Running new beakies from HH as intercessors in 40k?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

It was a league game and proxies were allowed. Yeah the dude was a real jerk that’s for sure but if proxies hadn’t been allowed it would has never been an issue.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I find it hard to believe that not allowing proxying would make that kid suddenly become fun to play against or would have prevented an issue he would have found a different way to push the rules. WAAC players are just wired different, and I think that league wouldn't have allowed proxies if that player was the only one with them. Typically, those guys don't last long in leagues and get a bad reputation quickly not have rules bent for them.  

 

In the OPs example I can't really think of advantage those models would have over intercessors. They have base gun that is unique because of bayonet and isn't supported in the rules so should be easy to follow. If that changes than I would probably not want to deal with it but I don't see the harm in it.

 

Granted I like kit bashes and I would leave the hobby if they weren't allowed. At the end day a lot of my models have bits from other kits, and you could make an argument that they're proxies because of it. So, this is a hill I'll die on hobby wise. 

[WrathOfTheLion]

I can reasonably understand full dismissal of proxies as a concept, even if I disagree. But at the end of the day, MK X armor is just another mark of power armor to me. I really don't care if someone represents intercessors as MK VI, or even any other mark, I just personally prefer that the weapon loadout is correct.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I find it hard to believe that not allowing proxying would make that kid suddenly become fun to play against or would have prevented an issue he would have found a different way to push the rules. WAAC players are just wired different, and I think that league wouldn't have allowed proxies if that player was the only one with them. Typically, those guys don't last long in leagues and get a bad reputation quickly not have rules bent for them.  

 

In the OPs example I can't really think of advantage those models would have over intercessors. They have base gun that is unique because of bayonet and isn't supported in the rules so should be easy to follow. If that changes than I would probably not want to deal with it but I don't see the harm in it.

 

Granted I like kit bashes and I would leave the hobby if they weren't allowed. At the end day a lot of my models have bits from other kits, and you could make an argument that they're proxies because of it. So, this is a hill I'll die on hobby wise.

 

You are talking out of your hat now and making many incorrrct assumptions.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

No, I'm not taking out of my hat.

 

Your argument is a that scout model with an extreme arm angle proxied as a devastator sergeant was used to abuse the rules, and what I'm saying is a devastator Sargeant with a vanguard vet upraised arm with a bolter/chainsword on it is going to able push that further. Even if this was editions ago which I suspect cause scouts haven't had an upraised arm with a chain sword for quite a while, there still would have been plenty of options better than that scout. GW used to love those models with swords pointing at sky it was the old tactical rock, heck the old blood claw sergeant had a powerfist going straight up like he was trying to ask a question in class lol.

 

That means that your experience would've been just as bad with kit bash, or a different marine sergeant in power armor. So, if that one experience is why proxying shouldn't be allowed than kit bashing has to go. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Like I said you’ve made quite a few incorrect assumptions.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Like I said you’ve made quite a few incorrect assumptions.

 

I will confess I made a lot of assumptions.

 

Tyberos never said nor implied proxies constitute cheating but they are in poor form in my opinion and I loathe to have to play against them. I’ll never forget a game versus a WAAC gamer trying to draw line of sight from a raised chainsword on a scout sergeant proxied as a Dev sergeant.

 

How did the Scout Sergeant provide him with any advantage in drawing LoS? They are smaller than dev sergeants, and both kits come with chainswords with similar angles. Please explain.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

He put TEH model on top of a big piece of terrAin so he could see over it only due to the upraised sword. The model was out of coherency with the rest of his squad so he cried about wobbly model syndrome. This is a peep that had his thumbs broken for rolling rigged dice.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

That sounds really frustrating, and he sounds like an idiot. That said I think he would've pulled the same stunt without proxies. Guys like that just need the win so bad that they aren't rational about it they change the rules to fit their narrative. It's why I love that there aren't templates anymore lol.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

He was an absolute horrid experience and you always knew that so game on my friend. Now I’m not totally against proxies but only for truly kick @ss counts as and very close to what it represents. I ended quitting that league and never looked back I’m glad to say.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Black Blow Fly

[phandaal]

I ended quitting that league and never looked back I’m glad to say.

