PDA

View Full Version : Question about mounts for characters



mark theurer
15-08-2009, 23:43
Hi all,

Thanks in advance for what is probably an easy question for more experienced players. The new Tzeentch Lord on a Disk is on a 50mm base. Would a regular Tzeentch Wizard on a Disk also be on a 50mm base? I'm about to start some conversions using old disks and just want to make sure I get the basing right. Also, would Heroes on Juggers be on a 40mm or 50mm base? Would all non-lords on Chaos or Daemonic mounts be on 50mm or regular cavalry bases?

Thanks,

Mark

Sarah S
16-08-2009, 00:35
Chaos Steeds and Steeds of Slaanesh are on 25x50mm bases.
All the others are on 50x50mm bases.

mark theurer
16-08-2009, 00:50
thx much

mark


Chaos Steeds and Steeds of Slaanesh are on 25x50mm bases.
All the others are on 50x50mm bases.

Humorous_Conclusion
16-08-2009, 10:55
The steed of Slaanesh is on a 50x50mm base like all the other Daemonic mounts. Only the Chaos Steed has a 25x50mm base.

Rikkjourd
16-08-2009, 12:11
The steed of Slaanesh is on a 50x50mm base like all the other Daemonic mounts. Only the Chaos Steed has a 25x50mm base.

No. The steed of slaanesh is on a 25x50.

You may be thinking of the old boobsnake. The WoC book has the one with legs in it.

Humorous_Conclusion
16-08-2009, 17:09
No. The steed of slaanesh is on a 25x50.

You may be thinking of the old boobsnake. The WoC book has the one with legs in it.

Where? I have my copy of the Warriors of Chaos book and I can't find a steed of Slaanesh on a 25x50 base or a reference to one. The only thing I can find is a picture of the 'boob snake' on page 84, with a caption describing it as a daemonic mount.

The GW website still has the Lord of Slaanesh mounted on the 'boob-snake' as a current model (not collectors) and lists his mount as a steed of Slaanesh. So where is this 25x50mm base coming from?

Tokamak
16-08-2009, 17:10
Where? I have my copy of the Warriors of Chaos book and I can't find a steed of Slaanesh on a 25x50 base or a reference to one.

No army book has base size references.

Humorous_Conclusion
16-08-2009, 17:29
No army book has base size references.

Which is what I though and I can't find a model or a picture of a model of a steed of slaanesh on anything other than a 50x50mm base unless I go back to 5th edition. So where has this idea come from?

Avian
16-08-2009, 17:34
The name Steed of Slaanesh NOW describes the mounts that Mounted Daemonettes ride. They are on 25 x 50 mm bases.
The name Steed of Slaanesh PREVIOUSLY described what is NOW just another Daemonic Steed miniature. That was on a 50 x 50 mm base.

Humorous_Conclusion
16-08-2009, 19:40
The name Steed of Slaanesh NOW describes the mounts that Mounted Daemonettes ride. They are on 25 x 50 mm bases.
The name Steed of Slaanesh PREVIOUSLY described what is NOW just another Daemonic Steed miniature. That was on a 50 x 50 mm base.

So to get this information you have to extrapolate from a description of a unit in an entirely seperate army book for which no models currently exist as part of the range and which is contradicted by information on the GW website.

Good to see GW keeping their information clear.:rolleyes:

theunwantedbeing
16-08-2009, 19:48
Where? I have my copy of the Warriors of Chaos book and I can't find a steed of Slaanesh on a 25x50 base or a reference to one.

So where is this 25x50mm base coming from?

1 wound mounts are cavalry mounts, which go on a 25x50mm base.
Page 7 of the Rulebook.

Page 54 of the Warriors of Chaos rulebook states that Juggernaughts, Discs, Palanquinns and Daemonic Mounts are all cavalry mounts, despite not being mounted on cavalry bases.

Seeing as the steed of slaanesh is not listed as an exception, its obviously going on a regular cavalry mount like all other 1 wound mounts do.

Same sort of logic applies in the Daemons of Chaos book.
Juggernaughts, Discs and Palanquinns are all explicitly stated to be cavalry mounts, despite not being mounted on cavarly bases. The Steed of slaanesh has no such exception, so as a 1 wound mount will go on a cavalry base as normal.

Avian
16-08-2009, 19:48
So to get this information you have to extrapolate from a description of a unit in an entirely seperate army book for which no models currently exist as part of the range and which is contradicted by information on the GW website.

Good to see GW keeping their information clear.:rolleyes:
Well, are you surprised? :D

Sarah S
16-08-2009, 20:54
1 wound mounts are cavalry mounts, which go on a 25x50mm base.
Page 7 of the Rulebook.

Page 54 of the Warriors of Chaos rulebook states that Juggernaughts, Discs, Palanquinns and Daemonic Mounts are all cavalry mounts, despite not being mounted on cavalry bases.

Seeing as the steed of slaanesh is not listed as an exception, its obviously going on a regular cavalry mount like all other 1 wound mounts do.

Same sort of logic applies in the Daemons of Chaos book.
Juggernaughts, Discs and Palanquinns are all explicitly stated to be cavalry mounts, despite not being mounted on cavarly bases. The Steed of slaanesh has no such exception, so as a 1 wound mount will go on a cavalry base as normal.

Yes, this is exactly true.

Urgat
16-08-2009, 21:03
In lack of any other reference, I'm pointing you to the base chart from the french GW website (see sig). Haven't checked it (I'm at work), but it should be under "Guerriers du Chaos", and the entry should be "monture de Slaanesh".

Briohmar
16-08-2009, 21:14
In lack of any other reference, I'm pointing you to the base chart from the french GW website (see sig). Haven't checked it (I'm at work), but it should be under "Guerriers du Chaos", and the entry should be "monture de Slaanesh".

Urgat, don't take this wrong, but the French version of the rules, and occasionally extrapolation of the rules are not always exact. Take for example the Lore of Heavens, two of the spell numbers are screwed up (Ibelieve numbers 4 and 5 are reversed, though it could be 3 and 4, I have it written down in one of my BFSP rulebooks, but I have the other one close by right now.) Also, when rules discussions come up at the local group, the guys come to my English books to see if the error is in translation, which it sometimes is.

Urgat
16-08-2009, 22:53
Urgat, don't take this wrong, but the French version of the rules, and occasionally extrapolation of the rules are not always exact. Take for example the Lore of Heavens, two of the spell numbers are screwed up (Ibelieve numbers 4 and 5 are reversed, though it could be 3 and 4, I have it written down in one of my BFSP rulebooks, but I have the other one close by right now.) Also, when rules discussions come up at the local group, the guys come to my English books to see if the error is in translation, which it sometimes is.

I'm not taking it wrong, there's certainly translation discrepancies (mainly why I bought/am buying the english versions of my books), but I'm certainly waiting for someone to offer a better alternative to that chart. It's the most up to date, GW sanctionned list. That's all there is to it really.