DBMM Forum

General Category => Rules Questions => Topic started by: loki223 on August 25, 2007, 06:57:14 AM

Title: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 25, 2007, 06:57:14 AM
My eyes are going buggy from trudging through this book....lol

Heres the question.

page 37 3rd from the last bullit.

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (s) troops that score equal or more while either (a) shooting, or in close combat in their own bound and either (b) foot fighting foot or (c) mounted fighting any enemy.

Who's bound???

the "any troops" bound or the "(s)" troops bound???

example: LH (s) charge LH (o). the (o) roll a sum of 6 and the (s) roll a sum of 8. Do the (O) take a -1 or is it in the next bound that they would take the -1????

wow! depending on where you place the inflection while reading this it could be taken a few different ways. someone help please.

Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 25, 2007, 07:48:10 AM
what would be the factors of PS (S) upslope (GH) against BD (I) charging in?

I came up with the PS as Having a 4 before rolling a die. is this correct?
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: DaveMather on August 25, 2007, 09:59:01 AM
The Ps(S) would be base factor 2

and as it is the Blades bound it (the Ps) would get a extra +1 for "any of its front edge upslope of all its opponents"

Given it a final factor before rolling the dice of 3

Not sure how you get the extra 1 from your example.

Grading does not come into play until after you have rolled the dice and compare totals.

So this combat is Blade 4 Ps 3

lets assume the Bd roll 1  :(
the Ps roll 2

its now Bd 5 Ps 5

Now grading

The Bd are I and take a -1 for I troops equal or less

They (Bd) also take a -1 for the Ps being (S) and their opponents being  (S)  have scored equal or more

So combat finishes after grading Bd 5-1-1 =3 Ps 5

The Bd recoil


Regards

David Mather


 
 
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: DaveMather on August 25, 2007, 12:08:37 PM
Heres the question.

page 37 3rd from the last bullit.

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (s) troops that score equal or more while either (a) shooting, or in close combat in their own bound and either (b) foot fighting foot or (c) mounted fighting any enemy.

Who's bound???

the "any troops" bound or the "(s)" troops bound???

example: LH (s) charge LH (o). the (o) roll a sum of 6 and the (s) roll a sum of 8. Do the (O) take a -1 or is it in the next bound that they would take the -1????

wow! depending on where you place the inflection while reading this it could be taken a few different ways. someone help please.



Easiest to answer your example - I struggled with this sentence and used the QRS until I learned it

Its the LH(S) bound

The S have won 8-6

The O will take a -1 finishing up with 8-5 and flee as they have lost to LH of higher grade

Th O take a -1 because

-1 LH(O) whose opponents are {LH(S) that score equal or more (the LH(S) did 8-6) and are in their own bound (its the LH(S) bound) and are mounted (LH(S) are mounted)} 

or sixth box down on QRS

Regards


David Mather


Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 25, 2007, 10:04:38 PM
thank you again.

I am sure there will be ore questions soon.

Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Barritus on August 27, 2007, 08:26:23 AM
With regard to grading factors, I don't bother to read the rules. I only look at the Quick Reference Chart near the back of the rules. I find that a lot simpler to read.
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Doug M. on August 28, 2007, 05:57:19 AM
Unfortunately, in at least one instance, I think it is incorrect, or at least inconsistent with the body of the rules..  if only I could remember what it was.

Doug
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: toby on August 28, 2007, 11:47:57 AM
If you do find a situation where the QRS is inconsistent with the body of the rules, please let me know asap and I will update the version on the website and also let Caliver know. I had hoped it was OK as both Phil and I checked it before publication.

Thanks

Toby
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 28, 2007, 04:15:12 PM
are there any current changes to the original QRC?  I only have the one from the main rulebook and no errata as of yet.

Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Aloysius the Gaul on August 28, 2007, 10:38:56 PM
I think it's in the (S) ratings - I remember coming across it a few weeks ago but trying to figure it out made my head hurt!! >:(

the rules have

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops that score equal of more while either (a) shooting; or in close combat in their own bound and either (b)foot fighting foot or (c) mounted fighting any enemy

but the QRS section that appears to cover this has the -1 applying in an enemy bound??

Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 28, 2007, 10:52:11 PM
which is it?
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Aloysius the Gaul on August 28, 2007, 11:47:46 PM
Well I'm not sure I'm reading it right in the first place!! :o

but I always take the rulebook over a QRS unless the author fesses up otherwise.
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: toby on August 29, 2007, 01:50:21 PM
The -1 applies in the own bound of the opponents.

As I said Phil checked the QRS (repeatedly) and signed it off as exactly reflecting the rules. I just tried to convert his Barkerese into something that I could use as a checklist.

There are some other versions on the www.dbmm.org.uk website as well - I have no opinion as to their accuracy though.
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 29, 2007, 04:45:59 PM
ok

so the -1 is in the opponents of the (s) troops bound?
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Aloysius the Gaul on August 30, 2007, 12:28:33 AM
OK - now I'm confused - the rules text states (to me at least) says the -1 applies in the bound of the troops who are fighting AGAINST the (S) troops - but Toby says that it applies in the bound OF the (S) troops.

If Toby is right then the wording in the rules is just crap  (sorry toby - I know you didn't write it)
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Geoff Pearson on August 30, 2007, 01:21:19 AM
OK - now I'm confused - the rules text states (to me at least) says the -1 applies in the bound of the troops who are fighting AGAINST the (S) troops - but Toby says that it applies in the bound OF the (S) troops.

If Toby is right then the wording in the rules is just crap  (sorry toby - I know you didn't write it)

Hi
The wording is not ideal but Toby is right
-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while either
(a) shooting;
or in close combat in their own bound and either
(b)foot fighting foot or
(c) mounted fighting any enemy

If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy

So if your element is fight (S) and the (S) scores more or equal you get -1 if you come under A,B or C

Hope this help
Best Regards
Geoff
PS I have put an Exel grading table to make it easier on www.dbmm.org.uk (http://www.dbmm.org.uk)
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Aloysius the Gaul on August 30, 2007, 06:10:25 AM
Quote
If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

Yep - no problem with that one

Quote


-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy


You haven't addressed whose bound it is, which is where my confusion comes in......
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Geoff Pearson on August 30, 2007, 12:11:40 PM
Quote
If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

Yep - no problem with that one
Quote


-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy


You haven't addressed whose bound it is, which is where my confusion comes in......


shooting is in both bounds
"in close combat in their own bound" meaning the Superior (S) troops bound
So it's the Superior (S) bound
or to put another way:-
its -1 to enemy troops who are fighting (S) in the (S)'s bound

If you look at the table I've done is dose make it clearer it's at:-  http://dbmm.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=35 (http://dbmm.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=35)

Best Regards
Geoff




Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Geoff Pearson on August 30, 2007, 01:03:41 PM
Hope this table makes is more clearer
Regards
Geoff
(http://www.maws.org.uk\dbmmdata\DBMM-Grading-Table.gif)
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: toby on August 30, 2007, 05:30:29 PM
I do my best to interpret it :)

Check what the other S grading QRS's come up with and see what they think.

I did get caught by one thing on my own QRS last night though - I didn't put in the exeptions for S being shot at by atrillery and war wagons (I think I ran out of space or something).

So its not perfect, but then what is.

I have to say that the new gradings are one of my least favourite parts of the rules.
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: madmike1 on August 31, 2007, 03:27:04 AM
Thanks for the new grading table, takes a couple of minutes to get use to it but it is a big improvement on what is provided in the rules. 

My first reaction after seeing the table is to wonder why the rules author didn?t do a similar table in the rules.  The current text description of grading factors is one of the worse features of the rules.   Don?t get me wrong, I like the grading concept, just hate the way they are served up in the rules.     

In the next revision of the rules this table should be a ?must? have!   Along with re-costing some unit types like Pike.    ;D
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: Aloysius the Gaul on August 31, 2007, 05:06:24 AM
someone can actually understand THAT??!! ??? ???
Title: Re: (s) troops
Post by: loki223 on August 31, 2007, 04:35:34 PM
i just printed it off. hopefully i can follow it. :o