phloog

Thanks... I do want to make sure I understand, though, because it SOUNDS to me quirkier than the last couple posts seem to indicate. Realizing most are bored already, I hope you won't mind if I make sure I get this. Scenario 1: Model A has 3" mêlée range, and is (admittedly corner case) BASE to BASE with Model B. A LOS blocking item/creature/thingie is positioned just over two inches away. Scenario 2: Model A has 1" mêlée range, and is (admittedly corner case) BASE to BASE with Model B. A LOS blocking item/creature/thingie is positioned just over two inches away... identical but for the range. Model B walks to behind the LOS blocking feature. In Scenario1: Model B successfully walks to behind the LOS-blocker. Model A gets no opportunity to stop this, even when Model B moves out of engagement range because it does this outside of LOS. In Scenario2: Model B tries to walk to behind the feature, but Model A gets to attempt the disengaging strike because before it gets outside of LOS it has to exit the 1" range. So when you say the shorter ranged model couldn't attack that far in the first place..true, but in the case of disengaging, the short ranged model gets a strike at the 1" point, doesn't it. You're right that it couldn't attack out to the full distance walked, but it gets a strike when the longer ranged model does not. Longer range not only doesn't grant its advantage, but you lose a disengaging strike because of the ruling.

I don't think there should never be a disadvantage to a large range, I just don't think that this particular disadvantage makes sense when I think about it. Presumably a bigger range means "you are a threat to things up to this far away"... this ruling seems to build a weird "attack negation field" in this comparison. But it doesn't break the game for me, and I guess it's no stranger than the mechanism of the move being important (push vs. walk)

Okay, incredibly new and this may have been answered, but I'm confused. IF a model has an engagement range of 3", and is positioned so that this range overlaps some 'feature' that could block LOS, then a target could walk to that feature, out of LOS, and be safe from a disengaging strike? Is the point that the move all occurs within that range and therefore the target is safe? But what if a model is in the same position, enemy as well, and only has a 1" engagement range.... when the target leaves 1" toward the feature, the attack is allowed, right, as they walked out of the range...? So in this case you're penalized for being able to strike at a longer range, because your longer range engulfs blocking 'features'? I'm not sure if I'm confused because I don't understand it or because it doesn't make sense. At no point in my thinking should a smaller range be better than a larger range. Edit: probably needs a visual, but imagine that the 'feature' - wall, tree, giant person... is 2.5 inches away from two models in base to base contact. With a 3" range, the 'target' can escape behind the feature because they never left the range until they were out of LOS. But with a 1" range as soon as the target moves outside that 1" bam.

The big brass arachnid in the plastic Ramos kit wasn't tough to get on the 30mm base -- but only because I immediately gave up and piled various girders and broken pipes onto the base, and had it perched on those. I always have trouble with any multi-piece hair/heads..always seems like I am on the verge of a lobotomy miniature. For me the current toughest is my Spawn Mother, but that's because in the box they gave me two right arms. Hopefully I can resolve this, because I am not good enough with sculpting tools/media to build an entire arm, and bending the duplicate won't work. Two rights apparently made a wrong this time. EDIT: Oops... despite fitting better with that poor joke, I just realized they gave me two left arms, not two right. That's the first error I've had with Wyrd...with Games Workshop it was a never-ending nightmare, but Wyrd has been good to-date.