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.

Character models in particular tend to have a lot of options as to what weapons and wargear they can use – given in the army list of their Codex. The rule is that such equipment must be visually represented on the model so your opponents can clearly see what they are facing. This concept is often referred to as WYSIWYG, which stands for ‘what you see is what you get’.
Of course, many gamers enjoy trying out different combinations of wargear in different battles.
So, for example, a player might decide that for his next game a model’s power sword will simply count as a close combat weapon, but he will also equip the model with melta bombs. While some tournaments may be more strict about this kind of thing, most opponents are happy to accommodate a small degree of one thing counting as another, so long as you explain exactly who has what at the start of the game.

Now the way that I interpret the rule is that as long as their is a consistence stated before the game thats WYSIWYG.

For example:

"What you see" - Chainsword
"What you get" - Power Chainsword.

So now what I am stating is that every chainsword modeled on my side of the table is a power weapon, and none will be treated as just a regular chainsword.

Now to add more confusion

"What you see" - Bolt Pistol
"What you get" - Lascannon

Now every bolt pistol on my side of the table is a lascannon. So now as long as no model has a bolt pistol in their hand except the guys with lascannons this should be allowed.

What do you think?

I think reading the last line of the quoted text provides all the answers one might need.

I will add this though; the more the "replacement" looks like, or belongs in the same "category" as, the original, the better. Meaning Yes to your first example and No to your second.

It comes down to your opponent and their willingness to play with such interpretations. If they don't want to play against your power chainswords or bolt pistolcannons, then that's their choice. You can't cite a rule that says they must play you, because such doesn't exist.

Personally, I think you're misinterpreting the term "what you see is what you get". By misinterpreting, I mean you are missing the word "is". If I see a bolt pistol, I expect that it is a bolt pistol; likewise with chainswords. If I see a bolt pistol, but what I get is a lascannon, then what I see is not what I get.

That said, I'm always willing to allow concessions for appropriate "counts as" models (cool conversions, for example), or proxies where players are trying something new and haven't got the models yet, etc. But if you're just too lazy to actually get your hands on some power weapons or lascannons, then I'd be inclined not to play you.

Cheexsta wrote:It comes down to your opponent and their willingness to play with such interpretations..

More or less this.

In a friendly game do whatever you want with your friends. I do that all the time.

At a Tourney or something I doubt many people would go for it.

Cheexsta wrote:It comes down to your opponent and their willingness to play with such interpretations. If they don't want to play against your power chainswords or bolt pistolcannons, then that's their choice. You can't cite a rule that says they must play you, because such doesn't exist.

This is actually the best point made yet about WYSIWYG: At Tournaments you're shoehorned into obligatory games, whereas pickup games are strictly optional.

(I know that tournaments are optional but if you play someone with questionable WYSIWYG in Round 3 of a 3-game Tourney and you've paid admission, you're "obligated")

IMO what you're doing is Proxying which is a diferent beast than wysiwyg

Cheexsta wrote:It comes down to your opponent and their willingness to play with such interpretations. If they don't want to play against your power chainswords or bolt pistolcannons, then that's their choice. You can't cite a rule that says they must play you, because such doesn't exist.
I am not saying that I am trying to force someone to play with me when such things exist.

Personally, I think you're misinterpreting the term "what you see is what you get". By misinterpreting, I mean you are missing the word "is". If I see a bolt pistol, I expect that it is a bolt pistol; likewise with chainswords. If I see a bolt pistol, but what I get is a lascannon, then what I see is not what I get.
No I think that I am taking it far to literal. I am saying that every instance of something in an army IS something else. So for every model on the table with a bolt pistol has a lascannon. So every bolt pistol IS a lascannon. I mean if I stick a lascannon barrel on the end of my bolt pistol and call it a cool conversion will it fly then? Why must it come to that to be acceptable? It is not hard to remember that the squad with four bolt pistols in that building are four lascannons is it? You remember 95 pages of rules + codex"es" + FAQ/Erratas, is it really hard to remember one simple change in the line up? This also takes into account of minis modeled for special characters. Why don't you stop being lazy and buy "Mephiston", I mean that mini is cool and all but it is not him. Fact and point. WYSIWYG is proxing in some cases then when it comes to conversions and home made models.

That said, I'm always willing to allow concessions for appropriate "counts as" models (cool conversions, for example), or proxies where players are trying something new and haven't got the models yet, etc. But if you're just too lazy to actually get your hands on some power weapons or lascannons, then I'd be inclined not to play you.

