What are your interpretations for engaging an ally concerning its maneuver costs? I've always assumed that you just spend a maneuver and take that action. But I don't even see that maneuver anywhere.

Right now, the best I can see is that it would cost you a maneuver to move to a new location within Close range (assuming your ally is in close range). But after that your considered Engaged with them.

I'm also assuming that if the encounter begins and the party is grouped together then they're already considered an engagement, so no maneuver is needed to engage your ally then.

Certain skill checks require you to be engaged with an ally (specifically engaged). First Aid checks, for instance.

There is no cost to disengage an ally.

Question to the questions: is it one manuever to engage an ally and then one maneuver to perform first aid check? 2 maneuvers?

jh

Right, you have to be engaged for certain things, specifically First Aid which was also what I was thinking of. But we never see anywhere in the rules about being required to spend a maneuver to engage allies. There's not even an Engage Ally action. So I'm wondering if becoming engaged with the ally is just a side effect of interacting with them.

For example, if you were to manipulate a chest that's a maneuver. You spend the maneuver to manipulate the environment, and by doing so you default to being engaged with the chest since you're touching. Perhaps the same thing happens for allies.

((Hmm, that is not at all how I would interpret "engaged". I think engagement to allies and object work in the same way as enemies. I don't see "Engagement" as a condition, but rather just a measure on closeness.

You always need to spend a maneuovre to move from close range to engaged, regardless if your trying to engage an enemy, ally or object. You also need to spend a maneouvre to move from engaged to close for all types. To move from close range and open a chest I would demand two maneouvres to be used, one for the move and one for the environment manipulation.))

edit:
hmm, I just realised that I was a bit wrong here. The rules are quite clear on that the move manoeuvres engage and disengage refer to opponents only. However, on the same page you have the third movement option "Move within close range". So if you need to move close enough to an ally or object to interact (or in other words to be engaged with) you need to spend a manoeuvre to do a move within close range.

Also, unless you state it before the encounter starts I would treat characters to be non-engaged to everything when an encounter begins. So if you're within close range to a beastman, a chest and an ally (neither of which are engaged to each other), you have these movement options (and many more ofc, just examples):

- Spend 1 manoeuvre to engage the beastman

- Spend 1 maneouvre to move within close range to become engaged to either the ally or the chest

- Spend 2 maneouvres to move within close range to the chest and then open it.

- Spend 2 maneouvres to move within close range to the ally and perform a First aid check.

If you're engaged to the beastman and want to disengage, move to your ally and do First aid it will cost you 3 maneouvres.

Thinking about this some more, I agree that you need to be engaged with an ally to use First Aid, so need to "move within close range" to do so, just as you need to be engaged with the chest before you can "interact with the environment" to open it. In effect, there is no need for an "Engage with an Opponent" maneuver, since you simply have to use the "Move within close range" maneuver to your target and state that you wish to become engaged with him/them/it. You only need the distinction as it applies to disengaging, since you do not have to spend a maneuver to disengage from an ally or an object. Do to the abstract nature of the system, you can move away from an ally or object and end up medium range away from them using a single maneuver, but when you are moving from medium range, you can only get to within close range of them, never directly into contact.