Switch Theme:

The Toyification of Orks (and all of 40k?)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Andykp wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Andykp wrote:
There’s no lack of options in 40k now. U can make what ever you want. It’s the easiest edition to make up your own rules for and worth power levels pricing them has never been easier either. The problem is the player base has become too up tight about rules and balance and all that rubbish. Do what you like and play people who do the same. You’ll have fun and less angst.


That really only applies to like minded people though. You can't really go to a store and say this is how I play.


Of course I can. U can walk into the store, say “look I’ve made some conversions with made up rules who fancies trying them out.” Nothing at all to stop you asking. That’s how you get to know about like minded people. It’s called social interaction. Not only that the rules will become better and the conversions will follow, before you know it you’re a group of like minded adults playing games and designing a whole imaginary world with history culture and personalities and having childish fun drawing maps and naming people and places. IT ALL ATARTS WITH A QUESTION.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JimOnMars wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
I can understand being perturbed by the lack of wargear options trending in recent codices, but can you seriously expect GW to make rules for literally anything you can conceive of kitbashing or converting?
Of course not.

We are not asking GW to "make" rules.

We wish they would stop unmaking them.


With the index’s I can’t think of any models I’ve “lost” from my armies. Perfectly legally with out house rules or anything.


Its clear you haven't spent much time in GW shops lol
   
Made in gb
Using Inks and Washes




U.k

 Blndmage wrote:
Andykp wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JimOnMars wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
I can understand being perturbed by the lack of wargear options trending in recent codices, but can you seriously expect GW to make rules for literally anything you can conceive of kitbashing or converting?
Of course not.

We are not asking GW to "make" rules.

We wish they would stop unmaking them.


With the index’s I can’t think of any models I’ve “lost” from my armies. Perfectly legally with out house rules or anything.


Orks lost a ton of units from Index to Codex.


Index units are still perfectly legal though. That’s my point.
   
Made in gb
Waaagh! Ork Warboss





Andykp wrote:
Index units are still perfectly legal though. That’s my point.
Until GW decide they aren't.

Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. Zoom in to read them. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy; "minimum" ranges don't work; Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll; the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit; the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously; Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields; Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12"; Spore Mines have an infinite range; Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad; T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only); the T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle; you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it; if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit; a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight; Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything; Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers; Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice; "Airborne" units can't be charged by non-FLY units, but can be Heroically Intervened into, piled into, or consolidated into just fine by non-FLY units; Wave Serpents cannot be legally charged at by any model with a standard base; Slab Shields, along with the 'Take Cover!' stratagem no longer have any effect; and vehicles that are "slain" by a special effect do not trigger the "Explodes" ability.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 BaconCatBug wrote:
Andykp wrote:
Index units are still perfectly legal though. That’s my point.
Until GW decide they aren't.


This, it's pretty clear that leaving them out of the codex means that they are not long for this world. This along with more and more events banning index options for "balance"/F you long term players, means that more and more models will be invalid before along.
   
Made in is
Furious Fire Dragon




Iceland

But this goes back to the point I made before. What's the point?

Why should I bother converting a model when the only thing I can use it as is a crappy sergeant? And, in the case of Scourges, a sergeant so worthless that he's always singled out as the first squad member to die.


Because converting is fun? It is cool to have unique looking units in your armies regardless of their power?

I'll be honest, but here I feel there is a bit of a disconnect in the argument so for the sake of the argument I think this needs to be clear and precise and not implied in future answers: are people mostly wanting to make unique units that are overpowered? Is nothing worth doing in 40k unless you can get a leg up on your opponent? Because if that is true then it sounds more like converting is a chore and elimination of converting should please that group of individuals.

Because speaking for myself I can say converting is fun and having unique models - regardless of powerful and unique rules - can be a delight as it gives you something no one else has on the table: model(s) you put together and painted yourself. Yet I get the impression again and again that people are just pissed off they can't use some special rules to punish their opponents with or use units that can eviscerate other armies.

I converted some Dark Angel scouts using Dark Angel veteran heads and Skitarii heads, are these worthless conversions because they don't belong to some named super special scout? I would say no. Is my old Thunder Hammer Belial worthless as a Terminator Sergeant? I would say no because I love the idea of the sergeant being slightly more imposing than the rest of the squad. Is my old Vect kitbash worthless as a generic Archon? No, I would say it just adds flavor to my army because I am not a fan of the current plastic Archon.

So perhaps the question should be: Do you enjoy kitbashing/converting models or are you doing so more for special gains than anything else?

Now, for the record I don't hate options, but as I've repeatedly stated Orks have been getting ton of new units and options to play with over the years even though some have disappeared. Especially compared to many other factions. Without dwelling into each and every book I would say Orks and core Space Marines(Primaris is a whole new level) stand relatively equally when it comes to losing options and gaining new ones.

Craftworlds | Drukhari | Dark Angels | Necrons | Emperor's Children(30k/40k) | Tyranids | Orks | Daughters of Khaine | Blades of Khorne | Stormcast Eternals
 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






 BaconCatBug wrote:
Andykp wrote:
Index units are still perfectly legal though. That’s my point.
Until GW decide they aren't.


