Hex and reach

[hcobb]

If your hexes are 6 feet across do you allow figures to ignore dagger armed opponents for the purposes of engagement?

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by hcobb

If your hexes are 6 feet across do you allow figures to ignore dagger armed opponents for the purposes of engagement?

I assume this question is for me since I have decided to switch from 4ft to 6ft melee hexes... the answer is no because engagement is not so much about 'reach' IMO, but is a result of focused attention or intent. I am 'engaged' not because my opponent has a weapon of a given length, but because I am focused on someone holding any weapon which could potentially do me harm.

That said, however, a longer weapon (like a 10ft pole-arm) will 'engage' my attention at a greater distance because it threatens me at a greater distance.

[MikMod]

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

a longer weapon (like a 10ft pole-arm) will 'engage' my attention at a greater distance because it threatens me at a greater distance.

So a pole weapon can 'engage' people not in an adjacent hex, but at jabbing range?

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by MikMod

So a pole weapon can 'engage' people not in an adjacent hex, but at jabbing range?

I would rule it that way, yes. RAW strongly implies that `engagement' is not a choice, but a state that is enforced upon a figure based on specific proximity-threat criteria. Being jabbed at by a spear-wielder over 6ft away should certainly 'engage' me and therefore limit some of my options.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by hcobb

If your hexes are 6 feet across do you allow figures to ignore dagger armed opponents for the purposes of engagement?

I think it's common to let anyone ignore engagement if they don't mind giving a free attack to that person.

I favour the idea that daggers should be better in HTH than melee. I wrote up a weapons list where each weapon had a strength-dependent damage and the types included:
* Dagger: good in HTH, weak at melee
* Long knife / seax: pretty good in HTH or melee
* Gladius: weak in HTH, good in melee
* Spatha (need a better name): no HTH, good in melee

Being not as good could mean less damage, or a 4/DX roll to hit, or whatever.

So if your opponent has a weapon that isn't terribly effective at melee range, you might feel more willing to act as if he weren't there.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

I would rule it that way, yes. RAW strongly implies that `engagement' is not a choice, but a state that is enforced upon a figure based on specific proximity-threat criteria. Being jabbed at by a spear-wielder over 6ft away should certainly 'engage' me and therefore limit some of my options.

But consider what that does to a fight between, say, a swordsman and a spearman in a three-hex corridor. The swordsman advances to two hexes from the spearman and stops, because he's engaged. He gets jabbed without the possibility of reply. If the spearman wins the initiative he can back up a hex and do it again. The spear becomes much more powerful and slows the game down.

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

But consider what that does to a fight between, say, a swordsman and a spearman in a three-hex corridor. The swordsman advances to two hexes from the spearman and stops, because he's engaged. He gets jabbed without the possibility of reply. If the spearman wins the initiative he can back up a hex and do it again. The spear becomes much more powerful and slows the game down.

Hopefully, the swordsman is smart enough to advance with his shield raised, but TBH, your scenario just seems to illustrate the advantage of carrying a spear when exploring narrow corridors. It seems perfectly reasonable to me.

[Steve Plambeck]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

The swordsman advances to two hexes from the spearman and stops, because he's engaged.

But he doesn't have to stop. He can (in RAW, does) move up that last hex to become adjacent. The cost of being allowed to do that is the +2DX bonus and the +1d6 damage the defending spearman enjoys. (There, I retconned an explanation for the pole weapon rules -- hehe)

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck

But he doesn't have to stop.

In the rules as suggested, he does, because the spear engages him at two hexes.

[Steve Plambeck]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

In the rules as suggested, he does, because the spear engages him at two hexes.

And I suppose one way to play that would be to leave it up to the defending spearman:

If the attacker stops one hex shy of adjacent, the defender gets their jab attack.

If the attacker keeps coming and stops adjacent to the defender, the spearman gets to immediately choose to (1) let that happen, and then benefit from the defensive bonuses for pole arms, or (2) declare he engages the attacker from two hexes away, immediately backing that figure up to the last hex they came from. In the latter case the defender still gets the 2-hex jab.

That does slow play a bit though, and gives newbies one more exception to memorize.