Me:
>> If they try 1 then their opponent gets an ability test to hit
>>them.
> Hmm, I don't like that. The AP system seems to me adequate to
> model this - I don't think we need special contingency attack rules
> and the like.
Agreed special rules == bad. I was just trying to get across the difference between withdrawal from combat as being something warriors are taught as part of close combat and running away.
> I'd do it almost the diametric opposite - I'd insist they use a
> movement ability TN (as they are executing a movement action) but
That is where a I disagree I think that Close Combat can be used to 'disengage', movement is used to flee. I suspect it depends on what you are trying to achieve - in other words what is the objective of the contest changed to. If the contest is changed to 'disengage' I would allow close combat - though there might be pursuit and a new contest after. If the objective was flee then movement might be appropriate, but if you do not disengage first then your opponent should be able to use his close combat (he tries to cut you down as you flee) which I think was at the heart of Benedicts' point.
Ian Cooper
Ian Cooper
Powered by hypermail