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.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Karol wrote:
head manager of local KFC

Krakow Fried Chicken?

But yes, to contribute, my local scene is comparable to yours, Karol. A few folks playing Battletech here too, I guess. And actually occasionally WHFB tournaments too (before Covid). That was always a trip.

Ah yes. I forgot about historicals and old table tops. For some un understandable reason to me. There is a legion, and by that I mean as many people as play W40k, that play historicals. Smaller scale then GW with small models, from different periods. Squad based WWII games. I don't hang around them, but there is a lot of them.

9th age was a thing at the old store too. I know that they still play at a club in my town, after the store closed. They got lucky, because the local school director is from the ruling party and he was a WFB player. And some of the players are really old, like grandfather old at 50 or something.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
I feel like GW, over the years, has adopted policies and practices which deliberately restrict the creativity of players.

You'll get pushback on this from people saying there's a thriving community of converters on facebook or they occasionally feature kitbashing in WD or WarCom articles but I agree.

I don't have a Chaos army anymore but I have a few old codexes and I remember conversions for mutations and converted minis being quite prominently featured. When was the last time a codex said "check this out this guy slapped a Great Unclean One on the front of this tanks and it looks cool as tits maybe you could do that?"?


This kind of stuff when I was a kid inspired me greatly and almost all of the few Chaos models I had were converted (even if it was bad) and I still love reposing, kitbashing and converting stuff if given then oppertunity.

Whereas now for example when Kill Team team came out I was excited at the prospect of our group all kitbashing stuff like trophies and characterising models based on their triumphs or failures and how cool all our kill teams would tell stories no one seemed interested in that part aside from the other guys in the group who'd been playing since the RT era. When 8th started and a bunch of new players joined, after games I'd give people bits from my bits box to use as triophies (necron skulls, tyranid armor plates etc) and they just stare at me blankly and tell me they didn't want them.

Its not that you CAN'T be creative with models anymore, its that GW doesn't encourage it much.

The 3rd edition Ork codex had scratch built Dreadnoughts being shown off.

Citadel used to sell a book with a load of guides to making your own terrain out of polystyrene, cardboard, wire etc.

They told you to make the stuff yoursel because back then they didn't sold you an alternative.

 Galas wrote:
They told you to make the stuff yoursel because back then they didn't sold you an alternative.

Now, according to Dakka, it is "Elitism" and "Gatekeeping" (or whatever buzzword they want to throw around this week...) to suggest players have to do some modelling in a hobby that involves modelling of some extent.

 Sim-Life wrote:

This kind of stuff when I was a kid inspired me greatly and almost all of the few Chaos models I had were converted (even if it was bad) and I still love reposing, kitbashing and converting stuff if given then opportunity.

Its not that you CAN'T be creative with models anymore, its that GW doesn't encourage it much.

It's interesting how culture changes over time. I remember when I first started we had a blast making mutated CSM by taking extra arms and gluing them to the shoulders in order to make 4-armed berserkers. It was a lot of fun even if it was goofy and that kind of stuff was encouraged in the gameshops we frequented in high school. You'd also see neat conversion that were extremely well painted in GW publications so it always seemed like that style of construction was greatly encouraged by the manufacturer.

I took a long break after until I could actually afford this hobby so I'm curious on what influenced the culture to change. Certainly a lack of official images praising this kind of work is a big factor.

I think GW realized that people were giving them most, rather than ALL, of their hobby money, because conversion bits could be got elsewhere...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think GW realized that people were giving them most, rather than ALL, of their hobby money, because conversion bits could be got elsewhere...

but only after GW stopped selling single sprues and metal bits

there was the time when I spend 3 times the money on Bits from GW than the original units costs, just to make the unique
I started with Thousand Sons only because 90% of the army needed to be done with conversions and I still see it as important for game system that there is at least 1 faction were people can go bonkers with the theme and models because there are none from the company (and this will benefit sales as if there is no such faction people will take on all of them to get stuff elsewhere instead of just the 1)

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
...I took a long break after until I could actually afford this hobby so I'm curious on what influenced the culture to change. Certainly a lack of official images praising this kind of work is a big factor.

With the rise of no kit/no rules and no model/no rules in the past five years or so it just feels to me like there's no point. I know there are people who think the models should be a purely artistic exercise that has nothing to do with the game, but I really don't; the models are supposed to represent something in the game, and GW's decision to say "no, the game is only going to allow you to represent kits built exactly according to the instructions" just takes all the fun out of it for me.

Meanwhile, here in reality, thousands of players are still having fun converting and playing games with converted models. Sure, the conversions and customizations now are a bit harder than "rotate waist on poopy squatting space marine", but I and many others are happy with the tradeoff.

Grimtuff wrote:

 Galas wrote:
They told you to make the stuff yoursel because back then they didn't sold you an alternative.

