Slitherine

dave_r wrote:

I don't see how "a rule that only certain armies can use" is anything but "army-specific".

All armies can carry out interpenetration. Just certain armies can peform penetrations that others can't.

That is not an army specific rule, just an army specific ability.

Nitpicking is what I do best

The rule in the rule book says, parapharase "you can interpenetrate in these circumstances plus any others that the list books allow. So the rule an dits mechanisms are in the rule book, the instances of where it can be used are in the list bookse.

Dismounting is similar in many respects.

So there is a bit of 'army specific' going on, just not much.

When the lists were being written the list authors were given some guidelines, included in which was 'don't invent new rules'. In essence that meant that if there was a temptation for a special rule it wasn't yielded to.

grahambriggs wrote:When the lists were being written the list authors were given some guidelines, included in which was 'don't invent new rules'. In essence that meant that if there was a temptation for a special rule it wasn't yielded to.

Absolutely. There are provisions built into the rules to allow certain things that no army in any published book has the capabiloty to do. When the armies which can use these rules appear it will not be an army specific rule, just an implementation of a rule that is already there.

If you want army and unit specific rules then you need to look at Warhammer in all its flavours or Flames of War which at present seems to be introducing more and more new rules with every suplement.

There are, of course, the disguised troops in the (IIRC) Syracusan list - an exception to prove the rule