Damian you are massively extrapolating from the rules as written, the consequences of your stand point are that
1) a model to pass through a tree.
2) a model treats a tree as a less physical object than it does a hobbit
3) models can fit through gaps smaller than their base so balrogs can fit through windows (you are inventing rules to prevent it, therefore your interpretation ALLOWS it)

I have stated the rules as written, the rules as functional, the rules as sense and people are still trying to counter by "he should be able to..."
As such I shall say no more until I hear back from GW. Not because I have lost the arguement but because I think we have reach a gap too small for my base to fit though aka an impass.

Coenus, join me at the pub? No trees or woodland creatures allowed.

I read your post you made good points. I am not sure what you are referring to here. Some of the post are long and make a number of points. Without responding line by line it is impossible to comment.
My point is agree ahead of time what the rule is.You made your point. I may or may not agree but so long as we resolve it before the games starts is what is important. Even if we have to dice for it.

_________________
"the same as a duck you must be made of wood"

I am not extrapolating anything. The text on page 9 is not a rule. The rules begin on page 17 (the clue is on page 15, where it says 'The Rules'). Page 9 is irrelevant

There are no rules to cover a model passing between two vertical barriers (tree trunks, pillars etc) unlike linear obstacles, so it is left entirely to the discretion of the players. Yes this does mean that in theory two players could have a Balrog climb through a small doorway, but you'd hope that nobody would be that daft - and if they were then it would be covered in the pre-game scenery chat.

I can understand players wanting to codify this a little bit, but relying on base size is deeply unsatisfactory as it makes no distinction between slim things like Wargs and bulky things like Cave Trolls. If you want to use base size, then have at it, but don't use page 9 to make out that your house rule is official, it isn't. Player discretion is all that matters.

The suggestion in my previous post was an attempt to use base size in a more satisfactory way than others are suggesting in this thread. I don't think it's the only way to go about it.

The rules for crossing obstacles rely on measuring the model's height in relation to the obstacle. While this is not perfect it is far better than going on base size as it means that there is a difference between things like Cave Trolls and Wargs. You could equally measure the width of the model's body in relation to the gap. This would produce much more satisfying and thematic game situations and is in keeping with existing rules regarding obstacles.

_________________
Titans Wargames Club

http://s10.zetaboards.com/The_Titans/index/

Please read the title and opening sentence of p.8 and then reconsider your statement.
p.8-9 is part of the fundamentals that define this game as not a different game. Re rolls are in there, measuring is in there, line of sight is in there.... models and bases are in there. So to say these are not part of the rules is horribly misguided.

I've always thought of war-games "woodland areas" as reasonably abstracted anyway. Most people can't hope to model every fallen branch, leaf, vine and brush, hence the "in the way" test for shooting through them, even if nothing is physically "in the way".

No disrespect to Old Man Willow (and I have a lot of respect for him, having followed his posts as a stalk… er, "lurker" for quite some time), but I do understand the desire of people who play in tournaments to work out a single "official" ruling on this. That doesn't make you a power gamer, it makes you someone who plays in (very relaxed in the UK) tournaments, where it's unsatisfactory to change the terrain "goal posts" with each new opponent you play. It's much easier if everyone knows how the game is played, and sticks to it.

But I think it's a mistake to take different elements of the rules book and try to "extrapolate" an answer from them as official. If the rules book in ambiguous (as it seems to be) and (at this stage) there is no official FAQ ruling, it's best for each gaming group/meta/tournament circle to settle on a house rule, and stick to it.

_________________
Available for Commissions!

Check out my blog: http://yggdrasilpainting.wix.com/yggdrasilpainting

One thing I love about this game is how intuitive it is. I've been playing with a friend of mine who picked it up straight away; if you charge a man with 3 orcs, the man is probably going to die. If you try to jump over a chasm, there's a chance you'll fall. If you charge someone with cavalry, it's going to hurt more. I don't need to explain all these rules to him up-front because they're all obvious.

