Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ed Forbes]

Scott,

No problem. The rules should be played the same both east and west. Just one
more area where the rules language needs to be tightened.

As to " the paring knife in your belt", SA is currently anything from a small
knife to larger than a 36" blade. I have held for years that SA was a loose
definition. Perhaps 1HCW will address this problem if more troops that trained
with and used a full sword gets the use of it.

Ed

>Ed: If you ever play out east and have 2HCW, you'll be required to use them.
No swapping them for the paring knife in your belt:):)



________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/2/2004 1:57:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
spocksleftball@... writes:

> Dare I say it....perhaps a list rule for those that might
> reasonably
> be expected to change weapons?
> Just an idea.
> Wanax>>

We'd certainly consider it. Do you know of a troop type in history that had a
two handed sword or axe and then dropped it and pulled out a sword or mace and
unslung their shields in combat?

[Ed Forbes]

Unfortunately we know to little about how these troops actually fought.

Most such troops trained hard with both axe and sword. Seems reasonable that
they would use that which was most effective for the moment. They would have
time to do so on the time scale that Warrior uses.

Even if they did not, it would not be the first list change to give a better
feel for what the overall effect was. Giving shields to those not known to have
them is one example.

Again, I think is comes down to needing to differentiate SA between an untrained
man with a knife at one end of the scale and a fully trained man with a full
sized sword at the other.

Ed

> Dare I say it....perhaps a list rule for those that might
> reasonably
> be expected to change weapons?
> Just an idea.
> Wanax>>

>We'd certainly consider it. Do you know of a troop type in history that had a
two handed sword or axe and then dropped it and pulled out a sword or mace and
unslung their shields in combat?





________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

[Todd Schneider]

The one danger I see is trying to switch back and forth between weapons,.
that is one round they are SA, the next 2HCW, the next SA.



I’m glad I’m not the guy who would have to write the rule for this if it
were to be implemented ;-)



Theres a lot of variables to cover in it.



_____

From: eforbes100@... [mailto:eforbes100@...]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 6:30 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: 2HCW




Unfortunately we know to little about how these troops actually fought.

Most such troops trained hard with both axe and sword. Seems reasonable that
they would use that which was most effective for the moment. They would have
time to do so on the time scale that Warrior uses.

Even if they did not, it would not be the first list change to give a better
feel for what the overall effect was. Giving shields to those not known to
have them is one example.

Again, I think is comes down to needing to differentiate SA between an
untrained man with a knife at one end of the scale and a fully trained man
with a full sized sword at the other.

Ed

> Dare I say it....perhaps a list rule for those that might
> reasonably
> be expected to change weapons?
> Just an idea.
> Wanax>>

>We'd certainly consider it. Do you know of a troop type in history that
had a two handed sword or axe and then dropped it and pulled out a sword or
mace and unslung their shields in combat?





________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/W
arriorRules/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HYPERLINK
"mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"Warrior
Rules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
"http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.624 / Virus Database: 401 - Release Date: 3/15/2004



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.624 / Virus Database: 401 - Release Date: 3/15/2004



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

easy,

player gets to choose which close weapon will be use in the round.

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 19:06:51 -0600 "Todd Schneider"
<thresh1642@...> writes:
> The one danger I see is trying to switch back and forth between
> weapons,.
> that is one round they are SA, the next 2HCW, the next SA.
>
>
>
> I’m glad I’m not the guy who would have to write the rule for this
> if it
> were to be implemented
>
>
>
> Theres a lot of variables to cover in it.
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: eforbes100@... [mailto:eforbes100@...]
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 6:30 PM
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: 2HCW
>
>
>
>
> Unfortunately we know to little about how these troops actually
> fought.
>
> Most such troops trained hard with both axe and sword. Seems
> reasonable that
> they would use that which was most effective for the moment. They
> would have
> time to do so on the time scale that Warrior uses.
>
> Even if they did not, it would not be the first list change to give
> a better
> feel for what the overall effect was. Giving shields to those not
> known to
> have them is one example.
>
> Again, I think is comes down to needing to differentiate SA between
> an
> untrained man with a knife at one end of the scale and a fully
> trained man
> with a full sized sword at the other.
>
> Ed
>
> > Dare I say it....perhaps a list rule for those that might
> > reasonably
> > be expected to change weapons?
> > Just an idea.
> > Wanax>>
>
> >We'd certainly consider it. Do you know of a troop type in history
> that
> had a two handed sword or axe and then dropped it and pulled out a
> sword or
> mace and unslung their shields in combat?
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>
>
>
> _____
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> HYPERLINK
> oups.yahoo.com/group/W
> arriorRules/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> HYPERLINK
>
"mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"Warr
ior
> Rules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
> "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.624 / Virus Database: 401 - Release Date: 3/15/2004
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.624 / Virus Database: 401 - Release Date: 3/15/2004
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