Exactly, anyone pretending the codex's are going to exist in a year or two are just being disingenuous to say 'stop moaning'. The reason people are pissed is not because they can't use these units, its because we know we can't in the future.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/12 16:42:10


 
   
Made in gb
Using Inks and Washes




U.k

Why get annoyed about something that hasn’t happened yet? Saying they have removed units and options is “currently” untrue. Events with their own rules is one thing, but officially index units ARE legal. Index options ARE legal. This is just moaning for he sake of it. Even IF they invalidate old models there’s nothing to stop you using them in friendly games and if your friends won’t let you then that says more about your friends than GW. It’s a non issue. Stop making it sound like you have been hard done by when nothing has actually happened.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/12 16:53:19


 
   
Made in gb
Waaagh! Ork Warboss





Andykp wrote:
Why get annoyed about something that hasn’t happened yet? Saying they have removed units and options is “currently” untrue. Events with their own rules is one thing, but officially index units ARE legal. Index options ARE legal. This is just moaning for he sake of it. Even IF they invalidate old models there’s nothing to stop you using them in friendly games and if your friends won’t let you then that says more about your friends than GW. It’s a non issue. Stop making it sound like you have been hard done by when nothing has actually happened.
"There is nothing stopping you making up rules" isn't an argument and you know it.

Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. Zoom in to read them. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy; "minimum" ranges don't work; Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll; the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit; the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously; Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields; Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12"; Spore Mines have an infinite range; Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad; T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only); the T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle; you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it; if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit; a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight; Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything; Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers; Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice; "Airborne" units can't be charged by non-FLY units, but can be Heroically Intervened into, piled into, or consolidated into just fine by non-FLY units; Wave Serpents cannot be legally charged at by any model with a standard base; Slab Shields, along with the 'Take Cover!' stratagem no longer have any effect; and vehicles that are "slain" by a special effect do not trigger the "Explodes" ability.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Andykp wrote:
Why get annoyed about something that hasn’t happened yet? Saying they have removed units and options is “currently” untrue. Events with their own rules is one thing, but officially index units ARE legal. Index options ARE legal. This is just moaning for he sake of it. Even IF they invalidate old models there’s nothing to stop you using them in friendly games and if your friends won’t let you then that says more about your friends than GW. It’s a non issue. Stop making it sound like you have been hard done by when nothing has actually happened.


Because I have the ability for foresight. If I know I'll be fired at the end of the month, I will be annoyed about it and yet I will still be working till the end of the month. This isn't moaning for the sake of it, this is the classic 'If you have any misgivings about the game then you are simply moaning, regardless of evidence or good reasons and should said argument should immediately be shut down and the moaners judged because by default we should be happy and greatful with everything GW does because it is an uber special business that doesn't have to cater to its consumers'

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/01/12 17:25:16


 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

 Eldarsif wrote:
Because converting is fun?


I cannot speak for everyone, but for me a big part of the fun is actually using my converted models. Not merely making them.

Converting a model, only to realise that I have no way to actually represent it on the table isn't fun at all - it's just depressing.


 Eldarsif wrote:
It is cool to have unique looking units in your armies regardless of their power?


But this is the whole point - it's not about power.

I'm not asking that wargear options all be good, merely that they still exist.


 Eldarsif wrote:

I'll be honest, but here I feel there is a bit of a disconnect in the argument so for the sake of the argument I think this needs to be clear and precise and not implied in future answers: are people mostly wanting to make unique units that are overpowered? Is nothing worth doing in 40k unless you can get a leg up on your opponent? Because if that is true then it sounds more like converting is a chore and elimination of converting should please that group of individuals.


As above, no, it's entirely unrelated to a unit's power.

In the case of the winged DE model I converted, I'd be fine with overpaying for wings (or for a Skyboard, Jetbike or anything else I could get away with representing with wings).

Again, it's not about power it's about actually having those options - good or bad.


 Eldarsif wrote:

Because speaking for myself I can say converting is fun and having unique models - regardless of powerful and unique rules - can be a delight as it gives you something no one else has on the table: model(s) you put together and painted yourself. Yet I get the impression again and again that people are just pissed off they can't use some special rules to punish their opponents with or use units that can eviscerate other armies.


If you're referring to me (which I have to assume, since I was the only one you quoted), then I have no idea where I gave that impression.

Power is not and has never been my objective when it comes to converting.

I agree that having unique models in my army is fun. What isn't fun is having unique models gathering dust on a shelf because there's nothing in the rules to represent them.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I converted some Dark Angel scouts using Dark Angel veteran heads and Skitarii heads, are these worthless conversions because they don't belong to some named super special scout?


Are you sure you even quoted the right person?

 Eldarsif wrote:
Is my old Thunder Hammer Belial worthless as a Terminator Sergeant? I would say no because I love the idea of the sergeant being slightly more imposing than the rest of the squad.


Here's the thing, though - you might choose to use Balial as a terminator sergeant (which is fine), but you could just as easily choose to use their model as a Terminator HQ.

I don't have that option with my winged conversion (nor with my Baron Sathonyx conversion or anything else involving a Skyboard or Jetbike).

I can understand liking impressive sergeants, but it's of absolutely no use to me if I'm making a model to be my army's leader.


 Eldarsif wrote:

So perhaps the question should be: Do you enjoy kitbashing/converting models or are you doing so more for special gains than anything else?


Could you please name a single in-game benefit I've supposedly obtained from converting my models? If not, then I'm baffled as to why you'd think I'd be converting models for that purpose.

