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.

I'm in the process of building a lord of change/fateweaver and I'm getting close to the point where I need to decide which one it's going to be. Originally I was going to build the loc version as I have a list waiting for one. However, I'm sure in the future I'll want to run fateweaver. So the question I ask myself is do I build the loc and at times say it counts as fatey? Or do I build fateweaver and at times say counts as a loc? It seems trivial, and it probably is, but it just doesn't feel right proxying named characters. I could get another one, but I don't want another one.

So how do you deal with problem with your characters?

Magnets?

For casual play counts-as is totally fine. In tournaments, no, this would not be ok.

Most people are just going to see a large bird and say ok. If they care it’s a good indicator of whether or not you want to spend the next few hours interacting with this person.

A lord of change can look like anything you want really. I built mine with two heads and a sword because I had a two headed one back in the first edition days. Me and my mates create our own characters and use existing ones as others. It’s always for fluff reasons and has good stories.

Hell I use generic characters for my names characters. All my HQ dudes are made by bitz.

Either is fine.

I did two heads, put a magnet into all three hand options. If it has the sucker hand, it’s Fatey. Sword or rod is a two headed LoC.

it is just a LOC with two heads. Also, as Slayer-Fan, 90% of my Special Characters are conversions from normal dudes with bitz from a ton of kits because I like those more and feel more unique than buying the exact miniature of the HQ.

The only HQ model that I have for 40k is Shadowsun because the model is gorgeous.

I don't see any issue it's a Lord of Change with an extra head. Just make it clear to your opponent.

RAW you can use any Citadel Model to represent any Datasheet, so you're fine using whatever model you want.

Of course, some may find it unsportsmanlike to not explicitly clarify it pre-game. For the sake of having a better gaming experience, you should always inform your opponent of any "non standard" aspects to your army.

Yep, as others have said, just be upfront about it from the get-go. Special Characters as normal characters is fine by my rationale, it's just a cool model. Unless the wargear is WILDLY different, there's no chance of confusion anyway. Now if you had two of the same model and tried to say "this one is a special character and this one is a generic model" then you're going to have an issue. Rule of cool, you've assembled the model in a way that looks badass, pay the points and use it as either depending on your mood at the time.

Put a name tag on its base? Little etched brass tag. One side reads Fate Weaver, the other Lord of Change.

Part of the problem I have is a sentimental one. In my mind, named characters are special and I like to treat them as such. This is amplified with larger and/or impactful models. For example, with my space wolves, I would never use Ragnar Blackmane as a counts as wolf guard or Harald Deathwolf as thunderwolf cavalry. I have a forgeworld great unclean one that has never been fielded as Rotigus, but I've been tempted. Part of the reason is the evolving story that you build around models as you play games and create memories. Most models' performances in battle are easily forgotten, but when I look at my important characters such as Harald, I have many memories of his battles. It's kind of weird, but I actually really like it. This is why I mentioned in my first post that my question is a bit trivial and more of a personal issue, I am curious to hear from others who feel the same.

Either or. Depends on your crowd and sympathies.
Ive got an inquisitor corteaz model but i dont like malleus inquisition so i field him as a generic hereticus inquisitor with hexenhammer (thunderhammer) and an angry pet bird.
At the end of the day, you go with wjat you like. Sometimes its more fun to come up with your own things- whether that be model ofrfluff.

 Kommisar wrote:
Most people are just going to see a large bird and say ok. If they care it’s a good indicator of whether or not you want to spend the next few hours interacting with this person.

Exactly. If someone takes issue with this (as long as the model is appropriately sized and represented of what it is meant to be) then you're already having issues with this person before any dice are rolled.

Play with like minded people and you won't have a problem.

Tournaments.. well really depends on the event and what they feel is correct - you have little room to move here, so I'd check with them before hand.

 Caveman wrote:
Part of the problem I have is a sentimental one. In my mind, named characters are special and I like to treat them as such. This is amplified with larger and/or impactful models. For example, with my space wolves, I would never use Ragnar Blackmane as a counts as wolf guard or Harald Deathwolf as thunderwolf cavalry. I have a forgeworld great unclean one that has never been fielded as Rotigus, but I've been tempted. Part of the reason is the evolving story that you build around models as you play games and create memories. Most models' performances in battle are easily forgotten, but when I look at my important characters such as Harald, I have many memories of his battles. It's kind of weird, but I actually really like it. This is why I mentioned in my first post that my question is a bit trivial and more of a personal issue, I am curious to hear from others who feel the same.

And this is how GW makes its money. I have three 'generic' marine armies because my Salamanders are my Salamanders. I don't like using the same dudes as a different army week in week out.

In saying that, I don't have your issue with characters. Mainly because I'm from the era of No Special Characters, way way back in the mists of time. Honestly, if your dudes were across the table all I'd see would be a giant bird thing and/or a Viking guy on a big wolf. I'd have no idea who or what they were and, like all games, I'd be relying on my opponent to spell out what was what. I couldn't care less if Wolfy McWolferson is a named character or not.

Tourneys have their own rules, though.

 Caveman wrote:
Part of the problem I have is a sentimental one. In my mind, named characters are special and I like to treat them as such. This is amplified with larger and/or impactful models. For example, with my space wolves, I would never use Ragnar Blackmane as a counts as wolf guard or Harald Deathwolf as thunderwolf cavalry. I have a forgeworld great unclean one that has never been fielded as Rotigus, but I've been tempted. Part of the reason is the evolving story that you build around models as you play games and create memories. Most models' performances in battle are easily forgotten, but when I look at my important characters such as Harald, I have many memories of his battles. It's kind of weird, but I actually really like it. This is why I mentioned in my first post that my question is a bit trivial and more of a personal issue, I am curious to hear from others who feel the same.

Well then, it sounds like you're talking yourself into building Fate Weaver & sometimes using him as a generic LoC.
Think of it this way, your LoC is always Fate Weaver. Just some of the battles you'll play will be from before he became a "named character" & some be after.

*I have zero knowledge of this character. Did he always have a 2nd head? Or was it a gift as he increased in status?

ccs wrote:
*I have zero knowledge of this character. Did he always have a 2nd head? Or was it a gift as he increased in status?

Kairos got his second head when he was chucked into the Well of Eternity by Tzeentch and received the ability to see the future (and the accompanying insanity). He was already a pretty important dude before that event, being Tzeentch's vizir, but that is what caused him to be one of the most important daemons in the narrative.

Magnets is pretty easy solution for this. No need for any confusion whatsoever and bullet proof against any tournament requirement as well.

I've used the Severin Loth model as a Raven Guard Libby since 5th edition.

I simply replaced the shoulder pad iconography and painted the model in RG colors.

I've never had a single opponent or TO at any event have issue with it.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ccs wrote:
*I have zero knowledge of this character. Did he always have a 2nd head? Or was it a gift as he increased in status?

Kairos got his second head when he was chucked into the Well of Eternity by Tzeentch and received the ability to see the future (and the accompanying insanity). He was already a pretty important dude before that event, being Tzeentch's vizir, but that is what caused him to be one of the most important daemons in the narrative.

Sounds like a case for magnets then.