We don't allow free flying Blast Focus. They're not on the plane of the table (which is physically within the volume occupied by the table, as you can see in Ogid's diagram B) but rather they are on the table, so infitessimally higher than the plane of the surface. The point you choose for the Blast Focus is immediately superjacent to the last part of the plane of the surface before free space. This position, because it is above the plane of the horizontal surface, can be seen from below it.l (just not directly below). Basically I'm saying 'on' in context means 'immediately on top of', not 'on the same plane as'. The Blast Focus is well understood as a point. The 3mm X 3mm required is for the Target. You only hit a point within that target though. Even if you accept that this is absurd for smoke, it's also relevant for Spec Fire. Where it's absolutely not absurd.
If the blast focus is supposed to be the point right in the center of the template, it'd be smaller than the 3x3mm area and no LoF could be traced from the edge of a roof, even if we assume some minor volumen. It'd be something like this: archivos de fotos gratis Black: surface; Red: area needed to attack (3x3mm); Green: Blast Focus; Blue: LoF. C) Without LoF to see easily the dot D) With some LoF lines
I stole @Ogid picture : So as long as the blast focus (no matter if it's a dot, a square, a circle, a cilinder or a goat) can be put on the border of the roof, you can trace LoF downward @meikyoushisui : your explanation is interesting but you are lacking RAW to support it (unless I missed something). Blast focus is defined nowhere (sadly) and the template page only shos teardrop template with a small circle (not a dot) as its focus. @Ogid : I don't agree with your picture B. The blast focus on it is not at the border of the roof. If you place your blast focus at the exact border of the roof, there is no surface to follow so you can trace a line downard So let's sum it up : We don't know what the blast focus is. It's definition make it possible or impossible for any circular template to hit a target downward (smoke but also any speculative attack). A) If the blast focus is a dot at the center of the template : said dot will be at best in the center of a 3mm square on the border of the roof. Drawing an unobstructed line downward is then impossible (see @Ogid picture D) B) if the blast focus is any form (circule, square...) of the same size or bigger than a 3mm square, then you can place it on the border of the roof and trace an unobstructed line downard (see picture above) B1) If the blast focus thickess is the same as a standard plastic template, an unobstructed line downward is insanely easy to trace (see the photo on the page before) B2) if the blast focus thickess is paper thin, drawing an unobstructed line downward is doable on paper (see pic above) but a bit tricky to demonstrate and will likely lead to calling the TO
Let's just solve this debate in the most correct way possible. Blast Focus is too undefined for us to properly answer questions regarding these, very literal, edge cases. We simply don't know if the Blast Focus has any volume nor, in fact, with how much precision we're able to place it. Please make a local judgement call on the topic and await a potential FAQ.
The case B) is a abstraction and I'm not 100% sure that it would work like that. The idea is that to trace LoF downwards you need the blast focus on the surface (even with a minor volumen like nm or um, mathematically you can trace the LoF if it's right on the border). However if there is no volumen at all (which is something hard to imagine) and you only follow the surface you have no point at the border to trace LoF downwards. But again I was streching things here a bit too much. I'm leaning towards D) for two reasons: 1 the closest thing that resemeble a definition this: The center and the narrow end are points, a point of more than 3x3 mm is a big ass point! 2 The intention of CB doesn't seem to support the smoke going downwards or the perfect intent to place it in the border: So D sounds as the closest to the RAI to me doing the safest assumptions, however I agree that it's not 100% clear.
You understand "is at the center" and "is at the narrow end" as meaning "is the center" and "is the narrow end". I'm not a native english speaker but I'm pretty sure "at" is here for a reason.
As an aside: That's because Impact Templates (Teardrop) have completely different placement rules than (Impact Templates (Circular). Anyway... Assumption 1: the Blast Focus is a point. Assumption 2 (based on LoF requirements): when you target a point on the ground, you are actually targeting a 3x3mm area. Extrapolation: when placing the template on this area, the closest we can get to the actual rule for Circular Template placement: Circular Impact Template (Grenades, Grenade Launchers, etc.): Place the centre of the Circular Template (Blast Focus) over the center of the main target's base. All other troopers affected by the Template suffer the Attack as well. Is to place the centre of the template over the centre of the target, aka the 3x3mm area. Placing the template off-centre requires Speculative Fire. Treating the target as the whole surface instead of the 3x3mm area also doesn't help, because placing the template over the centre would now be the centre of the roof. This approach works no matter what version of intent is being used, is the closest I can see to the written rules and as an added bonus is also the most realistic.
