PDA

View Full Version : Harbinger, Measuring, and Death Clock



Slivortal
03-20-2014, 12:02 PM
I've been looking through the Ruling archives, and I found no official answer for this. While I appreciate any responses, what I am looking for is specifically an official response to this question for tournament play.

At a tournament using Death Clock. Harby player feats. Non-Harby player goes and attempts to move his model in a fashion that doesn't end with his model being any closer to Harby.
1. Is Harby player required to measure the model before it makes its movement? If not, is the Harby player allowed to use proxy bases? Is the Harby player allowed to force the non-Harby player to use proxy bases? If proxy bases are allowed, why are they?
2. Is the active player allowed to "clock off" to the Harby player while he makes his measurements? If not, why not?

solkan
03-20-2014, 12:18 PM
1. Is Harby player required to measure the model before it makes its movement? If not, is the Harby player allowed to use proxy bases? Is the Harby player allowed to force the non-Harby player to use proxy bases? If proxy bases are allowed, why are they?


You've got the wrong idea about the rules responsibility. It's the responsibility of both players to ensure that the game is played properly. If the players cannot agree on how to properly conduct the game so that all of the rules are followed, the should discuss the matter with the tournament organizer.

Proxy bases can be one of the many possible solutions employed so that the Harbinger's rule is played properly. But there's more than one valid solution, and the choice between mechanism is a sportsmanship question.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 12:24 PM
You've got the wrong idea about the rules responsibility. It's the responsibility of both players to ensure that the game is played properly. If the players cannot agree on how to properly conduct the game so that all of the rules are followed, the should discuss the matter with the tournament organizer.

Proxy bases can be one of the many possible solutions employed so that the Harbinger's rule is played properly. But there's more than one valid solution, and the choice between mechanism is a sportsmanship question.

How is this not a question with a codified answer? Coming from games with fully-fleshed rulesets, I find it surprising that it's considered a matter of sportsmanship whether a player makes a measurement that divulges the range of effect before or after it becomes relevant. If it turns out that Harbinger's CTRL ends 3" before the model, the non-Harby player will probably take advantage of that and end 2-3" forward. If it only takes place after, the non-Harby player is going to be very careful about that POW14 damage roll.

If pre-measuring was allowed I'd understand this answer, but otherwise the way this situation is handled provides a non-trivial benefit for one player (Harby if measure after, non-Harby if measure before). If the non-Harby player knows they're exactly 18" away before, they're going to have a better time eyeballing the distance later.

Also, because it's a "must" effect, if a player moves a model that they aren't sure is in Harby's CTRL, can they "force" the Harby player to make the measurement? This seems ripe for abuse if a player starts moving models that are close to but not quite in Harby's CTRL, forcing the Harby player to start revealing the full extent of their CTRL area.

midas
03-20-2014, 12:26 PM
The Judge has the final saying on it, Proxy bases are merely an aid and should be avoided. Generally, it is required to use the models on their corresponding base (with arc markings). I would suggest that the non-Harbinger (lets call him opponent) player declares if he moves closer to the Harbinger, unless it is obvious.
1) Since control area can be measured at any time, this would be a good way to be sure imho. Have the Harbinger player put his tape over the model in measurement of his control range whenever the opponent makes his moves.
2)You normally "clock off" when the turn ends or when a dispute has to be judged, but Page5 also says to "win graciously and loose valiantly", there is no reason for the Harbinger player to delay his opponent with measurement. In that case DO call the judge.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 12:30 PM
The Judge has the final saying on it, Proxy bases are merely an aid and should be avoided. Generally, it is required to use the models on their corresponding base (with arc markings). I would suggest that the non-Harbinger (lets call him opponent) player declares if he moves closer to the Harbinger, unless it is obvious.

I assume you mean "unless it is not obvious"?


2)You normally "clock off" when the turn ends or when a dispute has to be judged, but Page5 also says to "win graciously and loose valiantly", there is no reason for the Harbinger player to delay his opponent with measurement. In that case DO call the judge.

