Re: Forced Retreats
First, the dangerous hex thing means like a pit or a fire hex or something that has consequences of entering it. So if there is a safe hex, the attacker has to choose a safe hex. If there isn't, the defender gets a 3/DX roll - if successful, they don't have to retreat. If they fail, they go in the dangerous hex.
Having said that, Steve (much to my dismay) just posted an intended errata list, which includes deleting that line from the rules.
Seems like a mistake to me - we used both that rule, and the original rule where people with no place to retreat need to roll 3/DX or fall, AND a house rule where anyone falling next to a pit needed to roll scatter direction and then 3/DX to not fall in the pit. These sorts of rules give more meaningful effects to pits and terrain hazards and maneuvering. And even when you use all of them, there are usually plenty of ways to move safely and avoid facing them, and even so they rarely come up much, but are generally a JOY when they do (maybe excepting someone whose PC falls in a pit, but that rarely happens). They make narrow bridges by pits actually mean something interesting.
It seems (from a TFT Discord chat) it's some not-very-experienced playtest feedback driving the desire to remove it. Someone thought it was OP... I'd like to see someone demonstrate how, because we used those rules a lot and ended up adding more rules for chances to fall in pits, not less, and it still didn't happen much. Usually people getting knocked into pits or falling down from being cornered and forced to retreat are going to die anyway - much more fun if some of them fall in pits... ;->
|