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.

Mannahnin wrote:The whole instruction sheet is in black & white.

The photos on the back of the box are in color.

But does it match the illustrations, as if it were a final product in illustration form. Or is it a real photo of a real model.

Scott-S6 wrote:

MisterMoon wrote:I guess I was wrong about this one. I did find a picture of a Chaos creature on a square base in the 40k rule book. Not sure if anyone else has mentioned this or not...

Not surprising since there are 40K models still being supplied with square bases only (e.g. flesh hounds)

Really? I have 5 of the previous flesh hound models as well as the previous bloodletters (both purchased at least 5 or 6 years ago) and i recall them only coming with round bases. I thought they would have both in the newer kits by now. I also find it odd that they'd go from supplying only round bases to only square.

The images on the front of the instruction sheet are of finished models on scenic bases; looks like a B&W rendering of a photo.

The images on the back are highly detailed as well; either photos of the actual pieces composited into the image, or CAD images of the pieces.

The picture on the front certainly appears to be consistent with the assembly instructions on the back, even if the images weren't generated the same way, the front image certainly implies "this is how they look when you're done."

Mannahnin wrote:The images on the front of the instruction sheet are of finished models on scenic bases; looks like a B&W rendering of a photo.

The images on the back are highly detailed as well; either photos of the actual pieces composited into the image, or CAD images of the pieces.

The picture on the front certainly appears to be consistent with the assembly instructions on the back, even if the images weren't generated the same way, the front image certainly implies "this is how they look when you're done."

Well if the image is of a real model, its legitimacy matches that of using the front of the box as assembly instructions. However, like I agreed if it showed both I would forfeit my argument.

Not as clear as I was hoping for.

Thus I conclude, the rules on page 3, describe that you can use any base that the models come with as legitimate bases in 40k.

That said, I still think the courteousness of requesting consent is an option worth testing. Only because my own experiences have granted me the competence to understand how useful of a tool it can be. For reasons shortly beyond being able to fairly field your models on square bases.

Mannahnin wrote:I know where they're coming from; I did the exact same thing with my daemons initially, and for the same reason. It was legal, and seemed the best way to give the models the dual utility of being used in both systems. It was only later that I realized that I was both disadvantaging myself in some cases, and making measurements awkward and potentially gaining an advantage in others, that I began to see issues. And being a big fantasy player, when I saw the converter movement trays, I realized you can get the best of both worlds and avoid headaches (even minor or occasional ones) entirely.

I have a few of the GF9 "converter" trays for Fantasy. The problem is that they're actually notably wider than a standard movement tray for square-based models (because the round bases aren't actually base-to-base while in the tray). And width-of-frontage is pretty darn important in WHFB, too. (Tends to be a disadvantage for my Horrors; would be great for Bloodletters, so I don't put them in those trays.)

For 40k, I move my old daemonettes (who ONLY came with square bases; these ladies have crab claws) very carefully - put down the 6" stick, and no part of the base moves further than that. It's no harder than moving my oval-based Tervigons, for whom I do the same thing.

Fair enough, Janthkin.

That really sucks, if the GF9 bases add width. The models should be touching. If they're not, that's a failure of design, and you're right, it screws up the frontage. Not okay in WH. Though you can usually compensate in combat by just doing the easy math to see how many are supposed to be in contact.

Fair enough on the square-based & Trygon/Tervigon movement, too. I just think it's one of those things which can also happen inadvertently if you're not careful.

Janthkin wrote:I have a few of the GF9 "converter" trays for Fantasy. The problem is that they're actually notably wider than a standard movement tray for square-based models (because the round bases aren't actually base-to-base while in the tray). And width-of-frontage is pretty darn important in WHFB, too. (Tends to be a disadvantage for my Horrors; would be great for Bloodletters, so I don't put them in those trays.)

An alternative then would be to just use normal movement trays, and mark 25mm increments along the front of it.

From the inside back cover of the 3rd edition CSM codex, a shocking depiction of square based models fighting against round bases:


Going through the instructions supplied with my most recent Chaos Daemon purchases, here's what I find.

(Plastic) Bloodcrushers: All three assembled models depicted on square bases.
(Plastic) Seekers of Slaanesh: All five assembled models depicted on the rectangular bases.
Bloodletters of Khorne: Three assembled models depicted on square bases on cover.
Daemonettes of Slaanesh: Three assembled models depicted on round bases on cover.
(Plastic) Daemon Prince: Instructions are given to assemble a "Warhammer Daemon Prince" with wings on a square base, and a "Warhammer 40,000 Daemon Prince" with the funky backpack on round base.
Pink Horrors: Instructions show both round and square bases for the six completed models, but the assembly instructions don't show bases.
Examining the Daemon spearhead box lid (since they printed the instructions there): The assembly instructions for the metal Bloodcrushers do not depict any bases, nor do the assembly instructions for the flesh hounds show any bases.

