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.

 jabbakahut wrote:


There are a lot of signs the GW has changed over the years, but I think the nail in the conversion coffin was the stupid Alpha marines. For a long time the gold standard for conversion work in difficulty and impressiveness was true-scale marines. The fact that GW saw that and decided to kill off that trend with a profit idea is what signaled the end of conversions in my mind (people will always still shoot with film cameras, but the prevalence of these individuals diminishes into an obscurity as the industry decides which route is most profitable). I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of my army is unplayable by modern standards because it's so old.

That's an interesting benchmark to go from. The majority of "true scale" SM models I've seen looked like a bag of gak. Almost like Slenderman in power armor.

Have had time to gather my thoughts, and digest opinions. And I think I've figured out how to best express myself on this one.

Once upon a time, GW put out rules without models. This was particularly prevalent in the very early days. Indeed as much as we remember Vehicle Design Rules as an oddity from 3rd/4th Ed, their origin lies in Rogue Trader, which featured a very primitive version. Different chassis and propulsion systems and that.

So from the get go, we were expose to skilled modellers scratch building and kit bashing. From Golden Daemon entries to White Dwarf articles it was a significant part of the Hobby at that time.

Back then it was a matter of necessity. GW couldn't produce that many kits, but didn't want that to limit the scope of the game.

Seeing such grand projects made Younger Me and his contemporaries want to build up their skills. And that starts with simple weapon and head swaps. Before long you're kitbashing infantry and modding stock models.

But in today's Hobby, everything you can field is available off the peg. And understandably, GW want to push their product, and not a cool looking model converted up from a Star Wars toy.

That's left us with less visible conversions. And when we do see them, theyre conversions of existing kits. That includes reposes, greenstuffed Nurgle hulls etc.

I fear that's robbed younger gamers, relative newcomers, without the initial inspiration I found. Over time, that could spell the demise of converting :(

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I fear that's robbed younger gamers, relative newcomers, without the initial inspiration I found. Over time, that could spell the demise of converting :(

Don't be afraid. It's not going to happen. Golden Demon is still full of conversions. People will continue to make the models that inspire them. The wealth of hobbyists posting on the internet provides more inspiration than I ever got when I started in the hobby.

The difference is that now kids don't have to waste a weekend cutting up sprues to make 40 "spears" because they didn't come in the box I don't see that as a requisite stepping stone to actually making good conversions.

Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

Now we don't need to do that, there's less need, if not desire.

I kind of hope GW pick up this aspect of the Hobby. Duncan Rhodes converted up some gorgeous Free People's Spearmen - even if it's a pricey way to make them, it's the spirit that counts.

Considering the majority of converting is weapon swaps and detail addition (much like the GW Space Wolf Cataphractii video) there' still loads of opportunities for that sort of thing. Hell, I just saw a guy making a barbarian-themed Stormcast army by using Fyreslayer and Space Wolf heads on every figure. That sort of converting is alive and well as it ever was.

The idea that everything is available isn't strictly true. I just started an AdMech army and you only get special weapon of each type, so if you want to split the squad into two with two snipers then you're out of luck.

This past summer I just converted 10 each Crusaders, Death Cult Assassins, Afro-Flagellants and 3 Penitent Engines because I didn't want to pay a loads of money for the official ones that only have two poses. I also recently discovered I REALLY love reposing and converting Dreadknights for some bizarre reason. I dunno, it's like a puzzle trying to figure out what I need to cut away or fill in without making it look like a mess. I also head swapped Grandmaster Voldus to be wearing a helmet which never even occurred to me for some reason.

I still think GW has loads of scope for conversion but I actually think that the reason it's not as seen commonly is that GW doesn't encourage it as much. I'm constantly offering bits to the newer players in the group after games as trophies for their models. Like if a unit kills a bunch of my genestealers I'll offer them a spare head or some armor plates to decorate their models with but more often than not they'll not bother. Compared to older members of the group have names, their own fluffy units that are always composed of the same models every game, small details in the paint job that were added after a lucky roll that killed a Carnifex etc. Again, in the Inquisimunda/Blanchitsu community conversions and both fantastic and rife and it's mostly made up of veterans.

