One last question: "Counts as" or New Army

[mrrshann618]

EVIL INC, Kind of a bad call on your challenge. I already stated on page 3 the "unwritten rule" it is common courtesy.

As for double dipping, that is what successor chapters are for. You want to make an army that could either be taken one way or the other. Make your own chapter and bastardize the icons. They basically say this concerning your own chapters and have been since 2nd edition.

My complaint has, and always will be, Playing a different army constantly when using a different (specific) army icon. Not about proxying, not about hey just this one time.

Not everyone is rich, I sure as heck know that, it hasn't prevented me from stripping models to repaint, or from taking an exacto to swap insignia. Not everyone has time, I sure as bippy know that also. Between full time school, full time work, and watching my kid by myself in my free time till she goes to bed there is not time for me to swap armies around at my liesure. So how did I solve this problem?
Simple, I spent years assembling bit by bit a "non-standard" SM army using generic parts from all the lines of available SM's and removing all the chapter relevant icons and painting my own on them. I now run the Crimson Crusade and they are more than a battle company strong allowing me to swap pieces in and out at my liesure to try stuff out. Do I have wolf pelts, Yup on certain models. Do I have axes Yup, I've replaced most of my chainswords with standard swords. I've made an army that if I want to I can add pieces here and there to create whatever army I want to play. Heck my Tactical squads are currently running roughly 15 models so I can swap weapons around. This army has been slowly building since about 2004 There is no way someone is going to mistake my figures for any specific army and get in the wrong mindset. They are not going to look down on my army and see them painted in a recoginized and "sanctioned" chapter and have the slighted possibility of getting confused at to what things are. All my models are WYSIWYG and I have storage cases full of special characters that I decide to pull out when I want them. As a side note that case has not seen the light of day as I do not believe that you need to play a special character to actually play that army.

WYSIWYG HAS everything to do with what you see. If I see Space Wolves 3rd company across from me I'm going to expect Space Wolves 3rd company. What You see (Space Wolves) Is What You Get (Space Wolves).

[kelanen]

I would be absolutely fine with this, and lots more besides, so would most players, and most tournaments (the problem here being GW won't set up some equivalent of the DCI, so there is no tournament standards authority, and each TO can make his own rules).

In my experience using something completely different (eg: Squat models using IG codex) is always fine.

Using your own colours/chapter/fluff and using whatever codex you want to represent them (eg: your homebrew chapter might be painted green and called the Space Gremlins, but use the Blood Angels codex) is always fine.

Using a figures/paintschemes of a current, legal army as another current legal army is where it gets tricky. No problem from most players casually, but I think it's about 50/50 for tournaments (there is normally a counts as ruling in the tournament pack however).

Having said all of this - the US tourney scene is very different to the UK, which is different to Germany, which is different to say Australia. The best bet is download a bunch of tournament packs from upcoming/past tournaments in the areas/conventions you are likely to play and check. With casual play I can't imagine any problems however.

[wookieegunner]

Evil, as far as the three rules you posted. Rule #1 is pretty much always superseeded for tournament play (otherwise the two oponents could agree to ignore the tournament rules), now given that I think everyone here agrees that for casual play the OP's question would not be a problem, we can ignore #1. Rule #3 is a generic "I can't find anything else to circumvent my opionion" so that isn't a specific rule as much as a statement, so it to can be ignored in a rules discussion. Furthermore, I state the same #3 for my answer to #2.

On rule #2, I don't see anything useful on page vii, but on page viii I do see under codexes "Once you have chosen an army to collect, it is a good idea to get hold of the Codex. Each army has a codex - its own dedicated book . . ." so from this we can infer that an army is a collection of Games Workshop models that are tied to a dedicated book, or mathematically speaking, an army is the set of models linked to a specific codex. Now to determine this set, we have to find a Games Workshop list of what models are linked to a specific codex. For this we will look at the Games Workshop website, http://www.games-workshop.com. On this website, there is a section for Warhammer 40,000 and a sub-section called Warhammer 40,0000 armies. This will be the basis for our set definition as it lists each codex along with a specific set of models attached to that codex. In this sub-section is a secondary sub-section labelled Blood Angels. Inside this is a codex and a list of models. By comparing the models in this set to the models the OP has, we can determine if said models are part of the army set defined by the codex per page viii. Now the models we have been questioning has been the ones with the tails, pelts, and heads. So, looking further we find these models are the Space Wolf special characters, Wolf Guard and Space Wolf Pack boxed set. Since these models are not listed in the Blood Angel's set, we can deduce that they are not appliacable to the Blood Angel's codex per page viii and therefore not acceptable.

