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.

When my group gets together to play a couple games, we generally end up using some of our other models to represent unit different from what they are due to monetary constraints. I'm just wondering what you guys opinion on the matter is, so please put your thought below!

Voted no, but it depends on the degree of differences between the proxy and the real model. Proxying a tank as a different tank on the same basic hull? Probably ok. Proxying a random $5 toy as a titan because you want the powerful rules of the titan but don't want to spend the time and effort required to have a real model? Forget it. And given the fact that you said this is about money issues and not "let me test this before I buy the real model" or "I think this model looks cooler than the standard one" I suspect your proxies are going to fall into the second category.

The way that I understand it is as follows:

1. You do not have to use the specific GW model to represent a given unit.

2. You do, however, have to have a model with the appropriate wargear.

Using a power armored space marine as a different power armored space marine is fine.

Using a guardsman as a space marine is not fine.

Peregrine, is this roughly your opinion?

Our group only allows us to use models of a similar size and shape. The biggest difference between the models and the unit it represents is usually me having to substitute a model from my Necrons for my SM or vice versa, but they're always very similar in size.

 JustaerinAtTheWall wrote:
Our group only allows us to use models of a similar size and shape. The biggest difference between the models and the unit it represents is usually me having to substitute a model from my Necrons for my SM or vice versa, but they're always very similar in size.

Like putting a necron warrior in a space marines tactical squad?

Not technically koscher, but I wouldn't object to it.

 Traditio wrote:

 JustaerinAtTheWall wrote:
Our group only allows us to use models of a similar size and shape. The biggest difference between the models and the unit it represents is usually me having to substitute a model from my Necrons for my SM or vice versa, but they're always very similar in size.

Like putting a necron warrior in a space marines tactical squad?

Not technically koscher, but I wouldn't object to it.

I'm in a similar boat, but would also limit the number of models they can do this for. For example, if they did an entire Tactical Squad this way, that's fine; but if it were a relatively significant number of units that were like this, no - I wouldn't allow it.

The different models are generally their each respective squads, causing less confusion as they don't mix up with different models.

 JustaerinAtTheWall wrote:
The different models are generally their each respective squads, causing less confusion as they don't mix up with different models.

I wouldn't turn down a game on the following conditions:

1. It's abundantly clear, with little difficulty on my part, to determine which units represent which rule-sets.

2. You're not using proxies to represent OP gak.

But then, even if you used the real models, I probably still wouldn't play against clearly OP gak.

If you want to use a squad of necron warriors to represent a squad of space marines with bolters, that's fine by me, though I'd find it aesthetically displeasing.

I would be ok with it, so long as you're not trying to use "alternative" models for your whole army. I've bought some third party stuff for my Guard, but the bulk of it is still GW.

 War Kitten wrote:
I would be ok with it, so long as you're not trying to use "alternative" models for your whole army. I've bought some third party stuff for my Guard, but the bulk of it is still GW.

6 - 10 man squads of necron warriors to represent tactical marines with bolters?

We do it all the time to test rules for models. If we like them, we try to buy the models.

I agree, it's entirely displeasing to view, But you'll have to define proxy, and gak for me.I'm afraid i'm not used to many of the gaming terms. And I agree that if I were to use large certain units frequently, I would purchase those models.

My friends and I were... unwealthy... when we started out 20 years ago. Some people like to have their models painted. I like to have my models WYSIWYG [painting be damned!]. I have no problem with weird and wonderful models representing other things, so long as the distinctions are clear and I don't get an "I'm trying to cheat" vibe.

So go to town. Necron Warriors as Marines with Bolters. That Immortal with Tesla gun? He's got a plasma gun. A-ok.

I like my models WYSIWYG because that's my vanity on the table top. Other people like painted minis. I play against non-wysiwyg models, and my opponents play against my [still somewhat] unpainted minis. It is what it is. We still have fun games.

