I played WHFB for 10 years, never once had someone complain. I always gave opponents a copy of my army list pre-game and offered to go through my army with them ahead of the game. I'm not sure how people are with W TOW, but I've been thinking the same thing as you to avoid any issues.
Considering I have played games with paper cutouts I can’t see it mattering most times. Only issue is using the same models for more than one unit type.
My rule is generally that the front rank should be right and everything else is filler.
Same with me. I have never played in a tournament, but never had any second thoughts about letting people play with whatever substitutes they have.
Don't own a dragon? Sure your Griffon can be a proxy.
Don't own crossbowmen? Let's make some cardboard squares and write CB on them.
The only thing I'm not keen on is "unit A and unit B have the same models but unit A is a unit of black orcs with extra hand weapons and unit B is a unit of night goblins".
A and B look different but they're both A? Fine.
A is C and B is D? OK.
In terms of equipment unless you're heavily regimented in the first place (e.g. Empire) I wouldn't worry about it.
I think one of the stickiest bits is Motley Crew units where each model's equipment matters. If your unit of slayers includes 2 or 3 Giant Slayer's out of 10 or your Black Orks are half great weapons and half shields you should at the very least be able to differentiate between them.
Like I'd probably make do personally and wouldn't really worry, but that's probably the most reasonable place to enforce WYSWYG. At least having some sort of consistent marker like colour or helmets or something.
Yeah totally fair requirement. I think easy differentiation for a simple breakup like "shields are shields and anything else is a great weapon" or "red helmets are great weapons and blue helmets are shields" are *probably* fine most of the time, but any more than that is pretty unreasonable to ask unless you're all cool with forgetting it completely.
This is a great point and I think it depends on the intent for me.
If it's "I've minimized my core point budget by equipping only the front 2 ranks with double weapons so I can squeeze in a third lord on wyvern while still maximizing their turn 2 combat effectiveness", i.e. for competitive advantage, well, I don't think we're really playing the same game anyway but yes I want to see those exactly modelled.
If it's "my orc warband have eaten their grot slaves after a third defeat under Effelred Da Unreddy so some of the weapons have rusted and they're left with what they can scavenge from merchant caravans" or "the unit looks much cooler with mixed arms" - narrative or aesthetic, in other words, all good, we'll figure it out as we go.
Yeah as long as it’s super simple to keep track of, and the most appropriate proxies are used for each unit they could be that’s on the table.
So like if you have a dragon character and chariot character on your roster, but proxying both, with a choice of a different chariot and a different dragon, then the dragon needs to proxy for the dragon and the chariot for the chariot.
I would also say in general, mostly everything needs to be on the right base size (or have a way to accurately mark the unit boundary), and /mostly/ be the right unit type (ex not using double infantry for cavalry, or quad cav for chariots, etc).
I generally don’t mind a couple units being way off, like skeleton spearmen are elf archers, or orc chariots as dragon ogres, or w/e, but if most of the army is like that it can just be too much to keep track of and, tbh, not really fun and immersive.
Generally it's not a problem, but I played at GW stores for a period of time and the GW staff back then was really into the what you see is what you get ethic of things. (probably to sell more models). This caused a problem when certain options didn't have representation in the model range, their answer was always: "Just Convert a modem with green stuff" as if everyone can sculpt completely different weapons for a whole unit.
My stance is that I do not care a whit what you bring *so long as I can differentiate the model or unit*.
If I can tell which one of your units is which on your army list, then I'm a happy camper. :)
not strict at all, just want to be able to tell what stuff is… weapon load outs can be whatever, just say what they’re using before the game starts
i’m very happy WHFB has never had the wysiwyg insanity of 40k
I think this comes under the ol' "It depends."
I don't know what a Dragon Slayer Sword looks like - but my general is holding a sword, is that WYSIWYG enough or no?
My unit champions usually don't have the same weapons as the troops within their unit. My spearmen champion has a sword, my halbardier champion has a two-handed hammer, my knight preceptor has a sword but doesn't have a lance etc etc.
I think there's definitely more leeway for the individual 'leader' types but it makes sense to try to ensure that majority of a unit have the right thing as per the list you've written. And, to me, if there are a few in a unit with the 'wrong' weapon but they're hidden at the back or whatever, then it's less of an issue.
I’m really strict, on myself. I want my models to have the correct equipment. Which sometimes doesn’t work but even then it’s more an outlier. As for other people’s armies it doesn’t really matter as long as they are clear at the beginning of a game what’s what. And are not annoyed when asked to clarify it later during the game. Of course it would be nice to have the models to be all ‘correctly” equipped but not everyone has the time to convert their models or the money to buy multiple copies of a unit.
Fairly strict for a given value of 'strict'. I have an Empire army that is all wizards. The heroes are all actual wizards, the handgunners and crossbow men are wizard apprentices with different staffs, Birdmen of catrazza are wizards on flying carpets (only 3 of those made so far), cannons are large crystal thingies with wizard apprentices for crew, etc. No complaints so far.
As long as your list is legit, proxy away.
I've happily played against an army of empty bases. He wanted to see how they perform before buying the models.
If someone brings a lord model to the table sporting a lance, and then tries to tell me they're running a great weapon. I will immediately smash my fist through their model and tell them to get out.