What about:

When a player moves a model, rolls dice, marks damage, or takes time to make decisions during the other player’s turn, the player whose turn it is has the option of switching the clock to his opponent’s time while these actions are resolved. This rule is present for the sake of time equity versus action and should not be abused.

Grey Templar
03-20-2014, 12:43 PM
I always put a marker down to indicate the models original position, finish moving it, then resolve feat by taking measurements.

dungeongod
03-20-2014, 12:45 PM
The way I have ruled this (and I am not a judge, infernal, or Hacksaw, so take that for what it is worth) is that the Harbinger player measures before/after every opponent move if they want to take advantage of the feat (barring cases of "This model charges Harbinger from 9" away) situations.

If the opponent wants to clock over to the Harbinger player during the measurements, that is fine - that is why it is a chess clock, after all. If the Harbinger player is quick about the measure, it shouldn't impact their game time in any significant way.

If there is a particularly tricky situation, it might be worth calling a judge over for the measurement (i.e. opponent is trying to move Caine with no focus parallel to the Harbinger).

midas
03-20-2014, 12:47 PM
I assume you mean "unless it is not obvious"?
same difference :)


What about: Post by STEAMROLLER 2014
... This rule is present for the sake of time equity versus action and should not be abused.
removed the irrelevant bits
Do you "clock off" to check if your opponent correctly marks off damage? The way it is played over here is, the active player making all his game actions while his clock is running, a "clock off" is only done if a dispute or complicated interaction with the inactive player is resolved (rules check, complicated counter charge or models being bowling-balled around en masse). The clock is not stopped for tough checks or damage marking. In the later case it is assumed to be marked off correctly, a mutual agreement, since you could also potentially cheat. A tournament player normally knows how many boxes the enemy has, so there is actually more than mere mutual trust involved. If you suspect cheating, ask a Judge to watch.

dungeongod
03-20-2014, 12:51 PM
Do you "clock off" to check if your opponent correctly marks off damage?

I have done this if an opponent is taking too long - as well as tough rolls (I have seen players take 10-20 seconds to roll a single tough roll, I wish I was exaggerating...).

In this case, the measurements could be somewhat complex and time consuming. Since it is the Harbinger's feat forcing the measurements, I would argue the time is on the Harbinger player's clock. Similar to a player playing Haley2 - if they are taking any time at all to choose what is next, it is on their clock. If you are fast enough on the measurement, it being on one clock or the other won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

SageofLodoss
03-20-2014, 12:52 PM
What about:

Measuring Control area is not included in that. The Harbinger player is not making any decisions so you shouldn't be switching the clock while you're determining if you've triggered her feat or not. You could quickly switch the clock for the damage rolls involved in the feat, though you need to be on top of this and most people only do this if the Harby player is taking a long time with their dice.

As to the issue of determining if Harby's feat is triggered or not, both players are responsible for ensuring the rules are played out correctly. The cleanest way to do this is:

1) You declare you're going to move a model
2) Harby player measures control area to determine distance.
3) You move the model to where you want to
4) Harby player measures control are ato determine distance. The two are compared to determine if feat was triggered or not.

There are of course times when you obviously know that you're taking it, in which case you just move up and say "ok, roll." If you intent is to try to see if you can move in a way that lets you not take the POW 14, then either the above method or proxy bases are options for resolving things neatly. The reason you sometimes see Proxy bases used in tournament games that are streamed online is that it allows the active player to set up their intended destination while also marking their original position, then the Harby player can quickly measure control range to both and get a determination right on the spot.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 12:54 PM
removed the irrelevant bits
Do you "clock off" to check if your opponent correctly marks off damage? The way it is played over here is, the active player making all his game actions while his clock is running, a "clock off" is only done if a dispute or complicated interaction with the inactive player is resolved (rules check, complicated counter charge or models being bowling-balled around en masse). The clock is not stopped for tough checks or damage marking. In the later case it is assumed to be marked off correctly, a mutual agreement, since you could also potentially cheat. A tournament player normally knows how many boxes the enemy has, so there is actually more than mere mutual trust involved. If you suspect cheating, ask a Judge to watch.

But the rest is completely relevant. Let's say there's 1 minute left in your assassination run, and you can kill your opponent in 50 seconds by rapidly making 6 attacks. However, your opponent will take a total of 20 seconds to mark damage, make tough rolls, etc. Should you effectively concede even though you can win in the amount of time given to you?

Relevant link (to PP's official YouTube channel, Iron Gauntlet 2013 finals: http://youtu.be/b9tMezNxbPg?t=1h35m38s)

vintersbastard
03-20-2014, 12:59 PM
The first issue has been discussed to death already here (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?185879-Harbinger-feat&p=2414925&viewfull=1#post2414925).

Is there a particular reason why people can't read threads from three months ago?

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 01:03 PM
In this case, the measurements could be somewhat complex and time consuming. Since it is the Harbinger's feat forcing the measurements, I would argue the time is on the Harbinger player's clock. Similar to a player playing Haley2 - if they are taking any time at all to choose what is next, it is on their clock. If you are fast enough on the measurement, it being on one clock or the other won't matter in the grand scheme of things.


Measuring Control area is not included in that. The Harbinger player is not making any decisions so you shouldn't be switching the clock while you're determining if you've triggered her feat or not. You could quickly switch the clock for the damage rolls involved in the feat, though you need to be on top of this and most people only do this if the Harby player is taking a long time with their dice.

As to the issue of determining if Harby's feat is triggered or not, both players are responsible for ensuring the rules are played out correctly. The cleanest way to do this is:

1) You declare you're going to move a model
2) Harby player measures control area to determine distance.
3) You move the model to where you want to
4) Harby player measures control are ato determine distance. The two are compared to determine if feat was triggered or not.

There are of course times when you obviously know that you're taking it, in which case you just move up and say "ok, roll." If you intent is to try to see if you can move in a way that lets you not take the POW 14, then either the above method or proxy bases are options for resolving things neatly. The reason you sometimes see Proxy bases used in tournament games that are streamed online is that it allows the active player to set up their intended destination while also marking their original position, then the Harby player can quickly measure control range to both and get a determination right on the spot.

My question is, which is it for each of these scenarios? As my link above noted, high-level play shouldn't have such matters up to the whim of the judge or PG on-hand at the time; that's why I hope I can get a concise, well-reasoned answer. Good sportsmanship etc. sounds really nice, but you're dealing with a game when two players are playing to win, and want to play as closely to the rules as possible.


The first issue has been discussed to death already here (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?185879-Harbinger-feat&p=2414925&viewfull=1#post2414925).

Is there a particular reason why people can't read threads from three months ago?

That's one of the threads I read, but the Infernal that ended the discussion came to no conclusion; he said that the measurement is public, but not whether it had to be done before or after. I'm not looking for discussions; I'm looking for answers.

Is there a particular reason why people can't provide me with threads that actually answer the question I ask?

Celebros
03-20-2014, 01:08 PM
That's one of the threads I read, but the Infernal that ended the discussion came to no conclusion; he said that the measurement is public, but not whether it had to be done before or after. I'm not looking for discussions; I'm looking for answers.

If you read the specific post the link goes to (of which Valander confirms is correct) does indeed state that the measuring needs to be made both before and after movement.

Also, there is no way to accurately determine if a model moved closer to Harbinger without the initial measurement.

midas
03-20-2014, 01:10 PM
The way I have ruled this (and I am not a judge, infernal, or Hacksaw, so take that for what it is worth) is that the Harbinger player measures before/after every opponent move if they want to take advantage of the feat (barring cases of "This model charges Harbinger from 9" away) situations.

