Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, with the new Space Marine codex, I'm all stoked about all the different armies I can field. I don't want to be hemmed into only a single list though, so I've been considering painting all my marines as my own custom chapter, so that I can field them with any Chapter Tactics I like. I think I will make a series of banners to put out before each game starts, so that my opponent can keep straight which army I am this week. Now, my question is, how do you guys feel about this? If an opponent made a chapter called the Blue Giants, or whatever, and fielded them one week as Iron Fists, and another week as White Scars, depending on how the mood struck him, how approving would you be of such behavior? (Keep in mind that before each game he's making it VERY clear to his opponents what army he's playing.)

As long as it is listed on his army sheet, shown during a mutual swap of army rosters I'd be fine. I would be a little irritated if while pulling out my army I'm told "Oh by the way, they are a Raven Guard successor." and it is not listed on the roster.

I would personally have absolutely no problem with this, as long as you make it clear what chapter tactics you'r using before hand.

My marines are painted crimson fist, but I am planning on not only using the imperial fist doctrine, but all of them at one point or an other. If my opponent is not ok with that, well that sounds like a personal problem.

Power armour is power armour regardless of the colour, and a bolter is still a bolter.

If its WYSIWYG and you have the army written with the CT on an army list when you swap lists, I would have no problem.

I'd be fine with it (but seeing as I do this myself, I'm pretty biased).

WYSIWYG is king. So long as that is followed, who cares.

I mean, is someone seriously going to demand that you paint all different marines armies for each CT?

I mean, the equivalent in other armies would be requiring:
- Every Eldar force, if you use a different Phoenix Lord, to swap color
- Every Tau force with an HQ from a different Sept to use a different color (want to play with Farsight? Whole army better be red. Want to play with another HQ? Better change color then).
- You'll need at least 4 chaos armies, for the Berzerkers, Thousand Sons, Noise Marines, and Plague Marines

etc. etc.

So long as you're not swapping your army right before the game SPECIFICALLY to take advantage of your opponent (for example, swapping to IH with vehicles to take advantage of opponent's anti-tank; swapping to IF to take advantage of mech list, etc.), then it's fine.

So long as it wasn't to specifically counter something, I'd be fine with it.

I'd only roll my eyes a tiny bit.

If you bring a legal list to the table, that's fine. I don't mind you swapping things out, a few proxies, etc. But I'd hope that over time you would find an army build and style that would "click" with you. By swapping rules around, it seems that you haven't settled down with the fluff of your army. And the fluff and lore is a big part of the game for a lot of people.

It's hard for your army to tell its story if it's constantly being re-conned.

I know "forging a narrative" is often used in a mocking manner, but there is some truth to it. There are different aspects of the hobby, and by focusing on the game mechanics you may miss out on the fluff/story/background. I'm making some sweeping generalizations here, and realize that the two are not mutually exclusive. But I do enjoy it when people find an army they enjoy, and to me, that implies settling on one set of rules.

Perfectly fine!
I have done the same with my army since i started in early 5th ed.
Space marines are an all-around army with many models and if am going to play the same army for another 5 years, i would certainly prefer a little variety.
Can you imagine the poor TAU player that has to put up with his 3 riptides list till his next codex comes out?

You don't even need to bother with a banner. Just say "I'm running white scars":

Eh, I figure the banner will go the extra mile to keeping me above board. Just so a regular opponent doesn't wind up getting confused.

I will be very surprised if you find anyone that has an issue with it and anyone that does really needs to grow up. In the end its your army and honeslty I see know problem designing it to expand your options and to try new things.

There is absolutely no problem with this at all.

For those that disagree, what you are actually advocating is that if someone wants to play both Raven Guard, Ultramarines, and Imperial fists (and paint their armies), then they must buy 3 space marine armies.

That's absurd.

Nothing wrong at all with painting them up a custom scheme to your liking, and taking each chapter tactic out for a spin as you want.

You have a Salamanders army, by looking at your signature. I don't know if you should repaint them or start an entirely new chapter, as that is a waste of time, money and effort.

Of course, if you felt like you wanted a new chapter because you hated your old colour scheme, etc. then feel free to.

However, I would have absolutely no problem (and I'm sure many people will too) with running your Salamanders as any marine army be it vanilla, blood, wolf, even chaos, etc. as long as your army is WYSIWG.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Eh, I figure the banner will go the extra mile to keeping me above board. Just so a regular opponent doesn't wind up getting confused.

With the new 6th edition chapter tactics, people will expect/be used to having a C:SM opponent potentially be 7 different armies. Some people are even playing founding legions but proxying other legions' tactics because they may have been a Kantor Sternguard or Lysander player in 5E but painted their army as Ultramarines, or any non-Salamander-related chapter who used Vulkan.

 Yonan wrote:
You don't even need to bother with a banner. Just say "I'm running white scars":

It would be White Scars.

