Charging against a polearm

[phiwum]

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:

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.