Upper Deck Entertainment Forums

We had one longer rule discussion at the DMF in Köln this weekend. The problem was the line of sight with range 4.

Taking the grid file from the other LOS question:
http://wiki.gamegardens.com/images/3/38/Hex_grid_coordinates.jpg

Character A is standing at 0.0. Character B is at 3.1
There is a hill at 1.0.
From the 405.4 there should be no clear LOS from A to B.

Ruled by me: Excluding the 2 outer pathes (0.0-1.0-2.0-3.0-3.1) (0.0-0.1-1.1-2.1-3.1).
The remaining 2 middle pathes (0.0-1.0-2.0-2.1-3.1) (0.0-1.0-1.1-2.1-3.1) are both blocked. So there is no LOS.
A cant see B.
Is this correct?

The second problem i encountered was the case that was printed in the Deluxe Starter.
With A at 0.0, B at 3.2 and a hill at 1.1.
The rule say something about the 4 pathes. Sadly you have 6 pathes from A to B in this case. So 405.4 could not even apply to this.
The 2 outer pathes (0.0-1.0-2.0-2.1-3.2) (0.0-0.1-1.2-2.2-3.2) have a clear LOS would be ignored.
All the remaining 4 middle pathes
(0.0-0.1-1.1-2.2-3.2)
(0.0-0.1-1.1-2.1-3.2)
(0.0-1.0-1.1-2.2-3.2)
(0.0-1.0-1.1-2.1-3.2)
are going though the 1.1 and have a blocked LOS this way.
I decided, that you dont have a clear LOS even though there is no clear rule for this scenario.

Basicly i was saying: Ignore the other 2 pathes and only check the middle pathes. If you have at least one way with a clear path, you have LOS and can target the other character. But if all the middle pathes are blocked, you cant target or see the other character.

Quote from the CR 1.02
405.4 Range 4 is an exception to 405.3 if, of the four paths of equal length to the destination, the middle two paths have blocked LOS. In this case only, LOS to that target is considered blocked, even though two paths of length 4 have unblocked LOS.

Hello DRaschke.

     I can understand the confusion as I've gone through it also.

     For your first example, A can see B.  If you look at the example on page 11 of the Deluxe Edition Rulebook (comes with the deluxe starter), they give an example.  When using paragraph 405.4, refer to the example in the rulebook.  It will give you a clear idea.  The only time this rule comes into effect is when the middle path between 2 characters is cover.  In your case, it is not.  Even though the hill is located in 1.0, it is not considered a middle path for that specific rule.

     As for your second example, I believe they did 4 paths as to not confuse people.  I see you counted 4 paths for the middle, but for the sake of simplicity, it is only refer to 2 paths.  Also, whether they are 2 or 4 paths, they still remain blocked.

     The middle path being blocked always has cover terrain in the middle.  So to recap, in your first example, A has LOS to B.  As for your ruling on the second example, you never ignore other paths.  They are included to confirm LOS.  But for clarity's sake, if a path to LOS of 4 has 2 middle paths blocked, you do not have LOS.

Just to confirm.

There is only 1 case where Range 4 has an issue and does not follow standard LoS rules.
And that 1 case is outlined in both the basic and deluxe rulebooks with pictures showing the setup.

Using the hex grid link provided in the first post, the setup instance is as follows:

Ally on 0,0.
Enemy on 3,2.
Space 1,1 is blocked in some manner (terrain, enemy, etc..).

That one setup instance is the only time you follow the special Range 4 rules outlined in the rulebooks and comp rules.  All other instances of characters being 4 spaces apart follow regular LoS rules.

And yes, there are a total of 6 paths in that one setup instance, not 4.  UDE stated here they intentionally left out 2 of those paths.

---

Simon Key

Player Management Level 4
WoW TCG Rules Knowledge Level 2
WoW Minis Rules Knowledge Level 2
Huntik TCG Rules Knowledge Level 1
Tournament Organizer Level 1
UDE Forums Moderator

So you tell me i should use the Deluxe Starer Rulebook (DSR) instead of the CR when making judge calls? ;)

The example in the DSR has nothing to do with my first question. In the DSR is only one example of the many possible ways to show a range of 4 with blockers in the way. Honestly they took the worst one for it, unless this should have been really the one and only exception for the rule. But this is not written there.

In the DSR its written: Effects at (Range)4 are an exception to this rule.
There is no word that the example to the left is the only possible range of 4. And as well not that this is the only exception.

For the second example (the one that is shown in the DSR) it really does matter that there are 6 pathes and not only 4 (as written in the DSR as well).

Example that it is really important: 
A at 0.0, B at 3.2. One Hill at 0.1 and one at 2.2.
Taking the example from the DSR, you suddenly don´t have a LOS anymore. Becauce both pathes in the DSR (the red lines) are blocked. But only 3 of the 4 pathes that are there are really blocked. You have still one line (0.0-1.0-1.1-2.1-3.2) that is free. So you see that it does matter.

So in my opinion it is important to get a clear rule for this, becauce currently the CR are not helping with this problem (question 1 and question 2). Maybe i dont understand the wording correct (english is not my main language as you most likly can see). But thats how i do understand the wording of the CRs. In the first example you dont have a LOS and the second example is not getting cought by the rules at all, but should have a blocked LOS since all the middle pathes are blocked.

966558:

Just to confirm.

