Balewind Vortex measuring from base to base

[James McPherson]

Hi

How do you play measuring from the base on a B.Vortex for the purposes of casting and synergies and hero abilities? Do you measure from the models base up high on the platform (and thus adding several inches) diagonally downwards towards the other base on the ground, or do you measure horizontally from the base of the B.Vortex itself along the ground to the other base?

[Nico]

Those are fine as house rules. I'm just trying to come up with a method that fits within the existing rules and isn't stupidly broken. 

If it came to a choice between not having it at all and having it without the movement effects, I'd take the latter. It's absolutely essential for any debuff spell - so a Daemonsmith can actually hard counter the 40 Savage Orruk archers as it's intended to with -2 to hit for example without having to win a double turn to do so. 

[Arkiham]

This may be the case, but if it isn't nerfed some how it'll be permanently banned in tournaments due to its strength.

Soon as Games-workshop is being slow to release faqs, I feel a community based one should be developed.

Then it doesn't become overpowered and the game is still fun and it's use able for people who don't want to exploit it 

[scrubyandwells]

Re: can you charge a Wizard atop a Balewind Vortex? – a GW community team member said (via their AoS Fb page), "We don't think so - that's how we play it."

Per usual this is an unofficial ruling (maybe they'll ask the rules guys to clarify in a future FAQ), but it's helpful knowing how they play it. 

[Arkiham]

This is why my group uses the house rules I mentioned before. Works really well

[Nico]

It's ambiguous, so i'll stick with the non-overpowered interpretation.

[inunn]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

It's another general FAQ question (Page 2 under Movement Phase) which says that the 3 inch wording only applies in the movement phase (not the charge phase). It might be that they did intend it otherwise, but the wording is identical in the Balewind Scroll.

I think the normal restriction from moving within 3" of an enemy model, referred to in the FAQ, is different to the restriction in the Balewind Vortex scroll.

In the second sentence of the FAQ answer they are talking about the normal restriction that only applies in the movement phase.

The first sentence of the FAQ answer is what makes me think that the restriction mentioned in the scroll also applies to charges and pile-ins.

i think this has the effictive impact that you can't get into melee combat with a wizard on a Balewind Vortex (unless you had a melee weapon with a range greater than 3").

That how I've been playing it but I'd be interested to hear thoughts.

[Nico]

It's another general FAQ question (Page 2 under Movement Phase) which says that the 3 inch wording only applies in the movement phase (not the charge phase). It might be that they did intend it otherwise, but the wording is identical in the Balewind Scroll.

[James McPherson]

4 hours ago, Nico said:

(see the FAQs the 3 inch rule only applies in the movement phase)

I haven't seen the B.wind Vortex in the FAQ?

[inunn]

4 hours ago, Nico said:

As for charging the dude on top

I don't think you can charge a model on top of a Balewind vortex because models can't move within 3" of it. I think that you have to shoot the wizard down.

[Nico]

The model. Not using garrison rules, although that could be a way to house rule it.

[Sadysaneto]

my 2 cents.

 

Are you attacking the vortex or the model?

 

There´s no point to measure to the vortex base, if you attacking the model. Its not like garrisoning, is it?

[Naflem]

3 hours ago, James McPherson said:

I think you are taking what I said a bit too literally. I wouldn't actually make a scenery out of a piece of tin foil and chewing gum. What I'm saying is how do you moderate the height of one if someone decides to build their own. Is the height of a standard GW B.Vortex common knowledge for people to check against as a baseline? Can you tell me what it should be? No? I rest my case then. Its about making it as level playing field as possible, in which case I'd measure from the foot of the B.Vortex. But that's just me.

Since the vortex (or the wild woods for that matter) come into existence from specific spells/abilities, and their dimensions effect the mechanics, I think their physical abilities need to be precisely defined. If I was playing someone I'd expect them to use the gw models to represent these things, or at the very least if they use copies then the dimensions would have to be the same (and that would probably apply more to the wild woods where someone my get a base of gw woods and then use it as a base homebuilt bases for wild woods).  I would feel the same about an opponent putting together a "short" bale wind vortex and pulling it out after they case the spell as I would if they pulled out their special homebuilt dice to roll arcane bolt damage and it turns out the dice doesn't have a "one" on it or something. 

[Arkiham]

56 minutes ago, Nico said:

I probably measure diagonally for that one. As for charging the dude on top (see the FAQs the 3 inch rule only applies in the movement phase) I just do: you need an 8 charge from the outside of the exclusion zone. 3 to get to it and 5 is enough to get within half an inch of the dude. If you can fly, then it's just a 3 to charge. I'd put the charging models in the exclusion zone (or to one side), say they are all in range of the wizard (and vice versa) but nothing else outside of the Balewind area is in melee range. That simplifies and nerfs the Balewind to a sensible level and speeds things up.

ive talked to some people in my group about this method of nerfing while keeping the balewinds viability, we've ruled that.

 

Only flying models can charge the model on top, you cannot climb up air or randomly levitate. allowing foot troops to do so is illogical and breaks immersion. ( we did consider rolling to allow a model to be sucked up the the vortex, but then it ventured into the realms of D&D due to variants in models etc a finding a fair number for different size models etc.)

wizards within unbinding range can attempt to unbind the spell, but it uses a spell allowance. so single spell wizards only get that attempt, nagash or whoever it uses one of their allotment up.

Wizards who are monsters, cannot cast this.

works for us, maybe not for others. 

