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.

BearersOfSalvation wrote: "OK, your bases are the wrong size, use these other bases to find out what the position is" would be fine,

This is the first reasonable remark I have seen.

While I always enjoy an over-exaggerated, 1-sided internet lynching behind someone's back... I have observed it is fairly common for TOs to require 25mm termies to be treated as if on 40mm bases. They usually have some to spare and some bluetac.

I do find it somewhat disingenuous to use multiple units of termies in the same list with different base sizes, especially at a tourney and then turn around and claim 'why should I re-base my minis?' I think people would have legitimate issues if all your assault termies were 25mm and all your other termies were 40mm.

TOs have the right to enforce whatever rules they wish. I think requiring all 40mm bases for a tourney is reasonable even with the 'bases they came with' rule. If you want to play at tourneys, take the 5$ and 20 minutes to rebase on 40mm. You can even glue your 25mm bases to your 40mm bases and add some rocks and paint and not even damage the model itself.

For this drama to play out to script, isn't this the point at which the tournament organizer, tournament organizer's best friend, or someone else at the tournament is supposed to discover Dakka Dakka, discover this thread, and inform everyone of the various other things the original poster was doing during the tournament or previously at the store?

Assuming you are reporting accurately I agree totally that the judge/TO was being a power tripping cock. The whole 'waiting' for you to 'do it' should have been sign enough.

But even the whole 'TO' thing is a MtG term, and it seems that people are more recently trying to 'standardise' what is a non-standard game. It involves things that are highly mutable such as tables, scenery, humans. It's not so rigidly defined like MtG where everything is defined precisely to death.

I'd name and shame said TO so none of the rest of us get screwed and maybe said TO will learn.

nkelsch - while TOs can enforce any rules they like, having an idea of that beforehand is a little better than randomly *waiting* for someone to deploy troops from reserve and to then make them change which models they were using.

That was crazy. I would have simply refused at that point, pointed out the basing rules, and asked for my money back if the TO insisted on changing the rules of the game when neither player had asked them to.

Nkelsch
What you say is fair enough, but is after the event.
And while the TO may have the right to enforce the ruling he went about it entirely inappropriately.

As I have already stated, the TO could have used the larger bases as a footprint to resolve the problem rather than electing to wait and make a meal of it.

Again if the TO was hovering waiting to happen, he would also know there would be a potential issue with being charged as you say.
Why leave it till the game is under way before saying something?

I don't know how much of the story I believe and I am not going to debate the supposed actions of the TO.

But I do agree with the concept that deepstriking 25mm base assault termies have an in-game advantage and would be seen as modeling for advantage by *MANY* tourneys. Especially with mixing bases in the same army.

I agree with the TO that the action of deepstriking 25mm when using 40mm elsewhere may warrant TO scrutiny, especially if a previous player complained and reported it for him to 'observe'. But since this is a onesided internet lynching... all I can really say is "rebase your models on 40mm and be consistant throughout your whole army and you won't experience issues."

nkelsch wrote:But I do agree with the concept that deepstriking 25mm base assault termies have an in-game advantage and would be seen as modeling for advantage by *MANY* tourneys. Especially with mixing bases in the same army.

Except in the original story, it was ranged Termies he was trying to Deep Strike... the TO forced him to replace them with the larger based Assault Termies...

... all I can really say is "rebase your models on 40mm and be consistant throughout your whole army and you won't experience issues."

Until you run into the guy who says 'Hey, those aren't the bases that those models came with... !'

insaniak wrote:

nkelsch wrote:... all I can really say is "rebase your models on 40mm and be consistant throughout your whole army and you won't experience issues."

Until you run into the guy who says 'Hey, those aren't the bases that those models came with... !'

And it will be the guy shooting AP2 blasts at them...

There is no winning on this. No matter how you do it, someone will construe it as modelling for the advantage.

