Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Greg Regets]

Thanks Chris .... it was actually you and I that were having the game where
the shoulder issue came up. I agree that it should just be spelled out, even
though it may be "intuitively obvious" to some it may not be to others, i.e.
.... those without military training and those that can't find a shoulder on
a wood, :-)

I for one still think the discussion we had at the tournament was ruled all
wrong. The reference to "shoulder" in the rule book is a reference to the
two sides of the gap (shoulders of the gap), not the side base edge of the
unit (shoulders of the unit). The way I read the rule in 7th and Warrior,
there has to be a one element gap from ANY part of one body to ANY part of
another (or terrain feature) unless doubled, per the rules. Saying that this
gap rule only applies to the side of the unit or that you only measure from
the side edge of the unit because that is the shoulder is all wrong in my
opinion. Where you measure from is not relevant as they are not talking
about the shoulder of the unit, they are talking about the shoulder of the
gap. If this is the case, (help us out Scott) than neither yours or my
charge would have been legal as there was not enough gap in the front of
either of our units in either instance. At least we both had one funky
charge, so the outcome was not effected, :-)

Greg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Regets [mailto:greg@...]
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 2:30 PM
> To: 'WarriorRules@egroups.com'
> Subject: [WarriorRules] More Shoulder Stuff
>
>
> Thanks Chris .... it was actually you and I that were having
> the game where
> the shoulder issue came up. I agree that it should just be
> spelled out, even
> though it may be "intuitively obvious" to some it may not be
> to others, i.e.
> .... those without military training and those that can't
> find a shoulder on
> a wood,
>
> I for one still think the discussion we had at the tournament
> was ruled all
> wrong. The reference to "shoulder" in the rule book is a
> reference to the
> two sides of the gap (shoulders of the gap), not the side
> base edge of the
> unit (shoulders of the unit). The way I read the rule in 7th
> and Warrior,
> there has to be a one element gap from ANY part of one body
> to ANY part of
> another (or terrain feature) unless doubled, per the rules.
> Saying that this
> gap rule only applies to the side of the unit or that you
> only measure from
> the side edge of the unit because that is the shoulder is all
> wrong in my
> opinion. Where you measure from is not relevant as they are
> not talking
> about the shoulder of the unit, they are talking about the
> shoulder of the
> gap. If this is the case, (help us out Scott) than neither yours or my
> charge would have been legal as there was not enough gap in
> the front of
> either of our units in either instance. At least we both had one funky
> charge, so the outcome was not effected,
>
> Greg
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ------<e|-
> Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!
> 1. Fill in the brief application
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR
> http://click.egroups.com/1/6630/2/_/_/_/964733772/
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ------|e>-
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>

> I for one still think the discussion we had at the tournament was ruled
all
> wrong. The reference to "shoulder" in the rule book is a reference to the
> two sides of the gap (shoulders of the gap), not the side base edge of the
> unit (shoulders of the unit). The way I read the rule in 7th and Warrior,
> there has to be a one element gap from ANY part of one body to ANY part of
> another (or terrain feature) unless doubled, per the rules. Saying that
this
> gap rule only applies to the side of the unit or that you only measure
from
> the side edge of the unit because that is the shoulder is all wrong in my
> opinion. Where you measure from is not relevant as they are not talking
> about the shoulder of the unit, they are talking about the shoulder of the
> gap. If this is the case, (help us out Scott) than neither yours or my
> charge would have been legal as there was not enough gap in the front of
> either of our units in either instance. At least we both had one funky
> charge, so the outcome was not effected, :-)

I read Warrior 6.53 the same way: measure between the two bodies/terrain
elements that you want to pass between; it must measure at least one unit
wide unless one or both bodies is/are an unbroken enemy not in HtH, or
unless the moving unit is routing. The reference to "shoulder" simply means
the body or terrain element being passed, and is not actually referring to a
part of any unit.

Phillip