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.

Hi everyone!

This is kind of a rules question, kind of not. It's actually quite squirrely what category it goes it; perhaps it belongs in general though I was most curious if RAW covers the situation.

So, soul grinders or defilers:
The instructions tell you not to stick the legs on with glue. They do indeed hold into place, and the intent clearly is that they can move/wiggle about.

The current rules for the game say that moving any part of the model counts against its movement (e.g. spinning a Vanquisher's turret 90 degrees means that it's moved more than half its distance and can't Grinding Advance).

Can the Defiler/Soul Grinder alter itself on the fly to fit into gaps in the terrain or get/lose line of sight? (e.g. by squeezing its legs in tight, then spreading out) This seems like the answer is yes but it also seems absurd, especially given that each individual piece subtracts from the unit's movement - or does it? Do you just measure from starting position to final position for the move, or do you subtract every fraction-of-an-inch for each leg/claw contraction/expansion? I'm very confused. You could actually "gain" movement from contracting and expanding the claws, depending on how this rule shakes out - and if it shakes out the other way, there's going to be a LOT (and I mean a sufferingly large amount) of very fiddly measuring and even calculations, given that the part that moves the furthest may not actually be on the tabletop (given the shape of the legs/claws and the fact that they can be jointed in the middle).

One solution exists in AOS, where they are given base sizes. Defiler kits, though, don't come with bases, only Soul Grinder kits, so not sure about their legality in 40k - and they do change how the model behaves, somewhat, since you have to measure from the base rather than the hull. It does, however, add consistency and is probably the option I am going to go with, unless someone can point out a problem with it. Still, it isn't RAW to put a base (at least on a Defiler, and the Soul Grinder still comes with an old square one). So:

1) What's the RAW answer? (just to satisfy my own curiosity)
2) What's the HWYPI answer? (just to see what people prefer/think is reasonable)
3) What's the RAI answer? (just give your best guess, since we can't actually know this unless the designer himself posts!).

From the movement section of the core rules:

When you move a unit, you can move any of its models (you can also choose not to move some of the models in that unit if you wish). Whenever you move a model, you can pivot it and/or change its position on the battlefield along any path, but no part of the model’s base (or hull) can be moved across the bases (or hulls) of other models, nor can any part of that model (including its base) cross the edge of the battlefield. You can also rotate any movable part of the model (such as turrets and sponsons) when it is moved. The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model’s base (or hull) that moves furthest along its path (including parts that rotate or pivot).

Provided no part of the model moves more than the move characteristic I don’t see a problem with adjusting the leg positions any more than I would with someone turning a turret or sponson to avoid LOS or fir any other reason.

Yes, but lets say I have my defiler claws fully extended, then I contract them fully.

Do I subtract that amount from my upcoming move? If so, the claws have moved (say) 4" back, so if I move 4" further the claws are right back where they started, but the model only got to move half distance. By itself I suppose that makes sense (if it's a bit silly), but...

What about contracting the legs - if I pull in the claws and all 4 legs, do I subtract their collective amounts from my upcoming move? Do I have to measure how far each leg component moves (or at least guess which part of the leg is moving furthest and measure that)? I ask because it may not be the tip of the leg. The tip can move in a single direction (or even stay stationary), but the "knee" can move in two dimensions, so you can move the tip inwards towards the center of the model (or not at all) while swinging the "knee" backwards like a folding wing and...

... oh dear. Do you see the problem?

Ah, I see the issue now.

From a strictly RAW viewpoint, I would say if you were to adjust any part of the model, including moving extended parts closer to the main body (or rotating a turret so that the gun barrel doesn’t protrude from the hull for that matter) then the unit has moved, that is, it hasn’t “remained stationary”. As such, any adjustments would be a “fall back” move if you were in engagement range.

I don’t think it’s possible to assign a numerical value to the move in this case though. So, if you were to retract the legs, and then move the hull forward as far as the legs had been positioned, you have moved, and the distance moved would be measured from whichever part (presumably the back legs) that moved the greatest distance.

Does that make sense?

Aash wrote:
Ah, I see the issue now.

From a strictly RAW viewpoint, I would say if you were to adjust any part of the model, including moving extended parts closer to the main body (or rotating a turret so that the gun barrel doesn’t protrude from the hull for that matter) then the unit has moved, that is, it hasn’t “remained stationary”. As such, any adjustments would be a “fall back” move if you were in engagement range.

