So many firstborns are done being 40k tourney models...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/07/24/space-marine-range-update-bikes-land-speeders-and-more-are-soon-zooming-off-into-the-sunset/

So if someone showed up with a WYSIWYG force of mark7 armored marines to using in a HH game... how'd you feel about that? Just curious. I have 2 full companies of 30k, so I'll have my pure FW forces for my games. But I'm wondering how someone with a massive c2000 white scar bike army is going to use their models, and so on

Most of the HH players I know would probably play with you, but they would 100% bitch about it afterwards and complain that they didn't enjoy the game and that you were a lame opponent for bringing 40k marines to the game instead of committing to playing a proper HH army.

It depends. If the individual has the models and is simply looking to learn the system before adding to their army with HH units and kits then I'd be absolutely fine with it.

However, while there were many different stop-gap Power Armour patterns used during the Heresy if someone didn't have any ideas of making a more era-appropriate force, I'd be disappointed. HH is not a refuge for people who don't like Primaris.

Exceptions concerning money and time are not considered for this second part because I'm not an ass but if someone has the time and money to be doing HH then I'd expect to see some sort of investment in that.

"It depends" has always been the correct answer, none of this is exactly new.

Some of the "40K Oldmarines" models have perfectly fine rules in HH. Land Speeders, bikes, scouts, dreadnoughts and most character models are usable without problems - some restrictions might apply though. Most people will have no issues whatsoever if the models are "heresified", i.e. no Imperial Aquila outside of Emperors Children or late-Heresy Loyalists, armour marks appropriate to the time period, and all that.

Other models might see "counts as" use. The Striker could easily stand in as a Scorpius Whirlwind, and the Thunderfire Cannon as a Rapier. I guess this would be down to proper communication and the person on the other side of the table being fine with it.

Just plonking down your regular 40K army will get eyebrows raised, and for good reasons. HH is not 40K, and outside of test/introduction games one should put some effort into having an appropriate army. This will of course vary from group to group, but overall "just use your 40K Marines in HH" will not get you far anywhere.

In the longer term, fridging these kits probably makes it even less likely that people will turn up to HH games with WH40k armies. As the Primaris range replaces the firstborn (about time!), people will start to shelve their firstborn (my Ultramarines have been in their box since Marines switched to 32mm bases). There seems to be strong resistance to using Primaris models in HH, unless they are heavily converted. And with no new WH40k rules for HH models, the 2 games are likely to become even more distinct. Which IMO is a good thing - provided GW plug the gaps in the HH plastic range.

It's weird to see kits like the Landspeeder go away. It's been part of the game for so long. I wonder what the long-term plan for venerable kits like the Land Raider is?

I'd be perfectly fine with it, personally. And I wouldn't "bitch" afterwards, as some loudmouths like to proclaim, without any evidence, I might add.

 Snord wrote:
It's weird to see kits like the Landspeeder go away. It's been part of the game for so long. I wonder what the long-term plan for venerable kits like the Land Raider is?

The Land Speeder is one of those headscratchers for me, as it would be so easy to keep it around for HH use.

The Land Raider has a "proper HH kit" in plastic already, but the 40K version has a variety of weapon options not available in there. It also is not yet "replaced" by anthing in the Primaris range - I doubt the LR will go away before this comes around, as right now it has a niche of its own in gameplay terms.

The Landspeeder that get's legended is a scheme that is found during the scouring era.

If you want to field a scouring era force he is more than adequate enough. The problem is the marines in it are MK VII, which is a hard pass for many HH players.

IoW, learn the armor marks and maybee modify some models and nobody will take issue. MK VII though is suboptimal.

As others have put it, put the effort in since HH is more like a historical and everyone will be happy. Ignoring of course as others have brought up time and money constraints or if you merely want to test something.

Blood Angels, White Scars and Imperial Fists themed around the seige of terra are the only armies that can really get away with using MKvii armour. I plan on using it for a couple of squads of inducti.
But it is pretty easy to swap a few bits around and use it as mkv. I have a bunch of landspeeders converted up but not painted for my white scars in this fashion.

The land speeder is fine to use if equiped with the right weapons.

Scouts are a bit odd, as they don't really fit in but were listed as HH kits when 2.0 came out.

Hopefully we will get plastic bikes, attack bikes and landspeeders for 30K to replace the now squatted kits.

 Lobokai wrote:
So many firstborns are done being 40k tourney models...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/07/24/space-marine-range-update-bikes-land-speeders-and-more-are-soon-zooming-off-into-the-sunset/

So if someone showed up with a WYSIWYG force of mark7 armored marines to using in a HH game... how'd you feel about that? Just curious. I have 2 full companies of 30k, so I'll have my pure FW forces for my games. But I'm wondering how someone with a massive c2000 white scar bike army is going to use their models, and so on

To answer this question you would need to see the models first. Has the person put the effort in to at least some degree in order to fit them into 30K? If the answer is no and he just transferred them from 40K to 30K without modifications then those models are not welcome.

I think it makes more sense to play older editions of 40k with OOP 40k models than 30k with OOP 40k models.

I'd play against 40K firstborn in HH any day, but nobody in my circles wants to play it at all

I find it strange how narrow-minded 30K players seem to be. They have locked down the mighty setting of the far future even more into a rigid boring story than current 40K, making the universe even smaller. Heck, soon even Necromunda is a more diverse and rich setting than 30K

I'd be absolutely fine with it and woud enjoy the game regardless of the armour mark. 30k is still a world filled with 'your dudes' and people who rivet count or get upset 'It's not appropriate armour' forgets how vast the heresy was and something can happen somewhere if thats what you want your legion to do, go for it

30k is not actually a historical, GW have proven time and again things change and unexpected things happen, just because some people don't like your armour mark doesn't mean it wasn't possible/ isn't fine and enjoy playing a great system and hopefully great community!

I think it's more strange that people like yourself call HH players narrow-minded, tauist.

Everyone who has said no to 40k Marines in HH in this thread has also been very clear that they would play against that army if the player was trying out the game and setting before investing in some HH units while also being clear they wouldn't discriminate based on factors like income and life circumstances.

You're actively encouraging more resentment and division between hobbyists when there isn't any there.

Another thing that just popped into my head. Restricting ones self to just reusing 40k models is massively restricting. No Contemptors, Leviathans, Legion units in many cases, most tanks or weapons and heck you wouldn't even be able to run 40k Tacticals as anything but Veterans which in turn restricts your Rites of War. Unless the player just proxies every unit as something else or with other equipment (which won't fly in my experience) they're basically just ignoring a huge chunk of the Legion army list and equipment.

Why not just keep playing 40k with those models tho?

 Gert wrote:

..
You're actively encouraging more resentment and division between hobbyists when there isn't any there.

Am I now? I thought I was just giving my opinion. But guess I just dont know how to talk the talk, clearly HH is not for me

 tauist wrote:
Am I now? I thought I was just giving my opinion. But guess I just dont know how to talk the talk, clearly HH is not for me

Just because it is your opinion doesn't mean you get to be rude.

Nobody here has insulted 40k players or those who wish to use their 40k models in HH.

@tauist:
WH30k is set in a specific pseudo-historical period i.e. before the Imperium had ossified. The whole point of it is that it's a civil war, involving earlier versions of the units and equipment that feature in WH40k. If someone isn't prepared to put at least some effort into making their toy soldiers look like they belong in that period, then it's entirely understandable that there'd be resistance from players who have made the effort. I don't think anyone here is advocating the kind of gate-keeping that you see from hard-core HH players (which is basically that WH40k players who cross over to HH are transgressors on holy ground). So you're just coming across as being being deliberately inflammatory.

Anyway, considering that you think that HH is a "rigid boring story", I'm not sure why you bothered posting in this sub-forum in the first place.

The speeders, bikes, and dreads all port over fine. Theres even art of the speeders in the heresy from the card game and visions I think? Possibly also the black books. They shared the profile with the "Proteus" pattern in v1 and still work perfectly now.

I'd definitely make an effort to turn the Mk7 marines into mk5 though or atleast paint them to look heresy-approproate. Mk7 does look good in heresy with a bit of care, but it can be a bit immersion breaking at a narrative even with no effort.

In a casual game though I can't imagine people actually having a problem with it though. People are better in person than the internet suggests

I've got tonnes of these old models I plan to use in Heresy, I find the easiest way to bring them up to standard is torso swap mk 4 and mk 4/mk 6 helmets. With that and the right paint scheme they look great.

I know Heresy isn't supposed to be a refuge for people who don't like Primaris, but I have a huge soft spot for the old metal and resin marine characters and mk 7 in general. I have to restrain myself from shoe-horning them in to my Heresy army for sure.

The saddest thing with this is really the loss of the classic marine look and feel and the 5 mins to midnight setting. I'm hoping that they might bring out a scouring game/supplement when they've run out of other Heresy stuff to do which could scratch that itch. In the meantime, Oldhammer all the way

Here is how I have transferred 40K SM to 30K. There is not a single conversion to be found but rather a selection of heads, torsos and weapons to be used while others should be avoided. I also used the clan symbol of Ungavarr which is not around anymore in 40K thus eliminating them for use in modern times.

Heads:
Dedicated Iron Hands heads were used as well as predominantly Mk6 helmets. If there is a Mk7 helmet then it is one which is suitably techy by having lots of lights on.

Torso:
Anything goes apart from the Aquila icon.

Weapons:
Again avoiding the Aquila icon.

Link:
Ungavarr_Tactical_Squad_#10
https://ibb.co/album/PZPNPX

Ungavarr_Support_Squad_#10
https://ibb.co/album/zsg9zv

And yes, the Tactical squad still needs weathering.

Sure, go right ahead. Marines are marines and plenty of people used 40k marine kits to play 30k-era games before FW decided to turn the whole thing into another cash cow for GW to milk. Obsessive rivet counting and gatekeeping people who don't comply with your specific vision of how 30k marines look is toxic as hell and the people doing it aren't the people you want to engage with anyway.

People who lazily transfer 40K minis to 30K are better off playing with sticks and stones than bothering established 30K communities who treat the setting with the respect it deserves.

 Strg Alt wrote:
People who lazily transfer 40K minis to 30K are better off playing with sticks and stones than bothering established 30K communities who treat the setting with the respect it deserves.

Thank you for this excellent example of gatekeeping and acting like your aesthetic preferences are the only ones that matter.

Sorry, disagree, there's more than enough old 40k minis that can be easily converted into 30k, from plastic castellans being an even older type than the common castellax in the 30k era, therefore fitting a more dire time of the HH conflict, to marines which merly require some bits and bobs cut off.

Not doing so, is kinda lazy, not only that, there once was a time were kitbashing and converting was seen as a hobby goldstandard, and it does a community well.
Therefore having a degree of standards to facilitate that is a good thing.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
Sure, go right ahead. Marines are marines and plenty of people used 40k marine kits to play 30k-era games before FW decided to turn the whole thing into another cash cow for GW to milk. Obsessive rivet counting and gatekeeping people who don't comply with your specific vision of how 30k marines look is toxic as hell and the people doing it aren't the people you want to engage with anyway.

But if a marine is a marine, why bother transferring to 30k, why not just keep playing 40k

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
Sure, go right ahead. Marines are marines and plenty of people used 40k marine kits to play 30k-era games before FW decided to turn the whole thing into another cash cow for GW to milk. Obsessive rivet counting and gatekeeping people who don't comply with your specific vision of how 30k marines look is toxic as hell and the people doing it aren't the people you want to engage with anyway.

But if a marine is a marine, why bother transferring to 30k, why not just keep playing 40k

Because fwiw the 30k ruleset is atleast somewhat competent, whilest the 40k ruleset has devolved to a point where it is one step away from going back to the ocean.

Why do HH players have to accept 40k armies just because those players don't like 40k at this current point? How is that fair?

I don't make this point because I feel ownership of HH at all, because that would be weird, but why should I as a HH player of 10 years be gracious to those who only deem my favourite game worthy because they don't like Primaris or the current ruleset of 40k?

Why am I getting tarred with the same brush as sexists and racists because I think people should make an effort to support the HH community?

I think people have been pretty clear that they would accept new HH players as long as they make a modicum of effort to support the game and participate in the community rather than just jumping ship because their personal preferences aren't found in the current edition of 40k.
HH has enough moaning and bad blood without people coming over and complaining about why they don't like Primaris.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
But if a marine is a marine, why bother transferring to 30k, why not just keep playing 40k

Because this thread was asking about models which no longer have 40k rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:
Why am I getting tarred with the same brush as sexists and racists because I think people should make an effort to support the HH community?

They are making an effort to support it. They're bringing their armies and asking to play games with you. The community is not the same as your personal aesthetic preferences and rivet counting.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
They are making an effort to support it. They're bringing their armies and asking to play games with you. The community is not the same as your personal aesthetic preferences and rivet counting.

It's not supporting the community if they're only coming over because they don't like Primaris and the current edition of 40k which is exactly the point that is being discussed in this thread. The idea that HH is only good now because 40k isn't is extremely insulting.
Not only that, most people here have made it explicitly clear that they would be absolutely fine with someone using a 40k Marine force as a test for the system before expanding into a proper Heresy force.

Regardless why does any of that give you the right to tell me that I'm the same as racists and sexists because I think that using a 40k army with no HH stuff isn't a good idea?

 Gert wrote:
Regardless why does any of that give you the right to tell me that I'm the same as racists and sexists because I think that using a 40k army with no HH stuff isn't a good idea?

I said no such thing. And if you're going to resort to hyperbolic false accusations there is no point in having any further conversation with you.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
Obsessive rivet counting and gatekeeping people who don't comply with your specific vision of how 30k marines look is toxic as hell and the people doing it aren't the people you want to engage with anyway.

Right yeah, I'm the one being hyperbolic. Your first post in this thread might I add.

Also brilliant that once again you choose to ignore the vast majority of my post because it actually challenges your viewpoint and you can't just dismiss it out of hand.

Removed - rule #1 please

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
But if a marine is a marine, why bother transferring to 30k, why not just keep playing 40k

Because this thread was asking about models which no longer have 40k rules.

Why would it be okay to proxy them for 30k if it's not okay to proxy them for 40k?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Why would it be okay to proxy them for 30k if it's not okay to proxy them for 40k?

Because they aren't being proxied in 30k. They're being used as fully WYSIWYG models matching the 30k rules.

If you are not willing to do the effort, nope, then you are permanently proxying.

Not Online!!! wrote:
If you are not willing to do the effort, nope, then you are permanently proxying.

They are not proxies. They are fully WYSIWYG representations of 30k units.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Why would it be okay to proxy them for 30k if it's not okay to proxy them for 40k?

Because they aren't being proxied in 30k. They're being used as fully WYSIWYG models matching the 30k rules.

If that were true, this thread wouldn't exist.

The wargear might be WYSIWYG in the sense that it's clear what is what, but the base models are not visually representative of 30k units.

They're WYSIWYG in the same way these are WYSIWYG

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The wargear might be WYSIWYG in the sense that it's clear what is what, but the base models are not visually representative of 30k units.

They are absolutely WYSIWYG. WYSIWYG is about the rules of a model being clearly represented so that you can look at a model on the table and know what its rules are. A shoulder pad having a slightly different shape has no rules meaning and is therefore unrelated to WYSIWYG.

What we are discussing here is your personal aesthetic preference for one shoulder pad shape over another, that in addition to being WYSIWYG models must aesthetically match the interpretation of the 30k lore established by FW in the official kits. And let's be honest here, most of the details in question are extremely minor ones that are not visible at tabletop distance. Nor would anyone but the most devoted rivet counters be able to look at different armor pieces and tell which ones are 30k vs. 40k era parts.

They're WYSIWYG in the same way these are WYSIWYG

Not at all. Those models are not WYSIWYG because they've diverged so far from the GW aesthetic that their rules are no longer clear based on looking at the model. Is that supposed to be power armor or terminator armor? Are those power swords on an entire unit or are they meant to represent chainswords? Their guns look like they might be bolt pistols, but then they have some bits underneath the barrel that look like they might be intended to be combi-weapons.

A 40k Land Speeder, on the other hand, is still clearly a Land Speeder with clearly identifiable weapons even if a close inspection might reveal that the crew have shoulder pads that aren't quite the same shape as the shoulder pads you prefer.

Oh really, NOW the aesthethique doesn't fit GW's then it's an issue, but GW also has a distinct aesthethique for 30k and 40k models don't fit that either.

A can not be at the same time not A.

Not Online!!! wrote:
See lord blackfangs post.

End of story.

It is not end of story. WYISYWG is about rules being clearly identifiable based on the model, not your subjective aesthetic preference for one shape of shoulder pad over another.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
See lord blackfangs post.

End of story.

It is not end of story. WYISYWG is about rules being clearly identifiable based on the model, not your subjective aesthetic preference for one shape of shoulder pad over another.

Again, A can not be not-A at the same time. You are breaking baseline logical foundations for personal preferences because you can't be bothered to convert.

Especially since for your meassure above you use aesthethique for a qualifier and yet don't apply that consistently.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Oh really, NOW the aesthethique doesn't fit GW's then it's an issue, but GW also has a distinct aesthethique for 30k and 40k models don't fit that either.

A can not be at the same time not A.

The aesthetic of the third-party models is a problem because, as I clearly explained, the rules are not identifiable based on the model. A 40k power armored marine with a bolter is clearly identifiable as a power armored marine with a bolter when used in 30k even if the shape of the shoulder pad doesn't match your version of the 30k lore. But I have no idea if those third-party models are supposed to be terminators or power armor, if the melee weapons are power swords or chainswords, etc.

If they were third-party models that clearly represented their relevant rules attributes then they would be WYSIWYG. But those particular models do not and so they are not.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Oh really, NOW the aesthethique doesn't fit GW's then it's an issue, but GW also has a distinct aesthethique for 30k and 40k models don't fit that either.

A can not be at the same time not A.

The aesthetic of the third-party models is a problem because, as I clearly explained, the rules are not identifiable based on the model. A 40k power armored marine with a bolter is clearly identifiable as a power armored marine with a bolter when used in 30k even if the shape of the shoulder pad doesn't match your version of the 30k lore. But I have no idea if those third-party models are supposed to be terminators or power armor, if the melee weapons are power swords or chainswords, etc.

If they were third-party models that clearly represented their relevant rules attributes then they would be WYSIWYG. But those particular models do not and so they are not.

Nope, by your own logic these are clearly normal assault marines.
Try again.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Nope, by your own logic these are clearly normal assault marines.

Assault marines can take power swords on every model?

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Nope, by your own logic these are clearly normal assault marines.

Assault marines can take power swords on every model?

No power node.

Actually the correct model replacement would be reivers in hindsight, but in essence a reiver is just a primaris assault marine to resell you an assault marine so.

Not Online!!! wrote:
No power node.

Actually the correct model replacement would be reivers in hindsight, but in essence a reiver is just a primaris assault marine to resell you an assault marine so.

Thank you for demonstrating my point nicely. The weapons in question don't have the power node for a power weapon, but they also don't have the chainsaw teeth for a chainsword. And you can't even decide which unit they're supposed to represent. They are clearly not WYSIWYG, independent of any aesthetic preferences about their style or compliance with any particular lore interpretation.

OTOH if I show you a picture of this model:



It is very clear what it represents in the 30k rules even if the shoulder pads on the crew aren't the ones that match your personal subjective aesthetic preferences.

A croc on a flight stand is also very clearly a land speeder.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
A croc on a flight stand is also very clearly a land speeder.

No it isn't. Please do not waste time with absurd arguments.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
No power node.

Actually the correct model replacement would be reivers in hindsight, but in essence a reiver is just a primaris assault marine to resell you an assault marine so.

Thank you for demonstrating my point nicely. The weapons in question don't have the power node for a power weapon, but they also don't have the chainsaw teeth for a chainsword. And you can't even decide which unit they're supposed to represent.

OTOH if I show you a picture of this model:



It is very clear what it represents in the 30k rules even if the shoulder pads on the crew aren't the ones that match your personal subjective aesthetic preferences.

No you don't got a point for above, because you can use a reiver easily for an assault marine.

and on the later : Because this thing actually is perfectly valid for a scouring era force, aka LATE HH after the siege of terra. But then again since you have once again proven to not put in the effort you wouldn't have known that bit now would you. The only problematic bit in them is, as has been brought up, the marines in them, which can easily be rectified.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
A croc on a flight stand is also very clearly a land speeder.

Nay bother.

It's clear that he isn't willing to actually engage in the HH hobby from a good faith position, else he would've realised that he COULD build a scouring era force, that would be perfectly fine using this pattern of Land Speeder, so long you replace the torso and helmet, wich is easy.

Not Online!!! wrote:
It's clear that he isn't willing to actually engage in the HH hobby from a good faith position, else he would've realised that he COULD build a scouring era force, that would be perfectly fine using this pattern of Land Speeder, so long you replace the torso and helmet, wich is easy.

This is exactly the sort of toxic gatekeeping I was originally referring to: the model is fully WYSIWYG but it doesn't match your personal and subjective aesthetic preferences so you insist that it must be modified to match your demands or the person using it isn't "engaging in the hobby in good faith".

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
It's clear that he isn't willing to actually engage in the HH hobby from a good faith position, else he would've realised that he COULD build a scouring era force, that would be perfectly fine using this pattern of Land Speeder, so long you replace the torso and helmet, wich is easy.

This is exactly the sort of toxic gatekeeping I was originally referring to: the model is fully WYSIWYG but it doesn't match your personal and subjective aesthetic preferences so you insist that it must be modified to match your demands or the person using it isn't "engaging in the hobby in good faith".

You are considering playing a hobby that is set up as a quasi historical.

Quasi historicals are loser on those things but still require atleast the force to be internally fitting enough.

I pointed out to you, that if you'd done the most basic hobbying in such a fashion that'd it would be easy to make said model fit in. Or understand that if you want said model a Scouring Era force is where you are headed.

You didn't and claim that i am a toxic Gatekeeper.

Fine then, think of me as toxic for pointing something out to you I can live with that.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

This is exactly the sort of toxic gatekeeping I was originally referring to: the model is fully WYSIWYG but it doesn't match your personal and subjective aesthetic preferences so you insist that it must be modified to match your demands or the person using it isn't "engaging in the hobby in good faith".

And you likewise have an entirely personal, pick and choose threshold of what is and isn't WYSIWYG depending on what suits you at the moment (where a guy in power armour with a bolt gun for some reason can't be a 40k marine but can be a 30k marine even though it does not match the lore of how marines looked in that period) and are expecting others to conform to it.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
toxic gatekeeping

*Ding Ding Ding* There it is! I'm surprised it took this long to appear.
If I never hear that term again in my life it'll be too fething soon.

You (the general you, not the specific you) come into a hobby (any hobby, not just this one) and want to be a part of it, and that's fantastic. No one's stopping you and you're more then welcome. But as soon as there's but a single thing you don't like about hobby or don't agree with, you start demanding that those already in hobby change to suit your desires, while not being willing to do the same yourself. And when you don't get your way you cry "gatekeeping" and immediately begin to do everything you can to exclude those same people from what has already established. Which is (although you don't like to admit it) just another form of gatekeeping.

Damn, I was thinking about branching out to HH but the staggering amount of elitism is a huge turn off.

Yeah, gotta say - accusing hobbyists of gatekeeping because they insist on other hobbyists meeting the baseline expectations of engaging in that hobby is a wild hot take. The expectation of anyone playing any wargame is that they model a force reflective of the setting being played, for 30k that means a force that is equipped and structured using the technology and equipment that actually existed in that fictional time period. Its not gatekeeping to decline to play against someone showing up with a 40k army they have tried to pigeon-hole into the game. Nor is it gatekeeping to decline to play a 40k match against a 30k force, or an Angry Marines force, or a Misters of Battle force, nor any of the other ridiculous meme armies that people have made over the years.

Your individual right to hobby how you want to hobby does not supercede my individual right to hobby how I want to hobby. If the overall community is in collective alignment on their collective hobby preferences (i.e. not welcoming in 40k armies) and that makes it hard for you to find opponents, then thats a tough break for you. Stomping your feet and accusing people of gatekeeping because you don't like it is immature and not a good way to gain acceptance of your point of view.

You aren't being "gatekept" - nobody is preventing you from participating in the hobby on the basis of your identity or any other factor, people are simply choosing not to oblige you with a game because your approach to playing the game is immersion breaking for the people in question and ruins their experience of the game, just like how someone playing a game set in the Punic Wars might be put off if you showed up with an army for the Hundred Years War.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Damn, I was thinking about branching out to HH but the staggering amount of elitism is a huge turn off.

You should read the earlier bits of the thread where people were very clear that they would welcome new players if they intended to adapt to the system.

Limiting oneself to only 40k minis is also needless and harms your chances of an enjoyable game. You'd be missing out on loads of cool units like Contemptors, Primarchs, or unique Legion units such as Palatine Blades or Phalanx Warders.
Converting and kitbashing are also massively encouraged and it's one of the foundational pillars of HH.

The above exchange is one poster trying to play victim because people won't agree with their absolutist stance that everyone has to share their very specific opinion.

Not Online!!! wrote:

It's clear that he isn't willing to actually engage in the HH hobby from a good faith position, else he would've realised that he COULD build a scouring era force, that would be perfectly fine using this pattern of Land Speeder, so long you replace the torso and helmet, wich is easy.

If a Scouring Era force is valid for Horus Heresy, then literally nothing about that speeder needs to be changed, even the torso and helmet.

So if Scouring Era forces are valid for Horus Heresy, then mark 7 armor in general are valid for Horus Heresy (as suits of it were used during Siege of Terra). And Aquila on armor also started during Siege of Terra to identify loyalty to the God-Emperor.

