Art De La Guerre

[SteveR]

Consider a unit of Heavy Chariot Impact charging a unit of Heavy Sword Armored with support.

The sword lose the first round of the melee

The Heavy Chariot's furious charge is cancelled by the support per page 18.

However the Armor is cancelled "During the first round of a melee if the enemy has Furious Charge..." per page 17

In my opinion the Chariot may not currently have Furious Charge but it still does have the Furious Charge ability. Even if the word "ability" does not appear on page 17.

So my conclusion is that the sword does not benefit from Armor.

Steve




(we now return you to the previously scheduled debate about how many Angels can wheel on the head of a pin if an enemy pin is right next door and the second rank of Angels would overlap it)

[daveallen]

Of course the swordsmen don't get the benefit of armour as their armour class is the same as the Heavy Chariot.

A more interesting question is if the Chariot loses the combat does it get the benefit of better armour?

Yes - if its (cancelled) and furious charge still cancels the HSwd's armour (see http://www.artdelaguerre.fr/adlg/v3/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7848)

No - if its (cancelled) and furious charge doesn't cancel the HSwd's armour.

I hope that helps

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence

[SteveR]

Silly me, of course you are correct that with Heavy Chariots the Armor MAY be equal (see the example on page 17- if the Furious charge being cancelled does not cancel the foot's armor, they are equal. If it does then the Chariot would indeed have heavier armor.)

But the fundamental question remains.

Make the winning unit medium cavalry impetuous instead. It has impact and furious charge. But loses the furious charge due to support. Does the swordsman keep the benefit of Armor when it loses?

[Za Otlichiye]

This really isn't a page 17-18 question. Page 18 lists a number of situations where Furious Charge does not "apply", and page 17 asks whether a unit "has" Furious Charge. You might as well ask if the Armored foot is in rough terrain, does Furious Charge negate the armor advantage?

Page 63, however, adds confusion. It introduces the idea of cancellation in the 2d and 3d bullets. Furious Charge is explicitly "cancelled" by attack on flank or rear; But bullet 3 talks about the outflanked unit being unable to cancel the abilities of units attacking it in the flank or rear, but still able to cancel those of a unit attacking the front edge.

When I looked at this, I couldn't see any abilities that flank or rear attacking units would have to begin with, nor understand what cancelling abilities the outflanked unit would retain. It looked like the rules equivalent of code rot.

Be nice to have this cleaned up.

[KevinD]

Units charging the enemy in the the flank or rear, where there is no other unit engaged I combat to that enemy’s front, get their abilities such as furious charge.

[daveallen]

Go to the wording on pages 17 & 18:

Page 17, Armour and heavy armour, para 4:

[vexillia]

Thank heavens! A reply I can actual understand. Far too much sloppy logic on the forum at the moment.
_________________
Martin Stephenson

[Za Otlichiye]

I agree with Dave that is what the rules mean, and with Steve that that is what the rules say. And I agree that it's sloppy...

[Hazelbark]

[KevinD]

[daveallen]

[vexillia]

[SteveR]

Does an accusation of trolling not also constitute trolling? When applied to a legitimate question of course, which my modified version certainly is.


Daveallen points out

"The key words here are does not apply.

So the armour ability is retained because the ability that would cancel it does not apply."


This may indeed be correct, however it relies on an application of a linguistic nuance in the English version of the rules. That is often suspect in interpreting ADLG. The author does not rely on subtle word play to delineate distinctions - I doubt if the use of "cancelled" in one place and "does not apply" in the other was carefully crafted to anticipate this question.

[KevinD]

[daveallen]