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.

Well, Strormraven is just a horribly designed model. Roof turret just looks silly, but the hurricane bolters actually shoot at the antigrav units. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with punishing player for the model designer's mistakes.

I would prefer if shooting rules were more abstact. It seems silly that flyer is locked in place and even sillier that how you mount your model would affect its fire archs.

Skimmers come with different height bases and some even with a ball joint that lets to adjust their angle. So how do people feel about those?

sudojoe wrote:
P313 - I can fill in spaces I don't like with green stuff and mount some accessories "on a variety of places"

Bottom of P 312 - "so you can manipulate the components to get the perfect position as it dries. Once you're happy, support the miniature as it sets by holding the parts firmly in place."

P322 - all about conversions.

There you go, permissive.

What, in the section entitled "THE HOBBY", which is after the section entitled "THE RULES"?

Hint: one of them is rules, one of them isnt.

Horst wrote:

Happyjew wrote:I love how people automatically assume, that just because someone argues strict RAW in a forum where you discuss strict RAW (unless you specify that you are talking HYWPI), the people actually play this way in real life AND are WAAC players. If I were to refuse to let you move a pawn backwards in chess, would that make me a WAAC player?

As sudojoe has pointed out, the rules clearly allow me to position my models any way I want on their bases.

They are enforcing rules that don't exist. That makes them WAAC power gamers.

Nope, the rules DONT allow you to position the models as you like. So, again, you ARE cheating if you convert models.

Oh, and you strawmanned. One of the litmus tests for a poor argument in a rules forum where people, you know, talk about rules. Please start to understand the difference between talkng in a forum dedicated to talking abou rules and an actual game.

I suspect GW would not print a big section of advice on how to cheat in their books.

It isnt "how" to cheat, it is simply that this is a game made up of 2 parts - playing the game and the hobby.

the game has rules, the hobby doesnt. When playing the game, playing use the rules, which do not allow conversions and do not allow modelling for advantage, is generally a good way to go.

What, in the section entitled "THE HOBBY", which is after the section entitled "THE RULES"?

Hint: one of them is rules, one of them isnt.

Technically there aren't any "Rules" in the rules section on how to assemble your models at all either. Permissive rule set? If you do find a specific spot in the "Rules" Section, please point it out to me as I do not see it. The closest this is mentioned is in the line of sight page 8.

Horst wrote:

Happyjew wrote:I love how people automatically assume, that just because someone argues strict RAW in a forum where you discuss strict RAW (unless you specify that you are talking HYWPI), the people actually play this way in real life AND are WAAC players. If I were to refuse to let you move a pawn backwards in chess, would that make me a WAAC player?

As sudojoe has pointed out, the rules clearly allow me to position my models any way I want on their bases.

They are enforcing rules that don't exist. That makes them WAAC power gamers.

But they do not allow you to alter the bases dimensions to do so.

That is the MFA point here. You have physically changed the base to allow your guns to fire at closer targets. On Page 321: "When you assemble your models, you'll need to mount them on the base they are provided with."

Also on page 3: "The rules in this book assume that models are mounted on the base they are supplied with."

Once you physically alter that base to change its dimensions it is no longer the base that came with the model.

Also, your claim that I am a WAAC power gamer just for disagreeing with you is laughable. I play Tau. Not even standard XV88 Railgun spam Tau. I play a Farsight themed army, so one unit of XV88s (which can't even split fire any more) and one Hammerhead. That is not a WAAC power gamer army.

You aren't changing the base at all if you've actually modeled the storm raven or vendtta for tilting.

There's a cross piece that slots into the bottom of the plane as part of the fusiliage. You push the base including the stem into the cross shaped hole. Filling in parts of the hole makes an easy slant. It's not even a huge modeling fare. Just adding in <1cm of putty into the back end of the slot gives you some tilt.

The base including mounted clear plastic piece are not changed in any way or shape.

Horst wrote:

Happyjew wrote:I love how people automatically assume, that just because someone argues strict RAW in a forum where you discuss strict RAW (unless you specify that you are talking HYWPI), the people actually play this way in real life AND are WAAC players. If I were to refuse to let you move a pawn backwards in chess, would that make me a WAAC player?

As sudojoe has pointed out, the rules clearly allow me to position my models any way I want on their bases.

They are enforcing rules that don't exist. That makes them WAAC power gamers.

The rules do exist. Anything outside the rules require opponent's permission. If you did it for advantage... IE: cheating, opponents don't have to agree. If you modify your base to gain an advantage, it is not the base the model was supplied with the way the model was intended to exist.

Congrats you now have a 90$ cinematic display model not suitable for play. That is what happens if you follow 'THE HOBBY' as 'THE RULES'.

Blindspots are part of the game. Ignoring that rule makes you a rule breaker. Consciously ignoring that rule when you know it is a rule makes you a cheater.

[quote=A Town Called Malus
But they do not allow you to alter the bases dimensions to do so.

sudojoe wrote:You aren't changing the base at all if you've actually modeled the storm raven or vendtta for tilting.

There's a cross piece that slots into the bottom of the plane as part of the fusiliage. You push the base including the stem into the cross shaped hole. Filling in parts of the hole makes an easy slant. It's not even a huge modeling fare. Just adding in <1cm of putty into the back end of the slot gives you some tilt.

The base including mounted clear plastic piece are not changed in any way or shape.

find a rule allowing you to use non-citadel models in your game

Hint: once you change the model, it is no longer a Citadel miniature, but a once-citadel-now-not offsrping of one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
find a rule allowing you to use non-citadel models in your game

Hint: once you change the model, it is no longer a Citadel miniature, but a once-citadel-now-not offsrping of one.

Yeah, no. That's just sad and silly.

What if I use GW greenstuff to make the tilt?

Its still 100% GW product, ergo its a Citadel miniature.


Thats just a really bad argument Nos. I thought you were better then that.

Grey Templar wrote:What if I use GW greenstuff to make the tilt?

Its still 100% GW product, ergo its a Citadel miniature.


Thats just a really bad argument Nos. I thought you were better then that.

Where is the rule that allows you to tilt the model or model for advantage?

If it impacts gameplay you are breaking the rules and being all around rude to your opponents. And since this is a social game based upon not cheating and respecting opponents, wanting an advantage not paid for with points and not intended by the model or the rules is rude. Makes you WAAC and a poor sport.

A good sport would modify the model and not intended to gain an advantage or modify how the model interacts with the rules and then would play with the entire blindspot intact. That is a good sport and someone respectful of their opponent and how people who are into 'THE HOBBY' play the game.

If you are modifying the slant to explicitly gain an advantage and then expecting to play off the altered model, you are in the wrong.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Horst wrote:

Saying the hobby should be separate from the rules makes you a WAAC power gamer.

Saying people who follow the hobby are cheaters makes you a dick.

People who follow the hobby have no problem being good sports and playing the model AS IF the customizations the person made due to 'the hobby' are not impacting the rules... blindspot intact.

The people who modify models and then want an advantage based upon that modification are cheaters and a dick.

Here is an example:

*Player A has an oversized custom BW, Player B has a custom oversized Battlewagon.

Player A understands it is oversized... He does not try to completely block LOS to trukks which he wouldn't be able to do behind the stock BW, he doesn't extend his KFF 6" from the hull to gain a wider bubble. he plays both as if it was stock.

Player B explicitly made it oversized. He attempts to block 3 trukks totally LOS with his oversized BW instead of just giving them cover. he extends his KFF 6" from the hull to cover half the table due to his BW being so big.

Player A is a Hobbiest who respects opponents and plays within the rules and doesn't stifle his creativity.

Player B is a dick and a cheater.

