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.

Never come across this idea, in conversation or in practice.

I DO understand GW only supplying GW terrain in store these days, but previous to this I also recall many instances of in store scratch built terrain too.

 auticus wrote:
Its a thing I've noted on various facebook groups over the past few months (particularly when sylvaneth came out). There was a big stink on a fb group yesterday that had like 200 responses.

My local community has also had some people complain about custom terrain, saying its somehow illegal or not fair.

It probably stems from the Sylvaneth ability to create forests and the book specifies the GW forest. Main justification is the footprint. Back in 8th there were problems with people abusing the create forest rules by throwing down a forest that takes up the entire middle section of the board. It could stem from some areas where people "modeled for advantage".

The only rule we have in our local area is that the forest footprint match the GW one for the Sylvaneth ability. One player made a number of tin cutouts, flocked them, and has trees with magnetic bases attached to them. It's pretty cool and no one complains.

I've never heard anyone complain about home made terrain.

 silent25 wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Its a thing I've noted on various facebook groups over the past few months (particularly when sylvaneth came out). There was a big stink on a fb group yesterday that had like 200 responses.

My local community has also had some people complain about custom terrain, saying its somehow illegal or not fair.

It probably stems from the Sylvaneth ability to create forests and the book specifies the GW forest. Main justification is the footprint. Back in 8th there were problems with people abusing the create forest rules by throwing down a forest that takes up the entire middle section of the board. It could stem from some areas where people "modeled for advantage".

The only rule we have in our local area is that the forest footprint match the GW one for the Sylvaneth ability. One player made a number of tin cutouts, flocked them, and has trees with magnetic bases attached to them. It's pretty cool and no one complains.

Well the 8th edition Wood Elf book specifically said "use a Citadel Wood", so if some d-bag was making forests that take up large portions of the table, well, they're a d-bag because the intention of the rule was clearly for it to be the same size as the Citadel Wood, it said so right in the rules.

That said, people only joked about HAVING to use a Citadel Wood, as long as the homemade forest was the same size as the Citadel one no one actually cared if it was homemade.

God, some of the stores you guys play at suck ass......

Man, I think he only storebought GW terrain pieces I own are the crashed shuttle from Battle for Macragge, and a ruined tower from the ancient line of foamed resin pre-painted terrain they used to sell, and I have been gaming for 20 years. I have a good chunk of the old Armorcast ruined buildings, though, and a shedload of the AT43 cargo containers.

Oh, good, another chance to use this Tommy Lee Jones picture as my reaction:


That being said, I understand the idea of not allowing 3rd party terrain in GW stores (and, to some extent, scratchbuilt, as they want to sell their terrain kits). I can also understand not allowing scracthbuilt terrain for terrain that has actual rules (fortifications and such) if they don't properly match up in size and appearance, particularly in events like tournaments and leagues.

But to not allow, say, scratchbuilt hills? Forests? Ruins and/or intact building?

Again:

No scratchbuilt terrian?


If I was 20 years younger, I literally couldn't even.

I'll be honest...someone who's concerned enough about any wargame to the point that they declare terrain "illegal" is someone I'm not gaming with (in any fashion). That person has some serious issues.

Anyone who takes stuff that seriously is not someone I want to spend time with.

 auticus wrote:
I've noticed a new movement that has picked up over the past couple of years (mainly dealing with games workshop games) where homemade terrain is called "illegal" and that a lot of people are refusing to play against homemade terrain because its not legal to use in games.

Creating homemade terrain has been a staple of wargaming since the 70s. Games Workshop itself sold a book on How To Make Wargaming Terrain (which has two printings, one with a red border and one with no border that is blue). Making terrain used to be as much a part of the hobby as playing the game itself.

Is this something that is becoming more common do you find or is this just a phenomenon that I myself am only starting to see and its not really reflective of the community as a whole?

Never encountered that, seems a bit silly to me. As long as the terrain is not--well, lame to the point of making the game look unattractive (like, a shoe or unaltered can of Pringles) I see no issue. If it somehow affects rules then common sense. I've encountered folks tracing the citadel wood to make their own but it looks good, so...

Now, what I have seen in the last couple of years is communities contributing to terrain or pitching in a few bucks for modular terrain for the store so the battlefields look better. And taking better care of the store/club terrain so it lasts. In any GW store I've been in I can understand being respectful and not bringing in 3rd party terrain but lots of nice conversion terrain, even if not every component is from a GW kit, and then, the rule of cool.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
The wood elves can create their own woods as I recall and the rules probably stipulate that you must have the models to represent them to use. Much like summoned Daemons.

I'd say that's what the OP is on about, just in a very confusing manner.

My old GW had a hardcore employee (read "Idiotic fanatic") who used to tell customers their models had to be painted with GW paints to play in-store. God he was a pain in the ass.

How would he even know?...did he have a mass spectrometer in the back office or something?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
The wood elves can create their own woods as I recall and the rules probably stipulate that you must have the models to represent them to use. Much like summoned Daemons.

