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.

GW owns the iea of giants ladies and gentlemen!

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
other people or companies who have made something similar.

Ok, gotcha. Similarity is not illegal. Nor is it unethical. Do you drive any car other than a Ford? The other cars on the road sure are similar to Ford cars, and they were the first. How's your computer? Is it an IBM PC?

I see you play Necrons.

Do you feel bad for not using the Leading Edge Games Terminator miniatures for your Necrons? Necrons are SO similar to Terminators, and Leading Edge were the first manufacturers of Terminator endoskeletons in miniature.

I understand your position:
"I like to support the company that I play the game of. So GW, makes a game I love playing, I buy their models in support of them. There are a few things they lack"
and I applaud that you want to support the company financially. I agree, I love certain companies and support them when I can - but I personally won't support a company carte blanche if they have a bad product or someone produces a superior product. Blind support leads to mediocrity - if GW makes a terrible model and still a million people buy it, they have no reason to resculpt it. If GW releases a terrible model and they sell five, but they hear that SomeOthercompany sold a million of a similar model, that would incentivize GW to up their game. It's how the free market works - competition is good for the consumer

RoninXiC wrote:
GW owns the iea of giants ladies and gentlemen!

Clearly the idea of really really REALLY tall humans, could only ever come to a single person and the author of the old testament (I can't think of a written occurrence of a giant before this), has been sent a letter by GW so that it could clarify that the rights to the original idea of a really really REALLY tall human has been accordingly granted to GW. [/sarcasm-just-in-case-anyone-is-silly-enough-to-think-I-was-actually-serious-about-this]

Let me put it this way, with a real example. I have a giant Orc army. But, not GW Orcs. I personally cannot stand the aesthetics of GW's big floppy headed ape arm Orcs. I love Mantic's armored, proportionately sized upright Orcs. Those are two of many choices in the marketplace, and I, as a consumer, am the winner, because I am allowed to choose whose Orcs I prefer. If it wasn't for Mantic's Orcs, I wouldn't even own an Orc army, because I never found them appealing until Mantic made their style.

Arguments about "hurts the original company" hold no weight for me unless it's an actual legal issue (copyright, etc) and in that case GW can take them to court. the writers of a given game have exactly NO established right to demand that folks buy their miniatures to use for their games (I have an entire game club based on this). There is no "Grey area" where you should feel bad by "hurting" a given company by using other miniatures.

Thus, unless it's at a GW store or some store/tourney where the owner/operator has established guidelines (completely their right) I follow the following guidelines.

1) Size of non-GW units should be about the same as the unit is replacing.

2) Weaponry should be WYSYWYG or close to it. (laser rifles are Las rifles, Bazookas are missile launchers, etc)

3) Armies are consistent (don't have two of the same unit representing different units) I shouldn't have to guess which is which.

If the army does those things, than my opponent is not putting an undue hardship on me and we are good to go. The above guidelines are general gaming edicit so theres no reason to "draw the line" for models.

Lastly, though I should point out that if the army isn't painted or in progress I likely won't be playing them again, but that's a separate issue.

 judgedoug wrote:
Let me put it this way, with a real example. I have a giant Orc army. But, not GW Orcs. I personally cannot stand the aesthetics of GW's big floppy headed ape arm Orcs. I love Mantic's armored, proportionately sized upright Orcs. Those are two of many choices in the marketplace, and I, as a consumer, am the winner, because I am allowed to choose whose Orcs I prefer. If it wasn't for Mantic's Orcs, I wouldn't even own an Orc army, because I never found them appealing until Mantic made their style.

Thanks for the good debate, unlike some other people on here who just like to throw sarcastic hate around.

I undestand your postion on gw orcs, and I would be happy to play with you, even if you use the mantic orcs. but here we fall into one of my exception case. mantic made these orcs for their own game, not to replace gw models. It is up to the customer on how they are used.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
Cool lots of lizards. Some of those were made for their own game, I'm fine with that. Some of those were made as replacements, I'm not ok with that.

My buddy is sculpting a giant, and it's coming along fantastically. He plans on casting it up, or having someone cast it, to sell.
By your own definition, you are not okay with him selling his creation because someone could maybe use it for Warhammer?

That is the gray area of ethics I'm trying to understand here. I aplaud his efforts, and I'd like to see it succeed, but I'm just unsure of how to market it without infringing on other peoples/companies work.