Anyway, to answer your question, I convert for fun. But, as I originally stated, a big part of that fun is finding ways to represent the models I make on the table. If anything, it usually leads to my taking suboptimal wargear and spending far too much on artefacts.

But apparently none of that matters. Because I'd like even a single mobility option for even one of the HQ choices in an army based around mobility, then apparently i must just be a WAAC power gamer or something.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Breng77 wrote:
You do realize more options makes WYSIWYG much more arduous right?


More options doesn't make WYSIWYG arduous- fewer options in combination with wargear-specific rules makes WYSIWYG arduous. If power swords and power axes are treated differently under the rules, but I only have the option to take a power sword, then a model with a power axe is non-WYSIWYG.

If I have the option to freely take a chainsword, power sword, power axe, lightning claws, etc, then I can count the power axe as a power axe and it's WYSIWYG.

If all of those weapons are genericized to 'Close Combat Weapon', then I can count the power axe as a CCW and it's WYSIWYG.

I'd be perfectly happy if GW went in either direction, it's the current halfway point that's awkward.
   
Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine





 Eldarsif wrote:
So perhaps the question should be: Do you enjoy kitbashing/converting models or are you doing so more for special gains than anything else?
I would rather play chess with plain models than checkers with custom ones.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Personally I'm expecting a lot of the "lost" units where there is nothing new - e.g. "big guns" have been replaced by Mek Guns so they are gone for good, but say the bike characters here - are going to vanish in a new edition but will likely return as new models at some point in the future.

e.g. the next ork codex, likely in 9th, which has enough changes to invalidate the indexes (as in GW put out FAQ/Errata for the codex books but not the indexes) could easily see the big mek on bike, with KFF, the bike warboss etc return with new models
   
Made in ca
Wicked Canoptek Wraith





For those of us who spent ages building sets of Big Gunz, cause the metal ones were stupidly expensive, what are we to do?

I've got 15 kannons that I made as the core part of my all Grot army.

Girl Gamers are the best! 
   
Made in gb
Waaagh! Ork Warboss





 Blndmage wrote:
For those of us who spent ages building sets of Big Gunz, cause the metal ones were stupidly expensive, what are we to do?

I've got 15 kannons that I made as the core part of my all Grot army.
Count-as Smasha Gunz.

Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. Zoom in to read them. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy; "minimum" ranges don't work; Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll; the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit; the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously; Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields; Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12"; Spore Mines have an infinite range; Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad; T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only); the T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle; you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it; if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit; a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight; Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything; Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers; Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice; "Airborne" units can't be charged by non-FLY units, but can be Heroically Intervened into, piled into, or consolidated into just fine by non-FLY units; Wave Serpents cannot be legally charged at by any model with a standard base; Slab Shields, along with the 'Take Cover!' stratagem no longer have any effect; and vehicles that are "slain" by a special effect do not trigger the "Explodes" ability.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. 
   
Made in ca
Wicked Canoptek Wraith





 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
For those of us who spent ages building sets of Big Gunz, cause the metal ones were stupidly expensive, what are we to do?

I've got 15 kannons that I made as the core part of my all Grot army.
Count-as Smasha Gunz.


Mek Gunz are much bigger than Big Gunz.

Girl Gamers are the best! 
   
Made in us
Swift Swooping Hawk





USA

 Eldarsif wrote:

So perhaps the question should be: Do you enjoy kitbashing/converting models or are you doing so more for special gains than anything else?


WEll my answer to this is easy. It is because of certain lore or certain model designs that I cherish.

In 8th edition I have played with my 3 Eldar Exodite Scout Walkers. [ this was a Citadel Journal article creation, Datafaxes, Mail-Order PART number, history, pictures, etc]

Basically it was a lighter faster War Walker with a holo field and ONLY 1 gun. My choice of rules is to use a Vyper as the stand in rule. It still has an extra set of guns...but it has weaker armor and more speed. The fly word doesn't really fit.

My friends told me just to USE the WAR WALKER stats and costs. Well I am against this for a few reasons. The model ONLY has one gun....perhaps it can shoot twice as fast could be a reason. Then again where is the holo field or the faster movement and the lighter armor...and the LOWER point cost.

I loved the VDR rules they made sense to players that did not try to break it as you suggest in the 2nd question. Due to those players.....guys like me have found many of our conversion/Mail-Order kit bashes are no longer playable.

I have at least a handful of models from the past that fit this 'unplayable' state. Mind you these are GW Marketed, GW sold, GW Labeled units.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/13 05:16:38


 koooaei wrote:
We are rolling so many dice to have less time to realise that there is not much else to the game other than rolling so many dice.
 
   
Made in gb
Using Inks and Washes




U.k

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Andykp wrote:
Why get annoyed about something that hasn’t happened yet? Saying they have removed units and options is “currently” untrue. Events with their own rules is one thing, but officially index units ARE legal. Index options ARE legal. This is just moaning for he sake of it. Even IF they invalidate old models there’s nothing to stop you using them in friendly games and if your friends won’t let you then that says more about your friends than GW. It’s a non issue. Stop making it sound like you have been hard done by when nothing has actually happened.


