What is "Embattled", really?

[#][F] Holden - 8/16/2017
Originally posted by Leetsepeak View Post
This is what overthinking looks like.

It's not that deep, man.

Also, Vance has to do the dual job of interpreting text he didn't oversee and answering questions as a developer making decisions for the sake of the line. This is probably a good thing to keep in mind when engaging in kremlinology about rules which are explicitly abstracted and require common sense adjudication.
Vance's answers 100% line up with my intent when I wrote those rules, fwiw.

"Embattled" is, I think, a remnant of the old "engagement range" thing from the end of 2e (Christ what a suppurating nightmare that was to calculate) still rattling around in my head, and some vague notion at the time that we might eventually have stuff like really big opponents or enemies with huge long tentacles or whatever that could threaten characters clear out to short range who tried to get away from them. It ended up just not being important or coming up during the rest of the rules writing, and the natural language the rules ended up being written in didn't need the specialized term.

[#][F] Holden - 8/16/2017
Originally posted by nalak42 View Post
Yeah I'm gonna be honest the disengage doesn't strike me as "If you don't disengage you and your opponent are locked into fighting in a particular 5 feet of ground," unless that's what makes sense narratively. So Vance's saying that if you wanted to do the cinematic fighting through a marketplace disengage isn't needed makes sense to me. Essentially it becomes that scene in Princess Bride where Wesley and Inigo are fighting along the cliffs of insanity and all that. Disengage isn't used until you're trying to create actual space as opposed to just both of you taking a step to the left
This, pretty much. Or the good old anime trope of the two swordsmen running in parallel to one another through a market or bamboo forest or whatever trading sword-blows. The scenery's changing around them but they're moving in lockstep with one another because the player and ST agreed that would be a cool way to conduct the fight. (That style of play doesn't tend to work too well if there's an archer trying to shoot one of them to death, mind, but it's nice for one-on-one duels.)

[#][F] Holden - 8/17/2017
Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
The thing everyone is missing is that range bands measure your positioning relative to the opponent. It's perfectly possible to have a running battle all through the halls of the palace with nothing more than stunting.

Yes. This is one of the reasons the game uses range band (which only care about your distance relative to other characters or some landmark in the scene you have a reason to give a shit about) rather than zones or a grid or whatever. The engine doesn't really give a shit if you're running in lockstep through a bamboo forest, standing in place, or having a lightsaber duel while standing on two force-fielded pieces of debris as they're carried over miles of lava-river-- they're all two characters just remaining at close range bashing away at one another as far as the system is concerned, so long as there's no important third point in the scene that you need to mark distance against.

(At that point, fudge something, because the engine and the fiction are starting to come unglued from one another.)