Lead Adventure Forum
Other Stuff => Workbench => Topic started by: Gabbi on October 16, 2016, 09:02:21 PM
-
I have a small lot of "corner ruins", by various manufacturers. I was thinking if it could be worth basing them, to add rubbles, and maybe arrange some in a destroyed building.
Point is: what should I use to base them onto? MDF seems a nice option, but I don't know where to get it (apart from online) and also looks not so easy to work with (cut into shapes).
I have a nice range of cardboard (up to 1.5mm thick) for papercraft and print'n'play games, but even the thickest kind tend to warp if wet glue or thinned paint is used on it.
-
I use 3mm or 5mm thick plastic advertising signs. I usually pick mine up from ex retail displays for free but you could always search out No Smoking Signs and No Parking signs.
Score the surface before gluing pieces in place - I use a Hot Glue Gun.
Good luck
Tony
-
Point is: what should I use to base them onto?
MDF is a good option but if availability is a problem then there are other options out there. I have based terrain on everything from cardboard to plastic sheet and it all depends on two things. What is available in your area and what works for you. Here are some ideas that can help:
Self adhesive Linoleum floor tiles. They are used for cheap kitchen and bath flooring. If you can find them in a discount store so much the better. They are easy to cut and fairly sturdy.
Cardboard (grey board) is cheap and easy to find. Not so good on wear and tear and they will warp. Things that you can do to mitigate that are to cut the base very close to the contours of your terrain, seal it up well with spray sealer, let it dry completely after each application of glue or paint and use guesso to prime it becasue that shrinks to fit and helps protect it.
Sheet plastic (styreen). Easy to cut but does not take PVA or wood glue well. A good place to ask for free off cuts is at commercial sign making shops. For cheap places to purchase it, look for for sale signs or keep out signs in the shops.
Sheet veneer. Used to add wood grain/designs to furniture or counter top surfaces. It is easy to cut and if you can find it in your local area then pretty cost effective. It will warp so use the same suggestion as for cardboard.
Cork tiles. Usually readily available. It will warp and structurally is not very strong. It will also add some height to the terrain piece.
Cheap place mats. Usually readily available can be made from different materials so that has to be take into account.
This is not an all inclusive list and I am sure that there are others who will be able to give you even more suggestions. There might be an Italian terrain builder who can give you the name of your local shop that carries MDF.
Hope that helps.
Snitchy sends.
-
Wow, nice advice! And -by memory- they're also quite thin, great for basing terrain. Never thought to use signs as base for buildings. Thanks for the suggestion.
-
I've done rather well with plywood from The Woodcrafter...
-
No idea if such things are sold in Italy but here and apparently the US, UK etc a number of craft shops sell MDF table mats and drinks coasters. I think the idea is that the creative person in your life, possibly a child or maiden aunt, will paint them in hideous tones and create permanent tension at the dinner table. They are cheap as chips.
I use them for basing all manner of things and just as often as cutting boards and paint palettes. The table mats I get locally are about 4mm thick, and 21 X 29 cm, which means you can get a decent sized bit of terrain on them. They will take white glue (at the risk of slight warping) or you can use spray adhesive if you want to put a sand base over them.
The coasters are, well, coaster size and useful for individual bits of terrain. They come in both round and square shapes. I've also seen oval shaped place mats, roughly the same size as the rectangular ones.
-
Gabby, where are you from in Italy?
Anyways, my advice is don't base your buildings, find some expedients to have only rubble or destroyed parts joining them if necessary. But a flat surface is not necessary for stability nor for asthetic purposes.
-
Anyways, my advice is don't base your buildings, find some expedients to have only rubble or destroyed parts joining them if necessary. But a flat surface is not necessary for stability nor for asthetic purposes.
Maybe not for aesthetic reasons, but I do base all of mine to give them more solidity and I get to mess around and add some scenic effort to the base to make it look pretty.
;)
-
Maybe not for aesthetic reasons, but I do base all of mine to give them more solidity and I get to mess around and add some scenic effort to the base to make it look pretty.
;)
Solidity - for sure, but it really depends if you are using them in a club, or with your friends at home. The base itself WILL look pretty, but will also limit the applications for the building itself.
Just to be clear, i'm against the flat base acting-as-a-meadow. ^^ That really breaks the supension of disbelief for me. :(
-
Solidity can easily be added internally. Don't actually need a base for that. And if the building itself is made pretty, then it doesn't need help from a base. There may be problems with a nice looking building clashing with a bland table or mat surface, but that's easy to fix by making your next project a terrain mat to match the standard of your buildings.
Basically (ha!), I agree with Sangennaru: buildings are large enough that they don't need (or don't need to need) bases for handling/solidity purposes, and the base creates an awkward visual boundary, as well as a potentially awkward topographical step for mini placement. Buildings without bases look more "natural" and immersive, and are less potentially complicated from a practical setup/play standpoint.
