In this video “allowed to stack scheme markers on top of eachother”. Both the Large book pg.49 and the small book pg.56 are written the same and ready the same way. And yes, both are ambiguous.
While playing I have heard both arguments but there hasn’t been any resolution. Below I break down different pros and cons for each that I have run across.
The arguments FOR stacking references Section 1 Paragraph 4
“Sometimes a model will drop multiple markers. It is perfectly acceptable for two Markers to be on top of each other; both have their effects, it doesn’t matter which one is placed on top.
This doesn’t specify if the “multiple Markers” can be friendly or if it's only legal to stack opposed markers.
And Section 4 Paragraph 4
“Models may take a (1) interact Action to remove EVERY enemy Scheme Marker that is in base contact with the model.”
The last point isn’t written in either rule book but a logic question. There are a great many Schemes and Strategies that are impossible combos; if every Marker needs a minimum of 4” between each other then certain combinations of S&S are illegal or impossible combinations. This could be a broken flaw to the game or an intentional layer of play strategy to understand the broken and illegal combos.
Additional things to note, There are many synergy and metta shenanigans of certain models that almost sound like they would support stackable markers.
The argument AGAINST stacking references Section 4 Paragraph 4
“Models may place a scheme Marker in base contact with themselves and NOT within 4” of another friendly Scheme Marker by taking a (1) Interact Action.”
Secondly, almost every Scheme and Strategy breaks or becomes moot if you can stack markers. E.G. Line in the Sand becomes an Auto-Take every time.
The rule book breaks down markers into the following sections,
Question
Flib Jib
Question about Scheme marker placement, Can they stack?
https://youtu.be/evdgzOGEeTU?t=20m14s
In this video “allowed to stack scheme markers on top of eachother”. Both the Large book pg.49 and the small book pg.56 are written the same and ready the same way. And yes, both are ambiguous.
While playing I have heard both arguments but there hasn’t been any resolution. Below I break down different pros and cons for each that I have run across.
The arguments FOR stacking references Section 1 Paragraph 4
“Sometimes a model will drop multiple markers. It is perfectly acceptable for two Markers to be on top of each other; both have their effects, it doesn’t matter which one is placed on top.
This doesn’t specify if the “multiple Markers” can be friendly or if it's only legal to stack opposed markers.
And Section 4 Paragraph 4
“Models may take a (1) interact Action to remove EVERY enemy Scheme Marker that is in base contact with the model.”
The last point isn’t written in either rule book but a logic question. There are a great many Schemes and Strategies that are impossible combos; if every Marker needs a minimum of 4” between each other then certain combinations of S&S are illegal or impossible combinations. This could be a broken flaw to the game or an intentional layer of play strategy to understand the broken and illegal combos.
Additional things to note, There are many synergy and metta shenanigans of certain models that almost sound like they would support stackable markers.
The argument AGAINST stacking references Section 4 Paragraph 4
“Models may place a scheme Marker in base contact with themselves and NOT within 4” of another friendly Scheme Marker by taking a (1) Interact Action.”
Secondly, almost every Scheme and Strategy breaks or becomes moot if you can stack markers. E.G. Line in the Sand becomes an Auto-Take every time.
The rule book breaks down markers into the following sections,
Markers: Three paragraphs
Paragraph 1 - Description/Overview
Paragraph 2 - Rules
Paragraph 3 - Summary
Corps Markers: Three paragraphs
Paragraph 1 - Overview
Paragraph 2 - Operation
Paragraph 3 - Clarification
Scrap markers: Three paragraphs
Paragraph 1 - Overview
Paragraph 2 - Operation
Paragraph 3 - Clarification
Scheme Markers: Four Paragraphs
Paragraph 1 - Rules
Paragraph 2 - Overview
Paragraph 3 - Clarification
Paragraph 4 - Rules
Link to comment
Share on other sites
9 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.