Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This has come up at my local game store and I'd like to see how everyone else interprets it.

Do hills block LOS to everything behind them or are they true LOS meaning low hills really don't do too much. The battle begins on page 8 of the rulebook.

I've always played that they block LOS to behind (abstract it).

Edited: Some additional clarification.

Basically, my friends and the various people I've played against go by the "You see it if you can see their bases" philosophy. So if they're directly behind a hill but you can see their heads, they can't be targeted, but if they're slightly to the side and you can see some of their bases, you're free to shoot at them.

I thought fifth edition used true line of sight. So, if the model can be seen, it can be shot at. Of course, if very little of the model can be seen then it deserves a cover save to reflect this.
So, if the model is behind the hill but can nevertheless be seen, it can be targeted.

Nightwatch wrote:I thought fifth edition used true line of sight. So, if the model can be seen, it can be shot at. Of course, if very little of the model can be seen then it deserves a cover save to reflect this.
So, if the model is behind the hill but can nevertheless be seen, it can be targeted.

5th edition was a long time ago....Wait, are you talking about 40k?

We play it as hills block LoS to everything but units with the large target rule. It plays pretty intuitively.

Woops...I'm kind of out of it at the moment. PB and J isn't good for the brain. Thought I saw a WH40k not WHFB. My apologies.

The rulebook never comes out explicitly and says it the way 5th ed 40k does, but the strong implication is actual true LOS for everything except a couple of specific cases:
1. Woods.
2. Units on hills can see over units not on hills.
3. Shooting units on hills can shoot in an extra rank.
4. Models can draw LOS to a Large Target or a unit on a hill over any other model on the ground.

That said, it is an INCREDIBLY common house rule to say that hills are abstract too- usually that they block LOS completely, no matter the size of the models involved.

This house rule is international in scope, and rooted in the difficulty of moving ranked units across realistically tall hills. This house rule is so common that I reliably expect it to be in effect no matter where I go in the world.

Page 8&9 of the Rulebook state very specifically what is and isnt line of sight, much is left up to the player but...

"Units on a hill... can always shoot (and be shot at) over models that are not on a hill, in the same way described for large targets."

"When other peices of terrain... block line of sight of a unit on a hill, you should get down over the table and take a model's eye view..."

"It is normally a good idea to discuss with your opponent how you are going to treat line of sight before starting the game."

So hills are not infinitly tall, but can be seen past by other models on hills and Large targets and vice versa. Assuming true LOS can be acheived.

I actually find the "house rule" kind of annoying because when I explain the real rule to people they ferverently argue with me calling over friends to agree and claiming its in the rulebook, which it isnt.

In any case, I say use the house rule if you have less than quality terrain or a more abstract playing environment. Otherwise I usually go with RAW, but it doesnt come up very often and I have no problem letting an opponent hide his hydra or dragon behind a hill i can clearly see over if he was unaware of this rule.

I always clarify before the game so you and your opponent agree.

i.e. woods are infinitely tall, depending on the hill you can/can not be seen behind it.

woods arent infinitly tall

wont someone please read pages 8&9!!

Leith wrote:woods arent infinitly tall

wont someone please read pages 8&9!!

True but a lot of the time they are pieces of felt with a tree or two on them so playing them TLOS seems almost pointless.

So would anyone say that a hill with a unit on it is equal to a large target and anything behind it would be out of sight?

I personally like to play hills block all LOS behind them for simplicity & fluff reasons. Playing with dynamic terrain for TLOS just doesn't work out well with ranked up regiments & movement trays so the table is never set that way. There is also precedent in the game for the abstract way of looking at LOS with the units. Units can't see through other units even though we all know that chaos warriors can see over gnoblars using TLOS. On the fluff side, I don't believe there is anything in the game that would be taller than a moderate sized hill. Giants & Dragons are only 30-100' tall at best so how would they be seen on the other side of a hill that tall?

Leith wrote:woods arent infinitly tall

wont someone please read pages 8&9!!

I didn´t say woods are. that is an example of something you can agree before the start with your opposition. I do however prefer to play like that as it makes it easier to play and less arguments (I can see him, no you can´t that leaf is in the way).

What I should do is make a cheezy 6¨ woods for my wood elves which is ridiculously tall (1/2 feet i´m thinking) so no one can see past it. As it is the one I have is too full of trees (only 3 or 4) I have a footprint base to replace it with so you can actually put your models in there.