Game Specific Figures

[Angel Barracks]

Question for you.

If you play a game/rule set from a company that also makes specific models for that game/rule set, do you only use the specific models or do you use whatever you want?

So when I played GW’s WFB as an example I used Citadel, Rafm, Grenadier, all sorts.
When I play Burning Sands I use Crom’s Anvil models, but also Copplestone, Irregular, Xyston…

[Steve Johnson]

I use whatever I want, but I remember at Portbury Knights Wargames Club the ‘teenage’ GW gamers would only use the ‘right’ models. This applied to some other games systems too.

[Alan Millicheap]

Whatever I want

[irishserb]

I mix figures from whatever sources are available for the game that I’m playing.

[Rhoderic]

I differentiate between “indie” (or “small press”) games and “slick” games. I like both styles of gaming, and try to go for what feels right for the game in question. With indie games, a homebrew mentality is to be expected. It’s practical, easy-going and open-ended. With slick games, I must admit I see a certain charm in the, well, slickness of only using the proprietary miniature ranges, or third-party miniatures which are very obviously meant to slot into the game in question (a phenomenon that so far has been contained to the GW-sphere). In these cases it’s not about dogma, but simply about maintaining aesthetic unity (given that said games usually have a unique aesthetic that I’d rather not dilute), and not having to muck about with homebrew modifications for such high-concept rules systems because proxy miniatures break WYSIWYG.

Obviously this only applies to non-historical gaming. The only situation where I’d limit myself to proprietary miniatures in a historical wargame is when it’s rendered a moot point by the absence of alternatives in the same scale and sculpting style. Non-historical games open up a dimension of mutually exclusive aesthetics, which isn’t really an issue with historicals, aside from general differences in sculpting style.

It’s worth appreciating that there are some companies which aren’t really indie but nevertheless promote an indie-oriented attitude in regard to sourcing figures for their games. Osprey does this a lot. So does Warlord Games, at least as far as their fantasy game, Warlords of Erehwon.

[fairoaks024]

If it’s a niche producer who does the rules and figures, I’ll buy their figures if I want to support the game e.g. Strange Aeons or Wasteman.

ill use any other suitable figures I already own too though.

 

for other types I’ll use anything to hand.

[Geof Downton]

I do things the other way around. I buy figures because I like them, or am interested in the “period”, then, with the (often unrealised) intention of playing with them find some rules to suit.

One who puts on his armour should not boast like one who takes it off.
Ahab, King of Israel; 1 Kings 20:11

[jeffers]

I read a book or article on an historical event and if it sparks enough interest to game it I look for appropriate figures and rules. Or make them myself. The ‘game’ bit is the least important to me.

More nonsense on my blog: http://battle77.blogspot.com/

[Ruarigh]

I generally mix and match as suits what passes for my aesthetic sensibilities.

Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

https://roderickdale.co.uk/
https://emidsvikings.ac.uk/

[Whirlwind]

I have never felt tied

Angel Barracks wrote:

Question for you. If you play a game/rule set from a company that also makes specific models for that game/rule set, do you only use the specific models or do you use whatever you want?

Whatever I want, can’t imagine not doing so.  And would specifically avoid a ruleset that I thought was trying to lock me into such purchases (like Ex Ilis), and would never contemplate playing in a competition or similar which demanded it.

[greg954]

Ruarigh wrote:

I generally mix and match as suits what passes for my aesthetic sensibilities.

This ^^^^^^^
I go with the minis first then think how can I fit these into a game.

[Truls Engebakken-Fjell]

Most of my units for Beneath the Lilly banners are from the same guys that wrote the rules. But that’s mostly because I really like those miniatures.  And also about a quarter are not from them.

 

As I don’t game sci fi or other fiction things.  I don’t run into problems of getting the correct cleric warrior of the 3rd legion or the correct X-Wing. A French napoleonic infantry man is a French napoleonic infantry man.

[Olaf Meys]

Never. I use what’s at hand, and if they happen to be the right figures, so much the better, but I refuse to kowtow to a company boxing me in.

http://mainly28s.com
wargames review site...

[Andrew Beasley]

I have a habit of using GW terrain for Kill Team with GW figures but the rest of my rules are deliberately not specific for any figures and there are some figures that do not have matching rules so always end up as ‘counts as’.

 

[Tony S]

I buy whatever figures I like to use in whatever ruleset I’m using.  As others have said, I’m mostly historical, so that just doesn’t come into play.

Oddly enough though, I bought some of the new Necromunda figures (because whatever I think of GW’s rules or prices, I do admit a lot of their figures are simply stunning) for use in post-apocalyptic games.  And perhaps I’m deliberately being contrary, but years ago when I played Necromunda, I used Copplestone figures!

 

 

[Patrice]

All my figures can play with all the rules they want.

(…which actually means that I own figures from many different companies and that they all follow my own rules most of the time).

http://www.argad-bzh.fr/argad/en.html
https://www.anargader.net/

[Punkrabbitt]

It depends. If the pick-up gaming community is hard on for company-only figures, I’ll make the investment if I want to play with them. Otherwise, it’s whatever I want. I mostly play solo or with a group of “whatever” guys, so it usually doesn’t matter.

Please visit my OSR products for sale at
www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/17194/Punkrabbitt-Publishing

[McKinstry]

Mix and Match. I don’t do Fantasy or GW so most historical rule sets don’t have an accompanying figure line but for those that do, I add whatever appeals.

The tree of Life is self pruning.

[Mike]

I can see myself playing in the 40k setting without using the GW rules.
I don’t think I could see myself not using SM models though.
They are so entrenched in the whole setting that nothing else would seem right to me.
If the aesthetic was right I would happily use other models as opponents, but I don’t think I would want to play in the Grimdark without GW SMs.

Same with my fantasy games, the setting has a certain feel and some fantasy miniatures would not seem right.
Though I would and indeed do use many different models from many companies as long as they seem to fit the feel of the setting.

When I did my 6mm sci-fi the look was less important as you could have things from other worlds, for me the most important thing was the size.
Did the various models look right in terms of size next to each other.

[MartinR]

I use whatever I like. To turn things around a bit,  if I have a specific vehicle or unit, I will put on a game just so I can put them on the table (like my Flammpanzer  Char Bs at Arnhem). So that is a game put on for specific figures. I don’t particularly care what rules are used.

"Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

[Phil Dutré]

I use whatever I want.

I keep saying this, but miniature wargaming (at least for those who are in it for the long run) is not about the rules. It’s all about your collection of miniatures build up over the years. The rules should fit your miniatures, not the other way around 😉

20 years from now I will most likely play rules yet to be written with gaming mechanics yet to be invented. But chances are I will use miniatures that are already in my collection today.

Rulesets come and go, and have short turnaround times. Miniatures are forever, especially if you’ve painted them yourself.

[Ivan Sorensen]

When I played “big name” games (40K, Warzone etc.) the rule of thumb was about three quarters “proper” models.
In an army-list type game, it gets frustrating to have to figure out what things are all the time.

It was never specifically enforced, but it was generally understood that a majority of the figures should be the “proper thing”.

I don’t really care nowadays though I do use “proper” figures for 40K still.

[Sane Max]

I am old enough to remember when you couldn’t GET the figures for even things like 40k or Warhammer, so never felt ‘tied’ except when I briefly worked for them.

I had a very interesting conversation with a dam’ youngster behind the counter in a (small local) wargames shop recently. he asked what I was buying the paints and brushes for, and I said I was painting Historicals

‘Historicals?’ Not heard of that one’

‘Oh… no, it’s a period. Lots of different rules for it, for example Warlord Games do a game called ‘Hail Caesar”

(TappityTapTap) Huh… Romans versus Egyptians? That’s weird’

‘No… you buy the figures where you like, those are just the figures they happen to make’

‘wh..what happens at Tournaments???’

He was obviously completely unused to the idea of not buying ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ box set, the boxes of figures that ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ make and playing other ‘Big Spoon’ Players at games.

[Rhoderic]

Sane Max wrote:

He was obviously completely unused to the idea of not buying ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ box set, the boxes of figures that ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ make and playing other ‘Big Spoon’ Players at games.

What really perplexes me is the way this attitude has expanded to concern terrain and scenery in some parts of the hobby community. Scratch-building your own trees, or even buying them from a model railroad shop, is unheard of in those circles. It has to be the GW hard plastic tree kits, or else the battle must be fought on a treeless plain. Ditto buildings. Some GW gamers seem to consider it right and proper that whatever venue you go to for a pick-up or tournament game, the same fortification with the same, well-known dimensions will be there. Almost like it’s become part of the metagaming.

