PDA

View Full Version : What do you think about unit fillers?



grickherder
27-09-2007, 01:53
Unit fillers are mini-dioramas or other unusual things that people put into their regiments. Sometimes it's done to bulk out the regiment up to a certain amount of figures. Other times it's done entirely for looks.

They don't modify the rules for the regiment at all, they simply take the place of a certain number of troops. It's almost always done in the center of a regiment and done so that it can easily be pulled with other casaulties as needed.

Some examples:

A herd stone in a regiment of Bestigors.

Dwarf rune pillars each taking up one base on the four corners of a special dwarf unit.

A mounted preacher in the middle of a Empire unit extolling the blessings of Sigmar.

A pony and ore cart in a unit of Dwarf Miners.

A big squig in a goblin unit.

So what are your thoughts?

Chaplain Nikolai
27-09-2007, 02:04
As long as they are fitting in with the unit, such as those you described, I really see no problem with it. I've seen horses used for guys before, and I don't think thats okay.

starlight
27-09-2007, 02:25
If they help Theme, they can be awesome.:D

I have yet to see one that wasn't at least as good as the model it replaced. :)

Khorghan
27-09-2007, 02:37
My chaos army's theme is a complete horde, every model is different and once and a while ill stick a chaos ogre or some big guy in the middle of a unit using multiple bases, its fine if its done well.

Rhamag
27-09-2007, 02:42
I played against a guy from the Netherlands who had a bunch of undead models playing instruments under a banner with "Korn" on it, in the middle of one of his big zombie units. Looked pretty cool, with a drum kit and everything!

grickherder
27-09-2007, 02:47
I'm thinking of making a Tzeentch unit filler that would go on either a 3x2 or 3x1 base which would be a bunch of bright flames/tentacles/energy holding up a steel symbol of Tzeentch made out of plasticard or something. The tentacles/flames/etc., would likely be made of wire, green stuff, sculpey/fimo or something like that.

For ranked up daemons like horrors, I'm trying to figure out a way to make a unit filler that is like a portal that they come out of or something.

Unwise
27-09-2007, 03:51
I voted that I did not like them. 90% of the time, they are not done by hobbyists who want to add flavour to a unit, they are done by people who want to save some cash.

The most common unit filler I see is undead filling up ranks with gravestones, or just hands coming out of the ground. It makes the unit look unregimented, which is ok for some units, but I think unsightly in units with full command.

Most people do not make the unit filler look anygood, it is just a last minute thing thrown together to bulk out the army. Alot of people around here also put trees or rocks etc in their units.

Even well done unit fillers seldom match the flair of the unit they are with. They might match the fluff theme, but the icons and other small details normally make them look out of place.

I have used unit fillers before, chained ratogres in middle of my clan moulder themed clanrats. I did not have enough models, now that I do, I don't use them.

grickherder
27-09-2007, 04:08
I guess I should have added an option to the poll like "Depends entirely on how good they look."

I'm not that interested in saving cash, but I do like that I can have a cool modeling opportunity and also spend the money on something else for my army. Also, things coming in multiples of 4 rather than 5 make it attractive as well.


Even well done unit fillers seldom match the flair of the unit they are with. They might match the Fluff theme, but the icons and other small details normally make them look out of place.

What do you mean by this? What icons? Which small details? What is it about a filler that makes it look out of place? What should be done differently to make sure it looks like it belongs?

Lord Malakai
27-09-2007, 04:32
IF it's well thought out and matches a heavy theamed army they'e great.

Unfortunally 98% of unit fillers I've seen have been rubbish.

Chiron
27-09-2007, 07:59
I use them, makes the unit look good and gives me a break from painting skeletons

Alathir
27-09-2007, 08:58
I think they're great. Nothing wrong with someone using a bit of creativity. I love even the simple ones, like a single skeletal hand rising up out of a base.

Braad
27-09-2007, 09:12
I sometimes model a few models so they are sort of interacting with each other to make a mini diorama. But still keep them as seperate models...

Though I can figure that with larger bases you can make some more interesting stuff, and I guess that's quite cool.

But just filling it up with stuff to save money instead of buying extra models... no way! Though if others like to do so, I won't complain. As long as it is clear what's it all about.

Urgat
27-09-2007, 09:37
I use them for 4 reasons:
1) yeah, it does save some cash, and when you've painted your 177th goblin, you do want a break
2) I like doing things like that
3) Old crappy multipart gobs and orcs don't rank up well, so it helps a huge deal.
4) I don't like orcs and gobs ranking up so perfectly, I like them to have messy formations.

Usually my fillers are not large things though:
I've been in the process of rebasing completly that unit of boyz with two choppas I got (see sig), so I've used a bunch of cavalry bases and a couple hand made 75*25 (75 wide) bases to put my guys on, gives more room to breathe. So yeah, I got a unit of 25 orcs with effectively only 20 orcs (and one old metal gobelin), and a lot of wooden or stone bits to make the whole thing look like they're moving in the Badlands.
If people look down at me because I'm trying to save some money that way, heck, I don't care, I'm used to snobish snorts.

Brother Loki
27-09-2007, 09:46
When did saving cash become a bad thing? I haven't played fantasy for a long time, but unit fillers seem like a good idea to me. I always used to spread my nurglings out amongst more bases than they actually come with. I though most people did.

