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.

Frazzled wrote:
Thats a misnomer. there is no requirement that they have round bases.

I agree. I can't think of a 40k rule that models must have round bases.

However, the OP was asking about using 40k Orks for Fantasy. I'm not aware if there is a rule mandating the use of square bases in WHFB (Just starting up my fantasy army - haven't even played my first game yet, so I'm not intimately familiar with the rules), but I imagine that circular bases would be a pain to rank up and all that.

Woops, my bad.

For 40K to WFB there are manufacturers already that have trays for round bases-plus you can make your own.

I'd proffer it'd be easier to have WFB standins to 40K though.

Zoot wrote:Just as the title says I was wondering if this'd be legal, of course the orks couldn't use their sluggas in a fantasy game and need to be based

I’m assuming you are new to miniature gaming and this hobby in particular. So, some friendly advice…It would look stupid. It would look like exactly what it is, a cheap and cheesy way to get two armies out of one. Is there a law against it? No. And there are no GW police to stop you. But, this is a miniatures game, that's why people spend lots of money and lots of time acquiring and painting models and terrain. Your opponents are not going to appreciate an entire “counts as” army.

Gobbla wrote:

Zoot wrote:Just as the title says I was wondering if this'd be legal, of course the orks couldn't use their sluggas in a fantasy game and need to be based

I’m assuming you are new to miniature gaming and this hobby in particular. So, some friendly advice…It would look stupid. It would look like exactly what it is, a cheap and cheesy way to get two armies out of one. Is there a law against it? No. And there are no GW police to stop you. But, this is a miniatures game, that's why people spend lots of money and lots of time acquiring and painting models and terrain. Your opponents are not going to appreciate an entire “counts as” army.

Woah, that is quite harsh. If he wants to do a Snakebite army then using Fantasy models is what he should do. If he wants to make it so that the models he bought can be used in both he can. There isn't anything wrong with that. As this thread shows, the solutions to some probelms that would arise are complex (I.E. What to do for sluggas?) however, it is ultimatly a players choice. No one has problems with using Marines for Chaos Marines, this to me is the same thing. It does have the added bonus that if he wanted to put in the time and effort he could make them usable in both games.

The guys asked, I answered. I'm not being harsh. I am being honest. He did not say he want to do a Snakebite army (where are the rules for that in either game, btw?). Yes, he can do anything he wants, that's already been established. Is it "illegal?" Well, it won’t fly in tournaments, some game stores would frown on it (especially Battle Bunkers and GW stores), and many players would not like it. And, it won’t look good. That’s all.

BTW, I’ve not seen CSM replaced by regular marines (that would also look crappy). And, using like figs with identical stats from the same game is not the same as using ‘Arrer Boys as Slugga Boys (or Shoota Boys?), nor using Slugga Boys as Big’uns (or ‘Arrer Boys or Savage Orc Boys or just Boyz?). It hurts my head to think about it.

Well, it won’t fly in tournaments,

You have obviously never seen some of the armies used in tourneys.

(especially Battle Bunkers and GW stores

Don't know about any BB's, but the GW stores near me wouldn't mind it.

Sorry you think it is 'cheap' and 'stupid'; good thing peoples enjoyment of the game does not hinge on your opinion, no matter how much 'friendly advice' you give.

Gobbla wrote:The guys asked, I answered. I'm not being harsh. I am being honest. He did not say he want to do a Snakebite army (where are the rules for that in either game, btw?). Yes, he can do anything he wants, that's already been established. Is it "illegal?" Well, it won’t fly in tournaments, some game stores would frown on it (especially Battle Bunkers and GW stores), and many players would not like it. And, it won’t look good. That’s all

Snakebites are the feral orks of 40k. They prefer the "old ways" to technology. There are found in the Ork dex. True, it is just a fluffy thing, like Deathskullz, KoS or Goffs, but they are there none the less. Also, to make them truly look like Snakebites should, you need to use alot of fantasy stuff...and it is NOT frowned upon. In fact, an Ork army with alot of WHFB conversions thrown in will usually score alot higher in the painting department than one that is just boring, unconverted 40k models.

coredump wrote:

Well, it won’t fly in tournaments,

You have obviously never seen some of the armies used in tourneys.

(especially Battle Bunkers and GW stores

Don't know about any BB's, but the GW stores near me wouldn't mind it.

Sorry you think it is 'cheap' and 'stupid'; good thing peoples enjoyment of the game does not hinge on your opinion, no matter how much 'friendly advice' you give.

Yeah, I've seen mini's without arms and heads in tourneys. I was thinking of something like a GT, where appearance matters. Why not tell the guy he can use pieces of paper with hand written labels? You can dumb this down as much as you want. I don’t see how that serves the guy’s best interests.

