PDA

View Full Version : Wysiwyg?



Bretonnian Lord
10-04-2007, 21:17
Hey everyone,

Well, I know that the WYSIWYG rules are a little bit more lax in Fantasy than in 40k, so bear with me. I want to field my Bretonnian Paladin with a magical lance, the Lance of Artois. However, my Paladin is modeled with a battle axe. Would I be allowed to have him use the Lance in battles, even if he is modeled with a battle axe? Or do I have to convert him in order to use the Lance? :(

Thanks in advance for your help!

TheWarSmith
10-04-2007, 21:23
normally WYSIWYG is pretty relaxed, but you should at least represent the basic weapon type that he has(i.e. a lance).

there is a model with a lance available(doesn't look as cool though).

Generally, magic items dont' all have to perfectly represented, as they're not supposed to be known, and if you did model them, i'd have to have tons of different models available.

that being said, if you only owned the one model and wanted to use a lance, i don't think most people would be that much of a jerk to call wysiwyg on you.

Zzarchov
10-04-2007, 21:28
you could throw a lance across his back, it could just be a converted toothpick. use floss for string in a loop so you can field him with it, and have him displayed without it.

Necrothrall
11-04-2007, 01:32
If its a magic item, it really doesn't have to be be wysiswyg (thats really hard to spell when your a wee bit tipsy). I believe it says somewhere in the rule book that the magic weapon in question could be weapon. Your magic lance could be the renamed the "axe of what ever" and still retain the abilities of the magic lance "of whatever" (can't remember if you said what it was).

For example if your guy had the sword of might, but he modle had a great axe I would let you away with it, it could be the "big axe of might" for all I care, providing you told me beforehand. However if it was a non-magical weapon, then it would probably be best if it was represented on the model, eg if your guy was armed with a normal lance, I would insist it was on the model.

VampireOfKhorne
11-04-2007, 13:40
For myself, I wouldn't even worry if it was even a paladin model, so long as it's mounted on the right base and you told me upon deployment what it was I wouldn't even care.

IMO WYSIWYG is a silly rule invented to sell more models and to please those with so much money on their hands that they can afford to spend on 30 different versions of the same guy.

Just field him as he is, if anyone refuses or makes a fuss, then they're not worth playing against.

EvC
11-04-2007, 13:56
It's more invented to simplify things on the battlefield- I don't want to have to remember what everything is if it can't be identified by simply looknig at it. Of course as long as you tell your opponent what it is you'll always be fine; in the case given though, it is 100% legal and goes with the rules, just when you deploy your Paladin, tell your opponent he's a Paladin on a barded warhorse, heavy armour, shield and an axe. That's all they should know.

Aelyn
11-04-2007, 19:07
If its a magic item, it really doesn't have to be be wysiswyg (thats really hard to spell when your a wee bit tipsy). I believe it says somewhere in the rule book that the magic weapon in question could be weapon. Your magic lance could be the renamed the "axe of what ever" and still retain the abilities of the magic lance "of whatever" (can't remember if you said what it was).

For example if your guy had the sword of might, but he modle had a great axe I would let you away with it, it could be the "big axe of might" for all I care, providing you told me beforehand. However if it was a non-magical weapon, then it would probably be best if it was represented on the model, eg if your guy was armed with a normal lance, I would insist it was on the model.
There's something of an expected exception to that - if it mentions in the item's rules that it counts as a lance, I would expect the model to either have a lance modeled on, or for it's player to say "By the way, that's supposed to be a lance on that model, not an axe" - though you need to be very careful not to say it's a mundane lance.

Basically, I'd say that a magic weapon has to be the right weapon type - but since most magic weapons are of the same style as hand weapons, anything that would be acceptable as a hand weapon would be fine for your typical magic weapon. However, Porko's Pigstikka (which counts as a Spear) would need the model to be carrying a spear.

Put bluntly, the magic aspect of a weapon doesn't need to be modeled, and while the actual weapon type does, 90% of the time "Generic Hand Weapon" is fine.

TheWarSmith
11-04-2007, 19:15
That pretty much sums up how i feel about it. Mundane things should be WYSIWYG.

If it's a weapon that does have mundane properties(i.e. spear/bow/lance/great weapon), then I think at least that should be modelled.

Joewrightgm
11-04-2007, 19:19
TheWarSmith +1

TheWarSmith
11-04-2007, 19:27
sweet, I'm a magical weapon/armour?

TAKE THAT!!!

Horus84
11-04-2007, 19:43
I would agree with Warsmith. Though to model it have a look at historical reference to see how real Knights would carry a lance when not in use. I seem to remember that they would have a "gun holster" type attachment on their shadel that a lance would rest in? - as they not exactly light weapons

Nell2ThaIzzay
11-04-2007, 19:44
For myself, I wouldn't even worry if it was even a paladin model, so long as it's mounted on the right base and you told me upon deployment what it was I wouldn't even care.

IMO WYSIWYG is a silly rule invented to sell more models and to please those with so much money on their hands that they can afford to spend on 30 different versions of the same guy.

Just field him as he is, if anyone refuses or makes a fuss, then they're not worth playing against.

quoted FTW!

[dice0]

Nell2ThaIzzay
11-04-2007, 19:46
That pretty much sums up how i feel about it. Mundane things should be WYSIWYG.

If it's a weapon that does have mundane properties(i.e. spear/bow/lance/great weapon), then I think at least that should be modelled.

So if I've modelled my Chaos Warriors with 2 hand weapons, then I can never field them with a hand weapon & shield unless I spend more time and money on more models?

I call b.s.

Bretonnian Lord
11-04-2007, 20:05
Thanks for all of the replies, guys :)

So we are in agreement, as long as I tell my opponent before hand my Paladin has a magical lance, I don't have to convert his axe into a lance?

TheWarSmith
11-04-2007, 20:34
So if I've modelled my Chaos Warriors with 2 hand weapons, then I can never field them with a hand weapon & shield unless I spend more time and money on more models?

I call b.s.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I modeled mine with 2 hand weapons and put shields on their backs, so I can run either 2 hand weapons or hand weapon/shield.

I have another unit with great/double weapons with shields on their backs, so they can have great weapons, 2 hand weapons, and/or shields.

I call getting way too steamed at a poster online.

devolutionary
11-04-2007, 20:39
Between the Counts As rules, Magical Item rules, and WYSIWYG rules, I think you can justify carrying a hamster and have it count as a magical lance blessed by Khrone and once used as a toothpick by Lord Kroak, age 23, after a good curry.

While personally I feel as WarSmith does, as long as you make it explicitly clear that it counts as the lance due to [insert fully justified reasoning here] then go nuts.

Marcel
11-04-2007, 21:37
i wouldnt stop you from using the item. this is because i wouldnt convert a character model just to represent one "set" of magic items. what if you use the lance of magic whatever, and it sucks? then your stuck with a converted model.

EvC
11-04-2007, 22:07
I would agree with Warsmith. Though to model it have a look at historical reference to see how real Knights would carry a lance when not in use. I seem to remember that they would have a "gun holster" type attachment on their shadel that a lance would rest in? - as they not exactly light weapons

If you ever had Lego castle stuff which came with mounted knights, that's the kind of thing I guess they would have on the saddle areas...

Häxjägare
11-04-2007, 22:49
Tricky question.

But since their are items in WHFB that allows you to force the player to reveal all magic items in a unit or a character I wouldn't even bother making the lance. The magic items are generelly supposed to be secret untill you bust them out on your oppontent, where in 40k you are supposed to see what the character is packing.

oop
11-04-2007, 22:58
If I were to play against you I wouldn't worry about your hero not having sculpted the lance, i know myself that you can't have a model for everything. BUT I think you should tell me "hey, this guy is wielding a lance, i just don't have the model"
So I could start thinking about magic lances. And even be mistaken.

Just my Point

Marcel
11-04-2007, 23:09
this is why i usually convert characters from plastic regiments. its alot easier than changing a metal figurine.

Wintersdark
12-04-2007, 01:11
For me, it's always been slightly different between regiments and characters.

For a character, I don't care at all how he's armed. He's a character, so I make assumtions as to what I think he'll have, and I nearly always assume a magical weapon until demonstrated otherwise. Personally, I change my characters gear around ALL THE TIME becuase I pretty much never play with the same army list twice, so that's the way it's got to be.

Besides, the "Counts As" rule allows any magic weapon to look like anything at all; EVEN IF it functions as a mundane weapon as well. Your example in particular is good for this. It grants +2 Strength on the charge, like a lance, but it still doesn't have to actually look like one at all. Counts as is a great rule that way :)

So, I don't ask what a character is equipped with, I don't rely on the model, I make assumtions. Bret character on a warhorse? I bet he's got either a lance, or a magic weapon.

Regiments, I'm a little more finicky with. I really prefer they be equipped as show; if they're not (and that's ok!) I absolutely expect to be told so during deployment.

Nell2ThaIzzay
12-04-2007, 09:38
No, that's not what I'm saying. I modeled mine with 2 hand weapons and put shields on their backs, so I can run either 2 hand weapons or hand weapon/shield.

I have another unit with great/double weapons with shields on their backs, so they can have great weapons, 2 hand weapons, and/or shields.

I call getting way too steamed at a poster online.

I'm not steamed, I'm just responding to what I interpreted to be something I highly disagree with.