Sell it a s an Xmm/Xscale miniature for use in TTG/ RPG etc. Job done. No hand winging ethical committee needed. It's up to the purchaser how it is to be used.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
It is up to the customer on how they are used.

There we go. problem solved.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
Cool lots of lizards. Some of those were made for their own game, I'm fine with that. Some of those were made as replacements, I'm not ok with that.

My buddy is sculpting a giant, and it's coming along fantastically. He plans on casting it up, or having someone cast it, to sell.
By your own definition, you are not okay with him selling his creation because someone could maybe use it for Warhammer?

That is the gray area of ethics I'm trying to understand here. I aplaud his efforts, and I'd like to see it succeed, but I'm just unsure of how to market it without infringing on other peoples/companies work.

Sell it a s an Xmm/Xscale miniature for use in TTG/ RPG etc. Job done. No hand winging ethical committee needed. It's up to the purchaser how it is to be used.

that is what I'm leaning towards. I know chapterhouse has crossed that line a couple of times, which is why they are in a big legal case right now, and why they always seem to be the example used in these debates.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
As I stated in the begining, In the case of unreleased models or a game that has no models, I am completely ok with getting the models from anywhere. As there are no originals to copy.

I see that, but Wizards of the Coast made miniatures for DnD and the DnD miniatures game, they had the Chainmail figures for a long time and had a game based on that. Why should I not be able to use my Reaper figures that aren't for Warlord, Savage Worlds, or Pathfinder (2 games produced by other companies that license the model making to Reaper and 1 game by reaper).

No one is arguing that you shouldn't use GW models in a GW store or tournament. In fact if you look at the user Mechanicum John's Dark Eldar, he made his own kitbashed beasts using several GW gits as he didn't like the ones that GW made, and his local GW store actually made him take those models out of their display case because people were asking what kit those were from, and didn't like that it was from 3 or 4 separate kits, which is completely okay in the lines you've drawn, but at the same time it cost the store money because they couldn't get people to buy the official GW kit.


This line you have is hard and set, and allows for no variation. You either buy the models the company makes for THEIR game, or you don't play at all.

And while yes I know you said earlier in the thread that you don't care if someone makes a model for someone else's game as long as it's unreleased, no one is making their own versions of Colossals and Gargantuans because many of those models aren't officially out, and no one is making 3rd party Malifaux figs because both of those companies operate on the idea that their models will be out by the time the next book is released (aHoffman is th exception it seems). GW was KNOWN for their waves of releases. Look back through News and Rumors, and look for "Dark Eldar Second Wave" or "Necron Second Wave, pics on page 30", etc... GW would release rules and books with no models. Being the GIANT that they are, you're bound to attract the third party market. Couple that with the customization that you can put onto a single mini (look at how many poses you have for your average Tactical Marine), and couple that with the fact that GW leaves their fluff open for the reason of customizing your minis to your "narrative".

GW for the most part is the ONLY model company I can think of that has this problem, and the fans that say, "so and so is stealing GW's ideas!!!!1oneone! D:" I mean even Flames of War has a thread on here that tells you where to buy other 15mm tanks and what not because no matter where you go, a Sherman tank from the makers of FoW is going to be similar to the Shermans made by Company B.

I feel as though you're being unusually strict with this definition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the most part, CHS brought the Ever-seeing Eye of Kirby (i.e. GW Legal, etc...) upon them by using GW models in their pics and using GW naming conventions like, "Replacement alien head for Genestealer model."

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

Thanks for the good debate, unlike some other people on here who just like to throw sarcastic hate around.

I undestand your postion on gw orcs, and I would be happy to play with you, even if you use the mantic orcs. but here we fall into one of my exception case. mantic made these orcs for their own game, not to replace gw models. It is up to the customer on how they are used.

Ah, but only recently. Mantic originally made figures with no supporting rules system.

Howsabout this one: I use Red Box Games utterly beautiful goblins, as they are some of the best goblins I've ever seen, sculpted by one of the best sculptors on the planet, in my Goblin army, and I use their Goblin chief riding a bear as a Goblin on wolf/similar. I bought the miniatures and want to use them because they are so amazingly detailed, and Red Box is a one-man operation run by Tre Manor, so I know my dollars are directly putting food on the table for him and his family. I support the company, but I also want to use them because they are brilliant sculpts. No game system for them. How would you feel about me using them in Warhammer?