I'd say that's what the OP is on about, just in a very confusing manner.

My old GW had a hardcore employee (read "Idiotic fanatic") who used to tell customers their models had to be painted with GW paints to play in-store. God he was a pain in the ass.

How would he even know?...did he have a mass spectrometer in the back office or something?

*Jigsaw voice* Some of these models I painted with GW paints purchased in this very store! Others, I used coat d'arms! Can you tell which is which BEFORE it's too late!?! /Jigsaw voice.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
The wood elves can create their own woods as I recall and the rules probably stipulate that you must have the models to represent them to use. Much like summoned Daemons.

I'd say that's what the OP is on about, just in a very confusing manner.

My old GW had a hardcore employee (read "Idiotic fanatic") who used to tell customers their models had to be painted with GW paints to play in-store. God he was a pain in the ass.

How would he even know?...did he have a mass spectrometer in the back office or something?

I think it was maybe based on shades and the finish. One guy used craft paints because they were a third the price for twice as much. They were much more flat than GW. It wasn't that he could even do anything about it, he just said stupid gak like that. Working with him was a whole other level of Hell.

Like I said, he was a real dill weed.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
My old GW had a hardcore employee (read "Idiotic fanatic") who used to tell customers their models had to be painted with GW paints to play in-store. God he was a pain in the ass.

In the mid nineties, GW stores were starting to spread in Australia. My brother and I were happy one opened in a mall we frequented. We brought our stuff in to play, and we were told my brothers miniatures were painted wrong. They had black rimmed bases and green flock. The miniatures had to be painted like GW did then, which was glued down sand, base painted entirely goblin green, and drybrushed sunburst yellow. It was awful and garish (which is why my brother didn't do it) but that was the only way the manager let you play in his store.

My miniatures were haphazardly built and not painted. They were fine.

They had dress codes for miniatures?

I, for one, would never, not ever, not under any circumstance, play a game of Warhammer 40,000™ on a table with scratch-built terrain. Nor AoS. Nope. No way.

I would not play a game of Warhammer 40,000™ if any of the minis my opponent had were wearing "fur" either.

I can see requiring only GW paint if you are participating in a painting night at the store. (Which is why I don't) I can also see people abusing the rules and coming in with an aegis line that fills half the table. Maybe this is the real problem. A well balanced table with some LOS blocking hills, thick woods and other unique terrain can be fair and fun to play on if it works the same way for both players.

If you want to play on my table at my house while eating my food and hanging out with my friends, you probably would be smart not to complain about who made my terrain.

(BTW, funny thing playing at Kirk's place... His cat jumped up on the table and laid right down in the middle of it on turn two. We immediately declared the cat to be impassible terrain that blocked LOS. At the very last turn of the game, after Kirk had his harlequin glass cannons hidden behind the cat, his Wife came in the door. Apparently, she is the primary feeder of the cat, because it jumped right up and ran into the kitchen, meowing loudly, leaving me wide open to mow down Kirk's last units. There are times when going second can be an advantage!) (Yes, we do take 40K seriously, but sometimes it's just too much fun to roll with the moment.)

-Loki- wrote:The miniatures had to be painted like GW did then, which was glued down sand, base painted entirely goblin green, and drybrushed sunburst yellow. It was awful and garish (which is why my brother didn't do it) but that was the only way the manager let you play in his store.

Urgh. You couldn't pay me.

My miniatures were haphazardly built and not painted. They were fine.

GoblinChow wrote:I can also see people abusing the rules and coming in with an aegis line that fills half the table. Maybe this is the real problem.

I think the real problem is applying special rules to official terrain kits.

 EmberlordofFire8 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 General Annoyance wrote:
Yeah, I've never heard this before; I actually have the blue version of the book you speak of, and it's fantastic. While GW doesn't do much along the lines of that stuff anymore to promote their own plastic terrain instead, I don't think they'd ever encourage people to rule out homemade pieces, especially when a lot of the stuff they use in WD Battle Reports is made from scratch.

Pretty much this.

Though I am promised (via letter published in WD no less!) that WD will be including Terrain Making articles in the near future.

So YOU sent that. It pretty much summed up everything I was going to ask them. So I didn't send a letter.

Indeed.

(Picture shows randomer somewhat less sexy than Mad a Doc Grotsnik's actual sexiness of not-terribly-sexy

Here's a link to when GW got rid of all of their scratch built terrain and OOP shop models.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/297314.page
It was back in 2010, the stores lost all of their character back then and I had little reason to ever go into a GW other than for a pot of paint since.

That was a trip down memory lane...

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Here's a link to when GW got rid of all of their scratch built terrain and OOP shop models.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/297314.page
It was back in 2010, the stores lost all of their character back then and I had little reason to ever go into a GW other than for a pot of paint since.

Wow, the denial and GW apologism in that thread...

And yep, GW store tables are a joke now. Every independent store in the area has way better tables and terrain options than the cookie-cutter Official™ GW™ Hobby Center™ tables.

