Feudal Guard Blog (Updated January 10th)

[Macfeegle]

The objection to the army at my LGS would be that it is a fantasy army plain and simple.
There is no conversion work (and I'm not counting the counts-as 'Valkyrie' here, although even that doesn't fulfill the three weapons it is supposed to have), there are no indicators that the army comes even close to belonging in the 40K universe.

Gabriel raised valid points, as I believe did I in my first post where I signposted Scallywaggin.
Pistol holsters, rare items of tech on senior models and vehicles, these all need to appear to add the flavour.

Take a look at Scallywaggin - see how the weapons have a pirate-era feel whilst still retaining the sense of 'fitting' in 40K.

Gabriel Lupus - the inventiveness lies in the airship, which I personally like (in Fantasy) - inventiveness is not basing a model on a round base and calling 40k.

[ElegaicRequiem]

Fantasy army on round bases. And? So long as everything has an obvious WYSIWYG counts-as, and it's all GW product, it's 100% tourney legal, not to mention friendly game legal.

I reiterate my position that this is awesome, and my only real issue is that the airship doesn't seem to have two rocket pods, which would be a problem as soon as it got a weapon destroyed result.

I look forward to further updates.

[Rolling Thunder]

Well....

As for WYSIWIG: Well, personally, I do think a little conversion work would make them better. Not neccesarily 40K-ish conversion work, but something to make the entire army a bit more advanced and 'Steampunk', rather than a Fantasy army on skirmish bases. Modifiy the handguns a little, maybe sculpt on some armour plates on the men, combine in some Guardsmen torso armour et al...

As it is, it feels a little too simple. Aside from the airship. That's just pure 110% awesome. It doesn't need to be complex conversion work. Just, say, switch out the Sergeant's sword for a Catachan sword. It really dosen't rate as hugely 'cool' to simply play Empire models as 40K ones.


That being said, I'd never go so far as to refuse a game to you. That's just overkill.

[ElegaicRequiem]

Yes, refusing to play based on the army isn't very classy. If one refuses to play another, it should be because person B is an unpleasant and/or powergaming jerk.

[Ymmot (M.I.A)]

Jul 8, 2010 17:54:14 GMT -5 Macfeegle said:

The objection to the army at my LGS would be that it is a fantasy army plain and simple.

Oh, and following the 40k rules and 40k force organization chart does nothing to make it a 40k army...?


Not everyone is as talented or has the same resources as the wonderful modeler you mentioned in your first post in this thread.


Or perhaps that is simply not the aesthetic he desires, why is there a problem?

[fishspit]

Or perhaps that is simply not the aesthetic he desires, why is there a problem?

Exactly.

@ Macfeegle
I'm not going to completely re-rant here, I really don't want to fight, but I will say that a lot of the effect comes from the fact that they don't really belong. I do understand where you all are coming from however, and I am planning on upping the tech a touch on the next squad (my veterans), but not too much. Glowey-bitz and the odd 40k bit are in order, but not much more. I may try and dig up a lasgun, or even a meltagun, and make it all ornate for a few even, but they are going to stay mostly fantasy.

@requiem
The airship has two pods now, I picked up a second hellblaster kit today and mounted the port missles. It kinda looks like one big battery now, I'll post pics tomorrow of the new stuff.

[Macfeegle]

Ymmot (M.I.A) - I wasn't suggesting that Fishspit needed to go to the lengths that the example I gave had done. That is clearly the examplar.

The simple point I was making is that, as it stands, the force in question is a fantasy army.

I raised the same objections that several had raised before and offered constructive advice on where to start with an example. Others have suggested using Warmachine parts, Vox kits, etc. The comment that seemed to offend you was that an army lacking in any change aside from a base swap would be refused play space at the LGS on a 40K table.

Let's reverse the situation. Personally I would love to throw my hat in the ring for the new WHFB. How about I get some LotR movement trays and use my guardsmen as Empire soldiers.
I mean, as long as I obey the FoC for Fantasy that's okay? That lascannon, well that's just a cannon, and the Autocannon, well that's a hellblaster. etc.

Whilst I admire the effort Fishspit is making with the Airship/Valkyrie, and appreciate the effort he has put into the painting of the fantasy miniatures, no effort, or nod even, has been made to the 40K universe that they inhabit.

