Watercourses

The main rulebook lists watercourses or seas as a terrain option, placed along "one side of the battlefield". Does such a watercourse count as a river and have to be diced for?

TD

I am not sure what you mean by dicing, Aurelius.

If you mean to determine its movement effect as in the river roll (p18):

3.1.4. Impassable ground. Rocks, large waterways, lakes and the sea. Units cannot cross this terrain, even partially. Here, too, Impetuous troops are allowed to wheel to avoid the obstacle. (page 18)

No need to dice, it's a terrain choice, but you can only have one (min 10U, max 30U). However, as per any other terrain choice, the opponent can move or remove.

Dennis

I suspect Aurelius is talking about the need to roll a 5 or 6 for the Defender to be able to place a river terrain piece.

In which case:
Advanced Impetus Amendments and clarifications (v1.6 - page 12)

PLACING BUA AND RIVERS

A River counts as a Defender choice. In case the river is not rolled, no other elements can be placed instead.

A BUA can always be placed by the Attacker if he gets a 5+. No matter of the limits stated by the Tournament Rules.

Now I have the books here the River option is covered in 3.3 of the main rulebook, p19.

"Only one river is allowed and can only be used if the Defender rolls a 5 or 6 on 1d6 (oe attempt only)"

A waterway is not a river and can be placed without the need to roll anything. The rules specifically mention rolling for a River not for every water feature.

Dennis

Ah yes, sorry I was not clear. Yes I was referring to the defender roll of 5/6 to place a river. Does a watercourse count as a river? The reason that has prompted the query is an observation that (at least in the UK tournament scene) I have never seen one placed. The terrain choices are invaribly the standard 2 or 3 patches of rough going/difficult going/gentle hills. I did place a watercourse once a few years ago, it was met with some suspicion of straining the rules. Rivers are almost never placed, too much of a gamble. But a watercourse would appear to achieve the objective of flank protection, without the risk of not rolling 5/6. Of course it could be removed by the attacker (unless only 2 pieces have been placed in the 25mm tournament rules).

TD

I see DM has just responded as I was typing this, thanks.

I ran the 28mm Cancon Impetus meeting this year. I supplied all the terrain. As part of that, I took four rivers, three lakes and several other water features. 

None were used.

People do seem frightened of them. You're right Aurelius. I've always felt that a river line is an excellent flank protector. I've used them a bit in home games and it's always been interesting.

By watercourses are you all referring to terrain that could fall within "impassible terrain" like ponds, marshes etc.?

That's what I was assuming. Any time I've used a watercourse (ocean) it has been removed by my opponent. I don't use rivers unless it's preset terrain, as it's too risky to try and roll for one. Seen a friend try over and over to use a beautiful river made of custom Perspex and I don't think it has ever been successfully rolled for.

Thanks for all the replies.

I see that there are two words used in the rules, large "waterways" or "watercourses", 3.1.1 section 4 or 3.2, pages 18 and 19. So these are classed as Impassable.

Ponds / marshes etc are classed as Difficult.

My intent has been to clarify to myself that it is perfectly legit to place a linear water feature along one side of the table, without having to dice to place it. Its interesting to hear the experience of other players that suggests linear water features almost never appear on the Impetus table.

TD

We usually play that ponds are impassable terrain. I wonder that the thinking is to allow them to be crossed? Marshes are difficult terrain for sure.

It is quite legit to use a linear watercourse such as the ocean along one side of the battlefield and there is no need to dice for it. In my experience, I try to use it to block one side of the field from Flank Marches or sweeping moves by Mounted opponents (if I have a mainly small Foot Army).

As long as it is clear to both sides, and is agreed to, a terrain feature can have whatever effect you wish it to have.

The idea that marshes and ponds are inherently impassable is silly. I have walked through kilometres of such terrain in Tasmania. Disordering, yes, impassable not always so. Sometimes, not always.

All I'm saying is that, if you lay such a piece down, simply declare what is - disordering, difficult, impassable or whatever. Make it clear.

If you can't live with this compromise then how do you represent something like the goat track at Thermopylae, for example?

In friendly games that works fine. In a Comp it needs to be stated by the Umpire what effect each piece of terrain will have in the game. If there is likely to be any dispute it is always a good idea to confer with the Umpire first before placing anything down. Experience will usually be an indicator of whether there will be a likely problem. Failing common sense, roll a dice.

Dennis

well a water feature that covers one flank is a river or a big watercourse but you have to roll die to place it and only on such element can be placed.

Then you can say that any difficult/rough/impassable terrain item is "wet" and call and depict your peice of terrain as a lake for example.

Thanks Lorenzo but there is nothing in the rules that says to treat a large water feature (such as the Ocean) the same as a River and roll to place it. I've always just placed it as a Terrain choice and nobody has challenged it. Has never been a problem.

Dennis

yes the sea, the ocean or the river work the same, provide it covers a flank of the board. In that case you must roll.

A differentr thing is if the water feature has the same size of a standard terrain and you call it a lake instead of a flat difficult/impassable terrain.

Ah, that is a pity. I guess we will not be seeing many water features in our games then...

Thanks for the reponses.

TD

well, if you want to add more water feature is ok, but to put them in an automatic way you just make impossible to flank march. If you don't use flank march it is not a big issue.

It doesn't make a Flank March impossible, but it does limit which flank it can come in from and it limits the size of a battlefield if you are Inf vs Cav for example. Like I said before, it has never been a problem.   If the opponent doesn't wants it, he can move or remove it.   It just adds another interesting variation to the game.

It does not get used very often anyway.   Even a river is rare in our games.   What has everyone else found?

Dennis

Dennis Maxentius wrote:It doesn't make a Flank March impossible, but it does limit which flank it can come in from and it limits the size of a battlefield if you are Inf vs Cav for example.   Like I said before, it has never been a problem.   If the opponent doesn't wants it, he can move or remove it.   It just adds another interesting variation to the game.

It does not get used very often anyway.   Even a river is rare in our games.   What has everyone else found?

Dennis

All of which gets back to my experience. I love rivers and ocean sides. They can make a battle really fascinating, slow or shut down a flank or just be "different". People do seem alarmed by them though.

My thoughts exactly. There are plenty of occasions in history where battles were fought where water features secured the flanks. Same goes for forests, steep hills, marshes, etc. Terrain just makes the battlefield more realistic and interesting.

No arguments re terrain being good, equally a watercourse is a major sort of thing, most battles were not fought near them because for one side or the other it would be far more sensible to withdraw rather than fighting over poor terrain.