Now, according to Dakka, it is "Elitism" and "Gatekeeping" (or whatever buzzword they want to throw around this week...) to suggest players have to do some modelling in a hobby that involves modelling of some extent.

No, it's an affront to their sensibilities to suggest such terrible thing.... and should be met with vitriol and vehemence.

All those promo shots of unpainted army's battling it out on planet bowling ball really make me want to start 40k. Pages and pages of gray plastic, it's a veritable smorgasbord of how you should play.

Racerguy180 wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

 Galas wrote:
They told you to make the stuff yoursel because back then they didn't sold you an alternative.

Now, according to Dakka, it is "Elitism" and "Gatekeeping" (or whatever buzzword they want to throw around this week...) to suggest players have to do some modelling in a hobby that involves modelling of some extent.

No, it's an affront to their sensibilities to suggest such terrible thing.... and should be met with vitriol and vehemence.

All those promo shots of unpainted army's battling it out on planet bowling ball really make me want to start 40k. Pages and pages of gray plastic, it's a veritable smorgasbord of how you should play.

I will say this once, and will not engage in a brouhaha over it, so keep that in mind. My position is that if someone is able to paint, they should. If they are unable to, such as in the case of a disabled person, they should not be expected to. That is all I took issue with in that thread.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
I feel like GW, over the years, has adopted policies and practices which deliberately restrict the creativity of players.

You'll get pushback on this from people saying there's a thriving community of converters on facebook or they occasionally feature kitbashing in WD or WarCom articles but I agree.

I don't have a Chaos army anymore but I have a few old codexes and I remember conversions for mutations and converted minis being quite prominently featured. When was the last time a codex said "check this out this guy slapped a Great Unclean One on the front of this tanks and it looks cool as tits maybe you could do that?"?

Spoiler:

This kind of stuff when I was a kid inspired me greatly and almost all of the few Chaos models I had were converted (even if it was bad) and I still love reposing, kitbashing and converting stuff if given then oppertunity.

Whereas now for example when Kill Team team came out I was excited at the prospect of our group all kitbashing stuff like trophies and characterising models based on their triumphs or failures and how cool all our kill teams would tell stories no one seemed interested in that part aside from the other guys in the group who'd been playing since the RT era. When 8th started and a bunch of new players joined, after games I'd give people bits from my bits box to use as triophies (necron skulls, tyranid armor plates etc) and they just stare at me blankly and tell me they didn't want them.

Its not that you CAN'T be creative with models anymore, its that GW doesn't encourage it much.

Exactly.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
With the rise of no kit/no rules and no model/no rules in the past five years or so it just feels to me like there's no point. I know there are people who think the models should be a purely artistic exercise that has nothing to do with the game, but I really don't; the models are supposed to represent something in the game, and GW's decision to say "no, the game is only going to allow you to represent kits built exactly according to the instructions" just takes all the fun out of it for me.

I know what you mean, there's nothing more unsatisfying than learning a common weapon for your army can't be used by a particular generic unit like an HQ or worse it's only allowed under Legends like most of the Eldar Autarch. I also think it's a shame that the Eviscerator has become a legends option for the Cannoness, I won't be surprised when it disappears for the Missionary/Preacher either.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Galas wrote:
They told you to make the stuff yoursel because back then they didn't sold you an alternative.

Now, according to Dakka, it is "Elitism" and "Gatekeeping" (or whatever buzzword they want to throw around this week...) to suggest players have to do some modelling in a hobby that involves modelling of some extent.

There is a huge difference between someone doing something because they want to do it, and being forced to do something you don't want to do, by people who like the things you don't want to do or don't like to do.

It would be as if GW started selling all their model kits without heads, and there was a rule that units not fully assembled generate a specific rule proc within the game and on top of it all, you would have to ask your opponent if you they are gracious enough to let you play with unassembled models.

SO far this year, 2 issues of WD have featured extensive conversions. The first was about using AoS Slaanesh bits for 40K- lots of inspiring pics.

The second was the issue with the Fallen.

None of them were tutorials, just inspirational photos. I mention these two specifically because the accompanying articles drew attention specifically to the conversion work.

There have been other examples- I think a few of the players in Tale of Four Warlords have written about conversion work.

It's certainly true that you don't see it in sourcebooks as often as we did, but as someone has already pointed out, in those days, the range was nowhere near as extensive as it is now, and conversion was more necessary due to those limitations.

Regarding conversions, the issue for me is when you're left with nothing to represent.

For example, DE Haemonculi used to inspire great conversions - with some people modifying the existing models (either the current one or the older one) and others basically scratch-building them from other parts. There were a lot of wargear options that didn't come with the model, so there were plenty of options to represent. You could outfit him with swords, whips, claws, gauntlets etc. and have them actually represented in wargear. Likewise, there were at least three different options for ranged weapons (a pistol, a flamer and a rifle).

