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.

Hello,

I've got a question regarding the "cultural standard" regarding the use of square bases for WH40K miniatures, for use in tournaments or "club games" both.

I'm in the process of painting my Ork/Ork army, which is heavily converted from various Citadel miniatures and a few others (every single miniature is a conversion, usually in a unique pose) with the use of rare earth magnets for both arms of 90% infantry figures (excluding Gretchin, who are too small). So that the same minis can be used for WH40K, WFB and Gorkamorka, most are designed to look non-SF and I have interchangeable options for fantasy weapon arms and futuristic arms.

Since I couldn't make the bases modular (posing the minis interestingly would be impossible and too fragile), I have to choose either round or square bases for all, and I chose the square ones so that they may rank easier in WFB movement trays, and stack more easily in the Trukks for WH40K/Gorkamorka (I scratch-built my Trukks from Dollorama toys and old GI Joe toys, so that they can hold at least 10 minis of 25mm bases). To maintain consistency all minis (except Gretchin) have square bases.

To cut to the question:

Though I plan mostly friendly games (as I don't like "unfriendly" gaming), could that choice of base size be an sufficient issue for my army to offer a case of being refused, from your experiment:

a) in GW tournaments?
b) in independent tournements?
c) in gaming clubs?

For info, I live in Canada (which means, of course, that I live in a wooden shack and I trade broken glass for furs with Indians for a living).


Merry Christmas and happy new year everyone!

yeah GW/official tournaments will be nazis about base use, square for fantasy, round for 40k, and god above help you if you've mixed any LOTR bitz in with your models.

From what I've seen, it's mostly the gamers themselves who tend to give others a hard time about this... so much so that people don't really attempt it at the tournament level, so I've never seen it get that far.

However, in the friendly environment you describe, I can tell you that people should be cool playing against this. We have a guy here with khorne daemons who has all circular bases, but has the movement trays with holes for them so that they rank up well. The only issue is some of the larger models that don't go in movement trays, but he's built bases with corners for them to sit in to make them square.

Unfortunately, I think you would have been better off going circular instead of square... since at least for the small circles, I believe (need to double check) that they can be inscribed in the square, and so you can make custom movement trays for them and have them rank up perfectly to face against square-based models.

Interestingly, the large circular bases I know for sure do not inscribe themsleves in the square... it seems to be the opposite. Meaning the large circular bases are humongous!! This did throw off the size of the bases for his larger models... but again, it was a friendly game.

But this will (imho) not work for any organized event or tourney... such is the culture of the games workshop games / events, and the gamers who attend them.

No idea about 'GW official' tournaments, but I've never run into a problem with square-based Daemons in indy 40k events.

There is a % standard of the model that has to be GW parts, so be careful and clear models with TOs before signing up for tournaments. I personally think that Orks should be the exception to that rule as some of the best Ork armies I have seen have been made with random bits and plasticard.

As for the square bases it is as Heinrich said, the organizers will probably not like it even though you can probably base just as many models with it. Given your opponent is using rounds and you count the points as "based".

Can't speak to tournaments (I only play with friends). But as a friendly gamer I wouldn't care in the slightest about square vs round bases as long as they were roughly the correct size.

You are clearly not modeling for advantage, so it wouldn't be a concern for me. In fact, I think it is an awesome (and frugal) idea! Please do post pics once you get the army going!

Square bases have the same advantages as oversized bases. The main advantage is gaining extra assault distance out of transports by putting the back corner of the base in your disembark area instead of the square edge.

Daemons, the one army legally allowed to use square really don't gain an advantage from it. Orks on the otherhand can highly abuse it.

*A 25mm square is 35mm corner to corner which can give an extra 10mm of assault distance out of a transport.
*A 40mm square is 56.5mm corner to corner which can give an extra 16.5mm of assault distance out of a transport.

Just like oversized bases, pretending it has no impact insults opponents. Being aware of the impact and explicitly not using it for an advantage by explaining how you measure from the square edge, not the corner to avoid extra distances puts opponents at ease and allows them to not have an issue with the bases.

