Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I don't have magnets. Even if I did I don't think I'm a good enough modeler to completely hide the join. I like the aesthetics of a model. If I think a Shuriken Cannon looks better on my Falcon than a Scatter Laser or vice-versa w/e I'd like to go with that. It's that not having played for so long I'm not sure as to the general consensus of how the gaming community feels regarding the subject. So how Important is WYSIWYG to you? Take into consideration that you were handed a roster for your use throughout the battle detailing the armament on every vehicle prior to playing. To be clear I'm not talking about proxying a Fire Prism for a Night Spinner or anything like that.

Consistency is important. If you put down three Falcons with shuriken cannons and play them as scatter lasers that is absolutely fine. Problems start when the same model or bits is played as different things in the same game.

Indeed

All of weapon X are weapon Y? Not so bad.

 Stephanius wrote:
Consistency is important. If you put down three Falcons with shuriken cannons and play them as scatter lasers that is absolutely fine. Problems start when the same model or bits is played as different things in the same game.

Agreed.

As far as weapons go the only thing I care about is that my opponent is consistent with what they claim the weapon is.
As for models, during a tournament I might get a bit fussy about someone claiming a Coke bottle as a Drop Pod...unless it's REALLY well painted.
Outside of tournamets feel free to use the Coke bottle.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:
Consistency is important. If you put down three Falcons with shuriken cannons and play them as scatter lasers that is absolutely fine. Problems start when the same model or bits is played as different things in the same game.

Agreed.

I totally see your point and remembering your own special rules during the game is enought to handle without having to worry with your opponents. My concern are things like my 3 War Walkers and such where you have multiple units with different weapons on them. I'm fairly certain that I will put whatever weapon on it I think looks best (and sometimes one will have weapon A and other weapon B attached but they may in actuality be weapons C and D or a compromise and say that regardless of weapon type all weapons on the left are in actuality weapon A while weapons on the right are weapon B.) Edit: Bad example. It's early/late here but I hope you guys got my meaning. I don't want to say "all Scatter Lasers are Star Cannons" because the 2nd Walker may have a Scater Laser on it but I'd like to use that one as a Bright Lance. But as I (poorly) first tried to describe my compromise would you be OK with all of the weapons on the left are one thing while all of the weapons on the right are another?

Of course I'd to have the option of using them in any manner I like, but completely understand someone's need for consistency, especially in a game store setting. Regular opponent chilling in my apartment though I may ask for a bit more leeway. Just trying to gauge the push-back and/or etiquette of today and this time-old question.

As long as everything is easy to remember/identify then sure. For example with my Killa Kanz I just say "they all have Grotzookas" and nobody makes a stink about it because its very simple and easy to follow. It also helps that everything else is very straight forward so there isn't a lot of stuff to keep track of. Tournament play might be more picky but for casual play its whatever so long as its not overly complicated.

I don't mind something minor, maybe a unit being proxied temporarily if somebody wants to try before they buy, or even in a more extreme case if the opponent has went to the effort to model berzerkers on juggernauts and wants to play them as thunderwolf cavalry (rule of cool wins in some cases)

I wouldn't be thrilled about somebody playing a shuriken cannon as a scatter laser just because they like the aesthetic of the shuriken cannon. Why not just use it as a shuriken cannon if you like the way it looks? I know it seems like a minor issue to expect the opponent to remember they're actually scatter lasers, but the game is complicated enough anyway. I think it's a bit discourteous if I'm being honest. I'd really like the use the heavy bolters in a chaos marine kit but I'd feel a bit cheeky explaining to opponents every game that they're actually flamers

I don't care too much about WISYWIG, I mean I play Dark Eldar and it's really difficult to get units like that (damned if I'm buying 4 boxes of Scourges just to run 1 five man unit with Heat Lances).

As long as me and my opponent know what's what before the game starts it's all good.

WYSIWYG is generally enforced a lot more on Imperial armies, which are both more iconic, have had the same style of weapons for decades, and also have a lot more options for bits.

For other armies, a lot of people don't even really know the difference by sight. (And even with my AM Praetorians, people often confuse the autocannon teams for lascannons).

With the sheer scope of the game, it's hard to keep track of what every weapon looks like, and I think a lot of people are okay with proxies, as long as they are consistent.

