Author Topic: Change deployment stratagem and fortifications  (Read 1553 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Barritus

  • Guest
Change deployment stratagem and fortifications
« on: January 29, 2011, 02:48:42 AM »
I was looking at the idea of a Marian Roman army led by Julius Caesar: the Man would lead the command with the Bd (S), there'd be a command of Bd (O), and a command of lesser troops - possibly Bd (I) - covered by two Art (O) behind TF. I'd also get the Change Deployment stratagem to allow two commands to swap places.

Now the question which occurs to me is this: if I swap Command 3's place, does it take its fortifications with it? I don't see anything in the rules to prevent it, either in the deployment rules or the rules about the stratagem.

It's just that it feels vaguely odd that the palisades trot over from one flank to the other, along with the troops they're protecting. I suppose that in the narrative sense, the initial deployment represents the way the army deployed yesterday rather than this morning as the armies march out again to battle.

foxgom

  • Guest
Re: Change deployment stratagem and fortifications
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2011, 07:21:11 PM »
Hi

Some elements can only deploy in PF so could be considered to have the PF "associated with their command". (P14, 1st para).

I think the TFs you describe are not part of a command but simply beling to the army as a whole and so would not change places (seems somewhat nonsensical, it would take hours to move such a camp, hardly a surprise big surprise for the enemy !)



neil

landmeister

  • Guest
Re: Change deployment stratagem and fortifications
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2011, 09:17:11 PM »
I think the TFs you describe are not part of a command but simply beling to the army as a whole and so would not change places (seems somewhat nonsensical, it would take hours to move such a camp, hardly a surprise big surprise for the enemy !)

I agree, but there is no specific rule banning it.  :-\ I think it goes against the spirit of the rules but certainly not against the word.  :(