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 confused, are we arguing painting schemes and modeling styles or narrative design choices? This thread is going all over the place.

There is such a thing as modelling for advantage. See: Kneeling Wraithlord kerfuffle.

There is such a thing a narratively built armies. See: All my blue space marine units aren't Ultras, they are a force called The Blues Who Use Salamander Traits.

The first is objectively not ok, and the latter is ok only with a discussion before hand, and not taken to extremes (Ala They are all blue paint for there are 3 different chapters, the Meltas are plasma, the flamers are HBs, and the spears are thunder hammers.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused, are we arguing painting schemes and modeling styles or narrative design choices? This thread is going all over the place.

There is such a thing as modelling for advantage. See: Kneeling Wraithlord kerfuffle.

There is such a thing a narratively built armies. See: All my blue space marine units aren't Ultras, they are a force called The Blues Who Use Salamander Traits.

The first is objectively not ok, and the latter is ok only with a discussion before hand, and not taken to extremes (Ala They are all blue paint for there are 3 different chapters, the Meltas are plasma, the flamers are HBs, and the spears are thunder hammers.

I think the latter is ALWAYS okay, if it's just a question of chapter colours. Ultramarines don't have a monopoly on blue armour! It's when they're blue, and their chapter icon is the U symbol, and their banners say "For Macragge", and they're trying to claim they're a Salamanders successor, that's when it gets stupid and annoying.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused, are we arguing painting schemes and modeling styles or narrative design choices? This thread is going all over the place.

There is such a thing as modelling for advantage. See: Kneeling Wraithlord kerfuffle.

There is such a thing a narratively built armies. See: All my blue space marine units aren't Ultras, they are a force called The Blues Who Use Salamander Traits.

The first is objectively not ok, and the latter is ok only with a discussion before hand, and not taken to extremes (Ala They are all blue paint for there are 3 different chapters, the Meltas are plasma, the flamers are HBs, and the spears are thunder hammers.

Welcome to this thread. The original idea was that GW designed the WYSIWYG rule then purposefully doesn't include every single possible wargear option in a box to get you to buy more boxes. This idea is kinda silly given that people will buy 3rd party plasma or melta guns, 3d print them, or simply convert them out of something else. The rule was also around before the Chapterhouse lawsuit back when GW included special characters or models that didn't have official models so players could convert what they'd like so long as the design of the model made it clear to their opponent what they're taking. Other game systems use the same standard because playing strangers in neutral settings shouldn't always devolve into a selfish "I play my way to maximize my convenience" mentality.

The idea of paint schemes and proxying different armies using another army's rules naturally came from the proxying wargear discussion. It's okay, things move quickly around here and the 5 paragraph essays you see in some posts for page after page make it hard to follow sometimes.

 Fajita Fan wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused, are we arguing painting schemes and modeling styles or narrative design choices? This thread is going all over the place.

There is such a thing as modelling for advantage. See: Kneeling Wraithlord kerfuffle.

There is such a thing a narratively built armies. See: All my blue space marine units aren't Ultras, they are a force called The Blues Who Use Salamander Traits.

The first is objectively not ok, and the latter is ok only with a discussion before hand, and not taken to extremes (Ala They are all blue paint for there are 3 different chapters, the Meltas are plasma, the flamers are HBs, and the spears are thunder hammers.

Welcome to this thread. The original idea was that GW designed the WYSIWYG rule then purposefully doesn't include every single possible wargear option in a box to get you to buy more boxes. This idea is kinda silly given that people will buy 3rd party plasma or melta guns, 3d print them, or simply convert them out of something else. The rule was also around before the Chapterhouse lawsuit back when GW included special characters or models that didn't have official models so players could convert what they'd like so long as the design of the model made it clear to their opponent what they're taking. Other game systems use the same standard because playing strangers in neutral settings shouldn't always devolve into a selfish "I play my way to maximize my convenience" mentality.

The idea of paint schemes and proxying different armies using another army's rules naturally came from the proxying wargear discussion. It's okay, things move quickly around here and the 5 paragraph essays you see in some posts for page after page make it hard to follow sometimes.

It's even more silly when it hasn't shown up in the main rulebook since 6th Edition. It's only event organizers who have perpetuated the rule. Still, I'm sure there are people who still think Necrons still have Phase Out as a loss condition.

