Art De La Guerre

[Ramses II]

The way p57 is phrased is interesting. To summarise by bullet 

• specific offensive abilities are cancelled
  
• furious charge is cancelled
  
• the unit cannot cancel any enemy abilities that are in melee against the flank or rear of the unit
• the unit’s armour still works

Since the Impetuous foot are engaged in melee on the front edge, the third bullet does not apply (that unit is in support). 

The first bullet does not mention cancelling Impetuous abilities. 

So, the Impetuous foot does not get the +1 for charging HI swordsmen. Though the swordsmen would be at -1 for multiple units facing them front and flank. 

[Hazelbark]

[Ramses II]

Good spot, lurking “in the weeds”.

I stand corrected. 

 

[Nightingale87]

So now (again) I need help to understand what p.17 means. It says that: impetuous impact is cancelled by swordsmen... unless the non impetuous swordsmen are contacted by the flank or rear.

But I had up to now considered that that "contacted by the flank or rear" meant by just one unit. Which makes sense, the same way Spears dont cancel the impact of the cavalry if that cavalry is contacting the spear´s flank.

But I think your interpretation means that "contacted by the flank or rear" by any other unit would also mean that the impetupus unit to the front can still apply its impact.

I do see a difference here from what was said about cavalry and Spears.

A2
1

Unit A is heavy spearmen. Unit 1 is any cav with impact. Unit 2 is irrelevant (but it has its front against A´s flank)

Cavalry loses impact because its confronted with the front of spears.

Spears dont get impact vs mounted because the unit on its flank prevents it from getting that "ability". Right?


Now same situation but:

Unit A is HI swordsmen. Unit 1 is heavy infantry impetuous. Unit 2 again is irrelevant (but...)

Impetuous unit is in contact with the front of a non impetuous swordsmen...Please continue from here...


Again thank you very much!

[Hazelbark]

Your spear example is correct.
Also in this case the Impetuous HI would get the benefit of the impact bonus.

[Ramses II]

Agreed Hazelbark
Essentially an ‘ability’ shows that the troops are trained to use their weapons in a particular way either offensively or defensively. As a result, they gain or deny the bonus under the relevant circumstances. This includes the proficient use of swords and shields denying Impetuous units the benefit of Impact when charging. 

However an enemy unit attacking the flank of the unit distracts them, depriving them of that ability.

While most of these details are explained on p57, this one item lies on p17, something that perhaps needs to be made clear in some way. 

[Nightingale87]

"However an enemy unit attacking the flank of the unit distracts them, depriving them of that ability. "

The problema is that the same can be said about Spears fighting mounted and another unit on its flank.

I don´t have the english versión of the ruleset. But I think that on p.17 when it says that the impact of impetuous is not cancelled if the enemy heavy foor is contacted on its flank...I think it might mean "BY THE IMPETUOUS UNIT"....not by any other unit.

I get what you say and I see no problema with it. BUT,...I do see that there is another way to understand it, and i just want to sort it out and go with one of the two.

You can think that some formations have "qualities" of their own, good or bad. Like it´s cav´s quality to lose impact against Spears. And it´s impetupus "quatity" to lose impact against non impetupus swords. Therefore, just like with cav, impetupus foot loses its impact against Swords to their front.

[Ramses II]

Impetuous troops normally have the Impact ability.

The impact of Impetuous foot is cancelled when charging non-Impetuous swordsmen that are contacted on their front edge. (“sword and shield ability”, my definition)  

The wording of the English text is 

[Nightingale87]

"the impact ability remains valid if these target troops are contacted on their flank or rear"...by the impetupus unit.

See my point?
Given that we already have some precedent (javelines for example), in which the unit can use its ability if it contacts the enemy´s flank or rear, one could assume that this is the same case.

"The impact ability of impetuous units is cancelled against the front of swordsmen, but it is applied against the flank or rear of swordsmen"

Just like javelines.

In this way of seeing it, the fact that there is another unit on the flank of the swordsmen is irrelevant.

[Ramses II]

Although you are correct if we look at the text in isolation (and thus the text could actually be read both ways), your point is covered by the third bullet on p57 - so you are correct that the Impact ability of an Impetuous unit charging the flank of swordsmen (by themselves) is not cancelled. 

However, the text must be taken in the context of the previous sentences (as I summarised), so the impact of the Impetuous foot would be cancelled by charging the swordsmmen frontally, unless the swordsmen are themselves charged in the flank. 

[Nightingale87]

Ok!

I can do with that. I´ll do it like that from now on.

Thank you for your patience.

Although I do believe that spears and cav should interact the same way as impetuous and swordsmen. It helps recreate the accuracy of the representation.

In gaming terms,...well...If spears are distracted fighting on 2 fronts they dont get the impact, but cav lose theirs. Whereas swordsmen dont cancel the impact of impetupus even if distracted on another flank.

I´m at peace now. hehe Thanks again!

[Ramses II]

Good. Though though have made some very reasonable points, and you are not the first to have been confused by this particular text being ‘misplaced’ here. 

Patrick
As I said earlier, it would be useful if we could consider whether there should be a simple pointer added to the FAQ or official amendments, and certainly it should be moved as and when the rules are revised.