Rules Question Thread

[Eric Fontaine]

Have a specific rules question, let’s hear it. Let’s chat about it. And lets get the official ruling. Who will be first?

[Carnyx]

Received my copy of Shield Wall recently, have a question related to the new skirmish rules if anyone can assist. When a figure such as a leader with 2 stamina takes a third hit (assuming the leader passes any morale tests), does his hits drop back to 2 hits or remain at 3 hits?
Regards,
Mark

[Jeremu]

I have a question:

I recently got the PDF for the hail caesar rules, and I was reading through it, but I couldn’t really find out what baggage did. Is it just something to fight over (an objective)? I’ve only “flipped” through the rules, so maybe it was obvious and I missed it, but I only found rules for what to do when baggage fights or is attacked. Nothing on whether it increases morale of nearby units, or anything.

[Jeremu]

I have resolved my own issue after further reading, unless I am mistaken, they are simply an objective. That said, I am glad that they are included in the game to such an extent, because they will likely make the game a bit more tactical. Me and my friend group will likely include rules for resupply, but that’s what I love about warlord games.

They give you an excellent rule set, and say “this is how we enjoyed the game, and I think you will too,” but they don’t just say that it’s the only way to play, they only ask that you consider the perspective of experienced game designers, for the sake of your enjoyment, not theirs alone.

[AdamH]

When units loses combat and gives ground, I assume that the victorious unit will indeed push forward to maintain contact as long as they are not shaken or disordered.

I would also imagine that when this happens, the combat carries over to the next turn where both units use “Sustained” rolls as opposed to “Clash”, thereby giving the winning unit the +1 to hit. So they would be hitting on 3’s.

Is this correct? Please explain.

[Big Al]

It all depends on the situation. It may not be advantageous for the victorious unit to maintain contact. For example, any supporting units may not be able to follow the victorious unit when it moves to maintain contact and would therefore weaken its chances in combat.

By the way, if you read the 4th paragraph under Moves by Victorious Unit’s on Page 78, you will see that shaken and disordered unit’s can follow up and maintain contact.

However, as I have mentioned above, a unit does not have to maintain contact. If the combat was in the turn of the Victorious unit, not maintaining contact would allow any disorder to be removed at the end of the turn.
Similarly, if the following turn belonged to the Victorious unit and it was shaken, not maintaining contact would allow a Rally Order to be issued, removing the shaken status.

Does that clarify?

[AdamH]

My final question is whether it is considered a new charge that uses clash or an ongoing combat that uses sustained?

[AdamH]

Lets say two units are in combat against two enemy units. Let’s call them Combat A and Combat B. They are right next to each other on the line.

Lets say that the attacker in Combat A breaks his opponent and then gets a Victorious Move. Can he then charge the flank of the opposing unit in Combat B, as this combat is still going on? It would seem like an easy wheel at first glance?

[Big Al]

Yes it can. It is called a Sweeping Charge. Read the Sweeping Advance Rules on page 78. Full details and what test the unit makes for disorder. The only thing that would prevent it is the Proximity Rule. Provided there isn’t another unit to its front quarter,it can turn onto the enemy flank and count its attacks in the “new” combat.

[mark bolton]

A charge order is given to a line of 4 units against 4 skirmisher units to their front and parallel to them 9″ away. I understand how ONE unit evades if charged , but what happens in this “group charge” ? Does the first unit charge then an evade test then the charger chooses what to do with surplus moves – and then the second , third etc ? I ask because a move/charge like this could have so many variables . Many thanks.

[Big Al]

Well, you have issued the order for four units to charge at four units. So, you work out the first charge and the charged unit evades. As you know, the evading unit rolls to see how many moves it may evade in the same way as if it was issued an order. So, it moves that many moves and then you move the Charing unit it’s full number of moves towards the evading unit. If the evadering unit has not moved far enough and is caught, it is destroyed. If it has moved far enough, the chargers are left hanging around.

You then do the same for the next charging unit versus the next target and so on. The charging unit does not redirect against another Skirmish unit because the charge move is direct and they will try to reach their target.

This illustrates the importance of the wording of your orders. You see, if you gave the order to charge the skirmishers, that is what will happen. If there is a formed unit behind the skirmishers and the skirmishers evade through it, your unit will stop short of contacting the formed unit. It will not charge into it because the order did not allow for it.

If your order was just Charge or Charge the line behind the skirmishers, the skirmishers would evade and your unit could continue into whatever was behind. But you can’t drive off one unit and change direction to charge into the one next to it just because the original target ran away.
All of your units will try to chase down their original targets, who will try to evade as far as possible.

[mark bolton]

As I thought . Thanks for the clarity.

[Edward Green]

I was wondering about the topic of “sub-units,” listed in the “A selection of useful rules” section of the rule book. My question pertains to using auxiliary archers as small units attached to a legionary units? If we can field them as such, can we pay for a full unit of 16 archers and deploy them between into two legionary units? Or does this rule pertain only to Republican Romans? Thank you for the clarification in advance.

[Charge The Guns]

I think the sub-unit special rule is basically a restriction on command / movement – the sub unit has to stay within a move of the parent unit. If you think that Imperial legionary units had “sub-units” of auxiliary bowmen then go for it. I would have thought legionary sub-units would be part of the legion rather than auxiliaries, i.e. legionary archers, but I’m not an expert. I think it was the later Roman armies that had integral archers to both both Legionary and Auxiliary units. The HC army list book “Late Antiquity to Early Medieval” has Thematic Byzantines with integral archers, but Late Romans can have small units of archers.

[Big Al]

As Charge the Gun’s has said, the sub unit is expected to stay as close as it can to the parent unit. The example given in the rules is that of German infantry mixed with cavalry, showing that it is not just for Republican Romans! In fact, the most obvious example is chariot runners for Biblical armies. They have a hard time of it keeping up when the chariots decide to charge off. They are forced to, though. If a sub unit becomes separated from the parent, they have to move towards it until they reach it.

[Author]

Posts