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.

I was wondering how WYSIWYG is applied to older GW Models. I have some older metal marines and a couple of the Original RT dreadnoughts and would really like to paint those up for the army but I suppose the question is: How do they fit into the current rules/troops format since they are (in modern scaling) ridiculously small?

Some examples (all models are official GW/Citadel/Marauder circa 1985-1995):

- Basic Marines: OBV cant be used as primaris, so only used as a Tactical Squad?
- Older Heavy weapons - Can these be used as Devastators?
- I have a Chaplaiin on Jet bike (you know - the one thats half the size of a current bike) can that be purchased and used as a chaplian on bike?
- I have older Terminaltor Storm shields - will this still count? The SS i see on todays models are almost as large as the model
- And the RT dreads.... I believe that the one of the arms is a double storm bolter, but since the model is so old is there a modern equivalent that is commonly accepted?

I also assume that all of these figures above will require the current basing standard, which just highlights how small true 25 mm scale is...

Basic marines it's how they are equipped and painted tac assault or devastators

It doesn't really matter if it doesn't effect the overall size of the model so stormshields changejng size is not a big issue but if a model is a different shape and base it would usually not be permitted.

Bases should normally be the size the model came with.

The exception being if the model has changed base size e.g. I have the old metal dialogus but have updated to the current dialogus base size noone will complain at that

WYSIWYG is not a rule.

Some Tournaments have house rules about models, but you would have to ask the TO's about their house rules.

In friendly games, you would have to ask your opponent.

There are no general official rules for WYSIWYG, so you won't get anything properly definitive here.

If you're just talking about casual games you'd be better off asking your group or local shop if they have rules or preferences on this. Tournaments will normally have fairly strict rules about what models can be used for what too, but they do vary from event to event.

Anecdotally, I would think most casual players would love to see some very old models on the table so probably wouldn't have a problem with them representing modern units. But I couldn't say for sure.

Ruleswise, there is no rule preventing you from using you old GW models. WYSIWYG is not defined in the rules, which just use a vague statement that the unit entries are the rules for using your models in the game.

Some people interpret this to mean the model dictates what rules you use for it. So a marine armed with a heavy bolter has to be used a a marine armed with a heavy bolter. Others say, any GW model can be used with any rules you want.

Ultimately, it is a question for your play group. If you branch out to tournaments, it becomes a question for the organizers.

Just depends on how your group wants to do it, we have one guy who prefers WSYIWG but for everyone else it doesn't matter what weapon your sgt is modeled with as long as you're upfront with what gear they have.

Tome_Keeper wrote:
I was wondering how WYSIWYG is applied to older GW Models. I have some older metal marines and a couple of the Original RT dreadnoughts and would really like to paint those up for the army but I suppose the question is: How do they fit into the current rules/troops format since they are (in modern scaling) ridiculously small?

In previous editions of the game, there have been various statements in the rulebook covering bases and such. The current edition rules don't say anything in the main rulebook.

The practical answer is that if your old models are significantly smaller than the current ones, you're going to have to do something to make up for the size difference. I've got original Realm of Chaos greater demon models on the 40mm square bases that I bought them with. The current plastic models for those are bases between 100mm and 130mm, and probably about twice as tall (or more) as the originals.

For the old 25mm marine models, the difference isn't nearly as extreme. Here's a comparison of some old metal Plague Marines with the more recent plastic.


Taking your existing 25mm based models (bases and all) and putting them on new 32mm bases would probably be close enough. You won't have some of the ridiculously huge and blinged out character models, but you probably don't have anything to compare to use for those anyway.

I made a Deathwatch army using the Mk 4 Marines from the Betrayal at Calth box set. I came up two marines short for my army (my OCD needs 10 marines in a squad, even if I don't use them) so I added two 2nd edition monopose plastic starter pose marines out of my bits box and conscripted them into the Deathwatch. Yes, they are shorter. Yes, their tiny 25mm bases fail to match everyone else. No one really cares though.

I know it's not a rule, but shouldn't we try to accurately represent our models as what they are? I mean, I don't want to get into basing for advantage again, but if we continue down this path we could get into some very ugly debates. I am hopeful my opponents will always try to accurately display what they are playing.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I know it's not a rule, but shouldn't we try to accurately represent our models as what they are? I mean, I don't want to get into basing for advantage again, but if we continue down this path we could get into some very ugly debates. I am hopeful my opponents will always try to accurately display what they are playing.

As discussed in one of the other threads: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/799123.page#11152240

The problem is that GW has switched from profile based basing to the base size determined to suit the model. Especially when Skarbrand is on a round base and the regular Bloodthirster is on an oval.

I'm more concerned with the far more extreme violations I guess. I played a BA player back in 8th who put Dante (or whatever Smash Captain) on a giant hand made pedestal base, that while amazing and beautiful, was like a 50mm base. This single model was able to tie up a lot of other models. Thats what I mean. Using bases that came in the box 20 years ago even if they don't match the current ones, oh well. I also mean like, my sgt is armed with a TH and a PP, even though his model only has a chain sword and a bolt pistol. That is hard to remember in the heat of things, and seems unfair to do.

Yeah, thats what it comes down to for me.

Ask yourself what extra are you asking of your opponent in remembering what is what in your army and is that fair to ask of them?