Because I have the ability for foresight. If I know I'll be fired at the end of the month, I will be annoyed about it and yet I will still be working till the end of the month. This isn't moaning for the sake of it, this is the classic 'If you have any misgivings about the game then you are simply moaning, regardless of evidence or good reasons and should said argument should immediately be shut down and the moaners judged because by default we should be happy and greatful with everything GW does because it is an uber special business that doesn't have to cater to its consumers'


You are moaning about units being gone, but they aren’t gone. And as leopard said, they could well get new models and rules later on. Look at calgar all pretty as a primaris now. I’m not saying GW can do no wrong, I had my entire ORK army invalidated when 3rd arrived and my good mate was less than impressed with the treatment his squats got. But they haven’t done that, they’ve written “rules” (that’s for you bacon cat thing) so you can still use everything. You expect them to keep investing time and money in updating rules for models they don’t make anymore so that other companies can make money out of them. That makes no business sense at all. As for catering to their consumers, I think the last two years have shown they have changed on that front but they aren’t going to pander to consumers every whim especially if it would discourage them from buying the products. Why buy the sexy new unit if your old one is still good to go.

. As for making your own rules up as an excuse for them not making rules for you, what’s up with it? Making rules and converting models and being creative is a huge part of the hobby and GW actively encourage it. Write campaigns with unique rules and missions and characters. I would have thought a rules obsessive like bacon cat thingy would love the chance to show off his rules writing abilities doing some homebrew stuff.

Don’t let the miserable minority in the hobby dictate how you should have your fun.

On that note, I think I’m going to build a gargant. And I’ll demand GW write rules for it because I’m the consumer and they should do what I want! (Not really, ill write my own),
   
Made in is
Furious Fire Dragon




Iceland

If you're referring to me (which I have to assume, since I was the only one you quoted), then I have no idea where I gave that impression.


I might be quoting you, but the comment was targeted to a broader audience because as I mentioned I feel there is a disconnect going on. So do not take everything say as explicitly targeted at you.

Again, it's not about power it's about actually having those options - good or bad.


I feel this is irrelevant to the kitbash question. Having options can be fun, but I feel like the arguing for kitbashing and arguing for options are two separate discussions that occasionally cross territories.

I don't have that option with my winged conversion (nor with my Baron Sathonyx conversion or anything else involving a Skyboard or Jetbike).


Technically you have, because as I mentioned you can use them as cool sergeants. It might be suboptimal, but you technically still can. Now, I agree that the loss of options for Drukhari was not fun, especially since we didn't get anything back, but my argument originally was that Orks have really no valid complaint as they've been drowning in new options compared to the few they lost. I think the only thing they could really complain about is the Mek with the KFF as that was a valid, good looking model that existed until a year ago or so. I also collect Ravenwing and you can guess about how many HQ are no longer HQ or don't even exist in any form anymore(hint: Librarian). I am just surprised they left my Sammael on Sableclaw alone as that is an old model they don't even make anymore and new players have to technically kitbash.

Could you please name a single in-game benefit I've supposedly obtained from converting my models?


The reason I asked this is because the optics make it appear you are. Whether you are or are not is irrelevant when you see people asking for special/unique rules to satiate their needs. It's why I wanted to ask a rather blunt and direct question so we could remove all doubt.

In 8th edition I have played with my 3 Eldar Exodite Scout Walkers. [ this was a Citadel Journal article creation, Datafaxes, Mail-Order PART number, history, pictures, etc]


I do agree that it sucks losing a model that existed and was in production. I have mentioned that I think it is weird and unnecessary of GW to remove the Mek with KFF as it was a good model that existed up until recently.


Craftworlds | Drukhari | Dark Angels | Necrons | Emperor's Children(30k/40k) | Tyranids | Orks | Daughters of Khaine | Blades of Khorne | Stormcast Eternals
 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I might be quoting you, but the comment was targeted to a broader audience because as I mentioned I feel there is a disconnect going on. So do not take everything say as explicitly targeted at you.


Fair enough.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I feel this is irrelevant to the kitbash question. Having options can be fun, but I feel like the arguing for kitbashing and arguing for options are two separate discussions that occasionally cross territories.


I disagree. I'd argue that it's a lot harder to make worthwhile kitbashes when you have very few options.

To go back once again to DE HQs, the lack of any mobility options basically rules out any cool conversions involving wings/jetbikes/skyboards (all of which exist within the DE range), unless you're happy with them being entirely non-functional. I suppose if someone really wanted an Archon whose Jetbike has run out of fuel, then they have that option. But for anyone else, they're basically converting with the knowledge that they'll never be abe to use their lovingly-converted model as anything more than a paperweight.

Do you really think that this never comes into play when people are deciding whether or not to bother converting something?


 Eldarsif wrote:

Technically you have, because as I mentioned you can use them as cool sergeants.


But that's not what I said.

I didn't say that I lacked the option to use them as sergeants. We've already been over that. What I said was that, unlike a terminator character, I don't have the option to use a winged model as an HQ.

Yes, I can use them as sergeants. But that's meaningless if I want to convert a model to be my army's leader.

 Eldarsif wrote:
Now, I agree that the loss of options for Drukhari was not fun, especially since we didn't get anything back


We're at least in agreement on that front.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I also collect Ravenwing and you can guess about how many HQ are no longer HQ or don't even exist in any form anymore(hint: Librarian). I am just surprised they left my Sammael on Sableclaw alone as that is an old model they don't even make anymore and new players have to technically kitbash.


