Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 96
|
 Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 9:32 am Sujet du message: Evade obstacle |
 |
Hi Guys,
What is considered an 'obstacle' during the evade move?
Under 'blocked evade move' on page 48 it defines an obstacle as:
"...enemy units, friendly units that it cannot interpenetrate or an impassable terrain..."
Is this the same definition of an 'obstacle' for the rest of the evade sequence?
I have seen it ruled and seen examples of play where any terrain is considered an 'obstacle' and the evading unit can slide / wheel to avoid entering it.
This was further confused by an entry in the errata:
"Note: A group can split up when evading if this is necessary to avoid terrain or friendly or enemy units. A single roll is made to adjust the evade distance."
The use of the term 'to avoid terrain' and not 'to avoid an obstacle' is the problem.
Andy |
|
Three
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017
Messages: 211
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 96
|
| Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 9:51 am Sujet du message: |
|
Cheers Gary - I missed that previous thread.
It would be nice to have collected rulings / examples of play available for all. |
|
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021
Messages: 681
Localisation: Texas
|
| Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 12:55 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Terrain is not an obstacle unless you can’t enter it. This means difficult terrain is an obstacle for light chariots but not cavalry - at least as I understand it.
Also, if evading troops can’t poke their head out of the far side of friends they can’t interpenetrate and the friends become an obstacle. So for example, if LI are 2.5 UD in front of friendly pikes and roll a 3 for evade, they won’t reach the far side of the pikes (which is 4 UD away) so the pikes are an obstacle the evading LI must try to avoid. |
|
Neep
Signifer
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 335
|
| Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 2:34 pm Sujet du message: |
|
There is a long-standing question about the implications of the second bullet at the top of page 48.
| Citation: | | If the evading unit starts within one UD of rough or difficult terrain it cannot slide to avoid it, so must enter the terrain. It's movement distance is reduced accordingly. |
According to the preamble, you can slide 1 UD to avoid enemy units, friendly units you cannot interpenetrate, or an impassable terrain situated less than one UD directly ahead.
The second bullet appears to be saying you cannot do this to avoid rough or difficult terrain. It leaves up in the air the question of whether you can avoid rough or difficult terrain beyond 1UD. Note that the version 3 FAQ - available at the Facebook site - explicitly gives the evaders the option to avoid slowing terrain after the first 1 UD.
It has never been formally resolved.
Dernière édition par Neep le Lun Juil 28, 2025 7:04 pm; édité 1 fois |
|
Three
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017
Messages: 211
|
| Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 3:42 pm Sujet du message: |
|
I believe it has been resolved in the link I posted above, last post by Hazelbark where he says -
| Citation: | | As the occasional officially sanctioned apostle. You can take in this instance the answers Zoltan gave you as the correct reading of the rules. |
Hazelbark is a member of the DT, so his post is authoritive.
Zoltan wrote:
| Citation: | To summarise what has already been answered in this thread:
1. No, an evading unit can not slide to avoid rough or difficult terrain.
2. No, rough or difficult terrain does NOT count as an obstacle.
3. Yes, an evader that has already moved the maximum permitted distance for the rough/difficult terrain stops in front that terrain and does not enter it. |
|
|
Neep
Signifer
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 335
|
| Posté le: Ven Juil 25, 2025 8:36 pm Sujet du message: |
|
I am quite familiar with that thread.
By "formally resolved" I mean posted where the customers can find it, explicitly endorsed by the Direction Technique rules committee, and later either added to the amendments by the author, or rejected.
Thoughtful posts by any individual, or an outcome from discussion, or assertions by Direction Technique members buried in the threads here are a useful basis for a consensus view as they have been made publicly in view of the author and the rules committee. But that cannot always be relied on. And they can be difficult to dig up. Which is why the question has been raised again, and why a formal resolution is much more useful.
(For those just finding this forum, "Hazelbark" is our esteemed US Chief Referee, Dan Hazelwood. His opinions are official in tournaments he arbitrates.) |
|
FAQ
Rechercher
Liste des Membres
Groupes d'utilisateurs
S'enregistrer
Profil
Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés
Connexion