So I find this discussion to be a bit silly and frankly disappointing. Common sense should rule above all else; if there's a gap that 3 Treebeards could fit through shoulder-to-shoulder but it's just too tight for his base, then of course he can walk through it. If my friend tried to do that and I told him he couldn't, he'd think I was mad. Don't even get me started on men not being able to go through man-made doorways!

So I find this discussion to be a bit silly and frankly disappointing. Common sense should rule above all else; if there's a gap that 3 Treebeards could fit through shoulder-to-shoulder but it's just too tight for his base, then of course he can walk through it. If my friend tried to do that and I told him he couldn't, he'd think I was mad. Don't even get me started on men not being able to go through man-made doorways![/quote]

Both good points! I believe that there was was a battle report where a Mordor Troll was able to claim an objective which consisted of a statue. literally by standing on it. The consensus was that its a huge monster and could dominate a small piece of scenery.

I have always used common sense in that the width of a low obstacle is not going to prove in anyway inhibitive to something concerned with passing over the top of it. I also have no problem with tree bears base partly resting on a wall.

Common sense is a great way to approach games between sensible adults who have a play-for-fun not a win-at-all-costs attitude.

However, invariably if you play at a club or tournament, you're going to come across a dick who tries to inch-steal and rules lawyer his way to victory.

In those circumstances it's really handy to have a single accepted way of handling a situation, and not leave it to (un)reasonable debate.

_________________
Available for Commissions!

Check out my blog: http://yggdrasilpainting.wix.com/yggdrasilpainting

Ok, here is the "official" response from GW games Dev. This is as official as you can get before an FAQ comes out but I have already been told that this will not be until 2014

A big one ... does woodland creature allow models to pass through trees?
Are trees obstacles which block movement?

1. No. They can move through woodland area terrain with no movement penalty, but cannot pass through the trees themselves.
2. Yes. Trees are solid and must be moved around (which is why you have to make In the Way rolls for the individual trees rather than for them being part of area terrain).

Hopefully we can now move on. If you want further proof I am happy to screen shot my facebook convo with the person. I am friends with both the person who wrote the rules and the current games development team. A lucky position for these kind of arguements I do not hold to be anything special myself so I am happy to bring further proof.

Hopefully we can now move on.

Spanking! Makes sense to me!

I don't think you asked the right question.

You should have asked a question about base size in relation to gaps between obstacles as that has so many more implications beyond large based models in woods.

Better yet, you could have asked: Is the Citadel Miniature of Radagast the Brown on Sleigh able to move freely between the trees in the Citadel Wood or is his base too wide to pass between them?

I suspect the answer would not be:
No, despite being a Woodland Creature, Radagast's sleigh is not compatable with the Citadel Wood set because it's base is too large to fit between the trees. This was a deliberate decision on behalf of the design studio.

I reckon it would be:
Yes, of course he can, it's the model that counts, not his base, just make sure that no part of Radagast Sleigh itself or the Rabbits move through a tree. If you have a Citadel Miniature of Radagast the Brown on Sleigh then the Citadel Wood set is the perfect addition to your gaming table, allowing you to re-create the exciting scenes from the film.

I'm done.

_________________
Titans Wargames Club

http://s10.zetaboards.com/The_Titans/index/

@Damian
So… if you don't think that base size determines movement then what other measure do you consider to be "official".

I'm struggling to think of anything mentioned in the rules other base size. I think it's a fair assumption that if the rules don't specifically mention some other measure of movement allowance, then there isn't one. At least, not one that is relevant to this argument. Certainly, when jumping or leaping the height of the model is mentioned, but nowhere do the rules state or imply that height determines the ability to move between two fixed scenery elements.

It does, however, mention base size in that context, as we've already covered. I'm not sure why you're still arguing. The answer was plain enough, as are it's implications.

_________________
Available for Commissions!

Check out my blog: http://yggdrasilpainting.wix.com/yggdrasilpainting

Hi, please keep it civil and the sarcasm to a minimum or I'll need to lock the thread.

