Art De La Guerre

[SteveR]

An individually based commander is attached to a unit which is destroyed by shooting.

There is no friendly unit within 5 UD.

Is the commander lost?

Ref - page 27. First bullet of Individually Based Commander and last bullet of Attached Commander.

[KevinD]

Yes. Last bullet on p 27, as you say. This is talking about an attached commander, not just engaged commanders. The moral of this story is do not attach commanders to units that can flee off table or a solitary unit w no friends w/in 5 UD that can be destroyed. (This is why I had asked the question about whether a camp can count as a unit for a general fleeing to it…)

[Neep]

Maybe. Neither the first bullet nor the last are qualified in a way that keeps them from being contradictory. Three bullets preceding the last are discussing what happens in melee, so it's not unreasonable to think the last bullet is also doing so. Furthermore the "see above" references a process requiring "contact". It may simply mean you do not have to pursue and make physical contact with the attached commander standing behind the now Routed unit.
That said, so long as you have a friend within 5UD, fleeing is probably the preferred outcome.
It's a rare but significant and moot question.

[lionelrus]

[SteveR]

Hi Lionel,

Contact by an enemy with no friend within 5 UD clearly results in capture.

However it was not obvious, to me, that only a commander attached to a unit destroyed in melee (outside range of friends) is lost. That bullet does not have a condition listed - it just says "unit to which a commander is attached is destroyed" without specifying melee is required.

[KevinD]

Steve, the way you describe it is also how I read it.

[SteveR]

Right Kevin. In English there is no condition in the last bullet which requires contact - only that the unit is destroyed and the commander is more than 5 UD from any friend.

However you have to admit it seems strange that destruction of the unit also carries away the Commander. Commanders may be attached, but they are independent of the unit and may run around by themselves.

And there is also a bullet that says "a commander attached to a unit is not affected by shooting against the unit"

Which can be read as either "any cohesion loss of a unit by shooting has no effect on the attached commander" or as "any bad result to a unit from shooting has no effect on the commander"

Or both.

Anyway it came up in a game on Thursday, I was not sure so I thought I would ask.

[Ramses II]

[SteveR]

Thank you Gavin,

But - it seems you are leading me to a different answer than Lionel who seems to be saying contact with an enemy is needed.

If a unit shot at has a commander "engaged in combat" (the title of the section in the rules) for purposes of elimination per the last bullet, logically should we also make it test by rolling a 1, 2 or 3 per the third bullet even if it has friends within 5 UD? (which we know we do not do)

The errata also says only commanders fighting with the main unit of a melee count suffer risk of elimination.

Of course the last bullet on page 28 only requires the unit to be routed, the other bullets do say "engaged in combat" as a requirement.

[lionelrus]

[Ramses II]

Steve, I think Lionelrus is inviting you to reconsider the entire section of Commander in combat.  

• If the unit to which the commander is attached is routed (by melee or shooting), he must dice to survive (dying on a 1, 2, 3). 
  
• If he survives check for a nearby friendly unit
  • if available, the commander moves to it and survives. 
    
  • if there is no-one nearby, he is  lost (he is captured or flees the battlefield)

.

Simples as they say

[Hazelbark]

My goodness. If we remove our glasses and squint and see nothing but one letter, we get a headache, loose the forest for the Bark Beatle and get a long thread.

Errata was for people to understand that a unit in melee support does not put commander at risk in combat. Example an elephant rampage into an included general unit that is in melee support does not create a die roll to kill the general.

An unincluded commander with a unit more than 5 UD from anyone else and that unit dies from shooting then p27 says captured.
An unincluded commander not fighting with a unit more than 5 UD from anyone else and that unit dies in melee then p28 says captured.
An unincluded commander not with a unit more than 5 UD from anyone else is fine, unless the enemy moves through or contacts the base then p27 says captured.

moral of the story
A commander with a unit and no friends within 5 UD is at risk don't lose it. Sometimes the gamey thing is for the cowardly general to run for the hills and abandon their troops. (E.G. Napoleon on retreat from Moscow)

[SteveR]

[Neep]

It's quite clear that an attached commander is only "engaged in combat" when in melee. Therefore, an attached commander engaged in combat can never be shot at.
An included commander is always "engaged", hence the parenthetical about shooting and protection.

[Neep]

This thread is about a very simple question. If shooting eliminates a unit, and a general is attached to that unit, must the general flee or be captured?

I'm beginning to think the better answer is that anything that eliminates a unit with a general attached should force the general to flee. It eliminates a whole bunch of other questions: enemy elephant rampage, friendly elephant rampage, cascading rout, etc.
The easiest fix would be to strike the first bullet under "Attached commander" which is therefore pointless.