I feel like GW and other companies (not just limited to miniatures) have encouraged a "stock is best" approach, where the models should be left as they are supplied. Blandness and over-consuming is encouraged via the pricing of kits. Kitbashing is generally something that's too expensive for most people. For example, the Penitant Engines I mentioned up there were made out of multiple kits and parts, but the only box I actually bought new to make them was some ork killa kansz. Everything else was given to me by friends or parts I had from the past 20 years.In order to make one I would have needed to buy an IG Sentinel for each one on top of the kanz, then the pilots which were mostly Empire flagellants, then theres some decorations from GK, Bretonnian and SoB tank bits. So yeah, having spent a great deal of time in the hobby definitely helped me but newer players don't have the luxury of having a load of spare models lying around.

Or maybe its the cost of their tools putting people off. Or maybe it's that people see really good conversions online and decide not to bother because it won't be as good.

I dunno, there is a lot of reasons but I don't think it's due to a lack of opportunities for conversion. Sorry if this is a rambling post, I'm very tired.

Quick edit: The lack of easily available bits is also an issue I think. Remember when nearly every individual part of a model was available on mail-order? If you needed the left arm of a Bloodthirster you could order just that arm. I know there's websites dedicated to ordering plastic bits but I think that's basically a lottery in terms of whats in stock. I dunno, I've not looked at them in a long time.

I'd argue one key element is the size of 40k armies now over back then.

In the 90s the Tyranid Screamer-Killer (Carnifex) was the centre piece of an aspiring bug general. These days you need 4 of them.

Converting one Carnifex was to some an achievable target, but who wants to convert 4 of them?

 Sim-Life wrote:
Afro-Flagellants

This is like, the greatest typo ever.

Someone convert these, stat! Or is it not a typo...?

Converting has its place because options are back.

40K has wargear lists which aids variety, and while AoS is static you can mix and match individual models in a unit and thus armament is important, also the lack of ranking means pose conversion is worthwhile.
When I made my Moonclan Grot army I reposed all the spear arms of my Skull Pass gobbos so they pointed everywhere. It looked a whole lot better even for this simple conversion job.


What needs to happen is the abolition of TLOS. It sounds ok as a rule until you recognise that figures wont want to stand in the same pose all day. That champion standing on a mound of skulls with his chainsword in the air might be posed differently if taking cover behind a wall or shooting a bolt pistol through a window. Units need generic size categories,, with same for terrain.
PP got this right and introduced size brackets specifically not to disadvantage modellers who rebased or posed their characters.
Removing TLOS and standardising unit sizes swill get rid of tower conversions for vehicles and long weapons pintels.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How do?

So this is something that's been preying on my brain for a few days now.

As an older gamer, I remember the days when conversions were really quite common place. From the simple head or weapon swap to truly impressive scratchbuilds, it was rare to see an army without some kind of conversions.

In the really early days, when you had to carve up solid models, I stuck to simple stuff. Then the advent (from my GW background) of multipart plastics made Kit Bashes the order of the day. Not only were the parts already separate, but being plastic much easier to bung together.

Then...something changed. And not just with GW, but the wider market. One of things that's always puzzled me about Warmahordes was the lack of customisation. And from that, the lack of need to convert. And GW seem to be following suit, going for more elaborate base kits, which lack the former flexibility. Which although still in plastic, are nearly as difficult to work with as the old Metal Lump models - because the parts aren't standardised across a given range (well, not all the time)

There's also fewer to no 'missing units'. So no more need to convert X on a Y character - because there's one you can buy off the peg.

Now of course, conversion does still go on. The lack of need is absolutely not the same as lack of desire.

I just feel the general industry's shift to more standardised kits has left the hobby a little poorer.

Forgive me if these have already been addressed, but here's my thoughts.

1) The old days. I remember the pre-GW-plastics days and there was alot of converting in white dwarf, but it didn't seem to be as much in actual players. I agree that nearly every army might have had something converted, but it wasn't the kind of army wide covnersion/kitbashing that you see today.

2) Warmachine. Warmachine has always catered to the hardcore gamer rather than the modeler/converter and is not really a good measuring stick for the degree to which people are converting their minaitures. Warmachine simply doesn't give you more than a couple of options per unit (as compared to dozens for a 40k unit) and those are usually represented by pieces in the box.There are of course great painters and converters in warmachine, but it's no secret that Warmachine consistently wins the award for "Minis Game Most Likely To Be Unpainted".

