Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Quoting "WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com" <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>:

> Message: 25
> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 08:16:46 EDT
> From: JonCleaves@...
> Subject: Re: Re: a different perspective on chariots
>
> In a message dated 4/21/2004 07:15:52 Central Daylight Time,
> mdevans@... writes:
> In that piece, Mark commented on joining a general's staff element
> with a foot unit as an effective method of dealing with other foot.
> My reading of 4.13 is that if a mounted general joins a foot unit, it
> is treated as if in the front rank for eagerness, random factor and
> risk, but is not treated as fighting except for cpf calculation.
>
> As such, the chariot horses and figures would not count in the combat.
>
> Is my interpretation correct Jon?>>
>
> Correct - they would count for CPF but be in the back rank
>

That applies to the bound in which the general joined. Is there anything that
prevents exchanging ranks on a subsequent bound? I'm not aware of it.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 17:12:29 Central Daylight Time,
larryessick@... writes:

If it is your intent that mounted generals cannot be joined with foot
units, then that is fine.>>

It is my intent that mounted generals are placed behind the rear rank when
joining a foot body and that the general *counts as* being in the front rank but
the figures of his staff element do not count for fighting - just for CPF.
This is what 4.13 says. It does not say that the figures cannot fight only on
the bound of joining, it says they do not count as fighting period. The
desire to somehow have the element be a ful part of the unit and go to the front
rank is not only counter to this - it is nonsensical - if the figures cannot
fight, why on earth would one want them in the front rank???

I will note, with a nod to Ewan, that this is precisely what 7th says as
well....
<< However, there are plenty of examples of
mixed mounted and foot units -- including the 1 element chariot with 1
element of runners detachment that I saw being run at Cold Wars.>>

That is illegal. See 2.52/2.53. I am sorry you did not bring it to my
attention. But I bet I can guess who it was...<sigh>


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 12:50:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

> That applies to the bound in which the general joined. Is there anything that
> prevents exchanging ranks on a subsequent bound? I'm not
> aware of it.>>

If a mounted staff element joining foot, it must remain behind the rear rank -
it does not actually join the rear rank.

[Ewan McNay]

Which surely then *becomes* the rear rank, no? Otherwise, which rank
is it? :)

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/21/2004 12:50:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mark@d... writes:
>
> > That applies to the bound in which the general joined. Is there
anything that
> > prevents exchanging ranks on a subsequent bound? I'm not
> > aware of it.>>
>
> If a mounted staff element joining foot, it must remain behind the
rear rank - it does not actually join the rear rank.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 4:26:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

> Which surely then *becomes* the rear rank, no? Otherwise,
> which rank
> is it? >>

It is not any rank. It is placed behind the rear rank, not made into the rear
rank.

[Larry Essick]

> > Which surely then *becomes* the rear rank, no? Otherwise,
> > which rank
> > is it? >>
>
> It is not any rank. It is placed behind the rear rank, not made
into the rear rank.

In which case it is not joined with the unit then?

How can a command element join a unit and not be part of the unit or
form a rank of the unit?

It seems that either the general joins or that he does not.

If it is your intent that mounted generals cannot be joined with foot
units, then that is fine. However, there are plenty of examples of
mixed mounted and foot units -- including the 1 element chariot with 1
element of runners detachment that I saw being run at Cold Wars.

Moreover, if the intent is to prohibit mounted generals from joining
foot units, then it seems the recipricol would also be true -- that
foot generals cannot join mounted units.

Larry

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 18:11:33 Central Daylight Time,
larryessick@... writes:
Let's take chariots with runners and agree that you must have full
units (2 or more elements) of each. It is still a mixed unit of foot
and mounted. Am I correct?
Yes.


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

[Larry Essick]

> It is my intent that mounted generals are placed behind the rear
rank when
> joining a foot body and that the general *counts as* being in the
front rank but
> the figures of his staff element do not count for fighting - just
for CPF.
> This is what 4.13 says. It does not say that the figures cannot
fight only on
> the bound of joining, it says they do not count as fighting period.
The
> desire to somehow have the element be a ful part of the unit and go
to the front
> rank is not only counter to this - it is nonsensical - if the
figures cannot
> fight, why on earth would one want them in the front rank???


> That is illegal. See 2.52/2.53. I am sorry you did not bring it to
my
> attention. But I bet I can guess who it was...<sigh>

Jon,

Thanks for the explanation.

Let's take chariots with runners and agree that you must have full
units (2 or more elements) of each. It is still a mixed unit of foot
and mounted. Am I correct?

As to the rest, I do vaguely recall a similar mechanism in 7th.

Larry