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.

 Bausk wrote:
No I was saying on paper there is zero difference between a sword or axe regardless of the models potential to survive.

That's the point of MFA, it's about intent and effect not just what it says on paper. If I make a chaos pred and stick the really long gargoyle heads on the guns and add an inch on the weapons, even though I'm just modelling a piece of wargear I've made an advantage for the model. Putting an axe on a model that doesn't have the option of an axe makes a marked difference in how it plays, in this case it no longer gets bogged down in 2+ save units. Putting a sword on Dante pre-faq would have given a distinct advantage as you'd have been able to reduce the number of attacks the unit suffered in combat because more often than not, you were assaulting units with lower initiative.
Kossaro Khan with an axe would have been devastating in a squad of bikers and it actually changes.
MFA changes how models play, not how they look on paper, on paper the weapons taken in a vacuum are balanced but they play very different on different units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Backlash wrote:
It does have a wargear option though provided through the FAQ. Its the same as if the codex had said may take a power sword or ax. In essence your trying to argue the validity of the option based on the source of said option.

The FAQ doesn't give an option it just says use page 61. Which again, doesn't give the permission to convert models. Wargear options are like may take x or y, this just says look at the model. I'm not saying the FAQ isn't valid, I'm saying it doesn't give an option beyond page 61 which still doesn't allow for conversions.

I am going to let this debate drop before it becomes this one again http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/489385.page.
There is no concrete evidence on either side, I feel the he can take A or B side has more going for it until he gets FAQed with a new dex and given a weapon template (like most other SC have been) and until that point there is no real rule saying it is illegal, and no real rule saying that it is MFA.
A sgt can take any of the 4 power weapons without someone complaining, even though most of them do not come in his kit (AM or Tac) so I feel the same applies for the sanguinor, as he just listed as having a GE (power weapon) that can be A or B by FAQ and will hold this until the 6th ed. BA codex comes out.

So if converting in order to take a legally available option is MFA, is it then MFA to scratchbuild or convert units that Games Workshop doesn't provide models for? There are a number of units that don't come with all the options in the box which are available to them in the codex. Is it MFA to model the equipment that the boxes don't actually provide? Doesn't it seem a little specious to say "Converting codex-approved options onto generic models is acceptable, but converting codex-approved options onto named models is not?"

That being said, I'm totally biased. I run a Sanguinor, with a Glaive Encarmine that is modeled as an axe.

Eh, on second thought, not feeling like wading into this debate. I feel like a conversion with an axe is perfectly legal, but I misclicked and hit submit with unfinished thoughts the first time, haha.

Ok Jimsolo, can you point me to the words that give you permission to convert a special character?

As I said earlier, I think special characters are far different from generic dudes as they don't have options. There is no option to model him with an axe as you are told on page 61 to look at the model.
Special characters have specific models(if gw gets around to making them), a generic sergeant doesn't have a specific model issued by gw. That is the big difference I see.

Pg 322 provides all the proof you need. It does not specify special or generic units, but does show intention to allow for conversions. As the ax is a legal option it would fall under this.

Is page 322 in the rules section?

Where in the rules section is there anything related to building your models?

Page 2 first line, it talks about minatures = models, not sprues or bits of models.

let it drop, there are no rules allowing a converting of a generic model. IE tac sgt. who comes with a chainsword. or for painting as the other post said. its a matter of opinion, but RAW nothing stops it. now I wish I never asked lol. liturges let it drop or its going to be 2012 debate all over again.

I'm being told there is RAW permission. I'll let it drop but it's still down to your opponent to agree it's cool.

I don't do tournaments much and even the ones I do around my LGS are friendly. If they won't play because of one model we won't play and I'll chock it up as the sang scaring the enemy away

 liturgies of blood wrote:
No..... the Sanguinary guard can have either as they have the option of being assembled with either. If you're saying the axes are always better on these models, I wouldn't say that at all. SG with swords are great for certain units.

What I would say is that a 2+/3+ EW model with AP 2 and +1 S is far better at taking out those pesky 2+ saves and can survive the wait to hit far better than a SG model who actually has the option of being assembled with either weapon.

So. You have never made a Special Character because you thought the original looked like crap? Or Changed parts on the SC because you wanted to make it look cool IE changing the way his legs stand on a base. If you have your are modeling for advantage. If the FAQ says it can be either, and they didn't state that the Sanguinor ONLY had a power sword then yes in fact your allowed to change it. Until as such time as they say "No, he in fact has a sword." If the faq says it can be either then it can be either as long as its WYSIWYG. But thats just my opinion based off your statements.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Page 2 first line, it talks about minatures = models, not sprues or bits of models.

But what does that really mean?

What rules govern assembly or painting models?

Both Lemartes and Dante had their weapons FAQ'd to be a specific type of Power Weapon. The Sanguinor did not. I say go for the axe if you wantm since a Glaive Encarmine can be either.