I've been questioning my understanding of this for a while now, and I just want to know if I have been interpreting this correctly or incorrectly all this time.

e = clear unoccupied terrain on elevation 2
E = clear occupied terrain on elevation 2
g = clear unoccupied terrain on elevation 1
G = clear occupied terrain on elevation 1

Eegggggg
eggggggg
ggGggggg

Do E and G have a clear line of fire to each other? I would say no because it crosses through the diagonal between two squares of elevated terrain that E does not occupy, making that corner considered a corner of elevated terrain that E does not occupy. However, E does occupy a square that is on that corner, so it leaves me thinking E still kind of occupies it and it may be clear. I figure it's blocked because if the other two squares of elevated were also occupied, the line would still be blocked, so why should that change the line of fire to leave them unoccupied?

Thanks in advance.

I asked this same question about a year back. The line of fire would be blocked. The reasoning behind that has to do with the rules about line of fire running though a direct diagonal and checking the terrain to either side of the intersection.

Since the squares to either side of the intersection are elevated terrain that you do not occupy, the line of fire is blocked.

Not very intuitive since the corner of the square you occupy is on the edge of elevated terrain, but it makes sense if you think about it long enough.

Simple answer: No, you do not have line of fire.

Good, I did understand that right. One guy brought up the argument I mentioned and was making me second-guess myself. Thanks.

That wasn't always how that was ruled, but a great simplification was made that said, "When you're going through a direct diagonal, flex your line a bit to the right and the left to check which path is less restrictive. That's the path you use to determine hindering bonuses, blocked fire, etc." As you can see, in this case the 'flex' would push you to a blocked LOF either way.

It's possible he was thinking of the old way, before the rules of intersection were added. Before the 2010 rule book you could draw line of fire to that square.