I see where you and Slivortal are heading to. You mean, what if the opponent accidentally triggers the feat, and should the entire resolution be intentionally set up in such a way that this is indeed a possible occurrence.
I think Page5 point 4 covers this surprisingly well:

...it is a self awareness of what we are doing, why we are doing it, ... This to me, means that, decisions in the game are made consciously and in full awareness of the consequences and intentions. So, in this case, if the opponent wants to skirt around the feats AOE, he should be able to do so (provided no other rules are broken).
Even the dumbest grunt is not going to overlook that floating chick over there who currently has a strong resemblance to an Australian bush-fire, roasting everything that comes too close.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 01:10 PM
If you read the specific post the link goes to (of which Valander confirms is correct) does indeed state that the measuring needs to be made both before and after movement.

Oh, sorry, I didn't see that Valander confirmed the answer. So the Harby player does need to pre-measure your spot. What about the second question though, concerning clocking off? Considering that the Harbinger player is the measuring player, simply relying on that player to return the clock to you in a timely fashion seems to be a system ripe for abuse.


I see where you and Slivortal are heading to. You mean, what if the opponent accidentally triggers the feat, and should the entire resolution be intentionally set up in such a way that this is indeed a possible occurrence.
I think Page5 point 4 covers this surprisingly well:
This to me, means that, decisions in the game are made consciously and in full awareness of the consequences and intentions. So, in this case, if the opponent wants to skirt around the feats AOE, he should be able to do so (provided no other rules are broken).
Even the dumbest grunt is not going to overlook that floating chick over there who currently has a strong resemblance to an Australian bush-fire, roasting everything that comes too close.

If this is really true then my question is answered, as you will always have your opponent's intention will always be to move forward or not. It would have to be an extremely rare circumstance involving points of interest (models to be attacked, scenario objectives) on the edge of a circular arc with an opposing model in question to have actual measurement even have to come into play.

Something leads me to believe the actual answer isn't quite so simple, though...

midas
03-20-2014, 01:27 PM
But the rest is completely relevant. Let's say there's 1 minute left in your assassination run, and you can kill your opponent in 50 seconds by rapidly making 6 attacks. However, your opponent will take a total of 20 seconds to mark damage, make tough rolls, etc. Should you effectively concede even though you can win in the amount of time given to you?

Relevant link (to PP's official YouTube channel, Iron Gauntlet 2013 finals: http://youtu.be/b9tMezNxbPg?t=1h35m38s)
If you look at it from a neutral point of view, the clock has the potential to favor each of the two players equally.
If you opponent is delaying on purpose, again, DO call a judge. Also, if you think that it is more beneficial to interrupt your own stride in order to have your opponent do his stuff, you are allowed to do so. IMHO, in practice, you will see that it is not practical and less beneficial then you assume.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 01:39 PM
If you look at it from a neutral point of view, the clock has the potential to favor each of the two players equally.
If you opponent is delaying on purpose, again, DO call a judge. Also, if you think that it is more beneficial to interrupt your own stride in order to have your opponent do his stuff, you are allowed to do so. IMHO, in practice, you will see that it is not practical and less beneficial then you assume.

I'm sure for most of the time, but let's say it takes 10-15 seconds to make the measurements for an individual model, including proxy bases and whatever. Across 30 models, that's a full 5 to 7.5 minutes, not taking into account remeasuring, dice rolling, damage calculating, etc. Games are certainly won or lost across that amount of time (7 to 10 minutes) when you're playing with one of the most attrition-heavy casters in the game.

And the clock is "neutral" to a certain extent, but I don't think you're seriously making the argument that a player should lose on his opponent's poor management of the clock. And in this scenario, the decision can heavily favor the Harby player, who can theoretically start with a significant time advantage just dependent on caster choice.

Mod_Redphantasm
03-20-2014, 02:01 PM
I'm sure for most of the time, but let's say it takes 10-15 seconds to make the measurements for an individual model, including proxy bases and whatever. Across 30 models, that's a full 5 to 7.5 minutes, not taking into account remeasuring, dice rolling, damage calculating, etc. Games are certainly won or lost across that amount of time (7 to 10 minutes) when you're playing with one of the most attrition-heavy casters in the game.

