Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xane" data-source="post: 4337224" data-attributes="member: 8261">Cover RulesOk, take 2.&nbsp; It took me forever to write this blasted reply and I got logged out while I was writing it and lost the first copy.&nbsp; ARG!&nbsp; That goes to show... write your long winded replies in notepad first!!&nbsp; Anyway...On page 280 under &quot;Determining Cover&quot; it says, &quot;A line isn’t blocked if it runs along the edge of an obstacle’s or an enemy’s square.&quot;&nbsp; It seems that the rules of determining line of effect are inferred from the rule for determining line of sight, which makes sense.&nbsp; It says (page 273), &quot;To determine whether you can see [or have line effect to] a target, pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of the target’s space. You can see [or have line of effect to] the target if at least one line doesn’t pass through or touch an object...&quot;On page 281 there is a diagram that shows the example of a Burst 2 effect (a 5x5 square effect).&nbsp; It would be really hard for me to describe what I'm trying to say in writing, so I'll make my own little 5x5 diagrams to illustrate what I'm trying to convey.&nbsp; a = affected square, x = non-affected square, o = obstructionThe diagram in the example is as follows:x&nbsp;&nbsp; x&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; ax&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; ax&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; aa&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; aa&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; oThis is what I think it ought to be by my reckoning of the rules:x&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; ax&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; aa&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; aa&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; aa&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; a&nbsp;&nbsp; o&nbsp;&nbsp; oI replaced 2 of the x's with a's.&nbsp; The upper x=a because I can trace an imaginary line from the chosen origin square's corner to the target square in question without touching an obstacle.&nbsp; The lower x=a because the imaginary line runs along the edge of the wall, so it isn't considered blocked for determining whether the target square in question is affected by the burst.&nbsp; Now, I don't think that it makes a whole lot of sense that a square that's directly on the other side of a wall from the origin square is affected by a burst, so I think some errata needs to be written...In this same vein, I would also like to propose some errata.&nbsp; All the examples seem to suggest that you determine line of sight/effect by tracing an imaginary line from a chosen corner of the origin square to any one of the corners of the target square.The rules say (page 273),&quot;...pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of the target’s space...&quot;The ought to say,&quot;...pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any corner of the target’s space...&quot;This change makes sense to me because there are an infinite number of lines from a corner of one square to any part of another square.&nbsp; This change is further reinforced by the following rule on page 281, &quot;If three or four of those lines are blocked but you have line of effect, the target has superior cover.&quot;&nbsp; If you were to follow both rules as written, then any kind of obstruction, no matter how small, would provide superior cover!Moreover the following rule,&quot;If three or four of those lines are blocked but you have line of effect, the target has superior cover.&quot;Ought to say,&quot;If three of those lines are blocked, the target has superior cover. If all four lines are blocked, you don't have line of effect.&quot;Since there are only 4 imaginary lines that can be drawn from the chosen origin square corner to any of the target square's corners, then you wouldn't have line of effect if all 4 lines are blocked.In summary, if one or two lines are blocked the target has cover.&nbsp; If three lines are blocked the target has superior cover.&nbsp; If all four lines are blocked, then you don't have line of effect.&nbsp; This falls in line with the line of effect rules (page 273), &quot;If every imaginary line you trace to a target passes through or touches a solid obstacle, you don’t have line of effect to the target.&quot;Let me know what you all think!&nbsp; Thanks!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xane, post: 4337224, member: 8261"] [b]Cover Rules[/b] Ok, take 2. It took me forever to write this blasted reply and I got logged out while I was writing it and lost the first copy. ARG! That goes to show... write your long winded replies in notepad first!! Anyway... On page 280 under "Determining Cover" it says, "A line isn’t blocked if it runs along the edge of an obstacle’s or an enemy’s square." It seems that the rules of determining line of effect are inferred from the rule for determining line of sight, which makes sense. It says (page 273), "To determine whether you can see [or have line effect to] a target, pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of the target’s space. You can see [or have line of effect to] the target if at least one line doesn’t pass through or touch an object..." On page 281 there is a diagram that shows the example of a Burst 2 effect (a 5x5 square effect). It would be really hard for me to describe what I'm trying to say in writing, so I'll make my own little 5x5 diagrams to illustrate what I'm trying to convey. a = affected square, x = non-affected square, o = obstruction The diagram in the example is as follows: x x a o a x o a a a x o a a a a a a a a a a a o o This is what I think it ought to be by my reckoning of the rules: x a a o a x o a a a a o a a a a a a a a a a a o o I replaced 2 of the x's with a's. The upper x=a because I can trace an imaginary line from the chosen origin square's corner to the target square in question without touching an obstacle. The lower x=a because the imaginary line runs along the edge of the wall, so it isn't considered blocked for determining whether the target square in question is affected by the burst. Now, I don't think that it makes a whole lot of sense that a square that's directly on the other side of a wall from the origin square is affected by a burst, so I think some errata needs to be written... In this same vein, I would also like to propose some errata. All the examples seem to suggest that you determine line of sight/effect by tracing an imaginary line from a chosen corner of the origin square to any one of the corners of the target square. The rules say (page 273), "...pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to [U]any part[/U] of the target’s space..." The ought to say, "...pick a corner of your space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to [U]any corner[/U] of the target’s space..." This change makes sense to me because there are an infinite number of lines from a corner of one square to any part of another square. This change is further reinforced by the following rule on page 281, "If three or four of those lines are blocked but you have line of effect, the target has superior cover." If you were to follow both rules as written, then any kind of obstruction, no matter how small, would provide superior cover! Moreover the following rule, "If three [U]or four[/U] of those lines are blocked [U]but you have line of effect[/U], the target has superior cover." Ought to say, "If three of those lines are blocked, the target has superior cover. If all four lines are blocked, you don't have line of effect." Since there are only 4 imaginary lines that can be drawn from the chosen origin square corner to any of the target square's corners, then you wouldn't have line of effect if all 4 lines are blocked. In summary, if one or two lines are blocked the target has cover. If three lines are blocked the target has superior cover. If all four lines are blocked, then you don't have line of effect. This falls in line with the line of effect rules (page 273), "If every imaginary line you trace to a target passes through or touches a solid obstacle, you don’t have line of effect to the target." Let me know what you all think! Thanks! [/QUOTE]

Verification