Would you object to this

[IronDuke]

I have just asked this question in my wip thread, but thought I would ask here as I am more likely to get an answer. I want my sergeants to be kitted out with combi weapons, but don't want to hack up lots of weapons to make them (and risk messing them up).

If I use the hand held melta/flamer weapons from the Blood Angel sprue to represent single shot weapons, and then gave them a bolter as well, would anyone have objections as far as WYSIWYG goes? Both parts of the weapon are represented on the model, but I just want to check if people would have any problems with it.

Cheers

[Gaz1858]

No i guess not. Alsong as you made it clear. Its a good idea model wise. Or one of the old school hand flamers would work to

[Hiro_Protagonist]

So long as it's clear, especially if you inform your opponent in advance, I don't see why it should be a problem.

[rat of vengence]

On the condition that your army doesn't use these weapons OTHER than as single shot combi's, I think it is a cool idea ;)

 

RoV

[Ming]

This is what I'm doing for combi-flamers - locating the old hand flamers I have lying around and putting them on the tool belt...

[ShinyRhino]

So long as the sergeant is clearly delineated and distinguished fromthe rest of his squad, it should be fine. If he's got a different color helmet or something that clearly defines him as a sergeant, your opponent can't say "Oh, I thought that was just the flamer guy in the squad!"

[IronDuke]

Thanks for all the responses guys. The consensus seems to be that it is ok, so I am going to go ahead and stick the arm on.

Cheers muchly

[Frosty the Pyro]

with the combinaiton both the "counts as" rule, and WYSIWG you end up with the following (in my own words).

 

Any non-standard wargear must be represented. It must be represented in a way that is unique from different non-standard wargear, and will not be confused with other wargear (assuming you have explained it before hand). So by RAW using a hand flamer to represent a combi flamer is fine, but only if you do not use the hand flamer to represent anything else (for example it can not be used on one model to be a combi flamer, and then on another to be a normal flamer, and then on still yet another to be a missile launcher).

[Algesan]

with the combinaiton both the "counts as" rule, and WYSIWG you end up with the following (in my own words).

 

Any non-standard wargear must be represented. It must be represented in a way that is unique from different non-standard wargear, and will not be confused with other wargear (assuming you have explained it before hand). So by RAW using a hand flamer to represent a combi flamer is fine, but only if you do not use the hand flamer to represent anything else (for example it can not be used on one model to be a combi flamer, and then on another to be a normal flamer, and then on still yet another to be a missile launcher).

 

I have a question on the "counts as" rule. Does this mean if I'm starting up a new army and don't have all the various bits, I could have squads that have base models (generic troops) with different colored helmets and define them before the game as:

 

White = sergeants with A

Blue = troop with B

Green = troop with C

Yellow = troop with D

Red = troop with E.

 

As I understand it, the "counts as" wants consistent representation throughout the army, but would I have to go find (or create) some actual bits of some sort to glue on?

[Grey Mage]

On the condition that your army doesn't use these weapons OTHER than as single shot combi's, I think it is a cool idea :lol:

 

RoV

Yeah- for example my SWs dont have hand flamers, at all- so any hand flamer is a combiweapon. So far no ones had any complaints on this.

[ShinyRhino]

I have a question on the "counts as" rule. Does this mean if I'm starting up a new army and don't have all the various bits, I could have squads that have base models (generic troops) with different colored helmets and define them before the game as:

 

White = sergeants with A

Blue = troop with B

Green = troop with C

Yellow = troop with D

Red = troop with E.

 

As I understand it, the "counts as" wants consistent representation throughout the army, but would I have to go find (or create) some actual bits of some sort to glue on?

 

Well, that might be fine for a few friendly games to get you started and experienced with the rules, but don't get comfortable doing it. Modelling a Marine with a bolter and a red helmet and calling him a flamer Marine won't fly in any but the loosest of gaming circles. I can't think of a single tournament event that would let you do that.

[Algesan]

I have a question on the "counts as" rule. Does this mean if I'm starting up a new army and don't have all the various bits, I could have squads that have base models (generic troops) with different colored helmets and define them before the game as:

 

White = sergeants with A

Blue = troop with B

Green = troop with C

Yellow = troop with D

Red = troop with E.

