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.

To me, a space marine is a space marine.

I don't know the symbols on any of those helmets.

When I get my marines up and going (if ever) they're going to be pink and glittery - so decreed the wife. Does that mean that they are chaos marines? Presume that they are not. In which case, what codex are my pink/happy/butterfly/flowers space marines supposed to fit into?

I'd also point out that while Space Marines can shop between books, many xenos armies have more built in variety of army builds, at least in the 5th edition troops focused forms.

Look at Codex: space marines. Two basic troops choices, with bikes as an option. Scouts are a support unit, good mostly for objectives and some light shooting/harassment. Tacticals are a mediocre shooting unit and lousy at assault. In the current book, few armies don't use 10 man tactical squads, with transports optional.

Now look at Orks. Only two core troops choices again, with grots being pure objective holding units. Boys, OTOH, can be built in many different ways: shooty horde, choppy horde, trukk boys, battlewagon boys. Orks can also take Bikes, Nobz, Nob Bikers, and Deff Dreads as troops. So, while the same boy may not be usable in different codices, he can be used in dramatically different builds.

Ditto eldar, with four core troops choices and optional wraithguard.

The advantages aren't as dramatic as perhaps you think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:Overall I agree with Polonius on this one, though with a side of Redbeard. While I'm not opposed to people swapping, I really do prefer it if a given army can easily be recognized to be whatever codex it's using- whether through color scheme or distinctive units.

And this is part of the problem. I'm currently playing with Space Wolf Razor/Fang spam. 15 Missile Launcher long fangs, four min grey hunter squads with meltas, razors all around, three MM/HF landspeeders, and two dreads.

That's a stupid space wolf army. it's a pretty cool iron hands army (if anything). The rules don't even match the fluff of the army.

It's not my fault that everything I want to do with codex space marines (psykers, tacticals, and devs) is done better with the wolf book.

A few years ago we went to Adepticon with guard. I was almost finished with a large steel legion army, then we decided to run Creed. I checked with the Adepticon guys and the ruling came back that I must use Cadian models if we run Creed. I was not happy, and I had to scramble to get Cadian models together.

Now, I have a pretty large collection of complete painted armies, but I also have a limited amount of time to build and paint new armies. I also have a strong desire to avoid paying GW any more money than necessary. When GW had the idea of "special character vulkan, or name him yourself", I know it was to make them more money. I don't mind because with one chapter scheme, I can play White Scars style, Salamanders style, Imperial Fists style, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, etc...

I am a proponent of WYSIWYG, I do build my armies with the appropriate armor and armaments, within reason (grenades and stuff). I also invest a lot of time in building, basing and painting my army. If you wanna be a purist and build seven different space marine chapters, knock yourself out, I'm impressed. You do it your way, I'll do it mine.

Krak_kirby wrote:A few years ago we went to Adepticon with guard. I was almost finished with a large steel legion army, then we decided to run Creed. I checked with the Adepticon guys and the ruling came back that I must use Cadian models if we run Creed. I was not happy, and I had to scramble to get Cadian models together.

Now, I have a pretty large collection of complete painted armies, but I also have a limited amount of time to build and paint new armies. I also have a strong desire to avoid paying GW any more money than necessary. When GW had the idea of "special character vulkan, or name him yourself", I know it was to make them more money. I don't mind because with one chapter scheme, I can play White Scars style, Salamanders style, Imperial Fists style, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, etc...

I am a proponent of WYSIWYG, I do build my armies with the appropriate armor and armaments, within reason (grenades and stuff). I also invest a lot of time in building, basing and painting my army. If you wanna be a purist and build seven different space marine chapters, knock yourself out, I'm impressed. You do it your way, I'll do it mine.

While that seems pretty silly of adepticon, was this during the old guard book?

If so, I can see how it would have mattered, as the different models were essentially "different codexes" in a way, since you have the doctrine/etc system, and the features on the steel legion would have conveyed a rules/wargear implication.

