Can I trace line of sight starting from the corner of the wall from a figure or does that conflict with "If the line passes through the edge of a map tile, a door, a wall, or a blocked space (a space containing a figure or obstacle), the target space is not in line of sight"?
The rule didn't specify, but if I trace the line touches only the corner of walled space, does the target is in LOS?
Edited by rpgplayer88Hi,
hope this help you:
Thanks!
Does the image below makes A,C and the orange marker have LOS to each other?
Yes. They have LOS to one another.
Hi,
hope this help you:
Are you sure about 7 and 8 examples?
From FAQ:
Q: Are spaces that are separated by a wall (edge of a map tile) adjacent to
Yes, as they don't share a corner, per the FAQ quote you posted...
That FAQ should answer whay Nr:6 is not ok.
The image note says: A&B in 6. Have neither LoS or Adjacency.
I can understand why in 6 you can not do a melee attack (because are not adjacency).
But if 6 have not LoS, then either in 7&8. I interpret that´s the only corner without LoS
Sorry for my english.
The image note says: A&B in 6. Have neither LoS or Adjacency.
I can understand why in 6 you can not do a melee attack (because are not adjacency).
But if 6 have not LoS, then either in 7&8. I interpret that´s the only corner without LoS
Sorry for my english.
There is no LOS in 6, because it is the specific example adressed by the FAQ.
Up to now, yes, it is the only "corner" which blocks LOS - but I would add that the separating wall has something to do with it too.
Wow.....I am actually more confused on what has line of site on what "after" reading this thread.
I initially came here wondering if that little visual depiction of a wall corner that appears IN the empty space diagonally adjacent to the corner space was enough to justify blocking line of sight on lines traced through the tiny corner.
Now I read that objects which have one wall space between them share line of sight only because they don't share the corner????
LOS is all about tracing lines from corner to corner. Read my guide (link in my signature). I think the process for determining LOS is explained in depth. If you have questions, please let me know.
Oh..crap. This is a 2nd edition thread isn't it?
I only have first edition. Pretty sure in first edition that it's center of square to center of square rather than corner to corner. Lol... Didn't realize that was something that they changed in the new edition (which I have not played yet).
No wonder I was confused.
On 7/8/2013 at 2:03 PM, PierreBoberg said:Hi,
hope this help you:
Non of these has LOS.
Believe it or not, that diagram has been confirmed by FFG to be accurate on multiple occasions. 7, 8, and 9 DO have LOS, as mind-bending as it may seem.
3 hours ago, Zaltyre said:Believe it or not, that diagram has been confirmed by FFG to be accurate on multiple occasions. 7, 8, and 9 DO have LOS, as mind-bending as it may seem.
Holy ****. We had a long discussion about this and yes. 1 - 6 does NOT have LOS but 7 - 9 DO have LOS. It is super stupid but it "kinda" makes sense.
Ok. Lets go with this. This is _the_ rule now. Thanks Zaltyre!
