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.

Do Independent run Warhammer Fantasy Battle tourneys allow the use of Mantic Minis?

Mantic has a nice kickstarter going on with nice deals going on and myself and some friends might bite on them.

Depends on the TO, I'd think.

Normally yes as long as things are WYSIWYG.

Yes, all fantasy tournaments that I personally have been a part of* (with one exception, see below) allow the use of properly modelled 3rd party miniatures. There are lots of fantasy miniatures companies out there that make suitable models.

*The notable exception to this would have been 'Ard Boyz, but it no longer exists.

Being a TO i do let people play with them but is frowned opon if the majority of your models are manic. Trying to keep GW alive lol

Masos wrote:Being a TO i do let people play with them but is frowned opon if the majority of your models are manic. Trying to keep GW alive lol

GW is going no where for the moment.. lol..

At Origins this last month, the WHFB tourney allowed Mantic models mainly as Unit Fillers... and also had no issue with AoW heros as well.

-Porkuslime

Most do. I've never been to an Indie tournament that didn't allow third party models. That being said, I wouldn't just take a mantic army to a GW tournament. It's somewhat frowned upon and just seems kind of... douchey.

It bothers me when people apply terms like that to the actions of others. Douchey? Come on... maybe the person just really liked Mantic's undead more than GW's.

If I were to ever make a dwarf army, it would almost definitely be Avatars of War based, assuming their dwarf units actually get off the ground. The one that I've seen is absolutely fantastic.

As always, "rule of cool" applies! If you don't put in the work to make the models extremely clearly represent the unit they're supposed to be, don't have a good theme / etc, it will be a much harder sell than a fantastic looking army that blows people away.

RiTides wrote:
As always, "rule of cool" applies! If you don't put in the work to make the models extremely clearly represent the unit they're supposed to be, don't have a good theme / etc, it will be a much harder sell than a fantastic looking army that blows people away.

Indeed... As long as the models are on the proper sized base and are easy to identify as WYSIWYG, then generally there isn't a problem. (You're talking about an independent tournament anyway.)

RiTides wrote:It bothers me when people apply terms like that to the actions of others. Douchey? Come on... maybe the person just really liked Mantic's undead more than GW's.

If I were to ever make a dwarf army, it would almost definitely be Avatars of War based, assuming their dwarf units actually get off the ground. The one that I've seen is absolutely fantastic.

As always, "rule of cool" applies! If you don't put in the work to make the models extremely clearly represent the unit they're supposed to be, don't have a good theme / etc, it will be a much harder sell than a fantastic looking army that blows people away.

The psychology behind "sunk cost fallacy" is part of the reason why some people will get angry if you put Mantic on the table (especially if you fail to notice the irritation and talk about how cheap they were), if they've paid $1k+ for their GW army, seeing a $200 Mantic army that is bigger than theirs has the potential to annoy the hell out of them, since the simple presence of it undermines the satisfaction of a "premium experience" that is an important part of why some people buy GW models.

It's like that episode of "The Simpsons" where Marge turns up to the posh country club with the cheap dress that looks just as good as the posh ones for a tenth of the price and everyone hates her for it when they find out... for some people there is a certain expectation of wanting to associate with the wealthy when buying premium-priced miniatures, it is part of the reason why the purchase was made in the first place.

Just human nature.. of course, I have to stress, it varies from person to person... some people will get mad over it, others won't care and be totally confused as to why anyone would even be bothered.

And that's just one of the reasons, for others it is the immersion in the background that they enjoy and gets broken for them whenever a non-official model or outlandish conversion is placed on the table. For this kind of player, Necrons painted pink with glitter bases are likely to be just as jarring as a Mantic army.

Then there is "the GW Hobby" angle, where a lot of people are not aware that wargaming exists as a hobby outside of a single company. Unfamilarity makes people uncomfortable, too.

All sorts of reasons why you might have a rough time with some people, although I'd say most will be okay.. I've never met anyone that had a problem with it, personally.

Well, I personally don't have to worry about the "sunk cost fallacy" since my current counts-as army (and an Avatars of War one, if I ever did do it) costs signifcantly more than a GW army!

Personally, I don't think that should be a factor, but if it is, there's that...

Also, Mantic is a bit of an exception. Most 3rd party models, or at least the beautiful ones that tempt me, cost more than GW to field an army of, due to GW's plastic.

I allow Mantic, banebeast/lords, forgeworld and any model that looks correct into my events.

scarletsquig wrote:

RiTides wrote:It bothers me when people apply terms like that to the actions of others. Douchey? Come on... maybe the person just really liked Mantic's undead more than GW's.

If I were to ever make a dwarf army, it would almost definitely be Avatars of War based, assuming their dwarf units actually get off the ground. The one that I've seen is absolutely fantastic.

As always, "rule of cool" applies! If you don't put in the work to make the models extremely clearly represent the unit they're supposed to be, don't have a good theme / etc, it will be a much harder sell than a fantastic looking army that blows people away.

The psychology behind "sunk cost fallacy" is part of the reason why some people will get angry if you put Mantic on the table (especially if you fail to notice the irritation and talk about how cheap they were), if they've paid $1k+ for their GW army, seeing a $200 Mantic army that is bigger than theirs has the potential to annoy the hell out of them, since the simple presence of it undermines the satisfaction of a "premium experience" that is an important part of why some people buy GW models.

It's like that episode of "The Simpsons" where Marge turns up to the posh country club with the cheap dress that looks just as good as the posh ones for a tenth of the price and everyone hates her for it when they find out... for some people there is a certain expectation of wanting to associate with the wealthy when buying premium-priced miniatures, it is part of the reason why the purchase was made in the first place.

Just human nature.. of course, I have to stress, it varies from person to person... some people will get mad over it, others won't care and be totally confused as to why anyone would even be bothered.

And that's just one of the reasons, for others it is the immersion in the background that they enjoy and gets broken for them whenever a non-official model or outlandish conversion is placed on the table. For this kind of player, Necrons painted pink with glitter bases are likely to be just as jarring as a Mantic army.

Then there is "the GW Hobby" angle, where a lot of people are not aware that wargaming exists as a hobby outside of a single company. Unfamilarity makes people uncomfortable, too.

All sorts of reasons why you might have a rough time with some people, although I'd say most will be okay.. I've never met anyone that had a problem with it, personally.

I meant it primarily in the sense of not supporting the company who gave you the rules for the game. I have no problem with third party minis, and I don't think most people do. It just seems a tad disrespectful to bring an army of Company A to an event falling under the paradigm of Company B.

Kirasu wrote:I allow Mantic, banebeast/lords, forgeworld and any model that looks correct into my events.

Does anyone not allow FW in their events? Or did you mean rules? Honestly curious, I've never heard of any event that disallowed FW minis (since they're an official GW branch).

Does anyone not allow FW in their events? Or did you mean rules? Honestly curious, I've never heard of any event that disallowed FW minis (since they're an official GW branch).

I meant the rules more specifically, although I personally don't see a difference between FW minis and other companies. Both are expensive and generally can't be bought off the shelf so if one is allowed then so should others. I've never understood the idea that we as players and independent TO's must ascribe to GW's protectionist gaming policy.

I don't see a reason for an Indy run tourney to care what minis you use as long as they are what you see is what you get.

I also am considering getting in on the Mantic kickstarter to start an undead army.