N18 Melee Blaze Question

[Rigormortis]

I have a question about blaze in melee combat. The last thread to ask this was a year old with no replies so thought I'd ask to try and clear this up.

So, a Redemptionist with a pyromantic mantle (gives melee weapons blaze) charges an enemy. He successfully hits, rolls for blaze, and the target catches fire. Does the target get to make reaction attacks? The blaze rules state that as soon as roll is successful, the target becomes subject to the blaze trait. When someone is subject to blaze they can't act normally. If they're engaged they can only remain standing and attempt to put themselves out. Since the target is immediately subject to the condition as it doesn't trigger from their next activation, then surely they can't perform reaction attacks.

I'm currently playing Redemptionists and this has come up. It feels pretty powerful and I want to make sure this is being played correctly. I don't want to be wrecking people's expensive nacht-ghuls effortlessly if it isn't supposed to work this way, but after combing the rules a couple of times, it does seem to imply this. Thoughts?

 

[JayTee]

Blaze only has an effect when Activated, the wording on Pg129 of House of Faith is not that you can only do these things, it is all entirely following the clause "When Activated". So if you are not Activated, none of the subsequent rules have any effect.

Reaction Attacks do not cause a Fighter to become Activated, so Blaze effectively does nothing until the enemy Fighter's next Activation. Fighters subject to the Blaze condition can perform Reaction Attacks.

It's thematically wacky that you can't melee someone when you're on fire unless they've tried to whack you first, but it's likely a balancing decision otherwise Blaze is way too powerful. A 50% chance to disable all Reaction Attacks just by hitting someone, note that you don't even need to Wound them just Hit them, would be pretty broken.

 

[Rigormortis]

Blaze only has an effect when Activated, the wording on Pg129 of House of Faith is not that you can only do these things, it is all entirely following the clause "When Activated". So if you are not Activated, none of the subsequent rules have any effect.

Reaction Attacks do not cause a Fighter to become Activated, so Blaze effectively does nothing until the enemy Fighter's next Activation. Fighters subject to the Blaze condition can perform Reaction Attacks.

It's thematically wacky that you can't melee someone when you're on fire unless they've tried to whack you first, but it's likely a balancing decision otherwise Blaze is way too powerful. A 50% chance to disable all Reaction Attacks just by hitting someone, note that you don't even need to Wound them just Hit them, would be pretty broken.

I figured there must be something to counter that. Blaze has different wording in different books/places, which is pretty typical of GW haha. It didn't mention upon activation where I was reading, and stated that the target is immediately subjected to the blaze condition as soon as the successful roll is made. I know the usual Str 3 hit and run around etc effects take place every subsequent activation, but the immediate effect in melee is really vague.

Cheers for the reply.

 

[spafe]

Yeah, when it says the fighter can't do anything, it implies with their own actions, which is not what areaction attack is. Thematically, yes they are attacking back, but mechanics wise is just a step in your action, same as them going pinned when got by a ranged attack.

Shame they've made it less clear though

 

[Scabs]

Thematically (or, real life) Melee is opponents fighting simultaneously. The game breaks that down into Action-Reaction. So, it's not exactly like the fighter gets charged and gets put on fire before being able to strike. In any case, the rules don't support that the charged fighter does not getting reaction attacks (I know, double negative).