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.

Looking at some data sheets in the CSM list it appears to me that there are wargear options that aren’t reflected in the boxes.

Noise marines are probably the standouts as they can have power fists and plasma weapons aswell as other sonic weapons.

Beast men and traitor guards don’t seem to have all the options but I’ve only seen the assembled models on the GW site. I think it’s the same for cultists aswell.

Of course this might just me making do as I think the only boxes for these units come from the kill team or boarding actions range

mrFickle wrote:
Looking at some data sheets in the CSM list it appears to me that there are wargear options that aren’t reflected in the boxes.

Noise marines are probably the standouts as they can have power fists and plasma weapons aswell as other sonic weapons.

Beast men and traitor guards don’t seem to have all the options but I’ve only seen the assembled models on the GW site. I think it’s the same for cultists aswell.

Of course this might just me making do as I think the only boxes for these units come from the kill team or boarding actions range

Noise Marines belong in finecast upgrade purgatory and get the weird/inconsistent legacy treatment. They're one of the last notable examples of that, so I feel like the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions. I'm honestly a little surprised that GW didn't Legends them and then bring them back when they get a new kit/EC gets a codex.

In some ways yes, in other ways no.

For the most part, the idea of kitbashing rules is not prominent. In many aspects, it's the least possible ever, with most units pretty limited to fielding what can be built out of the box.

On the other hand, they're significantly more general in their description of weapons, which means there's significantly more room to find cool parts to add on to models and still have them represent things in the rules accurately.

Personally, I think its a pretty ideal compromise, even if not every model I've built fits the template.

Also:

In editions 1-7, we all got the idea that conversion was about altering a model's loadout. And when must of us were converting, we were doing it so we could field the bling.

There's nothing wrong with that- in fact, it's pretty cool.

But it's not the only reason for converting. You don't actually need a rules based excuse to convert, nor do you need a gap in the range to create a need for conversion.

And GW very, very clearly supports this second type of conversion, even if they haven't been great at supporting the first in recent editions.

I buy WD almost every month. I can't remembering seeing an issue without at least one conversion. They aren't always how-to articles- in fact, those ARE quite rare- but they are often featured in the letters section, often under the banner of "Conversion Corner," and every time GW features an army, it usually includes at least one.

Problem is that you get people who think that only the first type of conversion actually counts as a conversion, and these folks are the ones who are always talking about GW not supporting conversions while the rest of us are flipping through White Dwarf and admiring the conversions that continue to appear there month after month.

Until I'm allowed my dual pistol Vanguard and triple sniper Skitarii Rangers, no. Just wait for the new Noise Marine kit and you'll get all the restrictions you expect.

mrFickle wrote:
Noise marines are probably the standouts as they can have power fists and plasma weapons aswell as other sonic weapons.

Noise Marines don't have a kit. The only Noise Marine items out there are a limited edition model that you can't buy, and a conversion kit made for a long OOP box of plastic Chaos Marines. They are a legacy item that exists in stasis until such time as they get a new kit, at which point they'll lose most of the non-Noise Marine specific things they currently have (just like Berzerkers did)

mrFickle wrote:
Beast men and traitor guards don’t seem to have all the options but I’ve only seen the assembled models on the GW site. I think it’s the same for cultists aswell.

Likely an oversight in the rush to make 40,000 new datasheets for 10th. I don't imagine that, should they be updated/included in the Chaos 'Dex, that Traitor Guard will get to keep their duplicate special weapons.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

mrFickle wrote:
Noise marines are probably the standouts as they can have power fists and plasma weapons aswell as other sonic weapons.

Noise Marines don't have a kit. The only Noise Marine items out there are a limited edition model that you can't buy, and a conversion kit made for a long OOP box of plastic Chaos Marines.

You mean the conversion bitz that fits nicely on the current CSM kit?
And the Noise Marine that's available for general sale on GWs site (though currently out of stock on the US site - along with any # if other things)?

There's also the Jump Librarian for Space Marines. The SM Captain on Bike. Any firstborn Lieutenant build. The Deathwing Strikemaster. The Ravenwing Talonmaster. Most of these are some sort of kitbash - the Talonmaster is a Landspeeder plus Ravenwing upgrade sprue. The Lieutenant is adding bling to one model from a generic marine box, or repurposing a different character clamshell.

The longer those hold on, the better chances are we can get back to kitbashing etc.

