Hey all, just joined this forum after recently buying the rules. I've played several games so far (solo, to learn the rules) and have had a total hoot! I do have a few questions about the rules, though.

I dug through the Rules Questions part of the forum for a while to get clarification, but couldn't find anything conclusive: when, if ever, do friendly casualties count as dependents? For example (assume all units in this example are on the same side)

Unit A has 5 men, two of them seriously wounded. Unit A only suffers from the Casualty Penalty, correct? Or do they also count as having dependents?

Unit B has 5 men, one of them KIA and another seriously wounded. They only suffer from the Casualty Penalty, correct? The KIA that they're carting around doesn't count as a dependent?

Now...say Unit A gets zapped hard and all of them go down as casualties. None can take 1st Aid Checks because no "healthy" figures are present. Unit B comes to their rescue during the next turn, and during the 1st Aid phase of the turn after that, everybody left in Unit A are found to be Seriously Wounded. Unit B decides to carry these Unit A casualties around to prevent their capture by the enemy---does Unit B count as having the Casualty Penalty (it has its own casualties, and its carrying a new batch of friendly casualties), or do the friendly-but-a-different-unit casualties count as dependents?

For some variation, say that Unit B in the big example above had no casualties before coming to Unit A's rescue. Casualty Penalty or Dependents?

I think I might be making Dependents an overly-inclusive category, as the main rules describe them as "POWs, VIPs, and other non-combatants" and doesn't mention wounded (and the section on wounded doesn't mention anything about them becoming dependents). I've also read about gamers who don't allow a unit to move if its casualties outnumber its healthy figures (an idea I like, and might use, possibly with the modification that the unit is totally immobile if outnumbered 3:2, and must pass a TQ check to move tactically if outnumbered by a smaller margin). I just wanted to make absolutely sure. Thanks!

Just the Casualty Penalty.



Again, just the Casualty Penalty.



Still just the casualty penalty (unless the scenario states otherwise).

Now all of the above answers just clarify the intent of the rules - if you think Dependents would work better in some situations (and I could see an argument for the case of carrying someone else's wounded falling into that category), by all means, play it that way! Whatever makes the most sense to you is fine with us.

_________________
Shawn Carpenter
Game Designer, Ambush Alley Games

"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

Shawn---thanks for the lightning-fast response! I really love the game, you guys did fantastic work. I'm all about result-modelling rather than process-modelling and your game does that to a T.

Another small question: If Unit B (from my example above) is treating the casualties of Unit A during the 1st Aid phase, would Unit B suffer from the "react to fire only" penalty of finding seriously wounded in Unit A? I would think that it would, as Unit B is the one doing the treatment.

Thanks for the kind words!

I agree with your interpretation - the friendly unit performing the aid check would surely be affected by the emotional impact of wounded or dead comrades.

_________________
Shawn Carpenter
Game Designer, Ambush Alley Games

"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

As a rule of thumb, I would say the CP is caused by casualties INTERNAL to the unit (i.e. one of the unit has been hit), whereas dependents are EXTERNAL to the unit (so escorting contractors, wounded from other units, prisoners, etc.). I could go either way on the wounded guys from another unit though since they would "act" roughly like an internal regular, and they would all know each other personally etc. A guy from another company that the unit is rescuing however would probably not be as bad from a morale standpoint.

Just a shout out, I don't know of any other rule set that really deals with casualties the way FoF does. Not OVERLY complex, but you do need to manage them somewhat (Stargrunt II did it to an extent, but was too complicated).

Cheers AA guys,

Chris

I would tend to go with the CP being applied to military personnel and the dependant rules being applied to civilian personel.

Military personnel are better trained in the handling of casualties and the careful movement about the battlefield. While civilians need to be lead about by their military escorts.

I am yet to see a 'Ross Kemp' direct military personel about the battlefield, however, he is keen to follow any instructions given to him by those same soldiers.



I would beg to differ, while he may not know the casualty personally, he certainly recognise his face and would in all likelyhood know his name too, and probably shared a beverage with him on occasion. Any friendly military casualty takes its toll on a soldier.

_________________
"The first thing people do in this situation is panic"
"Good, I am glad I am doing it in the right order!!!'