PROXY!

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • hello,

    i am having a chat with some friends of mine about "what is proxy in ninth age".

    i lurk the forum every day, so i know what is , more or less, the project perspective. but assume u have a pedantic player (friends are also local TOs) , that ask to create a ruleset to manage proxies,

    what would be the "basic rule" to differentiate models from proxy?

    Display Spoiler

    one of the subjects of discussion was
    TO: OK has tiger, can i use a wolf to sub it?
    me: yes u can
    TO: so what stops someone from using (wdg) barbarian on wolves instead of horses? it is proxy!
    me: if u use a homogeneus style in which woves are meant to be the mount of barbarian u can use them as mount
    TO: so basically just create some fluffy around your army and nothing is proxy. i can ride a stone or a can, telling a novel and everything is fine
    me: . . . .




    please elaborate in my PoV if u can.
  • it comes down to the social contract between you and your opponent. By the rules the only critical thing is base size, and to interpret that, some sort if differentiation between different bases.

    But most gamers I would imagine also enjoy the immersion or the aesthetic of actual toy soldiers.

    There will be endless debate as to whether grey plastic armies are better or worse than 3 colours min poorly applied etc, and that's an extension of the same tension.

    Some people will not bring unpainted minis to the table, it goes against their ethos. Others want to experiment with different lists and will bring a small amount of sub-normal standard minis to allow this whilst they're building or painting. Others don't really care for the hobby side and wont even bother with this.

    And it's all cool, so long as it's cool between the people playing. Pair up two hobby heroes with beautiful armies and you're golden. Pair up two people with numbered bases and they'll enjoy the game. Or most people in between. But pair up someone who values the hobby side more with someone who's primarily into the game mechanics side and not to fussed about hobby, and you'll get a tension.

    Normally it shouldn't be an issue with garage hammer and your mates cos you'll chat and know what you're each about. At tournaments TOs need to set a standard to try to provide a shared expectation of what everyone will bring, and they have to negotiate that line between accessibility and immersion.

    So imo the important thing is that you and your mate are discussing it, and not what the answer is ;).
    Join us on Ulthuan.net
  • Yeah, it all comes down to standards you deem acceptable. Like ferny said, some players will not bring unpainted minis to the table. I am one such player and it's a standard I set on myself: If the mini aint done, it aint seeing action. I take pretty good care to make a themed army and can't have any sore thumbs. It's also a great motivator to paint.

    But of course, I don't mind my opponents having their own standards. That being said, most players will agree on some kind of minimum effort, and that's really the key word: effort.

    Having wolf steeds instead of horse steeds is fine because you've actually made some effort to make mounts for your guys. gluing a stone to a base is not effort. This is a miniature game, after all. That being said, if you take something rocks and paint them so that you have an army of little rock people with painted on weapons and shields, that's effort. Likewise, an army of lego figures also requires some effort. A lego 4-square on a base, however, not so much. While you can argue about theoretical exceptions and bend the rules a bit, this very rarely become an issue in practice.

    Some basic WYSIWYG standards are also to be expected. You should be able to look at a model within an army and be able to tell roughly what it is. In other words, if you can tell without looking at base sizes that a cavalry model represents a cavalry unit, that's basic WYSIWYG. If you look at a model and can't tell what possible unit in the list it's supposed to be, then there's an issue.
  • it was more on "if it s written tiger, i want t atiger, not a wolf"

    or

    Display Spoiler

    "on google it states that karkadan is somekind of rhyno so it must be rhyno.
    me: no, on gold armybook it states boar, lions and monstruos cavalry
    tO: oh ok, so what is a kraken
    me: a DE monster
    TO: it must be a octopus-sy model
    me: shows mierce humanized octopus
    TO: it must be marine
    me: why?
    TO: because kraken is a marine monster
    me: WHYYYYYYY


    Display Spoiler
    me: if u want to can build an EoS halfling army
    to: no u cant
    me:why
    to: halfling have no horses, book states horses
    me: they use pony
    to: pony is not horse, is not that fast
    me: . . . .


    i really struggle to make wh veterans understand 9th age background. u need to emphatize this kind of abstraction from models. really.


    Display Spoiler
    considering that someone else told me
    "ninth age stated they were continuing WH, now they are breaking everything, we want to play WH"

    that's frustrating
  • That sounds like your TO is just a pain in the....

    Here in NZ we regularly have tournaments with many armies fielding what would be called "proxy" models. Some are better than others, much easier to identify what is what but others can be difficult to distinguish.

    My army is fully 3D printed daemons, so of course they will look strange and weird to people at first. So I sit down and say which unit is which, and that is that. Sometimes I have had to remind people during a game but not often.

    Heck, I even have a 3D printed OK army which the models are bananas...