A Town Called Malus wrote:
But they do not allow you to alter the bases dimensions to do so.

That is the MFA point here. You have physically changed the base to allow your guns to fire at closer targets. On Page 321: "When you assemble your models, you'll need to mount them on the base they are provided with."

Also on page 3: "The rules in this book assume that models are mounted on the base they are supplied with."

I agree with this. But you can still mount the model on the base it is provided with by moving the mounting point back half an inch toward the tail. It is still the base provided with the model and the base is un-modified. What is wrong with that?

And furthermore, GW's website shows a picture of a GK storm raven modelled with it's nose pointing down.

EDIT : spelling...*modeled

Grugknuckle wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:
But they do not allow you to alter the bases dimensions to do so.

That is the MFA point here. You have physically changed the base to allow your guns to fire at closer targets. On Page 321: "When you assemble your models, you'll need to mount them on the base they are provided with."

Also on page 3: "The rules in this book assume that models are mounted on the base they are supplied with."

I agree with this. But you can still mount the model on the base it is provided with by moving the mounting point back half an inch toward the tail. It is still the base provided with the model and the base is un-modified. What is wrong with that?

And furthermore, GW's website shows a picture of a GK storm raven modelled with it's nose pointing down.

Nothing. Many people are assuming that those who say there is no rule allowing conversions are 40k rule purists who despise every conversion, but they are simply stating that, since it is not in the rules, it is not a "right" granted by the rules. Many players will allow conversions (I am sure most who are advocating the rules stance do), depending upon what the intent of the rule is. This discussion has left the implication that someone modelling the stormraven to tilt forward some are doing it expressly for an advantage.

It boils down to this; conversions are most definitely on an opponent/TO agreement basis, so ask yourself why you are making a conversion before you do so, because some people might consider your conversion abuse of the rules or MfA.

Grey Templar - then it isnt the Citadel Mini that represents X any longer, it is the citadel mini you have altered so it is almost X but not quite.

I'm pointing out that people saying that conversions are a "grey" area are just flat out wrong. Three are no rules allowing it

Nkelsch - did Horst REALLY call everyone who plays by rules a dick? I'm guessing it got edited away....

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Nkelsch - did Horst REALLY call everyone who plays by rules a dick? I'm guessing it got edited away....

Yep. It was a quote of him.

The issue is people are highly tolerant of conversions as long as you don't attempt to gain advantages from them. Conversions are for 'show' not in-game advantage or circumventing rules like LOS and blindspots.

As someone who plays orks and has loads of conversions I am highly sensitive about not gaining unintended advantages from custom models and explicitly playing the game in a way as not to cheat my opponent. All you have to do is be aware and play by the rules and everything is fine.

nkelsch wrote:
The rules do exist. Anything outside the rules require opponent's permission. If you did it for advantage... IE: cheating, opponents don't have to agree. If you modify your base to gain an advantage, it is not the base the model was supplied with the way the model was intended to exist.

Come on man. My box of space wolves does not come with any flamers or meltaguns. If I buy those bits, or kit bash them with a tactical squad, I am modelling for advantage and I am using the models differently than they were supplied. If I am a space marine player and I want my character's power weapon to be a power axe instead of a power sword, can't I just use the bit that comes with the space wolf box? I am still using citadel miniatures. I am still following the rules in the codex and BRB for constructing my army list. But I absolutely am modelling them to get an advantage.

Now I agree with the rules you have put forward with regards to shooting through the hull (you can't) and depressing the weapon mount (22.5* down and 22.5* up). I agree that there is a blind spot. But you're making this fuss over a single assault cannon. One which is actually provided with the model and allowed by the rules. Be reasonable. Are you going to bring your protractor to your game and measure the tilt on every storm raven? What happens when that guy's model just tilts that way on accident because the glue just dried that way - are you going to ruin his day and cost him his tournament entry fee just because YOU think he's MFA?

