Vantage Points Clarification

[Mike3838]

Hi all,

I just wanted to seek clarification a situation that came up in a game last night, and now that I have the rulebook in hand I think we may have played it wrong.

Nino is standing on a Ht3 building, but he is 2.5 inches from the edge. By my reading of the Vantage point rules today, he is unable to shoot anybody on the ground on that facing of the building, even if they are a long way away and look reasonable as targets, because *every* diagonal downwards line (measured from his base) intersects the building's roof instantly, and since he is more than his height away from the edge, he isn't allowed to ignore the floor he's standing on for purpose of shooting.

I'm happy(ish) with the abstraction, but wanted to make sure I understand it properly. Is this correct?

Mike

[Fetid Strumpet]

That is my understanding. Also being on ht 2 will allow you to ignore all other ht 2 terrain, other than enclosed, on the entire board. So if you have a ht 2 barrel in the back of your deployment zone and niño is intop of it, all other ht 2 terrain on the board does not hinder his LoS, though it will give cover.

[Ausplosions]

So if you have a ht 2 barrel in the back of your deployment zone and niño is intop of it, all other ht 2 terrain on the board does not hinder his LoS, though it will give cover.

Only if you declare it as Vantage Point terrain and before the game....

So, um, don't?

[Fetid Strumpet]

The basic rules define anything that is at least ht 2 that can be stood on as a vantage point.

[Mike3838]

I think it says greater than height 2, so 3+

Dont have my book to hand to check though..?

Edit: No sorry, you're right. Ht 2 or greater

Edited August 29, 2013 by Mike3838

[Stinkmunk]

That is my understanding. Also being on ht 2 will allow you to ignore all other ht 2 terrain, other than enclosed, on the entire board. So if you have a ht 2 barrel in the back of your deployment zone and niño is intop of it, all other ht 2 terrain on the board does not hinder his LoS, though it will give cover.

Almost, but the terrain you ignore is based on the height of your target, not what you're standing on:

"Terrain that is equal to or less than the Ht of the lower model is ignored for LoS (but not cover)"

[Dracomax]

Almost, but the terrain you ignore is based on the height of your target, not what you're standing on:

"Terrain that is equal to or less than the Ht of the lower model is ignored for LoS (but not cover)"

And this last part is important--You still have that on the attack, and that can make a huge difference.

[Gyouza]

Not to derail this but on the point of vantage points and clarifications, me and a friend were playing and he had Rami up in a building and was looking to shoot my Seamus. He could draw line of sight but on my turn could Seamus return fire even though he was close to some barrels? From my reading of the rules it seems if the person on top can draw LoS so can lower models.

Figured this was a good time and place to ask.

[Mike3838]

Seamus would measure the diagonal line in the same way, but because he isn't stood on the Vantage Point, he doesn't have the ability to ignore terrain between himself and Rami, so (assuming the barrels were high enough to intersect that diagonal line), he wouldn't be able to draw the shot.

I think.

[Dracomax]

Well, Not having the book in front of me, if the barrels are lower than his height, or even equal to it, I think he might be able too. you would have to draw a diagonal line from the far end of Seamus base and see if it still intersected the barrels.

In M1E, you were able to ignore covering objects like that if you were within an inch of them. Is that not the case still? I need to reread that, because I honestly can't remember.

---------- Post added at 08:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 AM ----------

I'm pretty sure if the barrels are less than Seamus height, he can ignore them for all attacks, though.

[Fenton Crack]

I'm not weighing in on the vantage point LOS ruling itself, as I'm still uncomfortable with it, and need the book next to me to even try to stumble through it, but it seems odd that LOS is not always both ways. That is to say if you can see Dinesen they should see you. Maybe it's just a quirk.

[Dracomax]

I'm not sure whether or not it is both ways, to be honest. until I look it up specifically in the book, I can't be definitive, but having a slight advantage to the high ground does make sense--there's a reason that snipers often hide in high places--they can minimize their profile, while maximizing their field of view/number of targets.

[Fenton Crack]

I'm not sure whether or not it is both ways, to be honest. until I look it up specifically in the book, I can't be definitive, but having a slight advantage to the high ground does make sense--there's a reason that snipers often hide in high places--they can minimize their profile, while maximizing their field of view/number of targets.

I agree a sniper wants the high ground (although perhaps for choice of targets and the ability to suppress greater numbers) but if I can get someone's head in my crosshairs absent dome kind of camouflage, I don't see how they cannot theoretically do the same. Artillery or some projectile that is more "gravity dependent" as far as range goes makes sense, but bullets and spells less so to me.

Of course, that does not mean the rules agree with me.

---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 AM ----------

Broke the book out, it does appear to go both ways. I say this due to the following quotes on page 41:

"When the acting model is on (or is targeting a model on) vantage point terrain......"

and

"Rasputina can easily see over the closest crate, and therefore has LoS to Lilith (and vice versa)."

[Mike3838]

But in that very example, Rasputina can ignore the edge of the roof of the building she is standing on (due to the advantage conferred by the Vantage Point)

Lilith cannot ignore that building edge, so cannot draw any unobstructed line to Rasputina's base.

[Fenton Crack]

Yes, but I think they are saying that targeting a model with a vantage point works the same way. Granted, it could be a misprint, but the diagram clearly states Lilith has LoS. Additionally, it states above in the text, that you take vantage point into consideration when the active model is targeting a model on vantage point terrain.

---------- Post added at 11:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 AM ----------

Lilith can essentially ignore the edge, just like Raspy. It makes sense too. If the reason Raspy can see over the edge is her height (her heads on top) and so Lilith should be able to see her head as well and target her.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Fenton Crack
Spelling

[Mike3838]

Perhaps you're right.

I feel like I might be making a meal of something that should be very simple, and wish I'd encountered this during the beta, because it seems unclear in both the text and the diagram. I read that diagram as Raspy drawing LOS to Lilith, but I suppose it could be implied that it works the other way too.

[Fenton Crack]

I agree that it could be clearer. Perhaps they should have had arrows going back from Lilith to Raspy for clarity, rather than just caption "..LoS to Lilith (and vice versa)." , as that would make it more clear their intent.

I'm guessing the only reason they did not simply say something more direct, such as "When the acting model has LoS, the targeted model can draw LoS to the acting model," is it would not be valid in instances when the acting model is using an ability, such as Raspy using her Ice Mirror to gain LoS, but the target does not have LoS back.

[Pierowmaniac]

Personally I think Vantage point is going to be the new 'Companion'.

Ive looked at the page two nights on the run now and still can't get my head around it properly

[Jonas Albrecht]

You honestly never even need to check for cover for the target. They'll always have it.

[Gyouza]

I guess at least I didn't miss something completely obvious. We had ended up deciding they couldn't see each other and continued on after a minute or two. But I thought it was saying if you can poke your head out and shoot so can your opponent. It makes sense while assuming that the models do have height and are moving around in an area defined by their base(they could step back a bit away and shoot over the barrels(they were HT 2)

It also fits with other LoS rules where if someone shoots but doesn't move you wouldn't have to check for the enemy if they then tried to shoot. If one can see and shoot so can the other. Just my two cents but since someone brought up vantage point stuff and we had discussed it just this weekend I figured I would throw my question in.

Also drawing LoS with heights in vassal is a pain and confusing ordeal xD