There, we now are discussing based purely on the models themselves and not the paint or iconagraphy. Better?

[govannon]

First off, everyone needs to be more careful.
I see WAY TOO MUCH "putting words in peoples mouths" here. That's not cool.

The bottom line about it is that everyone has an opinion, and they're entitled to it.
Opinions are NOT facts and, as such, cannot be wrong. Disagreed with? Yes. Not wrong, though.

What chapter are these emblems for?
1)


2)


3)


4)
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/warha ... _Badge.png

If you DIDN'T respond 1) Soace Wolves, 2) Raptors, 3) Dark Angels, 4) Blood Angels, then you don't know iconography very well, or you're outright lying.

If you "get around" as a gamer, and are used to playing a LOT of different armies, You're going to look on the table, see Space Wolf models and presume it's Puppies. When you realize it isn't... it's too late. Your mind is going to keep with that association.

It's not that they CAN'T do it. It's just that it's an annoyance for their opponent.

Eric

2 is also Mentor Legion, White Consuls, Black Consuls

[JohnHwangBT]

So if, when I log in tomorrow, that BS is still up, I'm going to take it as a sign that admin isn't going to address the behavior displayed and that full-on flaming is acceptable. At that point, I'm going to light up this thread like you haven't seen in quite a while, because lord knows I've got a lot of stored up spleen to vent.

John, if you've got a problem with another member, PM an Admin or Mod, or report the post.

Threatening us to address it "or else" really pisses me off.

We try to give leeway to everyone, yourself included, and have - on NUMEROUS occasions. Don't be a hypocrite.

Eric

Eric:

First off, thank you and porkus for clarifying that you want the board to be civil. The fact of the matter is that admins were posting in this thread, and presumably reading but *not* acting. I took that to mean that such behavior was going to be acceptable in this particular thread, if not in general on the board. That is, it seemed to me that BT admins had given up on maintaining any pretense of civility on the board.I very much enjoy giving as good as I get, so if the gloves are off, I'm totally game. And I believe I ultimately reported the post last night. I'll guess I'll check and see what, if anything, was done.

I don't make threats - that was me doing you courtesy of giving advance notice before changing my approach to the board. And quite frankly, after the posts I saw last night, I could have cared less whether anybody else was pissed off or not.

If you ever feel you need to retroactively or preemptively ban me, please do so and I'll be totally fine with that. I'm a big boy and can take my lumps.

/John

[MagickalMemories]

John, the reason it ticked me off is because, AFTER the reported post and BEFORE your quoted post, both Jim and I had addressed the issues.
I made a general announcement to everyone involved, and Jim specifically addressed EVIL INC.
It was almost as if you ignored the fact that we'd addressed it before you commented just so you could post the advance notice.

Check your wording, though, please.

So if, when I log in tomorrow, that BS is still up, I'm going to take it as a sign that admin isn't going to address the behavior displayed and that full-on flaming is acceptable. At that point, I'm going to light up this thread like you haven't seen in quite a while, because lord knows I've got a lot of stored up spleen to vent.

That reads more like a thread or "warning" than advanced notice.

As for bans... suspensions happen before that. Very few things cause an outright ban. Nothing you did in this thread was cause for either.


Eric

[EVIL INC]

As has been said, please keep the personal attacks out of the thread. I have not done that myself and I am glad that you guys have finally stepped in to put an end to it. Thanx.
Note that I have put my opinions into the thread and I have posted them AS my opinions. Of course, you may note that my opinions MATCH the official stance of GW and the words as written in their rulebook (which is not an opinion at all but the rules). As it is a GW game, I had assumed that they have the right to make the "official" rules just as we have the right to make out own unofficial house rules at home.

