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.

More specifically basing for advantage. Was gonna put this question in P & M but i think the 'ole DD might get some mileage out of it. Lets say i am converting something to represent dark eldar beasts, i am not a fan of the cavalry base so will be using 40mm's instead and may be uing a spare dread base for a clawed fiend beast (a bit more sketchy i know), could this be misconstrued as modelling for advantage?

To boil it down; Replacing a small base with a big one? Or a big one with a smaller one? Which is worse?

They are both equal sins in front of the holy Rules Layers.

Could it be? Sure.

The vast majority of players just won't care, though. Most people won't even notice that they're not on the 'right' bases until you point it out. And for the infinitisemal impact it has on the game, most won't mind, so long as the base looks appropriate to the model.

To boil it down; Replacing a small base with a big one? Or a big one with a smaller one? Which is worse?

Strict rules-wise, either is a problem.

In gameplay, they have have their positives and negatives.

Meanwhile, rules questions go in YMDC. Moving this one now.

The Official models for the DE beasts ARE on 40mm round bases and NOT on Cavalry/bike bases.

Two questions to ask yourself when modeling something nonstandard:

1) Is it going to look cool?

2) Can you honestly say you're not doing it to gain some kind of advantage, however slight, over your opponent?

If you answer yes to both questions, then I say let the creative juices flow! Anyone who makes a fuss about it isn't really worth playing against.

P.S. Be wary of tournaments since the T.O. is the final say, and if they don't like your nonstandard modeling then you're basically out of luck.

DoW

svendrex wrote:The Official models for the DE beasts ARE on 40mm round bases and NOT on Cavalry/bike bases.

Well, he did say warp beasts, which are the beasts from the old codex, and they were on cavalry bases.

Galador wrote:

svendrex wrote:The Official models for the DE beasts ARE on 40mm round bases and NOT on Cavalry/bike bases.

Well, he did say warp beasts, which are the beasts from the old codex, and they were on cavalry bases.

Actually, he didn't. He said he was converting some Dark Eldar beasts. Now, I think that's what he will be converting them out of (or maybe Chaos Warhounds).

1: Strick rules wise?
Would have to be on the generic base size for the right model.

2: My take?
Aslong as you dont use those fugly pieces of gak that GW call beasts i dont mind what you base yours on.
Aslong as it looks good and wasnt obviously designed for your own gain, its fine.