OPs definition of WYSIWYG is not valid. He is warping WYSIWYG into optional 'counts as' and 'proxies'.

Well I am warping then, conversion minis cannot "count as" special characters. Those models exist.

Zedrenael wrote:I am saying that every instance of something in an army IS something else. So for every model on the table with a bolt pistol has a lascannon.

Right. I see a bolt pistol. It's not a bolt pistol. That's, by definition, not WYSIWYG. It's proxying or counts-as.

So every bolt pistol IS a lascannon. I mean if I stick a lascannon barrel on the end of my bolt pistol and call it a cool conversion will it fly then?

No - because the rule of cool isn't your opinion. It's your opponents or the TOs.

Why must it come to that to be acceptable? It is not hard to remember that the squad with four bolt pistols in that building are four lascannons is it? You remember 95 pages of rules + codex"es" + FAQ/Erratas, is it really hard to remember one simple change in the line up?

Yes. The rules don't (rarely) change. Having to remember every little change for every opponent, and not confusing this SM army that uses bolt pistols to represent lascannons with that SM army (painted the same way) that uses lasguns to represent missile launchers, or that other SM army that uses chainswords to represent power fists, on top of trying to stay on top of my tactics, on top of remembering what my plans were...

Yes, it's hard.

This also takes into account of minis modeled for special characters. Why don't you stop being lazy and buy "Mephiston", I mean that mini is cool and all but it is not him. Fact and point. WYSIWYG is proxing in some cases then when it comes to conversions and home made models.

Proxying and conversions are by definition not WYSIWYG. The "Rule of Cool" overrides WYSIWYG in most cases... I'm more than willing to remember that awesome mini over there is supposed to be a librarian/Rhino/Razorback/whatever. A shoddy conversion? Not worth my effort.

And remember, while the rules only call out WYSIWYG for characters, many tournaments (Ard Boys for example) require WYSIWYG for all models. If I'm playing in a tournament that requires that, and my opponent tells me "Every model you see with a bolt pistol is actually armed with a lascannon." I'm calling the TO over. In a friendly game I rarely care.

Their is no official "Rule of Cool". Or official rule for "counts-as" or "proxy". So just being a literal, straight forward thought process from the saying "What you see is what you get". So I know what you see is a bolt pistol. What you get is not a bolt pistol it "is" a lascannon. For the span of a few hours you will be reminded constantly that this bolt pistol in ever squad that it appears will be a lascannon. I saying "every" instance of a bolt pistol "is" a lascannon.

I would also like to point out that the jet bikes from rogue trader count as bikes in todays codexes are just the WYSIWYG. I see a "jet" bike which follow a different set of rules than a bike. So should I allow someone to play Rogue Trader Jet Bikes?


A shoddy conversion can also be left to opinion. Not every conversion is awesome right from the start.

WYSIWYG:
An important principle of our events is "what you see is what you get" or WYSIWYG (pronounced "wizzywig") for short. All this means is unless you are using the 'counts as' rule (see below), then miniatures are assumed to have their equipment actually shown on the model.

It would be grossly unfair to show the model being equipped with one thing, but claiming it to be armed with another; wars have been started for less.

COUNTS AS:
The 'Counts As' rule allows you to apply the rules for existing units to older or scratch built models that do not have rules of their own. This is to allow you to make full use of your collection or the army choices within our rule books; it's not an excuse to change your army as a way of fine tuning your force.

This has been GW's definition for over a decade and for all their events and what almost every independent event follows.

If you wish to PROXY by calling models with clear rules to be models with other clear rules... then you need opponents consent.

Ask your TO and opponent. You don't get to RAW argue your way into making PROXIES codex legal.

I have no intention of using this argument to bring Proxy codexes into a legal status.

Where did you find this definition?

It has been in GW's tourney packets for years, but most recently part of the rules of engagement for warhammer world in the UK.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m240024a_Warhammer_World_-_Rules_of_Engagement.pdf

Proxies are fine... just call a spade a spade. People are a lot more willing to accept it if asked. If someone tried to tell me 'this is what you see.... and this is what you get' I would walk away from the game due to the insulting nature of that interpretation.

Zedrenael wrote:Well I am warping then, conversion minis cannot "count as" special characters. Those models exist.

So for WYSISYG, it applies to the equipment and weapons and wargear. So as long as the wargear is the same on random conversion x as on the listed wargear for , say straken, then he is WYSIWYG for straken. So you don't have to use official GW models for your special characters.

Same with warrior acyoltes in power armor with boltguns. You can use standard marine figures, and it's WYSIWYG.

I've made about 4 commissars, Straken, and Guardsman Marbo from kitbashing, and they all have the same wargear as listed on their profile.

I will stand down now to showing me hard evidence of the fact that I cannot in fact do what I have been saying.

I will also accept the counts as.

I will admit I was wrong in this discussion and my argument of the fact.

I play dark eldar and use crossbows painted up sorta like power weapons as blasters going with sorta like a wookie weapon. Crossbows are across my entire army as blasters. Is this still wysiwyg?

It would be rather unreasonable to have to buy all the boxes for them since its 1 to box.

What wysiwig is saying is that if it already exist in the 40k world it is just that. A bolt pistol a bolt pistol. A lasgun a lasgun. As long as the Crossbow you are referring to does not already exist in your army it should be fine to "count as" a blaster just have to check with your opponent and TO.

my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Helixfire wrote:I play dark eldar and use crossbows painted up sorta like power weapons as blasters going with sorta like a wookie weapon. Crossbows are across my entire army as blasters. Is this still wysiwyg?

It is not the same situation that the OP describes.
Crossbows does not have an established set of rules in 40K. Certainly not as established as a Bolt Pistol, any way.

It would be rather unreasonable to have to buy all the boxes for them since its 1 to box.

What one person considers reasonable, or the availability of a given bit has zero impact on the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

madfjohn wrote:my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Please, this is beyond unreasonable.

How difficult is this concept? Is it "what I got is what you get"? Or "what I say it is is what you get"? A power chainsword, ok, that's actually what the Space Wolves frost blade is effectively. But a bolt pistol representing a lascannon? C'mon, get real. This isn't that expensive of a hobby...

If you read on you would see that I was proven wrong. It is nice to see that everyone reads through.

I prefer models to be 'configured' with whatever special weapons they are going to take.

So if all chainswords that are modeled in your army are power weapons, I don't have a problem with it.

If you want to 'mod' bolt pistols into some sort of lascannon and model it? I don't have a problem with it.

@steelmage99 Hoiw is that unreasonable? If the wargear listed on the profile is the same as the wargear on the model it is wysiwyg. unless hes using a nid to represent a marine. not wysiswyg, or something similar.

I think he was referring more to the fact that the post he was responding to appeared to have been written in Swahili.

madfjohn wrote:my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Omfg. Learn to type man.

Myself, I take a named character and remodel it. Its still WYSIWYG, just modified. But you will have to also consider that if the player is doing a fluff army, where they ????????????????????????????????????????????

(yeah I give up. )

Ok I would like to throw in my opinion on this particular subject. WYSIWYG is strictly set for tournament settings and ease for everyone to be able to tell what is what on the field with a glance. For example lets take the Chainsword issue, you can say that the Chainswords are power weapons in a friendly game for proxy purposes but if you really wanted them to be power weapons then the best thing to do is a little bit of modelling work, make them exceptional chainswords something that can't easily be mistaken as a normal chainsword and then you have your "Power Chainsword". The Bolt pistol example is stretching the concept way too far though.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

madfjohn wrote:my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Omfg. Learn to type man.

Myself, I take a named character and remodel it. Its still WYSIWYG, just modified. But you will have to also consider that if the player is doing a fluff army, where they
match it as close as possible.

(yeah I give up. )

Translated the rest. I think.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

madfjohn wrote:my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Omfg. Learn to type man.

Myself, I take a named character and remodel it. Its still WYSIWYG, just modified. But you will have to also consider that if the player is doing a fluff army, where they
match it as close as possible.

(yeah I give up. )

Translated the rest. I think.

I go that later on, but what in the hell is "might not have miny for so"?
That's where I just threw up my arms and said it.

madfjohn wrote:my self i take the named caricter and re modole it . its still in WYSIWYG jusr modified. but you will have to also consider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have miny for so they try to mach it as close as posibole.

Myself I take the named Character and remodel it. It is still WYSIWYG, it is just modified. However you will have to also concider if the player is doing a fluff army where they might not have a mini for it. So they then try to match it as close as possible.

Called in a personal favor from a buddy at mit. He used a complex algorithm to translate it. Only cost $20,000. No big deal right.