Thanks!

And by eliminating adjectives, I now dub this:

The intimidating baby ruling.

[It's not its own rule because it is merely an interpretation of a rule in the book]

I have a question using the map BDH, posted. (thanks BDH).
My 2friendly characters are:
Talia in I-13 and Psycho pirate in J-13, My opponet has Nico in I-14 and Bagman in J-14. Can Bagman target Talia? I didnt think so becasue only Sharpshooters can make a ranged attack when based to opposing characters.
http://www.ianparmenter.com/hcutils/map.jsp?map=DCD

How the example in this thread different from the example in the Normal Distribution that introduced the new intersection rules? In that example, Grounded/Elevated was good enough to block LOF between grounded and elevated figs, in this case it's Elevated/Elevated.

From page 12-13 (fig. 13) of the heroclix Rulebook...
http://wizkidsgames.com/v3/products/...eBook_0410.pdf
"Elevated terrain itself can’t be destroyed. Characters, objects, and terrain features on elevated terrain are considered elevated. Characters, objects, and terrain that are not elevated are grounded. Grounded and elevated characters are not considered adjacent for any game effect." I was under the impresssion from this ruiling that since Talia was considered not to be adjacent, and and Psycho Pirate and Bagman are, that Bagman can not target Talia. We flipped the coin and played on, but me and my brother wanted to get a ruiling.

Bag-Man is adjacent to an opposing figure, so he cannot make a ranged attack.

He can target Talia just fine, like when using Perplex, because nothing blocks his LoF.

Even if he could use Sharpshooter from the Elite Sniper feat, he still could not make a ranged attack against Talia, as she is not adjacent.

For those not wanting to go to the map, the following is the scenario:

T|N
P B

Talia and Psycho Pirate are on one team, Nico and Bag-Man are on another. Talia is elevated.

Talia can make a ranged attack against Bag-Man. The intersection rule comes into play, but the only square with an intersection has N and P straddling it. Talia has a clear line of fire through either of the two squares (as an elevated character's line of fire is not blocked by grounded characters) therefore, her line of fire through the intersection is clear.

Bag-Man has a clear line of fire to Talia. If he wanted to use Perplex to lower Talia's attack value or damage value, that would be fine. However, since he is adjacent to an opposing character, he cannot make a ranged attack.

Here's a diagram of what's in the ND article:


. A B C D
1 m . g .
2 . . . .
3 s . .|.
4 . . . l


Mera is in A1, Green Lantern is in C1, Scarecrow is in A3 and Lex is elevated on D4.

Why does the intersection rule prevent Lex from drawing a line of fire to Mera?

Lex's line of fire to Mera crosses 3 intersections. B1/A2, C2/B3, and D3/C4.

The first 2 intersections - B1/A2 and C2/B3 do not present any problems - let me know if there is something with those 2 intersections in question. Even though there is hindering terrain in B1 and a Barrier in C2, in both of those cases, the opposite square is clear and therefore the intersection itself remains clear (the intersection is the clearest of the 2 terrains).

The D3/C4 intersection has an issue. Both of these squares, individually, would prevent a line of fire from an elevated figure to a grounded figure. If Lex tried to draw a line of fire to Green Lantern, then it would be blocked by D3. If he tried to draw a line of fire to Scarecrow, it would be blocked by C4 (and B3, but not crucial to our current issue).

Since both squares block a line of fire from elevated to grounded, the intersection itself is blocked as well (since it is the clearer of the two, but in this case, they are both blocked)

Now, for the example at hand....

A line of fire between an elevated and grounded character is not blocked by grounded characters. So even if there are 2 characters straddling an intersection, the line of fire between them is still clear, because the character drawing this line of fire is not blocked by other grounded characters.

That's why my answer said that Bag-Man CAN draw a line of fire. He can see Talia just fine. Bag-Man's problem is that he is adjacent to an opposing character and, as such, cannot make a ranged combat attack. Conversely, Talia is NOT adjacent to an opposing character (she's elevated, everyone else is grounded) and therefore not only can she draw a line of fire to Bag-Man, but she can make an attack as well.

Norm, thanks for answering, but the Bagman exmaple from Drew Breezy09 isn't the one I was questioning, it's the one from the first post in the thread:

That looks exactly the same as the BN example to me, yet everyone chimed in that it was OK.

Edit to add: for the original article, I'm only talking about Lex/Mera, which a direct diagonal, just like the one in the OP's example.

This thread was necroed in order to discuss a new question. Why would people assume that you were not talking about the new example when you gave no indication that you weren't?



At the time those posts were made, those were the correct answers. The BN rulebook was released after that and the ruling changed.

You know, I never looked at the date and did refer to the OP, but everything is clear now, thanks!

As a side note, Bag-Man doesn't need to target Talia, he can just make a close combat attack on her, since his Leap/Climb lets him hit her regardless of elevation.

BWAH-HA-HA - absolutely correct!

Not absolutely.

He still targets her when making that close combat attack.

the barrier is in b3 not c2 in the lex mera example

Oh, phooey! You know what I meant, dagnabbit!