"Inside, Outside, Upside Down" Topic

How do your miniatures use buildings in your games?

- Outside (buildings are just blocking terrain)
- Inside (if there are buildings, we are only inside them)
- Outside or Inside (one or the other for a given game)
- Outside and Inside (fighters go in and out of buildings)
- Outside and Roofs (just blocking and elevated terrain)
- Upside Down (option included for completeness, any ideas?)
- And now for something completely different …

Outside and Inside for me.

"TECHNICALLY" inside. For my 18th century game I use for the buildings Lithuanian candle houses. They are expensive $30 USD to $80 USD a piece, but they are exquisitely beautiful and LOOK exactly like building s in the 28th century. I also use hex based terrain. It's not a hex game, but the hexes are merely modeling platforms for the hills, roads etc., The urban hexes with buildings on them have a wooden "lock" underneath to prevent someone from toppling them of the table by an incautious and excited move. When we actually have to fight over them we simply remove the fragile porcelain buildings to the side and fight over the now empy hex, but which is marked by the locks and platforms for the houses.

We developed this from an earlier time when I used cardboard buildings I made from scratch and could put the stands inside them. I never allow troop to be on or "outside the buildings" and even with the cheaper buildings we eventually just moved the buildings out of the way, and when the fighting moved on, put them back.

Works the best for all situations.

Is it wrong that this was what came to mind when I saw the thread title?

YouTube link

My troops use the outsides, insides, and roofs of buildings.

Many of my buildings are made of boxes with lids. I just turn the lid upside down to make the roof; it even has a parapet that way. Then we can take the roof off to see who's inside.

Other buildings, like those made from food containers, don't have removable roofs. If troops are inside (and not hidden), they usually go on the roof, but in a way that makes it obvious that they are not inside -- like on a post-it or other paper. Someday I'll make little roof trays out of old credit cards or something.

Sometimes I cut out the doors and windows. Sometimes I make doors and windows. Some of my favorite doors are sheets of corrugated metal made from coffee cup sleeves from Starbuck's and some other cafes (Peet's uses the same type, I think).

Almost but not quite. We ignore internal detail but have floors, so elevation (to restrict covered fire arcs) and and count windows and doors for restricting the sensible number of men fireing out and fire arcs. No windows or doors and no mouse holes no fireing. You can fire out more from a window but at the loss of cover. We ignore doors for acess as the houses are are way out of groundscale.

In 15mm, just the outside.

John T

Just outside unless it is a ruined building with an obviously useable interior. I own a few Miniature Building Authority pieces, which have fully accessible interiors, but I've honestly never used the interior sections.

When doing space hulk type games it is all about the inside.

@UscCha: I use doors and windows similarly. In addition, crossing a door or window to enter or exit a building has a movement cost (door cheaper than window).

I don't detail the interior of buildings, and just abstract the effects of being indoors. Units move more slowly in interiors than in open ground, and get cover benefits from fire from within the building.

Ok, my answer: All of the above. I use buildings different ways for different types of battles.

One thing I didn't put on my list is often, I will use buildings in an abstract way for modern/post-apoc scenarios. Figures enter a building. On a certain roll of a d6 on a later turn, they can exit from any exit. That simulates the interior complexity of the building without gaming a bunch of details. Basically, you don't know if you will run into things like obstructions, problems, or just getting lost in a maze of cubicles. Or maybe you go strait to the fire exit and run up to the roof in one turn.

If two sides are in the building, each squad (group controlled by the same player) gets a chance that they can fire a pot shot at each other squad.

@ etotheipi: That approach is similar to Advanced Squad Leader's rules for troops moving through sewer systems.

Yeah, it's a good off-board mechanic.

Sewers, however, are one of my fave indoor-only environments. I have six modular sewers ranging from printed paper tiles up to 3D walls on some really nasty water.

I leave the option open to lay down a floor to one side if fighting enters a building. The piece of felt is marked in inches and approximates the shape of the floor. If there is more than a ground floor we can include them if necessary. Usually the buildings form terrain for street fights. Passing through buildings is considered restrictive terrain and you only get the doors that show on the model. That's how I do it right now. In the past I've used buildings more abstractly, sort of like etotheipi describes.

Oberlindes Sol LIC,
we just make moving in buildings (as for difficult terrain) a bit unpredictable. Each time you move in/out or within a building its a 1/2 a D20. Its better than just half speed as it prevents unreasonable co-ordination except at very slow speeds.

Good approach, UshCha. For StarGrunt, I might make movement inside buildings a combat move divided by 2. (Normal move is a fixed number of inches, typically 6 or 8; combat move is 2 dice of that number, so 2d6 or 2d8.)

Oberlindes, 2 Do is significantly less random. Just under half the time you would get a 6 to 8 inch move 16/36 to be precise. 1/2 D12 +1 may be better. We deliberately increased the maximum possible move over and above a nominal controlled move in the open. This can increase disorder which we were looking for. Interestingly Stargrunt II was the inspiration for Maneouver Group. It showed the way but it did have some really obvious flaws. Worst was the quite common failure to do vehic a ls well and the usual failure to be sensible about weapon ranges. It's command and control system were well done. I have all our changes to SGII before we went on to write Maneouver Group if it's of interest.