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.

In the tournament I played, there was a game I was getting crushed.

8th edition has a lot of appeal to myself, however the general trend of an average game is that every model can see shoot charge and kill everything else. Other than rock/paper/scissor matchups they 'can' be boring.

This game was exciting to me as I had just stupid moves; and was trying to figure any way to survive and make a decent showing. The game was already won by my opponent.

There was a moment that his repulsar tank was just behind another repulsar tank with about an inch of los difference. He was targeting thru at least one of his titans and around a building and thru one of my units to hit one of my last fire dragons. All of this was in a box of like an inch and a half by an inch and a half. He went to roll dice and I said I don't think you have lof.

He said he did. I stooped down and did not see it. He walked over....did not stoop down and said oh I do have los. I pulled out my laser pointer. I spent over a minute trying to find any way to make the hit. I found none. I handed the pointer to him and he tried for a minute ....never found any but said he had los. At this point I fell like I was being the ass but in a game where we play with models and minatures...I think the models should matter or why not just place down paper counter chips and have at it?

I then took the pen while others were coming over to weigh in with their perspective. Finally after 2 minutes more I think...I think for the briefest second I found where the tippytop of his turrets guys helmet saw the tippy top of my helmet. So I relented and said he had los.

First as a sportsman, in that situation would you allow your opponent in a game already decided to just ignore los? ( I felt like I was the bad guy...as his mood definitely changed thereafter)
Second if you are crushin someone do you still try to take advantage of a dubious situation like this for your own gain?
Thirdly how would you have handled it? ( I know it did not matter in the game...but in the future I would like some groundwork for fair gameplay when IT DOES actually matter. If you let players play incorrectly, then they always will no matter which rule.)

So am I a jerk or did I take an appropriate stand? (We still both had fun and joked a good bit afterwards)

You were within your right. In a tourny, it's unfair not to leverage LOS when it's questionable. If it takes more than a minute, find an arbitrator; that can be a 4+off against eachother, someone uninvolved in the game to make a quick call (that neither should argue), or a TO, depending on the situation.

In casual games, I would accept it. Although if someone regularly did that, they'd not be everyone's first choice for games in the future.

Our group wouldn't give LoS if it is reasonably blocked like yours was. And if it is indeed obscured enough that you cannot find even a slightest way via a laser immediately, it is blocked. Models aren't absolute, they are representations of living things.

Outside a tournament setting, there is of course the option to use Cities of Death where there's always the courteous way of saying "you're wrong, but fine" by saying "fine, at -1 to hit" if they won't see common sense

I don't think you were wrong, but this highlights a big reason why GW's LOS rules are probably the worst I've ever seen in any game, ever. Completely lazy and totally unrealistic.

I don't think you are a jerk for taking a stand here. The word appropriate is the kicker though.

Lets play devils advocate here.

If you were winning comfortably would you have given him the shot knowing it wasn't legal?

You can't exclude the possibility that you were on tilt here from the mistakes you'd made previously.

LoS should in 8th edition be an objective thing. If you could have seen the tiniest bit then you're obligated to give him the shot. The other thing to consider is that laser pointers don't work so well on edge cases like this because you have to position the source of the laser off the targetting model or move the model to use the pointer. Neither is as accurate as your eyeline.

In these situations I always ask a third party and agree to abide by the decision.

I think that declaring intention is important in this situation.
If you move your model behind something and add a bit of fluff and humour, "This guy is gonna move up behind this tree/building/wall/other unit and take cover. He's a great big scaredy cat, i'll give you Show no Fear, mumble mumble", you'll diffuse the situation nicely.
Rules as written he's still got the shot but he'd have to be a bit of a dick to initially agree and laugh that the model is doing everything within it's power to make itself small then still take such a marginal shot.

Other option is during movement to say, "Can he see that from there?", "Is this wall tall enough to hide a space marine behind", until you're both happy that the shot isn't on.

If it's a tournament these are exactly the situations where you call a judge. Deciding on LoS is not always the most straight forward process and both players obviously have vested interest one way or another so the easiest solution is to have someone else check. For me the situation in the game isn't relevant. If you're winning or losing, sportsmanship should be the same thing. Only being generous or only observing good sportsmanship when the outcome is already determined isn't good sportsmanship at all.

As far as 40k's rules go, yes LoS and terrain is an absolute mess. There's no reason why GW couldn't implement a much better system that's much less open to interpretation and abuse while also providing engaging and somewhat realistic rules for how terrain and cover work son a battlefield.

I think GW should rule that any infantry unit behind cover, in ruins, etc, should get -1 to hit like they do in Kill Team. Feel like in this case, your opponent would/could get to shoot at you but at a penalty because his LoS is partially blocked

Malfurious wrote:
I think GW should rule that any infantry unit behind cover, in ruins, etc, should get -1 to hit like they do in Kill Team. Feel like in this case, your opponent would/could get to shoot at you but at a penalty because his LoS is partially blocked

Isn't this a Cities of Death rule? Or something similar. Just cities of death aren't "tournament standard" so doesn't get seen or used.

