Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Jon,

The following seems pretty straight forward to me, but since it has been a point
of discussion in the past I wanted to make sure. In 14.43 you say: "Players
define their troop types for their opponent at the outset, and when they become
visible. This will include all weapons and armor, but not morale grades."

Since darts, incendiaries, etc. are all weapons, their presence would have to be
declared at the outset. "All" means all, yes?


-Mark Stone

[Mark Stone]

Jon,

Last question/comment (for now). This concerns adjusting army lists in
competition, 14.46. You say: "No element of any body removed can be from a
troop type with an element minimum in the list."

So here's a common situation: An army list contains a line such as:
Peasants Irr D LMI up to 1/2 Bow, rest IPW @ 3 pts.... 0-12.

I buy a unit of 12 stands of Peasants, 1/2 Bow, 1/2 IPW. Not very useful. They'd
be a lot more useful if they could skirmish, and if I could come up with the
points needed for that ditched palisade to put them behind. As luck would have
it, if I can cash in 18 points I can afford the 20 points for the ditched
palisade. It seems to me that I can cash in the IPW guys, leaving me with a 6
stand unit of Irr D LMI B, since this is not a troop type "with an element
minimum" even though I end up with a unit that does not abide by required
ratios.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 9/23/2004 23:11:15 Central Daylight Time,
hrisikos@... writes:

What???!!! Where do the rules say this? On page 96 we find: "Field
fortifications are paid for after terrain positioning. The points replace
an equal value of TROOPS (not units) already chosen which are assumed to
be detached to gather materials or guard communications, AND CAN INCLUDE
COMPULSORY CHOICES..."



Greek, we are talking about the revised section 14.0, now in the files
section as a playtest draft. Did you miss the announcement? The adjustment
for
TFs and special equipment will no longer be allowed from list minima. Please
see the file Warrior1214 in the files section and feel free to let me know
your comments after you have read it.

14.0 is not and has never been a 'core rule' - it is a suggested tourney
format. But over the last two years it has been made crystal clear that the
playership wants one single basic standard for comp games in the rulebook.
They
do not all agree on what that is, however. So we are going to give them the
one that pleases the most people in the way best suited for
competition-style play and the list philosophy we employ.

Jon


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

[Bill Chriss]

=> You can't turn in part of a unit. If, however, you had made those 12
> elements into 2 units, you could get rid of the IPW armed unit and keep
> the B armed
> one.
>
> Jon
>
>


What???!!! Where do the rules say this? On page 96 we find: "Field
fortifications are paid for after terrain positioning. The points replace
an equal value of TROOPS (not units) already chosen which are assumed to
be detached to gather materials or guard communications, AND CAN INCLUDE
COMPULSORY CHOICES..."

This seems to say the precise opposite of your posts in two respects:
first, there is no mention of units, only troops. Second it seems
abundantly clear that one may detach and "trade in" required minimums from
an army list in exchange for field fortifications. Although this clause is
found under the section on TF's, everyone I know has always assumed it
also applied to everything else on page 96, but now I don't know what to
believe about anything.

Evidently, every player I've ever met going back 10 years into TOG has
been playing this wrong although precisely in accord with the wording of
the rule. I have to sacrifice a 74 point unit to buy 10 points of rocks
for another's use? Please explain.


Greek

[joncleaves]

So when
will the "new" rules be out..>>

I can't give you an exact date - or rather I won't. I have been in the game
business way too long to want to tell a customer that a product is going to be
out while it is still bein playtested. This is the rulebook I wish I had
originally written with the layout and production values I wish we had
originally applied.

<<.i.e., how much playtesting time are you
forecasting before finalizing text, printing and binding and selling?>>

I won't let this go to the printers until I am happy and I am a ways from happy.
All I can tell you is that I will be very unhappy if this isn't the rulebook
folks are using at HCon next summer. Is it possible it could be done before
then? Sure, but no promises.

