GW Grognard: What I See Better Be What I Get

Hey everyone, Adam, from TFG Radio, here to complain, I mean talk about, 40K stuff!

This won’t work out as you may hope, trust me.

I often use tournaments as a way to get my various armies tabletop ready. Whether it was for 40K, Fantasy, or any of the Specialists Games that I used to play, when it was tournament time, my army was ready. I used to stay up late at night, and I still do, in order to get the army ready and to a tournament standard. In the way, way past, this was a three color minimum standard, with Games Workshop models only, and based. The most important part was that the models had to represent the unit, or weapon, that the points were paid for. We all know this as “what you see is what you get” or WYSIWYG, and so, nowadays, I expect it from my tournament opponent.

This squad of Heavy Bolters are actually Lascannons, the other squad of Heavy Bolters are Missile Launchers

Now, I do not include leagues in this expectation. The reason for this is that most players use this as a way to playtest a list idea, or a unit they wanted to try out. This format really lends itself to the experimentation that you need to finalize your army, as you are guaranteed games and don’t have to waste time looking for a game. It allows you to finalize your list a lot quicker so that you can get the correct models and weapons for the army. Even with that, sometimes it is difficult to find the appropriate gear and/or weapon so you have to use a stand in. Thanks okay, as long as it is only a couple parts, however…

Now, some “count as” weapons are fine. When I need a seating chart in order to decipher what each weapon in your army actually is, that’s another thing. I shouldn’t have to be constantly asking you what that weapon is supposed to be, I should be be able to look at the army and quickly, and easily, know what weapons my opposing army carries. Many times it puts a player at a disadvantage if they cannot see and identify correctly the weapon that they are facing off against. This can, and has, affect the outcome of a game, and tournament.

I know that there are players, when they have an army that is heavily non-wysiwyg, that will give handouts or some other type of reference sheet, in order to make it easier for their opponent, but who really has time for that. With the current atmosphere of allegations of slow play, and the introductions of chess clocks, most players are already having a difficult time trying to fit as much of their game in as they can in the allotted time. So please, out of respect to your opponents, try to be as WYSIWYG as possible in your tournament games.

That’s all for this week, I hope you enjoyed the read. Let me know your thoughts, and if you have any stories of WYSIWYG gone wrong, in the comments section. Don’t forget to visit our Facebook, Twitch, and Patreon pages to stay up to date on what we’re up to and when episodes drop!

And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!



About Adam

Adam, aka Latin Gandalf, has been gaming since the early eighties and has played 40K since Rogue Trader (among a number of other games). He listens to more podcasts than any healthy person should and is currently the host for TFG Radio. He also is judges for LVO and head judges other major 40K Grand Tournaments.

4 Responses to “GW Grognard: What I See Better Be What I Get”

  1. Estasy_in_service June 30, 2018 5:15 am #

    Shots fire at Matt Root’s ork ad mech army

  2. WestRider June 30, 2018 10:46 am #

    My standard for acceptable Counts As has always been that someone who is reasonably familiar with the Codex in question (doesn’t necessarily play it, but has at least given it a quick read, and played against it before) should be able to look at the Army list, look at the Army itself, and be able to figure out what everything is. Maybe ask once, if there’s something that’s in equal quantity (e.g. the guns with crystals are Melta, the ones with electrode prongs are Plasma), but that’s it. If a competent Tournament player has to keep asking which Unit/Weapon is which, the Counts As doesn’t work.

  3. Oggthrok July 2, 2018 7:32 am #

    With the recent FAQ, “counts as” was heavily discouraged as well.

    But, this is also a company that seems to promote heavily converted armies; free people’s hand gunners made out of great sword and iron breaker bits, for one example, have been featured in White Dwarf. Which makes me think, the problem is less about conversions, and more about subbing an existing unit for another.

    Here’s my “counts as” sin – the Darkoath Warqueen. I love her model, but as a Blades of Khorne player she doesn’t do much for me, as all of her powers are tweaked for Slaves to Darkness, not Khorne. So, I wish to use her as an Exalted Deathbringer with biting axe and rune shield. The model is armed and painted exactly as the Deathbringer model should be, right down to her shield literally having runes on it. But, until I actually got a game in with her, it remains to be seen if locals will be against her as a “counts as” model.


  1. Musings against WYSIWYG – The Casual Cultist - July 11, 2018

    […] recently read a thought-provoking article on an excellent blog called Frontline Gaming, in which the author argued in favour of strict WYSIWYG in tournament settings. As tournaments […]

Leave a Reply