WYSIWYG or not so much.

[korto]

WYSIWYG is simply good for the flow of the game, not to mention the overall look and feel. Always having to refer to a table/list or asking your opponent everytime what's what definitely slows down the game. Maybe not by much but enough to make a difference. I mean it doesn't have to be 100% accurate, we all understand that in the first few games this might happen and to clearly state that one or two models are innacurate is perfectly fine but to play the game non-WYSIWYG on a permanent basis is definitely not the experience I'm looking for. Also, keep in mind that a thug's a thug...when I saw the barbarian queen with her two hand weapons up there to be used as a thug I was a bit meh...as good looking as this model is, it is definitely not a thug. Anything but. The "Epic-ness" of the models should go according to the in-game cost of the model imo.
In the campaign I'm playing in, we are giving bonus pts on the painting % and accuracy of the models to encourage players to play as WYSIWYG and fully painted as possible.

[The Red Graf]

In Frostgrave think the term thug refers mainly to the gear the model is carrying. I can see where having two almost identical models serving as two different types of mercenaries is a problem this is not the case here. We are talking about a model that is carrying two swords instead of one. Neither of the models I showed are queens.

[PhilM]

Neither of them are just your lowly hired mook either, they don't look like a thug you'd pay 20 gold to accompany you into a ruined city.

Also they need clothes.

[Bloodaxe]

I wouldnt mind some rules for "upgrades", so that models used are more WYSIWYG.  Shields, heavy armor, extra weapon, etc.

[Major_Gilbear]

If a model is obvious, then it doesn't need to be WYSIWYG; if it isn't then WYSIWYG helps.

For example, any barbarian model = Barbarian henchman is fine. No confusion.

However, five barbarian models, representing a mixture of different henchmen = confusing. Having WYSIWYG weapons and suitable accessories helps both players remember which model is which.

Using WYSIWYG as a stick to cajole your opponent with just because a barbarian (who represents a Barbarian henchman) has the wrong weapons seems very petty to me; I personally always try to be reasonable and accept my opponent's models as-is if I can, whilst at the same time trying to make it fairly simple for my opponent with my models where I can.

So, if your proposed models for Thugs look suitable for Thug henchmen, then I'd just get on with it - no need to clip weapons off I think.

[jp1885]

I'm just starting to build my warband, and am going down the WYSIWYG-ish route. In other words my thugs, though classed as having a single weapon, also have an extra sword/dagger moulded on them. I can't be bothered to try to hack them off, so they're staying on - I'll just ignore them (or explain them away as ceremonial items etc.)

[The Red Graf]

I'm just starting to build my warband, and am going down the WYSIWYG-ish route. In other words my thugs, though classed as having a single weapon, also have an extra sword/dagger moulded on them. I can't be bothered to try to hack them off, so they're staying on - I'll just ignore them (or explain them away as ceremonial items etc.)

That seems imenently reasonable to me. I hate to desecrate a good miniature and as the rules don't allow for two hand weapons at the same time I can't imagine what they would be mistaken for.

[ragsthetiger]

In our games, we have always tried to keep to the WYSIWYG standard as much as possible, but without making it a "do this or don't play" imperative.  After almost 30 years of tabletop gaming, I have hundreds of painted minis, and can usually find one that fills the bill, but if I can't, nobody in our group is going to complain as long as the mini is reasonably close.  Recently, for example, I was stumped for a Frostgrave Tracker -- staff and bow...how many minis have you seen with that combination?  I could have done a conversion, but I have plenty of other modeling projects to work on and didn't feel like putting the time into it, so I just used an elf ranger-type with a long bow.  As long as there isn't a lot of confusion caused by using identically equipped models, I say don't sweat the small stuff.  Pick an appropriate substitute and have fun...because having fun is the point, after all.
rags

[frogimus]

IMO, a dagger is an eating utensil for the FG era. The belt dagger can be only that, and not useful as a weapon - well, no better than unarmed combat.

[Corporal Chaos]

After all is said and done it is you and your friends who will make the final call. We all have a broad background and all of us different. I prefer fun gaming over miner discrepancy . Paint the non valid weapon black or tack a bag to it to make it not a weapon. I agree that using a knight in plate armor with two handed sword as a thief is over the top but a thug who happens to have two hand weapons modeled on.... Not a big issue. Eventually the figure in question may be upgraded to something better equipped as I have seen on one of the other members AAR. Play the game and have fun.

[The Red Graf]

In our games, we have always tried to keep to the WYSIWYG standard as much as possible, but without making it a "do this or don't play" imperative.  After almost 30 years of tabletop gaming, I have hundreds of painted minis, and can usually find one that fills the bill, but if I can't, nobody in our group is going to complain as long as the mini is reasonably close.  Recently, for example, I was stumped for a Frostgrave Tracker -- staff and bow...how many minis have you seen with that combination?  I could have done a conversion, but I have plenty of other modeling projects to work on and didn't feel like putting the time into it, so I just used an elf ranger-type with a long bow.  As long as there isn't a lot of confusion caused by using identically equipped models, I say don't sweat the small stuff.  Pick an appropriate substitute and have fun...because having fun is the point, after all.
rags

I don't think I'm the first to think of this, but just in case. Hugo Le Petite from the Bowmen of Bergiac.

[ragsthetiger]

Red Graf,
Thanks for the response, but at this late stage in my gaming life, one of the absolute essentials for getting involved with Frostgrave was that I should not have to buy or paint any more miniatures.  I already have more lead and pewter than I could ever possibly need...and so I am using my existing collection, and that is all. Nice mini, though.
rags