Passing to Rearward stance in the middle of a fight

[Butterfingers]

Maybe, going with the old rules (assuming I am reading them right), if the Enemies outnumber the Companions, then the LM assigns them (first one enemy per each Companion in melee stances), so the players couldn't pick their opponent in any case? So the LM would be free to keep the same opponents engaged or not, depending which is more advantageous... I guess? So if some enemy goblins take damage, he could disengage them to shoot with bow, and throw some fresh goblins in melee, and so on.

If the engagement rule was different, obviously this sort of shuffling wouldn't be possile, so there would a lot less tactical flexibility. So this would make a huge difference.

[Joaoperru]

The players can pick their opponents at the beginning of the combat only if their number is the same or above those of thier enemies. BUT during the combat if their number changes (i.e. they started outnumbered then they even the odds), those left disengaged are free to pick.

To strenghten the "new" way to read the rules comes this special ability (Fell Speed) of the Old Troll found in the Bree supplement:
[the Troll] must succeed at a Movement test (TN14) at the beginning of a round to abandon combat or disengage and engage a different opponent.

Clearly it seems a normal player cannot. Maybe you could check this ability in your edition of the rules.

As regards wounded foes going in to rearward it would seem they cannot, cause they're engaged. So that goes back to my initial question: can a PC go to Rearward stance if he's engaged?

[Falenthal]

I know that the sentence "until he defeats all opposition" induce to the interpretation that, once engaged, it's a kill or die (or escape) situation.

There are several instances in the rules that don't give a clear idea of which step is considered the first one when beginning a turn after the first one: Choosing Stance? Engagements? Or are those both decided only before the first round and can't be changed during the entire combat, or until your engaged enemies die?

Even the diagramm flow from the Adventurer's Companion doesn't resolve it properly.

But, from everything I've read from TOR, I've come to the conclusion that the way it should work is this (of course, I might be very wrong. As said, it's not crystal clear for me, and I'd be glad to be shown new infos that cleared the fog of war on this):

After the Opening Volleys, Close Combat happens, and it follows these steps:

1) Companions choose stance. Remember the limitations for Rearward Stance depending on the number of companions and the number of enemies.

2) Engagements are declared. By the LM if the adversaries are more than the heroes; the heroes if their number equals or is above that of the adversaries.

3) Attacks are done first by the side with the initiative, then by the other one.

4) Go back to step 1.

The main confusion I see is wether step 4 should redirect you step 1, 2 or 3 once the next turn begins. The OP's question is clear: can you change stances in the middle of a fight?

Some of the texts in the rules description seem to imply that you cannot (although they don't say it directly). The best argument I've found to defend that you can change stances at the beginning of every turn is the fact that some effects (Seize Victim, for example) specifically say that the hero can't change Stance in his next round.

And considering that Stance choosing is the first step during combat, I allow engagements to be changed (if necessary) at the start of each turn.

With the example from the OP, once a turn starts with less than double adversaries (9 or less), the archer can choose Rearward Stance.

[Butterfingers]

Fell Speed works in 1st Edition like this:

Creature can choose which heroes to engage at the beginning of each turn even if there are less enemies than companions, and it can engage heroes in any stance, and can choose to abandon combat at the beginning of any round.

No mention of any test needed to do this either?

Clearly there seems to be some differences between the editions, and it's odd that this isnt explained in the rules addendum intended to update 1st edition to 2nd?

[Rich H]

So that goes back to my initial question: can a PC go to Rearward stance if he's engaged?

No, I don't allow it; he needs to not be Engaged.

I think there's definitely a grey area here as to what to do when you're midway through a battle and you've killed enough enemies to allow someone to enter Rearward stance but that person is still toe-to-toe with an opponent and therefore engaged. Personally, I don't allow PCs to break their current engagement(s), whether they wish to go into Rearward or not; so until they defeat their current opponent(s), and therefore become unengaged, they can't enter Rearward stance or establish a new engagement. An engagement therefore remains in place until some condition changes it - eg, things like (a) escaping combat, (b) an ability that allows the current engagement to be ignored or changed, (c) some specific ruling to the combat situation to hand, etc. So, within the RAW, my interpretation of the Engagement element is that it is only applied when someone is not engaged. If someone is already engaged then that step is skipped for them.

[Butterfingers]

Well this is getting... interesting. So how do you handle close combat stances then, do you not allow a hero to move from open to defensive stance in the middle of fighting an opponent? You'd think that since the close combat stances are more attitudes than physical positions (or are they?), that you could switch from bold fighting into cautious? Or do you allow players to change stances, but their current opponents follow them there too? It sounds pretty complicated (and would seem to require rewriting some of the enemy abilites - which might be the case already?)

[Rich H]

Well this is getting... interesting. So how do you handle close combat stances then, do you not allow a hero to move from open to defensive stance in the middle of fighting an opponent?

No, that's fine; they can move around in any close combat stance while remaining engaged. That's how the RAW works and enemies always adopt the close combat stance of the PC they're engaged with or attacking (if they are engaged with more than one opponent). No one is talking about moving between close combat stances.

[Butterfingers]

I am not sure I understand? You allow moving between close combat stances *every round*, but not between them and Rearward stance, even if the number of combatants allows it, unless the hero is also not engaged at the time?

[Otaku-sempai]

I am not sure I understand? You allow moving between close combat stances *every round*, but not between them and Rearward stance, even if the number of combatants allows it, unless the hero is also not engaged at the time?

I might be wrong, but the reasoning seems to be that by attempting to withdraw from melee to assume a rearward stance, if the Hero is still engaged in melee combat then he leaves a hole in the defensive line that the enemy penetrates by moving along with him. This might be countered by using teamwork. If a companion or companions covers for the Hero, effectively taking over the melee engagement, then the Hero might be able to successfully withdraw to take the rearward stance. Otherwise, he cannot leave the line until any engaged enemies are defeated.

[Rich H]

I am not sure I understand? You allow moving between close combat stances *every round*, but not between them and Rearward stance, even if the number of combatants allows it, unless the hero is also not engaged at the time?

That's right, because the rules also state this:

A character is engaged when paired in close combat with at least one opponent. A combatant remains
engaged until he defeats all opposition.

Therefore a character cannot enter a ranged stance (ie, Rearward) if they are engaged. Tell me why this would create a problem for you? Is that problem more or less than the other potential option of them selecting Rearward (and thereby disengaging with their current opponent) and therefore 'breaking' the above statement (ie, a combatant remains engaged until he defeats all opposition) and basically walking away from an opponent that has been attacking them just the round before? He cannot move into Rearward and remain engaged as that is (sort of) replicating certain Adversary abilities.

It's all down to interpretation within this particular/specific example. Pick the ruling that is the path of least resistance for you and your gaming group. The way I rule doesn't appear to have thrown up any issues as yet after running the game for a good while now and its the one my group feels 'makes the most sense' based on the combat rules.