Group Movement

[andrew]

Hi

I had a friend pull a move on me the other day which had me thinking...huh??

A group only moves at the rate of the slowest element within that group and my friend had a group made up as follows:
Blade F on the left, Blade O in the middle and Psiloi on the right.

Both the Psiloi and Blade F have the same movement rate, but the Blade O is 40 paces shorter.  My friend then marched straight forward 160 paces and only spent 1 PIP, despite the Psiloi and Blade F moving short.  Is this interpretation correct?

Thanks
Andrew

[SteveC]

I am an absolute beginner, but I would have made him pay two (or 3 if the Bd were irregular) PIPs for this as well.

1) The Bd(F) is both a front corner of the group and moving less than [its] maximum distance (P27 d 2nd bullet).

2) P28 final paragraph only says that 'A group move cannot exceed the maximum move distance of its slowest element.' (Not that you don't have to pay the penalty if you mix troop types as described in the example given.)

[As an off-beat example, I remember reading in my local paper of a Rememberance day parade. The powers-that-be hired a Light Infantry band to lead the march. When it struck up the march it raced off ahead and ended up 15 minutes in front of the remainder of the parade. They said that this was their standard march rate, and that only if they had been placed in the body of the other marchers could they have gone slower.]

3) They can still legitimately take their own skirmishers(behind them) or rear rank support, because this would not cause both the group's front corners to move less than maximum distance.

You are after all trying to get three separate troop types to march to the same tune 

Steve (but this is only my take on it)

[landmeister]

The maximum group movement is that of its slowest troops. In this case the slowest move is 160 p due to the Bd (O), so the max move of this group is 160p. The group moved this distance, so it's correct.

[SteveC]

So, you are saying it does only cost one PIP?

I honestly admit I would never had read it that way in a million years.

Steve

[landmeister]

So, you are saying it does only cost one PIP?

I honestly admit I would never had read it that way in a million years.

Steve

This is the way we play it, but we were not playtesters and are we're far far away from all DBMM guru's clubs, so I can't promise this is the correct way 

Sorry

[toby]

Yes - you are correct. The group moves at the speed of its slowest element. If it moves full move, there is no penalty for some of the elements in it moving less than full move, no matter where they are.

The rationale is that it is easy for a group of soldiers to reduce their move so the slowest can keep up. What the stopping short rule is there to penalise is people who move up to just outside bow or charge range. This is a lot more difficult as different bits of the group might estimate the distance differently, so it would require more dressing of the ranks etc, hence the extra PIP.

Toby

[SteveC]

Thanks Toby,

As I said, never having played the game (or even seen it played) I am in complete ignorance of the mechanics of it. The trouble I find is that if you are unsure of a rule, often the rules themselves somehow seem to magnify that uncertainty, whereas seeing it actually played out usually clears it up.

Steve

[LAP1964]

Actually it is 2 PIPS as both front corners of the group have moved less than there maximum distance.If the group had been deployed as
Bd(O),Bd(F),Ps(whatever) only 1 PIP as only 1 front corner has moved less than its maximum distance.If the group is irregular it is 2 PIPS
whatever formation they are in.
                                         Les.

[andrew]

Thanks everyone for your comments!

Les - that is the way I had interpreted the rules but apparently what my friend did is actually ok given the group moves at the rate of the slowest element (in this case the BdO), such that the move only costs 1 PIP.

Andrew

[toby]

It a combination of seeing it played and of having spoken to or played with Phil to find out what he is actually intending from a rule that is necessary to work out what is going on. Although Phil has a terrible tendency to change his mind depending on the way a question is posed, which shows that he is focussed on the outcome rather than the actual rule.

I wish he would write more conversationally, but leopards don't change their spots. That said, I think sometimes that the rules that are written more conversationally just don't get the degree of rules lawyering that DBx rules get, which is why they haven't been blown away yet.

The primary function of the main dbmm.org.uk website will hopefully continue to be the clarification and explication of sections of the rules that are open to multiple interpretations, hopefully leading to clearer rules or some sort of purple primer.