 

Best option sometimes. Life is too short to waste free time on people like that.

[Bryan Blaire]

Can someone quote the WYSIWYG rule out of the 9th Edition rule book?  I’m having trouble finding which page it is on.

 

I did find a comment in the Matched Play section on Page 14, that isn’t a rule, but has good bearing on things, IMO: “That said, it is still the responsibility of all players to ensure that everything that happens is sportsmanlike and ‘in the spirit of the game’.”  This pretty much removes the “at all costs” part of a player’s focus, IMO, because you can’t sacrifice sportsmanship according to the game’s stated responsibility to both parties.

 

Honestly, you could probably play this game with rocks, in the dirt, if you and your opponent really wanted to.  As soon as you start violating the GW aforementioned statement of responsibility, that’s usually when things fall apart.

 

You can proxy with some fairly simple stipulations (such as stating “LOS can only be established from the neck down with these models” or “only from the core body” or “only across bases”, etc.), but if either party are specifically not wanting to abide by good sportsmanlike conduct and try and play fairly as well, then there are going to be issues whether proxies are involved or not.

 

The proxy thing would probably break people’s minds if they tried to play Battletech, where you can play the game with literal bottle caps marked with permanent markers.  You could conceivably do that with 40K as well, but there are so many people that would probably dismiss it out of hand.  It’s a difference in the types of communities and expectations within them though.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Yeah the battletech starter products even come with paper cutouts you can use. I do think that scence benefits from being more campaign focused than tournament focused.

[Bryan Blaire]

Yeah the battletech starter products even come with paper cutouts you can use. I do think that scence benefits from being more campaign focused than tournament focused.

Again, that’s a player expectation, not a game thing - I’ve played way more campaigns with 40K than I ever have with Battletech and I’ve played B’Tech for at least two years longer than 40K.  Conversely, the single B’Tech tournament I was involved in was a lot more fair overall than any 40K tourney I’ve watched or run because of the rules set.

 

Players are turning 40K more and more tournament focused - the game doesn’t have to be - but it definitely benefits GW, because they sell more models when they constantly tweak the rules to have a “new hotness” for competitive focused players.  You could develop local rules for fair proxying in 40K, but I’m guessing it will fall fairly flat because there would be outcries from players that it’s not an “official GW product.”  The “must be official” stance that so many people take is more damaging to the game than anything (to the point where people will actually make up rules and claim them to be official due to interpretations, even though the official rules don’t mention anything about them).

 

The “Beakies as Intercessors” question shouldn’t even be an issue - it’s incredibly easy to have an opponent hand you a copy of their army list with notes on it for which squad with which markings is the Intercessor one, versus this other one with different markings that is the standard Tactical squad.  Then you agree on a ruling to put a pauldron on the “Intercessor head” or something like that to determine LOS stuff to adjust for height differences, and use the cylinder of the base as your guide.  That really shouldn’t be earth shattering for anyone, and easily accommodates the proxying party (who would probably agree to you proxying things as well, since you are extending the courtesy to them).

[Blindhamster]

Equally, people shouldn’t be expected to be okay wi try proxying if they aren’t.

 

My groups have always been okay with it within the bounds of testing our a unit or option, but never as a blanket thing for an entire army.

 

A lot of people get their enjoyment from seeing “proper” armies across from them.

 

That said, I think a lot more people are okay with proxying than they realise, heavy conversations are essentially proxies afterall after a certain point. For example if I did an eldar army, I’d make it a pirate army and convert Corsairs to fit the load outs of the various aspects etc

[Bryan Blaire]

Equally, people shouldn’t be expected to be okay wi try proxying if they aren’t.

