Some cards state they give a bonus to any party member in the same engagement. They may also state that a party member engaged get a bonus.

Engaged means to be in melee range locked to a npc, but being in the same engagement? Does that mean being engaged with the same npc or just in the same fight (within range)?

Well, we see in the rules that Engaged just means close enough to interact with (be it an NPC or an object) and my initial assumption was that all individuals in an engagement would be engaged with one another. I haven't seen the specific distinction you mention on the cards so I'm not sure. I could see interpreting things differently though. So that for example two PCs are engaged with a Beastman, so all three are in an engagement (they all share a common engaged target). But perhaps the two PCs aren't necessarily engaged with one another? So maybe one PC would have to use a maneuver to Engage the other to use First Aid or something like that. Would that interpretation make more sense for the cards you're talking about?

Now that I've thought about it specifically, that second interpretation makes pretty good sense. I'd probably require the PC to use a maneuver to safely disengage the beastman and then another to engage the other PC in the "engagement" for healing purposes or something. What do you think?

donbaloo said:

Yes that's how I see the rules. To engage someone else you first need to disengage, then move if needed and then engage. At least two maneuvers.

I think perhaps it's guarded position that has that engagement and engaged term and I am just curious if the effect works for all allies in the same fight.

i see engaged as a measure of distance, engaged within touching distance or so, while close is like 5-10ft away-ish and so on. if you had two PCs standing next to each other i would say they are engaged with each other, and in my opinion, any number of character (PCs or NPCs) that are all in the same "fight" are considered engaged with each other.

Our example (other thread, same topic) is where the dwarf and barber-surgeon are fending off 4 crypt ghouls. Ghouls are engaged with the PCs (2 each).

MY HOUSE RULE WILL BE:

* For each person (or group of filet minions) on you and your patient during your attempt to use first aid in combat, add 1 purple challenge die for difficulty.

* You must disengage your opponent and engage your ally (free disengage from allies)

It seems to me that THIS would be a good example of when a MANEUVER is actually an ACTION.

Thoughts?

jh

Emirikol said:

I think you refers too much to the V2 half action concept.

In V3 Manoeuvers are what you are doing as standard "actions" or "movements" during you turn.

Using an action card is one special trick you're allowed to do once per turn.

willmanx said:

I think he's referring to the skill check being "Perform a Stunt". Perform a Stunt is attempting to perform a skill check which may be more difficult than a normal maneuver and I believe this to be totally up to the GM's discretion.

With the emphasis on this game being less written record keeping I can only see you being engaged with everyone in the engagement. This is shown by the stand ups being placed together with no markers between them. I think too much is being read into the rules to have a distinction between being engaged and being in an engagement.