Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, what are people's opinions on the base sizes of the new Tervigon, Tyranofex and Harpy? My thought would be since `Fexes and Tyrants have four wounds and are on 60mm, and the Trygons and Mawlocs have six wounds and are on the large ovals, then the four wound Harpy would be on a 60mm an the six wound Tervigon and Tyranofex would be on a large oval.

I'm a little puzzled as to why you think it would have anything to do with how many wounds they have, rather than simply how big they are...

Typically stuff that's bigger has more wounds, so I'm using that stat as a system of measurement of their general size.

You put them on whatever base the model comes with.

If there's no official model, you hope your opponent isn't TFG, or in the case of a tournament you contact the TO in advance and ask.

If there are no official models, do what you like, but be prudent. What you've got there sounds fine and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who wouldn't play with you.

In terms of RAW, I don't think there are any rules about scratchbuilt models, so you have to use your discretion.

I thought about this too, there are going to be 2 base sizes for MCs. The round 60mm that comes with the carnifex and hive tyrant, and the oval 100mm x 120mm that comes with the tygon/mawloc. From what i've read so far, the Tervigon and Tyranofex (per fluff) are bigger than a carnifex, so I personally will put those on the oval trygon base, the Harpy sounds like the best would be to put it on the round base. Even for modeling purposes, it looks like from the pictures available the Tervigon and Tyranofex use the back legs of a fex, and a larger torso, hunched over, using scything claws arms as 'feet'. So they are going to be longer and have more girth than the current fex model.

Aduro wrote:Typically stuff that's bigger has more wounds, so I'm using that stat as a system of measurement of their general size.

Yes, because Terminators with 1 wound are on smaller bases than Space Marine Captains with 3. </Sarcasm>

Well, in the Tyrannid Codex anyway.

No comment on the space marines.

Pika_power wrote:If there are no official models, do what you like, but be prudent. What you've got there sounds fine and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who wouldn't play with you.

In terms of RAW, I don't think there are any rules about scratchbuilt models, so you have to use your discretion.

There aren't "rules," but there is precedent. If you look in the hobby section of the big book you will find a picture with the caption "A scratchbuilt Ork Deffkopta using spare bits and plasticard." The "deffkopta" doesn't even have blades. That says to me that if it's similar size, can serve the same purpose, is GW bits and WYSIWYG then it's "legal."

GWAR Has a good point: My SoB Canoness has 50% more wounds than her 'Palatine' underling. Can i therefore put her on a 50% bigger base? Chances are, my opponent will tell me i can't.

If GW doesn't produce a model for something in the upcoming tyranid codex, don't be surprised if your opponent tells you you're gaining an unfair advantage by using a larger base for your MC's until the faq comes out

Maxus wrote:I thought about this too, there are going to be 2 base sizes for MCs. The round 60mm that comes with the carnifex and hive tyrant, and the oval 100mm x 120mm that comes with the tygon/mawloc. From what i've read so far, the Tervigon and Tyranofex (per fluff) are bigger than a carnifex, so I personally will put those on the oval trygon base, the Harpy sounds like the best would be to put it on the round base. Even for modeling purposes, it looks like from the pictures available the Tervigon and Tyranofex use the back legs of a fex, and a larger torso, hunched over, using scything claws arms as 'feet'. So they are going to be longer and have more girth than the current fex model.

I'd be careful about rushing to put your Tervigon on that large oval base, I don't know the exact measurements but the Tervigon with the many advantages it can offer to models within proximity to it certainly benefits greatly from having a larger base size.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Maxus wrote:I thought about this too, there are going to be 2 base sizes for MCs. The round 60mm that comes with the carnifex and hive tyrant, and the oval 100mm x 120mm that comes with the tygon/mawloc. From what i've read so far, the Tervigon and Tyranofex (per fluff) are bigger than a carnifex, so I personally will put those on the oval trygon base, the Harpy sounds like the best would be to put it on the round base. Even for modeling purposes, it looks like from the pictures available the Tervigon and Tyranofex use the back legs of a fex, and a larger torso, hunched over, using scything claws arms as 'feet'. So they are going to be longer and have more girth than the current fex model.

I'd be careful about rushing to put your Tervigon on that large oval base, I don't know the exact measurements but the Tervigon with the many advantages it can offer to models within proximity to it certainly benefits greatly from having a larger base size.

Until GW comes out with a model for the Tervigon, there wont be exact measurements since the model doesn't have a sculpt, just art. If and when they create a sculpt and it has a 60mm base, then the base may have to be changed. Until then, there will be 2 different size bases for MC creatures, which one should I use? GW advised how to create a Tervigon model, they said to use parts from a Tygron, and a Carnifex and put them togeather. Guess what, they come with two different bases, which one should I use? And I'm not trying to be a jerk about using the oval base, trying to gain an advantage, my model is going to be bigger than a carnifex, and wont fit. But since i haven't finished it yet, I will end up trying both and see what looks and fits better.

As an aside, the Biovore on pg 27 of the Jan 2010 White Dwarf, can you see whats wrong with that base?

People still buy White Dwarf?

Gwar! wrote:People still buy White Dwarf?

Well it was the Nid preview, I primarily play Nids. At my local game store, who had gotten a preview copy of SM, IG, and the Space Wolves dex, never got any preview at all of the Nid dex, so I broke down in a moment of weakness.

Maxus wrote:

Gwar! wrote:People still buy White Dwarf?

