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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - There isnt any. Shucks, guess that means we all need to ask permission now. Oh wait, rulepacks usually dictate that you have to have painted models, so thats covered.....

Can you please provide a rule permitting you to convert models? Can you please provide a rule permitting you to change your model so it gains an advantage?

Whoopie - you are told to look at the Citadel Miniature to determine what the weapon is classified as, you are NOT given permission to model the minmiature so it has the weapon you want.


There is a rather glaring difference everyone is ignoring.

Please provide a RULES ALLOWANCE to alter that Citadel Miniature to be a non-citadel miniature by altering its appearance. If you cannot do so, please confirm that here. Continuing to argue that this is allowed, when you have yet to provide rules to the affirmative, breaks the tenets of this forum.

Please address my statements regarding Burna's and a Scratch Built DCA model.

You'll also note that GW doesn't sell sprues according to their website, they sell models:

"This box set contains 10 multi-part plastic Cadian Shock Troops, and includes: five leg variants, seven head variants, 10 lasguns, two chainswords, two laspistols, two grenade launchers, two flamers and two Vox-casters. Also included are a host of additional components allowing you to assemble a Sergeant and personalise your squad. Models supplied with 25mm round bases."

So, accordingly, since there is no permission to assemble those models, I should just play with them as they are provided by GW... On sprue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So please provide a rule allowing you to assemble your models. Thanks!

pretre wrote:@Nos: Just as there is no rule that allows painting or assembly, there is no rule that allows altering. Both the rule you quoted for assembly and the idea that you can change weapons are assumptions based on the rules.

Neither side has rules in their favor on conversion because there aren't any either way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is no rule that says you can't modify a Citadel model and there is no rule that says you can. There is the hobby section which clearly shows assembly, painting and conversion, but you're not accepting that.

I am not accepting that a section entitled "THE HOBBY", as distinct from "THE RULES", has any bearing on "THE RULES" Now, you may see that as an odd stance, but I find treating THE RULES as, well, rules and anything not in that seciotn as not-rules makes for a generally clearer game.

You are told you use Miniatures. Unless you are claiming that the miniatures are each part of the miniature, which requires extraordinary proof, you remain wrong.

djdarknoise wrote:
Please address my statements regarding Burna's and a Scratch Built DCA model.

I have done. I sugges you read the thread more carefully and you may just spot them


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pretre - done with being facetious yet?

You are told to use miniatures, which requires you to assemble the parts into the complete miniature. Allowance given.

Please provide rules that allow you to alter a model from the supplied Citadel Miniature to something else. Until you can do so you have no rules allowance to do waht you are saying

I repeat: the rules require you to use Citiadel Miniatures, as per page 2. The rules do NOT give you permission to alter the miniature to your wishes, and the power weapon rule also does not give you permission to alter your model - it just tells you that your miniature will represent the type of weapon

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - done with being facetious yet?

I'm not being facetious. I am serious. There is no allowance in the rules to assemble your miniatures. You have not shown one yet.

You are told to use miniatures, which requires you to assemble the parts into the complete miniature. Allowance given.

Where? Page 2 says to use miniatures/models. GW sells miniatures/models on their site. There is no reference to assembly.

Please provide rules that allow you to alter a model from the supplied Citadel Miniature to something else. Until you can do so you have no rules allowance to do waht you are saying

There are none. Just as there are no rules allowing you to assemble or paint your miniatures.

I repeat: the rules require you to use Citiadel Miniatures, as per page 2. The rules do NOT give you permission to alter the miniature to your wishes, and the power weapon rule also does not give you permission to alter your model - it just tells you that your miniature will represent the type of weapon

They require you to use citadel miniatures but give no permission beyond that. That means that as long as I put a base on whatever I field (which is required, page 3), I can put a not-completely assembled mini on the table and it is completely legal.

Nos, GW creates CONVERSION KITS. Sprus used to change what the model looks like, is equipped with, or even what the model itself is. If you cannot change a model from its base spru then GW would not have released these kits. You have no rule basis saying that you cannot convert models but there is plenty in the BRB that allows, and even suggests you convert models.

