Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

One oddity from 7th that remains in Warrior is effect of the separation
of the line for impetuous close order from the line for loose order, and
the fact that the plus for mounted v. unsteady foot is on the same line
as the loose order plus. I never understood why impetuous CO mounted
got a net +3 versus unsteady foot, yet impetuous LO only got a net +2.
Is there an explanation I missed?

Bob

--

- Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit
materiari?

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/22/2004 6:53:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
doctormm@... writes:

> One oddity from 7th that remains in Warrior is effect of the separation
> of the line for impetuous close order from the line for loose order, and
> the fact that the plus for mounted v. unsteady foot is on the same line
> as the loose order plus. I never understood why impetuous CO mounted
> got a net +3 versus unsteady foot, yet impetuous LO only
> got a net +2.
> Is there an explanation I missed?>>

Bob, I agonized over that for a long time. I know why Phil did this (densely
packed close order mounted have a higher chance of breaking through a large foot
unit) and there is both good and bad in that. I honestly could see both sides
of the issue and at the end stuck with it. Even if one does not agree with the
reason, it only impacts close order mounted (SHC, SHCm) who are impetuously
charging foot that are disordered before they make contact - and I did not feel
strongly enough against Phil's logic to tear up the factor chart just to smooth
this one interaction out. It isn't like the +1 the SHC get in this one specific
instance is a game breaker...lol

Jon