Welcome to Librarium Online!
Thinking that, because Spellweavers are now near enough a necessity for a WE army, i would get one for mine. But what models are they?? There are four Spellsinger models on the GW website, but not Spellweaver? I always assumed that two of the four were Spellweavers, but now i am just confused? Can somebody clear this up for me?
WYSIWYG is not as important in fantasy as it is in 40k. As long as the model you use as a spellweaver looks like an elf and he/she is doing something that looks magic/holding a staff of some kind it is a valid model to use as a spellweaver, so a regular spellsinger model is fine
oh thats good then! So does WYSIWYG apply to normal models as well, so for example, if, in the codex, it says that a lord has a bow and arrow weapon, but there isnt one on the model, can they still shoot?
Thankfully no, Pretty much if you have for example a unit of Chaos warriors that you modelled with hand weapons and shield because you like the look better you can have them with 2 hand weapons when you build the army.. just remember if you have multiple units which has which if they have different equipment
Not codex, it's armybook in fantasy. If the armybook says he has a bow, he has a bow, no matter how much it looks like a shield. In fantasy what it says on your army list is what is in your army, I don't know about tournament rules, I haven't played in a tournament yet. But I am very positive that everything I've written is true.
Oh right, thanks! Im happy now, i thought that it was like that, but my friends moaned Thank you to all replies!!
Well how would a wizard level look different?
If you can make it wysiwyg, great, but as long as a majority is in coherence with the rules and you can back up what they have with accounted points and armybook entries then you can prod your friends in the neck and go "Meh!"
Fantasy: Wood Elves, Dark Elves, Beastmen and Tomb Kings.
LotR: Misty Mountains and Rohan
Haha! lol, i'll enjoy prodding them in the neck and going meh!
I have the Spellsinger model with the staff that looks like she's flying. It's always been pretty WYSIWYG anyway considering in 7th she was a Level 2 singer with a Calligator's staff, and in 8th she's a Level 4 weaver with a wand of Wych Elm =P
WYSIWYG in 40k can be asinine. The models with the most options in the game are metal and therefor have the least ability to be customized. Then you have armies comprised of 100% like mine (WH/DH) where you can't get a word in edgewise. Really, it's annoying trying to squeeze a book in on a Sister for a Superior because she's one piece of metal! Frustrating sometimes. I like that fantasy is more lenient. I like it a lot more, even though most WEs are plastic (which is a fantastic change of pace for me), even though the Daemons I play are metal. Plastic Pinkies around the corner, despite the new look making them far to beefy and less happy, are undeniably cheaper and easier to work with, though I wish we'd get some plastic Plaguebearers.
Rambling off topic.
Spellsinger/weaver same model. Fun fact about the whole thing, the flying male caster is labeled a spellweaver on the GW site and a spellsinger in the new BRB, just to prove the point even further =D
40k: Silver Angels of Our Martyred Lady 7/2/3 - Daemons of the Great Squiggle! 3/1/0
Fantasy: Windhost of Athel'Loren 2/0/0 - Daemons of Another Great Squiggle! 0/0/0
Warmahordes: Legion of Everblight (Absylonia)
Calmed my anxiety even more! I have that same model. So basically, FB is more lenient towards wysiwyg, obviously not overly so, but 40k is quite strict.
Thanks everyone btw!