Clarification for 'running away' rules.

[larsdangly]

An issue came up on a thread on therpgsite.net, and I think it is worth pointing out that a subtle re-write would help clarify something that is sure to come up in play:

Here's the rule, from Advanced Melee: "If figures are fleeing from a foe-that is, if they are disengaged, and have spent the previous turn in running away they automatically get initiative if and only if they use it to continue their escape"

Your interpretation of that depends on whether a disengage action counts as spending a turn running away. If so, then you can definitely disengage one round and claim initiative to start running the next. If not, then you must disengage, win initiative and use it to run away, and only then can you claim initiative on the third and subsequent turns. Either interpretation would be reasonable; I would say the rules don't make it clear which was intended by the author.

[Chris Rice]

I always compared MA scores when looking at this sort of situation. Unless there was some sort of terrain you could put between yourself and a pursuer, I didn't allow a character to outrun something that had a higher MA score.

[The Wyzard]

I think one should be generous to PCs who attempt to flee to avoid a TPK.

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

I always compared MA scores when looking at this sort of situation. Unless there was some sort of terrain you could put between yourself and a pursuer, I didn't allow a character to outrun something that had a higher MA score.

Absolutely agree, and totally logical. Also, (imo) a fleeing party (PC or Enemy) with a higher MA than their pursuer(s), should not get caught due solely to a bad roll of a die. Fair is fair.

JK

[ak_aramis]

Since it wasn't covered well in the rules, the one time it became relevant, I houserulled....

I allowed "Pushing the movement" - Full out sprint is +1 MA per 2 dice thrown vs AdjDX, but also makes one +1 to be hit. Running, in addition to it's inherent +2 MA, was -1D on this sprint check. I assigned 1 fatigue per minute per +1. On a fail, you end up shorting the amount pushed, and still take the fatigue.

SJ has my explicit permission to use this without credit.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Jim Kane

Absolutely agree, and totally logical. Also, (imo) a fleeing party (PC or Enemy) with a higher MA than their pursuer(s), should not get caught due solely to a bad roll of a die. Fair is fair.

JK

I didn't bother with die rolls for running away Jim. Once you broke away from the enemy and got clear I just ruled they couldn't catch you if your MA was higher. The only time I might require a roll was if MA was the same, but the players would normally come up with some clever way to put extra distance between themselves and pursuers (dropping treasure, stopping to fire arrows, etc.)

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

I didn't bother with die rolls for running away Jim. Once you broke away from the enemy and got clear I just ruled they couldn't catch you if your MA was higher. The only time I might require a roll was if MA was the same, but the players would normally come up with some clever way to put extra distance between themselves and pursuers (dropping treasure, stopping to fire arrows, etc.)

Did you take the *chase* out of combat scale altogether, and therefore dropped rolling for initiative?

When being chased through the Labyrinth by *Big Bad*, our players usually drop food for wolves and bears, gems for gargoyles, coinage for humanoids, caltrops (treated as a Sha-ken trap on the floor) against the barefooted, light and smash a molo-tail or have a wizard create a fire-hex or a trailtwister spell; but we play out the chase in regular combat turns on the megahexes, until the enemy either blows it's morale/motivation roll (house rule chart), or the fleeing party can put 30 MH's with no line of sight between them and the perusing enemy.

JK

[Rick_Smith]

Hi all,
In my campaign. Able disengages from Baker. Then there is an initiative roll. If Able wins, he starts running. (Or Baker could win an let him move first, I guess.)

If Able is faster, he escapes. If Baker is faster, Baker catches up.

But in TFT, almost everyone has the same speed. So if they are tied, Able does not have to roll for initiative each turn. He auto wins under the "chasing initiative rules", and keeps a narrow lead over Baker.

Warm regards, Rick.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi all,
In my campaign. Able disengages from Baker. Then there is an initiative roll. If Able wins, he starts running. (Or Baker could win an let him move first, I guess.)

If Able is faster, he escapes. If Baker is faster, Baker catches up.

But in TFT, almost everyone has the same speed. So if they are tied, Able does not have to roll for initiative each turn. He auto wins under the "chasing initiative rules", and keeps a narrow lead over Baker.

Warm regards, Rick.

Rick beat me to it. That's how we play.

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

... But in TFT, almost everyone has the same speed. So if they are tied, Able does not have to roll for initiative each turn. He auto wins under the "chasing initiative rules", and keeps a narrow lead over Baker.

Rick would you clarify please: So once Able is a head of Baker by a "narrow lead", how long does the chase go on for, and at what point does Able actually escape the chasing Baker? And how do you determine this?

Thanks,
JK