To be honest, this highlights another thing I dislike - the inconsistency of how the 'no model, no rules' policy is applied. Some factions have lost options left, right and centre, and yet on the other hand we have Grey Knights being given a unit that never existed and is only possible via kitbashing.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine






I'm not sure why you're in this thread being argumentative with Ork players Eldarsif.

Ork players aren't drowning in options and we lost more than we gained from index to codex. Including the new models.

Removing a fluffy HQ or Elite on bike and replacing it with a buggy is not an equivalent exchange.

Consider my army that has always been fluffy Evil Sunz speed freaks. According to GW Evil Sunz typically field large numbers of bikes led by various characters that are also mounted. If a boy can afford to purchase a bike, a Painboy and certainly a Big Mek would too. Now I am unable to take both of these options outside of index and my issue is that I don't understand why.

It is thematic and fluffy for an Evil Sunz army, contrary to the popular competitive Ork lists at the moment, to be fully mechanised. It is fluffy for Big Meks, who are responsible for maintaining Ork vehicles, to have a ride of their own (probably second in performance only to the boss' ride). Painboys can often also be addicted to speed and get a bike. The primary reason I believe that particular option was removed is because Kromlech launched a beautiful model for which GW had no equivalent.

Outside of bike characters, I can't for the life of me explain (in a fluff sense) why a warboss would ever use Meganobz but wouldn't take mega armour himself? Given the fluff it makes no sense.

Dark Eldar players should be more sympathetic than most, I don't think it's right that their flying/board HQs were removed, particularly if it fits with the fluff.
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




 vipoid wrote:
 Eldarsif wrote:

I might be quoting you, but the comment was targeted to a broader audience because as I mentioned I feel there is a disconnect going on. So do not take everything say as explicitly targeted at you.


Fair enough.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I feel this is irrelevant to the kitbash question. Having options can be fun, but I feel like the arguing for kitbashing and arguing for options are two separate discussions that occasionally cross territories.


I disagree. I'd argue that it's a lot harder to make worthwhile kitbashes when you have very few options.



If you kitbash with a completely codex-standard target in mind then it will be playable for the foreseeable future. I have a whole Kroot themed army with Kroot battlesuits, tanks and all sorts. When kitbashing those I had the standard Tau units in mind for rules purposes so my various Kroot kitbashes are Crisis/Broadside/Ghostkeel/Riptide battlesuits in the rules and should be pretty easy to identify as such by my opponents (they all have at least 50% donor parts from the model they are standing in as). Those models will be playable as-is for a long time, probably for the rest of my life. They may be horribly sub-optimal in some future version of the game/codex (as some were especially in the Index period of 8th) but they will be playable.

With a whole codex to aim at i have a vast set of options. That is true for most codexes - although obviously if you target one of the smaller codexes with only a few similar units it is less true.

I do not feel the need to add options onto *rules* that do not exist. There is no need for me to be able to add Fly to a Broadside battlesuit just because I can attach a huge pair of jetpacks to it - if I do that then I am on my way to building a different battlesuit entirely, perhaps a Ghostkeel? While it might be fun on the kitchen table to have those sorts of options having them more widely available would inevitably lead to modelling for rules advantage problems in the competitive game, a Broadside with Fly loses one of its few disadvantages so how would you correctly points-cost the option? It only takes one option with an application that the designer did not anticipate for it to suddenly be all over the tournament scene like a pox.

If I kitbash something that is only an option in the index then it may or may not have a shorter play lifespan. Could just be a couple of years if they deprecate and eventually remove the indexes. Maybe. The thing is that nobody really knows so if I do that sort of kitbash it is a risk I am taking.

I already got left high and dry with my Eldar Corsairs kitbashes so I have decided in future to aim my green-stuff modelling at current codex rules so that I will get a lot of years play out of the results. That is just because once I put all that effort into a model I want to show it off for more than a few months!
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Andykp wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Andykp wrote:
Why get annoyed about something that hasn’t happened yet? Saying they have removed units and options is “currently” untrue. Events with their own rules is one thing, but officially index units ARE legal. Index options ARE legal. This is just moaning for he sake of it. Even IF they invalidate old models there’s nothing to stop you using them in friendly games and if your friends won’t let you then that says more about your friends than GW. It’s a non issue. Stop making it sound like you have been hard done by when nothing has actually happened.


Because I have the ability for foresight. If I know I'll be fired at the end of the month, I will be annoyed about it and yet I will still be working till the end of the month. This isn't moaning for the sake of it, this is the classic 'If you have any misgivings about the game then you are simply moaning, regardless of evidence or good reasons and should said argument should immediately be shut down and the moaners judged because by default we should be happy and greatful with everything GW does because it is an uber special business that doesn't have to cater to its consumers'


You are moaning about units being gone, but they aren’t gone. And as leopard said, they could well get new models and rules later on. Look at calgar all pretty as a primaris now. I’m not saying GW can do no wrong, I had my entire ORK army invalidated when 3rd arrived and my good mate was less than impressed with the treatment his squats got. But they haven’t done that, they’ve written “rules” (that’s for you bacon cat thing) so you can still use everything. You expect them to keep investing time and money in updating rules for models they don’t make anymore so that other companies can make money out of them. That makes no business sense at all. As for catering to their consumers, I think the last two years have shown they have changed on that front but they aren’t going to pander to consumers every whim especially if it would discourage them from buying the products. Why buy the sexy new unit if your old one is still good to go.

