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.

Are OOP models allowed at tournaments? I mean if I have lets say 10 plague marines that are OOP can I still use them as plague marines? Does it depened on the tournament?

They are GW models. So the are tournament legal. Sometimes, maybe once every few decades I play my RT speesh mehrines. Somebody once tried to point out my models were oop. I then pointed out his terminators were metal, so they were oop also. He shut up. As long as they are GW models they are legal. Oh, they have to be wysiwig though for tournys.

I don't see why they shouldn't allow you to use the older stuff. Some might have issue due to difference in size. But, I suppose you could check with the TO to make sure that you can use them.

I'm pretty sure they'll have no problem at all with it most of the time, but couldn't hurt to be 100% on it.

If they are GW and WYSIWYG then they are legal.

So long as the tournament doesn't have its own rules about using only the most current models...

While that would be rare (I've heard only anecdotal evidence of it ever happening) it's certainly possible. There is no single 'tournament standard' that all tournaments adhere to. If you want to know whether something is legal for a tournament, you need to ask the person or people responsible for the rules of that specific tournament.

OOP models are not only legal, but some of the models still look amazing. The RT Eldar Aspect Warriors spring to mind.

Gee...I certainly hope OOP models aren't "Illegal",as I have a couple hundred dollars worth of Praetorians on my painting table ATM.
Then again...I'm not much of a "tourney" guy,so I suppose it wouldn't really affect me either way,still it would be a real jerk move on GWs part if they said that minis/armies they created were no longer able to be used at tournaments...oh wait..

I have heard once of a story where a guy was not allowed to use older models. My only concern would be if I were playing someplace with a bunch who only were familiar with the current range. I mean really, not many younger players are going to be able to tell a cataphract from a castellan on sight.

Old SM dreads are very funny looking. I want one.

n0t_u wrote:I don't see why they shouldn't allow you to use the older stuff. Some might have issue due to difference in size. But, I suppose you could check with the TO to make sure that you can use them.

n0t_u nailed it. Size is the only factor that I could think of that would cause a TO to exclude OOP models. A great example being the RT LandRaider which has a much smaller footprint than the current LandRaider model and thus could more easily claim cover bonuses. I have seen debates on Dakka about bases for OOP models causing consternation among players. Lots of older 40k models used to come with square bases, or differently sized round bases than their contemporary counterparts, and so I guess basing would also be problematic despite the ruling on bases in the BGB.

Otherwise it would have to be a pretty tight-assed TO who would disallow OOP models purely on the basis of the models' (lack of) availability. If such a TO existed I'd just as likely opt to not play in the tournament since I utilize a large number of OOP models in my army.

I have a friend who has the very OOP terminators that are on 20mm bases. If he was to bring them to a tourney and use them as deepstrikers there would probably be a lot of complaints.

ever seen the old avater model? you could hide that thing behind anything a guardian could hide behind.


same goes for the OOP oblits... ill take a 4+ cover save for that tiny wall over a 5+ invul any day... but man what a fugly model.



if i see someone trying to hide his avatar behind a 2 inch wall... im calling a judge over.

ive got no problem with people using the old avatar model, but when you try to deny me LOS because your running the old model over the current one then BS...

Leo_the_Rat wrote:I have a friend who has the very OOP terminators that are on 20mm bases. If he was to bring them to a tourney and use them as deepstrikers there would probably be a lot of complaints.

Most people I see that have these termies just mount them on 40mm to avoid that arguement.

I realize that some folks will get in a tizzy over older versions that are smaller but what's the real argument here?

Assuming it's a tourney adhering to GW rules if it's a GW model on the size of base it was sold with, then you're good. The person who is going to gripe about the smaller models is probably the same rules lawyer who should know that it's legal.

As to the 20mm-based termies. they would be techinically still be illegal as they were orginally issued with 25mm bases.

BRB using preslotta Chaos warriors in my army

Eilif wrote:I realize that some folks will get in a tizzy over older versions that are smaller but what's the real argument here?

Assuming it's a tourney adhering to GW rules if it's a GW model on the size of base it was sold with, then you're good. The person who is going to gripe about the smaller models is probably the same rules lawyer who should know that it's legal.

As to the 20mm-based termies. they would be techinically still be illegal as they were orginally issued with 25mm bases.

If you want to argue that, you might also want to whip out your older codices and field armies based on those rules. I'm sure it would be great fun for both sides.

GW models are legal in all tournaments I know of.

Right now I'm building an RT marine army.

I also have an Ork Dread (card and base) from second edition. I was thinking of using it in my ork army but I like the new model too much.