Crube
27-09-2007, 10:06
I love them, provided they're done well...

They can add more of a theme to an army, provide a nice bit of variety for the painter and are something that bit unique and different.

grickherder
27-09-2007, 10:36
There's nothing wrong with saving cash. But some people have a complex where if someone else saves money or paid less than they did for something and they didn't, they feel insecure and need to denigrate the other person's accomplishment to validate their own approach.

Toschenko
27-09-2007, 11:02
I like unit fillers, they can greatly increase the appeal of an army (provided they are well done and fitting the theme of the unit they are in)



Dwarf rune pillars each taking up one base on the four corners of a special dwarf unit.


I think this will be my next unit filler, thanks :D:D:D

Toschenko

Scythe
27-09-2007, 12:26
If they look good, sure, why not? Besides, they are your models. Do with them as you like.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
27-09-2007, 12:33
I don't see anything wrong with them as long as they suit the unit they are designed for.

For example, a Beaststone wouldn't be acceptable for Chaos Warriors, but some kind of Idol would be fine for all kinds of Chaos.

It also depends how much effort has gone into it. Most I've seen are great, but a few are a bit lame.

Don't give a rats ass why you use them, as long as they look good!

huitzilopochtli
27-09-2007, 13:17
i like them, i just wish i were a little better at making them. i have about 15 such fillers i use as skeletons which are basically arms coming out of the ground and about 7 with simply tombstones. they're useful for boosting my units to 20 but i should probably do more with them before i take them anywhere....

ZeroTwentythree
27-09-2007, 13:42
There's nothing wrong with saving cash. But some people have a complex where if someone else saves money or paid less than they did for something and they didn't, they feel insecure and need to denigrate the other person's accomplishment to validate their own approach.



Haha... too true.


Like alot of other people have already said, I think they're fine if they're done right. Same thing goes for stretching out the skeleton kits with the half-skellies digging out of the ground, tombstones, etc.

I especially like when people make a small diorama, like the orcs or gobbos fighting with each other, which I've seen done (well!) a few times.

mistformsquirrel
27-09-2007, 13:59
I didn't even know we could do stuff like this...

<o.O> I do believe I'm going to be digging in my "Big box of ideas" now <,<

Kerill
27-09-2007, 14:10
For ranked up daemons like horrors, I'm trying to figure out a way to make a unit filler that is like a portal that they come out of or something.

That is a tremendous Idea (I'm sorry I may have to steal it)

I think a piece of clear plastic with green stuffed vortex on the outside would look great. You might even be able to use the blister pack plastic :) When the new plastic daemons come out you could cut one in half (or just have arms and legs) coming through the portal with the back end nowhere to be seen!

happy_doctor
27-09-2007, 14:27
Well, it truly depends on the concept of the unit filler; if the modeler has given it some thinking and it fits the army, theme, all is well!

For example, I recently purchased 8 rat ogres off e-bay, not because I was impressed by their combat capabilities, but because they are perfect as unit fillers! I use 1 in the middle of every unit of clanrats, stormvermin and plague monks that I field. The idea is that the skaven swarm around these imposing figures, hence their leadership bonus!

Over the years, I've seen some very good examples of both "cheapish" unit fillers (ie. cavalry models in infantry units, skinks cut in half and posed as if diving in the water or emerging from it,,etc) and very nice, themed dioramas (from oathstones, summoning circles for chaos, shackled beasts, chapels and graveyard buildings). It is all up to the player...

Then again, I wouldn't mind if I played with small, square pieces of paper that had "12 chaos warriors, full command, shields" or "20 eternal guard, noble BSB on foot" written on them :D .If you or your opponent lacks the money to complete a unit, let him field it using unit fillers and proxies! It keeps the game going :P

Brother Loki
27-09-2007, 15:36
Very true, happy. I too am happy for people to play with counters, proxies, unit fillers or anything else.

DesertDirge
27-09-2007, 18:11
there is absolutely nothing wrong with unit fillers as long as it fits the army. I someone has a big problem with them... then you probably don't want to play that person anyway!

bdickj
27-09-2007, 18:16
All of my skaven slave regiments have a unit filler, the size of 4 20mm bases in a square, with piled up debris and a packmaster with whip in the middle. He's the overseer. It's the theme of the army- they are slaves to those above them and should be treated as such. Plus, in all skaven fluff, slaves are whipped into place. I have the models to fill the fillers place, I just think it looks cooler to put it in the regiment.

Aflo
27-09-2007, 18:58
I think the poll is begining to show a definte trend:p

I personally think unit fillers are great for the most part, but as some have said, things that are either irrelavent to the unit or other, more mundane pieces of scenery such as rocks and trees make for a bad unit filler: they just don't add anything (except numbers) to the unit.

I have seen some superb unit fillers, like a zombie unit filler that had a lone vampire hunter surrounded by zombies, making a final last stand on a coffin. Looked awesome :)

Spleendokta
27-09-2007, 19:48
Lets see, a gaggle of zombies that look like everyone elses gaggle of zombies. Then we have a nice centerpiece/filler in the middle of the zombies and now we got a cool theme going.

Lets say you have a block of 25 zombies, then add in a 3X2 centerpiece. Almost everyone rolls with 5 wide, so you still have alot of troops in the block and only missing 6, front/rear/sides are troops, but so much charicter is added to your normally boring infantry. I'm sure GW hates this since its less models purchased but oh well.

