Using conversions and different models with different rules

[General Strike]

So, it's hard to create a concise topic title for this, but I have been looking around recently at a few different posts, articles on WHC, and been thinking on conversions in my own head. How do you guys feel about playing against total army conversions, essentially. I saw a very cool article on WHC where a guy liked freeboota Orks and completely converted models to represent space wolves untils of freeboota Orks. Things like big tough orks with hammers and shields riding on ork beasts to be used as Thunderwolf cavalry, and a big Orky imperial knight. I have also seen some people talking about using Space Wolves rules for Black Templars. I've been thinking about some conversions, and doing something similiar with pumped up chaos warriors and Abaddon using Custodes rules.

 

Even something like running tau auxillary as Tau or Imperial Guard.

 

Whether you agree with our choices in representing or not, how do you feel about this in general. Would you play against an army like this if it was clear what was what? If I completely convert models and each unit of the same type is converted in the same way, etc?

[Quixus]

Those are awesome Ideas. While I like the look of orks I don't quite like how they play. Black Templar marines played as space Wolves is stretching it IMHO, using a DIY chapter with different codices from time to time, I have thought about it as well.

 

I wouldn't mind playing against such an army as long as the proxying is consistent and I get a proper rundown before the game.

[Ciler]

I would have no problem with that. As a casual player, I am not overly familiar with the profiles and model ranges other than those of the armies I actually play. Consequently,  I would effectively be unable to identify certain units/weapons (typically, the variety of T'au rifles, or some dark eldar vehicles) by sight and would have to rely on my opponent to tell me what they are and do anyway.

 

On that basis, the big ork on the space boar with a blunt-shaped weapons would certainly work as a space wolf on thunderwolf. As long - of course as has been said by Quixus - as the proxying is consistent.

[Kinstryfe]

Consistency is the key with this kind of thing. Everything should make sense within the context of the army you're playing as. I have a smallish full army of an elite Slaaneshi traitor guard regiment that runs with Sisters of Battle rules. Everything in it is 100% converted, but it's also 100% wysiwyg. Everything has the weapon it's supposed to, so Bolters are Bolters, etc, so you should have no more difficulty figuring out what everything is than on normal Sisters models. If everything is easy to figure out what it is, then I'm good with it. Running X space marine chapter as Y, I'm totally fine with in most instances. Sometimes it's a little weird, but keeping it wysiwyg makes it easy enough that Templars as Space Wolves shouldn't really throw anyone for a loop. Half the games I play, the other army is still mostly grey plastic. Why penalize a player for having a fully painted army that got so so rules?

 

Keep the sizing right, the equipment right, and keep things consistent, and I wouldn't have any complaints.

[Grotsmasha]

WYSIWYG is massively important for a full counts-as army, equally important is being really upfront about which is counting as what with your opponent pre game. I had a friend who did this in 4th Ed. and he created a little laminated, zip-tied, flip chart of with pics of each unit and what they were counting as to give to his opponent during the game.

 

Cheers,

Jono

[General Strike]

The laminated flip chart is a awesome idea. My current idea is to create some chaos supped Everchosen type warriors or maybe thunder warriors using Custodes or primaris rules. The guardian spears two parts will just be two different weapons, a bolter and a sword or claw.

[MARK0SIAN]

Something like Templars using Space wolf rules I wouldn’t have any problems with as they’re still just marines and their weapons are basically the same so the wysiwyg element is really easy.

 

For much more in depth conversions it would depend on the models I think, how wysiwyg they were. One thing I would say is that personally, I would stipulate that a weapon cannot count for two different weapons. So guardian spears either all count as swords or all count as claws, not some spears are claws and some spears are swords.

 

The only other thing I would insist on (it’s very obvious and I’m sure you would anyway) is that my opponent still followed the rules on allies. So I wouldn’t play against someone who is using tau and then has converted a unit of khorne berserkers to be their auxiliaries and intends to run them using the berserkers rules.

[DBadger]

If I was to do a counts-as army I'd take photos and create a codex. Then I'd throw the existing codex I was using out the window (figuratively) and just use the new codex I'd made. So it would have all the units in the old codex, but with my new photos next to them. That way if my enemy needed to know something I could easily point it out and reference it. None of the rules or values would change.

 

But I wouldn't expect that to fly in most games, only in games with very familiar friends.