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.

I was just reading the adepticon rules and assume that GTs and other major tourneys have a similar rule. From the adepticon rules:

The 'What You See Is What You Get' (WYSIWYG) rule is in effect. ...any and all weapons/options taken for a unit must be clearly represented on the model(s).

Question is this, to what degree is this enforced for equipment, I mean "any and all" is pretty straightforward, but does this mean that CSMs must be modeled with bolter, bolt pistol, and CCW or the model doesn't count as having them all??? If I choose to keep the smoke launchers and/or search light off my rhino because I dont like the look of the bit, does my rhino not count as having these items??? If I take a spirit stone on my Falcon or extra armor for my rhino, do I have to glue the bits on???

thanks
-pfoh

Especially on vehicles, if it ain't on there, you don't have it. The other way around is no biggie.
As for bolt pistols for Marines and Chaos Marines, I have yet to see anyone have a problem with them not being on the models, since previous versions didn't have those rules.

don_mondo wrote:Especially on vehicles, if it ain't on there, you don't have it. The other way around is no biggie.
As for bolt pistols for Marines and Chaos Marines, I have yet to see anyone have a problem with them not being on the models, since previous versions didn't have those rules.

In regards to vehicles: Can I forgo the searchlight and say the headlights are my searchlights? Do I really need to buy extra armor bits? is this enforced?

Further, you say "I have yet to see", can I assume you mean you have yet to see in a major tourney? "I have yet to see" doesnt really give me too much comfort. where does one draw the line? just playing devils advocate here (im not one to do this), if Im playing at adepticon and a CSM/SM player sets up across from me with their marines modeled to have bolters only, I could complain, point to the rules that clearly say "any and all", and what will the judge say?? "Yeah well 'any and all' doesn't actually mean 'any and all'"??

again, im not being a dick here, Im seriously the last person to call someone out on such things, but I am trying to get a concrete answer. I mean if I say to you, "I don't see grenades on the belt of ure infantry, so they don't have them", you would say, "give me a f***ing break, they come with the infanty choice by default and if you want a "real"-world explanation, there inside of his pack." good, i would agree with this, but I would also say a person could make the same argument for smoke launchers or searchlights (espcially if they come by default)

I don't like the look of the smoke launchers and don't put them on my tanks and have NEVER gotten any crap for it and i'm a frequent tournamenter.

Conversely, I've never that many fits over vehicle upgrades. Extra Armor, Spirit Stones, Overcharged Engines, Vectored Thrust, I've never modelled or seen modelled. Searchlights and weapons should be modelled specifically.

The same is true for your troopers. If one guy has a plasma gun, he should have a plasma gun in his hand. I don't think anyone has a problem with assuming that models have the base equipment they are listed with in the codex, but any upgrades/weapons should be shown.

If there is any sort of light, you should be able to claim that it is a searchlight. Smoke launchers are standard on many Imp Vehicles these days, that should be fine as well, as would an invisible "extra armor" upgrade. Basically, anything that comes standard in the profile for the vehicle, and therefore your opponent would have no reason to believe the upgrade was *not* present, should be fair game. As a previous poster said, the judge shouldn't be able to penalize you for a modeling option that may not have existed for the original release of the model kit.

Weapon loadout, however, is pretty much non-negotiable, both on vehicles and on figures. No counts-as EMLs because you ran out of scatterlasers.

Yeah, but technically, nearly every CSM is supposed to be armed with:
- Bolter
- Bolt Pistol
- Close Combat Weapon
- Frag Grenades
- Krak Grenades

That's a lot more bitz than are provided on the CSM sprue.

So it's a valid question whether WYSIWYG really means that they're all supposed to be modeled as such.


Practically, it's reasonable to assume that WYSIWYG applies only to upgrades such as Plasma Pistols, Plasma Guns.

But TFG can require models not fully WYSIWYG to be removed from the board, which would really crimp certain armies with heavy gear loadouts...