Again, those are legacy items. They're more likely to be Legend'd than get new models.

ccs wrote:
You mean the conversion bitz that fits nicely on the current CSM kit?

Nicely? If you say so.

ccs wrote:
And the Noise Marine that's available for general sale on GWs site (though currently out of stock on the US site - along with any # if other things)?

I genuinely thought he was a Limited Edition model. Didn't realise he was a general release.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Again, those are legacy items. They're more likely to be Legend'd than get new models.

The Strikemaster was introduced in 9th edition. The Talonmaster in 8th.

And they're, what, fancy names for Lieutenants? I mean with the inevitable Primarisisation of the Blood Angel, Dark Angel and Space Wolve model ranges that we're going to get this edition, I could see those units being revamped.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And they're, what, fancy names for Lieutenants?

Yep, they're the Terminator Lieutenant for Deathwing, and the Landspeeder Lieutenant for Ravenwing. I think there was a kit for the Talonmaster for a short period - probably a reboxed Samael on Sableclaw model with the Talonmaster name - but now you have to buy a Landspeeder kit and the upgrade sprue. As far as I know there's never been a first born Lieutenant at the same time there were rules for a first born lieutenant. I think there were some metal minis labelled Lieutenant in the Slottabase Tab but I'm also pretty sure they were OOP by the time GW made the Lieutenant datasheet.

For Space Marines, generally speaking yes. For any other army? Not really.

In 9th they added an extra data sheet to kitbash the Autarch kits (maybe after it was noted you couldn't take the one on the cover of the codex).

Only to rescind it all in 10th with specific equipment rules that were more complicated and convoluted than just having options for range weapon and melee weapon.

GW decided in 10th that Wyches don't get to use the stuff that is in their own box, let alone make use of the design on the dark eldar range that makes wargear interchangeable across kits, so I think you can safely say that no, GW are not getting comfortable with kitbashing again.

As I look at the datasheets of an Archon (easily kitbashable with Kabalites and Scourges – can only take a pistol), a Succubus (easily kitbashable with Wyches – can only take a pistol), and a Haemonculus (kitbashable with Wracks – "Wargear options: None"), well...

If you mean that GW is getting comfortable with wargear options which reflect the potential to kitbash various models, then the answer is either "not really" or, perhaps more accurately, "not in a consistent manner".

PenitentJake wrote:
But it's not the only reason for converting. You don't actually need a rules based excuse to convert, nor do you need a gap in the range to create a need for conversion.

You don't need one but if the rules aren't there then it's very quickly going to become tedious when you realise that all your hard work is about as impactful as taking the standard model and giving it a silly hat.

Shall I use the Dark Eldar codex as an example?

Let's say I wanted to convert a Haemonculus. In the past, there were a myriad of weapons and options available that gave a lot of flexibility in terms of how you could represent a conversion:
- If you modelled it with a blade, you could represent that with a Venom Blade, Huskblade, or basic Power Weapon.
- If you modelled it with a whip, you could have an Electrocorrosive Whip or an Agoniser.
- If you modelled it with something else, you could have Scissorhands, Mindphase Gauntlet, or Flesh Gauntlet.

Similarly:
- If you modelled it with a Pistol, you could have the Splinter Pistol or Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with a Rifle, you could represent it with the Hexrifle.
- If you modelled it with something else, you could have the Liquifier Gun.

Then of course you had other rules for other equipment that you could add for extra flavour (perhaps to represent one or more aspects of a conversion that don't come under any of the above). e.g. Vexator Mask, Soul-Trap, Animus Vitae, Webway Portal etc.


Having these options allows you to actually represent different conversions on the tabletop.

Conversely, look at Haemonculi now:
- If you modelled it with a blade, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.
- If you modelled it with a whip, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.
- If you modelled it with something else, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.

Likewise:
- If you modelled it with a Pistol, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with a Rifle, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with something else, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.

Apart from anything else, this means that multiple, different conversions play exactly the same on the tabletop. You can no longer customise one to have better range and another to be better at duelling. You get one loadout and that's your lot.


I fail to see how this approach can possibly encourage any conversions or creativity.

PenitentJake wrote:
And GW very, very clearly supports this second type of conversion, even if they haven't been great at supporting the first in recent editions.

We clearly have very different ideas on what it means to support this sort of conversion.