I'd roll my eyes. Why? It's not that I'm not ok with it, I'd roll my eyes because it's essentially Plastic Grey Marine chapter. Marines are the most modular, prolific, and bland force in 40k. All things combined in addition to using the Generic Marines codex to customize your army to a degree that none of the other factions can just makes my eyes want to exercise their directional muscles.

 DogofWar1 wrote:
WYSIWYG is king. So long as that is followed, who cares.

I mean, is someone seriously going to demand that you paint all different marines armies for each CT?

I mean, the equivalent in other armies would be requiring:
- Every Eldar force, if you use a different Phoenix Lord, to swap color
- Every Tau force with an HQ from a different Sept to use a different color (want to play with Farsight? Whole army better be red. Want to play with another HQ? Better change color then).
- You'll need at least 4 chaos armies, for the Berzerkers, Thousand Sons, Noise Marines, and Plague Marines

etc. etc.

So long as you're not swapping your army right before the game SPECIFICALLY to take advantage of your opponent (for example, swapping to IH with vehicles to take advantage of opponent's anti-tank; swapping to IF to take advantage of mech list, etc.), then it's fine.

It's a minor point, but I don't think you understand Eldar army structure or colour schemes.

Phoenix Lords have zero impact on army colours and have no association with a specific craftworld - with the exception of Maugan Ra and one of the minor craftworlds. Phoenix Lords go to the craftworld where they are needed.

 Far Seer wrote:
You have a Salamanders army, by looking at your signature. I don't know if you should repaint them or start an entirely new chapter, as that is a waste of time, money and effort.

Of course, if you felt like you wanted a new chapter because you hated your old colour scheme, etc. then feel free to.

However, I would have absolutely no problem (and I'm sure many people will too) with running your Salamanders as any marine army be it vanilla, blood, wolf, even chaos, etc. as long as your army is WYSIWG.

Salamanders are going to remain my main force, but I've got a number of figs I haven't used before, that are going to wind up being painted in the colors of my award winning custom chapter. Most of my ideas revolve around dual-Space Marine armies. There are a few examples where I would be running without ANY of my Salamanders. (Most notably, my Iron Hands gunline.)

I think even I would get a little eye-rolly if someone had their army painted like one of the actual chapters in the book but was running them as a different one.

Within the codex I'd probably be fine with it, though I'd much prefer to play an Iron Hands successor that actually LOOKS like one than 'generic marines 42'.

I'd have a bigger problem if you were swapping between code xes - iron hands one week and space wolves the next.

Generally, I think it should be obvious to the opponent what army you're playing without any explanation needed. If you need to explain something, your opponent then need to remember something additional, which is a bit unfair.

In trying to make this work without buying multiple armies, I had a similar idea to yours - using a generic colour scheme and different character/sergeant models with obvious chapter specific upgrades and units. So, in dark angels mode all the sergeants would have robes and DA style banners, winged shoulder pads, a special dark angels captain model, etc. The army would obviously be a DA army to any opponent who looked. Then, for Iron Hands, you just need another set of character models - which is a fun little project rather than a whole army build.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Within the codex I'd probably be fine with it, though I'd much prefer to play an Iron Hands successor that actually LOOKS like one than 'generic marines 42'.

I'd have a bigger problem if you were swapping between code xes - iron hands one week and space wolves the next.

Generally, I think it should be obvious to the opponent what army you're playing without any explanation needed. If you need to explain something, your opponent then need to remember something additional, which is a bit unfair.

In trying to make this work without buying multiple armies, I had a similar idea to yours - using a generic colour scheme and different character/sergeant models with obvious chapter specific upgrades and units. So, in dark angels mode all the sergeants would have robes and DA style banners, winged shoulder pads, a special dark angels captain model, etc. The army would obviously be a DA army to any opponent who looked. Then, for Iron Hands, you just need another set of character models - which is a fun little project rather than a whole army build.

I don't understand why some frown on switching between codices. Space marines are space marines, regardless of colour. The only real difference between a Blood Angel space marine and a Space Wolf is the colour scheme, the chapter symbol and maybe some few distinguishing bits.

If you can argue that you can use a bland SM army to represent multiple SM codices, I can't see why you can't argue same for an army that's been given a codex colour scheme as long as everything is WYSIWG, and you don't suddenly decide "Whoops, I wasn't using vanilla...I'm a wolf player" in the middle of a game.

Sure, running BA marines in massive Templar squads would break fluff, but ultimately 40K is a game where you push figures and roll dice. Whenever this type of topic comes up, I see people argue that it's not fair for non-marine players and therefore marine players shoudn't be allowed to codex hop. Well...I agree it is a little unfair , but it was ultimately GW's decision to make so many codices for marines.

