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.

Caveat <Not 100% sure if this is the right forum for this topic, but happy for it to be shunted if need be>

Hi Dakka,

I am building a Nid army, and was wanting to do some converting to build in some fluff with my army.

The fluff that I started with was a 'serpent' army of Nids (i.e. I would model my nids by cutting off legs and replacing with tails).

At first I didn't think this would bring up any WYSIWYG issues as hormagaunts, termagaunts, Carnifexes etc could all be effectively converted to be 'serpent' creatures without making them harder to identify as units during a game.

However, I've run into a problem with my warriors. The easiest way to convert them is with a Ravener body. The problem is, Ravenors can also take Deathspitters and Scything Talons (what my warriors will typically be using).

My question is - How obvious do I need to make it that these are warriors, and not Ravenors, in a 'typical' tournament environment? I realise every TO will be different on this issue but I just want general thoughts/opinions.

So for example, is it:
a) No - They would look too alike in any form, you can't uses 'serpent' warriors in a tournament setting
b) Probably not - You would need to go to some length to ensure they could only be seen as warriors (maybe long tails, but still have legs with hoof feet)
c) Probably ok - You would need to do some converting to ensure that if you had them next to a ravenor brood, that the two units are identifiable as ravs and warriors but should be ok
d) Definitely ok - No-one will mix-up Serpent warriors with deathspitters as Rav's because lets face it - most people prob don't think Ravs can take deathspitters
e) other - (please explain)

Of course, the other solution is to have a properly represented army for game play, and then your converted army for show... but where's the fun in that?

I appreciate your comments and any suggestions you might have on this topic.

Thanks!

c. or e. you would need some converting. but the major factor is raveners have 3 arms, while warriors only have 2, and the 3rd is replaced with legs.
you will have to remind your opponents about it however, because most won't be able to tell the difference unless they commonly play both raveners and warriors in the same army.

will you be using ravenors And warriors in your list?

If so, you will have to do something to make the two look different at first glance.

In fact, i'd suggest that this will cause less worries if you make sure you have both raveners and warriors, and make sure they look really different.

Old raveners had different heads then warriors. I'd suggest going that route for the ravenors and you shouldn't have any problems.

Id say just tell your opponent before hand so they know. And if you use both in a game, make sure they REALLY dont look the same. I like the idea, so go for it man, this will be a cool Nid army for sure

Running solo, it should be fine. But if you do both, have one be a shade of red while the others are blue. Or something like that if they are too similar.

-cgmckenzie

Why not give the warriors small lets on their serpent tails? Easy distinction.

I would try to do something to make them distinct.

Maybe make the warriors be on a stubby tail that kinda floats like a Venomthrope to show the slowness difference.

I also like the idea of maybe adding the legs so it is a warrior with a long tail not a ravener which is basically a tailed warrior.

Perhaps a different basing style or paint scheme. Maybe the Raveners have spots on their armour or have a single model that is coming out of the ground (so they know that whereever that model is, those are the raveners). That would be an easy distinction. If you see the burrowing model, that unit is a ravener unit.

Different-coloured bases works too.

e) the cooler the convertion looks the less likely your opponent is to complain about it. make em look nifty and if you fun both as long as they are distinguishable should be fine

Warriors carry deathspitters, Raveners have them in their chests. Simply put, they can ID the warriors because they have gun hands.

Traceoftoxin wrote:Warriors carry deathspitters, Raveners have them in their chests. Simply put, they can ID the warriors because they have gun hands.

This goes to show how used I am to this rules forum - I read this post three times before twigging you meant the warriors could be identified by gun hands.

I was trying to figure out why Instant Death wouldn't apply to the raveners...

Traceoftoxin wrote:Warriors carry deathspitters, Raveners have them in their chests. Simply put, they can ID the warriors because they have gun hands.

It is not about the weapons, it is about the movement rules. Many people can't identify if the weapon options are legal let alone optimal but they can identify the wiggly worm guys move faster and wings fly.

Let's say I wanted an army of all jetbikes for my orks and wanted Nobz on jetbikes. When people see them, they are going to assume 'oh those are deffkoptaz! Jetbike, 2 wounds...' if I go 'no they are nobz on bikes, see this weapon option? you should have known that!'

While rule of cool will always kick in, it is good to accept feedback for what it is and that it is not as clear as others may see it. Ravener warriors is a blurry line without something clear to distinguish.

Hi Guys, thanks for all the feedback on this.

@ svendrex: I currently only use warriors, but plan to bring raveners on board in the future

@ nkelsch: I like the idea of trying to model the serpent in a way that shows it as being slow, that could help with your later point about the movement types of the models...

@ Aelyn: This makes a lot of sense if you're either a Tyranid player, or have played against nids often enough to know this... I think the problem would still be that they look like raveners with deathspitters...

@ ArbitorIan: Agreed - If I specifically have raveners with lots of scything Talons/claws and converted serpent warriors with warrior deathspitters, I could probably get away with it...

Obviously using the deathspitter arms from the warrior box will go a long way towards identifying these guys as warriors rather than raveners. I think that if I could possibly find a way of modelling the tail to give a sense of 'slowness' to the movement (think Hydralisk from Starcraft, without the speed upgrade), then I could probably get away with it in most tournament circles...

I don't care as long as what you put on the table reasonably and consitantly fits with what's on your army list.