Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Thinking about the prospective irregular foot rules, I've been perusing some of the "classics" of irregular foot armies, and I have a couple of questions about Scots Isles and Highlands (Feudal Warrior 10).

It says that Irish Bonnachts can have a Kern detachment. However, there are no Bonnachts on the list. There are Irish Mercenaries, who are identical in armament and morale to Bonnachts, so I assume this is who this note should refer to. However, there are no Kerns on the list.

Is this a slip? Should there be a line for Kerns on the list?

Second, I note that some Highland Warriors can be upgraded to EHI, and that this is justified in the list notes by the following: "The option to upgrade some Highland Warriors to EHI represents nobility whose crypt reliefs show them with extensive armor." Now, unless we have specific evidence of these same nobility fighting in close formation (seems unlikely), I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to make the upgrade option to LEHI? I realize that the LEHI mechanism didn't exist when Feudal Warrior came out, and this may be a place where an earlier army list book could benefit from later list rule innovations.


-Mark Stone

[scott holder]

Mark: Clearly I missed this one.

There shouldn't be Kerns in the list. Instead, the detachment line shouldn't refer to the Irish. I'll put that on my list of errata.

As for the EHI upgrade, I don't think LEHI is warranted here. While I can't pull up specifics, in general, heavily armored troops in this period and geographic location fought in close order.

scott