LoS, Range, and Elevation Quirks

[Mycellanious]

The rules for elevation in this game are kind of convoluted (though they are much better than 2E), and have resulted in some wonky situations in games I've played. These are the ways I think these situations resolve based on my understanding of the rules, however I think they are a little unintuitive so I am looking for confirmation that we are playing things correctly. 

The equation for determining the distance between two objects on the board is:  "Horizontal Distance" + "Total Height of the Base of the Higher Object" - "Size or Height of the Lower Object" (p. 49 book)

So, say Mei Feng is standing on a Scrap Marker on ground leve. She attempts to RtR to another maker on top of a height 2 wall. The Marker is 12" horizontally from her. The distance between her and the Marker is (12")+(2")-(2") for a total of 12" of distance, so she can RtR.

 

However, if she were starting atop the wall and trying to RtR back to the Scrap marker she just came from, suddenly the equation becomes (12")+(2")-(0") for a total of 14" of distance because Markers are by default considered to have a Height of 0 (pg 64). So she could not RtR back to the Marker she just came from. 

 

Shockwave effects have a similar quirk because they drop Shockwave Markers. Wille for example could Toss Dynamite on to a Hieght 2 wall 8" away, but could not drop a Shockwave from atop that wall to his previous position. Effectively, the range of the action is reduced by the Height of the wall. 

 

Next, the way that Pulses and Auras work with low Walls is quirky. Because of the Shadow rules on p. 54, any model standing even partially in the Shadow of Terrain equal to or greater than its size has all Sight Lines that pass through the terrain blocked, even if the 2nd model is larger than the intervening terrain and supposedly ignoring it (also p. 54). Therefore, while separated by a Height 1 wall, and the Forgeling is within 1" of it, Kang and the Forgeling do NOT have LoS to each other and would NOT be affected by each other's Pulses, unlike in 2E where Kang could "lean over the wall."

 

Markers generally aren't considered Models, however according to pg 64, when drawing LoS to a Marker it is "treated as a model with Sz 0." Do Pulses and Auras, which have a LoS requirement, trigger this clause? For example, if Parker were standing behind a Height 1" and attempted to use Cashing Out, he would be UNABLE to remove Marker A, because it is a Sz 0 model in the Shadow of a Height 1 wall and therefore not in his LoS. He would however be able to remove Marker B even though it is further away. 

 

But what happens in the inverse situation? Say the Mech Rider, a towering Sz 3 model, were trying to use Revel in Creation to Drop a Scheme Marker just on the other side of a Height 1 wall. Because Mech Rider's Sz is greater than the Height of the wall, she ignores it for the purposes of LoS. So when she takes the Bonus Action, the space within 1" of the wall is within her Pulse because it is both within Range and LoS. However, if she were to Drop a Marker in that same space, she would be unable to draw LoS to the Marker because it is a Height 0 model in the Shadow of a Height 1 wall. Does this mean she cannot place the Marker, since she would not have LoS to it and therefore the closest place she could drop it is Marker B's position, or is having LoS to the space on the board she is going to drop it enough? 

 

 

 

[Maniacal_cackle]

Interesting finds!

One bit I'm unclear on is drawing LOS to the marker with Parker. I thought models essentially ignore terrain that is shorter for LOS.

So parker can see and do stuff with the marker (but if it was a size 0 model, it would qualify for cover because of the shadow)?

I thought shadows were primarily for cover, but I do remember something quirky about being right next to a building...

[solkan]

2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

Does this mean she cannot place the Marker, since she would not have LoS to it and therefore the closest place she could drop it is Marker B's position, or is having LoS to the space on the board she is going to drop it enough? 

Line of sight is needed to the dropped marker (as a side effect of the action having in the range).  It's going to be the same situation that Mechanical Rider can't drop the scheme marker centered under another Sz 3 50mm model because there's no line of sight to the marker.

[Paddywhack]

I don't have any issue with these. They are quirks - the only one that seems really odd is the Ht3 models dropping a Marker. It's an annoying quirk in those rare instances but hardly a big issue. Markers in general with Ht0 cause some issues here and there. 

For the Aura concern, remember the definition: Terrain that has both the Height and Blocking Traits casts a “Shadow,” which is a catch-all term used to represent overhangs, sight angles, and places where models can crouch down to avoid being seen.

