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.

I'm all for WYSIWYG and I only field what my models have in the cases of heavy weapons, special weapons, and so on.

If I were to purchase a close combat weapon for a unit of Chaos Space Marines, then I'd model it to avoid confusion, along with anything else that I purchase, like Melta Bombs. But does the Marine really need to show CCW, Bolt Gun, and Bolt pistol? Or will the Bolt Pistol/Gun and CCW be reasonable?

However, I've never think that basic equipment like bolt pistols and grenades need to be represented, nor is it impolite not to do so. A basic tactical marine has a bolt gun, a bolt pistol, Frag grenades, and Krak grenades. If I model one with a bolt pistol in one hand and use the arm throwing the frag grenade in the other, do I need to put a bolter on his leg?

Makutsu wrote:WYSIWYG should be only limited to what stuff you are given in the sprues, like how am I supposed to model "blah" if I don't do conversions at all?

Clearly, you're expected to learn to do conversions.

And I believe that conversions themselves are illegal?( Not 100% sure where it is in the BRB if someone can back me up on this)

Actually, it's quite the opposite. Conversions are encouraged, see page 323. For years, we've had codexes with models that didn't exist, the only way to get them was to convert them. "Don't do conversions at all", - why not?

Seriously though, I know it makes it easier for the game to play using WYSIWYG but does it really matter?

To some of us. It's much more enjoyable to play a visual game when you can look at the table and see what's going on, rather than have to try and remember all the things your opponent told you at the beginning of the game. That flamer is really a melta, the guy with the heavy bolter really has a rocket, and so on. The next think, you move your tank into the open, thinking all the anti-tank guns are gone, and it gets hit by a melta and a rocket.

If I could have seen that there was a melta and a rocket there, I wouldn't have moved my tank. But, after 5 turns (and five pints), I'm simply not going to remember that, I want to see it.

My FLGS was strict WYSIWYG but lately has been getting more lax about it and the players are more accepting of proxies even in tournaments.

IMO WYSIWYG is only important for tournaments. If its an issue for someone in a friendly game, its not very friendly at all. I would hate to have to chop up/convert units of untested models just to appease some guy in a one off game. If someone is using his massive proxy army to cheat, well, they just make themselves the idiot as you gain nothing.

Zod wrote:
Hi,

So yesterday I had a battle with someone. It was Chaos Space Marines vs Tyranids. The issue that we had was I wanted to give my Hellbrute a twin linked laser cannon, however my opponent would not allow it because he said my model has to have that weapon on him for me to use it. For example my Chaos Space Marines, he wouldn't allot me to swap my boltgun with a close combat weapon as my physical model had a boltgun on him. I am not sure who is right or wrong but I have always played Fantasy and 40k in the way that you can give your models additions providing you have the points available to spend and not be restricted by what comes in the sprues.

What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks

WYSIWYG is more of an agreement than a requirement, but people have different levels of what they find acceptable. You can't necessarily show *every* weapon option on your models, but as long as they are identifiable as what they are it shouldn't be a problem. I have a chaos marine leader fig who has been modeled with a tentacled fancy daemon/power weapon, but that doesn't mean he can't also have a combi-melta and a bolt pistol too. As long as the model is readily identifiable as to what it is, then you are pretty certain what its abilities are. The differences between a CSM with a bolter and a CSM with a bolter and CCW are so minimal it shouldn't matter much. If you want your CSM to have a heavy or special weapon you should have it modeled as such since it is near impossible for an opponent to keep track of which model out of 10 that otherwise look he same has the heavy weapon or the special weapon. As for your Helbrute that is another area where people vary. It is likely you want the ability to use whichever weapon you want with your one model. Again some folks won't care, while others will. For me if you have a single helbrute in your army and say "My helbrute has a twin-linked lascannon instead of twin-linked multimelta," then I wouldn't care at all.

Where this breaks down for me is volume. If you show up at the table with 3 helbrutes, each with different weapons, and none with the actual weapon as shown on the model, then I will get cranky. Either convert the models or use them as multimeltas. Same for regular CSM models. Don't show up with multiple units of CSMs all with bolters and then say "This unit with bolters is actually a havoc squad, with these heavy weapons" and this is a death guard squard and this is X squad and this is that squad. If you opponent has to keep a running list of your army to be able to play against you then you have definitely crossed the line.

Your opponent does have some say in this, but this will depend on your opponent. Sounds like yours was being REALLY picky, but that is allowed and you have a choice of accepting it or finding a new opponent for the game instead.

