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.

Do tournament organizers generally allow for conversions? I know that in GW games the TO usually allow whatever is there and fairly radical conversions are encouraged but the Privateer Press tournament conversion policy is (understandably, as weapon type and size plays a larger role in Warmachine and Hordes) a fair bit stricter.

I guess I just don't want to lose one of my favourite parts of wargaming as a hobby in order to be able to play in tournaments.

http://privateerpress.com/files/Conversion_Policy_0.pdf

Yes, TOs normally allow along the guidelines in this PDF. You're going to usually be stymied with attempting "counts as" but TOs are usually fairly reasonable.

For instance, would a change of weapon from a sword to a halberd on a unit of infantry be frowned upon due it (maybe) being interpreted as a reach weapon? Even though no rules change occurred, of course.

as I understand it yes. The change of weapon makes it so they are not carrying the original weapontype and therefoere be disallowed.

Freindly play is probably no problem, but Tournament play will not allow it...

What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

In general, so long as it pretty easily recognizable as what it's supposed to be, no one will care. I've got multiple things that are technically illegal according to PP's conversion rules but I've never been called out on any of them, or even suggested that I would.

Sazzlefrats wrote:What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

I think this would be acceptable. From the pics I've seen, they are that similar already. Do a good job with the flamespurt and you should be good.

Sazzlefrats wrote:What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

While technically it would be illegal due to needing to be based on the intended model, the Carnivean and Ravagore are similar enough that nobody will notice anyhow, so go for it.

Sweet. I really hate it when I think I got a great idea, and no one else agrees. This is one of those exceptions I guess :-)

the other one would be Khador series Head
no one would care what the head look like, they will be more worried looking at the ARM (pun intended)

Laughing Man wrote:

Sazzlefrats wrote:What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

While technically it would be illegal due to needing to be based on the intended model, the Carnivean and Ravagore are similar enough that nobody will notice anyhow, so go for it.

The conversion policy requires the model "A converted model must contain a majority of parts from the WARMACHINE or HORDES model for
which the rules were written."

The Carnivean and Ravagore are the same model with different heads, arms shoulder spines, so from a technical standpoint, most of the parts are from the model for which the rules were written. There is no difference between torsos, legs, tails etc.

If you do a Carnivian to Ravagore conversion, I would make sure you put in green stuff to bulk up the head and put in those eye slits it has. The head/hands are pretty much the only thing that differentiates the three heavys Legion has, and leaving the Carnivian arms on would add to confusion.

The Carnivean and Ravagore are the same model with different heads, arms shoulder spines, so from a technical standpoint, most of the parts are from the model for which the rules were written. There is no difference between torsos, legs, tails etc.

Actually, they're not. If you take a look at the tail, you'll note it curves in a different direction on the Ravagore.

And, technically, the Carnivian and Ravagore have a different central torso piece. The Carni's is a single solid chunk of metal, where the Ravagor has a two part hollow torso.

Sazzlefrats wrote:What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

Considering that the Carnivean also has a flame breath attack, I'd say that this falls under the category of A Bad Idea, at least without swapping the arms and adding the vent slits on the head.

The tourney rules for conversion are readily available on the site, and I assure you they are far less strict than any 40k tourney I have seen.

In my opinion the PP rules are MORE strict than GW's, because PP's require you to use the specific fig you want the model to represent as the starting point, where GW doesn't care so long as you use a GW model.

PP also strictly dissalows 'counts as' and most weapon swaps. Most events also don't allow you to use things that haven't had the models released yet.

Basically just reposing of the original, which makes GW look pretty generous with their conversion policy.

The only conversion I currently have is a repose of Kara using Sorcha's left arm to hold the rifle at low ready rather than showing she can swing the IK equivalent of a Barrett around like she just don't care.

I also have a Reaper Pug that I use as Butcher's Wardog, largely because it's funny. And the little guy has already bagged himself an Ironclad (only had a couple boxes left on the feat turn but a kill is a kill). I have the real wardog in case someone complains.

Speaking as a TO, as long as the model in question looks like the model it represents, there really isn't a problem. You really only start running into problems when you have to explain and / or justify your conversion to your opponent.

Sazzlefrats wrote:What about this for a conversion.

There is an amazing simularity between a ravagore and carnivean.

So taking carnivean and adding a flaming gout of fire from its mouth, and adding green stuff to the back spines to look more like the ravagore. Would that count as a ravagore, would probably look the same except the mouth is a little different?

The distinctive features between the Ravagore and Carnivean are the head and arms. If you're going to try to convert a Carni, you're going to have to do something about those giant kitchen mitts that it has for hands.

A bit of greenstuff on the back and fire shooting from its mouth are going to make a Carni look more like an extreme Carni since it already has backspikes/fire breath. You'll really have to modify the arms to make it a distinctively un-Carnivean model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Endgame wrote:Speaking as a TO, as long as the model in question looks like the model it represents, there really isn't a problem. You really only start running into problems when you have to explain and / or justify your conversion to your opponent.

