NCE [NCE] Falling from Hand-to-Hand

[undertaker]

A question about falling from ledges while in hand-to-hand combat. The current rules are thus and open to interpretation:

If a fighter is engaged in hand-to-hand fighting within 1" of an edge then he may fall off if he loses the combat. The fighter must take an Initiative test. If the test is failed then he falls over the edge to the ground.

 

[Azzabat]

The rules state “...he may fall off if he loses the combat.”

You therefore have to fight the combat exactly as you would if you were on ground level. Once the combat has been resolved, the loser then tests for falling (assuming they’re not dead).

 

[Stoof]

I can see where there is a little ambiguity - for example, If I down an opponent do I check to see if he falls off or just remove him as OOA?

I think the falling off if you lose bit only applies if you're still standing/down but not OOA i.e. you had hits infliceted but weren't wounded, you still have wounds remaining, or it's a multiple combat with a friendly still standing.

If he's take OOA in the combat then I wouldn't check for falling.

In any case, you work out the combat before checking.

 

[spafe]

I'd have said after you know the combat scores... as thats when someone has 'lost' the combat... I'd still say they take the hits, but unless you ooa them, they wont be in base conatact when 'down' in combat so survive oin the ground being down.

good catch though! I'm honestly not sure if thats right, just my intial reading version. Never actually palyed it in a game

 

[undertaker]

To me it would seem common sense to apply the hits first, then roll to check for falling. However, as @spafe has said, the combat winner is determined before any hits are applied, so it could be interpreted that the falling check happens before hits. This needs clarification in the rules.

The new wording will need to specify whether the falling check is made after a given pair of models resolve hits, or at the end of the combat phase. Otherwise there is ambiguity regarding multiple combats:

- In a 1-on-1 combat the rules state that the model is taken out immediately if they went down, so there is no chance for them to fall.
- In multiple combats things are less clear. For example in 2 vs. 1 combat (A1 + A2 vs. B), say A1 goes down but not out of action, do they test for falling then or at the end of the combat phase? If you wait to the end of the combat phase and A2 also went down, then both would be automatically taken out of action with no chance of falling.

 

[Ben_S]

I find it hard to imagine that you'd test for falling before resolving the hits. Yes, you determine who wins combat by comparing scores, but that also determines who loses [EDIT: I won't change it now it's been quoted, but this should have said 'getting hit'] - you're the loser because you're the one who got hit.

I agree, however, that the rules ought to be clearer. I'd say you certainly take all hits from the current combat, though in the case of a multiple combat I'd think you could fall before fighting your second opponent.

 

[enyoss]

I find it hard to imagine that you'd test for falling before resolving the hits. Yes, you determine who wins combat by comparing scores, but that also determines who loses - you're the loser because you're the one who got hit.

I agree, however, that the rules ought to be clearer. I'd say you certainly take all hits from the current combat, though in the case of a multiple combat I'd think you could fall before fighting your second opponent.

Agree on all of the above.

To add an agreement to others as wel though, I'd say that if you go down in a 1-on-1 combat you go OOA before testing to fall.

 

[Ben_S]

I'd say that if you go down in a 1-on-1 combat you go OOA before testing to fall.

From a realism point of view, I'm not sure that makes sense. But, for gameplay, it's probably sensible. It seems odd to 'reward' you for falling by escaping the auto-OOA. On the other hand, if it's a big drop (high impact) then falling could be even worse...

 

[enyoss]

From a realism point of view, I'm not sure that makes sense. But, for gameplay, it's probably sensible. It seems odd to 'reward' you for falling by escaping the auto-OOA. On the other hand, if it's a big drop (high impact) then falling could be even worse...

Yeah, I can see the realism / theatrics of it: sword slash across the chest, as the losing assailant pivots and teeters over the edge while relinquishing a Wilhelm Scream to the gloom.

But theatrics aside, it definitely seems weird to reward the loser. Then again that's how it works if someone gets pinned and falls off an edge going out of sight, so there's actually precedent to play it like that.

I could live with either way, as long as the hits get awarded.

 

[p0dde]

If a fighter is engaged in hand-to-hand fighting within 1" of an edge then he may fall off if he loses the combat. The fighter must take an Initiative test. If the test is failed then he falls over the edge to the ground.

I have never felt any ambiguity with this rule, but i can see that the rule isn't entirely explicit about its workings. I don't see how you can read this rules as something that can trigger multiple times in one combat, so rolling after each hit is out of the question. A downed fighter is removed from the game immediately, so it will not have the chance to fall. The only question left is, if this somehow should trigger right after you have summed up the combat scores, and found a 'winner', but before you roll to hit with one or more hits. But falling before you are hit also seems like a really odd cause of action. This leaves back only one interpretation: You check to fall after all hits have been resolved, if you have not gone OOA.

