Avert timing question
 

after movement, caster lands Avert on a monster engaged with a player (or maybe engaged with the caster themselves).

The caster had higher adjDX than the monster.... so now its the monster's time act while Avert is on it...

When does the spell's "disengage" clause kick in... aka does the monster get to act (aka the disengage kicks in next rounds "movement phase") or must it disengage right now?

Re: Avert timing question
 

ITL Page 18:
First, per the text, whoever the spell is cast upon, they must move away from the wizard. You can use it make a foe move away from the friend unless that is the same as moving away from the wizard.

Here is how I have done it and I suspect someone will tell me if I'm not following the rules. If the spell is cast before the foe can have an action, they must disengage one hex. If the spell stays active, the foe has to end their move two more hexes away from the wizard. If the foe had high enough DX, they could act first and attack the wizard before they cast the Avert spell. In that case, the affected foe will have to disengage the next turn as their action.

I have seen GMs make an engaged foe move back two hexes instead of one. I don't think that is correct but it didn't really change the affect of the avert all that much.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Let's say Avert is cast on Turn 1. On this turn, the subject gets to act normally, because the spell description states that they must end their movement phase at least two hexes further from the wizard. Avert was not in effect during movement of Turn 1, so the first movement phase for which Avert well be in effect will be on Turn 2. If, for any reason, they don't end movement at least two hexes further from the wizard, they must use their action to disengage (or possibly to attempt HTH) if that would let them move away from the wizard.

Some GMs will say that Avert kicks in on Turn 1 if the subject has not yet acted and if their movement did not end with them being two hexes further from the wizard, but I do not think this is correct, since it lets the spell have a retroactive effect.

You are right, Bill, moving two hexes in a Disengage is not correct.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Since the Avert spell mentions disengaging, which can only happen during actions, I would say the monster must disengage on turn 1.

Re: Avert timing question
 

The monster was not subject to Avert when Turn 1 movement ended.

Re: Avert timing question
 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

The spell write up also mentions disengaging which is never done during movement but actions. So, therefore the disengage in turn 1 still applies.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Let's take a look some other situations with an eye toward consistency of application. In each situation (save the last), we will assume that Avert was cast in Turn 1, that Figure B did not end their Turn 1 movement at least 2 hexes farther from the wizard who cast Avert, and that Figure B has a lower adjDX than the person who cast Avert.

Situation 1: Figure B is disengaged, has moved no more than 1 hex, and has a ready bow weapon. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, he can act as normal and loose an arrow when their turn in the ajdDX order comes around despite the Avert spell.

Situation 2: Figure B is disengaged, has moved half-MA, and is carrying a spear. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, he can act as normal and throw or jab with the spear when their turn in the ajdDX order comes around despite the Avert spell.

Situation 3: Figure B is disengaged and has moved up to half-MA. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, they can dodge this turn despite the Avert spell.

Situation 4: Figure B is disengaged and has moved no more than 1 hex. Disengage is not an option. Since they cannot move again, he can cast a spell or disbelieve when their turn in the ajdDX order comes around despite the Avert spell.

Situation 5: Figure B is disengaged and has moved no more than 2 hexes. Disengage is not an option. Since they cannot move again, he can ready a weapon when their turn in the ajdDX order comes around despite the Avert spell.

Situation 6: Figure B was unengaged at the start of Turn 1, moved first and moved more than half-MA but less than full-MA, and then became engaged by enemy movement. Having moved too far, no action is allowed. Since they can't disengage, they remain in their hex despite both the AVert spell and having unspent MA.

Consistency with regard to the circumstances posed by the opening post and those I described is impossible with your interpretation of how to apply Avert on Turn 1 without invoking house rules for the latter six. My interpretation, however, results in a harmoniously consistent application of Avert in all situations.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Or I like to think of turn 1 actions being consistent with turn 2+ actions. Your method treats the target creature inconsistently the first action phase while under the affects of Avert.

That is, for an engaged figure under this spell they are forced to disengage. No one that is engaged can move 2 hexes, so a engaged figure will always spend movement shifting 1 hex away unless already at the furthest hex and come action phase, they will disengage.

Side issue: I don't understand your situation 6. How is it the disengaged target moved their full movement and did no comply during movement to being under the affects of Avert? (Not important relevant to my point, just looked like a false scenario)

So, regarding engaged figures, my interpretation is the consistent way.

Re: Avert timing question
 

How so? According to my interpretation, no subject of Avert is compelled to move instead of act on the turn the spell was cast. That's pretty consistent.

That is your interpretation for the way Avert works on the turn it was cast, not mine.

Because movement on Turn 1 ended before the Avert spell could be cast.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Regarding disengaging, I wrote, "That is, for an engaged figure under this spell they are forced to disengage."

And you replied:
ITL on Avert says, "A figure which cannot move 2 hexes due to being engaged
must move as far away as it can, even if it has to disengage."