I played a game agianst my friend who didnt have any models. Just bases. It was not a very fun game, but it sure was funny. I would happily play with most any proxies as long as its clear or follows a general rule. For instance I use a fair bit of proxying so when I do I like to make all the proxying uniform such as saying "All my tactical squad sergeants have a combi plasma. Also all meltaguns in my army are actually plasma guns". I feel it would be a bit rude to mix and match too much as it can confuse your opponent and take away from the experience.
I would play against someone who did do that, but they would have to be a fun person to play with before I kept doing it.

In general I have no problems with proxies, but I have preferences to what I like to roll with. One of my friends proxies in a small Buzz Lightyear toy as his space marine captain and I find it hilarious to play with.

It all depends. How often do you plan to do this, and how good does the model fit the intended model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So the simple answer: YES

Would I allow you to try stuff out: YES
Would I allow you to use a cool and fitting count as / proxy: YES

Would I like to play against soda cans or other things / models who clearly are not a good proxy representation each time I play against you: NO

But most importantly I am not your opponent nor your TO or your local store owner, so my opinion on it doesn't really matter does it.

 Traditio wrote:

 War Kitten wrote:
I would be ok with it, so long as you're not trying to use "alternative" models for your whole army. I've bought some third party stuff for my Guard, but the bulk of it is still GW.

6 - 10 man squads of necron warriors to represent tactical marines with bolters?

If he/she didn't have that many Tac-Marines and wanted to try out a list with more than sure, I'd be fine with it.

It really depends on what you mean by "monetary constraints". I used to play in a school club where everyone was dirt poor and any we proxied the heck out of everything. We still made efforts to save and buy actual models though and took pride in actually being able to field WYSIWYG. In this case, I would be fine.

If "monetary constraints" means that you have a stable job but just don't want to spend money on buying actual models, instead picking up whatever is cheap and dumping it on the table, then I would keel haul you.

In general, as long as you are making some kind of effort towards completing your army (even if it just plans to buy stuff once you are more financially stable), I would be happy to overlook proxies for the sake of a game.

 the Signless wrote:


If "monetary constraints" means that you have a stable job but just don't want to spend money on buying actual models, instead picking up whatever is cheap and dumping it on the table, then I would keel haul you..

The sad truth is that the majority of the players can't really afford this hobby unless they are in the fortunate position to have a good job and no other major expenses. They still spend money on it but really shouldn't be spending it on plastic crack.
The same goes for spare time to put into your army. Those with kids and a Job don't have that much to spare. So I don't really care as long as they at least try and slowly improve their army.

For me it's all about consistency and models being roughly the same size as what they are representing. If a ork with a slugga is meant to represent a scout with a shotgun, I'm good as long as even slugga boy is that. If some other model is used to that effect that's fine as long as it;s the right size.

I'm generally fine with it, mainly the issue is of whether the models are appropriate as stand-ins in basic size, and that different equipment can be distinguished (doesn't have to be accurate, just different from models with other options). For example, I'm a sisters player, but I don't have any proper Dominion squads (as I want them to be all helmeted, which isn't easy in metal), so I currently use two units of Adeptus Arbites as stand-ins, which no-one ever really objects to since they're about the same size; although I don't have the exact equipment, it's easy enough to treat shotguns as boltguns, grenade launchers make for an unusual simulacrum imperialis, otherwise they're correctly armed (one squad of flamers, one of meltaguns).


I think the key thing is to make sure your opponent knows what to expect, and that you are as clear as possible about what a unit is meant to be, and accept that your opponent may have to ask you again what something is armed with. You might consider investing in some coloured, or otherwise easily distinguished, counters that you can use to indicate unit differences. For example, if you have two identically armed tactical squads, but decide you'd like to run them with different heavy weapons, then assign counters that your opponent (and you) can use to remember which is which.

In most of my games we clarify what everything is as it's deployed, as even if the equipment is mostly what you can see on the models there may be some tweaks such as the equipment a sergeant has, or something you had to shave off to stay under the points limit. It's great that some people can play WYSIWYG because their collections are either expansive enough to do-so or they have the patience to modify their squads when a new codex changes all the points and options, but most people can't, so it's just a case of communicating, and making sure you've marked any important changes clearly to avoid slowing the game down or making a bunch of mistakes.

For me it's fine to do this kind of proxying as a stop gap measure, say if you wanted to run a ten man tactical squad but you only had 7 built, so used three guardsmen to fill the numbers. Sure, but as an ongoing thing, the effort should be made to get your army up to standard.

As for making cool scratch built stuff, or counts as conversions. Rule of cool always applies.

I'd say that if you're playing your friends, in the process of building armies - or testing units you don't own, I don't see a problem with it.

It would get old really fast, but no problem if you're testing a few units.

For me, I'd agree with many of the posters above that it's a matter of how much effort you're putting into achieving a playable army. While the hobby is expensive - anyone with a job can likely spare $20-30 a month and pick up a squad at a time. You don't need to purchase 2,000 points in a single go.

For myself and many gamers the game (any wargame) is a visual spectacle and the goal is to play a fun game on nice terrain with nicely painted miniatures. As such I see it as a matter of respect for the other players that you bring the best you can to the table. It's simple wargaming table manners. The visual aspect of the hobby is a huge component - it's one of the main reasons we play a tabletop wargame. If we wanted we could be playing clix or board games --- that removes the hobby aspect from the game.

I think it's respectful to show up to a game with an army painted as well as you can -- this is your portion of the game, why not make it nice. It doesn't have to be professionally painted, but a genuine effort is appreciated. Same reason I'd rather not see someone show up with unpainted stuff, or models missing pieces, backed up by a dollar-store "counts as" toy T-Rex.

Now if your gaming group plays at home, in a garage or just against each other - you guys can determine the amount of effort you want to put in. Heck play the game with toy soldiers if you want. But playing against other players, I believe it's common courtesy to bring the best thing you can put on the table.

 War Kitten wrote:
I would be ok with it, so long as you're not trying to use "alternative" models for your whole army. I've bought some third party stuff for my Guard, but the bulk of it is still GW.

Out of curiosity, if said whole army made up of alternative models is correctly represented (weapons, gear, etc.), what's the difference?

 Elbows wrote:
I'd say that if you're playing your friends, in the process of building armies - or testing units you don't own, I don't see a problem with it.

It would get old really fast, but no problem if you're testing a few units.

For me, I'd agree with many of the posters above that it's a matter of how much effort you're putting into achieving a playable army. While the hobby is expensive - anyone with a job can likely spare $20-30 a month and pick up a squad at a time. You don't need to purchase 2,000 points in a single go.

For myself and many gamers the game (any wargame) is a visual spectacle and the goal is to play a fun game on nice terrain with nicely painted miniatures. As such I see it as a matter of respect for the other players that you bring the best you can to the table. It's simple wargaming table manners. The visual aspect of the hobby is a huge component - it's one of the main reasons we play a tabletop wargame. If we wanted we could be playing clix or board games --- that removes the hobby aspect from the game.

I think it's respectful to show up to a game with an army painted as well as you can -- this is your portion of the game, why not make it nice. It doesn't have to be professionally painted, but a genuine effort is appreciated. Same reason I'd rather not see someone show up with unpainted stuff, or models missing pieces, backed up by a dollar-store "counts as" toy T-Rex.

QFT

I voted no. The game to me is much more pleasing when the armies doing battle look like the armies doing battle.

I do not mind proxies for some things. For instance a buddy of ours has some Grey Knight Interceptors. He uses them a lot of times as a Grey Knight Strike Squad. To me that is acceptable as they still look like grey knights as long as he makes it clear before hand that they are a strike squad.

I personally magnetize anything I will potentially use as something different because I like my armies to represent what I am actually playing. Mostly because as stated earlier I like to envision the armies actually doing battle while we are playing and also because it removes any doubt as to what a model is.

 Traditio wrote:

 JustaerinAtTheWall wrote:
The different models are generally their each respective squads, causing less confusion as they don't mix up with different models.

I wouldn't turn down a game on the following conditions:

1. It's abundantly clear, with little difficulty on my part, to determine which units represent which rule-sets.

2. You're not using proxies to represent OP gak.

But then, even if you used the real models, I probably still wouldn't play against clearly OP gak.

If you want to use a squad of necron warriors to represent a squad of space marines with bolters, that's fine by me, though I'd find it aesthetically displeasing.

Almost the same for me, but with one addition:
If you ask me whether or not I'm fine with you bringing something shiny,new that's probably OP and you have to proxy it - sure, if it's as a playtest, why not.

But to be fair: I'm also that guy with the mostly unpainted army, so it would be a bit ridiculous to insist on something like that ;-)

I'd play against anything, so yeah.

To the OP: Yes I would provided that:

1.) You explained your situation. This isn't me trying to be a dick about it, but rather I just wanna know why you showed up with a mariachi band rather than a nid swarm. And

2.) You tell me clearly which model is suppose to be what. No morphing from a Termagant to a Genestealer between turns.

 Elbows wrote:

Spoiler:

I'd say that if you're playing your friends, in the process of building armies - or testing units you don't own, I don't see a problem with it.

It would get old really fast, but no problem if you're testing a few units.

For me, I'd agree with many of the posters above that it's a matter of how much effort you're putting into achieving a playable army. While the hobby is expensive - anyone with a job can likely spare $20-30 a month and pick up a squad at a time. You don't need to purchase 2,000 points in a single go.

For myself and many gamers the game (any wargame) is a visual spectacle and the goal is to play a fun game on nice terrain with nicely painted miniatures. As such I see it as a matter of respect for the other players that you bring the best you can to the table. It's simple wargaming table manners. The visual aspect of the hobby is a huge component - it's one of the main reasons we play a tabletop wargame. If we wanted we could be playing clix or board games --- that removes the hobby aspect from the game.

I think it's respectful to show up to a game with an army painted as well as you can -- this is your portion of the game, why not make it nice. It doesn't have to be professionally painted, but a genuine effort is appreciated. Same reason I'd rather not see someone show up with unpainted stuff, or models missing pieces, backed up by a dollar-store "counts as" toy T-Rex.

Now if your gaming group plays at home, in a garage or just against each other - you guys can determine the amount of effort you want to put in. Heck play the game with toy soldiers if you want. But playing against other players, I believe it's common courtesy to bring the best thing you can put on the table.

I'd agree with this, and I don't think I could ever have a hard and fast rule about it. Every time I come across a situation like this, I'd take the case on its own merits. If I met someone who had a nicely painted army, but wanted to try out including a land raider, I'd happily play against a non WYSIWIG proxy (I always accept non-GW models if they are WYSIWIG). However, if someone wants to play against me with a load of broken space marines or legs glued to bases with boxes for tanks, I'd most likely say, "why don't you use one of my nicely painted armies instead?" I didn't get into this hobby to fight battles against random household objects. If you only have a few models, then we'll play a small game, kill team or something like that. I'll lend you some models to make up the difference. There are many ways to avoid having to play a load of stuff that doesn't look like the army it's supposed to be.

Bear in mind that I'm a non-competitive player. I'd never use a non-painted model in my own army because I'm interested in the visual spectacle and the narrative. It's hard to get excited about a face-off between two warlords if one of the warlords is a grey lump of plastic.

Of course, this is all with the caveat that there are many kinds of gamers out there, and if I'm playing against a child who doesn't even own a paintbrush, I'm obviously going to cut them some slack and offer encouragement! We should all remember that - we need to encourage kids to play this game or it will die with us.

I really don't care what you bring as long as is vaguely similar and identifable

Believe me, i'm not spending any money elsewhere. I can't afford it!
But yes, once I get enough money, I do generally go to my FLGS and purchase a kit or two, along with some paint or modelling equipment. And I do think that magnetizing my models would be an excellent idea, but i've never tried that for my models. Trust me, I despise the notion of using boxes and cans as proxies just as much as the rest of you.