Incorrect.

The rules state:
"If you can't get in for a model's-eye-view for any reason, trace a line between the targets with a tape measure or range ruler instead" pg 8
First this is a last resort method, not the intended one for LOS.
Second this is for LOS, not for ITW. For LOS you only need 1 clear line, hence why you can make do with a bit of string from the shooter's eyes to a valid part of the target's body if you can't take a peek like you should.

You need to take an ITW roll for any object obstructing the target.
The rules are that simple, and you are complicating them by far when you start with that straight line stuff.

To recap, you have LOS if you have 1 straight unobstructed line from the shooter's eyes to the target's body.
Once you have established that you move on to the in the way.
Any object (or model) that obstructs the target requires an in the way roll.

This discussion repeats itself and the whole "arrows go in a straight line argument" still doesn't make any sense.
Arrows do indeed go in a straight line, so if the line goes through an obstacle it hits it, period.
ITW rolls are a simplified way of seeing where the arrow will end from the shooter's perspective. It's not a guided missile dodging targets as it goes along, it's an arrow. From the shooter's viewpoint it can hit a few different obstacles or the target, that's all the ITW rolls represent.

In case you still can't see the sillyness, two representations from the shooter's pov:


By the rules as written you take 4 ITW rolls both times, simple.
The way you are defending would mean 1 in the first and 4 in the second (the goblins are overlapping in the second example from the shooter's pov)

Also, if you have a rock, a goblin behind it and a troll behind the goblin, and the rock hides the goblin but not the troll.
Follow the rules and you'll only see 1 obstruction in front of the Troll, since you can't see the goblin at all. Ignore the rules and decide to play with the patriot arrow and you'll end up with 2 ITW rolls.

_________________
Tired of building armies with pen and paper? Try this handy spreadsheet for SBG. Download it here

I think I understand how you are thinking, but I think you are overcomplicating this. You don't take In The Way tests for everything covering your targets, as in your example four goblins standing in front of a dragon. You take In The Way tests for each object in the "way".

If one archer was shooting at that dragon, he could only risk hitting ONE of those goblins standing in a line, not all four of them.

If the goblins were ranked up behind each other on the other hand, you would have to take four in the way tests total. First one for the closest goblin, then one more for the next if you succeed, and so on.


Note the last sentence in first paragraph on page 33 of the rules. ("...starting with the obstruction closest to the shooter.")

They are ranked up behind each other in the example.
The way the rules are written the number of ITW rolls are easy to determine. You are the ones overcomplicating things by far. I present you with a scenario where goblins are behind each other, just not in a perfect conga line and you say that it's just 1. How much would they need to overlap to count as 4? Where in the rules is that percentage determined?


Incorrect

Page 32
"Often you will find that there are objects (or even other models) obscuring the shots you wish to make. When you are taking a look to see if your model can see its target, keep an eye out for any obstructions such as these. If your shot hits, you will need to take an In The Way test for each of these obstructions."



Seriously? That sentence is there to define the order in which the shots are taken, it says nothing about which obstructions you need to test for.

I'm not sure how you confuse rolling more dice with overcomplicating things. Especially when the way the rules are written doesn't necessarily imply more dice (the rock example)

Dragon in front of you, line of four goblins + a goblin on his own to the side of them, how many ITW rolls?
As per the rules, 5 from an elven archer's perspective in flat ground.
As per your way... you can't pick a line of shooting, that's not in the rules, if you think that you can sorry but you made that up.
The ITW rules are an extreme simplification.

It's pure basics, if you wanna do it with the piece of string you can btw. Trace all possible straight lines from the shooters viewpoint to the target (you need at least one unobstructed one for LOS and to take the shot). If any line intersects something, that's an obstruction that you need to take an ITW roll for.
If a line intersects 2 (or more) things then only the first one counts for that line (since the others won't be visible through that line). The others may still be obstructions through other lines.

The way I'm saying (and the way it's written):
Take the shooter's POV, whatever he sees blocking the target requires an ITW roll.
How the heck am I overcomplicating anything?