There is only 1 case where Range 4 has an issue and does not follow standard LoS rules.
And that 1 case is outlined in both the basic and deluxe rulebooks with pictures showing the setup.

Sadly that is not written in the CR and not in the DSR.
But: "Range 4 is an exception" means for me all the range of 4 and not only one that you have to look in the DSR. Players will call me insane when i tell this to them. Becauce the DSR is really not a good source for rulings.
And still. My first example has a range of 4, there are 4 possible paths and both middle pathes are blocked. Maybe my problem is in the definition of the middle line. I just see the outer ones as these that are surround the 2 spaces the most (circle them). And ever other are the middle for me.

 

Thanks for the link with the clearing of the "4" and "6" pathes. But should still be changed in the CRs as well. Especially since there was already a new version in Feb. The post was from Dec.

Hi,

    There are 3 possible [R4] scenarios on any map. Again, by using the grid coordinates above (Link:gamegardens.com), they are:

a) 0.0 to 4.0
b) 0.0 to 3.1
c) 0.0 to 3.2

    The first two (a & b) use regular LOS rules, where there is unblocked LOS if any of the shortest paths from the source to the destination has unblocked LOS.

    The LOS exception for [R4] applies only to the third scenario above (0.0 to 3.2), where if hex 1.1 is blocked (either by terrain, or an enemy character), then LOS between the source and destination is blocked.

    Thanks everyone for your feedback, and we will clarify this in the next CR update.

---

Edwin T.
UDE Forums Moderator

Hmm, the way It reads to me, it seems like its saying that if if attacker was on 2.0 and defender was on 2.2, the way to block it even though its only 4 spaces away is to put LOS blockers in 1.1 and 2.1, therefore blocking the 2 middle paths out of 4 possible paths

Using the grid provided in this thread...

Having the attacker on 2,0 and the defender on 2,2 is only a Range 2 scenario, and there are only 2 possible paths in that case.

Putting the defender on 2,4 would create a Range 4 situation.  And yes, blocking both 1,1 and 2,1 would block LoS in that case, but that doesn't apply to the Range 4 exception being discussed in this thread.

---

Simon Key

Player Management Level 4
WoW TCG Rules Knowledge Level 2
WoW Minis Rules Knowledge Level 2
Huntik TCG Rules Knowledge Level 1
Tournament Organizer Level 1
UDE Forums Moderator

855144:

Hi,

    There are 3 possible [R4] scenarios on any map. Again, by using the grid coordinates above (Link:gamegardens.com), they are:

a) 0.0 to 4.0
b) 0.0 to 3.1
c) 0.0 to 3.2

    The first two (a & b) use regular LOS rules, where there is unblocked LOS if any of the shortest paths from the source to the destination has unblocked LOS.

    The LOS exception for [R4] applies only to the third scenario above (0.0 to 3.2), where if hex 1.1 is blocked (either by terrain, or an enemy character), then LOS between the source and destination is blocked.

    Thanks everyone for your feedback, and we will clarify this in the next CR update.

Holy crap! That makes the most sense of any explanation to date.

Cheers!

-teh Sig

---

Level 2 Minis Judge.

966558:

Using the grid provided in this thread...

Having the attacker on 2,0 and the defender on 2,2 is only a Range 2 scenario, and there are only 2 possible paths in that case.

Putting the defender on 2,4 would create a Range 4 situation.  And yes, blocking both 1,1 and 2,1 would block LoS in that case, but that doesn't apply to the Range 4 exception being discussed in this thread.

correct me if I am wrong please.

Attacker is at 2,0
Defender at 2,4

Terrain / Enemy fig at 2,2

Result = Blocked LOS = can't attack

2405073:

966558:

Using the grid provided in this thread...

Having the attacker on 2,0 and the defender on 2,2 is only a Range 2 scenario, and there are only 2 possible paths in that case.

Putting the defender on 2,4 would create a Range 4 situation.  And yes, blocking both 1,1 and 2,1 would block LoS in that case, but that doesn't apply to the Range 4 exception being discussed in this thread.

correct me if I am wrong please. Attacker is at 2,0 Defender at 2,4 Terrain / Enemy fig at 2,2 Result = Blocked LOS = can't attack

You are correct. This, however, isn't a case where the exception applies, since there is only one shortest path...

---

WoWMinisDB.NET
Tournament Organizer - Level 1
Rules Knowledge World of Warcraft - Level 2
Rules Knowledge World of Warcraft Miniatures - Level 1
Player Management - Level 1

In this diagram, of all the 6 paths of sight (Red, Green, Orange, White, Yellow, and Black lines) from the Attacker (Red) to the Defender (Yellow) 4 are blocked by terrain (Green hex) or an enemy and thus this is the one and only case where LoS can be blocked at range 4.

---

WoW TCG RK Level 1
WoW Minis RK Level 1
Player Management Level 1
Tournament Organizer Level 1

If the Judge thinks your question is stupid, he will set you on fire.

In that setup, only the 4 middle paths have blocked LoS by the green hex.  But that setup is the exception to regular LoS rules, so the outer 2 paths (red and green) being unblocked means nothing.

The fact the 4 middle paths are blocked is why that setup results in a blocked LoS situation, but it is not the only case where LoS can be blocked at range 4.

---

Simon Key

Player Management Level 4
WoW TCG Rules Knowledge Level 2
WoW Minis Rules Knowledge Level 2
Huntik TCG Rules Knowledge Level 1
Tournament Organizer Level 1
UDE Forums Moderator