<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread ""Counts as" units at 'ard boyz"]]>

<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread ""Counts as" units at 'ard boyz"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/69.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
Can a blood crusher "proxy" be put on a calvary base? Can daemon princes be so small as to get cover from a space marine? There were issues about this at the tournament I attended over the weekend and would like to get the dakka community's opinion on this.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664896.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664896.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
The second could be called 'modeling for advantage', and truthfully, what is the model? If it's space marine size, no. If it's Belakor, then it's a GW demon prince model that happens to be a bit short. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664930.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664930.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
I just want to know where the line is drawn according to the rules so i know what to expect for the finals. I've never had to deal with modeling for advantage on that scale before and want to know if it's the norm.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664949.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664949.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664987.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664987.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz GW mini representing what its suppose, but is older or just smaller its fair. I play a couple of armies with a number of Rogue Trader models I've had for all these years and I've had the unintended advantage.

Its only with "count-as" and special conversions, that distort the heights that its really cheating.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664992.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1664992.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

The only rules regarding 'counts as' that I know of are that it has to be mostly GW model parts (this may be a holdover rule or only in certain tourneys) and that it has to be placed on the base the model comes with. If someone is using Cold Ones from the Dark Elf/Lizardmen line, it is a 100% GW model with a square base, nothing really in the rules against it. If someone is using a GW model that 'counts as' a demon prince and is visually recognizable as being something that could represent a demon prince in a WYSIWYG fashion, there's not really anything breaking the rules.

dereksatkinson wrote:I just want to know where the line is drawn according to the rules so i know what to expect for the finals. I've never had to deal with modeling for advantage on that scale before and want to know if it's the norm.

Modeling for advantage is a relatively new subject (well, since 5th ed) and often is not done to excessive proportions. Some people toss out "what ifs" of modeling a Wraithlord to be lying on its belly in a sniper position or a Trygon slithering across the ground in order to get easy cover saves, but I've honestly never seen or heard of this done in actual play.

That said, some models are simply smaller than others, especially the further back in years you go in the GW/Citadel line of models. Space Marines, especially Terminators, are significantly larger both in model and in base size (in the case of Termies) than they used to be. Look at poor little Abaddon, for instance. Even as far as official Monstrous Creatures go, the Eldar Avatar of Khaine is barely larger than a Terminator and it's the only (non-FW) model available for it, but it gets a cover save from Grots.

Bunker wrote:Are Monsterous Creatures even allowed to claim cover saves from infantry?

Monstrous Creatures gain a cover save from anything that visually obscures 50% of the model. In the above case of the Eldar Avatar, it's very easy to do so with basic infantry. In other cases such as a Hive Tyrant or Carnifex, it often takes larger infantry such as Tyranid Warriors to do so. Demon Princes vary greatly in size depending on the model so some could claim obscurity from a Space Marine, others from a Rhino.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665016.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665016.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

dereksatkinson wrote:I think the model he was using was from the fantasy line. It was from that campaign fantasy had after the eye of terror campaign. It looked like an earth elemental that he attached wings to. Barely larger than a space marine and he was getting his 4+ cover from everything i threw at him. Same with his cold ones he was using as a proxy without even changing the bases.

I just want to know where the line is drawn according to the rules so i know what to expect for the finals. I've never had to deal with modeling for advantage on that scale before and want to know if it's the norm.

Having played him (and feeling much better about my loss now that he is going to finals. lol), did he use the cold ones as crushers? Because when I played him at prelims, the Cold Ones were fiends and I thought that model was appropriate.

I did think the DPs were small, but were pretty cool models so never worried about it. It's a fenbeast from the Albion campaign.

Here's a link from the net of the model with some fantasy models next to it for comparison:

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665024.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665024.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

pretre wrote:Having played him (and feeling much better about my loss now that he is going to finals. lol), did he use the cold ones as crushers? Because when I played him at prelims, the Cold Ones were fiends and I thought that model was appropriate.

