Front side overlapping

[Delphin]

I found very strange situation, that looks like following the rules verbatim is against common sense.



Stand C overlaps a flank of D, but does B overlap front side?

At 68.1 a: Any edge that is overlapped by corner contact
At 68.2: A stand overlaps an enemy stand by corner contact if all the following apply:
a. The overlapping stand is in front corner-to-front corner contact with the friendly attacking stand. The contact must be left front corner-to-right front corner or vice versa.
b. The overlapping stand is also in corner-to-corner contact with the enemy stand.
c. The overlapping stand is not in front contact with an enemy stand.

Looks like all conditions are met and B overlaps front side of D. So, D receive -2 penalti.

What do you think about this?

[David Kuijt]

I don't have my rules in front of me (I'm in Canada right now), but you can only count one penalty on one side. So if you have two things on the right side (as in your picture), that only gives a -1.

[MarkusB]

Section 68.1:
"At most a single -1 tactical factor is applied per edge even if multiple threats apply to that edge."

[Delphin]

Yes, I can only count one penalty on one side. But in my case I overlap two sides - flank by C and front by B.

[zendor]

Very interesting question.
I also had such situation which was similar with Delphin's scheme.
I suppose it looks like diagram F.5.a but with one important difference in the enemy stand in front contact with stand A (I drew it as red stand in the diagram below).
So, in this example will the stand B overlap stand A on its front side or not?

[David Kuijt]

Yes, I can only count one penalty on one side. But in my case I overlap two sides - flank by C and front by B.

D has four edges: front (fighting A), left side, right side, and rear.

As MarkusB quotes (thanks, MarkusB), you cannot get more than one -1 per edge. The left edge of D could suffer a -1 for the overlap by B, or a -1 for the flank by C, but not both because that violates 68.1 . And the example you cite is exactly why the rules 68.1 says "even if multiple threats apply to that edge".

[David Kuijt]

Zendor, in your example, are you saying that only A, B, and X exist? Ignore the red blob?

If so, yes, X is the main combatant and B provides a -1 tactical modifier for an overlap.

[zendor]

Zendor, in your example, are you saying that only A, B, and X exist? Ignore the red blob?

If so, yes, X is the main combatant and B provides a -1 tactical modifier for an overlap.

Red exist. I redrew it.
So, will X overlap B and provide -1 factor to the main combat?

[MarkusB]

Yes, I can only count one penalty on one side. But in my case I overlap two sides - flank by C and front by B.

Ok, now I think I see where the confusion arises. This is how I've always played:

You don't overlap an edge that has front contact on it - you overlap the edge next to it. If you're in mutual front contact as in your example, then the edge next to it is a flank edge, and you cannot count both types of contact (corner and edge) on that same flank. But if you're in front contact with a flank edge, then you can overlap front/rear edges... see the Design Note on p. 35.

I've re-read section 68.1a and yes, now I see how it might generate some confusion by referring to "Any edge that is overlapped by corner contact".

Just my $0.02, of course!

[MarkusB]

So, will X overlap B and provide -1 factor to the main combat?

B is in front contact with A, so you must roll A vs B.
Y is in flank contact with B's right flank, so it contributes a -1 to the roll.
Nothing else can 'further penalize' B's right flank above and beyond this -1 factor.

As always, just my 2c - I'm not an authority of any kind