Talk Fantasy Football

Do Big Guys take up more than one square or do they only occupy 1 square just like any other figure? I tried looking at the GW homepage and the Treeman and Troll bases look a lot bigger than the Halfling and Goblin bases. But there don't seem to be any rules that I saw that talk about them taking more space on the pitch.

I know this is a dumb question, but we're playing with proxies at this point.

1 square.

And its not a dumb question. It has been the subject of many conversations in the past.

Thanks!

The slightly larger base just gives you an excuse to make your own custom pitch with a slightly bigger pass ruler..

Khaine wrote:The slightly larger base just gives you an excuse to make your own custom pitch with a slightly bigger pass ruler..

"Passing ruler?"

I can see Tom Hanks now..

"There's no passing in Big Guy Bloowbowl !"







-League of Thier Own , for those of you who don't get the reference.

Mad Jackal wrote:League of Thier Own , for those of you who don't get the reference.

Thanks, cause I didn't get the reference

Chairface wrote:And its not a dumb question. It has been the subject of many conversations in the past.

Some people get confused because BGs in 2ed used to take up 4 squares. To be honest, I kinda liked that better, they wheren't as easy to manouver and didn't have TZ on the rear, had more of a "large monster" feel. BGs used to be able to step over prone players without having to leap (so prone didn't block their path). Alot of the interesting quirks of the game were lost with the streamlining and simplification that happened with 3ed.

I think the larger round bases work better than the old square ones. They're still a bit large but they work okay.

One reason our league never got rid of them was because of the intercepting rules. If any part of the mini including its base is under that ruler he can intercept.

Dark Lord wrote:One reason our league never got rid of them was because of the intercepting rules. If any part of the mini including its base is under that ruler he can intercept.

Well personally we look at the square the models are in. If any part of the square the model is in is under the range ruler ... No problem with mini placement within their squares.

Eagleflight Paladins wrote:

Dark Lord wrote:One reason our league never got rid of them was because of the intercepting rules. If any part of the mini including its base is under that ruler he can intercept.

Well personally we look at the square the models are in. If any part of the square the model is in is under the range ruler ... No problem with mini placement within their squares.

that's the way it's supposed to be played, eagle. either DL and his group are playing older rules, or they're simply playing it wrong

Ravage wrote:

Eagleflight Paladins wrote:

Dark Lord wrote:One reason our league never got rid of them was because of the intercepting rules. If any part of the mini including its base is under that ruler he can intercept.

Well personally we look at the square the models are in. If any part of the square the model is in is under the range ruler ... No problem with mini placement within their squares.

that's the way it's supposed to be played, eagle. either DL and his group are playing older rules, or they're simply playing it wrong

I can see it now. All of the figs have been coverted to exploit wingspan/arm reach.

"Who needs passblock when the fig's arm reaches across two squares?"

Or the fig who can nearly cover the field alone with pass block because the fig and his arms cover 3 squares.

Or the thrower with the head that reaches 3 fields out because the rulebook talks about "placing the circle on the range ruler over the thrower's head"