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.

 insaniak wrote:

 Mythra wrote:
Official GW. .

The box the Leman Russ comes in is also made by GW. Can I use it as a tank?


A piece of cardboard with a picture on it is not a model.

I'll inform all my opponents to remove all scratch built items made of card stock. I think that's everything in most ork armies around here.

-Matt

jamesk1973 wrote:
Basically anyone would play you except Dan beaver and barbobot.

Hey now, I said I would play against it - I just call shenanigans on the concept that "it's okay because it's an official model"

 HawaiiMatt wrote:
I'll inform all my opponents to remove all scratch built items made of card stock.

Yeah, because that's totally what I said.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Unless it was released by GW as an official model...

...which it wasn't. It's a stand in for use in a scenario in the 2nd edition starter set.

To the OP.

No.

I love nostalgia as much as the next guy, but a 2 dimensional model is unacceptable for gaming purposes, and is frankly insulting to hobbyists, who take pride in the construction and painting of their models.

It looks to me to made by GW and looks to be fielded. If you cut out anything off their boxes it was never meant to take the field.

I wouldn't mind playing against it initially, as a stand in dread model. But not if you're still using it 6 months down the line; at some point you should be getting an actual model for it.

Zimko wrote:


Though that rule says to put a base on the irregular model, not to swap it out mid-game to check LOS. "using models of a similar type as guidance" in determining which sized base to use.

My mistake on the reading of it. So just toss it on the right size base for the model then. Raw its a model as per the rules i quoted earlier but some people will have problems with it because it isn't "standard".

If you intended to play with it, I would laugh at you, and deride you mercilessly. But beyond that yeah play away.

StewRat wrote:
As for the posters claiming the OP is only trying to gain an unfair advantage - common guys, get a life. This is a game.

Thank you!

Hells yeah, I'd play against it.

Anyone else remember the old Eldar Avatar? The one that is actually smaller than a current standard Marine? That one I might have an issue with, but then again, my IG army is pretty much all RT era models, so who am I to talk.

 don_mondo wrote:
Hells yeah, I'd play against it.

Anyone else remember the old Eldar Avatar? The one that is actually smaller than a current standard Marine? That one I might have an issue with, but then again, my IG army is pretty much all RT era models, so who am I to talk.

The only Epic avatar was smaller. The old 2nd Edition Avatar was mounted on a 40mm square base

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

The only 40K avatar was smaller.

That picture is of the Epic model of an Avatar, not a 40k model.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

The only 40K avatar was smaller.

That picture is of the Epic model of an Avatar, not a 40k model.

Thank you for spotting my error, I had meant to say Epic. I have duly updated my post

 DanielBeaver wrote:
At least try to put SOME effort into the modeling aspect of the game. If you really don't care about the immersion and modeling, then I'm not sure why you would play 40k over other more abstract wargames (which are far superior from a gameplay perspetive).

He's not taking a piece of paper and writing "dreadnaught" or "model" on it; this isn't simply being a frustrating person running proxies just to be a dick.

It's a neat throwback, it was an official miniature and it's neat to show off that you still have it and, by extension, use. I agree that it's probably not a good capp for tournament play, but in friendly games (with strangers or no) I see no reason to exclude it.

With regards to the people arguing that it's being used for advantage.. Seriously? if you're shooting at it from the side just put your finger on it, hold it in the same place, and turn it to face to see if you have a clear shot or not / what kind of cover it gets. Deff dreads are 12/12/10, and it's pretty easy to see where it's facing. I honestly don't see any problems..

As with alot of these types of questions, game setting and game timing are key.

Setting:
Your playing me in my basement at 3 am, bring it. Your playing me at the FLGS, bring it. Your playing me in an event with some sort of prize, its the TO's call. I have played against one and the owner had it on the correct base so CCW attacks were not an issue. For shooting attacks it was a bit harder but it worked out.

Timing:
You just got it from somewhere and your testing out how the dred does in a game. No issues. Youve had it for 10 years using it every weekend in games. Issue.

You find me a unit entry in the Ork Codex called "Ork Dreadnaught" and I'll let you field it. It doesn't look like a picture of any current model and doesn't share a name with any current unit.

 Kriswall wrote:
You find me a unit entry in the Ork Codex called "Ork Dreadnaught" and I'll let you field it. It doesn't look like a picture of any current model and doesn't share a name with any current unit.

Same entry in the codex that lets people field old metal models that came in a package labeled Ork Dreadnought. How something was originally labeled has no bearing on whether or not it can be fielded under a different name in the new codex. Or are you also going to say that I have to buy all new IG since many of mine were labeled as Imperial Army vice the current AM? Would you ban my old plastic beret Stormtroopers because they weren't labeled as Scions? If you're going to object, at least come up with a reasonable objection.

 Kriswall wrote:
Or are you also going to say that I have to buy all new IG since many of mine were labeled as Imperial Army vice the current AM?

Careful now, you'll give GW ideas.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
the only Epic avatar was smaller. The old 2nd Edition Avatar was mounted on a 40mm square base

There was a RT-era Avatar that was smaller than the current (2nd ed) one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Oberron wrote:
Raw its a model as per the rules i quoted earlier ...

No, it isn't.

It's a cardboard cutout intended as a stand-in for a specific scenario in the starter set. It is neither model, nor miniature. It's no more a model than a coke can being used as a stand-in for a drop pod.