Re: Avert timing question
 

I don't dispute that this is what Avert does on all turns after the one it was cast. If you insist that it works on that turn, as well, then I'd appreciate your explaining what Avert does during that turn to disengaged figures --ones for whom the disengage and no step option is not available. I'll restate the several examples I gave earlier, this time without my interpretation. Please tell us yours for each case. Remember: movement is over, it is the action phase, the wizard cast Avert on Figure B, and now it is Figure B's turn to act.

1. Figure B is disengaged, has moved no more than 1 hex, and has a ready bow weapon. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, he can ???
   
2. Figure B is disengaged, has moved half-MA, and is carrying a spear. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, he can ???
   
3. Figure B is disengaged and has moved up to half-MA. Disengage is not an option. Since Figure B can't move again, he can ???
   
4. Figure B is disengaged and has moved no more than 1 hex. Disengage is not an option. Since they cannot move again, he can ???
   
5. Figure B is disengaged and has moved no more than 2 hexes. Disengage is not an option. Since they cannot move again, he can ???
   
6. Figure B was unengaged at the start of Turn 1, moved first and moved more than half-MA but less than full-MA, and then became engaged by enemy movement. Having moved too far, no action is allowed. Since they can't disengage, they ???

Re: Avert timing question
 

As you pointed out, movement is over. No movement phase affects can happen in turn 1, since that has passed.

As to your last question, since they cannot disengage they cannot. They have no action that turn since they went full movement. As in other turns, if they can disengage they must unless they have already moved 2 hexes away.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Here is another way to look at Avert. Think of it as how animals react to fire.

If you cast a Fire spell on a wolf that is engaged, but has yet to act that turn, will it will use its action to disengage. It will not wait for the movement phase of next turn.

It cannot go back and change its movement option. Even if it was disengaged. So all the situations that you listed for disengaged character do not apply.

It is the same thing.

Re: Avert timing question
 

I’ll just point out that, at my table, in every hypothetical instance given, figures under Avert react the same way on the turn the spell was cast, whereas at yours, their reaction is different depending on their engagement status.

Re: Avert timing question
 

I disagree. In mine they are the same every turn including turn 1. I your model, the first turn's action phase is treated as an exception.

Even in yours the engagement status must apply and affect how the figure reacts. You just choose to ignore it on turn 1. See the example with the wolf in the fire.

In all the situations you list, mine is consistent.

We can go back to agreeing to disagree.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Sure, if by "consistent" you mean "variable". Consider the consistency of the actions, as determine by your interpretation, of the figures in this situation:

On Turn 1, Figures A and B cast Avert on figures C and D, who have not yet acted. C and D both have ready bows, moved no more than one hex, are 3 hexes from A and B, respectively, and did not end their movement at least two hexes further from them. C is engaged to E, but D is unengaged. Your interpretation compels C to disengage from E instead of taking a last-shot, while D is able to try to plug someone with an arrow.

Re: Avert timing question
 

It is consistent in all situations with the same engaged status.

Yes, you understand my interpretation.

Same scenario as you posted but now it is Turn 2. The archer was unengaged during turn 1 but Team E moved first in turn 2 and engaged figure F. Basically same engagement status in turn 2 instead of turn 1 of your scenario:

On Turn 1, Figures F cast Avert on figure G.
On Turn 2 team F moves first and engages figure G. G has a ready bows, during movement G shifts 1 hex or does not move. G is engaged. My interpretation compels G to disengage instead of taking a last-shot.

See how G's turn 2 is completely consistent with C's turn 1 (C is from your example)?

Comparing C & D in your example is being inconsistent because their situations are different. One is engage and the other is not.

Comparing C & G is the same since they are both engaged. The only difference is turn 1 vs turn 2.

Re: Avert timing question
 

Many things come down to interpretation and bias of perception in most games. Remember this is a simulation, things must happen in phases in order to give agency to the players ie decission points, damage targets, etc.

This is a prime example of what "you" the gamer think is good/fair in regards to what you think the result of the simulation model should render. Both interpretations you guys have given are fundamentally correct by the rules. Thus this now becomes a question of game balance.

A- do want the spell and or wizards in general to be slower in deploying the avert spell (ie summons do nothing on the first turn)

B- do you want spells/wizards to be more effective and or quicker to deploy the effects of spells like avert (ie drop weapon effects in the same turn)

Personally I think for game balance regarding warriors vs wizards and their ability to affect combat outcomes any spell that takes more than one turn to have effects is a large disadvantage.
The turn "phases" of move/combat cause a break in the avert spell only because of its unique effect of primarily focusing on figure placement during movement. It is still a "Thrown" spell and just like drop weapon or confusion or sleep etc it has effect on the turn it is cast.

Whether you want that effect for engaged figures to = a forced disengage is very much your choice of balance overall. Should the spell be debuffed?