[Stanislav]

Let's see...Official Stance....hmmmm

As an example of GW's official stance...

In the warehouse filled with stacks and stacks of GW goodies, there is a lone janitor.

Ring! Ring! Ring! goes the phone.

Sheepishly, looking around, the janitor notes there is no one in the room to answer the phone, so he goes over to it and picks it up....

"Hi! My name is Bandersnatch and I am a diehard Space Wolf player. With the Codex, I'm looking for an official answer as to whether Thunderwolf Cav have to be on cav bases or not?"

The janitor, "Yeah, they sure do".

Bandersnatch says, "That's what I thought, glad I could get it cleared up with an official GW answer! Thanks a bunch!"

This is a company that can't help contradict themselves with FAQs, and you think an Official Stance means anything?
It'll change next week.

[EVIL INC]

The fluff is something that changes more often then they change their underwear . Luckily for us, on this particular issue, they started their company with this stance and it has remained firm throughout every edition and ruleset they have ever put out (both when asked in person and in the written official rules). It is one of the very few things they staunchly stand by from the big guy at the top on down. Of course, you get a few aberrations at the bottom who try to buck the company on it but they soon find themselves out of a job.

[s_o_r_r_o_w]

Wow, I'm coming late to this (lively) discussion.

For my own part, I generally love "counts as" armies, because they usually reflect a player's desire to be creative with his modeling and painting in order to represent a force or faction not supported by rules: AdMech, Rogue Traders, Traitor Guard, Squats, Dark Eldar (j/k).

The other type of "counts as" player I can deal with is the one that likes a particular rules set/army book but hates the current model line, or wants to do something "wacky" orks using the IG list, Marines using the Necron list or some such. Marines are a special problem because of their many subtypes. Is using one type of Marine as another type "wacky" or "lazy"?

In my experience, the variables are usually 1) money, 2) aesthetics, 3) laziness.

1) Building a new army costs a lot of money. Buying an army book and then using the figs you've got costs a lot less. If you are a super-competitive but frugal Space Marine player, it makes a colossal amount of economic sense to swap some turrets and re-arrange your squads if you thing BA will kick more ass than SW, or if you're simply tired of SW. After all--Marines are Marines, right? It's not like these are some Dark Eldar MFs posing as the Sons of Russ.

2) The aesthetic argument is, I think, tough to de-legitimize. I personally think that SWs are gayer than a handbag full of rainbows. Space Vikings? Seriously? I mean, I enjoyed Rocket Robin Hood as a kid, but this seems a little too far. Especially when you push it to Space Viking Werewolves. Long teeth on Long Fangs? That's as lame as vampire teeth...oh, wait.... Or, maybe you're in love with Space Viking Werewolves, but the Background and play style (Ravenwing) of the Dark Angels really appeals to you, and nothing seems more bad ass to you than Space Viking Werewolf Hells Angels! (Actually, I might be able to get behind that myself....)

3) Lastly, laziness is...well, everyone hates it. It's lame. No one really likes to see unpainted models, or tac marines with no arms, etc. So when we see someone playing with the exact same army and the fourth different codex, well...you know how you feel about it. And I think that most of the venom in this discussion is for this type of "counts as" player.

There's been a lot of discussion about WYSIWY and rules and what not, and I think that's largely nonsense. If you're told, "These marines look like SW, but I'm using them as BA, and this guy here with a crazy Wolf Pelt and a ridiculous Viking Hat is Dante" then that should really suffice. Not to the point that his bolt pistol "counts as" a melta pistol or anything like that, because wargear SHOULD be WYSIWYG, but one marine counting as a different marine should, I think, be ok.

Can you ride the guy? Sure. But I think that you should be aware that you are lumping him in with the lazy gamers, when he might be cheap or aesthetically offended by red (or red/green colour blind).

I know it's been a long time since the beginning, but, in the beginning, the only thing that identified marines as being different was colour, and a few tiny chapter badges. And, as those of you familiar with the Compendium, http://rtb01.blogspot.com/2009/10/warha ... ndium.html, may recall, colour scheme could vary--WILDLY. So grey Blood Angels wearing wolf clothes and Viking Hats is not the most unreasonable thing in the world.

