Line of Sight

So i have seen some brilliant figures used in the campaign reports, including Skaven Assasins flying through the air, Acrobats from Papa Jingles Circus (if i remember correctly) and many others.

How do you judge line of sight with these things?

LOS to head or torso would seem sensible, but i want to know what the experienced groups do.

I have this Troll on it's way for my O+G's, as i really don't like the Skull Pass troll that i have.



But it looks like he will be about 4 Inches wide with his arms out.
Tucking him out of LOS behind a building will be tricky at best if anyone can shoot at a fingertip etc.

What do you think?

Most people, from what I can see, use House Rule on this. Yeah, model poses are an extremely unfortunate circumstance, and if you went with RAW, then even a fingernail exposed could be shot at. I play that you must see a certain percentage. A full arm, full leg, at least. Not just a hand or foot.

Honestly, talk with the gaming group, decide before hand, and stick with that.

yeah, we are a very agreeable group, but don't want to create a rule that someone here might think

"we tried that and it was awful because....."

I don't think anyone can come up with a rule that some one does not disagree with. Go with what works for your group.

we've agreed that at least the head or torso must be seen.

My group goes with main body has to be seen to have “target”. But the rules states that if any part of the model is in cover then the Cover Rules apply, meaning -1 to hit. Which is when someone moves a model as far out as possible with just the tip of a sword in cover, and yells, “Cover”, when it’s targeted.

Just a suggestion, you could use any empty base, and place it in the space you wish to have cover. If any part of the base is showing then it could be targeted with cover. Or if you have another duplicate model, use it without the arms and have it as a “stand in” to see if it would have cover.

My group has agreed that the head or torso must be visible. Nice troll by the way, who makes it?

Also remember that every model is considered to be the size of it's entire base and, generally, head height.
I would not concider an arm sticking above a guys head for this.
You should not be penalized for using dramatically posed models.

So, even if you cannot see the actual model, if part of his base is out in the open, then you can "see" him.

In the same light, if you can see the whole model but part of his base is in cover, then he gets cover when being shot at.

Of course this can be a little diferent with each game group.

These are the rules we play by:

Seems to me that we need to avoid dynamic action poses, then it becomes fairly simple.
Thanks for the thoughts.

@Wyrdstone Dave

The troll is a Reaper figure:

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/troll/sku-down/60021

No no no, do not avoid dramatic action poses!!!
They help make the game cool.

I feel your pain. I am on the only one in my group that typically models anything, and I seem to pay for it with dramatic poses. My group is one of those that busts out the laser pointers.

Generally we have always played that if they can see ANY part then they can shoot. I personally hate this especially when it is something stupid like a feather or cloak tip.

But with that said, as long as you all agree, and are aware well before hand, you can take your time and place the figures to avoid this as best as possible.


Our reasoning for ANY part is this.

We like to think of the game as constantly moving (The turns are just a ways to mange your actions), if you try to play the turns over in your head like a movie it makes more sense. Your figure might be moving from point A to point B. But the time in between moving they are in the open, this is when the shot happens. If they manage to get into FULL cover when moving then you could envision they were just to quick for the shooter to get off a shot. But if they can't get into FULL cover and there are parts sticking out then the shooter was fast enough.

Like wise, with a feather over the top of a wall. It might only be a feather, but one cold imagine maybe they peeked over that wall to take a look at the exact wrong moment allowing for a shot.

The figures might be static, but the action is dynamic. Or at lest that is how we view it.

Usually I go with if I shot that in real life could that hurt the other guy?

So if I can see arm, leg, torso, head then I go for it, but if I see like a feather on his hat, or something that couldn't really hurt him then I don't take the shot.

I don't really feel bad about shooting weapons. I think they are fair game.

Let's also remember the examples given in the core rulebook. Feathers, tips of cloaks and weapons are not counted for purposes of shooting in the official rules. I do like your reasoning for your house rule on cover though, HornedRat.

I would say it is because the shooter spots the target, and makes a shot whenever the target might shift in a way to make the shot lethal. However, that is why you get -1 to hit, which is the drawback for partial cover.

I, personally, wouldnt compromise with this rule as I dont see it as a large problem. If you got a large model, just walk up to a cover and hide, hide, hide, hide!

I myself use the Chaos Spawn models for my Possessed (double size of original minis) but they also have the advantage that being so large, there is almost anything that IS in cover (a tail or third arm, etc).

We play you have to see a body part - not a sword, feather, or bit of cloak. But if you can't see the head or torso, but can see a leg, shoot away. Oddly, I don't remember us ever having an argument over this issue.

When hiding, we are more forgiving - if what a warrior is trying to hide behind should be adequate if the model squatted down or scrunched himself up, he can hide.

It rarely comes-up in my group, because it is usually obvious. We usually argue that there should be rules for different levels of cover, like in D&D, 1/4, 1/5, 3/4 and full cover. But them we remember that we are rolling d6's, + or - 1 on a D6 is a lot bigger difference then a + or - 1 on a D20.

mweaver wrote:

We play you have to see a body part - not a sword, feather, or bit of cloak. But if you can't see the head or torso, but can see a leg, shoot away. Oddly, I don't remember us ever having an argument over this issue.

Maybe because in the rulebook, the hiding guy's feather is showing, but he still, according to the rulebook, counts as not being able to be shot at. Maybe if it was some extremist powergamer it would be something to argue about

HAHAHA, love the graphic Rudeboy!!

When you move/place a model, ask

"OK, we agree that this guy is in total cover and can't be shot at, right?"

or

"So, yeah, my Champion tries to take cover behind this fence, so this shooter, this shooter and this shooter is at -1 To Hit, right? And that guy there is elevated, so he has a clear shot. Agree?"

etc etc

Basically, when in doubt - ask. If your opponent doesn't agree, don't place him there, or shuffle your model around till he's in a position you both can agree on. Then move on to the shooting phase with no stupid 'surprises'/rules arguments because you both agreed before who can see and shot who.

Isn't that the easiest way?

Easiest? No. It would tend to be pretty time consuming, in that you spend time debating the legality of hypothetical shots at (potentially) multiple positions for one model. But if your gaming group tends to argue over this sort of thing and you can't come up with a workable guideline everyone agrees to, it is probably the best way.

The original question wasn't so much about normal LOS, more about action posed models, scenic bases and the like.

If i mount the pictured troll on a base launching itself over an overturned wagon, it will end up being 4" plus high.

This means his head could be visible through a 2nd floor window, when in reality he isn't going to be dragging a cart round with him to stand on (unless he has a neurosis about his height, like a more stupid version of Tom Cruise or something).

I wouldn't say that he could use his vomit attack through a 2nd floor window just cos his base elevates him to that height, that would be supremely beardy, but the rules don't take this sort of thing into account.
That's why i was asking about "real life" experience with this sort of thing.

I think re-reading my OP i could have been clearer about this, but hey, there's a reason i suit playing Green

Still given the troll model pictured most of the responses are still pretty germaine to what you asked. If the troll above is mounted on a wagon then it does become a bit different ballgame but most of the information shared still applies.

We have struggled with the odd sized model on occasion. Usually the problem is using a model that is smaller than standard or non-standard bases. We did go so far as to have a 40mm base handy because one of our players swore he could not get his cast-base Reaper model to adhere to a plastic base. After a few weeks of having to place it on the 40mm base it appeared glued to one...

Anyway my current orc boss has his arms spread wide and is about the same size as my troll. I get funny looks sometimes when I claim cover but using the rule book resolves this question. At other times I do take a bit of a penalty because he's the biggest orc, but that's why he's also the toughest.

We've never had the size or pose of a model become a game breaker.