Actually, I am quite afraid to shake this hornet's nest, but since I mentioned it on another thread, I might as well go all in. So, I am just back from reading several N3 threads about this and I am not any wiser despite that. The point is already in the title: by looking at a rood edge from the ground, is it possible to aim a targetless weapon at a point on the very border (at the intersection between the two surfaces)? I already read every kind of explanation about hypergeometries, physics of smoke gas and 3x3mm implicit rules (first time I saw that, btw) and none really helped. I just would like to understand if there is an official answer about this in N4 and, if there is, which is the general rule it should be used to ascertain situations like this. Or, if this is just a matter or perfect vs imperfect intent and it beng allowed is just a consequence of the former playstyle, and so it must be agreed by players beforehand.
I have seen it played in n3 that it requires horizontal like surface to target and so it cannot be thrown on a ledge above you. In n4, I asked about what prevents a person from yeeting a smoke grenade into a wall and the answers were just about the wording of *on the table* which seemed a bit thin imho. That said, I would argue that they cannot target the lip of a ledge above them. Either against the wall is legit or has to be a horizontal surface of smaller than your silhouette or less.
I would accept any answer as long as there is a undelying rule that is clear and can be applied elsewhere as well. This one, from my point of view, is not, since it does not hold its own definitions. The edge of the roof belongs, by the very definition of edge, both to the horizontal roof surface and to the vertical wall surface (it is, literally, the intersection of the two), so it "is" on the table and it "is also" part of an horizontal surface (aka "the roof"). But this is only true if we treat surfaces as bi-dimentional entities (as everywhere else in the rules, as far as I know) and target points as entities without dimensions at all. If we treat surfaces and target points as 3D entities with "a size", then in order to place an object (the target point) "on top" of another (the roof), you need to see that surface "from above". But this is a very thin ground to walk onto, as nowhere else in the rules is this "3D physical" aspect of entities like target points being considered. I would understand more the argument about imperfect intent: "that point on the edge does exist, but you will never be as precise as pointing your big 3D finger on it" ^^. But even "imperfect intent" would require a pretty good defition to allow players to use it in the most uniform way among different communities.
If you’ve done all you say, you’re declaring that no one but Corvus Belli has a reason to bother with this thread. Good luck.
Well, I did all the research I could, but I was not sure I had not missed a final answer somewhere that had set the thing once and for all. To be frank, I was almost hoping I missed that ^^. What I think should not happen is players trying to "argue the solution" among themselves out of their own personal interpretations of the table geometry rules. It's not healthy at all. Or even an "official statement" about it depending on perfect-imperfect intent, that should be mutually agreed upon at the beginning. Anything but just players' opinions (each of them valuable on its own) clashing one against the other on an on. I think you guys did that long enough already :)
Is the top of your silhouette taller than the surface? Yes. Is the top of your silhouette lower than the surface? No. You can't shoot somewhere you can't see. You can't see the top of a surface if you're lower than it (unless it is slanted). Use Speculative Fire if you need.
So, first of all I'd like to be understood that I am not arguing against your answer in any way, but I need to understand it better in order to be able to apply the same principles to other game situations as well. Since it is quite clear that, even by having the top of the silhouette lower than the roof, you can definitely see the edge between the two surfaces, the "border or the roof" (just by definition). You cannot aim at a point on it because: 1) THE TARGET MUST BE A POINT WITH A MINIMUM AREA The point you are aiming at DOES need to have a minimum area dimension (that 3x3mm rule I saw around). In order to aim at an edge (which is a monodimentioal line) you would need the target point to be a point with no dimensions at all. The only 2d surface you can see belongs to the wall, so you cannot fire on the edge for the reason above. 2) THE IMPERFECT INTENT EXPLANATION Techinically there is a line there where you "could" aim, but the game does not allow "perfect intent" declarations so you need to physically select a point and it will never be the perfect one at the very edge of the roof allowing the shot. In a perfect world you could, but, alas, we live in an imperfect one! 3) THE "ABOVE" EXPLANATION You need to aim "on" a point not "at" a point, somewhat over and above it, so, in order to see the roof from above, you need to start from a position higher than that. This argument invokes some kind of template's "thickness" aspect, which is not so clear to me, I'm just trying to quote as best as I got it but I must confess this explanation is the one I understood the least. I have read each of the explanations above used multiple times to support the impossibility to fire at edges and each of them can do, but it's just one of them and not the others. And it's important to know which one is the reason, since each of them can have different consequences on other aspects of the game as well. Thanks :)
I don't think there's been an official answer, so if you're looking for something better than the explanations in existing threads, you're likely to be disappointed. That said, to me the "above" explanation seems clear. A surface is two-dimensional. It doesn't have thickness, so you can't see it from the "side." If you stand beside a building and look up, you see the wall all the way to its top, but you don't see any part of the roof. If the wall weren't there, you would see the underside of the roof. To see the upper side of the roof, which is where you want to throw smoke, you'd have to be above the plane of the roof.
