Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

Ok...trying to make little text graphics here to illustrate the issue that came up.

First a unit description:
Unit A is a mounted lancer unit, 2 elements, in column
Unit B is an impetuous mounted lancer unit, 2 elements, in column, pursuing unit X
Unit X is a routing regular loose order infantry unit, 3 elements, in column, being pursued by unit B.
Unit Y is a mounted lancer unit, 2 elements, in column

Before the graphic, the intent of unit Y is to charge through unit X (as it is permitted via the interpenetration rules) to hit unit B. The intent of unit A is to charge the flank of routing unit X.

Here's my attempt to use text characters to display the case:

....A

Y XB

Direction - X is routing away from B, currently towards Y. Y is facing X and B. A is facing the flank side of X.

So, Y wants to charge through X and hit B while A wants to charge X. What happens?

Does A hit the flank of Y? That doesn't seem possible, as that would cancel Y's charge. Do Y and A instead hit? If so, where?

Frank

[joncleaves]

I have no idea.

X will have to rout to its table edge, which I can only assume is "west". Maybe A, now treated as charging vs an evader, may reach Y before Y gets into X - although if it has a choice at all, it must hit X as it is impetuous. Y's charge does not look canceled, but its hard to tell if it is in the path of A at start.

My guess is - both hit. But as the diagram is completely out of scale and the question extremely specific and exacting in what is required to answer, all I have is a guess.

[Frank Gilson]

X can't perform a rout move yet (at charges) as it is in contact with enemy (B). So Neither X nor B move at all, only Y and A.

Perhaps Mark Stone and I should fish up a digital camera, lay down figures and a ruler, and attach the resulting image.

Frank

[joncleaves]

Ah, that part is my fault as I read pursuing as the movement and not the combat action.

If X is stationary, it looks to me like Y will hit B and A will hit Y. You certainly can have a unit hit in the flank during a charge that did not have its charge initially cacneled.

Is Y in A's charge path to start?

[Frank Gilson]

Y is not in A's charge path at declaration. Y's declared charge would move it into A's charge path at resolution of charge movement, after Y has moved into and replaced some of the elements of X...which would seem to mean it needs to replace all of the elements of X, and contact B, at which point then you have:
X placed beyond Y, will rout move at the appropriate time
Y charging impetuously into the front of B
A charging the flank of Y
B, as originally (and still) impetuous pursuers, contacting Y frontally.

Is that correct in this case? Let me know if you would benefit from a photograph.

Frank

[joncleaves]

That is correct.

It begs the question what on earth the player who owns Y is doing, but it is correct rules-wise.

[Mark Stone]

[Frank Gilson]

In the actual battle:
Unit Y (our about to be flank charged unit) is SHK L,Sh.

Unit B (our pursuers) is EHC L.

Y should thus rout B at contact, regardless of being hit in the flank by A, and put A's command (A is a general with EHC L) into retreat. This is why Y really wants to charge B.

Frank

[joncleaves]

Well, that's one darned good reason for Y to charge.

Mark, don't know what to tell ya about your "rule of thumb". It certainly is possible to get off a charge and end up getting hit in your flank.

[Frank Gilson]

Dredging up old rules concerns again...

This case should actually be impossible by an application of 6.163K.

That is, in K we have "a charge is declared against it by enemy not already in or moving into the path of the charge." as a source of the cancellation of a charge.

So, A's charge cancel's Y's charge.

And A's charge is declared upon Y as we have 6.163G "Charges count as declared on all legal targets in or moving into the ‘charge path’, see below."