WYZIWIG question and your thoughts

[thecactusman17]

This is a question about WYSIWIG -- not scratchbuilding, not proxies, but wysiwyg on models.

the question came up as I'm preparing for a Rogue Trader tournament, and while my primary question has largely been answered by the event organizer (thankfully in my favor), it is an interesting question because it comes on models with "of course!" upgrade options.

My specific question was in regards to the Harlequin's Kiss -- rarely is a weapon so ubiquitous as the signature weapon of the Harlequins. However, the weapon is unusually rare in terms of actual models, from across the long range of Harlies models. Of probably some 30-40 different models since the rogue trader era, there are perhaps 6 different Harlequins Kiss models, only two of which are currently found in the Harlequins model range. I am fortunate to have most, if not all, of the models in question. But that is still perhaps only half of the models that I will be fielding. For the record, this tournament organizer has stated that all of my classic range models, at least, can be counted.

Another good example might be Frag Grenades on Marines, in editions where they are not a default piece of wargear.

When you come to these sorts of issues, what is your perspective on running them or allowing them. In a tournament situation, would YOU allow a player with models that were not all WYSIWIG to wargear and minor weapons to count them? Remember, this is in a tournament setting.

[boo_barr]

At the lower levels of a tournament, if I have the opponents army list then I don't really mind for things that an entire unit will have. One-offs or cases where you have just a few in the unit need to be modelled, otherwise the controlling player could always just elect whichever model is most convenient, on a per-turn basis.

For your case, it was silly for the opponent to complain. Same goes for modelling grenades on earlier marines. Anything that's default equipment doesn't need to be modelled, and anything that's ubiquitous across a unit is usually acceptable to many tournament players.

[Mike Dunford]

If an item is standard equipment that a model must have - like grenades for marines in the current codex - I wouldn't care about WYSIWYG. There's no option for the model not to have the equipment, so who cares.

If an item is a purchased extra, but it's been purchased for every applicable model in the army, I probably wouldn't care about WYSIWYG. I'll have to remember that the option exists, but won't have to worry about which models have the option, because they all do.

If an item is a purchased extra that's been purchased for some units but not others, I wouldn't care if the item doesn't appear on every model in the appropriate units, but I might complain if it's not represented on at least one or two models - there, we're starting to get into the point where keeping track gets harder. (Ork stikkbomms are an example of this.)

If the item is purchased on a model-by-model basis, and has not been purchased for every model in the unit, I will get very unhappy and complain if they are not WYSIWYG. This is particularly true for things where base contact is important, or the range is very different from the rest of the unit's weapons. (For example, if a unit of grots has one grotherd with a grot-prod and one with a grabba stikk, I will complain if both are modeled identically.)

[Schnitzel]

I find WYSIWYG particularly annoying, especially because of the hard core followers out there. I'm not going to sit down and model grenades on each of my Chaos Space Marines. And I'm certainly not going to spend hours chopping up close combat weapons or slinging bolters on them for them to be completely WYSIWYG. If its included in the units profile in their codex its not a big deal IMHO. Its the upgrades and such that really need to be WYSIWYG.

The purists out there who demand ever single frak grenade out there are lame. Any one who tells me my grenades don't count because they can't see them, I don't want to play with anyways.

[krispy]

i agree that the default equip should not need to be shown on a model, but i have 2 questions about WYSIWIG

1: if a model has a pistol in a holster then can you then claim it is a plasma pistol for the sake of it being in a holster?

2: on older models i have there are some marines with "combi weapons" - could i use these as bolter/melta combos or bolter plasma/combos depending on my army build? i mean they are gw minatures with combi weapons ist just that they look nothing like the now standard bolter melta combo weapons / bolter plasma weapons.
/krispy

[Schnitzel]

1: if a model has a pistol in a holster then can you then claim it is a plasma pistol for the sake of it being in a holster?

I don't see why not. Makes sense if you have a Sgt with a chainsword and pointy-hand or something.
You should probably clear it up with your opponenant first. Any reasonable person should be cool, but sometimes we don't always get that do we.

[Mike Dunford]

i agree that the default equip should not need to be shown on a model, but i have 2 questions about WYSIWIG

1: if a model has a pistol in a holster then can you then claim it is a plasma pistol for the sake of it being in a holster?

Almost certainly.

I say almost because I can conceive of at least one set of circumstances where I might complain - let's say that the PP's are in a unit like assault marines, where everyone can't have PPs, but more than one model can. In a case like that, I think it's fairest if there's some way for the opponent to distinguish the models with PP from those without. So if all the models had identical-looking holstered pistols, but some are plas and some are not, I might complain.

2: on older models i have there are some marines with "combi weapons" - could i use these as bolter/melta combos or bolter plasma/combos depending on my army build? i mean they are gw minatures with combi weapons ist just that they look nothing like the now standard bolter melta combo weapons / bolter plasma weapons.

In a friendly game, I'd never have a problem with that. In a tournament, it would depend on the exact army build and minis used. If it's clear who is who, I'm totally cool with it. But if identical-appearing weapons are being used as combi-plas in one unit and combi-melta in another, I might not be.

That's how I'd look at it as an opposing player. In both those cases, however, a strict reading of the rules might say that both your examples are legal - it's a pistol, it's in a holster, it's on the model, it's WYSIWYG; it's a GW-built combi-weapon, it's WYSIWYG. I might object to the official in a tourney, but I could easily be overruled. "Legal", after all, isn't always the same as "right".

[Culven]

My opinion on WYSIWYG (for other players) is that standard equipment doesn't need to be completely WYSIWYG. Unit-wide options should be represented in some way on a few models at least. Model-specific options should be modeled so that the model can be easily identified.

As to the "Plasma Pistol in a holster", I prefer to not do so on my models (see below), but if my opponent does so on an easily distinguished model, I probably won't have a problem with it. However, this could become a problem if such proxying is done throughout the army and I am expected to remember an extensive list of such items.

For myself, I try to model all of the options in some way so that I can keep track of which units/model have what. Otherwise I will forget at some point.

[Aldramelech]

I do use holsters in my army for plas pistols. Not all just some. Melta bombs are the biggest pain, If my guys have them then they are on the model and as my guys are IG and dont come with them this causes me no end of problems scrounging them. I wish that GW would provide for all options in the Plastic sets.

[TSINI]

1: if a model has a pistol in a holster then can you then claim it is a plasma pistol for the sake of it being in a holster?
/krispy

i agree with what has been said above. most people won't have a problem as long as its easiliy distinguishable. for example i have both the forgeworld DKOK commissars, they both have power swords and holstered pistols. now in some games i need to scrimp on points and so would count them as las-pistols, but in more extravagant games - plasma pistols. as long as its easy to point out that character at the beginning and say "he has a plasma pistol" and later in the game when removing casualties for example, the other player can identify which characters had plasma, then its all good.

2: on older models i have there are some marines with "combi weapons" - could i use these as bolter/melta combos or bolter plasma/combos depending on my army build? i mean they are gw minatures with combi weapons ist just that they look nothing like the now standard bolter melta combo weapons / bolter plasma weapons.
/krispy

as long as its a plasma combi, it can be a bolter/plasma weapon. no one should have a problem with that at all.

I think consistency is the key when it comes to wysiwyg