Now every Haemonculus has the exact same wargear with 0 options. Did you used to like taking a flamer or rifle and convert your own model accordingly? Tough. At best, you get to use those as his pistol. At worst, better get ripping those off if you want your model to by WYSIWYG. Did you convert your Haemonculus with a sword, whip or other such? Tough luck, he now has Haemonculus Tools and Scissorhands. if you wanted something more you should have played Space Marines instead (a proper army).

 vipoid wrote:
Regarding conversions, the issue for me is when you're left with nothing to represent.

For example, DE Haemonculi used to inspire great conversions - with some people modifying the existing models (either the current one or the older one) and others basically scratch-building them from other parts. There were a lot of wargear options that didn't come with the model, so there were plenty of options to represent. You could outfit him with swords, whips, claws, gauntlets etc. and have them actually represented in wargear. Likewise, there were at least three different options for ranged weapons (a pistol, a flamer and a rifle).

Now every Homunculus has the exact same wargear with 0 options. Did you used to like taking a flamer or rifle and convert your own model accordingly? Tough. At best, you get to use those as his pistol. At worst, better get ripping those off if you want your model to by WYSIWYG. Did you convert your Haemonculus with a sword, whip or other such? Tough luck, he now has Haemonculus Tools and Scissorhands. if you wanted something more you should have played Space Marines instead (a proper army).

Yea, that's not how that works. WYSIWYG is for representing the game affecting gear the model does have. Anything else, especially things that aren't options? Those are called decorations.
So just add a pistol & your Homunculus will be back to WYS.

You kind of glossed over what he was getting at...

TBH the fact that now Haemonculi have no options allows far greater freedom to convert one as you wish, because your aesthetic choices won't impact his performance on the table.


I know, I know, the eternal debate between power weapons vs power axes, swords and maces.

Generally I like my characters to be one of two extremes; Have a ton of options, so allow me to configure it ruleswise as I see fit, or have none at all, make it a complete package and let me make him whatever I want.

Nobody has said anything ever about my Ravenwing Champion converted to have two giant wings in a biker-base with a two handed spear leading my ravenwing charge because, you know, he has 0 options as a character.

At the end of the day, people that want to convert will do it. People that don't, wont.

Now you have more people that never convert anything. You have also more people that don't even paint. Then you have also a ton more people that do both of those stuff and post it all in social media. Because you have just more people, period. Now the kind of conversions GW does marketing for in both warhammer community (I remember one post of warhammer community when the new chaos marines were released in how to make them for each legion, both with fallen, noise marines and berzerker conversions) and other plataforms is for pure aesthetic reasons.
(Here it is: Now is not converting is kitbashing: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/04/03/kit-bash-chaos-space-marines/ )

They aren't telling you to take this bit and this other bit to make this option in the rules that has no model to represent it, because that stuff doesnt exist anymore in one way or another.

 Galas wrote:
TBH the fact that now Haemonculi have no options allows far greater freedom to convert one as you wish, because your aesthetic choices won't impact his performance on the table.

This must be whatever counts as 'newspeak' for 40k.

"Now that you have no choices, you are free!"

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You kind of glossed over what he was getting at...

No really. I mean, other than sympathizing with the poster there's nothing I can do about the poor Homunculus's complete lack of options (there's not even a legends entry).
But I can correct his hyperbole & misunderstanding of WYSIWYG.

One of the things I find interesting, and have discussed in other threads, is that equipment options =/= only options.

To me, it is far more interesting to figure out what conversions a Haemonculus needs to be a Master Haemonculus, or a Coven of the Twelve Haemonculus vs. a Prophet of the Flesh.

This is not white knighting for GW; I too am frustrated about the loss of equipment options. But I don't let my sorrow over the loss of equipment options blind me to the cornucopia of non-equipment options that we've been given.

PenitentJake wrote:
One of the things I find interesting, and have discussed in other threads, is that equipment options =/= only options.

To me, it is far more interesting to figure out what conversions a Haemonculus needs to be a Master Haemonculus, or a Coven of the Twelve Haemonculus vs. a Prophet of the Flesh.

Unfortunately, the removal of all the Haemonculus' gear has served to entirely kill my interest in the unit.

So I no longer give a damn which sub-subfaction he's from or whether he'll be a master or not because he won't be in my army in the first place.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH the fact that now Haemonculi have no options allows far greater freedom to convert one as you wish, because your aesthetic choices won't impact his performance on the table.

This must be whatever counts as 'newspeak' for 40k.

"Now that you have no choices, you are free!"

