Just to put it in a visible place for the forumites …

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/descent-second-ed/support/Descent%20Second%20Edition%20FAQ.pdf

"spaces that are separated by a wall (the black edge of a map tile) are not adjacent nor are they in line of sight to each other. Although the two spaces technically share a corner, the wall blocks both movement and line of sight between the two spaces on either side."

So we now have an explicit rule saything that you cannot trace line of sight between those two exact spaces (which is listed as an answer instead of an erratum for some reason, even though they specifically admit that they share a corner and the rules clearly state that spaces sharing a corner have LOS to each other).

The thing is, that's just the tip of the iceberg. We're also concerned about the line of sight of someone who stands one or two spaces away from the wall, rather than right next to it. Or someone who is adjacent to the wall, but is tracing line of sight from the free-standing corner to spaces that are down the corridor in the opposite direction. And they haven't said anything about these cases.

Now, we could guess that maybe you should just not be allowed to trace LOS through the terminating corner of a free-standing wall. But that would mean it blocks line-of-sight in a bunch of cases where you're not even behind it - where if you extended the wall out to the side to form a regular corner it would suddenly stop blocking your LOS. Which is every bit as stupid as the original problem.

So going strictly by RAW, the rules are now even more complicated and counter-intuitive than before. And if you're happy making up a house rule, you still need to solve the hard problems on your own; this provides no help at all.

Remember, kids: FFG answers the question asked, not the question implied.

Errata: a list of errors and their corrections …

They are not admitting to an error in the RAW or correcting any text, they are just clarifying the effect of a wall between two orthogonally adjacent spaces. The wall blocks movement & LOS because it has definite thickness. A line drawn perpendicular to that wall is blocked, but a diagonal line (45°) is still treated as crossing an open corner I would assume. [Diagonals are the bête noire of the square grid.] As someone suggested in one of the threads, insert a spacer between the tiles if that makes it easier to accept (although you will be changing the topology slightly).

I was hoping they would rescind the LOS rules, but it's probably too soon to contemplate that. I will teach people the RAW, and play that way in public with strangers, but in private (with like-minded players, if no one objects) we will house rule it.

I had a pretty good batting average with the FAQ. I understood what their rules said, I just disagreed with some of their design decisions. Maybe I overlooked it, but they don't seem to have answered what happens if a large monster's movement is interrupted by a hero player and there is no room for the LM to expand.

Thanks for the post Triu. Got it on my iPad and emailed it to work so I can print it out. Looks like I ruled correctly on stun (the heros fought me on it a bit because they use the character with the stun aura, but eventually they agreed it was OP if it was full turn stuns all the time).

House rules are great. I don’t know too many people who don’t use house rules when playing these types of games. Besides rules are just guide lines anyway.

I still don't understand why people are so pissy about the new LoS rules. In the most extreme cases (and I've had 1-2 come up in all the games I've played so far) you couldn't draw LoS but just about everything else was fair game. I think the LoS rules are pretty good, it helps speed the game up as just about anything can be hit besides hiding behind a wall (which makes sense).

Coldmoonrising said:

Because you can hide behind some obstacles, but not others, and in some cases you can hide behind yourself.

Triu said:

Um…the FAQ directly contradicts the original rulebook. The rulebook says:

"Any space that shares an edge or corner with another space is defined as being adjacent to that space." (p.10)

The FAQ says:

"spaces that are separated by a wall (the black edge of a map tile) are not adjacent…although the two spaces technically share a corner."

Those two statements can't both be true, so either the original RAW was in error and this is a correction, or the FAQ is itself wrong and is in need of a correction.

Triu said:

In the example in question, the starting and ending point of LOS are the same, so it doesn't have an angle. The FAQ says nothing about perpendicular lines vs. other angles.

But your proposed rule doesn't solve the issue either. Suppose I'm standing behind a wall that's solid on my left and open on my right. Under your rule, I can still trace LOS from my right front corner to spaces that are on the other side of the wall and on my left - that line will not be perpendicular to the wall.

When our group plays we just use center of square to center of square for LoS. It works for us. If some prefer the original rules for LoS then we go with that. No big deal.

Antistone said:

I'm not saying I like what they wrote or that it makes sense, but they did not say remove this text and replace it with that text. They let the original text stand, with an additional statement that is causing more debate.

Antistone said:

I did not explain myself properly. Someone else did a better job on BoardGameGeek. The line you propose would not work, because it passes through the wall that separates the spaces. Of course in normal 3D space, that wall would also block diagonals -- which many people are arguing on BGG. Apparently Terrinoth is not in the same universe as our world, and the laws of physics & geometry are different.

Triu said:

Right. They obviously changed the rules, but didn't explicitly tell us they were changing the rules (that is, they issued an erratum without labeling it as such). That was my original point.

Triu said:

The line I proposed is coterminus with the corner of the wall. Touching a wall at a corner is specifically allowed.

It's hard to have this conversation without a diagram, though. Let's see, take a look at this:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1374810/emmowbee

Imagine someone standing in the unlabeled space below the number 4 in that picture. Under both the FAQ ruling and your proposed "no perpendicular" rule, that person would have line of sight to the space labeled 3, by tracing LOS from the upper-right corner of his space to the upper-right corner of the 3.

The thing is, if you just extend that exact same LOS line further down, you can see that someone standing in the square below the yellow 5 would also have LOS to the 3 - even if we turned this free-standing wall into a regular corner by removing all the spaces below the 4. So any rule that denies LOS to the guy standing below the 4 based purely on the line being traced also has to deny it to the guy standing below the yellow 5, which means you'd be changing the LOS rules for regular corners, not just free-standing walls.

By the laws of geometry in our universe, I agree with you. Apparently in Terrinoth, geometry works differently (as evidenced by the fact that a right triangle is also an equilateral triangle). When you are drawing an orthogonal line between the 4 square and the one below it (let's call it 6), it's as if you were trying to draw a line from the 3 square to the 1 square -- there is a blocking edge there (but there is no square 2, increasing the range). You can't draw LOS from 3 to 6, because it's as if you were going from 3 to the square below 1.

For anything other than an orthogonal line, geometry works more or less as it does in this universe -- except that obstacles on a diagonal do not block LOS, but obstacles on an orthogonal do. 1 and 3 can't see each other, but if you put an obstacle on 2 -- by the RAW -- you can see the square on the other side of 2.

I think in the new expansion, we get two new monsters -- the Jabberwock and Bandersnatch -- and a new item -- the vorpal sword.

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

The Jabberwock, with eyes aflame,
Jaws that bait and claws that catch,
Beware the Jabberwock, my son,
The frumious Bandersnatch
He took his vorpal sword in hand
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

FAQ Says:

Q: When exactly can cards that are used “during your turn” be used?
A: Any skill or ability that can be used “during your turn” can only be
used during the Perform Actions step of a hero’s turn. A hero cannot use
these skills or abilities at the start of his turn or at the end of his turn.

Does this mean that I can only use these before the first action, after the first action but not after the second action?

Example:

Averic has 4 fatigue on his card and would like to use Healing Prayer. Unfortunately, he cannot. He takes a Move action to place himself by a monster. He then takes an attack action during which he recovers a fatigue.

At this point, is he at the EOT or is there time for him to use Healing Prayer?

jcbbjjttt said:

That's an easy one. Resting only rids you off the fatigue at the end of your turn. So when you declare "I am done", and before passing the baton to the next player, you discard all fatigue but can't do anything else. Your turn is done.

Snakeye said:

That makes sense for the rest action. What about my example though? He makes an attack during which he spends a surge to gain a fatigue. Can he use the fatigue after the attack or is his turn over after the attack is resolved?

Triu said:

All of the maps are on very tiny spherical planets. That's why you can see through diagonal obstacles - because they only touch at their bases, not at their tops.

jcbbjjttt said:

The way we have played it in Descent and in many other games is that your turn isn't over until you state it's over. This practice usually avoids these types of edge cases. However, some games are more exacting in their turn sequences and some may actually take the time to address this subject. But most games don't seem to do so, which is why we often play the way I described.

Sorry I don't have a RAW answer.

Kerrin2 said:

Page 7: "4. Flip Activation Card: After a hero player has finished performing his actions, that hero player flips his Activation card facedown to indicate that his turn is over."

I would say that Perform Actions isn't over until you reach to flip that AC. Until then you could still spend fatigue for movement points, skills, abilities, feats, deeds, or whatever they introduce in future. Once the card is flipped, end of turn events occur.

Page 9: "When a hero performs a rest action, he will recover all fatigue at the end of his turn. As a reminder that he has rested during his turn, he places a hero token on his Activation card. At the end of his turn, after the hero flips his Activation card, he discards the hero token and all fatigue from his Hero sheet."

jcbbjjttt said:

Well, it seems you're allowed to spend fatigue to move after your second action (p.8: "during his turn, before or after resolving an action or during a mvoe action, a hero may suffer fatigue to gain movement points.") So I would argue that your "perform actions" step doesn't necessarily end as soon as your second action is complete, and therefore you can do additional non-actions before proceeding to the next step.