 

As I understand it, the "counts as" wants consistent representation throughout the army, but would I have to go find (or create) some actual bits of some sort to glue on?

 

Well, that might be fine for a few friendly games to get you started and experienced with the rules, but don't get comfortable doing it. Modelling a Marine with a bolter and a red helmet and calling him a flamer Marine won't fly in any but the loosest of gaming circles. I can't think of a single tournament event that would let you do that.

 

Heh, I knew there was a reason I rejected 40K over a decade ago. I detest costly "collectible" games. OTOH, I don't plan on getting involved in any "official GW chicken excrement rules" tournaments, so I'm good. Considering I've read enough tales online where home modelers suggested weighing your home built model and gluing and equal weight of scrap bits from GW kits or cutting up the GW boxes and packing materials to fabricate so as to hit "50% official GW kit parts" rule, this qualifies.

 

Although, I did work with my Dad a long time ago when he was making his own molds.... These would be a bit small, and the details not as sharp, but some work with dental tools can do wonders...

 

Ceramic figures anyone. ;)

 

I know, I know, I'd hit an IP issue there unless I hand carved the original.

[Grey Mage]

*blinks* Its not a collectible game by any jargon Im familiar with. Asking you to eventually get your squads the weapons your telling me theyre armed with isnt asking much when you consider the kits come with them. Indeed, I know plenty of people who have swappable weapon arms on their assault squads, wolf gaurd, etc so they only need one unit- one guy even switches out the special weapons in his tactical squads using a small pinning system, and they look great.

 

Its not hard to use models that in fact look like what they are. 99% of gamers will be understanding for the first six months to a year if your proxying things, and wont mind in general if your trying out something new as long as you make an effort.

[AyanamiKun]

In my gaming circles proxying is very common and no problem at all. The only rule is, that everyone needs to understand what the model really represents.

[IronDuke]

Well here it is, the sergeant with one shot melta and bolter (counts as combi-melta), and the squads regular melta gunner. As recommended, I won't use the hand weapons for anything other than to denote combi weapons, to avoid confusion.

Thanks for the comments everyone!

[Algesan]

*blinks* Its not a collectible game by any jargon Im familiar with. Asking you to eventually get your squads the weapons your telling me theyre armed with isnt asking much when you consider the kits come with them. Indeed, I know plenty of people who have swappable weapon arms on their assault squads, wolf gaurd, etc so they only need one unit- one guy even switches out the special weapons in his tactical squads using a small pinning system, and they look great.

Its not hard to use models that in fact look like what they are. 99% of gamers will be understanding for the first six months to a year if your proxying things, and wont mind in general if your trying out something new as long as you make an effort.

Not collectible? *boggles*

It is collectible if I have to go get the "correct" pieces which the game company and only the game company (or a few cronies) sell. Now true, I don't have to buy blister pack after blister pack of random figures to try to get a multimelta armed model, which is what I think you are thinking of, like collectible card games.

Yes, I can see how to do swap out setups on weapons and such, it is a fun modeling/crafting challenge, but it has nothing to do with wargaming. See below. Sorry, it is a bit of a rant, if you want the short version: Any game that requires you to spend money to buy sanctioned game company parts beyond the rules and basic setup to play in official tournaments is a collectible game because it requires game company mandated expenditure of funds in excess of the required minimum to play the game in a reasonable manner. The allowing of home built variations that require excessive amounts of time to detail to be "approved", to the point where expensive company bought models become attractive options does not change the fact that the game is collectible.

In my gaming circles proxying is very common and no problem at all. The only rule is, that everyone needs to understand what the model really represents.

Emphasis added.

If it was just a regular game, this should be the only standard. I can make entire armies this way using poster board cut to the correct size for basing and wide popsicle sticks cut to the correct height and marked with clearly readable symbols identifying unit and weapons carried. Nothing fancy there. Table top wargames have been using this system for decades, they are called counters and some games have a lot denser information than 40k would require in a smaller space. It isn't real pretty, just functional.

If it did have to go to WYSIWYG, then I could do the same thing by using user created images (miniatures they've painted and want to show off) to print out scale color pictures to put on the popsicle sticks (B&W really would do, then use colored pencils). These days, I can probably find files for pseudo 3D paper models. Just take pictures from 4 cardinal directions, print, cut and fold them to form an "+" shape so you see the picture in correct perspective. Printed on cardstock, mounted to a popsicle stick backing and then to a legal size base, it would function as WYSIWYG and provide as accurate a model for all other game purposes as any metal or plastic figure. Oh, when the dog, toddler, clumsy oaf manages

Even assuming that most players must have pictures, I still think most of them wouldn't care about whether the models were metal, plastic or paper as long as they could clearly see and identify the equipment on them. How many of these full color, fully WYSIWYG paper miniatures would be allowed on in official GW tournament? These would cover every single excuse that a GW groupie could make except one... It doesn't put profits from figure sales in GW's pocket.

Understand, I'm not adverse to getting figures, painting them to make them pretty and having all the "proper bits", but that is part of my like for modeling and crafting stuff. It is nice that it would be useful to play games with since I could then show off my work and get ideas about improvement. There is a huge difference between that (modeling) and gaming. When there is a price tag in modeling, the price tag involves paying the game company for models and the price tag is a requirement for entry into official tournaments where a gamer could earn some bragging rights about his skill among other gamers, then we are at a collectible game. BTW, I just ran up two 1000 point armies, one cheap and the other expensive from some lists. One costs over $300US and the other $150US for approved GW models.

I'm also aware of other miniature companies that make 28mm figures consisting of absurdly oversized football player uniform looking armor carrying high tech looking machine guns, assault rifes, flamethrowers, etc. Much cheaper than GW official stuff. Would they go in a tournament?

Home modeling of vehicles can reduce costs, but from what I've read on tournaments, my Rhino equivalent that clearly has the correct dimensions (for LOS, etc), the correct disembarkation points, the correct fire points and the correct weapons represented, costs less than one US dollar in parts and a few hours time to build wouldn't be allowed. Despite the fact that it is 100% equivalent in form and function to a GW sanctioned Rhino. True, the looks aren't exactly as the GW model, but it is clear it is a Rhino and any discrepancies in the outer corners and details would technically be negatives for me and not my opponent.

I'm currently (as in today) fiddling with a better looking model now that I have a set of functional Rhinos, but that is because I like doing crafting and modeling and I know I can do better and the "rush" to field some vehicles for friendly games is behind me. It has nothing to do with my gaming abilities, skills or lack thereof.

When it becomes a secondary game behind the game to get a cheap, playable, reasonable and fully rules functional model approved in a tournament, the game is collectible. Note again my comment about using scraps from GW kits, boxes and packing materials to reach a "50% official GW parts" level.

DISCLAIMER: I like to model, craft and figure things out. The 40k stuff is interesting enough to make me enjoy doing that for its own sake and I will probably fiddle with models and figures as long as I play. I'm more than aware of the enjoyment to be gained from laying out on the playing field an army correctly done in loving detail.

Well here it is, the sergeant with one shot melta and bolter (counts as combi-melta), and the squads regular melta gunner. As recommended, I won't use the hand weapons for anything other than to denote combi weapons, to avoid confusion.

Thanks for the comments everyone!

Nice. Sorry to derail your thread a bit.

[Grey Mage]

: Any game that requires you to spend money to buy sanctioned game company parts beyond the rules and basic setup to play in official tournaments is a collectible game because it requires game company mandated expenditure of funds in excess of the required minimum to play the game in a reasonable manner.

 

WYSIWYG is part of the basic rules, its not a tournament thing. Allowing proxies is a house rule, though a common one. And not all tournaments ban proxies- my LGS, up until about six months ago allowed proxies in tournaments. IE over a decade of the things... until someone repeatedly and excessively abused it.

 

And you could make Popsicle stick armies if you wanted to- it wouldnt have the same feel to it. Ive played Star Fleet Battles, and frankly the feel is alot different when using the paper icons compared to the metal ships.

 

Home modeling of vehicles can reduce costs, but from what I've read on tournaments, my Rhino equivalent that clearly has the correct dimensions (for LOS, etc), the correct disembarkation points, the correct fire points and the correct weapons represented, costs less than one US dollar in parts and a few hours time to build wouldn't be allowed. Despite the fact that it is 100% equivalent in form and function to a GW sanctioned Rhino. True, the looks aren't exactly as the GW model, but it is clear it is a Rhino and any discrepancies in the outer corners and details would technically be negatives for me and not my opponent.

 

Again- depends on where your playing. Most LGS' Ive been to would allow it, provided it was painted to a 3 color standard, sturdy, and WYSIWYG.

 

I'm also aware of other miniature companies that make 28mm figures consisting of absurdly oversized football player uniform looking armor carrying high tech looking machine guns, assault rifes, flamethrowers, etc. Much cheaper than GW official stuff. Would they go in a tournament?

 

Some of them do- the SW Thunder Wolf Mounts are a common one, even GW stores seem to accept them actually. Others are incredibly ugly, and their guns etc just dont look right because of IP issues or bad sculpting. They no longer meet the requirements of WYSIWYG when you cant figure out what their wielding easily.

 

When it becomes a secondary game behind the game to get a cheap, playable, reasonable and fully rules functional model approved in a tournament, the game is collectible. Note again my comment about using scraps from GW kits, boxes and packing materials to reach a "50% official GW parts" level.

 

Thats the thing, it isnt a game. Not unless you go well beyond any reasonable limits to make it one. Set up a simple Ebay search if your an online type, or ask around once and a while at your store if your not. Heck, Cool modeling can save you alot too- a friend of mine literally doubled the size of both his Tomb King and Goblin army for fantasy by having some of the skeletons pull themselves out from the ground, and using bitz with his gobos to increase the ranks. It looks beautiful, its all well painted, and hes to my knowledge never had a single bad thing said about them.

 

Bottom line, as I see it: You only have to buy what you want to buy. If your happy with a particular list, you can just get the 'counters' for that and move on with your life. This game is as cheap or expensive as you want it to be- no more, no less.

 

The main reason its not a 'collectable' game in my mind is there isnt a swapping system- Marneus Calgar isnt rare, and isnt worth three tactical squads on the open market. You dont get any benefits from having one of each ultramarine, and you certainly dont increase the value of each model from having a play set.... and indeed, as you said- you get exactly what you paid for, none of this random stuff.

[ShinyRhino]

I can make entire armies this way using poster board cut to the correct size for basing and wide popsicle sticks cut to the correct height and marked with clearly readable symbols identifying unit and weapons carried. Nothing fancy there. Table top wargames have been using this system for decades, they are called counters and some games have a lot denser information than 40k would require in a smaller space. It isn't real pretty, just functional.

 

So, you want to play the game, but don't want to buy the game?

 

Even assuming that most players must have pictures, I still think most of them wouldn't care about whether the models were metal, plastic or paper as long as they could clearly see and identify the equipment on them. How many of these full color, fully WYSIWYG paper miniatures would be allowed on in official GW tournament? These would cover every single excuse that a GW groupie could make except one... It doesn't put profits from figure sales in GW's pocket.

 

I think "most" would indeed mind. These "groupies" enjoy their hobby because it is a hobby. Heaven forbid the gaming community enforce some sort of standard rules of play.

If you don't put money in the pocket of the people that manufacture your wargaming rules, what incentive (let alone means) do they have to keep making them for you? GW has made 8 editions of Warhammer Fantasy, and five Editions of Warhammer 40K. Their miniatures line has evolved from lumpy little lead men, to fully-customizable plastic kits designed and manufactured with modern technology. Who pays for the R&D for news rules, games, and miniatures if not the profit margin?

Slighting the playerbase as "groupies" isn't really the best way to win over your audience, FYI. ;)

 

I'm also aware of other miniature companies that make 28mm figures consisting of absurdly oversized football player uniform looking armor carrying high tech looking machine guns, assault rifes, flamethrowers, etc. Much cheaper than GW official stuff. Would they go in a tournament?

 

Of course you can't use other game manufacturer's products in a GW tournament. That's akin to bringing your lunch to a restaurant, sitting at a booth, and flatly refusing to order from their menu. If the restaurant allowed you to do this, they'd promptly fill up with brownbaggers who brought their own lunch every day. No income from paying customers means the business shuts down. The building is sold, and they open a postal supply store. The postal supply store won't let you eat your lunch on their floor. You now have nowhere to eat lunch.

 

When it becomes a secondary game behind the game to get a cheap, playable, reasonable and fully rules functional model approved in a tournament, the game is collectible. Note again my comment about using scraps from GW kits, boxes and packing materials to reach a "50% official GW parts" level.

 

Your arguments have nothing to do with the definition of a "collectible" game. Ranting about the inherent costs of official models doesn't make the game "collectible." It makes it a hobby you pay for. No one is telling you you're a bad man for modelling your own Rhinos and paper token Space Marines. Do that all you want. But in order to participate in a sanctioned event, you must abide by the sanctioned rules. In order to support the company that provides you that base rulebook that's constantly revised and updated, you have to provide them a profit, or they go out of business. If they go out of business, no one is there to update that rules loophole, or tweak the game. "I'll houserule it!" you say. You do so, and get along fine with your circle of pals. You all play by the same rule. But then one day you travel across town to a tournament held by some random schmoe and his pals. They houseruled the loophole differently. The differing rules cause a huge dispute over who "won" the tournament. The schmoes award the prize to one of their members, and you demand your entry fee back. They tell you to stick it in your bum, and kick you out. There's no governing body to complain to, so you stick it in your bum and go home frustrated. That makes the game collectible?

 

Do Flames of War tournaments allow you to play the game with green-painted matchbox cars or wooden tokens? Do Warmachine tournaments allow the use of green plastic Army men glued to bottlecaps?

Just because you ahve to pay for the product the company produces in order to compete in their sanctioned events, doesn't mean something is "collectible."

[BearersOfSalvation]

In order to support the company that provides you that base rulebook that's constantly revised and updated, you have to provide them a profit, or they go out of business. If they go out of business, no one is there to update that rules loophole, or tweak the game. "I'll houserule it!" you say. You do so, and get along fine with your circle of pals. You all play by the same rule. But then one day you travel across town to a tournament held by some random schmoe and his pals. They houseruled the loophole differently. The differing rules cause a huge dispute over who "won" the tournament. The schmoes award the prize to one of their members, and you demand your entry fee back. They tell you to stick it in your bum, and kick you out. There's no governing body to complain to, so you stick it in your bum and go home frustrated. That makes the game collectible?

 

Is that really all that different than now? There are a number of gaping loopholes and ambiguities that GW aggressively refuses to fix, leading to tournament-specific rules and rulings. They will put out one FAQ, which often has ambiguous or self-contradictory answers, and won't touch a set of rules again for years. I don't think that GW will currently act as a 'governing body to complain to' if you don't like a local ruling, unless it specifically contradicts one of a very few things. You're trying to paint this like some bleak possible future, but really it's what people deal wtih anyway.

 

I buy GW's stuff for the models and background, if I felt like I was paying primarily for the rules I'd ditch them in a heartbeat.

[Algesan]

WYSIWYG is part of the basic rules, its not a tournament thing. Allowing proxies is a house rule, though a common one. And not all tournaments ban proxies- my LGS, up until about six months ago allowed proxies in tournaments. IE over a decade of the things... until someone repeatedly and excessively abused it.

 

And you could make Popsicle stick armies if you wanted to- it wouldnt have the same feel to it. Ive played Star Fleet Battles, and frankly the feel is alot different when using the paper icons compared to the metal ships.

 

WYSIWYG and "counts as" plus the various exceptions. SM with bolter, bolt pistol, chainsword, grenades does not have to have all that crammed on him. A SM holding a plain bolter and nothing else, if GW issue, is 100% acceptable even though it isn't WYSIWYG technically.