Why encourage someone to do something that is not going to look good, is not going to work well, and is not very respectful of the hobby or his fellow players. And, when he goes to sell the army, he will get bottom dollar, or have to give it away.

Alerian wrote:

Gobbla wrote:The guys asked, I answered. I'm not being harsh. I am being honest. He did not say he want to do a Snakebite army (where are the rules for that in either game, btw?). Yes, he can do anything he wants, that's already been established. Is it "illegal?" Well, it won’t fly in tournaments, some game stores would frown on it (especially Battle Bunkers and GW stores), and many players would not like it. And, it won’t look good. That’s all

Snakebites are the feral orks of 40k. They prefer the "old ways" to technology. There are found in the Ork dex. True, it is just a fluffy thing, like Deathskullz, KoS or Goffs, but they are there none the less. Also, to make them truly look like Snakebites should, you need to use alot of fantasy stuff...and it is NOT frowned upon. In fact, an Ork army with alot of WHFB conversions thrown in will usually score alot higher in the painting department than one that is just boring, unconverted 40k models.

I played Snakebites in the Waagh Orks/'Er We Go days, I'm familiar with all the Clans. I've got some Orc bits in my current Ork army, but none of it “counts as.” Besides, the new 40K figs are so much better. And, yes, there is now no Snakebites army in 40K, nor is there a Sluggas and Shootas army in WFB. The proposal is NOT to make a cool looking 40K Feral Ork army. I’d love to see that in the Painting & Modeling forum. He wants to know if he can use the same figs in both 40K and Fantasy. He wants to know if he can use Orcs with bows and arrows in 40K, or Orks with sluggas and shootas in WFB. And, the answer is he can do anything he wants. Some tournaments would not allow it, some clubs would not allow it, some stores would not allow it, some groups would not allow it, and many players would avoid playing it. And, it will look terrible. He asked, I answered.

Yeah, I've seen mini's without arms and heads in tourneys. I was thinking of something like a GT, where appearance matters. Why not tell the guy he can use pieces of paper with hand written labels? You can dumb this down as much as you want. I don’t see how that serves the guy’s best interests.

That is not at all what I was referring to, but nice attempt at a straw man....

I have seen all sorts of 'counts as' armies, and if done well, they are very cool. And if done poorly, they suck.
Then again, I have seen a lot of 'straight out of the box' armies, and if done well are very cool, and if done poorly, they suck.

Don't know why you are harshing on using orc and Orks.... I saw a really cool Nid army using mostly fantasy models. (I think skinks? and lizardmen?) It looked good.

I play with some pretty serious tourney players, and they would think it was pretty cool... assuming it was done well.

As for "some tourneys", sure.... but some tourneys will only let you play Dark Angels if they are painted the right color...... Doesn't mean that is the standard....

I honestly wouldn't have a problem with it in a friendly game as long as I knew what was what and you had movement trays for Fantasy. However, if it was a more competitive setting, I would like the 40k Orks to have actual sluggas and look like 40k Orks, and the Fantasy orcs to look like Fantasy Orcs.

coredump wrote:

Yeah, I've seen mini's without arms and heads in tourneys. I was thinking of something like a GT, where appearance matters. Why not tell the guy he can use pieces of paper with hand written labels? You can dumb this down as much as you want. I don’t see how that serves the guy’s best interests.

That is not at all what I was referring to, but nice attempt at a straw man....

I have seen all sorts of 'counts as' armies, and if done well, they are very cool. And if done poorly, they suck.
Then again, I have seen a lot of 'straight out of the box' armies, and if done well are very cool, and if done poorly, they suck.

Don't know why you are harshing on using orc and Orks.... I saw a really cool Nid army using mostly fantasy models. (I think skinks? and lizardmen?) It looked good.

I play with some pretty serious tourney players, and they would think it was pretty cool... assuming it was done well.

As for "some tourneys", sure.... but some tourneys will only let you play Dark Angels if they are painted the right color...... Doesn't mean that is the standard....

I'm not against innovation. I had a real nice looking Tomb Kings army themed on Universal horror monsters that drew very heavily from my Vampire Counts army. Saved money (actually, I probably spent more on conversions), everything painted and converted, looked good, and other local players stole some of my ideas. I say again, that is not what this fellow is asking. He wants to substitute the same figs he uses for 40K into Fantasy, and vice-versa. The theme is too cheap to buy two armies. That is to going to be "done well." Why are you guys defending this?

He asked the EXACT same question on the WFB forum. I raised the usual objections. He has gotten a cool reception there.

No, he does not need my OK, I am not the arbitrator of good gaming taste, and there is no rule that says he can’t do it because that is unenforceable. But, this is a free forum; I’m giving my opinion. If asked, I’m not going to say a lousy idea is a good idea.