Didn't answer, because I feel like I'm in between "Important" and "Not Important". My spot would be;

"Preferred. I rather my opponent play WYSIWYG, but so long as they remain consistent and don't go overboard, I'm willing to bend."

If my opponent is playing Space Marines, and they say "all my flamers are meltaguns", I'll be totally fine with that. Magnetizing is really hard to do, and owning all the right models is also very difficult. I'd rather my opponent get the enjoyment of the list they want than be a stickler here.

What I do NOT like is when "this squad's flamer is a meltagun, and this squad's flamer i s a plasmagun, and this Rhino is a Land Raider, and this Rhino is a Whirlwind...". For this I'll say no, but not because I feel like I'm being taken for a ride. It's that, inevitably, one of us is going to start getting confused over which guy is armed with what.

This year I had a friend get back into 40k, and he was trying out Space Marines and said that each squad was armed with a Gravgun, a Sergeant with no upgrades, and a Missile Launcher - although he had no models with the weapons. He then Combat Squaded each unit. What proceeded was a game where for half the game it felt like every squad I came across had a grav gun. He never shot more than what was in his list, but even as units kept dying he was still firing at maximum effectiveness. It wasn't until I killed three grav guns and he tried to fire a fourth that I said "I don't think so, because 3 have died so far, and that should be all you got". It was at that point we both realized what had happened, that he had gotten confused with WYSIWYG. He wasn't trying to cheat me (as a returning player, a bunch of the rules were confusing him, so he was more focused on playing those correctly than on keeping track of what was where), he just honestly couldn't remember. The rest of the game he played with only a couple missile launchers left, and he made sure since that point to always have at least a model with a close-enough proxy to help him keep things in line.

[quote=Yarium 703596 8925407 9f3fee7451a55980b02c88f220043719.jpg What I do NOT like is when "this squad's flamer is a meltagun, and this squad's flamer i s a plasmagun, and this Rhino is a Land Raider, and this Rhino is a Whirlwind...". For this I'll say no, but not because I feel like I'm being taken for a ride. It's that, inevitably, one of us is going to start getting confused over which guy is armed with what.

This year I had a friend get back into 40k, and he was trying out Space Marines and said that each squad was armed with a Gravgun, a Sergeant with no upgrades, and a Missile Launcher - although he had no models with the weapons. He then Combat Squaded each unit. What proceeded was a game where for half the game it felt like every squad I came across had a grav gun. He never shot more than what was in his list, but even as units kept dying he was still firing at maximum effectiveness. It wasn't until I killed three grav guns and he tried to fire a fourth that I said "I don't think so, because 3 have died so far, and that should be all you got". It was at that point we both realized what had happened, that he had gotten confused with WYSIWYG. He wasn't trying to cheat me (as a returning player, a bunch of the rules were confusing him, so he was more focused on playing those correctly than on keeping track of what was where), he just honestly couldn't remember. The rest of the game he played with only a couple missile launchers left, and he made sure since that point to always have at least a model with a close-enough proxy to help him keep things in line.

Yss, because it is one more thing to have to refer to . Its gets tiring.

When you know what weapons look like, to be told a bright lance is a shuri cannon AND a bright lance is a bright lance is not necessary.

Magneitsing isnt hard, not for single piece weapons. Dremel or hand drill, and the small 3x1mm neo magnets.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yss, because it is one more thing to have to refer to . Its gets tiring.

When you know what weapons look like, to be told a bright lance is a shuri cannon AND a bright lance is a bright lance is not necessary.

Magneitsing isnt hard, not for single piece weapons. Dremel or hand drill, and the small 3x1mm neo magnets.

I had intended on magnetizing to be honest. I spent a good deal of money at bits stores buying more heavy weapons and weapon coverings for Wave serpents and other tanks. And I'm not lazy, but what really bothers me is the join. You can see it more often than not. It detracts from the model IMHO. I suppose if I'm playing someone who feels that strongly about it I will use what weapons are on the model. I could show up with two lists depending on my opponents preferences.

 Malakai wrote:
What if you were handed a list that was yours for the game. it read something like:

War Walker w/ Star Cannon and Bright lance have Eldar missle launcher and Shuriken cannon respectively

War Walker w/ Shuriken Cannon and Scatter Laser have Bright Lance and Eldar Missle Launcher respectively

You could tick off what weapons were destroyed and avoid such a circumstance. Yes it is one more thing to have to refer to (thus slowing down the game) but would that make a difference for you?

