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.

Hello all,

This is a general question that has been on my mind since I started playing Warhammer 40k. How strictly do you follow wysiwyg, how strictly does your LGS enforce wysiwyg, and how do larger tournaments (NOVA, Feast of Blades, ATC, ETC, BAO, etc) handle wysiwyg in regards to conversions? I've been playing 40k since the release of 6th edition as often as I can, which is admittedly not much, and have only attended one GT which was a relatively small affair (around 30~ people). I love the game and most of the people who play it are incredibly friendly and well mannered offering complements about even my modestly painted army.

When I played at this small GT I brought my Tyranids. I used flesh borer hives from my spare Tervigon bits to model the twin-linked devourers on my flying Hive Tyrants. I think the arms look great adding a bit of bulk to the model where as the official twin-linked devourers look a little ' gimpy ' and weird. Apparently this was perfectly fine at the event and has been fine with my opponents at my LGS even getting some praise for how neat they look. I suppose the rule of cool has been alright with this choice so far, but if I were to attend a larger GT with wysiwyg requirements would this still fly? Could my opponent complain and I get punished for not actually being wysiwyg?

That brings me to my next question! With the release of the new C:SM I, like may other space marine fans, want to create my own chapter of space marines complete with their own look, theme, and a tiny bit of fluff. I would like to know how you would feel playing against a SM player with converted models representing units with Grav weapons. I've been thinking of using pieces of wire to suspend rocks and bits from either CSM or Necron models in the air above the marine with a grav gun, his hands outstretched as if he is lifting them with his mind, and crushing them together into a gravitational singularity. Would this be clear enough to some one that "this is a model with a grav gun." even if I chose not to model them carrying the weapon? How would folks at a GT feel?

thanks in advance for any replies! I'll read and reply as I can.

- From

I magnetise alot of stuff so WYSIWYG is easy for me. I'm not strict in demanding wysiwyg from my opponents, but I do prefer it when it is. Proxy models/wargearvhas always been fine by me (though I don't play in tournaments currently but will do one day). I think consistancy is the main thing when it comes to conversions, if forinstance someone was using 'generic energy weapon' from company x to represent plasma weapons in their army That'd be cool by me. Same applies to conversions, especially if done well for gear/weapons as it add flavour, so long as I know what is meant to be x and what is eant to be y and it's consistant then it's all gravy.

As mentioned I don't play in tournaments yet...

D

I'm sure most people would expect to be able to tell at first glance what a model has without an explanation. Barring that, a very quick explanation on one or two exceptions (grav guns in your case) with everything else being 100% WYSIWYG/appropriate and correct weapons will likely be fine with nearly everyone.

But, as always, rule of cool. If its distinct, readily obvious and requires only once to explain "these obvious looking guys have grav guns (or whatever explanation for using the grav rules), everything else is WYSIWYG", I personally wouldn't have a problem.

unless you face your own race or someone who atleast also plays that race, wysiwyg will usually have issues anyway.

Unless its Orks, Tau, CSM, or Nidz i have no idea what im looking at because theyre so similar to the rest of the codex and i dont spend enough time with that codex to know the difference. I still have no idea what the differences in visuals between the 3 SM Dreadnoughts are, and i have their bloody codex rofl

That being said, when i do a conversion i usually use the actual weapons. Anything that is unusual is typically only identifiable as one item anyway regardless of how off the wall it looks. I am working on a daemon possessed Stormboy Nob right now for instance, his PK is going to be an overgrown, twisted, and talon-riddled daemon claw instead of a PK - pretty sure everyone will know wtf it is though lol

As for that last bit, i think i'd have to see it to understand what you mean. Complex constructions are often hard to share your ideas for. But remember the Rule of Cool - make it badass enough, and proper base/relatively proper height (taller usually isnt an issue), i doubt anyone would give a damn lol.

So far it's sounding like as long as I keep the conversions obvious and to a minimum it would be OK. The only models that would be converted in this way would be the ones with grav guns, everything else would be equipped exactly as appears. Before a game I could tell my opponent "Hey, these guys "floating" people in the air and crushing them are using grav guns, everything else is as modeled." I don't think there will be too much confusion... perhaps putting some magnets on the models would help as I could clip on a grav gun if some one was particularly nitpicky.

When it comes to conversions, they need to have the appropriate wargear. (Check out my custom built Vulkan in my gallery if you want to know what I mean. He's got the gauntlet, the cloak, and the spear.)

