ER Bickford
United States
Auburn
Maine
-
Player A controls a stack of White forces. His leader is assassinated. The stack is in violation so it must restack.
Does player a still control all of those White units, even though he doesn't have enough leaders, marking them with an "A" marker?
If there was a leader in that same stack, would he be able to take control of at least some of the units at the time of the assassination re-stack?
-
Kevin Bernatz
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
-
We had this same question come up, and though I know it was answered at CSW, I'm not sure I agree with the answer.
Our ruling was that "yes", they are still player controlled and not subject to "stealing" by other leaders of the same side. The reasoning was as follows:
- the rules state to put control markers on all "forces" controlled by that player.
- "forces" are defined as a stack of one or more combat units and/or leaders (i.e. a "force" does not require a leader).
- there is no explicit distinction made between controlled leaderless forces (green and blue combat units) versus controlled white/red combat units who happen to find themselves without a leader.
- the rules explicitly reference that "combat units" without a leader may not attack (excepting blue/green units which never have leaders). This would not be necessary if leaderless forces were never controlled in our opinion, since clearly uncontrolled forces could never attack per other sections of the rules (e.g. Germans, etc).
But, we may be wrong since others have apparently played that leaderless forces are "uncontrolled", though an earlier post on CSW noted that you would then need some way to keep track of which combat unit moved in the game turn, so that it could not be "scarfed up" and movd by someone later if your leader was killed in a combat/assassination/etc.
-K
-
|
|