To me your example is part of the first explanation, the MINIMUM AREA one, since you see the line that divides the side of the building from the sky (the same line you would see from the roof looking down), and that line belongs to both the roof and the wall. But, using that reasoning, you cannot aim there since you need a 2D area as a target and not just a point on a line. Anyhow. Since there has not been an official answer, has at least the majority of the community agreed to play it this way? It would be a start :)
What @Diphoration and @QueensGambit said. For completeness/anyone following along at home, the salient rules interactions are: Template Weapons: The weapon "affects not only the main target, but also an area of the game table" Impact Template plus Targetless: You may declare an "area on the game table" as the target, no main target is required. BS Attack: You must have LoF to the target unless the skill/equipment says otherwise. Speculative Attack: You may target without LoF. Impact Template Weapons: You place an impact template on a surface. Deployable Weapons: You place a token on a surface; it must be fully supported, just like a trooper. Smoke Ammunition: You may target any point on the table to center a circular template; the template will be horizontal and smoke will extend upward infinitely high to create a cylinder. Targetless Deployable Weapon + BS Attack: You need LoF to the target "location." No target point (center or otherwise) is specified, so it's not clear whether you need to have LoF to 100% of the final position of the token, or the center of its final position, or just any part of its final position. Simplest interpretation would be if you can see the minimum 3x3mm of any part of the token in its intended final location, you have LoF and can place it there legally. The final position must be on the table, a scenery item that supports the whole token, or a ladder/stairs. Targetless Deployable Weapon + Speculative Attack: You don't need LoF at all and can put it anywhere with a possible trajectory of access. The final position just has to support the whole token and be on the table, on a piece of scenery, or on a ladder/stairs. Targetless Impact Template + BS Attack/Speculative Attack: The only things in the game with this combination are Smoke and Eclipse Smoke grenades/launchers, see below. Pheroware Tactics: Mirrorball is a targetless impact template weapon but it also has No LoF and Zone of Control traits, so it's not relevant. Targetless Impact Template + Smoke/Eclipse Ammunition + BS Attack: You need LoF to the target point on the table. Because your choices are a horizontal scenery surface, stairs, ladder, or vertical (basically, non-horizontal, non-stair, non-ladder) surface, you clearly need LoF to some point on that surface, not adjacent to it, to place the template's center. That means some part of your Silhouette needs to be above/beyond the level of the surface in question, otherwise you're seeing its underside as @QueensGambit wrote. There's sort of a consensus that templates don't 100% need to be supported by a horizontal game surface (otherwise you couldn't put smoke against a wall for a half-circle smoke column) but that they do need to be centered on a point on something that is treated as horizontal/ladder/stairs. See this thread for discussion on the topic. Because trooper silhouettes tilt to follow the vertical angle of ladders (see diagrams here) you can presumably target any point on ladders from below as long as you can see some part of that imaginary surface. It doesn't really align with the rest of the rules to treat them as a series of small horizontal surfaces. Models on stairs are weird because their movement is tracked at an angle, but they don't seem to tilt to parallel that angle the way models on ladders/walls do. My experience is models sort of "escalator" up along a diagonal path—I've not seen anyone play model or mine positioning on stairs angled as if there was an invisible ramp—and while on the stairs we sort of ignore the part about the full base being supported by the surface, as the staircase is treated as a de facto continuous surface for that purpose. I would strongly advise a brief "are we basically treating stairs like a ramp, or do I need LoF to the top of a given stair to target it?" chat with an opponent if you're considering chucking a drop bear or smoke on a stair above the top of your trooper's Silhouette, just to be sure. Targetless Impact Template + Smoke/Eclipse Ammunition + Speculative Attack: Pick any spot that's a horizontal scenery surface, ladder, or stairs and go for it.