Can you do it? Certainly. Should you do it? Definitely not. What I don't mind though is if you say "Hey, all my Bright Lances are Shuriken Cannons, and all my Shuriken Cannons are also Shuriken Cannons". This is because then if I see either of these, I know what they are at a glance. A good example that I've used myself were some Space Marine devastators with Plasma Cannons. I love the look of Plasma Cannons. But in the era I bought them, I really rathered they be Lascannons (and back then, most extra stuff like this in the game was a pewter model, and magnetizing was only just starting to be talked about). So I just told people when we started the game "all my Plasma Cannons, they're just really spiffy looking Lascannons". Not once did anyone ever get confused or have a problem with it. Any Plasma Cannon they saw they knew to be a Lascannon instead.

Worst case scenario, it's okay to mix and match like you've shown, but the models REALLY need to distinguish themselves effectively. Like "the red War Walker has Bright Lances, and the Blue War Walker has Missile Launchers" even if they're visually otherwise identical. If the only thing that distinguishes them are some minor bells and whistles, it won't be enough for people to mentally grok.

As long as the same looking things are functioning the same army wide I am ok. If I need to tell that two squads are different but they are armed and look the same then I have a small problem. If this is an army wide thing then I will have a lot of things to remember while facing my opponent which can lead to misunderstandings and confusion. Generally speaking I enjoy more playing against Wysig armies and I always try to learn what a weapon looks like.

As above, really. Make all bright lances bright lances, and all cannon bright lances. Dont mix and match.

My general rule of thumb is I’d like to have the number of non-WYSWYG things I need to track kept to 3 or less. Preferably in categorical sweeping things “All scatter lasers are shurcats” More then that I spend more of the game tracking what’s what then actually playing. I don’t want to ask for a reminder every turn, or accidentally DS my terminators next to the plasma squad that looks like flamers.

I personally play my marines strict WYSWYG. I’m a bit more fast and loose with my Eldar. Partly because the range is not as developed and sourcing bits can be rough. Autarchs are a prime example of this. Also because of the age of some of my minis. My wraithlord is a chunk of metal. Not something easily modded for all the options.

If you do need to make substitutions, try to keep them visually similar in role to what you have. For example, I don’t really care what a chaos lord is actually swinging in combat. The mini has two melee weapons? OK, he’s a CC blender. I see what I get. The fact that he’s payed points for a relic mace, but swinging a pair of axes doesn’t bother me.

For eldar, counting MLs as brightlances is OK. Both are long range anti-tank. Counting shircans as BLs gets a little fuzzy, as I see anti-troop, but am really getting anti-tank.

I'm not too fussed, but I do prefer things to be wysiwig.

I'm willing to count some non-wysiwyg stuff as wysiwyg if my opponent can come up with a decent explanation (these missile launchers are plasma cannons as they are loaded with plasma missiles today).

Personally I prefer all heavy and vehicle weapons to be WYSIWYG. I don't mind that my opponent use stand-ins, but ideally all vehicle weaponry should be WYSIWYG.

My own armies are almost entirely WYSIWYG, but some of my infantry models deviate from what they're actually allowed to carry, but never characters. For example, my MKIV Marines are sometimes equipped with the assault knives that came with the kit, but they're not allowed to use them, so they're purely aesthetic. And as long as I don't put knives on every model, it's not going to raise any issues. Similarly, I prefer giving some of my Krieg troopers laspistol sidearms for self defence, even though they're not technically allowed to use them, but in most cases it looks strange or even irresponsible for them not to have access to a gun.

Honestly, there's such a thing as "Rule of Cool". If you prefer how a certain weapon look, then you should field that weapon as such and stick to it! That shows integrity and sportsmanship and that's the sort of opponent people enjoy playing against.

deviation from WYSIWYG is ok if not abused, but I've seen people play armies which could not even be considered WYSIWYG by a madman.

Where is WYSIWYG in the rule book?

Ahhh... they took it out. Its not a thing for the causal 40k gamer.

If my opponent and I agree and understand, I don't care if he uses a salt shaker as a dreadnought.

1. GW isn't paying me to play.
2. Playtesting is a thing.
3. Who wants to cut nice oop metal model just to have the codex change what they can take. This has happened to me many times since 2nd ed.
4. Are you not going to play a relaxing game of 40K because your opponent isn't a GW disciple?