I don't care what models people play with so long as they are very close to the size and shape of the corresponding GW model (or at least idea of that model if it doesn't have one yet).

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
[q
Cool lots of lizards. Some of those were made for their own game, I'm fine with that. Some of those were made as replacements, I'm not ok with that.

Just wanted to address this argument specifically as I think it is misguided and I see it quite often.

A few counter examples.

-As was said, most fantasy miniatures companies make miniatures for RPG's that they don't publish themselves. Many times these RPG's have their own miniature lines or have licensed their figs to another comany. Should I not use reaper, megamini or EM4 minis in a D&D game because D&D had their own prepainted figures?

-In the early days of fantasy miniatures (pre WHFB) GW made most of it's models pretty blatantly to appeal to D&D gamers, even though TSR had licensed the rights to make figures for their game to Ral Partha. You wouldn't even have GW if there hadn't already been D&D for them to make miniatures for.

-Many companies make aftermarket parts for cars when the car makers already make those parts. They don't have to consult car companies to do this. Is this a bad thing?

-Should I not buy resin ruined cathedral buildings because GW makes it's own?

This idea that you shouldn't use "replacement" figures may be a personal feeling, but it's silly for folks to suggest that it's based on anything other than that.

My advice to gamers has always been:
Pick the rules you like, pick the minis you like, pick the terrain you like. As long as you're not breaking any laws ignore anyone who trys to tell you to do otherwise.

Edit: Pointless, waffling, comment.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
that is what I'm leaning towards. I know chapterhouse has crossed that line a couple of times, which is why they are in a big legal case right now, and why they always seem to be the example used in these debates.

Whether or not Chapterhouse crossed any lines has yet to be decided by a court, but I don't think they've done anything wrong.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

I undestand your postion on gw orcs, and I would be happy to play with you, even if you use the mantic orcs. but here we fall into one of my exception case. mantic made these orcs for their own game, not to replace gw models. It is up to the customer on how they are used.

So Chapterhouse (the bad guys in your eyes) would be fine to use in 40K if they published their own rule set that uses their own figures? Do the rules need to meet any standards to be official or can they just slap together a couple of pages and provide stat sheets?

Would their lizard ogre be acceptable to use in warhammer if it had a stat line for Chapterhouses "Generic Fantasy Skirmish Rules" along with it?



I think the line is different; if it's from a generic idea (orge, giant, lizardman) or could be used in many games, then it's fine. If it's blatantly a rip off of a specific figure in a specific game (Blood Angels Sanguinor) then it's a bit iffy. But if no copyrights have been violated, let the best manufacturer win.


I think the GW high-ground is hilarious since they seem to have ripped off so many sources in the past*, and got started doing exactly what Chapterhouse does now; making figures for other peoples games.

* Tolkiens** Dwarfs, Elves, Orcs, Chaos & Halflings (The description of halflings in the Black Library books could easily have been photocopied out of LOTR pages describing Hobbits). Necrons are clearly Terminator rip-offs as well, as Tyranids are blatantly from the Aliens series.

** And all of the other standard fantasy tropes. I'm not sure if Skaven are new or borrowed.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
Cool lots of lizards. Some of those were made for their own game, I'm fine with that. Some of those were made as replacements, I'm not ok with that.

My buddy is sculpting a giant, and it's coming along fantastically. He plans on casting it up, or having someone cast it, to sell.
By your own definition, you are not okay with him selling his creation because someone could maybe use it for Warhammer?

That is the gray area of ethics I'm trying to understand here. I aplaud his efforts, and I'd like to see it succeed, but I'm just unsure of how to market it without infringing on other peoples/companies work.

Sell it a s an Xmm/Xscale miniature for use in TTG/ RPG etc. Job done. No hand winging ethical committee needed. It's up to the purchaser how it is to be used.

that is what I'm leaning towards. I know chapterhouse has crossed that line a couple of times, which is why they are in a big legal case right now, and why they always seem to be the example used in these debates.

If you strip the rarefied issue that is GW vs CHS out of this, does that make things any clearer?

I am currently using Hasslefree and statuesque miniatures (as some of my latest purchases) with a variety of differing rules ets, each by a different publisher/individual.

