ISSUE: On what size base should Thunderwolf Cavalry models be mounted?
HOLDING: While Thunderwolf Cavalry have no official GW model, Thunderwolf Cavalry models should be mounted on 60 mm. round bases or 25 mm. x 50 mm. rectangle bases.
ANALYSIS:
Justicar GiantKiller delivers the opinion of the court.
This issue arises from the fact that as of this writing, GW has yet to release an “official” model for the Codex: Space Wolves unit Thunderwolf Cavalry (hereinafter TWC), leaving players guessing as to what constitutes an appropriate base for their converted TWC models. This has apparently been a topic of much debate, as The Rules Lawyers received more than a dozen emails requesting a ruling on this issue during our recent hiatus.
As always, we begin by analyzing the language of the applicable rules – in this case, the rule governing bases:
“Citadel miniatures are normally supplied with a plastic base. If so, they must be glued onto their bases before they can be used in the game. Some players like to mount their models on impressive scenic bases. As mounting your models on different-sized bases might affect the way they interact with the rules, make sure before the game that your opponent does not mind this.” BGB p. 3
The language of this rule seems clear and unambiguous. Models that come with a base “must be glued onto their bases before they can be used”. (BGB p.3, emphasis added) From this language we conclude that models must be mounted on the type of base they are supplied with. Any other size base requires your opponent’s permission, something not likely to be forthcoming in a competitive environment.
But what happens when, as is the case with Thunderwolf Cavalry, there is not a model sold which represents the unit in question? The answer, unfortunately, is that the bases rule cannot apply if there is no official model for the unit. The base size restriction is triggered (as indicated by the language “[i]f so…”) by the miniature being “supplied with a plastic base” (BGB p. 3). Thunderwolf Cavalry aren’t supplied, period. Let alone with a plastic base.
Clearly the models need some base. Bases are fundamental to how non-vehicle models (and even some vehicles) interact with each other, right down to something as simple and integral as gauging the distance between two models:
“A model is considered to occupy the area of its base, so when measuring distances between two models, use the closest point of their bases as your reference points.” BGB p.3
And, just as they aren’t supplied with a base, TWC are certainly not “supplied without a base” which is the only way to become exempt from the basing requirement. (BGB p.3) So they must have a base, but which size is appropriate? Ultimately the bases rule, on its own, fails to provide a clear answer as to what size base is mandatory for TWC. But simply taking that rule at face value and arguing “there is no appropriate base size” just isn’t good enough if you’re a tournament organizer trying to impose appropriate and uniform restrictions, or a tournament player trying to make sure your models will be acceptable and won’t get you DQ’ed.
GW selects base sizes for a reason - or, more accurately, for many reasons. We can deduce that those reasons include everything from aesthetic considerations (“what looks ‘right’ given the size and shape of the model?”) to practical considerations (“how do we get this damn valkyrie to stand upright?”) to in-game effect (“how much space should this model take up on the board” or “how many infantry models should be able to get into base-to-base with this guy?”).
Luckily, no rule stands alone. The Use Context Canon directs us to interpret GW’s language in light of appropriate context. We must therefore consider context to determine GW’s intent regarding the appropriate base size for TWC models. As aesthetic considerations are highly subjective, we’ll steer clear of those. But in-game effect is ripe for discussion. For this rule, which deals with the in-game effect of bases, appropriate context would include any discussion of “modeling for advantage”, particularly that involving base sizes. We’ll define “modeling for advantage” broadly – as constructing a model in such a way that the player gains some advantage that he would not ordinarily receive if the model were built in the prescribed manner. Given that definition, we note that GW’s distaste for modeling for advantage is evident from its rules. See, for example, Canis Wolfborn’s “Wrath of the Savage” rule:
“Canis may choose to use the number of enemy models in base contact with him as his Attacks characteristic. … For those considering mounting Canis on a really large base to take advantage of this – don’t even think about it!” Codex: Space Wolves p. 54
From this language we can glean one bright-line rule regarding GW’s intent vis-a-vis base sizes – they should not provide an unfair advantage to the model. How does this help us decide on the appropriate base size for TWC? It lets us rule out bases either so large or so small that an unfair advantage is gained. What does that rule out? That question begs another question – what bases are “in the running” to begin with? Clearly the flying bases are not appropriate for this type of unit as they’re neither jetbikes, jump infantry, nor skimmers. That rules out a few. What’s left are the 25mm. round “infantry” bases, the 40mm. round “terminator” bases (leaving aside the fact that older edition termies used to be supplied on 25mm bases), the 60mm round “dreadnought” bases, the rounded-rectangle “bike” bases, and the 25mmx40mm rectangle “cavalry” bases. We examine the remaining bases to determine if any can be ruled out for providing an unfair advantage.
