lexicanium Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Just wanted to check something regarding the rules for obscuring terrain in relation to Nicodem's fog ability. The way I imagine it works is that if he has the spell in place, no model can charge him from more than 3 inches due to the need to see him. Is this correct? I realise that they can still use their walk to move into strike range of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Yep as long as they need LoS to charge, there are a few model's that don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfndrate Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 As always, someone can correct me if I'm wrong (since my rulebooks are in the car). You cannot charge Nicodem from the outside of the fog since it's a 6 inch bubble, so to charge Nicodem, you would have to be inside the fog and within 3 inches to charge him. ---------- Post added at 11:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:00 AM ---------- Lol, ninja'd by the rules-meister himself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog6750 Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Would models with the hunter ability not negate this effect being able to see upto 6" through obscuring terrain? Ie witchling stalkers etc Likewise no rule book to hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfndrate Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Would models with the hunter ability not negate this effect being able to see upto 6" through obscuring terrain? Ie witchling stalkers etc Likewise no rule book to hand. There is another thread (I'll see if I can't find the link) that the Hunter ability wouldn't go through it because the fog is not terrain, it is an ability and has no mention of it being obscuring terrain. http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?23192-Nicodem-s-Fog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 hmmm... I see the ruling and all... But now there is a difference between "obscuring" and "obscuring terrain" ? While we are at it, why don't we have a difference between "Obscuring" and "obscuring". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfndrate Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 hmmm... I see the ruling and all... But now there is a difference between "obscuring" and "obscuring terrain" ? While we are at it, why don't we have a difference between "Obscuring" and "obscuring". I would probably allow the hunter to see in, but that ruling does kind of put a damper on it :-\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadeton Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 I see the ruling and all... But now there is a difference between "obscuring" and "obscuring terrain" ? While we are at it, why don't we have a difference between "Obscuring" and "obscuring". Yeah, it's a bit like that. This one's been around a while. At least the new models are being made to work within this framework - all the Rail Crew models with Shapes in the Steam completely ignore it, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 hmmm... I see the ruling and all... But now there is a difference between "obscuring" and "obscuring terrain" ? While we are at it, why don't we have a difference between "Obscuring" and "obscuring". Not really Gruesome, there is a difference between an Effect and a piece of Terrain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Not really Gruesome, there is a difference between an Effect and a piece of Terrain. I agree. There is a difference. That's not my concern. It has to do with choosing to use a word like "obscuring" and then making it matter whether its in the context of an effect or terrain and THEN expecting people to remember who/what/where/when/why some things affect those contexts or not. I originally put it forth jokingly as I did not really expect a discussion, but do you really believe this is a clear cut language choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 I agree. There is a difference. That's not my concern. It has to do with choosing to use a word like "obscuring" and then making it matter whether its in the context of an effect or terrain and THEN expecting people to remember who/what/where/when/why some things affect those contexts or not. I originally put it forth jokingly as I did not really expect a discussion, but do you really believe this is a clear cut language choice? Obscuring works identically in both case. I don't see why you would use a different term for a Obscuring Effect and Obscuring Terrain. Hunter does explicitly say terrain, which an Effect is not. It is Clear Cut, unfortunately it doesn't allow for people half reading things and then filling in the gap with how they think it should work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Ok... We can leave it at that. Its super clear. There have not been threads dedicated to it. Have an excellent weekend! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.