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.

mikhaila wrote:I try to be consistant from locals to regionals. WYWIWYG is the rule, and it gets enforced.

And that's good, because as the TO, it's really your job to ensure the integrity of your tournament. You don't want to be named as the TO who let some guy slide.
____

pretre wrote:To be fair though, mikhaila, s0me of your examples are way beyond WYSIWYG into the realm of 'Really???'.

Oh, really?



1. red plastic cups for drop pods = not WYSIWYG. Not even a legit model.

2. broken weapons on predators and rhinos = not WYSIWYG. How can one tell what the model (tank) is armed with when there are no weapons on it? Especially when the very point of tanking a Pred is it's guns. Not being able to tell if that guy has an Annihilator, Destructor, Baal, or something else is pretty unfair. Especially if he has multiple Preds of different armament on the board.

3. Ork boyz were legs glued to bases = not WYSIWYG. As with the Preds above, how can one tell which models are armed with what, or even whether they're Sluggas or Shootas or Lootas or Nobs?

Sorry, but all of the above are legit reasons to DQ the model, if not the army.
____

augustus5 wrote:I was one of the people that used plastic cups for drop pods before there were GW drop pod models. I would never ad been foolish enough to hand over $80 for a bunch of FW pods.

As others have said, not in tournament play.
____

Mundar wrote:What about square bases on fantasy models being used in 40k?

If the model was originally only supplied with a square base (i.e. OOP 2E Dreads & Daemons), there is no basis for complaint. Same as metal Termies on 25mm rounds.
____

winterman wrote:Grenades.

GW specifically stated in their WYSIWYG rules that grenades didn't matter.

GW specifically stated in their WYSIWYG rules that grenades didn't matter.

Which rules are those? 5ed WYSWIG rules say no such thing. Neither do the ard boyz rules. Another bit of prior-ruleset-itis.

And see that's what I was getting at, verbatim from current rulesets there's no real difference between not having toxin sacs on your gargoyles and not modelling melta bombs on your assault marines. Yet people make a distinction.

just gonna +1 a few ideas. as a chaos mortals player I often use non wysiwyg (mostly for different marks since they are all color specific), I have never had anyone complain, but I always tell them at deployment as well as having a list handy, and make sure they feel as comfortable as if the army was a wysiwyg

1. If you are using counts as models (like the spine gaunt as other gaunt example) then *all* similar models are counts as (in this case meaning you couldn't have one unit as spine gaunts and the other as horma gaunts)
2. If it isn't a model you can't use it, I remember playing a 40k tourney the weekend necrons were released, and some chucklehead brought a waterbottle filled with boltgun metal water and counted it as a monolith... I couldn't believe the organizer allowed it, and havnt attended his tourneys since.
3. Be upfront. I don't care if you stomp me with a counts as list, I do care if you use a fark-ton of counts as units to try to confuse me into a loss. Let me know *everything* before the game starts
4. If your model isn't complete don't use it, unless you are converting because gw doesn't make a model for the unit... Your tank doesn't have sponsons because you want to magnatize the sponsons? Use it next tourney... You have 40 orcs you bough this morning, so you only had time to glue the feet to the bases? Use them next tourney... You have gs'ed a super sweet swarmlord and are waitng for a couple of sword arms to ship? Not a problem

overall I think wysiwyg is there to try to get consistancy for the sake of your opponent, rather than just to be a hard on about modeling

Great Unclean One wrote:Ah ok, thanks man, the problem is that the chaos marines come with chainsword, pistol and bolter as standard and fitting them all on a model can be a wee bit tricky... also makes them look very bulky. But thanks for that ^^

The Chaos Marine box does come with a couple of pistol holsters, which is one easy way of representing them. You'll need to scrounge for extras through.

Although, to be honest, I doubt too many players would have a problem with not having all pistols represented, since they are standard gear... it's easy enough to just say 'hey, they all have pistols' at the start of the game.

Does 5E even mention WYSIWYG?

For Grenades, I'm going off of the various GW Tournament rulespacks.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Does 5E even mention WYSIWYG?

The rulebook mentions it for Characters.

I believe (not going to go check as breakfast is a bit more pressing right now) that at least some of the codexes still mention upgrades needing to be modelled.


As far as I can recall, no mention is made of models specifically having to have regular gear modelled... Some take that as meaning that it doesn't need to be shown, some take it as not being mentioned because it's a given that models should be appropriately equipped anyway.

What if it is converted stuff? Like i have lightning claws that i made, they are obviously lightning claws when you look at them. Does this count?

Asking on forums for specific answers to specific WYSIWYG questions is ultimately pointless.

WYSIWYG is really very simple: When your opponent looks at the model, what he sees should be what is presented in the army list.

Conversions are fine, so long as they are recognisable. 'Counts as' is fine, so long as it is clear, consistent, and not confusing to your opponent.

All that WYSIWYG is supposed to do is make the game easier and less confusing for both players.

As for the gunless Rhino...Rhinos come standard with a Storm Bolter (At least as far back as I remember)...It isn't an upgrade, thus should still be usable (No additional stormbolters though). Same as CSm's...They come standard with Bolters, BP's, and CCW's...Usually you only need to model upgrades, not standard kit.

I realize no one here can answer for my local TO, but I was wondering how others feel about things like options for daemons, are you expected to model your breath of chaos or powers like unholy might? What about on a necron lord things like gaze of flame? I get that you have to have a powerfist if you have one on the guy, but it seems like saying you have to display each upgrade for some things is just a game breaker. Like a Chaos Daemon Daemon prince of Nurgle, do you have to model the mark, what about the defensive grenade like power, what about breath of chaos the list goes on and on. Also if it comes standard do you need to model it? Like CSM all have the 3 weapon trifecta but I have seldom seen any models made that way even on GW site.

Some stuff is common sense, and don't forget the almighty "Counts As" rule.

For example, my Emperor's Tarot isn't represented on my Inquisitor. He's got pockets and pouches and whatnot where it could easily be. Or he left it on the Strike Cruiser so it wouldn't get damaged after he consulted it. Modeling a couple of pouches on your guys with a lot of odd wargear can be helpful.

Player A: "Where's your Sergeant's Melta Bombs?"
Player B: "They're in his pocket, beeyatch! Recognize!"

On the combi-weapons. I have combi-meltas and combi-plasmas. I have never seen a combi-flamer, although I made a really crappy one.

Is there any boxed set or model that comes with a combi-flamer? If not, could I use a combi-melta and/or combi-plasma? Does that violate WYSIWYG?

Combi-meltas, Combi-plasmas, and combi-flamers are all different weapons, and should be modeled to be recognizable. If you can’t find an appropriate bit, your best bet is generally to take a bolter and the other gun, and clip/shave them to fit together.

Mannahnin wrote:Combi-meltas, Combi-plasmas, and combi-flamers are all different weapons, and should be modeled to be recognizable. If you can’t find an appropriate bit, your best bet is generally to take a bolter and the other gun, and clip/shave them to fit together.

I don't have a problem with that, as I enjoy converting and have specifically made a combi-flamer that should be very easy to recognize. However, there is no standard bit available for the combi-flamer and not everyone has my mad (horrible) conversion skills. Is this something that is really going to get someone dinged in a tournament if they use a combi-plasma for a combi-flamer?

I’m not sure if there is a standard bit. I know the chaos terminators come with one, but I’m not sure about a smaller one for power-armored marines.

But for reference, yes, generally having one kind of clearly-recognizable weapon and calling it another is a violation of WYSIWYG. Whether you actually suffer any kind of consequence for this is going to be at the discretion of the tournament organizer and your opponents, and they may be kind. But I certainly wouldn’t do it. I had two squads of terminators with converted combi-plasmas in 4th ed, which I’ve since busted off and replaced with combi-meltas and a combi-flamer.

WYSIWYG to me means that when i look at the model from the other side of the table i need to know what important wargear it has.


or maybe simplier, if you field a model it is reasonable to not model things that are required in the model,

so a tactical space marine always has
power armor
boltgun
bolt pistol
frag+crack

a tactical marine would have to be modeled if it is
sergeant as it is a specifically different model from a tactical marine
meltagun - upgrade
lascannon - upgrade

additionally
power fist - upgrade on sergeant


Orks

an ork boy has two choices, shoota or slugga/ccw these should be modeled as such because they are distinctly different models and different game effects.

There are two issues here. One WYSIWYG is not clearly defined and uses the word should in the BRB.

Should does not mean must.

You always need to check at almost every tournament specifically if your models are truly WYSIWYG if there is any question. In years of tourneys the general rules that I have found are:

1) If the model comes with it base don't bother modeling it.
2)If it is an upgrade that is not a weapon and has no affect on stat line such as an Emperor's tarot you usually don't have to model it.
3) If you have modeled anything that does not have a bit no one can tell you what it is supposed to look like so specify what it is to judges/opponents and you are covered
4) Many Kits come with none of the upgrade bits labeled. So if you are Tyranids and Tau many people won't know what any particular bit represents in your mind when you modeled it. Explain it and move on.
5) If the item is known by everyone who has played more than 3 games, i.e. a power sword it cannot be a power fist no matter what you claim to a judge.
6) Giving a run down on converted models before the game begins stops almost all general git-tery before it begins and you can use my favorite line "suck it up cupcake" if they complain at the end. They had their chance.
7) If you have to lose one random piece of gear due to some tard nut you will almost certainly win because you are the better player and they have angered you. Smile and compliment every unit you kill, compliment the one model a turn they kill from you. Laugh as they grow angrier and angrier.
8) When you collect the prize at the end make sure you stop and show them what they didn't get and thank them for a good game.

What about akimbo pistols or duel wielding chainswords? If I have an Assault Marine unit, can some of them be using akimbo, while others have both arms with chainswords, under the Rule of Cool?

No one cares about models with two chainswords/pistols.

Pika_power wrote:What about akimbo pistols or duel wielding chainswords? If I have an Assault Marine unit, can some of them be using akimbo, while others have both arms with chainswords, under the Rule of Cool?

Yes and no.

Dual pistols is Pistol and CCW.

Two Chainswords is not. But put a holster on him and you're WYSIWYG.

RoC doesn't factor in.

(I do this with my SW.)

I'm currently modeling an Adeptus Mechanicus strike force that will be counts as Daemons. It actually makes modeling the daemon upgrades like wind of chaos easy. Just put a huge flamer on the guy

I don't think anyone is gonna have any issues with my builds as they will be consistant and pretty easy to tell what they are (i.e. Tzeentch Herald Chariot=Speeder Storm w/Lascannon front mounted weapon to represent the Bolt of Tzeentch and with a Tech-Priest in the troop bay).

Fortunately Rule of Cool does work if you do it right

Hulksmash wrote:

Fortunately Rule of Cool does work if you do it right

This a thousand times. If someone put that much effort into converting an awesome army, I would put the effort forward to memorize what everything is.

Reading this makes me a bit concerned about some recently Konverted/Kustomized models I created.

1. Extra Wide Battlewagon. Something I've been wanting to do for awhile. I took a GW Wagon and made it a bit bigger...well, Wider mostly. I'm not sure if this is going to cause issues or not. I hope it won't be seen as "modeling to the advantage". I personally think it looks a lot better this way, but I feel like I should've also added a bit of height and length as well to balance it out.

2. Nob Bikers from Deffkoptas. A very common and well known way to create Nob Bikers. Along with looking really awesome, they tend to be at least 2x the size of a regular Warbiker. I hope this doesn't cause problems. I'm planning on measuring from base to base, even though some terrain and model bits extend beyond the typical Biker Base.

Other than that, I only have a few WYSIWYG concerns.

1. Big Shootas on Trukks and Dakka Guns on Bikers. Since both of these come equipped as default, and it's the only weapon they could possibley have, I wonder if I need to model them on. I'm sure I can find my Ork Gunners and attach them and I believe I have enough guns to attach one or two to every Ork Biker.

2. Big Mek with KFF and Burna. I currently have a custom Big Mek with KFF that came with the Ork starting army that I bought off another player at my LGS. The Ork is a bit smaller than the Current Big Mek with a KFF. I believe it's a 3rd edition or earlier model and the arms/body in general feel a bit smaller than most of the current Ork Models. I think putting a regular Burna on him would feel and look out of place, plus he's kinda falling apart. I'm considering rebuilding a Big Mek with KFF, if I can find a good model to use and scratch-build a KFF in one day.

pretre wrote:

Pika_power wrote:What about akimbo pistols or duel wielding chainswords? If I have an Assault Marine unit, can some of them be using akimbo, while others have both arms with chainswords, under the Rule of Cool?

Yes and no.

Dual pistols is Pistol and CCW.

Two Chainswords is not. But put a holster on him and you're WYSIWYG.

RoC doesn't factor in.

(I do this with my SW.)

I'd want to make sure the pistols aren't somehow TL like Seraphim pistols are, but after finding out it's just modelled that way, I'd be cool with it.

insaniak wrote:

Great Unclean One wrote:Ah ok, thanks man, the problem is that the chaos marines come with chainsword, pistol and bolter as standard and fitting them all on a model can be a wee bit tricky... also makes them look very bulky. But thanks for that ^^

The Chaos Marine box does come with a couple of pistol holsters, which is one easy way of representing them. You'll need to scrounge for extras through.

Although, to be honest, I doubt too many players would have a problem with not having all pistols represented, since they are standard gear... it's easy enough to just say 'hey, they all have pistols' at the start of the game.

This. If it's standard equipment or grenades, I don't have a problem with my opponent leaving it out. A CSM with bolter, bolt pistol and CCW, while doable given the bits in the boxed set, looks extremely overencumbered and silly.

Likewise, something like a Rhino missing its bolter...whatever. It's not going to make a huge difference and it comes with the thing anyway.



I have a much greater problem with people modeling for effect than not modeling at all. Using Forgeworld stuff that is quite obviously advantageous over the existing GW product, ie: using a Forgeworld Ork Battlefortress as a Battlewagon with Hardcase. It's MUCH bigger, and the size increase is nothing but advantageous for a Kan-wall list. Some other Forgeworld models put the weapons on vehicles up higher on the model than the GW equivalents, so you can use intervening friendly models as screening while shooting over them without giving your target a coversave. It might be legal, but it's "modeling for effect" and undeniably lame, especially if your strategy revolves around using that screen.

I completley agree with WYSIWYG with one exception. All Tactical Space Marines have a boltgun and a pistol this is universal for codex SM therefore a pistol does not need to be modeled.

CSM and GH have a bolter, pistol and ccw as standard again stated in codex therefore it does not need to be modelled.

Any unit that has grenades in the codex these do not need to be modeled.

If these things are stated in the codex you should have nbo need to model them. If your opponent does not know they have these things then it is their own fault. If it is stated in the codex the model has them.

Special Weapons, Heavy Weapons and upgrades of all sorts should be modeled with the exception of something like artificer armour which is very hard to model without looking like well painted power armour. Extra Armour on vehicles is the same. You should tell your opponent when you give him your army list that a model has one of these and show him the model ask him if he has any questions if he doesn't and everything has been declared then he has no grounds for redress if he forgets.

I think a little common sense helps with WYSIWYG. Generally, it's impractical to model every piece of wargear the models come with basic (i.e. boltgun, bolt pistol and CCW on Chaos marines)

However, if an upgrade has been taken, such as a meltagun or a unit champion, it is vital you represent these. This is especially true of any upgrades given to the aforementioned champion. I've probably just restated the posts of various others, but even so, this is what I think.

There, that's my thoughts on the matter.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:I think a little common sense helps with WYSIWYG. Generally, it's impractical to model every piece of wargear the models come with basic (i.e. boltgun, bolt pistol and CCW on Chaos marines)

However, if an upgrade has been taken, such as a meltagun or a unit champion, it is vital you represent these. This is especially true of any upgrades given to the aforementioned champion. I've probably just restated the posts of various others, but even so, this is what I think.

There, that's my thoughts on the matter.

Absolutely, and it should be modeled in a way that actually reflects what we're dealing with.

I've seen some pretty silly looking combi-weapons that don't really look like anything. If it's supposed to be a combi-melta then it should look like a combi-melta.

Darkzephyr wrote:1. Big Shootas on Trukks and Dakka Guns on Bikers. Since both of these come equipped as default, and it's the only weapon they could possibley have, I wonder if I need to model them on. I'm sure I can find my Ork Gunners and attach them and I believe I have enough guns to attach one or two to every Ork Biker.

Opinions will vary on the bikers. As many people are saying in this thread, some won't care if standard gear isn't modelled. For me, the point of WYSIWYG is that models should represent what they are supposed to be. Leaving the guns off Ork bikes is confusing, particularly for people who have played previous editions where the guns were optional.

The big shootas on trukks (or any other vehicle weapons that are missing) are an issue, because measurement and LOS for the vehicle's shooting is from the weapon. A little hard to do if the weapon isn't there.

insaniak wrote:

Darkzephyr wrote:1. Big Shootas on Trukks and Dakka Guns on Bikers. Since both of these come equipped as default, and it's the only weapon they could possibley have, I wonder if I need to model them on. I'm sure I can find my Ork Gunners and attach them and I believe I have enough guns to attach one or two to every Ork Biker.

Opinions will vary on the bikers. As many people are saying in this thread, some won't care if standard gear isn't modelled. For me, the point of WYSIWYG is that models should represent what they are supposed to be. Leaving the guns off Ork bikes is confusing, particularly for people who have played previous editions where the guns were optional.

The big shootas on trukks (or any other vehicle weapons that are missing) are an issue, because measurement and LOS for the vehicle's shooting is from the weapon. A little hard to do if the weapon isn't there.

Agreed. Trucks can upgrade to another weapon, and should have the weapon on the vehicle, including the standard one, for measuring to targets. Trucks come with the part, it's not like you have to go scrounging for them.

Bikes should have guns. In casual games where I want to run 20 bikers, I might break out my heavily modified bikers from last edition that use the gorka morka rider and have no dakka guns. I wouldn't use them in a tournament, as they obviously don't have guns, and the pistol the driver waves over sure isn't putting out that many shots.