Art De La Guerre

[Dave_r]

Commanders with a unit. A general is with a unit that get's shot to destroyed. There are no friends nearby.

Page 27 is the culprit here.

First off, "Individually based commander". This starts off by saying that generals cannot be attacked by enemy units in melee or by shooting. It then states that generals contacted by enemy must immediately join a friendly unit or is captured.

However, the general hasn't been contacted by enemy, so this doesn't apply.

So we move onto "Attached commander"

This starts with "A commander attached to a unit is not affected by shooting against this unit". As generals don't have cohesion I'm not entirely certain what this means, it's a rather superflous statement as since the general cannot give any bonus to a unit in shooting he would never fight with the unit and therefore can never be damaged in any case.

The next three bullet points all refer to a commander who is with a unit engaged in melee. Before the final bullet point stating

"If the unit to which a commander is destroyed, the commander must move to the nearest friendly unit within 5 UD or be captures (see above)"

So.... Does this mean only if the unit is destroyed in melee? (as the previous bullet points all relate to melee) or does this also include shooting?

As the "above" rule only applies when a general is contacted by enemy units is this the same with shooting?

[Za Otlichiye]

I certainly read it as only applying to melee.
Or to put it another way, the attached commander in a melee is in no danger (if unengaged) until the unit is routed, at which point the commander is considered to be "contacted".

[madaxeman]

[Dave_r]

That's how i'd read it Tim - but others read it differently as referenced to the comment above!

I'm just after clarity :)

[madaxeman]

[Za Otlichiye]

I change my mind yet again. A commander can be unattached. If and when they are contacted, they get a free flight move. No need to trigger that if the enemy is not in contact.

[Robert241167]

I'm confused Tim, are you saying the commander is lost and the points count towards the army break, which isn't how David read it?

Or do you think the commander isn't lost when there is no unit to move to within 5 UD's which is what David argued at the time?

Thanks

Rob

[madaxeman]

[Robert241167]

That's what I thought Tim, and not the stance David was taking.

So you are in agreement with all of us aside from David.......................

Rob

[lionelrus]

As usual, Tim's answer is correct.

I suggest to player do not attaching général to last command unit.....
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain.

[Robert241167]

In Dave's defence it wasn't the last command unit, but the rest of the command was a long, long way away................

Rob

[lionelrus]

[Za Otlichiye]

I think Dave is right. It lacks clarity.

The 5th bullet is not qualified to melee, but the preceding three are.

In practice, we have the baseline case:

An attached commander nearly surrounded by enemies, loses his unit, and wends his way through the mob to a unit 5 UD away.

Then we have two extremes:

Enemy heavy artillery, about to be overrun by Heavy knights on 3 sides, snipes the last point from a unit with a commander attached at 8UD.
There are no friends nor enemy within 5UD of the commander

An attached commander, nearly surrounded by LH, loses his unit to shooting in the enemy's turn. The commander moves 5UD away, and although caught by the LH then next turn,
is now within reach of a friendly unit.

All artificial, extremely unlikely, and narratively unsatisfying results. Either interpretation is as simple as the other. So roll a D6...

[Ramses II]

This is not that complicated, the key lies in the last sentence of Attaching a commander to a unit:-

[daveallen]

Not really. This looks like a fairly simple translation error arising from French using "he" (or "she") where English uses "it".

If so it would read: