Engaged in mid move

[hcobb]

What happens when you run past an enemy who isn't seen because of shadow, invisibility or blindness? If somebody tried this on me I'd use "Attacks Of Opportunity"(t.m.) But only if I could find a d20 somewhere.

My suggestion is that anybody can choose to run past any figure they like. If the ignored figure isn't an image then it can attack the undefending runner as if this was a rear shot, regardless of facing. The runner then stops in their current hex, if they were aware of the attack. The former runner can then choose any option consistent with the number of hexes they ran to that point, other than dodging. (Dodging needs to be announced when the figure moves their first hex.)

Speaking of dodging this ought to be stated as a cost of one additional MP per hex entered in order to play nice with the other movement adjustments. (Dodging carefully into an hex with a downed figure, etc.)

[Skarg]

̶I̶n̶ ̶o̶f̶f̶i̶c̶i̶a̶l̶ ̶T̶F̶T̶,̶ ̶I̶'̶d̶ ̶s̶a̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶f̶i̶g̶u̶r̶e̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶s̶h̶a̶d̶o̶w̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶e̶i̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶y̶ ̶h̶i̶d̶d̶e̶n̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶e̶n̶g̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶f̶i̶g̶u̶r̶e̶ ̶r̶u̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶b̶y̶,̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶w̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶m̶s̶e̶l̶v̶e̶s̶ ̶(̶p̶a̶r̶t̶l̶y̶)̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶e̶n̶g̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶v̶e̶r̶,̶ ̶s̶t̶o̶p̶p̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶h̶i̶m̶ ̶(̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶n̶ ̶c̶h̶o̶o̶s̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶y̶ ̶o̶p̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶m̶o̶v̶e̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶p̶o̶i̶n̶t̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶a̶l̶l̶o̶w̶)̶.̶
̶
̶I̶f̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶t̶r̶i̶e̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶m̶o̶v̶e̶ ̶I̶N̶T̶O̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶h̶a̶d̶o̶w̶ ̶h̶e̶x̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶h̶i̶d̶d̶e̶n̶ ̶i̶n̶s̶i̶d̶e̶,̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶y̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶b̶a̶b̶l̶y̶ ̶l̶e̶a̶r̶n̶ ̶i̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶o̶c̶c̶u̶p̶i̶e̶d̶,̶ ̶b̶o̶u̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶s̶t̶o̶p̶ ̶m̶o̶v̶e̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶n̶e̶x̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶h̶a̶d̶o̶w̶ ̶h̶e̶x̶.̶

Ok, I was somewhat wrong above. According to (basic new edition) Wizard page 9, as soon as someone becomes adjacent to a hidden figure, the hidden figure's position is revealed. Usual engagement rules would then apply.

As for house rules where you can ignore engagement but let your opponent attack you in consequence, I think that's a very good sort of house rule. I've seen it in various flavors (by others and myself) - the main issue tends to be people wanting to use it to go get side/rear attacks on people who would otherwise be screened by allies.

[platimus]

Can a human inside a shadow hex see out of it? Can a creature with Darkvision see through or out of a shadow hex? Is this specified in the rules somewhere?

[Anaraxes]

According to the rules in the Wizard PDF, a hidden figure is revealed if it "becomes adjacent at any time to an enemy figure" (among other reasons). That would include during enemy movement, and also if it's standing in a Shadow hex.

Allowing the hider in Shadow to try to avoid the moving enemy and stay hidden might make for an entertaining house rule.

There's a note in the section that says invisible movement would be better handled by a referee, as with the GM in TFT. So those rules might update these.

Originally Posted by platimus

Can a human inside a shadow hex see out of it? Can a creature with Darkvision see through or out of a shadow hex? Is this specified in the rules somewhere?

Wizard, p18: "A figure inside a shadow can see nothing, unless he has Mage Sight."

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by platimus

Can a human inside a shadow hex see out of it? Can a creature with Darkvision see through or out of a shadow hex? Is this specified in the rules somewhere?

Not without Mage Sight or some other ability to see in the dark. Magical Shadow hexes require Mage Sight not just Dark Vision. It is called out in the original description of the Dark Vision spell in the original Advanced Wizard. Basic Wizard doesn't have mundane darkness or a Dark Vision spell, just Mage Sight.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

According to the rules in the Wizard PDF, a hidden figure is revealed if it "becomes adjacent at any time to an enemy figure" (among other reasons). That would include during enemy movement, and also if it's standing in a Shadow hex.

Allowing the hider in Shadow to try to avoid the moving enemy and stay hidden might make for an entertaining house rule.

There's a note in the section that says invisible movement would be better handled by a referee, as with the GM in TFT. So those rules might update these.

Wizard, p 18: "A figure inside a shadow can see nothing, unless he has Mage Sight."

Yeah, that's what I was thinking when I wrote the reply I crossed out above. I usually play with the advanced rules and a GM, so... yeah.

[platimus]

Thanks guys. I don't have my new PDFs yet. My old copies are at home and my memory of them isn't that good. I thought I remembered reading that you couldn't see into or out of a shadow hex without some sort of magical ability.

The reason I asked: How would the figure in the shadow hex know someone was running by him if he can't see out? I suppose he could hear the movement as it passed by but it would seem too late for him to respond to it at that point.

As said, I don't have my PDFs yet. I can only go by what you've told me but I wonder: Is a "hidden figure" the same as a "concealed figure" or "invisible figure"? I wonder if it was intended for that hidden figure rule to apply in these situations? It doesn't seem right that a figure inside the shadow hex cannot see out of it, yet a figure passing by can see the figure in the shadow hex.

[Anaraxes]

The same rules in Wizard are used for invisible movement as for movement in shadow hexes.

If you attack a figure in a shadow hex, even if you know it's there because you just caused it to be put back on the board by movement, you still have the -6 DX "because you can't see it". The shadowed target doesn't become visible to the moving character or anyone else. It gets replaced on the board for the sake of the hidden movement rules, which is not the same thing as becoming visible.

Perhaps Skarg can remind us of the old ITL version of rules about shadow, which might cover the more general, out-of-combat effects.

[Skarg]

I think the additional rules on shadow and hidden movement in the original full advanced rules are scant and not much different, except for the idea that if you have a GM and only the GM's figures are hidden, he can just make notes of where they are. The AM rules suggest that if the players use hidden movement, it may be best to bring in another referee or adversary player to get the full hidden movement effect.

But even the AM rules are about the same. Being adjacent a foe just reveals its location (I think mainly for the meta-game reasons that hcobb started this thread about - you need to let the location be known or else the Engagement rule system breaks down and this is a clean simple way to address that). I think it's an ok solution that abstractly reflects whatever specific thing might have that effect in the game world.

However, when GM'ing with creative thoughtful critical players who want to get into specifically what is happening, then the GM may want to elaborate and indulge some exceptions, hence my initial reaction. I would rather house-rule an exception in order to not have to make PCs always have to stop for engagement, or not be able to say they stand still in the magic Shadow and hide, etc. It's just that the more the GM accommodates logical changes to the rules, the more they may need to do that, such as what exactly happens if another character tries to move through a character they didn't know was there, or whatever.

[hcobb]

There's also the visible case. We know what happens when a figure tries to move into an image, but not when they run past an image. Or run past a figure they wrongly assumed to be an image.