I have some old shooty terminators too, and I ended up rebasing them. Fewer people will recognize the models as being older than complain about the size of the base.

insaniak wrote:

nkelsch wrote:But I do agree with the concept that deepstriking 25mm base assault termies have an in-game advantage and would be seen as modeling for advantage by *MANY* tourneys. Especially with mixing bases in the same army.

Except in the original story, it was ranged Termies he was trying to Deep Strike... the TO forced him to replace them with the larger based Assault Termies...

... all I can really say is "rebase your models on 40mm and be consistant throughout your whole army and you won't experience issues."

Until you run into the guy who says 'Hey, those aren't the bases that those models came with... !'

25mm bases have an advantage when deepstriking... using 25mm bases for deepstriking and 40mm for others is inconsistent.

'these are the bases they came with' is a jackass response in a game of being socially respectful to your opponent.

Like I said... If you put everything on 40mm, you won't have an issue. Could the TO have handled it better? maybe... there is a lot we don't know about what actually happened or if it actually went down the way the OP said it did... and many times TOs are responding to someone else, so what if someone felt cheated by playing TFG who used multiple base sizes for in-game advantages and reported it to the TO?

I vote 'consistent basesizes for the same models' is reasonable and many events require current production base sizes for models. Not saying what is right or wrong, but I guarantee I can tell you what a majority of the laidback people who wouldn't dare shove 'the base it came with' in someones face to gain an in-game advantage would say...

Use 40mm bases for termies.

Sorry but you are not correct to say that there will not be an issue. Its just less likely. I've had someone point out to me that the terminators I swapped to larger bases were no longer on their supplied bases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:I vote 'consistent basesizes for the same models' is reasonable and many events require current production base sizes for models. Not saying what is right or wrong, but I guarantee I can tell you what a majority of the laidback people who wouldn't dare shove 'the base it came with' in someones face to gain an in-game advantage would say...

Use 40mm bases for termies.

This is your own house rule not RAW. The rules tell you to do something else.

Dracos wrote:Sorry but you are not correct to say that there will not be an issue. Its just less likely. I've had someone point out to me that the terminators I swapped to larger bases were no longer on their supplied bases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:I vote 'consistent basesizes for the same models' is reasonable and many events require current production base sizes for models. Not saying what is right or wrong, but I guarantee I can tell you what a majority of the laidback people who wouldn't dare shove 'the base it came with' in someones face to gain an in-game advantage would say...

Use 40mm bases for termies.

This is your own house rule not RAW. The rules tell you to do something else.

And most people don't play RAW because RAW breaks the game. And events usually play a form of RAI controlled by FAQs and TO discretion.

Most reasonable people like to go play games without doing things purposefully to instigate conflict and browbeat opponents with RAW.

Since a majority of people who don't frequent Dakka don't even know what the term RAW means, it just seems like a really socially inept thing to do by screaming at someone 'they are the bases my models came with'.

If you don't like it and really need to have your 25mm based termies, then be sure to talk to the TO before the event starts and say 'I plan to use 25mm bases because this is RAW and you don't have the right to tell me otherwise' and get his response. It is his event, he decides what version of RAW will be allowed to happen. Being 'right' and having your internet buddies backslap you in agreement doesn't do much when playing at an event and you are told your RAW isn't welcome. So at somepoint there is the game being played and internet RAW.

Or use consistent 40mm and never have a problem ever.

nkelsch wrote:25mm bases have an advantage when deepstriking...

They also have a massive disadvantage, in that they're more vulnerable to blasts and templates for the turn in which they have to stand around in a huddle.

using 25mm bases for deepstriking and 40mm for others is inconsistent.

Sure. But it's also allowed by the rules. A TO is certainly within their rights to alter the basing rules... but this most definitely should be explained before the event.

'these are the bases they came with' is a jackass response in a game of being socially respectful to your opponent.

What? How?

Like I said... If you put everything on 40mm, you won't have an issue.

