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.

simple:

Daemons can be used in both games.

So, can daemons use circular bases in a 40k game? (tourney?)

Or, will I need to mag it?

Captain Solon wrote:simple:

Daemons can be used in both games.

So, can daemons use circular bases in a 40k game? (tourney?)

Or, will I need to mag it?

Yes, they do.

Captain Solon wrote:So, can daemons use circular bases in a 40k game? (tourney?)

Why wouldn't they be able to?

Sorry, Would I be able to use circular bases in a fantasy game.

Misworded, please excuse.

More likely to get away with square bases in 40k than round in fantasy, I think...

Pin the larger based models, use circular bases with movement trays for fantasy

Captain Solon wrote:Sorry, Would I be able to use circular bases in a fantasy game.

With the right movement trays, sure.

Although you would get fewer quibbles if you magnetise the bases so you can swap them.

In fairness, square bases are 100% legal in 40K - the rules say you have to base them on the base they come with (barring opponent's permisson, of course), but the Daemons do come with square bases, so it's OK.

Yeah, to clarify, my point wasn't that square bases weren't ok in 40K... but you will get the occasional complaint about it, as some people just don't like it.

So you're perfectly justified in using square bases... but people will prefer to see round ones.

Don't round bases make more sense anyway when your squad isn't stacked right to each other like in WFB? It becomes an issue in 40k because of exact measuring of model base to model base, so I would think using a square base would throw that off in a 40k game. First off they're smaller, and the corners create issues with base-to-base contact that just don't exist in the round based world of 40k. Rotate a circle and it's still a circle. Rotate a square and you have a point sticking out. Maybe daemons come with a square one because that's how GW rolls and they are technically WFB minis, not W40k minis... but if I were to use, say, a hearbreaker model or a reaper, for conversion purposes or whatever, I would still want to make sure it was on the appropriate base size for whatever game it was being applied to.

Guitardian wrote: It becomes an issue in 40k because of exact measuring of model base to model base, so I would think using a square base would throw that off in a 40k game. First off they're smaller, ...

A 25mm square base is bigger than a 25mm round one.

and the corners create issues with base-to-base contact that just don't exist in the round based world of 40k.

They really don't. Base contact is still base contact, and you still generally get the same number of models in there.

And the 'round based world of 40K' not so long ago did include square bases for monstrous creatures and still does use rectangular ones for cavalry.

Maybe daemons come with a square one because that's how GW rolls and they are technically WFB minis, not W40k minis...

They actually come with both.

I'm starting to go the magnetic route. Found some magnets online that are very small rectangles, and my bases are a brick pattern. I just put the rectangle down over one of the bricks, paint it red to cover it up, and then glue a small magnet, also painted red, to the bottom of the mini. Do it on both the square and round, pretty fast and easy, and nobody complaigns.

Please go round bases for both, it might seem a hastle for fantasy, but they have no problems at all with round bases for fantasy, just throw them in trays, or if they are a skirmisher round is just fine. But when you transition over square fantasy to 40k, you will notice that deepstriking them will not only create a bigger pile to nuke, but will save you trouble using the army for either or as far as I can recall many fantasy players don't have that much problems at all with round bases, since most things are in trays.

The major issue with round versus square bases for daemons is caused by the models which have 50mm square bases and 60mm round bases. Unfortunately, the models on those bases are the superstar models like the Bloodcrushers and daemon princes. I don't know about anyone else, but building and then decorating a convertible base which fits into both a 50mm square adapter and a 60mm round adapter doesn't sound very appealing. :(

But for almost everything else, round bases should fit nice enough onto rectangular movement trays.

dancingcricket wrote:I'm starting to go the magnetic route. Found some magnets online that are very small rectangles, and my bases are a brick pattern. I just put the rectangle down over one of the bricks, paint it red to cover it up, and then glue a small magnet, also painted red, to the bottom of the mini. Do it on both the square and round, pretty fast and easy, and nobody complaigns.

THat's all very well.....btu won't 40k players object to the use of square magnets?

There is no "need" to do anything. If anyone complain about square bases in 40k they are clearly TFG and should be ignored.
Only go through the hassle with magnets or fantasy trays for round bases if that's what you prefer yourself.

I would definitely use the square bases for both games myself.

As Insaniak noted, square bases are actually larger (cover a bigger area) than the equivalent diameter round base. This has potential advantages and disadvantages. They can be hit/touched by templates more easily, but they can also gain a bit of assault distance if placed corner-on, as a 25mm square is actually around 35mm from corner to corner, so you can potentially gain about a centimeter of assault distance.

I play both games, and originally based my daemons on squares for compatibility, but I’m careful to place them “edge-on” (as opposed to “corner-on”) to my intended assault target when I summon them, so as to not gain an inappropriate advantage.

For future units, I’m definitely going round based, and using the adaptor movement trays for Warhammer.

Hmm, I have a square and a round base here. While you get a little bit of the points on the square base (25mm) poking out of the outer rim of the circle base when held up back to back, you don't get much. But, the edges of the circular base do come out a bit on all sides of the square base. The square base measures just over 12/16ths of an inch side to side, while the circular base measures almost an inch in diameter. So the round is wider for how your going to use it. This could be good or bad in fantasy. It'll widen your arc for charging and being able to get the opponent where they can be charged, but increase your area for foes to get to you, and increase your footprint. Making it easier for people to get just that much closer. Plus, it'll be harder to fit correctly into one of the standard movement trays.

