So if you have 4 boxes of squads you have 28 minis. 8 of those are heavy weapons so let's just remove those from the count. That brings you to 20. You make your 4 squads of 4 which leaves you with 4 left over minis but no "squad leader" mini. Does anyone know if it would be legal to field those 4 minis as a squad just cruising one to be your leader?

At home? Sure. As long as your opponent consents.

So there is a rule requiring the use of the squad leader minis?

Have you considered using IA minis?

No that would be less legal.

I don't think that will fly at official tournaments (Store Championships and higher), especially because you won't have enough unit cards either...

8 minutes ago, Tirion said:

So if you have 4 boxes of squads you have 28 minis. 8 of those are heavy weapons so let's just remove those from the count. That brings you to 20. You make your 4 squads of 4 which leaves you with 4 left over minis but no "squad leader" mini. Does anyone know if it would be legal to field those 4 minis as a squad just cruising one to be your leader?

You've only got 4 Deployment cards (Or whatever they will be called) so it will not be legal on that basis alone.

Tournaments it’s very unlikely to work due to the cards issue, but for friendlies it seems fine.

I thought about that after the fact

Finally found one little instance where 40k is better lol

5 minutes ago, Tirion said:

Finally found one little instance where 40k is better lol

Hah! yeah cards will always be the bane of FFG Organised play I think.

Also Lol @ all of us going Noooo the cards!

Just now, Sk3tch said:

Hah! yeah cards will always be the bane of FFG Organised play I think.

Bane and benefit both. I don't have to try to remember exactly how many of my opponent's otherwise almost identical Imperial Guard squads are Veterans, or squint to figure out what weapons options are in a squad (IF the models are even WYSIWYG).

This is along the same concept as the OP.

If I have 4 squads and each squad has a unique pose, can I run squads with all the same pose and thus have 4 squads all doing the same thing?

More importantly, would this make that one guy happy who was pissed about the sculpts?

13 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

This is along the same concept as the OP.

If I have 4 squads and each squad has a unique pose, can I run squads with all the same pose and thus have 4 squads all doing the same thing?

More importantly, would this make that one guy happy who was pissed about the sculpts?

I suppose as long as you mark the squad leaders in some way to make it obvious who you need to measure from for movement.

Probably not to your second question.

9 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

This is along the same concept as the OP.

If I have 4 squads and each squad has a unique pose, can I run squads with all the same pose and thus have 4 squads all doing the same thing?

More importantly, would this make that one guy happy who was pissed about the sculpts?

I could see it going either way. Will need the rules so the rules lawyers can sort out the do's from the dont's

3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Bane and benefit both. I don't have to try to remember exactly how many of my opponent's otherwise almost identical Imperial Guard squads are Veterans, or squint to figure out what weapons options are in a squad (IF the models are even WYSIWYG).

Jumpmasters say it's definitely a bane.

3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I suppose as long as you mark the squad leaders in some way to make it obvious who you need to measure from for movement.

Probably not to your second question.

Should it really matter though as long as you're using the same figure point to point?

I do seem to recall somewhere regarding shooting where it might be relevant but I can't recall the specifics.

13 minutes ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:

Should it really matter though as long as you're using the same figure point to point?

I do seem to recall somewhere regarding shooting where it might be relevant but I can't recall the specifics.

If you don't make the figure obvious, then you will have to make sure you are always measuring movement from the same model. Also, the location of the leader matters for Objectives. In either situation, it is best to make it VERY obvious which one is the squad leader so your opponent knows you aren't cheating either intentionally or accidentally.

33 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

If you don't make the figure obvious, then you will have to make sure you are always measuring movement from the same model. Also, the location of the leader matters for Objectives. In either situation, it is best to make it VERY obvious which one is the squad leader so your opponent knows you aren't cheating either intentionally or accidentally.

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't movement: choose figure (leader) -> move leader with movement template -> place remaining squad figures within some coherency distance of said figure? If that's the case then it shouldn't be a big deal.

Just now, GreatMazinkaiser said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't movement: choose figure (leader) -> move leader with movement template -> place remaining squad figures within some coherency distance of said figure? If that's the case then it shouldn't be a big deal.

It is if you select a different model that looks identical to the leader for the movement. From what we've seen the leader is a model in the squad designated before the game begins that is used for cohesion, movement, and objective checking. If you change leader on a turn, by accident or on purpose, then you get a free up to 1 movement.

If you paint an entire squad of the exact same pose the exact same way, then there is a chance that you or your opponent will forget which model is the leader. If you make them obvious with a different coloured shoulder/coat/uniform, then there isn't a problem as you both know the leader is the Stormtrooper with the orange shoulder, or the Rebel Trooper with the green jacket.

5 hours ago, Tirion said:

Finally found one little instance where 40k is better.

To play in tournaments we always found it wise to buy every book and learn every rule, so my question is better for who?

I don't mind buying a box of miniatures and getting the cards, miniatures a tokens that are all required for that unit.

As far as miniatures go, I find that miniature gaming needs a degree of help from your opponents in making the games work. Some of the best games you’ll have and remember are those where your opponent doesn’t hide his models, weapons or characters but plays you in a very open manner.

Now if you have a model that is clearly going to be a leader of a squad, by not using that model for that purpose you’ll have to make sure you and your opponent can easily identify who is who. Especially as many game rules are leader centric. People tend to think the worst and go from there when they aren’t too sure.

I tend to enjoy losing a lose hard fought game where I feel that my opponent won because he played well tactically, took some strategic choices that were cleaver or perhaps just got that one dice roll at the end. But I hate those game where I feel like my opponent won because he tricked me or hid game information that should have been in open view from sight.

In this situation the simple test is, would I like it if my opponent did it to me?

You know what will make the game fail. If xwing players bring their attitude of you can't use that converted model as a squad leader because its not offical when 40k and other gaming system players just want to convert and have cool models.

If someone wants to make a squad out of whatever troopers he likes and paint up a trooper as a leader who cares.

17 minutes ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

You know what will make the game fail. If xwing players bring their attitude of you can't use that converted model as a squad leader because its not offical when 40k and other gaming system players just want to convert and have cool models.

If someone wants to make a squad out of whatever troopers he likes and paint up a trooper as a leader who cares.

I believe that is what most of us are saying, as long as the leader is indicated through painting/basing/other VERY obvious means, and you have a unit card, shouldn't be an issue.

Edit: As least as far as casual play is concerned, obviously as Ralgon points out tourney restrictions might be different.

14 minutes ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

You know what will make the game fail. If xwing players bring their attitude of you can't use that converted model as a squad leader because its not offical when 40k and other gaming system players just want to convert and have cool models.

If someone wants to make a squad out of whatever troopers he likes and paint up a trooper as a leader who cares.

Depends on what ffg runs with officially. Assuming runwars mod rules as a base it has to be a licensed legion product and still be idenifiable as what it is. Units must be marked in some way to match the cards

For this game i'd assume that extends to unit leaders too. I also imagine Vehicles will need their arcs to be clearly defined on their bases

Mix and match in units should be fine, there may be issues with the "all heavies" though.

Personally, this is the first FFG game where I will be making the extra cards I need. I’m not painting anymore minis than absolutely necessary

15 minutes ago, DelGriffen said:

Personally, this is the first FFG game where I will be making the extra cards I need. I’m not painting anymore minis than absolutely necessary

So don't paint the minis included you don't need? I'm not sure how having extra cards will help significantly, especially if/when you army list changes.

For unofficial events or games, that'll be fine i'm sure, as would tracking multiple squads on the same card, but I doubt that would be acceptable for any official event, unless you can make very good fakes.