Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I'm currently modeling a commissar, and I am putting him on a termi sized base, to ad further scenery. He's more for painting, but could I still use him in a game legally on a large base?
GW's official rule was always that you had to put them on an equal or larger base than the model came with. The idea was that you couldn't find some way to mount a Dreadnought on a small base and hide it behind a shrub or something.
5th edition seems to have dropped this (it matters far less now that true LOS is the norm), saying that you can use different bases as long as your opponent is OK with it (page 3, FYI).
In actual practice it really doesn't matter unless you're trying to stick him on a base the size of a Monolith. going from a normal base to a medium base has minimal impact on game mechanics and frankly shouldn't make any difference to any opponents. Anybody who freaks out about something so trivial is probably a jerk that you don't want to play in the first place.
The current rules set is a bit different from the last but page 3 brb does say that you ‘must’ use the supplied base as a starting point.
Then goes on to say that you can model the base to be more impressive or of a different size if your opponent allows this.
Note that there is no longer the restriction of only using a larger base, it could indeed be agreed upon that it is smaller in size.
This would influence unit cohesion and events like deploying from disembarking, deep striking etc.
With your opponents permission you could legally size the base up to the area of the deployment zone or completely remove it entirely, but either extreme makes the game harder and harder to play – hence the suggestion of using what is supplied.
Now having said all that I personally suggest that you glue the original base onto the model firstly and then temporarily Blu Tac it onto a second larger base in case you need to separate the two due to objections.
You could have the best of both worlds by using the two bases stacked together so that they could be detailed well enough and still be removable for either “showcasing’ or ‘game play.’
Just a thought, Cheers.
In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.
That is what Ive done with my nightbringer. Its on the original base but then it is also glues to a detailed flight base. for the following reasons.
1. the damn nightbringer is suseptible to tipping over and breaking off his scythe.
2. It just looks more impressive with the larger base.
3. You can play it whatever way your opponent wants to. If he would rather you play the smaller base, its not a problem as you can still make out where the small base is.
The scarabs on the base are magnatized and can be removed. They are there to show the number of wounds remaining.
NECRON Army List Builder a Free excel capable list generator for 5th and 6th ed. 11/2011
Necrons - 6000 points, Tau - 6000, Daemons - 5250, Eldar - 4500, Blood Angels - 5000
Some pics form my hobby. http://s145.photobucket.com/albums/r...arodragon/40k/
Interesting. I thought that the rule in the new edition was that you had to stick with the base that came with the model and that resizing was out, up or down. I thought that the permission bit came in with the use of scenery bases which end up an inch tall or whatever, not that the size would change. This is a famous deepstriking trick, put your stuff on 40mm bases and they are that much closer to your oppoenent on the next turn!
Just goes to show how wrong a person can be.