Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

JLS bought as incendiaries counts as an incendiary weapon, It uses JLS factors
in HTH, as there is no special line in hth for incendiary weapons. The basic
effect is to cause disorder to animals if you do 1CPF. You can also burn down
wooden TFs.
The purchase of it is only permitted by list. This is basically dailami on
lists like Arab Conquest.

Note the change in list books (see website) for those troops that can have
incendiary JLS but also have another missile weapon. The below is from the
errata to Dark Age Warrior::

"GLOBAL CHANGE: Troops in lists 15, 16 allowed incendiary JLS who also have a
longer ranged missile weapon may choose to shoot incendiary (NOT normal) JLS, if
they have such a shot remaining, in any given shooting phase as an exception to
2.31. They may never shoot both in the same phase."

Jon

[joncleaves]

Are there any specifics relating to preparing to shoot, takes an approach
move or maneuver? Any specifics related to treat the unit as artillery for
move and fire? If unit moves incendiaries are lost? Etc...>>

No.

Or is it as simple as "I have em I wanna shoot them declared right then and
there in the prep shoot phase?">>

Yes.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Cool! Does this mean they can be shot in support?

kelly

JonCleaves@... wrote:
JLS bought as incendiaries counts as an incendiary weapon, It uses JLS factors
in HTH, as there is no special line in hth for incendiary weapons. The basic
effect is to cause disorder to animals if you do 1CPF. You can also burn down
wooden TFs.
The purchase of it is only permitted by list. This is basically dailami on
lists like Arab Conquest.

Note the change in list books (see website) for those troops that can have
incendiary JLS but also have another missile weapon. The below is from the
errata to Dark Age Warrior::

"GLOBAL CHANGE: Troops in lists 15, 16 allowed incendiary JLS who also have a
longer ranged missile weapon may choose to shoot incendiary (NOT normal) JLS, if
they have such a shot remaining, in any given shooting phase as an exception to
2.31. They may never shoot both in the same phase."

Jon





Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!

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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/7/2004 06:26:56 Central Daylight Time,
JonBecker@... writes:

DIdn't know if this one made it thru...>>
It did and I answered, but here goes again...



Are there any specifics relating to preparing to shoot, takes an approach
move or maneuver?>>
No.

Any specifics related to treat the unit as artillery for
move and fire? If unit moves incendiaries are lost? Etc...>>
No.



Or is it as simple as "I have em I wanna shoot them declared right then and
there in the prep shoot phase?">>
Yes.







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

okay fellas I have to through my hat in this ring. Having just read
Marco Polo's writings. The army of Kublai Khan invading the kingdom of
Annam used flaming arrows to scare(in our game disorder) the annam
elephants. There were no TF present in this battle. Marco Polo wrote
this description as if using flaming arrows was a common occurence
against enemy troops. Now he did not mention whether it was a common
occurence. So this might just be the way the interpreter translated
his text into English. Having done a bunch of research on the Mongols
over the last few months. They used flaming arrows against TF's
repeatedly in their 1241 campaign against the Russian principalities.
The sources I have read state specifically that the russian forts at
this time were wooden stockades. So historically there is a basis for
flaming arrows being used.
However I also agree with noel about the factor against infantry
being to high. Good luck on figuring this one JOn. GREG HAUSER