 

I’d have to be convinced that it’s against an actual written rule to agree with that…

 

Someone could muster their models of colored acrylic cylinders and shoe boxes that are the correct base/hull sizes and heights of corresponding GW official models, and as long as they had designators for weapons, the game should play exactly the same way.  About the only thing someone could get upset about is that the person didn’t spend money on official models (in which case, they aren’t upset about the game, they probably feel bad about how much money they have paid to GW).

 

Again, it’s incumbent upon the players to ensure the game is fair and sportsmanlike.  If the person proxying is being above board and ensuring that they are being fair, playing by the spirit of the game, and specifically not trying to negatively impact the game, then if someone else just doesn’t want to play because the person isn’t using “official minis”, then I would contend that it is the person that doesn’t want to play that is the negative party toward the game.

 

If anyone cares more about the visuals matching their own mental view, then everyone can put their collections on the shelf and stare longingly at them - the game doesn’t equate to the visuals, and the imagination is an incredible thing.  The models are very fancy counters, and that’s all they are.

[Blindhamster]

No, you don’t need a written rule, much like people can want to proxy, people are allowed to not want to play against proxy. It really is as simple as that. There’s no rule that says I can’t break each of your models as they die because I think that’s cool. Doesn’t mean you’d want me to do it.

 

A purely rules consideration would be true line of sight, honestly I personally wouldn’t care over much if someone used beakies as intercessors so long as it’s clear and they aren’t also being used for barebones tactical or anything like that. Ideally to me I’d prefer weapons be differentiated so if they all have stock guns, they all should use one of the bolt rifle variants. I also don’t care if someone takes the time to 3d print their models or use non gw ones so long as they are the right proportions and they bothered to put some effort in. But the last bit is purely personal preference and a non issue as I only play with friends, can’t remember the last time I did a pickup game. But imo pickup games even more so really need to be as abundantly clear as possible as you have less common ground with a stranger

Edited April 22, 2022 by Blindhamster

[Orange Knight]

The main initial attraction of 40k is the models and their lore. The game, in it's purest form, serves as an interactive diorama between the armies of two invested hobbyists.

 

From this perfectly valid point of view - which fundamentally served to create an environment that fosters immersion and rewards the participants for their hobby efforts - accepting a proxy would be counter-productive.

 

A proxy is often used to create an advantage for the player using it, and not the other way around, which is a stance that should never be encouraged. To put it simply you want to use the rules of a different model or weapon because it has better rules. We all know the cake metaphor.

 

Separate to this, as I mentioned prior, are conversions. These vary in quality - some are labours of love and extremely effective, others are lazy and can be more offensive than a straight proxy. These should be reviewed on a case by case basis.

 

Now, it would appear that some people don't seem to care about the models or the experience they ultimately foster. Whilst this is a valid viewpoint, it's not one I share, and I would disengage from the prospect of a game against an individual if the game would not be satisfactory to me.

 

We should be looking to create an experience that makes all participants happy.

[Bryan Blaire]

No, you don’t need a written rule, much like people can want to proxy, people are allowed to not want to play against proxy. It really is as simple as that. There’s no rule that says I can’t break each of your models as they die because I think that’s cool. Doesn’t mean you’d want me to do it.

 

A purely rules consideration would be true line of sight, honestly I personally wouldn’t care over much if someone used beakies as intercessors so long as it’s clear and they aren’t also being used for barebones tactical or anything like that. Ideally to me I’d prefer weapons be differentiated so if they all have stock guns, they all should use one of the bolt rifle variants. I also don’t care if someone takes the time to 3d print their models or use non gw ones so long as they are the right proportions and they bothered to put some effort in. But the last bit is purely personal preference and a non issue as I only play with friends, can’t remember the last time I did a pickup game. But imo pickup games even more so really need to be as abundantly clear as possible as you have less common ground with a stranger

There is a written rule actually that you can’t break someone else’s models - they can have you arrested for property damage.    So far as I’m aware, there’s no law against proxying, so that’s a really bad example to use.