-
I make building bases of a fixed size (roughly A5), and my terrain boards have lift out sections of the same size.
Leave those sections in for a plain board.
Lift out and put building (or field, or swamp) to add a terrain feature.
This way the base of the building is flush with the board - no nasty step.
Of course the buildings can still be used on top of the boards as usual, but then you do see the edge of the base.
I'll try and post some pictures to show what I mean - the river board have cutouts for optional bridges/fords in the same way so they look as though they are in the terrain rather than on it.
-
I make building bases of a fixed size (roughly A5), and my terrain boards have lift out sections of the same size.
Leave those sections in for a plain board.
Lift out and put building (or field, or swamp) to add a terrain feature.
This way the base of the building is flush with the board - no nasty step.
Of course the buildings can still be used on top of the boards as usual, but then you do see the edge of the base.
Oh, that works too! it's actually brilliant when you have a full table done with this approach.
Personally i've far too many projects to invest in such a setup, but if you can that's certainly a badass-solution! :)
I'd be interested in seeing some pics for sure!
-
Until now, I didn't usually base buildings, but I'm start noticing how individual "corner ruins" don't look as a whole building even when placed accordingly to the footprint of a hypothetical building. That's mainly because (imho) paving should change from "outside building" to "inside building", hence my will to base them. More specifically, I've just got for free a bunch of corner ruins from (I think) LotR starter sets. Those are really flimsy and with "negative" emboss of the outher details in the inside, as if they were vacuum formed (they aren't, they're of the usual GW injection plastics). So I think that basing them and adding details and rubble could somewhat make them look better.
-
Until now, I didn't usually base buildings, but I'm start noticing how individual "corner ruins" don't look as a whole building even when placed accordingly to the footprint of a hypothetical building. That's mainly because (imho) paving should change from "outside building" to "inside building", hence my will to base them. More specifically, I've just got for free a bunch of corner ruins from (I think) LotR starter sets. Those are really flimsy and with "negative" emboss of the outher details in the inside, as if they were vacuum formed (they aren't, they're of the usual GW injection plastics). So I think that basing them and adding details and rubble could somewhat make them look better.
That for sure!
However, you might find some exploits to prevent the "step": For example, add the base only in the inside of the perimeter, and cover the pavement change with rubble pieces. Otherwise, add a small stone walkway around the building, that justifies the step.
Long story short, everything but the ground-to-ground discontinuity, IMHO. :)
-
Here are some pictures showing what I mean.
This one is a FIW game. The building with the courtyard is on a base - which sits in a cutout. Likewise some of the fields.
The bridge also sits in cutouts, but the rover in the foreground has blank bank pieces in it - so no ford or bridge
(http://i.imgur.com/DvE5cfr.jpg)
This one is a dark age game, with both a bridge and a ford; there are also fields and a swamp
(http://i.imgur.com/IUToOPT.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/WqyAY4A.jpg)
-
For those of you who complain that basing means that terrain pieces have a step I have a tip for you - chamfer the edges! Crazy, eh?
And yet a step is there. Unless you cut them up to hair-thin edges, while keeping the exact terrain composition both for the table and the building base.
But yeah, i suppose that if you really want to base them, some chamfer could help. Here i'm only discussing the non-necessity of the bases.
As for the "terrain sockets" i really like the idea - and i thought of doing it myself in the past - and it's very well executed, but probably it works better with urban terrain: Especially when you have a concrete table, with "blocks" separated by rims anyway, you can hide the cuts much more easily!
Cheers,
Jack
-
I can see the 'no base' point well enough, but I will stick with basing mine.
If the scheme is consistent then I think the brain can look past them when seeing the table as a whole.
I will use my Old West town as an example, and use the photos that Captain Blood took at BLAM '14 as they are some of the clearest I have.....
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/us1_zps097cb5bc.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/us3_zps316b8135.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/us2_zps39eecfbc.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3090_zps7321704d.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3081_zps3cff0fdb.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3085_zps16bff617.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3061_zps4a8e72da.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3068_zps743d2c3d.jpg)
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x69/pantomaniac/IMG_3066_zps5eec7ac5.jpg)
-
Nothing wrong with basing buildings in my opinion and Masons buildings support my argument. I base all of mine and add clutter, foliage, boxes barrels etc which give character and interest.
Its a debate with no right or wrong answer, just personal preference at the end of the day :)
-
Nothing wrong with basing buildings in my opinion and Masons buildings support my argument. I base all of mine and add clutter, foliage, boxes barrels etc which give character and interest.
Its a debate with no right or wrong answer, just personal preference at the end of the day :)
I also base all of my buildings/terrain. I find it adds to the piece.
Like you I cannot say that either basing or not basing is right or wrong, it is just a personal preference.
Tony