Version 3 Errata
Moderators: terrys, hammy, philqw78, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3101
- Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
- Location: Fareham, UK
Re: Version 3 Errata
FWIW I agree with Graham. "Combat is adjudicated in the next impact phase".
But the RAW leave it open to interpretation. It clearly doesn't happen that often but it does need to be clarified one way or the other.
But the RAW leave it open to interpretation. It clearly doesn't happen that often but it does need to be clarified one way or the other.
Pete
Re: Version 3 Errata
When foot charge mounted, it is usually not good for the foot.grahambriggs wrote:One of the issues in having the mounted break off is that it could be bad news for them. Frequently, for foot to pursue into the mounted, that will mean the routers have either burst through the mounted or shifted sideways a bit and run behind them. JAP break offs occur before JAP routs. Often this will mean that the mounted can't break off and drop a level, and then have to fight an impact next bound anyway at a further disadvantage.
It is unlikely that the cavalry will be prevented from breaking off, if the routers have shifted, then it's almost impossible for the routers to prevent the break off. If the cavalry have been burst through the routers will almost certainly prevent the break off. Although expecting cavalry to break off from enemy moments after having been burst through is expecting a lot.
I've had this happen a couple of times. It is the first time I've ever _wanted_ to break off from enemy.
Evaluator of Supremacy
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3002
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
- Location: London, UK
- Contact:
Re: Version 3 Errata
This weeks editions of the various V3 list and rules errata are now posted on the BHGS website
http://www.madaxeman.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Re: Version 3 Errata
Thanks TimThis weeks editions of the various V3 list and rules errata are now posted on the BHGS website
Re: Version 3 Errata
Hello
I have rulebooks 1 and 2 but was not convinced.
Very interested in starting with FoG, I was prepared to order now the v3 rulebook and checked the forum before...my impression:
3rd rule edition out not a long time ago and already a lot of errata???...Even the errata with errors!!!!!!!
Why should I buy then such a rulebook?
Why is it not possible to avoid such an amount of errors!?!
I have rulebooks 1 and 2 but was not convinced.
Very interested in starting with FoG, I was prepared to order now the v3 rulebook and checked the forum before...my impression:
3rd rule edition out not a long time ago and already a lot of errata???...Even the errata with errors!!!!!!!
Why should I buy then such a rulebook?
Why is it not possible to avoid such an amount of errors!?!
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3057
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Re: Version 3 Errata
There are two reasons:LaurenceP wrote:Hello
I have rulebooks 1 and 2 but was not convinced.
Very interested in starting with FoG, I was prepared to order now the v3 rulebook and checked the forum before...my impression:
3rd rule edition out not a long time ago and already a lot of errata???...Even the errata with errors!!!!!!!
Why should I buy then such a rulebook?
Why is it not possible to avoid such an amount of errors!?!
1. There was an error by the publisher and a page of corrections were not made. This is most of the errata.
2. We are human.
Version 3 is a better rule set than version 1 or version 2.
-
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
- Posts: 8814
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
Book 2 Errata P15
There is an errata entry for the Clibanarii, but the line above shows Catafractarii as Average 13 and Superior 8 points per base.
What should it be? I assume 18 points and still superior
What should it be? I assume 18 points and still superior
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!