Galdred
Studio Draconis
He calls them back attacks.
The video is a bit long for the point he makes, but I think he makes a reasonable point:
You remain out of reach of your opponent most of the time in a standard melee engagement. That should give you plenty of occasions to disengage without being hit.
And if you have friends nearby, it makes no sense at all that he would run after you.
Historically, units that broke and ran away were slaughtered by cavalry, not by the attack of opportunity they got while disengaging.
Of course, in a game where it costs movement points to attack, it might be unfair to the "attacker" (ie the guy not running away), because he cannot both catch up with his opponent and hit him, but if there is a way to move and attack (charge), then there is no need for AOO: if the attacker is faster, he will be able to catch up and hit his opponent anyway.
The 5 foot step could be seen as more problematic: taking a 5 foot step between two opponents could leave you open if the hexagons are small enough, but it can be abstracted as you waiting for an opening to step in (and you'd be in a good position to be flanked anyway).
So basically, I agree with him that you should not get an AOO if you are in some other opponent's zone of control.
I think AOO should only occur if the opponent moves from one ZoC to another one, especially if he tried to move more than one tile (or 5 foot).
But at the same time, you still need a way to prevent someone from running past opponents and murder the wizard in the back (or backstab them without they can intercept him).
That is why I liked the penalty in Drums of War (and warbanner?):
moving from a tile in Zoc only costed an extra movement point. I think it represented looking for an opening well enough.
It also works in preventing the dance of Japanese tactical RPG where everyone backstabs everyone every turn in a duel.
Note: I know that D20 already covers it with withdrawal, but many CRPG actually do punish a character for withdrawing from melee even when it makes no sense. In this case too, ignoring the starting tile is a good compromise and helps in limiting withdrawals to sensible situations only.
Last edited: