1" Cover

[MrDeathTrout]

The rules say you need to be within 1" of terrain to claim a cover bonus from it.  We've been playing that the 1" needs to be along the line of sight between the two models to count.  I'm not sure if that is right.

 

In the illustration below C is shooting A through the green soft cover.  A is within 1/2" of the soft cover when looking along the sight lines (outlined in red).  So A gets soft cover.

 

 

Using the same method when B shoots A.  A is 2" from where the sight lines intersect the cover, but is within 1/2" of the cover as a whole.  Does A benefit from soft cover?

 

 

 

[Myyrä]

Rules say what the rules say, and they say that you need to be within 1" of the terrain. They don't say that the LoS lines need to intersect said terrain within 1" of the target model.

[AoS]

A don't have cover from B

 

The terrain which gives cover to the model must be within 1" from the defensor model and the LoS must pass through it. 

 

My interpretation from page 42.

[Paddywhack]

This has been in the FAQ for quite some time. At least one LOS has to pass through the terrain to gain a benefit (#30 in the FAQ).

 

The FAQ does not cover the specific question of B to A and if A needs to be within 1" of the part of cover that passes through the LOS or just 1" of the cover in general. For now I think I'd go for 'yes, A gets cover' based on the current FAQ and rules.

 

From the FAQ (if you look it up there is also a picture):

30) Q: In the following example, does Lilith have cover from Rasputina, as Lilith’s base is partially

located within soft cover?

A: No. None of the LoS lines between the models pass through terrain which grants soft cover.

[Tapdancer]

Rules say yes cover for all models. Odd shaped terrain is a corner case example.

[AoS]

I'm reading the rule book.

The model gain the benefits of cover when any LoS between the models can be drawn through cover terrain that is within 1" of the target.

There is no LoS between A and B drawn through terrain that is within 1" of the target.

[Tapdancer]

I'm reading the rule book.

The model gain the benefits of cover when any LoS between the models can be drawn through cover terrain that is within 1" of the target.

There is no LoS between A and B drawn through terrain that is within 1" of the target.

the green blob is a single piece of terrain, thus the query, it looks odd but the rules are clear.

[benjoewoo]

I'm reading the rule book.

The model gain the benefits of cover when any LoS between the models can be drawn through cover terrain that is within 1" of the target.

There is no LoS between A and B drawn through terrain that is within 1" of the target.

 

 

The drawing indicates that the cover in question is a single continuous piece of terrain, e.g. a mountain/forest. At least one LoS from B's base will pass through the terrain to reach A, and A is within 1" of the cover. Regardless of whether A is within 1" of the particular portion of the terrain that blocks the LoS line, it is within 1" of the terrain piece as a whole that is blocking the LoS line, so it should get the benefit of cover as defined.

 

If the models were having a shoot out around a mountain and both were bobbing and weaving along the mountain with poor visibility, why should one model retain cover benefits while he other doesn't?

 

It's distinguishable from a person having cover that is completely denied to the other model as a result of having multiple pieces of terrain or one model being too far from said terrain to use it. It's like caching them out in the open.

[StuffedKiwi]

This has been thoroughly discussed in the forums before, and it might be worth looking some of those discussions up if there are confusions. In particular, I think Justin has commented regarding situations similar to this, that the rules do indeed state that for a model to be in cover, two things need to be true: the model needs to be within one inch of the terrain that provides cover, and a Line of Sight line needs to cross that piece of terrain -- the model does not need to be within one inch of where the Line of Sight line crosses the terrain. BUT, and this is the really important bit, it is usually much better to define, before the game starts, a single complex piece of terrain as being multiple pieces of terrain, to avoid precisely this problem. For instance, if you decided before the game started that the complex terrain piece in the original example here (I don't know if it's a hill or a forest or what) consisted of, for the sake of the rules, not a single piece of terrain but instead 3 (or possibly more, depending on what it looks like on the board) pieces: the western end, the central piece that projects southwards, and the eastern end, then you would avoid this sort of problem. I think the version Justin was addressing involved the walls of a ruined building, that included several corners -- much more practical to rule that as several pieces of terrain, rather than a single one, for precisely this reason.

Hope that helps.

[AoS]

Ook, so if the LoS pass through the same piece of terrain which is within 1" of the target, then the target has cover.

My comunity has being playing this different, and I think is better the way we played, but I'll try this as the oficial ruling.

[MrDeathTrout]

Ook, so if the LoS pass through the same piece of terrain which is within 1" of the target, then the target has cover.

My comunity has being playing this different, and I think is better the way we played, but I'll try this as the oficial ruling.

 

I agree.  We've been playing it that A would not have cover from B.  I've had some doubts lately.  Thus the post.  I'm going to start playing that A does have cover from B.

Thanks everyone!

[Dassenkop]

To follow up on Stuffedkiwi's comment. I find the drawing in this link helpfull to remind me when LOS exists and when cover applies.

 

http://malifauxshadow.blogspot.nl/2014/02/line-of-sight-and-cover-issues.html

 

Not sure its totaly relevant for the question though.

[StuffedKiwi]

Following up just to be clear, I think A should not have cover from B, but that will only be the case if you define the terrain-piece, before the game begins, as consisting of several pieces (and being clear about what those are). There's no need to mess with the rules, in this instance, to make them line up with 'common sense,' but rather just a need for careful and sensible terrain-definition. Which we should always be doing anyway, before games begin, to avoid disputes about what counts as what.