Combat Gauge Video: An Officially Endorsed Measuring from Bases?

[Lissë-Prime]

Did anyone see this video from GW's Official Age of Sigmar Facebook Page?

Shiny, golden thing aside, you can clearly see they are measuring from bases in this video.

So while I can't say it is official that GW intended to announce that they will change the rule to measure from bases, but they did imply firmly for the 2nd time (the first time was that they mentioned the "popular" house rule is measuring from bakers in the General's Handbook).

Pros & Cons of Measuring from Bases has been actively discussed in TGA forums for a while and will be continued for sometimes. IMO GW folks are also prefer measuring from Bases because it's simple, easy and leave a little room to argue (as opposed to measuring from models that players can endlessly argue about what point from the model should they measure from and to).

[BaldoBeardo]

I still think there's a statement from GW coming at some point that simply reads "Ah, ****** it. Measure from bases. And use round bases. Yeah, we know. Cry us a river, neckbeards."

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Arkiham]

It'll happen. This edition was a cross over grace period. 

The next version will be rounds/ovals, an base to base as standard.

 

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

Well the General's Handbook states using base to base measuring is a common thing and theirs competitive tournament The Warlords used it as a house rule. So I take that as pretty official. 

[shinros]

22 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

Well the General's Handbook states using base to base measuring is a common thing and theirs competitive tournament The Warlords used it as a house rule. So I take that as pretty official. 

Pretty much GW said use what ever you think is best. 

[Wraith01]

I saw the video,  didn't really read much into it. They never actually pile on in the shop I go to and have always measured from the bases. 

[BaldoBeardo]

'member rank and file?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[JewelKnightJess]

It's just easier from a gaming perspective anyway to do base to base, no awkward "Well this guy is technically in 1" range because his sword fits over this guy's head even though he's actually 2.5 inches away" stuff. I mean, ok thats technically allowed in the rules but it does feel a bit cheap sometimes.

[Darth Alec]

It's officially endorsed in the sense that it's an officially aknowledged house rule. RaW is model-to-model, but half the point of AoS is play it your own way! GW officially endorses that, which includes measuring base-to-base for some communities. I'd bet a dollar that Robb is a base-to-baser though

 

 

[MightyQwan]

The ability to model you miniatures to gain advantage when wielding Spears, halbeards or any other long weapon makes measuring model to model a headache and will just delay games and annoy TOs who have to mediate these arguments at events. Not sure why they didn't just say base to base to begin with. 

[Enrgie]

I'm with the base to base measurement too. Allows less gaming of the system as it keeps miniatures fairly standardized. I remember a time when crouching Wraithlords were a thing as people modeled for advantage

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

[mldemoss]

Watching the Warlords tournament from a couple of weekends ago, they were measuring from the bases for the tournament. So it is definitely going in that direction. 

[Sleboda]

I just mounted my Thanquol on a 100mm round base because it looks "right" to me.  My savages with the big spear thing are on a round 50 or so because it looks right, too.  No ovals for me because they don't.

 

I'll be one honked off hombre if I get denied a game because I followed the rules that say the bases are not counted so do as ya please.

[Chris Tomlin]

On ‎17‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 7:41 PM, Arkiham said:

It'll happen. This edition was a cross over grace period. 

The next version will be rounds/ovals, an base to base as standard.

 

I also subscribe to this theory. I think what we have at present comes from a desire to try and hold onto WFB players rather than alienating them and "making" them doing anything. "grace period" is a good way of putting it.

[Enrgie]

I just mounted my Thanquol on a 100mm round base because it looks "right" to me.  My savages with the big spear thing are on a round 50 or so because it looks right, too.  No ovals for me because they don't.

 

I'll be one honked off hombre if I get denied a game because I followed the rules that say the bases are not counted so do as ya please.