And the clock is "neutral" to a certain extent, but I don't think you're seriously making the argument that a player should lose on his opponent's poor management of the clock. And in this scenario, the decision can heavily favor the Harby player, who can theoretically start with a significant time advantage just dependent on caster choice.

If you feel a players actions, individual or in sum, will take a significant part of your clock during which you are doing nothing you may switch the clock over to them during these actions, after which they will switch it back over to you. In my opinion this ends up eating a lot of time as every switch breaks the stride. But playing against the clock is something you do for tournaments, and must be prepared for.

It is the responsibility of both players to play within the rules and in a sportsman like manner. If these conditions are not being met, you should call a Judge to resolve the issue.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 02:35 PM
If you feel a players actions, individual or in sum, will take a significant part of your clock during which you are doing nothing you may switch the clock over to them during these actions, after which they will switch it back over to you. In my opinion this ends up eating a lot of time as every switch breaks the stride. But playing against the clock is something you do for tournaments, and must be prepared for.

It is the responsibility of both players to play within the rules and in a sportsman like manner. If these conditions are not being met, you should call a Judge to resolve the issue.

Thanks for the rulings everyone. Just to clarify:
1. Yes, Harby player must measure CTRL to models affected by the feat after before they make their move (but after they've declared their intent to move).
2. Yes, Harby's measurements must be done on Harby player's own time if requested.

Is this correct?

Living Impaired
03-20-2014, 04:41 PM
Really under the Harbingers feat you should be asking yourself, will this model die if I move it closer, if yes then do I gain anything from shuffling it sideways, if the answer is no then don't move it.

Slivortal
03-20-2014, 05:44 PM
Really under the Harbingers feat you should be asking yourself, will this model die if I move it closer, if yes then do I gain anything from shuffling it sideways, if the answer is no then don't move it.

Of course, but it could be important for toeing a zone, engaging enemies on a flank, etc. I know it can seem like a corner-case scenario, but Harby's a popular caster, and it's pretty important when it does happen.

dungeongod
03-20-2014, 09:08 PM
Thanks for the rulings everyone. Just to clarify:
1. Yes, Harby player must measure CTRL to models affected by the feat after before they make their move (but after they've declared their intent to move).
2. Yes, Harby's measurements must be done on Harby player's own time if requested.

Is this correct?

That is how I have always ruled it, and seen it done. :)

Groslon
03-21-2014, 04:27 AM
In our gaming group we have always measured (before and after moves) on the opponent's clock since they are making the decisions. Then we mark all models that incur a damage roll. Then we switch the clock over to Harby to make the damage rolls. This is done on a per unit/solo basis.

So if my opponent wanted to move a pile of IFP up, he would make all of the measurements and we would mark the models that incur damage, as they complete their individual moves, until he had moved the entire unit. We would then clock over, make the damage rolls, and clock back. Then he would take whatever actions he wanted with his models. Solos, 'Jack/'Beasts, and 'Casters get a similar treatment.

Are we doing this wrong?

Grey Templar
03-21-2014, 08:33 AM
Technically yes that is wrong. The IFP would take the hit before the other models moved into position(so no benefiting from shield wall)

You can do that to expedite resolving it and just treat them as not being in base to base for any rules that matter.

Groslon
03-21-2014, 10:30 AM
But other than that point, is the process correct?

Specifically, I am curious as to the process for determining clock time. So far we have clocked whoever is making decisions. If the opponent is moving his models then we use his clock. If I'm rolling damage we use my clock. So far we have done all measuring (range to Harby before and after moves, as well as distance travelled) on his clock because it is his option to move his models. Usually I find that spending a few moments of discussion at the beginning of the game is worth all of the time in the world once the clock is ticking. If both players are alert and prepared the measurements are very quick.