I'm trying not to make a big stink out of it pretre. I don't want to be a poor sport but 2/3 of his deepstrikes with those fiends either landed WAY close to his models or would have been off the board if he had used the bases from the fiends of slaanesh. He turned the bases sideways to avoid touching his own models or the board edge and the placed the other models lengthwise. As it was, he was able to place all 6 models and not have to roll on the mishap table. Either way, I don't have hard feelings about it but want to make sure I know what the actual rules are for the next round. That is why I asked in the way I did. I just want to know what is legal and what isn't.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665112.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665112.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

Bunker wrote:Are Monsterous Creatures even allowed to claim cover saves from infantry?

Should terrain or models cover 50% or more of its body (limbs, torso, not wings, weapons or standards), then yes. It's one of the reasons gargoyles might be useful in a nids list, since their wings are so voluminous. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665142.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665142.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

dereksatkinson wrote:
I'm trying not to make a big stink out of it pretre. I don't want to be a poor sport but 2/3 of his deepstrikes with those fiends either landed WAY close to his models or would have been off the board if he had used the bases from the fiends of slaanesh. He turned the bases sideways to avoid touching his own models or the board edge and the placed the other models lengthwise. As it was, he was able to place all 6 models and not have to roll on the mishap table. Either way, I don't have hard feelings about it but want to make sure I know what the actual rules are for the next round. That is why I asked in the way I did. I just want to know what is legal and what isn't.

Wow. I never knew what the Fiend model looked like until now. Yeah, they might have been a bit short. Although the straight up fiends are an ugly-ass model. Yuck.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665147.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665147.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

pretre wrote:Wow. I never knew what the Fiend model looked like until now. Yeah, they might have been a bit short. Although the straight up fiends are an ugly-ass model. Yuck.

If you are allowed to model for advantage, the models themselves weren't the issue. But if you are required to use the same bases then yeah.. it wasn't right. Live and learn..]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665170.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665170.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665187.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665187.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665195.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665195.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:This isnt the first time crushers were modeled on bases smaller then what they come with at ard boyz

Wait.. so it's ok to do this?

What if i used britonian knights, painted them red and said they were "counts as" blood crushers? What would be legal?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665252.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665252.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
Anything else, and you're asking for trouble.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665275.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665275.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
And wait until August and the Seekers on biker bases come out, and there'll be a second unit of Daemons that legitimately comes on biker/cavalry bases, with no guidance in the rules for how to make a circle using rectangles.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665282.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665282.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

dereksatkinson wrote:

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:This isnt the first time crushers were modeled on bases smaller then what they come with at ard boyz

Wait.. so it's ok to do this?

What if i used britonian knights, painted them red and said they were "counts as" blood crushers? What would be legal?

No its not ok to do it. I mean it is, but only in friendly games where you have opponents permission.

I do believe that all old edition models should be mounted on at least the current bases. My LGS has a box of used models for sale, and I could have picked up ye olden tyrant, the one thats about the size of a space marine terminator. I dont think many people would be happy about mini swarmlord running around. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665309.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665309.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

solkan wrote:As long as people are worried about controversial bases, I have seven fiends and five of them are the 1st or 2nd generation fiends which were mounted on the old slotted cavalry bases. And if someone had a set of 1st edition fiends, those things could probably hide behind a wall of troops, they are that short.

1st edition bases don't matter. The same issue came up with old school terminators now being required to be based on the larger bases.

solkan wrote:And wait until August and the Seekers on biker bases come out, and there'll be a second unit of Daemons that legitimately comes on biker/cavalry bases, with no guidance in the rules for how to make a circle using rectangles.

The seekers I have came with both calvary and circular bases. Since i use them for 40k they go on the circular bases.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665315.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665315.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

pretre wrote:

dereksatkinson wrote:I think the model he was using was from the fantasy line. It was from that campaign fantasy had after the eye of terror campaign. It looked like an earth elemental that he attached wings to. Barely larger than a space marine and he was getting his 4+ cover from everything i threw at him. Same with his cold ones he was using as a proxy without even changing the bases.

I just want to know where the line is drawn according to the rules so i know what to expect for the finals. I've never had to deal with modeling for advantage on that scale before and want to know if it's the norm.

A Fenbeast is large enough that it could rep a Demon Prince, especially a nurgly one. A monstrous creature needs to be oscured by 50% or more to claim a cover save, it doesn't matter by what.

If he was using Cold Ones as "Fiends", that's a pretty acceptable proxy/"counts as" I'd say. Also using cavalry bases should be fine too since that's what they are packaged with and some players use their demons for both fantasy and 40k. Being "a tad shorter" than the fiends isn't really that much of an issue I'd say, and I'd argue that they are roughly the same size. Those fiends are on a 40mm base in the picture shown above. They aren't that big.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:This isnt the first time crushers were modeled on bases smaller then what they come with at ard boyz

Polonius wrote:It's a pretty legit advantage. It allows you to deepstrike far more aggressively than you would otherwise be able to.

We are talking about FIENDS using cavalry bases, not CRUSHERS. Don't stir up drama where there is none.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665410.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665410.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

whitedragon wrote:Those fiends are on a 40mm base in the picture shown above. They aren't that big.

They are enough of a difference that he couldn't have place the center model twice if he used them.

I wasn't trying to make a stink, I want to know what is allowed and what isn't. Nothing more, nothing less. Thus far i'm getting a pretty big variation in what's kosher and what's not.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665629.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665629.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

dereksatkinson wrote:

whitedragon wrote:Those fiends are on a 40mm base in the picture shown above. They aren't that big.

There is a big variation, you are correct.

And even if he was using the actual fiend models, he could have put them on cavalry bases as well, since that's what they are supplied with.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665766.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665766.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

whitedragon wrote:And even if he was using the actual fiend models, he could have put them on cavalry bases as well, since that's what they are supplied with.

You are thinking of seekers. The fiends are actually put on bases the size of 2 of the Calvary bases. I own some of the real models so i'm positive on this.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665822.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665822.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

dereksatkinson wrote:

solkan wrote:As long as people are worried about controversial bases, I have seven fiends and five of them are the 1st or 2nd generation fiends which were mounted on the old slotted cavalry bases. And if someone had a set of 1st edition fiends, those things could probably hide behind a wall of troops, they are that short.

1st edition bases don't matter. The same issue came up with old school terminators now being required to be based on the larger bases.

And I can counter that the rulebook says to use the base that the figure came with, so that rebasing the old model is actually worse than leaving it as is.

solkan wrote:And wait until August and the Seekers on biker bases come out, and there'll be a second unit of Daemons that legitimately comes on biker/cavalry bases, with no guidance in the rules for how to make a circle using rectangles.

The seekers I have came with both calvary and circular bases. Since i use them for 40k they go on the circular bases.

And, I can argue against that for two points. The first, the model came with a rectangular base (which cavalry models in the book are depicted on), so the rectangular base is just as valid as the 40mm circle.
And on top of that, the Diaz Seekers have the metal tab for fitting into the slotted cavalry base, I can not be both adequately expressive and polite to tell you my negative opinion of taking that sort of model and trying to put it on the 40mm bases. Nothing in the '40K Ard Boyz Rules 2010 PDF' requires or even suggests that models be based on the most recent edition of a model, or explains what to do if a model is supplied with two different bases.

Now, if you really want an argument, I have six beasts of Nurgle. My three 1st edition one came without bases, my 2nd edition (the triangle heads) came on a rectangular base, my two 3rd edition (current) ones came on the 60mm large bases, and the blister packs I see in the stores now have 40mm round bases. So I could walk into a store, put down a unit with four different models on four different bases--rectangular cavalry, no base, 40mm round and 60mm round--all to represent Beasts of Nurgle in the same unit and say "That's what was in the blister pack at the time I bought it, and the book says I have to use it that way."
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665827.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665827.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz MC. His head height is only about 50% taller than a normal marine. Sometimes in a tournament newer players who never played 3rd ed question if it's a GW and/or where I got it, but it's more out of curiosity than any form of hostility. Older figures just happen to be smaller.

As far as using "Counts as" in a tournament the answer is no, but conversions are ok.

WISIWYG is what separates "Counts as" from conversions.

