Sunday, 20 May 2012

Modelling to a Disadvantage?

Converted Storm Raven
So, last time I spoke about 'Modelling for an Advantage', the logical (and always planned) continuation of this is the flip side of the coin. Now modelling for a disadvantage might sound totally nonsensical to you and I believe that to be a good and honest viewpoint.


It does however occur but not in the way it sounds at first.



The key to this discussion again revolves around two factors:-
A) Conversions, more commonly scratch-built or highly personal models representing unreleased models that are then later released.
B) The disadvantage is unintended by the modeller, but enforced by opponents and other players.

How does this work?
Well the most common example I have seen with this is hull-built weaponry on vehicles which on the 'official model' end up being positioned on a turret, which is the case for one of my friends Storm Raven's in his Blood Angel army (See Picture above).
With the codex having no note on weapon positions or firing arcs like older edition codexes and no picture being included my friend & I were forced to guess with our conversion (pre-official release) and position weapons where he felt they would work best, which in this case was wing-mounted and forward facing.
Since the official release, we all know that one of the weapon selections is hull-mounted and fixed while the other has a 360 degree arc on its turret, yet more than once my friend has been punished for using his conversion by opponents declaring both weapons to have a fixed 45 degree forward firing arc due to their placement.

Is this fair? I think not.

Should people with such models be expected to re-convert their models to bring them more into line with the official examples, risking ruining their designs, paintwork and model? I also think not.

Conversions add a lot of fun to the game, but should not be punished as long as they are done out of love of the modelling aspect of the game or artistic design and not out of desire for an advantage over others.

As a House Rule, I allow him to use the arcs and equivalent weapon positions from the official model on his conversion, rather than the actual position on the model itself (which represent WYSIWYG armaments) on the agreement, of course, that he always uses such arcs and positions and doesn't swap between during a game.

What thoughts to others have and what solution/decision would you devise?

Last note, laugh all you will that my 'I'm back' post was (after a period of regular weeks) followed by another period of silence. However good 40k is, there is always stuff getting in the way and I'm currently not actually playing. I took a break from all the fuss of organising games and getting pressured into bigger and bigger Apocalypse battles to relax, going over armies and hopefully paint some things properly! Still, I am disappointed in myself that Igota4 isn't as regular as I'd prefer but what is a girl to do?

5 comments:

  1. I agree with you in theory, however a direct reading of the rules doesnt support you. Its one of those huge risks that we take when we convert models before they come out.

    For Friendly games though, if your opponent doesnt like how you want to play it, pack it up, it is a friendly game after all and your opponent is being unreasonable.

    Tournament wise, if a model has a distinct advantage, it needs to be dealt with. A person that has a model that works against them, is just a tough one. Its down to either a redesign or reworking of the model in question if it is to be used in a tournament scenario.

    My suggestion though is to make sure you discuss it before games, or if in a tournament scenario, discuss it with the Tournament Organizer.

    Conversions are a ton of fun, and very cool to see. There are just inherent risks with doing them before a model is released. Especially when there is no picture to scale off of.
    Otherwise you are in for arguements, and that just ruins the fun of the game.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Conversions are pretty cool and bring a unique part to the army. They really do add some character.

    Conversions can have there problems, it all depends who you play against. Someone say might add wheels to a Deffkopta and someone will claim the missiles are too far forward. Or you make a Tervigon from a Carnifex, which is waaaay too small. There's the other side what you're talking about in your post, modeling something on a rock base will make it higher and harder to get cover in some situations. Or gun placement as you said.

    Conversions are cool, but a real hard spot.

    Will be adding this article to this weeks UK Bloggers weekly round up on www.imperiusdominatus.com you need to get the UK Bloggers logo up on your site btw ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Also become a follower too ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. hey all, I agree with your comments, this is my model and I have done what you have said in the past in the fact in a friendly game I have just packed up because my opponent decided to be unfriendly after agreeing the points at the begining,

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you for the comments, you are of course correct Natfka in how the rules don't follow directly. The idea to discuss before games is something I fully support but as JB says, with some opponents that still doesn't always work.

    Mercer, I'm glad to hear from you. I'll admit the rock base and similar ideas are far from perfect fixes, but the best idea I thought for those unwilling to put aside their conversion entirely.
    On an aside, I'm already a follower of www.imperiusdominatus.com (along with Natfka's Faeit 212) although admittedly I've fallen behind on reading lately with other things (I wish I had more time, don't we all?).
    I'll sort the logo out, thanks for reminding me.

    Final note, I'll admit that there are risks and problems with conversions, but they are still great fun in themselves and well worth the trouble nonetheless.

    ReplyDelete