Redbeard wrote:As for the 'no 3rd party stuff' - well, duh, Warhammer World is a game store and wants you to buy their stuff.

See, I did buy their stuff, though.

I just happen to think their stuff would look cooler with other people's stuff glued to it. Like a new Tau broadside with Paulson Games not-railguns glued to the back so that I have the newer, better-looking model but with the cooler silhouette of the old model.

Redbeard wrote:I see this as no different than any of the FLGS saying don't use Death From the Skies at their events because you can't buy it at their store.

Which a lot of people also complained about. I'd be surprised if very many stores still had that policy anymore, it was mainly one or two that made a big stink about it and got attention.

My store actually had a few copies of Death from the Skies for a while, so I know they didn't really care.

 CaulynDarr wrote:

I just hope independent stores don't pick it up as a guideline. The only thing that really keeps me in the game right now is all the third party options that help keep the game reasonably priced for me.

They won't, there's no reason and plenty reasons against.

Painted models: Reasonable - People who exploit 3 colors and based are a problem at painted events. One guy had an unpainted model at an Indy event which claimed to have painting and claimed "Plastic, metal and Greenstuff" was 3 colors. They let him play. Same event had a black landraider with a sticker on it also allowed.

No Proxies: Reasonable - A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

These have always been GWs rules and are supposedly the rules most Indy Events already claim to enforce but rude people show up and abuse the goodwill of a tourney and force unpainted or abusively modeled conversions or proxies on an event and people 'suck it up' Even I had someone claim 'this big shoota is a rokkit launcha' at NOVA and they have these very rules (painted, conversions need approval)

This is a non-issue. All Indy Events already have these requirements and they are reasonable ones. And no 3rd party stuff is a known thing for gaming on GW propertiah. Not going to lose sleep off corporate run events requiring corporate models to play. PP does this. Take the king's coin, do the king's bidding.

GW can make any kind of rule or policy with regards to how they want the game played -- and they can enforce that at any event they hold or sponsor. Which means it impacts only those people who play at warhammer world. I'm pretty sure that accounts for a whole 0.001% of 40k players. In other words: utterly meaningless. Meh.

I don't go to tournaments, so I don't care what silly little rules GW forces upon players.

But it seems to me people should be upset about this. Who is GW is judge what standard an army should be at? Even with the dumbed down tutorials, most people can't achieve the level of quality they do in their books.

And why should GW be making rulings about converted models and paint schemes? It seems to me this is a hobby, people should be able to do what they want. Tournaments are supposed to be a way to capture the best aspects of the community, not the most technically proficient or the most adherent to arbitrary rules.

Alabaster.clown wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
That's cool, but how do they expect to enforce these new policies? There is one GW event still running, and the rest of the tournaments have their own policy.

The next edition of the rules will introduce this "Warrior's Code" into the core of the game, inseparable from the mechanics, including a caveat that specific armies can only be painted in official colour schemes and any conversions (of which an available model already exists) must have prior written authorization from GW.
Any 3rd party tournament that wishes to include 40k will have to abide by these new rules or face C&D letters quickly followed by expensive legal proceedings.

That's how they will enforce these new policies.

And people will moan and complain, and a few will quit the hobby, but the majority will bow and submit just like they always have.

Not likely. The Warrior's Code thing is strictly a set of rules for participating in events at Warhammer World.

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't go to tournaments, so I don't care what silly little rules GW forces upon players.

But it seems to me people should be upset about this. Who is GW is judge what standard an army should be at? Even with the dumbed down tutorials, most people can't achieve the level of quality they do in their books.

And why should GW be making rulings about converted models and paint schemes? It seems to me this is a hobby, people should be able to do what they want. Tournaments are supposed to be a way to capture the best aspects of the community, not the most technically proficient or the most adherent to arbitrary rules.

Because conversions can hurt how the game is played, both in interacting with rule mechanics and giving people unfair advantages/disadvantages. Not being able to quickly and easily tell what wargear a model has is a big issue in a timed competative event, especially if only one side has to fumble around with paper and constantly ask 'what is that supposed to be' and the other side doesn't.

Your outrage is misplaced as *ALL MAJOR INDY EVENTS HAVE ALMOST THE EXACT SAME REQUIREMENTS*. Unfair conversions, unclear proxies, unpainted models are not allowed in most event's tourney packets. Almost all those events ask for conversions to be 'pre-approved'.

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't go to tournaments...

And why should GW be making rulings about converted models and paint schemes?....

The rules now, as ever, say you need to use GW models (not a new restriction, but one they enforce with discretion) and essentially ask you to be considerate to the other player. Nowhere does it ban converted models outright - as mentioned, we've played under these rules using lots of custom stuff.

I know - asking you to be considerate is an outrageous infringement of your liberty. Life is so hard sometimes.


Here, incidentally, are the old rules:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3010062a_Throne_of_Skulls_Rules2013.pdf

Again: Are there any GW tournaments left except the one in Nottingham's Warhammer World?
I thought GW axed them all.

So basically, Denzark's Warrior's Code rumor is Partially True. The core is true but his interpretations (no counts-as paints or models, drop pod doors, etc) are suspect.

I'd say - most of that is ok - pretty much just defining how people already play or expect at a tournament. There are quite a few hidden gems in there though - like the majority of the "incomplete" models section. Most of the examples given seem specifically designed to stop people from creatively stretching out kits and saving money so the section reads like an obvious cash grab - not something that reinforces the hobby.

Gdubz Warrior Code wrote:Here are some examples of incomplete
miniatures:
• One Mangler Squig on a base (even if you
strap a smaller Squig to it with a chain – it’s
not the same model!)
• Two Scarabs on a swarm base (it’s not really
a swarm if there are only two, is it?)
...
• An arm on the floor representing a Skeleton
(it’s not been fully raised boss, honest!)
...

1) Chopping the ridiculously overpriced, oversized, mangler squig in half and making two models is the most obvious thing to do with it and still completely obvious what the unit is if modeled converted correctly.

2) 2 insects = what is this model? I am so confused
4 insects = OMG a horrifying swarm!!

3) If the whole unit was like this - yes, it's a problem. A gravestone with an arm and a skull should be fine for those skeletons you summon and then just die again 2 seconds later.

The other examples they gave fall more under WYSIWIG - ie. A DP with flight needs wings and a 2 person space marine bike needs a side car.

Updated first post with the new info.

Well IF I ever find my self in the Uk Ill be sure to pack all the correct minis to go play a game at GW's world HQ this way I dont tick off Matt Ward.


EDIT:

Rule 10: Major conversions approved by us

Rule 1: All minis must be made by GW/FW/WF

This should also apply to ANYTHING GW posts on thier web page. I can't tell you how many times an army has been posted with converted land speeders using monster truck tires from Hot Wheels. I know cause I sell those same monster trucks.

FWIW, I heard from someone at the company years ago that production issues were what was holding back plastic Thunderhawks. Which I suppose is a somewhat obvious and not overly insightful comment. Still...this does more or less jibe with what I heard.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
There are proxies and there are counts-as. Using your fully painted squat army as Imperial Guard is a counts-as army. Using a shoebox or a borrowed space marine landspeeder to stand in for an Eldar Grav tank is a proxy. One is cool, the other isn't.

Exactly. We all know the kind of behavior they're trying to eliminate with this.

And regarding the Warrior's Rules overall, I think it's appropriate and even obvious that Warhammer World would be quite strict about various model-related issues. You're playing the game on company grounds, folks.

Interestingly enough no FW in their official document. Muhahaha.

Also, they clearly cover what the difference between counts-as and proxy is in their doc. The original rumor is bunk.

The rules are almost no different that days long past. They are also similar to indy events in a lot of regards. The only hitch is no 3rd party stuff, which is expected. The only way they could enforce it or rather try to, is to not support events with prize support, assuming of course that they do.

As for the plastic Thunderhawk. If it is true, I would have a fleet of them

I find people turning one kit into two like mangler squigs a perfectly reasonable thing to say incomplete models. I also think under-swarmed Swarms is not going to pass 'rule of cool' and is done purely for financial reasons.