Just throwing cold ones on the table and calling them bloodcrushers is clear "Counts as" Cone ones for bloodcrushers won't fly, but bloodletters mounted on cold ones can be called a conversion (a difficult conversion to boot). If the parts and pieces are GW, and it's easily recognizable as a blood crusher then it's a conversion. Personally I think building a mechanical exoskeleton over a bloodletter using parts and pieces from ork killer cans would look good for bloodcrushers conversions.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665829.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665829.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.solegends.com/citcat912/c20255rcslfiends-m.htm, the 1st edition Fiend of Slaanesh, for those arguing along at home:

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665847.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1665847.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666007.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666007.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

schadenfreude wrote:
As far as using "Counts as" in a tournament the answer is no, but conversions are ok.

WISIWYG is what separates "Counts as" from conversions.

Just throwing cold ones on the table and calling them bloodcrushers is clear "Counts as" Cone ones for bloodcrushers won't fly, but bloodletters mounted on cold ones can be called a conversion (a difficult conversion to boot). If the parts and pieces are GW, and it's easily recognizable as a blood crusher then it's a conversion. Personally I think building a mechanical exoskeleton over a bloodletter using parts and pieces from ork killer cans would look good for bloodcrushers conversions.

I think you're confusing 'Counts as' and proxy.

Just throwing something on the table and calling it something is Proxy. Often not 'WYSIWIG' for wargear.
Ex: Cold Ones = Bloodcrushers (huge size difference and one is a mounted model, one is just a mount), Rhino=Land Raider, Soda Can = Drop Pod, etc.

Putting work into a non-standard conversion or paint job that is clearly not the original model is 'Counts as'. 'Counts as' is usually held at a higher WYSIWIG standard because of the difference from original model.
Ex: Khorne Marine army using SW/BA Rules that is WYSIWIG, Marines on Bears for TWC, Cold Ones as Fiends.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kirbinator wrote:How many years has the Fiend been in production? That thing hasn't taken one step past "Beaten with the fugly stick" since its mangled form lifted itself from the molten vats of lead it was born from.

You do know who they are fiends of, right? The big S likes it freaky. shudder

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Going back to the OP.

Aren't BloodC's on 60MM now? So no, 60 to Cav would prob not be cool. Big area difference.

40 to Cav... I guess that's a different question.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666013.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666013.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

whitedragon wrote:

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:This isnt the first time crushers were modeled on bases smaller then what they come with at ard boyz

Polonius wrote:It's a pretty legit advantage. It allows you to deepstrike far more aggressively than you would otherwise be able to.

We are talking about FIENDS using cavalry bases, not CRUSHERS. Don't stir up drama where there is none.

Oh, see I didnt see fiends mentioned in OPs post, but I did see crushers. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666720.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666720.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:
Oh, see I didnt see fiends mentioned in OPs post, but I did see crushers.

I read petre's post and thought that he clarified the opponent in question was using the cold ones as Fiends, not crushers.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666773.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1666773.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1667799.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1667799.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
The current fiend uses a base that is twice that of the RT era version. Much like how old terminators use the old bases, the new terminators don't.

A cold one would be an ok proxy or "counts as" for the old RT version. But when you are using a counts as model for something currently in production, shouldn't you be required to use what is currently provided for the current model? I could see the argument of "what the original model came with" if he was using RT era models but he wasn't.

By the logic I am seeing posted here.. I could run a deathwing army using small circular bases with models from the fantasy line. Or I could glue a fancy looking space marine model to a small base and claim he's my avatar.

If you are using the old models, i don't see as much of an issue with using the old bases as much as I have a problem with using small bases on a counts as model.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668244.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668244.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
If they were used as seekers, there's a bit more leeway, as there is no seeker model available to buy, and they were on cavalry bases when available.

The thing that makes me sad is the number of stories I'm hearing about armies that are actually moving on to finals, that weren't wysiwyg, and the stores hosting the semi finals didn't bother to enforce it. This is just going to make for more drama at finals, either because it's enforced or it isn't. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668353.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668353.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz 40k uses both cavalry and 40mm round bases for other "beasts" pretty liberally.

And derekatkinson, were they proxying fiends or crushers when you faced them?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668377.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668377.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz TO is'nt doing his job)

Models are to be mounted on the bases they are supplied with, if you are using old 2nd edition terminators then they should be on smaller bases, if they are on larger bases then you are breaking the rules. most opponents and TOs allow it, but that is out of courtesy.

there are no "proxies" in 'ard boyz. you play the models you have, they dont even need to be painted, so the only excuse you have is being poor, which coincidentally is a poor excuse.

"counts as" IMO is a bit more lenient as many units do not have models, so counts-as is the only option. However, they should be very clearly represented on agreed base sizes with all options fully identifiable.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668457.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668457.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
And I prefered the old rules which were that you couldn't use a smaller base, but could use a bigger base. But for like 90% of situations the current rule of "base supplied with" works well.

Tbh, no matter what the rules on "counts as", WYSIWYG, and basing. There will always be ways round it, unless you exclude all conversion and "counts as" models, and can only use GW models straight out of the box . . . which frankly would be lame, boring, and eradicate some of the greatest parts of the hobby.

Oshova]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668546.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1668546.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
I am the Demon player in question.

If I can sum up your concerns, it sounds like you had two problems with my army.

1) My Demon Prince model and base were too small giving me an unfair or illegal advantage
2) My Fiends of Slaanesh ( yes Fiends and only Fiends ) were on square cavalry bases giving me an unfair or illegal advantage

I don't think I will change your mind, but let me talk about my models and their basing.

For my Demon Prince of Nurgle I use the Fen Beast from the Albion Warhammer summer campaign of several years ago. I believe that they are large enough and menacing enough to clearly represent a Nurgle monstrous creature. I have tried to take a picture of one and attach it here:

next to it is my older Demon Prince that in no way looks Nurgle, for comparison.

Here is a picture with a couple of standard models next to it.

I do not believe that it is too small. Also I don't remember getting any cover saves for him unless he had been in base with a vehicle that he had attacked.

For his Base size I chose the 40 mm base because it looked right and the DP on page 57 of the Demon Codex is on a 40mm base. They also show the truly awful abortion of a Chaos Marine Nurgle Prince on page 72 on the larger 60mm base just below the same DP on the 40mm. So GW appears to allow either the 40mm or the 60mm depending on the overall size of the Demon Prince.

You also don't like the cav bases my field of Slaanesh are on. I chose to use the Cold One models as Fiends to avoid, oh please don't look, Page 68 of the Demon Codex where, wait I'm going to hurl, Fields of Slaanesh on 40mm round bases are shown. So wondering what size round base to use for Fiends is moot. But at the same time we have page 57 and 67 where the Flesh Hounds are featured on the SQUARE cav bases. even the special character Karanak is on a square cav base. So I think for basing purposes the square cav bases that the cold ones were already on are accepted by GW for Warhammer 40k.

But apart from whether it is allowed or not, you also think that the square bases give an undue advantage during deep striking and game play. A cav base is 25x50 mm for a total area of 1250 mm square. The 40mm round base has a total area of around 1256 mm square. So from a total area standpoint I'm not really gaining anything. During game play the "squareness" the bases is a great disadvantage because template and blast markers are more likely to nick the squares rather than the rounds. The rounds also have the minimal radius possible for their area, so You actually can get quite close to an edge without going over it.
Here is a diagram I mocked up:

You see, with round bases you can get up to the radius of the base close to an edge and still be ok, the set model for the deep strike can be up to 15mm close ( which isn't very much ) and the whole unit will still be ok. This only works because I only have 6 models and the full loop for the first circle isn't closed. So, yes I agree. I was close enough that if I had had 7 models in the unit it was have been a mishap. But I did not. It is quite shocking how close you can get to things when you have less than 7 models in the deep striking unit.

I hope that I have been helpful in this discussion. Please give me feedback.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671001.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671001.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

Some people toss out "what ifs" of modeling a Wraithlord to be lying on its belly in a sniper position or a Trygon slithering across the ground in order to get easy cover saves, but I've honestly never seen or heard of this done in actual play.

Well, it happened to my brother in the 'Ard Boyz semis, playing against a Space Marine player using rifleman dreads with sentinel legs instead of dreadnought legs. Combined with the several other shenanigans being pulled (like slow playing) it made for what sounded like a pretty crappy day.

