 |
Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| joncleaves wrote: |
The intent is that the combined body can never be such that if either parent or detachment left the other in that moment (whether that moment is an appropriate movement phase or not) one or both would be left in an illegal formation.
I am taking suggestions for errata language that accomplishes the above. |
Hmmm...my proposed language doesn't accomplish this. In fact this is quite tricky...as a combined body must also obey all other restrictions in the rules.
Therefore, you could easily have a body of Parent plus Detachment that, even though the rear ranks are loose or open order, could never expand in a follow up as that would render the body either with multiple uneven ranks (forbidden) or violating what you have just stated here (should they be separate, they would be in an illegal formation.)
I recommend meeting with me, Scott, and probably a couple of others at Cold Wars with some bodies to experiment on a tabletop about detachments and movement...especially in the face of enemy units implying other movement restrictions.
I personally think that something like "The combined body of parent and detachment must be such that if, at any moment, they were separate bodies and not joined, neither would be in an illegal formation" runs us afoul of other rules intent and renders detachments very highly limited, perhaps more so than you desire.
Frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves
Moderator
Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's why I have been cool with "intermingled".
_________________
Roll Up and Win! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:30 pm Post subject: yet... |
|
|
Yet, intermingled, not very well defined, still runs detachments, parent bodies, and combined units afoul of the problems I've been bringing up...
Going to start another rules thread about 'side edge AND corner-to-corner'.
Frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OGS-Vintage
Recruit
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Posts: 34
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 11:36 am Post subject: Detachments |
|
|
.make them both independant bodies, but detachment has reduced command cost as per rules - this allows it to run around to its hearts content.
BALANCE - IF the detachment routs, etc, the parent wavers irregardless of where the detachment is, AND all in range. Sounds silly but cuts outs rule x.xx through x.xx+100
I hate paperwork. Plus, if you cannot keep track of units, stop playing.
By two bits worth.
The simplest solutions are not always popular. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Album
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
