Markers and Illusionary Forest

[Patzer]

If terrain would be created or moved on top of a marker, the marker is placed on top of the terrain without changing the markers position on the table's horizontal surface (the marker simply moves up) (Big rulebook, p.48).

 

Lilith's Illusionary Forest says: "Place two 50mm Illusionary Forest Markers within range and touching each other. These Markers are
treated as Ht 4, Terrain with the Dense, severe & soft cover traits. Remove these Markers the next time this Crew takes this action."

 

In Squatter's Rights, would Lilith be able to place 1 or even 2 (of the out-most markers) on top of her Illusionary Forest markers?

 

 

[jonahmaul]

By looking at the rules it would appear so - that is gross and sneaky!

[zFiend]

that is gross and sneaky!

 

And then they bad mouth us! 

 

But yes, Tom is a sneaky one. 

[Patzer]

Would you say one or both markers though?

[Cunning]

Surely it's just on top of the actual marker though?  Not 4" in the air?

[Seregon]

If the "trick" is that the Squatter's marker(s) would somehow end up on Ht4 with no way of getting to them I would say no. The rule on page 48 in my mind should be interpreted so that the original marker is meant to be physically showing at all times so the players don't forget about it. Otherwise this would be gamebreaking in a way I'm fairly certain the devs never intended.

[Patzer]

If the "trick" is that the Squatter's marker(s) would somehow end up on Ht4 with no way of getting to them I would say no. The rule on page 48 in my mind should be interpreted so that the original marker is meant to be physically showing at all times so the players don't forget about it. Otherwise this would be gamebreaking in a way I'm fairly certain the devs never intended.

 

I am also certain this was never intended. Especially since nearly all other marker placer have a clause which hinders them to put another marker over them. For example the Waldegeist (not over others markers), Raspy and Sonnia (not within 1" of any model or marker).

 

There are certainly room to interpret it as that the marker will be place into the dense terrain, which we all would agree on to be the reasonable interpretation. However this table's horizontal surface (the marker simply moves up) makes the rule a bit wonky.

[jonahmaul]

RaW say that you place them on top of the terrain and since regular markers can be placed on top of terrain it seems that they could be placed on top of terrain that is created during the course of the game (the rule specifically states 'created' during the game too).  I don't like it mind and not sure that was the intention but it is sneaky so maybe that was something that was considered when written.

[zFiend]

I would say they go on top as well per the rules.

[cdhay]

But the illusionary forest is intended to be a forest right, you can walk in it and see in and out of it. So although it is height 4 blocking, it isn't impassable so not a solid object. So I would say the markers would still be on the ground but on top of the marker (by on top of the marker I mean physically on the table), but importantly only height 0 still. At the base of the trees / tree and not on top of a tree.

 

My 2 cents

[The Godlyness]

It's not a tree. It's dense terrain. I assume when you guys place those forests pieces down you don't try balancing squat markers on trees. So it would be on the ground floor. And visable since it is in the dense terrain.

But feel free in a friendly game to balance markers but in the tournament scene laughing will ensue.

[Patzer]

But the illusionary forest is intended to be a forest right, you can walk in it and see in and out of it. So although it is height 4 blocking, it isn't impassable so not a solid object. So I would say the markers would still be on the ground but on top of the marker (by on top of the marker I mean physically on the table), but importantly only height 0 still. At the base of the trees / tree and not on top of a tree.

 

My 2 cents

 

Solid 2 cents.

[zFiend]

Solid 2 cents.

 

Gotta agree with that. 

 

Didn't think it that far.

[jonahmaul]

But the illusionary forest is intended to be a forest right, you can walk in it and see in and out of it. So although it is height 4 blocking, it isn't impassable so not a solid object. So I would say the markers would still be on the ground but on top of the marker (by on top of the marker I mean physically on the table), but importantly only height 0 still. At the base of the trees / tree and not on top of a tree.

 

My 2 cents

Makes more sense.

[entropolous]

Makes more sense.

Yeah, definately worth more like 6 or 7, maybe even 8 cents.

[oreaper]

I does agree and have played that it simply rests "in" the forest, though i kinda like the image of a Miyazaki-esk forest bursting from the ground to snatch the marker just out of reach like so much cookie jars.....  

[cdhay]

Taking my 8 cents and putting them back in my wallet