. As for making your own rules up as an excuse for them not making rules for you, what’s up with it? Making rules and converting models and being creative is a huge part of the hobby and GW actively encourage it. Write campaigns with unique rules and missions and characters. I would have thought a rules obsessive like bacon cat thingy would love the chance to show off his rules writing abilities doing some homebrew stuff.

Don’t let the miserable minority in the hobby dictate how you should have your fun.

On that note, I think I’m going to build a gargant. And I’ll demand GW write rules for it because I’m the consumer and they should do what I want! (Not really, ill write my own),


"On that note, I think I’m going to build a gargant. And I’ll demand GW write rules for it because I’m the consumer and they should do what I want! (Not really, ill write my own)" - Again you are just ignoring the actual argument because you've been caught out arguing for the sake of arguing, so all you have are straw man arguments.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/13 12:58:40


 
   
Made in gb
Using Inks and Washes




U.k

No not really. Read the rest of my post. I explain why I think you are moaning and I’ll spell it out her again.
1. You are complaining that units have lost options - they have not. Index options are legal.
2. You are complaining that factions have lost units - they have not, they are still legal to use.
3 you are demanding that GW continue to spend time and money updating rules for models they no longer make, which would a) discourage people buying newer models and b) prop up third party companies cashing in on their IP. U are criticising a company for not shooting its self in the foot.
4. You are basing all your moaning on the fact that you b believe these units won’t be legal soon. Ignoring that they may be replaced with better versions with new rules. (Look at the warboss on the trike).
5. U are arguing that you cannot use your creativity to enjoy a wargaming hobby by saying you couldn’t even ask people to use home made rules/models. that’s just daft.

See not a straw man in sight. I do intend to build a gargant but the bit about the rules was just me being flippant to demonstrate how silly yours and others position was. Not arguing for the sake of it, arguing because I believe you are wrong and misrepresenting the facts.
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Andykp wrote:
No not really. Read the rest of my post. I explain why I think you are moaning and I’ll spell it out her again.
1. You are complaining that units have lost options - they have not. Index options are legal.
2. You are complaining that factions have lost units - they have not, they are still legal to use.
3 you are demanding that GW continue to spend time and money updating rules for models they no longer make, which would a) discourage people buying newer models and b) prop up third party companies cashing in on their IP. U are criticising a company for not shooting its self in the foot.
4. You are basing all your moaning on the fact that you b believe these units won’t be legal soon. Ignoring that they may be replaced with better versions with new rules. (Look at the warboss on the trike).
5. U are arguing that you cannot use your creativity to enjoy a wargaming hobby by saying you couldn’t even ask people to use home made rules/models. that’s just daft.

See not a straw man in sight. I do intend to build a gargant but the bit about the rules was just me being flippant to demonstrate how silly yours and others position was. Not arguing for the sake of it, arguing because I believe you are wrong and misrepresenting the facts.


Yeah and they all rest upon you trying to suggest that you cannot worry about something that is going to happen lol

point 3 is also just wrong, they still sell the models that have no rules, so yeah we should expect them to make new rules for them and no one is demanding them of anything.

Point 4 is just laughable, I don't even have to rebuke that; as is point 5.

You are the silly one, you are acting like a clown with the points you have made. 'We can do whatever we want, because we have that special thing called imagination, therefore there are no issues with 40k.
You don't like that Burna Boyz only have D3 hits, why not make them 100 hits, because we have the imagination to do so' lol Suggesting that we demand that GW make rules for models that don't exist, rather than models that have existed and have models is a strawman.

This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2019/01/13 14:27:32


 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

happy_inquisitor wrote:

If you kitbash with a completely codex-standard target in mind then it will be playable for the foreseeable future.


But that's the whole point.

If my codex has very few options, then I'm stuck between kitbashes that are little more than weaponswaps, or else making elaborate conversions that will never see play.


happy_inquisitor wrote:
I have a whole Kroot themed army with Kroot battlesuits, tanks and all sorts. When kitbashing those I had the standard Tau units in mind for rules purposes so my various Kroot kitbashes are Crisis/Broadside/Ghostkeel/Riptide battlesuits in the rules and should be pretty easy to identify as such by my opponents (they all have at least 50% donor parts from the model they are standing in as). Those models will be playable as-is for a long time, probably for the rest of my life. They may be horribly sub-optimal in some future version of the game/codex (as some were especially in the Index period of 8th) but they will be playable.


I'm pleased that you're able to do that.


happy_inquisitor wrote:

With a whole codex to aim at i have a vast set of options.


With a whole codex to aim at, I *still* don't have a vast set of options.

Shall I run you through the options my HQs can take?

Spoiler:
Archon
- 4 Swords
- 2 Pistols (or a Blaster if you use the Index)

Succubus
- 5 melee weapons (some of which require both hands)
- 2 Pistols

Haemonculus
- 8 melee weapons (most of them useless)
- 3 Ranged weapons


TLR None of my HQs have even a single option that isn't just a weapon. And even the weapons are laid out in the most boring manner possible, such that I can't even run a 'gunslinger' Archon with 2 pistols anymore (however uncompetitive that might have been).

happy_inquisitor wrote:

I do not feel the need to add options onto *rules* that do not exist.


