|
|
Post by mattyhelms on Nov 7, 2020 22:58:49 GMT
Hey, All-
Been tinkering with Talomir Tales: Distant Shores and Swordplay 2018 in preparation for getting my fantasy loving game group into Two-Hour Wargames (and give me a chance to be a player for once!) Anyway, came across the following question while playing some solo encounters.
Can a character that is ducked back be the target of a charge and subsequent melee attack?
Thanks,
Matt
|
|
|
|
Post by shoshen on Nov 9, 2020 0:41:53 GMT
"Duck Back – Character is turned around presenting
its back to the enemy. Cannot see or be seen."
The target is unable to be charged. Spell casting and shooting are first on the list. If a figure casting a spell or shooting causes a duck back and another character is charging, it's a failed charge since it happens later in the turn sequence. At least, that's how I've been playing!
|
|
|
|
Post by mattyhelms on Nov 9, 2020 0:58:02 GMT
"Duck Back – Character is turned around presenting its back to the enemy. Cannot see or be seen." The target is unable to be charged. Spell casting and shooting are first on the list. If a figure casting a spell or shooting causes a duck back and another character is charging, it's a failed charge since it happens later in the turn sequence. At least, that's how I've been playing! Yeah, that's how I was reading it. I seem to remember another game (maybe Six Gun Sound Devil's Elbow?) allowed it, but I could be misremembering. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by bigwalleye on Nov 9, 2020 18:42:54 GMT
I have always played all THW battleboard combat rules just the opposite. My view of the situation is this:
At the start of a turn, all characters on the active side designate a target. A will fire at Z, B will fire at Y, and C will charge Y. Fire occurs first. B causes Y to Duck Back, but C was already committed to charging Y. The fact that Y ducked down behind a rock (tree, building, whatever) doesn't prevent C from running to the spot where Y was last seen, from which point Y will be clearly visible hunkered down behind that rock. At this point, Y can still shoot at C (if he otherwise could), before C engages Y in melee, possibly preventing C from engaging him. Then the melee rounds start. C can not decide to do anything else if Y Ducks Back, but IMO, he can and must continue the charge he started before B caused Y to Duck Back. The Duck Back takes the character out of the opposing side's line of sight and line of fire. It does not remove the character from the battleboard.
While this interpretation has always made sense to me, I can find nothind in any set of THW battleboard rules that I own that absolutely rules out your interpretation either. I hope Ed will tell us how he views it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattyhelms on Nov 9, 2020 19:22:07 GMT
Yeah, I get the logic of "I saw you duck behind that rock so I'm still coming to get you!" which is why I was asking. My characters are typically blessed with object permanence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Nov 10, 2020 0:31:27 GMT
Cannot see or be seen from the direction that caused the duck back. Come around the corner and see them - charge but they could shoot.
Come over the top and charge them or behind the tree - same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattyhelms on Nov 10, 2020 3:20:59 GMT
Cannot see or be seen from the direction that caused the duck back. Come around the corner and see them - charge but they could shoot. Come over the top and charge them or behind the tree - same thing. So you're basically saying, "Do what makes sense to you for your game." Someday, I'll have the confidence to embrace this common rule of your games! Thanks, Matt |
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Nov 10, 2020 21:46:42 GMT
Cannot see or be seen from the direction that caused the duck back. Come around the corner and see them - charge but they could shoot. Come over the top and charge them or behind the tree - same thing. So you're basically saying, "Do what makes sense to you for your game." Someday, I'll have the confidence to embrace this common rule of your games! Thanks, Matt That and rely on reality. Example - I shoot at you. You duck behind a wall. I move to the wall and look over, see you and we take an In Sight Test. |
|
|
|
Post by Shon Maxx on Nov 10, 2020 22:01:55 GMT
I don’t know about about other games, but in LTL, characters behind cover get a +1d6 if behind cover. This sounds to me like you can charge a ducked back opponent, since he is behind cover.
Granted more modern rules remove the Charge table, as well as In Sight, but the idea should still be similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigwalleye on Nov 11, 2020 11:49:33 GMT
So you're basically saying, "Do what makes sense to you for your game." Someday, I'll have the confidence to embrace this common rule of your games! Thanks, Matt That and rely on reality. Example - I shoot at you. You duck behind a wall. I move to the wall and look over, see you and we take an In Sight Test. Ed, how does that translate to the battleboard, where there is no movement and no Ib Sight or Charge test? |
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Nov 11, 2020 16:10:16 GMT
Same way, charge to the spot that was occupied, clear obstacle and melee if still there. Duck Back guy doesn't suffer a penalty.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigwalleye on Nov 11, 2020 18:22:43 GMT
Same way, charge to the spot that was occupied, clear obstacle and melee if still there. Duck Back guy doesn't suffer a penalty. Would that involve perhaps a physical Challenge to clear the obstacle? |
|
