Internal Structure and Forced Withdrawal

[Son of Kerenski]

Hello peeps.

A situation has come up in a game Ive been running with FW. Rules say something to the effect that once a unit has 50% or less (rounding up) structure left its in FW.

Scenario a Crusader than has 5 structure has been reduced to 3 - is it in FW? It has 60% technically but there was an interpretation that as 2.5 is half of 5 and rounded up is 3 then the unit is in FW.

Thoughts?

[Tai Dai Cultist]

You know I always play with Forced Withdrawal and I never noticed the wording.

It seemed clear that you needed to lose at least 50% of its structure to count as Crippling Damage, which then qualifies for the Forced Withdrawal.  But it doesn't say that.  And it doesn't say if you LOSE 50% of your structure (round up)... it does indeed say if you have 50% (round up) REMAINING.

That discovery being said... it's an optional rule as is.  I'm just going to house rule the optional rule to keep playing the way I always have...

[JadedFalcon]

Don't see any problem with the rounding up interpretation. By the time a mech is wrecked that far, it's gonna want to leave anyways. Forced withdrawal is supposed to represent some form of intelligence, self-preservation instinct, financial responsibility, fear of dispossession, etc. If you aren't playing zombie hoard mechwarriors, do you really want to be running your Jenner around with only two structure? If rounding up is a problem, then why use the FW rules in the first place?

Morale checks to override forced withdrawal is a whole different matter, which I may not be opposed to. But that topic belongs in a different subforum.

[Son of Kerenski]

Don't see any problem with the rounding up interpretation. By the time a mech is wrecked that far, it's gonna want to leave anyways. Forced withdrawal is supposed to represent some form of intelligence, self-preservation instinct, financial responsibility, fear of dispossession, etc. If you aren't playing zombie hoard mechwarriors, do you really want to be running your Jenner around with only two structure? If rounding up is a problem, then why use the FW rules in the first place?

Morale checks to override forced withdrawal is a whole different matter, which I may not be opposed to. But that topic belongs in a different subforum.

Playing the early to middle stages of the Clan Invasion which would, due to flavor and fluff, have the IS forces retreat when they suffer crippling losses where as the Clanners are fighting to the death and therefore ignore FW.

The bit I have a problem with is that it explicitly says 50% or less and 60% is clearly not 50%. The text is somewhat misleading and contradictory if you apply that logic to it.

[Weirdo]

It's not contradictory at all. When we're dealing with integers this small, it's very easy for 50%(round up) to equal 60%. In that situation, being at 60% does not override the fact that you're at 50%(round up).

[SC_Dave]

A situation has come up in a game Ive been running with FW. Rules say something to the effect that once a unit has 50% or less (rounding up) structure left its in FW.

Scenario a Crusader than has 5 structure has been reduced to 3 - is it in FW? It has 60% technically but there was an interpretation that as 2.5 is half of 5 and rounded up is 3 then the unit is in FW.

I think you've already got your answer. However, the rule actually states "reduced to half its original Structure (round up)". There's no mention of converting to percentages.

So in your 5 structure example. Half of 5 is 2.5, which rounds up to 3.

[JadedFalcon]

And if you take the Esprit de Corps command ability, then it becomes the other player's problem.