3)The present situation. If we're equating kitbashing with covnerting (as you seem to in your post) then I feel that I see just as much converting/kitbashing as ever. I'm in a club that loves hobbying as much as gaming, so I'm biased, but we scarcely engage in any project/army/system without some degree of conversions.

4) Standardization: This is where I agree with you. Converting may now be a part of most gamers DNA, but there's an awful lot of the same stuff going around. I see it especially terrain. As lovely and varied as they are, GW scenery kits have brought a sameness to wargaming tables that is a bit disheartening. I recall original Necromunda which thrived on custom terrain. I still build my Necromunda terrain from found objects, scratchbuilding and old toys but I fully expect that most folks are going to be playing Necromunda and Shadow War on the same basic GW terrain kits as one another.

All this said, I'm still living in a mostly-outside-mainstream-wargaming bubble where conversion and kitbashing are vital parts of the hobby so it doesn't really affect me what other groups of gamers are doing.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

I think you really overestimate the requirement for simple conversions as a stepping stone to more complicated ones. People can learn by making a attempt, even a failed one, at a more complicated conversion.

It's not rocket science, people don't have to be babied in to it.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

I think you really overestimate the requirement for simple conversions as a stepping stone to more complicated ones. People can learn by making a attempt, even a failed one, at a more complicated conversion.

It's not rocket science, people don't have to be babied in to it.

I think it may be more the worry of losing people without the clear desire or absence of desire to convert at work here, worry that people on the fence don't get the nudge in the right direction and then never try rather than everyone having to be spoon-fed before they can stand on their own.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

Now we don't need to do that, there's less need, if not desire.

I kind of hope GW pick up this aspect of the Hobby. Duncan Rhodes converted up some gorgeous Free People's Spearmen - even if it's a pricey way to make them, it's the spirit that counts.

I understand what you are saying, that need provided the impetus to build skills (much like being thrown into the ocean provides a need to learn to swim). But as you mentioned, we live in the age of Rhodes, with videos teaching you how to convert fantasy and 40k models for BloodBowl use, convert 30k cataphracti terminators to Space Wolf Cataphracti terminators etc. There is a wealth of information for anyone with the inclination.

Further, some of us may not like the models as presented (the primaris twin heavy bolter guys are god-awful IMHO) and this may lead to additional conversion desire. I myself am holding a Garro model which I will be converting to a Helbrecht for my own Chapter of Black Templar inspired crusaders.

Finally, singlepose miniatures are great for various reasons. A singlepose miniature is more of a sculpture and less of a pile of legoparts- the pose can suit the equipment and feel more real. How many models have been assembled with a heavy bolter waving around like a pistol? In 3rd ed, before bolters came with hands attached, there were some awful assemblies from the well meaning but ignorant. Singlepose are a lot more forgiving for a starting player and are more appropriate for rank and file. There's a reason the Battle at Calth and DV sets sold like hotcakes aside from the price- the easy to assemble orks and marines allowed you to have the guts of a decent army assembled for painting swiftly,

And because of their ubiquity, and the reasonable base afforded by single pose- the characters were converted extensively.

 Geifer wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

I think you really overestimate the requirement for simple conversions as a stepping stone to more complicated ones. People can learn by making a attempt, even a failed one, at a more complicated conversion.

It's not rocket science, people don't have to be babied in to it.

I think it may be more the worry of losing people without the clear desire or absence of desire to convert at work here, worry that people on the fence don't get the nudge in the right direction and then never try rather than everyone having to be spoon-fed before they can stand on their own.

I don't see the problem, people without the clear desire to convert models were probably doing it under sufferance anyway (and probably producing poor results for it).

I think we're far better off having less people put off by needing to convert than more people doing half arsed conversions because they have no great desire but need to do them to access rules that weren't supported by models***, and when it comes to quality conversions I don't think there's any less now than there used to be nor do I think that'll reduce in years to come.

Honestly, anecdotally, I see way more conversions at my local club/GW/FLGS these days than I did back when I started in 2nd edition 40k/4th edition WHFB.



