It states that you trace line of sight from any corner of the player's space to any corner of the target's space. In the visual example on page 12 is says player 2 does not have line of sight, but if you trace a line from front corner to rear corner, one which they didn't trace, the line only touches the corner of the rocks. Would the target not be in line of sight then?
Line of sight example page 12
The zombie itself blocks the line of sight to that corner.
Logically I totally agree with you that there should be line of sight, but with game rules real world logic is not always applicable.
Logically I totally agree with you that there should be line of sight, but with game rules real world logic is not always applicable.
I agree, Whitewing is correct. It's stated explicitly in the FAQ that if the line you're trying to trace from corner-to-corner passes through any blocked space including the target space, then you do not have line of sight.
But if the target were one space farther away it would be LOS.
It states that you trace line of sight from any corner of the player's space to any corner of the target's space. In the visual example on page 12 is says player 2 does not have line of sight, but if you trace a line from front corner to rear corner, one which they didn't trace, the line only touches the corner of the rocks. Would the target not be in line of sight then?
Remember that Line of Sight (and range) are abstractions designed for game rules, they are not necessarily real world models (a common complaint with the corner-to-corner LoS rules).
Many games make some kind of rules distinction for partial / full cover, etc., by increasing defensive values or applying penalties to attack values. Descent simplifies things and just breaks it down to "Yes you can attack" or "no you can't attack", but they have to draw a line (pun not initially intended, but I'm leaving it) somewhere. In this case, it's that you must have an unobstructed line from any corner to any other corner. If you don't, even if you can "see" part of the figure (the figure itself obstructs the view to one of its corners), consider it to have enough cover that you can't make an effective attack. If you do have an unobstructed line (even if it's just one), you are considered to have just enough of a view of the target that you can make an attack.
<History Lesson>
1st Edition used center-to-center line of sight rules, but the maps were often far bigger and less crowded, so there were more spaces you could position yourself to get line of sight on a specific target (or in the case of the overlord, more spaces you could spawn monsters to avoid line of sight from any hero). In 2nd Edition, the maps are smaller, and there are, relative to the amount of available space, more figures on the board, so having a more flexible line of sight system allows for ranged figures to not be hampered as much as if they used center-to-center LoS rules, and quest reinforcements are no longer limited by line of sight restrictions, so that's no longer an issue either way.
</History Lesson>
But if the target were one space farther away it would be LOS.
Correct.
In this case, which actually does have a real world equivalent, if you're hiding behind a pillar, I might not be able to see you well enough to target you, but if you step back away from the pillar, so long as I'm not on exactly the opposite side, even though you're farther away, you are more easily seen.
Edited by gritonI also know that they do extensive testing for game balance and those things are considered. If you say it's in the FAQs I'll go with it. I just didn't find it in the FAQs myself. Thanks for all your input.
I also know that they do extensive testing for game balance and those things are considered. If you say it's in the FAQs I'll go with it. I just didn't find it in the FAQs myself. Thanks for all your input.
In case you'd like a reference for later, in the most updated FAQ found on this website, it's on page 2, the first question/answer in the Line of Sight/Adjacent Spaces section.