(For that specific example we would resolve the damage rolls in the order they were incurred, and remove models accordingly to determine relevant benefits. If the opponent wanted to put a model into a certain place, and was willing to throw bodies into the fire until one lives, we would resolve the moves and damage in an alternating fashion, of course.)

dungeongod
03-21-2014, 10:43 AM
I think the range check is fine on either clock, but if the opponent WITH harbinger is taking a long time to measure, then it is OK to switch the clock over, IMO

Slivortal
04-01-2014, 12:56 PM
So far we have done all measuring (range to Harby before and after moves, as well as distance travelled) on his clock because it is his option to move his models. Usually I find that spending a few moments of discussion at the beginning of the game is worth all of the time in the world once the clock is ticking. If both players are alert and prepared the measurements are very quick.

This is a very dangerous line of reasoning, though. It may be his option to move his models, but it is your effect that is generating the need for the measurement. If I charge a model along a line that could potentially incur free strikes, I see no reason why you wouldn't flip the clock over to your opponent if he starts measuring his reach range to see if he gets those free strikes. Taking this reasoning further, wouldn't we also make the die rolls on the non-Harby player's clock because it was his fault for moving the models?

The fact that moving the models triggers the feat is irrelevant in the same fashion that moving your models trigger enemy free strikes. If non-Harby player is forced to sit through their opponent measuring on their clock, I don't really see the point of using a chess clock in the first place (the point of a chess clock being to punish and reward players for their own clock management).

Sycak
04-01-2014, 01:30 PM
I see no reason why you wouldn't flip the clock over to your opponent if he starts measuring his reach range to see if he gets those free strikes.

Why? I can measure the melee range of my models at anytime. During your turn or my turn.

Mr. Golden Deal
04-01-2014, 01:32 PM
Why? I can measure the melee range of my models at anytime. During your turn or my turn.
Sure, you can measure your melee range whenever you want, but if you're impeding the other player's turn by doing so they have the right to flip the time over to you.

Slivortal
04-01-2014, 08:50 PM
Sure, you can measure your melee range whenever you want, but if you're impeding the other player's turn by doing so they have the right to flip the time over to you.

Exactly. If a Harbinger player's measuring prevents me from continuing on with my turn, I see no reason why I can't flip the clock.

Pixl
04-01-2014, 11:02 PM
In steamroller (pg 4):

"When a player moves a model, rolls dice, or takes time to
make decisions during the other player’s turn, the player
whose turn it is can choose to stop the clock while these
actions are resolved."

There is nothing under death clock (pg 9) that changes this, death clock only changes how your time is measured and that there is no dice down called in the end. All the other rules for the game is still in effect, so when someone does something on your turn, you STOP the clock.



As for Harbingers feat, if you do not measure before any movement of a opponents model you can NEVER say for sure if they ended closer or not, I know that this is really picky, but just a millimeter or two is enough to give someone a POW 14 hit and it can really affect the whole game. Not even with proxy bases as it is virtually impossible to put down a base in the exact same place. As her feat say they suffer a hit they will, it is not optional. That means if they don't take the damage the game is in an error state as they are required to do so. So to make absolutely sure that the game does not end up in an error state you HAVE to measure a models location both before and after movement.

lord tyrant watt
04-02-2014, 04:44 AM
While no where in the rules, I've found the easiest/fastest way to get through The Harbingers feat turn is with proxy bases.

Harbinger player feats and passes turn.

Non-Harbinger player declares movement of a model. Leaves the original model in its place and grabs a proxy base and places it where they want to end their movement.

Flip clock.

Harbinger player measures to the model and then measures to the proxy base. If a pow 14 occurs it's rolled while the Harby player has the clock.

Flip time...rinse and repeat. It's simple, clean and the clock stays correct.

Celeb
04-02-2014, 04:59 AM
In steamroller (pg 4):

"When a player moves a model, rolls dice, or takes time to
make decisions during the other player’s turn, the player
whose turn it is can choose to stop the clock while these
actions are resolved."

There is nothing under death clock (pg 9) that changes this, death clock only changes how your time is measured and that there is no dice down called in the end. All the other rules for the game is still in effect, so when someone does something on your turn, you STOP the clock.




