LOS questions and order of scoring schemes.

[esqulax]

Hello, I have a few questions after a recent tournament that I hope someone here can help me with

1: Can a model block line of sight between two other models of equal height and base size? In theory the model would need to be standing completely perfect to do so, which would be impossible to do in practice, but can a player declare that they are doing so and place the model to block sight? 

2: Similar to question 1, can I place a 30mm model on top of a scheme or corpse marker to completely block line of sight to it? 

3: A strange situation popped up regarding primordial magic and Take Prisoner. I had Take prisoner on Primordial Magic, but during the final end step my opponent used the primordials ability to count as a scheme marker and removed it from play. Do I still score for Take Prisoner? 

[WWHSD]

1. Make an effort to line it up perfectly and then declare your intention and you're golden.

2. Nope. Sitting on top of a marker the same size as a models base does not block LoS to the marker. You should be able to block it the same way you could a model in question 1.

3. Who is the first player? The General Timing Chart has the first player resolving their effects first in the even't that there is no active or defending player. when multiple effects share the same timing. The chart is on pg. 46 of the Big Core.



Relevant FAQ entries:
32. If two models on 30mm bases are trying to draw LoS to each other, can another model on a 30mm base
which is positioned perfectly between them block that LoS?

Yes, although it would be very difficult to position the models in such a way.

 

45. If a model on a 30mm base is positioned perfectly on top of a 30mm Scheme Marker (or similar) such
that the Marker is completely covered, can other models draw LoS to the Marker?

Yes. A model on a 40mm base or larger would be able to block LoS to the Marker, but a 30mm base does not
block LoS (nor can it stop another model from being in base contact with the Marker).

[solkan]

 

3 hours ago, esqulax said:

3: A strange situation popped up regarding primordial magic and Take Prisoner. I had Take prisoner on Primordial Magic, but during the final end step my opponent used the primordials ability to count as a scheme marker and removed it from play. Do I still score for Take Prisoner? 

You're looking at the six step process for scoring the strategy and schemes at the end of the game, where the players score the schemes in lock step and the scheme markers don't get removed at the same step they're scored with.  Right?

If you're choosing to score Take Prisoner on the same step (4 or 6) that the other player is using Primordial Magic to score, keep in mind that removal of the scheme marker happens in step 5.

So you have three possible results:

1.  You score Take Prisoner in step 4, and get the points for it whether or not Primordial Magic gets sacrificed in step 5.

2.  You score something else in step 4, the other player sacrifices Primordial Magic in step 5, and you don't get the points for Take Zprisoner in step 6.

3.  You score something else in step 4, the other player doesn't Sacrifice Primordial Magic in step 5 because they didn't use it as a scheme marker in step 4, and you get to score Take Prisoner in step 6.

It doesn't matter who gets chosen during step 6, because there's no step 7.  

[esqulax]

Thank you for the quick answers And no, I was not looking at the six step process for scoring, but now that I have it definitely cleared it up. Thank you. 

[Paddywhack]

20 hours ago, WWHSD said:

 Make an effort to line it up perfectly and then declare your intention and you're golden.

Relevant FAQ entries:
32. If two models on 30mm bases are trying to draw LoS to each other, can another model on a 30mm base
which is positioned perfectly between them block that LoS?

Yes, although it would be very difficult to position the models in such a way.

 

Some people have come to agree that you can simply declare your intent, but in my mind the FAQ doesn't say this is how it has to be played. You may want to ask your TO or opponent. If they wanted it to be played that way, they could have simply said that in the FAQ, but instead they admit that it is technically possible, but would be extremely difficult to do in practice. This is still a game of miniatures and movement on a board and just being able to declare something that is practically impossible to do (barring terrain or other factors) seems a bit 'meh' to me.

That is of course my opinion, but the FAQ does not explicitly state you can just declare it so and it is. That is the interpretation that many players have agreed to, but your Meta may differ. There are already plenty of ways to block LOS in the game without this. 

[Ludvig]

If someone doesn't let you declare intent use something straight to line the three models up perfectly, ask your opponent if they agree that it is now a perfect line before declaring you have ended the move and you achieve the same result. Using declared intent is just a nifty way to speed things up but if an opponent wants you to use all manner of instruments and a good deal of time that should also be perfectly fine.

[WWHSD]

34 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

Some people have come to agree that you can simply declare your intent, but in my mind the FAQ doesn't say this is how it has to be played. You may want to ask your TO or opponent. If they wanted it to be played that way, they could have simply said that in the FAQ, but instead they admit that it is technically possible, but would be extremely difficult to do in practice. This is still a game of miniatures and movement on a board and just being able to declare something that is practically impossible to do (barring terrain or other factors) seems a bit 'meh' to me.