I don’t think it’s possible to assign a numerical value to the move in this case though. So, if you were to retract the legs, and then move the hull forward as far as the legs had been positioned, you have moved, and the distance moved would be measured from whichever part (presumably the back legs) that moved the greatest distance.

Does that make sense?

It does, thanks. I agree that you have "moved" but it makes the Defiler quite good at taking up space, fitting through a gap, and then going back to taking up space again. You could go from Baneblade Wide to almost leman-russ skinny back to Baneblade Wide again, depending on how the "furthest part" moved. Especially if they're "lateral" movements relative to the direction that the hull moves; you end up with a diagonal for your furthest moved piece, which is still a good bit further than is probably reasonable.

Yeah, it’s an odd one. A base would certainly make things easier.

Aash wrote:
Yeah, it’s an odd one. A base would certainly make things easier.

I agree - I am hoping this thread ends up saying that using the AOS-sized base for the Soul Grinder (even though the model doesn't come with it) and using the same base on the Defiler (even though it doesn't have an AOS base size given that it's 40k only) is the optimal solution. But since that's a HWYPI option, I wanted to give the community a chance to voice their concerns - or, perhaps, explain to me what is going on RAW because if it turns out it's way easier then that's probably preferable to a house-rule solution.

My friend put his Soul Grinder on a base and they just use that. I'd do the same for a Defiler because the crab claws do make it a pain to use.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Aash wrote:
Yeah, it’s an odd one. A base would certainly make things easier.

I agree - I am hoping this thread ends up saying that using the AOS-sized base for the Soul Grinder (even though the model doesn't come with it) and using the same base on the Defiler (even though it doesn't have an AOS base size given that it's 40k only) is the optimal solution. But since that's a HWYPI option, I wanted to give the community a chance to voice their concerns - or, perhaps, explain to me what is going on RAW because if it turns out it's way easier then that's probably preferable to a house-rule solution.

The easiest fix would probably be to glue legs and claws in place so they can’t move at all and avoid the whole movement issue entirely, without having to use a base at all. That being said, I think a base is a better answer.

I doubt anyone would accuse you of modelling for advantage by putting it in a base of a reasonable size.

As a bit of an aside, according to the FAQs for the guidelines for playing in organised events at Warhammer World, they say miniatures should be used with the bases provided, but then say that if base sizes have changed you should use the most recent base size. Not confusing at all.

They also say it’s not ok to use a smaller base than provided, but using a larger one is fine (usually to allow for detail and stuff). As the Defiler doesn’t have a base, I suppose any base you use is larger than the one provided! Just add some cool details and make a nice scenic base and you’re good to go I suppose!

Can I change the base size of my model?
Typically the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the games rules are designed around, so altering the base size can have an impact on gameplay. For Grand Tournament events miniatures must be on the intended base size, however for other events, such as Campaign weekends or Throne of Skulls this ruling is a little more relaxed.
In these cases, ’downsizing’ the base size is not permitted as this can lead to advantages in games. On the other hand, making a base larger within reason (usually for added detail purposes on a character or conversion) is permitted.
The models in my army used to be supplied with a smaller base than they are currently supplied with, do I need to rebase to the new size?
As above, the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the game rules are designed around, so any older base sizes do need to be upgraded. However we understand this can take time, so if the base size changes for a model kit, any events within a month of the change are exempt from resizing, though we would certainly encourage it.

https://warhammerworld.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2019/10/Updated-Model-Requirements.pdf

When you move a unit, you can move any of its models (you can also choose not to move some of the models in that unit if you wish). Whenever you move a model, you can pivot it and/or change its position on the battlefield along any path, but no part of the model’s base (or hull) can be moved across the bases (or hulls) of other models, nor can any part of that model (including its base) cross the edge of the battlefield. You can also rotate any movable part of the model (such as turrets and sponsons) when it is moved. The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model’s base (or hull) that moves furthest along its path (including parts that rotate or pivot).

We pretty much play by that rule as written, and it comes up quite often not only for defilers, but also for soul grinders, tiarch stalkers and multiple FW models. Essentially you just measure the point of the model that moved the furthest from it's original position, no matter what the other parts of the model do.

In practice, this usually means that people aren't changing the shape of their models a lot unless they want to "duck" into cover, block LoS, need to fit in a tight space, want to be able to shoot around a corner or, most commonly, just for the scenic effect.

