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.

 Crimson wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Exactly this.

No mention of converting in the rules.

Or assembling (assembling models is on p. 312 of BRB, in the Hobby section.) So you cannot actually play the fething game. In order to play the game, you have to refer to the Hobby section content, so whether they're technically rules or not is irrelevant.

See that is the thing, My rulebook does not have a Page 312.

 DeathReaper wrote:

See that is the thing, My rulebook does not have a Page 312.

I hope you haven't assembled any models then!

 DeathReaper wrote:

Ill will take the lack of an answer or page reference to mean that it is not in the rules.

It's there. Look for 'the hobby'

 Peregrine wrote:
Q: Would it be modeling for advantage to replace the standard model with a different one for the specific purpose of allowing better LOS for the models I want to put behind it?
A: Yes.

Agreed.

Dr Coconut wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Ill will take the lack of an answer or page reference to mean that it is not in the rules.

It's there. Look for 'the hobby'

What page? Introduction (pgs iii-xi)? The rules (pgs 2-132)? Or Reference (pgs 133-156)?

Look in the index. It tells you the page. It's between 'miniatures showcase' and 'battles'

There's a few more pages after 156!!! The last page is 432

Not in the small rulebook there isnt.

You're not looking in THE rule book then. The small one is a get you started book with simplified rules

Alternatively, the small rule book is all you "need". The BRB just has extra stuff.

(Post is just as valid as Dr Coconut's)

As for the actual topic of modelling for advantage, as it has been noted, it is a convention, not a rule. For me slight variation like this is perfectly acceptable considering that same effect could be achieved by using slightly larger grot models (that do exist) or basing them slightly differently. Models in this game can vary in size depending on when they're manufactured, or how they're assembled, so getting nit-picky over few millimetres seems pretty pointless.

Dr Coconut wrote:
You're not looking in THE rule book then. The small one is a get you started book with simplified rules

Wrong. The small Rulebook has ALL the "The Rules" pages as the main rulebook.

Dr Coconut wrote:
You're not looking in THE rule book then. The small one is a get you started book with simplified rules

Where on earth did you get that idea?

The rules in the small book are the exact same rules section as is found in the big book. It just lacks the extra sections that deal with modelling and fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

See that is the thing, My rulebook does not have a Page 312.

I hope you haven't assembled any models then!

Do you honestly not see a difference between assembling models for their intended use, and modifying models to perform differently to how they were designed?

The only small one I have is the one from aobr, and based my comment on that. It still isn't the brb though, and so isn't the complete rules

Dr Coconut wrote:
The only small one I have is the one from aobr, and based my comment on that. It still isn't the brb though, and so isn't the complete rules

..which was a complete copy of ALL the 5th edition rules from the larger rulebook

Again: look at your large hardcopy, and note the section called "The RULES". Every.Single.Page from there is in the 6th edition mini rulebook. It contains ALL the rules

 insaniak wrote:

Do you honestly not see a difference between assembling models for their intended use, and modifying models to perform differently to how they were designed?

Yes I do. It was merely a response to claim that converting is not allowed by the rules, which is a silly point to make.

Ultimately this is about whether altering the model gives unfair advantage and this is the basis how it should be judged. Now it feels bit iffy that the OPs explicit purpose was to keep the grots shooting instead of just model an awesome looking scrap wall, but the intention of the modeller should not really matter; it would be absurd if the state of mind of the modeller in the moment of making the conversion would affect whether the model is OK to use or not. I said earlier why to me this doesn't seem like unfair advantage: difference is so slight that the same effect could be achieved by choosing the largest grot models from the model range or basing the grots slightly differently. As I'm not going to claim that people can't use some obscure old grot models of give their soldiers few millimetres of scenic basing, I really can't have problem with this wall either.

The thing is, Grots are small enough to give cover to orks but the orks can shoot over the grots without giving cover in the other direction.

Grots explicitly can do this where other models cannot. They have an advantage all other 28mm cannot do, so this idea that all 28mm infantry are equal is not true.

Grots have other advantages, and one of their disadvantages is they can't use an ADL.