And like I said, all it does is change the potential issue.

The way to not have an issue is for TO's to clearly outline any modelling requirements in the tournament rules package. If they fail to do that, then the way to not have issues is to stick to the printed rules rather than assuming that a player is modelling for advantage simply by using the models that they have, as they were originally purchased.


You're absolutely right in that we only have one side of the story here. But you appear to be making a huge assumption that anyone using 25mm bases on their Termies is doing so purely for an in-game advantage (which, as has been pointed out, isn't strictly accurate anyway).

Again I see why you say all that, and it may be good advice, but it is for the future.
Unless you are going to jump into a time machine and forewarn the OP.

Yes this is one side of the story, but am not getting the impression that the OP is a cheat or a liar. Nor am I seeing anyone preparing a slipknot for the TO...

So much upset over 15 mill
Good grief there's people having a daily ten mile round walk just to get fresh water.

nkelsch wrote:And most people don't play RAW because RAW breaks the game. And events usually play a form of RAI controlled by FAQs and TO discretion.

So who gave you authority to speak for "most people"? Did you take a worldwide poll? People I've played with play by the rules (RAW) as closely as possible, using GW FAQ and comprimise to work out grey areas.

This is not a grey area.

nkelsch wrote:Or use consistent 40mm and never have a problem ever.

Dracos wrote:Sorry but you are not correct to say that there will not be an issue. Its just less likely. I've had someone point out to me that the terminators I swapped to larger bases were no longer on their supplied bases.

Did you miss the part where I have had personal experience that proves your assertion that it will fix the problem to be incorrect?

Were the shooty termies in LR?

Deepstrike shooty, assault in LR

Nkelsch - so pointing out the 100% clear, no room for argument RULE on page 3 is "inconsistent"?

If a TO wants to HOUSERULE something this should be stated clearly *before* the event. Given they are running the event FOR the players, not themselves, there is 0 reason to hide this decision from the players.

liam0404 wrote:
The termies in the land raider were Assault terminators equipped with LC's (and assaulting from the LRC was approved in this tournament before anyone jumps on that bandwagon!!).

Now I know this is a little off topic but why would this even be an issue? I thought all land raider variants had the assault vehicle rule.

Black Templar ones do not, as the rule did not exist in 4th edition codexes - it was in the main rulebook.

Thaylen wrote:Now I know this is a little off topic but why would this even be an issue? I thought all land raider variants had the assault vehicle rule.

Black Templars Land Raiders currently don't... See this thread for the last discussion on this issue.

Wow that TO sounds like really bad news. Must suckage to be him.

insaniak wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:When I bought a box of the newer terminators... a year or two ago, I distinctly recall it coming with both the 25mm and the 40mm bases. Did I just get a freak box?

It comes with the 40mm bases for the Terminators, and a sprue of four 25mm bases (unless they've changed them over to one of the little baggies of loose bases by now, in which case it probably has 5 or 6) so you can put a base on the Teleport Homer, should you be so inclined.

nkelsch wrote:

BearersOfSalvation wrote: "OK, your bases are the wrong size, use these other bases to find out what the position is" would be fine,

This is the first reasonable remark I have seen.

Terminators still come with 25mm bases so its perfectly legitimate to use them. So there is nothing wrong with 3rd edition or 5th edition terminators being on 25mm bases. The TO were wrong, even if they're empowered to force that wrong on a player.

stompydakka wrote:wow.... i feel bad for you. If i was the opponent, i would have spoken up...

Yes, that is probably what I would have done. He can't just walk up to you and call you a liar without any evidence whatsoever. As others said, a smaller base has disadvantages as well. You are more susceptible to blast weapons for one. There are a number of other things that could go wrong.http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/recentTopics/showTopicsByUserSubscription/11731.page

His final ruling was also pretty ridiculous. You can't make a new rule in the middle of a game. Its even worse that he was waiting to tell you that.