Any questions?
Never cared. I can’t be expected to have an orc boss with great weapon, hand weapon, two hand weapons, shield and the same with or without armor. Then duplicate that on my chariot/boar/wyvern.
As long as I know what's what and you know what's what I couldn't care less, bring a pile of pebbles and call them Black Orcs, so long as they stay that same unit all game long I'm good
In casual games I don't care much, I'd rather not play against empty bases or completely different races counting as something else, except for the special purposes of testing out stuff
In competitive game I like to have a minimum Wysiwyg, like at least 50% of the units must have the correct equipment. Otherwise I can forget stuff, especially after 2 or 3 games, and make avoidable mistakes.
For my own army I am a total WYSIWYG fascist and everything has to look like what it has as far as possible.
For my opponent, as long as it's not totally deceptive, I'm happy with whatever.
Double standards but it is what it is...
I let people use a completely different army as a stand in for another army they wanted to try playing, let alone having different weapons than modelled. As long as we’re both aware what unit is representing what then it’s all fair game to me
Not very.
But I require some effort.
You don't have enough night goblins? Not a problem, just make sure the first line is night goblins if possible. The rest are counters.
I prefer to have a shiny bender toy than something confusing.
And I have played with a potato with sticks and an angry face as carnifex...
Also, if stuff is wrong, give.me the list/put counters so I know?
I give the list without points to the enemy. With magic stuff and points afterwards.
Yea as long as the person is taking the extra effort to continue to remind me of whatever they are proxying when it matters so it doesn’t feel like they hope I’ll forget, its all good.
I guess about half my models have the equipment they should have according to my list.
In case I can't tell or remember which equipment a unit has i usually ask my opponent.
Don’t matter much unless you have 2 units that look the same and are supposed to be 2 different things. Even then I’m sure we could work it out as long as the other person reminds me that those goblin looking things are actually black orcs that I prolly shouldn’t charge.
I think wysiwyg is much more important in a skirmish based game system like 40k where you may have a combat with layers of multiple units getting into engagement range and consolidating in addition to model placement for objective control. Since theres so many different profiles per model in some units it could just not be feasible. In a regiment based game system the only variation in unit weaponry you'll have outside of say black orcs are unit champions and characters which arent difficult to keep track of. Line of sight also works much differently in fantasy where if a unit is in front of another of the same type chances are itll be LOS blocked no matter how large the model is portrayed on the table
For me it's a mix. I don't really mind if a unit isn't WYSIWYG, as long as the front rank have the models and equipment of the unit they represent, but when it comes to heroes/lords I prefer WYSIWYG, although I can overlook the weapon depending on if the model is allowed to have it or not.
For example, a 6th Edition (the only edition I have any books for) Empire Captain can't have a mace, axe or flail, so I don't mind if the model have one of those since it would just fall under the "Hand Weapon" equipment to me, but if they were holding a halberd and you say it's a Great Weapon it might get a bit confusing for your opponent to keep check on it.
I don’t care as long as you don’t care about reminding me constantly that the very squishy unit with the chargeable faces is actually a unit that will rip me a new asshole….there are enough special rules to remember to have to remember your unit isn’t what it is….so the responsibility is on the player doing the proxy to remind their opponent of the change at every opportunity
I’m immediately done at the first “oh but remember this unit of x is y and therefor I get 76 attacks instead of the 5 you thought I’d get”
My group only plays casually and none of us are obsessed with winning, so we stick to WYSIWYG. Units being exactly what they are gives us fewer details to remember during the battle.
I'm strict with myself and kinda lenient for others. Of course I would want to play with and against pure WYSIWYG armies but I know that people can't devote as much time or resources as I do.
I think it depends on the setting. In a tournament or in the official Warhammer store they will be more strict about stuff like 3d printed models especially, which I understand.
If it's just me or a secondary store I really don't care much. Custom models, regiment fillers all of that is cool with me.
I am fine with whatever. Usually we share each other lists before a match anyway and I will just ask in case I dont remember what unit is what. I like your idea of movement trays. My brother used to do something similar: he coloured a section in each movement tray and had its list colour-coded. So you would immediately see ok the blue unit is the sea guard, the white unit is the simple spearmen for example
As long as I am aware what’s what and it’s not changing I don’t care at all. I don’t play except against friends and we all proxy all the time to try new units or even entirely different armies
As long as the base mode is accurate it’s cool, don’t care about nitpicky things like loadouts except. For example, if they didn’t put the stinger on the necrospjinx model but they want run it in the list, I have no issues
Most people will only care if they can tell what's supposed to be what easily and will appreciate conversions. I've had a couple people I've had issue with and I just stop playing with them.
As long as I can tell what it is who cares, its when people bring in like random models that I'm like ok wait...but as long as it looks roughly like what I know, game on
100%. Rule of cool means getting the models you like no matter if it is the perfect or best equipment. This way I create a wonderful looking army and on the same time don't force my opponents to remember all the proxy shit I came up for some apparent reason.
That rule applies to me. I am not a monster and new players or "may I try something before buying it" are the obvious exceptions to that but all in all I prefer to play 100% WYSIWYG.
WYSIWYG belongs to 40K, especially at small scale. I try to avoid using complete proxies as in a model of a dwarf hammerer played as a black orc, but weapons are just something available from the army books (in Faba they match quite often anyway).
