Just an FYI, this line of sight example has sparked a huge debate on boardgamegeek.

The example is fine. It's just that we haven't looked at the complete ruling. It's not huge debate, just vocal minority. So happy finding the game's "faults".

The guys on the "target doesn't block itself from being shot" are misguided I think. Especially think that it's line of sight. If you can see, you can't be seen. In the "forced" theories, the zombie would have been able to shoot Jain, but only when it shoot through itself.

I don't know if someybody ever found counter-intuitive that a 1st Ed Large Monster figure does block LoS to some spaces occupied by the figure itself. There were situations where a Blast attack could be more conveniently placed on the rear part of the Large Monster to target the critters hiding behind him, but his front squares blocked line of sight to the rear squares and nobody said it was nonsense. There were also cases where a Large Figure front spaces blocked an attack traced from the same figure's rear spaces.

Changing the points used for tracing LoS does not change the rule that a figure blocks LoS (and attacker is a figure even for himself). It is still unexpressed in the previews, but I agree that sufficient hints have been found to support this (see discussion on BGG). By (game-related) commonsense, a figure must block LoS, otherwise everybody could shoot through a host of figures and target a specific figure behind them.

I think that LoS traced this way will reduce time spent thinking about the best move, probably not so much as intended until the players get accustomed to the new rule, which has some troublesome outcomes like an obstacle not protecting you if attacker shoots from a perfect diagonal position. The idea behind the new rule is to make visual interpretation easier, because corners are drawn on the board and space centers are not. In some situations LoS was really tricky to trace and we had to use a diagram to persuade each other that it was legal/illegal.

It will probably shift the weight from "moving to trace the LoS for attack" to "moving to take the best available cover", but in Descent 1st Ed both of these issues required a lot of planning. Now Heroes and Monsters will have to think more about cover, as attacking will be typycally possible, if ranged. Also remember that Spawning will not work like 1st Ed, so no need to plan your moves to prevent spawning.

Bleached Lizard said:

Ok it seems everyone aggrees with what you are saying but I'm not sure where you get it from?

Is it specifically mentioned in the preview?

Is it just the peoples understanding of the rule " can't pass anything"?

or has there been official word somewhere?

Ps. I actually like the rule better this way. It would be hard to find a point where you couldn't shoot someone in the example with how I understood it first.

 I also think that the rules are better this way… the hours we spent measuring the exact angles and arguing… until the online sight checker came out…. I was very frustrated as the Overlord… let's hope that the new rules, which seem good in theory also provide for a little faster line of sight determination….

Am I the only person that doesn't like tracing line of site between diagonally places blocking terrain?  I've always looked at those as a continuous wall (despite the fact you can walk between them - which also doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me).

Now, onto BGG to find out what the hoo haa is about.  Can a monster REALLY block line of sight to itself?  Seems a bit stupid, and I can't imagaine that's the case.  Certainly not a rule me and my gaming group will be utilising if so.

Coldmoonrising said:

This is exactly the same as the official rule anyway.  No need to make a house rule.

Sausageman said:

Re: point #1 - I'm a bit iffy about that as well.  I'm not sure what LoS rules I'm going to use when it actually comes to it.

Point #2: As someone above stated, figures have *always* blocked LoS to themselves.  It's just that now we measure to/from four points rather than just one.  Think of it this way: if we're standing directly in front of each other, facing each other, can you see the back of my head?

It's a shame the LOS still isn't made more intuitive. My playgroup always found it confusing that you can see monsters behind obstacles and can even walk through obstacle diagonals. A missed opportunity.

I do like the fact that it appears that you can still buy stuff, since there is a shop deck! I was worried getting gold was a thing of the past, luckily this is not the case. I do wonder what the effect of hero death is though. As it is now, it just seems an inconvenience for the heroes. I am a bit worried about that…

Sausageman said:

What if they're not continuous? What if they're supposed to be piles of boulders? Those usually taper towards the top. Hence the view in between two distinct mounds not orthogonally adjacent, and the ability to step between them.

Columbob said:

So with those same piles of boulders, why can't you see/walk between them when they're orthogonally adjacent?

Bleached Lizard said:

Maybe because it's then supposed to be a single large/long berm.

Columbob said:

So single large barriers only ever exist at right-angles to the dungeon walls…?

You see where the problem we're having with this comes from now?

 My favorite mind game in this whole strange fifth dimension descent world:

Looking/moving diagonally through the boulder: You can see through it fine, but it takes one extra movement to get to the other side.

Looking/moving straight through a boulder: You can't see through it, but it doesn't disrupt movement in the least.

That's pretty trippy, don't think about it too hard.

-Bubba

Sorry to detract from bickering about LoS, but I feel there's something else worth bickering about. 

Anyone else take a look at how the stun condition works now? It completely cancels the next round of action. And in the case of this sling, it only takes one surge to activate. Seems to me a no-brainer tactic to turn enemies into helpless punching bags until they're dead. Anyone else think this could get old quickly?

Also, if characters can't actually die (they just keep standing up endlessly), and there are no conquest tokens to lose, how exactly does the OL win?