Another knock back path question

[Krueger666]

Hi, guys.

I need clearing up something about knock back, if you please. I'll use a modified version of a diagram by Harpua from another post to illustrate my question.


1 X X 2 X X 3
X X X X X X X
X X X X Y X X
X X X T X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X A X X X X
X X X X X X X

X - empty squares
A - attacker
T - target
Y - another figure (friendly to the target)

Ok, we all know that if the knock back isn't a straight line, the (T)arget can be knocked back to either 1, 2 or 3 (the attack deals 3 damage w/ knock back).

The question is: does the target HAS to be moved to any square furthest from the attacker, or can he be stopped by Y and stay in place? If Y wasn't there, he would've been knocked to 3, which is the same distance of 1 or 2.

Thank you!

[WolvieFan9]

Two important clips from the rules, on page 9.

If a game effect knocks back a target that is not along a straight line from the attacker, the target is knocked back beginning in the square occupied by the target in a straight vertical, horizontal, or diagonal line chosen by the attacker away from the attacker (so that the target ends up farther away from the attacker).

And

If the knock back path would cross a square occupied by another character, put the knocked back character in the last unoccupied square before it would cross the square occupied by the other character. Stopping in this way does not deal damage to either character.


SO, in your diagram, A shoots T and gets knockback. As the target is not on a straight line from the attacker, the first paragraph above kicks in. The attacker can pick the line of movement along the row of squares to #2 or #3 (I am not sure you could say that #1 is a valid knockback path from the attacking A's position). The attacker could say the row of squares to #2 or #3, and then move the target along that line. The figure is moved along that line until it either moves the full distance or something stops it along the way -- a wall, the map boundary, the edge of elevated terrain, OR a character. The fact there is something that will stop the movement along the path does not make it an invalid path.

As the second paragraph shows, the figure would come to a rest in the last unoccupied square before it crosses into Figure Y's square -- in this instance, it would stay where it is, as Figure T's square is the last unoccupied square.

This is all a long way of saying that AS THE ATTACKER, you get to choose the knockback path, and both paths are valid choices. If you wanted the knockback, you could choose 2; if you didn't, you could choose 3, knowing that the target would stay in the square it is in. Your choice.

[Harpua]

(I am not sure you could say that #1 is a valid knockback path from the attacking A's position).
It is.

This issue was hashed out long ago.

The phrase "(so that the target ends up farther away from the attacker)" was ruled by the RA and GD to mean that you can choose any of the paths which would result (ignoring other factors like figures or walls) in the figure being the FARTHEST from the attacker.

That results in a three way tie with 1, 2, and 3 (in the diagram, all 3 are 6 away from the attacker).

To answer the OP, all three are valid choices.




And as a side note, I'll add that even if the KB was the choice of the target (ie, Combat Reflexes), the choice of path is still up to the attacker.

[WolvieFan9]

It is.

This issue was hashed out long ago.

The phrase "(so that the target ends up farther away from the attacker)" was ruled by the RA and GD to mean that you can choose any of the paths which would result (ignoring other factors like figures or walls) in the figure being the FARTHEST from the attacker.

That results in a three way tie with 1, 2, and 3 (in the diagram, all 3 are 6 away from the attacker).

To answer the OP, all three are valid choices.

And as a side note, I'll add that even if the KB was the choice of the target (ie, Combat Reflexes), the choice of path is still up to the attacker.


Ahh, thanks for the clarification.