If that is how it is, I can just only assemble half a model and double my army size.

nkelsch wrote:
A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

It may well have been an excellent conversion that fitted in perfectly with the rest of the army. Writing off conversions unseen is not a very clever thing to do.

 pretre wrote:
So basically, Denzark's Warrior's Code rumor is Partially True. The core is true but his interpretations (no counts-as paints or models, drop pod doors, etc) are suspect.

You might want to add that the Warrior's Code is only for Warhammer World events too, as that part about it being their rules for -everything- was blantantly false.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Palindrome wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

It may well have been an excellent conversion that fitted in perfectly with the rest of the army. Writing off conversions unseen is not a very clever thing to do.

Which is why you show it to them in person or via email with pictures and a full explination ahead of time. That's just common sense.

 Palindrome wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

It may well have been an excellent conversion that fitted in perfectly with the rest of the army. Writing off conversions unseen is not a very clever thing to do.

In an army where you have access to a landspeeder, even a converted landspeeder is probably best used as a landspeeder. It fails 'counts as' because there is probably a more appropriate set of rules or unit slot which can be used and they are just shoe-horning models for personal advantage. This is back to the 'everymarine' army using 'bikes' as TWC even though space wolves have access to bikes.

If someone wants to argue it meets 'rule of cool' then provide a photos. The description fails 'rule of cool'.

I got to chime in on this one. As a person who spent Thousands literly on GW products and had a professional modeler do my paint on approx 70% of my army's to date. It is foolish for GW to do this. I used infernus pistols for certain models even though my army list has melta guns on it because it made the model look better. Also because i did have a professional modeler do mine as well as paint i have certain things done so that they can fit in my army case with out breaking off. Arms cut shorter ect. and re molded and painted you cannot even tell it was done without a micrometer. Also there are people with armies in progress that are assembled primed or in some various state. I agree with the total proxy rule one thing being another coke can or a total different model being used in place of another. But my pro painted sang priests 2 with jump packs 2 without i should not have to de-bond them if i need one with a different load out. Even though my army looks great i do not expect or demand anyone that i play against have the same care or detail. .'m just happy most weeks to play a game or 2. Hell it would devastate new customers to be told yes you can spend hundreds on your army assemble them but no you cannot play till you have them all painted? It takes weeks do make a nice squads assembled painted everything. It is getting new customers into the game by showing them what their army can be by bringing out old customers like me that spent and still do that keeps the game alive. Cause lets face it GW is a 1 time purchase unless new models are brought out. You Buy your army finish it boom that is it or you do it for another but mainly that is a 1-2 army style for the player.

Side note anyone who goes well magnetize your models. On Vehicles or large pieces yes it works great. But on the small troops it always mis-aligns the paint pattern or causes problems. But to date i have NEVER seen a GW Magnet for any model nor is there any from their website and it is mentioned in the rule book even. So those of you that say well you should, I can go BUT it is not GW and that point is a custom model using non GW parts and the fact they can pick and choose is flat out crap. At that piont they can go let me see your army and go well your army as a whole does not look great we are so not allowing it.

Last point- IF someone your playing against has a nicely painted rhino and wants to use it a a razor back and has all the correct stats/load out printed out for it would you let them use it ? If they had a partially done razor in their army box that is a work in progress, Then? I would just based on the fact they own the model. I would not even care if it was still in the box.

Fireraven wrote:
I got to chime in on this one. As a person who spent Thousands literly on GW products and had a professional modeler do my paint on approx 70% of my army's to date. It is foolish for GW to do this.

I think you're missing the point. Also, GW isn't doing anything. This guy is alleging that GW is doing something and they weren't.

I used infernus pistols for certain models even though my army list has melta guns on it because it made the model look better.

As long as you're not playing BA, this could be counts-as. If you're playing BA, it is confusing. If you have NO infernus pistols in your entire army, it might be acceptable but is still confusing to your opponent and an example of bad counts-as. I.e. Some melta guns look like this, but some melta guns look like this. That's bad counts-as. All melta guns should be recognizably the same.

Arms cut shorter ect. and re molded and painted you cannot even tell it was done without a micrometer. Also there are people with armies in progress that are assembled primed or in some various state.

Neither the rumor nor the code for WW prohibits this.

But my pro painted sang priests 2 with jump packs 2 without i should not have to de-bond them if i need one with a different load out.

Umm, yeah you should. Or magnetize them or have different models. This has nothing to do with GW or the rumor. If you are playing a completely different model (model with jump pack) as another one (model without jump pack), that's proxying. Which is completely cool at casual events but not at pretty much any tournament (GW or otherwise).

Side note anyone who goes well magnetize your models. On Vehicles or large pieces yes it works great. But on the small troops it always mis-aligns the paint pattern or causes problems.

You obviously haven't seen good magnetization. There is no reason it should be misaligned.

Last point- IF someone your playing against has a nicely painted rhino and wants to use it a a razor back and has all the correct stats/load out printed out for it would you let them use it ?

Casually? Yes. At an event? No. You should have the models on the table that are in your list (or an appropriate counts-as). Would you let them play a shoe box as a land raider if they showed that they owned a land raider?

Fireraven, I really don't get what you're say. I see a lot of words but you never state a clear point on anything that makes sense.

These rules are only for people playing in events at Warhammer World. How is it foolish they have rules to make sure that they limit, of not eliminate, as many arguements as possible before hand?

EDIT: I hate posting from tablet. Typos...typos everywhere.

nkelsch wrote:
I find people turning one kit into two like mangler squigs a perfectly reasonable thing to say incomplete models.

Except, no.
If they have gone to the trouble of modeling on another squig attached by a chain it should be an acceptable conversion. Specifically calling it out in the doc is purely to drive sales of a powerful, overpriced model that just happens to be very easy to split in half.
If they didn't model on a second squig it would "technically" fall under wysiwig or conversions.

nkelsch wrote:
I also think under-swarmed Swarms is not going to pass 'rule of cool' and is done purely for financial reasons.

If that is how it is, I can just only assemble half a model and double my army size.

Ahhh yeah - that was the whole point.

There is a big difference between putting 3 insects on a base instead of a whole whopping 4 in order to squeeze out a few extra swarms to save some cash and saying "Herp Derp I'm going to chop all my space marines in half and have twice the army!"

But in any case I echo the sentiments of those reminding that these are rules for a once a year event that I wouldn't attend even if I lived in that country - meaning I give exactly 0 feths - except to mock it briefly for it's fart-in-windstorm level potency.

nkelsch wrote:
I find people turning one kit into two like mangler squigs a perfectly reasonable thing to say incomplete models. I also think under-swarmed Swarms is not going to pass 'rule of cool' and is done purely for financial reasons.

What's wrong with trying to save some money whilst having no noticeable impact on the identification of your toy soldiers?

If that is how it is, I can just only assemble half a model and double my army size.

That's not really the same thing, is it? No-one is talking about fielding squads of half models, just reducing the number of models on a multi-figure base. The models are still complete and identifiable, the base is the same, there's just less models on it.

The fight to legalize Chaos Dwarfs just took a hit.

 Red Viper wrote:
The fight to legalize Chaos Dwarfs just took a hit.

For the three people who play at WW.

 Red Viper wrote:
The fight to legalize Chaos Dwarfs just took a hit.

Only for those events. Getting with the staff beforehand will likely get you an okay that you wouldn't get if you showed up the day of with it.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As for plastic Sisters, I believe they're "done" design-wise, and likely have been for a while. That is not to say that they're ready for casting, and may only now be as of Enter the Citadel (as in "have the greenlight").