I'm really curious where you draw the line on that, especially with regards to Legion, since their -ean/-gore heavies all share roughly 50% of the same parts. I could see, for example, a Beast-09 carrying a Generator Blade from a Stormclad as an acceptable conversion, but a Kodiak with a Devastator axe arm is simply going to look too much like a Juggernaut.

sourclams wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Endgame wrote:Speaking as a TO, as long as the model in question looks like the model it represents, there really isn't a problem. You really only start running into problems when you have to explain and / or justify your conversion to your opponent.

I'm really curious where you draw the line on that, especially with regards to Legion, since their -ean/-gore heavies all share roughly 50% of the same parts. I could see, for example, a Beast-09 carrying a Generator Blade from a Stormclad as an acceptable conversion, but a Kodiak with a Devastator axe arm is simply going to look too much like a Juggernaut.

The common parts between the legion beasts should make it pretty simple to look like a ravagore. The biggest bit that will identify the ravagore is the fireball coming from its mouth. This is part of the reason why the conversion policy is in place -- the base parts of the models are identical between chassis, so the only distinguishable parts are the weapons carried in the locations they are carried in.

As for Beast, that would technically be an unallowed weapon swap (sword for an axe), but I would allow it as long as it looked like beast (the extra spike, etc). The Kodiak would be a much tougher sell -- why would a Kodiak be carrying a weapon at all? Its a double open fist jack....

Endgame wrote:

sourclams wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Endgame wrote:Speaking as a TO, as long as the model in question looks like the model it represents, there really isn't a problem. You really only start running into problems when you have to explain and / or justify your conversion to your opponent.

I'm really curious where you draw the line on that, especially with regards to Legion, since their -ean/-gore heavies all share roughly 50% of the same parts. I could see, for example, a Beast-09 carrying a Generator Blade from a Stormclad as an acceptable conversion, but a Kodiak with a Devastator axe arm is simply going to look too much like a Juggernaut.

The common parts between the legion beasts should make it pretty simple to look like a ravagore. The biggest bit that will identify the ravagore is the fireball coming from its mouth. This is part of the reason why the conversion policy is in place -- the base parts of the models are identical between chassis, so the only distinguishable parts are the weapons carried in the locations they are carried in.

Except, as mentioned, both beasts spit fire, and the loogie is an optional bit anyway. The hands and vent-slits are the real differences between the models.

The level of difficulty the policy will cause is depending on the interpreattion of this:

All models used in Privateer Press organized play events must be Privateer Press miniatures from the
WARMACHINE or HORDES ranges. The miniatures must be fully assembled on the appropriately
sized base for which the model was designed. Any non–Privateer Press models, unassembled
miniatures, or inappropriately based models are not permitted.

Now if this measn the miniature must be essentially a Privateer Press miniture, or are they saying a miniature must be 100% Privateer Press miniature.

If PP disallows free sculpting, non Privateer Press bitz box scrap etc I would have a problem with it.

I would be more content if they say that the miniature itself should be a Privateer Press original, but you can add what you like to it, so long as it fits the models loadout.

I added a Chaos Marauder cloak to Manhunter, it looks right. Would PP throw a hissy fit over it, the core miniature is still a Manhunter. I beleive thery shouldnt, whether they do is another matter.

Even GW doesn't demand 100% of a miniature by GW product.

As long as it's primarily a Privateer model, you'll be fine. Original sculpts are also perfectly acceptable, as long as they're recognizably the intended model. I'll see if I can't dig up the appropriate Infernal post for reference.

Let's ignore the conversion policy .pdf refernced earlier and take this apart here:

All models used in Privateer Press organized play events must be Privateer Press miniatures from the
WARMACHINE or HORDES ranges.

Meaning this one is OK and fairly neat.
But these are not. Despite being fairly neat.
And neither are these.

Number one started with PP models and built up. The second two are complete scratchbuilds. I think its fair that one should purchase their product to play in their tournaments. I also think those 'custom' raek in the third link aren't all that impressive. I like the real thing better.

The miniatures must be fully assembled on the appropriately
sized base for which the model was designed.

The game has base size as a critical aspect to it. Trollblood units for example can mostly can fit on a small base (I haven't gotten my paws on fennblades or sluggers to confirm) which would make my life as a Trollblood player much easier.

It goes round and round on the PP forums all the time. The general consensus usually becomes "TO's judgement" before it devolves into a flamewar arguing about what someone can do with their toys.

Typically a TO is fairly cool about conversions - they're aware that we all have other hobbies and that some parts do look cool together.

Ok, well I've had this idea for a long time now.

I'm thinking about mounting my Raptor's on Raek's instead of Them stupid elk's, would this be allowed? :3

I personally think it'd be awesome. However, you should probably ask your local TO/Press Ganger for confirmation.

That is nothing. I have an entire legion army with no legion models. Not really a conversion as such, but I relaly dislike the models for legion (except the raek, Ethagrosh and some others...)

I do not play in tournaments though, which makes it easier to do this. (I do not even play at a lgs)

Keep in mind local tourny's run by a tourney orginizer and big events run by privateer press are two different things. I have seen guys using legs glued to bases at local tourneys and no one cared, I have also heard guys with beautifully painted privateer press armies get dq'ed from large events because some of this guys opponents didn't care for his basing. All true sadly, If you want a cool looking army to play against your friends convert away. But if you get to a tourney and find out you can't use it don't be surprised.