The curse of WYSIWYG?

Okay, maybe the title of this post is a little over the top, but I was thinking about how figures are armed and the impact (if any) on the game for two reasons recently. 

Firstly, there is a paragraph in the Warhammer Armies book which sets out a quite different approach to the one commonly accepted today. Here's a picture:

The above paragraphs generally state that as long as both players know what a unit is armed with, the absolute details on the figures don't matter so much. As long as several of the figures in a unit are armed in the way listed in the army roster, it really doesn't matter if the rest are armed differently. A good suggestion given is to put the 'appropriately' armed or armoured figures in the front rank for easy identification, and remove others as casualties first. 

All of this is really about common sense and fair play, an agreement and understanding between two like minded players. 

I like how it mentioned that the guidelines given are meant to help make things easier and specifically "not to restrict players, or make them use specific models." Compare and contrast that to attitudes from other times as you will!

I think the only line that really matters is:

"The important thing is that all players know what armour and equipment troops have. So long as both sides are happy in this respect, other restrictions are superfluous."

A good example of this is shown in the pictures of the Bretonnian army. Compare these two knights:

Without checking the book, can you tell me with absolute certainty which is classed as +4 Shock Elite and which is +1 Shock Elite? Probably not. 

In fact the whole of the two units pictured look pretty interchangeable. But you know, if your opponent says that the chaps with a particular banner are a certain unit, what more do you need?!

The second reason I was pondering this topic is more directly related to this blog. When you play with 28mm it is fairly easy to get close to the enemy figures and see what they are carrying. This becomes a bit more tricky with 15mm! Also, a lot of 15mm figures come in bags of 8 with some variation between them. So you need to think, does it matter if one guy in my unit looks like he has a two handed axe? Personally I am pretty sure no one would notice during a game unless you pointed it out them them.

I put a question mark at the end of the blog title for the reason that I don't even know whether "What You See Is What You Get" is even significant enough to be called a curse. Sure, in a tournament setting it helps, I guess, but unless you are trying to substitute goblins for ogres or something similarly daft, a quick consultation with the other player should still be able to sort it out. 

So how strongly do you feel about this issue? Do you adhere rigidly to WYSIWYG or is it not so much of a problem for you?

Personally I think the paragraphs in the army book sum it up nicely for me and reflect how I'd want to play. 

Comments welcome as always!

Which rules I use.

There is much discussion on the interwebs about what exactly can be regarded as 'Oldhammer'. Whilst the majority seem to be in favour of the 3rd edition of the rules, there are also many (including lots of the aforementioned majority) who believe it to be more about the ethos and approach taken by the players. 

This is something I wholeheartedly agree with and is how I generally approach games. Because of this, I am perfectly happy to enjoy 4th edition along side of 3rd. To me, this is the edition in which the Warhammer World truly came together and became what I would recognise as being 'modern' Warhammer. I love the army books (easy to collect now without spending much) and the background they contain. I love the simpler rules which give quick, fun games. I love the unique and different troop types and warmachines which emerge during this period. It is just plain fun. BUT, it is best approached with an Oldhammer mentality. In fact the magic supplement for this edition specifically recommends placing a limit on some of the power. If you agree to limit magic and heroes then 4th is a perfectly good edition of the game (and isn't the Oldhammer spirit all about cooperating together to play great games?!)

But to me, it is 3rd edition which is more serious, detailed and full of depth. It is the flip side of the coin. There are many things I like about third which are missing in 4th, but there are also plenty added in 4th which I miss from 3rd. To me, which I play depends on what kind of fantasy game I want. The more bonkers 4th or the more serious 3rd. And there is room in my collection for both!

So while this blog primarily covers my adventures in 3rd edition, you can expect to see some 4th as well. 

And as for Warhammer 40k, well, I only own and play Rogue Trader, so I'll leave that side of the discussion to someone else!

What rules do you use for your Oldhammer games and how do you approach them?

Comments always welcome.