And then there's the Masque, Skulltaker, and the Changeling who all don't come with any assembly instructions at all. The one page instructions for Epidemius that I can find shows him on a round base.

Other kits which didn't come with instructions: The current Flamer box; the previous metal Horrors; the metal Plague Bearer boxes; the metal Plague Bearer command box.

And getting into the list of things that I've seen in the stores, there are the Beasts of Nurgle and Fiends of Slaanesh which are sold in blister packs containing both bases and no instructions what so ever. The Beast of Nurgle is depicted in the codex on a large round base, but currently ships with a medium round base (I don't remember which size square base I saw last time).

By all means, please try to construct a convincing argument from the instructions when half of them show square bases.

insaniak wrote:

Janthkin wrote:I have a few of the GF9 "converter" trays for Fantasy. The problem is that they're actually notably wider than a standard movement tray for square-based models (because the round bases aren't actually base-to-base while in the tray). And width-of-frontage is pretty darn important in WHFB, too. (Tends to be a disadvantage for my Horrors; would be great for Bloodletters, so I don't put them in those trays.)

An alternative then would be to just use normal movement trays, and mark 25mm increments along the front of it.

Yup. I also know folks who construct their own out of balsa wood, lining the bottom with a sheet of thin-guage steel, and sticking their round-based Daemons on using rare earth magnets on the bottoms of the bases.

solkan wrote:From the inside back cover of the 3rd edition CSM codex, a shocking depiction of square based models fighting against round bases:


Going through the instructions supplied with my most recent Chaos Daemon purchases, here's what I find.

(Plastic) Bloodcrushers: All three assembled models depicted on square bases.
(Plastic) Seekers of Slaanesh: All five assembled models depicted on the rectangular bases.
Bloodletters of Khorne: Three assembled models depicted on square bases on cover.
Daemonettes of Slaanesh: Three assembled models depicted on round bases on cover.
(Plastic) Daemon Prince: Instructions are given to assemble a "Warhammer Daemon Prince" with wings on a square base, and a "Warhammer 40,000 Daemon Prince" with the funky backpack on round base.
Pink Horrors: Instructions show both round and square bases for the six completed models, but the assembly instructions don't show bases.
Examining the Daemon spearhead box lid (since they printed the instructions there): The assembly instructions for the metal Bloodcrushers do not depict any bases, nor do the assembly instructions for the flesh hounds show any bases.

And then there's the Masque, Skulltaker, and the Changeling who all don't come with any assembly instructions at all. The one page instructions for Epidemius that I can find shows him on a round base.

Other kits which didn't come with instructions: The current Flamer box; the previous metal Horrors; the metal Plague Bearer boxes; the metal Plague Bearer command box.

And getting into the list of things that I've seen in the stores, there are the Beasts of Nurgle and Fiends of Slaanesh which are sold in blister packs containing both bases and no instructions what so ever. The Beast of Nurgle is depicted in the codex on a large round base, but currently ships with a medium round base (I don't remember which size square base I saw last time).

By all means, please try to construct a convincing argument from the instructions when half of them show square bases.

Bravo sir! I will not object.

The made daemons of two game systems they intended you to use square for WH and round for 40k (these sets where released AFTER the base rule was witten) its another GW being lazy and inconsistant. I would expect any player to use the right bases* for models regardless of game.

* right bases
25 mm for normal guys
40mm for some elites or fast attacks. (cant remember if chaos deamon has any 40mm models, most are 25/60mm)
60 mm for MCs and Mounted guys.
Bike bases for Most Beasts.

ThatMG wrote:The made daemons of two game systems they intended you to use square for WH and round for 40k (these sets where released AFTER the base rule was witten) its another GW being lazy and inconsistant. I would expect any player to use the right bases* for models regardless of game.

* right bases
25 mm for normal guys
40mm for some elites or fast attacks. (cant remember if chaos deamon has any 40mm models, most are 25/60mm)
60 mm for MCs and Mounted guys.
Bike bases for Most Beasts.

I warn you, this logic is not popular here.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Page 3, where it states you use the base supplied with the model.

There is my rule allowing me to use square bases. Please find a rule requiring them to be circular.

Jet bikes had, at one point, awful hexagonal bases.

Flawless.

That logic is fine... so long as it is presented as a house rule, rather than anything actually presented in the rules of the game.

insaniak wrote:That logic is fine... so long as it is presented as a house rule, rather than anything actually presented in the rules of the game.

Well as I was informed before this forum index is for the discussion of rules. And since I didn't back myself up with any, my logic was forfeit.

So what you mean to say is, this logic is fine, as long as you understand its not the Real rules. -edit, this contradicts you objecting my statement. To be more clear.

YMDC is for discussing the rules. That, by its very nature, includes how you would choose to play the game where that differs from the actual rules.