Ha ha! Now you're getting it ! Welcome to the team and get on board for the big win amigo !

now GW just need to add multibasing for 40k and we finally have true freedom

That was an example I was gonna make. I know many people dont like Kings of War lack of Game options ir multibasing but thats hasnt stopped people , quite the contrary, I havent seen so many converted armies like there.

Like It or not, each system has his benefits and his problems.


Personally I like when I have a toon of real options. If you are gonna give me 3-5 options and all are trash and only one works, just remove options (because they hace shown they cannot balance them) and give me freedomm to do whatever i want.


For ages GK falchions have been the BEST options. But halberds just look better. I built mine with halberds, but I knew i was shooting myself in the foot

Personally

 Galas wrote:

Personally I like when I have a toon of real options. If you are gonna give me 3-5 options and all are trash and only one works, just remove options (because they hace shown they cannot balance them) and give me freedomm to do whatever i want.

Or, you know, they could put the effort into making the other options actually functional?

Let me give you an example - if the designers made Power Fists S4 in one edition, would you accept them being completely removed in the next edition? (Because they're now sharing design space with Power Swords and are therefore not a meaningful choice.) Or would you be rather annoyed that these weapons were being removed because the designers had badly and thoughtlessly screwed up the rules for them in the first place?

What's more, this doesn't even work in the example I gave above. Yes, the Haemonculus had one melee weapon in 8th that was clearly better. But the same can't be said for his ranged weapons. He had a Pistol option which was weak but cheap. He had a long range sniper-rifle that was Heavy. He had a flamer weapon that was Assault. Especially with the current rules for those weapons, there would be no "best" option. And yet they were still purged anyway.

That isn't giving me (or anyone else) more freedom. It's removing freedom by constraining what HQs are allowed to do.

It's also assuming that everyone always takes the best possible build. If I'm using multiple HQs, I'll usually try and vary their wargear (even if it makes one or more suboptimal) just to make things a little more interesting. This option also no longer exists.

 Galas wrote:
That was an example I was gonna make. I know many people dont like Kings of War lack of Game options ir multibasing but thats hasnt stopped people , quite the contrary, I havent seen so many converted armies like there.

Like It or not, each system has his benefits and his problems.


Personally I like when I have a toon of real options. If you are gonna give me 3-5 options and all are trash and only one works, just remove options (because they hace shown they cannot balance them) and give me freedomm to do whatever i want.


For ages GK falchions have been the BEST options. But halberds just look better. I built mine with halberds, but I knew i was shooting myself in the foot

Personally

...Except that now, the only option I have for modeling a haemonculus is one which wants to kill you in melee.

If my haemonculus wants to attack you from long range, or primarily does his damage via guns rather than via melee, I can't do that now.

It doesn't help that Space Marines and Adeptus Mechanicus Techpriests and Adepta Sororitas Canonesses, the rigid, hidebound traditionalists who summarily execute eachother for heresy when they have different ideas, all have variety in their weapon loadouts while factions like Chaos Marines, GSC, and Drukhari who are supposed to be chaotic radical individualists free from the constraints of order and tradition are all locked into single playstyles.

EVERY ARCHON MUST BE a guy on foot with a pistol and one melee weapon. That's IT, thats the ONLY choice available.

Your space marine captain? Hmmm, shall I make him a fast melee bezerker? An infiltrating sniper, directing his troops via a communicator while he takes shots at enemy commanders? A stalwart Terminator with a Storm Shield? A mounted commander on a bike, decapitating enemies as he drives by with a relic blade? A tank destroyer, armed with a combi-melta and chainfist? a character-killing duelist with plasma pistol and blade?

it's almost like I can MAKE MY DUDE and have what I want him to be like, reflected in the rules! Wild! Crazy! A guy could get interested in the game because of this kind of thing!

Yeah, real freedom is not from removing all options, but by consolidating options which do little but introduce complications. This gives you the freedom to physically model the dude how you want whilst also giving you options to differentiate them from each other rules-wise.

So consolidate power weapons back to just being power weapons. Now somebody can model their dude with an axe, or a hammer, or a sword, or whatever they want without needing to worry that by doing so they are making them worse in the game.

This also solves the problem of no model/no rules and the horrific rules mess that is the plague marines unit entry. The only reason it needs to be that complicated is because GW made the stupid decision to split every type of close combat weapon into its own thing rather than just having general categories which each can fit into.

 the_scotsman wrote:


EVERY ARCHON MUST BE a guy on foot with a pistol and one melee weapon. That's IT, thats the ONLY choice available.

There is one archon model. So there is one set of gear for him. Cpts have various models with multiple set ups, plus strong themed historical models like the WS mounted Khans, so they have to get a rule set for all those options. Has its bad sides though, because instead of having a gravis captin with weapon option as a single choice, there are multiple separate options for various load outs, bloating the codex by a lot.