Jump to content
Kyle

Placing Markers Poll

"Placing" Markers Poll  

166 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. What should the effect of putting a Marker on the table be called?

    • Place
      46
    • Drop
      120


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, solkan said:

When you "target" an object, whether it's a marker or a model, the rules are the same.  The same for when you draw line of sight to an object, whether it's a marker or model.  For that matter, even "move" (non-place movement) works nearly the same for markers as it does for models.  (I write "nearly the same" because I don't want to stop and look up whether there are any effects that move non-terrain markers.)

When you "place" an object, the rules aren't the same.  In particular, "Place a marker" means two entirely different things in different contexts.

That's the difference, and the reason for the change.  

What's the difference? It usually says "places with an Interact Action" or do you want to simply shorten this to "drop", but still make it a place effect like summon and bury?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Ming said:

What's the difference? It usually says "places with an Interact Action" or do you want to simply shorten this to "drop", but still make it a place effect like summon and bury?

Placing a marker with an interact action/model dying is not the same as summoning or unburying a model or moving an existing marker around on the table.

 

Honestly the amount of times people have asked what's the difference or just immediately went to talking about the movement effect place pretty clearly demonstrates that a change in terminology is needed.

Not trying being condescending to anyone, it's unnecessarily confusing having a game term mean two different things.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer Drop. 'Place' has specific interactions with other game rules, for example Gravity Well on Anna Lovelace. Unless we dont want corpse markers being created within range of her, (As Resserectionists, we really do want corpse markers being created) then drop is a much clearer game term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Thrawnic said:

I would prefer Drop. 'Place' has specific interactions with other game rules, for example Gravity Well on Anna Lovelace. Unless we dont want corpse markers being created within range of her, (As Resserectionists, we really do want corpse markers being created) then drop is a much clearer game term.

"Gravity Well: Enemy models may not be Placed within :ToS-Aura:6 unless they are Placed by an effect generated by a friendly model."

There should be no interaction with corpse or any kind of marker, because a marker is not a model.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the difference between place and drop is pedantic at best, and it could cause even more confusion that synonyms have different definitions unrelated to each other. To me, this feel very similar to the problem of "Prevention is not reduction" from M2E.

IMO, rather than using Place and Drop and giving them definitions, the rule book should cover Placing a Model, Placing a Marker,  Placing Terrain, and Place as Movement, as different specifics of the general action "Picking something up and putting it somewhere on the board"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

In my opinion, the difference between place and drop is pedantic at best, and it could cause even more confusion that synonyms have different definitions unrelated to each other. To me, this feel very similar to the problem of "Prevention is not reduction" from M2E.

What problem was that?
 

2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

IMO, rather than using Place and Drop and giving them definitions, the rule book should cover Placing a Model, Placing a Marker,  Placing Terrain, and Place as Movement, as different specifics of the general action "Picking something up and putting it somewhere on the board"

Having a single game term refer to multiple different concepts is just asking for people to get mixed up.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

What problem was that?
 

I thought that the reason soulstones don't prevent damage in M3E was that is was not intuitive to have two words that mean similar things (reduce and prevent).  Since "prevent isn't reduce" it could block unreducable dmg, and I feel like we are close to a similar level of pedantic here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

I thought that the reason soulstones don't prevent damage in M3E was that is was not intuitive to have two words that mean similar things (reduce and prevent).  Since "prevent isn't reduce" it could block unreducable dmg, and I feel like we are close to a similar level of pedantic here. 

If that were true then soulstones wouldn't have started out as being able to reduce irreducible damage.

Also, having them be the same term but work different has all the same baggage that being two different terms would, but with the added baggage of having to use the same term so you can't actually talk about it without a disclaimer. If there are going to be two distinct mechanics they need distinct names.

If you want an example look at 2e and suffer. Suffer could mean either the amount of damage that a model is supposed to take or it could mean the amount of damage a model actually takes, and good luck figuring out which was which if there wasn't already an FAQ covering it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

If that were true then soulstones wouldn't have started out as being able to reduce irreducible damage.

Also, having them be the same term but work different has all the same baggage that being two different terms would, but with the added baggage of having to use the same term so you can't actually talk about it without a disclaimer. If there are going to be two distinct mechanics they need distinct names.

If you want an example look at 2e and suffer. Suffer could mean either the amount of damage that a model is supposed to take or it could mean the amount of damage a model actually takes, and good luck figuring out which was which if there wasn't already an FAQ covering it.

Right, but I still think it would be clearer to use one term for the general action rather than giving each specific sub section a similar sounding name. Its just my opinion. In that sense, the analogy to suffer doesn't rly apply, because that is a question about an unclear term, a term that wasn't defined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already say "drop a scheme marker" all the time any way so making the game term align to the common vernacular seems good.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

Right, but I still think it would be clearer to use one term for the general action rather than giving each specific sub section a similar sounding name. 

It's not different subsections of the same general action. That's the whole point. It is two completely different and unrelated mechanics.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that you are thinking about these issues now. One of the issues with M2E was the wording on a could things was left open to interpretation and depending at what stage the rules where written would mean different things. The clearer the basics are from the start the better the game will be as a whole. It might even help to have a small appendix of usual used terms.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

drop sounds cooler (& really isn't this what it's all about?), I'm just gunna drop these shadows/pyres/pianos over here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2019 at 2:40 AM, Mycellanious said:

Right, but I still think it would be clearer to use one term for the general action rather than giving each specific sub section a similar sounding name. Its just my opinion. In that sense, the analogy to suffer doesn't rly apply, because that is a question about an unclear term, a term that wasn't defined.

 

On 2/22/2019 at 5:15 AM, santaclaws01 said:

It's not different subsections of the same general action. That's the whole point. It is two completely different and unrelated mechanics.

This conversation seem like good evidence that the words needs to be different!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of swapping out Place when talking about markers.  However I'd recommend we rename; Create to Drop, and placing a marker to Create.  The way create works today feels more like 'dropping' the marker, and the way placing a marker works feels more like creating one.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...