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.

 oni wrote:
I'm not so strict with WYSIWYG. Some model kits (e.g. SM devastators, C:SM havocs, etc.) don't come with a full compliment of the weapons options (i.e. 4x lascannons, 4x reaper chaincannon, etc.). I think it's a bit much to ask that someone purchase 2 to 4 boxes of a kit to make one squad that's WYIWYG.

Proxies however are a hard 'no' for me.

? You think it's too much to ask that a dev squad be WYSIWYG weapon wise given the contents of the kit, but you're against proxies....
How do you reconcile that when your opponent says "all my devs have (chaincannons) - but what you see is 1 chaincannon, 1 HB, 1 ML, & a LC? 3 of those are by definition proxies.

What about in games where your opponents army has non-GW pieces? Or scratch-built stuff or conversions?

 Argive wrote:
As long as its reasonable.
In an era of affordable and easily accessible neodymium magnets WYSIWYG is not that un-attainable. No excuse for a lot og kits that offer all the options in the kit.

As someone who has recently magnetized all the veriations on a unit of wraithguard i can understand it might not be viable on some little models..

Old kits and oop stuff likewise can be reasonably expected to not be wysiwyg because rles change etc. long as its made clear before hand and its not a case of 3 gray plastic power armoured dudes being identical but all having different load outs.

I doubt you can tell apart a spanner, nob or killa kan that has been built ten years ago from one that has been built yesterday.

as long as things are clear no problem. The only issue I ahev with non wysiwyg players is the ones that cannot keep up with it themselves. Like if you are running marines and have 3 tac squads and one group has a melta one has a plasma gun and one has a missile launcher... but somehow you keep swapping where the weapons are because they are just all bolter marines or all 3 have lascannons modeled. Maybe intentional mayeb not but multiple armies and players do this like... oh my melta gun shoots your battlewagon, then next turn suddenly the plasma is in that squad shooting my nobs and the melta is trying to shoot another battlewagon across the board becaus enot this squad had the melta transported to them... maybe they forgot but I have to point things like this out all of the time against non wysiwyg players.

WYSIWYG helps eliminate it. I will still play the non wysiwyg players, heck i will play against paperhammer armies taped to coins, but it is nto as fun and often frustrating.

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
What about Counts As forces?

Say I love the Kroot models and lore, but the Tyranid rules fit how I play them. Any issues with this as long as there's consistent mocking to show weapon differences?

I'd have no issue with that, as long as you tell me which "kroot" have which stats. And you'd probably have to tell me multiple times since I'm not good at remembering this stuff

The key is your motivation. "I like kroot models and want to run them with tyranid rules" is fine. "I want to run tyranids, but don't want to buy new models, I'll take these kroot I have for my tau army instead" is not.

Yeah, I totally get that.
I've still got my old Kroot Mercenaries force from 4th that I lovingly converted, and and now no longer capable to replicating (due to increasing disability), so I'm trying to find something I can using it as. I spent far too long on it to have the models sit in a box. I might cycle through a few different Codexes until I find the right one, but as long as things are crystal clear there shouldn't be any issues.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

Prove it.

 Blndmage wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

Prove it.

Please don't...

 Blndmage wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

Prove it.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769402.page#10297848

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

Prove it.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769402.page#10297848

Thank you for the link.

How do you reconcile that with the official OK for Counts As forces in earlièr editions?
The GW Game Police won't smash down my door and stop me. If my opponent is 100% ok with it and I've made things crystal clear, what's the harm? The models are equivalent in size, it's not like using a Grot as a Knight.

If your above is true, than any proxies are invalid as well, as the models are holding the wrong weapons and cannot be used as if wielding different weapons. Am I correct in that assumption? The quoted section basically enforces WYSIWYG without explicitly using the term.

usually rule of cool applies to conversions. It is between you and your opponent. that onyl time it really comes into play is tournaments where they will likely want official models, gamesworkshop official stores may not liek it (though I have played my converted terminator/crisis suit/wraithguard/ tyranid warriors to mega nobs in a GW store, the staff was even taking pictures of the conversion loving them as no 2 models were alike and its all looted, but still wysiwyg on pk's and combi weapons) some FLGS may also haev issues if not official GW models used and its what they sell but that is an in theory as I have never experienced this.