That Ht1 model on the other side is 'actively' hiding to avoid being seen/effected. I think it adds some additional tactical options as otherwise you couldn't hide at all. 

[LeperColony]

2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

One bit I'm unclear on is drawing LOS to the marker with Parker. I thought models essentially ignore terrain that is shorter for LOS.

For most terrain that's true, but sight lines between two models that cross blocking terrain, where either model is within that terrain's shadow and that model has Size equal to or less than the terrain's Height , the sight lines are blocked even if LoS would normally be permitted.

[Mycellanious]

2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Interesting finds!

One bit I'm unclear on is drawing LOS to the marker with Parker. I thought models essentially ignore terrain that is shorter for LOS.

So parker can see and do stuff with the marker (but if it was a size 0 model, it would qualify for cover because of the shadow)?

I thought shadows were primarily for cover, but I do remember something quirky about being right next to a building...

In addition to what Leper said, Markers are called out as specifically being treated as Models for the purposes of LoS

[touchdown]

The first diagram is misleading. The equation of minus the height of the lower model is to simulate its height. You should draw the line from the top of the model. Then it will look fine.

[Adran]

Dropping a marker does not automatically need to you have line of sight to it, so The mech rider can drop the marker in a place it can see, and then not be able to see the marker.

Otherwise I think you are right in all these quirks. They are a little strange, but they are all very niche scenarios.

 

 

[Vatic]

Another I came across, similar but opposite to your first 2 is auras/pulses. These are measured from the base of the "source" model and ignore its height. 

So in your first diagram, if the scrap on top is putting out a 12" aura, it hits Mei (as she us SZ 2). But if Mei is putting out a 12" aura, it doesn't hit the top scrap.

Is this the right reading?

[Mycellanious]

1 hour ago, Vatic said:

Another I came across, similar but opposite to your first 2 is auras/pulses. These are measured from the base of the "source" model and ignore its height. 

So in your first diagram, if the scrap on top is putting out a 12" aura, it hits Mei (as she us SZ 2). But if Mei is putting out a 12" aura, it doesn't hit the top scrap.

Is this the right reading?

You got it! A 3" pulse can hit a marker 1" away and on top of a Ht 2 wall, but cannot hit a marker 1" away on top of a Ht 3 wall. 

[Ogid]

First of all, ty for the nice images and RIP pythagoras

On 8/3/2020 at 11:05 PM, Mycellanious said:

Shockwave effects have a similar quirk because they drop Shockwave Markers. Wille for example could Toss Dynamite on to a Hieght 2 wall 8" away, but could not drop a Shockwave from atop that wall to his previous position. Effectively, the range of the action is reduced by the Height of the wall. 

About this case, the description is correct but the graphic isn't so just to be 100% clear: I think you couldn't drop the marker in any place that isn't directly the border of that wall. That marker has Ht (0+2) and the wall has Ht 2; as this model is an Ht2 model, any LoS line crossing terrain will get blocked and LoS is needed to drop the shockwave.

[Mycellanious]

4 hours ago, Ogid said:

First of all, ty for the nice images and RIP pythagoras

About this case, the description is correct but the graphic isn't so just to be 100% clear: I think you couldn't drop the marker in any place that isn't directly the border of that wall. That marker has Ht (0+2) and the wall has Ht 2; as this model is an Ht2 model, any LoS line crossing terrain will get blocked and LoS is needed to drop the shockwave.

I dont believe so, because LoS is always drawn from a top-down perspective (like playing on Vassal). LoS isn't actually a straight line in 3D space in Malifaux, it starts at the model's base, runs along the ground and "climbs" up over any Terrain with height. This is why Ht 0 conceilment patches work. This is my understanding anyway. So because the wall is the same HT as Willie for game purposes the wall is treated as if it were flat ground. 

[Ogid]

19 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

I dont believe so, because LoS is always drawn from a top-down perspective (like playing on Vassal). LoS isn't actually a straight line in 3D space in Malifaux, it starts at the model's base, runs along the ground and "climbs" up over any Terrain with height. This is why Ht 0 conceilment patches work. This is my understanding anyway. So because the wall is the same HT as Willie for game purposes the wall is treated as if it were flat ground.