Where you run into problems is when you present something as an actual rule when it isn't. Which is what you did by arguing that 40K requires round bases.

Stating that you prefer round bases is fine. Stating that the rules require round bases is not... because they don't.

Mannahnin wrote:Yup. I also know folks who construct their own out of balsa wood, lining the bottom with a sheet of thin-guage steel, and sticking their round-based Daemons on using rare earth magnets on the bottoms of the bases.

I have some standard GF9 movement trays as well. Best solution: go to Michael's/craft store, and get rolls of adhesive-backed magnet. Rare earth magnets stick well to it, irrespective of polarity, and you don't have to cut tin/sheet metal yourself.

I put my Tau XV25 Stealth Suits on 40mm bases. The models are too large for 25mm bases.

I posted once before than when I made my core Tyranid army, the first thing I did was to take all the 40mm bases from all the kits, ballast them, fill them, and texture them with putty. Consequently I have no idea if any of my mid-sized creatures are on the bases supplied with them or on bases that are identical in size, from other kits.

I think the only legally based unit in the whole of Hive Fleet Kielbasa is Trixie the Trygon.

People worry about this far too much. Stop worrying about a base being square or round, it makes no discernible difference to the game.

My experience differs.

But YMMV.

LordofSteel wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:
But why even let the possibility of an issue arise? If you mount them on rounds there is no chance of a problem.

Pure logic. I don't understand why people hold their ground to defend their square bases when choosing a circle base for a 40k game is the obvious solution. Deliberate misinterpretation of the rules only digs the foul-play hole deeper.

Simple answer: I play Daemons in both 40K and Fantasy. I don't particularly want to buy two copies of the same army just to have them based round for 40K when basing them on square bases works just fine and is totally legal.

And if you suggest using the GaleForce or whatever round-holed movement trays, Fantasy's rules are written assuming rectangular (usually square) bases for all but the rarest of models. It is not legal to have round-based models in Fantasy, as the individual models do not have an identifiable point by which to identify arcs.

EDIT: Note I wrote this before fully reading the argument.

LordofSteel wrote:

Dracheous wrote:Fun aside, while you constantly call for common ground, you refuse to move from your own; creating this here dead lock.

I have tried to find common ground. I dropped my argument that the rule was not as solid as people were making it out to be, in the sake of finding common ground. I then emphasized that I was only giving suggestions as to what would be a good approach. Those suggestions being courteousness. Surprisingly people had a hard time agreeing that asking your opponents consent was possible alternative than to prove to him he has none. Then people seemed to totally forget I had previously given an argument on the rules of page 3, so I had to bring it up again. I think my tone has lead new comers to this topic to believe I am unfair and wrong. However I cannot stress enough how hard I have tried to drop the argument by merely giving my more than reasonable suggestions. Although, people are bent on proving me wrong.

I can't find common ground because I am so greatly misunderstood.

No we understand what you're saying, we just want you to show a written example of where it says all bases must be round in the rulebook. It is greatly understood by many that GW is moving towards all round bases for 40k armies, but they are not lacking the understanding that a LOT of people have been playing for a long time; to suddenly impose a rule would force said players to make massive modifications to their armies ((many would be greatly upset by this)). Because the Fantasy product line pretty much entirely used square bases from the get go; it was much less of an issue to press the subject there.

Common ground is only found when both parties move from their position, you have not. You're responses ((including the ones after this)) still resemble the same as they were before that GW has a rule about round bases. As Insaniak stated, no such rule is written unless you can show us it; however we have all moved from our position that it does NOT exist at all to grant you our ear to your word if you can show it. Basically we stepped from the line that you're wrong, but we're still waiting in the center here for you to bring the evidence; at which point we would meet on "common ground". But you're still over there in "Square bases are illegal in the game!" - land.

LordofSteel wrote:

Dracheous wrote:Did you stop to think for a moment that if my models were supplied with square bases and I changed them
to round bases that I would THEN require your permission to use those models by RAW. Because quite simply I have changed
the base that the model was supplied with, EVEN if it is to one that is more commonly used, I still changed
the base.

You don't require my permission. I only suggest that people take the approach of asking consent rather that the approach of proving to your opponent he has none, if he questions its legitimacy. I have said before, I personally don't care if someone uses square bases. In fact I think that is the 8th time I've said it.

In fact I do:

Pg 3. BRB states

Big Rule Book wrote:Citadel miniatures are normally provided with a plastic base. If so, they must be glued onto their base before they can be used in a game.

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.

It states right there in black and white that you are to mount the model to the base SUPPLIED with the model; however it gives a stipulation allowing you to change the supplied base with another an example of this are Space Marine Commander models being glued to 40mm bases so that one can create a scenic base for the important model. However when one does this they require the permission of the other player. MUCH the same I would by RAW require your permission if I changed supplied square bases with newer round bases EVEN if the new models are supplied with the newer round base because MINE was not; and changing the base MINE was supplied with COULD change the way IT interacts on the table ((EVEN though it would make it interact more like the newer models, still gotta go RAW )).


However you stated several times you wanted more pages and pictures:


Page ix : SM Bikes w/out base at all
page xi: Chaos SM Bikes on sq. base
Page 4: Flesh Hound of Khorne on sq. base
Page 225: Ork Deffkopta on sq. base

I know if I keep flipping through the book I'd find MORE models that are illustrated or pictured with square bases.


So let me try to make these even clearer; we don't understand where you're getting the idea that square bases are illegal. If you can show us that then maybe we can start to see your point; but as it stands, its really just you saying you don't think they should be legal.

Considering im planning on doing the same thing I don't mind. The round bases look better though IMO.

I am amazed at all the people who picked 'no'.

Would you guys also picked no if your opponent moved his units 6"? Or measured 24" for Bolters?

BuFFo wrote:I am amazed at all the people who picked 'no'.

Would you guys also picked no if your opponent moved his units 6"? Or measured 24" for Bolters?

Er... yes?

I suspect you have read the poll backwards...

Buffo didn't really read the thread.

He just didn't have the time, and figured it didn't matter whether he posted what he meant to, or whether anyone might have posted an explanation in the thread that would have answered his question.

Going Back to my post what I intended to mean is how I would play the game and how I would expect my opponent to play. There are advantages and disadvantages to various base sizes. the point I was making was that These Pictures/Rules where taken before said models/units etc was released. The whole daemon codex allows for you to use models in both game system to save GW monny. That is where the issue is. I do understand that remodeling base would be an problem for some people becuase they cant/wont magnet bases.

Please Do not flame hard to explain what i mean
Square Base's using common sense WH and round bases are 40k.
As I said there are pros and cons to use different bases and this CAN effect the game rarely.
E.g. old terminators on 25mm base's (I would be fine with this but Square is a no go in my view)

Mannahnin wrote:Buffo didn't really read the thread.

He just didn't have the time, and figured it didn't matter whether he posted what he meant to, or whether anyone might have posted an explanation in the thread that would have answered his question.

Actually, I did read the thread. My only 'crime' was misreading the poll question. Apologies for not editing my post afterwards.

The rules allow for square bases in 40k, so refusing to play a person who fields square bases would be the same as refusing a player for playing by any other rule, for example moving a unit 6" or firing a bolter 24".

@ LOS

Daemons on squares easier to hit more with templates.
Daemons on squares can be based by more models in CC.
Daemons on squares can not pivot in the shooting phase, because they would illegally move, or gain movement.

Seriously what is the argument here? I see people that are either being cheated by bad players, or are simply grasping at straws because they had a bad lose to a Daemon player who may or may not have even done any of these things you think they did. You people trying to deny someone from using square bases for an army that was clearly intended to be used in both game systems, and supplied with both base types so people like me could pick which ones we would prefer is as bad as the people cheating. If you are in a WAAC tourney like say ard boyz then simply pay attention to your opponent, and know what is legal movement/shooting/assault and what isn't. You should be doing this anyways in these type of environments because there are more people cheating with armies on round bases then there are with square based armies I can promise you that.

At the end of the day I think the morale of this story should be: Don't be a douche to your opponents, understand the rules as written (because there isn't much RAI in big tourneys), and pay attention to your games. When I play a WAAC tourney I don't take my eyes off anything my opponent does from movement to rolling dice. If it is just a friendly game.... well if you are this uptight over a friendly then maybe you should find a new hobby. If you have one of those guys, and I'm sure every shop or club does, that just always moves that extra 1/2" or argues every rule when he has never read the rule book. Just avoid him, and watch him like a hawk in a tourney if you have to play him.

This whole thread is more about someone cheating in game, more then it is about the legality of square bases, which are legal, and always will be.

Sol wrote:This whole thread is more about someone cheating in game, more then it is about the legality of square bases, which are legal, and always will be.

I agree 100%. There isn't a gray area here at all.

In a perfect world, the first post asked the question, and the second post gives the page answer from the rule book, and then /end thread.

This whole nonsenses about 'edge of a square base for extra measurement' is laughable at best. Are there REALLY gamer groups out there that worry about things like this? Seriously?

Sol wrote:@ LOS
Daemons on squares can not pivot in the shooting phase, because they would illegally move, or gain movement.

Square bases are important in that other game because regiments have 90* LOS.

Non-vehicle models in 40k do not suffer from this affliction.

Again, that other game specifies base types. 40k doesn't. No issues. The people who would not play against me because of square bases are the same kind of people I don't want to play anyway. EVEN in a tournament. They can take their free win (if that's what it takes) just so that I don't have to put up with their issues.