When it comes to counts-as conversions (using whips to represent Power Mauls) then the most important part is consistency, but if someone is utilizing this allowance to try and screw people over ("Oh no, the serrated swords are the ones that count as power axes. The ones with no fuller are the ones that count as power fists") then it's totally fair to complain to a TO. I've never seen anything this bad though.

 Jimsolo wrote:
When it comes to conversions, they need to have the appropriate wargear. (Check out my custom built Vulkan in my gallery if you want to know what I mean. He's got the gauntlet, the cloak, and the spear.)

When it comes to counts-as conversions (using whips to represent Power Mauls) then the most important part is consistency, but if someone is utilizing this allowance to try and screw people over ("Oh no, the serrated swords are the ones that count as power axes. The ones with no fuller are the ones that count as power fists") then it's totally fair to complain to a TO. I've never seen anything this bad though.

Thanks Jim, I always enjoy your posts. My intention is to only use "counts as" for the grav rifles and ONLY the grav rifles, there will be no grav cannons or pistols in the whole army. So the models levitating things will be the only ones and will remain consistent. The only issue I see would be if I included combi gravs, but in that case I will either use a combi weapon OR make the Sergent very obviously different.

WYSIWYG is pretty important for Imperial armies.

Some people won't even know what Tyranid weapons look like but everyone will be able to identify the unmistakable silhouette of a melta gun, plasma gun, flamer, etc.

I would not push my luck with counts-as for Imperial gravity weapons unless it was something that is clearly not another Imperial weapon, such as FW volkite guns or some sort of third-party gun with a lot of grooves or ridges or using a Necron weapon.

Players tend to be lenient. Most posters will allow you to do whatever you want within reason, but when making something like a permanent investment in your non-magnetized army, it's not what your opponent will allow, but what the TO will.

Considering it's impossible to make a WYSIWYG Hive Tyrant with both Wings and 2 sets of arms without converting and the fleshborer hives are a common conversion for devourers I doubt you'll run into any trouble. Chances are your opponent won't even know the difference between a Fleshborer and a Devourer unless they're also a Tyranid player. I've run into people who can't tell what some models are, let alone the weapons they're carrying.

I have always found that WYSIWYG more beneficial to me than my opponents. You see I have a terrible memory for things and don't like to slow the game down by constantly checking what upgrades I bought for my army.

Therefore, if I have an upgrade the model also has it to some form or another, that way I can look at my own model and no straight away what I have and haven't got.

Not sure my opponent really cares that much, most people have a better memory than I do anyway.

How much do I wysiwyg? As much as I can. I've got a lot of guard models, so I haven't done any proxying with that army for awhile (well, I did when I started running russes but didn't really have the models yet). On the other hand, I don't have many CSM models, and they're in various states of assembly, so for that I proxy a lot. I've also done a fair amount of half-proxy work. Like taking a chimera chassis, and quick bodging together a plasticard box with four bits of aluminum tubing sticking out and calling it a hyrda. I've done a fair bit of sort-of-wysiwyg that way.

As for my FLGS, we don't have restrictions on proxying. People work towards wysiwyg, and are generally mostly there, but if you're trying something new, then that's no problem. All you've got to do is have a reasonable proxy ("this game my autocannons are lascannons" for example) and explain what things are well in advance. Also, there are only SO many people in our gaming club. It doesn't take THAT long to play everyone a few times, and people don't tend to have dramatic fluctuations over short period of time. It's more like "I'm running my nurgle list, except I'm bringing two squads of havocs instead of one. That's what those unpainted guys over there are".

I do as much as I can to follow WYSIWYG, by giving my units the wargear they'll most often use. Occasionally I'll use a power weapon as a CCW or vice-versa, due to points, in which case I try to make it as obvious as possible and point it out to my opponent. Noone in my local group minds (except one, but noone likes to play him anyway ) as long as they know what's going on. The same thing applies to the tournaments I go to, but I know it isn't the case everywhere.

I'm happy to play against converted models, because they're usually awesome. I need half the wargear from any non-MEQ/Imperial army explained to me anyway, so it's never worried me.

I can't help much with Grav Weapons, as I've yet to take a look at them. What you're suggesting is probably feasible, as long as it was really obvious what was going on. Maybe paint their hands a different colour, or have their eyes glowing Avatar-style?

