N18 Reworking how Retreat(Basic) works

[JawRippa]

I've always found it a bit silly how Retreat is amost entirely dependant on stats of who you are retreating from, rather than stats of who is retreating; Even if retreating model has a great initiative, you do not want to gamble on the fact that opponent may not get a full round of reactionary attacks.

So, what if we make it into a two-part initiative check for the retreating model?
1). Test your initiative. If the test is successful, you may move up to D6" away from any models you are engaged with, provided that retreating model didn't get seriously injured or OOA'd by reactionary attacks in step 2.
2). Regardless of result for previous initiative test, each engaged opponent gets a full round of reactionary attacks. However, you may cancel opponent's attacks by doing a successful initiative test for each attack.

This way retreating is still a risky endeavor, but at least fighters with Initiative 3+ or 2+ will feel a lot more slippery.

 

[Kiro The Avenger]

Why not follow the example of RPGs.

Disengage (Double): fall back M" from combat, don't risk reaction attacks.
Retreat (Basic): fall back M" from combat, always take reaction attacks.

Initiative isn't involved, but does it need to be?

 

[JawRippa]

Initiative isn't involved, but does it need to be?

Initiative is already underused stat, this would make it even less important. I do like the simplicity of double vs basic actions.

 

[almic85]

It’s one of those things that would be perfect for an opposed roll of but can’t because the stats have changed from the old format to the new x+ standard. It’s why you end up with each fighter needing to pass their own initiative check rather than each rolling a dice and adding their initiative.

Personally I think it would be easier if the whole action was just tied to the retreating fighters initiative test, so if they pass they get away or if they fail their opponents get a reaction attack.

 

[JawRippa]

It’s one of those things that would be perfect for an opposed roll of but can’t because the stats have changed from the old format to the new x+ standard. It’s why you end up with each fighter needing to pass their own initiative check rather than each rolling a dice and adding their initiative.

In our houserules we've changed a "Border Dispute" scenario (the one where 2 guys bump into each other in the center and start a gang fight, it also has gang relics to spoil). A roll-off between two fighters in the middle of the board is used instead of priority, basically you roll a D6, add your initiative stat, and whoever rolls lowest gets to activate first (with rerolls on ties). I've been planning to use the same mechanic for retreating and reaction attacks, but players have concluded that the mechanic is unintuitive and would not make for a good core rule (works okay as a one-off sequence in scenario though).

Personally I think it would be easier if the whole action was just tied to the retreating fighters initiative test, so if they pass they get away or if they fail their opponents get a reaction attack.

I think this is the least complicated suggestion, which still keeps initiative important. My only complaint is that now initiative does not matter for whoever you are retreating from.

 

[almic85]

Lowest just doesn’t “feel” right for an in game mechanic where you are trying to win.

It’s why they didn’t ever make the to hit roll just rolling below your WS/BS. Even though it is technically the same odds people just don’t like it.