EDIT : How much of a tilt is MFA? Greater than 5 degrees? 10?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Grey Templar - then it isnt the Citadel Mini that represents X any longer, it is the citadel mini you have altered so it is almost X but not quite.

I'm pointing out that people saying that conversions are a "grey" area are just flat out wrong. Three are no rules allowing it

Nkelsch - did Horst REALLY call everyone who plays by rules a dick? I'm guessing it got edited away....

Yes, he did, I reported that one as well and within a few seconds it was gone.

As to the topic - One tenet of tournament gaming has typically been that you gain all the disadvantages of your conversion/modification, but none of the advantages. This is to make sure that people are allowed to model things however they want, and ensure that the intent is for the "cool' factor, rather than for the in-game advantages. As Nos/others have stated, the rules are permissive, the book explicitly states you use the model with the base supplied, it doesn't give you permission to modify, so you don't have it.

Will almost anyone have an issue with your conversion? Almost certainly not, but you also shouldn't expect to gain any advantage from it. WAAC and "powergaming" are terms that relate to ingame behavior and mindset, throwing them around just to bully people into allowing you to not play by the rules is not appropriate behavior for a social hobby.

On a personal note - before the CH kit I extended my ravens, they're several inches longer, and I under-slung the top turret for "cool" factor. Before every game I tell my opponents I'll be measuring/doing LOS from the top of the model, it's only fair! Both plays are happy, my opp. knows i won't get/won't try to get an advantage, and I know I get to use my model I worked hard on/enjoy.

Well this got out of hand fast. What would you all agree the range of the "deadspot" is then? It seems like if you can't reach a concensus on MfA or not, it would be good to have a general idea of the dead spot, so you don't have to re-measure it at an angle every time.

As above.

If you're altering the way a model looks, because you find it more aesthetically pleasing - thats a good thing. I am a STRONG advocate of the rule of cool in gaming! However should you also be able to expect to get advantages because of it?

No.

Honersstodnt wrote:Well this got out of hand fast. What would you all agree the range of the "deadspot" is then? It seems like if you can't reach a concensus on MfA or not, it would be good to have a general idea of the dead spot, so you don't have to re-measure it at an angle every time.

It will depend on the height of the model you're shooting at, a kneeling guardsmen will have to be further away to be shot at, while a trygon in front of you will likely be shot at within a couple inches of your nose.

Just use your tape measurer each time to check the angle and see if you're able to "touch" (and as such see) the model you intend to shoot. You can also try the infamous laser pointer

Grugknuckle wrote:
Come on man. My box of space wolves does not come with any flamers or meltaguns. If I buy those bits, or kit bash them with a tactical squad, I am modelling for advantage and I am using the models differently than they were supplied. If I am a space marine player and I want my character's power weapon to be a power axe instead of a power sword, can't I just use the bit that comes with the space wolf box? I am still using citadel miniatures. I am still following the rules in the codex and BRB for constructing my army list. But I absolutely am modelling them to get an advantage.

EDIT : How much of a tilt is MFA? Greater than 5 degrees? 10?

@Grug, giving a unit a legal component is not MFA. You are following rules and not giving a model an advantage different than its rules and model allow. Changing fire arcs and LOS on a released model IS intentionally changing how a model interacts with other units in the game, and is outside the rules, poor sportsmanship, and fairly petty in a miniature game.

My quick two cents to those who have been saying that the BRB doesn't cover how the models should be assembled. It doesn't have to as each model comes with assembly instructions to show you exactly how the model should be put together even to the point that for most guns they tell you not to glue them in place. It also clearly shows on the storm raven kit where the flying base attaches and how it does so. At the end of the instructions it even shows how the model should look when completed.

emptyedens wrote:My quick two cents to those who have been saying that the BRB doesn't cover how the models should be assembled. It doesn't have to as each model comes with assembly instructions to show you exactly how the model should be put together even to the point that for most guns they tell you not to glue them in place. It also clearly shows on the storm raven kit where the flying base attaches and how it does so. At the end of the instructions it even shows how the model should look when completed.

