Re: Stargrunt questions (NOT about cavalry<grin>)

>Jon et al.,
>
>Couple of questions about some situations that came up in a game last
>Saturday.  Scenario was a prison raid - a high-ranking officer was
being kept
>in an impromptu POW camp.  Problem occurred when the defender (quite
wisely, I
>thought at first) detached his SAW gunner from one squad and placed him
in a
>guard tower.  A good idea, but . . .the leader of the squad was a
Regular - 3.
> He proceeded to fail every comm roll to get the detached SAW to
actually fire
>at anyone. 

"Hey, the Sarge can't see us up here, maybe if we just keep our heads
down
and don't fire then no-one will notice us...."

>  Then, the squad he was detached from proceeded to get into heavy
combat and
>routed.  
>
>Questions:
>1) I wasn't sure what to do with the detached element when the rest of
the
>squad routed.	The squad was probably 18 inches away at the time.  It
didn't
>seem right to force the detached SAW element to rout as well since he
hadn't
>even been fired on during the game.  

Tricky one this. A lot would depend on whether or not the SAW team could
SEE the rest of their squad bugging out - if they could then I think
they
might well decide to follow, if not then they may continue doing what
they
were before. This is the sort of situation that is almost impossible to
legislate on in the rules (unless you want us to get SPI/SFB syndrome
and
tell you it is covered on P.247 of master rules book 4, paragraph 38,
rule
651.12, sub-clause 9A..... :)) - it would be an umpire's call if you
have
one, if not then a gentlemanly agreement or a dice-roll!

>
>2) Can a unit commander on the next command level up attempt to give a
>detached element orders?  In this game, the Platoon commander was
nearby and
>was passing every comm roll he tried.	I don't think I'd want other
Squad
>leaders ordering the poor guy around, but it seemed logical to allow
the
>Platoon commander to step in when the guy's inept squad leader couldn't
manage
>to do anything with him.

Yes, I think under these circumstances this would be entirely
reasonable.

>
>This was just a trial game - we were trying out the rules.  I loved not
having
>to look up anything on a darned table in the rulebook!
>
>Very nice rules, Jon, thanks for letting us play with them, too.

Thanks for buying them ... ;)
>
>Nick Caldwell
>clcaldwell@primary.net 

Jon (GZG)