On the topic of the 18' gun barrel, I guess its a good thing that you measure weapon range from where the weapon meets the hull (Changed b/c of that very argument)

My god, I think we all deserve to be shot for this thread.

1st, conversions are cool. It is in the brb. If you are allowed to take a weapon or wargear option then you are able to convert your model to express it and conform to wysiwyg.
If this isn't true my local GW should throw me out because of my custom made combi-meltas. Any player that uses assault canon or laz-plaz razorbacks that aren't the old 2nd ed models would be in the wrong. Grey hunters that use any special weapon other than plasmaguns, tacticle squads that use a heavy weapon other then missile launchers.
To say that any of the above is modelling for advantage is foolish and limits any discourse on what the rules are about to hyperbole and flame wars.

I agree you should not be able to model some god awful thing to kinda look like a mix of sword, maul, axe and lance cos that would be awful and an auto-unusual power weapon. A player can however magnetise their characters to allow a range of options to be put into play. This really isn't an issue because the model is wysiwyg when it hits the table and you have an army list to show what he should have.

Also if people are worried about players changing the weapon to the most beneficial version during a tournament then all you have to do is to require that people be more exact in their army lists. If you want a power weapon you must list which type in the same way that space wolves now have to list frost axe or frost blade.

That being said, page 51 says that a dca with a power axe and power sword would gain the +1 attack but would only get to choose 1 weapon profile to use per turn. I can't see anything stopping you taking different weapons atm but I would like there to be.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Bzzzt, wrong. It is unique. Or dont you think that being a power weapon or not existing as a CCW isnt unique? I suggest you look to the rules threads on this in case you are still in doubt

bzzt, wrong.

Find me the Burna unique close combat rules. Where does it say "a Power Weapon on a Burna adds +X to Y". Find me where it has additional rules and characteristics presented in its entry. You can't, because it has no additional close combat rules. You can't, because it does not have an entry or profile.

djdarknoise wrote: We then look to The Rule of Cool, as taken from various signatures states;
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."

djdarknoise wrote:GW defines WYSIWYG: An important principle of our events is "what you see is what you get" or WYSIWYG (pronounced "wizzywig") for short. All this means is unless you are using the 'counts as' rule (see below), then miniatures are assumed to have their equipment actually shown on the model. It would be grossly unfair to show the model being equipped with one thing, but claiming it to be armed with another; wars have been started for less.

GW defines COUNTS AS: The 'Counts As' rule allows you to apply the rules for existing units to older or scratch built models that do not have rules of their own. This is to allow you to make full use of your collection or the army choices within our rule books; it's not an excuse to change your army as a way of fine tuning your force.

So I take a IG Guardsman. I scratch build him to "counts as" a DCA with a power sword and power axe as then defined under WYSIWYG. What then?

Counts as isnt a rule. Can you provide some rules allowing you to use a guardsman with a sword and axe as a DCA? Page and paragraph from the rulebook Hint: tournament rules arent valid here.

Keep the burna thing out of here. That's a separate thread.

"You have no rule basis saying that you cannot convert models but there is plenty in the BRB that allows, and even suggests you convert models. "

In the hobby section. Not the rules. Can you please at least acknowledge there is a difference? Or do you honestly believe that everything in the hobby section is a rule, and vice versa?

The ruleset is permissive. You have to have a rule saying you CAN convert the model for you to be able to convert the model.

Pretre - wrong. Orikan "This is a finely detailed resin cast kit, and contains five components and a 25mm round base with which to make Orikan the Diviner. "

Components to make Orikan, which is a model. Try again,

Please find allowance to change the supplied Citadel Miniature for a model that is NOT a citadel miniature. Until you can do so then a DCA, which is supplied with Swords, stays that way in rules.

What if I use weapons from another citadel minature to make the DCA armed with whatever power weapons I like?
It is a citadel minature, madde of citadel products, even citadel glue to ensure it's cool. What is the problem?

@pretre, I don't have the rule book to hand. So unless another provides you a page number I will do so when I can.

Nos, do you accept that I can use Devastator parts to build the Heavy Weapons for my Tactical Squad?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - wrong. Orikan "This is a finely detailed resin cast kit, and contains five components and a 25mm round base with which to make Orikan the Diviner. "

Components to make Orikan, which is a model. Try again,

Please find allowance to change the supplied Citadel Miniature for a model that is NOT a citadel miniature. Until you can do so then a DCA, which is supplied with Swords, stays that way in rules.

That's the website and not in the rules section, so it doesn't count.

Show a rules reference that says what a model consists of and that you would have to assemble it in order to make it one.

There isn't one. There is no definition of model other than 'citadel miniature'. So, if we allowed the website, some models would need to be assembled (like orikan) but others wouldn't (cadians, rhinos) since they don't mention that in the description.

DJ - So the fact it isnt a power weapon at all times isnt a unique close combat rule? Not only OT but wrong.

Frankly you have descended to nonsense now. I said "conversions live and die by the rule of cool" - as in: they have NO PERMISSION IN THE RULES to exist. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. So, if you wish to use them then following the rule of cool is a good start. It also isnt a real rule - it isnt in the rulebook RULES section - it is just the name given to a convention used in tournaments and friendly games, erroneously called a "rule"

Nothing in the suggestion of cool says "converting your model so it provides an ingame advantage is cool", so it really doesnt apply to MFA. An 18" wide converted battelwagon would be unlikely to meet with the rule of cool, and a conversion allowing your power sword armed models, as dictated by the Citadel Miniature, can now cut through TEQ armour also doesnt meet with it.

Convert them to have axes but play them as swords because that is what the correct model is armed with? Fine, if they look cool. Trying to claim you get a sword and an axe, and so can choose between them, despite the model not coming with an axe? Not cool

And how is the website more reliable than the hobby section of the rulebook which does detail assembly, painting and conversion?

pretre wrote:Keep the burna thing out of here. That's a separate thread.

No, this is entirely relevant. Nos is stating that if a model as sculpted does not come with exactly what it is supposed to have, then any and all conversions/weapon swaps are MFA and illegal.

There are no rules about how you build your model. Absolutly none. You build a supplied model, great. There is nothing saying you cannot add to that supplied model. Do my marines now not carry pistols b/c itisint on them? How about grenades? Do my CSM not carry bolt pistol and cc b/c I modeled them with a bolter? If you are telling me that I must re-do the way I have modeled my miniatures b/c you dont like fighting against special rules gw made then you can be the one to take them apart and rebiuld them, as can anyone else who tells me that the way I build my models makes them invalid.

Nos,

I normally agree with most of your interpretations. Let me ask you this, I just bought a "Night Lords Hero" out of metal. He is equipped with a bolter and a combi-flamer. Would I be out of line if I chose to equip this model with a combi-melta instead? And I mean physically change the model to be a combi-melta? Do I need explicit permission from GW to change this model they have released?

I see the power weapon situation being no different than the combi-weapon situation. For 10 points, I can purchase a combi-weapon of my choice. Once it is on the model, that is what it is. How is a power weapon any different?

Pretre - so you are saying Citadel Miniatures cannot define what their models are?

Interesting supposition.

Still, can you find any rules alowing you to convert models from the Citadel Miniatures provided to you by GW? Until you can do so you have no permission to alter the model from that which Citadel Miniatures has defined.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Convert them to have axes but play them as swords because that is what the correct model is armed with? Fine, if they look cool. Trying to claim you get a sword and an axe, and so can choose between them, despite the model not coming with an axe? Not cool

And yet, RAW, entirely within the rules. So what's your point again?

There is nothing saying the modeleing section of the BRB is not a rules binding section either. Show me where it says that.

OK. So if I decided to create a character out of plastic parts, as long as it it WYSIWYG correctly, what says it is not that model?

I get a kit and make a sergeant. Am I allowed to put whatever wargear I want on it? Or do I have to folllow the precedent set by one metal model made by GW 10 years ago?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - so you are saying Citadel Miniatures cannot define what their models are?

According to you, they cannot do so unless they do it within the rules section of the rulebook.