With figures, my only reason for sometimes sticking with the official ones is that a lot of the games that have their own “proprietary” miniature ranges are very high-concept in regard to aesthetics and background setting. This makes suitable figures from third-party manufacturers something of a moot point on account of being non-existent. Obviously this doesn’t apply to 40K which has plenty of look-alike options from other manufacturers, but there are many other games where this isn’t the case. If I was playing Malifaux, for instance, I doubt I could find any non-Wyrd figures that could blend in with the official Wyrd ones. Sure, I could just toss some historical Old West gunslingers and Victorian adventurers in there, but they would still clash aesthetically, at least to my perfectionist eye. Another option is to shun high-concept game systems altogether in favour of more generic, “low-concept” ones, but I enjoy having a variety of projects, both low-concept and high-concept.

[Sane Max]

It doesn’t perplex me -if you are raised in an environment where you play ‘a game’ and everything is provided, that’s what you do. Just amusing really to encounter it in full effect.

There were people who played a certain very popular WW2 game with the same approach.

[Mike Headden]

Sometimes it’s not enough to use ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ figures, I’ve had youngsters bicker because I wasn’t using the right (i.e. newest) iteration of figures.

Just one example, went to a fantasy tournie with my 10mm High Elf army. I’d converted Citadel baby dragons to act as my dragon riding heroes and wizards and was told I couldn’t use them as they weren’t GW figures. A brief conversation established that the figures were as old as, or older than the teenage GM and that GW was just an evolution of Citadel. Then a senior staff member wandered by and made favourable comment on them. The combination was enough to persuade the GM to accept them … reluctantly.

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

[Sane Max]

youngsters, eh? When I was a lad I had to sleep in a box…..

never forget that the hobby we are in attracted a fair number of people with poor social skills, always try to cut them some slack.

It’s the old ones that are gits that I react badly to 🙂

[Mike]

Sane Max wrote:

It’s the old ones that are gits that I react badly to

Leave me out of this.

[Patrice]

Rhoderic wrote:

What really perplexes me is the way this attitude has expanded to concern terrain and scenery in some parts of the hobby community. Scratch-building your own trees, or even buying them from a model railroad shop, is unheard of in those circles.

In a Larry Leadhead cartoon (I can’t find it now, their website is gone away) an old guy had made a miniature wall with small stones, and left it in the natural stones colour, and a young player asked where he had bought it and how he did paint it… and when he had the answer he said with admiration: “Wow! You historical gamers are really creative!”

Sane Max wrote:

I had a very interesting conversation with a dam’ youngster behind the counter in a (small local) wargames shop recently. he asked what I was buying the paints and brushes for, and I said I was painting Historicals ‘Historicals?’ Not heard of that one’ ‘Oh… no, it’s a period. Lots of different rules for it, for example Warlord Games do a game called ‘Hail Caesar” (TappityTapTap) Huh… Romans versus Egyptians? That’s weird’ ‘No… you buy the figures where you like, those are just the figures they happen to make’ ‘wh..what happens at Tournaments???’ He was obviously completely unused to the idea of not buying ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ box set, the boxes of figures that ‘Big Spoon Wargames’ make and playing other ‘Big Spoon’ Players at games.

That reminds me of a discussion in a local RPG club in Rennes (Brittany) more than 30 years ago, we were talking about Tolkien (it was long before the movies, and Tolkien’s works were not widely known in France then) and a younger guy heard the name and said: “Tolkien? Oh yes, he wrote books inspired by D&D?”…
(I swear it’s true, and I’m sure he was sincere.)

But hey, it’s normal, people who discover the hobby cannot be expected to know older things. Not understanding this is called: talking as “anciens combattants” (in French).

http://www.argad-bzh.fr/argad/en.html
https://www.anargader.net/

[Ivan Sorensen]

As an anecdotal point, when I played 40K tournaments a lot back around the 2e to 3e transition.

A: It never said anywhere but I never saw anyone bring a non-GW figure. They were sponsored events, so I’m sure they’d have asked the figure to be replaced though.

B: I used several Rogue Trader figures in my armies (late 2e through late 3e) and never had a bad word said about them by players, staff or visitors from GW.

[Phil Dutré]

Patrice wrote:

“Tolkien? Oh yes, he wrote books inspired by D&D?”…

I just felt a great disturbance in the Force …

[Author]

Posts