Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-05-2020, 07:37 PM   #1
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Charging against a polearm

I read the thread on New Pole Weapon Rules because I was interested in the polearm defense against charges. Here's what I found.

As Skarg pointed out, ITL 111 says:

Quote:
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.
Let's take a simple example. A figure X moves adjacent to polearm user P, moving only a half move or less. The question is whether P gets the bonuses for defending against a charge attack. If he does, then he will attack before X (presuming X is not an equally or more dexterous polearm user). But X has not yet declared his action, so whether this is a charge attack or not is unclear.

Xane suggests that at the beginning of the turn, P has the option of asking X whether this is an attack or not. If he says no, P gets none of the benefits but X loses the option to attack for the turn.

Skarg says that any time one has the option to attack, it counts as a charge attack and the bonuses apply. If I understand correctly, Skarg thinks that forcing X to answer at this point is inconsistent with the general rules regarding changing one's mind.

I was wondering whether any consensus on this has been reached. How do folk play it?

Skarg's other arguments have to do with realism, broadly understood. If the actions during movement are the same, why should ability to strike first with bonuses depend on the actions after movement?

I tend to think that RAW supports xane's interpretation better, but I'm a newb and appreciate input from others. Regardless of whether you buy xane's position or Skarg's, it seems that RAW grants no bonuses if a figure moves more than a half move to close with a polearm, which is a little surprising.

Obviously, xane and Skarg can correct any errors in my summary.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2020, 08:33 PM   #2
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

The standing polearm user gets +2 DX and first attack against anyone who moves next to them.

If this was a move of three or more hexes add a die to their damage.

If eight or more hexes add +2 damage also.
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2020, 09:12 PM   #3
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Quote:
Originally Posted by hcobb View Post
The standing polearm user gets +2 DX and first attack against anyone who moves next to them.

If this was a move of three or more hexes add a die to their damage.

If eight or more hexes add +2 damage also.
I was hoping to settle the interpretation of RAW. I adopt house rules fairly rarely.

Thanks nonetheless.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2020, 09:34 PM   #4
Kieddicus
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Honestly my family is usually to lazy to do declared actions. Polearms that just engaged in melee combat go first then high adjDX not counting any situational modifiers.
Kieddicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 02:43 AM   #5
Chris Rice
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

The way I always did things:

First Strike: if an opponent moves into range of a polearm wielder, they can be attacked first regardless of DX scores.

Bonuses: to get the charge bonus, the opponent has to have moved 3 or more hexes toward the polearm user.
Chris Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 05:35 AM   #6
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I was hoping to settle the interpretation of RAW. I adopt house rules fairly rarely.
How many people using the same house rule does it take to change it from a "house rule" to a "settled interpretation of RAW"?
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 06:35 AM   #7
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Just read the Melee rulebook page 12.

Any movement to contact: Pole weapon strikes first.

Standing response to moving to contact: +2 DX

Movement of three or more hexes this turn then contact: +1 die (This has to be three hexes in a straight line for the pole weapon user.)
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 07:51 AM   #8
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaraxes View Post
How many people using the same house rule does it take to change it from a "house rule" to a "settled interpretation of RAW"?
Some house rules are filling in the gaps or fixing contradictory passages in RAW.

Some house rules are clearly going further than that and contradict RAW or add something new. Popularity doesn't make the written rules different than what is written.

For instance, I interpret attempting HTH to include making an attack that same turn if the attempt is successful. Some think that attempting to HTH does not allow an additional attack that turn, that the attempt used your action. I don't think either interpretation is a mere house rule, because there's (contradictory) evidence for each interpretation.

But Henry's suggestion that movement of eight or more provides 1d+2 damage is not of this sort. It may be sensible. It may become overwhelmingly popular, the de facto rule that everyone on this forum uses. But it don't make it RAW.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 08:00 AM   #9
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

The high speed damage bonus is from ITL 131.
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2020, 08:02 AM   #10
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Charging against a polearm

Quote:
Originally Posted by hcobb View Post
Just read the Melee rulebook page 12.

Any movement to contact: Pole weapon strikes first.

Standing response to moving to contact: +2 DX

Movement of three or more hexes this turn then contact: +1 die (This has to be three hexes in a straight line for the pole weapon user.)
If the pole weapon guy, P, stands still and the other guy, X, moves adjacent to attack P, P gets an additional die damage as well, according to RAW.

From the Melee rules (p. 12):

Quote:
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.
Quote:
If a pole weapon is used
against a charge attack, it also
gets the extra die of damage,
whether or not the enemy moved in a straight line.
A strict reading of those two passages clearly supports the interpretation that a move of one hex by X is sufficient for the extra die of damage by P.

There is, I think, some wiggle room over whether it applies only if X actually attacks that turn (or declares an attack). I think Skarg's interpretation is arguably within a reading of RAW. I don't think the requirement of a three hex move is within that reading.

In any case, I'm trying to focus on whether or not the bonus depends on declaring an attack at the start of the action phase, as xane suggests. My mind is made up that RAW doesn't require a three hex move when defending.

You might convince me that RAW should require a three hex move, but you can't convince me that RAW does require a three hex move. We can see that it does not.

Last edited by phiwum; 11-06-2020 at 09:11 AM.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
charge attack, pole weapons

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.