Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> To use Ewan-speak (and I am attempting humor here, nothing more
> intended...) unease is discrete, not continuous.
>
> This means that since the effects of unease only matter in two cases -
> when one takes a waver test and when one is declaring charges - you
> only ever check for unease at the instant it matters. It has no real
> effect on game play if a body actually had more than one state at
> different points in the bound.

Er, I'm not sure that computes. If troop state isn't continuous there
would appear to almost identical situations where a player can derive
more or less benefit from discreteness, mostly because of the 2 causes
of unease/1 cause of unease for eager/willing. It also doesn't make
sense because the other two troop states, cohesion, and fatigue are
continuous states with defined conditions for when they end
(consistency is important after all). But that may be your intent.
Consider the following example:

Irr C infantry advances supported, and hence with no causes of unease.
Its willing, until its general advances to within 240 paces of the
enemy, at which point they are eager.

Now, in preparatory shooting an enemy unit in ambush fires from behind
the flank of the Irr C infantry. Since they are eager, The enemy unit
behind flank is only one cause of unease, and they Irr C don't have a
-1 modifier on their subsequent waver test if they take sufficient CPF.

Example 2

Same situation as above, except rather than firing, and the enemy moves
his ambushing infantry, emerging them from cover behind the flank of
the infantry during approaches. Because unease is discrete, he now
only has to deal with willing troops, rather than eager, because the
general has not had a chance to advance yet during the bound. Now a
cavalry general could pre-empt the enemy infantry, and make his boys
eager, but a foot general is screwed in the same situation.

Do these variations in similar situations match your intent?

Thanks
Cole

[joncleaves]

<< Consider the following example:

Irr C infantry advances supported, and hence with no causes of unease.
Its willing, until its general advances to within 240 paces of the
enemy, at which point they are eager.

Now, in preparatory shooting an enemy unit in ambush fires from behind
the flank of the Irr C infantry. Since they are eager, The enemy unit
behind flank is only one cause of unease, and they Irr C don't have a
-1 modifier on their subsequent waver test if they take sufficient CPF.>>

True. The fact that they were willing and not eager prior to the general's move
has no impact on that waver test.

<<Example 2

Same situation as above, except rather than firing, and the enemy moves
his ambushing infantry, emerging them from cover behind the flank of
the infantry during approaches. Because unease is discrete, he now
only has to deal with willing troops, rather than eager, because the
general has not had a chance to advance yet during the bound.>>

True.

<< Now a
cavalry general could pre-empt the enemy infantry, and make his boys
eager, but a foot general is screwed in the same situation.


Do these variations in similar situations match your intent?>>

Yes.

I am not trying to be short, but you do realize what it would take to write a
rule to make troop state continuous and to allow players the benefit of the
doubt on future actions. Horrible to comtemplate! lol

Jon


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