Yes, this would very much tie in with what the devs have been saying previously (modelling issues prevented their release, followed by saying recently that they now have the capabilities to produce them) as well as the AS digital 'dex suddenly being a thing. Obviously the "picked up from attendees not any GW staff" part is cause for doubt on the truthfulness of this rumour, but I will note that obviously the devs themselves probably won't be saying anything further if a model update is now planned, so this is about the sort of way that we would be getting such news anyway.

 pretre wrote:

Denzark on the Bols Lounge wrote:Rumours
These were picked up from attendees not any GW staff. I cannot comment on the provenance. But, 2 main ones. Firstly, plastic T-Hawk is designed. However it currently takes 7 sprues. Apparently the problem is that the big boy kit machine can only do 6 at a time. So the sprues need rehashing to try and cram it all in to make it economical. (I know, I know...)

Tell me more, Denzark, about the 6 sprue limitation on "the big-boy machine" and how it makes a 7 sprue model impossible.

Herzlos wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
I find people turning one kit into two like mangler squigs a perfectly reasonable thing to say incomplete models. I also think under-swarmed Swarms is not going to pass 'rule of cool' and is done purely for financial reasons.

What's wrong with trying to save some money whilst having no noticeable impact on the identification of your toy soldiers?

If that is how it is, I can just only assemble half a model and double my army size.

That's not really the same thing, is it? No-one is talking about fielding squads of half models, just reducing the number of models on a multi-figure base. The models are still complete and identifiable, the base is the same, there's just less models on it.

The GW HHHobby consists of "Buying GW models", obviously if you are trying to buy less models you aren't doing the HHHobby right...

 pretre wrote:

For the three people who play at WW.

Right. But you know people are going to argue that since it isn't legal at WW, it shouldn't be legal in local tournaments.

It's funny because in the Tamurakhan book it specifically says that it is a legal list and then GW leaves it off their list anyway. Good job team.

nkelsch wrote:
I find people turning one kit into two like mangler squigs a perfectly reasonable thing to say incomplete models. I also think under-swarmed Swarms is not going to pass 'rule of cool' and is done purely for financial reasons.

I agree with the latter, but not at all with the former. I think the Mangler Squigs look substantially better split and the way they modelled them was a really poor decision. The default posing looks terrible but individually they look awesome. I get that making it shorter screws up the rules so is a problem but I don't think it's fair to declare bad faith or being cheap on that.

 Red Viper wrote:

 pretre wrote:

For the three people who play at WW.

Right. But you know people are going to argue that since it isn't legal at WW, it shouldn't be legal in local tournaments.

It's funny because in the Tamurakhan book it specifically says that it is a legal list and then GW leaves it off their list anyway. Good job team.

Except that their inclusion is only for GW events, not for everything. And we all know by know that GW events are about as proof as what is legal in normal games or local tournaments as whatever they do at NOVA or Adepticon. That is to say, not at all.

The solution to the "it can only stamp 6 and not 7" is very easy.

Stamp out 6 runs of the 6 sprues and then make the 7th run all of the 7th sprue.

It's magic.

 TalonZahn wrote:
The solution to the "it can only stamp 6 and not 7" is very easy.

Stamp out 6 runs of the 6 sprues and then make the 7th run all of the 7th sprue.

It's magic.

This would be horribly inefficient as a manufacturing process. But anyway, this is obviously BS as the Baneblade has 7 sprues.

-Shrike- wrote:

 TalonZahn wrote:
The solution to the "it can only stamp 6 and not 7" is very easy.

Stamp out 6 runs of the 6 sprues and then make the 7th run all of the 7th sprue.

It's magic.

This would be horribly inefficient as a manufacturing process. But anyway, this is obviously BS as the Baneblade has 7 sprues.

Is that the current Baneblade kit that is a combination of 2 kits instead of 1? I think the old one was like 4-5 sprues.

Moving on from that, it might have been speculation, or maybe the sprues are larger than we're thinking of. I don't know. Apparently there is some credence to the idea that they need to reduce the number of sprues in the kit as it's come up in the batch of rumors that BoLS has had submitted to them.

Wait now GW is telling us how to model thier products?

 5deadly wrote:
Wait now GW is telling us how to model thier products?

No, read the thread.

 pretre wrote:

 5deadly wrote:
Wait now GW is telling us how to model thier products?

No, read the thread.

Better yet, read the actual Warrior's Code (link is in the first post).

The original Baneblade kit was indeed 7 sprues.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The original Baneblade kit was indeed 7 sprues.

Ah, okay. Thought it was less for some reason.

Who knows, maybe the T-Hawk sprues are even bigger? I recall that the sprues for my Stormlord are actually paired around a centerline that was where the plastic was injected from. Could it be possible that instead of that, they're larger, single sprues instead?

I don't know. I'm speculating here.

The thunderhawk is the ugliest model GW/Forge World has ever made. You could just glue to bricks together long ways and add wings and it would look better. I want a Warhound titan.

Now that would be something. With the Dreamforge Leviathan Mortis just released in plastic it shows that a titan can be done in plastic. Even if its $200 I'd buy one. And then they could sell the arms seperately and make more money.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Again: Are there any GW tournaments left except the one in Nottingham's Warhammer World?
I thought GW axed them all.

nkelsch wrote:
. The description fails 'rule of cool'.

The description is vague, aside from it being a "big ugly speeder" which suggests that it was more than a standard speeder with some lascannon glued haphazardly to it. Its perfectly possible to use the landspeeder model as the basis of a large skimmer with the same footprint and armament of a predator. It would take a lot of work but it is possible and as such it shoudn't be discounted out of hand as an attempt to gain some kind of advantage given that wargaming is supposed to be a creative hobby.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Again: Are there any GW tournaments left except the one in Nottingham's Warhammer World?
I thought GW axed them all.

Don't know, and I don't think it honestly matters, the rules are only for Warhammer World events anyways.

Think you guys are missing the point. The issue is with production capacity. If they have to do multiple runs, that's even more machine time (and money) dedicated to making a single kit, during which time they aren't making other kits. My understanding is that those machines run all day long as is, so they'd need a pretty significant "hole" in the production schedule to pull that off.

IMO, that's the real reason to be skeptical about a plastic Thunderhawk -- when are they going to produce it given this accelerated release schedule?

 gorgon wrote:
Think you guys are missing the point. The issue is with production capacity. If they have to do multiple runs, that's even more machine time (and money) dedicated to making a single kit, during which time they aren't making other kits. My understanding is that those machines run all day long as is, so they'd need a pretty significant "hole" in the production schedule to pull that off.

IMO, that's the real reason to be skeptical about a plastic Thunderhawk -- when are they going to produce it given this accelerated release schedule?

Actually we're not missing the point when the machine is a large machine used soley for making these oversized super heavy kits. The only negative impact it would have is on the super heavy kits which don't sell nearly as fast as everything else does.

It could be as simple as they think the kit would make (enough) money if it was on 6 (or fewer sprues)

but not make enough if it has to be on 7 just because of the extra costs of tooling, and the extra time taken to produce them all

 Tamwulf wrote:

- If there is a model for it, you must use it. This concerns me a little as I like to use a lot of the Blood Angels bits/models for my Blood Ravens army. Does this mean that even if my Blood Ravens are painted up as Blood Ravens with Blood Angels bits, I'll be forced to play a Blood Angels list?!?!

I'm in a very similar position, except I happen to use a load of Dark Angels bits all over my army as well. And, god forbid I want to field my Blood Ravens 1st Company ever again either...

Even reading the actual document, I'd still be very wary turning up at Warhammer World with my Blood Ravens again. In fact, a mate tried to talk me into going to the final part of the Vidars Fate campaign. I turned him down and now I'm very glad I did.

This isn't just affecting Throne of Skulls, there's literally an event on every 2 weeks at Warhammer World.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Think you guys are missing the point. The issue is with production capacity. If they have to do multiple runs, that's even more machine time (and money) dedicated to making a single kit, during which time they aren't making other kits. My understanding is that those machines run all day long as is, so they'd need a pretty significant "hole" in the production schedule to pull that off.

IMO, that's the real reason to be skeptical about a plastic Thunderhawk -- when are they going to produce it given this accelerated release schedule?

Actually we're not missing the point when the machine is a large machine used soley for making these oversized super heavy kits. The only negative impact it would have is on the super heavy kits which don't sell nearly as fast as everything else does.