    As long as the model is reasonably representative of the model parts in the army book (I.e standard infantry, cavalry need a mount + rider, monstrous things are big) then there should be no problem whether the mount is a wolf/tiger/boar whatever.

    Alumni

  • It's a complicated issue because there are several different factors that go into a proxy:

    -The likeness of the proxy vs the original. E.g. wolf to tiger vs but human to tiger.
    -The quality of the conversion, painting and basing. Is it a thoughtful conversion that exhibits effort and love or is it just another model glued on a base?
    -Some arbitrary notion of whether the proxy belongs on a tabletop or not. E.g lego or toys or tuna cans. What about 2d cutouts?
    -The overall theme of the army. Well executed themes like goblintonia have more leeway.

    There isn't a definitive line between acceptable and non-acceptable proxying because the perceived weight of the above factors differ from player to player. For example player A might be ok with with a nicely painted banana army even though there is no fantasy relevance, while player B might be okay with toy dinosaurs representing saurians because although they're not models they reflect the fantasy species of the originals.

    Ultimately, because the t9a community is so small, it can't afford to exclude players for any reason outside cheating or other integrity-influencing actions (something the project consistently forgets in other aspects of the project).

    There will always be a small group of people that insist their "models" are just as nice and acceptable as any other army. That's ok because they're entitled to their opinion. Art, by its very nature, is highly subjective. If that was the full story than anything goes, always. However, t9a is a two-player game and any proxy requires the opponent to perform leaps of imagination to maintain the level of immersion a miniature game represents. There is an unwritten social contract between players, whether they realize or agree with it or not, that by playing a miniature war-game they agree to maintain some modicum of immersion. That's why we play with miniatures and not with beer cans, pogs and pebbles from the garden.

    Therefore, it comes down to the TO to make decisions on a case-by-case basis for events, and individual players to choose to play or not play against said conversions in friendlies. Thankfully, those people are such a small portion of the player base it's not a rampant issue that needs to be explicitly addressed by this project further than it is currently.
  • Shukran wrote:

    it was more on "if it s written tiger, i want t atiger, not a wolf"

    or

    Display Spoiler

    "on google it states that karkadan is somekind of rhyno so it must be rhyno.
    me: no, on gold armybook it states boar, lions and monstruos cavalry
    tO: oh ok, so what is a kraken
    me: a DE monster
    TO: it must be a octopus-sy model
    me: shows mierce humanized octopus
    TO: it must be marine
    me: why?
    TO: because kraken is a marine monster
    me: WHYYYYYYY


    Display Spoiler
    me: if u want to can build an EoS halfling army
    to: no u cant
    me:why
    to: halfling have no horses, book states horses
    me: they use pony
    to: pony is not horse, is not that fast
    me: . . . .


    i really struggle to make wh veterans understand 9th age background. u need to emphatize this kind of abstraction from models. really.


    Display Spoiler
    considering that someone else told me
    "ninth age stated they were continuing WH, now they are breaking everything, we want to play WH"

    that's frustrating

    There isn't a good rebuttal to this, because it's a discussion about what is acceptable in terms of what is tasteful, not what's officially legal to play. T9A doesn't use the term proxy because that term cannot be objectively defined in a game that doesn't have an official line of miniatures.
    I suspect that you are not going to change anybody's mind on arguing about what a proxy really means, unless perhaps it is their first time exploring that question. What you can do is change the perspective to a more useful debate.
    Ask "What would our tournament/local group be like if we allowed people to use wolves instead of tiger models?". Regardless of how you call that. Would you see cool armies, new players, a returning veteran coming back because they are inspired by a theme or conversion? Or do you think it would ruin the experience of players and that they would no longer attend?
    Or even better yet, agree to run this very experiment just for a couple months, and see if anything has changed after that.
    We are nerds, we have a tendency to debate minute details. That's a big part of why people like miniatures: the attention to details. But sometimes we don't realize that we get stuck on debates that in the long run aren't necessarily productive.

    It's my experience that people who start off a bit rigid about rules and regulations also end up liking that ambitious army conversion after all, if love and care have obviously been poured into that project.
    People with a creative idea and not that much confidence, or not the energy/time to fight, on the other hand might just give up in the face of a wall of negative criticism. That's why I personally think it's always way better to err on the side of leniency and tolerance for any group of players. Of course your mileage may vary, as other have said different groups have obviously the right to set up different standards.
  • I've been using models from an "all consuming alien race from a certain sci-fi" game instead of dinosaurs since 8th edition WFB. I've been to tournaments all of the US and I've never had an issue with the army. There are basic principles to follow though:

    1. Portray the type of unit accurately. If it's cavalry put an infantry on a mount of some kind
    2. Accurately portray weapons. If they have great weapons don't model them with two hand weapons. If they have ranged weapons model them with something that looks like an appropriate ranged weapon
    3. Be consistent. If want to model wolves instead of horses, then make ALL your horses wolves.
    4. Talk with your opponent. I'd have my army laid out and take a minute to go through each unit. I did this with or without the different models, but when you're fielding conversions it also avoids confusion

    If someone else still has problems with your army there really isn't anything more to do.