Even if his opponent had spoken up I doubt it would have made any difference. The TO seemed to have it in for that unit. If I were the opponent I would have apologized after the TO left but I wouldn't have interrupted him.

nkelsch wrote:'these are the bases they came with' is a jackass response in a game of being socially respectful to your opponent.

Actually, I think calling someone a 'jackass' for quietly and politely following a clearly-written rule is pretty much a dictionary-worthy example of being socially disrespectful to your opponent. Why is it that on these boards the first people to trot out 'ohh, this is a social game' are the ones calling people who just try to play fairly 'jackass', and generally being horribly disrespectful to people just trying to play the game?

Do you really think that you'd get many 'yes' answers if you ask people in general 'if someone is going to be playing a game with models with an unknown group of people, and he consults the rulebook and follows it exactly for how to assemble his models, is he being a jackass?' It saddens me to see how many people pervert the idea of social respect into 'do whatever I say even if it's the opposite of the rulebook or I'll say you're unsociable'.

I vote 'consistent basesizes for the same models' is reasonable and many events require current production base sizes for models. Not saying what is right or wrong, but I guarantee I can tell you what a majority of the laidback people who wouldn't dare shove 'the base it came with' in someones face to gain an in-game advantage would say...

If you're demanding that people rebase models in direct contradiction to the RAW and RAI, you're not a 'laidback' person at all. That's control freak behavior, and trying to justify it by calling yourself 'laid back' when the evidence is the opposite doesn't change things.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:And most people don't play RAW because RAW breaks the game. And events usually play a form of RAI controlled by FAQs and TO discretion.

Any event requiring rebasing terminators is going directly against the clear RAW and RAI. The intent of the rule is clearly 'if you buy a GW mini and use what comes in the box, the base is fine', not the direct opposite of that.

Most reasonable people like to go play games without doing things purposefully to instigate conflict and browbeat opponents with RAW.

I don't think that the guy following simple, clearly defined rules is the one instigating conflict. I think that the guy creating house rules inconsistent with the RAI and RAW, then springing them on his opponent at the last minute is the one purposefully trying to instigate conflict.

So should players with 25 mm bases glue them onto 40 mm bases ?

I think the TO violated one of the unwritten rules of the game, which is that as long as both players are having fun and agreeing, the judge shouldn't interfere with the game.

As for actual basing... I dunno. The new termies have been out for like five years now, and I think that it's getting to be time to switch over. I wouldn't do what the TO did here, of course, but by this point the game works best with consistent bases.

I have several generations of terminators. I have ripped all older models off their 25mm bases, cut off the lead slot insert and re-based them on 40mm bases. My choice, I did it to have a consistent army.

I don't play in tournaments or with strangers so I don't have some of the aforementioned problems... there are enough real rules problems my friends and I can already fight about!

Here is the weird thing, are my old terminators illegal because they are on 40mm bases? Kind of strange when you look at it the other way. Not that it matters.

i've had the same problem both with my terminators in my 3rd edition and older BA army and my 3rd edition IG army with the heavy weapons teams (who switched to 60mm bases mandatory this codex). i simply carry the extra bases around with me. i usually use them regardless but every once in a while i forget; if it ever becomes an issue, i can simply slide them under.

warboss wrote:i've had the same problem both with my terminators in my 3rd edition and older BA army and my 3rd edition IG army with the heavy weapons teams (who switched to 60mm bases mandatory this codex). i simply carry the extra bases around with me. i usually use them regardless but every once in a while i forget; if it ever becomes an issue, i can simply slide them under.

I am in the middle of my rip and replace for the IG heavy weapons too. It really is a good policy to update your army the modern bases, you can't go wrong that way and you'll have a less stressful life. Of course 6th edition will make every base a mandatory 33.3mm and we'll have to rip every model apart!

Are you sure you can't tell us where this tournament was so that we need never attend by accident?