Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman
However, we have a contradiction of two rule mechanics: IN and Disengage. IN has the intent that the side choosing to move first has an advantage of positioning, maneuvering, and Engaging the opponent.
|
It does achieve that, if/when the situation allows, and the winning player manages to capitalize on having won initiative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman
Disengage, however, cancels out losing the IN since you have created an impervious wall of fighters who cannot be fought unless they feel like it - how awesome to have such god-like powers! Imagine, with a measly DX of 10 not even the power of a giant matters; he has to stop when coming adjacent and then you Disengage.
|
No, Disengage does not cancel out losing initiative. If you disengage, you're not accomplishing much to win a fight. It also is only possible if you have an adjDX advantage AND you have someplace good to disengage to AND your enemy doesn't have things they can do with their time while you use your action to disengage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman
If someone wins IN and successfully Engages someone in combat before they have time to run away, than Disengage contradicts the obvious intent of the IN rule mechanic. By failing to win IN, you should open yourself up to some sort of consequence, but you don't.
|
No. Winning initiative generally does give advantages. It's usually a coin flip to answer the necessary question of who moves first, though, and is not intended to always guarantee an advantage. It's up to the players to move wisely and find ways to gain advantages.
Disengage in no way "contradicts" the advantages of winning initiative. I would say rather that it offers a faster figure a way to avoid a really bad position, which may or may not be the result of losing initiative. But if a figure does use Disengage to escape a bad position, they are also using their action for the turn to accomplish nothing else but moving one hex, which in general is not a productive thing to be doing. Maybe it's better than staying where they were, but if your foes are using their actions to move one hex, that's generally a worthwhile thing to get them to do rather than having them hurting you with weapon attacks instead.
That is, making an enemy take Disengage generally IS a valuable consequence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman
In fact, according to this rule, if I have a dozen warriors all of whom have ONE POINT of DX higher than a dozen opponents [say DX11 to DX10], then one side may NEVER combat the other side, without their consent. And that is just plain broken.
|
Again, no, that's not a fact. That's you under-thinking the situation. Not only is a dozen warriors Disengaging no way to win a fight, but it also generally doesn't work when you actually have a bunch of figures on an actual map, for at least the dozen reason hcobb and I listed in response to your similar post in house rules.
Perhaps the most general reason why even if someone ever did try that (why, I don't know), it wouldn't work, is because Team Disengage can only move 1/2 MA and Disengage, while Team Engage can move full MA to envelop them, and then close in from multiple directions, and/or corner them, or whatever.