Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Garthanos" data-source="post: 7936741" data-attributes="member: 82504">Now you have me analysing in more depth thanks for that.Basically in that means Chainmail Are you saying the hero is not 20 points but rather only 8 points if not mounted? See that doesnt work very nicely for me. You arent 2.5 times as awesome by being mounted in any edition of D&amp;D ever even the specialists in it like Cavaliers could not claim that.Historically In real life few cultures had mounts who actually fought much themselves it was mostly about the mobility and many used mounts to get to the battle field and then just dismount. Basically assuming the hero would be mounted during the fight is attributing a huge amount of their power and effectiveness to a mount which seems counter to legendary heroes too.&nbsp; Where as for me add 3 pts worth works better. To me even if you are assuming the 20 is mounted a not mounted hero might be 17pts.Further battlefield size affects the assumption of being mounted.&nbsp; I feel makes more sense in the big battle and less in the man to man.&nbsp; You need to reach more enemies when the ground space of the figures and the whole battlefield is greater and that is boost a mount really grants and maybe that is a multiplier but not in smaller battles like in man on man scenario.&nbsp;I kind of think we should not assume the hero is mounted in man to man scenarios. Most of the enemies are close enough to be handleable and you do not need the mount then the value of the mount becomes the hero gains access to more enemies faster when the hero wants it and less when they don't and more enemies are available with a big war scenario.It occurs to me only a small amount of unit/squadron can really attack one man in a minutes time anyway and vice versi&nbsp;I think i just looked too close at the sim and it isnt designed for that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Garthanos, post: 7936741, member: 82504"] Now you have me analysing in more depth thanks for that. Basically in that means Chainmail Are you saying the hero is not 20 points but rather only 8 points if not mounted? See that doesnt work very nicely for me. You arent 2.5 times as awesome by being mounted in any edition of D&D ever even the specialists in it like Cavaliers could not claim that. Historically In real life few cultures had mounts who actually fought much themselves it was mostly about the mobility and many used mounts to get to the battle field and then just dismount. Basically assuming the hero would be mounted during the fight is attributing a huge amount of their power and effectiveness to a mount which seems counter to legendary heroes too. Where as for me add 3 pts worth works better. To me even if you are assuming the 20 is mounted a not mounted hero might be 17pts. Further battlefield size affects the assumption of being mounted. I feel makes more sense in the big battle and less in the man to man. You need to reach more enemies when the ground space of the figures and the whole battlefield is greater and that is boost a mount really grants and maybe that is a multiplier but not in smaller battles like in man on man scenario. I kind of think we should not assume the hero is mounted in man to man scenarios. Most of the enemies are close enough to be handleable and you do not need the mount then the value of the mount becomes the hero gains access to more enemies faster when the hero wants it and less when they don't and more enemies are available with a big war scenario. It occurs to me only a small amount of unit/squadron can really attack one man in a minutes time anyway and vice versi I think i just looked too close at the sim and it isnt designed for that. [/QUOTE]

Verification