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, I was playing on Sunday against a guy playing IG

His Ogryns were on the OLD square bases.

My question was,

Is it legal to use those bases anymore. or does he have to convert them?


As an example, my Termies, came on the small bases, I have since converted them, but if I can use the small ones, that gives a slight advantage.

What is 'Legal'?

It would not be allowed in a tourney.
It is poor form in a game against someone you don't know.
In friendly games, well, it's up to you both.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:What is 'Legal'?

It would not be allowed in a tourney.
It is poor form in a game against someone you don't know.

That is what I need to know...

It is legal via the rules. They must be based on the bases they come with. So technically it's illegal to change them, as they came on the square ones.

As for it being poor form: I don't think so. If it's a friendly pick-up-and-play, who cares? I'd consider it fairly poor form to attack someone over bases they're using for their _Ogryns_ in a friendly game, but if we go too far down that route, everyone is dubbed TFG.

Pika_power wrote:It is legal via the rules. They must be based on the bases they come with. So technically it's illegal to change them, as they came on the square ones.

As for it being poor form: I don't think so. If it's a friendly pick-up-and-play, who cares? I'd consider it fairly poor form to attack someone over bases they're using for their _Ogryns_ in a friendly game, but if we go too far down that route, everyone is dubbed TFG.

So, my terminators should be on the smaller bases, as they are the old metal ones, and thats what they came with?


About the Based on bases they come with, where does it say that? I can't find it anywhere

MeanGreenStompa wrote:It would not be allowed in a tourney.

That's a pretty poor TO if he disallows perfectly acceptable models as per the BRB

Vanguard27 wrote:

Pika_power wrote:It is legal via the rules. They must be based on the bases they come with. So technically it's illegal to change them, as they came on the square ones.

As for it being poor form: I don't think so. If it's a friendly pick-up-and-play, who cares? I'd consider it fairly poor form to attack someone over bases they're using for their _Ogryns_ in a friendly game, but if we go too far down that route, everyone is dubbed TFG.

So, my terminators should be on the smaller bases, as they are the old metal ones, and thats what they came with?

About the Based on bases they come with, where does it say that? I can't find it anywhere

Main rulebook, page 3. Oddly enough, in the paragraph labelled.... Bases.
"Citadel miniatures are normally supplied with a plastic base. If so, they must be glued onto their bases before they can be used in the game."

And it goes on to say that if you want to use something other than what it came with, you need your opponent's permission:
"Some players like to mount their models on impressive scenic bases. As mounting your models on different sized bases might affect the way they interact with the rules, make sure before the game that your opponent does not mind this."

I can't imagine his old ogryns would be disallowed from using old 40mm square, but if you measure corner to corner, his bases could give extra distance for assaulting out of transportsby putting the corner at the edge of the 2" deployment zone.

But since they don't have access to open-topped, I think the impact would be minimal.

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:It would not be allowed in a tourney.

That's a pretty poor TO if he disallows perfectly acceptable models as per the BRB

Models yes, base size no.

Good grief.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:It would not be allowed in a tourney.

That's a pretty poor TO if he disallows perfectly acceptable models as per the BRB

Models yes, base size no.

Good grief.

Considering the rule book says they have to be modeled on the bases they came with, they square bases, or smaller bases for metal termies are legal. If a TO disallows them then it is a poor TO.

jbunny wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:It would not be allowed in a tourney.

That's a pretty poor TO if he disallows perfectly acceptable models as per the BRB

Models yes, base size no.

Good grief.

Considering the rule book says they have to be modeled on the bases they came with, they square bases, or smaller bases for metal termies are legal. If a TO disallows them then it is a poor TO.

The model should use the current base size.

Or are you suggesting it's kosher to use the original Avatar on it's original base, as an eldar player?

Do you really want to stand there and explain to the guy on the other side of the table that his template weapon misses the target model because its on a square base when current ogryns use round bases and square bases are no longer used in the current 40k range.

Cos if you really really believe it's a 'poor TO' then I'm taking eldar to play you, good luck getting LOS or blasts to hit my avatar...

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The model should use the current base size.

This is not what the rules say.

Or are you suggesting it's kosher to use the original Avatar on it's original base, as an eldar player?

If he has the Original Avatar, then yes.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The model should use the current base size.

That's perhaps what should happen (I'd love to see GW issue a base size 'standard' for the entire range, although a lot of players would grumble about being 'forced' to rebase old models) but is not what the rules say to do.

Or are you suggesting it's kosher to use the original Avatar on it's original base, as an eldar player?

It's perfectly within the rules. Whether or not it's acceptable behaviour though is completely up to the players involved.

Do you really want to stand there and explain to the guy on the other side of the table that his template weapon misses the target model because its on a square base when current ogryns use round bases and square bases are no longer used in the current 40k range.

Given that the square bases in question are larger than the round base that Ogryns currently come with, (a 40mm square base has more surface area than a 40mm round one) I'm not sure how that would be an issue.

Considering I have a friend that has the small Aviatar, and uses it in tournaments, i have not problem with you bringing it. It is after all a GW model.

As far as the model shoudl use the current base? Please show me the rules that state that? If you can't then please move on as it is nothing more than you opinion of how you feel it should be based.

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The model should use the current base size.

This is not what the rules say.

Or are you suggesting it's kosher to use the original Avatar on it's original base, as an eldar player?

If he has the Original Avatar, then yes.

I will see you in August, face to face, for a chat.

Gwar is right though. If you read the rulebook it's pretty clear that you are suppose to use the base the model is supplied with in the box. If you are looking to the official GW rules for an answer that's the one you get.

Though considering my old metal ork dreads came with no base in the box I'm a bit foggy what I'm suppose to use there as a regulation base (they don't stand too well without a base). This is another example of the futility of taking GW's relaxed language in the rulebooks and treating it as gospel. It's really up to the TO in a tournament setting or you and your opponent in a friendly setting to determine what is and isn't reasonable. I doubt in a friendly setting anyone would tell you to go home and rebase your models. If they do you should probably rethinking playing with them.

insaniak wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The model should use the current base size.

That's perhaps what should happen (I'd love to see GW issue a base size 'standard' for the entire range, although a lot of players would grumble about being 'forced' to rebase old models) but is not what the rules say to do.

Or are you suggesting it's kosher to use the original Avatar on it's original base, as an eldar player?

It's perfectly within the rules. Whether or not it's acceptable behaviour though is completely up to the players involved.

Do you really want to stand there and explain to the guy on the other side of the table that his template weapon misses the target model because its on a square base when current ogryns use round bases and square bases are no longer used in the current 40k range.

Given that the square bases in question are larger than the round base that Ogryns currently come with, (a 40mm square base has more surface area than a 40mm round one) I'm not sure how that would be an issue.

At no stage did I mention 'illegal' or the rules, I said what people should be doing. It would be entirely unacceptable behaviour to show up to a game with an original avatar, it's a MC according to it's rules but the original model is smaller than an autarch.
In a friendly, I wouldn't give much of a crap about the monster square bases vs the round bases, what the straight lines deny in templates, the corners will give back.
But showing up to a competition with them, I'd consider that weird. But obviously if people have been to tourneys recently and seen them being used then fine. But I'd have a problem with it and I imagine others at those games would do as well. If not, are we going to see lots of the old killa kans bought online by tourney players on the chance they have the smaller bases...

jbunny wrote:Considering I have a friend that has the small Aviatar, and uses it in tournaments, i have not problem with you bringing it. It is after all a GW model.
As far as the model shoudl use the current base? Please show me the rules that state that? If you can't then please move on as it is nothing more than you opinion of how you feel it should be based.

Where? What tourney was it? Show me pictures of it. Show me the expression on the other guy's face when your friend pulled that language ! stunt. Or are you jusssssst talking gak...

Actually I'd imagine most people with the old killakans will be rebasing them to larger bases if anything considering it means they will cover more area thus be a more effective kan wall. At least I know I've been considering that option. It was kind of funny anyway putting them on the smaller bases before considering the model doesn't really fit on it and the legs hang off both ends.

I find it strange that you assume his friend is being a prick by using an old avatar model. That wouldn't be my first reaction. How about he's being nostolgic (he likes the old look) or frugal (by not replacing his old model).

It is interesting how you get to decide what players should do, MGS. What is the guidelines you use when you decide that players ought to depart from the rules put forth by the rulebook?

Tell you what....I think people should do as the rules tell them to.

phillosmaster wrote:Actually I'd imagine most people with the old killakans will be rebasing them to larger bases if anything considering it means they will cover more area thus be a more effective kan wall. At least I know I've been considering that option. It was kind of funny anyway putting them on the smaller bases before considering the model doesn't really fit on it and the legs hang off both ends.

I find it strange that you assume his friend is being a prick by using an old avatar model. That wouldn't be my first reaction. How about he's being nostolgic (he likes the old look) or frugal (by not replacing his old model).

Or being a beardy bastard and exploiting it for LOS reasons...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Steelmage99 wrote:It is interesting how you get to decide what players should do, MGS. What is the guidelines you use when you decide that players ought to depart from the rules put forth by the rulebook?

Tell you what....I think people should do as the rules tell them to.

You go girlfriend...

MeanGreenStompa wrote:At no stage did I mention 'illegal' or the rules, I said what people should be doing. It would be entirely unacceptable behaviour to show up to a game with an original avatar, it's a MC according to it's rules but the original model is smaller than an autarch.

From my experience, most players would be excited enough to see such an old model on the board that size considerations wouldn't be particularly important.

In a friendly, I wouldn't give much of a crap about the monster square bases vs the round bases, what the straight lines deny in templates, the corners will give back.

Again, you don't lose anything by using the square base because the length of the square base is exactly the same as the diameter of the round one. A 40mm base is 40mm across, whether it is round or square. The square bases are the size of the round ones, with corners added on top.

If not, are we going to see lots of the old killa kans bought online by tourney players on the chance they have the smaller bases...

Yup, they'll be right in there with all the vast hordes of kneeling Wraithlords.

The simple fact is that GW used square bases for all of their large models for at least 15 years. There are just so many of them out there that seeing them still used on the table is not at all uncommon... and most players simply don't care. So long as you're not altering bases significantly, specifically for some sort of perceived advantage, most players don't even notice, let alone complain about how much differently it causes the model to function in game.

People are not going to rebase all of their old models. Well, some will... but most just don't care enough about bases (or don't care for the expense of it) for it to be worth the effort for the infinitesimal impact it actually has on the game.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Or being a beardy bastard and exploiting it for LOS reasons...

I'm sure our difference of opinion is influenced by our different experiences in the hobby. Do you really come across that many legitimate LOS exploiters?

In any event I've never rebased anything in my armies. I spend too much time and energy painting and basing them the first time around to be bothered to do it again. I'm also reluctant to replace models with newer sculpts for the same reason (unless I really like the newer sculpt). I'm not doing this to be a LOS exploiter. I just don't care enough about tournament play to structure my hobby time around it.

the only alternative to my old model ork kan wall army is my ork BW army which consists of converted SM and IG tanks/transports (which have a completely different footprint from the current BW model) that use to be looted vehicles under the old codex. Either way I'm completely violating your definition of fair play, and I'm really not doing it to be beardy. That's what bugs me.

insaniak wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:At no stage did I mention 'illegal' or the rules, I said what people should be doing. It would be entirely unacceptable behaviour to show up to a game with an original avatar, it's a MC according to it's rules but the original model is smaller than an autarch.