Not saying it was nice/necessary, but I could see that under the old book being an issue

All of my marines use the DA Robed bodies. Why? Because I like painting cloth and I think they look cool. Heck my GK's are using those torsos. I have squad markings and army markings on the seperate shoulder pads as appropriate though I like the sword Iconography so that is the chapter pad I use for my DIY (my GK's use them as Strike Squad markers).

I think it's fine if it's painted as DIY no matter what bitz you are using. Key things to note is PAINTED and DIY. I'd say don't run Ultra's as Wolves but that's more of a fluff issue for me since I can't see a company of Ultra's working like Wolves. But if it was WYSIWYG I probably would shrug and get my game on.

Polonius wrote:So, by your logic, you can't play a successor chapter without having the appropriate bitz? So, even if I built a blood angel army from the ground up, if I don't use BA bitz or symbolism my army isn't WYSIWYG?

What if a person doesn't want Wolf themed space vikings?

What about Blood Ravens, which explicitly don't have a known founding chapter?

There's a codex that exists for Space Marine Chapters that don't fall into one of the sub-codices. It's called Codex: Space Marines. This codex offers all of the rules for building a generic SM chapter.

If you build a Blood Angel army from the ground up, but don't use the BA bitz or symbolism, is it really a Blood Angel army?

If you don't want Wolf themed Space Vikings, don't play Space Wolves. WYSIWIG means What You See Is What You Get. There is a definite look to Space Wolves that is supported by GW, and using a generic marine to represent a Space Wolf, which it is quite clearly not, is exactly the same as if I used an Ork to represent a Space Wolf.

Polonius wrote:I get the general rule, no doubt, that codex shopping is an advantage. But I don't think it's as much a problem for WYSIWYG as it is a problem because people resent the advantage.

And yes, it's not fair that marines can swap, while xenos can't. Life's tough sometimes. A power armored space marine simply doesn't change that much in look, while a guardian and Ork are vastly different. I'm not talking about calling a clear Space Wolf a Blood Angel, but when you have a generic, DIY marine... how can you tell, as a player, that it's "meant" to be an ultra, not a wolf?

I resent the advantage. Absolutely no arguement from me on that point. However, I am also attempting to demonstrate how, from a literal interpretation of WYSIWYG, how you shouldn't be able to codex hop any more than a xeno chapter can codex hop. Just because you're close in appearance (What You See) does not mean that you're a representation of the model as promoted, manufactured, and sold by GW (What You Get).

The various codices impose certain restrictions regarding appearance. If you're not willing to comply with those restrictions, why should you enjoy the advantages offered by that codex?

You state that it's not acceptable to use a "clear Space Wolf" as a Blood Angel. So, why would it be acceptable to utilize a generic Space Marine to represent a Blood Angel? They are, after all, both power armored space marines. My contention is that they are vastly different, in the same way that an Ork and a Guardian are vastly different. If you're using a generic chapter, which would be covered under Codex: Space Marines, as another chapter, then you're by definition running a Proxy Army.

And "Life's tough sometimes" isn't a good arguement. It's just going to push people against your stance, rather than for it.

Polonius wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:WYSIWYG is part of wargaming - as is the appearance of the models. If you can't be bothered to make your chaos marines look like chaos marines and your blood angels look like blood angels, why not play ASL with cardboard tokens representing the men?

While I get your point, I find any argument of the form "if you do not take your models as seriously as I do, don't play 40k." It's needlessly insulting. Arguing that calling my fully painted Star Owls Space Wolves instead of Ultramarines is the same as playing with chits is a gross exageration that does nothing to advance discussion.

In short, have some pride in your colours. Make your DIY chapter a Space Wolf successor chapter, or a Ultramarines successor, or whatever you want, but be consistent with it. Those little icons and details on the models do count.

Yeah, because my non-codex squad and company markings and hand painted chapter badges clearly idenfify my army as one thing. I appreciate being told that I don't have pride in them.

I don't think Redbeard is attempting to be insulting. He's taking the arguement to the extreme. I think the proper counter to "Why not play with cardboard tokens" is that GW doesn't currently make cardboard tokens to represent Space Marines.