To be honest, I think you've chosen the wrong side of the coin.

Round 25mm bases should rank up the same as square 25mm bases in a movement tray. Square bases, as mentioned, would give you a slight unfair advantage in 40k games.

Therefore, it makes more sense to mount everything on round bases for 40k and Gorkamorka, and then just use movement trays in WHFB.

You don't need 'special' movement trays with round slots, because a movement tray should fit the same number of 25mm based models, regardless of if they're square or round.

nkelsch wrote:Just like oversized bases, pretending it has no impact insults opponents. Being aware of the impact and explicitly not using it for an advantage by explaining how you measure from the square edge, not the corner to avoid extra distances puts opponents at ease and allows them to not have an issue with the bases.

Totally agree with this... as long as you're aware of the possible abuse and play intentionally not to abuse it, people will be able to have a good time playing you in friendlies.

Also agree with ArbitorIan from a practical standpoint, but it sounds like you're a real modeller and preferred the square bases, which is OK! And to boot, fantasy is better game, anyway... (warning: bias, it's the only GW game I play!)

nkelsch wrote:Square bases have the same advantages as oversized bases. The main advantage is gaining extra assault distance out of transports by putting the back corner of the base in your disembark area instead of the square edge.

Daemons, the one army legally allowed to use square really don't gain an advantage from it. Orks on the otherhand can highly abuse it.

*A 25mm square is 35mm corner to corner which can give an extra 10mm of assault distance out of a transport.
*A 40mm square is 56.5mm corner to corner which can give an extra 16.5mm of assault distance out of a transport.

Just like oversized bases, pretending it has no impact insults opponents. Being aware of the impact and explicitly not using it for an advantage by explaining how you measure from the square edge, not the corner to avoid extra distances puts opponents at ease and allows them to not have an issue with the bases.

nkelsch, thanks for pointing that out! For me personally that falls in the category of "meh, I'm not that hardcore about the rules", but its definitely good to know so people can, as you say, point it out and not abuse it. Cheers!

Honestly you'd be much better off going with round bases. Round bases can be inserted into square bases and movement trays with slots, making them 100% correct and legal for all games.

I'd base them for the game you play the most. And if you want to dabble in other games, that's fine. No one really plays Gorkamorka that I know of, so I figure anyone you play with would be so pleased to have a game that they'd not likely quibble over the bases.

I have to admit that square bases in 40K would distract me, but in the end, I wouldn't complain about it. If it was me, I'd try to figure out how to interchange the bases as needed though, as you pointed out, that's probably more trouble than it's worth.

Also worth mentioning - most 40K Orks have guns, so if you use your Fantasy Orcs in 40K, that would be noticed, too. Again, for friendly games, as long as your opponents agree, no problem. Against new opponents, you may get complaints if you try to use Fantasy Orcs in 40K.

He's already got them based, with removable arms...

My 40k-WFB Orc army is being slow built on round bases. Every model is highly converted. The reason for round bases was GF9 Makes a movement tray that has circles cut out for just that purpose. Its easy just to magnetize them into the cut out's, then use the same case whether its 40K / WFB as then i'm prepared for both. Vehicles is a whole different store then warmachines though...

Cybor's for boarboyz though!

While I wouldn't have a big problem with it, it does give you an advantage, both psychologically due to confusion and logistically. It's an area that if I were a TO, I would allow, but I totally understand other people being upset about it.

As stated, the best way to go is on rounds, because they can still go on movement trays and not be an issue.

I've seen the square bases allowed in 40k tournaments, but you need to be careful in using them so as not to gain extra distance.

Daemons are actually more of a problem, as the square bases make for smaller deep strike formations, reducing their chance of mishap.

I guess the 50 or so other threads about this went by the wayside, huh?

Yes, use the round bases for 40K, square for fantasy.

Tournament I'm running states you must use the round base provided for 40k. If you place a 40k base on top of a fantasy one the fantasy corners stick out which can gain you extra distance, (I saw a tournament game lost because of just such a discrepency).

