I sympathise with neal's position an ambivalent really on the LoS question. I think the RAW are actually not consistent with themselves, so on balance LoS probably is intended to apply everywhere but it's hard to know.

On the 1.12.4 FAQ, the FAQ is addressing not only the LoS requirement but also whether the lack of LoS (you should also mention range for completeness) means the assault doesn't take place, or whether as Onyx and I (and I think ginger now) are saying it goes to resolution. Note that the gaminess does not arise from this part but the LoS part - so long as the attacker needs to get into range and LoS, the defender is never forced to fight an assault against an enemy he cannot attack. So for me, whether an assault takes place is checked -after- the charge move, it's not part of it. The charge move rules for me are about ZoC, contacting units, moving through units, terrain etc. This is also the simplest, and IMO most fair interpretation. Reading it as you check for whether the assault takes place as part of the 'charge move rules' is a totally valid way to read it, don't get me wrong ('charge move rules' meaning the entire subsection called 'make charge move') and thus also applying the check for an assault occurring after countercharges has a logic to it, I just think it is more awkward that way and creates the secondary issue that dptdexys brings up, i.e. an assault that has already begun can now stop after each 'charge' in subsequent rounds, without rolling for resolution. I don't see how that is possible and would open another can of worms so it doesn't make sense to choose to read it as part of those charge rules. To reiterate, you must still check for LoS (and range) after countercharges, the only difference is that you are checking it in the 'resolve attacks' section. If nobody can fight, you resolve the assault exactly as described in the FAQ about the second round.

To capture this either way I think it's necessary to split the FAQ into a part about LoS being required and another about what happens when nothing is in range/LoS at each stage.

Other than that, the other thing I would change is the wording of the last FAQ. A unit does not need to have attacked to be directly involved. Some units have line of sight and are in 15 but lack firefight weapons. Those are still valid targets for allocating hits and determining support. This is I believe the reason for the slightly odd 'in position to attack' wording in the rule book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list