40K's LOS rules should be revamped.

The +1 to hit for cluttered LOS should be applied, the current terrain rules should be revamped, and the game changed so a Natural 6 is always a hit.

Reemule wrote:
40K's LOS rules should be revamped.

The +1 to hit for cluttered LOS should be applied, the current terrain rules should be revamped, and the game changed so a Natural 6 is always a hit.

The 6s always hit is such a clean and simple fix that I'm really shocked they haven't implemented it yet. It helps to tone down some of the crazy negatives you can stack.

Wayniac wrote:

Malfurious wrote:
I think GW should rule that any infantry unit behind cover, in ruins, etc, should get -1 to hit like they do in Kill Team. Feel like in this case, your opponent would/could get to shoot at you but at a penalty because his LoS is partially blocked

Isn't this a Cities of Death rule? Or something similar. Just cities of death aren't "tournament standard" so doesn't get seen or used.

Yes it is indeed. Any shooting model that cannot see at least one model in the target unit entirely unobstructed from tip to toes gets -1 to hit, or if it's a Vehicle/Monster that's 50% hidden, easy and clear. There's even a difference between hugging a makeshift barrier (+1 to saves) or actually sitting in a sturdy building (+2 to saves), yay! Also, 6+ always hits!

GW has ruled so (in optional rules that create better gameplay), get the tournaments to do so too and everyone benefits.

You were not out of line, though perhaps a judge should have been called to make a call rather then spending a bunch of time on back and forth. That said this is why TLOS is horrible. Abstract LOS would make the game much smoother.

 Sherrypie wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Malfurious wrote:
I think GW should rule that any infantry unit behind cover, in ruins, etc, should get -1 to hit like they do in Kill Team. Feel like in this case, your opponent would/could get to shoot at you but at a penalty because his LoS is partially blocked

Isn't this a Cities of Death rule? Or something similar. Just cities of death aren't "tournament standard" so doesn't get seen or used.

Yes it is indeed. Any shooting model that cannot see at least one model in the target unit entirely unobstructed from tip to toes gets -1 to hit, or if it's a Vehicle/Monster that's 50% hidden, easy and clear. There's even a difference between hugging a makeshift barrier (+1 to saves) or actually sitting in a sturdy building (+2 to saves), yay! Also, 6+ always hits!

GW has ruled so (in optional rules that create better gameplay), get the tournaments to do so too and everyone benefits.

Yeah pretty much. If ITC adopted those, then you'd see them become widespread across gaming tables worldwide. But until that happens, they'll be for narrative only and unsuitable for competitive gaming.

Wayniac wrote:
I don't think you were wrong, but this highlights a big reason why GW's LOS rules are probably the worst I've ever seen in any game, ever. Completely lazy and totally unrealistic.

As opposed to what game system exactly?

Why'd it take you that long to determine LoS?
At the shop when we challenge each others creative targeting we directly ask the other person where they think their LoS is coming from.

Quick tip for LoS, especially when peering through multiple layers of terrain, and interposing units?

Say where you think you can see, and ask your opponent to put their finger in front of it.

Presto! Instant clear colour contrast, making LoS far, far easier to work out.

If the opponent is being that argumentative or unwilling to bend when you think you are right (and being polite about it) then just call for a judge's decision. He can't argue if they say no LOS.

 sfshilo wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
I don't think you were wrong, but this highlights a big reason why GW's LOS rules are probably the worst I've ever seen in any game, ever. Completely lazy and totally unrealistic.

As opposed to what game system exactly?

tlos is insane. One of the few things I like about warmachine is that every model takes up a predermined volume that's set by base size. It would solve all of these arguments and get rid of modeling for advantage.

 Kommisar wrote:

 sfshilo wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
I don't think you were wrong, but this highlights a big reason why GW's LOS rules are probably the worst I've ever seen in any game, ever. Completely lazy and totally unrealistic.

As opposed to what game system exactly?

tlos is insane. One of the few things I like about warmachine is that every model takes up a predermined volume that's set by base size. It would solve all of these arguments and get rid of modeling for advantage.

Yeah, Warmachine's LoS rules take Warhammer's LoS rules behind the woodshed like a red-headed step-child.

A small tip on lasers - instead of using dot pointers buy a cheap laser level. Those produce a line instead of a dot, so you can easily scan from behind a shooter onto a target or the other way around even on a very, very dense Necromunda table. And as a bonus they nicely show how much obscured the target is.

As to OP case - if a controling player cannot tell you what exact part of his model sees what part of your model for you to confirm this on the spot then no LOS for him. Checking reasonable LOS claims should last seconds, not minutes.