 Lance845 wrote:
How are any of you strict wysiwyg players modeling your relics? Do you have multiple versions of your warlords or whatever to show different relics them?

How is it wysiwyg if relics as wargear are not represented?

I model it if there is a clear visual difference that is known. But some of these are unknown. What does Endless Fury look like compared to a normal Avenger Gatling? Gluing on an extra ammo feed, when your opponent didn't know an avenger gatling cannon had a ammo feed, isn't useful.

For me, if there is a known model, or look, specific to something, I certainly do that. But the complete goal is to reduce confusion and make sure the opponent can see what I'm doing/what i'm fielding at a glance. If it doesn't do that, what is the point?

"Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs."

What's the difference between Looted TDA and a Looted Carnifex?

This sounds like a kitbash/alternate model - not a proxy.

Bharring wrote:
"Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs."

What's the difference between Looted TDA and a Looted Carnifex?

This sounds like a kitbash/alternate model - not a proxy.

It was a full Counts As force. Everything was made from Marines, but they all had the right weapons and such, truks made from various SM vehicles to be the right size, etc.

That sounds beautiful.

Orkz, more than most, are better played counts-as/kitbashed/etc than built-as-sold.

Which usually is done WYSIWG.

Kithail wrote:I have three units of vanguard veterans. Actually the models have been lovingly kitbashed, but the base models are assault marines. Bodies, legs, jetpacks. Everyone has the weapons and equipment they should have, as power swords, power axes, storm shields, plasma pistols and thunder hammers. I lavishingly showered the minis with kitbashed bling as to make them stand out. All 21 of them in three squads of seven. Sergeants are even kitbashed with forge world heads and have sanguinary guard jetpacks. Some of the storm shields are actually COMBAT shields.

I had a guy refusing to play me because those weren't vanguard veterans. Those were assault marines.

SO WYSIWTG has limits.

I have some choice words to describe this guy but none of them will make it past the word filter. Those sound fething beautiful man, I'd love to see pics of them?

I myself have been converting Vanguard Vets using Mk 3 armour from Burning at Prospero, and Grey Knight teleporter backpacks instead of Jump Packs. If someone told me they were invalid I'd be raging. I even have a heavy thunder hammer and a Combat shield posing as a storm shield and thunder hammer combo so I can get a sweet two-handed pose.

Lance845 wrote:How are any of you strict wysiwyg players modeling your relics? Do you have multiple versions of your warlords or whatever to show different relics them?

How is it wysiwyg if relics as wargear are not represented?

Relics are a somewhat ambiguous situation. In 6th ed, they were specific, paid-for upgrades, so on some level you would expect an especially ornate version of whatever weapon. On the other hand, now where relics are simply an upgrade to an existing weapon that anyone can take...

Let's take the Relic chainsword "Teeth of Terra." Its a chainsword, and a relic. Anyone with a chainsword can be upgraded. But if all Chainswords are identical, whose to say which can and cannot be the Teeth? Can then, no chainsword be upgraded because they aren't "fancy" enough? What qualifies as fancy enough?

On the other hand, the Relic sword "Burning Blade." I myself lovingly painted a transitional fiery effect on one sword to represent this - must this sword ALWAYS be the Burning Blade? Can I choose NOT to "upgrade" this free upgrade? Considering the same model also has sweet armour and a shield to represent other relics, or if I prefer to have my Chapter Ancient carry the relic banner? What about the old Marneus Calgar honour guard? He clearly carries the Ultramarine chapter banner, sculpted with amazing detail and represented in the codex as such, but its just a normal banner rulewise... can this model NEVER have the relic banner, as its not "WYSIWYG?"

My opinion on relics is that, as they are a one off, free upgrade that more or less equates to saying "This guy here has a special sword!" and only one model can have that upgrade, its not so important to have it WYSIWYG, particularly as you need to a have the "base version" equipped to get the relic. So its not like "This pistol here is actually the Standard of the Emperor Ascendant," but rather "this one model has upgrade X wargear to the Relic version."

