Very brief discussion over a game at the weekend. If a player is using an army that doe not have a Legendary commander identified within the list, such as Alexander, can the player still choose to take one subject to paying the correct points? For some reason I got it into my head that the ONLY time a Legendary commander can be taken is where mentioned in specific lists. We came to the conclusion that it is indeed a player option to take a legendary commander and that the specified named commanders are instances where if that commander is taken he must be Legendary.
You choose .
Your mistake is defining a legendary general by our western history but would Alexander be legenday for a inca warrior ? the answer is clearly NO. Were there legendary inca's leaders, surely yes but we do not know them as all records are lost.
Same goes for northern indians , japaneese, chineese, indian.... A leader may be legendary to it's own people and not to foreigners . Also what we know of the past is what propaganda tells us . What is reported from earlier times is only a point of view .
Well, the only mistake here is the assumption you jumped to about there being some confusion as to what might constitute a legendary general for who. I don't actually see that anywhere in the question, probably because that wasn't the question at all. The question WAS, is it a player choice to take a Legendary General or not? it was a simple RULES question, nothing more. Attention to detail and all that ;)
Anyway, thanks for the first two words of the answer that were useful. As to the rest of the diatribe, probably better to be certain what people are confused about before offering the benefit of your wisdom. Most people I know don't actually like being told what they are thinking by others.
Some list are very specific on generals.
I recall that the Swiss couldn't take legendary for instance.
Some other list create constraints : for Alexander Macedonian if you want the agema then you need Alexander as CiC, Alexander is graded legendary.
I recall there were discussions so have a close look when list are re-edited.
Otherwise you take the general grade you like (or the one you can afford once you paid for the rest of the army)
Quote from: Plantagenet on October 18, 2021, 10:02:23 AM
Well, the only mistake here is the assumption you jumped to about there being some confusion as to what might constitute a legendary general for who. I don't actually see that anywhere in the question, probably because that wasn't the question at all. The question WAS, is it a player choice to take a Legendary General or not? it was a simple RULES question, nothing more. Attention to detail and all that ;)
Anyway, thanks for the first two words of the answer that were useful. As to the rest of the diatribe, probably better to be certain what people are confused about before offering the benefit of your wisdom. Most people I know don't actually like being told what they are thinking by others.
My answer was : YOU CHOOSE
Very first part of my answer ;D
Quote from: Rino on October 18, 2021, 03:52:28 PM
Some list are very specific on generals.
I recall that the Swiss couldn't take legendary for instance.
Some other list create constraints : for Alexander Macedonian if you want the agema then you need Alexander as CiC, Alexander is graded legendary.
I recall there were discussions so have a close look when list are re-edited.
Otherwise you take the general grade you like (or the one you can afford once you paid for the rest of the army)
Right, I haven't looked at the lists in question TBH but guessed there may be one or more factors that might force the use of the Legendary general, at least in some cases, otherwise people might just drop Alexander for Colin. In the games we've played I always go for the command and control levels I need, cheaping out on generals is too much of a risk for me, unless they are literally needed to do nothing.