It might not seem like much but for tournaments I have to say either magnetize the bases or get the movement trays for fantasy that use circle bases, forgot who makes em though.

If an opponent really complains about it, tell him you have larger bases to be covered with templates. There really shouldn't be a problem with it, by anyone, for any reason.

More recent arguments, with some more substantive data (as well as a bunch of junk, of course), in this recent thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/334338.page

Mattlov wrote:If an opponent really complains about it, tell him you have larger bases to be covered with templates. There really shouldn't be a problem with it, by anyone, for any reason.

Larger bases = more spaced out = less hit by templates.

@ Brother Heinrich; GW gets its panties in a wad over Lord of the Rings bits because its not technically there intellectual property and it was part of the agreement for GW to even be able to make the Movie version of LotR Miniatures.

On Topic! I think you'd be better off basing the armies on rounds so it fits in the rules with everything except for fantasy and for fantasy you can use the War of the Ring movement trays and all is gravy. Most tournaments I've seen has 1 or 2 people playing a demon army the same way I described. If you go with a square base in 40k It's probably going to go down like this: Friendly games it will be perfectly fine, small tournaments it depends on who's running it, Indy tournies same, and GW big events it more than likely won't be ok. I think your better off on rounds. But if your set on squares you should be ok minus any larger or more "competitive" events.

In hindsight I think you should have used circular bases as you could have used war of the ring movement trays to rank up your models for fantasy.

It wasn't that long ago that all the larger 40K figures were mounted on square bases. I much prefer the round bases though as they match the smaller ones. If you're only playing 'friendly' games then you could simply not squeeze every advantage out of having the square bases.

AFAIK the round bases have the same diameter as the square ones, no?

If so, what would've been wrong with making some movement trays with slots for round bases to fit in but leave them ranked up as if on square?

Mattlov wrote:If an opponent really complains about it, tell him you have larger bases to be covered with templates. There really shouldn't be a problem with it, by anyone, for any reason.

apart from all the problems presented above your post, 40k is designed to be played with round bases, combat, assalting, firing can all be positivly effected (for the player, not opponent) by using square bases.

seeing as you can get regiment trays online with circles cut out, use circle bases

Wow, that's a great link Mannahnin.

Two things I learned from it... in the poll, 75% said they'd be OK with it. And, apparently it's even legal by the letter of the rules.

Interesting to know!

Thanks for the replies. In fact, I really didn't think it would matter...
Personally, I would find arguments about "ork advantages" spurious compared to the gross advantage of cheap space marines with a 3+ armour save, since an Ork army is by no means a power-player army, but I understand this could raise quibbles, so I appreciate all remarks said.

I think I'll stick to playing friendly games, and next time I'll favour round bases. I should have asked before priming...

Anyway I'll post pictures when painting's done and I've got a better camera.

Edit: I made square bases instead of round because it's easier with plasticard; since ALL my minis are conversions to some degree (50%+ citadel, parts green stuff, parts star wars/heroclix/horrorclix/dollarstore/toys) I don't get bases with the bits I buy. Not a single one of my minis looks like anyone else's; it's an artistic thing, really, I never considered tactical implications, just that the base size was 25mm for all.

Would love to see some pics! Put 'em in the gallery

Mattlov wrote:
There really shouldn't be a problem with it, by anyone, for any reason.

Yeah...no.

Assuming you actually read the thread first, someone did already point out that you do gain an advantage depending on how you measure from the base. And not only that but I don't see how that makes you more vulnerable to templates, because you could potentially space your models out farther than you normally could. So you're wrong on both counts.

Not only that, but even if you were right, it's still a moot point because if you just used the right base size to begin with there wouldn't be any argument at all. You wouldn't have to try and justify anything.

Honestly, I question how modular bases could be "impossible". Especially for Orks, since they have big feet and are actually easier to pin to a base than most models. Just how "interesting" are you making these poses, does every single model in the army have to be hopping around on one leg or flying?