Luckily this type of idiocy seems to be limited to GW games/stores, as they are the only ones with "official" terrain.

Imagine our horror if 10-15 years ago we saw glimpses of some of the game communities of today, and discussions like these.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Here's a link to when GW got rid of all of their scratch built terrain and OOP shop models.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/297314.page
It was back in 2010, the stores lost all of their character back then and I had little reason to ever go into a GW other than for a pot of paint since.

That Alex guy made out like a fething bandit! Did you see all the cool gak he got?

*looks at user name*

Can I have some of that gak?!

The main complaints that I hear locally (not on the facebook group arguments) is that a citadel wood can be seen through so its not fair if someone makes a forest that actually blocks line of sight and that citadel woods should be the only thing used otherwise you're modeling for advantage by blocking line of sight.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Here's a link to when GW got rid of all of their scratch built terrain and OOP shop models.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/297314.page
It was back in 2010, the stores lost all of their character back then and I had little reason to ever go into a GW other than for a pot of paint since.

Many years ago, GW US decided to toss a bunch of GT terrain. I was an Outrider back then and fairly local to the Baltimore HQ, so I got this phone call telling me to meet them at the dumpster...

 auticus wrote:
The main complaints that I hear locally (not on the facebook group arguments) is that a citadel wood can be seen through so its not fair if someone makes a forest that actually blocks line of sight and that citadel woods should be the only thing used otherwise you're modeling for advantage by blocking line of sight.

I'm not that familiar with AoS rules, but if Wood Elves/Sylvaneth get a free wood or similar like they used to in 8th then it makes sense you model it in a way that matches the wood GW make.

But that is a very specific case of, yes, you should either use GW terrain OR make your terrain match GW as closely as possible because otherwise you're bending the intention of the rules.

 auticus wrote:
The main complaints that I hear locally (not on the facebook group arguments) is that a citadel wood can be seen through so its not fair if someone makes a forest that actually blocks line of sight and that citadel woods should be the only thing used otherwise you're modeling for advantage by blocking line of sight.

If your army doesn't pay for the terrain in question (like it would a Bastion), any complaints about terrain will be ignored by me.

If it made that big a deal to my opponent, I'd say "Fine, it doesn't block line of site, but I'm still getting a cover save. Roll the dice and let's play."

If we can't get to an agreement about fething terrain on the table, then I don't want to play with you. Hell, I don't even want to have a beer with you.

I'm sorry that you play with man-childs. I'd say neck beards, but I doubt they can grow the patch-work stubble!

I've never heard mention of this before. But if someone did put that to me, they'd be the kind of anal gamer that I'd probably hate playing in the first place.

 auticus wrote:
The main complaints that I hear locally (not on the facebook group arguments) is that a citadel wood can be seen through so its not fair if someone makes a forest that actually blocks line of sight and that citadel woods should be the only thing used otherwise you're modeling for advantage by blocking line of sight.

For Sylvaneth woods I could see this argument, as only using the actual model since it's essentially a part of your army (and bullgak anyways). But for regular forest terrain this sounds like delusional fanboys crying that people aren't supporting GW.

 auticus wrote:
I've noticed a new movement that has picked up over the past couple of years (mainly dealing with games workshop games) where homemade terrain is called "illegal" and that a lot of people are refusing to play against homemade terrain because its not legal to use in games.

Creating homemade terrain has been a staple of wargaming since the 70s. Games Workshop itself sold a book on How To Make Wargaming Terrain (which has two printings, one with a red border and one with no border that is blue). Making terrain used to be as much a part of the hobby as playing the game itself.

Is this something that is becoming more common do you find or is this just a phenomenon that I myself am only starting to see and its not really reflective of the community as a whole?

No. There is no "New Movement". Your idea must have come from a Reichstag worker from a GW store. We get the type from time to time.

The idea is one of those lame ones that comes from a GW store/ stores to shill you to buy that GW terrain, or give a false crisis, where they are nobs on the subject, but on the whole, GW themselves gives you ample articles on how to make terrain, So it is as well, a false dichotomy. Workers like that need to be schooled on the subject, and quickly, or they keep that mentality and take it farther and push it into everything they do. They become B.S. shill artists in the end, and a real drain on the store.

If anyone gives you that grief, smile, pick up your stuff, and go find another place to game. Even the HHHobby isn't that dense. THOSE type of particulars are some of the ones that don't know much, except from what they learned in their "Red Books".

This should end the discussion.

7th edition rulebook wrote:Scratch-built Terrain
Many players enjoy making their own terrain features from scratch (thus the term ‘scratch-built terrain’),
and it’s also possible to improvise a perfectly usable set of terrain using everyday objects at hand. Players
that do so will need to devise their own datasheets for the terrain models they have created. Don’t worry,
this is very easy

Some employees might discourage you to play with all scratch build terrain instead of showcasing the terrain models they sell, in order to boost his or her sales. But this is a store specific thing really.