Still, can you find any rules alowing you to convert models from the Citadel Miniatures provided to you by GW? Until you can do so you have no permission to alter the model from that which Citadel Miniatures has defined.

Nope, I cannot find anything in the rules section that allows conversion. The same as you cannot find anything that allows assembly or painting. You have no permission to assemble or paint your models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

djdarknoise wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Convert them to have axes but play them as swords because that is what the correct model is armed with? Fine, if they look cool. Trying to claim you get a sword and an axe, and so can choose between them, despite the model not coming with an axe? Not cool

And yet, RAW, entirely within the rules. So what's your point again?

Yeah, Nos's interpretation above actually violated the rules for Power Weapons listed in the book as you are supposed to play them as they are on the model.

Nos, can you please address my question.

Do you accept that I can use Devastator parts to build the Heavy Weapons for my Tactical Squad? If so, why?

Green is Best! wrote:Nos,

I normally agree with most of your interpretations. Let me ask you this, I just bought a "Night Lords Hero" out of metal. He is equipped with a bolter and a combi-flamer. Would I be out of line if I chose to equip this model with a combi-melta instead? And I mean physically change the model to be a combi-melta? Do I need explicit permission from GW to change this model they have released?

I see the power weapon situation being no different than the combi-weapon situation. For 10 points, I can purchase a combi-weapon of my choice. Once it is on the model, that is what it is. How is a power weapon any different?

Technically? Yes, to the main question. You have no rules permission to change the weapon, but do not need explicit permission from GW to change it if you want to do so - just to play with it you now have a non-citadel mini, and thus need opponents permission. In a pick up game - easily done. In a tournament - ask the TO

Which is the entire point of this.

The STOCK rule is that you use the Citadel Miniature, and are not given allowance to alter said miniature in any way. So, anytime you do so - as has been pointed out all through these modelling threads - you risk rejection by opponents, and they would have a rules justification for doing so.

Now, in your case would it be a reasonable use of this rule? Probably not - after all, it is an allowed option in the book, and unless you decided to make the combiflamer 30x larger than normal so it acted to block LOS to half your army, it's negative impact on the game is likely to be outweighed by the positives.

Now, how is this different to the power weapon issue? Because with a power weapon, you are told it is MODEL FIRST, not *modeller* first. To whit: you are told the model defines the weapon. It does NOT say the modeller can change the weapon to be whatever they want - just that the model fixes what type of weapon you are allowed

So, if your model comes with Citadel provided Options, then you can pick those options. Howveer there is no allowance for you to create your own, non-citadel provided optons and use those instead.

If a model comes with power swords only, and you give it additional abilities strictly through modelling that give you an advantage in game, this is the VERY definition of MFA, and is likely to cause you issues under the page 2 rule. Is this issue justified? In this case I would say YES, as you are creating a model with no drawbacks, when it is modelled to have drawbacks

This is no different to modelling the TLAC on a SR underslung, so it is easier to target ground units. Or modelling a BW so it is wider making it easier to get Front AV14 against incoming shots.

I'm glad that you are saying changing a combi-flamer to a combi-melta is equivalent to laying down wraithlords, underslung TLAC and superwide BW.

That makes complete sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S. Now I am being facetious.

Pretre - sigh.

Everyone - play it as you wish. However any tournament I run will enforce the requirement that a DCA does not come with Swords, and so you cannot play it as swords

MFA all you like, just dont be surprised if people dont want to play you


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:I'm glad that you are saying using heavy weapons from a different kit to outfit your tac squad is equivalent to laying down wraithlords, underslung TLAC and superwide BW.

That makes complete sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S. Now I am being facetious.

Shock. Thanks for straw manning, as well.


And jsut to make it clear: it is GW that have made all conversions have the same illegality. They have not included any sliding scale of what is acceptable and what isnt. They have just said that you use citadel miniatures, and not given you permission for ANY conversion.

If you dont like the rules GW operate, blame them. I've been reasonable to increasingly gak laden posts which dont get this simple premise - GW dont have rules allowing conversions. None at all. Changed 1mm of the model? Not allowed, according to their rules. Made a kneeling wraithlord? Not allowed by their rules.