ALL OF THAT SAID--there are reasonable limits. Thunder Wolves really aren't land speeders or attack bites, stock. You want me to buy that they are--get converting.

Lazy "counts as" players need to be less lazy, and put some work (and pride) into their armies.

[kelanen]

There's been a lot of discussion about WYSIWY and rules and what not, and I think that's largely nonsense. If you're told, "These marines look like SW, but I'm using them as BA, and this guy here with a crazy Wolf Pelt and a ridiculous Viking Hat is Dante" then that should really suffice. Not to the point that his bolt pistol "counts as" a melta pistol or anything like that, because wargear SHOULD be WYSIWYG, but one marine counting as a different marine should, I think, be ok.

This is very much GW's view too, and espoused officially (at least as official as GW makes anything except a printed codex full of errors) by Jervis Johnson in his monthly posts in UK White Dwarf. The fact this is running on so long, I'm guessing you don't get JJ's Standard Bearer in the US WD? I know regional White Dwarves vary, but never having seen a non-Uk one, I don't know by how much.

[s_o_r_r_o_w]

This is very much GW's view too, and espoused officially (at least as official as GW makes anything except a printed codex full of errors) by Jervis Johnson in his monthly posts in UK White Dwarf. The fact this is running on so long, I'm guessing you don't get JJ's Standard Bearer in the US WD? I know regional White Dwarves vary, but never having seen a non-Uk one, I don't know by how much.

No, we get it. The problem is two-fold:

1) Jervis's credibility isn't great. His apologetics are sometimes good for the game, and often a measure to exciue GW's ass-hattery.

2) Gw's ass-hattery is occasionally exceeded by some players who do want to claim that Ragnar Blackmane is Dante, Bjorn is the BA character Dread, and Thunderwolves are attack bikes.

[EVIL INC]

Very well put Sorrow. The rules allows for it. This is because of the 3 reasons you gave. The HUGE majority of people who do it falls into your first category. Lets face it, it is an expensive hobby and not everyone has enough cash to but ANOTHER marine army. This is especially so in today's economy. Then, there are the ones who just like to have different imagery for their army then the usual or want to be creative. It is the "lazy" people who are few and far between. Lets face it, this is an artistic and creative hobby. People who are THAT lazy usually will not be in the hobby to begin with.
You are right though that the hatred that is being aimed at people who have their marine models serve in more then one chapter (and the hate flames directed at me here for supporting them) are made in the majority by people who think that people whose models are serving double duty are being lazy or are trying to pull a fast one. That is a misconception that is causing the issues.
As for the models themselves, you need to remember that it is not the color paint on a model, or the icons sculpted onto them or the wolf tails ect that give the models special rules in the game, it is the codex and the rules the codex has for them that is doing it (yes, even ork red paint jobs are a reflection of the rules in the codex).
No one is asking for wolf mounts to count as land speeders or bolt pistols, represent sniper rifles or anything at all of that nature. It has been explained that things of that nature would be bought/modeled separately (for example, totally new werewolf models that are not even in the space wolf range and would have to be convert just for the purpose to represent death company).
If someone is to accept such things as "hello kitty" marines (they were featured in white dwarf even) or dallas cowboy marines, accepting blood angels who use wolf icons and tails is just as plausible (more so I would think). To be honest, the rules allows for it so I would have no reasonable right to stop them from modeling them. Even if I did have that right, I would not hold their financial situation against them like that.

[kelanen]

2) Gw's ass-hattery is occasionally exceeded by some players who do want to claim that Ragnar Blackmane is Dante, Bjorn is the BA character Dread, and Thunderwolves are attack bikes.

All of which is fine by me, and mostly fine in GW tournaments too...

Ragnar/Dante is grey - some allow this, some don't. Bjorn and Thunderwolves would be fine, and GW promotes using alternatives for stuff - cavalry for jetbikes for example is often done!

[EVIL INC]

Sorry, misclick.