I think alot forget that theres more to this game then crushing your opponents. Some of us enjoy the hobby side more than the gaming. I am certainly one of them.

BTW, has anyone caught grief for doing this at tournies? I'm not a tourny player yet, but one of these days I'll give it a shot.

darkprincewilson
27-09-2007, 19:56
I voted indifferent. As long as whatever is on the table is representative of the unit, I am OK with it.

deadkez
27-09-2007, 20:04
My only unit filler is a 40mm base with a Flagellent whipping two repenters both in stocks, more care and attention to pose went into this than the other 17 flagellents put together.

I've heard someone say before that a unit filler can only be good if it isn't seen as a shortcut. I think there's something in that.

N810
27-09-2007, 20:30
Woah I'm just starting out... I didn't know you could do this.
That being said I allready made a Skink Priest proxy untill
I get a real one
http://warseer.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=28227&d=1190393649
I call him Sprueasaurus. LOL

Aflo
27-09-2007, 20:35
That being said I allready made a Skink Priest proxy untill
I get a real one
http://warseer.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=28227&d=1190393649
I call him Sprueasaurus. LOL

I'm nonplussed as to how you managed to capture so much character within such a small mini! :p

deadkez
27-09-2007, 20:45
Yeah, why bother getting a real one? Thats great.

SevenSins
27-09-2007, 21:23
fillers are nice touches and add that little extra to a ranked unit, (as already mentioned) if done well ;)
Haven't made any myself yet, mainly not much ranks to fill in my ogre army and all my beasts skirmish... But I'm (slowly) building a skaven army on the side wich would do nicely with a few dioramas (liked both the slave-whipper and rat ogre idea, might steal those)

theunwantedbeing
27-09-2007, 21:34
Fillers are only good when they arent there to be fillers.

Filler scenery never looks right if the unit moves at all.

I dont mind people using the skeleton sprue to get 30 skeletons out of their 20 man box set, as it usually comes with enough bases to do that as well as a bunch of additional bits....so long as the unit gets steadily lower and lower as it gets to the back of the unit where it's just hands and such it looks fine.
The unit needs to be properly painted as well.

Plus you take models from the back of the unit anyway so they get removed first.

I dont use fillers personally,mainly as I tend to avoid deep ranked units most of the time so I dont have a place to put them.
DE spearmen....cant think of a good filler for that.
Witch elves.....still cant think of anything,not anything that would be suitable in a family atmosphere anyway...lol
I might swap my witch elves for some executionairs as my current witch elves tend to fare very poorly, so I could have a guy with a load of heads in a bag,or a chopping block and a sharpening wheel in the middle of the unit....

I wonder if anyone's bothered to put a table and the models on the edges playing cards (while having to move the table every so often to keep up with the unit) as that would be an amazing unit filler.

wallacer
27-09-2007, 22:05
With GW prices climbing inexorably upwards it is inevitable that people will start thinking about unit fillers as a way to keep down the cost of building an army.

I think it's fine.

fadam
28-09-2007, 00:58
I seriously doubt there's anyone out there who gets incredibly angry at the sight of a little creative expression. If it doesn't mess with the core game at all who cares?

MalusCalibur
28-09-2007, 01:06
To me it really depends what it is. For example, I do really like 'in-fighting' scenes in O+G units. What I don't like, though, is pieces of terrain replacing models, because then you have to ask 'is that REALLY replacing the missing models' combat ability?' For me it has to be believable. Something like putting an Ogre in amongst 'man-sized' troops is better, but still feels wrong somehow.

As a rule I'd have to say I'm against them, though.


MalusCalibur

Sovereign
28-09-2007, 01:58
If you're talking about scenery (or ogres) among men, they look like crap and should be banned. There is nothing worse than a bunch of men / whatever standing around a boulder and dragging it across the battlefield. You might as well simply insert a blank base at that point.

OTOH, if you're talking about multi-based vignettes, those are awesomely great and should be encouraged.

So if it has the same number of models, great.

If it's using a rock to stand in for men, crap.

Crazy Harborc
28-09-2007, 02:02
I just had a flashback. A couple of years ago, an opponent had a great looking VC army. Tombstones....laying down, sunken into the graves(s). various skelies partially arisen......say a skull and a hand, arms from the elbows to fingers. A couple of skelies were emerging feet (bottoms) first plus the top half of a skull.

Unwise
28-09-2007, 03:10
What do you mean by this? What icons? Which small details? What is it about a filler that makes it look out of place? What should be done differently to make sure it looks like it belongs?

Its a little hard to explain, and I suspect I am just being too pedantic.

When designing a unit, lets say Plague Monks, there are certain icons, symbols and small little details that the designers put all over the models to make them look like they are coherent and themed. In the case of Plague Monks it is mostly boils, censers, staffs, little bells sown into clothing, rotten cloaks/hoods.

If I were to put something else into that unit, say, a rat ogre. It will not fit the visual theme well even though it makes some sense for it to be there. To make it look any good, I would have to not just paint it sickly looking, but add some censers hanging from it, tatter any clothing it has, maybe model a hood on it and maybe give it a staff. They it will fit the iconography of the unit.

Hmm that was not a good example, but I'm drawing a bit of a blank at the moment. Other possibilites:

- A priest with attendents + altar in a flaggenents unit. The priest/altar would need pages nailed to it/him, torches/flames all around it, slogans painted around etc and be rather filthy to fit the visual theme of the unit.

One could say that the priest should be all clean cut and neat to make a juxta position between him and the rabble, but the net effect of that is a disjointed looking unit. Only an artist of considerable merit could pull that off.

- A priest preaching to a unit of empire soldiers. Has the priest got similar colour scheme and markings to the soldiers? Do the soldiers look otherwise religious? How are they interacting with him? (In 95% of filler diarama, the entire rest of the unit is ignoring the guy in the filler) This could work, but you would have to raid the empire bits box and get heaps of religious symbols to make the troops look inspired/zealous.

- A very good example I saw was a skink priest sacrificing an empire soldier on the altar at the foot of a magepriest. This was used to fill out the Temple Guard unit. It interacted with the Slaan well, which made it look like he was giving the final command to kill the guy.

The temple guard on the sides of the unit next to the diarama were looking inwards paying attention to the ritual. The ground on diarama and the models next to it was blood spattered. This further tied the rest of the unit in with the filler.

At the very back of the unit, a Temple Guard was holding a few more chained empire guys. This helped fill out the unit with casualty markers, but also fit the main filler peice well.

Anyway, back to work. May add more examples as I can think of them.

grickherder
28-09-2007, 04:25
Anyway, back to work. May add more examples as I can think of them.

Those were good examples, I get what you're saying. I also generally agree. A unit certainly has a certain look or feel and it does help when everything in it carries that look or feel.

For skirmishers, I think fillers are way, way harder. There's very few things that would work well in a group of skirmishers. I could however, see Witch Elves having humans in stocks that they are whipping along with them to scare the enemy about what's going to happen to them once they're captured. For Way watchers, I guess you could make some sort of wolf, deer or other forest creature. Ghouls? A pile of bodies might be okay, especially if another one is converted into stooping down to eat them.

For the fillers that are basically terrain pieces, I'm a bit torn. On one hand, I don't like the idea of a piece of terrain that they drag along, but on the other, we have that with every bit of sand, texture, static grass and flock on the model's bases. So we already do that. I guess it's just adding in more times for things to look off-- like when your forest based guys are playing on a ice table and your verdant green flock looks out of place.

Gwwwargh
28-09-2007, 05:00
Woah I'm just starting out... I didn't know you could do this.
That being said I allready made a Skink Priest proxy untill
I get a real one
http://warseer.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=28227&d=1190393649
I call him Sprueasaurus. LOL

omg lmao... thats just so bad its hilarious and amazing... I’ve got to give you credit for that its by far the best worst mini I’ve ever seen... if that makes any sense to you

ohhh and im for Fillers as long as they looks nice and suit the army there in

Halelel
28-09-2007, 07:42
I'm all for fillers, let's face it, not everyone can spend the same amount of money and time on their armies (as much as we would like them too though, lol) so fillers are a great way to fill out armies as long as they are done well.

As others have said, putting a rock in the center of a bunch of skeletons for example is just crap and is obviously just to take up space. However, I have no problems with people making bases with tombstones and skeleton arms, skulls, whatever popping out of the ground. I'm pretty sure that's where they are coming from anyways.

On another thread, I mentioned how much I dislike the BfSP dwarfs, but even I will admit that they make great filler units and I have no problem killing the ugly little stunties, :)

Phazael
30-09-2007, 04:52
I don't mind them from a modelling/saving money aspect. What annoys me is that some players like to use them to obscure how many models they have at a given time, forcing you to guess how many guys are there. It can lead to a lot of confusion, especially if the person using them is doing it intentionally, which I have seen pulled. Anyhow, I think that it ultimately belongs in casual play but not tournament play, and as soon as GW decides they want more money for those missing models, it will likely be booted from GTs.

grickherder
30-09-2007, 09:57
That's totally not cool. They should never be used to cause confusion or misdirection at all, ever. The rules about how to rank models up are quite clear-- full ranks and the last guys centered. If I count the width of the unit and how deep it is, multiply it and add the stragglers by base in the last rank and get the wrong number, the guy is cheating.

Neknoh
30-09-2007, 10:46
On the topic of rocks in the middle of units, it CAN be done well, if done as a diorama, for instance:


Zombies:
- Rock on 40mm base, could also be a bunch of skulls or just a big crater, anyhow, it should be made to look as if though it has impacted. A few half zombies and zombie parts should be sticking out from underneath said rock. Bases surrounding the 40mm base should becovered in strewn bodyparts, zombies walking without heads, legs on their own, eveyrthing moving away from the rock in disorientated angles (towards front, corners, flanks and rear of the unit)... and zombies looking oddly at the big rock in the middle. Allofasudden, we have a unit of Zombies that was hit by a Trebuchet/Rock Lobber/Screaming Skull Catapult/Hellcannon/Mortar/Helstrom etc. (if the appropriate "rock" is used, can, as said, be a crater or similar).


Flagellants:

A bunch of Flaggies pulling a rock on logs using ropes on a 40 by 60mm base. On the rock, the text "Sins of humanity", "Sigmar forgive our sins", "Repent" or something similar should be scribbled or carved. The rock should be placed on a platform, which, in turn, should have loads of torches and perhaps someone crucified (do note, crosses used for this is not only the typical one used for christian crucifixes, there were also "X", "Y" and "T"-shaped variants, use one of these in case of someone finding it offensive).


