules are intended to ensure that models don't get penalized for having impressive standards, blades, guns, majestic wings, etc.”

 

The concept of, “proxying” modes does not appear in the BRB. Nor are there any exceptions pertaining to how a model is posed. So whether we are dealing with a crouching Firewarrior or a Chaos Raptor that’s inches above its base, the rule of True LoS is absolute.

 

I’m not saying that it always makes sense and I’m especially not saying that it’s fair for all models. I’m just saying that playing it any other way is a house rule.

 

-OMG

[Isiah]

I’m not saying that it always makes sense and I’m especially not saying that it’s fair for all models. I’m just saying that playing it any other way is a house rule.

 

You're right it can penalise naturally smaller or crouched/kneeling models etc, but can also be to their advantage, ie when being targeted themselves. One of the unseen (no pun intended) fallouts of the TLOS ruleset.

[Hellios]

Wraithlords and Wraithguard do not have any eyes :'(

[Grey Mage]

Out of curiosity... what happens if a model has no eyes?

Not sure. I think you only find that rule in the copies they print in Braille.

 

-OMG

As noted... my Wraithgaurd have no eyes, do they then not get to shoot?

 

What about my friends custom zoanthrope- it too has no eyes. Or that Demon Prince another friend has in his C:Daemons army.

[OwlandMoonGuy]

Well gents, if you want to hang your hat on the, “not all models have eyes” argument then be my guest. As critical I am of GW’s ambiguities that one isn’t too difficult to work through. There’s the RAW that we use to interpret game rules and then there’s RAW; defined as crude, scraped, inflamed, brutally harsh & painful, etc.

 

So next time to face off vs. any of the said models inform your opponent that the afflicted unit is incapable of firing based on this rule. I’m sure they will pick up their models and not waste any time playing you again – but you’ll have the satisfaction of being right.

 

-OMG

[Grey Mage]

*Shrugs* I was just curious to see what peoples methods would be in that one. No-one Ive played in the last year has been that uptight, but Ive ran accross a few in stores.

[Chengar Qordath]

*Shrugs* I was just curious to see what peoples methods would be in that one. No-one Ive played in the last year has been that uptight, but Ive ran accross a few in stores.

I'd just go for measuring from the model's head in a case where there are no eyes. Then again, in pretty much all gaming I tend to feel that common sense and good sportsmanship should trump RAW.

[Frosty the Pyro]

Yeah but all models do have a way to see, wraithguard/lords have their spirit stone, drones/battlesuits have cameras, Nids even have eyes on their guns half the time. Zoanthropes, measure anywhear from the head, its super psychic after all.

[Hellios]

Yeah but all models do have a way to see, wraithguard/lords have their spirit stone, drones/battlesuits have cameras, Nids even have eyes on their guns half the time. Zoanthropes, measure anywhear from the head, its super psychic after all.

 

Where did you get they could see through the spirit stones? I know they can see (the spirit world/wraith sight <_<) or was this just your assumption that that is what they used to see?

 

Also on this one of my CSM models who I call Mr.Eye has about 20 eyes modelled on him so he dosen't even have to turn to face when shooting as he has 360 LoS.

[Frosty the Pyro]

They ARE the spirit stone, the wraithlord/guard body is just a construct, Think of the spirit stone like a brain in a jar ontop a robot body. Theoreticly if you tore the stone off of one it would stop working.

[Hellios]

They ARE the spirit stone, the wraithlord/guard body is just a construct, Think of the spirit stone like a brain in a jar ontop a robot body. Theoreticly if you tore the stone off of one it would stop working.

 

I know what a spirit stone is :lol: and how it works as a device to capture eldar souls before they go into the warp because a they don't want to be eaten and b they cannot reincarnate anymore. I was just more interested if there was fluff I missed.