Auteur |
Message |
Ramses II
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 21, 2019 11:59 am Sujet du message: |
|
As Dave says, RAW the support may not move (even if it is not impetuous), because it cannot move “the same distance†as the impetuous victors.Â
The intention here seems to be that the victorious unit and its supports maintain a line when they advance.
I will put this to the TB to see if they want to revise this in V4 |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1464
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 21, 2019 4:53 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Ramses II a écrit: | Ahh.Â
I think Dave is correct here. The key phrase is “the same distanceâ€.Â
It also means that normal units would stop their pursuit on contact with any enemy, irrespective of which unit made contactÂ
Good spot Dave. |
That's getting us into the territory of Barkerese divination of tea leaves, looking for The One Truth by teasing out semantically driven subtleties of meaning in the RAW that are highly unlikley to have been deliberately put there.
"tha same distance" could prefectly reasonably be read as "as far as possible until they meet an obstacle"...
I guess the DT need to think about how legalese-heavy they want these rules to become.
As I suggested at the start, this is still all pretty corner case and adoptinga culture of "hmm, dunno, lets dice for it" could well be a better overall outcome for us all that the eventual consequeces of battering every one of these things out of the wording of rules _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 6:27 am Sujet du message: |
|
madaxeman a écrit: | That's getting us into the territory of Barkerese divination of tea leaves, looking for The One Truth by teasing out semantically driven subtleties of meaning in the RAW that are highly unlikley to have been deliberately put there. |
Well that's an odd approach to the rules. In fact it's the height of "Barkerese divination" to look at a clearly stated rule and say it doesn't mean what it says, but means something else entirely.
On the question of whether or not it was deliberately put there you can always ask the author, but I'd point out the single sentence paragraph in question contains three very specific conditions. I very much doubt the phrase "the same distance" slipped in by accident.
madaxeman a écrit: | "tha same distance" could prefectly reasonably be read as "as far as possible until they meet an obstacle"... |
No it can't, it can only be read as "the same distance." Unless you're applying the "Barkerese divination" reading method of course.
madaxeman a écrit: | I guess the DT need to think about how legalese-heavy they want these rules to become. |
Or before each game you could give your opponent a list of the rules you think shouldn't apply to you.
madaxeman a écrit: | As I suggested at the start, this is still all pretty corner case and adoptinga culture of "hmm, dunno, lets dice for it" could well be a better overall outcome for us all that the eventual consequeces of battering every one of these things out of the wording of rules |
That's a fair point. You can do that in your games, I'll just stick with playing by the rules and letting the umpire decide the rare disagreement. _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Centurion
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 8:32 am Sujet du message: |
|
BDRM, mmm, has a certain ring to it.
|
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1464
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 5:06 pm Sujet du message: |
|
No-one wants ambiguity in the rules, but there is also an issue if there is too much clarity as well.
Whilst most of teh banter and chat in ADLG has now migrated to the Facebook page, the bigger picture is that means that currently virtually the only activity taking place on this forum is a small group of the same half-dozen people debating corner case DBx-style semantics - which I fear (and have been told...) is starting to get to a point at which it is beginning to put more casual players off.
Maybe the better answer here is that some of these 'head of a pin' discussions would be better being taken off this form and into a closed "DT-lite" forum or mailing group? _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014 Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 5:29 pm Sujet du message: |
|
I would be very happy if there were a mailbox for rules queries - if those answers could be delivered in a timely manner. However I think that could be quite a strain on those involved in providing the answers. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1464
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 7:52 pm Sujet du message: |
|
AlanCutner a écrit: | I would be very happy if there were a mailbox for rules queries - if those answers could be delivered in a timely manner. However I think that could be quite a strain on those involved in providing the answers. |
I'm not convinced these things have "answers" - its more a case that a handful of people are debating these corner case examples in public in order to get each query to the point at which it can be presented to the DT.
Given the limited pool of people who are chipping in each time, it might be better just for these half a dozen people to email each other... _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 22, 2019 10:43 pm Sujet du message: |
|
madaxeman a écrit: | AlanCutner a écrit: | I would be very happy if there were a mailbox for rules queries - if those answers could be delivered in a timely manner. However I think that could be quite a strain on those involved in providing the answers. |
I'm not convinced these things have "answers" - its more a case that a handful of people are debating these corner case examples in public in order to get each query to the point at which it can be presented to the DT.
Given the limited pool of people who are chipping in each time, it might be better just for these half a dozen people to email each other... |
EDIT to remove an unnecessarily snarky and possibly unhelpful post.
Okay Tim, but there's no need to make a public performance out of it, just email the other five and get them to agree a way forward.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|