Rules Question Thread

[Big Al]

You can use whatever term you like. There is no wheeling in BP. That means that you just move the unit to its final position. You don’t measure movement in an arc, like you do in other systems. You can move the left hand stand directly to where the right hand stand would end up and the right hand one to where the left hand stand would be. Effectively a wheel, though the individual stands have changed position.

[Big Al]

Battalion guns are mentioned in the rules. As far as I am aware (without looking it up in the book) they are not independent of the battalion and move with it.

[Mark Stanoch]

Yes there are vestiges of concepts acquired over 40+ years of miniature wargaming that need to be disabused by oneself in order to understand BP II. But so far I have to say that it is definitely worth it. BP II is the best rule system I have gamed with the possible exception of WAB.

[Mark Stanoch]

I have a question on Follow Me orders. The rules on page 34 state that “..A follow me order is given in the usual manner. Make the dice test to determine if the order is given successfully”. The rules then go on to state that “…If the result is a pass…the unit together with the brigade commander can be moved up to three moves..”. Do Follow Me Orders always allow for 3 moves if passed or are the number of moves calculated by subtracting the dice rolls from the commander’s staff rating?

[Mark Stanoch]

In the description of the Battle of Isandlwhana scenario of the Zulu! Supplement, a reference is made to the ability of the Zulus to “go to ground”. Can anyone explain what this means exactly?

[Big Al]

Three moves, exactly as it says and no need to declare anything. The downside is that your commander can issue no further Orders and he is stuck with that particular unit until his next turn. That means that if the unit loses combat and breaks, he is lost.

[Big Al]

It means exactly what it says – the Zulus hit the deck! They lie down or crouch and go out of sight and then move away or relocate their position unseen. They were very good at this because they knew the land and took advantage of the terrain and tall grass. There are times when a man standing up can’t be seen in the grass, it is that tall. Even elephants can be concealed by it.

[Mark Stanoch]

Thanks for the response. But how exactly is this ability reflected in the game mechanics, i.e. not considered clear targets, etc.?

[Big Al]

No, there are no special rules for it. I would suggest that you would declare it during the command phase as part of an order.
Remove the unit from the table and replace it with a marker. Unit cannot be targeted. Hidden movement allowed. I would suggest that for hidden movement, a Command roll be made, though you would only have to declare charges. The roll decides the number of moves that the unit can make. Unit cannot “Go to Ground” when within proximity and must show itself if it’s hidden movement puts it within proximity (unusual grass movement etc). The unit may remain hidden if enemy moves within proximity.

How does that sound as a suggested rule for Go To Ground?
Perhaps if the author reads and likes it, he could authorise it as “official”?

[RKHaryett]

Hello again. Black Powder is our group’s current ruleset for Napoleonics. We have played two games and are in the midst of our third. Our games tend to be rather large as we have a permanent table and played over a number of nights. Anyway, I digress. I have a question regarding Closing Fire.

Generally speaking, Closing Fire is issued by the target of a charge which other than a couple very specific exceptions is a single unit. He have had the situation where a large cavalry unit in line (6 bases on a 9″ front) has charged a French regiment of 3 battalions in mixed order. They targeted the left side attack column which promptly formed square. The Cavalry’s movement brought them in range of the 2nd battalion in line. The Cavalry’s frontage covered a considerable part of the battalions frontage, about 1/2. Can the battalion in line issue Closing Fire? By analogy with the example of the artillery adjacent to an infantry unit, I would say “Yes”. Thoughts?

Kent

[Big Al]

No it can’t because it was not the subject of the charge.
The cavalry will move up to the square and then withdraw with the remaining movement that it has left after contacting the square (See the form square rule). If the cavalry would contact both infantry units, the second incidentally (as you have mentioned the example of the cannon in the book) then both units would react to the cavalry charge by forming square. Either way, there would be no Closing Fire because the unit can only make one reaction to the charge and as they have the Must Form Square Rule, they must react in that way.