If you tell me that I can't use my Orks as Space Wolves, but you can use your (Ultramarines, Dark Angels, Salamanders, Blood Angels, etc) as Space Wolves, then you're applying a different standard to each of us. You're telling me that I have to take my models more seriously than you take yours. Again, to me, this is the very definition of unfairness.

If you want to run a successor chapter with your own customer markings, have a field day with it. But keep it in the theme of the army you're basing it on. And for gods sakes, don't codex hop. Saying you're a successor to Space Wolves is fine, as long as you keep within a Space Wolf-like theme. Using a bunch of generic tacticals to represent Grey Hunters, Long Fangs, etc isn't keeping within that theme. And if I play you as Space Wolves at a tournament this month, and you're running as a successor chapter to Blood Angels next month, then you're just abusing the successor chapter concept to get around WYSIWYG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:To me, a space marine is a space marine.

I don't know the symbols on any of those helmets.

When I get my marines up and going (if ever) they're going to be pink and glittery - so decreed the wife. Does that mean that they are chaos marines? Presume that they are not. In which case, what codex are my pink/happy/butterfly/flowers space marines supposed to fit into?

There's a codex for that. It's called Codex: Space Marines, and contains the rules for running a generic chapter.

WYSIWYG, all of my armies follow it. I play BT and a codex list, using two different armies. The codex being Mentor Legion.

But I have one model that does not follow it. My custom built Marshal for my BT. He carries a large power sword, that I use as a lighting claw, mainly because I dislike the look of a LC on a power armored model, and especialy on my HQ. How would that fly? So far I have used him in every game using a LC and no one says otherwise, I even point out that everything is WYSIWYG except him, which is just the sword. Any thoughts? You can even check him out in my gallery.

@DashOfPepper:

Considering the long description of a possible situation where WYSIWIG can create tactical advantage due to misinterpretation, and the amount of coinage you have riding on these things (personally I think you are insane for doing so, but hey everyone enjoys the hobby differently ) I can appreciate your position with a bit more clarity.

Perhaps the solution in this case would be to carry a small wad of post-it notes with you to tournaments. If your opponent is unable to provide suitable WYSIWYG models, he should at least then be gracious enough to allow you to use other means to keep you informed. Say in the waveserpent example, if I was facing you in a tournament, and I had said bright lance-scatter laser proxies, and you said to me:
'good sir, may I stick this post-it note, upon which the words "SCATTER LASER NOT BRIGHT LANCE" are written to the flying stand of your wave serpent, to further aid my rum-addled brain in remembering the exact equipment, as per your army list, of your fine craftworld's machinations of my demise?', I would likely respond with 'Of course dear chap, stick away!'

Similar for lascannons count as ML, plasma count as melta, I'm quite sure a little note that follows the unit around isn't too damaging (aside from a loss of aesthetic appeal) to the experience, as it gets rid of some of the misinformation problems.




And as for your WAC shenanigans spreadsheet, I rather like that idea, personally I use 'wound rings' (read 'ring-pulls from beverage cans') and hang them from a convenient spike/blade for my multi-wound models. Much easier to identify on the field when lots of dice are everywhere, less likely to get lost or left behind, or accidentally rolled. So long as the marker is light enough not to overbalance the model, any sort of ring-shaped object would work quite well (even loops of brightly coloured string/rubber bands would be suitable).

Here's a perfect example of some Marine "counts as" right here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/368049.page

Is this acceptable or not?

Polonius wrote:I'd also point out that while Space Marines can shop between books, many xenos armies have more built in variety of army builds, at least in the 5th edition troops focused forms.

Look at Codex: space marines. Two basic troops choices, with bikes as an option. Scouts are a support unit, good mostly for objectives and some light shooting/harassment. Tacticals are a mediocre shooting unit and lousy at assault. In the current book, few armies don't use 10 man tactical squads, with transports optional.

