Markers & 'Base Contact'

[Kriltic]

This is something I've been looking at for sometime now and I can't seem to find an answer other than 'Yes you can do it'. I'm hoping I've over looked something...

When a model drops a Scheme/Corpse/Scrap Marker... Is there anything that prevents a model from placing the marker underneath itself or another model (assuming the two models were contacting one another)?

I ask as Scheme Markers become much easier to defend and prevent enemies from removing them as models with 1" melee ranges cant stop another enemy model with a 1" melee range from interacting with them.

Corpse and Scrap markers could be 'hidden' from models so the enemy cannot target them for summoning etc.

[Dracomax]

I ask as Scheme Markers become much easier to defend and prevent enemies from removing them as models with 1" melee ranges cant stop another enemy model with a 1" melee range

Sure they can. they just have to be standing partly on top of the marker.

 

As for your main question, I don't see any reason you couldn't put a marker under the model which is being removed. I don't think you can put it under another model though.

[Kriltic]

Sorry I meant if the marker was dropped using the last Ap. An enemy can walk up and remove it... Same sort of thing for Squat markers. I probably should have explained that a little better.

Hmmm interesting. If you can place in underneath your own base, under another model doesn't seem to be too different.

[Fenton Crack]

If you were adjacent to a friendly model, I guess you could perhaps drop a scheme marker under the adjacent friendly model, as it would be in base contact with the dropping model (edge to edge) and still completely under the other model 's base. If the friendly model is within the 1.1" you could perhaps drop it so it's partially covered by the enemy model.

Since the markers are Ht 0, I do not recall any rule that would prevent you from placing under a enemy model, but it does seem a bit odd.

[Ausplosions]

You could place them under an enemy also of that enemy is on B2B.

[Mike3838]

The question is, can I drop a scheme marker directly underneath myself, rather than edge to edge adjacent. It's still touching my base, isn't it?

[The Godlyness]

Sure you can do that. I would ask you not to move your model though since i dont want you accidently move forward or backwards a millimeter. So if you can do it with out koving i would be impressed.

Common sense to me would just put it in base to base like you would if you were base to base with am enemy.

[Ausplosions]

Sure you can do that. I would ask you not to move your model though since i dont want you accidently move forward or backwards a millimeter. So if you can do it with out koving i would be impressed.

Common sense to me would just put it in base to base like you would if you were base to base with am enemy.

Wow.

Glad my regular opponents aren't so pedantic.

[Barnaberible]

The question is still can a model put a marker underneath itself? I say no but don't have my rule book with me so base that on nothing but common sense.

[The Godlyness]

Wow.Glad my regular opponents aren't so pedantic.

Use cooler synonyms when judging my sarcasm like bookish, precise Synonyms: abstruse, academic, arid, didactic, doctrinaire, donnish, dry, dull, egotistic, erudite, formal, fussy, hairsplitting, learned, nit-picking, ostentatious, overnice, particular, pedagogic, pompous, priggish, punctilious, scholastic, schoolish, sententious, stilted

Pompous is a nice one as is abstruse.

I'm really not but the thought process to want to do this confuses me. But to place it under your model you will have to pick your model up which some people would cry foul.

B2b to me is just that b2b not base under base or base partially under base.

Now putting it under another model since you might not have any choice is ...ok. but again some people are crazy about moving models. Or heck someone even touching their models.

Isn't there a definition of b2b in the rulebook? I am at work so no book for me atm.

[solkan]

There's a point in gaming where you just start putting flat proxy markers under all of your bases so that you can pick up the model and put it back down exactly where it was.  Alternately, put three markers surrounding your model's base, pick it up, and then you can put it back down exactly where you left it.

 

So it's completely reasonable to pick up your model, put a marker where it used to be, and put it back down exactly where it was.

[Thaarup]

...

Isn't there a definition of b2b in the rulebook? I am at work so no book for me atm.

 

From the FAQ/Errata:

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.”

 

So going by the rules I guess it is an option.

[The Godlyness]

See you just broke the game. It defines B2B when concerning models not markers. How is one b2b with a marker its height is 0 and all models are at least height 1. The model/marker are never touching gasp. Oh the pain. But for real yeah you can do it. For what ever perceived advantage.

[Dracomax]

See you just broke the game. It defines B2B when concerning models not markers. How is one b2b with a marker its height is 0 and all models are at least height 1. The model/marker are never touching gasp. Oh the pain. But for real yeah you can do it. For what ever perceived advantage.

That's kind of being pedantic.

Base to base is defined as, loosely, contact with base to base. markers have a base, ht of 0, like terrain. There is no reason that a marker could not be placed there under other than courtesy and lack of thinking 3 dimensionally.

 

That being said, in most cases, it isn't worth doing so, simply because it reduces the amount of range you can place them at, which often means that you can't just move 4 and place one otherwise.

[The Godlyness]

I really need to end parts of posts with /sarcasm. Would make me look less like a waac player or pedagogical. But i thought the "but for real" did that. Guess not. I will be more clear in the future.

[Fenton Crack]

We usually place scheme markers at least partially under the base of the model that is dropping it, especially if there is an a enemy model near by.

 

I assumed most do this, as if you have the marker base to base tangentially and not slightly under, it is likely to get eaten by the subsequent enemy activation.

 

Many models have a Ml range of only 1", so if a 30mm base is about 1.1" in diameter, the enemy model can simply move opposite your model touching the marker, and then use an interact to remove it.

 

The main exception to this preferred placement, as noted by Dracomax, is if we are playing with Wk 4 models that are hoping to lay down markers over consecutive turns.

 

I have never considered this "gamey", but rather just ordinary course of play, and have never had a player upset I lifted a model, anymore than if someone accidentally bumped a piece of terrain with their elbow, had had to reposition it back.

 

 

 

While previous posts were intended sarcastically, there might be players that do feel the concern over a millimeter (or fraction there of) that may be lost one way or another, but the people I play with  are not that "hardcore."

 

In a tournament setting I can imagine a higher level of "concern", but we generally follow the rule that "if it is too close to call, go ahead and do it anyway," as it' a game after all.

 

 

I have never placed a scheme marker under another enemy model though, as an opportunity has not yet arisen where I have even thought it would be beneficial if possible.