Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blacky the Blackball" data-source="post: 5989911" data-attributes="member: 6688526">To be honest, I'm not sure what the intent is there. I put it in Dark Dungeons because it was in the RC, but I very rarely use it. When I've done battles the winners haven't normally wanted to chase the losers away from the battlefield.In the book, I say that if the winner chooses not to push the loser back they can't inflict the casualties they otherwise would, but if the winners don't want to advance and the losers don't want to retreat I'd be happy to say that the casualties stand.That sounds fair to me. The winner gets to push the loser up to X without the loser getting a choice in it; but the loser can choose to only go as far as they're pushed if they want to keep fighting or they have the choice of going as far as Y if they don't want the engagement to continue.I think a good rule of thumb is that if both sides finish in the same place they have to fight again (even if one of them chooses the &quot;Withdraw&quot; tactic). If they don't finish in the same place - and the loser always has the option of losing ground - then the loser can try to manoeuvre to regain some of that ground as you say (or to simply move away from or around the army that beat them).But don't forget that in cases where the losing army is forced into a significant retreat then the army will always also have been severely fatigued and the advancing army who beat them won't have been; so you could simply rule that the advancing army has the choice of re-engaging them in their new position before they have chance to recover and move again.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blacky the Blackball, post: 5989911, member: 6688526"] To be honest, I'm not sure what the intent is there. I put it in Dark Dungeons because it was in the RC, but I very rarely use it. When I've done battles the winners haven't normally wanted to chase the losers away from the battlefield. In the book, I say that if the winner chooses not to push the loser back they can't inflict the casualties they otherwise would, but if the winners don't want to advance [i]and[/i] the losers don't want to retreat I'd be happy to say that the casualties stand. That sounds fair to me. The winner gets to push the loser up to X without the loser getting a choice in it; but the loser can choose to only go as far as they're pushed if they want to keep fighting or they have the choice of going as far as Y if they don't want the engagement to continue. I think a good rule of thumb is that if both sides finish in the same place they have to fight again (even if one of them chooses the "Withdraw" tactic). If they don't finish in the same place - and the loser always has the option of losing ground - then the loser can try to manoeuvre to regain some of that ground as you say (or to simply move away from or around the army that beat them). But don't forget that in cases where the losing army is forced into a significant retreat then the army will always also have been severely fatigued and the advancing army who beat them won't have been; so you could simply rule that the advancing army has the choice of re-engaging them in their new position before they have chance to recover and move again. [/QUOTE]

Verification