And GW is quickly moving to the point where nothing matters, anyways. I wouldn't be surprised to see them release a Mark 7 armor kit. Or, as my friend speculates, re-releasing the 40k assault marine kit as a 30k kit. Clutching onto specific armor marks and details as "authentic 30k aesthetic" is dying, and it's being killed by GW itself.

Yeah no rhigu.

It’s perfectly valid for people to want an authentic look and feel to a setting and era, and it’s more unfortunate that marines of all models are becoming obsolete in such a way.

Really depends on the community I would suspect here, as most of the 30k people outside event days I have met have been using a fair bit of 40K painted up to fit their 30k forces.
As well as legacy army’s made before 30k was really supported at all by GW setting super specifics on things.

GW issues.

Not Online!!! wrote:
You are considering playing a hobby that is set up as a quasi historical.

No it isn't. The game as published by GW is set up just like every other game GW publishes. The "quasi-historical" thing is purely a creation of certain players who have decided on The Correct Way To Play 30k and gatekeep out anyone who doesn't comply with their standards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Damn, I was thinking about branching out to HH but the staggering amount of elitism is a huge turn off.

Don't worry about it. Online 30k forums are an echo chamber where the rivet counters discourage anyone else from participating. Offline things tend to be much better and people will welcome the chance to get games at all, while the rivet counters sulk alone in the corner with nobody to play against.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yeah, gotta say - accusing hobbyists of gatekeeping because they insist on other hobbyists meeting the baseline expectations of engaging in that hobby is a wild hot take.

They aren't the baseline expectations. They're the expectations you have added onto the game because you expect people to comply with your aesthetic preferences. You can insist that every shoulder pad in your army must have exactly the correct number of rivets according to the interpretation of the 30k lore published in the FW books but that is your own standard you've created, not something found in the game as published by GW.

And let's not be hyperbolic about Angry Marines or whatever meme nonsense you want to compare 40k models to. We're talking about subtle differences in minor details, details that are indistinguishable at tabletop distances and that most players wouldn't be able to recognize if you had the models side by side. Show an average person a 30k shoulder pad and a 40k shoulder pad, I doubt they'll have any clue which one is which or even understand that there's supposed to be a difference between them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
And you likewise have an entirely personal, pick and choose threshold of what is and isn't WYSIWYG depending on what suits you at the moment (where a guy in power armour with a bolt gun for some reason can't be a 40k marine but can be a 30k marine even though it does not match the lore of how marines looked in that period) and are expecting others to conform to it.

There is nothing personal about it. I have already explained multiple times that the reason I reject the third-party models is because it is not clear what their equipment is meant to be, not because of subjective lore or aesthetic factors. No such ambiguity exists with the official GW models being discussed here.

Meanwhile HH Black books etc exist .

Yeah no, come back when you can formulate an argument that is not baseline illogical.

I think people are focussing too much on Power Armour patterns and not the problem where a 40k Marine army isn't a HH one. Of the mainstay Firstborn units (Tacticals, Assault Marines, Devastators) only one can be used as a direct swap in HH, Assault Marines.
Legion Tacticals can't take Heavy or Special weapons and Legion Heavies have to use the same type of weapon for the whole unit. Got a Scout Squad with a Heavy Bolter or Missile Launcher? Too bad you can't use that because Scouts in HH can't take those. Got a Vanguard Veteran unit? Not anymore you don't because there's no basic Legion equivalent.
Throw in Centurions, any of the flyers, Razorbacks, Land Speeder Storms, Thunderfire Cannons, two Land Raider variants, and the AA tanks into the "can't be used" pile as well.

So either you're running a Pride of the Legion army for the rest of your days with no real fire support, Lords of War, aircraft, unique Legion units, Characters, or Primarchs, or you're buying new units.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Meanwhile HH Black books etc exist .

Yeah no, come back when you can formulate an argument that is not baseline illogical.

An illogical argument like "books exist"? The 30k books are just like 40k books and the mere existence of lore does not mean your personal aesthetic preferences are part of the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:
I think people are focussing too much on Power Armour patterns and not the problem where a 40k Marine army isn't a HH one.

Because the question in the OP was about models, not using a 40k army exactly as-is with no additional or modified units.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
Because the question in the OP was about models, not using a 40k army exactly as-is with no additional or modified units.

The title of the topic is nowhere near that specific and the point has been brought up before in this thread, within the first few posts actually.

The fact remains that unless a 40k Marine army makes a lot of changes to its roster or puts a lot of models on the sideline, then it won't function as a HH army in most cases.

Lets get this thread back on track eh? Lets stop the circular argument and get back to the topic.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
You are considering playing a hobby that is set up as a quasi historical.

No it isn't. The game as published by GW is set up just like every other game GW publishes. The "quasi-historical" thing is purely a creation of certain players who have decided on The Correct Way To Play 30k and gatekeep out anyone who doesn't comply with their standards.


[

You may want to crack open you Age of Darkness rulebook to where it discusses the game as explicitly being a game set amidst the civil war between the forces of Horus and the Emperor and the forces that partook in it. You can always skim through the section about all the different Armour marks used during said conflict and note the absence of anything beyond mk6, etc. All GW games are by definition quasi-historical as you are playing within the context of a fictional timeline, but in the case of HH its more explicit (or implicit) as the rulebook literally states that you are playing put the narrative that sets the foundation for warhammer 40k, whereas the 40k rulebook is more open ended in saying that players are forging their own narrative.

They aren't the baseline expectations. They're the expectations you have added onto the game because you expect people to comply with your aesthetic preferences.

Except that they are? Any sensible persons expectation when playing a game called "The Horus Heresy" is that they will be playing a game suitably representative of the setting it is named after, featuring forces representative of the forces that fought in that conflict. I don't go into a game of Team Yankee expecting to fight a World War 1 army, nor do I come into a game of Horus Heresy expecting to fight a Warhammer 40k space marine chapter. The rulebook and product line are entirely structured around the concept that you and your opponent will be playing games simulating battles of the Horus Heresy using miniatures modeled and painted to be representative of the factions that featured in said conflict. There's no provision, allowance, encouragement t, or discussion to be found of deviating from that expectation, because the idea of adhering to the games narrative is implicit in its design and packaging.

It's not about "aesthetic preferences", it's about using the product the way its actually marketed and directed to be used.

Oh look, another thread almost completely derailed by a poster known to jump into random threads and throwing around borderline flamebait and bad-faith arguments. Can we not just ignore this please?

To get back to the topic: I think the "40K Marines in HH" is a bit like "using unpainted models to play". For your first few games it is completely okay, and if your whole group is happy with playing like this, it is just fine overall. Playing in a group with an established standard of "we only play with painted models" will get some eyebrows raised if you show up with those same grey hordes again and again. The similarity is linked to the effort you put in: nobody will complain about 40K Marines used for your first games of HH or to try out things before making an investment. With some time a certain established standard is expected though - and it is definitely not "just play 40K Marines as is".

None of this is an issue if you play Ruinstorm Daemons.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
They are making an effort to support it. They're bringing their armies and asking to play games with you. The community is not the same as your personal aesthetic preferences and rivet counting.

That's not what Gert or anyone else is saying. You are ignoring the difference between "I'll only play against FW Heresy models" and "At least make an effort to make them look as though they belong in the Heresy period". And the difference between WH40k Marines and Heresy-era Marines isn't just a matter of personal aesthetic. It's in the fluff, the artwork and the models.

so because GW is doing bad things, we must be angry at the players

well, overall with the very same arguments, one can go the AoS Community and ask if they are fine if people come up and play the 40k models as Stormcasts because GW removed them from 40k and they don't look that different to Stormcast anyway
and it is easier to proxy them in AoS than in 40k as the people there won't allow it

the easy solution is be angry at GW and let them know
instead of be angry at the players who don't let you play your 40k army in a different game until GW tell you are allowed to play them in 40k again
(and than, how will GW check if you play 40k with your old models instead of the new ones?)

 kodos wrote:
the easy solution is be angry at GW and let them know
instead of be angry at the players who don't let you play your 40k army in a different game until GW tell you are allowed to play them in 40k again
(and than, how will GW check if you play 40k with your old models instead of the new ones?)

Why be angry? Everyone on the frigging internet is so quick to find things to be angry about. It's a hobby - enjoy it.

why are people angry if the company making the game, removes models they bought for a premium price from the game?

yeah, just buy more stuff and enjoy "the hobby" of buying GW models

 kodos wrote:
why are people angry if the company making the game, removes models they bought for a premium price are removed from the game?

yeah, just buy more stuff and enjoy "the hobby" of buying GW models

This.

Just as with AAA videogames the community has too long been too forgiving to gw.

Be angry if you want just keep those vibes to yourself.
HH has enough problems with grognards as it is without people dragging their anger at current 40k into it.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
None of this is an issue if you play Ruinstorm Daemons.

This made me think: what do HH players usually use for Daemons?

If models from the 40K range get you weird looks, are regular AoS/40K armies of GW daemons getting any flak? Those two things are a bit different, but they share the "no effort" part, as you can use AoS/40K daemons without issues - but in the HH background the Ruinstorm daemons tend to be described more generic if I remember correctly, and the FW models are their own thing.

While I see no problem with using the "normal" GW daemons, for my own Ruinstorm force I want to use mostly third party models. For all the hate I give Mantic for their crappy sculpts, there are some pretty cool hard-plastic kits they do that fit my idea of generic daemons perfectly (see exhibits A and B).

Daemons are one of the armies where the rules team explicitly said "there is no baseline for this army".
The other was Militia.
Obviously from the corporate perspective that means "use whatever GW models you want and let your imagination run free" but in real world terms it's "do what you want".
Gentlefolks understanding that if you're using say Custodes models, you'd be using Custodes rules.
But if someone rocked up to an event with an Ork army and said they were using either Daemon or Militia rules I'd be down for that as long as it was clear what everything was.
Common sense still needs to prevail.

 Gert wrote:
Be angry if you want just keep those vibes to yourself.
HH has enough problems with grognards as it is without people dragging their anger at current 40k into it.

GW. Not 40k GW.

And no, i think clamping down on it won't make it any better,

I think this thread has run its course...

It seems any topic that can become a flashpoint for a gatekeeping/elitism/snobbery vs hobby always ends up there.

the best position is somewhere in the middle, respecting what 30k is and what it represents and the time and effort that long standing gamers have put into keeping the system alive, while also being open to different takes on the hobby and people's desire to put their own spin on it. I'm sure we can all agree on that.

I've got a big conversion project coming up with a bunch of these legended units that I've had sitting around for months/years, while we can argue about how much effort = Heresy and how much is just you being cheap and porting a whole 40k army over with zero effort, my reason for doing it is none of that. it's really just because I like the models, they're cheap, they're available in plastic, they're easy to customise and convert and they add a bit of flavour to some army ranges that don't have a lot of personality. If I've got 5 land speeders I don't want them to all look the same, same goes for squad sergeants - I like to use old Games Day captains and metal veterans to make the squads more interesting.

Personally if I had to limit myself to just Heresy components that would be boring from a modelling and painting perspective because there's just such limited options compared to the 30+ years of old marine bits and pieces that are available 2nd hand for pretty cheap. Sometimes they aren't 100% era appropriate, but I make an effort.

Really GW is to blame for this, long term lack of plastic support for Heresy and ever escalating prices, more and more overpriced boring kits with lack of customization options and parts. Compared to companies like Wargames Atlantic GW are left in the dust.

I went to 30k events at the NOVA Open all week last week and there was

1) 2 players with Chaos War Dogs
2) a player with unconverted Triarch Praetorians
3) a player with AoS Nighthaunt with guns and cog-axes glued on
4) a cults/militia army that was just unconverted 40k Chaos Cultists, not even WYSIWYG (owned and run by one of the Event Organizers!)
5) a thunder warriors army

and probably more, just not that I saw.

and nobody among the 100ish players (across multiple events, no single event had 100 players) seemed to bat any eyes at any of it. If they did, they kept it to themselves. It would be strange to me if people weren't bothered by this but were bothered by Mark 7.

 Rihgu wrote:
and nobody among the 100ish players (across multiple events, no single event had 100 players) seemed to bat any eyes at any of it. If they did, they kept it to themselves. It would be strange to me if people weren't bothered by this but were bothered by Mark 7.

Yes, I've been to WH40k tournaments much like this - it wasn't very inspiring. While I am not a huge fan of Mr Outer Circle, here is a recent video he put up of a HH tournament he attended. The quality of the armies (including his) is pretty impressive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=DpOc0qDqv60

Many of us don't have the time, money or level of commitment to produce these kinds of armies, but it is something to aspire to. Even if most of your army consists of retired WH40k stuff, with some minor converting and a 'period' paint scheme it's still going to look pretty good.

 Rihgu wrote:
I went to 30k events at the NOVA Open all week last week and there was

1) 2 players with Chaos War Dogs
2) a player with unconverted Triarch Praetorians
3) a player with AoS Nighthaunt with guns and cog-axes glued on
4) a cults/militia army that was just unconverted 40k Chaos Cultists, not even WYSIWYG (owned and run by one of the Event Organizers!)
5) a thunder warriors army

and probably more, just not that I saw.

and nobody among the 100ish players (across multiple events, no single event had 100 players) seemed to bat any eyes at any of it. If they did, they kept it to themselves. It would be strange to me if people weren't bothered by this but were bothered by Mark 7.

1) dark mech grants a degree of liberty, but just plopped down out of a box is Bad. Especially since amirigers are awesome conversion Material.
2) that is a Hard pass honestly.
3) nighthaunt are awesome to build dark mech scyllax out of, however require bits and pieces to do so. As you describe them that sounds as if someone wanted securators (?) For which baseline magi are far better suited to convert them and did so in a clearly lazy way.
4) should not be accepted and shows a clear lack of care and questionable standards of nova. Also not wysiwyg is just a hard pass. Even more troubling though, the fact militia which would Make for easy adaptability of all human kits into, got fielded in that Way is just sad.
5) as in full converted?!? Not gonna lie that is awesome but not fitting at the same time.

4) definitely sounds like a tryhard trying to chase a 30k meta

 lord_blackfang wrote:
4) definitely sounds like a tryhard trying to chase a 30k meta

See, we know that's not true because militia aren't meta

A fair argument, but, without any additional info, I will still assume that the person with a bare bones proxy of a fringe army list is motivated by something in their rules, not their looks.

What is wrong with the Chaos Militia army, other than the "not WYSIWYG" part? Chaos Cult uprisings were a common thing during the Heresy, and the 40K Cultists are the perfect models for their basic infantry, so... what is the problem?

What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

 Lord Damocles wrote:
What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

Some people seem to think that the Chaos aesthetic didn't develop until after the Heresy, despite many, many sources indicating otherwise.

3) nighthaunt are awesome to build dark mech scyllax out of, however require bits and pieces to do so. As you describe them that sounds as if someone wanted securators (?) For which baseline magi are far better suited to convert them and did so in a clearly lazy way.

Pretty sure the guy was running them as Myrmidons

A fair argument, but, without any additional info, I will still assume that the person with a bare bones proxy of a fringe army list is motivated by something in their rules, not their looks.

Take what you will of this, but his primary army was Imperial Fists. He "just dabbled" in militias.

 Rihgu wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

Some people seem to think that the Chaos aesthetic didn't develop until after the Heresy, despite many, many sources indicating otherwise.

That severly depends on the time of the HH source in question.

Siege, yeah defininatly you start seeing chaos stars and some trim.

Before that? nope. not really. With the obvious exception being the Word bearers and ironically emperors children which are already on the way and have units that mark that halfway point like kakophoni.

Dark mech is up in the air though however intermixing both the chaos wardogs wit normal amirigers is a lot more accurate overall.

3) nighthaunt are awesome to build dark mech scyllax out of, however require bits and pieces to do so. As you describe them that sounds as if someone wanted securators (?) For which baseline magi are far better suited to convert them and did so in a clearly lazy way.

Pretty sure the guy was running them as Myrmidons

Myrmidon secutators the elite variant. Myrmidon destroyers are the HS variant. Since both are myrmidons i just use the thing afterwards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ProfSrlojohn wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
4) definitely sounds like a tryhard trying to chase a 30k meta

See, we know that's not true because militia aren't meta

You clearly haven't run into vanquisher militia, granted they play into the terminator and dreadnought meta because terminators and dreadnoughts don't find vanquishers particulary nice and neither do custodes but thankfully vanquisher militia are more of a team game issue.

I don't believe the one about the Necron models but I also want to know its context.

 Rihgu wrote:
I went to 30k events at the NOVA Open all week last week and there was

1) 2 players with Chaos War Dogs
2) a player with unconverted Triarch Praetorians
3) a player with AoS Nighthaunt with guns and cog-axes glued on
4) a cults/militia army that was just unconverted 40k Chaos Cultists, not even WYSIWYG (owned and run by one of the Event Organizers!)
5) a thunder warriors army

and probably more, just not that I saw.

and nobody among the 100ish players (across multiple events, no single event had 100 players) seemed to bat any eyes at any of it. If they did, they kept it to themselves. It would be strange to me if people weren't bothered by this but were bothered by Mark 7.

Just because you saw it doesn't mean people weren't bothered by it. At a big event like this though you kinda expect (and are also basically forced to accept) that these kinds of things will happen and you will have to grin and bear it. Its up to the organizer to set and maintain the standards, if the organizer is okay with it - you're playing in their swimming pool and have to follow their rules. If you have a personal issue with someone running their Necron army as Iron Hands at the event and the organizer has no issue with it themselves, your options are to drop out of the event or deal with it, the organizer probably isn't going to kick them out because you raise a complaint about it at that point.

 Gert wrote:
I don't believe the one about the Necron models but I also want to know its context.

It was some Mechanicum thing, judging by the rest of the army, but I wasn't able to ask what specifically.

So there's no actual context to it? Could it be that the player was using those because their original models had broken and that was all they had spare?
Context is key and without being rude, there isn't really any in your list.

Also we know that the Silent King was pals with Sanguinius (*quiet sobbing*) and other Necrons were active during the Heresy , so I can imagine narrative reasons for using praetorians as some sort of counts-as.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Also we know that the Silent King was pals with Sanguinius

the. what.

He wasn't, Damocles is making a goof.

I appreciate that nobody else read The Word of the Silent King, but come on now...

'Framed by a cowl of shimmering light and the traceries of his intricate collar, Szarekh - heralded as the last and greatest of the Silent Kings, and undisputed overlord of the necron race - wore a golden mask fashioned into the likeness of our Lord Sanguinius.'

'Perhaps, had he not fallen to illogical and prideful infighting, their Sanguinius-Angel might have steered them towards a more enlightened destiny.
Certainly he would have made a more amenable emperor than a preserved witch-corpse.
If ever there was a human to be mourned, noble Szarekh would say that it was him. That alliance - the first alliance, perhaps? - might have ended the threat of the Devourer before it even surfaced...'

''Mighty Szarekh, last and greatest of the Silent Kings, honours your angel-father and the accord that we wished to strike with him in ages past''


Trazyn also claims Guilliman as an old friend. Them Primarchs were gettin' around back in the day.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

Some people seem to think that the Chaos aesthetic didn't develop until after the Heresy, despite many, many sources indicating otherwise.

That severly depends on the time of the HH source in question.

Siege, yeah defininatly you start seeing chaos stars and some trim.

Before that? nope. not really. With the obvious exception being the Word bearers and ironically emperors children which are already on the way and have units that mark that halfway point like kakophoni.

you where also seeing it among the sons of horus, the thing is though that it wasn't exactly a uniform thing, the traitors didn't randomly take a vote and say "so we're doing chaos stars and mutations starting wendsday guys"
it set in slowly, gradually, and by the time the traitors gathered to invade Terra the corruption was near total

Frankly I can't see why anyone would be bothered by it. Maybe annoyed if the ascetic matters that much to you. A predator is a predator and a marine is a marine at the end of the day. By the end of the heresy there were units of MK VII being fielded. You can argue that it should only go on late heresy army but the same should go for most of the MKVI by that logic. Taken to the extreme if scarcity is the breaking factor, everyone should be up in arms about primarchs since there were only 19 running around for the heresy and that number dropped to 18 very quickly.

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

Some people seem to think that the Chaos aesthetic didn't develop until after the Heresy, despite many, many sources indicating otherwise.

That severly depends on the time of the HH source in question.

Siege, yeah defininatly you start seeing chaos stars and some trim.

Before that? nope. not really. With the obvious exception being the Word bearers and ironically emperors children which are already on the way and have units that mark that halfway point like kakophoni.

you where also seeing it among the sons of horus, the thing is though that it wasn't exactly a uniform thing, the traitors didn't randomly take a vote and say "so we're doing chaos stars and mutations starting wendsday guys"
it set in slowly, gradually, and by the time the traitors gathered to invade Terra the corruption was near total

Corruption was not near total in the majority of the Legions. The physical corruption came after the Heresy when they took refuge in the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. The Word Bearers had possessed legionnaires but most were destroyed at Istanbul V. The Death Guard started showing signs of Nurgle's rot when they arrived at Terra. The Emperor's Children were experimenting with various augmentations but most of the demonic horns and tentacles came much later. The Kakaphoni were augmentations not demonic corruption. The Night Lords, Alpha Legion, and Iron Warriors despised the physical and mental taints of Chaos. The World Eaters showed little sign of corruption other than Angron, they were only mindless berzerkers who gave into the butchers' nails. The Thousand Sons had their flesh and but they would put them down when the change took them over. The Sons of Horus were corrupted but did not show much physical corruption - they struggled with the gods because they did not give themselves fully to any one deity or the pantheon. It was why they struggled to create possessed marines like the Word Bearers.

I am just of the opinion that if you play HH, you should be in the setting. With GW jumping to the Siege of Terra, playing missions during the Scouring wouldn't be too far off to blend both HH and first born marines. The Scouring would be the time Primarchs still walked, Mk7 armor was available, not all Legions had split into chapters, and most traitor Legions were fully corrupted. So first born marines and all armor marks would be available (outside of primaris). It should be enough to keep all parties happy.

The World Eaters showed little sign of corruption other than Angron, they were only mindless berzerkers who gave into the butchers' nails.

The hordes of half-shark/half-men from Saturnine would disagree with that.

the entire siege of terra series made it clear that the corruption was pretty clearly advanced, read the books as they're not describing heresy legions, they're chaos space marines. it's obviously not total (no rubric marines) but yeah if someone played a "late heresy sons of horus" army and used CSM minis as the basis for their troops, yeah it'd be fine.

We are only given a snippet/snapshot of how the legions devolved into pure debased debauchery.


I'm sure by the time of Istvaan(5 or 3) that entire companies were completely lost to their chosen basal instinct.

Further along you go in the Heresy, the % of the specific legion that's traitor is full traitor grows exponentially.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
I appreciate that nobody else read The Word of the Silent King, but come on now...

'Framed by a cowl of shimmering light and the traceries of his intricate collar, Szarekh - heralded as the last and greatest of the Silent Kings, and undisputed overlord of the necron race - wore a golden mask fashioned into the likeness of our Lord Sanguinius.'

'Perhaps, had he not fallen to illogical and prideful infighting, their Sanguinius-Angel might have steered them towards a more enlightened destiny.
Certainly he would have made a more amenable emperor than a preserved witch-corpse.
If ever there was a human to be mourned, noble Szarekh would say that it was him. That alliance - the first alliance, perhaps? - might have ended the threat of the Devourer before it even surfaced...'

''Mighty Szarekh, last and greatest of the Silent Kings, honours your angel-father and the accord that we wished to strike with him in ages past''

Did the thought occur to you that the Silent King never met Sanguinius and only knew of him from histories gathered via intelligence? None of that quote says "Oh yeah I met your dad and he was my best friend".

Trazyn also claims Guilliman as an old friend. Them Primarchs were gettin' around back in the day.

Trazyn "You can totally trust me" the Infinite? Ok dude.

boyd wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
What's wrong with the War Dogs if they're WYSIWYG, for that matter?

Some people seem to think that the Chaos aesthetic didn't develop until after the Heresy, despite many, many sources indicating otherwise.

That severly depends on the time of the HH source in question.

Siege, yeah defininatly you start seeing chaos stars and some trim.

Before that? nope. not really. With the obvious exception being the Word bearers and ironically emperors children which are already on the way and have units that mark that halfway point like kakophoni.

you where also seeing it among the sons of horus, the thing is though that it wasn't exactly a uniform thing, the traitors didn't randomly take a vote and say "so we're doing chaos stars and mutations starting wendsday guys"
it set in slowly, gradually, and by the time the traitors gathered to invade Terra the corruption was near total

Corruption was not near total in the majority of the Legions. The physical corruption came after the Heresy when they took refuge in the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. The Word Bearers had possessed legionnaires but most were destroyed at Istanbul V. The Death Guard started showing signs of Nurgle's rot when they arrived at Terra. The Emperor's Children were experimenting with various augmentations but most of the demonic horns and tentacles came much later. The Kakaphoni were augmentations not demonic corruption. The Night Lords, Alpha Legion, and Iron Warriors despised the physical and mental taints of Chaos. The World Eaters showed little sign of corruption other than Angron, they were only mindless berzerkers who gave into the butchers' nails. The Thousand Sons had their flesh and but they would put them down when the change took them over. The Sons of Horus were corrupted but did not show much physical corruption - they struggled with the gods because they did not give themselves fully to any one deity or the pantheon. It was why they struggled to create possessed marines like the Word Bearers.

I am just of the opinion that if you play HH, you should be in the setting. With GW jumping to the Siege of Terra, playing missions during the Scouring wouldn't be too far off to blend both HH and first born marines. The Scouring would be the time Primarchs still walked, Mk7 armor was available, not all Legions had split into chapters, and most traitor Legions were fully corrupted. So first born marines and all armor marks would be available (outside of primaris). It should be enough to keep all parties happy.

Have you read the later heresy/siege books? Large numbers of the traitors are fully corrupted, the world.eaters are pretty much all.mindless beserkers, the death guard are fully converted to plague marines before they even reach terra, the emperor's children are fully enthralled to slaanesh and many are mutated and possessed even by the time of path of heaven, which is a good few years before the siege begins. The sons of Horus vary wildly depending on company and individual. But many are mutated, they have the lupercalii which are possessed marines, and many are dedicated to the pantheon (theres even some currupted looking SoH on the cover of one of the books). Even the night lords are showing signs of mutation by the time they assault the first wall.

The iron warriors and alpha legion are the least corrupted, but there are pockets of the iron warriors who have fallen to chaos (Kroeger for.example)

The World Eaters are mindless berserkers because of the Butchers Nails. Nothing to do with Chaos - otherwise you're generally correct.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The World Eaters are mindless berserkers because of the Butchers Nails. Nothing to do with Chaos - otherwise you're generally correct.

eh not really, they basicly hyper accelerated into chaos once Angron went deamon primarch. I've a theory that a deamon primarch's mere presence tends to be corruptive to their genesons

My town has a large 40K community (we get 40+ players at our tourneys) and a small but active Horus Heresy community (we get 12 to 16 players at an event; we've had active leagues and you can get a game if you want). If there was an 30K scene before HH V2 then it was underground and not at the FLGS. Of the current HH players that I play with, at least half are also 40K players. At our events I have seen a few "pure" HH armies, but I have also seen a few armies where it is all 40K models. Several of the armies have a mixture. I have not seen any angst or drama about having 40K models on the board. 40K Landspeeders are quite common to see zipping around. While some prefer to use the HH versions, nobody is checking the pattern on Rhinos, Vindicators and Predators.

I play Ravenwing Black Knights from my 40K army as Outriders in my HH Dark Angels army without any conversions or changes to the paint. Yesterday I tried out Hellblasters as Interemptors (oh the heresy - Primaris! What if children were watching!), although I did paint those ones black and tried to Heresy them up a little with decals. One of our most dedicated HH players has a beautiful Imperial Fists army that does use models from 40K 3rd to 5th Ed in some squads along with the FW models for the specialist squads. I find as long as squads look homogenous it all works out aesthetically to have a mixed army.

I think if we banned 40K models we wouldn't have much a local Horus Heresy community. I have absolutely no issue with someone using their old Tactical Marines as Horus Heresy Tactical Marines. Nor 40K Devastator Marines as Horus Heresy Heavy Support Squads. Having said that, the Heavy Support squads should all be equipped with the same weapon. If someone had an issue with my ersatz Outriders and Interemptors I guess we wouldn't have a game?

I mean thge Mars pattern rhinos etc where in sue during the Heresy so nothing wrong with using them. I've not added rhinos to my army yet, but I'm considering Mars pattern simply to give some visual differances

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
My town has a large 40K community (we get 40+ players at our tourneys) and a small but active Horus Heresy community (we get 12 to 16 players at an event; we've had active leagues and you can get a game if you want). If there was an 30K scene before HH V2 then it was underground and not at the FLGS. Of the current HH players that I play with, at least half are also 40K players. At our events I have seen a few "pure" HH armies, but I have also seen a few armies where it is all 40K models. Several of the armies have a mixture. I have not seen any angst or drama about having 40K models on the board. 40K Landspeeders are quite common to see zipping around. While some prefer to use the HH versions, nobody is checking the pattern on Rhinos, Vindicators and Predators.

I play Ravenwing Black Knights from my 40K army as Outriders in my HH Dark Angels army without any conversions or changes to the paint. Yesterday I tried out Hellblasters as Interemptors (oh the heresy - Primaris! What if children were watching!), although I did paint those ones black and tried to Heresy them up a little with decals. One of our most dedicated HH players has a beautiful Imperial Fists army that does use models from 40K 3rd to 5th Ed in some squads along with the FW models for the specialist squads. I find as long as squads look homogenous it all works out aesthetically to have a mixed army.

I think if we banned 40K models we wouldn't have much a local Horus Heresy community. I have absolutely no issue with someone using their old Tactical Marines as Horus Heresy Tactical Marines. Nor 40K Devastator Marines as Horus Heresy Heavy Support Squads. Having said that, the Heavy Support squads should all be equipped with the same weapon. If someone had an issue with my ersatz Outriders and Interemptors I guess we wouldn't have a game?

Cool. I wouldn't play with you, nor would any of the dozen or so local HH players I know, outside of a demo game to help you figure out what actual HH stuff you wanted to buy.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
My town has a large 40K community (we get 40+ players at our tourneys) and a small but active Horus Heresy community (we get 12 to 16 players at an event; we've had active leagues and you can get a game if you want). If there was an 30K scene before HH V2 then it was underground and not at the FLGS. Of the current HH players that I play with, at least half are also 40K players. At our events I have seen a few "pure" HH armies, but I have also seen a few armies where it is all 40K models. Several of the armies have a mixture. I have not seen any angst or drama about having 40K models on the board. 40K Landspeeders are quite common to see zipping around. While some prefer to use the HH versions, nobody is checking the pattern on Rhinos, Vindicators and Predators.

I play Ravenwing Black Knights from my 40K army as Outriders in my HH Dark Angels army without any conversions or changes to the paint. Yesterday I tried out Hellblasters as Interemptors (oh the heresy - Primaris! What if children were watching!), although I did paint those ones black and tried to Heresy them up a little with decals. One of our most dedicated HH players has a beautiful Imperial Fists army that does use models from 40K 3rd to 5th Ed in some squads along with the FW models for the specialist squads. I find as long as squads look homogenous it all works out aesthetically to have a mixed army.

I think if we banned 40K models we wouldn't have much a local Horus Heresy community. I have absolutely no issue with someone using their old Tactical Marines as Horus Heresy Tactical Marines. Nor 40K Devastator Marines as Horus Heresy Heavy Support Squads. Having said that, the Heavy Support squads should all be equipped with the same weapon. If someone had an issue with my ersatz Outriders and Interemptors I guess we wouldn't have a game?

I'd absolutely play with you. Let's have fun. As to the opinions of others? Who cares. May they burn.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Just because you saw it doesn't mean people weren't bothered by it.

Did they drop from the event? Did they refuse to play against the people who brought non-canon or proxy armies? They clearly weren't all that bothered by it if they were willing to play the games.

This all just proves my original point: the most passionate 1% of 30k fans who are dedicated enough to regularly participate in online communities aren't representative of the game as a whole. That 1% at least claims to be very committed to historical accuracy and have the highest standards, refusing to play more than a demo game against anyone who doesn't have a historically accurate army and expecting anyone joining the community to meet their accuracy standards. But what we see offline is that when real games are played non-canon and even proxy-heavy armies are common and the majority of players are simply happy to get games at all.

Ive shared with you my experience with my local play group, which is the exact opposite, and that's a group that is decidedly not online - they don't participate in forums, half of them don't even have facebook profiles, and (not that it entirely matters) one of them is long time friends with a number of old-time GW big names (Andy Chambers, Thomas Perinen, Jervis Johnson, Perry twins, John Blanche, Jes Goodwin) from when he worked for GW corporate and still travels to meet up and play oldhammet with them a few times a year.

So, that attitude is decidedly more influential and widespread than the "1% dedicated enough to engage online".

Assuming that all the participants at NOVA were cool with it because they didn't drop is also completely asinine. They paid a lot of money to he there, when life gives you lemons - make lemonade. I wouldnt drop in that situation either and I've attended events where I have played with people I really would rather not have played because the alternative was basically wasting $1000 to do nothing.

I think one can have preferances without being so married to them they refuse to bend.

chaos0xomega wrote:
So, that attitude is decidedly more influential and widespread than the "1% dedicated enough to engage online".

You're describing an outlier group, one strongly influenced by ties to a specific sub-community even if they aren't online all the time. Most people aren't friends with the GW staff who created the game they're playing.

Assuming that all the participants at NOVA were cool with it because they didn't drop is also completely asinine. They paid a lot of money to he there, when life gives you lemons - make lemonade. I wouldnt drop in that situation either and I've attended events where I have played with people I really would rather not have played because the alternative was basically wasting $1000 to do nothing.

NOVA is held in DC, home of enough activities to keep you busy for weeks if you wanted. If the game is so objectionable drop from the event and go have a nice vacation instead. Go on some tours, visit some museums, eat dinner in a nice restaurant every night, etc. If people were staying in the NOVA 30k event it's because they wanted to play 30k against non-canon and proxy armies, not because the had a choice between playing the game or spending the rest of their weekend staring at the wall in their hotel room.

