JediCat's Rules Questions

[JediCat]

This will be a collection of my questions, as they will be all over the place.

1. More of a confirmation of the rules than a real question, as I second guess my readings of rules quite often and like to double check:

If I have a Commander compelling a unit type to Mainstay ubiquity, and I have already included one unit in that Commander's command, may I include a 2nd unit of that type in a different command (such as the general's), still under Mainstay ubiquity?

Ex. Krokodarch commander compels Krokodar to Mainstay. I include one unit of 5 in his Command. I then muster a 2nd Krokodar unit of 5 in the general's command, at Mainstay ubiquity. Is this allowed?

[Jonathon Chester]

That is correct

[JediCat]

Thanks! Already have another question, this one most likely for Rob (or similar Mierce folks):

2. Is the Index of the Hardback First Edition Rule Book supposed to be all messed up? Maybe its my copy, or supposed to be read in a certain way, but I have a heck of a time navigating using it. For example, the rules for unit Strength are found on page 37, Section 2.3.3.5.1. In the Index, under "strength"it lists pages 116, 118, 238. Tese pages appear to have nothing to do with Strength, being Joining a Battle, rules on Play (4.1.5), and Shot & Dragged Warriors (6.33.3.1) respectively.

Another example is "Invocation". In the index it points you at page 275 under the heading "Invocation". This page is actually about Issuing new Orders. Even looking at the basic "Attack" heading in the Index, it lists pages 119, 120 and 192. These pages are actually "The Battle Hour", more rules on the battle hour, and (ironically) retreating. Now while retreating does revolve around attacking, that is moving away from one, it isn't exactly what one might be looking for.

Any ideas? Did I miss an update?

[Jonathon Chester]

From memory the Index is a bit jumbled up honestly it would be better for you to book mark it. It may have been fixed in later print runs but that's one for Rob

[Rob Lane]

Yeah, the index is messed up... it's on my (very long) list of Things to Do. I will do it, honest...

Cheers
Rob

[JediCat]

3. Next question, once again for clarity: for the Jutes Līchēloth "Through the Veil", if a unit would land such that it is engaged, does the compulsory Ambush take place just after the compulsory Land, but just before you are formally Engaged, so that the Ambush Test Charge can take place (assuming the test is successful)?

I'm just slightly confused since the wording of "Through the Veil" almost makes it seem like you can't Charge after the Fetch Move, since your Landing makes you Engaged. And if you're already Engaged, you can't Charge...right? Its probably just some very fine rules reading, and I understand the intent (teleporting ambush woo) but I wanted to check.

[Jonathon Chester]

3. Next question, once again for clarity: for the Jutes Līchēloth "Through the Veil", if a unit would land such that it is engaged, does the compulsory Ambush take place just after the compulsory Land, but just before you are formally Engaged, so that the Ambush Test Charge can take place (assuming the test is successful)?

I'm just slightly confused since the wording of "Through the Veil" almost makes it seem like you can't Charge after the Fetch Move, since your Landing makes you Engaged. And if you're already Engaged, you can't Charge...right? Its probably just some very fine rules reading, and I understand the intent (teleporting ambush woo) but I wanted to check.

You don't half pick the good questions! It would be a case of you have made an attack move rather than a charge, so your opponent can make a rection if able, from what you've described here though I would need to double check.

[Rob Lane]

3. Next question, once again for clarity: for the Jutes Līchēloth "Through the Veil", if a unit would land such that it is engaged, does the compulsory Ambush take place just after the compulsory Land, but just before you are formally Engaged, so that the Ambush Test Charge can take place (assuming the test is successful)?

I'm just slightly confused since the wording of "Through the Veil" almost makes it seem like you can't Charge after the Fetch Move, since your Landing makes you Engaged. And if you're already Engaged, you can't Charge...right? Its probably just some very fine rules reading, and I understand the intent (teleporting ambush woo) but I wanted to check.

That's a good question and what I'll do is change Through the Veil to make this clearer.

The intention is that the unit moved gets a Charge Attack action, but it's not worded very well - so here's the change:

"If the Marked unit is lively and Lands so that it Engages an enemy unit, it immediately performs a compulsory Ambush action (and can Charge even though the Marked unit has already Engaged), ignoring any Position, Emerged or Flanked requirements."

Cheers
Rob

[JediCat]

That seems like a good clarifier, though I feel like a bit of a derp now. Your Ambush errata clearly states "...Ambush Charge action against the Ambushed unit, regardless of whether it is normally able to perform a Charge action or Charge and... action". Obviously this is a general fix to the more specific issue I "found". Woops!

[Rob Lane]

Don't feel like a derp, it's important that these things are reinforced throughout the rules ;o) Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Cheers
Rob

[JediCat]

4. Next question, mostly because I think its a bit too buried for me. For Mounts and Ardent Mounts, does their Authority subtract from the total authority that a General/Commander has for non-noble units in their Command?

