Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Halted
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Rules
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
srawls
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:21 am    Post subject: Halted

In a recent game, I shot a unit of close order foot for CPF in prep shooting. My opponent decided to halt rather than take the waiver. When it came time for charges, I declared a charge on the unit and my opponend informed me he would be counter charging. When I looked puzzled, I was informed that he had a similar situation at HistoriCon and that there was a ruling that allowed a halted unit to counter-charge. I conferred with the New England guys and was informed that this was in fact the case. His close order foot was allowed to counter charge.

I decided to take a close look at the rules so I could try to figure out the rational for this ruling, so I could be prepared to answer at the next tournament why this would be allowed. After lots of review, I am further confused, as I cannot seem to figure out why this would have been ruled this way.

At the bottom of table 11-1, it states "When an apporopriate body takes 2 CPF from prep shooting andeither must halt or chooses to halt, it CANNOT perform any voluntary movement (approaches, counters, retirements, enter skirmish formation (or any other), etc.)."

6.16 states "A charge is a move intended to result in hand-to-hand combat". This tells me a charge is a move and as such could not be performed by a unit that is halted.

6.166.A states "A counter-charge differs from a charge in that it:

- cannot be impetuous
- is not declared or prompted
- must be against an enemy who count as having declared a charge on the body
- movement by each body is prorated until contact is made
- does not have to begin with the counter-chargeing body being within its own tactial move distance of the charger"

No where in 6.166.A does is state that a counter-charge is not a move. In fact it talks about movement being prorated.

6.166 states " The only reponses allowed to an enemy charge are to stand to receive it at the halt, without further direction or formation changes, or to counter-charge or to evade."

Am I correct in thinking that table 11-1 disallows either the choice of a counter-charge or an evade, as they are movement? Or did I miss something somewhere? Any assistance you could provide would be appreciated.

Steve Rawls
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:01 am    Post subject: Re: Halted

srawls wrote:
In a recent game, I shot a unit of close order foot for CPF in prep shooting. My opponent decided to halt rather than take the waiver. When it came time for charges, I declared a charge on the unit and my opponend informed me he would be counter charging. When I looked puzzled, I was informed that he had a similar situation at HistoriCon and that there was a ruling that allowed a halted unit to counter-charge. I conferred with the New England guys and was informed that this was in fact the case. His close order foot was allowed to counter charge.

I decided to take a close look at the rules so I could try to figure out the rational for this ruling, so I could be prepared to answer at the next tournament why this would be allowed. After lots of review, I am further confused, as I cannot seem to figure out why this would have been ruled this way.

At the bottom of table 11-1, it states "When an apporopriate body takes 2 CPF from prep shooting andeither must halt or chooses to halt, it CANNOT perform any voluntary movement (approaches, counters, retirements, enter skirmish formation (or any other), etc.)."

6.16 states "A charge is a move intended to result in hand-to-hand combat". This tells me a charge is a move and as such could not be performed by a unit that is halted.

6.166.A states "A counter-charge differs from a charge in that it:

- cannot be impetuous
- is not declared or prompted
- must be against an enemy who count as having declared a charge on the body
- movement by each body is prorated until contact is made
- does not have to begin with the counter-chargeing body being within its own tactial move distance of the charger"

No where in 6.166.A does is state that a counter-charge is not a move. In fact it talks about movement being prorated.

6.166 states " The only reponses allowed to an enemy charge are to stand to receive it at the halt, without further direction or formation changes, or to counter-charge or to evade."

Am I correct in thinking that table 11-1 disallows either the choice of a counter-charge or an evade, as they are movement? Or did I miss something somewhere? Any assistance you could provide would be appreciated.

Steve Rawls


Your opponent, and anyone else who claims that such troops could counter-charge, was/is/are incorrect.

If you decide to halt as a 11.1 reaction, you cannot move in any voluntary way, including counter-charges. You can(must) perform involuntary movements (recoil, rout, etc.)

It CANNOT perform any voluntary movement.

These are the rules as I have them...if something was changed while I was 'away' somebody should let me know about that.

Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5833
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:12 pm    Post subject:

Um, if the ruling was done at Hcon, it was done by me. Why can't people call a spade a spade in situations like this?

I know there's a compelling reason for that ruling. It might be something that's come up in the Forum, I searched and found it.

Feel free to search for it. I can't remember off hand what I found but I would have found something compelling.