From my experience, most players would be excited enough to see such an old model on the board that size considerations wouldn't be particularly important.

From my experience, my gaming group would be fine with it as long as we used the height and base of the current avatar for consideration for LOS and templates etc. Otherwise it would be construed as taking the piss.

insaniak wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:In a friendly, I wouldn't give much of a crap about the monster square bases vs the round bases, what the straight lines deny in templates, the corners will give back.

Again, you don't lose anything by using the square base because the length of the square base is exactly the same as the diameter of the round one. A 40mm base is 40mm across, whether it is round or square. The square bases are the size of the round ones, with corners added on top.

Which is dandy till in a comp someone says that 'well it wouldn't really/would affect my ogryn since they are supposed to be on round bases but I couldn't be bothered to change them over'. In cases of a lack of clarity, why the hell shouldn't a model be on the base size of the unit it's supposed to be representing?

insaniak wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:If not, are we going to see lots of the old killa kans bought online by tourney players on the chance they have the smaller bases...

Yup, they'll be right in there with all the vast hordes of kneeling Wraithlords.

Models can be reposed to exploit the rules on LOS, I'd take one look and remind them of the current base and outline for all calculations. If some fella showed up to play me with the old 'runtbotz' and claimed to use them as killa kans, as someone here posted a while back, I have absolutely no problem with them but I will assume for shooting them, that they are twice the height and have the current correct model base.

insaniak wrote:
The simple fact is that GW used square bases for all of their large models for at least 15 years. There are just so many of them out there that seeing them still used on the table is not at all uncommon... and most players simply don't care. So long as you're not altering bases significantly, specifically for some sort of perceived advantage, most players don't even notice, let alone complain about how much differently it causes the model to function in game.

People are not going to rebase all of their old models. Well, some will... but most just don't care enough about bases (or don't care for the expense of it) for it to be worth the effort for the infinitesimal impact it actually has on the game.

The money involved in taking things off square bases and putting them on round bases is feth all. If you are referring to a display model, well then display it somewhere.

There is no way in hell someone is putting that drizzle of piss old avatar down on the table and telling me it's a MC, unless they are prepared to have a larger base under it and accept that I'll assume the space 3 inches over it's head is also viable target.

So I'm the proud owner of 12 old style MegaNobs, on 25mm bases and your suggesting that I'm "cheating" by using them and you'd A) want me to rebase them on 40mm B) Measur to some imaginary point above their heads.

Also what about my Gorkamorka trukks? Hmmm???

ChrisCP wrote:So I'm the proud owner of 12 old style MegaNobs, on 25mm bases and your suggesting that I'm "cheating" by using them and you'd A) want me to rebase them on 40mm B) Measur to some imaginary point above their heads.

I would expect you to play them however the hell you want to play them pal. In a casual game.

In a tournament, where there should be a common criteria, MANZ should be on the bases they are currently equipped with, there should be neither benefit or penalty according to the age of the models. A meganob should, in the age of LOS and template weapon dominance, occupy a given space. Or you will find people coming to competitions with models sculpted to afford advantage or dug up old models for limited LOS. In a competition, benchmarks are important to the outcomes. Those benchmarks should be shared.

The old MANZ occupy feth all difference, silhouette wise, to the new ones. The comparison I was giving, was the old avatar, the first one, that is smaller than an exarch is nowadays.

And don't put words in my mouth pal, I didn't say 'cheating', if you want to sit more of your meganobs under a template because you still have them on old bases and in so doing have them closer together due to unit coherency, in friendly matches, I say knock yourself out.

In other news, the gorkamorka trukk is shorter wheelbase than the current ork trukk but is also wider, so it makes sweet feth all difference.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The model should use the current base size.

It would be entirely unacceptable behaviour to show up to a game with an original avatar, it's a MC according to it's rules but the original model is smaller than an autarch.

Or being a beardy bastard and exploiting it for LOS reasons...