***Of course I'd prefer options weren't pruned in order to have a model for every option, but having well-optioned kits I only see as a good thing.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Have had time to gather my thoughts, and digest opinions. And I think I've figured out how to best express myself on this one.

Once upon a time, GW put out rules without models. This was particularly prevalent in the very early days. Indeed as much as we remember Vehicle Design Rules as an oddity from 3rd/4th Ed, their origin lies in Rogue Trader, which featured a very primitive version. Different chassis and propulsion systems and that.

So from the get go, we were expose to skilled modellers scratch building and kit bashing. From Golden Daemon entries to White Dwarf articles it was a significant part of the Hobby at that time.

Back then it was a matter of necessity. GW couldn't produce that many kits, but didn't want that to limit the scope of the game.

Seeing such grand projects made Younger Me and his contemporaries want to build up their skills. And that starts with simple weapon and head swaps. Before long you're kitbashing infantry and modding stock models.

But in today's Hobby, everything you can field is available off the peg. And understandably, GW want to push their product, and not a cool looking model converted up from a Star Wars toy.

That's left us with less visible conversions. And when we do see them, theyre conversions of existing kits. That includes reposes, greenstuffed Nurgle hulls etc.

I fear that's robbed younger gamers, relative newcomers, without the initial inspiration I found. Over time, that could spell the demise of converting :(

Coming into the hobby from the early days of 2nd Edition I understand what you are saying, but I would respectfully disagree. about the warning that this could be the demise of converting.

For those who are not as adept at converting figures from another range, or manufacturer, into a GW unit for which there are no models that should not act as a barrier for entry into the hobby. Instead having a much larger range of kits and bits is a gift for people involved in the hobby as it opens up a huge range of possibilities for making your own collection unique without the need to chop up 5 different pewter miniatures using a jeweler saw (and ruining the donor minis) to get conversion fodder.

It is true that we have so many units that are now available out of the box without being forced to convert another unit to represent them, but that does not eliminate the ability nor desire to convert. If you look at the P&M section here you will find so many examples of stock units available off the shelf that have been converted to be more thematic and in line with the owner's fluff, especially when it comes to allied units.

The hobby is not hermetically sealed, and many who enjoy the hobby will take inspiration from music, artwork, other armies to inspire their own and fuel their conversions.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still a starting point for skill building.

Some lucky sods have the knack, there's no doubt about it, but for us mere mortals those Spear conversions are the training ground.

I think you really overestimate the requirement for simple conversions as a stepping stone to more complicated ones. People can learn by making a attempt, even a failed one, at a more complicated conversion.

It's not rocket science, people don't have to be babied in to it.

I think it may be more the worry of losing people without the clear desire or absence of desire to convert at work here, worry that people on the fence don't get the nudge in the right direction and then never try rather than everyone having to be spoon-fed before they can stand on their own.

I don't see the problem, people without the clear desire to convert models were probably doing it under sufferance anyway (and probably producing poor results for it).

I think we're far better off having less people put off by needing to convert than more people doing half arsed conversions because they have no great desire but need to do them to access rules that weren't supported by models***, and when it comes to quality conversions I don't think there's any less now than there used to be nor do I think that'll reduce in years to come.

Honestly, anecdotally, I see way more conversions at my local club/GW/FLGS these days than I did back when I started in 2nd edition 40k/4th edition WHFB.



***Of course I'd prefer options weren't pruned in order to have a model for every option, but having well-optioned kits I only see as a good thing.

Goes against my experience, but okay.

I don't subscribe to the idea that unless you are absolutely sure you want to convert, the world is better off if you don't even try.

 Geifer wrote:
Goes against my experience, but okay.

It's probably a local thing. My current GW manager is very much a hobbyist so he's always doing conversions and talking about conversions he's working on and it seems like half the people sitting at the painting table are also working on converted models. Much so more than when I started back in the mid 90's where most of what I saw was out of the box stuff. At the non-GW store the display shelves are again filled with converted models (most from non-GW lines), there's no real historic comparison because those sorts of gaming stores didn't exist in the mid 90's around here.

The local club has always been conversion heavy and remains conversion heavy.

I don't subscribe to the idea that unless you are absolutely sure you want to convert, the world is better off if you don't even try.

I just don't think there's a large swathe of middle of the road people who *need* small annoying projects like weapon swaps in order to transcend to doing more quality conversions.

