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.

Played a game yesterday and my opponent declared a charge into the rear of my grey hunter pack. When i went to fire overwatch my opponent objected saying i didn't have line of sight because his wytches was behind my unit. Arguments were had, names were used and fisticuffs ensured. for the sake of getting back to the game i rolled off to settle the argument and lost.

Overwatch follows line of site rules as normal. A model that can trace a straight unblocked line from its body to any part of its target body has line of sight. My grey hunters had line of sight following these rule.

Can a unit fire overwatch at a unit behind them?

Please read the shooting section concerning firing with infantry.

Yeah mate, he definitely pulled a fast one on you--he owes you a beer (and a punch to his nuts).

There is the possibility that your opponent was a little bit of 'that ******** guy' and evoked an old 6th Edition Rule that was clearly in error. That would require the eyes of the model to be the point to draw Line of Sight from, and could make it difficult and sometimes impossible to make over-watch shots. The reason I used the above terminology was because it was generally accepted that the model didn't block it's own Line of Sight, that helmeted Models could still fire weapons for example, because it was pretty obvious a mistake in the Rule. There where other Rules also stating that the Model could look in any direction and not effect it's ability to fire a weapon, making it even more obvious the 'from the eyes, looking forward always' method was flawed.

In 7th, you are 100% correct because they fixed that error, it is any part of the Model to any part of the Enemy.

JinxDragon wrote:
... because it was generally accepted that the model didn't block it's own Line of Sight,...

No, it wasn't. That was a matter of considerable debate right through 6th edition. And 5th edition. And 3rd and 4th editions.

There were rules like Rage where is made a big difference, and there was never a solid consensus as to whether models were supposed to be able to see through the backs of their own heads or not.


7th edition has nicely removed this issue, though.

yeahtoast wrote:
My grey hunters had line of site sight following these rule.

Sight. SIGHT.
Unless your Grey Hunters were constructing a line

Insaniak,
I do have to disagree as Author penned that the direction a Model was facing would not effect the Models shooting, then suggested we face them towards the enemy because it would simply make sense. If that was not enough there was the allowance to shoot through Models in one's own Unit, which clearly the Firing Model classify as. Seeing I can ignore the back of the Model's own head when drawing line of sight towards the Enemy, charging from behind did not cause any real problem for non-vehicle Models. The real question was Models without Eyes and if there where Eyes under Helms....

In any case, it is all Moot as the problem has been corrected.

JinxDragon wrote:
Insaniak,
I do have to disagree as Author penned that the direction a Model was facing would not effect the Models shooting, then suggested we face them towards the enemy because it would simply make sense. If that was not enough there was the allowance to shoot through Models in one's own Unit, which clearly the Firing Model classify as. Seeing I can ignore the back of the Model's own head when drawing line of sight towards the Enemy, charging from behind did not cause any real problem for non-vehicle Models. The real question was Models without Eyes and if there where Eyes under Helms.... .

I wasn't making an argument about how it actually worked. I was disagreeing with your claim that it was 'generally accepted' that it worked that way. It wasn't.

I believe the vast majority would play that the Models had Line of Sight behind them, however I do not have a poll on the matter to confirm.
Do you remember one?

You've been bamboozled. M8