And I have those ork barricades, and I use them, and most grots still can't see over them. And I wouldn't expect an advantage from a cinematic grot and a themed custom ADL to change how the core rules of the game work.

And grots can still use a quadgun to shoot flyers since usually the LOS from the grount to the sky, the grot can see.

 Crimson wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Do you honestly not see a difference between assembling models for their intended use, and modifying models to perform differently to how they were designed?

Yes I do. It was merely a response to claim that converting is not allowed by the rules, which is a silly point to make.

No sillier than saying

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah, that's still not true. They put that modelling section in the BRB on purpose, buddy.

In response to my post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Da Butcha, MFA is not a rulebook thing, therefore a converted model can never be legal as per the rules for 40k.

"a converted model can never be legal as per the rules" Is a true statement. It is not false like you claim, I was just correcting you.

Q: Would it be modeling for advantage to replace the standard model with a different one for the specific purpose of allowing better LOS for the models I want to put behind it?
A: Yes. In fact, this is the very definition.

Q: Would you care?
A: In a pretzels game? No. But at a tournament I may snap off your car's antenna and start whipping you with it while shrieking "underhanded cozener!"

Q: Would it be considered modelling for advantage if I had little piles of skulls and stuff behind the line, as part of the terrain, that the Grots could be placed upon so that they could then see over the wall?
A: Still yes, but someone would have to be TFG himself to call you on it in that case, as you've now blurred the lines between "modelling for advantage" and simply "modelling". Rule of Cool would sway my vote.

Here's how this dilemma should be solved.

I am one of those who is of the belief that 40k and Competitive 40k are two completely different games. What you are describing is perfectly acceptable in 40k, but not at all in Competitive 40k.

So, OP, how do you 40k?

 azazel the cat wrote:

Q: Would it be considered modelling for advantage if I had little piles of skulls and stuff behind the line, as part of the terrain, that the Grots could be placed upon so that they could then see over the wall?
A: Still yes, but someone would have to be TFG himself to call you on it in that case, as you've now blurred the lines between "modelling for advantage" and simply "modelling". Rule of Cool would sway my vote.

Considering the ADL goes directly to the ground and has nothing able to be stood on, this is way worse than 'cinematic tip toe' grots. It changes ADLs into a 'Bring whatever terrain you want in whatever shape gives you the most advantage'

Page 95, "Use Your Imagination!"

This alone makes me think that terrain is supposed to be modelled in a fluffy way, and that converting models, particularly terrain pieces, is encouraged in the rules.

Regardless, if your opponent rules lawyers you, it is your obligation to rules lawyer him back. Use those grots as impassable terrain for enemy units, and stick some flash gitz or some such behind them. I'd bring your converted ADL and the standard one, and ask the TO before the game begins. As any warhammer gamer knows, it is manipulating the gaps in the rules that makes you win, and not the rules themselves, whenever you face a rules lawyer.

And how does that differ from the shape of every other piece of terrain?

I only got through the first before the thought of modeling your grots to be holding their weapons over their heads to be able to shoot over the ADL "Gangsta" style got me ROFL.

As to the issue of modeling for advantage, there is the little spoken of concept of "modeling for disadvantage" where in you make a change in a model that causes a disadvantage to your unit(s) in order to allow the model to be use at all. In the case of scratch building you own Ork-ified ADL so that your grots can see over the wall is in fact downgrading being albe to ignore range attacks for a 4+ cover save. I'd allow it, seeing as any other unit that uses it still only receives the listed 4+ cover save due to it being an ADL.

SJ

Xyrael wrote:
This alone makes me think that terrain is supposed to be modelled in a fluffy way, and that converting models, particularly terrain pieces, is encouraged in the rules.

It implies that, and encourages you to make up rules. You should note that the callout boxes like that one aren't actually rules.

Regardless, if your opponent rules lawyers you, it is your obligation to rules lawyer him back.

... What? Playing by the rules is being a rules lawyer?
So if I insist that your orks hit on a 5+ for being BS2 that's being a rules lawyer?