You have to look at pg 10 of Steamroller, which is still deathclock rules:


When a player
moves a model, rolls dice, marks damage, or takes time to
make decisions during the other player’s turn, the player
whose turn it is has the option of switching the clock to his
opponent’s time while these actions are resolved.

mattolordlights
04-02-2014, 05:05 AM
Checking range shouldn't switch back to your opponents time, he's doing you a favor by measuring both ranges, previous range, because he technically doesn't have to measure it until the end of a models movement as stated on harbys card. No where does it state that "you have to measure both spots", imo it give's the harby player an unfair advantage if your requesting him to measure before/after ranges because you can simply check ranges and so forth.

Final thoughts:

You know if your going closer to harby or not, if you push your model forward or at a slant towards harby, your taking the pow 14s and you as the player should be conscious of that. Only exception of the proxy base combo is if the models at the edge of the feat and thats even debatable for me.

Word of advice:

If your playing kill box with harby and have zero models with immune to fire, cast what ever defense spell you have and pas the turn.

Caladian
04-02-2014, 05:08 AM
Actually, you do have to measure both spots, because without a precise measurement beforehand there is no verifiable evidence that the model moved closer. mattolordlights, read above they ruled on that already.

WintersChill
04-02-2014, 05:34 AM
without a precise measurement beforehand there is no verifiable evidence that the model moved closer.

Correct. If you want to be sure, you need to measure before you move your models.



While no where in the rules, I've found the easiest/fastest way to get through The Harbingers feat turn is with proxy bases.

Harbinger player feats and passes turn.

Non-Harbinger player declares movement of a model. Leaves the original model in its place and grabs a proxy base and places it where they want to end their movement.

Flip clock.

Harbinger player measures to the model and then measures to the proxy base. If a pow 14 occurs it's rolled while the Harby player has the clock.

Flip time...rinse and repeat. It's simple, clean and the clock stays correct.

This is a good procedure.

(Please note that appropriate proxy base use is outside the scope of this topic but must also be followed).

DarthWinrod
04-02-2014, 09:35 AM
Can you have the Harby player measure the control area so you can stay outside of the control area?

Celebros
04-02-2014, 09:41 AM
Can you have the Harby player measure the control area so you can stay outside of the control area?

You can ask them to, but they are not required to do so.

Noddin_Dog
04-02-2014, 11:18 AM
While no where in the rules, I've found the easiest/fastest way to get through The Harbingers feat turn is with proxy bases.

Harbinger player feats and passes turn.

Non-Harbinger player declares movement of a model. Leaves the original model in its place and grabs a proxy base and places it where they want to end their movement.

Flip clock.

Harbinger player measures to the model and then measures to the proxy base. If a pow 14 occurs it's rolled while the Harby player has the clock.

Flip time...rinse and repeat. It's simple, clean and the clock stays correct.

This should be written into the Rules about how it should be done!!!

I use this method and I also provide my opponent the bases!

MouseC
04-02-2014, 11:30 AM
I have never had an issue with a Harbringer opponent. Each time i've seen them feat, and I've asked "May I mark your control zone with my dice on my clock?" Every opponent in every steam roller i've ever played in has answered "yes." I've always seen it as a very sportsman like way to handle the issues. It removes any grey zone, its on my time as its my question and takes a action of more then a few moments.

So basically : Harby feats. Flips clock to me. I use my own spare dice to mark the control. We agree on the zone and flip back. Immediately my opponent and I both know what models are affected. The game continues. This takes all of 10 seconds as the Harby opponent does the fan of the zone. Since in the rules all measurements are shared between opponents, its a open book method, its on my clock. I've never Deathclocked myself.

The game is competitive, but meant to be sportsman like. If your opponent is taking a long time with marking damage ( I have also experience the 30 seconds to mark damage on a Warjack ). The first time, I warn my opponent I will flip the clock to them if they take a significant time. The second time, I flip the clock. As always, a TO at an event makes the final call if needed.

Mr. Golden Deal
04-02-2014, 04:47 PM
There is no zone, though. The Harbinger player has no requirement to show their entire control area to you - you measure as it's required (when you go to move your models) and that's it.