Terrifying movement question

[PatG]

I also posted this question up on the Facebook page - please excuse the duplication.

Now having made an effort to search for an answer to my question, I must first state that I am a native English speaker, I have worked as an editor, I am very comfortable with "light" / guidelines style rules and I am asking "What do you do?" rather than "What is the cast in stone official tournament ruling". However, I also found 4.1.1 a little lacking in clarity... so please let's keep it civil

So here goes: I recently ran a dino hunt game in which a terrifying T-rex moved into base contact (more teeth to head contact) with his victim. Said victim failed the pluck roll for being contacted by a terrifying character and took off leaving the poor T-rex with no breakfast.  3.2.5, second paragraph implies that terrifying characters can follow up fleeing victims and if they have enough movement left, they can remain in contact. Is this interpretation how people generally play it?  If so, and the terrifying character comes up a couple of inches short of its victim, would you then allow them to retroactively "run" to maintain contact?

I intend on house ruling "yes" for both cases (especially for aggressive dinos/carnivores), I just wanted input from more experienced players in case there is a pitfall I missed.

Thanks

Pat 
 

[timt]

Hi Pat

I would always assume that an attack was at a run unless otherwise stated (say, if you wanted to use a pistol) and so would allow the terrifying attacker to move his full run move to try to contact his fleeing target. Makes sense to me.

Regards Tim

[PatG]

Thanks Tim,

Ok so doing more digging, I found that Craig answered this back in 2014: http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=71224.0 and specifically said: "Can I also direct your attention to 'The Power of Rules' on page 7 of IHMN"

So then I am going to house rule that unintelligent terrifying creatures must follow up fleeing opponents and intelligent characters may choose to follow up. In both cases, to the limit of their possible movement including running.

I am still interested in how others play this out.

[Craig]

Hi Pat,

If I was moving a terrifying figure into contact knowing that the target may flee I would state clearly from the beginning that the attacking figure was running. This removes all doubt.

I may also choose to attack with a terrifying figure, but not run, in order to possibly displace an opponent who otherwise might snatch an objective or attack one of my figures. This also leaves my attacking figure with the option to shoot or use suitable powers in the shooting phase. Again I would state, before moving, that my figure was not running in order to remove doubt.

It is good practice to state when you go to move a figure that you are running or moving normally. Thus, if you then fall short of your objective you cannot then suddenly say, 'Oh I shall run then'.

This also meets 1.4 Measuring Conventions, which states you should not measure the distance to an opponent before choosing to shoot at or move closer to them. Choosing to run only after you fail to make the distance would not be in the spirit of this important rule.

[PatG]

Thanks Craig - very good point about 1.4

3.2.5 paragraph 2 says "Depending on its roll, and the proximity and speed of the enemy, the fleeing figure may still be contacted."   To me this, implies that if a terrifying character, with a standard move of 6", moves (for the sake of illustration) 1" to contact a target character and that target character fails it's pluck and rolls, say, a 3 therefore flees 3" away then the terrifying character (with 5" of movement unused) can move the difference and remain in contact with the target.

Was that your intent or am I just overthinking edge cases?

If not, then I may need to cook up a separate talent or power for very aggressive characters allowing follow up of disengaging and terrified targets.

     

[Craig]

That was indeed our original thought, which is why the flee move is random.

There is also nothing to stop you declaring that your terrifying figure will run at the enemy so, even if they still outdistance your possible 9" move, you have the 'protection' of having run against subsequent shooting attacks.

[leadfool]

Experience has shown that the "protection" of running is not that great.  I much prefer the protection of running.... out of the line of sight.

[PatG]

Excellent - thank you Craig!