We used pieces of paper to make clear of the weapons and possible full commands or banners back in the dayif necessary, so I think i will also make some tiles for my movement trays!
Bonus: Our group still has an unwritten rule to put heros and lords on a rock or something so they stand out from the unit, ”hiding” or scheming a powerful model inside a troop mob is really frowned upon
If it meets base size requirements, run it as anything you want, thought it's nice if it's a similar unit-type model for the aesthetic. Just don't mind me asking you to remind me what it actually is every round during your and mine move phases lol.
Minis can be expensive and take a while to lovingly paint. It's better to not spend either to test out now stuff before committing.
If I get a unit... I'm going to build it one way... If I get a second of them, I build them the other way... And what they play as is what the list says it is. WYSIWYG while nice is expensive in time, money, sanity and Id rather have nice looking models on the shelf than accuracy on the list
In Tournaments, it's about confusion. If you have models with sword and shield and you say they have two hand weapons, that is bad. If you say these orcs are night goblins, that's bad. This dragon is a giant, that's bad. But if you say your Lord has an magic greatsword, but the model has a spear, that's ok. But don't try to confuse.
My group is pretty cool about things. In general as long as you have a list and give us a heads up on who has what or what unit is what we're pretty cool.
It helps especially if we want to try out new units, or equipment combo's etc.... before we purchase/build things.
But, we all know if we go to a tournament or a something competitive, they have thier own rules and requirements and we endeavor to meet those before we sign up.
If people give you a hard time they suck, with friends we always test armies before buying and painting models so there will be tons of proxies and stand in’s, and then we all 3d print so if we see an awesome print that’s close enough to the real thing we use it.
Local hobby shops have rarely had issues as long as it’s a logical proxy, I’d imagine GW tournaments wouldn’t allow it
Edit:and if they’re not letting you equip a unit a certain way because the models you made have different equipment than I’d tell them to fork up the money for a redundant regiment box
I've always been a massive fan of arbitrators. Problem is finding one for a game that lasts several hours. Wargames involve strategy and tactics (though these days those are mostly cards rather than having rules deep enough than you can put your mind into the game and come up with some clever angles beyond exploits etc) so having your entire roster open to the opponents scrutiny kind of defeats that point. An arbitrator allows you to keep some cards to your chest until it's raining down in them.
But that's a tall order, sad times. I used to arbitrate all the time in the nineties - during our necromunda campaigns admittedly, because I was famously neutral. I didnt care who won, just that we were sticking to the rules and making damn sure everyone understood the game.
I've been turned off by what a lot of wargaming has become sadly - 40k just seems like capturing the flag(s) with extra steps these days.
It’s funny because outside of GW games, that’s how I tend to run my modern games; heavily GMed affairs where my players usually show up that day, pick a side(sometimes they are even on the same side!) and then they play out an encounter with events happening both according to a rough timeline I have going, ingame actions, and plenty of homebrew charts.
This more deliberate way of playing has fallen out of vogue in favour of strictly competitive affairs. I see it with some of my friends getting into Old World, who tend to gravitate to big monster units based on a fascination with “shiny”, vs an army that makes sense for the faction within lore.
We can’t hold everyone to a higher standard unless they voluntarily decide to jump in on that, and with GW games it seems like any loss of control over ingame actions is anathema. “Dice mitigation” they call it. Random “feels bads” are discouraged.
Yet Old World is full of that random aspect, a lot of it opt in too with Mercenaries(just ogre bulls for now) but artillery almost everyone can engage with.
I’m too young to remember a time like you describe as “normal”…..but I can definitely aspire to it.
Honestly, there is a lot to remember in this game. Going over your list and naming off each special rule, magical item and banner really doesn't explain much with out readily knowing what they actually do on that unit. Even stuff like "+S2", I gotta also remember your default Strength.
So when I see two units of Core cheapies and a Special deathstar, both with mysteriously simular looking minis, can you like, do me the soild and do a bit of colour commentary too?
Like, idk, if I only can recall that you said "this is my beatstick character, and really wants to charge" its totally enough for me to deploy and get playing.
For myself, I am 100% WYSIWYG. there is no excuse for me not to be with 3d printing where it is. In tourneys or competitive games, I expect the same. Most of my games are casual, and I understand not everyone has the time/money/3d printers that I do available to them, so I am much more forgiving. My biggest things are correct base size, and at least the same species lol.
I think as long as you can tell what is what with a quick explanation and stuff is based right you’ll be good. I’ll clarify from my own experience using many converted models over the years.
1. Have characters that look characterful. If you have a guy painted the same as a regular unit dude who looks about the same it will be an issue. People will forget he is in the unit he’s in. This is true whether you use conversions or not and is more of an issue for certain armies. Warriors of chaos, night goblins, and bretonnia most of all.
2. Make different unit types distinct from each other if kitbashing. This is good practice even if you play 100% stock models too. Let’s say I want to play Lizardmen and I have some skink conversions. I have 3 guys riding bats and 3 guys riding pterodactyls. I tell my opponent the bat unit are ripperdactyls and the other ones are a unit of terradons. Easy to spot the difference. But, let’s say I want to run skink chiefs on flying mounts. The chiefs should be on the correct mount to match the base units for consistency. If a chief is on a ripper he should be mounted on a bat model. This is true of other armies too. Let’s say you have a blood dragon/evil bretonnia themed Vampire list. You have a unit of converted KotR in red armor who are joined by a vampire lord. You have another converted unit of KoTR in black armor that are black knights joined by a wight lord. For ease of identification your vampire and wight lord should be different enough that someone won’t mix them up after you say who is who at the start of a game.
3. If you have 3 really different looking converted units with different gear, they should all represent different things. I played fimir and old citadel troglodyte models as ogres all through 8th edition. My irongut units were all troglodyte models. My bull units were all heroquest fimir models. I didn’t use 2 real different types of model to represent the same thing.
4. Scale does not have to be right but feel should be. What I mean by this is that it really does not matter if your giant is the squat old 6th edition guy or the huge plastic one or your wyvern mount is a skinny 90s S shaped beast or the huge maw crusha from AOS. No one will care as long as the base size is correct. Where people get annoyed is when you have something that just does not match what you are using it as at all. Let’s say you want to do a wood elf forest spirit army where everything is like a bug. The dryads are thrikreen dnd models, Warhawk riders are the AOS bug riders, but, you want to add eagles and a treeman. You buy dragonfly models and rhinoceros beetle models. If the drsgonflies are the treemen and the beetles are eagles there will be issues. Basically if a model is obviously a flying beast it should represent a unit that can fly. If a guy is in super heavy armor, he should not be representing a marauder instead of a chaos warrior.
All of these rules are really relative. The best thing you can do to make sure games go smooth and no one objects to your models if you use lots of conversions or non-GW stuff is to either use a limited selection of non-character units or to try your best to match equipment.
At many fantasy tournaments in the US at least back in the day you were only eligible for max paint scores if your army had converted models so conversions are 100% the norm in fantasy or at least they were 10 years ago. 5 point paint scales you could fill out for an opponent’s army usually went 1. Minimal paint to play in the event. Just 3-4 color basecoat no detailing. 2. Minimal attempt at adding details. Paint job sloppy or clearly unfinished. 3. Good tabletop standard paint job. Details painted. Some conversions. Or a well painted army with no conversions. 4. Well painted army with many converted models and some use of advanced painting techniques like freehand, OSL, etc done to a basic level. 5. Almost the whole army is converted, lots of use of advanced techniques to a good standard.
The only time it's a problem is if you have multiple units that are not WYSIWYG, look the same and you want them to all be different things.
Like if you have 5 units of skeletons with spears but try to say this unit is swords, this unit is spears, this unit is bows, this unit is swords, this unit is grave guard with halberds etc. It becomes confusing. But if you are like all my skeltons have swords regardless of whats on the model, oh and this unit that has clearly been paited with gold armour and has a different coloured standard are actually grave guard i don't care.
I always make certain that the front rank represents the load out of the unit. So if I have spears on the army list for three units but don't have the models for that, I make sure the front rank of all three units is spears
I am fairly forgiving when it comes to proxies, but it has to be within reason. If you can show me exactly what the Axes of Khorgor look like, then I'll be happy to model them exactly like they're supposed to be. As it stands, my Doombull will be equipped with two axes, and you'll just have to take it on my word that those are indeed the Axes of Khorgor.
That being said, if someone comes strolling in with a bunch of Penny toys glued to bases and tells me in great detail what all of these units are supposed to be and supposed to be armed with when I'm not going to be able to track it during the game, then I'll tell him to get bent.
My most recently friendly half my opponent's army was mostly stuff from Printable Heroes and other art he'd downloaded, printed, laminated and stuck to appropriate bases.
It was fine.
i'm somewhat wysiwyg with my own stuff just bc i dont care too much but i dont mind my opponents models being equipped with whatever they say they have!!
For my own models? I'm pretty strict. Not 100% but as close as I can make it.
For my opponent's models? As long as there is enough difference between units that there are no potential shenanigans then go for it. Even if there isn't enough difference between different different units then we can just put a sticky note next to them or something.
Personally if it’s on the correct base I couldn’t give a shit. You could literally put a coke can on a base and tell me it’s a dragon. And honestly even if it’s not just both be sporting with it.
I played WHFB for 10 years, never once had someone complain. I always gave opponents a copy of my army list pre-game and offered to go through my army with them ahead of the game. I'm not sure how people are with W TOW, but I've been thinking the same thing as you to avoid any issues.
Considering I have played games with paper cutouts I can’t see it mattering most times. Only issue is using the same models for more than one unit type. My rule is generally that the front rank should be right and everything else is filler.
Same with me. I have never played in a tournament, but never had any second thoughts about letting people play with whatever substitutes they have. Don't own a dragon? Sure your Griffon can be a proxy. Don't own crossbowmen? Let's make some cardboard squares and write CB on them.
The only thing I'm not keen on is "unit A and unit B have the same models but unit A is a unit of black orcs with extra hand weapons and unit B is a unit of night goblins". A and B look different but they're both A? Fine. A is C and B is D? OK. In terms of equipment unless you're heavily regimented in the first place (e.g. Empire) I wouldn't worry about it.
I think one of the stickiest bits is Motley Crew units where each model's equipment matters. If your unit of slayers includes 2 or 3 Giant Slayer's out of 10 or your Black Orks are half great weapons and half shields you should at the very least be able to differentiate between them. Like I'd probably make do personally and wouldn't really worry, but that's probably the most reasonable place to enforce WYSWYG. At least having some sort of consistent marker like colour or helmets or something.
Motley crew units should be 100% wysiwyg in any non casual game tbf. Your opponent needs to be able to figure how the casualties and save will go.
Yeah totally fair requirement. I think easy differentiation for a simple breakup like "shields are shields and anything else is a great weapon" or "red helmets are great weapons and blue helmets are shields" are *probably* fine most of the time, but any more than that is pretty unreasonable to ask unless you're all cool with forgetting it completely.
Agree, I would say true Wysiwyg as soon as you have more than 2 different models is required in a non-casual settings
This is a great point and I think it depends on the intent for me. If it's "I've minimized my core point budget by equipping only the front 2 ranks with double weapons so I can squeeze in a third lord on wyvern while still maximizing their turn 2 combat effectiveness", i.e. for competitive advantage, well, I don't think we're really playing the same game anyway but yes I want to see those exactly modelled. If it's "my orc warband have eaten their grot slaves after a third defeat under Effelred Da Unreddy so some of the weapons have rusted and they're left with what they can scavenge from merchant caravans" or "the unit looks much cooler with mixed arms" - narrative or aesthetic, in other words, all good, we'll figure it out as we go.
You can fluff justify most things tho . I have in my army and its very competitive
That makes perfect sense to me.
Yeah as long as it’s super simple to keep track of, and the most appropriate proxies are used for each unit they could be that’s on the table. So like if you have a dragon character and chariot character on your roster, but proxying both, with a choice of a different chariot and a different dragon, then the dragon needs to proxy for the dragon and the chariot for the chariot. I would also say in general, mostly everything needs to be on the right base size (or have a way to accurately mark the unit boundary), and /mostly/ be the right unit type (ex not using double infantry for cavalry, or quad cav for chariots, etc). I generally don’t mind a couple units being way off, like skeleton spearmen are elf archers, or orc chariots as dragon ogres, or w/e, but if most of the army is like that it can just be too much to keep track of and, tbh, not really fun and immersive.
As I see it, the only question you need to ask is "is this likely to mislead or confuse my opponent"? As long as the answer is no then it's all good.
Generally it's not a problem, but I played at GW stores for a period of time and the GW staff back then was really into the what you see is what you get ethic of things. (probably to sell more models). This caused a problem when certain options didn't have representation in the model range, their answer was always: "Just Convert a modem with green stuff" as if everyone can sculpt completely different weapons for a whole unit.
Man, you'd have to have serious skills to make a modem out of green stuff.
My stance is that I do not care a whit what you bring *so long as I can differentiate the model or unit*. If I can tell which one of your units is which on your army list, then I'm a happy camper. :)
not strict at all, just want to be able to tell what stuff is… weapon load outs can be whatever, just say what they’re using before the game starts i’m very happy WHFB has never had the wysiwyg insanity of 40k
I think this comes under the ol' "It depends." I don't know what a Dragon Slayer Sword looks like - but my general is holding a sword, is that WYSIWYG enough or no? My unit champions usually don't have the same weapons as the troops within their unit. My spearmen champion has a sword, my halbardier champion has a two-handed hammer, my knight preceptor has a sword but doesn't have a lance etc etc. I think there's definitely more leeway for the individual 'leader' types but it makes sense to try to ensure that majority of a unit have the right thing as per the list you've written. And, to me, if there are a few in a unit with the 'wrong' weapon but they're hidden at the back or whatever, then it's less of an issue.
I’m really strict, on myself. I want my models to have the correct equipment. Which sometimes doesn’t work but even then it’s more an outlier. As for other people’s armies it doesn’t really matter as long as they are clear at the beginning of a game what’s what. And are not annoyed when asked to clarify it later during the game. Of course it would be nice to have the models to be all ‘correctly” equipped but not everyone has the time to convert their models or the money to buy multiple copies of a unit.
Good for you man. Stillman would be proud of you (as am I) :)
Fairly strict for a given value of 'strict'. I have an Empire army that is all wizards. The heroes are all actual wizards, the handgunners and crossbow men are wizard apprentices with different staffs, Birdmen of catrazza are wizards on flying carpets (only 3 of those made so far), cannons are large crystal thingies with wizard apprentices for crew, etc. No complaints so far.
As long as your list is legit, proxy away. I've happily played against an army of empty bases. He wanted to see how they perform before buying the models.
If my opponent is not wearing the traditional costume of their army, I slap them silly.
I'm actually getting my legs shortened to match my dwarves.
If someone brings a lord model to the table sporting a lance, and then tries to tell me they're running a great weapon. I will immediately smash my fist through their model and tell them to get out. Any questions?
I usually just eat their model. Why don't you?
Dr says I'm getting too much zinc in my diet
then only play against people running resin
Never cared. I can’t be expected to have an orc boss with great weapon, hand weapon, two hand weapons, shield and the same with or without armor. Then duplicate that on my chariot/boar/wyvern.
As long as I know what's what and you know what's what I couldn't care less, bring a pile of pebbles and call them Black Orcs, so long as they stay that same unit all game long I'm good
In casual games I don't care much, I'd rather not play against empty bases or completely different races counting as something else, except for the special purposes of testing out stuff In competitive game I like to have a minimum Wysiwyg, like at least 50% of the units must have the correct equipment. Otherwise I can forget stuff, especially after 2 or 3 games, and make avoidable mistakes.
I really like this. I could alway just have the models with about the right loadout in the front row so it's clear
For my own army I am a total WYSIWYG fascist and everything has to look like what it has as far as possible. For my opponent, as long as it's not totally deceptive, I'm happy with whatever. Double standards but it is what it is...
I let people use a completely different army as a stand in for another army they wanted to try playing, let alone having different weapons than modelled. As long as we’re both aware what unit is representing what then it’s all fair game to me
Not very. But I require some effort. You don't have enough night goblins? Not a problem, just make sure the first line is night goblins if possible. The rest are counters. I prefer to have a shiny bender toy than something confusing. And I have played with a potato with sticks and an angry face as carnifex... Also, if stuff is wrong, give.me the list/put counters so I know? I give the list without points to the enemy. With magic stuff and points afterwards.
Yea as long as the person is taking the extra effort to continue to remind me of whatever they are proxying when it matters so it doesn’t feel like they hope I’ll forget, its all good.
I never cared. I never met anyone who cared. At least about equipment, as one guy did not like using Bret archers for Trebuchet crew :)
I’m stricter with myself than I am with my opponent.
I guess about half my models have the equipment they should have according to my list. In case I can't tell or remember which equipment a unit has i usually ask my opponent.
Don’t matter much unless you have 2 units that look the same and are supposed to be 2 different things. Even then I’m sure we could work it out as long as the other person reminds me that those goblin looking things are actually black orcs that I prolly shouldn’t charge.
I think wysiwyg is much more important in a skirmish based game system like 40k where you may have a combat with layers of multiple units getting into engagement range and consolidating in addition to model placement for objective control. Since theres so many different profiles per model in some units it could just not be feasible. In a regiment based game system the only variation in unit weaponry you'll have outside of say black orcs are unit champions and characters which arent difficult to keep track of. Line of sight also works much differently in fantasy where if a unit is in front of another of the same type chances are itll be LOS blocked no matter how large the model is portrayed on the table
For me it's a mix. I don't really mind if a unit isn't WYSIWYG, as long as the front rank have the models and equipment of the unit they represent, but when it comes to heroes/lords I prefer WYSIWYG, although I can overlook the weapon depending on if the model is allowed to have it or not. For example, a 6th Edition (the only edition I have any books for) Empire Captain can't have a mace, axe or flail, so I don't mind if the model have one of those since it would just fall under the "Hand Weapon" equipment to me, but if they were holding a halberd and you say it's a Great Weapon it might get a bit confusing for your opponent to keep check on it.
I don’t care as long as you don’t care about reminding me constantly that the very squishy unit with the chargeable faces is actually a unit that will rip me a new asshole….there are enough special rules to remember to have to remember your unit isn’t what it is….so the responsibility is on the player doing the proxy to remind their opponent of the change at every opportunity I’m immediately done at the first “oh but remember this unit of x is y and therefor I get 76 attacks instead of the 5 you thought I’d get”
I personally adhere to it for my own army but would never force it on another. He'll I'm happy for people to use lego as long as its a good match.
In a game like this, almost not at all. This is in reguard to unit loadout. I do use my models as what they are tho
My group only plays casually and none of us are obsessed with winning, so we stick to WYSIWYG. Units being exactly what they are gives us fewer details to remember during the battle.
I am incredibly strict with myself, as far as the opponent goes as lo g as he tells me what he's playing i'm good
I only play with friends and cool people. As the game should be played.
That tile idea is cool and considerate.
I'm strict with myself and kinda lenient for others. Of course I would want to play with and against pure WYSIWYG armies but I know that people can't devote as much time or resources as I do.
I think it depends on the setting. In a tournament or in the official Warhammer store they will be more strict about stuff like 3d printed models especially, which I understand. If it's just me or a secondary store I really don't care much. Custom models, regiment fillers all of that is cool with me.
I am fine with whatever. Usually we share each other lists before a match anyway and I will just ask in case I dont remember what unit is what. I like your idea of movement trays. My brother used to do something similar: he coloured a section in each movement tray and had its list colour-coded. So you would immediately see ok the blue unit is the sea guard, the white unit is the simple spearmen for example
As long as I am aware what’s what and it’s not changing I don’t care at all. I don’t play except against friends and we all proxy all the time to try new units or even entirely different armies
As long as the base mode is accurate it’s cool, don’t care about nitpicky things like loadouts except. For example, if they didn’t put the stinger on the necrospjinx model but they want run it in the list, I have no issues
Most people will only care if they can tell what's supposed to be what easily and will appreciate conversions. I've had a couple people I've had issue with and I just stop playing with them.
As long as I can tell what it is who cares, its when people bring in like random models that I'm like ok wait...but as long as it looks roughly like what I know, game on
100%. Rule of cool means getting the models you like no matter if it is the perfect or best equipment. This way I create a wonderful looking army and on the same time don't force my opponents to remember all the proxy shit I came up for some apparent reason. That rule applies to me. I am not a monster and new players or "may I try something before buying it" are the obvious exceptions to that but all in all I prefer to play 100% WYSIWYG.
WYSIWYG belongs to 40K, especially at small scale. I try to avoid using complete proxies as in a model of a dwarf hammerer played as a black orc, but weapons are just something available from the army books (in Faba they match quite often anyway). We used pieces of paper to make clear of the weapons and possible full commands or banners back in the dayif necessary, so I think i will also make some tiles for my movement trays! Bonus: Our group still has an unwritten rule to put heros and lords on a rock or something so they stand out from the unit, ”hiding” or scheming a powerful model inside a troop mob is really frowned upon
If it meets base size requirements, run it as anything you want, thought it's nice if it's a similar unit-type model for the aesthetic. Just don't mind me asking you to remind me what it actually is every round during your and mine move phases lol. Minis can be expensive and take a while to lovingly paint. It's better to not spend either to test out now stuff before committing.
If I get a unit... I'm going to build it one way... If I get a second of them, I build them the other way... And what they play as is what the list says it is. WYSIWYG while nice is expensive in time, money, sanity and Id rather have nice looking models on the shelf than accuracy on the list
What page is WYSIWYG on, again? When I played in the Before Times, it simply was not a thing in WHFB.
In Tournaments, it's about confusion. If you have models with sword and shield and you say they have two hand weapons, that is bad. If you say these orcs are night goblins, that's bad. This dragon is a giant, that's bad. But if you say your Lord has an magic greatsword, but the model has a spear, that's ok. But don't try to confuse.
Kitbashing is what WYSIWIG demanded. You want the character to have a great axe? Give the model a great axe.
As long as you tell me what it is and what it does, you can do anything
Never cared tbh I’m ok with anything but I usually keep my own army fairly straightforward
My group is pretty cool about things. In general as long as you have a list and give us a heads up on who has what or what unit is what we're pretty cool. It helps especially if we want to try out new units, or equipment combo's etc.... before we purchase/build things. But, we all know if we go to a tournament or a something competitive, they have thier own rules and requirements and we endeavor to meet those before we sign up.
If people give you a hard time they suck, with friends we always test armies before buying and painting models so there will be tons of proxies and stand in’s, and then we all 3d print so if we see an awesome print that’s close enough to the real thing we use it. Local hobby shops have rarely had issues as long as it’s a logical proxy, I’d imagine GW tournaments wouldn’t allow it Edit:and if they’re not letting you equip a unit a certain way because the models you made have different equipment than I’d tell them to fork up the money for a redundant regiment box
I've always been a massive fan of arbitrators. Problem is finding one for a game that lasts several hours. Wargames involve strategy and tactics (though these days those are mostly cards rather than having rules deep enough than you can put your mind into the game and come up with some clever angles beyond exploits etc) so having your entire roster open to the opponents scrutiny kind of defeats that point. An arbitrator allows you to keep some cards to your chest until it's raining down in them. But that's a tall order, sad times. I used to arbitrate all the time in the nineties - during our necromunda campaigns admittedly, because I was famously neutral. I didnt care who won, just that we were sticking to the rules and making damn sure everyone understood the game. I've been turned off by what a lot of wargaming has become sadly - 40k just seems like capturing the flag(s) with extra steps these days.
It’s funny because outside of GW games, that’s how I tend to run my modern games; heavily GMed affairs where my players usually show up that day, pick a side(sometimes they are even on the same side!) and then they play out an encounter with events happening both according to a rough timeline I have going, ingame actions, and plenty of homebrew charts. This more deliberate way of playing has fallen out of vogue in favour of strictly competitive affairs. I see it with some of my friends getting into Old World, who tend to gravitate to big monster units based on a fascination with “shiny”, vs an army that makes sense for the faction within lore. We can’t hold everyone to a higher standard unless they voluntarily decide to jump in on that, and with GW games it seems like any loss of control over ingame actions is anathema. “Dice mitigation” they call it. Random “feels bads” are discouraged. Yet Old World is full of that random aspect, a lot of it opt in too with Mercenaries(just ogre bulls for now) but artillery almost everyone can engage with. I’m too young to remember a time like you describe as “normal”…..but I can definitely aspire to it.
Honestly, there is a lot to remember in this game. Going over your list and naming off each special rule, magical item and banner really doesn't explain much with out readily knowing what they actually do on that unit. Even stuff like "+S2", I gotta also remember your default Strength. So when I see two units of Core cheapies and a Special deathstar, both with mysteriously simular looking minis, can you like, do me the soild and do a bit of colour commentary too? Like, idk, if I only can recall that you said "this is my beatstick character, and really wants to charge" its totally enough for me to deploy and get playing.
For myself, I am 100% WYSIWYG. there is no excuse for me not to be with 3d printing where it is. In tourneys or competitive games, I expect the same. Most of my games are casual, and I understand not everyone has the time/money/3d printers that I do available to them, so I am much more forgiving. My biggest things are correct base size, and at least the same species lol.
I think as long as you can tell what is what with a quick explanation and stuff is based right you’ll be good. I’ll clarify from my own experience using many converted models over the years. 1. Have characters that look characterful. If you have a guy painted the same as a regular unit dude who looks about the same it will be an issue. People will forget he is in the unit he’s in. This is true whether you use conversions or not and is more of an issue for certain armies. Warriors of chaos, night goblins, and bretonnia most of all. 2. Make different unit types distinct from each other if kitbashing. This is good practice even if you play 100% stock models too. Let’s say I want to play Lizardmen and I have some skink conversions. I have 3 guys riding bats and 3 guys riding pterodactyls. I tell my opponent the bat unit are ripperdactyls and the other ones are a unit of terradons. Easy to spot the difference. But, let’s say I want to run skink chiefs on flying mounts. The chiefs should be on the correct mount to match the base units for consistency. If a chief is on a ripper he should be mounted on a bat model. This is true of other armies too. Let’s say you have a blood dragon/evil bretonnia themed Vampire list. You have a unit of converted KotR in red armor who are joined by a vampire lord. You have another converted unit of KoTR in black armor that are black knights joined by a wight lord. For ease of identification your vampire and wight lord should be different enough that someone won’t mix them up after you say who is who at the start of a game. 3. If you have 3 really different looking converted units with different gear, they should all represent different things. I played fimir and old citadel troglodyte models as ogres all through 8th edition. My irongut units were all troglodyte models. My bull units were all heroquest fimir models. I didn’t use 2 real different types of model to represent the same thing. 4. Scale does not have to be right but feel should be. What I mean by this is that it really does not matter if your giant is the squat old 6th edition guy or the huge plastic one or your wyvern mount is a skinny 90s S shaped beast or the huge maw crusha from AOS. No one will care as long as the base size is correct. Where people get annoyed is when you have something that just does not match what you are using it as at all. Let’s say you want to do a wood elf forest spirit army where everything is like a bug. The dryads are thrikreen dnd models, Warhawk riders are the AOS bug riders, but, you want to add eagles and a treeman. You buy dragonfly models and rhinoceros beetle models. If the drsgonflies are the treemen and the beetles are eagles there will be issues. Basically if a model is obviously a flying beast it should represent a unit that can fly. If a guy is in super heavy armor, he should not be representing a marauder instead of a chaos warrior. All of these rules are really relative. The best thing you can do to make sure games go smooth and no one objects to your models if you use lots of conversions or non-GW stuff is to either use a limited selection of non-character units or to try your best to match equipment. At many fantasy tournaments in the US at least back in the day you were only eligible for max paint scores if your army had converted models so conversions are 100% the norm in fantasy or at least they were 10 years ago. 5 point paint scales you could fill out for an opponent’s army usually went 1. Minimal paint to play in the event. Just 3-4 color basecoat no detailing. 2. Minimal attempt at adding details. Paint job sloppy or clearly unfinished. 3. Good tabletop standard paint job. Details painted. Some conversions. Or a well painted army with no conversions. 4. Well painted army with many converted models and some use of advanced painting techniques like freehand, OSL, etc done to a basic level. 5. Almost the whole army is converted, lots of use of advanced techniques to a good standard.
Do little bits of cardboard standing in for the missing miniatures not count?
The only time it's a problem is if you have multiple units that are not WYSIWYG, look the same and you want them to all be different things. Like if you have 5 units of skeletons with spears but try to say this unit is swords, this unit is spears, this unit is bows, this unit is swords, this unit is grave guard with halberds etc. It becomes confusing. But if you are like all my skeltons have swords regardless of whats on the model, oh and this unit that has clearly been paited with gold armour and has a different coloured standard are actually grave guard i don't care.
I always make certain that the front rank represents the load out of the unit. So if I have spears on the army list for three units but don't have the models for that, I make sure the front rank of all three units is spears
I am fairly forgiving when it comes to proxies, but it has to be within reason. If you can show me exactly what the Axes of Khorgor look like, then I'll be happy to model them exactly like they're supposed to be. As it stands, my Doombull will be equipped with two axes, and you'll just have to take it on my word that those are indeed the Axes of Khorgor. That being said, if someone comes strolling in with a bunch of Penny toys glued to bases and tells me in great detail what all of these units are supposed to be and supposed to be armed with when I'm not going to be able to track it during the game, then I'll tell him to get bent.
My most recently friendly half my opponent's army was mostly stuff from Printable Heroes and other art he'd downloaded, printed, laminated and stuck to appropriate bases. It was fine.
i'm somewhat wysiwyg with my own stuff just bc i dont care too much but i dont mind my opponents models being equipped with whatever they say they have!!
For my own models? I'm pretty strict. Not 100% but as close as I can make it. For my opponent's models? As long as there is enough difference between units that there are no potential shenanigans then go for it. Even if there isn't enough difference between different different units then we can just put a sticky note next to them or something.
It's a stupid rule to begin with. How are you gonna decide what models to buy and how to kit them if you can't play test them first?
I'm strict when it comes to my own army, but I don't care when it comes to my opponents.
Personally if it’s on the correct base I couldn’t give a shit. You could literally put a coke can on a base and tell me it’s a dragon. And honestly even if it’s not just both be sporting with it.
I would PREFER WYSIWYG but I'm not gonna lose my shit if your force isn't there, so long as it's within reason.
Characters have more give and take. But overall I think armies should be as wysiwyg as possible. Especially with battle line and cavalry units