GW has never been less friendly towards kitbashing, to the point that I’m sure they would explicitly forbid it if they thought they could get away with it.

Say what you will, but imo kit bashes (and conversions in general) have always been driven by equipment options. Representing things which may not come stock on the models sprue / unique items of war gear such as relics, was always my personal big motivator.

Yet these days we’ve somehow moved past even the stupidity of No-Model-No-rules into a zone where there are numerous kits that cannot even take the options available in the box. Not that they cannot take everything in the box at once, but that there are things in the box that the unit is not allowed to take period. It’s dumb beyond belief.

Noise Marines are s relic of a bygone age supported only by an upgrade sprue that…kinda… works with the current CSM kit. But as EC are probably the next legion codex, that’s not going to last forever. When they do get their codex and upgrade it’d be best to hope that they get the Berzerker treatment, who actually came out “alright” in terms of build options… at least by new kit standards. Especially when the alternative is ork boys, ergo entirely easy build monopose with like one option for one model.

Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

Yeah, I've got some lovely kitbashed CSM Havocs made out of a combination of Space Wolves, Grey Knights and Possessed. I didn't do them myself, they were an ebay find. They were from before the new kit was released and had the highly desirable 4 x autocannon loadout.

Not sure if that loadout is still valid, let alone desirable - the World Eater codex invalidated the whole damn unit for me. :(

 alextroy wrote:
Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

But they still play like every other Model X in the game, so why even bother at this point?

 vipoid wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

But they still play like every other Model X in the game, so why even bother at this point?

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

 Gert wrote:
For Space Marines, generally speaking yes. For any other army? Not really.

"And They Shall Know No Unfavourable Rules Changes."

 vipoid wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
But it's not the only reason for converting. You don't actually need a rules based excuse to convert, nor do you need a gap in the range to create a need for conversion.

You don't need one but if the rules aren't there then it's very quickly going to become tedious when you realise that all your hard work is about as impactful as taking the standard model and giving it a silly hat.

Shall I use the Dark Eldar codex as an example?

Let's say I wanted to convert a Haemonculus. In the past, there were a myriad of weapons and options available that gave a lot of flexibility in terms of how you could represent a conversion:
- If you modelled it with a blade, you could represent that with a Venom Blade, Huskblade, or basic Power Weapon.
- If you modelled it with a whip, you could have an Electrocorrosive Whip or an Agoniser.
- If you modelled it with something else, you could have Scissorhands, Mindphase Gauntlet, or Flesh Gauntlet.

Similarly:
- If you modelled it with a Pistol, you could have the Splinter Pistol or Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with a Rifle, you could represent it with the Hexrifle.
- If you modelled it with something else, you could have the Liquifier Gun.

Then of course you had other rules for other equipment that you could add for extra flavour (perhaps to represent one or more aspects of a conversion that don't come under any of the above). e.g. Vexator Mask, Soul-Trap, Animus Vitae, Webway Portal etc.


Having these options allows you to actually represent different conversions on the tabletop.

Conversely, look at Haemonculi now:
- If you modelled it with a blade, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.
- If you modelled it with a whip, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.
- If you modelled it with something else, it doesn't matter - you get Haemonculus Tools.

Likewise:
- If you modelled it with a Pistol, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with a Rifle, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.
- If you modelled it with something else, it doesn't matter - you get a Stinger Pistol.

Apart from anything else, this means that multiple, different conversions play exactly the same on the tabletop. You can no longer customise one to have better range and another to be better at duelling. You get one loadout and that's your lot.


I fail to see how this approach can possibly encourage any conversions or creativity.

You know what I [i]don't[i] have though?
3 identical looking Haemonculi.
You might not see that as something worth caring about, but others of us do.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

But they still play like every other Model X in the game, so why even bother at this point?

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

Exactly. I have Battle Sister model kitbashed to be holding a Heavy Flamer in one hand and a Bolt Pistol in the other. She is WYSIWYG and plays just like any other Battle Sister with Heavy Flamer. She is also damn cool!

 alextroy wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

But they still play like every other Model X in the game, so why even bother at this point?

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

Exactly. I have Battle Sister model kitbashed to be holding a Heavy Flamer in one hand and a Bolt Pistol in the other. She is WYSIWYG and plays just like any other Battle Sister with Heavy Flamer. She is also damn cool!