So, RAW you can't really "gain" movement from contracting and expanding, as the part furthest away from it's original position will still be within your maximum movement distance. You are not going to be able to shoot or charge something that you couldn't shoot or charge if you hadn't changed the shape. Which is - when thinking back to 5th edition's pivoting drukhari transports - is probably exactly what they intended when writing the rule this way.
It's also not really fiddly to find out what part moved the furthest, it's usually either blatantly obvious because you intentionally struck out one part to be further ahead or it tends to be the same part of the model each time (knee spikes!). If you still struggle, you just measure from the part of the model closest to the point you want to move, put down some dice to mark the maximum movement distance and then make sure no part of your model is further ahead than your dice.

As someone who regularly plays ork buggies, an army with lots of large bases, I definitely advise not putting the defiler on a base unless you have to. In some mission/terrain combinations the deployment zone can get really crowded, especially for large models as the defiler. In more than one game I was forced to put parts of my army into reserves because unstable position terrain made it impossible to fit buggy or morkanaut bases.

Would you allow a defiler to "climb" terrain? Based on keywords or what?

Depends on who I play in what game mode.

RAW, if we are playing GT2020/21? Anything with unstable position or scalable is off limits.

Crusade or narrative game? Climb whatever you feel like, just don't break your model while doing so

The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

That's not what the instructions that came with mine said. They have the "No drippy bottle" symbol, which is defined in the legend as "Do Not Glue" (with what is presumably "do not glue" in several other languages afterwards).

It turns out that if you do glue it, I will definitely just use a base (to reinforce the connections).

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

Instructions on how to put the model kit together are not 40K rules. The 40K rules do not cover assembling or painting your models.

The instructions in the kit are more like guidelines on how that model can be assembled.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

Instructions on how to put the model kit together are not 40K rules. The 40K rules do not cover assembling or painting your models.

The instructions in the kit are more like guidelines on how that model can be assembled.

Dear gods man I was responding to the premise of the thread. Stow it, or post this on response to the OP! <facepalm>


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

That's not what the instructions that came with mine said. They have the "No drippy bottle" symbol, which is defined in the legend as "Do Not Glue" (with what is presumably "do not glue" in several other languages afterwards).

It turns out that if you do glue it, I will definitely just use a base (to reinforce the connections).

And check the box underneath that very Do Not Glue symbol-using diagram.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

That's not what the instructions that came with mine said. They have the "No drippy bottle" symbol, which is defined in the legend as "Do Not Glue" (with what is presumably "do not glue" in several other languages afterwards).

It turns out that if you do glue it, I will definitely just use a base (to reinforce the connections).

Assembly guides most likely get updated as well...

Disclaimer: I did this conversion during a time when the consensus was "You don't have permission to change how the model is arranged during the game, so don't" but mostly did it because I thought it would be cooler--I wanted Defiler action figures.

For what it's worth, around the time that the first Chaos Demons codex came out (back when Soul Grinders didn't have bases...), I built two Defilers where I magnetized the weapon arms, and replaced the plastic balls at the ends of the legs with rubber balls (which took some trying to find a place where I could buy them, let me tell you...) to fit the existing sockets. That's what you need to do if you want those legs to actually be posed -and- keep the pose the game. The idea "I'm just not going to glue them" is just a pure recipe for the model's joints slowly becoming more and more loose over time and eventually collapsing during a game.

I think I'd recommend to a new player to get a base for their Soulgrinder or Defiler models, and not adjust the model during play, still. It's much easier to deal with the model that way, even if you're trying to use in melee.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

Instructions on how to put the model kit together are not 40K rules. The 40K rules do not cover assembling or painting your models.

The instructions in the kit are more like guidelines on how that model can be assembled.

Dear gods man I was responding to the premise of the thread. Stow it, or post this on response to the OP! <facepalm>

And I was just alerting people to the actual rules.

This is YMDC after all for rules questions.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The instructions say “pose the legs and claws before final gluing.”

So there isn’t really any issue created as the model is intended to be glued. /thread

Instructions on how to put the model kit together are not 40K rules. The 40K rules do not cover assembling or painting your models.

The instructions in the kit are more like guidelines on how that model can be assembled.

Dear gods man I was responding to the premise of the thread. Stow it, or post this on response to the OP! <facepalm>

And I was just alerting people to the actual rules.

This is YMDC after all for rules questions.

So direct it to the OP whose thread begins with asking for rules interpretations based off modelling instructions. Don’t beat me with that stick.

Alright, I do see the instructions have that little blurb about gluing on them.

Interestingly, one of my defiler kits (newer) does have that, while the older one does not. I suppose this does mean they update their instructions.

That said, I think that means I will just put the defilers on a base (the AOS ones) since it is recommended to model them statically.