Re: Clarity of Orders

You are going to get opinions both ways, but "to" is a preposition, not 
a verb, and as such, the presence of the word "support(s)" (a transitive 
verb in this case) in the orders would settle the question in my mind. I 
would rule both 5 & 6 as valid support orders with a caution to the 
player in question to not use both "to" and "support" in future orders 
in consideration of the poor GM who must worry about such things. :-)

Regards to all,

Mike A.

squirelibbymcafee wrote:

>Gentleman, 
>
>I would be interested in your input on the orders below. All orders 
>are logical regarding the borders between the provinces, meaning they 
>are adjacent and would succeed if not attacked or opposed. The 
>intended actions of the units in orders 5 & 6 are in question.  I am 
>inclined to consider 5 & 6 as ambiguous, given the use of verbs in 
>orders 1-4.
>
>
>1 – "Unit Province C to Province D"
>2 – "Unit Province E supports Unit Province C to Province D"
>3 – "Unit Province G to Province H"
>4 – "Unit Province I supports A Province G to Province H"
>5 – "Unit Province F to supports Province E"
>6 – "Unit Province J to support Foreign Country Unit Province Z"
>
>TY,
>
>Libby
>
>wnrytyrsd
>
>
>
>
>
>Community email addresses:
>  Post message: [email protected]
>  Subscribe:    [email protected]
>  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]
>  List owner:   [email protected]
>
>Shortcut URL to this page:
>  http://www.onelist.com/community/CAT23-GM 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>  
>