The minis themselves have no affiliation to any of these games. And I have purchased them so they can be used in multiple environments.

1. I have brought multiple rulesets and play with lots more.
2. I have brought figures from multiple sources to play these games.
3. Some of these games have a mini line, most do not.

Another example. I have a FOW rulebook and some of their figures. I also have other 15mm scale minis from other companies,

1. FOW represnts battles set in WW2.
2. Military representations, as far as I am aware can be freely made. A Wermacht infantryman is a Wermacht infantry man, dependant on historical equipment. A Hurricane Mk.IIb will be the same, whatever company makes it (bar a few artistic differences) etc.

Now I am supporting FOW by playing their rules. I am using other companies to provide miniatures (those who do not produce their own rules).

I would like to see what you would feel about these situations.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Don't know why the Lizard Ogres crossed the line. Reaper http://www.reapermini.com/Miniatures/reptus and, in old times, RAFM, made complete Lizardmen armies.

As I've said before, if models were made for another game system (the reptus minis) then I think it is ok. I draw the line when models are made for no reason other than to fit into a different company's game.
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples out there other than the 'not-kroxigors', but that is the example I used.

You are seriously blowing my mind.

http://www.reapermini.com/Miniatures/Dark%20Heaven%20Legends%20lizard
http://otherworldminiatures.co.uk/?s=lizard&post_type=product&submit.x=0&submit.y=0
http://trollforged.com/shelf_fantasy_Lizardmen.html
http://cavalcadewargames.com/cavalcade/Dragonblood_Draconid_Legion.html
http://trollforged.com/shelf_fantasy_Fishmen.html
http://www.artemisblacks.com/dragonrune/komodons.shtml

Cool lots of lizards. Some of those were made for their own game, I'm fine with that. Some of those were made as replacements, I'm not ok with that.
I don't know all of these examples, but thanks for pointing them out to me. I might actually get some of these for use in some other games I play.

None of those were made as replacements... they were made as lizardmen, which are just generic fantasy. Just as space marines are generic sci-fi (and were before GW pooped out the first giant shoulderpad). The sun doesn't rise and set for GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
other people or companies who have already made something similar.

So you should really not be OK with more or less anything by GW, since someone else did it first. Giants, space marines, orcs, lizardmen. Afterall, GW was just making Ral Partha replacements.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

General statement to everyone here: I made this thread not to argue GW vs everybody else, but so we could discuss what everyone thinks of 3rd party models. So if you have something to add, maybe your opionion on what should and shouldn't be allowed by third party companies, go ahead. If all you have is GW hate or just overall negative words, then please leave.
This is an issue that covers more than just GW. I know other games are growing in popularity (warmahordes, malifaux, . . . I'm sure ya'll can list more). As those other games get bigger, they will have to start dealing with their own 3rd party companies issues.

You claim this is not a GW only issue, when in fact it IS pretty much a GW only issue. GW "loyalists" are the only people that have this big issue with third party models, nobody else gives a carp. The rest of the gaming world are happy to use third party models if they fit within their chosen game.

No figure manufacturer makes a line of figures that is considered "complete" by every single hobbyist buying a particular line. There isn't any gaming figure line that can't be "improved" by third party products.

Actually, it doesn't only involve GW - you can look at other companies and see how they can take a completely different approach to dealing with the 3rd party issues.

Micro Arts studio for instance started making buildings and tokens amongst other items for use with Infinity - yet rather than trying to shut this company down, then do the same thing themselves and pocket the proceeds, Corvus Belli has essentially licensed MAS to continue to make those items, even going as far as to have them advertised on their own website. Battlefront miniatures have done the same thing with Galeforce 9, and the 'Battlefield in a box range'. They realise that these other companies benefit their own in a form of symbiotic relationship - how many players have started Infinity because of a thought of a tabletop of MAS apartment buildings in a future city?

GW obviously spends a not inconsiderable sum on legal representation - a group that must constantly strive to legitimize their own existence by pulling crap like trying to shut down the numerous 'garage casters' who exist only (most of the time) because they love the wargaming hobby and want to do something for like-minded people. I doubt very much if there have been many instances of fat guys sat with their feet up on a solid-oak polished table, flicking through bundles of cash while smoking on a cuban cigar - I would say with near almost certainty that practically every company that has made 3rd party parts for GW games did so because they loved the idea of doing so, and genuinely wanted to improve their own experience and that of others. Yes even Chapterhouse, although I should imagine the fondness on their part will have somewhat staled by this point.

