PDA

View Full Version : Spear Rules Changed?



GrogsnotPowwabomba
11-09-2006, 18:20
I was reading over the new rulebook, and it appears as if spears have changed. Despite the description of the weapon saying that spears are weapons well suited to defensive, stationary troops, the actual line that explains their in game effect says that the troops fight in two ranks. Nothing is stated that clearly indicates that this bonus does not apply when the unit charges. So I am led to believe that spears always fight in two ranks now...

Have I missed something here, or are spears now and improved weapon choice? I can see this change being intentional, as spears were generally not as desireable as HW+Shield.

Thoughts? Comments?

Festus
11-09-2006, 18:22
Hi

You missed the paragraph on p.55 (5th)

Festus

GrogsnotPowwabomba
11-09-2006, 18:57
Out of curiosity, what does it say? I'm at work and would like to know.

That sucks. I was hoping for a boost to spears this edition...

Festus
11-09-2006, 19:27
The same as always: If you want to fight in multiple ranks, you must have been stationary. You cannot fight in multiple ranks in the turn you charged.

Festus

Milgram
11-09-2006, 20:12
wow, festus, don't quote this sentence without the addition a paragraph later: when moved they fight with one rank less than normal. as a standalone the other quote would not allow high elven spearmen to fight with two ranks when charging anymore.

almost moaned that spears got weaker by reading this. ;)

EvC
11-09-2006, 21:13
Thanks so much for clarifying that Milgram! :)

TheWarSmith
13-09-2006, 07:02
p. 55: "In order to employ all of its additional ranks as described, a unit must not have moved in that turn. If a unit has moved, if it has charged for example, then it fights with one less rank than it otherwise would."

It's in the "Fight in Ranks" section, not the spear. It's a way to simply apply a rule to all rank type weapons instead of having to explain it in each scenario(if more rank weapons are invented)

Zilverug
13-09-2006, 08:02
(if more rank weapons are invented)

Pikes are already invented.

Dodgy Ed
13-09-2006, 22:36
Oddly enough I think you could posit that spears are actually better when charging a defended obstacle. Odd little bit of rule interaction but my reading of it is you ignore any bonuses for charging and count as fighting a normal round of combat, so presto you get you're second rank attacks back,

Ivan Stupidor
14-09-2006, 02:19
Oddly enough I think you could posit that spears are actually better when charging a defended obstacle. Odd little bit of rule interaction but my reading of it is you ignore any bonuses for charging and count as fighting a normal round of combat, so presto you get you're second rank attacks back,

But, going by the quotes above, you lose the bonus if you moved, not if you charged. The loss of ranks is totally unrelated to the charging; it's the movement that's important - one supposes that, if some spell or somesuch forces the unit to move in the opponent's turn and the unit then gets charged, they wouldn't get their rank attacks either...

Ganymede
14-09-2006, 04:05
Additionally, no one in their right mind would ever consider losing a rank's worth of attacks any kind of bonus.

Dodgy Ed
15-09-2006, 14:38
Right mind or not I'm sure there are those that wonder:p

The rules for defended obstacles state that combatants "fight as if they were already engaged in the combat from a previous turn" and "no special rules that rely on them [weapons] charging would work" (-both on pg35)

I would argue that spears have a special rule that stops them from attacking in both ranks when they charge as well as allowing multi rank combats in the turns afterwards.

Just my twopenneth anyway, for me its a moot point as I rarely play any spear armed armies, but I would see it as reasonable considering how relatively bad spearmen are for their cost vs hand weapon and shield armed troops