That said, a lot depends on the order that was issued, as well. For example, if the order was just “Charge!” Then the cavalry would maximise its charge to take in the second unit.

[RKHaryett]

Thank you for your response Big Al. As always your views are much appreciated.

I take no issue with much of what your wrote but I’m positive that I read somewhere in the rules or CoE that units in l’ordre mixte, a line with both flanks anchored on an assault columns, was treated differently. I’ll be darned if I can find the passage I’m referring to today and I’ve looked through BP2 and CoE. The jist of the rule was that the battalion in line can ignore “Must Form Square” as it’s flanks are protected much the same as if anchored on a built up area or impassable terrain. Does that ring a bell with anybody? I can’t remember the exact wording though and it may be that the anchoring assault columns must already be in square, not reacting, when the charge is declared against the line battalion.

I must take issue though with your second paragraph. Unless I’m missing something, a unit can only declare a charge against more than one unit in very restrictive circumstances most of which are based on the size of the defending unit/s.

Final query for the day, I hope and this might seem a no brainer. In CoE Cossacks are rated as Irregular. The MRB states Irregular troops may adopt March Column but default to either Skirmish or Warband formation. My Russian opponent believes that the only formation his Cossacks can deploy into is Skirmish because Warband doesn’t apply to cavalry. I disagree and believe his Cossacks can either be in Skirmish or Warband formation. Thoughts?

Final comment for the day. Just noticed a major error in MRB. For the Eve of Waterloo scenario all British and French Light cavalry, including Polish Lancers of the Guard are rated as Irregular as are Voltigeurs and British Riflemen. Can’t believe that’s not a typo.

Cheers guys. Look forward to your comments.

[Big Al]

You might have read something in Clash of Eagles, but you didn’t ask that and My response, as always, is only about the main rules. I don’t use the supplements’ suggested rules very often, as I don’t find them necessary.

Again, if you read the section on orders and Charge Orders in particular, you will see that my comments in the second paragraph are totally correct. However, as you have just said that a charge must be against one specified unit, that answers your original question for you.

Closing Fire is a reaction against a charge and the second unit has not been charged or contacted, so cannot react. If it had been contacted, the only reaction Open to it would be to form square.

For what it is worth, I would agree with you on the Cossacks. Warband usually does refer to infantry, but as the Cossacks are cavalry, they will be of limited use only as skirmishers. Cavalry rarely shoot in the game. Skirmishers can’t attack any formed units, cavalry or infantry, so what are they going to do all game? Just loiter around waiting to join in a fight that another of their friends has started?

[RKHaryett]

The Supplements can certainly make rules queries slightly more problematic. I will continue to look for passages regarding l’ordre mixte and perhaps repost my question if the answer is not apparent.

A follow up to your last response. The unit forming square can’t deliver Closing Fire on the charging cavalry but can it deliver Closing Fire if charged by a second unit?

With respect to the cossacks, you make the same argument as I did. Perhaps we are giving too much credit to them…lol…Really, I shouldn’t complain as they are much easier to deal with if they can only skirmish.

Our Battle of the Berezina continues this weekend. We are third of our way through the combined game and the Russians have yet to put much pressure on the French holding the West bank. The Russians on the East bank are due to arrive next turn as are the French stragglers so it will be an interesting finale. Hopefully the Russians will continue to have difficulties deploying and bringing their superior numbers to bear.

Cheers,
Kent

[Big Al]

Yes, the square can give closing fire to a second unit charging the square. Remember it is one shot per facing up to a maximum of three. It can be argued that a second facing might get a shot in corner to corner, so to speak. That is because the unit charging is usually wider than the facing of the square and each facing would be shooting into its own front quarter. I allow it, but Only for a second facing, not a third.
The big question is whether the square can give closing fire to a charging enemy once it is engaged in combat? A single battalion square, probably can’t, whereasa Brigade square could, being made up of four units. Of course, a brigade square fires three shots per facing for the same reason.

[Author]

Posts