Base to Base after the FAQ

[Aesop]

Hey all,

 

Base to base has two questions with address it in the FAQ. I just need a touch of clarity:

 

Q: Can you define the terms “base contact” and “base to base contact”?
A: They both mean the same thing: “When the bases of two or more models are physically touching.”

Q: If a model is placing a Marker in base contact with itself and the Marker is Ht 0, can the Marker be placed underneath the model’s base?
A: No. The Marker must be placed touching the model’s base, but not overlapping it.

 

The way I read this is, "when placing a marking in b2b with your model, it must be placed tangentially. However, anytime that 2 things bases are touching, they are considered in base to base contact". But it was recently suggested to me that b2b now was ALWAYS defined as "touching but not overlapping". A common example would be, interacting/claiming with a squat marker. Can you be standing on top of it when you interact, or is that no longer considered base to base contact?

 

Thanks!

[The Godlyness]

Correct. Since that faq you can no longer stand on markers and flip them.

[binkys]

<snip> A common example would be, interacting/claiming with a squat marker. Can you be standing on top of it when you interact, or is that no longer considered base to base contact?

 

 

The FAQ is specifically about placing a ht 0 marker, not interacting with it.  Don't have my book with me for the wording on squat markers atm, but I don't see why you couldn't stand partway on an opponents scheme marker, then interact to pick it up.

[Paddywhack]

I think the word 'placed' in the FAQ agrees with Binkys opinion. Interacting is not placing. The FAQ only address placing the scheme marker, nothing else.

[The Godlyness]

I guess it comes down to what is base contact. On one hand it tells us two bases are touching. Then it says when placing a marker you can't be standing on it. Which would also be base contact.

So why did the rules people explicitly tell us that placing a marker in base contact can't be under it. But then just wave their hands dismissively saying oh feel free to stand on it to remove though. Squaters rights and the (1) interact action both say remove/flip a marker in base contact.

Heck the action itself "...(1) interact action to place a scheme marker in base contact with itself and not...."

So then when it says can't place it underneath that highly infers if not says base contact is two bases touching but not overlapping.

Now what is base to base with models why can't they stand on each other? Well besides the part they are impassable. So he have base to base defined as them touching bases. Why would there be definitions of what base to base is?

Those are my points.

[Aesop]

I read it as an extra clause to placing a scheme marker but not a new definition of base contact.

[Jonasty]

So why did the rules people explicitly tell us that placing a marker in base contact can't be under it. But then just wave their hands dismissively saying oh feel free to stand on it to remove though. Squaters rights and the (1) interact action both say remove/flip a marker in base contact.

 

I think the big difference between the two instances and why they were more concerned about placement vs interaction verbiage is that when it comes to interacting with a marker, whether scheme or strategy based (i.e. Squat) you're dealing with a static marker that has already been dropped on to the table.  Outside of specific crew/model actions these aren't going/moving anywhere so where you are when you interact with it is relatively unimportant.

 

On the other hand, when placing a marker you are directly involving where that marker will be on the table which has to account for the rules about markers being placed within 4" of other markers via Interact actions.  So where the marker is placed and whether it's legal to count it being under your base as B2B for placement has a lot more impact to adhering to the existing rules which is why I think they singled it out.

 

These are my thoughts, won't even call them 2 cents, maybe half a cent. 

[Kadeton]

Doesn't the FAQ still have the bit about how the questions and answers presented relate only to their specific situations, and shouldn't be used to infer or extrapolate a general case?

Base contact is base contact whether you're standing on a marker or next to it - the base and marker are physically touching. You are also not allowed to place a marker underneath a base with an Interact. That's all the FAQ says as far as I can tell.

[The Godlyness]

Fair enough. Not saying I am right (or wrong) just pointing out why I think it is.

So yeah /dance party.