LoL I was correcting my error when you posted! Thanks @Obscene

Since somebody brought him up, I would argue that Uncontrolled Geomancer would also be limited by LoS, shooting out a wave of rocks like the illustration on the Protectors of the Realm preview shows. This game values facing, so I think we are going to be seeing a lot more "Burning Hands" and "Color Sprays" than "Fireballs".

3 minutes ago, drkpnthr said:

Since somebody brought him up, I would argue that Uncontrolled Geomancer would also be limited by LoS, shooting out a wave of rocks like the illustration on the Protectors of the Realm preview shows. This game values facing, so I think we are going to be seeing a lot more "Burning Hands" and "Color Sprays" than "Fireballs".

Based on the illustration I agree, however the card tells a different story because it says "including you," which tells me that he is nor hurling rocks at his enemies but instead causing the earth to tremble. Which is why it can effect him as well as ally units and should not require line of sight. Basically its an AoE not a spray.

It's been agonizing waiting for these rules inquiries to be answered by FFG! I'm checking my email constantly. I hope we get an answer soon.

18 minutes ago, Orcdruid said:

Based on the illustration I agree, however the card tells a different story because it says "including you," which tells me that he is nor hurling rocks at his enemies but instead causing the earth to tremble. Which is why it can effect him as well as ally units and should not require line of sight. Basically its an AoE not a spray.

You keep using theme to justify rules and that is an incredibly poor reason.
Use the RRG please.
It basically amounts to you saying I feel this way so it is.
I can just as easily say it's him picking up the earth underneath him and accidentally crushing his friends/slinging them at the enemy as to why it is just a cone effect and hits yourself.

Instead I am going to use the reason that because it has a target(targets) it must use the line of sight rule which is derived from it's firing arc to determine if it hits multiple targets.

1 minute ago, Obscene said:

Instead I am going to use the reason that because it has a target(targets) it must use the line of sight rule which is derived from it's firing arc to determine if it hits multiple targets.

I don't think it requires line of sight because it says "Each unit at range 1-[unstable]."

64.6 - "At: If any portion of a unit's tray is inside the specified band, that unit is at that band."

There are no targets of the attack, it simply has an effect that applies to each unit at the specified range. Without a target, I don't think it requires line of sight.

2 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

I don't think it requires line of sight because it says "Each unit at range 1-[unstable]."

64.6 - "At: If any portion of a unit's tray is inside the specified band, that unit is at that band."

There are no targets of the attack, it simply has an effect that applies to each unit at the specified range. Without a target, I don't think it requires line of sight.

My retort is that it has multiple targets. By applying an effect to something it is inherently targeting it, even if it is effecting other units at the same time.
64.6 still applies even under that intention. It's largely there to say if a unit a portion of it's base formation within the specified range it is a valid target for the effect.

An example would be a big bad formation of skeletons 99 percent outside of range 2 but 1 tray is barely in, that unit would be at range 2.

Yeah, I can see where you're coming from, but it seems really odd to use the phrase "each unit at range X" when it really means "each unit at range X and in line of sight." Sure, it's possible, but it seems less parsimonious to me.

ok here are my thoughts. most of this is just from general gaming experience as most rulebook references have already been quoted.

since target is not clearly defined, i revert to the assumption that target implies choice. therefore the act of choosing a target means you are targeting it.

this means that the uncontrolled geomancer would not require line of sight because you are not choosing the target, it just happens to hit everyone.

this means kari does require line of sight.

however this conversation has reminded me that LOS is only through the front arc. so Kari could really only use her ability after finishing off a unit (because the unit she is fighting in melee effectively blocks LOS) perhaps this is the intent. i suppose she could trace line of sight out of a corner if her melee target isnt too wide on that side.

10 hours ago, Obscene said:

You keep using theme to justify rules and that is an incredibly poor reason.

No, I am using what the card says, that being "each unit at range 1-unstable(including you) suffers damage..." to justify a theme.

As for using the RRG, i can't because, as has been stated several times in this discussion, it is unclear whether "other effects" means all other effects or other effects that require LoS. This is not helped by the fact that only 2 cards that have ranged effects(carrion lancers and deathcaller) say the need LoS when several of those cards have the space for such text.

@Klaxas kari's ability can't trigger after you destroy the unit, spend surges is step six of the attack chart and spend mortal strikes and spend hits are 8 and 9 respectively.

8 hours ago, Orcdruid said:

No, I am using what the card says, that being "each unit at range 1-unstable(including you) suffers damage..." to justify a theme.

As for using the RRG, i can't because, as has been stated several times in this discussion, it is unclear whether "other effects" means all other effects or other effects that require LoS. This is not helped by the fact that only 2 cards that have ranged effects(carrion lancers and deathcaller) say the need LoS when several of those cards have the space for such text.

@Klaxas kari's ability can't trigger after you destroy the unit, spend surges is step six of the attack chart and spend mortal strikes and spend hits are 8 and 9 respectively.

you are correct. i was looking for that attack chart before i posted but i couldnt seem to find it when i needed it. well i dont see her ability as being useful at all then unless it ignores LOS. your only option would be to charger her with one of her sides open so she can get a shot in diagonally. maybe thats why her ability is so good, the limiting factor is the LOS? but that seems really punishing. i wonder what the official ruling will be.

Well, I'm just going to put it out there. I don't think Uncontrolled Geomancer damages itself, only friendly units always within the range. For example, it could plough through an enemy unit and then also hit a friendly unit behind the target.

I expect Line of Sight to be reworded to say: Ranged attacks require line of sight and ranged effects when specified require line of sight to their targets to resolve them.

Just now, Muz333 said:

Well, I'm just going to put it out there. I don't think Uncontrolled Geomancer damages itself, only friendly units always within the range. For example, it could plough through an enemy unit and then also hit a friendly unit behind the target.

No, it hurts itself the word "You" on upgrade cards is a game term referring to itself.

To bring this thread back on topic, thanks to a conversation with @Tvayumat in another thread I've come up with this ridiculous monstrosity

3 4x3 reanimates each with trumpets

That is 66pts per unit, 198pts total

Assuming you split a core set it will require 14 of the reanimates expansions and cost 450 USD including the core, maybe more depending on what expansions trumpets comes in as you only get one copy in the core set.