That is of course my opinion, but the FAQ does not explicitly state you can just declare it so and it is. That is the interpretation that many players have agreed to, but your Meta may differ. There are already plenty of ways to block LOS in the game without this. 

It's not practically impossible to do on purpose, it's just unlikely to ever occur unless you are purposely trying to do it. This is a game where premeasuring is explicitly permitted. There's no reason that you couldn't place a 30mm base perfectly in line between two other 30mm bases. 

Declaring intent on something like this is more a time saver than anything and guards against models that should not be moved getting getting jostled between when they are placed and when the measurement is taken. You measure your stuff, check your angles, and then let your opponent know your intent. If they don't think your placement is quite right you adjust it until it matches the stated intent. Later, when the agreed upon measurement needs to be checked again you don't actually check it.

It's the same for placing a model in base contact with another or putting a model just outside of a particular range. If you want your model to sit just outside of two inches from another, you measure two inches out and then set the model just outside of that. To prevent disagreements later, you let your opponent know that you are just outside of 2 inches. It's not something that's codified in the rules or FAQ but it makes a miniatures game run more smoothly. 

[Adran]

14 hours ago, Paddywhack said:

Some people have come to agree that you can simply declare your intent, but in my mind the FAQ doesn't say this is how it has to be played. You may want to ask your TO or opponent. If they wanted it to be played that way, they could have simply said that in the FAQ, but instead they admit that it is technically possible, but would be extremely difficult to do in practice. This is still a game of miniatures and movement on a board and just being able to declare something that is practically impossible to do (barring terrain or other factors) seems a bit 'meh' to me.

That is of course my opinion, but the FAQ does not explicitly state you can just declare it so and it is. That is the interpretation that many players have agreed to, but your Meta may differ. There are already plenty of ways to block LOS in the game without this. 

Its actually very easy to do if you want to do it, its very difficult to do it by accident. If you want to do so, place a straight line between the 2 things you want to block, and put your model right up against that line. Job done. If the model wasn't placed with that intent, then its quite unlikely to be mm perfect enough to block LOS. 

[WWHSD]

10 hours ago, Adran said:

Its actually very easy to do if you want to do it, its very difficult to do it by accident. If you want to do so, place a straight line between the 2 things you want to block, and put your model right up against that line. Job done. If the model wasn't placed with that intent, then its quite unlikely to be mm perfect enough to block LOS. 

Yup, pointing out intent to have the model blocking LoS prevents any issues that may arise later from a model being slightly bumped while measuring or moving another model, or having to be rotated because a model overhangs the base. If your model was blocking LoS when it was placed it should still be blocking Los if there was no game effect that caused the model or the objects for which it was blocking LoS to move even if a measurement taken later shows that they are no longer aligned.

[Paddywhack]

Still seems gamey to me if you can ignore the need for cover by running your model into the open and then just 'declare' that you have perfectly lined up another model in front of it to block LOS. To each their own. In that case though, you'd on'y be blocking LOS to one model that you have declared to be lining it up perfectly in front of. Any other model, even slightly placed off that line, would still have LOS. 

[Ludvig]

@Paddywhack

You aren't reakly ignoring the need for cover, most crews (especially shooty ones) will have ways to shift models and it's only a single model that needs to move slightly or pick another target. I use it on occasion to avoid my own auras or a scary charge.

You also need the models to be the same base size so there are many models you can't hide from. Base size is pretty much arbitrary as apparent by Barbaros originally having a 30mm base but being swapped to a 40 since the model didn't fit. It isn't gamey to block LoS between two 30mm bases with a 40mm model so I don't see why a 30mm doing it is somehow worse.

[WWHSD]

15 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

@Paddywhack

You aren't reakly ignoring the need for cover, most crews (especially shooty ones) will have ways to shift models and it's only a single model that needs to move slightly or pick another target. I use it on occasion to avoid my own auras or a scary charge.

You also need the models to be the same base size so there are many models you can't hide from. Base size is pretty much arbitrary as apparent by Barbaros originally having a 30mm base but being swapped to a 40 since the model didn't fit. It isn't gamey to block LoS between two 30mm bases with a 40mm model so I don't see why a 30mm doing it is somehow worse.

Sometimes blocking LoS between two 30mm bases is all you need if you want to drop scheme markers around Fingers or family members while Nino is on the board, want to charge a Terrifying model while a Hanged in is  within 4 inches, or get around any of the other nasty effects that require LoS.  

When someone declares that a placement meets a certain criteria it's just a time saver. If it doesn't look like they are even close then make them fix it. You aren't declaring the intent of your placement to not actually have to put you model where it needs to go but just to save time by not nit-picking over millimeters when you place the model and then again when your opponent measures to see if it had the desired effect.