8th Ed. Skink priest model?

does it matter what skink priest model i buy?

 

It depends really. If you are going to play in tournaments that have strick WYSIWYG rules, then yes, it matters. If not, then no. Get the one you like best.

 

wisjawysha what?

 

I must be missing something here if it is in fact a Skink priest model then how could they have a problem with you using it?

 

bc some have different items on them

 

=> No, it's a miniature wargaming thing. It's a gentlemanly gamer thing. It's the right thing.

See my rant (outdated and with a few errors, but still applies in many ways, like this one) -

http://www.muppin.com/joesleboda/manifesto/Section3_1.htm

=> Exactly. If your opponent is familiar with the Lizardmen book it would be quite right of him to assume that the skink with the cloak made up of feathers is equipped with the Cloak of Feathers (for example). If he isn't that's misleading. If a different model has it and you also have this model in the army, then that's really, really bad sportsmanship.

 

Or you could just ask what the models represent and plan accordingly? >.<

 

Still not fair, as I covered in my link.

It seems reasonable on the surface, but it's truly not. I won't go into it here (that's why I have a link, after all), but the bottom line is that when one person has to remember what something "actually" is and the other person does not, it creates an unfair advantage. The degree of the advantage can be argued, of course, but not its existence.

 

When deciding what army I want to collect next I like to test them out (as I can't afford to do multiple armies) and me and my cousin do a lot of proxy battles, usually using units we enjoy to see if we can make them work.

We use sheets of paper measured to the correct unit size and write on the paper all the details relevant to the unit. If we forget during the battle we just check the rules again and talk about it with each other.

My uncle is dead against it, he is very much WYSIWYG but I have no problem with it. I find it makes the game more fun anyway if people have conversions. But then again I never play competitively.

 

Except there's a point where WYSIWYG becomes ridiculous. Like for example, that skink model with the feather cloak can only be used of he has the cloak of feathers. So that model becomes extremely situational. I think it's unsportsmanship like to make someone buy a single model for one very specific situation. WYSIWYG should go as far as using a consistent model and having the right weapon equipped. Beyond that, that's what army lists are for. Army lists show your opponent what model has what items. The list can be requested at any time. But requiring someone to have each and every item represented is ridiculous. I have a skink priest on my list? I should have a model that is clearly a skink priest. I have a scar veteran with a sword and shield? I should have a model with a sword and shield. That's really as far as it should go. I'm not going to model a dispel scroll, armor of destiny, crown of command. Because again my list has all of that information and my opponent isn't forced to remember what I have since my list is entirely available for him or her to see at any time.

 

I don't think Devil was going that far. But if you have two Skink Priests, one with the feather cloak, and you've given one a Cloak of Feathers, why WOULDN'T you use the appropriate model?

I have Skink Priests with different coloured skins to help me remember who has which spells. Of course, if you have two or three lvl 1 Wizards in your army then your opponent is taking it on trust that you're rightly tracking who has which spell.

That being said I often forget to note down who is carrying the Dispel Scroll, and when I want to use it one of the priests is dead and as such I don't use it, since it may or may not have been destroyed!

It just comes down to common sense, trust and transparency TBH.

(I once had a game of 40k against an IG player who wanted to use his Centaur artillery tractors as counts as Chimeras. He had a few Chimeras sitting unused in his army box. I refused to play him....)

 

Whoops

 

Could all those who are in favor of "complete WYSIWYG" please redirect me to the page where I can buy and oldblood/scarvet on an Arabyan Carpet?

It seems like this is one of those things that should be marked as it is HIGHLY interacted what that model "Can do".

if you aren't able, it would seem like that item cant be used by us....ever... unless you convert....which makes it a conversion....and thus a "count as" doing of your own hands (your argumentation circles itself)


---

My point is, it doesn't make any sense.

no you shouldn't use a Steam tank for a Wyvern with a boss on it, but yes you should be able to run a Scar-vet on a cold one with a GW even though the model has handweapon and shield.

if not:

the High Elf Reaver bow would never be available
very few ogres could ever get the ironfist upgrade
Chaos units will have to be painted the colour appropiate to the god / get the right brand painted on them to take
Marks of chaos

and so f'ing on.