That said, if someone HAD converted the model to have a particular relic, such as a fire effect on a sword, and only that one model had that effect, but the player chose to place the relic on some mook nobody sergeant who has a regular looking sword instead... to me that's kind of a poor sport move but again, its no big deal in this instance.

Sir Heckington wrote:

I'd also expect players who start recently to adhere to their colour scheme as much as possible. Someone who started with Crimson Fists in 2002 shouldn't be bound to rules published 15 years later, but someone who started with Salamanders in 2019 with a full grasp of the rules and backstory - they've made their bed so they must lie in it. Legacy paintjobs are more a case of an episode of Hotel Hell where Gordon Ramsay turns up to a 5* hotel but gets a sofa bed in the boiler room instead.

I disagree. There are no rules on paint jobs. As long as it is painfully clear what units are what, I don't care what people run their army as paintjob wise, just because people like a paintjob doesn't mean they should be locked into rules.

That's stupid. Rules should never be something I have to consider when deciding the overall scheme of my army.

When I say "They made their bed," its only an opinion. I would never force someone to use a specific trait. For someone who has only one army, for example, and is painting for love of the faction, sure, swap traits. Its somewhat the fault of the codex by stating that each trait is linked to Chapters. It should just say "Pick one tactic and write it on your army list! No swapping later in the game/tournament."

For tournaments or players who start new armies all the time, the ability to swap is basically just picking the rules they like best to suit them. I feel on some level, knowledge that a certain paintjob will hold expectations of certain tactics, if not enforced rules, should be taken into consideration when making the army. At the very least, come up with a fluff reason that they use different tactics - Captain Smith is a cityfighting expert, and so favours Melta and Flamer weapons in his company. He is good friends with the Techmarines so gets first dibbs on fancy weapons. This is justification for Salamanders tactics on your Ultras.

The flip side of that is legacy paintjobs. Players who had no warning that their paintjobs would be soft-bound to certain rules. They should not be punished at all.



TLR - If you painted your Ultras 15 years ago, feel free to use whichever tactics but put it on your army list, don't pick it when you see my army (related to tailoring). If you painted your Ultras yesterday, feel free to use whichever tactics but put it on your army list, don't pick it when you see my army (related to tailoring).

In my meta, there are BA players, Sally players, UM players, and soforth. Main chapter or successors, doesn't matter.

Some players even have multiple Marine armies. Of different factions.

Each army is clearly intended to be a specific Chapter, and that chapter has the Chapter Tactic it uses.

In my meta, armies don't change Tactics. They use the one that matches the fluff the player picked for their Army. With a new book, there's always talk of "Should I change...". But once picked, I don't recall it having changed (short of a new army being built).

We don't have a problem with list tailoring.

 Lance845 wrote:
How are any of you strict wysiwyg players modeling your relics? Do you have multiple versions of your warlords or whatever to show different relics them?

How is it wysiwyg if relics as wargear are not represented?

Just an example here from my collection:

SM Cpt. : Storm Bolter, Lightning Claw & Power Armour.
SM Cpt. : Storm Bolter, Power Fist & Terminator Armour. If the edition allows he will also have access to his mini grenade launcher fitted on his Power Fist.
SM Cpt.: Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, Power Armour & Jump Pack.

These three characters will ALWAYS be fielded with the above wargear. Smaller wargear like grenades or similar sized "gadgets" doesn´t have to be modeled.

Since watching Aliens I have introduced a homebrew rule which allowed the SM Sgt. to give his Auspex to a regular trooper as the former is too busy shouting orders than to watch blips on the screen. The trooper in question is modeled with the Auspex in hand and watches it with interest as numerous blips descend on the position of his squad. So far three Tac squads and one Devastator squad have been modified in this way.
Though if my opponent would have demanded that the actual working distance of the device must originate from the Sgt., I would have complied of course but none of my opponents so far had the notion that I modeled for advantage.

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
How are any of you strict wysiwyg players modeling your relics? Do you have multiple versions of your warlords or whatever to show different relics them?

How is it wysiwyg if relics as wargear are not represented?

