Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[John Murphy]

Okay, I had thought that impetuous chargers whose HtH opponents
break and rout had to pursue the routing opponent to exclusion of
all else if at all possible, i.e. dropping back elements to pass a
gap etcetera.

But when this came up in a game yesterday I could not find it in the
rules for the life of me, and in fact the rules say the pursuers
can, even if impetuous, convert into an uncovered new target, which
was taken to mean the following.

PPPP
PPPP
..RR
..RR
EE..
EE..

P had charged impetuously. R routs against P. R passes unit E. E is
now "uncovered" by the passage of R, even though no
interpenentration or break-through occured. So P may now convert
into E rather than continue to pursue R which it could reach by
dropping elements back.

Not how I understood it, but I can certainly see how the rules could
be read this way.

(a) What is correct here and (b) is this something in need of
further clarification in the new rulebook?

(did not make a real game difference but a need-to-know for future)

[joncleaves]

Okay, I had thought that impetuous chargers whose HtH opponents
break and rout had to pursue the routing opponent to exclusion of
all else if at all possible, i.e. dropping back elements to pass a
gap etcetera.>>
[
The rule here is 6.33..

"6.33 Pursuit Moves. Pursuit moves are similar to charges at evading troops:
pursuing bodies move their tactical move distance directly
after their target and it is a variable move (6.112). After the variable
distance is determined, pursuers move the full distance they are
capable of, or the same distance as the pursued, whichever is least. Pursuers
maintain contact with the pursued if possible, causing handto-
hand combat casualties without reply while still in contact. "

That means that if you *can* maintain contact with the pursued body, then you
must. John, in your diagram, it seems that the pursuer had the movement to
reach the router, so so far by 6.33, he should have.

later in 6.33...
"If the pursued body interpenetrates or diverts around other troops of its own
side, impetuous pursuers must convert their pursuit
to a charge into the new (uncovered) enemy if it is a legal charge target.""

From the diagram, it did not appear to me that the router had to dovert or
interpenetrate, so the other body was not 'uncovered'. So, if I understand the
diagram correctly, the pursuer should have dropped back and stayed in conatc
with the router.

Jon

[John Murphy]

Got it. That is what I thought but for some reason the rules did not
seem to read that way when I pointed them out to my opponent.

Perhaps the issue is with "uncovered". Even if the routers did not
interpenetrate or deviate, it was thought that the fact their
presence no longer was in the way of converting into the new target
meant they were "uncovered".

Looking at it this morning the language seems clear enough though
as "uncovered" definitely is written to apply only to being
uncovered by a deviation or interpenetration, just had a mental
moment trying to explain it Saturday. Oh well.

thx,
jm