Anyway I digress, but how many of the GW design/sculpting guys (who are the heart and soul of the company) really agreed with shutting down the likes of Warsmith Miniatures, or off on a tangent the numerous fan websites that have been made about Warhammer (The Golden Throne, Turn signals on Land Raider, a slew of Blood Bowl sites)? I'd guess it lies somewhere between zero and none. The people who make the games, who love the hobby as a fan would and beyond just a way of making money and satisfying share holders, sit far apart from the kind of mentality that is bringing law-suits against garage-casters and other small companies. What's sad is that, like in cases like this, some fans aren't able to recognise that it is obviously a result of the actions of 'suits' (for want of a better term - or just call it 'them' ), and that by following GW's decision making blindly (white knighting, whatever you want to call it) without actually thinking through the reasons why, they are behaving in a way that is completely contrary to their own best interests. This hobby (wargaming) is about art, about expression, about two people creating a fantasy situation in which to have fun together (of the non blue-movie variety) - you can't place a copyright on that, and for something as generic as a giant, a lizard warrior or any other monster from historical legend, they deserve our ridicule, and constant belligerence, for trying.

1.) So you think, if any gamer thinks that a non-GW miniature can be used for GW games, the owner of that company should be sued, and the company closed?
2.) So you think that Goodyear should be allowed to make tires for Goodyear cars, but immediately closed and sued, if they dare to make tires usable for other cars, even if that is absolutely legal since more than 100 years?
3.) Are you aware that Citadel Miniatures started making miniatures meant for the game D&D (a setting including lizardmen from the start BTW)? So if Chapterhouse is a parasite, then GW started as a parasite as well. Like Ford and General Motors would be parasites of Daimler.
4.) If things were so simple as you think they are, why is GW so struggling to even provide the necessary documents for filing a lawsuit against CHS? Do you also follow GW's claim, that noone except GW should be allowed to sculpt arrows and skulls and use the 28mm scale?

I don't actually see any problem with making a model which replaces, or substitutes for, the "official" model, so long as it does not break a copyright.

Obviously the official manufacturer would prefer you to buy their own models, and they can enforce this at their official events. They can't do anything against players at home and clubs, though.

The main point from the view of the game is that whatever models are used need to be compatible and recognisable.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
I like to support the company that I play the game of. So GW, makes a game I love playing, I buy their models in support of them.

And if that's you're preference, then good for you. But at the end of the day, GW is a business. You are under no obligation to 'support them' ... They offer a product, and you can choose to buy it if you like it. That's where the relationship ends. They certainly feel no obligation to support your gaming habit, beyond trying to entice you to buy your stuff.

GW can encourage gamers to be 'loyal' by releasing stuff that people want to buy. If another company releases something that people like better, then they will buy that instead. That's just business.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
This thread is timely, because I wanted to respond to something HBMC said in the last CHS thread but it was offtopic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I say just lock it. Every time CHS posts anything it's just a siren call to our resident White Knights to come a'charging.

Respectfully, I disagree. There is no reason to support a status quo where one manufacturer can't post new releases because people can't stop coming in and crapping in it; the answer is not shrugging and saying "ah well, guess they win again".

I'm not a huge fan of CHS simply because I'm not really into their sculpts generally (although I did get the Stormraven extension which is great) but the nonsense that happens in their threads every single damn time has got to stop.

I created this thread because I realized that I was one of those people getting that thread off topic. I am not trying to burn CHS down, but when I saw the 'lizard-ogres' I was just kinda shocked. I am fine with bits and upgrade sprues, but I'm stil unsure of how to proceed when it comes to selling a replacement model for another company's game.

I guess I just don't get where you are coming from on this. Obviously it is meant to be a Kroxigor replacement but do you really think that GW invented Ogre sized lizards? In my opinion GW has no more of a right to produce ogre sized lizards, high elves, or skeletons than anyone else.

brettz123 wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
This thread is timely, because I wanted to respond to something HBMC said in the last CHS thread but it was offtopic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I say just lock it. Every time CHS posts anything it's just a siren call to our resident White Knights to come a'charging.

Respectfully, I disagree. There is no reason to support a status quo where one manufacturer can't post new releases because people can't stop coming in and crapping in it; the answer is not shrugging and saying "ah well, guess they win again".