 

For the game though, there actually do need to be written rules - assumptions and lack of clarity must be discussed by the participants of the game.  I’m actually somewhat shocked there isn’t a rule in the rule book about specifically using GW models to play the game given GW’s stances, I’m guessing it’s because they assume no one will really be playing the game without the GW models, since GW has pushed them so much anyway and so many people express an “official or nothing” mindset about the models.

 

Of course people can always refuse games (I know I do), but that in itself is a negative for the game because you aren’t playing it.

 

I completely agree that pick up games need to be as abundantly clear as possible - that’s why any proxying must be discussed in a sportsmanlike fashion to ensure the game is played fairly for both parties (as I have repeatedly stated).  If the proxying is used negatively, then the player has already violated the responsibility that has been discussed.

 

…A proxy is often used to create an advantage for the player using it, and not the other way around, which is a stance that should never be encouraged. To put it simply you want to use the rules of a different model or weapon because it has better rules. We all know the cake metaphor.

…

We should be looking to create an experience that makes all participants happy.

That’s an absolutely anecdotal assertion.  I’d love to see global data that backed that up from all game types, but it isn’t going to happen - my guess is there’s as many proxies that have nothing to do with advantage as there are people trying to gain an advantage with it (I haven’t personally had much in the way of negative interaction with proxies, and I played against a Biovore in place of the Nightbringer once upon a time - that guy was more than generous in the game toward me).  Someone using a 3rd party melta weapon for melta guns and using the GW produced melta guns as plasma guns is hardly “proxying for advantage”, and if all their plasma guns proxy as lascannons, who cares as long as they are up front about it, and do things like remind you and give you a copy of their list?

 

From what I’ve seen, folks that build up negative feelings about proxying typically have held a negative view of it anyway (built from an initial negative encounter with it, from what I’ve seen of folks’ stories) and so continue to build that narrative in their own head even if they encounter positive stories about it.

 

Considering that the “experience” is only for the two people playing the game, then the only folks concerned are them.  We all have zero game interaction here for the most part.  So the idea that your negative experience about proxies being relevant in the situation is a non-issue for anyone else that isn’t playing you.  If proxies make others happy, they should be fully encouraged by your standard, you shouldn’t be spouting off about how negative they are.

 

At this point, I’m just going to agree to disagree on all of this and see my way out.  Marshall Mittens, make sure you check with whoever you might be playing against to make sure they are good with you using the HH beakies as Intercessors and be really clear and courteous with them, be a good sport as an opponent and gracious about your proxying, and I hope that it works out for you.

 

Sounds to me like there’s a lot more here about wanting other people to have the “official stuff - I bought it, why can’t you” than anything.

[GenerationTerrorist]

I'd probably run them as Veteran Intercessors, but not regular ones.

[phandaal]

 

A proxy is often used to create an advantage for the player using it, and not the other way around, which is a stance that should never be encouraged. To put it simply you want to use the rules of a different model or weapon because it has better rules. We all know the cake metaphor.

 

In the topic of this thread, the question is in regards to a specific model swap. OP has said they own a ton of intercessors already and would maybe like to throw in some upscaled beakies under the same rules.

 

Is it done in order to use more powerful rules? Technically, sure, because Intercessors are a little better than Tactical Marines.

 

But in terms of things that boost the power of your army, running a unit of Intercessors instead of a unit of Tactical Marines is so far down the list that it should be embarrassing to even bring it up as a point of contention.

 

The expectation is that someone who will nitpick that hard over such a minor thing will probably nitpick even worse over other things during the course of any game. As you say, it is best for both parties to simply disengage if it is that much of an issue.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

 

Yeah the battletech starter products even come with paper cutouts you can use. I do think that scence benefits from being more campaign focused than tournament focused.

Again, that’s a player expectation, not a game thing - I’ve played way more campaigns with 40K than I ever have with Battletech and I’ve played B’Tech for at least two years longer than 40K.  Conversely, the single B’Tech tournament I was involved in was a lot more fair overall than any 40K tourney I’ve watched or run because of the rules set.