<< My
"old" rules are already coming apart (both copies).>>

You will be able to send us proof of your old one for a discount on the new one.
Save the cover...

J

[Bill Chriss]

>
>
> Greek, we are talking about the revised section 14.0, now in the files
> section as a playtest draft. Did you miss the announcement? The
> adjustment for
> TFs and special equipment will no longer be allowed from list minima.
> Please
> see the file Warrior1214 in the files section and feel free to let me
> know
> your comments after you have read it.
>
> 14.0 is not and has never been a 'core rule' - it is a suggested tourney
> format. But over the last two years it has been made crystal clear that
> the
> playership wants one single basic standard for comp games in the
> rulebook. They
> do not all agree on what that is, however. So we are going to give them
> the
> one that pleases the most people in the way best suited for
> competition-style play and the list philosophy we employ.
>
> Jon
>


Hmmm...I guess I didn't understand or deleted that message. My goof.
Sorry. I'll get into the files section and check this out. I'm interested
to see playtesters' reactions. Thanks for setting me straight. So when
will the "new" rules be out...i.e., how much playtesting time are you
forecasting before finalizing text, printing and binding and selling? My
"old" rules are already coming apart (both copies).
Again, sorry i missed the previous explanation.


Greek

Jon,

Given that the front edge of all elements in a unit is congruent with
the edge of a terrain feature and the remainder of the unit occupies
the terrain (example, a unit in a village with front edge lined up on
edge of village). The unit moves straight forward out of the terrain
feature.

Question: Is the unit's movement reduced at all?

Based on your answer, I may have a follow-up question to this.

Thanks.

-- Charles

[joncleaves]

Given that the front edge of all elements in a unit is congruent with
the edge of a terrain feature and the remainder of the unit occupies
the terrain (example, a unit in a village with front edge lined up on
edge of village). The unit moves straight forward out of the terrain
feature.

Question: Is the unit's movement reduced at all?>>
[
Yes, the front edge started the move in the terrain. Aligned exactly with the
edge is 'in'. Thanks

Jon

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Gosh Mark,

I love my peasants. They provide me with much fun on my opponents flanks
and especially up in the middle where many opponents will simply charge them.
Additionally, if you set them up right by giving them a three element gap to
their right, their rout move can deliver an enemy's shieldless side into the
waiting hands of any counter punching lancers/foot that you post to react to
this planned event. Though I can see your point that the IPW is a dead give away
about their possible morale, but points are points and some guys can't help
themselves when freebies are presented and they think they may be able to cause
some waiver tests. It's just so priceless to see the looks on peoples faces when
they discover that they're stuck to following "E" class troops and the
realization that "Hell is coming to dinner" (quoted from "The Outlaw Josey
Wales")!

Just my 2 cents.

kelly wilkinson

kelly

JonCleaves@... wrote:
In a message dated 9/23/2004 18:10:10 Central Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

Last question/comment (for now). This concerns adjusting army lists in
competition, 14.46. You say: "No element of any body removed can be from a
troop type with an element minimum in the list."

So here's a common situation: An army list contains a line such as:
Peasants Irr D LMI up to 1/2 Bow, rest IPW @ 3 pts.... 0-12.

I buy a unit of 12 stands of Peasants, 1/2 Bow, 1/2 IPW. Not very useful.
They'd
be a lot more useful if they could skirmish, and if I could come up with the
points needed for that ditched palisade to put them behind. As luck would
have
it, if I can cash in 18 points I can afford the 20 points for the ditched
palisade. It seems to me that I can cash in the IPW guys, leaving me with a 6
stand unit of Irr D LMI B, since this is not a troop type "with an element
minimum" even though I end up with a unit that does not abide by required
ratios.>>

You can't turn in part of a unit. If, however, you had made those 12
elements into 2 units, you could get rid of the IPW armed unit and keep the B
armed
one.

Jon


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


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 is new and improved - Check it out!

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