Skriker

I have a plan to throw some small PostIt notes that I can slap onto a model, in case I'm not running WYSIWYG. I tend to run WYSIWYG for simplicity's sake -- I keep an excel file with exact totals for squads, so I can just copy and paste -- but when I'm trying something out, it's a pain to have to convert for a single game. (I assume... I'm not foolish enough to have actually tried that.)

It's nice to see it's not a hard and fast rule.

Oh here we go again. People telling other people how to play the game.

What is next, that the minis have to be painted? Oh wait......


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I guess I am luck. When I use to play my gaming group allowed "counts as".

The only time I wouldn't allow "counts as" for example if you say this group of fleshborer gaunts are devil gaunts and these felshborer gaunts are fleshborer gaunts.

Or this SM has a missle launcher while they all look the same, then the guys says, no it was this group who had the missle launcher when he clearly said it was the first group.

Other than that "counts as" is perectly acceptable. Anyone who says otherwise, is just pushing his ideas on how the game is played.

Davor wrote:
Oh here we go again. People telling other people how to play the game.
...
Other than that "counts as" is perectly acceptable. Anyone who says otherwise, is just pushing his ideas on how the game is played.

And this is your idea on how the game is played? Pot, Kettle, etc.

As Redbeard says, that's a very hypocritical stance, Davor. Not everyone wants to play against a bunch of counts-as models.

That's right not everyone wants to play against it, BUT we don't have to be dicks to people who do though.

I just don't like it when people say "You HAVE to do it this way".

It's a game. It's a game for fun. We all have different versions of fun. Most times the fun stops when other people tell you how the fun is suppose to be. If you don't like to play against for what ever reason, just be polite about it. That's all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One more thing though. How come not everything is WYSIWYG? How come it's only acceptable WYISWYG. Funny most people don't WYSIWYG, grenades, ammo, or even psychic powers.

If you going to do is WYSIWYG, then EVERYTHING should be WYSIWYG, other wise you are using "counts as" anyways.

No idea. I've never said everything must be WYSIWYG, nor did I say I wouldn't play the original poster.

You're barking up the wrong tree, mate.

Personally only way I can do WYSIWYG is to do IG/Tau/Necrons since they don't have boat loads of war gear.

 kronk wrote:
Not everyone wants to play against a bunch of counts-as models.

And not everyone wants to play against pedants who insist on enforcing their own personal set of unwritten rules. Fortunately, most people realize that they can simply choose not to play opponents with whom they won't enjoy interacting.

Like Davor says, the point of the game is to have fun, and there are many different ways to derive fun from this game. Live and let live.

Could you possibly make your point without name-calling, Danny Internets? Could you be bothered read my other posts and see that I NEVER said I personally wouldn't play against counts as?

It's Davor's attitude that's off-turning, and posts like the one you just made.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davor wrote:

I just don't like it when people say "You HAVE to do it this way".

But that's exactly what you just did.

Davor wrote:

Other than that "counts as" is perectly acceptable. Anyone who says otherwise, is just pushing his ideas on how the game is played.

 kronk wrote:
Could you possibly make your point without name-calling, Danny Internets? Could you be bothered read my other posts and see that I NEVER said I personally wouldn't play against counts as?

It's Davor's attitude that's off-turning, and posts like the one you just made.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davor wrote:

I just don't like it when people say "You HAVE to do it this way".

But that's exactly what you just did.

Davor wrote:

Other than that "counts as" is perectly acceptable. Anyone who says otherwise, is just pushing his ideas on how the game is played.

Ah that is what you mean. Sorry, I was half asleep when I wrote that. Didn't realize that is what I did. I didn't mean it that way at all. After napping, not even sure what my intent was when I wrote that now.

All I can stick to now is, "I just don't like it when people say "You Have to do it this way". The game as I said is for fun. If your fun is different from someone else's version of fun, I believe the proper way is a polite "no thank you" and just move on. Nobody should be a jerk about it.

Davor wrote:
If your fun is different from someone else's version of fun, I believe the proper way is a polite "no thank you" and just move on. Nobody should be a jerk about it.

Right there with ya!

But for the original poster, play the way you like. It's already hard (at least in my area) to find games, so you might have to adjust if you really want to game.

If you are lucky, and can find like minded people, play the way you want. Don't change, you did nothing wrong.

Agree with hard to find people to play that's why I am thinking of getting out of 40k.

I basically gave up playing. I just collect now.

I purposefully reject WYSIWIG from a wargear perspective. I think it is bull$hit on many different levels.

It is really quite simple. If you want to play against me, you are going to play against the models I present on the table. If you don't like it, go find someone else to play with.