To me this swapping/choosing between using the 2hcw or side arm + shield
smells of rule lawyring, the initial post had the dreaded words "there is
nothing
in the rules that say's you can't". If the 2hcw is the primary weapon, or any
other weapon for that matter, then that is the one to be used. The side arm
would be used if the primary weapon got broke, or if the circumstances meant
that it could not be used. If the axe was such a liability then it would not be
used at all, or as a last resort. How a warrior would switch between weapons
and shield in mortal combat I cannot see. It would at the least give a free
strike against him, or if asking his fellow warrior to watch his back whilst
fighting his own opponent the same result on his fellow.

My 2 cents worth,
David.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

And how else is one to interpret rules? The rules are very specific in
that if you have both JLS and another distance weapon, you are not
allowed to use the JLS as a distance weapon. Nothing is specific in the
rules that if you have 2 close weapons, you can not use SA unless
required to.

Our reasonable interp on this was that as the rules were specific for
missile weapons and not for close weapons, the player got to choose which
close weapon to use.

And yes, if something looks like you may have a choice and it is not
specifically forbidden, I will argue the rules give the choice as "there
is nothing in the rules that say's you can't".

Ed

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 06:30:11 EDT dvdglnv@... writes:
> To me this swapping/choosing between using the 2hcw or side arm +
> shield
> smells of rule lawyring, the initial post had the dreaded words
> "there is nothing
> in the rules that say's you can't".

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

[Mark Mallard]

In a message dated 4/4/04 11:31:23 AM GMT Daylight Time, dvdglnv@...
writes:

> To me this swapping/choosing between using the 2hcw or side arm + shield
> smells of rule lawyring, the initial post had the dreaded words "there is
> nothing
> in the rules that say's you can't". If the 2hcw is the primary weapon, or
> any
> other weapon for that matter, then that is the one to be used. The side arm
> would be used if the primary weapon got broke, or if the circumstances meant
>
> that it could not be used. If the axe was such a liability then it would not
> be
> used at all, or as a last resort. How a warrior would switch between weapons
>
> and shield in mortal combat I cannot see. It would at the least give a free
> strike against him, or if asking his fellow warrior to watch his back whilst
>
> fighting his own opponent the same result on his fellow.
>
> My 2 cents worth,
> David.
>

2 cents dave - come on you live near me in england cents? - nice to see you
comment tho - game soon/?

ps working on that uk championship still - promising tie in with whitehaven
maritime festival 2005 so book your leave - in the mean time got to try to get
sorted for this year.

mark mallard


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/4/2004 3:31:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:

> And how else is one to interpret rules? The rules are very specific in
> that if you have both JLS and another distance weapon, you are not
> allowed to use the JLS as a distance weapon. Nothing is specific in the
> rules that if you have 2 close weapons, you can not use SA unless
> required to. >>

Actually, what the rules say is that you use the appropriate line on the combat
chart for how you are armed. There is no SA line. The rules tell you when to
use 'other infantry' and having 2HCW is not one of those. Having *only* SA *is*
one of those, but that is not the same.

I will admit that there are other ways to word this - it isn't direct enough.
But there is no line on the combat table for a troop who is armed with 2HCW to
use except that one and there is no exception for it like there is with some
others.

Now, I will promise to reword it in the new rulebook. What I would ask of you
guys is to let go of the rules lawyer argument - it isn't going anywhere but
bad...lol

Jon

OK, I can see where you are coming from, but the circumstances for not using
the primary weapon are clear, and is to do more with the inability to use the
weapon due to terrain, climbing etc., and that choice is made before any
combat. I still do not see how a warrior would once in melee, start switching
between 2hcw and then putting it away and using his sidearm and shield without
inviting a free opportunity to attack himself.

David.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 05/04/2004 03:06:02 GMT Daylight Time,
markmallard77@... writes:

> 2 cents dave - come on you live near me in england cents?

Practising for when we get the Euro perhaps?

Steve


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 05/04/2004 05:57:03 GMT Daylight Time, dvdglnv@...
writes:

> I still do not see how a warrior would once in melee, start switching
> between 2hcw and then putting it away

Where exactly would he put it, except in his opponent perhaps?

Steve


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

dvdglnv@a...
> writes:
>
> > I still do not see how a warrior would once in melee, start
switching
> > between 2hcw and then putting it away
>
> Where exactly would he put it, except in his opponent perhaps?
>
> Steve

Yeah like a mid battle HTW :)

Mike