Now, one I said was a reasonable conversion, one I said wasnt. That is apparently making them equivalent. You're better than that, pretre.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - sigh.

Everyone - play it as you wish. However any tournament I run will enforce the requirement that a DCA does not come with Swords, and so you cannot play it as swords

MFA all you like, just dont be surprised if people dont want to play you

DCA don't come with swords. One comes with swords. One comes with sword.

pretre wrote:I'm glad that you are saying using heavy weapons from a different kit to outfit your tac squad is equivalent to laying down wraithlords, underslung TLAC and superwide BW.

That makes complete sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S. Now I am being facetious.

Shock. Thanks for straw manning, as well.

It's not a strawman. You said that modifying your model in any way is the same as the classic MFA scenarios. Look at your own post.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:Nos,

I normally agree with most of your interpretations. Let me ask you this, I just bought a "Night Lords Hero" out of metal. He is equipped with a bolter and a combi-flamer. Would I be out of line if I chose to equip this model with a combi-melta instead? And I mean physically change the model to be a combi-melta? Do I need explicit permission from GW to change this model they have released?

I see the power weapon situation being no different than the combi-weapon situation. For 10 points, I can purchase a combi-weapon of my choice. Once it is on the model, that is what it is. How is a power weapon any different?

Technically? Yes, to the main question. You have no rules permission to change the weapon, but do not need explicit permission from GW to change it if you want to do so - just to play with it you now have a non-citadel mini, and thus need opponents permission. In a pick up game - easily done. In a tournament - ask the TO

Which is the entire point of this.

The STOCK rule is that you use the Citadel Miniature, and are not given allowance to alter said miniature in any way. So, anytime you do so - as has been pointed out all through these modelling threads - you risk rejection by opponents, and they would have a rules justification for doing so.

Now, in your case would it be a reasonable use of this rule? Probably not - after all, it is an allowed option in the book, and unless you decided to make the combiflamer 30x larger than normal so it acted to block LOS to half your army, it's negative impact on the game is likely to be outweighed by the positives.

Now, how is this different to the power weapon issue? Because with a power weapon, you are told it is MODEL FIRST, not *modeller* first. To whit: you are told the model defines the weapon. It does NOT say the modeller can change the weapon to be whatever they want - just that the model fixes what type of weapon you are allowed

So, if your model comes with Citadel provided Options, then you can pick those options. Howveer there is no allowance for you to create your own, non-citadel provided optons and use those instead.

If a model comes with power swords only, and you give it additional abilities strictly through modelling that give you an advantage in game, this is the VERY definition of MFA, and is likely to cause you issues under the page 2 rule. Is this issue justified? In this case I would say YES, as you are creating a model with no drawbacks, when it is modelled to have drawbacks

This is no different to modelling the TLAC on a SR underslung, so it is easier to target ground units. Or modelling a BW so it is wider making it easier to get Front AV14 against incoming shots.

So what does it mean when my codex says "..any model can replace bolt pistol and or chainsword with the following..." ?

nosferatu1001 wrote:If a model comes with power swords only, and you give it additional abilities strictly through modelling that give you an advantage in game, this is the VERY definition of MFA, and is likely to cause you issues under the page 2 rule. Is this issue justified? In this case I would say YES, as you are creating a model with no drawbacks, when it is modelled to have drawbacks.

There are absolutely drawbacks to what type of power weapon you take. You want AP2, you swing last. You want to swing first, you go to AP3 or AP4. You want increased strength, you lose more AP. I quite like this new system that GW has come up with. It is probably one of the only things that is remotely balanced in the game.

The last time I was at my FLGS, I saw a chaor sorceror with an axe (pewter model). I bought it just to have an AP2 force weapon if I need it. Now, if I were to create a chaos sorceror from parts, do I HAVE to use an axe?

Well, that wasnt messy at all (sarcasm) but quick for a YMDC argument.... I mean discussion. I think the overall concensus is they it is not MFA and only modeling for wargear