--

Dont spoil the game by nitpicking this kind of thing, and then defending it by accusing of "bad sportsmanship".
if anything, it is rather "not paying homage to the game world", It has nothing to do with sportsmanship, and since this is the world of warhammer FANTASY battle could you guys PLEASE use that part a bit?

Surely most of you have the brain-capacity to remember the details anyway (correct me if im wrong), and if not: there is even less shame to ask since the guy across the table was the one to make this ATROCIOUS VIOLATION AGAINST THE GAME to begin win.

This is a strategy game, sure, but before that it is a hobby where people like to have fun painting, getting a personal expression on their models and then playing THEIR army.

If you want something else you should pick up video-game instead that gives everyone the same looking units, and let us have this fun and flexible hobby to ourselves.

 

You are not entitled to lay this out as a fact or lay claim to "the right thing".

Nothing can grind my gears as much as people who are "certain" that they figured out the "one right way" to do things. For a guy with "True scholars have more than just one book to study." as your signature YOU MUST be able to appreciate what I am saying here.

 

I believe only mundane items need to be WYSIWYG - so shields, great weapons etc. magic items can potentially take any form (it is magic after all!) and are often kept secret (so wysiwyg would defeat the point).

Get the gorgeous plastic skink priest model. If someone complains that he isn't modelled with a scroll, tell him it's on his necklace (like a plaque), and tell him to lighten up.

 

=> I took out the bit on common sense since there truly is no such thing (being as it is colored by world view, economics, upbringing, culture, etc etc etc), but the rest is right.

I understand that some may not want to take it to the extremes that I prefer (and yes, I do sometimes go so far as to paint stuff like "follow me" on a helmet for a model with the crown of command or paint the Latin for "dispel scroll" on parchment on models that take one - at least back when I used to use dispel scrolls, and if my character has a mundane weapon you can damn well bet I won't use a model that has its sword painted all glowing green or flaming red). I get it. Still, there's no reason a player should field a model that generates mental associations that are not actually there. That's why I used the Cloak example. If you have the feathered cloak priest model on the table, and the book has a well-known item called the Cloak of Feathers, then that model should have that item.

It's not a ring, or a scroll, or an amulet. it's a prominent, usually brightly-colored, feature on the model - a feature that _easily_ can trigger associations.

As to showing your list upon demand...no. I won't show mine as there is no rule, at all, that instructs me to do so and the ability to maintain secrets is part of this game. Why else would there be spells/items that reveal the presence of items or hidden models? It's also, while we're at it, an advantage that normal characters have over Special Characters. Have you (not you, PlasmaDavid - this latter bit has been a more general response) never played a game where there opponent is faced with a choice between attacking your troops or your character and opts to attack your troops because he assumes the character is well defensed? I have. Please don't tell me that you tell your opponents what wards and the like your (non-special) character has before he decides where to attack. That removes a great deal of the fun of the game if you do.

Anyway, I really don't want to repeat my entire online rant here, but I can tell from some of the responses here that it's not getting read before posting. That's ok. It's long and nobody can force you to read it, but it really does address many of the counters people seem to want to use.

=> This is more than a game. It's a hobby. If one is not prepared to explore that hobby and just treat the game as the full extent of the experience, I might suggest that other games are far superior and require no hobby commitment at all.

As to the carpet, I have yet to play against anyone - it literally has never happened to me - that took the carpet and did not model it in some way. For my own part, I have used the Cloak of the Dunes in my Tomb Kings army and built a model of a djinn with his lower half being made up of swirling sand so that it was clear what he has. I am not perfect on this, but I really do try hard to practice what I preach in this.

Oh, also, @Tlaloc, I get you. If you and your opponents are all on the same page about using paper, chits, or other stand-ins, then great. You are all on equally confusing footing. One key element of my disdain for counts-as stuff is that when only one player does it, he gets an advantage. That advantage is rendered largely meaningless when both players do it. The truth is, even with my current Lizards I am struggling to get all the right models out there. I had to use a terradon rider instead of a ripper rider for a few games while I was getting and building the ripper. The thing is, my Dark Elf opponent is in my same boat - we are both starting new armies and agreed to be loose as we build. We are on the same footing. We are both making progress each week as we learn our armies and will soon have fully accurate models for all units (mine is there now, actually).

EDIT:

=> ...aaaaand there it is. The 99% predictable outcome of conversations like this. Here, let me re-phrase it for you:
"It's my army, my hobby, and my game. If you don't like the way I do it, then go away."

You see, the problem here is this. It IS your army. It IS your hobby.

But it's OUR game.

You can do whatever you want at home, on your hobby table, and in your display cabinets. When you show up for the part of this hobby that involves the game, however, it ceases to be about you. It's about us. At the point where we play a game, we enter into a cooperative venture. If you are placing your desire for the use of inaccurate models over my desire for following the rules and seeking a clear, unconfusing, non-deceptive mutual gaming experience, then you have indeed gone astray.

It's form over function. MY fun over OUR game.

Folks who find themselves using "my army, my game, my fun" often (as in, pretty much always) conveniently ignore their opponent's reasonable expectation that THEIR fun is important as well. When to versions of fun come into conflict during a game, the sensible course of action is to defer to whichever version does not impose on the other or leave out rules.

After all, it may be fun for me to re-position a badly placed unit three turns into the game by simply picking it up and moving it three feet to the right. Surely others could understand that I don't want my beautifully painted unit to get killed so soon and would not mind me tossing out the rules and/or intrinsically competitive nature of the game so that my models could be pleasing to me for longer, right?

 

Wow... I had no idea people are so passionate about WYSIWYG. I can understand the sentiment though. Just to be clear, I was giving general guidelines to a general question. I'm not a proponent of any one particular methodology or opinion on the matter.

 

Magic items are kept secret, and are not WYSIWYG for the most part. Magic gear that is defined as mundane items (such as glittering scales "light armor", armor of Destiny "Heavy Armor", Charmed shield "Shield". Some much items are defined as mundane weapons, such as a spear or lance.

WYSIWYG, you'd want to have armor/shield/lance/spear as appropriate, but outside of that, it's not required to be modeled.

As far as keeping gear on characters strait, I write on the army list: Priest with feather crown, Priest with knife, Priest with staff. Then I generate spells. This way, I can track who's got what based off of a very basic description of the model.
On my Cowboys, I have 1 riding a normal coldone, the other rides a coldone with an armored helmet.
I mark one as helmet, the other as normal. (for my own tracking, I usually have the coldone with the helmet be the cowboy with the dragon helm; yeah, his mount is wearing it).

When I use the gear (thereby revealing it to my opponent) I'll show them on the army list where the gear is listed, along with the description of the model, so they know I'm not switching to the conveniently needed equipment.

-Matt

 

=> I understand your points, but largely disagree with them. If I am given a choice to take one of two actions, and one is self-serving at the expense of fairness to my opponent, you can bet I think the _other_ choice is indeed "the right thing."

It's the old Golden Rule thing again.

The Western version is far too self-centered compared to the Eastern.
Western: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Eastern: Do nothing to other that you would not have done to you.

In other words:
Western: Hey, if it's something I like, then I'll do it since I wouldn't mind someone else doing it.
Eastern: Hey, I really wound't want someone to do that to me, so I won't do it to someone else.

Hobby:
Western: I don't mind when someone plays with misleading models, so that's how I will play too.
Eastern: I don't like it when others use the wrong models, so I won't do that to someone else.

=> Fer sher. That's the standard minimum, and nobody should fuss as long as that's met. I know I take it upon myself to go even further down the path of being considerate to my opponents, but not everyone does and that's ok.

Forums are great because we can discuss many things, including ideals. Let's take the Cloak:

Ideal - The model has a feathered cloak and so you pay for the Cloak of Feathers or use another model.
Middle - You use that model but don't take the Cloak.
Crappy/Bad Sport/Questionable Intent - You have two skink priests. One model has the feathered cloak and the other does not. The one without the feathered cloak gets the Cloak of Feathers.

You have to question a player that would do the last. Why? Why attempt to deceive? Sure, the rules don't prevent you from doing this, I know, but it says a lot about the character of the player if he does it anyway. I mean, how hard would it be to simply swap the models? You still don't have to confirm who has what, but at least you are not deliberately trying to deceive your opponent.