_________________
Tired of building armies with pen and paper? Try this handy spreadsheet for SBG. Download it here

Hi Lonely Knight

First off, I wanna say I am a massive fan of your army builder, and even though I'm going to disagree with you now, I will still be forever in your debt for how easy you have made it to write a list.

Suppose the following situation

Dragon

GGGG


Shooter

In this case, you are arguing that because there are four goblins in front of the Dragon, the shooter would need to take 4 ITW rolls. However, suppose the following situation

Dragon

WALL


Shooter

Instead of 4 goblins in the way of the dragon, we now have a Wall. However, the Wall takes up exactly as much space as the goblins, and so represents as much as an obstacle to the shooter. The rulebook does not distinguish between terrain and models; if they obscure the archers sight then they both count as obstructions. If we follow your method, then the archer would have to take 4 ITW tests to beat the wall, which would be a tad ridiculous. This is why I agree with Dr Grant and the others and say that for both examples, only one ITW test is required.

Direct quote from my previous post describing "my method" (the rules as written)
Take the shooter's POV, whatever he sees blocking the target requires an ITW roll.

You take the shooter's POV, he sees 4 goblins blocking, he takes 4 ITW rolls.

You take the shooter's POV, he sees 1 wall blocking, he takes 1 ITW roll.

No idea how you got 4 ITW rolls for the wall. It seems you are applying a personal idea and not the rules.
The rules do not account for size of the obstruction, they are simplified to 1 roll per obstruction (with +3 or +5 in special cases).


The fact that folks keep giving a top down view of the situation shows that you do not understand the rules. What matters is the Point of View of the shooter.
Like I said in the rock example, top down view is:

Dragon

G

Rock

Following the silly way that you've been defending you'd take 2 ITW rolls.
But top down does NOT matter. POV does.

And in the example I said that the rock was big enough to hide the goblin completely. So, following "my method", you take the shooter's POV, you see one obstruction (since you can't see the goblin), so you take 1 ITW roll.


If you lads still can't see how absurd your way is, even after the rock example, even after all this...

Goblin taking a shot at Treebeard, from his perspective he sees a Goblin and Dwarf obstructing each of his legs.
As per the rules you'd take 2 ITW rolls.
As per your way... no solution, you'll say 1 ITW roll, but who is it gonna hit?
I'll repeat this, you do not get to pick a shooting path, the rules never say that. If you did, you'd pick the clear shot that got you the LOS obviously and you'd get no ITW roll. So there is no possible way to decide.

Heck Elf taking a shot at a troll, a goblin hides one of the legs, one of those D6 goblins hides the other.
Per the rules, 2 ITW rolls.
Per what you want it to be, 1, but where? You still can't justify having a choice.

There are plenty of combinations that lead to confusion if the rules were like you say.
That and folks reaaaaaally need to keep real world logic out of the rules discussions. You take the same test for having a mumak and a goblin ITW, the rules are VERY simplified. I do like the new +3 and +5 exceptions, adds a wee bit of flavor without any complication.

_________________
Tired of building armies with pen and paper? Try this handy spreadsheet for SBG. Download it here

No one said to look at it from the top down, thats just the easiest way to make diagrams with letters and symbol in the post.

I'm sorry, but it seems you are not even trying to understand our point of view, you're only defending your interpretation of the rules.

And I can see what you mean, but I'm just gonna say that it doesn't quite make sense. Yes I see those situations with the different models covering models can be difficult, but I think in those situations one should discuss it with the opponent, maybe randomize the shots. And I agree with the "shooter-rock-goblin-dragon" situation.

I'm sorry but there are several ways to interprete the rules as written, and to me it seems more logical that if four goblins are standing next to each other, an archer makes ONE In The Way roll, as there is no way it would risk hitting the other three as well.

one arrow, one object gets hit, simple
the arrow cannot magically splinter into 4 all of a sudden.