Where? What tourney was it? Show me pictures of it. Show me the expression on the other guy's face when your friend pulled that 'mark of a total prick' stunt. Or are you jusssssst talking gak...

Models can be reposed to exploit the rules on LOS, I'd take one look and remind them of the current base and outline for all calculations. I

There is no way in hell someone is putting that drizzle of piss old avatar down on the table and telling me it's a MC, unless they are prepared to have a larger base under it and accept that I'll assume the space 3 inches over it's head is also viable target.

What is 'Legal'?

It would not be allowed in a tourney.

Hahaha, 'mate' be very careful - words in your mouth indeed - all of the above aye?

'In other news' actually old mega nobz are smaller than the AoBR nobz, and the old trukks hardy stand an inch high.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

In a tournament, where there should be a common criteria, MANZ should be on the bases they are currently equipped with, there should be neither benefit or penalty according to the age of the models. A meganob should, in the age of LOS and template weapon dominance, occupy a given space. Or you will find people coming to competitions with models sculpted to afford advantage or dug up old models for limited LOS. In a competition, benchmarks are important to the outcomes. Those benchmarks should be shared.

And in any tournament you run, you can apply those rules. Just make sure they're porperly advertised and that all players are aware of your idiosyncracy with the basing rules up front.

However, I don't recall this having EVER been a concern in any tourney I've been to. Let's see, that's 20+ US/Canadian GTs and god knows how many indy events. And that doesn't include the ones I've run, either indenpendently or as a judge/head judge at the Baltimore Games Day RTTs. I've seen Leman Russ 'tanks' built up from old WW2 Czech t-29 (IIRC), anyways, like half the size of a HW Leman Russ, at the US GTs, I think the army won some sort of painting or Player's Choice prize. I personally still field RT-IG Heavy Weapons on 25mm bases and even some old models still on hexagonal bases. Again, never a concern and positive comments from players, opponents and staff.

Point being, while you may have a particular opinion on this, that's all it is, an opinion. You can take your "should" and use it in your own events. The rest of us aren't gonna worry that much about it. Now you're gonna make me dig through my boxes and see if I still have my old 'smaller-than-a-current-guardian' Avatar.

MGS, your dictation that this is how people "should" play smacks of egoism. You've no ability at all to dictate how things should be done. The models were supplied with the bases they were supplied with. The old Avatar is the size of the old Avatar, and that's really it. The rules don't say to measure LOS to imaginary points above peoples head.

My Cadian HW teams are all on kneeling legs, but I modeled one on standing legs. Should I then draw LOS to his crotch, because he's only supposed to be that tall?

I mean, you're free to measure to imaginary points all you like, but don't try and come riding in on a high horse proclaiming that that's how it 'should' be done.

Vanguard27 wrote:

Pika_power wrote:It is legal via the rules. They must be based on the bases they come with. So technically it's illegal to change them, as they came on the square ones.

As for it being poor form: I don't think so. If it's a friendly pick-up-and-play, who cares? I'd consider it fairly poor form to attack someone over bases they're using for their _Ogryns_ in a friendly game, but if we go too far down that route, everyone is dubbed TFG.

So, my terminators should be on the smaller bases, as they are the old metal ones, and thats what they came with?

By the letter of the rules, yes. (Read: Playing to the letter of the rules makes considerably less sense than running headlong into a brick wall, and I would not suggest anyone do either)

And the time you template a unit of ogryns and you can't target all of them because your opponent has measured unit coherency from diagonal corner to diagonal corner of his bases and enough of the unit therefore survives to contest an objective or kill something of yours? You really want to lose a game to that?

It can be exploited, it isn't the current base for the model range and it can lead to a double standard for the same unit according to when you bought the model.
I call it poor sportsmanship.

Of course, if you disagree, then by the letter of the BGB, we should make all the older models wear their old bases.
All those metal termies back on little bases and pie plate the crap out of them till our sick little hearts burst with joy.