They still produce other large kits, and just about every army release is getting one. Production capacity is never free.

And you don't think two runs versus one run makes any difference to a company that's as protective of their margins as GW?

Carry on then, I guess. *shrug*

 Compel wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:

- If there is a model for it, you must use it. This concerns me a little as I like to use a lot of the Blood Angels bits/models for my Blood Ravens army. Does this mean that even if my Blood Ravens are painted up as Blood Ravens with Blood Angels bits, I'll be forced to play a Blood Angels list?!?!

I'm in a very similar position, except I happen to use a load of Dark Angels bits all over my army as well. And, god forbid I want to field my Blood Ravens 1st Company ever again either...

Even reading the actual document, I'd still be very wary turning up at Warhammer World with my Blood Ravens again. In fact, a mate tried to talk me into going to the final part of the Vidars Fate campaign. I turned him down and now I'm very glad I did.

This isn't just affecting Throne of Skulls, there's literally an event on every 2 weeks at Warhammer World.

What part of the document said anything about paint scheme or chapter having to match the rules you are using?

 pretre wrote:

 Compel wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:

- If there is a model for it, you must use it. This concerns me a little as I like to use a lot of the Blood Angels bits/models for my Blood Ravens army. Does this mean that even if my Blood Ravens are painted up as Blood Ravens with Blood Angels bits, I'll be forced to play a Blood Angels list?!?!

I'm in a very similar position, except I happen to use a load of Dark Angels bits all over my army as well. And, god forbid I want to field my Blood Ravens 1st Company ever again either...

Even reading the actual document, I'd still be very wary turning up at Warhammer World with my Blood Ravens again. In fact, a mate tried to talk me into going to the final part of the Vidars Fate campaign. I turned him down and now I'm very glad I did.

This isn't just affecting Throne of Skulls, there's literally an event on every 2 weeks at Warhammer World.

What part of the document said anything about paint scheme or chapter having to match the rules you are using?

Nothing, but I'm suspecting it's not entirely relevant what the PDF says as going by what was originally reported the judges were being somewhat "open" in their interpretation of this document with the quote in the OP regarding DP doors and the White Scar army for example, neither situations are mentioned in the PDF yet both were (apparently) being enforced by the judges present.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Nothing, but I'm suspecting it's not entirely relevant what the PDF says as going by what was originally reported the judges were being somewhat "open" in their interpretation of this document with the quote in the OP regarding DP doors and the White Scar army for example, neither situations are mentioned in the PDF yet both were (apparently) being enforced by the judges present.

Allegedly. This from the guy who says a Plastic Thunderhawk is coming...

-Shrike- wrote:
This would be horribly inefficient as a manufacturing process. But anyway, this is obviously BS as the Baneblade has 7 sprues.

I know.

It would be like switching the material you manufacture in and then switch back a couple years later.

Oh wait.....

nkelsch wrote:
No Proxies: Reasonable - A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

Well...

I mean I'd be ok with that.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
No Proxies: Reasonable - A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

Well...

I mean I'd be ok with that.

Eh, depends on how they solve the missing turrent problem. But it's a start!

Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

Not really. It is a special kind of current.

Turrents are delicious, I have them for breakfast every morning.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

O'Ralai?

 pretre wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

O'Ralai?

Nope.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

True story: you can often find a good deal on a Razorback or Predator top half by searching for this common typo.


Next week, I can tell you how to remove inches of belly fat with this one weird trick from a mom.

I suppose you could find a use for the big DA speeder as a base for a Predspeeder conversion...

 Ouze wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

True story: you can often find a good deal on a Razorback or Predator top half by searching for this common typo.


Next week, I can tell you how to remove inches of belly fat with this one weird trick from a mom.

Would you like to know more?

 Cryptek of Awesome wrote:
There is a big difference between putting 3 insects on a base instead of a whole whopping 4 in order to squeeze out a few extra swarms to save some cash and saying "Herp Derp I'm going to chop all my space marines in half and have twice the army!"

Three Scarabs on a base is pretty much considered normal by a lot of people. They also happen to have three wounds.

I agree two scarabs on one base is too few, but if anyone would complain about three instead of four I would tell them to feth off.

Then again I don't play at tournaments/GW stores so this will never be a problem anyway.

 TBD wrote:
[Three Scarabs on a base is pretty much considered normal by a lot of people. They also happen to have three wounds.

I agree two scarabs on one base is too few, but if anyone would complain about three instead of four I would tell them to feth off.

I also use 3, for the same reason. It just makes sense.

 Ouze wrote:

 TBD wrote:
[Three Scarabs on a base is pretty much considered normal by a lot of people. They also happen to have three wounds.

I agree two scarabs on one base is too few, but if anyone would complain about three instead of four I would tell them to feth off.

I also use 3, for the same reason. It just makes sense.

I only use two scarabs.
Then again, mine are the old 2nd Edition metal scarabs, and I can only fit two of them on the base.

Ouze wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is a turrent a special kind of currant?

No, it's a typo for "turret" that Chrome didn't notice.

True story: you can often find a good deal on a Razorback or Predator top half by searching for this common typo.

I used to get Raveners for cheap by searching for "Ravenors" on eBay.

I can't help but think I should make a new thread called. "Reasons Games Workshop would 'ban' my Warhammer army."

1) I use Gale Force 9 plaster as stones / rocks on my bases.
2) I have converted Sanquinary Priests with nartheciums
3)a) I paint my Codex: Blood Angels army as Blood Ravens
3)b) My Codex: Space Marines Blood Ravens army uses Blood Angels pieces and models. (EG, space hulk termies) - I'm a naughty proxier.
4) I planned on making a converted Storm Talon from a Nephilim Fighter
5) I use Captain Korvydae as an Assault Marine Sergeant.
6) I have some line models wielding duel pistols due to Rule of Cool. Similarly, I have models armed with duel infernus pistols.
7) I have some line models wielding duel chainswords due to Rule of Cool
8) My Imperial Guard Colonel that I've used for 16 years has a shotgun.
9) I use Cadian Shock Troopers as Veterans for my Mordian Iron Guard army
10) I used converted lascannons for my Vendetta conversion. Made before the forgeworld kit was released.
11) My Vulture uses the quad Missile Launcher pods as hellstrike missile hardpoints.
12) I use Ravenwing biker models as Blood Raven bikers. Cause, you know... They have... Ravens... Wings.
13) I have a kitbashed Techmarine model.
14) I use a Death Korps Commissar as a Lieutenant for my flamer wielding platoon command squad, who ride a chimera armed with a turreted heavy flamer.
15) I have a converted Baal Predator carrying an Imperial Guard autocannon in its turret.
16) My Dreadnought Drop Pods don't have the central crew harnesses in them. Because, that would be silly. That is now an 'unassembled' model.

Ok, some (much) of that list was slightly facetious but quite frankly, I don't want to pay hundreds of pounds to go to a Warhammer World event only to be told 'shove off, you can't play as your army doesn't meet my own personal interpretation subsection 3, paragraph 4 of The Warriors Code'.

Blood Ravens are an unknown founding and are pretty much free to do whatever they want. Besides, having Chapter Tactics and Relics "gifted" to them is in character!

All in all, the standard "don't be a tardnugget" rules with a few troubling issues, should this get pushed out in the next edition:

"We do not define what fully painted is"- Why, so you could enforce this selectively? Not all of us are your damned 'Eavy Metal Painters.

"...Or we suspect a model falls under this criteria.."- so...if I model Berets and Peacoats on my shooting cultists to look like the 1980's IRA and Life Preservers to make my melee ones look like Somali Pirates, you'll ask me to remove it ? even though it is obvious that they're heretical IG, themed like terrorists to be used as cannon fodder...er...brothers in arms for my Night Lords. Yeah....I am sure that'll go over really well after getting recorded and put up on YouTube, not the obligatory defamation/slander suit or five from experienced modellers whom you incorrectly guessed.

