Re: [SG2] 2 questions

On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 06:59:58 -0500, "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
<Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:

>[Bri] This is bad (IMHO). I liked the solution proposed on the list
earlier:
>The defender makes a confidence check even if voluntarily withdrawing
(this
>is actually indicated on p.41 "Should the defender withdraw [he may
elect to
>do so voluntarily if desired, irrespective of the Confidence test
>result]..."). If if they fail, they loose confidence as normal.

I do to. Of course some folks don't like house rules, depending on what
their
players want. They prefer to avoid arguments by trying to keep things
"clean".

>[Bri] I like this as a house rule better. Both attacker and defender
perform
>combat moves when attacking or withdrawing from CA.

Yeah, me too. Some of those comments were just "off the top of my head".
Or,
as a friend calls them, a "scream of consciousness". I like the idea of
a CL
test for voluntary retreating and a combat move for retreats and
advances.
Only one, as well, no unlimited retreat/advance across the table top.

Allan Goodall		       awg@sympatico.ca
Goodall's Grotto:  http://www.vex.net/~agoodall

"Now, see, if you combine different colours of light,
 you get white! Try that with Play-Doh and you get
 brown! How come?" - Alan Moore & Kevin Nolan,