Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a charge are
applied.

#1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF) applied before
combat results are calculated?

#2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF foot) applied
before combat results are calculated?

In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it counted as tired
(-1) when casualties are calculated? The same question would apply to a mounted
unit with 2CPF that charges impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they
occur" seems to imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are
resolved but I'm not certain. Thanks again.


Paul Wilson


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

[joncleaves]

#1 Yes.

#2 Yes.

Your use of CPF isn't correct as no casualties have been caused by simply
charging. i am assuming you mean FP (fatigue points).

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Wilson <pwilson@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 21:14:48 -0500
Subject: [WarriorRules] Fatigue Question


My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a charge are
applied.

#1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF) applied before
combat results are calculated?

#2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF foot) applied
before combat results are calculated?

In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it counted as tired
(-1) when casualties are calculated? The same question would apply to a mounted
unit with 2CPF that charges impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they
occur" seems to imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are
resolved but I'm not certain. Thanks again.


Paul Wilson


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




Yahoo! Groups Links






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

Thanks Jon...I did mean FP.

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com on behalf of JonCleaves@...
Sent: Thu 1/12/2006 11:21 AM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Fatigue Question

#1 Yes.

#2 Yes.

Your use of CPF isn't correct as no casualties have been caused by simply
charging. i am assuming you mean FP (fatigue points).

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Wilson <pwilson@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 21:14:48 -0500
Subject: [WarriorRules] Fatigue Question


My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a charge are
applied.

#1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF) applied before
combat results are calculated?

#2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF foot) applied
before combat results are calculated?

In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it counted as tired
(-1) when casualties are calculated? The same question would apply to a mounted
unit with 2CPF that charges impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they
occur" seems to imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are
resolved but I'm not certain. Thanks again.


Paul Wilson


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




Yahoo! Groups Links






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




SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Miniature+wargaming&w1=Miniature+wargaming&\nw2=Wargaming&w3=Four+horsemen&w4=Warrior&c=4&s=72&.sig=1nB8eqbfEaooS4kYDfZrcw>
Wargaming
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Wargaming&w1=Miniature+wargaming&w2=Wargami\nng&w3=Four+horsemen&w4=Warrior&c=4&s=72&.sig=U_I45U1fZqcv7A6ogpeg_Q> Four
horsemen
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Four+horsemen&w1=Miniature+wargaming&w2=War\ngaming&w3=Four+horsemen&w4=Warrior&c=4&s=72&.sig=PJeAuBGRU5B2rbSh_D4_8A>
Warrior
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Warrior&w1=Miniature+wargaming&w2=Wargaming\n&w3=Four+horsemen&w4=Warrior&c=4&s=72&.sig=6R3z7yzhTjB-enrCQk4dQQ>

________________________________

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


* Visit your group "WarriorRules <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules>
" on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


________________________________




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

Just on more question on this:

Say a cav. unit has four fatigue points. Can it charge impetuously?
Declaring the charge would put the cav. over five FP so can it still
be an impetuous charge?

Thanks,
Art


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Wilson" <pwilson@...>
wrote:
>
> My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a
charge are applied.
>
> #1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF)
applied before combat results are calculated?
>
> #2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF
foot) applied before combat results are calculated?
>
> In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it
counted as tired (-1) when casualties are calculated? The same
question would apply to a mounted unit with 2CPF that charges
impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they occur" seems to
imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are resolved
but I'm not certain. Thanks again.
>
>
> Paul Wilson
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[joncleaves]

Yes it can. The fatigue is for making the charge move, not declaring it.

-----Original Message-----
From: jovialdude <jovialdude@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:29:50 -0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Fatigue Question


Just on more question on this:

Say a cav. unit has four fatigue points. Can it charge impetuously?
Declaring the charge would put the cav. over five FP so can it still
be an impetuous charge?

Thanks,
Art


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Wilson" <pwilson@...>
wrote:
>
> My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a
charge are applied.
>
> #1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF)
applied before combat results are calculated?
>
> #2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF
foot) applied before combat results are calculated?
>
> In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it
counted as tired (-1) when casualties are calculated? The same
question would apply to a mounted unit with 2CPF that charges
impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they occur" seems to
imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are resolved
but I'm not certain. Thanks again.
>
>
> Paul Wilson
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








Yahoo! Groups Links






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

I would say yes, they can. If it is the charge that puts them over the
top from Fresh to Tired, then they can make the charge impetuous. 6.164
says that the troops can't be tired "at declaration." Since the troops
only become tired as a result of the charge, they are not tired at
declaration and can therefore declare the charge impetuous.


On Apr 6, 2006, at 8:29 AM, jovialdude wrote:

> Just on more question on this:
>
> Say a cav. unit has four fatigue points. Can it charge impetuously?
> Declaring the charge would put the cav. over five FP so can it still
> be an impetuous charge?
>
> Thanks,
> Art
>
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Wilson" <pwilson@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> My second question regards when the affects of fatigue from a
> charge are applied.
>>
>> #1 Is the fatigue for a non-impetuous mounted charge (2CPF)
> applied before combat results are calculated?
>>
>> #2 Is the fatigue for an impetuous charge (3CPF mounted, 1CPF
> foot) applied before combat results are calculated?
>>
>> In other words if a mounted unit with 3 CPF charges is it
> counted as tired (-1) when casualties are calculated? The same
> question would apply to a mounted unit with 2CPF that charges
> impetuously. According to 5.31 "Record them as they occur" seems to
> imply that the fatigue would be appied before casualtied are resolved
> but I'm not certain. Thanks again.
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilson
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>