"Please note: Simply painting your bases a
certain colour is not enough. A good example
of the minimum standard we expect are Citadel
textured paints, as they cover texture and
colour quite nicely in one quick easy to apply package."- this is a blatant attempt to sell product. So...once again, GW, you're going to kick out all those modellers with older armies painted under previous editions? Two words: BITE ME.

Warhammer World, since the hamster in your brain housing group has apparently died on the wheel, I dub thee Dubya Dubya, and say that you deserve the loss in revenue for the UK AND yourselves.

dkellyj wrote:
The day GW starts to provide serious support to the Tourny scene is the day they can start dictating rules on what is acceptable and what is not.

There's a logic fallacy hidden in your statement somewhere. I'll let you think on it for a while. Here's a hint if you need it:

For now.

That's the point we are trying to make some of us. If this code becomes compulsory some will say how's GW going to enforce it? The same way they treat rumours right now.

If FLGS allows proxies they'll be cut from the early release loop. Hey it's a trade contract, they can do it if they feel like even if it's insane but lately GW has not been very sane in certain areas of their conduct.

M.

This thread is starting to make me think of some song lyrics. I believe they go:

Paranoia, paranoia
Everybody's coming to get me

Yeah, that's the bit.

My ork army would have no chance... I use rhinos as trukks a land speeder and pirahna as buggies have looted big guns (they are the other gun you can put on a hammer head) and a dreadnaught as a deff dread.

They are painted well and blue for death skulls for a themed army but still.

The headline everybody seems to have missed is that in these rules (guidelines? no, rules) GW have actually acknowledged the existence of other model making companies!

When attending events at Warhammer World, we require that you abide by The Warrior’s Code, which is
designed to ensure everyone taking part has a fantastic experience. We expect that:
1. All your miniatures have been produced by Games Workshop (Citadel, Forge World or Warhammer Forge)."

I'm not sure how that rule's primary goal is to "ensure everyone taking part has a fantastic experience" unless we're taking Tom Kirby's potential feelings and retirement nest egg into account. In a way, though, I can't blame them for disallowing other people's products from their events held at their own locations if they're also not allowing *THEIR OWN* models as proxies or conversions unless approved in advance. At least they're not being entirely hypocritical this time around...

 Breotan wrote:

dkellyj wrote:
The day GW starts to provide serious support to the Tourny scene is the day they can start dictating rules on what is acceptable and what is not.

There's a logic fallacy hidden in your statement somewhere. I'll let you think on it for a while. Here's a hint if you need it:

Spoiler:

GW is only dictating rules for GW-run events like the ones held at Warhammer World (read the .pdf).

No fallacy at all. If its a GW sponsored event in a GW store and they want to make modeling/list rules for their event...then they can do that. (though you would hope they publish those rules ahead of time so someone doesn't spend the time/money going to the event only to be booted because some guy does not like his conversions).
But if they want to dictate those rules to FLGS and Indi-Tournys...they better be coughing up some serious prize support.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Dakka commentator makes up a bunch of extra stuff and complains about the extra stuff.
Business as usual.
We've played Throne of Skulls under those rules, taken our own design Mycetic Spores made of 80p polystyrene eggs and, even, ymgarls with chapterhouse cthulu heads, and those bloody red shirts had the cheek to compliment the army and give us a glass trophy! The horror! The horror!

I don't think you'll be getting away with that again!

Having said that - the rules seem reasonable from GW's perspective, and won't have any impact on almost all of us.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:

No Proxies: Reasonable - A Landspeeder is not a Predator. It is not a clever conversion, it is not a cool 'Counts as' it fails rule of cool. It is someone turning starter box trash into 'coke can' proxies.

Not having seen the conversion, you can't really say jack gak about it, particularly whether or not it's cool or not. I've seen some fething cool conversions of Landspeeders into FAV attack bikes. It could look brilliant, average or crap. A LS Vengeance could easily go either way, and it's about the right size for a Pred, as well.

I can see the no conversions rule making people rightly pi$$ed off.
I can see why they would do that (to make people buy models that are really pricey instead of converting a cheaper model) but i think it stinks.

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't go to tournaments, so I don't care what silly little rules GW forces upon players.

But it seems to me people should be upset about this. Who is GW is judge what standard an army should be at? Even with the dumbed down tutorials, most people can't achieve the level of quality they do in their books.

And why should GW be making rulings about converted models and paint schemes? It seems to me this is a hobby, people should be able to do what they want. Tournaments are supposed to be a way to capture the best aspects of the community, not the most technically proficient or the most adherent to arbitrary rules.

There's nothing about White Dwarf level painting. It's clearly to prevent abuse of the "3-colour rule", and actually allows nicely-painted grey armies that might not feature a lot of colours. As far as making rules, they can do what they want in their own building. As stated, it doesn't have any effect on 99.99% of us. If you don't like those rules, don't play at WHW. Simples!

 ClockworkZion wrote:
This thread is starting to make me think of some song lyrics. I believe they go:

Paranoia, paranoia
Everybody's coming to get me

Yeah, that's the bit.

This comes from the same company that claimed grenade launcher, halberd and plasma as trademarks in the chapterhouse suit. It's not farfetched to think that they are at it again trying to make stick some inhouse policy as a general rule.
M.

 sennacherib wrote:
I can see the no conversions rule making people rightly pi$$ed off.
I can see why they would do that (to make people buy models that are really pricey instead of converting a cheaper model) but i think it stinks.

You may need your eyes checked. Only full proxies where banned, conversions are on a case-by-case approval basis.

 Miguelsan wrote:
For now.
That's the point we are trying to make some of us. If this code becomes compulsory some will say how's GW going to enforce it? The same way they treat rumours right now.
If FLGS allows proxies they'll be cut from the early release loop. Hey it's a trade contract, they can do it if they feel like even if it's insane but lately GW has not been very sane in certain areas of their conduct.
M.

While I enjoy rampant and baseless speculation as much as the next bloke, this is egregiously pointless. The plastic Thunderhawk thing is, for the first time, not the most outrageously stupid part of a rumor, but that still doesn't make it in any way likelier to be true.

There will not be a GW Gestapo cutting off stores that refuse to adhere to a mythical document. There will not be plastic Sisters. There will not be a plastic Thunderhawk. The unsourced statements of a couple of faceless Internet avatars can safely be ignored until they present some actual hard evidence.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You may need your eyes checked. Only full proxies where banned, conversions are on a case-by-case approval basis.

Of course their definition of "proxy" isn't the same one that the rest of us use. Their example of an illegal proxy is adding a scope to a Cadian lasgunner to make a storm trooper, when a storm trooper is just a guardsman with a fancy gun. That's blatantly a case of "buy the official model or don't play".

 Agamemnon2 wrote:


There will not be a GW Gestapo cutting off stores that refuse to adhere to a mythical document. There will not be plastic Sisters. There will not be a plastic Thunderhawk. The unsourced statements of a couple of faceless Internet avatars can safely be ignored until they present some actual hard evidence.

Just as you shall be ignored until you present some actual hard evidence to back up your unsourced statements.

My answer is - "I can't actually see the future, and this is my personal opinion based on information ( and my interpretation of the historical actions of GW ) that I have observed, as viewed through my own personal psyche."


Only time will tell if your speculations hold any more weight than mine.

 Azazelx wrote:

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Dakka commentator makes up a bunch of extra stuff and complains about the extra stuff.
Business as usual.
We've played Throne of Skulls under those rules, taken our own design Mycetic Spores made of 80p polystyrene eggs and, even, ymgarls with chapterhouse cthulu heads, and those bloody red shirts had the cheek to compliment the army and give us a glass trophy! The horror! The horror!

I don't think you'll be getting away with that again!

Having said that - the rules seem reasonable from GW's perspective, and won't have any impact on almost all of us.

Seriously, I think we would be OK again. I have met the Warhammer World games manager and staff, and with the odd exception, they are enthusiasts and all about the rule of cool.

Like everyone, we've met GW employees who are prats - altho the manager's great, there's one particular guy at Bluewater who whinges endlessly that Curtis's mate hasn't got the new Space Marine codex, and whines on how he's doing him a favour letting him play (result, even more time spent at Dark Sphere).