 

Players are turning 40K more and more tournament focused - the game doesn’t have to be - but it definitely benefits GW, because they sell more models when they constantly tweak the rules to have a “new hotness” for competitive focused players.  You could develop local rules for fair proxying in 40K, but I’m guessing it will fall fairly flat because there would be outcries from players that it’s not an “official GW product.”  The “must be official” stance that so many people take is more damaging to the game than anything (to the point where people will actually make up rules and claim them to be official due to interpretations, even though the official rules don’t mention anything about them).

 

The “Beakies as Intercessors” question shouldn’t even be an issue - it’s incredibly easy to have an opponent hand you a copy of their army list with notes on it for which squad with which markings is the Intercessor one, versus this other one with different markings that is the standard Tactical squad.  Then you agree on a ruling to put a pauldron on the “Intercessor head” or something like that to determine LOS stuff to adjust for height differences, and use the cylinder of the base as your guide.  That really shouldn’t be earth shattering for anyone, and easily accommodates the proxying party (who would probably agree to you proxying things as well, since you are extending the courtesy to them).

 

 

That's a fair point. With battletech I'm basing it more on the type of source books catalyst sells because I don't really have a big play group at the moment though the LGS is selling quite a bit of it so that may change. So that point is completely valid. Honestly pretty stoked about the new alpha strike boxset atm.

 

That said GW definitely is putting a ton of emphasis on the tournaments. They have metawatch articles, they're putting out chapter approved twice a year, they are running a series of tournaments and crowning champions. They have a substantial stake in 40k being a tournament game now. Which isn't necessarily the end of the world but its bit more than just the players expectations.

 

Totally agree with your other points. Honestly, I wouldn't even care about the height difference I'm not willing to chase the dragon as far as being competitive. I just try to know what to expect, so I can handle broken stuff with some grace.  

[Lemondish]

I'm going to join the choir here and say anybody with an issue with it isn't likely to give you a fun match. Like, if they draw the line on visual purity that's really saying something...

 

It's likely that they expect you're doing it in bad faith, and starting from a position where your opponent already thinks you're trying to get one by them before models are even placed and dice are even tossed isn't somebody looking for the same thing you are - a good match.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Lemondish

[Orange Knight]

I'm going to join the choir here and say anybody with an issue with it isn't likely to give you a fun match. Like, if they draw the line on visual purity that's really saying something...

 

It's likely that they expect you're doing it in bad faith, and starting from a position where your opponent already thinks you're trying to get one by them before models are even placed and dice are even tossed isn't somebody looking for the same thing you are - a good match.

I disagree strongly with this attitude. Your assumption that someone who disagrees with proxies is immediately going to be difficult to play with is the most flawed and blinkered argument that is repeated in this topic, and honestly we all deserve better than that.

 

Expecting someone who is willingly giving up hours of their time to be happy about a discrepancy such as proxies is wrong.

 

Some people are fine with them, others are not. You must accept that a player who doesn't appreciate proxies is completely justified in their opinion, and that it's perfectly fair.

[WrathOfTheLion]

 

I'm going to join the choir here and say anybody with an issue with it isn't likely to give you a fun match. Like, if they draw the line on visual purity that's really saying something...

 

It's likely that they expect you're doing it in bad faith, and starting from a position where your opponent already thinks you're trying to get one by them before models are even placed and dice are even tossed isn't somebody looking for the same thing you are - a good match.

I disagree strongly with this attitude. Your assumption that someone who disagrees with proxies is immediately going to be difficult to play with is the most flawed and blinkered argument that is repeated in this topic, and honestly we all deserve better than that.

 

Expecting someone who is willingly giving up hours of their time to be happy about a discrepancy such as proxies is wrong.

 

Some people are fine with them, others are not. You must accept that a player who doesn't appreciate proxies is completely justified in their opinion, and that it's perfectly fair.

 

I don't think that's entirely true, but I then expect that any one of them playing whatever successor chapter with whatever rules they like at a given time is wholly hypocritical.