Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
gronnelg

Line of sight

Recommended Posts

Per the rules, if any part of a unit sees any part of another unit, then the units have line of sight. 
My question is about what you guys typically houserule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our most common "houserule" is, if there is any doubt, it's visible. Usually we just discuss about it like "would you say this model is LOS blocked to your unit XXX if I put it in this position?".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What @tom_gore has said. If in doubt mention it to your opponent. Most of the time it’s clear what can block LOS but I tend to say what I’m doing with a unit (bit of a narrative) just so my opponent is aware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently I played a game were my opponent could see through a hole in a buidling. He could't really "see" the model per se, but noticed change in the light trough the hole when I moved the model. We couldn't really decided, so we just rolled for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't houserule anything.  We use the rules as written.  If you can see any part of the model then you can target it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

We don't houserule anything.  We use the rules as written.  If you can see any part of the model then you can target it.

Pretending the rules for line of sight are clearly written is a bit naive. But I guess people are in agreement about line of sight in 99% of the cases.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

We use the following house rules:

  • Monster bases block line of sight to the smaller ones. You can't shoot between the Treelord's legs in order to hit a Branchwitch, for example.
  • No shooting through multiple buildings, or multiple windows/doors.

A lot of people that I play with also play Warmachine and Infintiy (myself included), so LOS rules in those games were direct inspiration for house rules listed above. We are perfectly aware that there are no such restrictions in regular rules. Generally, in 95% of the games we played, we never had situations where these house rules would apply - they were regular AoS games with regular rules. 

However, I have to say that if I could change any rule in the game, it would be the LOS rules. I think the game could benefit a lot from terrain pieces that affect LOS in some way (maybe giving negative modifiers to attack rolls against models within that terrain feature) and from things like larger bases obscuring smaller ones. 

Edited by Painbringer
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Isotop said:

Pretending the rules for line of sight are clearly written is a bit naive. But I guess people are in agreement about line of sight in 99% of the cases.

I've never in my two plus years of playing AOS have had anyone question the line of sight rules as being not clear.  I have heard many people complain about the line of sight rules (shooty players mainly complaining that forests now block line of sight as being not fair to them), but never had I until this very moment had anyone say they were not clear.

Edited by Dead Scribe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of the friction wrt line of sight is that a lot of players want to create a narrative and want to be able to imagine a story. That gets harder to do when your captain gets shot full of arrows because his spear was sticking out of a doorway.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats understandable.  Unfortunately AOS is not a game that supports that type of thing.  Its a game, so people are going to have to accept that level of abstraction in lieu of "reality".  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its also greatly because a lot of terrain (esp GW terrain) doesn't actually block line of sight much. All those open windows and gaps and such mean that we do end up with units hiding behind a wall who get shot at because there's a grid window that the enemy can just see a tiny toe sticking out from behind. There's also things that don't seem to visually make sense. "Oh you can see the tiny spear tip from 1 of my 40 clanrats - so you can now shoot the whole clanrat unit? Wait what?!

 

Some things like that can appear very odd and almost be a bit like cheating when first encountered. It's quirks in the game system and AoS isn't unique in it. Warmachine 2nd edition had a fair few tricks like that such as declaring a charge when out of range. Sure you'd fail, but you'd' get more movement to "run" than if you'd used the run command itself. Again little quirks in the rules that once you know them they work, but can appear very cheaty to new people. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dead Scribe said:

Thats understandable.  Unfortunately AOS is not a game that supports that type of thing.  Its a game, so people are going to have to accept that level of abstraction in lieu of "reality".  

It is perfectly possible as long as both players aren't so desperate to win they're clenched tighter than a mouse's ear. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't think that wanting to win or not caring who wins really has any bearing on using house rules or choosing not to use house rules that arbitrarily enforce someone's vision of "reality".  I don't think those two things are connected in any way.

Again little quirks in the rules that once you know them they work, but can appear very cheaty to new people. 

Thats the price you pay for an ultra casual ultra easy system that caters to the casualest of players however.  Thats what the gw fans want.

Edited by Dead Scribe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m with @Dead Scribe on this one. I like the competitive play within our group but I love the narrative campaigns more. But like of sight is never an issue. 
When playing for mastery of the mechanics of the game. It’s super clear cut. You placed the model, if I can see it. You didn’t pay enough attention placing it. Black and white. And nothing wrong with that.

and I experience the opposite of what @Kirjava13 and @Overread describe in my narrative games. The small bit sticking out is a narrative hook. The clanrats are hiding behind that wall. One eagle eyed soldier spotted the careless clanrats waving his spear around the corner. As he frantically waves his fellows to attention the squad lower their rifles.... and blast the clanrats to bits through the wall. (Or sent their arrows in a high arc landing behind the wall). The little toe is not just the toe it’s a warrior peeking around the corner... of course he’s going to get shot but due to cover some missiles ping of what gems hiding behind. 

the rules are there and if you want to change them, absolutely do so. But if playing to build a narrative just use it. That’s were the unexpected stories happen.

so the clenched tighter thing (while it made me snigger 😂)   Is really missing the point of the other way of playing imo  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, gronnelg said:

Per the rules, if any part of a unit sees any part of another unit, then the units have line of sight. 
My question is about what you guys typically houserule?

On thing to bear in mind with line of sight is that each model must be able to see the enemy unit.  I've had to point out to people when half their unit is behind a rock that they can't only shoot with the ones that can see...  Plus a unit cannot see through a unit that isn't their own.

