fishtank Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 This came up tonight. Rasputina is behind a bunch of Ice Pillars, in B2B with Snowstorm. Sonnia is about 8" away on the other side of the Ice Pillars. She declares she wants to target Rasputina (Ca7) with Flame Burst. Per This ruling: http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22803&highlight=Sonnia+cover Sonnia ignores cover. Snowstorm specifically grants it to models in B2B, ignoring the LoS rules. Which ability trumps which? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Dreygan Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Don't have the book in front of me to quote but I am pretty sure it says if one ability says something does happen and another ability says it does not, the "not" wins. So if Snow Storm's ability says Rasputina does have cover and Sonnia's says she is not affected by it, then Sonnia's wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr. Bigglesworth Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I believe Sonia ignores cover because los, unless states can't be ignored, in the case of silruds. I don't think there is a separation of cover from terrain cover from ability. Cover is only separated by hard and soft. So if something it ignores cover it ignores cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 All that Sonnia's ability says is that it ignores the Line of Sight rule. This could be construed as ignoring cover except there is already an ability that does this, Hunter which ignores penalties for cover when targeting models, but not the penalties for damaging a target. Sonnia does not have Hunter so while she can target models not in LoS she cannot ignore the penalties for cover. This seems to be the right way to go about this as frankly this seems like the only thing keeping Sonnia from making everyone her bitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Omenbringer Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Rasputina would still recieve Soft Cover from being in base to base with Snow Storm, however it provides no protection from Sonnia's Magic Seeker which as Ropetus points out in the refrenced thread ignores it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) One, one rules marshal answered the question with his interpretation. I for one think its wrong. Ignoring Line of Sight would not be useless without the ability to ignore cover penalties as it allows you to strike at models you otherwise wouldn't be able to and there are ways to counter the negative flip such as Focus which I always forget. Besides, just because its a negative flip does not mean you might not flip two high cards. Granting one ability an extra benefit is a bad move. Edited January 20, 2012 by pixelante does not not? Did I just add a double negative? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Lucidicide Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 It's not an extra benefit if that was what's intended all along. Besides which, it is not wrong if a RM says it. You may dislike it, but by definition they are pretty much right unless a RM overturns it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Omenbringer Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 One, one rules marshal answered the question with his interpretation. It only takes one Rules Marshal to weigh in on a topic and they are charged to provide the correct "interpretation" of questioned rules. Also they do have the ability to confere behind the scenes with each other in a portion of the Forum that only they can access (just like playtesters and Henchman have). Though you may only see the one rules marshal response, you can bet that they collaborated with each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Ok, I am willing to confer the benefit of the doubt, however what is wrong with making a model expend a action point to focus its attack? Having Line of Sight also confer the model a more powerful version of Hunter (since you can't even get the measly +1 armour) seems too overpowered to be intentional. Even the logic you would apply that you can't get cover against something that ignores LoS starts to fall apart when you question why a Pigapult would know where anything was over the squeals of the pig being wedged into the loading cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Omenbringer Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) Having Line of Sight also confer the model a more powerful version of Hunter (since you can't even get the measly +1 armour) seems too overpowered to be intentional. Hunter would also ignore the granted Soft cover Middle of the Storm provides Rasputina. Additionally, it is a very rare ability (and in Sonnia's case further limited to only models with a CA over 7) unlike some of the other more powerful things like Spirit. Edited January 20, 2012 by Omenbringer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Hateful Darkblack Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Ok, I am willing to confer the benefit of the doubt See that star by the name on that Rules Marshall? That means that there isn't a doubt for which you could confer the benefit. Nobody on the forums can stop you from playing a house rule with your friends, of course, but there isn't anything you could say that would make the Rules Marshall not a Rules Marshall. There's nothing disastrous about ruling the your way instead , in my opinion... except that Rules Marshalls are considered authoritative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Omenbringer Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 There's nothing disastrous about ruling the your way instead , in my opinion... Except that Cover (soft or Hard) is determined by LOS to the target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Hateful Darkblack Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Except that Cover (soft or Hard) is determined by LOS to the target. No disagreement on that from me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) As a matter of fact I think I have the answer. Under the Guild Austringer it clearly states the Raptor Ignores Cover and LoS. Sonnia's rule only ignores LoS. This is from Sonnia's V2 card. In a sense you could say that rather than ignoring cover it seems igoring LoS ignores the blocking trait granted by some terrain unless stated otherwise. Edited January 20, 2012 by pixelante Adding some rivets to my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr. Bigglesworth Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) Read the whole post. http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25921&highlight=sonia+cover I made same argument. It's ok to be wrong which we both were. Deal with it and get over it As related note, this hardly makes her jump from tier 2 to tier 1. I love Sonia but she is not really much of a beast. Edited January 20, 2012 by Mr. Bigglesworth added link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I think not. Ignoring LoS and Ignoring Cover have been defined by the game designers as being two separate things and a rules marshal has come along and bound them together. I however will continue to regard them as separate, up to and including in tournaments (don't sweat it, I've no plans to attend any soon.) until I see this unholy matrimony approved by some kind of official document. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 TheOneWhoFell Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Wyrd has not put out v2 cards for the Austringers... so the ruling on Criid's v2 card is more up to date than the Austringers cards. If there were a v2 card for the Austringers it would probably just say LoS and not cover, based on the new ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Lucidicide Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 They are separate. It's squares and rectangles. All cover is just cover. All LoS is LoS and Cover. The fact is that ignoring LoS always ignored cover. The only way you were granted cover was by the LoS rules. If you're ignoring those, you couldn't get cover. Now, I'll grant you that some abilities grant cover independently of LoS, but since the original rules had it so you couldn't get cover when LoS was ignored, it is not surprising that it would be ruled to keep with the original ruling. Could it have gone the other way? Sure, but that would be slightly more confusing and a very minor distinction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) As a point of fact their is nothing in the rules that deal with ignoring Line of Sight. In fact the steps you take when declaring a target include checking LoS and the step after that brings the models ability to ignore LoS into play. So by following the correct order you have already determined if the model is getting hard or soft cover before you determine if the attacking model ignores LoS. Edited January 20, 2012 by pixelante Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 micahwc Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I think they ruled the same way in reference to Lilith's Master of Malifaux ability, which lets Lilith ignore Line of Sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Lucidicide Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 As a point of fact their is nothing in the rules that deal with ignoring Line of Sight. In fact the steps you take when declaring a target include checking LoS and the step after that brings the models ability to ignore LoS into play. So by following the correct order you have already determined if the model is getting hard or soft cover before you determine if the attacking model ignores LoS. OK so -- we've now determined you are not in LoS after declaring a target. Therefore you are not obstructed (as this is a specific rules condition that only occurs if one has LoS). You only get cover if LoS is obstructed. Now you get to the step where you ignore LoS. The targeting is successful. Again, nowhere during that process are you getting cover. But more than this, the fact is that you check LoS, and that includes the rules whether a model gets cover or not. So let's assume I'm targeting someone in cover, but in LoS. They now have cover, as per the LoS rules. Now I ignore LoS, and therefore cover is ignored, too (as being granted cover is a subset of the line of sight rules). As I said before, there are some unique cases where you can get cover independently of LoS, but 99% of the time it's coming from the LoS rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pixelante Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 Yes, your point seems to be in favour of my argument except for the fact that everyone keeps circling around to the one single sentence that has equated ignoring LoS to ignoring cover. I maintain that this is wrong and I have already established that I will not be swayed by weak arguments and brow beating so let us just all go our own ways until a FaQ comes out in favour of one outcome or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 fishtank Posted January 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 But that one sentence came from a Rules Marshall. They are the law. Until there's an official clarification at least. All of which is irrelevant as to whether SnowStorm's special ability effects Sonnia's. I'm inclined to go with the first (and so far only relevant) reply..."not" wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr. Bigglesworth Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) This is a faq (without the plural) and they have answered it. Your wrong buck up and move on. Lucidice gave you the rule break down, cover is determined when you draw los. No drawing los, no checking for cover. Only way this will change is with a v2 snow card that states can't be ignored. I don't know if that is their intent. Edited January 21, 2012 by Mr. Bigglesworth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Omenbringer Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 I maintain that this is wrong and I have already established that I will not be swayed by weak arguments. Rules Marshals are the strongest arguments available (unless Nathan or Eric want to weigh in). You can have your disagreement, but rules is rules (and it has been ruled). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
fishtank
This came up tonight.
Rasputina is behind a bunch of Ice Pillars, in B2B with Snowstorm.
Sonnia is about 8" away on the other side of the Ice Pillars. She declares she wants to target Rasputina (Ca7) with Flame Burst.
Per This ruling: http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22803&highlight=Sonnia+cover
Sonnia ignores cover. Snowstorm specifically grants it to models in B2B, ignoring the LoS rules.
Which ability trumps which?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
24 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.