Safely Approaching Pole Weapons

[Chris Rice]

Looking only at the options seems to be what is causing some of the confusion. The detail regarding what is regarded as a "charge" is clearly outlined on p111 of ITL.

In addition, I think the word "attack" is misused. I've always ruled that any movement which could result in a charge attack is a charge for the purposes of the Pole weapon user regardless of whether an attack is actually carried out.

[xane]

Originally Posted by amenditman

Allowing a figure to approach a polearm equipped figure without attacking and letting them avoid the polearm priority attack is contrary to what would happen if you tried to do this against a real warrior with a polearm.

He would stab you with his long pointy thing as you approached but before you were in range to attack or defend with your short pointy thing.

I figure not attacking is passively avoiding and/or defending, so I think it is reasonable to assume they avoid the polearm advantages, a hex is 4' so if you are not actually engaging the polearm user then you can avoid being impaled by keeping distance.

The polearm user still gets a minor advantage in this instance, which is a "free attack".

The "stab before you approach" is the function of the pike, not the regular polearm.

[RobW]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

I've always ruled that any movement which could result in a charge attack is a charge for the purposes of the Pole weapon user regardless of whether an attack is actually carried out.

I agree this must be case.

For example, Sword and Spear start one hex apart, and Sword moves next to Spear. Whether Sword declares he is charge attacking or not is irrelevant, because he can always change his option later. Spear gets the bonus and the priority attack before Sword can act. Then, assuming he's still standing, Sword can choose an action and execute it at his adjDX. He could then decide to Charge Attack, Disbelieve, Change Weapons, etc.

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by amenditman

Allowing a figure to approach a polearm equipped figure without attacking and letting them avoid the polearm priority attack is contrary to what would happen if you tried to do this against a real warrior with a polearm.

He would stab you with his long pointy thing as you approached but before you were in range to attack or defend with your short pointy thing.

You are always able to defend against a polearm with your own pointy thing, you just do not get to attack when the polearm user gets to attack. And if his attack puts you out of the fight, then you are screwed, but you can defend against any melee attack. However, the defense maneuver means no attacking that turn anyway. But defending might be better than being dead. If you are playing the table top tactical combat game, anyway.

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

Looking only at the options seems to be what is causing some of the confusion. The detail regarding what is regarded as a "charge" is clearly outlined on p111 of ITL.

In addition, I think the word "attack" is misused. I've always ruled that any movement which could result in a charge attack is a charge for the purposes of the Pole weapon user regardless of whether an attack is actually carried out.

3 hexes in a straight line or no charge. Moving one hex to maneuver from a spearmans front hex to his flank is moving and threatening the spearman, but not a charge.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by xane

I figure not attacking is passively avoiding and/or defending, so I think it is reasonable to assume they avoid the polearm advantages, a hex is 4' so if you are not actually engaging the polearm user then you can avoid being impaled by keeping distance.

The polearm user still gets a minor advantage in this instance, which is a "free attack".

The "stab before you approach" is the function of the pike, not the regular polearm.

1. There is no "free attack". The only "free attack" is in regards to attempted HTH initiation on a defender's roll of 6.

2. It would be meaningless to require a literal "attack" by the enemy of a polearm user to get the defensive bonuses, because the polearm attack happens before the foe has to pick an action anyway. i.e. The figure wanting to avoid a polearm defensive charge bonus could declare his option was going to be any non-attack action (e.g. change weapons, defend, disbelieve, change position) just in order to negate the polearm effect, and then when his turn to act comes, pick some other action (i.e. attack) because you can always change your option up until you actually act on it, which happens later in the turn after pole weapon charge attacks. (You could add a house rule to prevent that, but it would be a house rule.)

3. What do you mean about pikes?

[larsdangly]

Last post is spot on. The problem with linking the pole weapon attack to the action selected by the moving figure is that the latter does not need to commit to an attack or other action until after the pole weapon attack is delivered.

In any event, it seems clear to me that the intent of the rule is to grant pole weapons the capacity to attempt early attacks vs. figures that try to close distance on their wielders, which seems very reasonable to me - in fact it is basically the design goal of a pole weapon.

I feel this is yet another instance where it is possible to tangle yourself up in knots if you try to reconcile the exact wording of every rule, but that the spirit and intent is more clear than that. SJ's writing simply isn't precise enough to use as the basis for a strictly legalistic argument about these sorts of issues.

[Lord Twig]

We can only guess about the "intent" or "spirit" of the rules, but what is actually written is clear.

"A charge attack is defined as an attack in which the attacker moves from a non-adjacent hex to a hex adjacent to his target." That is the full sentence, and it is very clear. If you do not attack, you are not a charge attacker.

As for changing your action when your turn comes up I would say this falls into the same realm as moving and defending. You can't move and defend then, after everyone has attacked you with 4 dice, decide you weren't defending after all and now you are going to attack. So likewise if you close on a pole arm user and avoid his charging bonus and can't later decide to attack after all. That action is no longer a valid choice.

[RobW]

Originally Posted by Lord Twig

We can only guess about the "intent" or "spirit" of the rules, but what is actually written is clear.

"A charge attack is defined as an attack in which the attacker moves from a non-adjacent hex to a hex adjacent to his target." That is the full sentence, and it is very clear. If you do not attack, you are not a charge attacker.

By this interpretation, the pole weapon will never get the +2 bonus, as discussed above.

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by Lord Twig

We can only guess about the "intent" or "spirit" of the rules, but what is actually written is clear.

"A charge attack is defined as an attack in which the attacker moves from a non-adjacent hex to a hex adjacent to his target." That is the full sentence, and it is very clear. If you do not attack, you are not a charge attacker.

As for changing your action when your turn comes up I would say this falls into the same realm as moving and defending. You can't move and defend then, after everyone has attacked you with 4 dice, decide you weren't defending after all and now you are going to attack. So likewise if you close on a pole arm user and avoid his charging bonus and can't later decide to attack after all. That action is no longer a valid choice.

The advantage of the pole weapon is that, if the opponent is not charging to attack, you still get your jab in 1st when the opponent is 2 hexes away, wether he chose to attack you or not, and he might not survive your pole weapon attack to take the action he chose.

I would allow a pole weapon user to make a jab if a figure moved through 2 continuous hexes of the possible jab hexes, even if the opponent wasn't moving to attack the pole weapon user. He would NOT get a bonus to the opponent charging, though, since the opponent is not charging the pole weapons user.