Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Would you let me get away with this?
In my Space Marine army i've taken one or two liberties with wysiwyg for example in my tactical squad the Sargent is holding a flamer in one hand and a chainsword in the other. In game terms the squad is still considered as having a Veteran Sargent and a flamer because it's still represented in the squad despite being on the same model.
Also my Assault Squad has it's flamer represented by a pair of hand flamers (yes the weapon that doesn't exist anymore). My reasoning for this is that Sisters of Battle Seraphim already use two hand flamers as a flamer.
Though I haven't done this yet i've also been tempted to put both my Terminator squad's assault cannons on the same model and treat the squad as having two separate assault cannon wielding Terminators.
Am i taking liberties by doing something that could confuse a player? Would the GW rules in the strictest sense allow this?
As for the special weapon, doesn't it say that one model may be upgraded to Vet. sarg? That means you can have your vet. sarg as the special weapon carrier.
The terminator with twin cannons is just a plain cool (give pic!!) idea so no complaining.
And the Hand-flamers is an excellent idea! They are flamers after all so it doesn't matter how they look, just as long as your opponent knows what it is.
I like your idea, I do however think it's impportant that you in some way show who is carrying the second Assault cannon or who is carrying the flamer. It can be quite important when the unit is partly blocked from LOS, meassuring distances and such.
As long as I knew who "really" carries the weapon I'd have no problems what so ever to accept your idea.
You could do two with double assault cannons. Would be awsome. :yes:
Or have a spare model with a single assault cannon, so when the first cannon wielder dies you can replace him with a model with only a single assault cannon.
Actually you'd need to take two guys out and put one back in, otherwise you'll have lost the assault cannon but not the space marine.Originally Posted by rovens
And over there we have the labyrinth guards.
One always lies, one always tells the truth, and one stabs people who ask tricky questions.
O yeah, me and my maths :wacko:Originally Posted by CBrate
You get my drift though.
So, here it is for the "strictest rules"Originally Posted by Shadows Coil
Well, I don't think its viable to put the flamer on the sergant. Under the description of Weapons pg34 SM codex: Sergant may replace his BOLTER with a bolt pistol and close combat weapon. By getting the guy a CCW you just dropped a bolter.
It specifically makes the distinction between space marines and the sergant in Number/squad- and it says one SPACE MARINE can be armed with one of the following: etc.
not the sergant. So, I'm sorry, but your sarge cannot be the flamer man.
Your sergant has his own section for his upgrade options apart from the options section.
Modeling it on the same model and saying its on two different is not cool, it becomes confusing for other players to keep track of who has what. If its on the model that model has it. Part of the skill and challenge of the game is in precision of where thigs are placed and who to remove.
The assault cannon termies, on the other hand, I would not allow. one model one weapon of that sort. Again, it becomes unclear for taking casualties and placement when you can arbitrarily choose which one has the assault cannon and always have the removed model not be the carrier. If you're going to have multiple assault cannons, you need to model multiple termies with assault cannons.
The hand flamers, I personally have no problem with this counting as a flamer, but strictly speaking, no. I believe hand flamers are counted as extra close combat weapons(like pistols), and if WSIWYG is strict, you have armed your guy with 2x CCWs which a single flamer is not.
Someone who is used to counting them as they are could get confused in CC.
The flamers would be ok in a friendly game, and the sergant with flamer... maybe.
But you asked about strictly speaking, whether it would work, unfortunately no, by tourney standards your army would be Disqualified for not meeting WYSIWYG.
W/D/L Eleventy trillion billion/NONE/ NONE - I am STILL rulezor!
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!
That only counts for SoB-hand flamers on the Seraphim. The description of SoBs say that they have mastered the use of firing two pistols at once so a SM would not be that good in handling them both and thus not getting a +1 attack. And saying that he would get extra attacks would break the rules...Originally Posted by theyak
As long as you keep it clear wich model has what then it's no problem.
Under the current rules, I would not accept it if it would not be clear which model had which equipment. I don't need to see the actual equiment on a model - I'm not that WYSIWYGish - but I'd like to see a defined destinction between normal models and models equipped in other ways. And here's why: Mind War (the Eldar psychic power) and Vindicare assassins allow you to pick single models from the squad. If oyu cannot see which is equipped in which way, if makes it impossible to use this rule.
(><)This is Bunny. Copy Bunny and this message into your signature to help him on his way to world Dominatio