WYSIWYG doesn't matter with wargear. You can equip your models with anything allowed in the codex, and 99.9% of people won't care.

It only matters with some tournaments, and I believe that will change in the future. GW cancelling bits sales kinda sets the stage.

Tournaments is the only setting where it comes into play because it can throw people off. Friendly games are "usually" not as die-hard because youre experimenting anyway. Ive had friendly games where ive proxied like HALF of my army because i wanted to try a list that i didnt have any of the proper models for, so i had my troops, my HQs, and whatever i found that was relative size to what i was trying to field lol. Noone cares about anything within REASON for friendly games.

Biggest thing is having something stand out as a different gun/special character. Even something as a painfully obvious different paintjob works (This marine #441 thats painted pink for some reason has the melta gun even though he has a bolter) lol.

What is annoying about WYSIWYG is that the current Tyranid Codex does not have a reference to what each weapon looks like. I had to buy an older Codex for that. So with that in mind it's up the player what they use to represent a weapon because GW obviously isn't that bothered.

Personally, I don't care what guns represent what on my opponents army and I've not come across any opponent having problems with any of mine.

Thanks everyone for all of the feedback!

It really helps to understand different peoples take on WYSIWYG and its importance. It's sounding like for almost all of the games I will be playing conversions will be fine as long as it's painfully obvious what the model has, the army list details it, and I explain to my opponent beforehand what the models are. The only situation in which this might not fly is with some tournaments and I am pretty sure some discussion with the TO before attending will answer if my converted models will be acceptable for the event.

I will go about putting together one of the converted models in the near future and post a picture on the painting and modeling sub-forum, perhaps even post a link to it here if this thread is still alive and kicking by the time I finish. I look forward to any further responses this thread gains as it has already been very informative and quite reassuring to learn that most people (so far) would be accepting of a converted model as long as it looks cool!

For me wysiwyg is the general standard to go by, but not rock hard YOU MUST approach. There is grey area for new players, people trying new ideas from their codex before investing money and so on. The key is COMMUNICATION. If you tell an opponent clearly and openly up front that your fleshborer hives are really a different weapon and you don't have any other models in your horde using them for actual fleshborer hives you are not going to have any trouble...in fact that use for the fleshborer hives is actually pretty common. Saying all the heavy bolters in my army are really autocannon is also a simple thing to remember.

Your other conversions make me think more of psykers than marines with grav guns, but they could work with letting your opponent know, though, how would you differentiate between grav pistols, grav guns and grav cannon? While you might think a conversion with increasing large stones would signify the difference admirably, that isn't A) Something opponents want to have to keep track of; or B) Something opponents would need to keep comparing different units to each other to keep track of. That could end up being a pain for opponents. The kind of things that are not easy for an opponent to track simply should be avoided in tourney settings usually.

Your opponent shouldn't have to work to know what is in your army when looking at it on the table, which is the basis of WYSIWYG in the first place.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:
For me wysiwyg is the general standard to go by, but not rock hard YOU MUST approach. There is grey area for new players, people trying new ideas from their codex before investing money and so on. The key is COMMUNICATION. If you tell an opponent clearly and openly up front that your fleshborer hives are really a different weapon and you don't have any other models in your horde using them for actual fleshborer hives you are not going to have any trouble...in fact that use for the fleshborer hives is actually pretty common. Saying all the heavy bolters in my army are really autocannon is also a simple thing to remember.

Your other conversions make me think more of psykers than marines with grav guns, but they could work with letting your opponent know, though, how would you differentiate between grav pistols, grav guns and grav cannon? While you might think a conversion with increasing large stones would signify the difference admirably, that isn't A) Something opponents want to have to keep track of; or B) Something opponents would need to keep comparing different units to each other to keep track of. That could end up being a pain for opponents. The kind of things that are not easy for an opponent to track simply should be avoided in tourney settings usually.

Your opponent shouldn't have to work to know what is in your army when looking at it on the table, which is the basis of WYSIWYG in the first place.

Skriker

Hey Striker,

In my earlier posts I believe I addressed your second paragraph. In my case there will be no other instances of grav weapons in the army outside of the rifle. Combi-Gravs will use the appropriate bit, and only the "Psykyer looking" models will have Grav weaponry. I realize that the modeling may be more reminiscent of what a psyker would be doing, but in my case that's the point. A home brew chapter with unique cool looking models to make them stand out.