That makes sense. But only to be crystal clear here. Your reasoning is: Placing the blast focus off center would need speculative fire The blast focus is a point (smaller than the 3x3mm required to target) So the smoke wouldn’t extend downwards even if the 3x3mm were placed perfectly in an edge However that opens a follow up question. Let’s say we use speculative fire and place the blast focus right in the edge. In that case, would the blast focus right in the edge be able to trace LoF downwards?
Place the Template directly on the game table or horizontally over a piece of terrain, and never on a vertical surface or in the air.
This doesn't mean the full template has to be supported by the game table or an horizontal piece of terrain
Let me explain myself better: Black: surface; Red: area needed to attack (3x3mm); Green: Blast Focus (D) Blast Focus and Center 3x3mm area (E); Blue: LoF. Arrows: Black: Perfect intent; Red: Illegal?; Green: Legal but never in the edge. Case D) would be the one described in your other post with the blast focus centered so no possible LoF downwards. Case E) would be possible thanks to the offcenter placement of the speculative fire. The blast focus right in the edge woluld be able to trace LoF downwards. However If you place the templace in any other position (green arrow) those 3x3 mm wouldn't be in the border so you wouldn't be able to trace LoF downwards. Placing it just in the black arrow so the 3x3mm area match the end of the surface would require perfect intent. So the Red arrow. If a player say, i'll throw my grenade here (red arrow), that is meassured and that is a position 1mm from the border (so centering the 3x3mm area there would leave 0,5mm out of the surface and it'd be illegal) OR that is assumed to mean "as close as the border as possible" and the 3x3mm area is placed in the black arrow. If the Red arrow would turn the throw of the grenade illegal, then we can assume that a player will never get perfect placement so no possible LoF downwards.
Because you have to be able to see them if they're drawn. Also using cartesian coordinates apparently is confusing :)
That's because a 0 mm line doesn't show on paint, wonder why More seriously, thickness is not a rule issue but a demonstration issue. The answer to the question "can you do it' will be the same no matter the size. That's the blast focus size that matters here Thickness impact how easy it's to demonstrate on the table what we show with paint To sum it up : For smoke : - if the blast focus is a point, then you cannot smoke downard - if the blast focus is a 3 mm square or a 3mm circle, then you can smoke downard For speculative fire : - if the blast focus is a 3 mm square or a 3mm circle, then you can smoke downard - if the blast focus is a point, then - you can smoke downward if you can place the blast focus on the edge - you cannot smoke downard in other case Noone has been able to quote a part of the rule saying what is the blast focus : point, square, circle, (hexagon, cube, bostria miniature picture...) so we need an official answer here. @HellLois : any opinion on this ?
You're using those to base arguments off of, that's why I'm asking. @Ogid has a line going 45° downwards based off of the position of an "illustrative line" @inane.imp argues the point by necessity needs to be separated from the surface it is placed on, which gives it volume - why?
We are getting lost in the details. Volumen or not it doesn't really matter; you can't assume all Players will make an abstraction about a 0 volumen point being unable to trace LoF downwards unless it's stated clearly in the rules. And it could be argued that even with no volumen at all if the blast focus is just in the corner, you could trace LoF downwards; this is a miniature game not a math problem XD. Knowing CB point of view about this would be interesting tho. The most important question is if whether a player is allowed to place the 3x3 mm area just fitting in the corner, or if choosing a point too close to the border would make the attack ilegal (see the arrows in my last post case E). If the player is allowed to select the point of the red arrow and the area is placed in the black arrow to not being illegal, then the blast focus could be placed just in the corner and without any other clarification it'd make sense the LoF downwards. If the player is not allowed to do that (selecting red arrow point would make the attack illegal), then we have to assume that the perfect (black arrow) placement will never happen and we will always place it in the green arrow. So the blast focus will never be in the corner (no LoF downwards)
I'm not sure I understand your reasoning, assuming the blast focus is fully supported by the horizontal surface, Case E is not possible, because the blast focus does not have height. It is a point on the 2D space that you get if you were project the 3D table onto a 2D plane from above.
I did that same reasoning in my case B). However, it's not an easy case to visualize and it could also be read assuming that a point right in the corner would let you trace LoF downwards. In fact @Arkhos94 did that same reading in this thread: So unless it is stated exactly how it works, it having or not having a volumen it's not going to give us a reliable answer.
