sooo if I charge a guy with an autogun with an axe and miss, is he considered to be in melee and can therefor do nothing but wheep?

He can proceed to beat you over the head with the autogun or he can pull out a combat knife and stick you, if he does not have a bayonet attached.

He could also pull out a pistol and shoot you.

My favorite option would be to have him pull the pin on a grenade, drop it at his feet and start laughing maniacally.

but he is considered in melee inspite of me missing my attack alltogether?

vogue69 said:

Yes. Then again he could simply use the manouver action on you by making an opposed WS test. If he succeeds he will manage to place himself at least one meter away from you, effectively making him stand at point blank range. And if he had been smart enough to use the "Delay" action before that turn, he' have one full action to spare and be perfectly able to do a point blank full auto burst. They tend to be messy, so watch out!

vogue69 said:

Yes, because if he takes the time to aim his autogun, that means he isn't taking the time to defend himself, and will therefore be stabbed (possibly in the face). The fact that the attack missed is immaterial - when a maniac with an axe is coming at you, you concentrate on keeping out of the way of the axe.

Cardinalsin said:

...and the miss might have been the result of the defending character ducking out of the way, side stepping, or otherwise moving about so the damned thing didn't hit him (even without a dodge or parry roll). After all, you have a +30 to hit a helpless (can't move or defend themselves) target. Since I'm gathering the fella swing the ax didn't get a +30, then the defending character was moving about and doing his best not to have an ax stuck in his face and, as such, is engaged in melee.

Varnias Tybalt said:

please elaborate, I am always looking for ways to mess up melee characters

vogue69 said:

It's all there in the rulebook.

So let's say that we have this Melee Character closing with you. You could try to shoot, but you're only at close range, rather than point blank. So you use the Delay action (listed on page 192 in the core rules), which ends your turn immediately, but let's you keep an additional half-action for your next turn. The melee psycho charges you, but hopefully won't kill you (preferably you'll dodge the attack or survive it). Then it's your turn again. Now you have not only a full action to use, but your delay from the past turn gives you an additional half-action.. So you spend this half-action on the "Manoeuvre"-action (also listed on page 192), hopefully you win the opposed Weapon Skill test involved (this is the tricky part) and you'll force your Melee opponent a meter away from you, but you chose NOT to advance a meter into melee. Suddenly you're not in melee anymore but one metre away from your opponent, and you have an entire full action to spend on, oh let's say, a full auto burst with +30 to BS for being at point blank range.

It i a gamble doing this of course, but it can seriously hurt Melee characters...

Varnias Tybalt said:

A minor point, but the stored Delay Half-Action must be used before your next turn. Presumably there is nothing to stop you from using it just before your next turn actually begins.

I know the core mentions that whenever you end your movement adjacent to an adversary you are considered enganged in melee, is adjacent ever actually defined? Is it considered to be < 1m? The fact that they are moving away from you should get around the free attack opportunity, but is 1m enough?

Khouri said:

OOOO 1 meter is plenty...

Khouri said:

Exactly!

Khouri said:

The rules merely state "adjacent", it doesn't specify the exact range so 1 metre would be enough. Also a successful Manouvre states that in addition of relocating your opponent one metre you may advance one metre as well. So insterad of advancing you could just say that you move the opponent one metre away and then you step back one metre making the distance 2 metres instead which would definetly not be melee range. (it says "advance" one metre, it doesn't say you have to advance towards that specific opponent ).

Ruleswise this stunt would work, as long as all the relevant tests succeed of course.

If there is a 1 meter space between you and your opponent, you are no longer in melee combat. Adjacent means next to, as in base to base if you are using miniatures. 1 meter of space would mean point blank range for shooting.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Tybalt, your delay-manoeuvre assumes that the defender acts before the attacker, in which case he could already have fired of course, possibly with aim. Still it's a nice way to get a point blank shot, assuming you can predict that the enemy will charge you like that. Also the drawback is that the enemy's charge may very well decapitate you as you cannot be sure you can interrupt the enemy (opposed agility test).

The rules are fuzzy wether you can actually interrupt another and take your action before he finishes his own, and if so, if the interrupted character can finish his action, change his action, or risk losing it. If you're just going to manoeuvre just after the attacker finishes the charge, that is a moot point but in any case you do suffer risk of not being able to take a full turn later for whatever reason (stun, death etc.).

As for being in melee or not, or "engaged" as the rulebook called it, that's another matter. I agree that being within less than 2 meters away (adjascent in a 1meter/square grid) qualifies as engaged, but the question is if situations could warrant being engaged at longer ranges (for example from long spears or pikes), or even shorter (daggers, unarmed, teeth of an animal).

I actually prefer to let this be a GM call rather than hard set rules, but it requires some logical thinking and decisiveness.

As for using Manoeuvre to "advance" away from the enemy... eh sounds like rule expoitation to me. Pushing an enemy and following is different from doing the same and stepping back, as you have momentum from the former.