I'm not a huge fan of CHS simply because I'm not really into their sculpts generally (although I did get the Stormraven extension which is great) but the nonsense that happens in their threads every single damn time has got to stop.

I created this thread because I realized that I was one of those people getting that thread off topic. I am not trying to burn CHS down, but when I saw the 'lizard-ogres' I was just kinda shocked. I am fine with bits and upgrade sprues, but I'm stil unsure of how to proceed when it comes to selling a replacement model for another company's game.

I guess I just don't get where you are coming from on this. Obviously it is meant to be a Kroxigor replacement but do you really think that GW invented Ogre sized lizards? In my opinion GW has no more of a right to produce ogre sized lizards, high elves, or skeletons than anyone else.

Ok, I think I've figured out a better way to explain my position. I look at the intent of the model. If somebody makes a cool looking giant lizard thing because it is a cool idea, great! but when I see somebody bringing up a new product, that is meant just as a replacement, I'm less inclined to accept it.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

Ok, I think I've figured out a better way to explain my position. I look at the intent of the model. If somebody makes a cool looking giant lizard thing because it is a cool idea, great! but when I see somebody bringing up a new product, that is meant just as a replacement, I'm less inclined to accept it.

Intent doesn't matter. As long as copyright isn't violated, then intentionally creating a replacement is not a crime.

Further, I fail to see how intentionally making a replacement intended for another companies game is moral failing. As was mentioned earlier, GW did it with D&D, even though TSR had already licensed Ral Partha to make D&D minis.

I still support your right to buy what you want for your own reasons, and I think folks here understand what they are. They (and I) just don't agree with you.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
As I stated in the begining, In the case of unreleased models or a game that has no models, I am completely ok with getting the models from anywhere. As there are no originals to copy.

The problem I have is that it doesn't feel to me that you have thought this out well enough. Most (though not all) GW models are just generic takes on normal fantast tropes. In this light your argument about unreleased models doesn't make much sense. Exactly which models can a company do without crossing your line? A large lizard with a weapon is about as generic as it gets.

timd wrote:
GW "loyalists" are the only people that have this big issue with third party models, nobody else gives a carp. The rest of the gaming world are happy to use third party models if they fit within their chosen game.

Hahahah, hah, haha, no.

Try to use GW models in a Warmahordes game in your non-regular store. They're just as looney about it.

brettz123 wrote:

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
As I stated in the begining, In the case of unreleased models or a game that has no models, I am completely ok with getting the models from anywhere. As there are no originals to copy.

The problem I have is that it doesn't feel to me that you have thought this out well enough. Most (though not all) GW models are just generic takes on normal fantast tropes. In this light your argument about unreleased models doesn't make much sense. Exactly which models can a company do without crossing your line? A large lizard with a weapon is about as generic as it gets.

But slightly less generic than a small lizard with a spear

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

Ok, I think I've figured out a better way to explain my position. I look at the intent of the model. If somebody makes a cool looking giant lizard thing because it is a cool idea, great! but when I see somebody bringing up a new product, that is meant just as a replacement, I'm less inclined to accept it.

I can accept that. I tend to disagree but I think that is a much better position for you to take.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

timd wrote:
GW "loyalists" are the only people that have this big issue with third party models, nobody else gives a carp. The rest of the gaming world are happy to use third party models if they fit within their chosen game.

Hahahah, hah, haha, no.

Try to use GW models in a Warmahordes game in your non-regular store. They're just as looney about it.

Are you talking about a tournament? If its a tournament sponsored by Privateer Press, then I don't see a problem with the Press Ganger enforcing the PP only rule. But that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about general use of third party minis. There has been no discussion of using third party minis in sanctioned tounament play in this thread.

So then who specifically is loony about it? The store owner? Unlikely... Another player in a pickup game? If he's that anal you are probably better of not playing with him. Random secret agent Privateer Press enforcers? I've never seen the kind of anti-third party invective seen on Dakka from anyone but GW gamers. Its simply not an issue in the rest of the miniatures gaming community.

Actually, using Hormegants for Shredders might be a nice way to run the otherwise awkwardly expensive 78 Shredder list using one of the Thagrosh models + 3 shredders from his warbeast points and then 75 shredders to fill a 150 point game... It would be a funny game however