Nope, you're right. It's far more fun to have basically no options whatsoever. Because why would I want the leader of my army to be remotely interesting or fun?

happy_inquisitor wrote:

I already got left high and dry with my Eldar Corsairs kitbashes


You and me both.

happy_inquisitor wrote:
so I have decided in future to aim my green-stuff modelling at current codex rules so that I will get a lot of years play out of the results.


Perhaps I should do the same. How could I possibly resist the thrill of exchanging one my my Archon's arms for a slightly different arm. The possibilities are just endless!

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Using Inks and Washes




U.k

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Andykp wrote:
No not really. Read the rest of my post. I explain why I think you are moaning and I’ll spell it out her again.
1. You are complaining that units have lost options - they have not. Index options are legal.
2. You are complaining that factions have lost units - they have not, they are still legal to use.
3 you are demanding that GW continue to spend time and money updating rules for models they no longer make, which would a) discourage people buying newer models and b) prop up third party companies cashing in on their IP. U are criticising a company for not shooting its self in the foot.
4. You are basing all your moaning on the fact that you b believe these units won’t be legal soon. Ignoring that they may be replaced with better versions with new rules. (Look at the warboss on the trike).
5. U are arguing that you cannot use your creativity to enjoy a wargaming hobby by saying you couldn’t even ask people to use home made rules/models. that’s just daft.

See not a straw man in sight. I do intend to build a gargant but the bit about the rules was just me being flippant to demonstrate how silly yours and others position was. Not arguing for the sake of it, arguing because I believe you are wrong and misrepresenting the facts.


Yeah and they all rest upon you trying to suggest that you cannot worry about something that is going to happen lol

point 3 is also just wrong, they still sell the models that have no rules, so yeah we should expect them to make new rules for them and no one is demanding them of anything.

Point 4 is just laughable, I don't even have to rebuke that; as is point 5.

You are the silly one, you are acting like a clown with the points you have made. 'We can do whatever we want, because we have that special thing called imagination, therefore there are no issues with 40k.
You don't like that Burna Boyz only have D3 hits, why not make them 100 hits, because we have the imagination to do so' lol Suggesting that we demand that GW make rules for models that don't exist, rather than models that have existed and have models is a strawman.



Have gamesworkshop stated that index rules are going to scrapped anytime soon? I haven’t heard anything but am happy to be shown the statement where they say this. If they haven’t then all your moaning is based on speculation.

Point 4 is about the fact that they haven’t made a warboss on a bike model ever, the rules were there. Forgeworld did one. Now instead you have the wartrike filling the same role and having a subtle nod to the nobbikes of the good old days (first edition). New rules and pretty new model. Who is to say that warboss in mega armour or big mek on a bike of some sort isn’t in the offing. Also the old forgeworld model and your own conversions are still legal.

So even with out imagination you can still use a warboss on a bike. Or mega armour. So what are you so upset about? The prospect that you might not be able to? In the future? Maybe? That’s where imagination and creativity come in then. If you can’t use something and you want to then you can make up rules. I have done just that for my boar boyz. Much prefer that to counts as. Would I prefer GW to write the rules, maybe, they are better at it than me.

What models do they sell that have no rules?

As for burna boyz I might try some house rules for them but it wouldn’t be to make them super amazing, it would be a collaborative thing with my friends, as it should be. But I’m quite happy to use them as they are too.

You and others on here are saying that you can’t use this model or that option and it isn’t true today. So think me a clown if you like mate, I’m happy to stand behind my arguments and happy to play my index units, and as long as my opponent is happy to use our house rules then I will have squats and boar boyz and all sorts of lovely things on the table. Now I’m going to look for models on the gw site that don’t have rules, I’m intrigued to see what they are.


This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/13 17:36:58


 
   
Made in is
Furious Fire Dragon




Iceland

I'm not sure why you're in this thread being argumentative with Ork players Eldarsif.


Original input was someone bemoaning their loss as the only real loss. I added a cheeky comment that Drukhari would like to have a word with that individual in Commoragh. That in turn stated that Drukhari hadn't really lost much which of course meant the discussion had to evolve/devolve(depending on your stance and disposition in the discussion).

When I said Orks have been overall receiving more than losing I am talking about several editions. GW have overall rewarded Ork players more with new kits compared to most other factions. I mean, compare 37 results(on the GW website) of the Drukhari to the 58 of Orks. That's a 21 entry difference between Orks and Drukhari.

Now, if there ever was a part I might be argumentative it is that some people in the discussion(overall, not necessarily targeting anyone here) is the implication that kitbashing is only worthwhile if the unit is special or not. I feel like it cheapens the act of kitbashing, especially for those who go to great lengths to make very unimportant(and often bad) units both unique and beautiful. It is one of the reasons I like the idea of models being more 1-to-1 to their unit profile, as it allows for more options regarding kitbashing without worrying that you are breaking some WYSIWYG rule. That is however a personal preference.

Finally, index units still exist as far as I know. I am using index units for my Craftworld and Dark Angels and so far the phasing out of Index should - and probably will - only affect tournament goers when that happens. I feel like people need to accept the fact that modern GW is focusing a little bit more on tournaments than before as that is bringing in revenues through presence and indirect advertisement. There Orks have a leg up on Drukhari as Drukhari's unit losses were huge between 7th edition and 8th edition so we never had an index entry for many of the things we lost compared to Orks. Orks at least have the option even if it is Index only, Drukhari much less so.

