Art De La Guerre
Bienvenue sur le forum de discussion de la règle de jeu l'Art De La Guerre
 
FAQFAQ RechercherRechercher Liste des MembresListe des Membres Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs S'enregistrerS'enregistrer
ProfilProfil Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés ConnexionConnexion
Impetuous charging, or charging but not actually charging?
Page 1 sur 1
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Auteur Message
Three
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017
Messages: 180
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 9:09 am    Sujet du message: Impetuous charging, or charging but not actually charging? Répondre en citant
This caused an amount of discussion during last night's game.

Very Happy = Impetuous Camels
Confused = Light Horse Archers
Exclamation = Medium Knights

The situation was as follows -

Confused - - Very Happy
Exclamation Very Happy

The Knights have charged the lower Camel base and moved the Light Horse Archers up into a supporting position. The upper Camel base is just over 1 UD away from the LH, so must pay to charge or to hold them back. All the bases would line up side edge to side edge and corners to corners by the upper camel's base moving straight forward, there is no lateral movement required.

Assuming the Camels want to charge, their target must be the LH. No issues so far. The Camels then announce that they will charge the LH and pay a pip to do so. The LH evade.
The query is what happens next?

Do the Camels -

1) Continue their charge to the full extent of their charge move because they are Impetuous and all the targets of their charge have evaded - page 40, 3rd paragraph under Charge movement
or
2) Stop in a supporting position to the lower camel base as soon as it's front corner touches the front corner of the knight's base - page 36 under charge definition, 3rd paragraph 2nd bullet point, if that applies in this situation?

My initial response was that 2 is the correct answer, as the Camel owner I would say that, and that is how we've been playing it in previous games, but this was also the first time I've used impetuous mounted and I'm coming round to the conclusion that 1 is correct.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Commodore
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2012
Messages: 1195
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 10:41 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Your answer 2 is OK
_________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead"
Cdr Farragut,Mobile 1864
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Three
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017
Messages: 180
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 11:39 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hi Commodore,

Not doubting you Cool but could you say why?

For 2 to be correct, as I understand it, the Camels charge and the Light Horse evades. The camels then stop charging, and change to a move to contact as page 36, under charge definition, 3rd paragraph 2nd bullet point, says that this movement is not a charge.

If this is allowed then fine, but I would appreciate the rule reference for this, and why it would take precedence over page 40, 3rd paragraph under Charge movement, which seems quite clear.

Thanks.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Maverick2909
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017
Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 12:44 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I don’t have my book in front of me but your #2 is correct. Any unit whether impetuous or not stops during a charge when the come into contact with the enemy and thus in this scenario the camel unit would stop.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 1:15 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Three a écrit:
For 2 to be correct, as I understand it, the Camels charge and the Light Horse evades. The camels then stop charging, and change to a move to contact as page 36, under charge definition, 3rd paragraph 2nd bullet point, says that this movement is not a charge.

Just replying on this point - that rule is badly worded.

Take the example below:

X B
A

X and A are in melee, B faces X's flank and is less than 1 UD away.

Can B declare a spontaneous charge against X?

Of course it can unless you want to take the rule you quote on page 36 literally. ie if it's not a charge it can't be a spontaneous charge.

If B moves to contact X on the flank and A disengages is that "move to contact" (as per page 36) then converted to a charge for the purpose of factors such as impact, javelins or furious charge?

Clearly, a strict reading of the rule results in nonsense situations.

My view is that the rule should say that this move "need not be a charge" (rather than "is not a charge"). Thereby allowing light infantry to give support to friends in melee and other troops the benefits of charging.

Onto your other question - there is within the rules a general expectation that moving into contact with the enemy allows a unit to cease moving without penalty (see page 32 Difficult Manoeuvres).

If you look at page 36 Continuing a charge
Citation:
When one or more units of a charging group contact the enemy, the other units of the group who have not contacted an enemy can continue their charge...

Continuing a charge is optional except for impetuous troops for whom it is compulsory.


In this situation:

X

!ABC


A B C are a group of impetuous cavalry slightly offset from X. They charge straight ahead and A contacts X, but B and C don't.

Now since continuing a charge occurs before conforming both B and C should wander off into the blue. But what actually happens is A and B conform and C goes off on its own. The mechanism for doing it this way isn't covered in the rules - it's just common sense.

Similarly, it makes sense in the overall feel of the rules that when the second camel unit in your example makes corner to corner contact with the knight unit it should stop.

There has to be a certain amount of pragmatism in the way we read these rules. However, there's also a danger in applying common sense because we all have different ideas of what's reasonable. Far better to square it away in the FAQ until we get to edition 4 Wink

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Three
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017
Messages: 180
MessagePosté le: Mar Juin 05, 2018 6:44 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Thanks for the replies, and to reiterate, 2 was how we have played it up until last night when the actual wording was closely looked at.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Page 1 sur 1
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet Toutes les heures sont au format GMT

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum