Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Given the new rules Scott just posted regarding how generals may be combined
with other units, on the Marian Roman list it appears you could now have the
following units:

CinC as HC JLS,Sh + 2 Reg A HC JLS,Sh (front rank)
Macedonians 1 stand of Reg B HC JLS, Sh (back rank)

Subgen as HC JLS,Sh + 2 Reg A HC JLS,Sh (front rank)
Macedonians 1 stand of Reg B HC JLS, Sh (back rank)

That's not the question. That part is all clearly and perfectly legal under
current rules; I've no idea whether it's historical or not (not my period).
Now, the list rules say "Macedonian... cavalry fight 1.5 ranks in h-t-h if
charging, counter-charging, or pursuing." So here's the question: do the above
units fight in 1.5 ranks when charging, counter-charging, or pursuing?

Possible answers that occurred to me: No, because the front rank isn't
Macedonian (which begs the question if it isn't Macedonian, then what is it --
the list doesn't specify -- and why is it allowed to mix with Macedonians).

Yes, because each is a unit of Macedonian cav, and the list rule applies.

Yes, because the front rank gets to fight for being the front rank and half the
second rank gets to fight for being Macedonian.

What's the right answer here (and presumably the answer that applies to
Historicon)?


-Mark

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/8/2004 5:59:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

> Subgen as HC JLS,Sh + 2 Reg A HC JLS,Sh (front rank)
> Macedonians 1 stand of Reg B HC JLS, Sh (back rank)
>
> That's not the question. That part is all clearly and perfectly legal under
> current rules; I've no idea whether it's historical or not (not my period).
> Now, the list rules say "Macedonian... cavalry fight 1.5 ranks in h-t-h if
> charging, counter-charging, or pursuing." So here's the question: do the above
> units fight in 1.5 ranks when charging, counter-charging,
> or pursuing?>>

No. Whenever a list rule allows an element to fight 1.5 ranks, both the 1 and
the .5 have to be the same as the descriptor in the list rule. As the
subgeneral and cinc are not listed as macedonian cavalry, the answer is no.

Jon

[Mark Stone]

> From: JonCleaves@...
> Subject: Re: rules/list question regarding Marians
>
> In a message dated 6/8/2004 5:59:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> mark@... writes:
>
> > Subgen as HC JLS,Sh + 2 Reg A HC JLS,Sh (front rank)
> > Macedonians 1 stand of Reg B HC JLS, Sh (back rank)
> >
> > That's not the question. That part is all clearly and perfectly legal under
> > current rules; I've no idea whether it's historical or not (not my period).
> > Now, the list rules say "Macedonian... cavalry fight 1.5 ranks in h-t-h if
> > charging, counter-charging, or pursuing." So here's the question: do the
> above
> > units fight in 1.5 ranks when charging, counter-charging,
> > or pursuing?>>
>
> No. Whenever a list rule allows an element to fight 1.5 ranks, both the 1
> and the .5 have to be the same as the descriptor in the list rule. As the
> subgeneral and cinc are not listed as macedonian cavalry, the answer is no.
>

Sorry to be a complete pain about this, but I want to make sure I completely
understand. So:

What makes you think the general isn't Macedonian? No nationality is specified
for the general; why wouldn't he assume that of whatever troop type he combines
with?

And the answer _can't_ be that historically Romans didn't have Macedonian
generals. I, as a player, have no access to history; I only have access to the
rules and the lists. And there are certainly other lists where the CinC can be
of a nationality different from that of the list (Feudal French, for example,
can have a Spanish CinC).

So show me where, in the list, or in the Warrior rules, it makes clear that the
general _cannot_ be Macedonian.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/9/2004 12:36:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

> So show me where, in the list, or in the Warrior rules, it
> makes clear that the
> general _cannot_ be Macedonian.>>

Not the issue. The general is not listed as Macedonian Cavalry and the list
text makes no exception - therefore the list rule that applies to Macedonian
Cavalry does not apply to him because he is not listed as such. Whether
historically the actual person of the general might or might not be ethnically
macedonian is not relevant to the application of the list rule.

J

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/9/2004 08:44:29 Central Daylight Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:

List rule states "noble/follower cavalry". But you put your generals
with noble cavalry (a logical step with no gamey reason). Now, they
do not fight 1.5 ranks because of the general - even though he is
exactly the same troop class and morale grade and everything?

A more "normal" application which certainly seems reasonable by any
stretch and there may be a few others like this (though I have not
seen the latest errata yet).>>

We are working this out internally to FHE. Mark, John and others, please
stand by.

Jon







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

[John Murphy]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> Not the issue. The general is not listed as Macedonian Cavalry
and the list text makes no exception - therefore the list rule that
applies to Macedonian Cavalry does not apply to him because he is
not listed as such. Whether historically the actual person of the
general might or might not be ethnically macedonian is not relevant
to the application of the list rule.

Say, then, you have Early Sarmatians (ImpWar #4).

List rule states "noble/follower cavalry". But you put your generals
with noble cavalry (a logical step with no gamey reason). Now, they
do not fight 1.5 ranks because of the general - even though he is
exactly the same troop class and morale grade and everything?

A more "normal" application which certainly seems reasonable by any
stretch and there may be a few others like this (though I have not
seen the latest errata yet).