|
|
Post by zendor on May 15, 2020 13:38:10 GMT
The pursuing don't give me rest... it pursues me)
Does element in rear contact pursue, if its opponent is destroyed in close combat? The text does not literally say that only elements in front contact have to pursue. In the example below, the element of Auxillia is destroyed and then...: Figure #3: both elements of the Blades will pursue, moving 1/4 BW, and will bump into in each other in the middle of the position of the Auxillia element. Figure #4: Only one element of the Blades that fought on the the front will pursue on its full 1/2 BW.  |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 15, 2020 14:55:40 GMT
I believe that the convention is that only when BOTH sides front-edges touch is pursuing triggered.
The 3Bd in your diagram is facing the rear of the Ax element, and is only providing a -1 tactical factor
(as well as leaving nowhere to recoil!).
The second paragraph of Close Combat on page 10 covers the situation:-
“When an element is in close combat both to front and to flank or rear or in close combat to its front and overlapped,
only it and the enemy element in front fight each other. Others only provide tactical factors.
A flank or rear contact on an element providing rear support is treated as if on the supported element (see figure 20a).”
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on May 15, 2020 15:33:40 GMT
This time it is stevie making the running and me following in his wake. Fig #4 is correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on May 15, 2020 16:11:53 GMT
As only one of the blades is fighting the other is offering its chum some moral support in these troubles times I would say only one pursues.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendor on May 15, 2020 16:15:56 GMT
Thanks!
Ok, but this begs the question, do elements that are in "legal" flank or rear contact considered to be in close combat?
My point is, this statement in Pursuing section applies to those elements which are in any close combat not only in front close contact: "...an element whose close combat opponents...".
(we usually play as you describe, with only one element that pursue, but a couple days ago I started to think about it, and found myself confused)
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on May 15, 2020 17:10:53 GMT
Thanks! Ok, but this begs the question, do elements that are in "legal" flank or rear contact considered to be in close combat? My point is, this statement in Pursuing section applies to those elements which are in any close combat not only in front close contact: "...an element whose close combat opponents...".
(we usually play as you describe, with only one element that pursue, but a couple days ago I started to think about it, and found myself confused) It does. However, given that no account is taken of the combat factor of an element whose front edge is in legal contact with the side or rear edge of an enemy element, it would be strange to treat that element as being in combat for the purposes of the pursuit. |
|
|
|
Post by zendor on May 15, 2020 19:57:37 GMT
To be honest, I was confused while read HOTT 2.1 and saw the strange example on page 36. In the last sentence explains, that if enemy element is destroyed, then both Warbands (one was in front and other in rear contact), will have to pursue on their half base depth, and will meet each other in the middle, like on my #3 example. And this is despite rules clearly say that element in rear contact does not pursue. Then I opened HOTT 2.0 rulebook and the same diagram (in 2.0 it is on page 76) is treated in differently way! And then I thought, what about DBA 3? You know this strange example in HOTT 2.1 book... if you don't know what I talk about, I could show you this diagramm and description (is it ok to post photos from the book here?).
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 16, 2020 5:17:44 GMT
Zendor, great discovery of flaw in the 2.1 version. The statement you quote from diagram on page 36 (Close Combat Example 2) is a clear violation of the rules in the text, on page 26 and as you note, a change from the 2 version. Someone should write to Sue to point this out.
Text with Diagram in Version 2
"As it is warband , E pursues. C does not pursue, as it fought only as an overlap. F does not pursue, as i t fought only as a flank contact. G does not pursue, as it fought only as a rear contact."
Text with Diagram in Version 2.1
"As they are war band, E and G pursue, meeting the middle of B's previous position..."
Rule 2.0
PURSUIT
An element of knights, behemoths, beasts or warband whose close combat opponents
recoil, break off, flee or are destroyed immediately pursues straight forward the lesser of its own base depth or width unless any of the following apply:
•
• It fought only as an overlap or flank or rear contact.
Rule 2.1
Same as above
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on May 16, 2020 7:07:22 GMT
To be honest, I was confused while read HOTT 2.1 and saw the strange example on page 36. In the last sentence explains, that if enemy element was destroyed, then both Warbands (one was in front and other in rear contact), have to pursue on their half base depth, and meet each other in the middle, like on my #3 example. And this is despite rules clearly say that element in rear contact does not pursue. Then I opened HOTT 2.0 rulebook and the same diagram (in 2.0 it is on page 76) is treated in differently way! And then I thought, what about DBA 3? You know this strange example in HOTT 2.1 book... if you don't know what I talk about, I could show you this diagramm and description (is it ok to post photos from the book here?). I don't play HotT. (Doesn't mean it's not a great set of rules. Just not my cup of tea.) However, despite their similarities, I'd be wary of reading across from one set to the other. |
|
|
|
Post by zendor on May 16, 2020 13:11:13 GMT
Because of HOTT shares many fundamental mechanics with DBA (and pursuing is one of them), I was confused by strange (incorrect?) description of this situation.
So, there only two possibilities: the description is wrong or rules are wrong.
What do you think?
(maybe it'll better to ask on the HOTT forum)
|
|
|
|
Post by Roland on May 16, 2020 14:10:45 GMT
Just because the diagram that zendor provided is helpful to set up the question, I'd like to ask ( rather than start another thread), in Figure 1 and 2 were the Aux to win the combat ( I believe he'd have to throw a 6 and the Bd a 1), do both Bd elements recoil or just the Bd to the front applying _its_ combat factor?
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on May 16, 2020 14:26:11 GMT
Just because the diagram that zendor provided is helpful to set up the question, I'd like to ask ( rather than start another thread), in Figure 1 and 2 were the Aux to win the combat ( I believe he'd have to throw a 6 and the Bd a 1), do both Bd elements recoil or just the Bd to the front applying _its_ combat factor? Both would recoil. P |
|
|
|
Post by Roland on May 16, 2020 14:38:35 GMT
Just because the diagram that zendor provided is helpful to set up the question, I'd like to ask ( rather than start another thread), in Figure 1 and 2 were the Aux to win the combat ( I believe he'd have to throw a 6 and the Bd a 1), do both Bd elements recoil or just the Bd to the front applying _its_ combat factor? Both would recoil. P This is what I would expect. Glad my drunken sailor version of DBA ( I did mentioned that my sole outlet to play for a while was at the pub with my brother, didn't I ?!) isn't completely off. |
|
|
|
Post by zendor on May 16, 2020 17:13:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on May 19, 2020 18:40:53 GMT
Shows the continuing advantage of having a common set of base mechanics for DBA 3.0 and HOTT for which one common set of diagrams and interps apply.
TomT
|
|
