|
|
Post by alanyork on Dec 5, 2017 3:39:24 GMT
If bows are forced to recoil they can go through friendly blades, I'm ok with that.
However if there is an enemy element touching both of their flanks, the "closing the door" trap, the bows are destroyed. So far, so good
What about the blades though? They aren't recoiling, they aren't being pushed back as bows through blades is a legitimate interpenetration, they aren't fleeing and they aren't behind a head of a column that has been destroyed. I take that last to be quick kills or doubling the lead element's score.
Do the blades survive then and if not, why not?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Dec 5, 2017 6:59:55 GMT
I may have got the example wrong but this sound to me like this is a column and as the lead element is killed (recoiled but enemy front touching flank) then the blades are also destroyed if the enemy is also touching their flank.
Regards
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by alanyork on Dec 5, 2017 7:41:20 GMT
If that's the case then looking at the example 20f on page 29 where there's a column of three blades and the lead one can't recoil, why is the one behind it not destroyed?
Surely what is meant by this is if the lead element is quick killed IE the combat outcome is "Destroyed if" or "Destroyed by..."
Assuming that is true we go back to the problem that the blades are not recoiling because they aren't fighting, are not being pushed back as interpenetration is legal, aren't fleeing and as we have just seen aren't behind the head of a column that's been destroyed.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Dec 5, 2017 10:25:38 GMT
Isn’t the situation in figure 20f covered by page 12 paragraph 5? “An element already in contact with any of these (obstacles) cannot recoil and is destroyed instead.” Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Dec 5, 2017 15:05:15 GMT
If that's the case then looking at the example 20f on page 29 where there's a column of three blades and the lead one can't recoil, why is the one behind it not destroyed? Surely what is meant by this is if the lead element is quick killed IE the combat outcome is "Destroyed if" or "Destroyed by..." Assuming that is true we go back to the problem that the blades are not recoiling because they aren't fighting, are not being pushed back as interpenetration is legal, aren't fleeing and as we have just seen aren't behind the head of a column that's been destroyed. In 20f there is no enemy in side contact so the 2nd/3rd elements are not destroyed. The reason why the lead element is destroyed is that it cannot push back the second element as that would mean the 2nd element pushing back the 3rd element and pushed back elements cannot push back other elements. As well as Stevie's reference above, also see the last line of the paragraph before it. Hope this helps, Simon |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 6, 2017 17:49:40 GMT
I am not good at visualizing text into situations, but it seems that there is a Bow element in front of 1 or more Blade elements. The Bow and the Blade behind it are flanked. The Bow loses combat. So both Bow and Blade are destroyed.
Destroyed Elements
"An element that has an enemy front edge in contact with its side or rear edge is destroyed by recoiling, being pushed back, fleeing or being in a column whose front element is destroyed."
Am I missing the problem?
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Dec 6, 2017 21:29:58 GMT
Like Bob I was a bit confused by the description but if a element has a Hard Flank on both the Bow and a Blade behind than both are probably dead. I say probably because the rules can mean different things to different people (as I have learned). Normally if the front element has to Recoil and so Push Back the rear element both are Destroyed due to the Flank Lock (even though the Recoil element is "instantly" Destroyed and so does not techically Push Back the "behind" element). This was to solve the problem of residual contact (i.e. the behind element left in illegal contact with the Hard Flanker.
But what if the Recoiling element does not Push Back the behind element but instead passes through it - so never even theoritically Pushes it Back. My instinct is to rule that the behind element is still Destroyed just for consistency (that hobgoblin of my mediocre mind) and to avoid the residual contact situation. It may be covered by the "being in a column" phrase.
As always I'm open for feedback on this ruling. Interesting question...
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 7, 2017 0:15:00 GMT
Tom, note that the rule says "being in a column whose front element is destroyed." So if the front element and the one behind it are flanked, both are destroyed even if the front could pass through the second. Moreover, if there were three elements in the column, the front cannot pass through the one behind as there is no space, so it is destroyed, or it would try to push back The one behind, but that one cannot push back the third so the front is destroyed. 3+ Elements columns are now deadly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Dec 7, 2017 9:22:47 GMT
Tom, note that the rule says "being in a column whose front element is destroyed." So if the front element and the one behind it are flanked, both are destroyed even if the front could pass through the second. Moreover, if there were three elements in the column, the front cannot pass through the one behind as there is no space, so it is destroyed, or it would try to push back The one behind, but that one cannot push back the third so the front is destroyed. 3+ Elements columns are now deadly. I am with Bob on this one. Cheers Simon |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Dec 7, 2017 18:30:23 GMT
As I noted earlier I think the situation is covered by the "being in a column" - which we can define as 2+ elements lined up front to back so yes they are in a column whose front edge is destroyed. This is also consistent with the intent to prevent residual contacts. This leaves the case of elements which are back to back. The rear element is not Recoiling, not can it be Pushed back as its not facing in the same direction so its not Destroyed by being Pushed Back, nor is it in Column with the front element. Here we must apply the underlying reasoning for the rule (no residual contacts).
These extra odd cases is why I try to give the reasoning behind a ruling as well as the part of the rules that seems to most cover the topic. I believe the original poster did not consider 2 lined up elements a column (it is: "A column is a group only 1 element wide." PG8 - in the poster's defense its not in the index), so waiving the column language around did not much help him. Nor does the rule quite cover all cases. But its intent is to Destroy all Hard Flanked elements if the lead element loses - leaving none in contact. We can of course carve out a rule lawyer exception for a back to back formation - but this could induce players to form such odd entities to avoid the effect of this rule.
(It should be noted the Push Back rule can be pushed: " ...friends facing in the same direction can be interpenetrated if allowed. If not, they are pushed back...."
So what does "If not" mean? Its supposed to mean "If they cannot be interpenatrated"....but could just as well mean "if friends are not facing in the same direction, they are pushed back". We only know which is correct by use and practice. (And really it should say lined up such that they are facing exactly the same direction.)
I think the original post covered this about as well as it could given the state of the rules.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Dec 8, 2017 18:00:15 GMT
I should also have mentioned the case where the two elements are seperated by a mm or two. Hence not in Column. Technically this would call for a different result and leave a residual contact - but I think the intent is that both be Destroyed. It illustrates the problem of rules "lists" your bound to forget something and leave it out of the list (hence for legal drafting we use "including but not limited to" for lists).
The rule should have been: Elements whose side/rear edge is in contact with the front edge of an enemy element participating in a Close Combat are Destoryed if the Combat result for a friendly element is Flee, Destroyed or Recoiled. See diagram 1X.
TomT
|
|