    That's just me,
    HC303
  • Shukran wrote:

    considering that someone else told me

    "ninth age stated they were continuing WH, now they are breaking everything, we want to play WH"

    that's frustrating
    I'm not entirely sure what the first missions statements or official PR channels said at the very beginning but as far as I can go back and see, the project never mentioned aiming to be Warhammer, other than in the sense of a spiritual successor. But obviously, the name and common description of T9A as being basically the "9th edition of Warhammer" would give rise to the common perception that that's what it was meant to be. Some - or most - people were fine with name changes and minor tweaks to the armies but after that, there's been players complaining about straying too far from Warhammer 8th edition. I find this ironic because if GW had made the exact same changes T9A had made, I would doubt anyone would complain. GW changed the game quite radically at times, between editions, only 7th to 8th was rather minor IIRC.

    While being a community run project staffed by volunteers has its upsides, one downside is authority. "Who are you to change the game?" is a question you'd never hear anyone ask GW but because we don't have a business with paid writers or boxes with models in stores, there's an aura of "amateur" around the project that will likely remain so long as there are players who think of GW as the standard for how to do wargames.

    Some people loved our way of doing things from the start, some people have come around to it and some people will always think of T9A as "a fan-made warhammer substitute I'll reluctantly play while wishing GW would go back to WHFB". It's all really a matter of perception and how you wanna look at the game.

    But as the head of PR, you can always tag @VisconteDimezzato and tell him to fix it faster xD
  • i dont know if You saw it yet, but there is a pretty comprehensive guide for tournament rules, including the projects views on "proxies"


    In short: Wyfiwyg what you field is what you get.

    1. correct base size
    2. represent correct army (or be not confused with another)
    3. appropriate hight
    4. appropriate weapon
    5. not mistakeable for other entries
    6. command groups
    7. not too many unit fillers
  • those bananas by the way would be absolutely okay under wyfiwyg ^^

    correct base check
    not to be confused with another army check
    hight check
    weapon check
    not mistakeable for otger entries... hard. i can distinguish the tiger. The bombardiers are marked by the weapon. The unit in front could be bruisers, could be tribesmen. My guess is bruisers because of the weapon.
    command groups: i can see a musician. check
    Unit fillers: Check

    :thumbsup:
  • As an old wh player myself, I find it liberating not to be stuck using only one miniature line. We used to proxy things often before but were limited to using only gdubs.

    I think it is astonishing to see how many professional miniature companies make their business with our hobby.

    Diversity is the spice of life/t9a whether it is beautiful banana knights or zany xeno saurians.
  • Theokrit wrote:

    those bananas by the way would be absolutely okay under wyfiwyg ^^

    correct base check
    not to be confused with another army check
    hight check
    weapon check
    not mistakeable for otger entries... hard. i can distinguish the tiger. The bombardiers are marked by the weapon. The unit in front could be bruisers, could be tribesmen. My guess is bruisers because of the weapon.
    command groups: i can see a musician. check
    Unit fillers: Check

    :thumbsup:
    And the wizard has a purple hat!

    I have sword and shield ones for tribesmen, so when fielded together they should be easy to distinguish.
    Scraplings are strawberries, auroch is a giant pineapple, giant is an eggplant :D

    Alumni

  • Shukran wrote:

    hello,

    i am having a chat with some friends of mine about "what is proxy in ninth age".

    i lurk the forum every day, so i know what is , more or less, the project perspective. but assume u have a pedantic player (friends are also local TOs) , that ask to create a ruleset to manage proxies,

    what would be the "basic rule" to differentiate models from proxy?

    Display Spoiler

    one of the subjects of discussion was
    TO: OK has tiger, can i use a wolf to sub it?
    me: yes u can
    TO: so what stops someone from using (wdg) barbarian on wolves instead of horses? it is proxy!
    me: if u use a homogeneus style in which woves are meant to be the mount of barbarian u can use them as mount
    TO: so basically just create some fluffy around your army and nothing is proxy. i can ride a stone or a can, telling a novel and everything is fine
    me: . . . .




    please elaborate in my PoV if u can.
    It really depends on the purpose and aims of the TO. I don't remember or simply I never knew in which part of Italy you play.

    In general, levels of WYSIWYG are relative in T9A and they are generally broad guidelines appreciated by the local community. It's not really up to T9A to give tight guidelines on it, since we're not a miniature company needing people to field proper models (like Corvus Belli or Wyrd, for example).