Dark Eldar players should be more sympathetic


Surprisingly enough I do sympathize, but mostly with case where there existed a perfectly good model that was then phased out along with unit rules. Everything else is, and always will be, a certain risk as it enters the arena where copyright and third party are at play and gets removed one way or another throughout the editions. Perhaps the more appropriate term would be that I am jaded. Ever since 2nd edition I have seen models and such phased out due to availability/legal ramifications and I at this point expect it to be a part of the game.

To be honest, this highlights another thing I dislike - the inconsistency of how the 'no model, no rules' policy is applied. Some factions have lost options left, right and centre, and yet on the other hand we have Grey Knights being given a unit that never existed and is only possible via kitbashing.


I agree there. The haphazard way they approach their "no model, no rule" is very inconsistent. I definitely agree that if they are to enforce it it should be all or nothing.


Craftworlds | Drukhari | Dark Angels | Necrons | Emperor's Children(30k/40k) | Tyranids | Orks | Daughters of Khaine | Blades of Khorne | Stormcast Eternals
 
   
Made in it
Ichor-Dripping Talos Monstrosity




Italy

 Eldarsif wrote:


When I said Orks have been overall receiving more than losing I am talking about several editions. GW have overall rewarded Ork players more with new kits compared to most other factions. I mean, compare 37 results(on the GW website) of the Drukhari to the 58 of Orks. That's a 21 entry difference between Orks and Drukhari.



Blame GW politics about expanded factions for that. They don't see drukhari as a faction anymore, they see the aeldari one. With CWE, harlequins and the new ynnari models.

The point is that someone who used to play dark eldar in 3rd-5th edition did lose several units but also gained tons of new stuff, just available from different books and 100% legal. So just like an ork player did get the chance to expand his army with the 2014-2018 releases at the same time even the dark eldar player got the same possibility, and actually he gained even more options overall. Not by adding new kits (barring the ynnari guys) but adding already existing kits that weren't part of the faction before.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, I despise soups, but that's how GW see 40k since 5 years at least.

Orks 9000
Space Wolves 6500
Drukhari 4500 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




 vipoid wrote:
happy_inquisitor wrote:

If you kitbash with a completely codex-standard target in mind then it will be playable for the foreseeable future.


But that's the whole point.

If my codex has very few options, then I'm stuck between kitbashes that are little more than weaponswaps, or else making elaborate conversions that will never see play.


Seems to me that is just a limitation you place on yourself. My conversions are pretty elaborate and see regular play. They had no issue with them at Warhammer World, although they did ask me to do a reference sheet for opponents so I mocked up something in Ordo Xenos style. Those conversions all end up with codex-standard rules and equipment, although for the most part they start out as a bunch of very different stuff in my bits box.

 vipoid wrote:

happy_inquisitor wrote:
I have a whole Kroot themed army with Kroot battlesuits, tanks and all sorts. When kitbashing those I had the standard Tau units in mind for rules purposes so my various Kroot kitbashes are Crisis/Broadside/Ghostkeel/Riptide battlesuits in the rules and should be pretty easy to identify as such by my opponents (they all have at least 50% donor parts from the model they are standing in as). Those models will be playable as-is for a long time, probably for the rest of my life. They may be horribly sub-optimal in some future version of the game/codex (as some were especially in the Index period of 8th) but they will be playable.


I'm pleased that you're able to do that.


happy_inquisitor wrote:

With a whole codex to aim at i have a vast set of options.


With a whole codex to aim at, I *still* don't have a vast set of options.

Shall I run you through the options my HQs can take?

Spoiler:
Archon
- 4 Swords
- 2 Pistols (or a Blaster if you use the Index)

Succubus
- 5 melee weapons (some of which require both hands)
- 2 Pistols

Haemonculus
- 8 melee weapons (most of them useless)
- 3 Ranged weapons


TLR None of my HQs have even a single option that isn't just a weapon. And even the weapons are laid out in the most boring manner possible, such that I can't even run a 'gunslinger' Archon with 2 pistols anymore (however uncompetitive that might have been).



Not a single unique item/relic available in the whole codex? My son plays DE and I am pretty sure there are quite a few.


Also he just uses all sorts of different models as a base so that one Archon does not have to look like another. He sticks to pointy-eared jerks because he likes them but if he pulls in the odd fantasy mini and kitbashes it up for 40K that is par for the course.

If you are modelling for the long term then considerations like a weapons being "useless" are short term at best as they rarely last over editions. They are probably not actually useless, just not completely optimal. But then you keep saying that the power of the resulting model is not an issue for you just that is it playable, do you mean that or are you just saying it while really hoping for super-optimal builds out of this?

 vipoid wrote:


happy_inquisitor wrote:

I do not feel the need to add options onto *rules* that do not exist.


Nope, you're right. It's far more fun to have basically no options whatsoever. Because why would I want the leader of my army to be remotely interesting or fun?


I am not sure I see your point here. Are you saying that none of the HQ choice in your chosen codex are remotely interesting or fun? If so why are you choosing to play that codex?

You are genuinely confusing me here.

Pick a unit that is fun to play, find an interesting and fun way to model it. Fun all round.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: