Rules Question Thread

[RKHaryett]

After further searching I found the passage I was referring to in CoE. Basically, if a unit in line is flanked by and touching assault columns on both flanks it does not need to form square if both columns successfully form square. In this circumstance, the columns do not have to be the target of the charge to form square. If the line is targeted by a cavalry charge, the columns may attempt to form square and if successful, the line will issue Closing Fire. This differs from my initial query.

However, if the cavalry elected to charge one of the columns forcing it into square and overlapped the line I would have thought the line could provide Closing Fire in much the same way as the unit in the example with the artillery being charged. I appreciate that is not the rule but seems to me that the amount of overlap should determine whether a unit can deliver Closing Fire. The Attacker has plenty of opportunity to avoid this occurrence simply by changing formation prior to charging and should, in my view, be punished for failing to do so. Just my thoughts. May have to consider some sort of house rule based on amount of overlap.

Just my thoughts. Regardless, a fun set of rules that I will continue to use for all my horse and musket games.

Kent

[Big Al]

If the unit of cavalry charges, why should it have to change its formation? As I mentioned in my earlier response, the unit has the must form square rule and is being contacted by cavalry, so must form square.
Following your train of thought, if the column forms square, the charging cavalry will not make contact (read the form square rules) and as the line is not subject to the charge and is not incidentally contacted it cannot give closing fire. The situation is not the same as the picture in the book. That’s because cavalry is involved and the target unit forms square, changing the situation.

Do you have the page number of that paragraph? It would be helpful to read it in context. Out of context, well, everyone would adopt it and follow it, rendering cavalry virtually useless!

[Bert]

Hi
About moving in Proximity
In this picture, is it possible for “Blue” Gun to move straight back ?. (I think yes)

[Big Al]

Yes it can! It is moving directly back and if it stayed there it wouldn’t last long.
Strictly speaking, it doesn’t have to move at all and it could just turn on the spot. But those skirmishes would make short work of it if you did that.

[Bert]

ok
You mean that the gun could rotate then fire at either 2 ennemy units ? (I have always believed that a unit could not change his facing in the proximity on an ennemy..)

Thx

[Big Al]

Any unit can change facing or formation while within proximity. What it can’t do is move sideways!

[Napoleon]

Hey all, can anyone help with a query on BP2 rules for generals.
Question:
If a Brigadier orders one of his units to advance and fails his roll, but the General is close enough to invoke his re-roll option and passes, the unit moves. Can the Brigadier go on and order other units in his brigade or does his original roll count as a failed commanders? Opinion in split in our club on this one. What do the expects say?

[Charge The Guns]

I’d say that if you re-roll and succeed then you continue as if you hadn’t failed. I don’t think the rules say this explicitly, but they do imply that you carry on using the re-rolled result.

[Redcoat]

I can find no such implication, at least not one that outweighs the opposite view, ie the General overrules the Brigadier for just that one order.
However, having pored over the V2 rulebook for the last two hours, I would like to make an observation.
Page 110 refers firstly to the basic rule being discussed above, but it then moves on to four other types of general which we can employ in our games.
“Commander in Chief” is basically reverting back to the general in the V1 rulebook.
“Battlefield general” appears to be a walking God Of War and can do the V2 procedure (whichever variant comes out on top) for all brigadiers within 12” of his heavenly presence.
“Warrior general” likes to get stuck in, personally running a brigade, and possibly overruling subordinates as per the V2 procedure.
“General with ADCs” is a communicator, and likes to spread his influence far and wide across the battlefield, by sending several junior staff officers off with his written instructions.
At the very least, these various types of general give us options that do not tie us down to the fractious conundrum above.

[Charge The Guns]

I guess one man’s implication is another man’s mince pie :-). Heartily agree that it is great to have some alternative suggestions for CinC types. Very handy for different scenarios.

[Big Al]

I responded to this on Facebook and my answer is that he can carry on. The retool has changed the result, so you obey the new result and carry on!

[Robbie]

This is actually a tricky one because the two interpretations people have put forward are both of similar validity. Some would point to the fact that the re roll replaces whatever result was rolled and draw from it that this would allow further orders to be given. Others would point to the fact that a failed roll means that the Brigadiers should stop and the re roll is the General intervening. If you like The Brigadiers messenger is shot down and the General and his staff intervene to allow the required movement to take place.

Both interpretations can argue validity because the rules do not have that vital final clarification; If the re roll is successful it only applies to that order OR if the re roll is successful, then the Brigadier can continue issuing orders.

For clarity’s sake, I started this debate thinking no further rolls should occur. I now am moving to the opposite opinion. This is because the reroll can take place for successful as well as failed orders. This fact only makes sense if new order fully replaces the old order and that further orders can then be issued by the Brigadier.

However it would be very useful if an answer from the rule writer or Warlord games could clarify this.

[Big Al]

Robbie, I don’t see it as tricky at all. It is quite simple in my view. You have rolled the dice for an order issued by a specific commander that has failed. You use the reroll bestowed by the proximity of the General. What are you rerolling? You are rerolling the commander’s Command dice which gives a result that you are now bound by in its entirety. If it is successful, it is successful in every way because it has replaced the original. You can’t keep part of a now obsolete result.
Effectively, the reroll means that the original never happened. Otherwise, you are cherry picking parts of a rule or decision. I mean, by taking any other view, you could just say that the order failed to reach the intended recipient, but the commander can continue ordering other units. That is another interpretation that nobody is going to agree with. Yes, it is a bit of a silly suggestion, but it illustrates my point about “cherry picking” which part of a rule a player will use. The rules state that a reroll result must be obeyed.

If you want Rick to step in, try tagging him on Facebook. He may not get to see this on here. Not sure how often he frequents the forum.

[Charge The Guns]

+1 to what Big Al says. It seems the logical interpretation to me as well. At the end of the day it comes down to how much of a benefit you want to CinC to be, and it’s not a vast difference either way. If the new CinC rule is too troublesome you could always go back to the BP1 approach.

[Marecki]

I’ve got another question. Maybe someone asked about it on old forum: attack column with skirmish screen has +1 to morale save, or mixed formation is separate formation at all?

[Author]

Posts