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.

There is an upcoming tourney that I really want to be part of but I'm having difficulty understanding WYSIWYG. I have a Chaos Predator with Lascannons all around but for example i want it to have HB sponsons and AC turret, is that legal as it is a vehicle?? Also I'm planning on running a Chaos Lord w/ jump pack and DW yet there is no models featuring that. So can someone please give me advice?? Much obliged

1) That would not be WYSIWYG.
2) As long as you convert it properly.

WSIWYG means if your predator has lascannons you can't say it has heavy bolters and an autocannon. It must use the weapons that are modelled on it.
You can model a Chaos lord with a jump pack and daemon weapon through conversions.

If you converted your lord to have a daemon weapon and a jump pack, that would be perfectly fine. Any suitably nasty looking Chaos dude with a big axe and a jump pack would do fine. That vehicle doesn't adhere to WYSIWYG for this tournament though. Also, please don't write your thread titles in capslock. You can change this by editing it in your first post.

Im a little confused about what Brother SRM is saying as it conflicts with what everybody else is

Vendetta 476 wrote:Im a little confused about what Brother SRM is saying as it conflicts with what everybody else is

No, he's saying what everyone else has said, just in a different way.

Actually he is saying in pretty much the same way...

Ah my bad
In that case I'll probably not run it in the tournament

Essentially this if you have a Lascannon and want it to be a Heavy Bolter in a WYSIWYG tourney. You're going to have some issues as it is in fact not a heavy bolter.

It's like saying the red robe is blue ...

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Essentially this if you have a Lascannon and want it to be a Heavy Bolter in a WYSIWYG tourney. You're going to have some issues as it is in fact not a heavy bolter.

It's like saying the red robe is blue ...

In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

An example: I run an all Genestealer army with 120 Genestealers. Half of the 'stealers are modeled with talons, however, the entire does NOT take talons. It's noted in my army list and I make sure my opponent knows that, although modeled, none of models use talons.

You might be able to ask the TOs before hand if it is possible to proxy the predator weapons depending on the size of the tournament and how many people you know there, it could work out if everyone at the store is ok with it.
@thegreatavatar, my FLGS uses similar wysiwyg rules. One rule of thumb we use is that if the model has a weapon on it that you don't pay the points for, it's still wysiwyg (naturally you have to make it clear to your opponent), but you can't make a flamer and say it's a meltagun for instance.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

Thank you. We had an ork player try to argue that as long as all of his vehicles were the same color yellow, he could claim a red paint job on each of them for 'Ard Boyz.

I don't see a problem with that.

As long as he paid the points, he can represent the Red Paint Job upgrade with whatever colour he likes.

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

But in terms of "counts-as" it's WYSIWYG . Since ALL flamers are meltaguns, there's no confusion about what is and isn't a meltagun. However, if, in the same army (or dear deity, same unit) flamers are used as flamers AND meltaguns, then THAT would be an issue.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

But in terms of "counts-as" it's WYSIWYG . Since ALL flamers are meltaguns, there's no confusion about what is and isn't a meltagun. However, if, in the same army (or dear deity, same unit) flamers are used as flamers AND meltaguns, then THAT would be an issue.

That's exactly the point, it isn't WYSIWYG at all - it's What You Remember Me Saying Earlier That It Counted As Is What You Get and who wants to remember that?

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

But in terms of "counts-as" it's WYSIWYG . Since ALL flamers are meltaguns, there's no confusion about what is and isn't a meltagun. However, if, in the same army (or dear deity, same unit) flamers are used as flamers AND meltaguns, then THAT would be an issue.

That's exactly the point, it isn't WYSIWYG at all - it's What You Remember Me Saying Earlier That It Counted As Is What You Get and who wants to remember that?

But that's MY point. It's permissible to convert models, even entire armies. As long the conversion is consistent, what's the issue. Granted, it can be taken to the extreme ("All my bolters are lascannons, my lascannons are meltas, my meltas are plasma....") but in such extremes either don't play with the player or call the TO.

We had a guy at my local group that did convert his IG to squats and made size consistent changes to the weaponry. He was consistent about conversions and after spending just a few minutes looking over the army and list, it was clear what was what. Now, I have played players that have mixed their conversions where some tanks were converted and others weren't. It was so confusing even the player had a hard time keeping track of which tank had what.

So, WYSIWYG is part of "counts-as" since if a bolter "counts-as" a lascannon then the WYSIWYG is all bolters are lascannons.

So after digesting everything, my predator sponsons can have Heavy Bolters as long as there are no other predators?

Vendetta 476 wrote:So after digesting everything, my predator sponsons can have Heavy Bolters as long as there are no other predators?

No. TheGreatAvatar is expressing a different viewpoint then everyone else.

If the tournament asks for WYSIWYG then the expectation is that if your Predator is armed with Heavy Bolters and an Autocannon, that's what they have (because that's what I see).

Now, many players and some tournament organizers are generous with the rule and will let you get away with minor deviations as long as they are consistent within the army. However, this is a measure of sportsmanship and generosity and you should NOT count on it unless you've checked with your tournament organizer ahead of time.

In fact, instead of wasting time asking peoples' opinions here on the internet, you should be emailing the only person that matters: the tournament organizer in the event you're playing in.


But as for WYSIWYG it means exactly that: What you see on the model is what it is armed with...saying the weaponry 'counts-as' something different is the exact opposite of following WYSIWYG.

Aight thank you all for your quick responses and yakface, this is my first tourney so im going to ask a lot of questions :p

Scott-S6 wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:In most instances, the issue is being able to discern the intent of the model is made clear and consistency through out the army is maintained. So, yes, you can say all the red robes are blue (if, for example, blue robes convey some bonus that red robes didn't), provided ALL red robes are treated as blue. You'd run into problems if some models with red robes are normal while other models with red robes are treated as "blue".

This is exactly analogous to saying "all flamers are meltaguns". That is not WYSIWYG - it's counts-as.

No, that is Proxies... Saying something with clear existing rules is something else with clear existing rules is a Proxy. Saying something with no valid or clear rules that are fit into the most reasonable and close rules for what it looks like is 'counts as'.

Saying all missile launchers are Lascannons are 'PROXIES'.

Saying all these converted large weapons with electrical-looking powers with no specific rules are lascannons, that is 'counts as'.

Now in a total conversion army, where you run genestealer cult as Orks, then you might be able to say 'all of these type of genestealer arms' are 'Ork PKs'. That is also 'counts as'.

Long and short, when you attend a WYSIWYG tourney... 'counts as' is usually for total conversion armies, not proxies. Proxies will not be allowed even if consistent. Make sure to ask your TO.

And Red paint Jobs usually just need to be consistent across the vehicles. If yellow and black flames is your RPJ then everything with Black flames better have the upgrade.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:So, WYSIWYG is part of "counts-as" since if a bolter "counts-as" a lascannon then the WYSIWYG is all bolters are lascannons.

No, because what you see is a bolter still.

A squat-sized lascannon is still recognisable as a lascannon. A bolter is recognisable as a bolter - if you're using it as a lascannon then it is not WYSIWYG.