Mounted pole arms

[tarnowski1]

On the QRS the wording suggested that Charging lancers dont get their bonus against mounted pole arms. If you compare with the wording for mounted short spears these clearly make a differential between foot and mounted PA.

random wording or deliberate?

Regards
Matt

[badhabum]

I wonder how you come to that conclusion.
Mounted PA have a +1 vs any mounted except vs CL or Lsp
CL vs standing FOOT  LSP,PA or PK or vs Nellies or BWG  ...have a 0 impact but +2 vs others including mounted PA

So the mounted PA is at a disadvantage. Not the contrary .

[tarnowski1]

I wonder how you come to that conclusion.
Mounted PA have a +1 vs any mounted except vs CL or Lsp
CL vs standing FOOT  LSP,PA or PK or vs Nellies or BWG  ...have a 0 impact but +2 vs others including mounted PA

So the mounted PA is at a disadvantage. Not the contrary .

you are missing my point

CL vs standing FOOT  LSP,PA or PK or vs Nellies or BWG
Short spear  vs standing FOOT  LSP,  FOOT PA or PK

notice the small yet significant difference between those two entries? Short spears make the distinction that their +1 is not applicable against foot PA but the entry for CL just says PA.

Regards
Matt

[nikgaukroger]

Battle Chariot also says Foot PA as opposed to just PA.

[RocketSix]

it was deliberate to balance the nomadic/chinese cavalry types

[nikgaukroger]

Eh? The nomadic cavalry types aren't charging lancer though so I don't see how that interaction drives things ... 

[RocketSix]

no - the nomads are typically SS or LS. The Chinese are MPA or CL

[nikgaukroger]

But that aside, the leaving out of "foot" is deliberate and so CL does not count against PA whether the latter are mounted or on foot?

[RocketSix]

Mounted polearm was a later addition...  CL have never counted against foot Polerarm. 

[nikgaukroger]

True but unhelpful in relation to the 2019 QRS where the question is whether the fact that the CL line just mentions PA is deliberate or an accidental omission as other lines specifically say Foot PA.

[AntiokosIII]

Shades of Phil Barker!! Surely we have not come to the point where we must construct sentence diagrams to decipher the rules? It seems clear to me that foot PA cancels CL, mounted PA does not.

[badhabum]

OK back to the words

As CL are

0 vs EL,BWG or standing** Foot LSp,PA or PK, 0 vs other

As written it is pretty clear to me it is FOOT LSp,FOOT PA and FOOT PK

I never saw any cavalry with PK ...

So the intend is clear to me

Now we might review all the lines but never forget, we need space for all the wording 

And I understand why the question was asked

[lionheartrjc]

As the QRS is written,  CL vs standing mounted PA  should be 0 vs 0. 
If the intention (as I believe it is) is that it should be 2 vs 0, then the CL line should read "0 vs El, BWg  or standing** Foot LSp, Foot PA or PK, +2 vs. others"

Richard

[nikgaukroger]

Bingo 

[Jilu]

As the QRS is written,  CL vs standing mounted PA  should be 0 vs 0. 
If the intention (as I believe it is) is that it should be 2 vs 0, then the CL line should read "0 vs El, BWg  or standing** Foot LSp, Foot PA or PK, +2 vs. others"

Richard

this is absolutely unclear, as badaboum said it reads like CL  0 vs foot LSp, foot P, foot PK.

wording for shortspear is more detailed : +1 vs foot LSP, foot PA, PK

so i asume that if foot is not mentioned for a weapon it means foot/mounted or whatever.