But Warhammer World is a fantastic place, I was very impressed by the staff who are well-motivated and have a great sense of humour. Because they're enthusiasts, they want people to make an effort, and because it's a GW location, which must cost a lot to run, they want people to use GW models. If you're offended by that, you must have your outrage bar set exceptionally low.

Alabaster.clown wrote:
Just as you shall be ignored until you present some actual hard evidence to back up your unsourced statements.

The burden of proof is on people making the claim. What is asserted without evidence can be summarily dismissed or put aside to wait for the materialization of such evidence. With regard to the Thunderhawk, I am agnostic, since this latest rumor does not bring anything concretely new to the table, except for the whole "6 sprue maximum" angle, which some earlier posters have already addressed and dismissed.

With regard to the "Warrior's Code" being a harbinger of dire things to come is, I am even more skeptical, since for GW to make a Thunderhawk is, to a large degree, logical of them. They like Marines, they like big kits. For GW to start a keen interest on the tournament scene like that, not so much. Even at worst, this interpretation might simply apply to in-store gaming in the future. There is no reason to believe independent gamers or events would be affected. Certainly not to the extent of getting lawyers involved, or doing it via contractual means, like someone suggested a few messages back. That's no better than alarmism at this point.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
The burden of proof is on people making the claim.

Given (almost?) all of GWs recent actions I'd actually argue the burden of proof is on them.
If they introduce something new and people can see a reason that it could be bad it is not unreasonable to expect it will be bad given the company's recent history.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You may need your eyes checked. Only full proxies where banned, conversions are on a case-by-case approval basis.

Of course their definition of "proxy" isn't the same one that the rest of us use. Their example of an illegal proxy is adding a scope to a Cadian lasgunner to make a storm trooper, when a storm trooper is just a guardsman with a fancy gun. That's blatantly a case of "buy the official model or don't play".

This.

It also seems to me to be an emulation of PP's Steamroller tournament package, just poorly implemented; as GW's rules are not up to the same scratch as PP's are.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
While I enjoy rampant and baseless speculation as much as the next bloke, this is egregiously pointless. The plastic Thunderhawk thing is, for the first time, not the most outrageously stupid part of a rumor, but that still doesn't make it in any way likelier to be true.

There will not be a GW Gestapo cutting off stores that refuse to adhere to a mythical document. There will not be plastic Sisters. There will not be a plastic Thunderhawk. The unsourced statements of a couple of faceless Internet avatars can safely be ignored until they present some actual hard evidence.

Damnit Agamemnon! Stop being sensible about it this is dakka. We like being radical here, either pro or anti GW.
M.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
There will not be plastic Sisters.

Sure there will. We know, from interviews with developers, that they've tried making them in the past. There is a desire to make them. Then there's the recent thing from Enter the Citadel where they reportedly said that they now have the technology to do plastic Sisters. There is far more evidence in their favour than some dodgy internet source.

And, of course, the recent good performance of the AS codex is good evidence against any theories about GW not seeing them as a good investment, as does the big DE update.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
While I enjoy rampant and baseless speculation as much as the next bloke, this is egregiously pointless. The plastic Thunderhawk thing is, for the first time, not the most outrageously stupid part of a rumor, but that still doesn't make it in any way likelier to be true.

There will not be a GW Gestapo cutting off stores that refuse to adhere to a mythical document. There will not be plastic Sisters. There will not be a plastic Thunderhawk. The unsourced statements of a couple of faceless Internet avatars can safely be ignored until they present some actual hard evidence.

amen to all that

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You may need your eyes checked. Only full proxies where banned, conversions are on a case-by-case approval basis.

Of course their definition of "proxy" isn't the same one that the rest of us use. Their example of an illegal proxy is adding a scope to a Cadian lasgunner to make a storm trooper, when a storm trooper is just a guardsman with a fancy gun. That's blatantly a case of "buy the official model or don't play".

They gave some examples though to help with that. Things like using a Rhino as a Trukk is a no go. But Centurions as Oblits may get you an okay if they're done well.

It seems rather clear to me that their idea of a proxy is actually not that far off what we think of in some respect (dragon replacing a Falcon). They aren't against conversions or rule of cool, they're against things being unclear because it doesn't have the right weapons on it, or because it's modeled in such a way to give the person who has it an unfair advantage.

Maybe that ends up defying some of the internet's definitions because of it, but for the sake of fair play and a fun event I understand their point of view completely and I'm on their side for it.

And for the people crying about how GW is going to try killing the hobby with this: look at the version number for that document. It's not 1.0. This is not a new thing, and honestly I don't think the things the sales department is doing to help smooth out events by having standards is really a thing you need to worry about being crammed down everyone's throats. If you don't play at Warhammer World it doesn't effect you and it can't effect you because there are no GW secret police to make it work.

Really, I'm not sure this is a bad thing on the 40K side of things. Not being able to codex hop as easily for Marines just puts them in the same boat as all the Xenos armies. It'll be no more worse than saying that Eldar can't be used as Tau. It's partially since I expect IG or one of the other Imperial armies to be way too good and get a flood of folk using their marines as whatever the FOTM is.

The WFB side where they are trying to crack down on scenic fillers is stupid, though. It's one of the few ways to break up the mess of figs you'd otherwise have, and also saves so sanity from you painting for 70th spearmen. 20 percent max is fine, but killing the ability to add nice rock outcroppings, fallen monuments, ect is just counterproductive.

All this thread did was give me an awesome idea for a Vengeance to be converted into flying tanks

 Hulksmash wrote:
All this thread did was give me an awesome idea for a Vengeance to be converted into flying tanks

Thinking of conversions...I've been wanting to convert a super heavy into a church on treads.

We rate these rumors as follows:
Apocalypse Stuff: Probable coming from multiple known sources
Thunderhawk Stuff: Possible coming from multiple sources, but it involves the words "Thunderhawk" and "Plastic" so we rolled it back one notch...

I can't even imagine what it will cost.

I CAN imagine what it will cost, but GW will get it and probably from me as well. I'd really like to see a plastic Thunderhawk in my model collection.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It seems rather clear to me that their idea of a proxy is actually not that far off what we think of in some respect (dragon replacing a Falcon). They aren't against conversions or rule of cool, they're against things being unclear because it doesn't have the right weapons on it, or because it's modeled in such a way to give the person who has it an unfair advantage.

The Dragon replacing a Fire Prism was a real example from the campaign weekend I went to. And it was awesome. There was nothing unclear about it at all. You can see the two of them in this image.




I mean, that's a truly amazing army and if I was that guy, the thought that I'd need to get every single converted mini approved beforehand is just so incredibly disheartening.


On a more... mortal front.

I imagine they'll never let me use this guy as an Assault marine sergeant again.



And my Apothecary conversion will probably be tossed in a bin someplace.

 azreal13 wrote:
The headline everybody seems to have missed is that in these rules (guidelines? no, rules) GW have actually acknowledged the existence of other model making companies!

HA! Yes Azreal, you are very much correct. A further chink in the armor.

 Compel wrote:
I mean, that's a truly amazing army and if I was that guy, the thought that I'd need to get every single converted mini approved beforehand is just so incredibly disheartening.

Why disheartening? When you make a full conversion counts-as army you kind of have to expect that people are going to want to take a look before accepting it.

I imagine they'll never let me use this guy as an Assault marine sergeant again.
And my Apothecary conversion will probably be tossed in a bin someplace.

Non GW parts?

Also, why would you bin them? Do you only play at WW?

As someone who plays almost exclusively with either the primary or ally being counts-as these days I have accepted that I need to send in photos of my completed army for major events.

The only real issue I have is the non-gw parts thing. We had a local GW store open up and I was going to participate in their armies on parade (excuse to paint some more stuff for my armies) but the 100% gw parts (up from 50% GW from back in the day) meant I couldn't attend. But that's the only gripe and I don't expect this to expand to events they don't provide any support for so it's a non-worry for me.

 Hulksmash wrote:
As someone who plays almost exclusively with either the primary or ally being counts-as these days I have accepted that I need to send in photos of my completed army for major events.