 

I bailed out of SFB when they messed up the strategic game and tried to pull in all kind of stuff from the movie. However, I did play the floor version from the 70s from when there were no miniatures the right size to play that kind of game (and you really needed a floor in a big room). I only played one game with models. Guess what, whether or not I was capable at shooting, moving and managing my starship had zip to do with an extra decoration that got in the way of figuring my firing arcs since I had to look around the darned thing. It was nice, it was pretty, it was fun, but it didn't have anything to do with my gaming skill.

 

Again- depends on where your playing. Most LGS' Ive been to would allow it, provided it was painted to a 3 color standard, sturdy, and WYSIWYG.

 

Actually my LGS wouldn't have a problem with it being the current plain white, everyone knows Rhinos well enough and I can pop a turret on top. IMO, it is a decent little pop on the board toy for when someone needs an extra vehicle. I didn't expect them to have a problem, since the normal weekly games are friendly games and almost all gamers are friendly people.

 

Some of them do- the SW Thunder Wolf Mounts are a common one, even GW stores seem to accept them actually. Others are incredibly ugly, and their guns etc just dont look right because of IP issues or bad sculpting. They no longer meet the requirements of WYSIWYG when you cant figure out what their wielding easily.

 

Would they meet the standards of WYSIWYG (or even "counts as") if the weapons were easily recognizable, even if the appearance was at variance from the GW issue version?

 

Remember, I started out with using "counts as" in an easy format to provide definite visual clues about what each model was carrying. In fact, it would actually so much easier for everyone playing a game to identify the models even if they were 100% WYSIWYG (even ignoring the exception for standard wargear) except for someone with with deficient color vision and I bet I could use color and pattern to cover that. At this point, I would have exceeded the justification for WYSIWYG as long as I follow the "counts as" rule.

 

Thats the thing, it isnt a game. Not unless you go well beyond any reasonable limits to make it one. Set up a simple Ebay search if your an online type, or ask around once and a while at your store if your not. Heck, Cool modeling can save you alot too- a friend of mine literally doubled the size of both his Tomb King and Goblin army for fantasy by having some of the skeletons pull themselves out from the ground, and using bitz with his gobos to increase the ranks. It looks beautiful, its all well painted, and hes to my knowledge never had a single bad thing said about them.

 

With True LOS I'd reject any model that isn't within the standards for normal model height unless we could reasonably swap out his pretty, but short, models with regular sized ones for determining LOS. In other words, your buddy is probably reasonable and he wouldn't try to abuse the issue. Please don't address what a great guy your friend is, I actually would think he was, I've know lots of gamers, I'm simply pointing out a potential gameplay issue. I will note from your description that your friends models probably fit the 50% GW rule.

 

The problem is that any modeling I do is up to the discretion of the game organizers and they have to draw on certain GW rules or preferences. One of which I've seen mentioned quite a bit is the 50% GW parts rule to make a home built acceptable. Until I found that out, I thought the guys cutting up their GW figure boxes for home building were amusing because I've got sturdier cardboard from whenever I get a USPS standard rate package in the mail.

 

Bottom line, as I see it: You only have to buy what you want to buy. If your happy with a particular list, you can just get the 'counters' for that and move on with your life. This game is as cheap or expensive as you want it to be- no more, no less.

 

If I "want" a certain list with options then I have to "collect" models (by whatever means) that will fit a certain aesthetic standard and qualify under whatever modeling rules are in place or I won't be allowed to play. The fact that fully functional 'counters' can be created that fulfill every game requirement (except for spending money on GW approved products) listed as justification for WYSIWYG and "counts as", but will not be allowed in competition play means I have to "collect" if I want to play.

 

The main reason its not a 'collectable' game in my mind is there isnt a swapping system- Marneus Calgar isnt rare, and isnt worth three tactical squads on the open market. You dont get any benefits from having one of each ultramarine, and you certainly dont increase the value of each model from having a play set.... and indeed, as you said- you get exactly what you paid for, none of this random stuff.

 

As I mentioned, you are trying to define 'collectible' only in terms of trading collectible games, not in terms of having to acquire a collection of models that fit GW rules to play in tournaments. No hava enuff cashola? No playa da game!

