Fighting retreat/full retreat

[johnnybleu]

If there's one thing in LL that always struck me as particularly vague and ambiguous it's the section on combat movement. First they begin by stating that there's "two special forms of movement possible in combat", and then refer to the rules mentioned in the "Movement in Encounters" section (which I assume are normal movement and running). They then add that there's "additional movement types" and discuss the Fighting Retreat and the Full Retreat. Broadly speaking, those extra maneuvers are then explained as such;

A fighting retreat allows you to move backwards at 1/2 your encounter speed. A full retreat allows you to move backwards at greater than 1/2 your encounter speed, but you forfeit your attack this round, and your opponent attacks with a +2 to hit.

Reading and re-reading this section leaves me with a few questions, and I'm not entirely sure how this is meant to be played. Are we suddenly expected to keep track of who's moving forwards and backwards in combat? Couldn't you just turn around first, and then move? Also, the +2 attack that your opponent gets; does that happen immediately, or whenever it would normally occur in the round? Almost sounds like an "attack of opportunity" from 3.5. It's interesting to point out in the combat example from the Mutant Future rulebook, all combatants get a free attack (with +2 to hit) against the fleeing flies, but no such scenario is present in the LL combat example.

I should point out that I'm not too concerned with these questions, as I intend to use the RC rules for combat maneuvers (Fighting Withdrawal and Retreat). I'm simply making an observation here.

[austrodavicus]

I think your confusion is a result of the way this paragraph is worded, which is a bit convoluted. The way I read it, and hopefully Dan will correct me if I'm wrong, is that the two "special" forms of movement are fighting retreat and full retreat, as opposed to "normal" combat movement. Normal combat movement is "A character may move his encounter movement and attack the same round".

Fighting retreat is slowly backing up while still engaging in combat, thus half encounter movement. Obviously the continuation of combat relies on the opponent following the retreating character, which could lead to them being surrounded by the character's allies. That being the case, a fighting retreat is a good way for a character to withdraw safely from combat.

Full retreat is possibly poorly worded, although it says the character moves "backwards", I believe what is meant here is that the character moves "rearward", which is a different thing. In other words the character has turned his back on combat and is moving to the rear. The clues here are in the statements that the character forfeits his attack (you can't attack if you're facing the wrong way), and the character's shield is not counted on his AC (shield only covers the front, not the rear). Well, that's certainly how I interpret this rule. Of course I could be wrong and full retreat is simply a character stumbling backwards at rapid pace and without attempting to defend himself.

As for when it happens, with the statement that normal combat movement is "A character may move his encounter movement and attack the same round", in both cases the player announces his actions for that round, but whereas the fighting retreat allows this normal move and attack, the full retreat loses the ability to do both, but only move instead, which I read to say the attacker gets to hit the retreating player in that round, when the character is retreating.

[johnnybleu]

That's mostly how I interpreted the rules, but it still doesn't address some of my confusion. For example, when you say that the attacker gets to hit a retreating player (full retreat) in that round, when the character is retreating, do you mean a "free" immediate attack which occurs out or regular combat sequence? (i.e. You declare that you will use a full retreat against an orc, and win initiative. When the time comes for you to move and retreat, does the orc get to attack you right then and there, with a +2 to hit, even though it's not even his turn, let alone the melee phase?)

Also, there's no real mention of when or why anyone would use these movement options. Why use a Fighting Retreat when you can simply move your full combat movement and attack? Why limit yourself to 1/2 your movement? And why ever use a Full Retreat? Sure, you can move more than 1/2 your movement, but you forfeit your attack, lose your shield's bonus to AC, and your opponent gets a +2 to hit!

My beef here is that there's no clear distinction as to when these "special movement" types are available to you. In the RC, it explicitly states that the Fighting Withdrawal and Retreat maneuvers are the ONLY movement options available to you if you begin the round engaged in hand to hand combat. Suddenly it makes perfect sense that you would want to use these (inferior) maneuvers, because it's the only choice you have. There is no such mention in LL, which leads to needless ambiguity and confusion. That, and the clause about how your "opponent attacks with +2 to hit".

[3llense'g]

Why use a Fighting Retreat when you can simply move your full combat movement and attack?

I have an older edition LL rulebook, that states you can only move half your movement if you want to attack as well. Maybe yours has a misprint?

[johnnybleu]

Why use a Fighting Retreat when you can simply move your full combat movement and attack?

I have an older edition LL rulebook, that states you can only move half your movement if you want to attack as well. Maybe yours has a misprint?

Could be. I ordered mine from Lulu roughly 3 or 4 months ago. However, this is the first time I hear that you can only move half your movement if you want to attack, whether in LL or Classic D&D.

[3llense'g]

Why use a Fighting Retreat when you can simply move your full combat movement and attack?

I have an older edition LL rulebook, that states you can only move half your movement if you want to attack as well. Maybe yours has a misprint?

Could be. I ordered mine from Lulu roughly 3 or 4 months ago. However, this is the first time I hear that you can only move half your movement if you want to attack, whether in LL or Classic D&D.