What about things like Tyranid Toxin Sacs? How heavily is this monitored? Quite simply, most Nids end up with TS on them, but GW gives you about 6-10 for every 16 models. And since the Codex shows each model with them having one Sac on each forearm, how are you supposed to do this?

Thankfully, most players haven't a clue what Toxin Sacs look like...

I just started a SM army and was planning on putting CCW and Bolt pistols on as arms than slinging bolters over their backs.

Has anyone run into a problem with anyone complaining about that say if the configuration is just a bolter?

If you're playing SM armed with BP&CCW, rather than Bolter, that will be somewhat confusing as most basic SM cannot be armed this way.

Typically, that would be Veterans or Assault without Jump Packs, or denote BA/BT/SW rather than vanilla SM.

Ummm, yes, I meant at major tournies (20 or so US/Canadian GTs), rules judge at Games Day tournies for 5 or 6 years now, etc etc.

Personally, I'd want to see the searchlight modelled. If you're gonna use headlights, then EVERY headlight in the army needs to be a searchlight. Need bits, just go to Bartertown (www.bartertown.com) and trade for or buy them. Far cheaper than elsewhere.

Thr33ifbyair. Problem is, standard (ie Smurf codex)Marines don't come with bolter, pistol and CCW. They only come with bolter and pistol...................

So don_mondo, just out of curiosity, if I showed up at a tournament with standard Space Marines, you would rule that none of my vehicles had searchlights even though they come standard in the codex unit profile and there is no bit supplied in the kits?

If that is your position as a tournament official, could I get a Chaos player disqualified/disallowed from using Frag/Krak grenades if each model did not have them or a Tyranid player for not having enough Feeder Tendrils displayed?

Typically, if a unit comes with something standard on it's profile, who really cares if the actual model has it. Not all of my marines are modeled with grenades and pistols, but since the unit comes with it, who cares. WYSIWYG is there to avoid confusion so it really only applies to "upgrades". If I have a tactical squad with a powerfist, plasma gun, and missile launcher, those are the things I need to model, not the bolter, pistol, grenades, etc.

So for vehicles, anything bought as an upgrade should be modeled to avoid confusion but things that come with it (like searchlights, smoke launchers) etc. don't really need to be modeled.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

What about Honor Guard? Do they need to have bolters modeled? Each one comes with a standard bolter, but the metal models don't have them.

sourclams wrote:So don_mondo, just out of curiosity, if I showed up at a tournament with standard Space Marines, you would rule that none of my vehicles had searchlights even though they come standard in the codex unit profile and there is no bit supplied in the kits?

If that is your position as a tournament official, could I get a Chaos player disqualified/disallowed from using Frag/Krak grenades if each model did not have them or a Tyranid player for not having enough Feeder Tendrils displayed?

Hmmm, I can see why you're sour............ OK, same question sort of, to you. A battlecannon is standard equipment on a Leman Russ. Do you expect it to be modelled? If yes, then why not the searchlight? Where do we draw the line. Over the years, I've found searchlights often more devastating to my opponents than battlecannons.

As far as the others you have mentioned, GW has long had a standard that grenades didn't have to be modelled, and as long as the unit has enough feeder tendrils on display (we all know that GW doesn't nclude enough parts for all the models), go with it. I'll cut infantry models a lot more slack than I do vehicles, cause who doesn't have spare vehicle bits laying around? Or can't just kitbash something (I use christmas tree light holders for searchlights on my sentinels).

As for Honor Guard, I hadn't realized that the models didn't have bolters. Marines aren't something I'm currently playing, and even if I dug them out, mine are all RT-beekiez, so I'd just do some cutting and glueing to make them what they're supposed to be.

However, I've never yet been to Adepticon and doesn't look like I'll make it this year, so to the OP. Your best bet is to ask this same question of the event organizers. Get an answer instead of opinions.

