Can a lone model move backwards with Bridge of Shadows?

[Semprus]

The spell states "The target unit is immediately removed from the table and replaced anywhere on the battlefield visible to the Wizard, provided that no model from the unit is within 1" of another unit or impassable terrain."

Does "visible" in this case mean forward arc and if so, does it apply to lone models that are in combat?

I have attached an image to better explain my question.

Thank you.

[pk-ng]

If those are the exact words of the spells then no. RAW clears states visible to the Wizards

[Nyeave]

But visible doesn't mean forward arc if I recall correctly?

[RE.Lee]

First of all - Loremasters of Hoeth don't know the Bridge of Shadows spell, being level 2

The Line of Sight rules on page 10, indeed, do not mention the front arc. However, where Line of Sight is mentioned for targeting (charging, shooting, magic missiles), its always the front arc that can be seen. Logically this extends to moving with Bridge of Shadows. So you're nor allowed to move backwards, as thats outside of where the wizard can see.

[Nicene]

I'd say it's not only forward arc, but actually Line of Sight (so no teleporting through buildings).

[Nyeave]

I'd say it's not only forward arc, but actually Line of Sight (so no teleporting through buildings).

My thought too.

[RE.Lee]

Obviously not everything in the front arc is visible. Anything out of it is not, however.

[Dartanelo]

I agree line of sight, it didn't say forward arc, and it's silly to imply you couldnt turn your head to look behind you

[pk-ng]

I agree line of sight, it didn't say forward arc, and it's silly to imply you couldnt turn your head to look behind you

a) This is warhammer
b) line of sight is forward arc...

[Dartanelo]

I agree line of sight, it didn't say forward arc, and it's silly to imply you couldnt turn your head to look behind you

a) This is warhammer
b) line of sight is forward arc...

Fine I will acknowledge your this is warhammer point but the second part isnt true, is it? I'll have to check the rule book which i dont have right now, but i seem to recall something with warmachines and spells refering to LOS as 360 degrees. While buildings and other things can still, of course, block it

[wisetiger7]

Actually, I believe Line of Sight is not the same as Forward Arc, technically speaking. Line of Sight specifically states:

"Line of sight literally represents your warriors' view of the enemy - they must be able to see their foe through, under or over the battlefield terrain, and other models (friendly or enemy).

For one model to have line of sight to another, you must be able to trace an unblocked line from its eyes to any part of the body (i.e., the head, torso, arms or legs) of the target."

Yes, it is similar to forward arc, and it is widely accepted that it is interpreted/ruled to be in the front arc (as most models are facing forward, so their eyes will be facing forward), but they are not the same thing, literally speaking.

This is further evidenced by the fact that the summary chart for spells in the back of the BRB has some spells that need forward arc but not line of sight, and vice versa. Of course, it can be argued that it was a mistake as the spells that needed line of sight but not forward arc were errata'd to the fact that they now needed neither (hexes and augments, I'm looking at you), but the intent is there in the original printing, an intent which, again, could be muddled by the fact that they errata'd it to make it simpler.

Regardless of the RAW aspects above, I agree with pk-ng to a degree, but to take it one step further: a model that needs forward arc does not necessarily need line of sight, but a model that needs line of sight does also have to be in the forward arc. To me, line of sight is a further restriction to forward arc.

As for turning their head and looking behind them... I'd say nope. The rules don't say you can do that.

[RE.Lee]

@ Dartanelo

Nope, their LoS is not 360', though you're allowed to pivot them freely before you shoot, making it kind of irrelevant.

Like I explained earlier, anywhere LoS in mentioned it invokes the front arc. There are exemptions, like the 360' LoS of a Grey Seer on a Bell, but they are just that.

EDIT: Ninja'ed by Wisetiger7

[Dartanelo]

This is further evidenced by the fact that the summary chart for spells in the back of the BRB has some spells that need forward arc but not line of sight, and vice versa. Of course, it can be argued that it was a mistake as the spells that needed line of sight but not forward arc were errata'd to the fact that they now needed neither (hexes and augments, I'm looking at you), but the intent is there in the original printing, an intent which, again, could be muddled by the fact that they errata'd it to make it simpler.

This is one of the main things I was thinking of with regaurds to line of sight and forward arc being different
thank you for finding it

and it is widely accepted that it is interpreted/ruled to be in the front arc

Is it? It could be i guess, It doesn't come up that often. But I have always played it, and know other who do as well, LOS is what a model can see around them and forward arc is of course their front 90 degrees. This is the first time i am hearing of them being considered largly the same. What specificly leads people to beliveing they are same? or as Wisetiger7 said a special case of each other