_________________
http://grungehog.blogspot.co.uk/

I get where you're coming from Lonely Knight but I still don't think you're right. Consider this example (I realise the top-down hypothetical approach is getting annoying but its the best way to explain my point )


Dragon

Rock


Archer

In this case there is a large rock between the archer and the dragon, obscuring his line of sight. In both methods the archer would take 1 in the way roll for the large rock. However, replace the one large rock with 4 small rocks.


Dragon

RRRR


Archer

In this case you are saying that the archer should take 4 in the way tests, one for each rock. The four small rocks offer the dragon much greater protection than the one large rock, which doesn't make sense.

First of all, allow me to say that I disagree with the logic of Line of Sight (LOS) that games workshop (GW) implies. So if something or someone hides the big toe of the dragon, does that means that I have a 50-50 change of either hit the dragon or the obstacle? Or on the other hand if I can see only the right palm of someone behind a rock formation I have 50 – 50 chance of hitting either the warrior or the rock? It is insane.

Having admitted that, I must say that I AGREE 100% with lonely knight. The GW couldn’t write it simpler and lonely knight couldn’t explain it better. It is not what we think that is logic or not, it has to do with what GW states in the rules. And what GW states is that if your shooter cannot see 100% of the target you must role a separate dice for everything that is partially covering your enemy. So in the example of Colin Higgins, the answer is YES you need to take individual in the way rolls in the case of many little rocks (again is has nothing to do about reality, it is an illogical rule to begin with).

Furthermore it is stated clearer in the “one rulebook” (the rulebook that was substituted by the hobbit one), however this particular rule didn’t seem to have changed.

But it also works with

Dragon

R
O
C
K

Archer

1 ITW

Dragon

R
R 4 little Rocks
R
R

Archer

4 ITW as you'd play it.


I can't understand this. If I shoot an arrow and do not hit an obstacle it is very unlikely, that the arrow hits something behind the obstacle (it doesn't fly zig zag...) it is more likely to hit something aside, because it did not fly in the direction of the first obstacle.
What about a little experiment place 5 targets and a Dragon in your garden like this

You



T T T
T
T
Dragon

I'm sure if you try to hit the Dragon most of the arrows hitting a target will hit the three in the front and not the two others.

Yes, exactly, it doesn't zig zag. So why on earth would it hit the target next to it?

If the archer makes the first in the way roll and misses the goblin, does the arrow take a left/right turn to see if hits the goblin next to it? No.

I was not saying the arrow is flying zig zag, I'm saying you take an In The Way test because there is an obstruction in the way. There is nothing magical about these tests, they simply mean that there is a chance of hitting the obstruction, and there is a chance that the arrow will fly past it.

Yeah past, not through it. But flying past one of the Goblins doesn't mean, that it also passes the Goblin next to it.

Lindir,
Your point of view is logical. In reality this is what is supposed to happen.
But explain me, please, what will happen in this situation:
.--D---R---A---G---O---N-
.---!--}------!-----}---!
.----G--}----W---}--T
.------!--}---!---}--!
.--------!-}--!--}-!
.---------!-}-!-}-!
.----------!}!}!
.----------- S
where G is a goblin, W is a warrior of good side, T is a tree and is S is a shooter.
The shooter has two unblocked line of sight (LOS) whose trajectories are drawn as "}", and three LOS which cross a goblin, a good warrior and a tree, and drawn with "!" respectively.
So in case you choose one you may want to choose the unblocked trajectory. Or if you have to choose a one with an obstacle you may want to choose the one with the tree, since that offers the least cover (passes on 2+).
One the other hand your opponent (that in this example plays the evil side) would like you not to be able to make the shoot because there is a trajectory that may harm the good warrior.

So in this case what would you do? And imagine that you are not playing with a friend of yours that you know him for a long time, but with a player that you play for a first time and you both want to enjoy the game and win as well.

The way lonely knight and gw rulebook describe and I agree, you would have to take an ITW roll for every obstacle and since there is a possibility that you may injure a one of your own side, you are not allowed to shoot. But I am curious to see what is your opinion on this matter.