Rules Question Thread

[Mark Stanoch]

I am in a quandary regarding Shooting To Hit modifiers in BP2.

In the To Hit Modifiers chart on page 49, it instructs players not to apply the Target Is Not Clear/Skirmish/Artillery -1 penalty more than once even if the target unit may be in more than one of these conditions (ie, skirmishers in woods). Clearly these effects are not cumulative.

But on page 187 in the How It Played section for the Battle of Deadman’s Creek, the author states that “With both sides being in skirmish order, often as not clear targets or in cover, you pretty much need a six to hit every time.” This infers that the -1 To Hit Modifiers ARE cumulative. So which is it? Are To Hit Modifiers cumulative or not?

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch. Reason: Misspell
• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.
• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.

[Dr Dave]

I’d have said that they are cumulative. They certainly should be.

[Mark Stanoch]

I don’t know about that. The To Hit Modifiers table on page 49 is quite clear. I now read the line “Target is Not Clear/Skirmish/Artillery” as “Target is Not Clear OR Skirmish OR Artillery”. The Target being in one or more(!) of these conditions defines whether a -1 penalty is applied. The fact is the die roll required to hit can never be greater than 6 (also on page 49, second paragraph) so being cumulative does not make any sense.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.
• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.
• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.

[Big Al]

They can be cumulative and the result can be greater than 6. If the target number is greater than 6 it just means that you can’t hit the target under those conditions!

I do believe that the slash means “or”.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Big Al.

[Mark Stanoch]

I hate to disagree with you Big Al but the statement on page 49, second paragraph reads “Regardless of these modifiers, a 6 always scores a hit…There is no such thing as either an automatic hit or an impossible shot.” And accepting that the “/“ is equivalent to OR, this means that modifiers are not cumulative for those 3 conditions. This is a substantial divergence from the way we have been playing so I want to be sure I have it right before I spring it on my gaming group.

BTW: Happy New Year again!

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by Mark Stanoch.

[Mark Stanoch]

So the way I read the Rules As Written, the only way a shooting unit would require a “6” to hit would be if the SHOOTING unit is Disordered or Shaken AND the TARGET unit is Not Clear OR Skirmish OR Artillery.

[Bert]

Hi
About Combat
Can a Victorious Unit freely rotate ? (in the intention of facing another enemy unit in the vicinity) . Or in the case of a Cavalry, to make a Sweeping Advance then rotate to charge another enemy unit. ?

thks

[Big Al]

A Victorious unit can do any of the moves listed on Page 73 under the title Moves By Victorious Units. So, yes, it can rotate to face another unit. However, if the unit that lost has only fallen back and is not shaken, you might be better off following up or staying facing it.

As to the Sweeping Advance question, the answer is no!
The Sweeping Advance is governed by the same conditions as an ordinary charge – the advancing unit must be able to see the target enemy at the start of the move. If the cavalry has to rotate, then the intended target is not in sight at the start of the move and a Sweeping Advance is only a single move!

Just in case you play Hail Caesar, as well, in that game, the Sweeping Advance Rule is different and two moves are allowed (with a penalty risk) and your example would be allowed. I have only mentioned this because I suspect that you are mixing up the two systems.

[Bert]

Thks for the quick answer.
Another one about Special Rule in Clash of Eagle.
I suppose that “Heavy Cavalry D1” mean Heavy Cavalry +1 ?

[Big Al]

Yes it does.
By the way, it was in the original BP1 rulebook. I think that was an error And Rick was going to give it something else, but ended up changing his mind, but not the text.

[Karl Deppe]

On questions in regards to unreliable units.

When a commander roll just equals its stuff rating the order is issued but as the unit is unreliable they will not act. Now what anout the commander, can he still give orders?
Do the commander now have failed because the unit do not take his order or as he had equaled to his staff rating he had not failed?

BR Karl

[Big Al]

The order did not fail just because the Special rule prevented the unit from acting. That is what Unreliable means – you can’t rely on them to do as they are told. He passed the command roll, so he can continue to give orders to other units under his command.

[Karl Deppe]

Thanks, that helped a lot.

[Bryan]

Hey Guys. What are your thoughts on this.

A Napoleonic Infantry unit;
– Moves up to a forest.
– Changes to skirmish formation
– Moves into the forest to be on the edge

A nearby enemy unit decides to clear this threat by charging it.

It declares a charge and rolls a successful 3 moves.

The first move is up to the edge of the forest thereby also contacting the enemy that is in skirmish order in the forest.

If the Skirmish does not evade, Does

A
– the combat take place with the skirmish unit gaining cover bonus and skirmish disadvantage and the attacking unit fighting as normal (as it’s not in the woods).

– this would be the same as charging a linear obstacle with similar results.

B
– the chargers second move is to change to skirmish with it’s second move

– it then counts as charging into contact with the third move

– this would then count as fighting in the woods

– this would create an odd problem if they only rolled two moves as they would end up in contact but not in combat which seems against the rules

So far, as someone in our group suggested, for ease of play when we first started, that it was all too hard and you could not charge the skirmishers in the woods. This has led to, probably obvious, problems.

Any thoughts?

[Big Al]

This was brought up in the very early day’s on the Yahoo Group. The author said that the line could contact the unit at the edge of the wood without having to change to Open Order.
The unit at the edge of the wood are in Open Order, but they are not skirmishers, so cannot evade. However, it would still suffer the negative modifier for being in Open Order.
The problem arises when the charging unit wins, they cannot follow up because they are not in Open Order, although it may not matter because of the break test result.
If the unit in Open Order falls back, it would lose its defended status.
If the line lost and fell back, the unit in the wood could choose to follow up, but would remain in Open Order.

[Author]

Posts