Houserule wise, my local group don't use any, but we do apply a healthy dose of common sense - if you can see me then I can see you if nobody moves for example.

One thing I do occasionally have to do, is get my opponent to check that they can see characters, as most people play with the assumption they can see anything that isn't behind cover.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

I've never in my two plus years of playing AOS have had anyone question the line of sight rules as being not clear.  I have heard many people complain about the line of sight rules (shooty players mainly complaining that forests now block line of sight as being not fair to them), but never had I until this very moment had anyone say they were not clear.

This. 

The rule is clear. It's just that some people don't like the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

  Plus a unit cannot see through a unit that isn't their own.

Wait. That's a thing?

I know you cannot see through a model that is not in the shooting unit, but between models or even between the legs and other gaps is fine, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the unit does not create a magic box. But it's hard to draw line of sight in between three ranks of goblins to shoot the shaman behind in the foot, for example.

I've never had aby issues with LoS outside being thoughtless, myself or the opponent, when positioning units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

On thing to bear in mind with line of sight is that each model must be able to see the enemy unit.  I've had to point out to people when half their unit is behind a rock that they can't only shoot with the ones that can see...  Plus a unit cannot see through a unit that isn't their own.

Houserule wise, my local group don't use any, but we do apply a healthy dose of common sense - if you can see me then I can see you if nobody moves for example.

One thing I do occasionally have to do, is get my opponent to check that they can see characters, as most people play with the assumption they can see anything that isn't behind cover.

Is this correct? I have looked it up in the core-rules and the rule states:

"In order to attack with a missile weapon, the model using the weapon must be in range of the target unit (i.e. within the maximum distance, in inches, of the Range listed for the weapon making the attack), and the target unit must be visible to the model with the weapon (if unsure, stoop down and look from behind the shooting model to see if a model from the target unit is visible)." 

it says "modell" not "unit". So why should i not be able to make some shots with half of the unit?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As long as each model in your shooting unit can see at a minimum a toenail or spear point of someone in the enemy unit, it can shoot at that unit.  If any models in the unit cannot see the target, they cannot shoot at it.

However even if you only have one target model out of a unit of ten models that can be seen, if you can have as many guys shoot that one model, the damage leaks over so line of sight obstructions are very minor in AOS and don't really matter too much, which is where sloppy play comes in when people don't bother checking anymore.

This causes some people to rage because it doesn't make sense to them, but this is a game, and its not supposed to make sense.  For rules that make sense, people should find simulation games which are built around making sense.  AOS is an abstract game built on the back of card games and board games, not simulations.

Edited by Dead Scribe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Bombort this is my understanding. it's one of those rules that is really ****** but at the same time is probably one of the least worse options, if you want the game to keep moving,  so you just have to kind of roll with it. Also on a related note for determining LOS I personally prefer the slight modification that Kill Team has for cover, that is you don't include parts that are 'sticking out' like bases, antenna or weapons, but everyone has a different opinion on these things.

LOS.png

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Wait. That's a thing?

I know you cannot see through a model that is not in the shooting unit, but between models or even between the legs and other gaps is fine, right?

Absolutely fine if there are gaps for other units (friend or foe).  Where I've had issues is with dense units and small heroes - if I have a blob of 4 or 5 deep Grimghast Reapers, there's very little chance you can see my Necromancer or Vampire who's stood behind them!

1 hour ago, Bombort said:

it says "modell" not "unit". So why should i not be able to make some shots with half of the unit?

You can - that's what I was clarifying, you have to check each model to see how many can shoot (if I'd meant it the other way I'd have said every model).  The post I was responding too could have been read that units have line of sight to another unit, whereas it's models that have line of sight to a unit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

Absolutely fine if there are gaps for other units (friend or foe).  Where I've had issues is with dense units and small heroes - if I have a blob of 4 or 5 deep Grimghast Reapers, there's very little chance you can see my Necromancer or Vampire who's stood behind them!

Ah. Ok. Thought I'd missed something.

I agree that a more dense unit limits the gaps, but that said, if there is a gap, no matter how small, I'll never ask my opponent to ignore the rules and not take a shot to which she's entitled.

In other words, to the poster's point, our house has no house rule here.

Edited by Sleboda
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a bit of a problem with my current game buddies. For one, they play 40k more often and have been playing even before the rules simplification. They do get picky about LOS for magic and shooting. In addition, they employ subtle tactical advantage through omission. Not giving me their intentions under the guise of "fun" or "narrative". So imagine your opponent declares "i'll move this wizard to the 2nd level of this building looking out the window *stares angrily*". Our house rule for LOS is, all models "see" each other base to base as a default, and don't consider the model's height, with plenty of exceptions for centerpiece models. Now I naturally say "they're hiding" because I can't see their base AND I interpreted the move as not wanting to be in LOS. I don't ask questions because they're my friend AND they're hosting me AND we play casually. So I don't shoot the model in my following turn, something else perhaps. Then my opponent casually goes, "All right, I look down upon my enemies and cast XXXX on top of them". And so, I'm besides myself. This is my gripe. I'll survive. 

Truly, the one thing we haven't cracked the code for are those towering centerpiece models like Nagash, where they could very well be taller than most terrain on the board. Nearly the whole model can be seen without any LOS to the base in some cases. I always propose from the "character's head" to base for LOS in these cases but its never perfect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why house rules are bad.  You are playing with a different set of rules than your opponent is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...