Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/19/2004 2:39:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

> And as soon as you can guarantee that people will not try
> to seek
> advantage by finding a previously unseen loophole...>>

Oh, I know better..lol I'd just rather be spending my time on the new
rulebook...most of which is only there in the first place BECAUSE of this sort
of thing...

>
> ...hell will freeze over and mess up the terrain rules.>>

Now, *that* is funny...

>
> Ewan, who would never be sleazy. No, no, not I. Oh no.>>

No, we are all aware of your snowy-white rep on this issue... ;)

[Doug]

>In a message dated 5/19/2004 1:21:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>rockd@... writes:
>
>> SO if the line of elements A,b,C,d,E,f,G is aligned so the center of
>> each element (from front to back) is resting directly on the crest
>> line, then they can all see & be seen over each other; in
>> effect they
>> can now shoot "overhead" 360 degrees:>.
>
>No, as if they are all on the crest they are all on the same height.
>
>You know, I just have to say I personally hate answering 'rules
>questions' that are theoretical attempts to sleaze as much out of
>the rules as possible....This would be time I would personally
>prefer to spend on another aspect of Warrior...
>
>Jon

My point is that the rules I quoted don't contain the qualifier "higher."

Don't the bullets need to say --

5. Troops who are:
* at different heights on steep slopes and/or crests
* more than 80 paces...

can see or be seen over others.

*****

> ...hell will freeze over and mess up the terrain rules.>>

Sounds like a suggestion for the Fantasy Warrior terrain rules.