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.

For infantry models with flight stands such as Inceptors, if the unit's bases are all within 1" behind a barricade and the barricade is closer to the Inceptor than the shooting model, but the flight stand on the model elevates the actual model high enough to where they aren't very obscured from the perspective of the shooting model, do the Inceptors still get a cover save or do they lose it because the flight stand made them less obscured from the shooting model?

Line of sight has nothing to do with cover in 8th edition for Infantry. You're either on area terrain or behind a barricade or you aren't.

The rules for barricades disagree, per CA 2018:

"When a model targets an enemy INFANTRY unit that has all of its models within 1" of a barricade, the target unit receives the benefit of cover if the shooting model is closer to the barricade than it is to the target and the target is at least partially obscured from the point of view of the shooting model."

So if you're within 1" of a barricade but the shooter is flanking you from the sides or behind so that they are closer to you than to the barricade, you would be in full view of the shooter, so the target wouldn't get cover which makes sense. My only concern is if that means infantry models with flight stands are just inherently screwed most of the time when it comes to getting cover from barricades because the model itself is elevated by the flight stand to make them less obscured, or if the flight stand is somehow discounted for the purposes of getting cover per barricade rules.

Fair enough, I was reading the pre-CA BRB Errata. Thanks GW for making things more complicated than needed.

"partially obscured from the point of view of the shooting model" means if even a femtometer squared is hidden then you benefit. This means that since some of the flight stick and/or base is obscured, you benefit, because the Flight Stick and Base are most certainly part of the model.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Fair enough, I was reading the pre-CA BRB Errata. Thanks GW for making things more complicated than needed.

"partially obscured from the point of view of the shooting model" means if even a femtometer squared is hidden then you benefit. This means that since some of the flight stick and/or base is obscured, you benefit, because the Flight Stick and Base are most certainly part of the model.

Yea, it seems even if a yoctometre is hidden then the model would benefit.

And base is model, so if the base is obscured (and why wouldn't it be 99% of the time with a barricade between you?) then you are partially obscured.

Agreed.

I guess it makes narrative sense also.

Regular troops can crouch etc behind, someone wearing a jet pack isn't really going to be able to do that as easily.

 Stux wrote:
And base is model, so if the base is obscured (and why wouldn't it be 99% of the time with a barricade between you?) then you are partially obscured.

I think if you have a standard Infantry dude standing behind a barricade and then have a particularly tall model with some base overhang like most flyers very close to the barricade, you could have a situation where the model is behind a barricade, but not actually obscured at all. I do agree that's situational and rare, but it could happen.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Stux wrote:
And base is model, so if the base is obscured (and why wouldn't it be 99% of the time with a barricade between you?) then you are partially obscured.

I think if you have a standard Infantry dude standing behind a barricade and then have a particularly tall model with some base overhang like most flyers very close to the barricade, you could have a situation where the model is behind a barricade, but not actually obscured at all. I do agree that's situational and rare, but it could happen.

Right, but what I'm saying is that the base itself is part of the model, even if it's a flying stand. If the base is behind the barricade, there must surely be some obscurement between its base and the base of the shooting model.

 Stux wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Stux wrote:
And base is model, so if the base is obscured (and why wouldn't it be 99% of the time with a barricade between you?) then you are partially obscured.

I think if you have a standard Infantry dude standing behind a barricade and then have a particularly tall model with some base overhang like most flyers very close to the barricade, you could have a situation where the model is behind a barricade, but not actually obscured at all. I do agree that's situational and rare, but it could happen.

Right, but what I'm saying is that the base itself is part of the model, even if it's a flying stand. If the base is behind the barricade, there must surely be some obscurement between its base and the base of the shooting model.

If the model is unobscured from any point on the shooting model, it's unobscured? I'm not sure why you'd measure line of sight from base to base.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Stux wrote:


Right, but what I'm saying is that the base itself is part of the model, even if it's a flying stand. If the base is behind the barricade, there must surely be some obscurement between its base and the base of the shooting model.

If the model is unobscured from any point on the shooting model, it's unobscured? I'm not sure why you'd measure line of sight from base to base.

Because the base and flying stand is a part of the model and as such, given the situation, the model would (Most likely) be obscured.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Stux wrote:


Right, but what I'm saying is that the base itself is part of the model, even if it's a flying stand. If the base is behind the barricade, there must surely be some obscurement between its base and the base of the shooting model.

If the model is unobscured from any point on the shooting model, it's unobscured? I'm not sure why you'd measure line of sight from base to base.

Because the base and flying stand is a part of the model and as such, given the situation, the model would (Most likely) be obscured.

This is what I'm saying.

jump pack type models are obviously obscured.. you can tell by the honking great cloud of dust thrown up when they land behind the wall.

given its only a minor benefit to be in cover generally this could be said to represent the enemy blasting through said cloud of dust and not overly caring whats inside it

leopard wrote:
jump pack type models are obviously obscured.. you can tell by the honking great cloud of dust thrown up when they land behind the wall.

What? where is that written?

Citation needed.

I thought the base and flight stem counts as part of the model as well but when I asked my friend that question he argued that the actual miniature itself is what counted when it comes to obscurity and cited weapons and banners sticking out of the model not counting when it comes to targeting the model. Is it written anywhere that the "model" for rules purposes includes everything on the model (bases, flight stands, the actual miniature, etc)?

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
I thought the base and flight stem counts as part of the model as well but when I asked my friend that question he argued that the actual miniature itself is what counted when it comes to obscurity and cited weapons and banners sticking out of the model not counting when it comes to targeting the model. Is it written anywhere that the "model" for rules purposes includes everything on the model (bases, flight stands, the actual miniature, etc)?

Your friend has edition lag. There is no such rule in 8th, whereas the was in 7th. Closest is the measuring rules for vehicles without a base, but even then all parts of the model count for LOS purposes even if not for range. You’d need a rule for things to not count, and there isn’t one in 8th.

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
I thought the base and flight stem counts as part of the model as well but when I asked my friend that question he argued that the actual miniature itself is what counted when it comes to obscurity and cited weapons and banners sticking out of the model not counting when it comes to targeting the model. Is it written anywhere that the "model" for rules purposes includes everything on the model (bases, flight stands, the actual miniature, etc)?

What exactly did he cite because that is total nonsense. The only rule that comes to mind is the Designers Commentary ruling about what constitutes a "hull", but that is only for range, not LOS. 8th edition uses utterly true line of sight. If I can see a literal femtometre squared of your banner tip, I can shoot you to full effect.

"Stepping into a New Edition" reinforces this, emphasis added:

Q: How do I determine if a model is visible to another model?
A: The models are visible to each other if you can draw a straight, uninterrupted line between any part of one model to any part of the other.

He was definitely working off 7th edition rules. Thanks for the input everyone!

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
He was definitely working off 7th edition rules. Thanks for the input everyone!

A lot of people still make this error. It just feels intuitive that you shouldn't be able to shoot to or from the top of a banner for instance.

But it also feels like intuitively a flamer shouldn't be great for shooting aircraft. But here we are, thems the rules!

Of course if both players want to house rule LoS to work differently by mutual consent then that's totally cool. But in that case it should be agreed at the start of the game.

 DeathReaper wrote:

leopard wrote:
jump pack type models are obviously obscured.. you can tell by the honking great cloud of dust thrown up when they land behind the wall.

What? where is that written?

Citation needed.

you can't see where its written for the dust cloud, well that and the stairs having been removed

beware of the leopard