I have checked it yesterday It is written that if unit is shooting and traces line of sight through the forest, unit being attacked gains soft covers. So it looks like it's not blocking. But my group decided to house rule that so soft cover gains everyone in the forest, but normally forest block line of sight.
Good luck with that. You are almost certainly going to uncover lots of unintended consequences down the road. Plus, you won't have to look far to discover why it is that all those monsters that did so well in games within your group are suddenly horrible in games played by the actual rules.
Only vs canons I personally think True line of sight is the absolutely worst thing GW could come up with. It's just an invite to the conversation: - I can see your model. - No you can't. - Yes, I can. - Nope. - Yes! - No, however I look, the tree-trunk blocks line of sight. - No, it doesn't! - Yes it does. ... and so on. And, by the way, doesn't ETC use a variant of true line of sight? Anyway, I think your gaming group has made the game a lot easier, fun and interesting. Monsters are a lot more fun than canons, and if it's more competitive to take them that must be a good thing.
It may have silly unintended gameplay consequences, but TLoS was an incredibly simple solution that was part of the streamlining of 8th. Can you see it? Yes - then you can shoot it. Apply some modifiers for cover. Done. The problem is less with TLoS than it is with the cannon rules.
Another good house-rule for playing it - If it's area terrain that is supposed to be a proper forest and not just a few trees, saying that it completely blocks line of sight over any part of the footprint is good/works. The reasoning being that you WOULD model a fully thick forest, but naturally that means you can't actually place your units in it. Wasn't there previous editions where you could see a few inches into a forest but no more? That would make more sense.
I have to say that I completely disagree with that view PlasmaDavid. Why is it that we should think that we are supposed to being playing with "proper forests?" And what is a "proper forest?" And I don't agree that "saying that it completely blocks line of sight over any part of the footprint is good/works" at all. It may be good if you want a different game, one with a more abstract scale, and one that does not factor that thinking into point values at all, but that's not the game we have, and modifying this would be a big change that is likely not accounted for. Not only would monsters live longer, but other stuff would too. Flying uberheroes could hide and pounce. Not to mention, Tomb Kings have so few real advantages in the game, and their ability to hit on unmodified BS rolls is one which would be greatly diminished by throwing up chunks of blocking terrain like that. I happen to think that a Warhammer forest actually IS two or three trees. The rules are written to support this. I just can't support that idea that what we have is not 'proper' or doesn't reflect what "would" be modeled and so on. Yes, older editions, with many, many other rules changes and different point values, used to play woods as you mention. That was older and "made sense" in those editions, in those contexts, with those other rules and point values. Old versions of the game also used to be played without turn limits, allowed models to "fly high", drop rocks for all flyers, take monsters from a monster allotment, had complex and simple maneuvers, push back and follow up moves, and so on and so on... Those are not the rules today. Today we have True Line of Sight.
The really sucky thing about True Line of Sight is that if you model a really nice looking forest, with stuff that might actually block some lines of sight, it is terribly difficult to actually put models inside of it. That is reflected in the rules, since ranked units loose their rank bonus. But how to you play True Line of Sight when your movement tray of Saurus Warriors is sitting on top of the trees? Do you build your forest with removable trees so that you can move your units through them? Then how does True Line of Sight work? Do those trees no longer block line of sight because you had to temporarily remove them from the board? True Line of Sight is the rule of the game, but it's a poorly thought out rule. And on top of that, the GW guys seem to think that a Forest can block Line of Sight to a new Treeman. I wonder how they play it in house?
My forests are a flat, sanded and painted MDF-board, and the trees are all on 40 mm round bases that can be moved around freely. Very practical. I prefer to keep the distances and models in place, and remove the trees if they are in the way, instead of balancing my metal TG on the treetops. They don't like the 3" drop, and I'm to fond of the paint-job. And measuring a chargedistance from a wobbly treetop isn't straightforward. Do you measure diagonally, treat the battlefield as 2-dimensional or do you factor in that they have to climb down the tree as well? I don't think that forests block line of sight, but if you draw a line to the target through a forest you get soft cover. Same thing with hard-cover terrain features. If you don't treat the footprint of the forest as "forest", but only the trees, how do you make out if the majority of the models are in a forest? And about TK: they are supposedly considered to be quite weak, maybe they would be more balanced (compared to other armies) if it was easier to get cover?
[/quote] Was this in the WD? Don't believe a word they say in that garbage about rules. In the latest one, the Beastman army used in the battle report is illegal (too much Rare, too little Core), a Level 2 knew more than 2 spells without any way of doing so, etc.
TLOS is an abomination. The only way to get it to work is to model the terrain so that it works, e.g. buildings twice the height of its intended occupant per storey, trees to be 5 to 10 times human height and forests to have bushy margins (if light reaches then plants will grow to take advantage), hills all over the place representing minor undulations. Real hills need to be modelled even higher. Also most natural land undulates more than model height in relatively short distances, it is common on real terrain to be within bow range but unable to see the target because the land undulates and there is a bump or dip preventing vision. An extreme example of this are sand dunes at the beach, if you are in a dip how far can you see? Who can see you?