Closing and Size

[ThatGuy]

Ok. So our good friends Thak and Bek are squaring off once again.

Thak has a Target Shield (reach S) and a War Gauntlet (reach T) and 22 initiative.

Bek has a one handed battle axe (reach M) and 10 initiative.

Thak attacks first with his shield and strikes, but Bek Parries.

Next Bek attacks but Thak parries.

Now Thak wants to try to strike Bek with his War Gauntlet. Does he need to close?

Remember- Thak attacked first- establishing an S reach with his shield. The Axe doesn't have the disadvantage of not Being able to parry (or does he?), but can Thak even attempt to hit Bek? Or is he out of range?

I would think the answer is "Yes he can attack with the War Gauntlet," because if Bek had a T reach weapon Bek could attack... But am I wrong?

 

[HalfOrc HalfBiscuit]

Ok. So our good friends Thak and Bek are squaring off once again.

Thak has a Target Shield (reach S) and a War Gauntlet (reach T) and 22 initiative.

Bek has a one handed battle axe (reach M) and 10 initiative.

Thak attacks first with his shield and strikes, but Bek Parries.

Next Bek attacks but Thak parries.

Now Thak wants to try to strike Bek with his War Gauntlet. Does he need to close?

Remember- Thak attacked first- establishing an S reach with his shield. The Axe doesn't have the disadvantage of not Being able to parry (or does he?), but can Thak even attempt to hit Bek? Or is he out of range?

I would think the answer is "Yes he can attack with the War Gauntlet," because if Bek had a T reach weapon Bek could attack... But am I wrong?

Well, I'm no expert, but since no one else has answered I'll give it a go.

Assuming that the fight actually starts with the opponents some distance apart, and assuming enough CAs on both parts, I would suggest that Bek should have been given the option to prevent Thak closing to the point where he can use his gauntlet - if that was Thak's intent (even though Thak didn't need to get that close to use his shield Bek should, in my opinion, have been aware of the wider tactical possibilities). This would burn one CA from each combatant.

If Bek took up that option and was successful in the opposed test of evade skills, then Thak would have been able to get no closer than "M" distance and would therefore be confined to attacking with his shield.

If Bek didn't take up the option (or Thak succeeded in the opposed test) Thak could close to "S" - in which case both opponents could use their weapons - or to "T" - in which case, by the rules, Bek would not be able to use his axe to parry (though I think he can still attack with it, which strikes me as odd, but I'm pretty sure Mongoose Pete clarified that that is the intention in an earlier thread).

Going back to the start - if Thak only ever intended to get to "M" distance, the issue of using a CA to close (and for Bek the choice of using a CA to oppose the closing action) doesn't arise, but Thak is still confined to attacking with shield only.

I think ...

 

[Deleriad]

I would rule, keep it simple. The rules don't say that combat happens at any specific reach simply that if your opponent is using a weapon that is 2 sizes bigger than the one you want to attack with then you have to close to be able to use it.

So:
Attack with shield vs axe is ok
Attack with gauntlet vs axe would require you to close first.

That's what I would rule.

 

[gran_orco]

I would rule, keep it simple. The rules don't say that combat happens at any specific reach simply that if your opponent is using a weapon that is 2 sizes bigger than the one you want to attack with then you have to close to be able to use it.

So:
Attack with shield vs axe is ok
Attack with gauntlet vs axe would require you to close first.

That's what I would rule.

I think that this is correct.

 

[ThatGuy]

Thanks everybody!

This is how it ended up getting ruled in a game I play in, and Im thinking about adjusting it in my tabletop that I GM. Its just a lot cleaner with a lot less attention to detail when done the way detailed above.

As one of my players pointed out, it is odd that a shield wielder can be punched but can not punch back if the guy has a M reach weapon, but that is the advantage of the reach rule. Your weapon dictates peoples ability to reach you. Not the other way around- even if they are hitting you first. A good example is a Pike against a charge.

I tried the "initiative dictates reach" rule in my table top, and though it worked some of the time, it got really murky at others, especially when the rule was used to the players disadvantage ;-).

Again thanks for the opins!