 

Oh, BTW, given that one of the exceptions to the rule is that any official GW model is usable in tournament play means that there are certain models that would probably demand a higher value for a hyper competitive player. Terminators now have a 40mm base, they used to have a 25mm base. So if there is a 76mm wide passable gap between two terrain features, someone with older GW official Terminators could get three abreast through while someone without could only come through one at a time. Older, lower profile Rhinos would have advantages for being obscured or not being seen at all when maneuvering through terrain. Yes, there are potential disadvantages to using the examples above and many times the differences won't be relevant, but that depends on how you use the units.

[greatcrusade08]

im not going to reply to any one point, but simply wade in with my 2 cents worth.

 

40k isnt a 'collectable' game unless you want to play by 'tournament rules'.

As grey mage said many gamers and even clubs would have no issues with the popsticle men and home made rhinos.. aslong as you can tell whats what its all good.

If you want to enter a GW GT though you have to play by thier rules.. and to be honest i dont know why anyone has an issue with this.

If you enter any non-sanctioned tournament youd have to play by thier rules too, regardless of how silly they appear.

 

I know alot of gamers that use non GW systems, they hate the commercialism of GW as a result of them becoming a shareholder based company.

Still we have to remember one thing, GW are the reason us nerds play in convention halls instead of basements..

So whilst i may not agree with some of thier buisiness decisions, what doesnt adversely affect my gaming doesnt get a huge wall of text explaining why its bad.

[Algesan]

So, you want to play the game, but don't want to buy the game?

 

I've bought the game, I just find it annoying that I can fulfill "counts as" and every justification for WYSIWYG without paying GW for more than their rules, but to "really play" I have to pay extra. It's like paying for a concert ticket and when you get there, if you want to hear the band, you have to pay for the auditorium utilities and staff. That was a bit silly, but you had a silly one below too.

 

More realistic: It is like the rule banning bringing your own food and drinks into certain venues where you are likely to be hungry and thirsty and that venue charges an arseload of rent to the concession vendors. Gee, so the prices are high on food and drink, but why do that? Because if the venue didn't, then nobody would pay the entry fee, but this way they hide the cost and get to claim they cannot help with the vendors.

 

I think "most" would indeed mind. These "groupies" enjoy their hobby because it is a hobby. Heaven forbid the gaming community enforce some sort of standard rules of play.

If you don't put money in the pocket of the people that manufacture your wargaming rules, what incentive (let alone means) do they have to keep making them for you? GW has made 8 editions of Warhammer Fantasy, and five Editions of Warhammer 40K. Their miniatures line has evolved from lumpy little lead men, to fully-customizable plastic kits designed and manufactured with modern technology. Who pays for the R&D for news rules, games, and miniatures if not the profit margin?

Slighting the playerbase as "groupies" isn't really the best way to win over your audience, FYI. :jaw:

 

There are two hobbies involved here. I enjoy both because I like working with my hands and I like working with my mind. Modeling covers one and gaming covers the other. There is no real reason to mix them except that as you point out, GW has an investment they must protect, namely their modeling department.

 

Bah, if they hadn't been stolen while I was overseas, I could post pics. The miniatures then looked pretty close to what they do now, but even I preferred Ral Partha mostly, I did have quite a few Citadel (GW) minis in my boxes. They painted up quite well and weren't any "lumpier" than the rest. Since I was collecting miniatures (for D&D) before Citadel (and GW) opened for business, I'd say you are overstating the change in quality. Your point about the miniatures would have a whole lot more impact if I wasn't looking at an army with a seven year old codex (at least, from the GW FAQ I probably have a never version) that still has no "fully customizable plastic kits" except the ones that are variations on a model line already in production.

 

OH WAIT! I don't have an updated codex for that army, so after spending extra for the lumpy lead figures, it might be in the toilet anyway because I have to rebuild for the new codex!

 

I'm not slighting the playerbase, but then that is because I don't care about "winning" them over. I've just pointed out what the issue is. Now, is the game worth the candle? Are the mandated extra costs worth the enjoyment a player gets out of it?

 

Oh, and thank you for making my point for me.

