Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Don! Welcome back. Missed you on the FanWar group..... :)


> 2X2 unit of REG C LC JLS,B,Sh "contracted" to 1X4, then moved forward 40p
> and adopted skirmish formation. As part of adopting skirmish, the unit
> changed frontage to become a 2X2 skirmisher. We reluctantly allowed the
> move. >>

And you should - entirely legal.

Our question is: Under manuevers it says clearly that a unit may not>
> both expand and contract in the same bound. Is that the maunuever "expand"
> and "contract" or the physical act of changing frontage. >>


The maneuver

The reason we ask>
> is that under skirmish, it says the unit adopting skirmish formation can do
> so with up to 2 El more or less frontage than the previous formation. Is
> this change in frontage an expansion (or contraction)? >>

It is not the maneuver 'change frontage'

> Can a Regular body execute the manuever "expand" or "contract", and still
> be allowed to change frontage when adopting skirmish formation in the same
> bound? >>

Yes

Will clarify. I can see where that could be written better.


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

[Don Coon]

On a different contracting note. In a game on Saturday a player did the
following:

2X2 unit of REG C LC JLS,B,Sh "contracted" to 1X4, then moved forward 40p
and adopted skirmish formation. As part of adopting skirmish, the unit
changed frontage to become a 2X2 skirmisher. We reluctantly allowed the
move. Our question is: Under manuevers it says clearly that a unit may not
both expand and contract in the same bound. Is that the maunuever "expand"
and "contract" or the physical act of changing frontage. The reason we ask
is that under skirmish, it says the unit adopting skirmish formation can do
so with up to 2 El more or less frontage than the previous formation. Is
this change in frontage an expansion (or contraction)? Per Webster it
obviously is, but the fact that is was not called expansion or contraction,
made us wonder if it was an intentional omission.

So:

Can a Regular body execute the manuever "expand" or "contract", and still
be allowed to change frontage when adopting skirmish formation in the same
bound? If the answere here is yes, perhaps a quick clarifying statement in
the skirmish para like "this does not count as an expansion or contraction"
could be added after the frontage change statement. If the answere is no,
perhaps a clarifying statement such as "This change in frontage may not be
executed in the same bound as an expand or contract manuever" could be added
after the frontage change statement.

Either way if you do or do not decide to add the clarifier (which would seem
to be a useful IMHO), could you let us know?

Don

[Don Coon]

Cool. Glad we did it correctly.


> Don! Welcome back. Missed you on the FanWar group..... :)

FanWar fell victim to summer business.

> > 2X2 unit of REG C LC JLS,B,Sh "contracted" to 1X4, then moved forward
40p
> > and adopted skirmish formation. As part of adopting skirmish, the unit
> > changed frontage to become a 2X2 skirmisher. We reluctantly allowed the
> > move. >>
>
> And you should - entirely legal.

> Will clarify. I can see where that could be written better.