If I'm reading it right, this case would be equivalent to the one under "Terrain with Height" in the rulebook (pg18, the one with Ophelia, Iggy and Pandora). In that case a Ht2 model loses LoS with other Ht2 things as soon as it reach something (a model or terrain) with Ht2.

A model in the ground can trace LoS to things because the ground has Ht0 and models are Ht1+.

[Mycellanious]

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

If I'm reading it right, this case would be equivalent to the one under "Terrain with Height" in the rulebook (pg18, the one with Ophelia, Iggy and Pandora). In that case a Ht2 model loses LoS with other Ht2 things as soon as it reach something (a model or terrain) with Ht2.

A model in the ground can trace LoS to things because the ground has Ht0 and models are Ht1+.

The situations are not equivalent, however that example does actually illustrate my interpretation. 

The reason they are not equivalent is because in the book's example Ophelia is trying to draw LoS through Iggy to something behind him. Because his Sz is bigger than her, she cannot ignore him for LoS purposes and sightlines that pass through him are blocked. Note though, that even though Iggy is standing on Ht 1 terrain, Ophelia can still draw LoS to IGGY, because not all sightlines to Iggy pass through the terrain.

In this scenario, Iggy is in an equivalent position to the Shockwave marker, not Pandora. 

[Adran]

2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

I dont believe so, because LoS is always drawn from a top-down perspective (like playing on Vassal). LoS isn't actually a straight line in 3D space in Malifaux, it starts at the model's base, runs along the ground and "climbs" up over any Terrain with height. This is why Ht 0 conceilment patches work. This is my understanding anyway. So because the wall is the same HT as Willie for game purposes the wall is treated as if it were flat ground. 

I think Ogid is right in that if you are trying to draw line of sigth to the ht2 marker, and the sight lines pass through a ht 2 wall before hand then they would be blocked

 

22 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

The situations are not equivalent, however that example does actually illustrate my interpretation. 

The reason they are not equivalent is because in the book's example Ophelia is trying to draw LoS through Iggy to something behind him. Because his Sz is bigger than her, she cannot ignore him for LoS purposes and sightlines that pass through him are blocked. Note though, that even though Iggy is standing on Ht 1 terrain, Ophelia can still draw LoS to IGGY, because not all sightlines to Iggy pass through the terrain.

In this scenario, Iggy is in an equivalent position to the Shockwave marker, not Pandora. 

The reason that Ophelia can see Iggy is that he is treated ass ht 2, so the Ht1 rock he is standing on does not block the line of sight.

 

Unless the crux of your argument is that the sight line has not gone all the way through the Ht 1 rock

O_____i-Mi   would work, but O____i-i__iMi  does not work 

(where O is Ophelia, i is a ht 1 rock and M is the ht 0 marker on a ht 1 rock, so treated as ht 1)

which I'm not sure works

[Mycellanious]

24 minutes ago, Adran said:

I think Ogid is right in that if you are trying to draw line of sigth to the ht2 marker, and the sight lines pass through a ht 2 wall before hand then they would be blocked

 

The reason that Ophelia can see Iggy is that he is treated ass ht 2, so the Ht1 rock he is standing on does not block the line of sight.

 

Unless the crux of your argument is that the sight line has not gone all the way through the Ht 1 rock

O_____i-Mi   would work, but O____i-i__iMi  does not work 

(where O is Ophelia, i is a ht 1 rock and M is the ht 0 marker on a ht 1 rock, so treated as ht 1)

which I'm not sure works

That's how Hazardous works. I dont know if LoS works the same way. If it does, then you cant see the marker because Sz 2 is not greater than Ht 2. I always thought it meant pass through completely, but if it means at all then the rule where a model standing on the terrain can ignore up to an inch of it makes more sense, but at the same time that feels really unintuitive, that you can see a child standing anywhere on the top of an eye level roof but not the corpse of that child if its .01 inches away from the edge. I feel like if the rule was meant to rely on "Ht 1 + Sz 0 = 1 and 1 isn't greater than 1" that would have been explicitly laid out somewhere. 

