How do you adjudicate initiating HTH?

[larsdangly]

They've done a hexagram article about the defend action, and that was very helpful. This one is trickier because a clear but poorly thought out resolution to the ambiguities might do more harm then good, so a bit of play testing would likely be required to figure out whether it was functioning as intended.

[phiwum]

You're spot on, Lars, about the need for playtesting, and not just with humanoid characters. Wolves, ghouls, baboons, housecats all use HTH rather a lot. Getting it right is essential.

(To be sure, I've not had a housecat fight yet, but I think I would have it attack from the same hex but not in HTH, much like a dragonet. I just don't see a housecat forcing a man to fall prone and tussle. Nonetheless, RAW says they only fight HTH, same as a baboon.)

[hcobb]

Whataboutism: If figure A isn't big enough to engage figure B by itself then use the auto-enter and trample rules, not HTH?

It's a big nerf for centaurs and horses though.

[Steve Plambeck]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

So you think the unstated intent was that you enter HTH from the front during movement phase for option (b)...

Absolutely. From the front, from the side, or from the rear. If it was only permitted from the rear, or rear and sides, then why do the rules say:

"A figure may move onto an enemy figure’s hex, initiating HTH combat, if (a) the enemy has his back to the wall, or is lying down, prone, or kneeling, or (b) the enemy has a lower MA, or (c) the attacker comes in from the rear, or (d) the enemy agrees to HTH combat."

Why would it say "or" the attacker moves in from the rear, in a list of alternative circumstances that all work, if the other circumstances required coming in from the rear? If you couldn't move onto an enemy figure from the non-rear hexes, it wouldn't be worded anything like that. It would instead say:

"A figure may move onto an enemy figure’s hex, initiating HTH combat, if first the attacker comes in from the rear and then (a)... or (b)... or etc., etc."

And another clue. Kneeling figures have front hexes too. They also may be moved onto for HTH as an alternative to coming in from the rear. For that matter a figure with it's back to the wall still has front hexes as well, but again "rear" is not a dual requirement along with the back to the wall. You must be able to enter from non-rear hexes or there wouldn't be a list of reasons for when you can. And if the non-rear hexes were limited to side hexes, then the rules would state "You can move onto another figure from the side or rear." Side hexes wouldn't have gone unmentioned, never singled out, unless all the non-rear hexes could be treated equally and passed through to initiate HTH during movement.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

...but during action phase (clearly stated) for option (o)?

Sorry Lars, I don't understand this part of your question.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

That seems irrational to me. A more reasonable explanation, in my opinion, is that the author got his wires crossed about how he really intended it to work and never got the two relevant rules passages into alignment with each other.

To me, SJ purposely gave us two means to attempt HTH combat, with separate rules for trying it during (1) the movement phase or (2) the action ("attack") phase. They aren't conflicting rules at all, just intentionally different rules for different circumstances. Nary a once did any of the players, and multiple GMs in my group. ever raise this as an issue in decades of play. We fought like cats and dogs over many, many rules, but nobody ever had any question about the HTH rules.

I'll bet anything that if SJ gets cornered about all this, he'll say "I meant just what I wrote -- what's the problem?"

I love the HTH rules as written. Ending a charge attack with dropping your weapons and just throwing yourself straight at the enemy is exciting. It's very risky. But it buys you a chance against a better armed opponent before they can slice and dice you. It's unpredictable. It's a zesty part of the game.

Yet there are those intriguing side issues I'd love to hear ruled on. Can a defending bowman get one-last-shot on the movement phase, against a HTH attacker? How does the set pole arm factor in? When initiating fails during the movement phase, does either party still have an action coming that turn? These are the interesting questions.

[Skipper2921]

This is exactly how I see the rules and are the same questions I have. I believe the two methods for disengaged and engaged are intentional/correct. It would be interesting to hear or read the rationale. And a clarification on the rest of the questions.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by Skipper2921

This is exactly how I see the rules and are the same questions I have. I believe the two methods for disengaged and engaged are intentional/correct. It would be interesting to hear or read the rationale. And a clarification on the rest of the questions.

If it is intentional and correct, it begs some questions. What is it that the two ways of entering HTH are supposed to represent? More specifically, what is it about standing adjacent to someone that changes when one initiates HTH [option (o)] as compared with someone who wants to do the same thing but is more than four feet away from their target [option (b)]?

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Shostak

If it is intentional and correct, it begs some questions. What is it that the two ways of entering HTH are supposed to represent? More specifically, what is it about standing adjacent to someone that changes when one initiates HTH [option (o)] as compared with someone who wants to do the same thing but is more than four feet away from their target [option (b)]?

Seems to me, it's that if you try to jump someone from the front, and they're faster than you or have a polearm, they get to act before you get to jump them. That's accomplished by making engaged figures attempt HTH during the action phase.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by Skarg

Seems to me, it's that if you try to jump someone from the front, and they're faster than you or have a polearm, they get to act before you get to jump them. That's accomplished by making engaged figures attempt HTH during the action phase.

Right, that's for engaged figures under option (o), and I agree that it should happen in the action phase. But, the different rules for disengaged figures under option (b) and elaborated at ITL 116 lets them jump opponents in the movement phase before their target can act, regardless of whether or not their adjDX is higher or, presumably, if they have a polearm. Because ... why? (other than the rules saying so, which is a legitimate, albeit unsatisfying, answer) I'm at a loss to explain why engagement status should matter at all.

[Skipper2921]

Let me clarify a bit. When I said "intentional/correct", I meant the text written was what the authors intended. I was not stating that it is the correct cinematic representation of HTH. Precisely why I would like official clarification published, along with answers to the questions asked above.

Now to take a stab at reasoning for two methods of entering HTH. Being engaged implies the person that has you engaged has some influence on your ability to move. When you are disengaged there is not any influence at the beginning of the movement phase. When using option (b), the charge attack is initiated and there is not any influence until the hex prior to entering the defender's hex. That influence is minimized by the momentum of the situation - throwing yourself at the enemy. Also think of the wolf charging from six hexes away and leaping into your hex - it isn't going to stop one hex away. The defense is more along the lines of deflecting or stopping the momentum of the charge attack.

When using option (o), from the beginning of the movement phase the person engaging you has some influence over your actions preventing you from simply jumping in the occupied hex. This is similar to the engaged person preventing you from simply leaving engagement during the movement phase. In this case, the defense begins in the movement phase and might be more about positioning than momentum. Dexterity enters the equation and the most dexterous acts first. That first act could be the defender employing a normal attack. The authors handled this by moving the initiation to the action phase.

Just a thought experiment for the group to rip apart. Its been nearly forty years since I have been in HTH and it was always unarmed :-)

[larsdangly]

Everyone's entitled to their own readings of these things, but I'm not buying the interpretation of RAW that you are supposed to enter HTH during the action phase in Option (o) but during the movement phase in option (b). This feels to me as much more likely to be something akin to the ambiguities about two weapon use, the Main Gauche, the Defend action, etc.: someone didn't think through the teleconnections between parts of the rules that were written at different times and places in the text and we are trying to sort out a logical inconsistency. The fact that the clearly designed parts of the game uniformly aim for some simple, parsimonious abstraction makes it seem unlikely to me that the author was actively trying to have us do two quite different things in pretty similar situations yet didn't want to say so directly.