You can say that using GW models out of the box makes the game "boring" and "lame" or whatever, but it really annoys me to see someone clearly and without shame, modeling for advantage. It's the same as cheating in my opinion, only you're using the "hobby" as an excuse to get away with it, and most usually do because no one wants to look like a douche and tell them not to play with their conversions (or at least play with them like they were at the "proper" height, but people usually don't like being asked to do that, either). Unless you're going to tell me that the guy with the dreadnoughts built purely for long-range shooting was unknowingly giving them a significant height advantage and the ability to see and shoot at things they might not have been able to before when he gave them sentinel legs.

I know one thing, you'll never convince me it was done for looks...

As for the issue here with the DP and fiends...I think a metal 40k daemon prince would probably be able to get cover from Marines as well, I don't own one so I'm not sure. Square bases in 40k annoy me, but if he were at least using the equivalent square base I'd probably be okay with it...using cav bases, not so much. I'm not buying that "total area" crap, the cavalry bases are noticeably narrower than the 40mm round bases the fiends are supposed to be on, and I believe it would in fact give you an advantage when Deep Striking.

I don't think you quite get the idea of "counts-as", either. True, models are supposed to be mounted on the bases they came with, but when you're playing "counts-as" then it should be modeled on the base that the actual model would come with, and should have all of its options clearly modeled on, etc.

Also:

So I think for basing purposes the square cav bases that the cold ones were already on are accepted by GW for Warhammer 40k.

IIRC that was before GW made a round base for bikes/cavalry in 40k. I'd be curious to know what bases the models are sold with now. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671387.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671387.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz GW product pages for 40K demons, Half of them are on square bases, MCs and Princes included.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671434.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671434.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

kb10r wrote:I hope that I have been helpful in this discussion. Please give me feedback.

David..

I brought this discussion up so I know what is legal and what isn't. I wasn't accusing you of breaking any rules but I really want to know what to expect in the finals. My plan was to discuss this with you once I had enough knowledge to make a constructive criticism rather than bitching for no reason. I have your email and your handle on ordo so I knew i'd be able to. I didn't want to make a big stink about it.

The issue at hand is whether or not using a proxy should be put on the bases that are currently available for the actual model and whether or not it's allowed by GW. Should fiends of slaanesh be based on calvary bases, the square bases or the circular bases? Are you allowed to pick any base for a proxy? Could I put a horse on medium circular bases (smaller than what comes with the current model but consistent with the old juggernaught models) and call them blood crushers? GW hasn't provided any clarity on these issues. If I proxied an avatar, could i put it on a small base since the original model came with that?

I know you don't think it really mattered but the only reason why one of your units didn't fall off the table was because you were able to turn the calvary base sideways. Then again with your second unit of fiends almost landing on another squad. I could foresee other players complaining about this so it's in your best interest to see what the actual rules are.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here is an example of the 3 types of bases.. The 1st 2 are the ones supplies by GW and the 3rd is the one being used.

IMO.. there is no question that being able to turn the base is an advantage for avoiding a mishap during deepstrike.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671709.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671709.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz 40K 'Ard Boyz a few years back. They were held in Media at Mikhaila's fine store. There was some guy who brought in an 'ork' horde. He was using fantasy orc proxies, like arrer boyz as shootas. And he had dozens of models that were feet glued to bases. It was ridiculous. It was the only time I have seen Mikhaila get mad. He bounced the guy and rightly so. Turns out he had bought the proper models from Mikhaila's store 2 weeks prior to the event, but just hadn't glued them together. The whole thing was so sad as to be funny.
But to remain on topic, I think if you are going to proxy for 'Ard boyz, the models should be on appropriate and current base size, and the models should fit a theme, not be transplants from a different system. Just my thoughts.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671967.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1671967.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672325.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672325.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

Gobstomp420 wrote:Just for the sake of two cents.... I remember the semis for the 40K 'Ard Boyz a few years back. They were held in Media at Mikhaila's fine store. There was some guy who brought in an 'ork' horde. He was using fantasy orc proxies, like arrer boyz as shootas. And he had dozens of models that were feet glued to bases. It was ridiculous. It was the only time I have seen Mikhaila get mad. He bounced the guy and rightly so. Turns out he had bought the proper models from Mikhaila's store 2 weeks prior to the event, but just hadn't glued them together. The whole thing was so sad as to be funny.
But to remain on topic, I think if you are going to proxy for 'Ard boyz, the models should be on appropriate and current base size, and the models should fit a theme, not be transplants from a different system. Just my thoughts.