We have seen on this forum Skaven Ratlings, converted Ogres and Zombie Guardsmen, which have all taken immense effort to fit into the game universe that we play in and maintain, why shouldn't these be held to a similar standard?

[Ymmot (M.I.A)]

Jul 9, 2010 10:26:14 GMT -5 Macfeegle said:

why shouldn't these be held to a similar standard?

Suppose because he said he does not want them to be...

you got a Fantasy 40k army?

Sure, why not. Let's play a game.(Though I don't know how so you would have to teach me the rules. Hey, a new edition came out right? So we'd both be kind of learning!)

Of course it would look a bit silly, but the setting for 40k allows for such mismatches of technology to exist, feudal worlds are written in the fluff, planets that only possess black powder technology are in the fluff, it is all already in there.

They don't have to have a space backpack or a lasergun to fit into the 40k universe, it isn't written in the fluff and it isn't written in the rules.

[ElegaicRequiem]

The Scallywagin' army is a Chaos army that's been de-40K-ified to be a fantasy pirate themed force. Fishspit's feudal guard is going the opposite direction: fantasy/historical to 40K. And he doesn't even want to go too far into it at that. It's like comparing fruits and vegetables - yeah, they're both plants, but they have separate defining characteristics.

And besides, fantasy and 40K have really different rule sets, and fantasy doesn't allow the use of the IG codex. Because of the circle bases, this wouldn't work as a fantasy army, but it does work for 40K.

[Ymmot (M.I.A)]

and remember, in the 41st millennium

M stands for...

[Gabriel Lupus]

I'm just wondering what people would use for the example feral guard regiment in the back of the old codex - didn't they have the option of having two combat weapons and no ranged weapon? Would seem a perfect opportunity to use Empire swordsmen or Bretonian men at arms... My point? I suppose other than my usual random thought processes (that even I don't claim to understand), being as they shun even the use of lasguns/laspistols (I seem to remember a mention that some weren't even trained to use firearms at all) they'd hardly be likely to show any other forms of 40k tech.

Anyways, I'm less interested in furthering an academic argument and more interested in seeing more of fishspit's feudal guard... don't make me send round the heavies fishspit

[fishspit]

Ok, Update! Havn't put pics up in a while, I've been distracted by 8th edition fantasy, dwarfs, and canada. But I have managed to squeeze in some love for the fuedal guard.

First off, the start of the second missile pod on the airship. The missiles themselves are drying after a coat of primer.


Then, a bit of painting got done. The Custodian (Seargnet fluffwise) of my penal legion (rangers fluffwise) and a grunt are done now.



Two more rangers are in progress as well, almost not even posting, but I might as well throw them up.



Meltagunner. There will be greenstuff straps holding on the powerplant, as well as hoses linking the gun to the backpack. The gun itslef will be painted so the barrels are glowing red. I'm pretty happy with this guy.



Sniper. An out of the box longrifle, I think it fits the role nicely myself.


Ok, here goes, many of you are going to like this. I used a 40k meltagun on the following guy. "woah, it's almost like...fishspit listens to our rantings?" Don't get used to it. I persoanlly think it needs more to hide it's 40k-ness. I am going to give him a backpack power supply similar ot the guy above, and probobly put a purity seal or two on the front of the gun. The paint will make it look like a wooden main body with gold embellishments. This isn't anywhere near done, and I'm not sure if it will work out in the end.



Ok, now for the assault phase.

Ymmot (M.I.A)
Nice pic.

@ Macfeegle

Yes, it is a fantasy army I never denied it, in fact, I embraced it! I want these guys to stand out, I want them to be different. I'll repeat, THIS IS A FANTASY ARMY...for use in 40k.

Why is this so atrocious to you? If you can accept the counts-as as valid. Then how is this any different than any other guard army on this site? It may be for the most part, out of the box Empire, but look around this site and you will see, for the most part, out of the box IG. If you accept that the fluff for fuedal worlds exists, and the my force could plausibly exist in the 41st millenium, then how is it that my guys are unnaceptable? You wouldn't deny some kid's IG army on the grounds that

There is no conversion work

would you?

there are no indicators that the army comes even close to belonging in the 40K universe.

Without pulling fluff word for word from the rogue trader sourcebook (my inspiration), fuedal worlds exist. Mine happens to exist at a black-powder level of technology, and was never unified. Meaning? No lasers, no spaceships, no missile launchers. Just good old black powder, and the odd arcane antique weapon that no one really understands. The fluff exists, and so it does belong in the 40k universe. True, it's unconventional, but i wouldn't just slap my dudes on the table and expect my opponent to understand, no. I'd explain what my army is all about, give some background, and point out the counts-as'es in person. And if I'm met with criticism about how:

There is no conversion work (and I'm not counting the counts-as 'Valkyrie' here, although even that doesn't fulfill the three weapons it is supposed to have), there are no indicators that the army comes even close to belonging in the 40K universe.

Then I'd pack myself up and find another opponent. This is my hobby, and so I don't need to answer to jerks.

Let's reverse the situation. Personally I would love to throw my hat in the ring for the new WHFB. How about I get some LotR movement trays and use my guardsmen as Empire soldiers.
I mean, as long as I obey the FoC for Fantasy that's okay? That lascannon, well that's just a cannon, and the Autocannon, well that's a hellblaster. etc.

Ignoring the fact that this is completely different from what I'm doing, It actually sounds like a decent idea.
By all means, do it. Follow the rules for fantasy, throw down some fluff (with the requisite amount of blaming the warp) and be logical with your counts-as'es and there shouldn't be a problem.

One thing though, the round bases in the LOTR movement trays does not adequetly represent the formations, you's have to use the small square bases, otherwise your unit's frontage would be significantly larger than the proper size. That would be bad, only because it would change the game mechanic. What I'm doing is harmless.

</rant>

[Macfeegle]

Jul 9, 2010 10:50:36 GMT -5 ElegaicRequiem said:

Because of the circle bases, this wouldn't work as a fantasy army, but it does work for 40K.

I stand corrected Requiem. Circle bases make it a 40K army not fantasy?
I wish someone had said it that simply sooner.

Sorry better add this <sarcasm> just in case I caused confusion.

[Ymmot (M.I.A)]

Bases, yes, and the fact he is using the ig codex and 40k rule book.

Nobody said you have to like it, personally I'd mix the knights with the pistoleers for my rough riders, do some more conversions here and there(The crossbows aren't my thing either.), but I would never go so far as to say that 40k bits are a required or the army is not fit to be placed on the table, that just seems unnecessarily harsh to me, especially if the only reason you can come up with as to why it is unacceptable is that you don't think it looks sci-fi enough.

[ElegaicRequiem]

Jul 9, 2010 18:39:17 GMT -5 Macfeegle said:

Circle bases make it a 40K army not fantasy?

Not trying to be a smartass, or start an argument, but...

To my knowledge, yes. The WFB system seems to rely on the smaller, square bases for grouping members of a unit together. As I recall, the only real stipulations I read in the rulebook is that unit have the proper base shape and size.

I am curious, though. Would you play a game with Fishspit, if he were to use this army? Or would you refuse, based on the reasons you gave earlier? I'm not talking about a tournament, here.

[Macfeegle]

@reqiuem - would I play a game against Fishspit? As his army currently stands, the answer would have to be "no".
Until it is easier to determine what the threats are, for example, anti-infantry, anti-tank weapons, even which units are which, then it is just not acceptable.

Any "counts-as" model, unit or army needs strong visual cues to indicate what it represents.

The muskets clearly are fine as las-rifles, as are flintlock pistols for laspistols, the problem arises with the recognition of special and heavy weapons.
Whilst I accept that we are yet to see much, if anything, in the way of these, I reiterate that at this time the answer remains a "no".

The challenge to Fishspit is to therefore produce something that generates the 'feel' of 40K (the act of threat recognition if you will), but still fits solidly in his premise of a devolved societal structure.


A couple of suggestions would be to remove all reference to the Mechanicus, the society would probably have burnt them all as witches by now anyway, or the Mechanicus would have brought the population "into the light of the Omnissiah".

The second thing is perhaps to use the model labelled as a meltagunner as a heavy bolter instead. This would make more sense from a visual perspective.
Other visuals might include mortars (clearly) becoming heavy weapon mortar teams, some may be more difficult to represent however.

I would strongly recommend you abandon the crossbows, either that or the muskets, unless you use crossbows for lasrifles and muskets for shotguns. Even then I might suggest repeater crossbows.
There should definitely not be the same weapon represented on the table by two disparate items.

