Adjacent monsters

[Jewels!]

I don't recall this ever coming up back in the day since the way we played, every hero had every weapon they could afford (and use). But it came up tonight:

The rules for the crossbow state the hero cannot attack adjacent monsters. However, the rule book (NA) clearly states that "adjacent" means in the square immediately to the north/south/east/west of the hero. Does this mean the crossbow can be used to attack in the immediate squares diagonally, the same as the longsword? It didn't sound quite right to me for some reason but I couldn't find anything saying otherwise in a skim of the rule book.

I allowed the attack. Was I right?

[Sjeng]

This is one of the many unclarities of the HQ rules.

Most people houserule this not to be allowed. To me "adjacent" means all the 8 squares surrounding a figure. The adjacent squares can he straight or diagonal. Most weapons only allow you to attack in a straight line, some also allow diagonal attacks, such as the longsword or spear or staff. I've given this a name too: "reach" (the name itself wasn't my idea, but it's very clear).

Ranged weapons hit anything in line of sight, but not adjacent, in my case all 8 surrounding squares. Check my custom Armoury sheet for the rules too.

I also have an additional houserule for ranged weapons: you may fire over low furniture such as a table or chair (not cupboards or bookcases) at the cost of one attack die. Basically I think you should be able to shoot over a table, but as the enemy is partially covered by the furniture, your chances of hitting are reduced

[The Road Warrior]

I allowed the attack. Was I right?

If you are Zargon/Morcar you are always right!
I'm sure it says this somewhere in the rules

[knightkrawler]

My reasoning is this: a ranged attack is any attack over a distance of 2 squares or more (for any miniature to move).
A diagonal square is a distance of 2 squares away from you when you move.
So, for me, attacking a diagonal square is a ranged attack in this sense, and thus allowed to be pulled off with any ranged weapon - projectile or thrown.

[Goblin-King]

My reasoning is this: a ranged attack is any attack over a distance of 2 squares or more (for any miniature to move).
A diagonal square is a distance of 2 squares away from you when you move.
So, for me, attacking a diagonal square is a ranged attack in this sense, and thus allowed to be pulled off with any ranged weapon - projectile or thrown.

Pretty much this.
You are either in melee range or not. If you are out of melee you are allowed to use ranged attacks. Normal weapons can only reach N,S,E,W. Ergo the diagonals must be out of melee range, thus allowing for ranged combat.

[chaoticprime]

Adjacent basically means "presently bordering something or someone you can [jet] grab and throw down, or thrust at." "Near-Laying Down-Throw," literally.

I think the rules are pretty clear regarding the crossbow, actually. The rules make a clear distinction between adjacent and diagonal ranges, and the crossbow specifically eliminates only adjacent enemies as targets. Though, realistically, an arbalest could be used quite simply against an adjacent enemy. Loading it again, even with a crannequin, would suck, however.

[Sjeng]

I just don't like the idea that you can both attack a diagonal enemy with a weapon that has reach ánd the crossbow.

[knightkrawler]

And I don't like the idea that you can't...

[Sjeng]

it's just too easy! Ranged should be far away from you. And an attack with a melee weapon that has diagonal reach is basically still melee range. And a ranged weapon should be beyond that. But that's how I interpreted it, and I kinda find it most logical too. But I agree the official rules leave room for the aforementioned diagonal attack with ranged weapons.

[knightkrawler]

But why shouldn't you be able to just shoot that Fimir in front of you in the stomach?

The only reason why I don't allow ranged weapons to be used adjacently is because at least two heroes (Elf and Dwarf) probably wouldn't even buy melee weapons anymore...
My far-fetched reasoning for not allowing this is
1. The rules; sometimes I just don't change them, cause they seem to have it right
and
2. No time to aim and too awkward an angle... IF my players ask, which they haven't.

I aim to
1. As aforementioned, keep it a requirement to always equip a melee weapon. My heroes max out towards the end of the games system quests EVEN THOUGH I only allow two treasure searches per room and other changes...
and
2. Keep the "compromise" nature and purpose of diagonally attacking weapons; also, I plan introduced halberd (and maybe even pike) to have a range of two squares edge-to-edge (which still means, only one diagonal step, mind you).