I definitely would feel the same hence I've not rebased anything that is not repackaged. If they are, I actively seek out the new bases to match only because I reckon this grace period where bases don't matter will change with the next iteration of AoS

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

[Ollie Grimwood]

I don't think it is a grace period. It's  like that because it's much easier to explain for both measuring distance and working out LoS. It takes a couple of sentences. Base to base takes extra clarification if only to add what are correct base size for what model and that's before we get to that cylinder thing based on the height of a model and its base size, which would be a whole extra page at least. 

Of course it is official that players can use house rules. It's right there in the FAQs and GHB. You want to base to base measure go ahead. It also isn't as if there isn't a precedent for variants of the game, Matched play is an optional add on for example. 

[Neil Peckett]

It would be interesting to know what new people, coming to the game fresh, think they are supposed to measure from. i.e. With no preconceptions do you think people think you measure from the base or any point on the model? 

 

20 years of gaming has instilled in me an inability to even *think* about measuring from the model while I am playing - it doesn't even cross my mind! 

 

 

Neil

[rokapoke]

2 hours ago, Neil Peckett said:

It would be interesting to know what new people, coming to the game fresh, think they are supposed to measure from. i.e. With no preconceptions do you think people think you measure from the base or any point on the model? 

I had never done anything like AoS or tabletop gaming until I picked up the starter kit last year. I read the rules, and they say measure to the model. I watched battle reports online, and the earliest ones all specifically said they were house-ruling to measure to the base. I saw the convenience of it and never went back, but it's clear in the written rules what you are "supposed to measure from" according to the letter of the law.

It's also much, much more convenient to use the bases, in my opinion.

[Dez]

Twin linked combat gauge!

[MechaBriZilla]

I think your reading too much into it.  There is (almost) no need for them to ever change the official rule.  The video just acknowledges what we already knew, that the house rule they used in the tournament, is also most likely the most common house rule in the game.  i.e. Measuring from base to base (with round bases as the default).

AoS is all about player options, not hammering us into specific forms of play.  That design is evident from top to bottom.  That's why no points is the starting point in the basic rules, why there are so many battleplans, and so many time of wars rules.  Why codify base to base, or even a specific type of base, when it removes options, and people are already doing it most of the time?  They didn't even feel the need to stick to the letter of the law in their own tournament which, to me at least, is FREAKING AWESOME!  I mean what better way is there to tell us all that the game belongs not to GW but the players?

At most, I think a future version of the rules might do well to call out some of the most popular house rules, i.e. base to base measuring, and use of the standard bases found in the boxes (once all repacks are done and square bases are no longer packaged with any products of course.)  This way they can avoid confusion for folks who are new to the game, and are interested in more structured play over open or narrative. Other than that, there are very few reasons to change that rule sheet, except to fix problems in the mechanics, or provide clearer instruction.

[Enrgie]

I think your reading too much into it.  There is (almost) no need for them to ever change the official rule.  The video just acknowledges what we already knew, that the house rule they used in the tournament, is also most likely the most common house rule in the game.  i.e. Measuring from base to base (with round bases as the default).

AoS is all about player options, not hammering us into specific forms of play.  That design is evident from top to bottom.  That's why no points is the starting point in the basic rules, why there are so many battleplans, and so many time of wars rules.  Why codify base to base, or even a specific type of base, when it removes options, and people are already doing it most of the time?  They didn't even feel the need to stick to the letter of the law in their own tournament which, to me at least, is FREAKING AWESOME!  I mean what better way is there to tell us all that the game belongs not to GW but the players?

At most, I think a future version of the rules might do well to call out some of the most popular house rules, i.e. base to base measuring, and use of the standard bases found in the boxes (once all repacks are done and square bases are no longer packaged with any products of course.)  This way they can avoid confusion for folks who are new to the game, and are interested in more structured play over open or narrative. Other than that, there are very few reasons to change that rule sheet, except to fix problems in the mechanics, or provide clearer instruction.

Amen brother

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

[Veterannoob]

Have my first AoS event in 4 weeks which is m2m. I'll do my best. Not a big deal. But, yeah, they think everyone plays m2m outside the GW store walls, it seems.