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.

I have been finding alot of people griping about DIY and "counts as" lately.

Here are just a few examples:

bolterandchainsword.com/index.php
bolterandchainsword.com/index.php
www.dakkadakka.com/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/18/tpage/1/view/Topic/postid/76392/Default.aspx

So how do you feel about people painting and modelling their armies into a "Barney the dinosaur" theme and using the rules for "codex X" or any other theme that is either ridiculous or cool?

I am genuinly curious about what the general consensus thinks.

I don?t see a lot of griping in those threads. Only one or two people per thread making mildly negative comments, and the vast majority understanding it?s perfectly fine. The tone of your responses makes pretty clear that you?ve seen worse in the past, though. Maybe that?s shading your perceptions?

Those are just a few examples I could find without exhausting research.

My perceptions are actually very shaded, but because this sort of topic does infact popup now and then, I want a valid reason why people are of the opinion that "counts as" is an unethical way to go.

Basically, I am looking for a reason to understand why they feel the way they do, so I can be less vitriolic when the issue arises in the future and more sympathetic even if I dont happen to agree.

So far all I have seen is basically 'You cant do that because of my preconceived notions'. Green angel here at dakka has been the only one to come up with any semblance of a somewhat valid attempt at a reason for his opinion, in my opinion.

And no, I am not trying to start a flame war. My attempt at understanding is sincere.

Personally, I don't care. In fact, I've seen enough really well-done 'counts as' and DIY armies that I rather like the idea. Undead IG, Genestealer cults, Squats using everything from 3rd ed. Salamanders to IG rules, Adept. mechanicus, mercenaries, etc. As long as it's clear and well done (which is really the rule for anything--you can have a 'straight' codex army that's confusing and poorly done), I'm happy.

The only issue I ever have with it is confusion. If the army doesn?t confuse your opponents, it?s all good.

There is, however, an increased chance of confusion if you use the color scheme for an army which has its own special rules and the rules set for another. Painting a Blood Angels army and then playing them with Dark Angels rules would be much more likely to confuse, and thus more likely to arouse annoyance, than making a DIY new chapter color scheme and using them as either BA or DA.

The BA/DA or (UltraLysanderWing) sort of thing is much less of a problem for people you play regularly, and for experienced players who are familiar with the rules for both armies. Again, I think the key factor is confusion. Newer players, and those unfamiliar with the army rules in question, are the ones most likely to get a negative impression.

I think a part of the problem arises from WYSIWYG as well. Everyone knows what a veteran with power-fist looks like, and tries to eliminate him first during HtH. An undead Guardsman with some sort of messed up mutated arm doesn't leap out at you as 'counts as a verteran with a power fist'.   The giant cybernetic eagle with engines instead of wings 'looks like' a Stormboy assault trooper, but 'counts as' a Dethkopta.

I agree about the 'confusion' issue. Strange mutations greenstuffed on, or fluff based reasons for things might tend to cause confusion. That said though, I am a hobbyist by nature. There is no reason why these things shouldn't be done. In fact, they should be encouraged. Among friends, it should never be a problem. In a tournament it would go a long way to create an armylist complete with small pictures of the unit next to their descriptions. The list could even be laminated. At any rate the list should be made available to the opponent. The more wacky the conversions the more care should be taken to consider the opponent.

Now, having said that I do need to add to the hate unfortunately. I play blood angels. I take special care to create death company models painted all black and stuff so they stand out from the regular boys. I never use these models as normal troops and I never use normal troops as Death Company. The codex specifically states that if the player doesn't have the models to represent them, they are lost. Such is the risk with BA. I self impose that rule always and without exception. Now, if someone has green blood angels I don't care, but they'd better have pink models to represent their DC or something. As with anything, I would allow an opponent to slide but I would expect leway later on in the game for a ruling to go my way or something.

Posted By Glaive Company CO on 11/13/2006 10:21 AM
The more wacky the conversions the more care should be taken to consider the opponent.

Now, having said that I do need to add to the hate unfortunately. I play blood angels. I take special care to create death company models painted all black and stuff so they stand out from the regular boys. I never use these models as normal troops and I never use normal troops as Death Company. The codex specifically states that if the player doesn't have the models to represent them, they are lost. Such is the risk with BA. I self impose that rule always and without exception. Now, if someone has green blood angels I don't care, but they'd better have pink models to represent their DC or something. As with anything, I would allow an opponent to slide but I would expect leway later on in the game for a ruling to go my way or something.

I can agree with that. which is why representation is so much more important to the person who is using DIY. If he is going through all that trouble to be creative, he damned well better take the time while converting to represent things clearly. But to me, thats a given. I had no idea there were players out there going hog wild with the "counts as" concept. I am pretty meticulous when it come to this, so I assumed that everyone else would be as well when it came to converting.

And you have found a rule for representation! Bless you! I forgot about the DC. Thankfully, DC seem to be the exception concerning "counts as". Meaning you MUST have the models. This is cited in the rules, not some flight of fancy about strict GW regulations and adherence to "Chapter approved" colour schemes.

I am beginning to understand why people feel negative about DIY. It seems confusion of representation is encountered frequently.

But if that seems to be the main issue, why are so many people I have played IRL been so adverse to my converted termies using a non standard colour scheme (basically so they cannot be locked into the "Thats an IF model" or " thats a DW model" ). They are all fully repped and to a high degree (there is no "Ya see this bright lance sticking out of the knee of this termie? Thats my purity seal" ).

I think squad markings go a long way to. So that if there is confusion, you can point to your army list (with corresponding squad markings) and point to who is who and what is what.
Thats a habit I had from the days in playing in RT's, where squad marking not only helped in composition scores, but really helped in sportsamnship when questions arose.

Totally. I'm not familiar enough with the other chapters/codeci to know if they have similar such rulings. It sounds like they don't. If the marines of that chapter you're working on are all pictured as yellow, but there is nothing in the rules specifically saying anything about their markings or scheme then I say paint them however they look coolest.

I mean, obviously Yellow <> Cool.

I don't like "counts as". But that's just because I hate freedom.

I think the argument would go something like this:
Special Characters are restricted to specific, stated chapters. Those chapters are distinguished either by codex (blood angles, space wolves, etc.) or by specific traits in the Codex: Space Marines. Keep in mind that while the Blood Angel and Dark Angel codices freely allow the player to create a successor chapter, the special characters, IIRC, are restricted to the "parent" chapter. Based on that precedent, it could be argued that successor chapters, or DIY chapters, should not be able to use the special characters of a Legendary Chapter.

That said, keep in mind that the heraldy and colors of Chapters have shifted both in the background, and in reality. Ultramarines 2nd Company went from yellow trim to gold trim. Most Legions changed colors from before the heresy to the current state in the game.

I think that there is a clear precedent for "counts as," but I think the counter argument hinges on the words "use only in an Imperial Fists" army. RAW, if your army isn't an "Imperial Fists" army, then Lysander can't be included. This does raise the metaphysical question of "what is an Imperial Fists army?"

I think a lot of nonsense gets cleared up by just sharing your army list with your opponent.

Also, I think base size can be used to help as well; if you keep the proxied figs on bases the same size they're trying to represent, that'll cut down on confusion (so if I see that giant cybereagle on a CD sized base, I can assume it's not a stormboy)...

Posted By Polonius on 11/13/2006 12:25 PM
I think that there is a clear precedent for "counts as," but I think the counter argument hinges on the words "use only in an Imperial Fists" army. RAW, if your army isn't an "Imperial Fists" army, then Lysander can't be included. This does raise the metaphysical question of "what is an Imperial Fists army?"

So whats the RAW on paint schemes then?

For all intents and purposes, they are imperial fists, just not painted that way.

Posted By Abadabadoobaddon on 11/13/2006 12:11 PM
I don't like "counts as". But that's just because I hate freedom.

I love you, abby!

The few times I caught flak from using vanilla or DA rules for my Legio Angelicus Mortis were all from people just ribbing me than serious complaints. So long as weapons & wargear are WYSWYG and/or you point out any potentially confusing conversions or what not, the vast majority of players aren't going to give a hoot. It's that tiny portion of freedom hating commie pickled pork turds that are going to create a stink, but they're almost always a fecking drag to play against anyway, so screw 'em.

Ahaha! I thought you said "LEGO Angelicus Mortis"...I agree that using Lego figures with 'counts as' could lead to some confusion.


But seriously, I used to play WHFB using whatever few miniatures I owned (<50, of various brands and types). I did actually use Lego blocks to represent ranks of troops - the front rank would be minatures, with lego to delineate the back ranks. It worked fine. I also played the cardboard cutout version of Battletech, and that was a blast!

When I started 40k I bought a bunch of marines off ebay, and proxied everything from Tau to IG to Nids with them. Anyone with half a brain can remember "the marines with missile launchers count as my Raveners, and the normal bolter marines are my Gaunts" as long as it's reasonably consistent across the army.

All this WYSIWIG and "you must have different painted models for different chapters" crapola is simply economic discrimination, and is obviously encouraged by GW to encourage people to spend gobs of money. I am very lucky to have a job that pays a reasonable wage, and be able to afford to buy multiple armies. I am saddened that if I happened to wash floors for a living, no one would want to play 40k with me because I might only have one small set of models.

It's a game. Most games are played with little cardboard chits or single-colour plastic pieces, but everyone usually has fun anyways. GW miniatures are little plastic dolls that *represent* or 'count as' warriors and aliens and space elves anyways - is it really so hard to make that extra level of abstraction to make them 'count as' something a bit different?

I do understand that it's easier if everything is WYSIWIG and colour coded. I actually paint my special weapons bright colours so that they stand out (more for myself than for my opponent - I hate losing track of my flamer guys and leaving them in the back ranks where they can't fire). I will be very pleased when my armies are finished being painted and look good.

But I would never refuse to play someone just because they couldn't afford to do the same. Unless you all are prepared to buy your poorer opponents a few hundred $ of miniatures to satisfy your WYSIWIG fetish, I suggest you get down off your economically privileged high <s>chair</s> horse.

Have you heard of 'land reform' when communist/socialist revolutions happen, and the rich get their land forcibly seized and given to the poor? I'd like to see Game Reform, when the impoverished mass of gamers rise up and redistribute all the rich gamers miniature collections.

Power to the people! Down with the Emperor! Revolucione!

Here here! ¡Viva la revolución!  Death to the infidel pigs!

I've always wanted to do a Tyranid army using Guard models. Every Guardsman would have blades and whatnot (H-Gaunts), and the TMC's would be Sentinels with various bladed attachments - big loud speakers for Synapse creatures.

BYE

If you're playing Lysander-Wing with non IF colors, but had all your stuff clearly WYSIWYG (this is an assault cannon, this is a power fist), especially taking the care to have squad markings and a clear list, and someone complained they deserve to get beat down with the BGB.

I've had some bad experiences at the local GW store going in to play a Chaos list that had some old 2nd ed models that were unpainted, and charging them assuming they were normal marines, only to find out they were plague marines and they had a banner of Nurgle, and that my Cyborks were all dying in his shooting phase.

I think the general idea is "Don't be a douche".

That's a great rule. If I could enforce that rule in my day to day life, I'd be a happier man.

But seriously, 40k is a game that allows us to create our own armies that look and play as we imagine. If somebody wants to take away that ability, so that we have to play armies that look they way they expect, then ignore them. If they're running an RTT, then game somewhere else, because they have clearly lost perspective as a gamer.

Strangelooper:
Unless you all are prepared to buy your poorer opponents a few hundred $ of miniatures to satisfy your WYSIWIG fetish, I suggest you get down off your economically privileged high chair horse.

"Have you heard of 'land reform' when communist/socialist revolutions happen, and the rich get their land forcibly seized and given to the poor? I'd like to see Game Reform, when the impoverished mass of gamers rise up and redistribute all the rich gamers miniature collections.