There is a lot more work involved in creating a good 'counts-as' army than a simple rebasing, and until it reaches something close to that point I retain my position.

[ElegaicRequiem]

Fair points, and I think it's easier to understand your position now. But I'd have to say that as long as I knew what was what, then I'd have no problem.

[robertm]

I love this idea about having a backward planet that has been lost to the warp since before unification. I'd like to hear some more fluff about it. I really like the look of having Warhammer Fantasy miniatures for a Feudal World set in the Warhammer 40,000 universe. I don't see a problem with it. If someone came into my local gaming club and had this, I'd ask to play against him first. I want to do the same kind of thing you're doing. I think it's great. Just as long as I know what everything is, I'm fine. I'm going to keep an eye on this. I really want to see the airship painted. I bet it'd look great! I wish I had the time to scratch build something for my Imperial Guard army. If I could I'd just buy random tank kits and make them count as Leman Russ Battle Tanks. I'd like to have some variety in my force. I mean, it's the Imperium of Man for Petes sake. Why is it that there can only be one kit for a tank? I'd imagine that there would be countless versions of one. There'd be countless versions of the lasgun even. Sorry for ranting.. I just love it, keep it up. You've given me an idea for a planet that has the same technological knowledge as the world did back during World War II. Autoguns!

[Macfeegle]

@requiem - that's all I was ever saying. He won't get a game in my LGS because they don't accurately represent the types of threats that are expected in an IG army, yet.

robertm - I suggest you head back to the books. The Imperium of Man uses Standard Template Constructs (or STCs) for the manufacture of vehicles, weapons, etc. Any changes or variants, unless approved by the Mechanicus are considered Heresy. Yes there are variant lasgun bodies, you can see differences with Valhallans and Cadians for example, but the Leman Russ chassis is pretty much it (plus it is named for a Primarch so it is best not to challenge it).

[fishspit]

Jul 10, 2010 3:01:04 GMT -5 Macfeegle said:

Until it is easier to determine what the threats are, for example, anti-infantry, anti-tank weapons, even which units are which, then it is just not acceptable.

Any "counts-as" model, unit or army needs strong visual cues to indicate what it represents.

The muskets clearly are fine as las-rifles, as are flintlock pistols for laspistols, the problem arises with the recognition of special and heavy weapons.

The challenge to Fishspit is to therefore produce something that generates the 'feel' of 40K (the act of threat recognition if you will), but still fits solidly in his premise of a devolved societal structure.

There is a lot more work involved in creating a good 'counts-as' army than a simple rebasing, and until it reaches something close to that point I retain my position.

I intentionally left my army simple, and with few counts-as specail and heavy weapons. Please hit my army list thread to see what I mean. I think the meltaguns work out well, bearing in mind that 90% of that conversion is going to be in the paintjob. But thats it, I have three meltaguns, and a few missile launchers. Everyone else is a grunt. Oh, and missile launcher=cannon becasue there is already a precedent for how a cannon behaves in the 41st millenium. Grab an ork codex and look at thier "kannon" if you will, it's exactly like a missile launcher. it won't be confusing on the table because there isn't too much going on. I'll point out the commmand squads, the masses of infantry, and then the three meltaguns and six or so cannons. I think it's plenty reasonable on the threat-scale.

As for "strong visual cues"

Right now I have posted pics of two meltagunners, a sniper, and ten standard guardsmen. No heavy weapons, no power fist counts-as, nothing...

...and yet already you write off my army as terrible. Tell me Macfeegle, how do I convert these little jerks so that they are more like guardsmen?

A standard guardsman is two things:
1-Human
2-Carrying a lasgun

And my guys are:
1-Human
2-Carrying muskets (which we have established is a good coubts-as lasgun)

There is a lot more work involved in creating a good 'counts-as' army than a simple rebasing, and until it reaches something close to that point I retain my position.

So if you are seeing some way they could be converted to suit the role of "guardsman" better, please share it with me, because I think they have all the right stuff. How can I generate the "feel" of a devolved societal structure in the 41st milleunium with my 50 point infantry squad?

[nilkimas]

I wouldn't care if someone used bottle caps as soldiers, as long as it's written or declared what is what I'd fight him.
And ofcourse bases matched somewhat, but I can be more lenient there.

After all it's supposed to be fun ^^

Anyway: I like this a lot and am curious like most people here how the airship will turn out.
How are you gonna represent tanks? Or are you going to be pure infantry based?

[Gabriel Lupus]

Jul 10, 2010 3:01:04 GMT -5 Macfeegle said:

Until it is easier to determine what the threats are, for example, anti-infantry, anti-tank weapons, even which units are which, then it is just not acceptable.

Any "counts-as" model, unit or army needs strong visual cues to indicate what it represents.

I would strongly recommend you abandon the crossbows, either that or the muskets, unless you use crossbows for lasrifles and muskets for shotguns. Even then I might suggest repeater crossbows.
There should definitely not be the same weapon represented on the table by two disparate items.

*disclaimer* Macfeegle - apologies for 'cherry picking' certain parts of you reply, but I felt these were most pertinent to the point(s) I wanted to make - feel free to use my 'cherry picking' as a way to disregard my point(s) should you wish.

On to my point(s)

I see your point with concerns over identifying what weapons/troops are being represented by the models in question, though I fell that, if the models were explained prior to the game (maybe even noted for quick reference on paper), this should no longer cause an issue.

I'm sure everyone would agree that destroying what you have believed to be an hardcore anti-tank weapon and discovering it was in fact a puny anti-infantry weapon is... annoying.

I may be wrong but I get the impression that your main concern is with "non-standard" weaponry that is used as 'counts as' when there are more than one conversion of the weapon (i.e. two converted weapons that look different, both representing a shotgun for example). Fair enough, that can cause some issues, but surely these can be resolved prior to gaming (otherwise I'd advise against playing Ork armies...

My other point (well, more of a question really) is, I wonder if you would have issues playing against my Imperial Guard, given the following points:

A Veteran Squad equipped with 'shotguns' and meltaguns:


My Inquisitor (note the Inquisitors shotgun - which counts as a bolter/stake crossbow):


And the two different styles of shotgun in his retinue, which are both different to the 'shotguns' in my vets unit:


Would this level of variety cause you an issue?



Now for apologies...

Sorry to fishspit for silling his thread with my pics...
Sorry to Macfeegle if you feel I am victimising you - I'm actually agreeing with you on a few points
Sorry to anyone else who was bored by my ramblings

[robertm]

I already knew that the Imperium uses STC. Everyone knows that. It's pretty straight forward. to be blunt, this is a game. Why can't I use say a German King Tiger to be used as a Leman Russ? I don't even like the Leman Russ kit. It's so, ugly to be honest. Why can't I just use different kinds of tanks? They'd all have the same stats, I wouldn't want to change that. The Imperium consist of what? Countless worlds, yes? I honestly doubt that everyone uses the same STC. Plus, the only reason why Valhallans and Cadians use different lasguns is because they've designed them to be used effectively by them, correct? What if they just change the Leman Russ and it just happens to look like a King Tiger, just because they've designed this tank to be used by them to meet certain threats. (And plus they're made my Games Workshop so they have to be used. Since they wont allow you to buy other minis and call it a lasgun, even if it looks better.)
why is it that your gaming club is so stiff about it? I honestly don't see a problem in this at all. Not one. Not even the simple "tell me what this unit does". Isn't that what you're supposed to do at the beginning of every game? Shouldn't you be fair to your opponent? Even if he came with bottle caps for men and little boxes for tanks, I'd still play. I've had to play with pennies, just because I honestly can't afford to go and buy 30 dollars worth of plastic just to for ten Imperial Guardsmen.
And another thing, why is it that you're being so rude to this guy? He's making an army of his own design. You have no say in what he can do, what he can call what. If he wants to use Warhammer Fantasty miniatures, I say let him. It's his imagination. I thought this forum board was pretty chill. Full of encouragement of those who love this hobby. Why don't you encourage the guy so he can succeed in his endeavor to make his own army.
I want to get out of the feel of the whole everyone has to look the same. They don't have to.

[Gabriel Lupus]

Ok... looks like we're (me included) now delving into a whole new realm of arguments here, which is not appropriate or fair on fishspit.

Can any parties who wish to discuss STC/conversion viable/counts as/etc, please take it somewhere else. Take it to PM only, or make a thread with an appropriately titled warning.

If it makes you feel better, pretend I'm a Mod saying this (otherwise I'll GET a mod to say it).

[robertm]

He's right. I want to be the first to apologize Fishspit. I really like what you're doing and please keep it up.