Re: [eia] question about multi-national sieges

But the garrison is not in the area, it's in the city. So the battle is not taking place in the area at all.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----

From: Kyle H

To: eia@xxxxxxxxx

Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 3:29 PM

Subject: Re: [eia] question about multi-national sieges

JJ wrote:

Don't the rules you are refering to about a party not at war with the attacker apply to field battles, not sieges ?

I reply:

I don't think so. 7.3.8, the introduction to the whole section, reads as follows: "To avoid problems when moving into combat the following step sequence *must* be followed whenever moving into an area containing two or more forces or when using combined movement." I assume that siege battles are a type of "combat."

Now there is an obvious lawyer-like response that can be made at this point: since there was no *movement* involved, this section does not apply. Obviously, I think that response would be inadequate. (And I am not accusing JJ of making it. I am just addressing it hypothetically in case anyone thinks to use it.) Here we must understand spending 0 movement points as an instance of "movement" as far as the rule is concerned. Otherwise, there would be no rules at all to handle this case, a consequence that is as unlikely as it is undesirable.

kdh