It's not a a stand in, it is a model. It was used as a model in a scenario for the game it came with.

Was there another metal model you could purchase that was the same, yes? Was GW going to put a metal dred in their box, no.

It even came with its own 20mm slotta base, models go on bases

it is more a model than a coke can, it was officially produced by GW as a model for use in a scenario in their boxed set, was there a metal version you could purchase of the same model. Yes.

GW did not make a scenario in any of its boxed sets that was a coke can that would be a drop pod.

also neither of the eldar pics above is the RT era avatar, which also fit on a 20mm slotta base. It did have a spear, and was holding it perpendicular to its body iirc.

You can really see what era folks started in by the reactions in this thread. Us old era players love it the new era players don't like it, for the most part.

Well, I started in 5th and I'd be happy to face it because it's a cool and amusing piece of history. It's like my friend who still uses his 25mm-based Terminators: I tease him about it, but I'm not seriously going to complain.

Now, I'm assuming that the person fielding the cardnought is willing to turn it to check LOS. If you won't do that then you're MFA in an annoying way, but I have a hard time imagining someone being that difficult.

barnowl wrote:
You can really see what era folks started in by the reactions in this thread. Us old era players love it the new era players don't like it, for the most part.

It's pretty sad if you shut down any valid argument by saying "We started earlier!". And as you can see in this very thread, there also are "vets" who dislike it for pretty good reasons.

Been playing since 3rd edition. I don't think its unreasonable to object to a thin piece of cardboard with a picture on it as a 40k model.

barnowl wrote:
You can really see what era folks started in by the reactions in this thread. Us old era players love it the new era players don't like it, for the most part.

The 2nd ed starter set was my second purchase for Warhammer 40000 (the first being Baharroth and Maugan Ra, before I knew there was a game to go with them ) ... So, no, it's not as basic as a 'vets vs newbs' situation.


I dislike it now for the same reason I disliked it back then - it's not a model, and it looks rubbish in a miniatures game. For a one-off scenario it's passable. As an actual part of someone's army it's on par with running a bunch of empty bases and calling them Tactical Marines, or the aforementioned coke can.

barnowl wrote:
You can really see what era folks started in by the reactions in this thread. Us old era players love it the new era players don't like it, for the most part.

The 2nd edition set was what I started out with, and I still have that cardboard cutout dreadnought around here somewhere. The only reason it was in the set was as a placeholder so that new players could try out the vehicle rules.

I have one of those old avatars somewhere....




young whippersnappers don't know thier history.

Not only do I think you should use that cardboard, I think you should make an entire army out of them.

 insaniak wrote:

Oberron wrote:
Raw its a model as per the rules i quoted earlier ...

No, it isn't.

It's a cardboard cutout intended as a stand-in for a specific scenario in the starter set. It is neither model, nor miniature. It's no more a model than a coke can being used as a stand-in for a drop pod.

Can you find something that goes against the rules that I posted?

As for the coke can being a stand-in, was it released officially by GW to be used as a drop pod? Yes it is a cardboard cutout, but it's an official cardboard cutout that is to be used as an Ork Dread. That is like saying you can't use the helbrute or any of the models from the Dark Vengeance box because those models are suppose to be used for the demo set-up that comes with it.

barnowl wrote:
You can really see what era folks started in by the reactions in this thread. Us old era players love it the new era players don't like it, for the most part.

I started in September. I just feel like if someone has the official thing that is made by GW says it is suppose to be XXX then they should be able to use it. I do like playing sisters because their models have some weight to them and it feels like i'm taking a glimpse at the past. Crons will still be my first love and i still enjoy playing them all the same, but it just feels "different".

Oberron wrote:

Zimko wrote:


Though that rule says to put a base on the irregular model, not to swap it out mid-game to check LOS. "using models of a similar type as guidance" in determining which sized base to use.

My mistake on the reading of it. So just toss it on the right size base for the model then. Raw its a model as per the rules i quoted earlier but some people will have problems with it because it isn't "standard".

Good luck drawing Line of sight with it to shoot anything. Since it does not have a weapon mounting or barrel to draw Line of Sight from it can never make any shots.

Oberron wrote:
Can you find something that goes against the rules that I posted?

Yes. I have posted it several times now: A cardboard cutout with a picture of a dreadnought on it is not a model, nor is it a miniature. It's a cardboard cutout with a picture of a dreadnought on it.

Yes it is a cardboard cutout, but it's an official cardboard cutout that is to be used as an Ork Dread.

... for a specific scenario.

It was not released as an Ork dreadnought. It was included in the starter set as a stand-in.

That is like saying you can't use the helbrute or any of the models from the Dark Vengeance box because those models are suppose to be used for the demo set-up that comes with it.

Sure. Aside from the fact that it's nothing like that, it's exactly like that.

I just feel like if someone has the official thing that is made by GW says it is suppose to be XXX then they should be able to use it.

And I totally agree. If someone has an official Dredd model, they're welcome to use it.

If they have a cardboard cutout of a dredd, because they just want to try out a dredd in their army before they actually go an buy one, and they bring that up before the game... then in most cases they're likely to be welcome to use it.

Beyond that, though... It's not a model. It's not a particularly good stand-in for a model. Put it in your 'Curios from Dayes of Yore' box and move on.