Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nathaniel

Round bases in Warlord 2nd Edition

Recommended Posts

So I've been collecting and painting miniatures for a number of years now and I've always preferred round bases. My miniatures are all almost entirely on round bases. Lately I've been putting them on 30mm, 40mm and 40mm warmachine style bases like the ones that come in many/most of the Chronoscape line.

 

And now a friend of mine wants to play Warlord. And I'm not going to switch miniatures over to square bases because I don't like them.

 

What issues will we face in the newest edition of the rules?

 

What about larger models being on 40mm round bases rather than inch and a half squares?

 

What about cavalry being on 50mm round bases rather than 1x2 inch rectangles? Is multiple cavalry ranking up shoulder to shoulder a big part of the game, or will they be fine in a looser formation being on 2 inch round circles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that for the most part round or square isn't too critical of an issue. In most situations you'll be getting similar numbers of models into base to base with either. I think you'd probably have some issues if you mixed round with square, simply because the shapes don't go together too well geometrically.

 

In 2nd edition there are fewer rules related to corners of bases (I think, actually, that corners are no different than sides, unlike in 1st edition), so you're better off in 2nd edition if you want to use round bases.

 

Cavalry - yes, that will really mess with how you can use cavalry. Big deal? Eh, maybe. If your army was all about cavalry and getting lots of them in on regular sized models, it could make that really difficult. If your idea of cavalry is a small group of them operating on the flanks, you ought to find that they still work pretty well.

 

Swing Through is an SA that interacts with "sides of bases" in a way that requires a square or rectangular base. You could house-rule it easy enough. Reach, likewise, will have to be fudged.

 

 

If your gaming is casual I don't anticipate too many problems, but you will have to re-think some things. That's my take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim is correct, there are some SAs like swing-through and reach that will be issues on round bases, some LOS issues will arise as well. For cav, I would suggest oval 'bike' bases instead of larger round ones.

 

It is really a simple matter to cut out the proper sized square bases (from tin, cardstock, thin balsa, &c.) and blue tac them on to the bottom of a round base. I have done something similar with the D&D plastic cursed spirit minis that I use for Spectral Minions. The only problem would be the 30mm round for a 25mm square base, but even that can be fudged with thin chalk lines on the base itself defining the 25mm square area.

 

Hope that helps,

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to investigate getting those oval bases. I have some cavalry miniatures I've been meaning to rebase anyway.

 

For sides of bases, when they are needed, would simply having a mark on the rear of the base and then a template you use off of that to determine the sides work fine? For example, for the MERCS miniature game, you need a ton of different arcs marked, so templates like below can work well:

 

http://3.bp.blogspot...0/Image0623.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot...0/Image0625.jpg

source: http://sync-wargaming.blogspot.com/2011/05/syncs-wargaming-tools.html

 

Would something like that do for the instances when the sides of the base do matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be some problems but as long as you are commonly based there should be no problem. What others mentioned above will be problematic but those templates could work for you. The other thing is the number of models that can fit around a base are different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the point setting was done based on how many models you can bring into base to base contact, so the point values may become slightly off. Also consider that a one inch round base has a smaller area than a one inch square base, and that this has an effect on area of effect spells. Overall if both sides are based similarly and you aren't too bothered about balance then it shouldn't be a problem. If the sides are not based similarly and you guys are competitively minded I imagine that the round bases will give you an edge in some situations and that it won't be popular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to investigate getting those oval bases. I have some cavalry miniatures I've been meaning to rebase anyway.

 

For sides of bases, when they are needed, would simply having a mark on the rear of the base and then a template you use off of that to determine the sides work fine? For example, for the MERCS miniature game, you need a ton of different arcs marked, so templates like below can work well:

 

http://3.bp.blogspot...0/Image0623.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot...0/Image0625.jpg

source: http://sync-wargamin...ming-tools.html

 

Would something like that do for the instances when the sides of the base do matter?

 

 

those templates could work, tracing the 'edge' across the base. the issue becomes practicality of use. are you really gonna move bases away from contact to place the template then move them back ALL the time. I mean, I use rings to mark damage instead of dice because in a scrum, dice get bumped and even when they don't there is this extra 'thing' hanging off the side of a figures base that needs to tracked (now who's die is this?).

 

I would just chalk or paint a small L shape on the bases that are larger than those proscribed for Warlord to designate the 'corners' of the base and imagine the line between those. For those round bases that are the 'same' size, I think the simple/cheap way would be to use cardstock sabots.

 

The less you have to deal with things that are assumed in the game design, like the base size, the better off you will be. Plus, if you EVER want to play someone outside of your group, there would be no real 're-learning' curve as you are both operating under the same rules to start with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could magnetize the base and then use these to indicate the corners.

 

http://www.wargameaccessories.com/Products.htm#Metal%20Bases

 

These are steel bases and their cost is pretty good. Sticking a rare earth magnet on the underside .125" thickness would work fine. You could get all three sizes for a reasonable price. You would only need package of each size and could use them across every army you would make. The 25mm or 1 inch will work with your 30mm rounds because the diagonals of the square bases is greater than 30mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What people in our group do is simply sticky tack their models onto square and cavalry bases temporarily while they play and then remove after the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the point setting was done based on how many models you can bring into base to base contact, so the point values may become slightly off. Also consider that a one inch round base has a smaller area than a one inch square base, and that this has an effect on area of effect spells.

 

 

Well, the 30mm round bases are actually bigger than 1 inch square bases (25mm) so that changes things a bit. When they're spread out, it's easier to catch more in the area. When they're packed together, it's harder. So it ends up being either more or less easy to catch more models under the base.

 

I assume the getting into base to base thing has to do with the corners allowing 8 same sized bases to engage? That could be an issue as round bases will allow 6 rather than 8.

 

I'm also a bit disappointed that the game uses base to base contact. I've been playing so many games where melee range is a measured distance so you don't have to jam your models together to fight in close combat. I find it way easier as you don't have to worry about swords or other things that stick slightly off the base.

 

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/Crusaders/latest/14544

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/Crusaders/latest/14407

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/Crusaders/latest/14299

 

 

those templates could work, tracing the 'edge' across the base. the issue becomes practicality of use. are you really gonna move bases away from contact to place the template then move them back ALL the time.

 

Well, I gather that once you're that close, you can probably just look at the back marker and estimate it. I haven't had any trouble using templates like that, but I've been playing games where you have a melee fighting range (Warmachine, Malifaux, etc.,) so base to base is not necessarily going to happen.

 

I would just chalk or paint a small L shape on the bases that are larger than those proscribed for Warlord to designate the 'corners' of the base and imagine the line between those. For those round bases that are the 'same' size, I think the simple/cheap way would be to use cardstock sabots.

 

You could magnetize the base and then use these to indicate the corners.

 

What people in our group do is simply sticky tack their models onto square and cavalry bases temporarily while they play and then remove after the game.

 

For me it's an aesthetics thing. I think square bases are ugly and I think round bases stuck onto square bases would be even worse.

 

Looks like Warlord might not be for me. I guess it's just not compatible with my basing. And I don't like games where you have to go base to base to get into melee as they're more likely to be hard on the models. I remember the first time I played a game where there were measured melee ranges and a model died and it wasn't a big production to make sure he was extracted without knocking everyone else over because of his base or sword catching a part of another model. I haven't played a game with mandatory base to base close combat since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? It's that big of a deal? Ok. Just so you know many of us play as long as you make base to base get them as close as the models allow. Also magenetizing or card underbases aren't problematic. Also I think you missed the early parts that other than a few special abilities one can play this game how they wish as long as both armies are commonly based. Some of the suggestions we provided were to help you to avoid needing to make rule adjustments. Locally I use my GW based dudes on the steel squares for the dudes on smaller bases.

 

As for the other games you play actual base to base happens all the time. Failure to actually make contact can screw you in some situations. Figures getting tangled up is going to happen in every game. If you're worried about scratching your figures maybe you shouldn't game with them.

 

I think you're missing out on a good game because you've made the bases a mountain when in fact it's an ant hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you cant temporarily sticky tack a square base on it to be able to play, because it would be asthetically unappealing, well, then.. I guess you are right.

 

But, I do appreciate that you at least came and asked about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure I know of a single game out there that does not utilize base to base contact...

 

I know we always play if you get there but can't fit due to the model just get it as close as you can to touching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure I know of a single game out there that does not utilize base to base contact...

 

 

I would have to say that you need to maybe investigate more games. GW's LotR game has a zones of control so no need to base once you are in the zone you are fighting, same with Wyrd's Malifaux, and a host of others (even D&D has figs that can attack you multiple inches away from B2B with melee).

 

So, maybe Warlord is not Nathaniel's game, 'cause he hates square bases or uses minis based such that quick sobots cannot be used. That would be too bad, because Warlord has a good game engine and point system that for most cases works very well and allows good fantasy skirmish play in a reasonable time frame.

 

Nathaniel, is also free to make whatever changes to the rules that he wishes in order to play the game. I think that many of the posts here are just really reminding Nathaniel that if he learns the game with the base modifications he wants, then it will be a slightly different game and he might have issues playing folks outside his group that play straight out of the box (err...book).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks like Warlord might not be for me. I guess it's just not compatible with my basing. And I don't like games where you have to go base to base to get into melee as they're more likely to be hard on the models. I remember the first time I played a game where there were measured melee ranges and a model died and it wasn't a big production to make sure he was extracted without knocking everyone else over because of his base or sword catching a part of another model. I haven't played a game with mandatory base to base close combat since.

 

I like Warlord. It used to be my bread and butter game. Now I play Malifaux and Pulp City more. I understand liking the melee radius and not having to move a bunch of figs to extract a dead guy or worry about messing up a painted figure.

 

I know a guy that has the same aesthetic problem as you. He bought pink foam that was 3/8" thick and carved little 1" circles to set his round bases in. After cutting them out they were slightly larger than a standard 1" base, but not enough to matter. He then just based the rims of the squares to match the basing on the rounds. Granted that is a project that takes time, but so is painting and basing in general.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...