View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ed Forbes Centurion

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1092
|
Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2004 5:43 am Post subject: Rules Question: Pavise |
 |
|
7.2 a pavise counts as cover and shield, except if carried on back of
hand gun or crossbow, then count cover and shieldless when shooting.
Question: do all crossbow / handgun count as above or is the above
exception a list rule for some armies?
________________________________________________________________
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!
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447
|
Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:31 am Post subject: Re: Rules Question: Pavise |
 |
|
In a message dated 2/20/2004 20:57:41 Central Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:
7.2 a pavise counts as cover and shield, except if carried on back of
hand gun or crossbow, then count cover and shieldless when shooting.
Question: do all crossbow / handgun count as above or is the above
exception a list rule for some armies?>>
All CB/HG armed figures count this way if equipped with Pa and shooting.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________ Roll Up and Win! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ed Forbes Centurion

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1092
|
Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:13 pm Post subject: Re: Rules Question: Pavise |
 |
|
Thanks Jon,
I think the wording on 7.2 should be tightened up on CB / HG.
I have had opponents state that their CB did not carry the Pa on their
back, so they took both shield and cover. I had to agree with them as
the way it is written implies that only some, not all, CB / HG have
their Pa on their back. I realize the parenthesis can be thought of as
outside the sentence, but not all usage, including yours, of parenthesis
use this rule. Best to keep it clear.
I suggest something on the order of removing the statement in
parenthesis, (that is hung.....), from the body of the sentence stating
the rule. Adding an explanation at very end of the line on CB / HG on
how CB / HG use Pa carried on their back as the reason for the rule would
be ok. This change would make it clear that all, not some, CB / HG are
impacted.
Ed
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:31:22 EST JonCleaves@... writes:
>
> Question: do all crossbow / handgun count as above or is the above
> exception a list rule for some armies?>>
>
> All CB/HG armed figures count this way if equipped with Pa and
> shooting.
________________________________________________________________
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!
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447
|
Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 12:16 am Post subject: Re: Rules Question: Pavise |
 |
|
In a message dated 2/22/2004 13:26:29 Central Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:
I think the wording on 7.2 should be tightened up on CB / HG. >>
The statement in parens is 'color'. But I will note this for the second
printing.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________ Roll Up and Win! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|