xxxd
xxxD
xxxa
xxxx
xbxx

set up, dD is a duel based character
a blocks line from b to squar D

D blocks line of fire from b to d

if d and D where single based charaters b would not have line of fire to either, but sense they are a duo charter does b have a shot on d

Yes, there is LoF.

Page 17: "One square of a multi-base character will not block the line of fire from another square it occupies."

That specifies "from". What about "to" another square it occupies?

yeah we say that, and it says "from" so that means it cannot block itself, the way it is worded. so if d was shooting b, D would not block it, but does it work the other way around, and where does it state that.

i mean it makes sense that it would, but just going off the wording.

It does work both ways.

Can you please cite where in the rules we can find this information?

Nope, but I can tell you that is the way it is meant to work.

I agree entirely that is how it is meant to work and have always assumed as much. I just like to have things like that clarified in the rules.

When drawing line of fire to/from one square, it will not be blocked from the other squares it occupies.

It works both ways as written.

I agree that it should be obvious, but I also agree that, yes, it should be spelled out because to some people it isn't. My suggested rewording:

Squares of a multi-base character do not block line of fire to or from each other.

That's not only more clear, but it's more concise.

Grammatically, I don't believe "from" can be used that way. I think "by" would work. I think "to or from" would work. Any analogy I come up with to use "from" to mean "to or from" like this simply doesn't work in the English language.

It's fine if this needs errata, but I can't see the argument for it being "fine as is".

I see what MisterId was saying.. his emphasis of the word "from" is trying to say the use of the preposition "from" does not refer to "from another square" (or the origin of the line of fire). But rather the "line of fire" isn't blocked from "another square", as in the two things are not separated or kept "from" one another...

So I think, read with that meaning in mind, the sentence does work as written. But that's not the most logical reading of the statement, particularly when talking about lines of fire in heroclix, which are always drawn "from" one square or figure "to" another...

Finally, the sentence by itself should probably have used the article "a" rather than "the" in "One square of a multi-base character will not block the line of fire from another square it occupies." I suspect (but am not certain) that the specific sentence from page 17 is part of a larger paragraph that talks about the different ways in which a line of fire can be drawn, so it may have more pertinent to use ''the'' in the sentence in question, if read within the fuller context of the paragraph.