Move ork dread, turn sideways.
"Look my Dread is hiding behind a tree"

Flashman wrote:The RT Eldar Aspect Warriors spring to mind.

You mean the rocket boot, weather vane hat Dark Reapers?



Other than those wretched sculpts, I would agree. Those old RT Aspect models still keep up with today's standards. The Dire Avenger Exarch is awesome.



King Ghidorah

I see a lot of people who seem to be coming down against older models on basis of size an gaming advantages gained by that. So we have suggestions of rebasing. How is this fair.for.the owners of these models? I guess no one can make you play a game you dont want.to play, but few seem concerned with that side of the coin.

Ghidorah wrote:

Flashman wrote:The RT Eldar Aspect Warriors spring to mind.

You mean the rocket boot, weather vane hat Dark Reapers?



Other than those wretched sculpts, I would agree. Those old RT Aspect models still keep up with today's standards. The Dire Avenger Exarch is awesome.

King Ghidorah

No I more had these chaps in mind

bushido wrote:

Eilif wrote:
Assuming it's a tourney adhering to GW rules if it's a GW model on the size of base it was sold with, then you're good. The person who is going to gripe about the smaller models is probably the same rules lawyer who should know that it's legal.

As to the 20mm-based termies. they would be techinically still be illegal as they were orginally issued with 25mm bases.

If you want to argue that, you might also want to whip out your older codices and field armies based on those rules. I'm sure it would be great fun for both sides.

I'm not arguing.
I'm just stating GW's rules for tournaments, minatures and basing, which are quite simple and in a nutsehell stay that:
-Must be GW models or conversions based on mostly GW models
-Must be based on the size base they were issued with.
If I'm wrong, let me know.

It wouldn't be fun to play against a WAAC gamer who purposely fields all smaller models to gain a competative advantage, but I think that most folks fielding smaller models are doing it because they already have the older models, and I'm not about to tell them that they have to buy new models just because they are smaller.

grizgrin wrote:I see a lot of people who seem to be coming down against older models on basis of size an gaming advantages gained by that. So we have suggestions of rebasing. How is this fair.for.the owners of these models? I guess no one can make you play a game you dont want.to play, but few seem concerned with that side of the coin.

It's just as fair as it is for everyone else whose models and/or codex gets updated and makes them change models.

That being said, I played in a tournament just a few months ago against someone who had 20-odd terminators in his list, a mix of current and old ones, on both base sizes. It looked terrible and was a little wonky in play, but it was legal and I didn't complain. I wouldn't do that personally, though. I have a bunch of old metal terminators as well as newer plastic ones, and I only use the metal ones on 40mms for consistency and for appearance.

no, not really. people are expecting me to go to the time to rebase and pai.t bases for my models, when they dont have to? I have a painting backlog thats already huge, i dont care to go rework a piece i have already finished simply because gw issued new stuff. i guess i should go and rework all my metal IG heavy weapons teams as well, just to make them happy? how is me having to go back and rework a product that they only had to work once? if i wanted to rework thi.gs, I have my own list and schedule thanks.

The new Terminator bases look great but as I play Space Hulk I need them on regular bases.

Which people are expecting you?

Every time this thread comes up, IME the answers break down around the same:

95%: "It's perfectly legal to use the bases the models came with".
80%+: "Most people have no problem with this."
15%: "Remember that the TO can make whatever ruling he wants, so it's always smart to check with him."
5%: "Some people find it aesthetically more satisfying and game-wise more consistent to update bases. YMMV."


I see people saying "it's perfectly legal" (aside from the IG HW teams), and a few people saying "ther

What about the old 2nd ed Necron destroyers, they walk instead of hovering, that can't legal, can it?

2nd ed Destroyers did fly though.

Howard A Treesong wrote:2nd ed Destroyers did fly though.

Hover-go-carts for the win!

I assembled a mixed group of terminators over the weekend and re-based the older metal miniatures on new 40mm bases to make them a cohesive unit. In the past I've run my terminator captain on a 25mm base alongside 40mm termies in tournament and wasn't given any flak for it, but knew my opponent kept an eye out for any other beardiness I might throw his way.

My eldar army is composed of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th edition models. I can say without a doubt that 2nd ed Banshees are 2-3mm shorter than the more recent edition models - almost the difference between a teenage eldar and an adult eldar, which is how I explain the difference to anyone that asks.

Gavin Thorne wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:2nd ed Destroyers did fly though.

Hover-go-carts for the win!

Flying lawn chairs, you mean.

All I can say is, 'The Doom that Wails'...

Seriously though, if you feel this may be an issue just re-base your models onto the current valid base size, shouldn't get any complaints and if the TO is specifiying in-production models only, then quite clearly he is from the GW sales team