[Adran]

4 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

That's how Hazardous works. I dont know if LoS works the same way. If it does, then you cant see the marker because Sz 2 is not greater than Ht 2. I always thought it meant pass through completely, but if it means at all then the rule where a model standing on the terrain can ignore up to an inch of it makes more sense, but at the same time that feels really unintuitive, that you can see a child standing anywhere on the top of an eye level roof but not the corpse of that child if its .01 inches away from the edge. I feel like if the rule was meant to rely on "Ht 1 + Sz 0 = 1 and 1 isn't greater than 1" that would have been explicitly laid out somewhere. 

I'm not sure what you mean with that's how hazardous works. If any part of you goes in Hazardous terrain you suffer hazardous. You appear to be treating Blocking terrain like dense terrain with a ht component. Which I don't think its specified either way, but the top of that building is slightly above eye level. You can't see something painted on the floor of it, which doesn't seem un intutative to me. Ht 1 + no height is still Ht 1. The equations of "1+0 = 1"  and "1 is not greater than 1" are things that I would assume as true unless something said otherwise.

[Mycellanious]

16 minutes ago, Adran said:

I'm not sure what you mean with that's how hazardous works. If any part of you goes in Hazardous terrain you suffer hazardous. You appear to be treating Blocking terrain like dense terrain with a ht component. Which I don't think its specified either way, but the top of that building is slightly above eye level. You can't see something painted on the floor of it, which doesn't seem un intutative to me. Ht 1 + no height is still Ht 1. The equations of "1+0 = 1"  and "1 is not greater than 1" are things that I would assume as true unless something said otherwise.

I could see the interpretation your way is what i am saying. In Hazardous "Moving through" means "if at point any part of you was in the terrain." So if LoS follows the principle of "if at any point any part of the sight line crosses over the terrain then it counts as passing through" then you would be unable to see the marker. It feels like the kind of thing my opponent would criticize me for if I tried to enforce it though. I the reason its confusing is that LoS is considered from a 2D perspective, but then you have to go back and remember that some things have Ht

[Ogid]

The most unintuitive part of this for me is markers with Ht0. Those are represented with markers with some volumen which might make players think they can target them as if they had more Ht, but rules-wise there is no difference between Ht2 and Ht0+2.

I was refering to the example I did before because there is no difference between Iggy on top of a rock of Ht1 blocking LoS to Pandora standing on the ground (Ht 1+1 blocking LoS to Ht2+0) and an Ht2 wall blocking LoS to an Ht0 marker on that Ht2 wall but not right on the border of it (Ht2 blocking LoS to Ht0+2)

[santaclaws01]

11 hours ago, Ogid said:

models are Ht1+.

Not actually true. Malifaux Rats and Gupps are both Sz 0, but the table itself isn't ever really defined as having any terrain traits, so I don't think that causes any issues. As for how the LoS works there, I agree, you can't draw LoS between 2 Sz 2 objects if there is another Sz 2 object in the way blocking them.

[Mycellanious]

26 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Not actually true. Malifaux Rats and Gupps are both Sz 0, but the table itself isn't ever really defined as having any terrain traits, so I don't think that causes any issues. As for how the LoS works there, I agree, you can't draw LoS between 2 Sz 2 objects if there is another Sz 2 object in the way blocking them.

But what does "in the way blocking them" count as. If the Marker is on top of the Sz 2 object, is it still in the way blocking it? The answer seems to be yes. 

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

But what does "in the way blocking them" count as. If the Marker is on top of the Sz 2 object, is it still in the way blocking it? The answer seems to be yes. 

Any blocking terrain has the potential to, well, block. If it is being ignored or not we have to look at the Sizes involved. In this case it's a Sz 2 model, Sz 2 terrain, and a Sz(0+2) marker. Neither the marker nor model are tall enough to ignore the intervening terrain.

[Ogid]

7 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Not actually true. Malifaux Rats and Gupps are both Sz 0, but the table itself isn't ever really defined as having any terrain traits, so I don't think that causes any issues.

True, I forgot about those 2D creatures... It must be impossible to prevent a rat to sneak under a door haha.

Yes, I don't think it causes issues, but it does add another quirk for this list: A rat on the table may trace LoS to another Rat/marker with Ht0, but that's not true when they are on top of blocking terrain.