Orks and Gobblins:

Either gobblins shoving a big, round bolder because "da boss... an' da guy wif da whip says so" followed by an orc bully in the rank behind it. Or, a bunch of orcs shoving an effigy of Gork... or Mork. In the case of the goblins, you could have Orcs pointing and laughing to the sides.


Bestigors:

Same as Flaggies, but with a Herdstone filled with sacrifices and the likes, perhaps some Ungors running allong the sides of it.


So, it can work, though as said, you just have to tie them in with the rest of the unit.


Personally, I love unit fillers, and as long as they are good, they add a LOT of character to a game

Crazy Harborc
01-10-2007, 00:27
Using the correct bases within those units that have other than the normal minies will help to stop the "fudging" of numbers/minies in the unit. In a unit with 20mm square bases for each minie....a square 40mm base will work to designate 4 minies.

When faced by an opponent that you thinking is faking the body count that is left.....total up how many are left use dice as markers for the total left. OR use dice to keep track of how many have been killed.

As long as an opponent has the correct number of the correct size of bases OR the equivalent of space using bigger bases I am happy. I do insist they have a body count marker if the correct number of bases aren't being used. When "stand ins" for minies are used.....they(stand-ins) should be removed as they are when minies are used.

The SkaerKrow
01-10-2007, 02:14
Like just about everyone here, I'm fine with them if they're done well. I really like the idea of chained Rat Ogres in a block of Moulder Clanrats. Awesome (and simple) way to perpetuate a theme.

I'd love to do some unit filler for the Wood Elf army that I'm working on (in this case, twisted and somewhat demonic tree husks). Unfortunately, I don't have any units that rank up deep enough to make it worthwhile.

Unwise
01-10-2007, 02:25
omg lmao... thats just so bad its hilarious and amazing... Iíve got to give you credit for that its by far the best worst mini Iíve ever seen... if that makes any sense to you

ohhh and im for Fillers as long as they looks nice and suit the army there in

I have to agree. I love that mini. It looks like a modern impressionist take on a saurus warrior. It resembles alot of modern art. What made me LoL though is that the creator went to the effort of making it, rather than just using an empty base or another model. It appeals to me greatly.

Dr Death
01-10-2007, 10:19
As a rule i'm against them.

The main reason for this is that when used regularly they make armies look untidy, disorganised and gimmicky. Slapping an Ogre, Troll or other 'big guy' in every large unit that you cant be bothered to paint doesnt add character, it just looks exactly like you cant be bothered to paint any more models. Similarly i am generally against big 'set peices' like Herdstones monoliths and any kind of what would normally be classed as terrain since the notion that your regiment is lugging that thing around (which looks either a) very heavy or b) rooted in place (or both)) is just silly: keep such things for your army display base if you really want to show how into the hobby you are.

With that unfashionable moan out the way i better explain what i am happy to see.

The occassional mounted model is more than welcome to break up great blocks of infantry, you could even mount it on a 40mm x 40mm base if you like and shove a few attendants on there (think along the lines of warmaster hero stands). Palanquins bearing individuals or relics are also fine (though not all of us can be as talented as Tammy Haye with her Nurgle sorcerer) but such peices do have to be used more sparingly.

There is a sub genre which are ordinary rankers modelled to be interacting with each other: They are perfectly fine by my book, as are newly risen undead with only hands or heads visible above disturbed earth. Units with a coherent theme across them are fantastic to see but to be honest they're not really fillers in my book, they're just a converted regiment.

Dr Death

Ward.
01-10-2007, 11:20
Well personally I will be cheaping out on unit fillers when the new VC book comes out, hopefully they come up with a new "stronger" zombie type unit so I can wack some gorger's in there, appropriately modeled of course.
(That scene from 300 anyone?)

But i think this thread will start a new trend and alot of army's posted here in the future will contain at least one "elite" unit with a center piece.

The boyz
01-10-2007, 13:21
I have no problem with people using unit fillers, so long as they fit the theme of the army they are using. When I get round to finishing of my Goblin army, I am going to create a couple myself.

zak
01-10-2007, 14:55
I voted indifferent. I don't mind others using them and I have occasionally used some proxy undead skeelies by using gravestones and hands emerging from the earth. I tend to use these as reinforcements and it is mainly because I can't be bothered to paint another 20 skellies as I've already painted 100 and I don't drybrush!!

EvC
01-10-2007, 15:17
Fillers are fine, but I do expect a bit of creativity in there! Skeletons and Zombies rising from the earth aren't really fillers, they're just cheap alternatives, but still good (I only use one block of 4). My other unit fillers consist of 2 40mm bases that combine together to hold a battering ram (Though I rarely bother balancing the ram on their arms, I want to play a siege game!), and another one with two cheery Skeletons helping down another Skeleton that's been tied up to a road sign (From the Giant box). Adds nice character without being too unoriginal ;)

SevenSins
01-10-2007, 19:09
Just a thought any of you got any pics of some of your fillers? Just some inspiration for us who like good fillers :)

sephiroth87
01-10-2007, 20:13
NOT MINE.

But Gorgeous...



http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=150158483136

DesertDirge
01-10-2007, 21:25
there is no difference between someone on a horse in a unit and an ogre or a beast on a heardstone in a unit... That's just being picky!

Like most are saying.. if it fits the theme of the unit (meaning painted/modeled) then there should be no problem.

It's being creative... not boring or cheap.

sabre4190
01-10-2007, 23:27
Every unit filler ive seen (even if they are rare) have been beautiful pieces that really add a sense of theme to the army. The only times i see them used otherwise are by players who dont actually have armies.

Tutore
02-10-2007, 09:43
I never built one, but I want to do it, because I think they can add flavour. I just need to find good component to create them.

Dr Death
02-10-2007, 10:35
there is no difference between someone on a horse in a unit and an ogre or a beast on a heardstone in a unit... That's just being picky!

No more picky than WYSIWYG (in fact a hell of a lot more lucid and liberal in the application than WYSIWYG) or demanding that fillers be 'theme appropriote' (whatever that means). Considering i dont play that often my concerns are mainly from an aesthetic point of view: the 'moving monolith of doom' which incidentally has the same fighting prowess of 4 Chaos Warriors to me is no less rediculous than using trees or fences as unit fillers.

Ogres, Trolls and other such creatures are less of an issue (in that they actually have personal means of locomotion) but to me they come across as pretty univentive, particularly when someone has just slapped an ogre bull in the centre of a regiment of skavenslaves, or even worse tried to make a 'novelty' maneater. To my view (picky as you would call it) you could just about get away with a kroxigor in a unit of skinks since that was an old formation in 4th/5th edition but ogres in a unit of state troops? Nah, not good.

In the case of individuals on horseback, particularly unit champions, it makes perfect sense for purposes of visability. Equally if someone was to use the limited edition night goblins releasing a fanatic i would be in full consent (you could even get away with the odd squig in a regiment of night goblins to give the 'unruly rabble' feel). It's just a matter of restraint for the best aesthetic effect.

I should point out that i probably wouldnt call anyone out on these matters or even worse refuse to play them, but for my own purposes these are the rules i abide by.

Dr Death

Fredmans
02-10-2007, 11:10
I love creative unit fillers, and I am currently working on a couple of fillers myself, but I somewhat agree with Dr. Death. There has to be some means of locomotion in a filler. A walking bush or moving stone feels a bit weird. That said, I still love fillers. This is a hobbyists' game and there is nothing wrong with a bit of creativity. A good-looking filler takes more time to accomplish than the three or four guys it replaces anyway. I have a lot more problem with the if-it's-not-GW (or WYSIWYG)-it's-not-properly-Warhammer attitude than the "filler problem".

/Fredmans

The SkaerKrow
02-10-2007, 11:15
Hey man, Wood Elves can get their bushes to move.

DesertDirge
02-10-2007, 16:21
theme appropriate, similar in theme, fits with the rest of the unit, looks similar not out of place.. etc.... ;) This is about looks.. the only functionality the unit filler has is taking the place of models for "game" purposes. A Horse will only represent one other model and thus really isn't a unit filler.

I never said plop down a rock and or tree as a unit filler. If the peice is built right then there shouldn't be anykind of an issue! Who cares if "In real life" it shouldn't be able to move with the unit.. this is a game/Hobby.

If someone is going to say that rock with your beast campion ontop can't move.. then I'm going to pull.. that horse can't be in the unit because it has different stats (unless used by a character).. and this topic will go on and on and on. ;)

The whole purpose of this topic is to find creative ways to create unit fillers for those who can not afford extra models or don't have the time to paint 100 rats.

I'm just using the Horseback champion as a counter argument... I'm not dissmising it.

Dr Death
02-10-2007, 17:15
Who cares if "In real life" it shouldn't be able to move with the unit.. this is a game/Hobby.

Well was assume gravity applies in the Warhammer world as do most other laws of physics (arrows fire fowards rather than rebounding back at the firer (if they do rebound into the firer consider training your archers better).) Therefore herdstones are heavy and except when possessed by demonic entities (who the hell would incarnate themselves as a rock?) are only moved by the strenuous effort of others involved.


theme appropriate, similar in theme, fits with the rest of the unit, looks similar not out of place.. etc....

That's all very well but it does avoid the obvious matter of theme- fitting a world where the rules of physics apply;).

Individual rocks such as are mounted on the bases of characters are a different kettle of fish since one boulder is much like any other boulder and such basing tricks represent the character 'freeze frozen' if you will, in time. Alternatively you could say that your character immediately heads for high ground for visability and your rock represents such a place.

Just to make perfectly clear: i dont have a problem with sand and static grass on the bases either, such things fall through the 'improbable moving objects' ('IMO' if you will) filter - one peice of dirt is much the same as any other peice of dirt, but unless you're playing ents or treespirit heavy wood elves, there should be no 'Macbeth' moments with Birnham wood coming to Dunsinane.


Dr Death

EvC
02-10-2007, 17:20
In the case of individuals on horseback, particularly unit champions, it makes perfect sense for purposes of visability.

While I agree that a champion on horseback is a great addition to a unit, I'd be weary of putting any of my command models on any kind of "filler" base, as that means there are situations where you'll need to switch the model for another, which is annoying.

Chiron
02-10-2007, 17:58
That's all very well but it does avoid the obvious matter of theme- fitting a world where the rules of physics apply;)

Perhaps, but in a world with Physics then half of the models in the game shouldnt be able to even move, take the latest elves and their helmets or the Orcs and their weaponry. Theres no way either army could fight with that load out, all you'd have to do was wait for them to faint from exhaustion. :angel:

bhusus
02-10-2007, 18:00
It never even occurred to me to do something like this...and I love conversions and saving money...this is one of the best ideas for both...

Dr Death
02-10-2007, 18:36
Perhaps, but in a world with Physics then half of the models in the game shouldnt be able to even move, take the latest elves and their helmets or the Orcs and their weaponry. Theres no way either army could fight with that load out, all you'd have to do was wait for them to faint from exhaustion.

********! Foiled again!:rolleyes:

I think i shall have to clarify in saying there are thresholds for these things, knowing full well that in indulging you with technicalities i'm digging my own grave. I suppose it's no benefit to my argument that i actually dislike those High Elf models for exactly that reason? No? Thought not:o.

Quibbling matter of design style aside the warhammer world is still one which abides by the laws of physics. We suspend disbeleif in so far as mythical creatures and the completely baseless notion of Magic goes but without the basic principles of existance in our world applying we wouldnt be able to have a coherent fictional universe, let alone a game based on the physics-centric notion of killing each other with pointy objects.

Dr Death

Count Sinister
02-10-2007, 18:45
The physics argument doesn't seem to hold much weight in a universe in which flying horses exist, I think, which seems to suggest that it's really how something looks that's important when it comes to unit-fillers. I hadn't really thought about using them before, but now that I'm putting together an Empire witch-hunter army, I can already see how it's going to help me. My plan is to have a few big blocks of free company fighters to represent the witch-hunter's 'angry mob', and I can aleady see them dragging a few unfortunate witches along with them, in chains. I might also build a cart with an executioner's block on top, and pop that into another unit. It adds character AND fills out the unit. That's really the bottom line for me, I think.

DesertDirge
02-10-2007, 18:58
The physics argument doesn't seem to hold much weight in a universe in which flying horses exist, I think, which seems to suggest that it's really how something looks that's important when it comes to unit-fillers. I hadn't really thought about using them before, but now that I'm putting together an Empire witch-hunter army, I can already see how it's going to help me. My plan is to have a few big blocks of free company fighters to represent the witch-hunter's 'angry mob', and I can aleady see them dragging a few unfortunate witches along with them, in chains. I might also build a cart with an executioner's block on top, and pop that into another unit. It adds character AND fills out the unit. That's really the bottom line for me, I think.

at least it's movable! :rolleyes::D

Chiron
02-10-2007, 20:07
********! Foiled again!:rolleyes:

I think i shall have to clarify in saying there are thresholds for these things, knowing full well that in indulging you with technicalities i'm digging my own grave. I suppose it's no benefit to my argument that i actually dislike those High Elf models for exactly that reason? No? Thought not:o

I'll give you that excuse as thats the reason I hate them as well.

Honestly though I think that its more than enough that the entire game relies on imagination and a snapshot image of models in single poses to more than forgive unit fillers provided they fit a coherent theme and arent to large. Its just another way for people to use their imaginations

I dont think I've really had a bad reaction to my own unit fillers so perhaps I'm just biased (mmm... polystyrene stonework...)

grimkeeper
02-10-2007, 20:21
if it adds to the feel/look of the unit great.

thorgrim
03-10-2007, 00:58
If there done well and as part of a themed unit i really like them.
But if there just there to take up space then i hate them.
So i voted indifference some i like some i don't.

Highborn
03-10-2007, 02:02
It depends on the army. Vampire Counts are great with filler, while High Elves it's a little more to be avoided. Depends on how regimented the unit is, and how organised it's meant to be.

starlight
03-10-2007, 02:06
With Greenskins, they can be the source of great hilarity. :D

Lord of Skulls
03-10-2007, 09:06
I have to agree with most people here: If they are well done, and not just the easy way out, I like them:) Also, looking like they are able to move is an advantage.

I've been planning to make a unit filler myself (first time), and thought I'd see what people here think of it. I was planning to put one of the new Chaos Spawns in one of my Marauder units, with the four Marauders around it tugging it along in chains. (Like the Immortals from 300.) I will of course convert the Spawn so that it isn't more than 1 cm taller than the Marauders, and give it the same kind of weapons and armour, to make it fit in...

So, what would people think of that?

Dr Death
03-10-2007, 10:44
Honestly though I think that its more than enough that the entire game relies on imagination and a snapshot image of models in single poses to more than forgive unit fillers provided they fit a coherent theme and arent to large. Its just another way for people to use their imaginations

Then why not use that imagination to create a stonking peice of terrain instead of making a half-arsed parody to make up numbers in a regiment? Remember Paul Sawyer's herdstone from the original To4G? Now that was a proper herdstone! A proper full-on peice of themed terrain that made no compromises for universal usage.


The physics argument doesn't seem to hold much weight in a universe in which flying horses exist, I think, which seems to suggest that it's really how something looks that's important when it comes to unit-fillers.

Well to paraphrase Stephen Fry "Just because science doesnt apply everywhere doesnt mean science applies nowhere". To be honest i think all this debate rather elevates the matter of inanimate objects marching along with your regiment looking silly to an unjustified importance.

If it doesnt bother you then by all means have such things in your army, my opinion impacts not in the slightest upon personal choice, i am simply voicing my personal opinion and *how I* do things, which apparently some feel the desire to deny me.


It depends on the army. Vampire Counts are great with filler, while High Elves it's a little more to be avoided. Depends on how regimented the unit is, and how organised it's meant to be.

This is another equally important matter. Taking the Empire as an example (an army which i am familiar with) an unruly mob of flagellants would be far more amenable to a unit filler than a strictly organised regiment of Greatswords. In an army large enough that it has context, i frankly wouldnt mind at all if someone turned up with the Automemorial of Middenheim Delivered from the Darkness (as shown on page 47 of the hardback rulebook) as a filler (in the words of my esteemed opponent in this matter, DesertDirge: "at least it's moveable").) Visual context, whether that is regimental or just a matter of proportion (the above example is a little inappropriote as a filler for your one 10-strong core unit of Flagellants) is all important.

Dr Death

Chiron
03-10-2007, 11:48
Then why not use that imagination to create a stonking peice of terrain instead of making a half-arsed parody to make up numbers in a regiment?


Because not everyone has access to their own table or there own scenery to stick that bit of terrain on there? Yes some people are part of clubs which they can use their own terrain at but if your moving your army around a lot you want to make it a bit more customised and a bit more unique

And its not always because its half arsed that a filler will look bad, not everyone is a great modeller and great painter, but they still deserve to be able to use them as part of the army.

Anyway, I shall leave it at that and look forward to fighting you with my movable stone circle at some point if your ever back down in London ;)

DesertDirge
03-10-2007, 15:36
Awesome Dr.Death.. we actually agree on something! lol Organized state troops (empire soliders and highelves) really shouldn't have fillers.

Rats,Orcs/gobbos,beasts,Chaos,undead are your best bet for fillers depending on the size of the unit. (10 man units shouldn't have fillers as well as skirmishers)

Lizards,Dwarfs,Tombkings, are kind of in the middle.

while Empire, Brets,DE and HE have maybe one unit in which this could be done in.

turelhim vampire
03-10-2007, 18:53
For my beasts of chaos I use "fillers" to bulk up my numbers - in my beast herds I have, for example, a hand full of gnoblars to count as ungors. Using ogre kingdoms plastics to make chaos ogres leaves you with a lot of the little buggers, and what better use for them? They are weedy enough that no one gets confused by what they count as and I think they help convey that "marauding raiders" theme that beasts of chaos have. I also have a marauder with shield and spear to count as the same thing. He's the foe-render's "pet".

Fillers, so long as they help theme the army, are perfect for "horde" armies where a bit of randomness adds to the look of the army. I had never really thought about dioramas as fillers before, I may have a go at it.

A suggestion for chaos players would be a chaos spawn with a few marauders/ungors/warriors/whatever with chains as handlers. I've wanted to do that for ages but never realised it was an acceptable practice.

Ethlorien
03-10-2007, 19:00
Wow, this is the first I've heard of them and I think it's a great idea. Out of curiosity, what would any of you folks use for a High Elf army (I'll assume putting a big, poity helmet on my Ogre Hunter and plopping him in the middle of my pheonix guard would be frowned on)?

turelhim vampire
03-10-2007, 19:39
Wow, this is the first I've heard of them and I think it's a great idea. Out of curiosity, what would any of you folks use for a High Elf army (I'll assume putting a big, poity helmet on my Ogre Hunter and plopping him in the middle of my pheonix guard would be frowned on)?

If your army is aligned with Chrace, or at least includes White Lions, perhaps one of the soon to be released white lion models from the tyranoc chariot kit? I think it would look pretty cool - a large square base with the lion and a white lion handler on it? That would look fairly cool in a unit of spearmen.

For archer units, maybe an "ammo station" with a large amount of arrows stuck in the ground ready for use, and a stand with a number of full quivers hanging from it ready to be grabbed. Perhaps even a phoenix-shaped brazier for lighting the arrows on for when fighting flammable opponents?

Maybe a small mound with a watch tower on it? Nothing huge, just a cylindrical tower with a door in it and some arrow slits, etc?

Dr Death
04-10-2007, 10:05
Awesome Dr.Death.. we actually agree on something! lol Organized state troops (empire soliders and highelves) really shouldn't have fillers.

Rats,Orcs/gobbos,beasts,Chaos,undead are your best bet for fillers depending on the size of the unit. (10 man units shouldn't have fillers as well as skirmishers)

Lizards,Dwarfs,Tombkings, are kind of in the middle.

while Empire, Brets,DE and HE have maybe one unit in which this could be done in.

Yes, all of this rather boils down to liking fillers when they're not really needed as fillers. Fillers is perhaps the wrong term for them as it evokes 'proxies' or 'stand-ins' which rarely have much attention given to them. Warhammer has a longstanding tradition of 'counts as' replacing individual models (sometimes across an entire army) for something different which i have no problem with.

Ideas i have seen used are Halflings standing in for Empire archers, converted cultists taking the place of Ungors in Beast-herds, alternative slaves in skaven-slaves regiments. Larger 'set peices' or centre-peices have to be managed somewhat more carefully: The chaos spawn suggestion that has popped up a couple of times on here is one of the better ideas (there's a wonderful peice of artwork of a spawn amongst a beast-herd in the BoC army book) and such set peices do certainly look better when in a 'rabble' than an organised regiment. One could argue that we already have an official unit filler in that mould in the form of the grail reliquae.

Dr Death