I get that a lot of this is implied, so adding a short: At the end of the fight, should be enough: If a fighter is engaged in hand-to-hand fighting within 1" of an edge then he may fall off if he if he loses the combat. At the end of the fight the fighter must take an Initiative test. If the test is failed then he falls over the edge to the ground.

 

[enyoss]

I have never felt any ambiguity with this rule, but i can see that the rule isn't entirely explicit about its workings. I don't see how you can read this rules as something that can trigger multiple times in one combat, so rolling after each hit is out of the question. A downed fighter is removed from the game immediately, so it will not have the chance to fall. The only question left is, if this somehow should trigger right after you have summed up the combat scores, and found a 'winner', but before you roll to hit with one or more hits. But falling before you are hit also seems like a really odd cause of action. This leaves back only one interpretation: You check to fall after all hits have been resolved, if you have not gone OOA.

I get that a lot of this is implied, so adding a short: At the end of the fight, should be enough: If a fighter is engaged in hand-to-hand fighting within 1" of an edge then he may fall off if he if he loses the combat. At the end of the fight the fighter must take an Initiative test. If the test is failed then he falls over the edge to the ground.

I'm not so keen on end of the fight terminology, as in multiple combats people might interpret that as being a single test after all the individual combats have been resolved. That could then result in everybody fighting, and then half the combatants falling dramatically at the same time. Including someone who lost their first combat, won their next one, but who then remembered they lost the first one whence they throw themselves over the edge.

I would put something like "after hits are resolved the losing fighter must take an initiative test to fall. If the fighter is down and would normally be taken out of action automatically, the fighter will remain down and fall if the test is failed." or "after hits are resolved the losing fighter must take an initiative test to fall. If the fighter is down, their opponent automatically takes them out of action if able to do so - the fighter goes OOA and there is no need to test to fall."

But again, that's just, like, my opinion man. I'm not too fussed as long as it's unambiguous

 

[Stoof]

I think going OOA should take precedence over falling, so if you lost but you're still "there" you test. But, like, whatever, man... neither harshes my mellow.

 

[p0dde]

I think going OOA should take precedence over falling, so if you lost but you're still "there" you test. But, like, whatever, man... neither harshes my mellow.

I don't think there is any discussion about that.

@enyoss, "after hits are resolved", works too . But I would say that it works both ways. In order to understand how Multiple Combat works, you need to understand it as separate fights. So by referring to the end of the fight, you might motivate/force the reader to investigate that part of the rules, too.

 

[Ben_S]

I don't see how you can read this rules as something that can trigger multiple times in one combat, so rolling after each hit is out of the question.

To be fair, that wasn't one of the options in the poll either, so I don't think anyone was reading it that way...

We definitely do need a wording that covers multiple combats. We could say something like 'at the end of the combat phase' or 'after all combats have been resolved'. Either of these may result in two people of opposing sides both falling, but I assume that's fine.

Do we need to specify anything about where they fall? You could be on a walkway with a much greater fall one side than the other. Should you fall of the nearest side? Or randomly? Or can your opponent pick?

 

[enyoss]

I think going OOA should take precedence over falling, so if you lost but you're still "there" you test. But, like, whatever, man... neither harshes my mellow.

Piffle to your mellow. This fence is only big enough for the one of us man, and I was sitting here first. Just sayin'

 

[enyoss]

To be fair, that wasn't one of the options in the poll either, so I don't think anyone was reading it that way...

We definitely do need a wording that covers multiple combats. We could say something like 'at the end of the combat phase' or 'after all combats have been resolved'. Either of these may result in two people of opposing sides both falling, but I assume that's fine.

Do we need to specify anything about where they fall? You could be on a walkway with a much greater fall one side than the other. Should you fall of the nearest side? Or randomly? Or can your opponent pick?

Isn't that just the normal fall dilemma though? We usually randomise if there's choice of edges to fall off.

 

[Ben_S]

It's the same question, but doesn't necessarily need the same answer. For instance, when shot it might be reasonable to suggest that you fall backwards (away from whoever shot you), whereas in HTH it may be more reasonable to say 'opponent picks' (as they manoeuvre/throw you off the edge).

 

[Stoof]

Or they opt for a "this is spartaaaaa" chest kick off an 18" ledge... splat!

 

[p0dde]

Had to look up Clip Harness to check for interactions with the 'Falling from H2H'. Luckily the Clip Harness auto-detaches as soon as you enter H2H. Nice feature!

 

[Outlaw Elvis]

I would have thought that it's resolved after wounding hits. there are arguments on both sides, it could be the back and forth of combat or the coup de grace that causes you to fall. The fact it says if he loses, I'd let wounding hits be awarded to the victor. If he isn't taken ooa then test for falling.

In multiple combats, resolve first combat, test for falling, resolve next combat, potentially that out numbered fighter can deliver that death blow if all other fighters have fallen, as it frees him up a bit.

Falling from combat won't always be a bonus, potentially you are going to suffer more wounds and at a higher strength, not to mention possibly falling on to someone else.