Multiple Group Moves

Taking the example illustrated on page 40 of the Rules, para 7.7.1. If this had been a second group move how would the second move DT be played? Would unit C role a separate dice to group A-B, or would a single group DT be played?

Just to complicate it further, if unit B was a general, would C benefit from his presence in the DT?

What does the team think?

Good question. The move clearly started as a group move, and it is only the presence of the enemy units that has split up the group. Note also that rule 5.8.1 says that each unit in a group can get a separate charge bonus, so there may be other situations where a group charge ends with the group split.

If I take the words of rule 5.1 ' a Group can move for more than one movement phase...but it must pass a Discipline test.. at the end of the second and each successive movement phase'. The position of blue units on page 40 resulted from a group move. So, with a bit of hesitation, I say that units A, B and C take a single DT if the position shown is after their second group movement phase. If there was a general with unit B, the group would benefit from his presence in the DT.

I also think that if the only red unit was the one that is contacted by C, A and B could not make another group move after reaching the position shown. The contact ends the group move and it is not possible to make more group moves with anything less than the starting group. Equally, if one unit of a moving group is disordered by opportunity fire, the other units of the group cannot continue to move after that movement phase.

RogerC

My understanding is the following:

Impetus does not allow units to be dropped off if they move as a group. Once the group is disrupted the units the group can no longer take an additional move. For instance, if C were hit by missile fire and went disordered A and B would not be eligible for another round of movement. In the example on pg.40 C is not longer part of the group and cannot benefit from any group advantages including a general's bonus. Why is C no longer part of the Group? The picture on page 14 shows the configuration of what constitutes Groups. C clearly does not fit this definition.

As GC says the situation doesn't arise. A group must move entirely together, only if the group is moving into contact or using the random charge bonus can the group end up other than in a group.

To all intents and purposes a group ceases to be a group if it is in contact with the enemy. Activation of units in combat follow the main and support rules not group rules.

So as soon as C contacts Red, the group ABC ceases to be a group. C can do no more and AB cannot do anything other than continue their movement phase. But AB are not a group - groups can only be formed at the start of the activation not on the fly.

If only C contacted Red and AB had a clear path forward they still wouldn't be a group with each other or with C and you could not constitute group AB until the next activation.

Groups exist only in the form they are created upon activation, any change to that status dissolves the group. This has been thrashed to death in the past, even though the example text claims that A chooses to remain aligned with B to "stay in a Group" that group doesn't exist yet. And as B will activate and fight a combat there will be no group AB next activation either.

GC, Zippee, in principle I agree with everything you say.

The problem is that the question supposes that the position shown on page 40 was reached in the second movement phase of the group. A,B and C moved as a group in their first movement phase, then moved as a group in their second movement phase, until C made contact with the red unit. So the question is how you do the DT at the end of that second phase. Your answer seems to be that the group has split up by the end of the 'group' move so each member of the group must test individually. My answer was that it was a group move that got the units into that position (it certainly wasn't by moving the units individually) so it is a group move test.

To put things another way, is the DT test based on the formation at the start of the movement phase (when A, B and C form a group) or at the end of the movement phase (when they don't)? I'm saying the first, because the movement was a group move (by the definition of the question).

I agree (it was a point. I made at the end of my post) that, since the original group has been dissolved, A and B cannot then have another movement phase of their own. I also agree that a group only exists in the form it had at the start of activation. But the rules are silent on what happens to the DT test if a group is split up during a movement phase. Note also that Rule 5.8.1 says there may be separate charge bonuses for each member of the group, and the melee only starts after all movement. So that allows separate movement but with the group still being considered as a whole. Otherwise, if the use of the charge bonus made each unit an individual one, you'd have to do one melee before any other.

RogerC

I would concur Roger - the DT is required because of a group move. As a matter of form we take the test at the end of the move, we could as easily take it at the beginning in which case there would be no question.

So yes the test is for the movement in the form it was taken. It is not a test for the situation at the end of the movement but of the impact of the movement. Phases and sequencing are artificial constructs - a means not an end

Apologies - I didn't realise your post was asking for confirmation

Thanks for the replies gents. As the rules stand I suspect that GC and Zippee are correct in their thinking that C will have to roll a separate DT, and that it terminates all further movement for A-B-C. Although I would prefer RogerC's interpretation, the reason being that Roger's mechanism prevents a rather gamey tactic that would be very useful against impetuous troops, i.e. just set your line at a small angle to the approaching warband. Each warband unit then loses the advantage of general in the group. C'est la vie.

TD

I would still count AB as a group for the purposes of the DT test at the end of the movement phase (getting the Commander bonus.) They conform to requisites for forming a group. I am open to Zippees interpretation however.  

Discipline Tests for extra movement phases are taken at the end of the move and take into consideration the events of the moment. So for instance a group or unit starts in the command radius but after a move end out of it are considered out of command for the purposes of the DT and suffer a -1 on the roll.

The way to get around all of this is to advance C first and then advance AB as a group.

Aurelius, I think you misunderstand - I do not think that C takes a separate DT, it does however prevent further group movement because the original ABC group is dissolved at the moment C contacts Red (or possibly the moment B decides to continue its possible movement, although I believe that's merely a technicality as contact trumps group).

For the purposes of a DT for multiple movement I would consider it a group ABC test with the commander's bonus applying, because the function of that test is to see if the movement caused disorder. And that movement was via a group including a commander.

The requisites for forming a group only apply at the start of an activation - the situation at the end is irrelevant, other than it may dissolve the group.

Group ABC is dissolved because C dissolves it, it matters not what relationship AB have at the end. I don't think that changes the purpose or nature of the DT which predates the dissolution.

I take the point re command radius but consider that a mechanical effect - it has to apply or not based on when the DT is made. Allowing units to ignore it because they started within CR would be more gamey than not. QED. But I don't think it implies the test only (or principally) considers the end situation.

Concur on the work around - I would not move ABC as a group in the situation given.

The trick comes down to planning. You are not forced to include units in a Group so if two units are only capable of making two moves before contact and you ant the third unit to make three (dice willing) then activate as a group of 2 and activate as a single. Do that in whichever order you like to gain tactical advantage.

Interesting point Zippee. I agree that rules aren't totally clear on this point. If C had become disordered from missile fire or terrain would it continue to be part of the group with A and B until the movement phase were completed?

Gaius Cassius wrote:Interesting point Zippee. I agree that rules aren't totally clear on this point. If C had become disordered from missile fire or terrain would it continue to be part of the group with A and B until the movement phase were completed?

Agreed the rules don't explicitly cover this.

But for me the DT is for the move/manoeuvre just made - that was a group move. QED

C would be included in the group DT, but irrespective of the DT outcome, C would end its movement phase disordered due to the shooting or terrain. And as such the group would dissolve. Only an idiot would attempt a group move where one unit would enter terrain!  

I see the current phase as being a "thing" - it can be interrupted by opportunity sure but the effect of any change such as disorder doesn't impact that "thing" it is applied in the artificial period of non-time between that "thing" and the next "thing".

Yes entering terrain breaks that concept but then that is enumerated in the rules and one can argue that it is enumerated precisely because it breaks the norm.

Shooting abides by it though - the notion of return fire is there so that units aren't disordered in the middle of a potential "thing" but at the end of that "thing".

I think if we start changing states in the middle of "things" we get back to the "my shooting ends your activation" argument from the other thread.