[Jonathon Chester]

4. Next question, mostly because I think its a bit too buried for me. For Mounts and Ardent Mounts, does their Authority subtract from the total authority that a General/Commander has for non-noble units in their Command?

No the mount is more like an upgrade for the rider. They have authority because if the rider dies and all the commanders die too there's a chance that mount may become the general!

Worth noting the mounts ubiquity still counts to your limits

[JediCat]

Only in the case of Ardent Mounts my good sir; Beast Mount ubiquity is absorbed into the Rider's ubiquity. Thanks for the answer!

[Jonathon Chester]

Sorry did mean ardent mount damn knowing things but poor articulation!

[JediCat]

5. When measuring distances, the game defines "within" and "completely within" as terms. When you're measuring from a point, and the rules do not specify, do you have to be within, or completely within? For example emerging from underground after a passed Emerge Test. If you misjudge distances and such (perhaps because of enemy units being near terrain), do you have to be within 5" of your emerge point? Or completely within 5"? I presume "within" is the general case, and "Completely within" is the specific case that has be mentioned in the action you're taking, but I wasn't sure.

[Rob Lane]

5. When measuring distances, the game defines "within" and "completely within" as terms. When you're measuring from a point, and the rules do not specify, do you have to be within, or completely within? For example emerging from underground after a passed Emerge Test. If you misjudge distances and such (perhaps because of enemy units being near terrain), do you have to be within 5" of your emerge point? Or completely within 5"? I presume "within" is the general case, and "Completely within" is the specific case that has be mentioned in the action you're taking, but I wasn't sure.

If it doesn't say completely within, then it means within.

Cheers
Rob

[JediCat]

6. Curious about the following:

Teyrn: Gwynedd: Uncommon
Ceffyldraig: Mount Only, Gwynedd: Uncommon(2), Gwaelod: Uncommon

The Cefflydraig must be taken as a mount, and has two ubiquitous listed. Currently, only a Gwynedd Teyrn can mount a Cefflydraig, so the Gwaelod ubiquity cannot be used.

Is this a hint towards a future rider for the Cefflydraig? Or is it possible to use the Gwaelod ubiquity somehow during muster, like as an ally or something?

7. Sáthach's ability Battle-Master: Does it stack with unit upgrades? Ex. If I paid to upgrade a Tuanagh unit to Veteran, can I use her ability to upgrade them again to Elite?

8. Further to Battle-Master, does this upgrade provide an increase in statistics similar to other acuity increases? I presume no, but every other instance of acuity increase also increases Skill, Fortitude, and Authority, so I wanted to double check.

Thanks.

[Rob Lane]

6. Curious about the following:

Teyrn: Gwynedd: Uncommon
Ceffyldraig: Mount Only, Gwynedd: Uncommon(2), Gwaelod: Uncommon

The Cefflydraig must be taken as a mount, and has two ubiquitous listed. Currently, only a Gwynedd Teyrn can mount a Cefflydraig, so the Gwaelod ubiquity cannot be used.

Is this a hint towards a future rider for the Cefflydraig? Or is it possible to use the Gwaelod ubiquity somehow during muster, like as an ally or something?

A hint, basically. You can't take the Ceffyldraig as a non-mount, which means in the Gwaelod realm it can be something else...

7. Sáthach's ability Battle-Master: Does it stack with unit upgrades? Ex. If I paid to upgrade a Tuanagh unit to Veteran, can I use her ability to upgrade them again to Elite?

Yes.

8. Further to Battle-Master, does this upgrade provide an increase in statistics similar to other acuity increases? I presume no, but every other instance of acuity increase also increases Skill, Fortitude, and Authority, so I wanted to double check.

Thanks.

No, it doesn't. Sáthach would be much more expensive if that were the case...

Cheers
Rob

[JediCat]

9. What ubiquity rules do the host command ignore? I know they ignore the mainstay one, but what about common, uncommon, and rare? It could just be the mainstay one, but wasn't sure.

EDIT

10. I notice that "Infernii" isn't in the Sell-Sword muster at all (as a Kindred that can hire any of the sell-swords). I can assume this is for lore reasons, but I wanted to double check since Byzantii is in there, and it could be a holdout from when they were still the same kindred.

[Rob Lane]

9. What ubiquity rules do the host command ignore? I know they ignore the mainstay one, but what about common, uncommon, and rare? It could just be the mainstay one, but wasn't sure.

See p5 of the Muster Rules: "The host's command is a command just like any other, except that the members of the host's command can only be drawn from the following Host's Command List..." etc. So, it follows the normal rules excepting the Mainstay one.

10. I notice that "Infernii" isn't in the Sell-Sword muster at all (as a Kindred that can hire any of the sell-swords). I can assume this is for lore reasons, but I wanted to double check since Byzantii is in there, and it could be a holdout from when they were still the same kindred.

It's a lore thing. The Infernii will not hire anybody.

Cheers
Rob