It was even worse, he bought them the morning of the tourney!

He had burner boyz with no heads, vehicles with no gunz and no drivers. Fantasy black orcs, most with no heads, on square bases for 'ard boyz'. Gun crews were forest goblins, etc etc. The two boxes of boyz he bought that morning were up to legs glued to bases for the first round. I'd made two other players make changes in their armies to make them WYSIWYG, I could in no way let this guy slide.

Sad thing was, this was at semi finals. His local store not making him do any work got him bounced from semis.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672420.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672420.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

mikhaila wrote:Sad thing was, this was at semi finals. His local store not making him do any work got him bounced from semis.

Unassembled models shouldn't be allowed on the table.

Back on topic though...

I don't think the work required to fix this would be that time consuming. At the finals, I would hope this isn't an issue.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672579.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1672579.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
In a six man unit as long as the primary dropper does not get within 15mm of impassible terrain, it is impossible to have a mishap. In no way would that unit have been off the board in our game. In a "friendly" game I would have placed the extra models in a poor way and allowed the unit to have a mishap. But I didn't have to. I was unwilling to force a mishap because this was immediately following your "forgetting" that you roll for the Red Thirst after deployment and not before deployment. That small edge of knowing which units are fearless and have Furious Charge before deployment was rather "gamy" to me and I did not feel charitable.

I'll ask Ordo about the cav bases, and whatever they decide, between rebasing them and leaving them alone, I'll do.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673454.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673454.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
I'd say the model you used for a demon prince is probably fine. The other one you show is from the fantasy line I believe, but regardless, I've seen it used a lot as a demon prince, along with Belakor and other similarly sized models, without a problem from anyone. The Demon Prince GW currently sells comes with a 40mm base I believe. Either a 40mm or 60mm would be fine for one.

As to the pictures of fleshounds on square cav bases - at the time GW was putting out the two demon books, the photographer screwed up a ton of the pictures every chance he got, round bases in fantasy adverts, squares in 40k, etc. I think for some models they only got one set painted up at all, and just used some units for both systems.)

I didn't catch whether you were moving on to nationals, but if so, I would definitely suggest using something other than Dark Elf cavalry on the rectangular bases for fiends. They just aren't fiends, aren't a conversion, and are just proxy models from a fantasy army. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673730.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673730.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

mikhaila wrote:As to the pictures of fleshounds on square cav bases - at the time GW was putting out the two demon books, the photographer screwed up a ton of the pictures every chance he got, round bases in fantasy adverts, squares in 40k, etc. I think for some models they only got one set painted up at all, and just used some units for both systems.)

Prior to the Demon Book, demons were regularly shown on both square and round bases for 40k, as they were usually interchangeable for players playing fantasy and 40k chaos armies.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673734.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673734.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673894.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1673894.page GMT "Counts as" units at 'ard boyz
I dunno tentacles or extra mammaries or something. I do hate me some Fiend models though, so I certainly feel the change.

I get where Mikhaila is coming from on the Proxy vs Count As although it didn't bother me. Without modification, I can see people calling 'Proxy'. With mod, you can pretty easily go the Counts As route.

Would you agree, Mik? (Kinda an important opinion since Mik is a 'AB Finals TO.)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1674825.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1674825.page GMT Re:"Counts as" units at 'ard boyz

kb10r wrote:How about the page 4 definition of the Beasts unit type in the main rule book. To the left, the representative picture is of a Flesh Hound on a 25x50 square base. Was this in error?

My comments about the pictures in the demon codex and army book were just that, comments about the pictures in the Demon codex and army book.

Base sizes for GW models have changed quite a bit, especially as old models go to new models. If someone showed up with vintage fiends on old bases, I wouldn't have a problem. If it's a new model, and came with the appropriate base, then it should be on the correct base. If you make a conversion or do counts as, it should be on the correct base. If a demon model comes with square and round bases, it's to let you base your models appropriatly for two different games, not so that you can choose which you want for either game. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1675003.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/300164/1675003.page GMT