Power to the people! Down with the Emperor! Revolucione!"

Yeah, how dare people bust their tails to get ahead and then spend well earned money on toys because others didn't make it to his economic acheivement.

So, after the large amount of money, time and effort I've spent buying, building and painting my army, I should be ok with someone bringing a Marine army and telling me it's really Tau and this equals that? Sorry, not a lot of fun for me (and I've played these kinds of games.) Spending money on GW is disposable income. If folks don't have the money, then so be it. I'm not going to feel bad b/c I make more money than someone else and I've found I don't have fun trying to constantly figure out what some guys army of the week is.

I want to race cars, but I don't have the money to build one: can someone give me the car b/c I can't afford it? I'll be really nice when I race against you...

Then don't play them.  I do this all the time. We sub in different units to fill out variant lists.  Its ok because we know each other.  Now I wouldn't do that in a tourney, or in pickup games where I didn't know the opponent, but among friend-who cares? I mean at that point, you're assuming we're even playing with GW figs...

As long as its properly WYSIWYG, I dont care.

Posted By nyarlathotep667 on 11/13/2006 2:09 PM
The few times I caught flak from using vanilla or DA rules for my Legio Angelicus Mortis were all from people just ribbing me than serious complaints. So long as weapons & wargear are WYSWYG and/or you point out any potentially confusing conversions or what not, the vast majority of players aren't going to give a hoot. It's that tiny portion of freedom hating commie pickled pork turds that are going to create a stink, but they're almost always a fecking drag to play against anyway, so screw 'em.

Sigged!

One of my friends was playing marines in a tournament back in the day (2nd ed I think). He was a very prolific and imaginative painter and as such, every single marine in his army had a unique paint job. No 2 figures looked alike. One of his opponents has the gaul to try and get him kicked out of the tournament because his marines were not all painted the same. I really couldn't belive it but apparently there are people out there that can't deal with imagination.

Looks like GW doesnt have a problem with it. According to Jeff Hall:




So if GW doesnt have a problem with it, why should you as joe shmo?

Nice. Thanks for the Jeff Hall quote.

I personally have little issue with counts as game play IF the person makes an effort to actually go about trying to aquire what he has counts as.

For instance there is a kid (14) who begs and pleads for people to let him borrow models for plasma/melta guns.  The problem is every squad in his chaos army has a plasma cannon/gun/pistol or multi-melta/melta.  So if he cant find people to loan him models he just uses whatever he has, and cheats with it.  Coming to the point his 10 man CSM squad had over 12 special weapon shots with 2 plasma guns and 2 plasma pistols.  You call him on it he declares you a poor player yadda yadda yadda.  I could care less about what he thinks, everyone knows he does it, BUT it has been over 4 months since he has made this list and had made no effort to actually get these weapons other than "hey do you have any extra plasma guns".

Rule of thumb for me:  "Count as" once, give it a try, twice, iron things out, thrice, go out and buy the models or stop using the list

Good point. There was a time when I was playtesting lysanderwing with some friends and wanted to see how it worked BEFORE buying $500+ on terminators and other models.

I used bases, and nothing else. I painted what the bases were (i.e "Lysander", "Termie squad #1 sgt.", "Command sgt.", "Command assault cannon".) and it worked fine for repping what they were. But I did go and buy the models once I was satisfied that the army I was playtesting was right for me.

The models are basically chits with 3d representations of what they are anyways. Chits or models, its basically the same difference. But you really should buy an army to rep it. Alot of people spend alot of time and money on this and expect the same from their opponents not to be cheap skates and uses pieces of paper with crudely drawn images to show what is what.

Playtesting with friends is a completely different animal than using different color marines as counts as.....

Not really. Even officially. GW allowed a player to use a Dogs of War army as a Dark Eldar army in a GT a few years back. The player had the temerity to argue that the Bronzino's Galloper Guns models that he was using for Raiders could hide behind terrain as if Raiders were normally that size.