One of the big debates within the SBG community is related to the use of alternative models in our games. There are many different arguments both for and against this straying from the Games Workshop standard but I definitely fall into the pro-proxy camp.
One of the main arguments that I have seen against the use of alternative models is that it breaks the immersion of playing the Lord of the Rings (and therefore ruins the fun) when you introduce models of someone else's vision of the armies of Middle Earth. The question I then wondered is "well who's vision of Middle Earth is the 'right' one to use? My own? My opponent's? GW's design team's? Peter Jackson's? Professor Tolkein's?"
These versions of Middle Earth can all differ from each other. For example, the clearest description of the evil men in Sauron's service is this line, "They have black eyes, and long black hair, and gold rings in their ears... lots of beautiful gold. And some have red paint on their cheeks, and red cloaks and their flags are red, and the tips of their spears; and they have round shields, yellow and black with big spikes." (Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers Book 4 Ch. 3 "The Black Gate is Closed"). This description matches none of the film depictions or any of the in-game factions that Tolkein could possibly be describing (Serpent Horde, Easterlings, Khand or Far Harad) but would it be unacceptable to create an army using proxy models based upon this description?
 |
| Artwork from Flight Fantasy Game's Lord of the Rings card game. |
There are many different instances where this variation of vision occurs between versions of Middle Earth:
- Iron Hills dwarves had round shields, mail armour and no spears in the book.
- Game Workshop's Dunlendings wearing head to toe metal armour despite both book and film versions having minimal metal.
 |
| '[The Dunlendings] were without body-armour, having only among them a few hauberks gained by theft or in loot....' (Unfinished Tales) and yet a typical SBG Dunland army is filled with armour clad warriors. |
- Movie version plate vs book version chain mail armoured Gondorians.
- The book's description of Thorin's Company bares minimal similarities with the film depictions.
 |
| Spot the difference between Alan Lee's depiction of Thorin's Company and the film version. |
Then there's all the areas beyond the edges of the map and those little detailed peoples or past events that barely get a mention in the lore of Middle Earth. People like the Beornings, or the other Dwarven houses and historical events such as Thorongil's adventures, the Gondorian Kin-Strife or the War of Dwarves and Dragons.
Creativity is one of the aspects of this hobby that I enjoy the most and the ability to explore these different versions to create a unique force fills me with excitement. To then limit that creativity and be forced to stay within the GW aesthetic is very disappointing to me.
Another major argument in the proxy war comes down to cost, especially with regards to out of production models. While I appreciate the view that supporting the creators of the game is important in order to ensure the future of the game I also acknowledge that this can be an expensive hobby and believe that gatekeeping based on wealth and affordability is wrong.
I'll finish by saying one thing, any deviations you do decide to make from the established Games Workshop standard should be made clear and obvious and explained to your opponent before and during the game in the interest of fairness. But as long as you stay within the spirit of the lore and the spirit of the game then in my view then work away to your hearts content.
