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.

How do you guys feel about unit fillers?

Just to clarify, a unit filler is a decorative base that "counts as" another model in a unit of actual models.
These were popular in Warhammer 8th edition prior to Age of Sigmar. They worked well because units had to be base-to-base, so the unit fillers blended in well.
Examples were using tomb stones for extra Zombies/Skeletons.

With 8E 40K not having blast markers anymore and wound allocation being determined by the controlling player, could unit fillers work?
A specific example I am thinking of would be using a few single (or double) Nurglings on 25mm bases to bulk up my Plague Bearers.
With no more than 30% of the unit being 'fillers' I do not anticipate any issues. The first few models removed will be fillers from the back of the unit

-

Some people would probably get butthurt about it, lots of people don't even like if the model doesn't show a specific gun or loadout.
I think it looks cool in Fantasy tho so I wouldn't care in 40k, depends on the play group tho

I think it's pretty acceptable for zombie type units where you might be expected to field more than you originally deploy.

Personally, I'd be ok with it as long as thought was given.
Mostly empty bases with some random ammo bits probably wouldn't work.

It just seems like large units of Infantry really got a boost this edition.
Other examples I'd like to see someone do is to put 1-2 Nid Rippers per 25mm base and field them with their Gaunts
Or 1-2 Scarabs per 32mm and mix them in with their Necron infantry units

I can't think of any other great examples right now though.
Elite-ish Armies like Space Marines probably shouldn't have filler models

-

They worked in FB because infantry engaged in generally big blocks with models behind the first rank generally being nothing but wound counters. And since you typically pulled off a lot of models at once, or had spares to make sure the count was right after you pulled, it wasn't an issue.

What you're describing are not 'fillers' but proxies, and honestly, fillers were scenic, like dead coming from a cemetery, or the back ranks of ogres dragging a provision wagon.

Your example, along with mixing up models that actually belong to different units, just comes across as more lazy than anything else.

You'd be welcome on our tables. Maybe some basics...no more than 25% of unit as fillers? And the base decorations would still have to represent the unit? (your example, nurglings in plaguebearers works for me). Has to be painted as well (hey proxies for a few battles to test out is all good here, but there has to be a point where you actualy build your army...) The "feel" of the unit needs to stay the same, and so in my mind plaguebearers being followed about, climbed all over, etc with nurglings works. Rippers in nids, sure. Grots standing on each other's shoulders with a helmet way too big for them as boyz...actually, that would be awesome.
That said, watch out for the wysiwyg crowd.

Last note, if you go with some of these...share! I'd love to see your ideas.

In my opinion it is your responsibly to make sure the opponent can tell what is what. If they are confused, it's your fault. So wysiwig is very important imo.that being said, is you have really cool models and make it clear to them what is what, is probably okay.

 Bookwrack wrote:

Your example, along with mixing up models that actually belong to different units, just comes across as more lazy than anything else.

You clearly haven't seen most of my work. I've done so many convolutedly complicated conversions in my time that could hardly be considered "lazy"

But otherwise I agree with a general no more than 25% of the unit philosophy. This only came to mind because you can take models from the back of the unit now, so "proxies" can be hidden behind the real models.

jcd386 wrote:
In my opinion it is your responsibly to make sure the opponent can tell what is what. If they are confused, it's your fault. So wysiwig is very important imo.that being said, is you have really cool models and make it clear to them what is what, is probably okay.

I agree. In the examples I used, it should be pretty clear since all those original models are 3+ individuals per 40mm base. Dropping to half that number on a smaller base should give anyone a clear indication that they are different.