This all day long. Most big events require you to clear conversions or count-as ahead of time. Most also operate by rule of cool and are really just trying to make sure no one tries to sneak by some modeled for advantage gak. GW doing it is no different than anyone else doing it.

 Hulksmash wrote:
The only real issue I have is the non-gw parts thing. We had a local GW store open up and I was going to participate in their armies on parade (excuse to paint some more stuff for my armies) but the 100% gw parts (up from 50% GW from back in the day) meant I couldn't attend. But that's the only gripe and I don't expect this to expand to events they don't provide any support for so it's a non-worry for me.

The non-GW parts thing makes since seeing as it's Warhammer World. I mean back before we had so many competitors for alternate bits GW used to require conversions in their events contained a certain percentage of actual model parts. With it being so easy to get full models that look a lot like the official versions it's no real surprise they'd push a little further and just say that all the parts need to be GW (though I'm betting they won't ban sculpted sections and the like, so if people are good with the green stuff they're probably safe).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Compel wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It seems rather clear to me that their idea of a proxy is actually not that far off what we think of in some respect (dragon replacing a Falcon). They aren't against conversions or rule of cool, they're against things being unclear because it doesn't have the right weapons on it, or because it's modeled in such a way to give the person who has it an unfair advantage.

The Dragon replacing a Fire Prism was a real example from the campaign weekend I went to. And it was awesome. There was nothing unclear about it at all. You can see the two of them in this image.

Those aren't dragons.

This is a High Elf Dragon:

 pretre wrote:
+
Non GW parts?

Also, why would you bin them? Do you only play at WW?

The bin them was a bit of self indulgent hyperbole, my apologies.

However.

"If there is a model available for any given
unit, we expect you to use the correct model."

So, I can't use my Captain Korvydae model as a Blood Ravens Sergeant. And, as an Apothecary model already exists...

 Compel wrote:
However.
"If there is a model available for any given
unit, we expect you to use the correct model."

So, I can't use my Captain Korvydae model as a Blood Ravens Sergeant. And, as an Apothecary model already exists...

You can just pre-approve it as they have listed counts-as examples and those are way less severe than Centurion = Oblit (their example).

In other words, you'll be fine.

Meh, who cares about the code. If you're army isn't painted or using the right stuff well that's up to GW to decide. It is their tourneys. I don't know many people that bother with the big tourneys and really don't care to. What's the point in playing a game if you're not playing for fun?

I'd gladly open my wallet for a plastic T-Hawk and plastic SoB though

I love how you can be thrown out of the tourney for not having the correct rules interpretation.

 skyth wrote:
I love how you can be thrown out of the tourney for not having the correct rules interpretation.

I think that is a rather broad (and incorrect) interpretation of this bullet:

Knowingly interpreting the rules of the game
in your favour to take advantage of another
player.

There's a difference between having a different rules interpretation and trying to interpret the rules in your own favor when you know that it isn't correct.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You may need your eyes checked. Only full proxies where banned, conversions are on a case-by-case approval basis.

Of course their definition of "proxy" isn't the same one that the rest of us use. Their example of an illegal proxy is adding a scope to a Cadian lasgunner to make a storm trooper, when a storm trooper is just a guardsman with a fancy gun. That's blatantly a case of "buy the official model or don't play".

Please point to me where in the rule packet where they list that example? Per the rule packet:

A “proxy miniature” is a model that is standing
in for something else and has not been changed
in any way. These are not allowed at any of our
events. A Cadian Shock Trooper cannot be a
Genestealer, a Tyranid Ravener cannot be a
Fiend of Slaanesh, a Savage Orc with a large
ball and chain cannot be a Mangler Squig.

And as is also pointed out, if you are concerned about a conversion, write in ahead. PP has a very restrictive policy regarding conversions on their tournaments, more so than this, but whenever that is brought up in WMH discussions, they just say write head, most tournament organizers won't ban an army if it is done well.

Most of this thread can be summed up as:

Poster 1: I didn't read the document and am angry about something that I think is in it!
Poster 2: You know how I know you didn't read the document?
Poser 3: Plastic Thunderhawk!

dkellyj wrote:
But if they want to dictate those rules to FLGS and Indi-Tournys..

Citation needed.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
As someone who plays almost exclusively with either the primary or ally being counts-as these days I have accepted that I need to send in photos of my completed army for major events.

This all day long. Most big events require you to clear conversions or count-as ahead of time. Most also operate by rule of cool and are really just trying to make sure no one tries to sneak by some modeled for advantage gak. GW doing it is no different than anyone else doing it.

 Hulksmash wrote:
The only real issue I have is the non-gw parts thing. We had a local GW store open up and I was going to participate in their armies on parade (excuse to paint some more stuff for my armies) but the 100% gw parts (up from 50% GW from back in the day) meant I couldn't attend. But that's the only gripe and I don't expect this to expand to events they don't provide any support for so it's a non-worry for me.

The non-GW parts thing makes since seeing as it's Warhammer World. I mean back before we had so many competitors for alternate bits GW used to require conversions in their events contained a certain percentage of actual model parts. With it being so easy to get full models that look a lot like the official versions it's no real surprise they'd push a little further and just say that all the parts need to be GW (though I'm betting they won't ban sculpted sections and the like, so if people are good with the green stuff they're probably safe).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Compel wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It seems rather clear to me that their idea of a proxy is actually not that far off what we think of in some respect (dragon replacing a Falcon). They aren't against conversions or rule of cool, they're against things being unclear because it doesn't have the right weapons on it, or because it's modeled in such a way to give the person who has it an unfair advantage.

The Dragon replacing a Fire Prism was a real example from the campaign weekend I went to. And it was awesome. There was nothing unclear about it at all. You can see the two of them in this image.

Those aren't dragons.

This is a High Elf Dragon:

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?19081-Eldar-Exodite-converted-army&p=322466&viewfull=1#post322466

The dragon was actually a Scorpion.

These rules have always been around for GW tournament play I thought... Been about 6 or so years since I last went to one, since they died out, so I guess there was a period in there that this wasn't the case.

Without sounding rude, has anyone actually read the opening post? How many people is it really likely to affect?

It's like saying "No alcohol allowed at all parties ... that are attended by Bjorn Borg!", and then people getting really upset that they can no longer drink at parties. I think we're probably talking about similar percentages of demographic here.

Well, it does affect some real people - I could have very well have gone next week!

And yes, sorry for the dumbness of not saying Griffin.

 Compel wrote:
Well, it does affect some real people - I could have very well have gone next week!

Except the examples you gave of your army not complying were really unlikely to actually not be in compliance. If you read the actual doc, it is really pretty simple.

My Genestealers are Space Marines? Not okay.
My Forgeworld special character model is actually a sergeant? Probably okay.

"yes we know the rules suck, just dont look at them too closely, 4+ it and move on and dont ask us to figure it out either because we dont know or care"

 Pacific wrote:
Without sounding rude, has anyone actually read the opening post? How many people is it really likely to affect?

It doesn't matter. The simple act of GW publishing rules for their own GW-run events at Warhammer World causes everybody to lose their freaking mind. People are even fabricating stuff out of thin air to justify their paranoid rantings.

Pfffff. No use in trying to be the voice of reason around here. Just sit back, grab some popcorn, and watch this cavalcade of comedy march on. It's dinner and a show.

Now I actually want popcorn.

Off to the microwave...

 Breotan wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Without sounding rude, has anyone actually read the opening post? How many people is it really likely to affect?

It doesn't matter. The simple act of GW publishing rules for their own GW-run events at Warhammer World causes everybody to lose their freaking mind. People are even fabricating stuff out of thin air to justify their paranoid rantings.

Pfffff. No use in trying to be the voice of reason around here. Just sit back, grab some popcorn, and watch this cavalcade of comedy march on. It's dinner and a show.

You mean just like the yellow shirted judges allegedly did according to what was reported in the OP. What the document says is irrelevant if said report has any truth to it as the judges were pulling things out of their backsides left, right and centre.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Without sounding rude, has anyone actually read the opening post? How many people is it really likely to affect?

