Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

We had several questions come up during "The Shield" regarding the incendiary cart expendable type (something you can get on several lists, but the ones we're most likely to see in competition are Spanish, Camillan Roman, and Timurid).

The questions boil down to what happens when a unit "equipped" with carts is charged frontally from outside the carts' charge reach. There are two cases: foot charge and mounted charge. I think we played these correctly, but I want to verify.

Foot charging incendiary cart equipped unit frontally from outside 80p:

* the carts can countercharge, since this is a situation in which mounted would normally be able to countercharge foot;
* the carts do not take a waver test for countercharging since, per Jon's official clarification last Fall, these carts never waver test;
* no combat occurs between the carts and the foot, but instead the charging foot suffer a disordering interpenetration and the carts are removed from play;
* since no combat has occurred yet, the now disordered foot continue their charge into the body from which the carts counter-charged, and hand to hand combat is resolved;
* the body from which the carts counter-charged has no response available to it at this point other than to stand and receive;
* if the charging body is not in contact with any enemy at the end of the bound, and has suffered no new cause of disorder, it reverts to steady as the interpenetration from the carts is a cessation-cured cause of disorder;
* if the charging body is in contact with enemy at the end of the bound, it remains disordered as you can't recover from disorder while in combat.

And now the question: is all of the above correct?

Mounted charging incendiary cart equipped unit frontally from outside 80p:

* the carts can countercharge, since this is a situation in which mounted would normally be able to counter-charge mounted;
* the body from which the carts counter-charged makes no charge response, including no waver test for being charged by mounted, as the carts, rather than the body, are making the charge response;
* the mounted charge stops at the point at which the carts are contacted, and the mounted take a waver test for being contacted by expendables;
* the mounted body and the carts "fight", with the carts doing incendiary damage and any applicable support shooting applying to the carts before incendiary damage is assessed;
* the only possible outcome of this fight is that the mounted destroy the carts, and then rally on the spot (since they've destroyed all hand to hand opponents);
* if the mounted had shaken from being contacted by expendables, they would now revert to disordered (since they've destroyed all hand to hand opponents).

And now the question: is all of the above correct?


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

I don't see anything substantively wrong there.

One minor point - the unit launching the expendable is, in fact, the one doing the responding.

"Igniting incendiary expendables as a countercharge *is* a charge response by the accompanying unit and may be made against impetuous and/or mounted bodies."

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Jon,

Wouldn't mounted still take the waiver test for being contacted by expendables?

Kelly

[joncleaves]

Yes. And in Mark's third bullet, they do.

[Martin]

wouldn't it be theoretically possible for the carts to rout a mounted opponent. Either by:

a) inflicting 3cpf

or

b) If the mounted shook (for been contacted), were then disordered by the combat (fairly likely in a combat with incendiaries) and failed the second waver test for disordered while disorded

Martin

[joncleaves]

Both are possible.

boy do I hate those things...lol

[Kelly Wilkinson]

I like them for making moogs and scutari fight my LTS at a fair and even playing field. Instead of my guys dying on an even die throw, they have a chance to make it into a fight by disordering those brutal men from Spain!

Kelly

[Bill Chriss]

[Kel Wilkinson]

Jon,

Is Mark's 6th bullet correct that a shaken enemy mounted unit would revert to disordered because the expendable destroyed?

Kel

[joncleaves]

Yes.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Jon,

I'm kind of confused as usual. Since an expendable such as pigs or ox/camel carts will always be destroyed at the end of it's attack, won't all opponents shaken by these types of expendables end up as merely disordered and does this remain as a combat caused disorder or is it of the cessation cured variety?

Kel

[joncleaves]

I see now where the confusion is.

Incendiary expendables can only be *destroyed* by entering a water obstacle.
In all other cases, they are *removed*.
The target of an incendiary expendable does not actually fight it in hand to hand.

I only saw the word 'expendable' when I was answering the question. If this specific question is about incendiary expendables specifically, then yes, the shaken target would remain shaken.

[Dave Markowitz]

Jon, you made the following clarification: One minor point - the unit launching the expendable is, in fact, the one doing the responding.

"Igniting incendiary expendables as a countercharge *is* a charge response by the accompanying unit and may be made against impetuous and/or mounted bodies."

Based on that, Mark's second bullet point that says "the body from which the carts counter-charged makes no charge response, including no waver test for being charged by mounted, as the carts, rather than the body, are making the charge response." needs to be corrected.

In short, loose foot with an incendiary expendible do waver test if charged by mounted, even if they chose to lauch their incendiary expendible as a charge response. Correct?

[Mark Stone]

[Dave Markowitz]

Many thanks, that would be a good one to know before the 26th!