Houserule: Push Back

[IvenBach]

I understand what you mean. I'm probably going to houserule in more traps and dangers to shave off more BP. What are your thoughts on my idea of rats?

Trying to give my play group more of a challenge without them complaining. I was thinking about using the rats from my reaper set and giving them MP: 12+ AD:1 DD:0 (maybe 2 for being so small) BP:1 Mind:1 and allowing them to move->attack->move along with allowing them to occupy a square that contains a hero or monster on account of their small size. That way they have a constant pea shooter annoying them and if they focus an that they waste their attack for the turn. Once all the big monsters are cleared they'd high tail it to another room.

[knightkrawler]

I haven't made up my mind on how to use a rat swarm.

1. Stats like yours, except 1 Defend. Special rule Plague: When a rat swarm causes the loss of a Body point, the victim hero must roll a combat die at the beginning of his each subsequent turn. A skull means he loses a Body point. Maximum poison damage: 4 Body points. The poison's effect may be immediately negated by discarding a healing spell or potion of healing.
Note that the rat swarm miniature for this version takes one square.
OR
2. Stats like yours, except no Defend, and 8 Body points, after the loss of which the rest of the swarm will simply skedaddle. The rat swarm, however big the miniatures' base is, fills one entire room or an entire corridor segment (from one corner to the next) and attacks all heroes therein. No special rule in addition to this. The swarm can move through and end its turn on any square occupied by another miniature.
Here, the rat swarm is also represented by a 1-square-based miniature.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

There is a lot of material on this thread and the forum in general around push back and exchanging squares, much of it originating from a need to address the door-blocking issue so I wanted to examine this in detail.

For each proposed rule I want keep a clear decomposition so for example (and I’ve used Daedalus’s text from earlier in this thread as the sample text).

When a figure loses one or more Body Points during a melee fight, an attacker may choose to use the momentum of the attack to push that opponent back or to the side one square. If there's a wall or other immovable object behind or next to the opponent, pushing back in that direction is not possible. Figures also count as immovable objects if their number, including the defending opponent, exceeds the Body Points lost from the attack. If instead the total number of figures is less than or equal to the Body Points lost, then they may all be pushed in the same direction. Push Back isn't possible if the defending opponent is killed.

Conditions in which the rule is invoked: When a figure loses one or more Body Points during a melee fight,

Is it mandatory or optional (I don’t mean do you have to use the rule or not I am referring to whether the interaction happens automatically or whether the attack gets a choice): attacker may choose to use the momentum of the attack to

Effects when invoked: push that opponent back or to the side one square

Any exceptions: If there's a wall or other immovable object behind or next to the opponent, pushing back in that direction is not possible.
Figures also count as immovable objects if their number, including the defending opponent, exceeds the Body Points lost from the attack. If instead the total number of figures is less than or equal to the Body Points lost, then they may all be pushed in the same direction.
Push Back isn't possible if the defending opponent is killed.

So let me comment on each bit separately

1. Conditions

We are clearly concerned with close combat, more specifically an attack and there are four possible categories of outcome; no skulls rolled (a miss), some skulls rolled that are all cancelled by shields (a hit without wounding), some skulls rolled that are not all cancelled i.e., BP loss for the defender (a wounding hit), defender killed (a killing hit).

For me the nature of a push back relates more to the force of the hit than any other factors, for example a powerful blow from a battle axe may well cause a push back even if the victim, perhaps a Dread Warrior, is sufficiently protected by its heavy armour that a good defend roll results in no BP being lost, so I would suggest that the result of the attack roll is used rather than the number of BP lost as that latter figure is partially based on the defend dice of the opponent and I don't think that is significant in a push back situation. As our push back rule is universally applicable for both Heroes and Monsters but is intended to mitigate the door blocking situation where the monster is the attacker then it makes sense that all Monsters should have a chance of pushing back Heroes, even a low one, so the minimum threshold for a push back should be low so that even a Goblin or Skeleton can do that if luck is with them so..

When a close combat attack roll shows at least one then,

2. Mandatory or Optional

If the condition is met does the attacker get the choice as to whether to push back or is it automatic? And if so, does the attacker get the choice of which square- or does the defender or is it automatic

As this rule comes into play when the initiative is with the attacker and a strong blow has been landed, I will start with the assumption that the attacker chooses whether and where (out of the available options) to push his opponent back or chooses not to

3. Effects

The attacker moves the defender how far and in what direction…

Chain Gang Challenge – at some point during these deliberations it will begin to occur to you, if it hasn’t already, that if you allow a model to be pushed back into a square that is already occupied then it turn you will need to push back that figure in turn into an unoccupied square, or an occupied square in which case that occupant will need to be pushed back … etc. This gets complex fast so I would prefer to try and set the rules to avoid this kind of cascade effect so I will limit the pushback to a maximum of 1 square of movement. This also excludes diagonals due to the existing “no diagonal movement” rule (you can’t reach a diagonal if you can only move one square) and only if that square is empty (i.e., not blocked by a wall or closed door or occupied by a figure, piece of furniture or a blocked square marker)

The attacker moves the defender onto an empty/unoccupied square that is adjacent to the square that the defender is on (i.e., a square that the defender could validly move onto with a single point of movement)

4. Exceptions

What if there aren’t any valid squares? One option would be to just state that if no valid squares are available then you cannot push back however bearing in mind the original problem that we are trying to mitigate this would make it very easy for the Heroes to ensure that the ‘meat’ in the sandwich would not be able to be pushed back so … if there are no valid squares then the attacker may exchange the squares occupied by the attacking and defending figures.