I downloaded the newest free version from the site.

A character may move his encounter movement and attack the same round, but any further distance takes his entire action for the round.

These are maximums, and players can always opt to have their characters move a shorter distance.

So your encounter movement is your maximum, but any further movement is penalised? I'm pretty sure that's a typo.

[petespahn]

Is your encounter movement your maximum? What if you're running?

[The Iron Goat]

It seems like the wording that's confusing more than anything. Fighting retreat is cautiously retreating with your guard up; the other is just turning around and running away.

The second part about whether you potentially get an extra, free attack against a fleeing enemy is less clear. Personally, I'd say yes, do it the way it's explained in Mutant Future, but I'm sure some would rule differently.

[austrodavicus]

That's mostly how I interpreted the rules, but it still doesn't address some of my confusion. For example, when you say that the attacker gets to hit a retreating player (full retreat) in that round, when the character is retreating, do you mean a "free" immediate attack which occurs out or regular combat sequence? (i.e. You declare that you will use a full retreat against an orc, and win initiative. When the time comes for you to move and retreat, does the orc get to attack you right then and there, with a +2 to hit, even though it's not even his turn, let alone the melee phase?)

Yep, that's how I play it. Actions are announced prior to rolling initiative. A player says I'm going to run away (full retreat), he wins initiative - well too bad, so sad, the opponent gets a free hit.

Also, there's no real mention of when or why anyone would use these movement options. Why use a Fighting Retreat when you can simply move your full combat movement and attack? Why limit yourself to 1/2 your movement? And why ever use a Full Retreat? Sure, you can move more than 1/2 your movement, but you forfeit your attack, lose your shield's bonus to AC, and your opponent gets a +2 to hit!

A fighting retreat is handy in a situation such as two characters fighting side-by-side in a 10' passage and one runs away, leaving the other exposed. Now he could also run away, giving his opponent a free hit, or he could do a fighting retreat to a more defensible position.

My beef here is that there's no clear distinction as to when these "special movement" types are available to you. In the RC, it explicitly states that the Fighting Withdrawal and Retreat maneuvers are the ONLY movement options available to you if you begin the round engaged in hand to hand combat. Suddenly it makes perfect sense that you would want to use these (inferior) maneuvers, because it's the only choice you have. There is no such mention in LL, which leads to needless ambiguity and confusion. That, and the clause about how your "opponent attacks with +2 to hit".

Again I don't see it as a problem, you use exploration movement rates until you're in melee, once in melee you swap to encounter (combat) movement rates. If you have opponents in front you cannot advance as they are blocking your way, you can obviously only continue fighting or retreat. If you retreat you can do so two ways, controlled (fighting retreat) or uncontrolled (full retreat). However, if you find your front is clear of opponents (because they're dead or have retreated), you are clear to move forward. If it's still a combat situation (nearby opponents) that movement will still be encounter/combat movement, if combat has ended then you can switch to exploration movement (or running).

[johnnybleu]

Again I don't see it as a problem, you use exploration movement rates until you're in melee, once in melee you swap to encounter (combat) movement rates. If you have opponents in front you cannot advance as they are blocking your way, you can obviously only continue fighting or retreat. If you retreat you can do so two ways, controlled (fighting retreat) or uncontrolled (full retreat). However, if you find your front is clear of opponents (because they're dead or have retreated), you are clear to move forward. If it's still a combat situation (nearby opponents) that movement will still be encounter/combat movement, if combat has ended then you can switch to exploration movement (or running).

This example makes sense in a 10' wide corridor where your only movement options are forward or backwards. But what about in a huge room with combatants spread around randomly? What if there's no clear distinction between what would be considered pressing forward and retreating, because there's simply is no "forward"? Does that mean that moving forward you use normal encounter speed, but moving backwards you move at 1/2 your rate (depending)? Does that also mean that suddenly you have to keep track of who's facing which direction, and whether they're moving forwards or backwards?

Say there's a brawl in a large room, and you're fighting a goblin in melee. You notice your fellow adventurer needs help with the 2 goblins he's fighting, so you decide to move over there... Can you simply use you full move to get over there, and make your attack? Or are you at this point considered to be retreating, and thus restricted to 1/2 your movement? Similarly, what if you're not fighting a goblin in melee and you just want to move? Do you get your full move, or only 1/2? Or does everyone simply use their normal movement until the party literally decides that they wish to retreat (i.e. flee the battle), at which point they must each decide whether to use a fighting retreat, or full retreat? That's the problem with these special movement types-- there's no clear and concise explanation of when and how they should be used. In fact, it's one of the most loosely defined and arbitrable rule in the book.

And not to further confound the issue, but wouldn't you also forfeit your attack for the round if using a Fighting Retreat and moving backwards at 1/2 your speed? Unless you just happen to end your movement next to a valid target (which is admittedly not likely if you're moving backwards in a 10' corridor).

I hate to come off as dense or pedantic. I'm more "thinking out loud" than "arguing the rules". I truly love LL and what it's doing for the hobby, and I would hate for things like this to turn people away from the game.

Thanks for the conversation, folks!