(that's 2…)

Apologies- sarcasm wasn't my intention.

_________________
Available for Commissions!

Check out my blog: http://yggdrasilpainting.wix.com/yggdrasilpainting

FWIW, "officially" I'm sure that base size matters, even if it means Treebeard can no longer enter the Citadel Woods. If base size suddenly doesn't matter for certain models, then we enter into pretty nebulous territory that's hard to adjudicate in a tournament. Maybe they need a new product, Middle Earth Woods, that lets you remove trees to let Ents through

Personally at home I'd let Treebeard or any Ent go wherever he wants in a wooded area, base size be darned, so long as the physical model didn't overlap with another tree. But that would just be a house rule.

Don't worry mertaal, it wasn't you.................

Apologies.


In keeping with all of GWs games, it's not, and never will be, a system designed and optimised for competitive play (which, I admit, may sound odd coming from someone who TOs SBG events). Measuring the width of a gap and the width of your model's body are no more onerous than measuring the height of your model and the height of an obstacle. It makes more sense when your models are prone and their bases are vertical too..........

Now I'm done.

_________________
Titans Wargames Club

http://s10.zetaboards.com/The_Titans/index/

Damian you are continuing to add wishful thinking, though I agree, Radagast SHOULD be able to ride through the woodland and the base the model makers stuck him on is STUPID! but....

GW confirmed a tree is a solid object. I have already shown you where it says that the base is a part of the model. A model cannot pass THROUGH an obstacle. If you cannot accept those three things then the problem is not the rules but your desire to have the models perform certain function which they currently cannot do.

From the view of designing the models. The citadel trees were designed with fantasy and 40k in mind not future hobbit models. The radagast base is just the flyer base for 40k. Shame they didn't make a new base size like they did with old Azog on the White Warg. A slimmer but equally long base would have been much more appropriate imo.

Just returned form a long weekend in Paris and interested to read the new posts



Well that's that then. Whilst it's obviously not 'official' (for anyone who cares about such things) at the very least it is the current games dev team giving a clear and concise answer to the question at hand. Given the response above I don't honestly see how any other interpretation is possible. Nice of the guys in games dev to sent out a temporary fix as well, guess it's who you know eh Cereal?

Personally, when I'm playing games at home, for a laugh, with my mates, (the vast majority of games I'll play) I'd have no issues with Treebeard moving through a wooded area wherever the trees are if it's in the spirit of the game and makes for a fun scenario. For exactly the same reason when playing over Goblin Town terrain we often say you can climb up or down wherever you want, jump wherever you want and leap wherever you want, it's fluffy, it's quicker than the tedium of measuring model height and gap height etc. and it's fun.

However, for tournament games (of which we thankfully have an exponentially growing number here in the UK), where people have paid an entry fee and the results of games 'matter' this issue clearly needed discussion. Any topic/question that generates the kind of mixed reactions/emotions that this one has is clearly in some way a grey area that needed an official ruling. Thankfully GW has provided that ruling and I'd expect to see this appear in the next FAQ and become the standard ruling for tournament play.

Beyond that, play how you want, move how you want and have fun, after all, as a wise man said many pages ago, that is the point.

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569

Those questions don't address the bone of contention here. I don't think anyone disagrees that models can't walk through trees. The question is can models that could obviously fit through gaps do so even if their base is slightly too large. It looks like the general consensus is no, which surprises me, so it'll be a question to ask and clarify at tournaments.

I don't think there is a general consensus. S.C. friends have made a ruling on the GW wood with nothing official till 2014. "The Most Important Rule" and set up terrain in a mutually agreeable manner is unchanged. I build my terrain so that the bases of the models will fit. So I hope this issue will not come up in my games.I have a house rule that covers it in the unlikely event that it does. I hope the official GW tournament organizers will make a ruling that every one can agree to.

_________________
"the same as a duck you must be made of wood"