It doesn't matter. The simple act of GW publishing rules for their own GW-run events at Warhammer World causes everybody to lose their freaking mind. People are even fabricating stuff out of thin air to justify their paranoid rantings.

Pfffff. No use in trying to be the voice of reason around here. Just sit back, grab some popcorn, and watch this cavalcade of comedy march on. It's dinner and a show.

You mean just like the yellow shirted judges allegedly did according to what was reported in the OP. What the document says is irrelevant if said report has any truth to it as the judges were pulling things out of their backsides left, right and centre.

Gosh, you mean a yellow shirt actually asked someone why their drop pod doors were glued shut. Allegedly. Is there no end to GW brutality?

.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Without sounding rude, has anyone actually read the opening post? How many people is it really likely to affect?

It doesn't matter. The simple act of GW publishing rules for their own GW-run events at Warhammer World causes everybody to lose their freaking mind. People are even fabricating stuff out of thin air to justify their paranoid rantings.

Pfffff. No use in trying to be the voice of reason around here. Just sit back, grab some popcorn, and watch this cavalcade of comedy march on. It's dinner and a show.

You mean just like the yellow shirted judges allegedly did according to what was reported in the OP. What the document says is irrelevant if said report has any truth to it as the judges were pulling things out of their backsides left, right and centre.

Gosh, you mean a yellow shirt actually asked someone why their drop pod doors were glued shut. Allegedly. Is there no end to GW brutality?

And in a GW run event, too. Oh, the humanity. Back to my popcorn.

Seriously, am I the only one that's more interested in the plastic SoBs than the GW rules?
And I live in the UK unlike a lot of posters, so that is a tad more relevant to me...

 Breotan wrote:

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
Gosh, you mean a yellow shirt actually asked someone why their drop pod doors were glued shut. Allegedly. Is there no end to GW brutality?

And in a GW run event, too. Oh, the humanity. Back to my popcorn.

There is worse.

My 12 year old had to sit there as the organisers at Warhammer World questioned him on his mycetic spores. He had to submit to their compliments. At one point endured questioning about the bases on his gargoyles, and was forced to wait for two or three minutes until they concluded they looked great. Later on, the same concentration camp guards forced him up against a glass display box and asked him to place his army on a shelf.

I'm his dad, and I can see some massive therapy bills on the horizon.

.

You busted that quote chain somehow, HFO.

Sorry about the quote chain. Such an emotional business, couldn't type for the tears flooding my keyboard.

.

 liquidjoshi wrote:
Seriously, am I the only one that's more interested in the plastic SoBs than the GW rules?

Not at all, that's the only reason I posted in this thread.

Though it's not exactly the most solid of rumours. But it does come in a favourable context.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
Gosh, you mean a yellow shirt actually asked someone why their drop pod doors were glued shut. Allegedly. Is there no end to GW brutality?

And in a GW run event, too. Oh, the humanity. Back to my popcorn.

There is worse.

My 12 year old had to sit there as the organisers at Warhammer World questioned him on his mycetic spores. He had to submit to their compliments. At one point endured questioning about the bases on his gargoyles, and was forced to wait for two or three minutes until they concluded they looked great. Later on, the same concentration camp guards forced him up against a glass display box and asked him to place his army on a shelf.

I'm his dad, and I can see some massive therapy bills on the horizon.

.

Bahaha. Exalted.

I would not have a problem like this because I don't play in any GW run events... since they don't exist here outside of Throne of Skulls... but I do find it rather silly they won't allow proxies.

Currently my plan is to run Shadow Spectres as Dark Reapers because I hate running models with the same sculpt in an army, and the Shadow Spectres are incredible models. I suppose that wouldn't have been allowed?

Oh well, overall sounds kind of bunk to me but like most have said.. probably has very little affect. The 3 colors thing was funny though. White spray, wash and bolt gun... nice.

 Matt1785 wrote:
I would not have a problem like this because I don't play in any GW run events... since they don't exist here outside of Throne of Skulls... but I do find it rather silly they won't allow proxies.

Currently my plan is to run Shadow Spectres as Dark Reapers because I hate running models with the same sculpt in an army, and the Shadow Spectres are incredible models. I suppose that wouldn't have been allowed?

Oh well, overall sounds kind of bunk to me but like most have said.. probably has very little affect. The 3 colors thing was funny though. White spray, wash and bolt gun... nice.

Proxies can be confusing and it's easier to ban then than make sure you check on every game to make sure that every proxy is clearly explained as to not give an unfair advantage to anyone.

But if they're not going to let you use your Forgeworld models for what they are, and they won't let you use them to proxy.. how do they keep selling the stuff to you?

Again, it doesn't matter much to me here in the US, but I'm sure it's a more pressing question in the UK.

 Matt1785 wrote:
I would not have a problem like this because I don't play in any GW run events... since they don't exist here outside of Throne of Skulls... but I do find it rather silly they won't allow proxies.

Currently my plan is to run Shadow Spectres as Dark Reapers because I hate running models with the same sculpt in an army, and the Shadow Spectres are incredible models. I suppose that wouldn't have been allowed?

Oh well, overall sounds kind of bunk to me but like most have said.. probably has very little affect. The 3 colors thing was funny though. White spray, wash and bolt gun... nice.

I don't like lootas, so I am going to use stormboyz instead of lootas to represent lootas. No one should be able to tell me otherwise and so what if I gain a tactical advantage by having higher LOS from the stormboy models for shooting and it makes it easier to see over stuff and deny cover?

*No Tourney anywhere allows proxies. They allow limited 'counts as' *IF* the model is clearly converted and cannot be confused for anything else and has no better match for rules. Also, Such COUNTS AS usually requires TO approval.

*Forgeworld is handled differently, but usually, events who do not allow the rules allow the models to be used as their closest codex counterpart. Not as an excuse to proxy your ass off. If the event had allowed FW, you probably wouldn't be allowed to proxy them at all and would need to use them for what they are.

You guys act like GW is insane. These are the rules to every INDY GT that exists. You can't show up and proxy stuff, if you do, you are breaking the tourney's rules.

Why is this thread still here?

This is possibly the 5th most useless thread on dakka.

 Troike wrote:

 liquidjoshi wrote:
Seriously, am I the only one that's more interested in the plastic SoBs than the GW rules?

Not at all, that's the only reason I posted in this thread.

Though it's not exactly the most solid of rumours. But it does come in a favourable context.

Exactly why I'd like to hear more

 Valhallan42nd wrote:
Why is this thread still here?

This is possibly the 5th most useless thread on dakka.

You do know that threads die faster when people don't post in them, and if it isn't your cup of tea you can ignore it right?

I don't believe anything that includes the plastic thunder hawk.

 Troike wrote:
Though it's not exactly the most solid of rumours.

Yeah, it's actually so empty I don't even find anything to say about it. Even if trying very hard !

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
Gosh, you mean a yellow shirt actually asked someone why their drop pod doors were glued shut. Allegedly. Is there no end to GW brutality?

And in a GW run event, too. Oh, the humanity. Back to my popcorn.

There is worse.

My 12 year old had to sit there as the organisers at Warhammer World questioned him on his mycetic spores. He had to submit to their compliments. At one point endured questioning about the bases on his gargoyles, and was forced to wait for two or three minutes until they concluded they looked great. Later on, the same concentration camp guards forced him up against a glass display box and asked him to place his army on a shelf.

I'm his dad, and I can see some massive therapy bills on the horizon.

.

I wouldn't let him handle sharp objects and I fear for your life

I'll believe the plastic TH when I have it in my hands. I sold the metal TH on the rumor of a plastic kit, which ended up being a more expensive FW kit... Still the metal one need to go.

Hmmm. I may buy a FW Thunderhawk this Christmas, because if I do that then the plastic will surely happen, that's how it usually works for me... I go and spend $600 plus on a model, then a $100 kit comes out 6 months later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thanks for the rumor post though. Would like some Sister Allies, that would be cool!