Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was a little confused by something I read about the new system coming in.

We are no longer measuring from the base, but the model now.

So....?

Like, say I have a Knight Lancer with a 6" lance which the tip is 4" from the actual model. Am I measuring from this part to gain an extra distance advantage...or from the body of the model?

Well after reading the white dwarf, it just says you are measuring from the model.

But it also says that if there is a discrepancy in the rules, discuss it with your opponent and if you cant reason it out roll a d6 to decide who is right.

It says from the model you would measure. Don't you love GW rules.

hahaha......

Asking to measure from the tip of the lance is well not a great idea, but if you do and you have a 6" move well the tip of the lance should go no further than 6" from its starting point. If some a## measured from the tip of the lance then ended the measuring at the base moving 10" arguement will ensue, I think everyone would have a problem with that. Hell, I have a problem when people start by measuring from the front of the base and end with the rear of the base, ahhhhhh so annoying.

Pretty sure we will just see people measure from base for the sake of it being easy.

Will be measuring from what the rules tell me to. That's what rules are there for.

Yes, do not measure from the base. The rules are very precise now in measuring the closest part of a model to the other closest part of an enemy model for charges and attack range. As per the rules, bases are ignored - in many cases you will be overlapping the bases of your enemies and models in your own unit.

I hate the idea of having bases overlapping. I am not going to let some ham fisted boob destroy all of my basing. Well, I guess that close to 10k points of High Elves will never see the table top again. This is going to cause way too much conflict I feel. I was really hopeful for this edition, I feel that they could have done so much better with this than it is looking like they did.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Pretty sure we will just see people measure from base for the sake of it being easy.

That is the obvious solution.

It's dumb not to measure from the base. It causes a bunch of unnecessarily problems. I'd ignore that rule for simplicity.

This is the kind of game that will only work if players ignore a lot of the official rules and made sensible adjustments.

My Eagles are on scenic bases, putting them quite high above the table. So, unless you have a long spear pointing upwards, it's impossible to get within 0.5 inches of my Eagle!

Aha! They are invincible!

GW rules are just the greatest.

Asking to measure from the tip of the lance is well not a great idea, but if you do and you have a 6" move well the tip of the lance should go no further than 6" from its starting point.

The problem there is the move limit starts to do ridiculous things to your ability to move the model.

Let's say you've got a 4" move. If you've got a spear/pike/lance coming 2 1/2" out the front of the model, then if you pivot around the centre of the model by 90 degrees, you've used almost your entire movement allowance (as the tip has moved 3 1/2" from its starting position) - when if you'd modelled the lance or spear vertically, you've moved virtually no distance.

Any rule set where there is a major rules impact from an artistic modelling decision makes me very nervous.

Personally, I'd go with "don't be stupid" - all right, you're drawing range and movement distances from the model, not the base, but measuring to or from the end of a horses' tail or stream of troll vomit strikes me as up there with drawing line of sight with 40k shooting attacks to the back banner of an otherwise completely obscured space marine.

"Shot in the heraldry" jokes aside, I see that as clearly ridiculous.

Yeah the new rule is real unclear so I'll probably just measure torso to torso of the models/mounts. IMO the least contentious solution unless you scratch someone else's mini... Measuring from weapons is not so good as there are a lot of minis in the ranges in, shall we say, advantageous poses.

Facing has no impact, the rules don't consider it, so the obvious solution to the movement problem is to not rotate models, just move them in a straight line to the finish position. If they end up side or back on to the enemy it doesn't matter apart from aesthetic considerations.

Yeah, these rules are incredibly dumb for several reasons. Trying to actually measure how much movement is used by a rotation seems impossible.

The fact that bases are completely ignored is also dumb. If you have something up high on a flight stand, I will probably have to charge onto your base and get literally under it.

i think most players will ignore both those rules as impractical.

It's not exactly an endorsement of the game that initial reactions are "we are going to have to house rule these broken rules".

The rules are skimpy and defective, however as they are free we can't complain much.

On the plus side, it's easier to house rule and improve a very basic core than a huge complex rulebook.

There is a serious question to be had, though, which is "why not use the models with a different free rule-set that is less broken?".

I'm going to be measuring from the model's feet in any AoS games I play. It's the thing that's most similar to the old, sensible rules and avoids any "sword pointing shenanigans" whilst it still fits in with AoS rules and means not having to worry about models having different bases.

Another sane idea would be to put a mark on the front of each model's base and just do all measurement from that mark.

As long as you measure form the same point each time I don't think there's too much of an issue.

I'm gonna go crazy berserk and just use the base.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
There is a serious question to be had, though, which is "why not use the models with a different free rule-set that is less broken?".

Because they are the official rules and its not supported if you use other rules.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I'm gonna go crazy berserk and just use the base.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
There is a serious question to be had, though, which is "why not use the models with a different free rule-set that is less broken?".

Because they are the official rules and its not supported if you use other rules.

If you're house ruling massive stuff, you're no longer really supported either.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
There is a serious question to be had, though, which is "why not use the models with a different free rule-set that is less broken?".

Yes indeed. In fact I would go further and say why bother using the official models if you don't like them. Use a non-GW ruleset and non-GW figures. It solves a lot of problems.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This is the kind of game that will only work if players ignore a lot of the official rules and made sensible adjustments.

Which is quite a feat in and off itself considering that the rules are 4 pages long!

PhantomViper wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This is the kind of game that will only work if players ignore a lot of the official rules and made sensible adjustments.

Which is quite a feat in and off itself considering that the rules are 4 pages long!

4 pages of rules and you ignore 3 of them. Sounds like a great game to play

You measure from the sky... as it's falling.

 TheWaspinator wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I'm gonna go crazy berserk and just use the base.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
There is a serious question to be had, though, which is "why not use the models with a different free rule-set that is less broken?".

Because they are the official rules and its not supported if you use other rules.

If you're house ruling massive stuff, you're no longer really supported either.

But I can keep buying GW models when they come out, which is the best part and the thing I spend the most time considering.