I'm like 90% sure most GW stores stop you from trying to use non-GW bitz in a game if they get identified. The one I visited in New York when I loved on the east coast tried it at least. That's probably where that comes from too.

How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

It varies a lot store to store and also country to country since some countries have variation in their local structure and interpretation of GW rules. I know that in the past some even banned non-GW scenic bases for a time, but that's largely been squashed now. In general some staff are going to be more "hot" on it than others. Some might not care, others might not notice etc... It can really vary a lot. Best person to ask is your local GW store manager.

 Overread wrote:

nataliereed1984 wrote:
How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

It varies a lot store to store and also country to country since some countries have variation in their local structure and interpretation of GW rules. I know that in the past some even banned non-GW scenic bases for a time, but that's largely been squashed now. In general some staff are going to be more "hot" on it than others. Some might not care, others might not notice etc... It can really vary a lot. Best person to ask is your local GW store manager.

Thanks!

No worries - also note that it might even vary depending on how you present it. If you start loudly talking about these great 3rd party bits and basically advertising them in the store than the staff might well come down on you more so than if you'd just put the models down and answered if asked, but otherwise not made a big scene about it.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

How hard is it to tell the bit isn't official and what's the difference between a 3rd party bit and a custom conversion. Not a joke: back when I would convert Ork stuff with just plastic and cobbling together GW bits I'd get asked if the model was something new [humble brag]. I have since brought in 3d printed 8mm scale vehicles for AT bases along with 3d printed AT guns because the official weapons weren't available. I have made my own cannons, powerpacks, base material, terrain bits, etc with no problem at all in the past. If you bring in 3d printed HH shoulder pads from Shapeways it's going to be awfully hard to tell them apart from the official FW ones and I know for a fact they've been in our store. Recast FW stuff can be impossible to tell next to one another once they're painted and I've heard of people getting better quality resin casts from Russia or China than the quality FW is putting out these days.

I refuse to buy FW recasts. Regular GW is a different story but I haven't actually done so yet.

Just from a pragmatic standpoint I’d rather not give my credit card info to the Chinese or Russians tbh.

On WYSIWYG, what do people say about models/regiments no longer produced?

Steel Legion still has models, and I guess you could always use Kreig?

Mordian can be kitbashed with bits available through IG kits, although they will all likely have the same head piece.

Vostroyan were re-released briefly last year.

So what about Valhallan and Tallarn? Would you let people paint Cadians in the colors of other regiments? What about 3rd party bits? Or would you insist that people find the metal models on eBay?

What about old metal Cadians? Would you let them be stand-ins for other regiments or would you insist they be Cadians only?

What about Kasrkin? Would you let them be used as Scions? Insist they be Veterans? Insist that, as they no longer have rules, that they not be used?

What about someone (like me) who uses Fantasy or Forgeworld models as Crusaders?

All of those are IG. Kasrkin are absolutely Scions or Veterans (are Vets still in the IG book?)

My store refuses to allow anything not made by GW or FW (Still GW).

That all being said, Even if EVERYTHING in the army screams Ultras, but you want to try out Sallys, that's cool. IT's gonna be a slow game because I am going to ask you a lot of the same questions repeatedly.

But I DO think it's important that we all play to a standard, because winning is more fun than losing. Obviously the journey matters, but I'd rather eek out a close win the grind out a tough loss. That's just me.

Which is why I play Custodes, because I like winning....once every three months. But DAMN do mah models look sexah as HELL.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

Don't mention it, don't talk about it, and for the emperor don't loudly declare how much better the 3rd party bits you are using are, and you should be fine. If someone asks play it off like you made them yourself or they're from a weird kit and you're probably fine. If they insist shoot them a look and give the impression they need to shut up. Most managers don't know nearly enough about the game to call you out on a guardsman with a 3rd party head, gun, or backpack. And in my experience, a lot of the managers that CAN tell the difference don't care and won't call you out provided you're not openly discussing it or bragging about it. Really not much different that loudly bragging that you use recasts in a store for example.

Ironically, I've heard of the opposite problem, such as showing up with old 2nd edition models and having a manager call them out thinking they're recasts.

Unrelated, but I remember once I brought my guard army out at the FLGS. It has a mix of old 3rd edition metal cadians, starship troopers light mobile infantry (the movie guys) and some Victoria lamb Arcadians. I was casually talking about how I use a variety of stuff because the store was cool with it, only for the new player to pick up my actual cadians and go "yeah I can tell these are the 3rd party ones, look how chunky and old fashioned they look compared to the others".

If you're not a moron and loudly talking about how you're breaking the rules, odds are the average Joe won't even notice or care in the first place. Good rule to live your life by in a lot of cases really. And to be honest you're not doing anything wrong by buying 3rd party bits, it's just the equivalent of buying a big Mac and eating it in a burger king. Yeah you're not breaking the law, but it is kind of in bad taste when you walk into a store and loudly talk up their competitor. I feel like GW should license 3rd party companies to make "approved" to fill in the line from talented companies anyways so they make the best out of a situation instead of beating their head against a wall, but that's a discussion for another time.

Wait do non-GW FLGS have policies against using non-GW bits or models? Why on earth would another store care that you're using other product lines in an IG army so long as it's clear what they're armed with?

 Fajita Fan wrote:
Wait do non-GW FLGS have policies against using non-GW bits or models? Why on earth would another store care that you're using other product lines in an IG army so long as it's clear what they're armed with?

For the same reason as a GW store. THEY aren't selling it.

I must be missing something, there are stores that don’t let you use models you didn’t buy there? I’ve played in stores I just bring stuff to.

 fraser1191 wrote:
If you support wysiwyg don't play anyone that plays min squad wych cult units.

Combat drugs are invisible, and have to be different for each unit. If you can manage that you can manage other armies

Of course I could. It's just not my job to manage your army. It's on YOU to show me which of your models has what upgrades. Refusal to do so means that you're one of the lazy/cheap/cheats.

On wyches & their drugs;
Our lone DE/Wych player simply has a color coded set of tokens (made from Poker Chips) printed with the names of the various drugs for each of his squads.
Each squad of wyches has a different color of rim on the base (red squad, blue squad, green squad, etc) & all of the tokens for that squad are of that color. Tokens not being used remain in the case.
There is no way that you're going to mistake what squad has what drugs. It's as WYSIWYG for this type of thing as you can get.

He learned it from a Tyranid player back in 4th who tracked his more or less invisible bio-morphs in a similar way.

And yet the lazy/cheap/cheats are trying to convince us all that it's impractical to model their pieces with the correct weapons - wich do exist in physical form....
They could also do exactly as our DE player & make tokens for each squads special/heavy weapons/wargear weapons. But they don't. Hmm, I wonder why?

 Fajita Fan wrote:
I must be missing something, there are stores that don’t let you use models you didn’t buy there? I’ve played in stores I just bring stuff to.

There are not. This is one of those constructed fantasy hate boners that don't really exist in reality.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
Wait do non-GW FLGS have policies against using non-GW bits or models? Why on earth would another store care that you're using other product lines in an IG army so long as it's clear what they're armed with?

I've never met a 3rd party store that had that problem. Sorry I should've been more clear. That was intended for if you're using non GW stuff in a GW store.

I've brought armies that didn't have a single GW mini in them to play games at non GW stores and long as it's painted and looks good no one seems to care.

Hey, serious question for a second, if it's okay:

I'm building / painting up a Drukhari army right now, and I've got a Wych detachment. Currently it's just a patrol detachment for use with the "Raiding Party" and "Alliance of Agony" rules, and it doesn't have any duplicated unit types, but it would still probably be helpful for my opponent to have some reminder that the wyches are using grave lotus, the reavers have hypex, the hellions have painbringer, the beastmaster has splintermind, etc etc. *

Should I make little counters to put next to the unit? Or is it enough to just say which units are using which drugs at the beginning of the game, while I'm also explaining stuff like my Obsessions and pre-game stratagems, have it written down on my data sheets, and maybe just periodically remind my opponent who is high on what kind of goofballs?

* Note: Yes, I am smart enough to change this up on a game-by-game basis. Like I'm already running them as Cursed Blade, so I'd give the wyches adrenalight rather than grave lotus if I'm going to be using them against T3 units.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
Hey, serious question for a second, if it's okay:

I'm building / painting up a Drukhari army right now, and I've got a Wych detachment. Currently it's just a patrol detachment for use with the "Raiding Party" and "Alliance of Agony" rules, and it doesn't have any duplicated unit types, but it would still probably be helpful for my opponent to have some reminder that the wyches are using grave lotus, the reavers have hypex, the hellions have painbringer, the beastmaster has splintermind, etc etc. *

Should I make little counters to put next to the unit? Or is it enough to just say which units are using which drugs at the beginning of the game, while I'm also explaining stuff like my Obsessions and pre-game stratagems, have it written down on my data sheets, and maybe just periodically remind my opponent who is high on what kind of goofballs?

* Note: Yes, I am smart enough to change this up on a game-by-game basis. Like I'm already running them as Cursed Blade, so I'd give the wyches adrenalight rather than grave lotus if I'm going to be using them against T3 units.

If you have no duplicates using different drugs and it is on the list your opponent has, I wouldn't say it was strictly necessary for good sportsmanship - but hey, you could always use it as a fun modeling project

nataliereed1984 wrote:

nareik wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
If you support wysiwyg don't play anyone that plays min squad wych cult units.

Combat drugs are invisible, and have to be different for each unit. If you can manage that you can manage other armies

obviously models with the drug 'upgrade' are painted with dilated pupils to achieve wysiwyg.

No no no. You use dilated pupils for adrenalight, pinprick pupils for hypex, clammy sweat for splintermind, track marks for painbringer, and a scabby nose for grave lotus…

I humbly acccept your correction.

Back banners might be a fun interchangable way to visibly mark out which drugs a unjt is using. Throw in some dumb glamorising slogans, 'Grave Lotus Rave Folkers" or something.

Having counters or markers to denote which unit has specific buffs not modeled as wargear should always be appreciated by your opponent as you’re trying to make it clear. The Poorhammer crowd will object at having to spend money on something that’s extra to help you and your opponent keep track of things but I do it too.

Remember my Night Goblin Fanatics? I had a mushroom token as a unit filled in each of my NG blocks that I would turn over when fanatics were released to reveal how many were in the unit that had 0-3 under it. This way no one could say I was cheating by putting them in the most advantageous position.

I’ve made order counters for AT so it’s clear which of my titans have which order and I made my own magnetized 3D printed move dials for Aeronautica.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
Having counters or markers to denote which unit has specific buffs not modeled as wargear should always be appreciated by your opponent as you’re trying to make it clear. The Poorhammer crowd will object at having to spend money on something that’s extra to help you and your opponent keep track of things but I do it too.

Remember my Night Goblin Fanatics? I had a mushroom token as a unit filled in each of my NG blocks that I would turn over when fanatics were released to reveal how many were in the unit that had 0-3 under it. This way no one could say I was cheating by putting them in the most advantageous position.

I’ve made order counters for AT so it’s clear which of my titans have which order and I made my own magnetized 3D printed move dials for Aeronautica.

You'd think this would just be common courtesy. One dude brought in these gold hoops as wound counters, I was giggling as my Doombull had several hanging off his horns. Marking your transports if you have different squad types in identical transports, the like.


And Poorhammer? You can make markers out of the cardboard your soda 12 packs are made out of.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

GW sells Greenstuff.
If you get hassle for something as niggly as a pauldron, tell the accuser you made it yourself, using GW-bought Greenstuff.

If you headswap from 3rd parties, tell them you got it from a bitzbox you had from years ago. WHo can prove that a specific head DID NOT come from a GW kit you bought a decade ago?

nataliereed1984 wrote:
How common is it for GW stores to not permit models that have *cosmetic* bits from third party sources? Like not a whole third party model, which they obviously ban, but if you had, for example, a pauldron on one of your proper official chaos marines that came from a 3rd party, cos it helped tie the model to a particular power better.

Only if it was obvious and you couldn't claim to have made it from something else. But third party bits once painted should be nearly indistinguishable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also to be fair I brought out an old metal Terminator. I was asked what third party made it! Fun moment

Being in a state with only one licensed GW store, and the next one being over 100 miles away, I generally try not to anger the bear. That being said I've seen guys be asked to put away their models, and if they give the slightest defense, asked to leave the store.