For that matter, I was going to break out my old Chaos Renegades figures which are metal and came with a random mix of some with just bolters (group A) and others with bolt pistols and chainswords (group B). I had assumed that since the standard equipment was now bolter, bolt pistol and close combat weapon that I'd be able to mix the two groups together in my units.

As long as the upgrades are modeled, it should be okay, right? Because it's standard eqipment, there shouldn't be any confusion as long as you can determine the unit type, right?

don_mondo wrote:Hmmm, I can see why you're sour............ OK, same question sort of, to you. A battlecannon is standard equipment on a Leman Russ. Do you expect it to be modelled? If yes, then why not the searchlight? Where do we draw the line. Over the years, I've found searchlights often more devastating to my opponents than battlecannons.

Leman Russes can take Demolisher Cannons on the same chassis. This is why I would expect the battlecannon to be modeled; there are different loadout options for a single model base. Conversely, it is impossible to field a Space Marine Land Raider without searchlights.

But yes, it's always up to the TO.

So, what does an extra-armor bit look like? Couldn't the extra armor be internalized like it is in armored cars?

This question comes up repeatedly here in forums and the answer isn't something that can be nailed down precisely for a number of reasons. First of all, every tournament is different so you need to check the tournament rules for the tournie you're attending to make sure exactly what their rules (if any) are regarding WYSIWYG.

But more importantly, the goal of such a rule in a tournament environment is to make sure that players aren't confused or tricked by their opponent's models. In other words, you should be able to look across the table and know within reason what the models your facing are equipped with.

So the only time you're only going to even encounter this rule in a tournament is if:

1) Your models confuse your opponent to the point where he gets so frustrated he goes to complain to a judge (or vice-versa).
2) Your opponent is TFG and happens to notice that your army isn't completely WYSIWYG so he decides to complain to the judges just to ruin your day.
3) The tournament actually has judges going around checking on WYSIWYG. I've never heard of a tournament doing this so I think we can ignore this possibility.


So ignoring #3, we can see in the first two cases (especially the first case) that you aren't going to encounter an issue unless your models actually end up confusing your opponent. That means as long as you are clear when deploying your army and make an effort to make sure your opponent understands what is going on, you won't have a problem.

Consistency is really the key here. Modeling searchlights on your Black Templar vehicles where the upgrade is an [b]option[/i] is obviously much more important than modeling them in a new Space Marine army where they come standard on every vehicle. Obviously it also does not hurt to mention to your opponent when deploying your vehicles in a Space Marine army that "just so you know, all my vehicles have searchlights".

Again, it is the attitude towards keeping your opponent informed or in the dark that is going to determine whether they call a judge over on the WYSIWYG rule.


Now, you may encounter situation #2 where you're playing the type of guy who just wants to make an issue out of WYSIWYG even though he isn't confused by your models. Thankfully in my experiences TFGs are a much more common 'story' told online then they actually are in real life, so frankly I wouldn't personally design anything in my life around possible encounters with TFGs.

But even if he does complain to a judge about your army, the judge is going to come over to your table and judge whether or not you've broken the WYSIWYG rule based on the reason the rule exists: Is your army confusing your opponent?

Again, if you've made attempts to make your model's equipment clear even if the entire army isn't 100% WYSIWYG then the judge is likely to recognize that your opponent is just being TFG and let you off. So again, consistency throughout the army is key.

If you have one unit of Gaunts with Toxin Sacs and another without then, yes you better damn well have that one unit modeled with toxin sacs. But if every guant unit in your army has toxin sacs it becomes significantly less important to have those toxin sacs modeled, especially if you take the time to inform your opponent when deploying the units.


So in the end, as long as you spend the time thinking about making your opponent's game enjoyable (which includes making sure they can follow what your models are equipped with), I wouldn't worry about it.

One thing I find especially important when it comes to WYSIWYG, is the ability/willingness to put yourself inthe other players shoes.

It is not impossible that you run into opponents that exclusively play one single army.

What might seem obvious to you, might not be to your opponents. When I model my Orks, I take extra care to make vehicle upgrades and other special items painfully obvious. Upgrades on Orks have a tendency to disappear in the "sea of green" on the table. The same applies to Tyranids and CSM. Take the time to imagine that you haven't ever lifted up one of your models, let alone your army and ask yourself; "can this be confusing to my opponent?".

sourclams wrote:

don_mondo wrote:Hmmm, I can see why you're sour............ OK, same question sort of, to you. A battlecannon is standard equipment on a Leman Russ. Do you expect it to be modelled? If yes, then why not the searchlight? Where do we draw the line. Over the years, I've found searchlights often more devastating to my opponents than battlecannons.

Leman Russes can take Demolisher Cannons on the same chassis. This is why I would expect the battlecannon to be modeled; there are different loadout options for a single model base. Conversely, it is impossible to field a Space Marine Land Raider without searchlights.

But yes, it's always up to the TO.

So every single Land Raider in the game, regardless of army list, now comes standard with a searchlight?? And that's exactly my point. The vehicle chassis can have different equipment. Not all rhinos are the same (altho the difference is more by army now).
As others have already posted, bottom line generally comes down to whther or not your army is confusing to your opponent. I use some odd (old RT era stuff) models myself, so I always have to spend a few minutes explaining things before games.
I will also say this. My viewpoint on the issue changes depending on whether I'm playing or judging. As a judge, I'm more strict, if you will, while as a player, I tend to not be too concerned. As long as you know what's what, let's play.

yakface wrote:Now, you may encounter situation #2 where you're playing the type of guy who just wants to make an issue out of WYSIWYG even though he isn't confused by your models. Thankfully in my experiences TFGs are a much more common 'story' told online then they actually are in real life, so frankly I wouldn't personally design anything in my life around possible encounters with TFGs.

But even if he does complain to a judge about your army, the judge is going to come over to your table and judge whether or not you've broken the WYSIWYG rule based on the reason the rule exists: Is your army confusing your opponent?

I think so, too. You're really not likely to run into anyone who has a problem with these small technicalities... it's more of an issue of things that could be really confusing (or especially deceiving) to your opponent, and explaining anything that might possibly be (this squad of guants all have toxin sacs, it's modelled on these 3 of them to signify, but all of them have it).

If he's TFG, you're going to have a bad time playing him anyway... might not be a bad thing to skip the game after all

I run preety lose on modeling as long as my opponent has a "organized" army list I can read. I would expect in a tourny army be 90% modeled. One question for all of you, if any of you have played Daemons, They get specific gifts. and those gifts might be any thing from Death strike (modeled as a whip, brass skulls, or a sword) to soul devourer, master of sorcery, Aura of Acquiescence, or boon of mutation. How does one model an aura or that he can manipulate the warp with boon of mutation?. None of which have a bit that aids in modeling. Heck, chaos daemons dont even get thier fast attack choice seekers of slaanesh with a current model. Along with their major HQ pieces.

So..... my question is, in a tourney setting would writing on the base BM for boon of mutation be appropriate for those figs that select that gift.?? or is my army list good enough.?

If your model has BM on it's base, I'm thinking Nurgle, not Slaanesh

Mondo stop being such a WYSIWYG Nazi. If the headlights are halogen then they can obviously operate as a headlight as well.

G

Is making gestures towards WYSIWYG usually acceptable? For instance, having one man in a squad throwing a grenade to denote a grenade upgrade for the entire squad rather than sticking them on all ten?

Grenades usually aren't cared about much; having one or two guys throwing grenades is really more representation than there usually is.

Wiggles - I wouldnt model a grenade thrower for the sole purpose of representing grenades. He could be taken as a casualty, or missed among his comrades.

As was said, if it is common, basic equipment like grenades I wouldnt say you have to model it.

For friendly games, you can do it however you want, its up to you and your opponent. People here have used cardboard boxes as tanks before.

That's alright then. I'm so sick of assembling stuff right now, I couldn't face putting grenades on all those little buggers. Thanks.