First off, that sounds awesome. But imagine that that model gets new rules and can now only take a bolt pistol. Your converted model is now only ever using its pistol, the heavy flamer is just for show. That's essentially what happened to the haemonculus.

Also you mention wysiwyg, did you by chance model it with heavy flamer and bolt pistol because those weapons are what that model has/had rules-wise (honest question, not familiar with sisters)? I ask because if yes then that'd be exactly what vipoid is getting at, a conversion inspired by rules. There's no inspiration for haemonculus conversions in the statline anymore. You can still make it whatever you want, but it's more fun if your conversion is actually reflected in-game.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

So there would be no complaints if Marines were made T3 W1 Sv5+?

The models are cool so nothing else matters, right?

ccs wrote:

You know what I [i]don't[i] have though?
3 identical looking Haemonculi.
You might not see that as something worth caring about, but others of us do.

Not just me - GW doesn't see that as something worth caring about either.

shortymcnostrill wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Many kitbashes are done purely to make a model look cool and not like every other Model X in the game.

But they still play like every other Model X in the game, so why even bother at this point?

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

Exactly. I have Battle Sister model kitbashed to be holding a Heavy Flamer in one hand and a Bolt Pistol in the other. She is WYSIWYG and plays just like any other Battle Sister with Heavy Flamer. She is also damn cool!

First off, that sounds awesome. But imagine that that model gets new rules and can now only take a bolt pistol. Your converted model is now only ever using its pistol, the heavy flamer is just for show. That's essentially what happened to the haemonculus.

Also you mention wysiwyg, did you by chance model it with heavy flamer and bolt pistol because those weapons are what that model has/had rules-wise (honest question, not familiar with sisters)? I ask because if yes then that'd be exactly what vipoid is getting at, a conversion inspired by rules. There's no inspiration for haemonculus conversions in the statline anymore. You can still make it whatever you want, but it's more fun if your conversion is actually reflected in-game.

There are many weapon flattenings that I don’t agree with. Drukhari were decimated in the weapons option arena, even in cases where simple kitbashes allows for variety. Wyches were done dirty with the loss of all special weapons.

But that wasn’t the question I was answering. That was “why kitbash if it doesn’t change the rules”. My Retributor holding her Bolt Pistol is an example of a kitbash because it was cool, it put an otherwise not represented Bolt pistol on the model, and it let me avoid needing to line up the second hand on the Heavy Flamer.

 vipoid wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

It's a model figurine. The point is to look cool, I think?

So there would be no complaints if Marines were made T3 W1 Sv5+?

The models are cool so nothing else matters, right?

ccs wrote:

You know what I [i]don't[i] have though?
3 identical looking Haemonculi.
You might not see that as something worth caring about, but others of us do.

Not just me - GW doesn't see that as something worth caring about either.

Ok, so what? I still have 3 distinct looking models that I like better than the standard model. I also have models in other forces that've been moded for no other reason than appearance.

Yeah, I gotta say, I'm not buying the "distinct models without distinct rules are worthwhile" argument. I kitbash the crap out of my armies (I have multiple armies where well over half of the models are), but I'm a lot more likely to put any effort in so if there's a reason to, especially with characters. I don't play dark eldar. Is there a reason to take three Haemonculi in this edition? Because, if there isn't, there's no reason, and in practice you'll see someone take their favorite and the rest stay home.

This isn't entirely distinct from models with upgrades that are unquestionably upgrades and not roughly equivalent builds: no options is similar but worse.

I build characters because it's fun to think, well, I've got this character, but what if I feel like kitting this dude out for big game, or barebones, or anti-infantry, and I often build my own little character out of this, and then there's the satisfaction of trying that character out and as you play their loadout maybe you build your own narrative or background or simply like your build (model and mechanics) and history with it. If models are all mechanically identical, what's the motivation? "I really want to model and paint a second Haemonculus or Captain or whatever but this one will have a weapon that used to be a viable option, but now I'll take some {subpar/illegal} gear and get to {pay proportionally more for my build/explain that this is a proxy that's the same as the other one of this model}.

GW's new mode isn't going to prohibit conversions and won't stop me, but I would be shocked if this had a neutral or positive effect for that part of the hobby. My small player group playing old editions was ready to update to 10th rules when we saw the basic mechanics which looked pretty solid and like improvements in some areas, but the lack of incentive to customize left us cold, and it felt like continuing old editions was the only way to keep what we liked about army building.