I read Disengage as the only action that takes you out of combat.

1 Meter away from the crazed Preacher with his two handed Eviscerator? Oh thats fine, he can't touch me. I'll just stand here and aim carefully......

Nope, not gonna fly in my game. 1 Meter is about the length of my arm.

The only way to exploit this legally would be the use of Acrobatics to Disengage as a half action. This lets you move 3 meters away and leaves a Half Action for a standard Attack at PB range. This also means that your attacker cannot use Swift, Lightening, All-Out attacks or Charge (needs 4 meters), but must Move to engage and then use a standard Half-Action attack. Which you may Dodge or Parry before repeating your Dance of Death. Sure, you cannot use Full Auto Bursts this way, but a PB blast from a Shotgun is pretty nasty anyway.

Darth Smeg said:

Remember that you are actually more than 1 meter away when you're more than 1 square away instead of adjascent. A character typically "takes up" one square, but humans are not one meter long and wide (most of us anyway), so when you are adasjcent you are typically 0.5-1 meter away already. Moving 1 square back (or pushing you forward 1 meter) means you are close to 2 meters away. Still a case for long weapons (I'm sure the Eviscerator would qualify), but if you're wielding a knife or just unarmed you're too far away without closing first (which is a half action).

BTW your acrobatics example also works with Tybalt's "wait and burst" tactic, as long as you have a round to spare.

A more efficient tactic is to use full auto burst, get charged, survive, quickdraw autopistol and then full auto burst again.

Fair enough, people involved in melee are usually not at kissing-distance

Also consider, if by manouvering your enemy one meter away from you means you are no longer in melee combat, then this should also allow you to move away from him normally without giving him the "free attack". I think this may be acceptable, if you pull of your manouver you are demonstrating a superiority in combat allowing you to create an opening for moving or other actions.

Anyone may Disengage, but to use manouver you must win an opposed WS test, yes? I like it...

As for big melee weapons, yes the Eviscerator would probably qualify for an abstract exception. But then again several weapons do, like spears or neurowhips (the whip actually let's you fight in melee from a distance of 3 meters ).

Some weapons must probably be handled differently. But for swords, knives and power fists I'd say that you can't strike anything that's one meter or more away.

Friend of the Dork said:

I don't think so because it still requires a winning an opposed WS roll so it's not something that a BS only character is going to succeed in very often and it could well have been an aim - swift attack or other melee combo really if the character has the b@lls to delay actions at that close range.

Darth Smeg said:

Exactly.

BTW my gripe with "advancing" backwards has more to do with fluff and wording than any balance. Manouvre is no guarantee it will work but remember that it allows you to move farther away than disengage already.

Actually, I'm beginning to wonder if this might call for a house-rule that you must follow up a manoeuvre action. After all, let's think through how this works:

- You come at your opponent with your weapon

- He attempts to defend

- You put enough pressure on him that he is forced to retreat

... and then, what - you just stand where you are? If that happened, surely that would qualify as failing to put enough pressure on him to force his retreat? He would, in fact, step back a metre while the pressure was up, then presumably step forward again once you let up.

This goes back to the old "abstraction" point - combat is meant to be a swirling melee, not a static bashing match. The idea that you can "manoeuvre" someone a metre back then open up on full-auto, just seems ridiculous.

Just to keep in mind. The Maneuver action itself does not break you out of melee combat.

To voluntarily (and prematurely) exit melee, your choices are basically to:

1) Perform a Disengage action

2) Move away and suffer free attacks from those engaged in melee with you.

So performing a maneuver action will not technically allow you to immediately thereafter shoot someone with a basic weapon at PB range, because despite being more than a square away, you have not technically done either of these ways to prematurely end melee.

dvang said:

There is also the opportunity to use acrobatics to disengage as a half-action, though I cant remember if that was an optional rule in the IH

and #4: stun your opponent. Since a stunned opponent is no longer considered to be engaged, if he or she is the only one engaged in melee combat with you, once you stun them, that will end the engagement. Gives a new twist to the arbiters favorite combination of weapons ;-)

Edit: instead of maneuver, use takedown + standard PB attack with you favorite shotgun!

Cardinalsin said:

More likely it seems perfectly plausible. If I had an assault rifle in hand and some sword swinging maniac was suddenly in my face, I'd do my best to either tackle him/her or knock him/her over the face with the butt of my rifle. After that I'd open up my entire mag on the aggressor, just to make sure. From less than a meters range I might add.

I always foun that to be a bit wierd about DH, that you can't fire basic weapons in melee...

Varnias Tybalt said:

Knock them in the face with the butt of your rifle? You mean, you want to stun them for a second or two so they're not swinging that damned sword all over the place so you could actually open up on full auto without having your arms and head lopped off the second you have the barrel aimed in his general direction? ;-)