I believe he has a point gents. However it will be ignored since it isnt actual rules. So the point is, if you model your dumpster with a tilt, it changes the model from the stock standard, now obviously Horst isnt going to do it so he has no blind spots, but it is a slippery slope. Maybe I'll model all my guardsman knelling, so i can hide them behind walls. OR maybe my wraithlord will be prone so he gets cover from everything. In that case, if there is even a sliver of a doubt if its MFA or not, a stock model should be used to ensure no one gets cheated.

Also, Gentlemen and Ladies, let us try to be more civil on the YMDC threads, their will be alot of different opinions, and since tone can not be conveyed in text, we should strive to not accidentally offend anyone, since no one on Dakka would offend someone on purpose right? If in doubt please refer to Rule #1.

Lobukia wrote:

Grugknuckle wrote:
Come on man. My box of space wolves does not come with any flamers or meltaguns. If I buy those bits, or kit bash them with a tactical squad, I am modelling for advantage and I am using the models differently than they were supplied. If I am a space marine player and I want my character's power weapon to be a power axe instead of a power sword, can't I just use the bit that comes with the space wolf box? I am still using citadel miniatures. I am still following the rules in the codex and BRB for constructing my army list. But I absolutely am modelling them to get an advantage.

EDIT : How much of a tilt is MFA? Greater than 5 degrees? 10?

@Grug, giving a unit a legal component is not MFA. You are following rules and not giving a model an advantage different than its rules and model allow. Changing fire arcs and LOS on a released model IS intentionally changing how a model interacts with other units in the game, and is outside the rules, poor sportsmanship, and fairly petty in a miniature game.

While I agree with you 100%, the point I was trying to make is that the "permissive rule set" doesn't give you permission to alter your models. But every space marine player I know alters their models by using bits that didn't come with their kits.

The second point I was trying to make is that there WILL be variation in the angles from model to model just because model builders are by nature not very precise. So two dudes build storm ravens and niether of them is intentionally MFA. But one of them leans backwards (nose up) 5 degrees making his assault cannon have an enormous blind spot. The other guy has his Storm raven leaning forward 5 degrees (nose down) making his blind spot much smaller. The two guys play each other. At the end of the game, the guy with the nose up storm raven says, "screw this, I'm going to nose down my SR to 5 degrees." Suddenly he's cheating?

This is foolish. I can see someone with a dramatic down angle being called on it. But can we get a ballpark number on what is acceptable and what is not?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

emptyedens wrote:My quick two cents to those who have been saying that the BRB doesn't cover how the models should be assembled. It doesn't have to as each model comes with assembly instructions to show you exactly how the model should be put together even to the point that for most guns they tell you not to glue them in place. It also clearly shows on the storm raven kit where the flying base attaches and how it does so. At the end of the instructions it even shows how the model should look when completed.

So if I use parts that are not in the kit, am I cheating? For example, meltaguns on my spess mehrines?

I honestly can't see anything good coming out of this thread.
One man's WAAC is another man's "just playing by the rules".

Well, technically if you are following the rules you can't be called a power gamer. You're just following the rules. If I use the En-passant move in chess, does that make me a power gamer?


It implies that following the rules is a bad thing. Everyone needs to follow the rules. Now you are free to modify the rules if everyone's ok with it.

My stormraven's base fits really snugly into the raven's underbelly. So I can actually pose it multiple ways without additional parts.


I think the SR should be able to shoot at targets that are in front of its hull when viewed from the top down. Its a freakking flyer thats doing strafing runs.

Grey Templar wrote:Well, technically if you are following the rules you can't be called a power gamer.

Yes you can. That's why power gamers are different from cheaters...

Ech, meant to say WAAC.

But either way. I insist on following the rules to the letter, even in a friendly game.