WYSIWYG is generally reserved for competitive play(usually required) and hardcore fluff bunnies(not that there's anything wrong with that). However, there is no rule on it.

 Byte wrote:
Where is WYSIWYG in the rule book?

Ahhh... they took it out. Its not a thing for the causal 40k gamer.

If my opponent and I agree and understand, I don't care if he uses a salt shaker as a dreadnought.

1. GW isn't paying me to play.
2. Playtesting is a thing.
3. Who wants to cut nice oop metal model just to have the codex change what they can take. This has happened to me many times since 2nd ed.
4. Are you not going to play a relaxing game of 40K because your opponent isn't a GW disciple?

WYSIWYG is generally reserved for competitive play(usually required) and hardcore fluff bunnies(not that there's anything wrong with that). However, there is no rule on it.

yeah but when a player brings a skeleton army saying its a SM army that is a little too much (yes have seen this happen before).

Asterios wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Where is WYSIWYG in the rule book?

Ahhh... they took it out. Its not a thing for the causal 40k gamer.

If my opponent and I agree and understand, I don't care if he uses a salt shaker as a dreadnought.

1. GW isn't paying me to play.
2. Playtesting is a thing.
3. Who wants to cut nice oop metal model just to have the codex change what they can take. This has happened to me many times since 2nd ed.
4. Are you not going to play a relaxing game of 40K because your opponent isn't a GW disciple?

WYSIWYG is generally reserved for competitive play(usually required) and hardcore fluff bunnies(not that there's anything wrong with that). However, there is no rule on it.

yeah but when a player brings a skeleton army saying its a SM army that is a little too much (yes have seen this happen before).

Depends. Is the player trying out SM rules before they even buy anything? In a situation like that, sure! If it's going to be their regular SM army forever, then I'd get iffy, but I understand things cost money and time and not everyone can buy a full army right away. I'd expect the skeletons to be replaced over time, though.

BossJakadakk wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Where is WYSIWYG in the rule book?

Ahhh... they took it out. Its not a thing for the causal 40k gamer.

If my opponent and I agree and understand, I don't care if he uses a salt shaker as a dreadnought.

1. GW isn't paying me to play.
2. Playtesting is a thing.
3. Who wants to cut nice oop metal model just to have the codex change what they can take. This has happened to me many times since 2nd ed.
4. Are you not going to play a relaxing game of 40K because your opponent isn't a GW disciple?

WYSIWYG is generally reserved for competitive play(usually required) and hardcore fluff bunnies(not that there's anything wrong with that). However, there is no rule on it.

yeah but when a player brings a skeleton army saying its a SM army that is a little too much (yes have seen this happen before).

Depends. Is the player trying out SM rules before they even buy anything? In a situation like that, sure! If it's going to be their regular SM army forever, then I'd get iffy, but I understand things cost money and time and not everyone can buy a full army right away. I'd expect the skeletons to be replaced over time, though.

kept bringing them in over 2-3 months no changes.

I prefer WYSIWYG all the time, and field my armies as such. Given that, I'm okay with my opponent being less strict until they start making mistakes. Once they start "forgetting", I will help them out with folded paper dunce caps for their offending model(s), with the correct gear listed. "Forget" too many times, and I simply will just stop playing them.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
I prefer WYSIWYG all the time, and field my armies as such. Given that, I'm okay with my opponent being less strict until they start making mistakes. Once they start "forgetting", I will help them out with folded paper dunce caps for their offending model(s), with the correct gear listed. "Forget" too many times, and I simply will just stop playing them.

SJ

You must have a large pool of players to be able to be so selective.

I'm not fussy about WYSIWYG at all. Sure it's the ideal way to arrive at a game and it looks great but it's not important to me. I'm lucky enough to play with people who I trust to remember their equipment and be honest about which models are which when I ask. Of course before the game I'd like a walkthrough of what's what and during a game I'd expect any questions I have about it to be answered.

Dead center in the middle just in between your last two options.

because I "Prefer" WYSIWYG but im not going to WYSIWYG Shame people for wanting to try new things or not having the cash to buy 3 kits to make 1 unit.

Important for me and my armies that i play. Everything is wysiwyg up to grenades.