Figure Bases

[The Grue]

This may be an odd question but as far as I have looked I have not found an answer. 

 

I was wondering if it is necessary to use "round" bases for your miniatures? I know that the "size" of the bases plays a roll as each figure has a different predetermined displacement, but I was curious if you could use other shapes as long as the basic "size" of the base remained the same.

 

As an example: 

• Could you use a 30mm square base as opposed to a 30mm round base?
• Could you use a hexagon base instead of a round base?
• Sound geometric shapes fit together more orderly than round and that was one of the reasons I was curious.
• Also, why do most companies go with "round" bases, not that it is a bad thing as it presents a uniformity that I think is nice but I am not sure if I have ever saw a reason for this, beyond "size" and possibly "orientation/ facing" which you could do with other shapes but it would be harder.

 

Thanks for taking the time reading my inquires.

 

 

As Always,

The Grue

[solkan]

The rules are written for round bases.  If you're going to use square bases, you're going to be way better off painting/etching/enscribing the appropriate circules on the bases and then doing your best to pretend that the square parts of the base don't exist.

 

Malifaux doesn't have facing--every model can see in a complete 360 degrees--so being able to mark orientation/facing simply isn't an issue.  (I've gotten so used to painting forward arcs on bases for games like Warmachine that I've just been painting my Malifaux models with the front arc marked as 360 just so I never forget. "Oh, yeah, facing doesn't matter in this game.")

[The Grue]

It wasn't my intention to make it seem like I was going to use different shape bases and pretend the sharp edges wouldn't exist, and if I came across that way I am sorry. It was more of an observation over looking many different wargames. Warmahordes, Malifaux, Warhammer 40k they all use round bases and I was just wondering if there was a reason for it. (Warmahordes, as you mentioned, does use facing so I guess there is that)

 

It was more of an innocent curiosity than anything else.

 

 

As Always,

The Grue

[Minijunkie]

I believe it's because most people prefer the look of round bases and they make it easier for models to be placed close together in multi-model fights.

[Bengt]

I think the reason round bases are so common is because 40k uses them and they are the market leader. And I think they used them to emphasis the skirmish part as opposed the ranked up nature of their earlier game (WHFB). Square bases are much easier to rank up, especially if you have flimsy movement trays made out of cardboard or whatever that I suspect was really common in the olden days. So with round bases they telegraphed the not ranked part.

 

An aesthetic aspect of the base is that a square/rectangular base invite the viewer to look at the miniature straight on from one of the four edges. While a round base leave the viewer free to chose any angle.

[Dirial]

The distances between models wouldn't be identical, I think. I don't think it would be a huge difference, but strictly speaking, the positioning would change: A square base isn't 30mm in every axis.

[retnab]

Exactly what Dirial said.  Coming from Warmachine (and seeing a lot of the same in this regard in Malifaux) you need to be able to measure exactly from any line between bases for abilities and movement.  If you're using cornered bases then there are going to be spots on the table where you can have three models and even though center-to-center two of the models are exactly the same distance away as the third their base edges may not be and that's kind of not okay.

[solkan]

I have 40k rulebooks back from the era before the bases were standardized as round (there were large models that were sold with the same square bases that Warhammer Fantasy Battle uses).  Square bases or rectangular bases cause troubles when moving that circular bases don't--when you turn a square base around its center, the corners of the base sweep out and cross bases that are touching or near the square base.

 

For as long as I've been reading rule discussions in forums (from about 40k 3rd edition to now), there have been arguments caused by taking a rectangular or oval vehicle, pivoting it 90 degrees, and then trying to figure out whether the vehicle moves its movement rate from where its front side is now or from where it's side was.  Oval bases cause the same argument.

 

So if you're looking for a reason why people use round bases, that's a big one:  Fewer arguments caused by pivoting models.

 

There's a similar reason for measuring distances from base edges instead of base centers--put different models on top of round bases and try to precisely determine the center point of the base, repeatedly, and precisely. 

[The Grue]

Well that all does make sense, and is the first time I have heard people give accurate descriptions as to why the round bases. 

 

So I guess we can scratch off another question off my question list.

 

I thank you all for your responses.

 

 

As Always,

The Grue