Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/19/2004 16:48:07 Central Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

Jon,

1. Can chariots charge enemy behind stakes/chains?>>
[
[
No. 6.711: "Vehicles and mounted troops can cross field fortifications only
where they have been destroyed."



2. Can chariots charge enemy behind stone walls/ditched palisades?>>
[
[
See above.



3. If a body of front rank chariots and rear rank LMI detachment is
responding
to being charged by mounted in the open, does it take a waver test?>>
[
[
Yes, IF the LMI is contacted by the mounted in the charge as per 5.5.



4. If a body of front rank chariots and rear rank LMI detachment is charged
from
160p by enemy mounted, can it counter-charge?>>
[
[
yes, but we obviously need a clarification to 6.166 in a simialr way to
6.163. The issue remains that the original text of 7th, which i borrowed WAY
too
heavily from said 'figures, foot, troops, friends', and all sorts of other
imprecise words for what can do what. One of the objcetives of the rewrite is
to fix this throughout the rulebook once and for all. The answers to these
questions are always in terms of what the intent has always been, but the
langauge needs to be more thoroughly mine and not holdovers in places like it
is
in the first printing.



5. Under 6.163 "Declaring Charges/Cancelled Charges" it states that
"Elephants
and non-impetuous foot cannot join in charging an enemy with impetuous or
(non-elephant) mounted friends." Suppose we have a body of front rank
chariots
and rear rank LMI detachment. I'm clear what happens if such a body charges
impetuously.>>
Note that is the LMI is regular, such a body will NEVER be impetuous.

I'm _not_ clear what happens if such a body charges _not_
impetuously.
5a. Can it charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the
front
rank is entirely mounted?>>
[
[
Yes, and we will so clarify



6. Same clause under 6.163, only this time we have a body of chariots with
LI on
the base, charging non-impetuously.
6a. Can it charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the
front
rank is entirely mounted?>>
[
[
Yes. Same as above.

Jon



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

[Mark Stone]

Jon,

1. Can chariots charge enemy behind stakes/chains?

2. Can chariots charge enemy behind stone walls/ditched palisades?

3. If a body of front rank chariots and rear rank LMI detachment is responding
to being charged by mounted in the open, does it take a waver test?

4. If a body of front rank chariots and rear rank LMI detachment is charged from
160p by enemy mounted, can it counter-charge?

5. Under 6.163 "Declaring Charges/Cancelled Charges" it states that "Elephants
and non-impetuous foot cannot join in charging an enemy with impetuous or
(non-elephant) mounted friends." Suppose we have a body of front rank chariots
and rear rank LMI detachment. I'm clear what happens if such a body charges
impetuously. I'm _not_ clear what happens if such a body charges _not_
impetuously.
5a. Can it charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the front
rank is entirely mounted?
5b. Can it _not_ charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the
body contains non-impetuous foot?
5c. If it _cannot_ charge with other (non-elephant) mounted, can it charge
with other non-impetuous foot?

6. Same clause under 6.163, only this time we have a body of chariots with LI on
the base, charging non-impetuously.
6a. Can it charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the front
rank is entirely mounted?
6b. Can it _not_ charge together with other (non-elephant) mounted because the
body contains non-impetuous foot?
6c. If it _cannot_ charge with other (non-elephant) mounted, can it charge
with other non-impetuous foot?

Once I have answers to these questions, I think I'm ready to make my 2004-2005
lead purchases and painting decisions (he says, eyeing the Late Hebrew list
with renewed interest....).


-Mark Stone

[John Garlic]

Hi Jon,

Is there a time frame you are looking at for completion? No pressure, just
curious.

John Garlic
Weslaco, Texas

> One of the objectives of the rewrite is
> to fix this throughout the rulebook once and for all.



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