Well it was the Nid preview, I primarily play Nids. At my local game store, who had gotten a preview copy of SM, IG, and the Space Wolves dex, never got any preview at all of the Nid dex, so I broke down in a moment of weakness.

Nid preview codices got delayed due to the printing error. I've got mine coming in Thursday, and I expect various stores will be getting them wed-fri of this week.

mikhaila wrote:

Maxus wrote:

Gwar! wrote:People still buy White Dwarf?

Well it was the Nid preview, I primarily play Nids. At my local game store, who had gotten a preview copy of SM, IG, and the Space Wolves dex, never got any preview at all of the Nid dex, so I broke down in a moment of weakness.

Nid preview codices got delayed due to the printing error. I've got mine coming in Thursday, and I expect various stores will be getting them wed-fri of this week.

Printing error? What printing error?

Maxus wrote:Until GW comes out with a model for the Tervigon, there wont be exact measurements since the model doesn't have a sculpt, just art. If and when they create a sculpt and it has a 60mm base, then the base may have to be changed. Until then, there will be 2 different size bases for MC creatures, which one should I use? GW advised how to create a Tervigon model, they said to use parts from a Tygron, and a Carnifex and put them togeather. Guess what, they come with two different bases, which one should I use? And I'm not trying to be a jerk about using the oval base, trying to gain an advantage, my model is going to be bigger than a carnifex, and wont fit. But since i haven't finished it yet, I will end up trying both and see what looks and fits better.

As an aside, the Biovore on pg 27 of the Jan 2010 White Dwarf, can you see whats wrong with that base?

I fully understand the issue of no official model being available, nor did I suggest using the larger base inherently suggests trying to model for advantage, I was simply advising that the larger base whether intentional or not DOES give the model significant advantages, atleast in my view and possibly other people's as well, so you should be wary of using it since it will garner more raised eyebrows than the smaller base would.

Gwar! wrote:Printing error? What printing error?

There was some sort of mishap with the English printing of the codex. It's why the Nid release was pushed back two weeks.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Printing error? What printing error?

There was some sort of mishap with the English printing of the codex. It's why the Nid release was pushed back two weeks.

Dern. I want one of the misprints now

Gwar! wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Printing error? What printing error?

There was some sort of mishap with the English printing of the codex. It's why the Nid release was pushed back two weeks.

Dern. I want one of the misprints now

LOL you probably already have one. The 'printing error' was a simple case of the printers doing 20 odd thousand copies of the current nid codex not the new one. D'oh.

Ha, epic fail on GW's part.

Perhaps it's the Universes way of protesting GWs current direction when it comes to codexes?

I thought the printing error was supposed to be them leaving out a section of how all the special rules worked?

Whilst I'm here and looking to toss this thread back on topic, here's a bit of a thought that might provide an answer to the issue for at least one or two of the units...

Can it take a bug-flavored drop-pod?

From what I've seen, and from the information I can infer, if it fits one to a landing spore, then it's probably meant to go on a 60mm base, as opposed to one of those wonky, oddly-shaped ones that seem to be all the rage with GW's ever-growing normal army selections (like the valk/vendetta).

Standard caveats apply, and I could be completely wrong, but I'm not sure if the Tyrannofex or the Tervigon can actually do the whole falling out of the sky thing or not, but it might actually give some hinting of an answer...

Kinda like how 20mm bases tend to take up one transport slot, and the larger termie bases tend to take up two. Not a hard and fast rule, but certainly a good starting point to look at.

Dronze wrote:
Can it take a bug-flavored drop-pod?

now this is without having a codex until jan 16th, but from what I've seen so far, it looks like there aren't any restrictions besides 20 models or 1 MC.

So take this with a grain of salt, if there aren't any restrictions besides these, technically you could then put a Trygon or a Mawloc into the landing spore, which has the new MC base size.

Current rumors that i just saw have a Nid upgrade pack slated for February, this might help out on these types of question with modeling things that don't have models (plus in the rumor, spore model by christmas)

Maxus wrote:

Dronze wrote:
Can it take a bug-flavored drop-pod?

now this is without having a codex until jan 16th, but from what I've seen so far, it looks like there aren't any restrictions besides 20 models or 1 MC.

So take this with a grain of salt, if there aren't any restrictions besides these, technically you could then put a Trygon or a Mawloc into the landing spore, which has the new MC base size.

Current rumors that i just saw have a Nid upgrade pack slated for February, this might help out on these types of question with modeling things that don't have models (plus in the rumor, spore model by christmas)

You can't put them in it because they don't have it as a transport option, and AFAIK it's only available as a dedicated transport.

How can it be a transport if it isn't a vehicle?

I imagine the same way infantry is allowed to walk without actually being Walkers.

Aduro wrote:I imagine the same way infantry is allowed to walk without actually being Walkers.

I mean by the rules you smartarse, considering the transport rules are in the vehicle section.

Well, it's a drop pod, they're not going to spend any time in the thing. It drops, and you deploy the unit within 2" of it.

Gwar! wrote:How can it be a transport if it isn't a vehicle?

I'm with you Gwar! I'm just waiting to see how GW mess up the rules for it so that by RAW it's totally useless, I feel so certain they will, as I said, I expect it to revolve around the fact that according to the disembark rules only models "embarked on a vehicle" are allowed to disembark, of course there's always the chance they will write the rules for it fine, I just don't see it happening.