Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 25, 2016 9:45 pm Sujet du message: |
|
I think I am groping toward the actual question.
Page 39 and 40.
The adjusted move is step 5.
The stopping short is in step 7.
I don't see the stop short being restricted in any way other than having some evader triggering the evade steps.
Suppose we can get clarification. |
|
footslogger
Vétéran
Inscrit le: 12 Jan 2015 Messages: 166
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 25, 2016 9:53 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: | I think I am groping toward the actual question.
Page 39 and 40.
The adjusted move is step 5.
The stopping short is in step 7.
I don't see the stop short being restricted in any way other than having some evader triggering the evade steps.
Suppose we can get clarification. |
I don't think it's a desirable outcome, but like I said, I can live with it if it is.
I can't imagine explaining it to someone who charges my light foot with cav and winds up stuck on my pike 4UD away. I can walk through the steps.
I am curious because both your and Ethan's first response was the charger could stop short after the first target evades, so my guess is this is a situation that either hasn't come up, or that you've just done what seems natural and not pressed the rules in section 7? If so, others might do the same. So it might be worth having that as an example to clarify along with the existing example (in the FAQ of course ).
Oh, and thanks to both of you for being patient enough to bear with me through the discussion. If we were on the phone we probably could have got to the point in about 2 minutes.... The joys of Internet forums. |
|
ethan
Signifer
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 354
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 25, 2016 10:15 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: | I think I am groping toward the actual question.
Page 39 and 40.
The adjusted move is step 5.
The stopping short is in step 7.
I don't see the stop short being restricted in any way other than having some evader triggering the evade steps.
Suppose we can get clarification. |
All targets have to evade to allow you to stop short, IMO the FAQ clarification basicallys says "anyone in your normal move distance on the path you declare is a charge target." |
|
hcaille
Administrateur

Inscrit le: 20 Mai 2008 Messages: 2547
Localisation: Lyon
|
Posté le: Mer Jan 27, 2016 8:37 am Sujet du message: |
|
I see that this point seems not clear.
In general case, the attacker can choose to stop after 1 UD (ou 2 UD if mounted) if the target unit evade.
If attacker is Impetuous it must pursue to all it's movement allowance (adjusted by the die if ennemy flee).
Example : A Cavalry is face a LI at 2UD and just behind the LI there is an ennemy HI.
If the cavalry charge it can stop after 2UD before contacting HI. If Cavalry is too close (less 2 UD) , it may have to charge HI.
Impetuous Cavalry is not forced to charge a LI if it's charge can contact HI so it is not mandatory for the Cavalry to charge (see P41 uncontrolled charge 9th bullet) .
If impetuous cavalry chooses to charge it cannot stop after 2 UD : it have to contact the HI.
Is it more clear ? |
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1236
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Sam Fév 06, 2016 11:41 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Many thanks Herve. What you wrote is clear, up to a point.
Reviewing the rules, IMO there is a key discrepancy between step #1 and step #7 of the Charge / Evade sequence.
When declaring a charge the (in Step #1) the attacking player is only required to specify the direction of the charge, while Step #7 allows non-Impetuous chargers to stop early if all the targets have evaded.
The point at issue is caused by not requiring the player to specify the target of the charge in Step #1. Consequently in your example and following the Rules As Written, the cavalry would be forced to continue the charge into the HI (if they are in range) because they have not evaded.
When I am playing, I specify the direction of the charge and the target in step #1, so it is clear whether all the units in the target have evaded or not.
Note, this problem is possibly made worse by not specifying visibility rules, so in theory a unit or group can charge an enemy that is out of sight behind terrain. Is this what you intended? |
|
deuz
Gladiateur
Inscrit le: 11 Oct 2015 Messages: 38
|
Posté le: Dim Fév 07, 2016 10:24 am Sujet du message: |
|
[quote="Ramses II"]Note, this problem is possibly made worse by not specifying visibility rules, so in theory a unit or group can charge an enemy that is out of sight behind terrain. Is this what you intended?[/quote]
This particular aspect has been annoying me for a while, with opponents able to go up and down a hill in contact with an opponent. Imo, that kind of charge should be disorganised: "woops, we went up that hill and then saw the guys below us and decided to engage" |
|