 

Of course you can't use other game manufacturer's products in a GW tournament. That's akin to bringing your lunch to a restaurant, sitting at a booth, and flatly refusing to order from their menu. If the restaurant allowed you to do this, they'd promptly fill up with brownbaggers who brought their own lunch every day. No income from paying customers means the business shuts down. The building is sold, and they open a postal supply store. The postal supply store won't let you eat your lunch on their floor. You now have nowhere to eat lunch.

 

Only valid if GW has a vested interest in making money off the modeling hobby. If GW wasn't stuck so deeply in there, but was just doing what they originally did (put out rules and articles in their magazine), then the artificial "need" for physical GW purchases to play wouldn't be there.

 

The rules about models are to support the model making portion of GW, not the game writing.

 

Your arguments have nothing to do with the definition of a "collectible" game. Ranting about the inherent costs of official models doesn't make the game "collectible." It makes it a hobby you pay for. No one is telling you you're a bad man for modelling your own Rhinos and paper token Space Marines. Do that all you want. But in order to participate in a sanctioned event, you must abide by the sanctioned rules. In order to support the company that provides you that base rulebook that's constantly revised and updated, you have to provide them a profit, or they go out of business. If they go out of business, no one is there to update that rules loophole, or tweak the game. "I'll houserule it!" you say. You do so, and get along fine with your circle of pals. You all play by the same rule. But then one day you travel across town to a tournament held by some random schmoe and his pals. They houseruled the loophole differently. The differing rules cause a huge dispute over who "won" the tournament. The schmoes award the prize to one of their members, and you demand your entry fee back. They tell you to stick it in your bum, and kick you out. There's no governing body to complain to, so you stick it in your bum and go home frustrated. That makes the game collectible?

 

Don't confuse this with collectible trading card games, I've already mentioned that I'm not referring to that, even though the business models are similar. In one, you have to buy more and more packs of cards to try and find rare ones to enhance your competitiveness and in the other you have to buy more and more models and bits to try to enhance your competitiveness.

 

Yes, I'm familiar with the concept of planned obsolescence. I got it in high school economics decades ago. What you just described is fairly standard IP/software style.

 

Gee, I wonder why I read complaints about "grey area" rules with every edition along with the comment that GW doesn't playtest or (if the venom level is high) even proofread new books coming out. This despite the fact that we have the Internet, email and probably lots of players who would be willing to test (under NDA) new mechanics and proofread rules and codexes before publication. Players could and did do that in the bad old days when all we had was snail mail, it was just that the pool was usually local players instead of global players. Ahhh, it means there will have to be a new version published to "fix" these issues. About every 4.5 years.

 

One of the guys I'm playing with won a number of tournaments using an army using 4th edition rules when he was really into playing. He had his army and tactics worked out in detail. Cool, right? Oh, with 5th edition rules his army isn't so nifty. Not bad, but it needs some adjusting for the "new and improved" battlefield of rules edition and codex changes. <cha-ching> New rules, new codex, new models to be collected.

 

Like it, don't like it, somewhere in the middle? Doesn't matter in the long run, that is a personal choice, but you do realize a whole lot of that activity you cite as justification for profits are expenses that require extra profits be generated by pay to play methods such as the "sanctioned" tournament. Do you want to get into the psychology of paying more to keep your obsolescent investment functional? GW is well aware of it. I am too. Are you?

 

BearersofSalvation nailed this issue pretty hard in the post right below yours.

 

Do Flames of War tournaments allow you to play the game with green-painted matchbox cars or wooden tokens? Do Warmachine tournaments allow the use of green plastic Army men glued to bottlecaps?

Just because you ahve to pay for the product the company produces in order to compete in their sanctioned events, doesn't mean something is "collectible."

 

I don't know about either of those games, so I have no comment on them.

 

As soon as I have to collect something other than rules that must be purchased from officially sanctioned sources that meet officially sanctioned standards, despite being able to create alternates that are fully functional and fit all the justifications of WYSIWYG and "counts as" (in other words, easily and clearly identifiable), then it is collectible.

[Grey Mage]

So, at this point were way off topic, and Im closing this.

 

If anyone wants this topic split off and sent to Amicus, drop me a PM.