Even with perfect intent you can't see the top of a wall from below. So intent doesn't affect this one. That lack of LOF is the fundamental reason this isn't allowed: if you can't see the target your can't throw the Smoke there.
Hard to say. With most of the wacky ideas that get floated in these forums, I can confidently say that I'm just not encountering them at the table. That's not the case with the "smoke up onto the edge of a roof" wacky idea. I've had opponents try to do it on occasion. Not often, but I don't know whether that's because only a minority of players think it's allowed, or because it's just not that often that people want smoke on a rooftop. I've never gotten any pushback when I've said "you can't see the roof the so you can't throw smoke on there" (and then let them unspend the order, of course), so there's that.
Huh? If you use the nail portion of your finger it is impossible to touch anything else than the very edge of the roof/wall. So just declare that the point to be selected is the one you'll physically touch. Edit : other than this remark. My general opinion is you can only draw LoF to a 3x3 square. Select a point on the edge, sure. Has LoF to that point, not possible, you'll need a bigger than infinitesimal point.
Yeah, I didn't support that either argument either, I was only listing possible reasons for not allowing that as I understood them from past threads. The 3x3 square, instead, is quite solid, in case and stands if used as reason for not allowing the shot. The argument that you cannot see the point does not at all (since geometrically you clearly can) but my intention was understading how people generally play, not to argue any point so I didnt' go on replying. Anyway, I think for future editions rules definitely need to be more specific on this point as, for how it's written at this moment, I can totally see a lot of people ruling out on their own that they can, and this can be confusing since the majority of the community does not play this way.
A different question about smoke and roof edges if I might? Smoke doesn't flow to the side when it meets a wall, like shown on the first diagram, when the green smoke token is centered where the green area is. But does it flow DOWN like on the 2nd one? That is, is the yellow-orange area also covered by smoke?
I remember reading an answer about this saying it does not flow down because the roof blocks any los from the origin point to the lower ground (if I remember correctly). This answer, in my opinion, suffers from the same problem as the shot on the roof, meaning it considers the smoke point ABOVE the roof itself (also, as in your picture), while since the smoke does not place any marker, the origin should be the target point itself. So, in case the edge is chosen, it has full visibility to the ground as well. Here's what I mean: The point in black is BOTH part of the roof (red line) AND part of the wall (green line). Actually, it's defined as the intersection between the two. And that point is definitely visible from below. Bear with me and let me add some maths :P The point A (1, 2) belongs to all the three equations, meaning: - it IS roof - it IS wall - it IS on sight of the trooper. With this I do not mean AT ALL to argue to change how the rule is played, but just to write it differently in order for the way it is played to be supported by the rules. Actually, I already started to play the shot as not possible, but, as it is, many players just learning the game on their own (like me!), will rule out it is possible and play differently from how the community does. Some options that come to my mind that would fix the issue are: 1 - Rule that you need a minimum AREA for the shot (that would invalidate the drawing above, since you only see a point). 2 - Change the targetless wording to "choose any point on the table that is only part of an horizontal surface", ruling out all edges and borders since they are also part of a vertical surface.
While this touches on some of the game's under-developed part of the rules, I don't think it's consistent with the rules to treat a non-horizontal surface as part of the "an area on the game table" unless it's a surface defined as ladders or stairs.
And I would argue you can't throw smoke onto the side of a ladder either. The rules say that Troopers treat ladders as horizontal surfaces, and smoke isn't a Trooper. (Also, narratively it would be dumb.)
Agreed, but IJW was pretty adamant that stairs and ladders were the same thing. I wouldn't take it for granted that the template is aligned with the plane it is placed on, however, I find it'd make a lot of sense (and solve a bunch of (pun intended!) edge cases) if a smoke template was always aligned with the horizon.
The point is the edge of a building is ALSO part of an horizontal surface so it abides the definition for being a target as it is written under smoke at the moment. This is the whole point. There are not two edges, one of the roof and one of the wall, there is a line that is both roof and wall, both horizontal and vertical, both visible from the roof and from ground. This is a geometrical fact. If we want to play out the shot as not possible (and I am fully ok on that, since I also think it's how it is supposed to work), rules must be written different.