    Local communities are often quite different, for example in some countries TOs allow supplements to be used, while in Italy this doesn't happen.

    So, to be really pragmatic, the best thing is for the TO to discuss it with the local community and be clear about his/her purposes (having more people at the tournament? Have only people with fully painted armies? and so on).

    Also, a good thing is always to discuss it with the broader national community. Just invite it to the whatsapp chat we have with mostly all the tournament player in Italy.
  • subspace wrote:

    VisconteDimezzato wrote:

    Local communities are often quite different, for example in some countries TOs allow supplements to be used, while in Italy this doesn't happen.
    Jeez, that's gotta suck. Do the TOs use custom maps instead of the map pack or do you just use the terrain generation rules from the rules book?
    To be honest not all TOs use the very same points. There are tournaments at 4.500 pts and tournaments at 5.000 pts. As far as I remember, recently a scottish tournament used 5.000 pts and custom maps.
  • i agree with the Visconte - context is everything in this case.
    (i would argue that context is everything in every case. even philosophy of science is starting to recognise that there's no way of defining what science is and what science does outside of its contexts of existence and communication. but that's a different story.)


    just as you ask us to take your perspective in the debate with your TO friend, i think the best way to answer him is to take his perspective, and understand what worries him. let's assume he is not arguing "just for the sake of arguing", but that he is arguing because he wants to organise an event that will be positively accepted by his community.



    (1)
    in this case, personally, i would first of all reassure him that, no matter what the official T9A policies are, we encourage him to take the lead and define WYFIWYG as he thinks is best. he is the one who knows the local community, he is the one who is invested in making the event amazing, so we trust him to make the best choices.

    (2)
    once that's done, all we can give him are examples of events that have been successful in the past, arranged on a spectrum that goes from "absolute monocompany wyfiwyg" to "cardboard rectangles with grids and names". so he can choose where to position his own tournament. T9A has given guidelines on what happens in most tournaments - they're listed in the spoiler.

    (3)
    those are just guidelines. they are not rules. so, as third step, i'd boil it down to the single T9A requirement: respect of base sizes. that's the only prescribed thing. admittedly it's a low bar - but that not how we want him to play. it's just the starting point for him to create his own rules, if he want.



    so, in brief: base size is the only strict requirement; there's plenty of other restrictions that can be enforced; some commonly used guidelines are listed in the spoiler below; we encourage him to do what's right for his tournament and his community.

    and on top of it all, thanks for taking the time to talk to your friends about T9A. gratitude.



    Display Spoiler

    What you field is what you get - GUIDELINES

    T9A encourages the use of models provided by all miniature manufacturers, as well as handmade and scratch-built models, as long as a serious effort has been made. In case of doubt arising in any aspect of WYFIWYG (for example you have a fully themed army with extensive conversions), ask the tournament organiser or post a picture of the unit/army on the forum. To accommodate the players and tournament organisers, we have composed some guidelines regarding WYFIWYG:
    1. Models (including Summoned models) must be mounted on the appropriate base sizes, as stated in the corresponding Army Book.
    2. Models (including Summoned models) should represent the appropriate army, or at least not be easily mistaken for another army.
    3. Models (including Summoned models) should represent the appropriate Height and Type, or at least not be easily mistaken for another Height or Type.
    4. Models (including Summoned models) should represent the appropriate weapon option (in case of multiple weapon options) according to the Army List (e.g. at any time during the game at least 51% of the models in the unit should represent the appropriate weapon (and shield) option according to the Army List; these models should be placed as far to the front of the unit as possible).
    5. Models should not be mistaken for other models (e.g. if you are using a Chariot with one mount to represent a “heavy” Chariot (e.g. Chosen Chariot/Razortusk Chariot), you cannot use the same model to represent a “light” Chariot (e.g. Warrior Chariot/Raiding Chariot).
    6. Command Group models should be represented by the appropriate models (see the picture below for an example of a unit of Barbarians, with full Command Group and at least 51% of the models equipped with the correct weapons (Flails)). --> ( @Grimbold Blackhammer any chance we can change this, since we no longer have Flails?)
    7. Unit fillers* are allowed, adhering to 4 general guidelines:
    ● Unit fillers should not cause confusion. To prevent this they should not be included in the first rank (e.g. it must be clear how many models and what Troop Type is represented by the unit filler).
    ● Unit fillers should not interfere with normal gameplay (e.g. it must be possible to remove casualties from the unit with the unit representing the appropriate unit size, without the unit filler prohibiting this).
    ● Unit fillers should not be more than approx. 33% of the unit ’s size.
    ● Unit fillers do not count towards the 51% minimum as stated in point 4.
    *A unit filler is a base with one or several models, pieces of terrain, or similar. This base represents RnF models in the unit in which it is enclosed.