One Challenge per "Combat"

[thade]

First round of games I saw, Challenges were treated as if they were "once per combat round" and "only one at a time per combat round". However, there's no reference to "round" and in the first paragraph of the Challenge section it says only one per "combat".

 

So...what is a "combat"? Is it all combat "rounds" from beginning to end for a given mosh pit?

 

If so, what does "multiple combat" mean for this?

 

It's some annoying verbiage and - honestly - I think it's more fun/cooler the first way, but I'm wondering what other people's take on this was.

[ShinyRhino]

I think we'd have to assume a "combat" is made up of all of the "combat rounds" fought between given units. So, your Character can't strike down one enemy Character and then challenge another in the next player turn.

[dswanick]

BRB, Pg.20, Assault Phase Summary, Fight Subphase

Step 1 - Choose a combat.

 

I think this makes it fairly clear what a "combat" is - it's all the engaged units which would be resolved together.

[Legatus]

"Once one challenge has been made, no further challenge can be issued in that combat whilst the previous challenge is onging."

(6th BRB, p. 64, 'Issuing a Challenge' 3rd paragraph)

 

"Even though further challenges cannot be issued in a combat until the existing challenge has been resolved, there is the possibility that another character in the fight might intercede in a Glorious Intervention."

(6th BRB, p. 65, 'Round Two', 2nd paragraph)

[thade]

So this is where it confuses me, because where it says "Choose a combat" it's clear that it means "a bunch of guys in an angry pile-up" but not clear as to whether the term 'combat' persists over rounds or just for each round when you select it.

 

ADDENDUM:

 

That first rule quoted by Legatus there seems to suggest that - once a challenge has petered out - you can in fact make another challenge in a subsequent turn.

[Legatus]

That first rule quoted by Legatus there seems to suggest that - once a challenge has petered out - you can in fact make another challenge in a subsequent turn.

That is indeed what both of the cited statements suggest.

[thade]

Sweet. Thank you, sir.

[dswanick]

OK, I have to admit - I'm a little unsure as to the meaning of yhour question, but let me try and noodle it out.

 

Unit A is strolling along minding its own business when "Oy, there's them dudes over there - let's GET'UM!" and charges an enemy.

For the sake of Blood for the Blood God, let's say that they Disordered Charge two units - Unit B and Unit C.

Upon charging said units, Sergeant A issues a Challenge.

The player for Units B & C (see what I did there :D) chooses Sergeant B to accept the challenge. This combat now has a challenge.

Consequently IC C can't issue a challenge, even if there is an IC A because this combat has an ongoing challenge.

As each player turn rolls around you select this combat to resolve, resolving both the challenge and the general melee.

If IC A the 2nd charged into this combat, he could perform a Glorious Intervention to tag out Sergeant A but he could not issue a challenge.

This state will continue until Sergeant A (or IC A the 2nd) defeats or is defeated by Sergeant B (or his Heroic Intervenor).

Once the challenge is concluded, if the combat is still ongoing and there are characters involved - the Controlling player can issue a new challenge when selecting a combat to resolve, or hisopponent can if he chooses not to.

 

Does this make any sense/answer any of your questions?

[thade]

haha questions good and answered. :D ty

[awfulawful]

The analogy I came up with to relate this to my real life (and presumably yours as well) is this: Say you are walking down the street with your breakdancing gang, and you stumble upon a rival breakdancing gang. Inevitably, someone from one gang is going to throw down the cardboard and challenge someone from the other gang to a dance off. While that dance off is going on, obviously nobody else from either gang is doing any dancing beyond some simple background moves and head nods. Once that dance off is resolved, however, anyone else is free to, and let's face it, expected to step up and show their moves to initiate the next dance off.

 

Summary, only one dance off at a time, but once that one ends, somebody better start the next one or WHY WERE THEY IN A BREAKDANCING GANG IN THE FIRST PLACE?

[Legatus]

That is how I will imagine all challenges from now on.

[ShinyRhino]

The analogy I came up with to relate this to my real life (and presumably yours as well) is this: Say you are walking down the street with your breakdancing gang, and you stumble upon a rival breakdancing gang. Inevitably, someone from one gang is going to throw down the cardboard and challenge someone from the other gang to a dance off. While that dance off is going on, obviously nobody else from either gang is doing any dancing beyond some simple background moves and head nods. Once that dance off is resolved, however, anyone else is free to, and let's face it, expected to step up and show their moves to initiate the next dance off.

 

Summary, only one dance off at a time, but once that one ends, somebody better start the next one or WHY WERE THEY IN A BREAKDANCING GANG IN THE FIRST PLACE?

 

"Noticably F.A.T., rewind the tape!"

[thade]

...precisely what I was on about...

 

/throws down cardboard