Just an example here from my collection:

SM Cpt. : Storm Bolter, Lightning Claw & Power Armour.
SM Cpt. : Storm Bolter, Power Fist & Terminator Armour. If the edition allows he will also have access to his mini grenade launcher fitted on his Power Fist.
SM Cpt.: Plasma Pistol, Power Fist, Power Armour & Jump Pack.

These three characters will ALWAYS be fielded with the above wargear. Smaller wargear like grenades or similar sized "gadgets" doesn´t have to be modeled.

Since watching Aliens I have introduced a homebrew rule which allowed the SM Sgt. to give his Auspex to a regular trooper as the former is too busy shouting orders than to watch blips on the screen. The trooper in question is modeled with the Auspex in hand and watches it with interest as numerous blips descend on the position of his squad. So far three Tac squads and one Devastator squad have been modified in this way.
Though if my opponent would have demanded that the actual working distance of the device must originate from the Sgt., I would have complied of course but none of my opponents so far had the notion that I modeled for advantage.

As a long time Aliens fan, that is beautiful and I love it!

And here are my thoughts on the aspect of legion/chapter/clan/craftworld/regiment loyalty.
When I started my foray into 40K I used the models from Space Crusade. There were three chapters present in the box: Blood Angels, Imperial Fists and Ultramarines. As I liked the Blood Angels the most because of their aggressive play style and close combat prowess, I bought the Blood Angel Cpt. in artificer armour & boltgun, Librarian, Dreadnought and Predator. All of them were painted red apart from the Cpt. Not any of my buddies or I would have ever contemplated the notion of playing our chosen chapter/legion or whatever as something else just to get an advantage because of a new shiny op codex.

Though there is an exception to this rule. In 4th edition I wanted to collect SM again because in 3rd I got rid off my Space Crusade SM models. 4th edition allowed you to conceive your very own SM chapter by choosing advantages & disadvantages. My custom chapter was called "Grave Diggers" because I could paint a tombstone on a shoulder pad without hurting myself. Another idea was that the chosen army colour was black and as a result of this it would be an army that was going to be swiftly painted but this didn´t pan out in the end as I had to paint all the edges of the armour in Codex Grey which took a lot of time. The veteran squad was represented by choosing the hooded Dark Angels marines as the Grave Diggers were a successor chapter of the first legion.

I was aware at that time that codices can change and will change in a very drastic way and therefore took measures with my chosen advantages and disadvantages that my SM army wasn´t affected in a major way. One of the advantages that I chose was the option to promote a Tac Sgt. to an Apothecary which was represented by an actual Apothecary model. When 5th SM codex deleted all of my custom chapter´s rules, I naturally used the Dark Angels rules for them because they were a successor chapter after all. This meant that I now had three Tac Apothecaries that never could be fielded in a 5th+ SM army but that´s how the cookie crumbles when GW get´s their less than competent paws on a new codex design. I also could have used the vanilla SM codex because I didn´t follow the method of painting the bikes, terminators and all other aspect of the chapter in another colour scheme because imo it destroys fundamentally any sort of army cohesion.

When 8th hit the stores, I asked one of the regulars from my local GW store to do an introduction game with me. I intended to use the Grave Diggers from my vast collection of armies but they couldn´t perform on the tabletop as either vanilla SM or Dark Angels because my host only owned the Blood Angels chapter codex. This was the only time when my beloved pale skinned marines had to jump codex in a very blatant way.
I told him a week before what I would field and that he should get familiar with those units as he uses primarily Eldar. When I showed up at the store at the appointed day and time, he was relieved that I actually brought the stuff along as I told him I would do which begged the question with what sort of player types he usually consorted with. Our forces were chosen with power levels and not with points as this was a very new feature at that time.