I think it's absolutely better that a unit that has spears as an option actually comes with spears in the box so people don't have to convert them. It might mean there's less conversions being done overall, but who cares when quality and quantity conversions by people who actually give a crap about converting hasn't changed. Those are the ones that actually matter IMO because they're the ones that inspire me, not the 40 models that have had weapon swap conversions because weapon B is better than weapon A but weapon B doesn't have a model.

I don't look at my crappily converted plastic Terminator Wolf Lord from 2nd edition and think "Gee, that's wonderful" I thank the plastic model gods that half decent Terminator models exist off the shelf now and if I still want to convert one it's going to look so much better because the model I'll use as a basis doesn't have a hideous rigid pose.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Goes against my experience, but okay.

It's probably a local thing. My current GW manager is very much a hobbyist so he's always doing conversions and talking about conversions he's working on and it seems like half the people sitting at the painting table are also working on converted models. Much so more than when I started back in the mid 90's where most of what I saw was out of the box stuff. At the non-GW store the display shelves are again filled with converted models (most from non-GW lines), there's no real historic comparison because those sorts of gaming stores didn't exist in the mid 90's around here.

The local club has always been conversion heavy and remains conversion heavy.

I don't subscribe to the idea that unless you are absolutely sure you want to convert, the world is better off if you don't even try.

I just don't think there's a large swathe of middle of the road people who *need* small annoying projects like weapon swaps in order to transcend to doing more quality conversions.

I think it's absolutely better that a unit that has spears as an option actually comes with spears in the box so people don't have to convert them. It might mean there's less conversions being done overall, but who cares when quality and quantity conversions by people who actually give a crap about converting hasn't changed. Those are the ones that actually matter IMO because they're the ones that inspire me, not the 40 models that have had weapon swap conversions because weapon B is better than weapon A but weapon B doesn't have a model.

I don't look at my crappily converted plastic Terminator Wolf Lord from 2nd edition and think "Gee, that's wonderful" I thank the plastic model gods that half decent Terminator models exist off the shelf now and if I still want to convert one it's going to look so much better because the model I'll use as a basis doesn't have a hideous rigid pose.

Fair enough. Not trying to talk you out of your opinion or anything, but to share my experience, I don't come across a whole lot of people who outright refuse to do conversions. Most, if asked, say they don't think they're good enough. My problem with that is that if they never try, they'll never learn. And I'd rather encourage them in the hope that at least a few discover their passion for conversions. Because you got to start somewhere. None of my conversions from twenty years ago should ever see the light of day again, But these days I can sculpt anything I want. If it's physically possible, I can do it. And you'd better believe that I did not set out to learn converting properly. Most of my starting steps were done out of necessity, not passion.

Just saying. Of course I can't say any better than you how many are on the fence who'll become great converters. You may well be right that's it's not many. I just prefer to think that any kind of encouragement is better than nothing.

On GW's end I kind of agree. There's really not a whole lot of options. They either provide the parts for which they write rules, or don't. I don't like the way they're handling things by cutting options instead of manufacturing, say upgrade sprues to cover options so they wouldn't drop them. My biggest issue is when they do that even though the option exists, albeit in a different kit, because that is plain unnecessary. But I can understand that there is little middle ground to work with otherwise, so they have to make a choice.

 Orlanth wrote:


What needs to happen is the abolition of TLOS. It sounds ok as a rule until you recognise that figures wont want to stand in the same pose all day. That champion standing on a mound of skulls with his chainsword in the air might be posed differently if taking cover behind a wall or shooting a bolt pistol through a window. Units need generic size categories,, with same for terrain.
PP got this right and introduced size brackets specifically not to disadvantage modellers who rebased or posed their characters.
Removing TLOS and standardising unit sizes swill get rid of tower conversions for vehicles and long weapons pintels.

I must respectfully disagree here. There will always be donkey caves trying to model for advantage and removing TLOS will do nothing to stop them. TO's, in my experience, are pretty harsh on people who are modeling to be jerks and I simply won't play with someone like that. I don't think most people would honestly.

That said, what system do you suggest for standardizing unit sizes? A template? The imaginary cylinder of WM? Something else?

 Todosi wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:


What needs to happen is the abolition of TLOS. It sounds ok as a rule until you recognise that figures wont want to stand in the same pose all day. That champion standing on a mound of skulls with his chainsword in the air might be posed differently if taking cover behind a wall or shooting a bolt pistol through a window. Units need generic size categories,, with same for terrain.
PP got this right and introduced size brackets specifically not to disadvantage modellers who rebased or posed their characters.
Removing TLOS and standardising unit sizes swill get rid of tower conversions for vehicles and long weapons pintels.

I must respectfully disagree here. There will always be donkey caves trying to model for advantage and removing TLOS will do nothing to stop them. TO's, in my experience, are pretty harsh on people who are modeling to be jerks and I simply won't play with someone like that. I don't think most people would honestly.

That said, what system do you suggest for standardizing unit sizes? A template? The imaginary cylinder of WM? Something else?

You... you, do know how LOS works in WMH right? There is literally no way to MFA with it due to a model's base size being an integral part of its rules. If I put Butcher on a small base, that isn't MFA, that's straight up cheating. Conversely, I can take the Juggernaut from Thagrosh the Painter and put it on its large base it's supposed to be on would not be MFA as its base size given in its rules determines it volume.

Ruin wrote:

 Todosi wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:


What needs to happen is the abolition of TLOS. It sounds ok as a rule until you recognise that figures wont want to stand in the same pose all day. That champion standing on a mound of skulls with his chainsword in the air might be posed differently if taking cover behind a wall or shooting a bolt pistol through a window. Units need generic size categories,, with same for terrain.
PP got this right and introduced size brackets specifically not to disadvantage modellers who rebased or posed their characters.
Removing TLOS and standardising unit sizes swill get rid of tower conversions for vehicles and long weapons pintels.

I must respectfully disagree here. There will always be donkey caves trying to model for advantage and removing TLOS will do nothing to stop them. TO's, in my experience, are pretty harsh on people who are modeling to be jerks and I simply won't play with someone like that. I don't think most people would honestly.

That said, what system do you suggest for standardizing unit sizes? A template? The imaginary cylinder of WM? Something else?

You... you, do know how LOS works in WMH right? There is literally no way to MFA with it due to a model's base size being an integral part of its rules. If I put Butcher on a small base, that isn't MFA, that's straight up cheating. Conversely, I can take the Juggernaut from Thagrosh the Painter and put it on its large base it's supposed to be on would not be MFA as its base size given in its rules determines it volume.

This. True line of sight was an experiment of the 80s that failed. Standardization of heights speeds up play and avoids all the dumb 'my laser versus your laser' crap.

Coming from WMH, I was shocked to find out 40k used "true line of sight". All it does is encouraging people to model for advantage.

 Cream Tea wrote:
Coming from WMH, I was shocked to find out 40k used "true line of sight". All it does is encouraging people to model for advantage.

It allows for it sure but i dont think it necessarily encourages it as much as you think.

And it gets silly when it comes to vehicles. The number of laser shots sent from the wingtips of eldar tanks or imperial antenna rods number almost as many come from the main cannons

 Desubot wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Coming from WMH, I was shocked to find out 40k used "true line of sight". All it does is encouraging people to model for advantage.

It allows for it sure but i dont think it necessarily encourages it as much as you think.

I tend to seek out loopholes in rules without even trying, not because I want to utilise them but because my mind finds them interesting. When I first heard of true line of sight, the first thought to go through my head was "now that can be abused in lots of ways". I doubt I'm alone.

To reiterate, I would never model for advantage myself, but I can't help but notice the potential.

 Cream Tea wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Coming from WMH, I was shocked to find out 40k used "true line of sight". All it does is encouraging people to model for advantage.

It allows for it sure but i dont think it necessarily encourages it as much as you think.

I tend to seek out loopholes in rules without even trying, not because I want to utilise them but because my mind finds them interesting. When I first heard of true line of sight, the first thought to go through my head was "now that can be abused in lots of ways". I doubt I'm alone.

To reiterate, I would never model for advantage myself, but I can't help but notice the potential.

I assume lots of people notice the potential, but far fewer are of the mindset to actually abuse it.

 =Angel= wrote:
I understand what you are saying, that need provided the impetus to build skills (much like being thrown into the ocean provides a need to learn to swim). But as you mentioned, we live in the age of Rhodes, with videos teaching you how to convert fantasy and 40k models for BloodBowl use, convert 30k cataphracti terminators to Space Wolf Cataphracti terminators etc. There is a wealth of information for anyone with the inclination.

Of course simply watching video isn't going to make you able to do it nor make it easy to even try. Especially for art related things. Starting small is still better way to learn something.

Finally, singlepose miniatures are great for various reasons. A singlepose miniature is more of a sculpture and less of a pile of legoparts- the pose can suit the equipment and feel more real. How many models have been assembled with a heavy bolter waving around like a pistol? In 3rd ed, before bolters came with hands attached, there were some awful assemblies from the well meaning but ignorant. Singlepose are a lot more forgiving for a starting player and are more appropriate for rank and file. There's a reason the Battle at Calth and DV sets sold like hotcakes aside from the price- the easy to assemble orks and marines allowed you to have the guts of a decent army assembled for painting swiftly,

And because of their ubiquity, and the reasonable base afforded by single pose- the characters were converted extensively.

Battle at calth? Only single pose that had were HQ's and you get real tired of looking the umpteenth identical HQ models with no weapon options. The way the models are sculpted makes even weapon swaps surprisingly tricky conversion. Especially with the terminator captain. I'm trying to figure how to get that darn chainfist into something else. Sword, lightning claw, ANYTHING.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ruin wrote:
You... you, do know how LOS works in WMH right? There is literally no way to MFA with it due to a model's base size being an integral part of its rules. If I put Butcher on a small base, that isn't MFA, that's straight up cheating. Conversely, I can take the Juggernaut from Thagrosh the Painter and put it on its large base it's supposed to be on would not be MFA as its base size given in its rules determines it volume.

How that works with GW games where you are allowed to use base it originally came with so as to not be a jerk and force expensive/impossible without damaging model rebasing?

I'm going to be uncharacteristically salty for a moment....

On the subject of 'modelling for advantage' that is sadly a thing - but it really hit it's zenith during the era of the vehicle design rules of 3rd/4th Ed (possibly 5th? Not sure).

They were there so we could field our conversions - a way to give existing scratch builds a path onto the field.

Points wise, they usually ended up a bit pricey.

But then came the exploiters. Those who saw a way to cover a weakness, or create something which gave an advantage.

Clear example? In my local store, some goon converted 'Moriar's Chariot'. A flatbed Rhino with the express purpose of getting Moriar into combat on turn 1, where he became all but unstoppable. This was in the days of Gav's deeply flawed 3rd Ed Blood Angel Codex. Not only was he ridiculously hard, but you could also consolidate into a new combat.

That was never the intention or the spirit of the VDR. And that's a shame - that a handful of goons could taint something so comprehensively for the majority.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I'm going to be uncharacteristically salty for a moment....

On the subject of 'modelling for advantage' that is sadly a thing - but it really hit it's zenith during the era of the vehicle design rules of 3rd/4th Ed (possibly 5th? Not sure).

They were there so we could field our conversions - a way to give existing scratch builds a path onto the field.

Points wise, they usually ended up a bit pricey.

But then came the exploiters. Those who saw a way to cover a weakness, or create something which gave an advantage.

Clear example? In my local store, some goon converted 'Moriar's Chariot'. A flatbed Rhino with the express purpose of getting Moriar into combat on turn 1, where he became all but unstoppable. This was in the days of Gav's deeply flawed 3rd Ed Blood Angel Codex. Not only was he ridiculously hard, but you could also consolidate into a new combat.

That was never the intention or the spirit of the VDR. And that's a shame - that a handful of goons could taint something so comprehensively for the majority.

Ah the good old vdr. Loved it and still do, though that is the first time I've ever seen mention of someone actually going through and making the offending model. Round here we had an infamous theoretical one called "the Turd". It was a Nid gargantuan creature that was about 3" long and 48" wide (the idea being to plonk it at the front of your deployment zone as a bullet sponge). Rest of the army sets up behind it. Profit!

Problem with VDR is that either you are so concervative that anything you create is horribly overpriced or there IS going to be broken combos.

Anything that uses formula for balancing points is inheritently so flawed it's not even funny. You can be 100% sure you are way off the correct point value.