I quote from Reference guide 1.3 When a Character uses a movement to leave a space Adjacent to an Enemy, both Characters make a Face to Face Disengage Roll. To Disengage, follow this sequence: However it is not totally clear to me whether this is mandatory on the part of the Defender. Could the Defender just choose to let the active player move without the roll? I just saw Juan Lara in his latest YouTube video use Bachmann to impose four Poison tokens on the Defender merely by moving two spaces. We have always had the Taunting Characters being able to taunt in the Disengage roll and we often see Tao Wu forcing the Defender to discard two Tactics by attempting to move twice. I have always felt that the Disengage roll was mandatory for both players until I saw what Bachmann did.
Disengage is mandatory for both aristoi, as long as it's a FtF roll mandatory for the active character that wishes to move. After the roll both characters can decide whether using their symbols for disengaging/engaging or for switches (as always). Hope this helps! :3
I am sorry, but I think I do not understand the question. But I would like to, to get a better understanding of the rules Are you referring to the defender using his dice results just for switches? Hence with two disengages away from Bachmann and with his switch you could inflict 4 poison token to the active Aristo. Or is it the other way around and you would like to prevent the disengage roll completely and just let the active Aristo (Bachmann) move away to prevent any switches? E.g. Taowu making you discard tactics for a "disengage" he cannot win (-> agility). Would be great to clarify as I have not seen the video you are referring to. Thanks!
I mean the second paragraph. May the defender choose just to let the active character leave without any face-to-face roll all together. I believe now that the answer is NO. This makes Bachmann a very powerful character that can inflict poison merely by moving adjacent and then away from an enemy. Watch the "Ecos del Hexadome" video posted March 17. Even if you don't understand the Spanish you will understand Aristeia!
This would also apply to Taowu. His whole thing with disengaging is that he automatically makes the opponent discard a card. It wouldn't make sense if the opponent could let him disengage without his "roll" activating.
While I can see some instances where it'd be beneficial to let someone move away, in the end I believe its beneficial to keep it a mutual requirement. The reason for that is that the disengaging player has to remind the other player to participate in order to be successful. If its optional and 1) the disengaging player forgets to ask plus 2) the player being disengaged forgets to do it, then its unopposed. Lets face it: lapses happen :)