My "Blood Angels" force:
Cpt. Storm Bolter, Lightning Claw & Power Armour
2x 10 Tacticals (Heavy plasma gun, Plasma gun)
Dreadnought (Assault Cannon, Power Fist & Heavy Flamer)
Landspeeder (Assault Cannon & Heavy Bolter)

His Ulthwe force:
Autarch (don´t remember which kind of wargear)
2x 15-20 Guardians (Shuriken cannon or Star Cannon)
Wraithlord (don´t remember which kind of wargear)
Vyper (don´t remember which kind of wargear)

I had to quit the game at the beginning of my third turn because there wasn´t any chance that I could even achieve a draw. At that point one of my Tac squad and Dreadnought was removed from play and the other Tac squad was nearly wiped out and the Landspeeder was flying around with just a couple of remaining wounds. As I didn´t bring any lascannons along and the assault cannons lost the ability in 8th to be a threat against vehicles, the Wraithlord turned out to be nearly untouchable. Only fun fact of the game was that my SM Cpt. shaved off three of it´s wounds in close combat while the rest of my army was responsible for another two lost wounds during two turns of shooting. Another nice touch was the reintroduction of the auspex but my two squads of marines only managed to cause five casualties against his Eldar Guardian squad which used a webway due to these facts:

1) Tacs suffer a penalty when shooting while using the auspex.
2) Nerfing of their boltguns (no AP).
3) Eldar Guardians of Ulthwe have Feel no pain USR

Then the Eldar Guardians (BS: 3+) opened fire and caused seven casualties in return... Ouch!

I learned these valuable lessons in my first game of 8th:
1) Bring lascannons or go home.
2) Boltguns suck.
3) Ulthwe Guardians have an uncharacteristic trait (Feel no pain) which they never had in prior editions. I have to know because I own an Ulthwe force since 3rd.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

When GW is buying the models for me, building my gaming table for me, and paying the mortgage on my home- they can tell me what I can do with my models. Until then they can piss right off.

 Strg Alt wrote:
When 8th hit the stores, I asked one of the regulars from my local GW store to do an introduction game with me. I intended to use the Grave Diggers from my vast collection of armies but they couldn´t perform on the tabletop as either vanilla SM or Dark Angels because my host only owned the Blood Angels chapter codex. This was the only time when my beloved pale skinned marines had to jump codex in a very blatant way.
I told him a week before what I would field and that he should get familiar with those units as he uses primarily Eldar. When I showed up at the store at the appointed day and time, he was relieved that I actually brought the stuff along as I told him I would do which begged the question with what sort of player types he usually consorted with. Our forces were chosen with power levels and not with points as this was a very new feature at that time.

My "Blood Angels" force:
Cpt. Storm Bolter, Lightning Claw & Power Armour
2x 10 Tacticals (Heavy plasma gun, Plasma gun)
Dreadnought (Assault Cannon, Power Fist & Heavy Flamer)
Landspeeder (Assault Cannon & Heavy Bolter)

His Ulthwe force:
Autarch (don´t remember which kind of wargear)
2x 15-20 Guardians (Shuriken cannon or Star Cannon)
Wraithlord (don´t remember which kind of wargear)
Vyper (don´t remember which kind of wargear)

I had to quit the game at the beginning of my third turn because there wasn´t any chance that I could even achieve a draw. At that point one of my Tac squad and Dreadnought was removed from play and the other Tac squad was nearly wiped out and the Landspeeder was flying around with just a couple of remaining wounds. As I didn´t bring any lascannons along and the assault cannons lost the ability in 8th to be a threat against vehicles, the Wraithlord turned out to be nearly untouchable. Only fun fact of the game was that my SM Cpt. shaved off three of it´s wounds in close combat while the rest of my army was responsible for another two lost wounds during two turns of shooting. Another nice touch was the reintroduction of the auspex but my two squads of marines only managed to cause five casualties against his Eldar Guardian squad which used a webway due to these facts:

1) Tacs suffer a penalty when shooting while using the auspex.
2) Nerfing of their boltguns (no AP).
3) Eldar Guardians of Ulthwe have Feel no pain USR

Then the Eldar Guardians (BS: 3+) opened fire and caused seven casualties in return... Ouch!

I learned these valuable lessons in my first game of 8th:
1) Bring lascannons or go home.
2) Boltguns suck.
3) Ulthwe Guardians have an uncharacteristic trait (Feel no pain) which they never had in prior editions. I have to know because I own an Ulthwe force since 3rd.