Use those grots as impassable terrain for enemy units

... they are. I have no idea what you're getting at?

and ask the TO before the game begins.

Yes, this will solve any arguments. And the TO should insist that the "regular" ADL be used as long as you're honest and point out that the modified one changes what models are allowed to see through it.

As any warhammer gamer knows, it is manipulating the gaps in the rules that makes you win, and not the rules themselves, whenever you face a rules lawyer.

No, it's normally good tactics (including list building) and not making rules up that make you win - not trying to easter egg. Because as soon as you make up a "hole in the rules" to "abuse" you'll only get madder when it's proven to not actually work that way.

I'd model it how I like. If anyone objects, I'd either drop the ADL (if they were nice about it) or not play 'em (if they weren't). If I were playing against a modified ADL I would be fine with it - as long as the ork player gave me the benefit of the doubt concerning cover saves for any of MY units which tried to get a cover save for it - i.e. Leman Russ tanks and full sized infantry.

The only time you might get called out is in a tourney, but that's what a TO is for.

I have this issue with the occasional crouching guardsman. In a tourney I'd make sure that all my minis were standing properly, but in scratch games or LGS campaigns noone seems to mind.

Most people that tell you they wouldn't let you use a converted model over a message board wouldn't dare make such a fuss if they were across the table from you at a hobby shop, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Also, while a fairly common response is "It's fine in a pickup game, but wouldn't fly at a tournament", I've yet to meet a TO that isn't a fan of the modeling aspects of the hobby. They run events and are just as interested in seeing a variety of cool models brought by the players as anyone else.

 Oaka wrote:
Most people that tell you they wouldn't let you use a converted model over a message board wouldn't dare make such a fuss if they were across the table from you at a hobby shop, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Also, while a fairly common response is "It's fine in a pickup game, but wouldn't fly at a tournament", I've yet to meet a TO that isn't a fan of the modeling aspects of the hobby. They run events and are just as interested in seeing a variety of cool models brought by the players as anyone else.

Cool models are one thing.
Cool models that change inherent characteristics of the model they're "replacing" are another.

And yes, I'd object at the table and bring it up to the TO.

stripeydave wrote:
I'd model it how I like. If anyone objects, I'd either drop the ADL (if they were nice about it) or not play 'em (if they weren't). If I were playing against a modified ADL I would be fine with it - as long as the ork player gave me the benefit of the doubt concerning cover saves for any of MY units which tried to get a cover save for it - i.e. Leman Russ tanks and full sized infantry.

The only time you might get called out is in a tourney, but that's what a TO is for.

I have this issue with the occasional crouching guardsman. In a tourney I'd make sure that all my minis were standing properly, but in scratch games or LGS campaigns noone seems to mind.

The difference, is there are valid Guard models who can stand. The entire Grot line can't stand that tall, and there are explicit advantages to having grots as they can give 1-way cover unlike most other units out there. So to have the advantage of 1-way cover, you lose the advantage of ADL see-over.

 Oaka wrote:
Most people that tell you they wouldn't let you use a converted model over a message board wouldn't dare make such a fuss if they were across the table from you at a hobby shop, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Also, while a fairly common response is "It's fine in a pickup game, but wouldn't fly at a tournament", I've yet to meet a TO that isn't a fan of the modeling aspects of the hobby. They run events and are just as interested in seeing a variety of cool models brought by the players as anyone else.

Actually most TOs I know, myself included, tend to encourage modelling but also acknowledge that cool conversions shouldnt then impact play unfairly. So you would simply use your cool line as a cool line, that provides cover as a normal ADL. After all, it isnt fair to gain an unpaid for advantage, surely? What about a kneeling wraithlord? Or cool "converted" ground up genestealers that look like theyre emerging out of the ground?

The way I see it;

Start with an actual ADL. Ork it up some; add a few girders, debris, drill some holes, etc... This is an effective way of creating LOS for the shorter grots without changing the dimensions of the ADL.

Conversions are widely accepted and encoraged, so long as you don't change the profile dimensions there is no problem.