 Jimsolo wrote:
as Iron Fists

Chapter Master: Lemmy Kilmister
Chapter Champion: Eddie Clarke
Chapter Banner Bearer: Phillip Taylor

 Far Seer wrote:
I don't understand why some frown on switching between codices. Space marines are space marines, regardless of colour. The only real difference between a Blood Angel space marine and a Space Wolf is the colour scheme, the chapter symbol and maybe some few distinguishing bits.

If you can argue that you can use a bland SM army to represent multiple SM codices, I can't see why you can't argue same for an army that's been given a codex colour scheme as long as everything is WYSIWG, and you don't suddenly decide "Whoops, I wasn't using vanilla...I'm a wolf player" in the middle of a game.

Sure, running BA marines in massive Templar squads would break fluff, but ultimately 40K is a game where you push figures and roll dice. Whenever this type of topic comes up, I see people argue that it's not fair for non-marine players and therefore marine players shoudn't be allowed to codex hop. Well...I agree it is a little unfair , but it was ultimately GW's decision to make so many codices for marines.

The reason it annoys people is the same as the proxy argument. Ahem....,

Long fangs and devastators are different units with different abilities, which look quite different. If you field regular marines, but they're meant to represent long fangs, then I have to remember that for the entire game. If you fielded real Long fang models I wouldn't. Just like if you proxied all your flamers for meltas.

This is fine, until that point in the game where I forget that they're long fangs (or that those flamers are meltas) and do something stupid, because they look like devastators, not long fangs (or tactical marines, not grey hunters). You've now got an advantage because of unclear modelling which, if you were playing with the correct models, you wouldn't have got.

Even if you've informed me before the game, having to remember that fact makes the game a tiny bit more difficult for me, which isn't fair.

So, although all marines have the same equipment, they don't all have the same rules, Using tac marines to represent grey hunters, or blue UM terminators to represent Deathwing, May be WYSIWYG, but it's still asking the opponent to remember something he wouldn't usually have to...

But if I tell you I'm using the Space Wolf codex, and every unit is WYSIWYG minus wolf iconography and the weird blue/grey colour, would it matter?

I guess I'm a little confused on your stance. A grey hunter is really just a tac marine anyways. The colour of a marine or whatever dangly bits hang off the end of the gun or around their belts shouldn't make a difference anyways, as this would stifle any creativity for homemade chapters using a certain codex.

I dunno, I say have at it. Tell your opponent before what codex it is, exchange army lists, and have WYSIWYG models. I don't think it would make a difference, at least not anymore than remembering the special rules for an obviously space wolf army and a not so obviously space wolf army.

To me, power armor looks pretty much the same. Grey Hunters or Tactical Marines (or hell, Jump Pack-less Assault Marines, or a Command Squad, etc etc) are pretty much the same to me, at least at tabletop distance. While I agree that the rules are vastly different, Long Fangs and Devastators look pretty much the same to me. Obviously the actual SW models have all the crazy wolfywolf stuff all over them, but that's just decoration, and I don't think that, as long as I knew my opponent was playing Space Wolves, that I would confuse the two.

That's just me, of course.

I have a large collection and am random when I play. I run the Dark Angels when in the mood or a Vanilla marine chapter when I. Want a simple set of rules for the army. So as lone as I knew what I was up against I have no problem. It would be refreshing to face differing tactics from game to game.

Corporal_Chaos wrote:
I have a large collection and am random when I play. I run the Dark Angels when in the mood or a Vanilla marine chapter when I. Want a simple set of rules for the army. So as lone as I knew what I was up against I have no problem. It would be refreshing to face differing tactics from game to game.

"It would be refreshing to face differing tactics from game to game"

That is the problem with (some) people as they don't like different things as that makes them have to think. But then again I am fond of just building one large space marine army that can be used as many of the chapters in 40k. It will however have a large deal of fluff behind it and I would not ally two armies that look the same and come from different codex(s) (because that would be a jerk move) but it does help from having to have 2000 points of space marines painted red, 2000 points painted dark green,2000 points painted blue etc. I would say you should however that no matter what you are playing looking at your opponent's army then building a list just to counter them is a bit of a jerk move. unless you have nothing that can hurt that army. in that case someone is just being cheesy to the point of being jerky.

I don't really see any problem with it at all. Heck, I'll be doing it from time to time with my Crimson Fist army. Not on a regular basis mind you(my inner fluff bunny won't let me ), but for the occasional change of pace

I don't field any bikes, so that eliminates WS from my list of chapter tactics. But I'm dying to try out Iron Hands with a heavy dose of Dreadnaughts.

There is no problem and no reason anyone should complain about what color your marines are. If the primary weapons are correctly modeled on everything, you are completely fine. Anyone who says otherwise, isn't worth playing.

Personally I'd be fine with that as long as it's stated in the roster before the game has started
And it's really no fun not being creative here and there
So switching it up every once in awhile isn't a bad idea, it keeps flavor to the game