BrianDavion wrote:
I think one can have preferances without being so married to them they refuse to bend.

Not according to ThePaintingOwl over here.

chaos0xomega wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think one can have preferances without being so married to them they refuse to bend.

Not according to ThePaintingOwl over here.

I mean me personally I'd certainly prefer a lovingly painted Horus Heresy army of Horus heresy units etc. but if I run into a guy whose mixed in some old mark VII mini's from his 40k ultramariens army it's not going to upset me too much, aaaand honestly if you plunked down an army made mostly of chaos marines minis and claimed it's a lot heresy army I'd actually be 100% on board with that

For me, I'll do it once or twice if you're just starting out, perhaps even longer if you're committed to playing like fully painted and its just taking you a while to make slow but steady (and visible) progress through your collection.

But if you're just lazy and cheap and looking to do whats convenient for you at the expense of my ability to enjoy the game in the face of the effort I've put into my stuff, then nah. Hard pass. I categorize you in the same gorup that I did the guys who used to use shoeboxes as stand ins for stormravens and red solo cups for drop pods. I refused to play them then, I refuse to play you now.

chaos0xomega wrote:
For me, I'll do it once or twice if you're just starting out, perhaps even longer if you're committed to playing like fully painted and its just taking you a while to make slow but steady (and visible) progress through your collection.

But if you're just lazy and cheap and looking to do whats convenient for you at the expense of my ability to enjoy the game in the face of the effort I've put into my stuff, then nah. Hard pass. I categorize you in the same gorup that I did the guys who used to use shoeboxes as stand ins for stormravens and red solo cups for drop pods. I refused to play them then, I refuse to play you now.

also you have to be a little careful as sometimes a 40k model over a HH model may be an aestetic choice, like using mars pattern land raiders, rhinos and predators may be a specific choice for aestetics rather then "just reusing my 40k stuff"

My army is late heresy Imperial fists and I've been considering what pattern of rhinos I want to use from an aestetics POV

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
My town has a large 40K community (we get 40+ players at our tourneys) and a small but active Horus Heresy community (we get 12 to 16 players at an event; we've had active leagues and you can get a game if you want). If there was an 30K scene before HH V2 then it was underground and not at the FLGS. Of the current HH players that I play with, at least half are also 40K players. At our events I have seen a few "pure" HH armies, but I have also seen a few armies where it is all 40K models. Several of the armies have a mixture. I have not seen any angst or drama about having 40K models on the board. 40K Landspeeders are quite common to see zipping around. While some prefer to use the HH versions, nobody is checking the pattern on Rhinos, Vindicators and Predators.

I play Ravenwing Black Knights from my 40K army as Outriders in my HH Dark Angels army without any conversions or changes to the paint. Yesterday I tried out Hellblasters as Interemptors (oh the heresy - Primaris! What if children were watching!), although I did paint those ones black and tried to Heresy them up a little with decals. One of our most dedicated HH players has a beautiful Imperial Fists army that does use models from 40K 3rd to 5th Ed in some squads along with the FW models for the specialist squads. I find as long as squads look homogenous it all works out aesthetically to have a mixed army.

I think if we banned 40K models we wouldn't have much a local Horus Heresy community. I have absolutely no issue with someone using their old Tactical Marines as Horus Heresy Tactical Marines. Nor 40K Devastator Marines as Horus Heresy Heavy Support Squads. Having said that, the Heavy Support squads should all be equipped with the same weapon. If someone had an issue with my ersatz Outriders and Interemptors I guess we wouldn't have a game?

I'd absolutely play with you. Let's have fun. As to the opinions of others? Who cares. May they burn.

Cool! I haven't faced Night Lords - would be very thematic!

I am grateful that I have found that your can-do attitude has been the prevailing one in my gaming circles.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I categorize you in the same gorup that I did the guys who used to use shoeboxes as stand ins for stormravens and red solo cups for drop pods. I refused to play them then, I refuse to play you now.

Do you really not think it's a bit hyperbolic to treat a model with some minor differences that aren't visible at tabletop distances as equivalent to shoeboxes and plastic cups?

You of course have the right to refuse to play with anyone who doesn't meet your demanding standards, but most people are going to think you're being ridiculous. And if you cross into telling people that your standards are expected for anything outside of games with you then you're crossing the line into gatekeeping and that isn't ok.

BrianDavion wrote:


also you have to be a little careful as sometimes a 40k model over a HH model may be an aestetic choice, like using mars pattern land raiders, rhinos and predators may be a specific choice for aestetics rather then "just reusing my 40k stuff"

My army is late heresy Imperial fists and I've been considering what pattern of rhinos I want to use from an aestetics POV

Sure, if its done purposefully and intentionally with underlying fluff to justify it, I'll buy that concept, but you can usually tell when someone is doing that for justifiable reasons, vs showing up with their customer 40k chapter and trying to pretend that they are an army from one of the lost legions.

chaos0xomega wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:


also you have to be a little careful as sometimes a 40k model over a HH model may be an aestetic choice, like using mars pattern land raiders, rhinos and predators may be a specific choice for aestetics rather then "just reusing my 40k stuff"

My army is late heresy Imperial fists and I've been considering what pattern of rhinos I want to use from an aestetics POV

Sure, if its done purposefully and intentionally with underlying fluff to justify it, I'll buy that concept, but you can usually tell when someone is doing that for justifiable reasons, vs showing up with their customer 40k chapter and trying to pretend that they are an army from one of the lost legions.

Yeah totally, I don't think anyone wants to reward complete laziness and lack of interest in the fluff, which is what you're talking about I think. People who enjoy the game rules but don't care about the setting at all. That being said effort/aesthetics makes a difference, if someone showed up with a beautifully painted oldhammer chaos marine army and said it was late Heresy I would just be happy to see it honestly.

There's another issue we're not discussing which is access to the background material. You might be a seasoned veteran wargamer who has all the skills and the desire to create an amazing force who is new to Heresy, but the Black Books are difficult to get hold of now, and the new Heresy books are quite light on detail and sketches/model photos, they don't offer much advice or inspiration. There's an absolute tonne of novels we don't all have time to read. Personally I would like to see some in depth guides like they used to do back in earlier editions of 40k, with army showcases, modelling and painting advice, heraldry, legion organisation charts, that sort of deep dive nerd stuff. I would jump on a book like that for my legion

 From_Kiavahr_With_Love wrote:
People who enjoy the game rules but don't care about the setting at all.

Why is enjoying the rules but not the setting laziness?

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 From_Kiavahr_With_Love wrote:
People who enjoy the game rules but don't care about the setting at all.

Why is enjoying the rules but not the setting laziness?

I acknowledge that is a completely subjective statement. And there's nothing wrong with enjoying the rules but not the setting, however there's going to be a lot of Heresy gamers who are deeply attached to the system and the setting who aren't going to like that approach or want to play against people with that approach and would see it as lazy. I see it as a bit like WAAC vs narrative in 40k, I got bored of 40k and stopped playing years back because no one in my gaming group was interested in doing anything creative with the game and just wanted to spam all the best units and smash their opponents.

Each to their own though. We all want different things from the game, and like you I don't have an issue with playing against people with proxy/40k armies and I don't want to be told how to model mine either. I do think that Heresy has traditionally been a place where more narrative approach has been encouraged though and I get why people would want to 'gatekeep' that, because (IMO) it's just so much better. You're not going to win people to that perspective by being elitist though, that's just a fact.

 From_Kiavahr_With_Love wrote:
I see it as a bit like WAAC vs narrative in 40k, I got bored of 40k and stopped playing years back because no one in my gaming group was interested in doing anything creative with the game and just wanted to spam all the best units and smash their opponents.

FYI that's not what WAAC means. WAAC means Win At ALL Costs, including cheating and seal clubbing and similar unethical behavior. Playing the best units and prioritizing good strategy over "creativity" is just normal competitive play.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 From_Kiavahr_With_Love wrote:
I see it as a bit like WAAC vs narrative in 40k, I got bored of 40k and stopped playing years back because no one in my gaming group was interested in doing anything creative with the game and just wanted to spam all the best units and smash their opponents.

FYI that's not what WAAC means. WAAC means Win At ALL Costs, including cheating and seal clubbing and similar unethical behavior. Playing the best units and prioritizing good strategy over "creativity" is just normal competitive play.

OK well, there was a 50/50 mix of WAAC and normal competitive play then. I'm just saying that it didn't float my boat. I'd rather just read the books than play those games every weekend. Which is why I like Heresy, because there's more of a balance between the hobby side and the gameplay side.