BTW, corner to corner diagonally the square 25mm base is 17/16 of an inch.

For 40K, the square bases will let you deepstrike into a smaller area, as you wont be so far across, but it'll be a tighter group when the inquisitor and mystics have a nearby unit hit you with 5 plasma cannon shots...

The problem I see is that base size is often used in rules complications, including backhatch-blocking, unit cohesion, barrages, etc. TLOS suddenly made the figure size trump the base size and complicated it even more. I'm just saying is... use the base that the game uses and prevent all the nitpicky details over milimeters in the first place... is probably the best way about it.

dancingcricket wrote: The square base measures just over 12/16ths of an inch side to side,

You're looking at the wrong square base. That's the 20mm base. Daemons come with 25mm.

Mannahnin wrote:As Insaniak noted, square bases are actually larger (cover a bigger area) than the equivalent diameter round base. This has potential advantages and disadvantages. They can be hit/touched by templates more easily, but they can also gain a bit of assault distance if placed corner-on, as a 25mm square is actually around 35mm from corner to corner, so you can potentially gain about a centimeter of assault distance.

I play both games, and originally based my daemons on squares for compatibility, but I’m careful to place them “edge-on” (as opposed to “corner-on”) to my intended assault target when I summon them, so as to not gain an inappropriate advantage.

For future units, I’m definitely going round based, and using the adaptor movement trays for Warhammer.

See, personally I would be fine with square bases in 40K, but I'm not so comfortable with round bases in Fantasy. Unless the movement tray is nigh-on perfect, the unit will be wider than it should be, and frankly basing is more important in Fantasy than in 40K - I feel both games' armies should come with an official base size for each unit, but as far as I know, there's never been one in 40K. There has been at least one cardboard insert into White Dwarf, however, which did give base sizes for all units in Fantasy.

I'm going for the idea that were going to say circle bases.

It seems the main 'problem' is movement trays. I'm just gonna put them on circular bases

thanks for the help, guys.

Actually, the main problem is Fantasy is very strict on facings, which are all determined from the corners of the base and a circular base has no corner.

That's why WFB uses square bases, because of corners and facing issues that don't exist in 40k. They don't have any more place in 40k than a magic card on a chess board. Just use the base for the game. Square for WFB and circle for 40k. I am thinking this is an 'intended' rather than dictated rule, made obvious by the fact that daemons come with two varieties of bases.. One for one game one for the other game.

In other news... Cavalry bases are not the same as infantry bases. The arguement made earlier about their rectangularity does not hold up because they are not the same type of unit, and therefore are not held to the same standard. Try mounting a bike on an oval instead of a rectagonal standard issue base and I'm sure you'll get complaints about that too.

Base size is crucial for so many reasons, even down to a millimeter, so it just works better if everybody just uses the same standard, that way everyone knows exactly where the template lands, or where the deepstrike happens, etc.

With Daemons, I would think it is that much more important, because they all deepstrike, and that sort of 'approximate' measurement of the difference in base size could make a lot of difference in oopses and in barrages and so forth that could give your army a big advantage.

Guitardian wrote:In other news... Cavalry bases are not the same as infantry bases. The arguement made earlier about their rectangularity does not hold up because they are not the same type of unit, and therefore are not held to the same standard.

I'm not sure what argument you're referring to. The only mention of cav bases so far has been to point out that they exist, and they're not round... as an example that not all bases in 40K are round.

Try mounting a bike on an oval instead of a rectagonal standard issue base and I'm sure you'll get complaints about that too.

I have mine on 60mm round bases, and have never had a complaint.

Aelyn wrote:
See, personally I would be fine with square bases in 40K, but I'm not so comfortable with round bases in Fantasy. Unless the movement tray is nigh-on perfect, the unit will be wider than it should be

I've always been under the impression that a tray that's larger than it needs to be is fine. Otherwise, there are an awful lot of trays sold by an awful lot of companies that aren't valid...

DaveL wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
See, personally I would be fine with square bases in 40K, but I'm not so comfortable with round bases in Fantasy. Unless the movement tray is nigh-on perfect, the unit will be wider than it should be

I've always been under the impression that a tray that's larger than it needs to be is fine. Otherwise, there are an awful lot of trays sold by an awful lot of companies that aren't valid...

A little bit of lip isn't generally an issue, but if it's much more than, maybe, half an inch out, that can lead to issues with things like march-blocking. I feel it's best to play with the correct size of unit, to the extent that around here we actually ignore lips entirely when playing. It's no uncommon to see my friend's Orc army, for example, to be almost entirely at a slant - with one unit's tray resting on another's.

Guitardian wrote: Try mounting a bike on an oval instead of a rectagonal standard issue base and I'm sure you'll get complaints about that too.

(At least some) bikes come with oval bases actually.

nah. There is zero "lip". Millimeters count and can win or lose games.

RAW, square in 40K is fine. Mount it on the base provided. What's that? You've got a square base in that box? Go ahead.