the rules for fighting groups say wounds have to be distributed evenly and vangard has to take at least as many blows as everyone else (ie hit first) but it has one area that isn't clear is if that is for round by round or over course of a battle:
Example 1: You have a group of warriors: Let's call them Albert (Vanguard), Boris and Chuck and they get into a fight.
round 1: 1 wound taken by group (fighting 1 foe)
round 2: 2 wounds taken by group (fighting first opponent and someone joins him)
Round 3: 4 Wounds taken by group (fighting 4 opponents now)
Round 4: 2 wound taken by group (back down to 2 opponent)
Round 5: 1 wound taken by group (back down to 1 opponent)
For total of 9 wounds
Are the wounds distributed evenly every round or over course of the combat.
IE does Albert take 6 wounds (first wound each round and extra wound round 3), with Borus 2 (round 2 nad 3) and Chuck 2 (round 3 and 4) or can they be distrubutes across the group over the rounds that Round 1 Albert is hit, round 2: Boris and chuck take the blow, round 3: Albert takes 2, borus and chuch each take 1 so that in the end, Vanguard is hit 4 times and each of the others 3.
Another example: Same group before fighs five round battle against single powerful foe who hits them once each round. Does vangard take 5 hits and the others never get hit?
I would distribute them as evenly and "fairly" (if that counts in combat) across the group. But, I would say that the vanguard takes the first wound each round. So yes, your vanguard could end up getting trashed pretty early.
I wouldn't allow members of the group to go unscathed while others line up to take the wounds round after round.
This becomes issue because A group does need to pull out of combat for a full round to change vanguard. It seems very odd that a trained fighting group would have to have the same person take the full blows every round and can't rotate that the wounds are spread out (esp since they can't change vanguard in middle of battle unless wierd situation of being able to retire from field (not something I have ever really seen)
I had always interpreted it to mean that the vanguard must, at any given time, have at least as many wounds as anyone else in the group. In other words, I don't think the vanguard has to take a wound every round. I don't have my rule book with me -- does the group combat example shed any light on this?
Nope because the group combat example was 3 on 3 so when wounds were inflicted: 3 wound inflicted, one on each. The damage section only has single round example of 4 wounds on a group of three grogs that vanguard had to take 2 so that he did not have less than anyone else.
It doesn't address issue of group of three fighting a single giant or group of three fighting group of 4 on 2nd and 3rd rounds (first round vanguard takes 2, others take 1 (wounds 2-1-1) but 2nd round, someone else could take the extra since it would then make wounds (3-3-2) and third round the last one takes extra for (3-3-3) vs (6-3-3) of the other way).
Considering vanguard can't pull out, someone else can't step up as vangard unless they do not attack or defend for a round, this is a problem. I would think a trained group would be better than this though perhaps the untrained are not.
I thought each time wounds were done the vanguard had to take at least many as the others. The reason I thought it was each time is that wounds matter from round to round, so they cannot just be considered at the very end. This is one of the reasons to rotate the vanguard.
Except that you can't rotate the vanguard unless you don't attack or defend for a full round. (what foe is going to give you a round without battle once engaged.)
The question is that when Vanguard must take at least as many as the other: is that per round or is that per battle? That is what makes things unclear. The example given shows vanguard taking two wounds while the others take 1 each because vanguard takes them first but doesn't address the multi-rounds and going forward.
The actual group on group example is also less than helpful because it is three on three that every times wounds are dealt, everyone of the foes gets one.
Reading the rules over again a few times, and it seems pretty clear to me that it is intended "per round". Wound Penalties are inflicted round-to-round as well, not saved up for the end of combat. So distributing wounds after combat messes up the math quite a bit.
Further, the spirit of the rules is that the Vanguard is supposed to take the brunt of the injuries. so even if they are distributed at the end of combat (which makes no sense, but hypothetically speaking), the Vanguard should suffer the more serious wounds and the others the lighter wounds.
Distributing wounds at the end is not what I or anyone in this discussion is advocating.
Keeping track of number of wounds is. If vangard has taken 3 wounds and others have taken 2, next wound goes to one of the others. Simple running total keeps number of wounds distributed evenly. The vanguard has always taken more. If any of the supporters are incapacitated, they fall out of the combat.
To me, it does not make sense that you have a fighting team, 1 person gets hit 4-5 times, the others aren't wounded and that because that one person is hit, the overall skill of the group to hit becomes nothing (vangard takes 4 med wounds over four rnds of battle, group is -12 to battle and basically incompetant while vanguard taking 2 and other two taking two means only -6 and group still functions somewhat). The effect of those others attacking becomes totally negated because all the wounds to single person.
Then again, considering how easy it is for one to step back and another to step forward, it doesn't make sense that it takes a full round of doing nothing for vanguard to change, esp for groups people who trained together (trained group)
we are not talking about what makes sense, we are talking about what the rules say
it does make sense. A full combat round is only a few seconds. I have been in my fair share of drag out brawls in my day. Next time we game at Hugh's, remind me to tell you the Saint Louis story (1996, involving a stripper, a bouncer, and two rednecks; the glory days of Markoko when he was still young ). But it really works much the same way. If the bruiser/vanguard goes down/pulls back, the cohesion of the entire unit is disrupted. Oh yeah! Also remind me to tell you the story of the biker gang in '79. That is a classic (I am not that old, it was my uncle's fight, I just got to see the results).
But the long and the short of it is that I have reached a decision. I see nothing in this thread to dissuade me from my decision. The group suffered two wounds inflicted during two different rounds, a Light and a Heavy. The Vanguard (your character) bears the brunt of the injury. I will even compromise and say that they suffer just the one, the Heavy Wound, someone else took the light wound. I think that is generous.
I think the rules imply that wounds are applied each round rather than spread evenly throughout the combat, so yes the vanguard seems little hard done by.
But the beauty of a game system is that you can change what you don't like. If you prefer that the vanguard is treated fairly across the combat, then go ahead. It's your game, so do what feels right to you. It's an easily defensible position to take so feel free.
). But it really works much the same way. If the bruiser/vanguard goes down/pulls back, the cohesion of the entire unit is disrupted. Oh yeah! Also remind me to tell you the story of the biker gang in '79. That is a classic (I am not that old, it was my uncle's fight, I just got to see the results).