[Nico]

I probably measure diagonally for that one. As for charging the dude on top (see the FAQs the 3 inch rule only applies in the movement phase) I just do: you need an 8 charge from the outside of the exclusion zone. 3 to get to it and 5 is enough to get within half an inch of the dude. If you can fly, then it's just a 3 to charge. I'd put the charging models in the exclusion zone (or to one side), say they are all in range of the wizard (and vice versa) but nothing else outside of the Balewind area is in melee range. That simplifies and nerfs the Balewind to a sensible level and speeds things up.

[bottle]

1 hour ago, James McPherson said:

I think you are taking what I said a bit too literally. I wouldn't actually make a scenery out of a piece of tin foil and chewing gum. What I'm saying is how do you moderate the height of one if someone decides to build their own. Is the height of a standard GW B.Vortex common knowledge for people to check against as a baseline? Can you tell me what it should be? No? I rest my case then. Its about making it as level playing field as possible, in which case I'd measure from the foot of the B.Vortex. But that's just me.

You're right that I don't know the exact dimensions. That's why I wouldn't play a scratch built one in a competitive game unless the player could show me it's the same dimensions as the the original. In a friendly game, if it looks good, sure - but I would still expect it to be approximately the right size and not 1" off the ground.

[James McPherson]

1 hour ago, bottle said:

If you're going to follow that line of thought, why not glue all your close combat models lying prone on the base so they can't be seen behind low walls? Or even "scratchbuild" a unit of Stormfiends out of tiny blobs of blue-tac on 60mm bases so you can hide them behind your clan rats until the time is right?

If someone wants to use an OP OOP free scenery piece in a competitive game I would fully expect them to have bought the original model and not made one out of chewing gum and tinfoil. Especially if it's different dimensions.

And I would say you still measure from the base of the model on top.

I think you are taking what I said a bit too literally. I wouldn't actually make a scenery out of a piece of tin foil and chewing gum. What I'm saying is how do you moderate the height of one if someone decides to build their own. Is the height of a standard GW B.Vortex common knowledge for people to check against as a baseline? Can you tell me what it should be? No? I rest my case then. Its about making it as level playing field as possible, in which case I'd measure from the foot of the B.Vortex. But that's just me.

[bottle]

8 hours ago, James McPherson said:

yeah that's the common sense way of doing it. But then I could just make a B.Vortex myself out of a piece of tin foil and a bit of chewing gum that is only 1" above the ground, and get a 5" advantage by modeling my own one.

Common sense in that regard would dictate measure from the foot of the base of the b.vortex

If you're going to follow that line of thought, why not glue all your close combat models lying prone on the base so they can't be seen behind low walls? Or even "scratchbuild" a unit of Stormfiends out of tiny blobs of blue-tac on 60mm bases so you can hide them behind your clan rats until the time is right?

If someone wants to use an OP OOP free scenery piece in a competetive game I would fully expect them to have bought the original model and not made one out of chewing gum and tinfoil. Especially if it's different dimensions.

And I would say you still measure from the base of the model on top.

[scrubyandwells]

23 minutes ago, James McPherson said:

yeah that's the common sense way of doing it. But then I could just make a B.Vortex myself out of a piece of tin foil and a bit of chewing gum that is only 1" above the ground, and get a 5" advantage by modeling my own one.

I know it's just an illustrative example, but personally I'd consider that excessively inappropriate and would question someone's (lack of) common sense and manners if they did it (and, at a minimum, it should never pass muster in Matched Play). As more folks realize the value of the Balewind Vortex, we may see more of them on the table, and it should be obvious that any custom work must at least match the vertical footprint of the original terrain piece. The same level of common sense would be expected with citadel wood bases. I would expect everyone to question my sanity if I were throwing down three custom wood bases that are each twice the size of the normal citadel wood bases, and pronouncing, "Here's my Sylvaneth Wyldwood."

[James McPherson]

58 minutes ago, scrubyandwells said:

@Nico might have some thoughts on this. Personally I like how SCGT did vertical measuring. Facehammer GT is following suit. I don't know if it's a rare or common way of doing it, though. See attached.

yeah that's the common sense way of doing it. But then I could just make a B.Vortex myself out of a piece of tin foil and a bit of chewing gum that is only 1" above the ground, and get a 5" advantage by modeling my own one.

Common sense in that regard would dictate measure from the foot of the base of the b.vortex

[James McPherson]

1 hour ago, Arkiham said:

From the model.  the spell/terrain is already incredibly strong, the double range takes most spells into way more range than you need.

 

I've wondered how it affects the silver tower chaos sorcerer, as it doubles range does it then double the range to 36" around the sorcerer. 

I know it doubles the range, I was thinking more about synergy distances and command abilities and objective capturing to be honest. Being within 6" of an objective is harder when you are 7" in the air to begin with. Or using that all important 12" inspiring presence is suddenly going to get tricky.

[scrubyandwells]

@Nico might have some thoughts on this. Personally I like how SCGT did vertical measuring. Facehammer GT is following suit. I don't know if it's a rare or common way of doing it, though. See attached.

[Arkiham]

From the model.  the spell/terrain is already incredibly strong, the double range takes most spells into way more range than you need.

 

I've wondered how it affects the silver tower chaos sorcerer, as it doubles range does it then double the range to 36" around the sorcerer. 

[BaldoBeardo]

Don't recall of there's an official on this - may be in the scenery scrolls - but we just measure from the terrain piece if it's 'active'.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk