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 just got back into 40k after having not played for a while (4th ed I believe was the last I really played), and I'm curious as to how much base sizes matter? I ask because I'm starting up with Khorne Daemonkin, and 2 issues have already arisen that revolve around bases.
-I have a lot of bloodthirsters from alternate companies, or even just the old metal/finecast one, but obviously they've changed the base size of the model. How does this play out now? Do I have switch my small metal Bloodthirsters to colossal bases, or is it adequate to leave them as is?
-I'm using a lot of Flesh Hounds and am getting them from a non-GW company which likely won't supply bases. I know a lot of people also use Fantasy Chaos Hounds but I often see both of those options on either 40mm or biker bases. That said, the Flesh Hounds come with 50mm bases now, so how does that play out? Are all of these people cheating, or does it really not matter? Do I need to fork out $50 on 50mm bases, or can I use 40mm bases?

I can see this going for a lot of things, and so I'm curious as to how I should go about basing said things. Is there something in the rulebook that states you have to use the bases a model comes with, or is it a grey area? But then what happens when bases are updated like with Space Marines now having 32mm bases? They don't have to change to the new bases, so does the Bloodthirster?

The "official" line is play the model on the base it came with.

In reality, the importance of your model's base sizes is directly proportional to the douchbaggedness of your opponent.

 Azreal13 wrote:
The "official" line is play the model on the base it came with.

In reality, the importance of your model's base sizes is directly proportional to the douchbaggedness of your opponent.

Well, if you expect to put tactical marines on terminator bases, or a walker on a smaller base, you can and will catch flack for it

I'm actually just looking for bases for the warhounds I just bought, dunno why my 'murica GW page isn't loading only the british one, so I see that 50mm bases are 3 pounds for a package with 3... that is stupidly expensive. So I went to privateer press who also have 50mm bases, they are 5 dlls for 5 bases so this will likely be my purchase option to base my 15 warhounds.

I mean, for little stuff it really isn't that huge of a deal. I know people that still use the old rhinos or dreadnoughts, which are smaller than newer ones. "Most" people don't have a problem with it, so it's probably fine. The only time I'd genuinely say something is if you brought an ork horde on terminator bases or something equally game changing. Even though it does have its ups and downs, it's too drastically different.

So again, keep it within reason, and as long as you're not in any major tournament you're probably fine. Heck, if you didn't mention it I probably wouldn't even know they weren't the right bases.

At the same time, I would encourage you to use the proper bases if you can get them, as it's just the nice thing to do. And this way you don't have to ask "hey, can I use these other bases" every single game.

Very important in my opinion, someone with a bigger base than tgey should have is modelling for advantage in my opinion.

Except a bigger base has disadvantages too.

Firstly, when disembarking or Deepstriking, a larger footprint can be a drawback of space is limited.

Moving through gaps may attract more terrain tests.

If not an assault orientated unit, more opposing models can get in base to base contact.

As long as you're being reasonable about it (and let's not overlook that the OP is basically asking about rebasing his old models, and he is fine with those supplied, as is mentioned in the BRB) then I stand by my statement that the only players likely to take issue with it are those you probably won't enjoy playing against anyway.

Nobody is asking if they're ok with Grots being based on large ovals, just with using old models on different bases.

Bigger != better in all cases. Bigger means more things can get in base contact, which comes up occasionally. And while bigger means you have a larger footprint and therefore can have longer ranges, it also means that you're a bigger target and easier to hit from more directions.

For example, bigger base size means that if you're casting a Nova power, you have a slightly larger radius in which things are hit.

On the other hand, it means that you're more likely to get hit by blasts or the like, since you have a larger base to scatter off of.

For consistency, use the correct base sizes. It makes things less confusing for people.

Indeed @azeral

Most Reasonable players will not give a gak that your Power armor character is on a 40mm scenic base and such.

Big Tournaments will take the easiest approach and say just use the base it comes with just to nip any prolonged argument that really shouldn't arise in the first place.

People that moan about it usually arnt fun to play with in the first place.

While I agree with these facts, the point is it can be an advantage, and you are not basing them in the right way, therefore I disagree with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At the same time I wouldn't refuse a game because of it

Requizen wrote:
On the other hand, it means that you're more likely to get hit by blasts or the like, since you have a larger base to scatter off of.

While I'm fine with reasonably different bases, I need to point out that this statement is incorrect. I'm going to use extreme examples just to prove my point... Say you have guys on 1" bases. If you line 5 of them in the widest row possible, the total distance between the two at either end is 11". Now give them 2" bases.... the total distance is now 14". If I drop a 12" blast, it'd hit all 5 of the smaller based ones (because there's only 11" end to end), while only hitting 3 of the larger ones, not reaching either of the ones on the end.

 kingbobbito wrote:

Requizen wrote:
On the other hand, it means that you're more likely to get hit by blasts or the like, since you have a larger base to scatter off of.

While I'm fine with reasonably different bases, I need to point out that this statement is incorrect. I'm going to use extreme examples just to prove my point... Say you have guys on 1" bases. If you line 5 of them in the widest row possible, the total distance between the two at either end is 11". Now give them 2" bases.... the total distance is now 14". If I drop a 12" blast, it'd hit all 5 of the smaller based ones (because there's only 11" end to end), while only hitting 3 of the larger ones, not reaching either of the ones on the end.

You'd hit less models, but you would also have a lower chance of scattering off the unit altogether. Those 3" could very easily mean the difference between 1 or two wounds taken and no wounds taken because the blast marker went too far.

But your point is correct too. Like I said, pluses and minuses. Best to keep consistent so it's not screwy anyway.

Proper sizes are better, a few mm might be perfectly excuseble with some people if very nicely done senic bases.

I have one sternguard Sgt on a40mm but its more for the fun of the fancy base. However I also have a 25 version too.

However best to use right size and save the trouble and faffing about.