I think a lot of us have realised the same (perhaps not the specifics but certainly the principle) - depending which faction you're playing against, a lack of AP or the fact that they have invulns across the board can be incredibly frustrating...

I expect WYSIWYG in general, but will allow proxies etc if it's reasonably presented. If I bring a green tide, and after seeing such, my opponent claims all his meltaguns are flamers, the answer is no, unless his written army list says otherwise.

I generally don't care about little things (grenades etc), especially if it is standard kit for the model. I wouldn't expect to have to inspect each model to work out who has meltabombs - I'd just ask.

I don't think any chapter would have changed the outcome of that game.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Crazy Jay wrote:
For me it’s consistency and clarity. If you have that I don’t mind playing you. The one thing I won’t do is play some who is using marines to represent Orks or something like that. I tried that once and it was a cluster. That all being said, I hold myself to a much higher WYSIWYG standard.

What if someone absolutely loves the Marines models, and takes the time to model equivalent weapons and wargear so they can use them as Orks? Back in the day, I remember e friend who loved Terminators kitbashing them to be the coolest army of MegaNobs.

GW's own rules prohibit conversions like that.

Prove it.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769402.page#10297848

That's not proof.

That's just you arguing with people on a forum with a very contentious population.

For me, I love originality. Conversions that are good and well thought out? Great! Now if I’m in a tournament and you’re running ulteamarines complete with paint theme of ultramarines and iconography, I am giving you a 0 I’m every aspect I can, because it’s not original. Like, play them as Greg knights or something to change it up and give it flavor.

Reemule wrote:When someone tells you they don’t want to play WYSIWYG, you should be suspicious of them. Chances are they are not at the table for a fun rewarding competitive game, but to screw someone over, with chicanery or other subversive techniques. As the self help books say, when someone tells you who they are, believe them. When someone doesn’t play WYSIWYG, they are showing they are bad gamers, and morally suspect. Believe them.

What absolute twaddle.

 Excommunicatus wrote:

Reemule wrote:When someone tells you they don’t want to play WYSIWYG, you should be suspicious of them. Chances are they are not at the table for a fun rewarding competitive game, but to screw someone over, with chicanery or other subversive techniques. As the self help books say, when someone tells you who they are, believe them. When someone doesn’t play WYSIWYG, they are showing they are bad gamers, and morally suspect. Believe them.

What absolute twaddle.

I see his point to some level, that SOME people might be out to fudge their equipment for advantage. But those are few compared to those just trying out a new list or swapping one thing because they packed Flamers instead of Meltas by mistake.

 Deadshot wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:

Reemule wrote:When someone tells you they don’t want to play WYSIWYG, you should be suspicious of them. Chances are they are not at the table for a fun rewarding competitive game, but to screw someone over, with chicanery or other subversive techniques. As the self help books say, when someone tells you who they are, believe them. When someone doesn’t play WYSIWYG, they are showing they are bad gamers, and morally suspect. Believe them.

What absolute twaddle.

I see his point to some level, that SOME people might be out to fudge their equipment for advantage. But those are few compared to those just trying out a new list or swapping one thing because they packed Flamers instead of Meltas by mistake.

I'm fine with proxy because you wanted to test them out, but I wouldn't actually buy you packed the wrong dudes because the two weapons are CLEARLY distinct.

I know for my Sternguard I use the Volkite Culverins as Grav Cannons. I think that's reasonable at least. They look badass.

 Excommunicatus wrote:

Reemule wrote:When someone tells you they don’t want to play WYSIWYG, you should be suspicious of them. Chances are they are not at the table for a fun rewarding competitive game, but to screw someone over, with chicanery or other subversive techniques. As the self help books say, when someone tells you who they are, believe them. When someone doesn’t play WYSIWYG, they are showing they are bad gamers, and morally suspect. Believe them.

What absolute twaddle.

IME he's speaking the truth. I'm instantly suspicious of someone who isn't a close friend who wants to proxy, as in almost every case it has been used for shenanigans.

 Mmmpi wrote:
That's not proof.

That's just you arguing with people on a forum with a very contentious population.

I'm very much inclined to agree. To be honest, I don't think GW cares as long as you're giving them money. It's their primary interest after all