Diagonal attack weapons – my assumption here is that attacking a figure in a diagonal square means that you are already stretching/reaching to hit them so momentum is less of a factor, so I would restrict these new rules to apply to attacks on targets in adjacent squares (which also neatly rules out ranged weapons before that becomes a point of confusion) and I’ll specify that in the conditions.

Are all monsters affected? I would suggest that larger monsters would be harder to push back so I would allow a special exception for any monster that fall into this category that the attacker needs at least for the push back rules to take effect

Also, if the conditions are met but the defender dies, obviously there is little point in working out push back for the corpse, but I don’t see any reason why the attacker cannot opt to step forward into the now vacant square.

Larger monsters: Troll/Fimir, Mummy, Dread Warrior, Gargoyle (and perhaps some types of “named” monsters/bosses, but I’ll leave that up to the Quest Builder/Designer to note accordingly)

So, in conclusion

When attacking an enemy on an adjacent square and the attack roll shows at least one then the attacker may choose to push the defender back one square onto any square that the defender could validly move to with a single point of movement, if there are no valid squares then the attacker may exchange the squares occupied by the attacking and defending figures. If the attacker chooses to push back, then they must move into the now unoccupied square. If the attack kills the enemy, then the pushback isn’t relevant but the option to follow up into the now unoccupied square remains.

Notes:
• Larger monsters with the "Rock Solid" attribute require at least to be rolled to push them back
• You cannot push back an opponent that is in a pit
• You cannot push back an opponent if you are in a pit

Add "Rock Solid" attribute to Chaos Warrior, Gargoyle, Ogres, possibly even Mummy and Fimir

[burglekutt]

When attacking an enemy on an adjacent square and the attack roll shows at least one then the attacker may choose to push the defender back one square onto any square that the defender could validly move to with a single point of movement, if there are no valid squares then the attacker may exchange the squares occupied by the attacking and defending figures. If the attacker chooses to push back, then they must move into the now unoccupied square. If the attack kills the enemy, then the pushback isn’t relevant but the option to follow up into the now unoccupied square remains.

This all seems reasonable. You could also use your Defense to Push Back by rolling more Defense than needed.

EXAMPLE
#1 Goblin attacks with ONE & ONE . The Wizard defends with only ONE . The Wizard resists the Skull but can be moved by the Goblin.

#2 S/A above, but the Wizard rolls TWO 's. The Wizard resists both the Skull & being moved.

#3 S/A above, but Barbarian rolls THREE 's. The Barb defends against both the Skull or being moved & with the extra allows the Barb to instead move the Goblin?..

This is where fans of "Counter Attack" will still have options for the Barb with his two extra 's to:
A) Be moved, but Counter with TWO 's.
B) Not be moved & Counter with ONE .
C) Not be moved, & move the Goblin instead.

Maybe the monster or hero doesn't mind being moved from time to time? Maybe it helps both sides mix it up quicker.

If you roll TWO 's when attacking against a Goblin, shouldn't it move the Goblin one more square? I think it might be ok if space is available. This might be where Displacing a second monster (or Rock Solid) becomes possible if squares are available. If not, you simply trade places with the Goblin or Rock Solid.

Not sure if you answered this Bareheaded Warrior, but if you're in a single corridor & there are two or three enemies in front of you does the Push Back work on all of them?

Moving several opponents "back" seems complicated & could be annoying to both players & EWP if each was having to do it often back n forth in the same hallway battle.
It would make a better "Class Skill" or "Feat Card" instead where I might even allow ALL opponents to be Pushed Back/Displaced one or MORE squares.
Otherwise I'm cool with just switching places with the opponent in a packed corridor no matter how many 's you roll.

Someone needs to figure out how a hero stuck behind or adjacent to the Barb (who's stuck in a doorway fighting) might " Squeeze Past" or "Assist Push Back". It sucks waiting for the hero in the doorway to make the appropriate rolls!

This is where I'm thinking a hero could move diagonal using Push Back. The adjacent Elf with a Long Sword might be able to push a Fimir out of the way back or to the side & take the Fimirs place (squeezing past the Barb & Doorway). You should not be able to move a monster diagonal though.

What I really like about this is if the Wizard rolls only ONE with his starting Staff, he can at least move a monster if nothing else.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Not sure if you answered this Bareheaded Warrior, but if you're in a single corridor & there are two or three enemies in front of you does the Push Back work on all of them?

The push back rule still applies, but in this instance it would just be an exchange between the two in combat for exactly the reasons you have given, the alternative is too complicated.

I'm not a fan of allowing diagonal move for heroes or monsters as part of push back as I have deliberately kept it to "movement into a square that is valid as per normal movement" to avoid any situation where you could be pushed back diagonally into a square then you then couldn't validly move out of...corners with furniture on either side for example

In terms of allowing diagonal attacks to push back...may be an option...need to think about that more but my gut tells me that diagonal attacks are more of a bonus opportunistic attack then an adjacent one...

In terms of defending against pushback, or more precisely your defend dice potentially cancelling a push back, again a possibility .. but I need to think more as I'm still playtesting the basic pushback and want to be happy with that before complicating it more ... at least for the moment (watch this space!)