What advantage is there to be gained from base size? One advantage of a smaller base is maneuverability. Simply put, models on smaller bases can fit into tighter places:
“A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model (which is represented by its base or by its hull) or through a gap between friendly models that is smaller than its own base (or hull) size.” BGB p. 11
Therefore allowing a model to be mounted on a base significantly smaller than the model itself could lead to absurd and unfair situations where an extremely large model is allowed to move through an extremely small gap simply by virtue of its extremely small base. That would qualify as an unfair and unintended advantage provided by the base. (not to mention running afoul of our Absurdity and Injustice Canon) We also note that a 25mm. base is likely to be significantly smaller than a TWC model. It is logical to expect, barring extreme “counts as” outliers, that a TWC model will necessarily include a roughly space-marine sized humanoid riding some manner of creature large enough to bear the rider into battle. The combination of the two will inevitably be significantly larger than a single infantry model for which the 25mm bases are appropriate. Thus we can safely conclude that mounting a large TWC model on a 25mm. round “infantry” base would be considered “modeling for advantage.”
As for practical considerations, mounting a large cavalry model on a small 25mm. round base could also present a nightmare when trying to keep your model upright, especially over uneven terrain.
For these reasons we conclude that GW would not intend for TWC to be mounted on 25mm. round bases and rule those out.
None of the other base sizes listed seem quite so easily dismissed, however. So we must look elsewhere for helpful context. If there is not a clear-cut written rule to guide our decision, we can turn to other examples given by GW to determine their intention. Has GW given us examples of what might be an appropriate base size for cavalry models riding thunderwolves?
The first place we turn for examples is the “unit types” section of the 40k rulebook. This section is an appropriate source of context because it lists each of the various unit types, and along with each unit type is a picture of a model from a unit of that type and its base. We note that Thunderwolf Cavalry have the unit type “cavalry”. (Codex: Space Wolves p. 90) so we look to the “beasts and cavalry” section for guidance, and there we find a picture of a Flesh Hound of Khorne on a 25 mm x 50 mm “cavalry” base (see BGB p.4). This is a clear indication that GW finds it appropriate for beasts and cavalry to use the rectangular cavalry bases. But our search for context clues does not end there.
The other place we turn is the Canis Wolfborn model. Canis is an appropriate example because it is currently the only model available from GW which is riding a thunderwolf. Now, it has been argued that Canis is not really riding a thunderwolf but is actually riding “Fangir,” an especially large, unique thunderwolf – and is therefore not a good example of what GW expects of “real” thunderwolf mounts. We find that argument unpersuasive. Name it what you will, Canis rides a thunderwolf into battle (a thunderwolf by any other name would smell as sweet?) and therefore the size of Canis’ base is relevant to our discussion. We note, then, that Canis is supplied with a 60mm. “dreadnought” base. This is an indication of GW’s intent that 60mm bases are also appropriate for units on thunderwolves.
Many have taken this argument regarding Canis one step further. It has been argued that Canis is a thunderwolf cavalry model and therefore his base size is the mandatory base size for all units mounted on thunderwolves. This argument is unpersuasive simply because Canis Wolfborn is a unique special character, NOT a Thunderwolf Cavalry model. Canis is clearly a distinct unit from Thunderwolf Cavalry and Wolf Lords/WGBLs/Iron Priests on Thunderwolf Mounts as evidenced by their separate unit entries. (See Codex: Space Wolves pp. 83-90)
Ultimately, in the absence of a bright-line rule indicating what size base is appropriate for Thunderwolf Cavalry, we are compelled to decide what base size(s) are appropriate based on the drafters’ intent. In the instant case, the Flesh Hound example from the Unit Types section and the Canis Wolfborn example each give us clear indicators of the types of bases GW would approve of for TWC. We note that it is entirely appropriate for a model to have more than one possible base size, as there have been a number of models which have been sold with more than one base type over the history of their production. One example would be terminators, which were historically supplied with 25mm bases but are currently supplied with 40mm bases. For these reasons, we hold that the appropriate base sizes for Thunderwolf Cavalry are 60mm round bases or 25mm x 50mm rectangle bases.
Justicar Szafraniec concurs in part, dissents in part.