Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.

Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes
more than the general's alloted minutes. Should we:

1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.

2. Make the body do what it was prompted to do only if the situation
has not changed.

3. Allow the body to do whatever.


Note that one of 1+2 may be 'more realistic', but require record
keeping.

Let me know what you think.
Jon

[Ed Forbes]

On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 15:44:12 -0000 JonCleaves@... writes:
> No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.
>
> Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes
> more than the general's alloted minutes. Should we:
>
> 1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.

I would favor #1 unless the order is overridden by expenditure of an
additional prompt in this next bound.

Ed Forbes
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Dear Jon,

If the prompt fails - let the unit do whatever. Record keeping is a bitch.
Easier to regard it as "The messenger never got going" or "The messenger was
ambushed by a run-away expendable." or whatever. If you go for option 1 the
arguments will be that "The situation has changed - no fool will obey that
order now!" Go for option 2 and the argument will be "Ah-ha! What is a change
of situation? Wher is that defined?"....

Cheers,

Bob

[Chris Bump]

Jon

It seems to me that throughout most of history orders were orders and various
unit commanders were not trained to use iniative but rather to insure that
the orders that they received were in fact carried out. I have always
believed that a prompt sent should be carried out if at all possible. If the
charge target is no longer there then that is one thing, but someone is told
to retire, for example, because the commander sees something now should be
forced to, even if the situation changes or force the commander to send
another prompt to reverse the previous command. Ala D'Erlon for all of the
16th of June 1815.

Chris

Jon,

It must be;

"1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound."

because, if the prompt had arrived on time, the unit would have done
what it was ordered to do. If the "do something" then becomes
unworkable or illegal?) next bound, the unit is free to accept
another prompt OR do whatever other options are available to it.

eg. a unit prompted to charge. The message arrives late, the unit
will charge next bound. Next bound arrives but the target counters
away and out of charge reach. So, no charge but the unit is now free
to approach again. Or countercharge, or evade etc etc etc.

But the question now is,since they have ALREADY been prompted to
charge, do they need to be prompted again? Does the "prompt to
charge" carry over in this situation?

As for "record keeping", surely you jest? What with recording
shooting fatigue, fighting fatigue, keeping track of minutes for
prompts, results of combats (do you recoil or did I?), remembering to
declare "recalls" for LI vs close foot etc etc, what's one more? :)

====================================



--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.
>
> Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes
> more than the general's alloted minutes. Should we:
>
> 1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.
>
> 2. Make the body do what it was prompted to do only if the
situation
> has not changed.
>
> 3. Allow the body to do whatever.
>
>
> Note that one of 1+2 may be 'more realistic', but require record
> keeping.
>
> Let me know what you think.
> Jon

[Don Coon]

> Dear Jon,
>
> If the prompt fails - let the unit do whatever. Record keeping is a
bitch.
> Easier to regard it as "The messenger never got going" or "The messenger
was
> ambushed by a run-away expendable." or whatever. If you go for option 1
the
> arguments will be that "The situation has changed - no fool will obey that
> order now!" Go for option 2 and the argument will be "Ah-ha! What is a
change
> of situation? Wher is that defined?"....

While I am really in favor of option 1 because it adds to the fog of war, I
never looked at it from a "messenger got lost or ambushed" perspective. I
think that is a very cool way to view prompts that do not make it. One
problem I see, is that sometimes you get Irregulars out of sight and there
is no way you are going to get a prompt to them in 1 turn (I know I know,
you shouldnt get yourself into those situations). I like being able to send
an "early" promt in anticipation of a future requirement. Also When
changing the orders of a command, many times you run out of prompt minutes
and the order change is delayed for a turn. I would not want to lose that.

Don

[Tim Grimmett]

Option 1

Besides the unit commanders should do as they are told argument, to have a
rule "exempt" the unit from its order opens a whole can of
"gamesmanship"--who determines if the situation has changed,or allow it to
do whatever. It would further allow a player to order a unit to do
something knowing he might have the chance to "change his mind" later should
circumstances warrent. Hence, there might be no consequences to ordering
units do do something and actually encourages a general ordering stuff that
he knows he can change next turn--not good.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 5:44 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Open issue for the group


No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.

Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes
more than the general's alloted minutes. Should we:

1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.

2. Make the body do what it was prompted to do only if the situation
has not changed.

3. Allow the body to do whatever.


Note that one of 1+2 may be 'more realistic', but require record
keeping.

Let me know what you think.
Jon



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Attachment: (application/ms-tnef) [not stored]

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001 JonCleaves@... wrote:

> No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.
>
> Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes
> more than the general's alloted minutes. Should we:
>
> 1. Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.
>
> 2. Make the body do what it was prompted to do only if the situation
> has not changed.
>
> 3. Allow the body to do whatever.
>
>
> Note that one of 1+2 may be 'more realistic', but require record
> keeping.
>

I would opt for 1. That's the whole point of prompting, that for some
decisions units need to be told explicitly what to do. Prompts should not
be subject to "interpretation".

However: we should also allow generals to anticipate changing
conditions. Here's a situation that's come up for me more than once, but
one that is unclear to me in the rules:

I have a general who is low on prompt points and/or looking at prompting a
unit far away. That unit is not currently eligible to do something (say,
march), but there is every reason to think that the unit will be eligible
to do so by the time the message arrives. So: can a general prompt a unit
to do something it is not immediately eligible to do, in anticipation that
it will become eligible by the time the prompt gets there?

If we're going to be rigid and opt for #1 above, then I think by the same
token we have to allow generals to have forsight and prompt for the
conditions they expect to apply when the message arrives.


-Mark Stone

    ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Stone Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 2:20 PM To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Open issue for the group   On Mon, 3 Sep 2001 JonCleaves@aol.com wrote:> No, this is not a denocracy, but opinions do matter.>> Let's say a body is prompted to do something, but the prompt takes> more than the general's alloted minutes.  Should we:>> 1.  Make the body do what it was prompted to do next bound.>> 2.  Make the body do what it was prompted to do only if the situation> has not changed.>> 3.  Allow the body to do whatever.>>> Note that one of 1+2 may be 'more realistic', but require record> keeping.>I would opt for 1. That's the whole point of prompting, that for somedecisions units need to be told explicitly what to do. Prompts should notbe subject to "interpretation".However: we should also allow generals to anticipate changingconditions. Here's a situation that's come up for me more than once, butone that is unclear to me in the rules:I have a general who is low on prompt points and/or looking at prompting aunit far away. That unit is not currently eligible to do something (say,march), but there is every reason to think that the unit will be eligibleto do so by the time the message arrives. So: can a general prompt a unitto do something it is not immediately eligible to do, in anticipation thatit will become eligible by the time the prompt gets there?If we're going to be rigid and opt for #1 above, then I think by the sametoken we have to allow generals to have forsight and prompt for theconditions they expect to apply when the message arrives.-Mark Stone A general in the heat of battle could not reasonably be expected to anticipate macro events that might at some future time effect an individual unit. If a unit cannot do it when the prompt is initiated than they should not be allowed to do it if the circumstance has changed the following turn. The only exception being a change of orders for an entire command.  Lenney Herrmann------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->FREE COLLEGE MONEYCLICK HERE to search600,000 scholarships!http://us.click.yahoo.com/47cccB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM---------------------------------------------------------------------~->To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.comYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/