Next time when referring to conventions that I ump and *I* make a ruling, refer to me specifically.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
lilroblis
Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 410
Location: Cleveland Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject: Unpiring

Scott in this case I think it may have - no offense implied but for me I remember (sometimes) the conversation and sometimes who was involved and sometimes not. I believe when we were discussing this on chat - it was put as ruled at Historicon not by who. That being said I think it was you and the game was Derek and I - but I may be wrong. Hcon is fading in memory like most things - but still loved the Sumerians - now trying to figure out dogs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
srawls
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject:

Point taken, Scott. Next time I will be sure to start with "Scott, what kind of crack have you been smoking?!" Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:11 pm    Post subject: Feb 2016

The February 2016 Official Clarifications, available on this Forum, state:
11.1 (page 91). Below Table 11-1, fourth bullet: Add to the list of prohibited voluntary movement: “charge, counter-charge”. Add new sentence at the end: “It can, however, still perform involuntary movement (recoils, routs, etc.).”

Don't know who said what or why at Historicon, where I was not present, but no counter-charges if you decided to halt as a reaction to 2 CPF from prep shooting.

In a simple search of this forum based on the word 'halt' I find nothing to change this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
srawls
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:13 pm    Post subject:

It has an etc at the end of the list in the book. Figured that was not an exhaustive list. Thanks again, Frank!

Steve
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1026
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:25 pm    Post subject:

So

Question: Can we state now that a body that has been halted is not entitled to counter-charge?

I believe the rationale for this was a troop rallying disordered is entitled to charge responses - which includes counter-charging.

Todd

_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message [ Hidden ]
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5833
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:39 pm    Post subject:

srawls wrote:
Point taken, Scott. Next time I will be sure to start with "Scott, what kind of crack have you been smoking?!" Very Happy


I would prefer that.

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5833
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:41 pm    Post subject:

Todd Kaeser wrote:
So

Question: Can we state now that a body that has been halted is not entitled to counter-charge?

I believe the rationale for this was a troop rallying disordered is entitled to charge responses - which includes counter-charging.

Todd


Yes, that's now ringing a bell and I know that's been asked and answered in this forum. I'm pretty sure it was answered by Jon back in the day but I didn't see anything to change that ruling, hence the alleged crack-smoking ruling that's now making the rounds.

The key was that I found something doing a search in here. Frank, the fact you haven't found something doesn't matter. I did.

Ah but, clearly I missed the 11.1 Clarification Frank pointed out above.

Oops.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2019
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:03 pm    Post subject:

It was answered by Jon back in the day, specifically on June 11, 2004. According to Jon, counter-charging is forbidden.

http://www.fourhorsemenenterprises.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13015&sid=05b46005f5c487e78998010c589d98c7
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5833
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:17 pm    Post subject:

Well crap, that's not the post I remember finding.

Heh heh, but it's clear...in that post and in the latest Clarifications.

Nothing more to see here people, move along.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1185
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:17 am    Post subject:

Todd Kaeser wrote:
So

Question: Can we state now that a body that has been halted is not entitled to counter-charge?

I believe the rationale for this was a troop rallying disordered is entitled to charge responses - which includes counter-charging.

Todd


As Scott says, nothing more to see here...move along...Wink

Rallying has nothing to do with Halting due to prep shooting response...nothing from one should infer anything with the other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1026
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:14 pm    Post subject:

Frank Gilson wrote:
Todd Kaeser wrote:
So

Question: Can we state now that a body that has been halted is not entitled to counter-charge?

I believe the rationale for this was a troop rallying disordered is entitled to charge responses - which includes counter-charging.

Todd


As Scott says, nothing more to see here...move along...Wink

Rallying has nothing to do with Halting due to prep shooting response...nothing from one should infer anything with the other.


Understood Frank, but it does not specifically state that a troop halted cannot countercharge in the rules, soooooooooooooo one has to infer the rules and going to a "like" body - one who is in a must rally (similar to a halt) and therefore maybe can charge. Even Jon's "clarification" never made it into an official clarification for us to add to our rulebooks so we could find it easily.

I will add my own rule in the halted section so I know for future games/umping events. "Jon said halted troops can't counter-charge."

Wink
Todd

_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message [ Hidden ]
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5833
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:18 pm    Post subject:

I disagree that it's not clear. The 11.1 clarification makes it clear, at least as it pertains to choosing to halt from shooting CPF. 4th bullet under the table.

Of course if you want to write in something extra like "Jon said this on the Forum a gazillion years ago", knock yourself out.

Shocked

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Rules All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group