Now look at Orks. Only two core troops choices again, with grots being pure objective holding units. Boys, OTOH, can be built in many different ways: shooty horde, choppy horde, trukk boys, battlewagon boys. Orks can also take Bikes, Nobz, Nob Bikers, and Deff Dreads as troops. So, while the same boy may not be usable in different codices, he can be used in dramatically different builds.

Ok, so same number of "core troops". Scouts have the option to take bolters, shotguns, bolt pistol + CCW, or sniper rifles. So in the same way that an ork boy mob can take choppa/slugga or shoota, scouts have multiple weapon choices.

Tacticals aren't "mediocre" at shooting. They're better than average. Guardmen are mediocre at shooting, and orks are just bad at it. Tacticals could be used to make a shooty horde. Scouts could be used to make a choppy horde. Tacticals can be placed in a transport, just like trukk boys. Tacticals could be mounted in a Land Raider just like mob can be mounted in a Battlewagon. No difference so far.

Bikes are only troops if you have a special character, in the same way that you can take Khan and make bikes a troop for SM. Nobs as a troop choice are only granted if you take a warboss (ditto for biker nobs), so you're dedicating an HQ choice to make one unit a troop. Deff Dreads may be the only thing that SM don't have an equivalent option for. But then again, they aren't that good either.

So, Codex SM has as many options as orks, without having to resort to codex hopping.

Polonius wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:Overall I agree with Polonius on this one, though with a side of Redbeard. While I'm not opposed to people swapping, I really do prefer it if a given army can easily be recognized to be whatever codex it's using- whether through color scheme or distinctive units.

And this is part of the problem. I'm currently playing with Space Wolf Razor/Fang spam. 15 Missile Launcher long fangs, four min grey hunter squads with meltas, razors all around, three MM/HF landspeeders, and two dreads.

That's a stupid space wolf army. it's a pretty cool iron hands army (if anything). The rules don't even match the fluff of the army.

It's not my fault that everything I want to do with codex space marines (psykers, tacticals, and devs) is done better with the wolf book.

So you want the advantages of a Space Wolf army without the disadvantage of having a WYSIWYG SW army?

Polonius wrote:So, by your logic, you can't play a successor chapter without having the appropriate bitz? So, even if I built a blood angel army from the ground up, if I don't use BA bitz or symbolism my army isn't WYSIWYG?

Not by my logic, by the logic inherent in the game, and the WYSIWYG rules.

Let's break down the issue as it pertains to the eldar guy with the brightlances versus scatter lasers.

How do we know what a brightlance is? Could I glue a (painted) drinking straw to my tank and say it was a brightlance? No, because we see pictures in the codex of what a brightlance is. We also see pictures of what a scatter laser is. Could I glue a piece of sprue to my tank, and, being neither a brightlance or a scatter laser, claim it was either? No - again, we know what a brightlance is because we are given pictures.

Okay, now consider the same with marines. How do we know what a Space Marine is? Because we are shown pictures. How do we know what a Space Wolf is? Because we are shown pictures. Those pictures are not the same.

Discounting colour - I'm certainly not arguing about the validity of DIY chapters of any sort - the models simply look different. You might claim, "well, they're not as different as orks and guardians", to which I say they're still noticeably different. Want to try an experiment? Go through all the power armour codexes you want. Take scans of any of the marines in them. Run them through a black&white filter. I bet I can name the codex they come from with at least a 90% success rate. The ones that might be tricky are Dark Angel/Blood Angel/Vanilla tacticals, but even then, there are tells.

Space Wolves are not just Space Marines in Power Armour, they're space vikings. They have a distinct look to them. You can tell from the unpainted models that Space Wolves are different from Space Marines. And just because they're not as different as orks are from guardians, I don't see why they should be given any more leeway. Dark Eldar are not as different from Eldar as orks are either... Tau Firewarriors are not as different from Cadians as they are from Marines. These levels of distinction aren't relevant, what is relevant is that they are all different, and notably so.

What if a person doesn't want Wolf themed space vikings?

Are they even notably Space Vikings?

What about Blood Ravens, which explicitly don't have a known founding chapter?

Blood Ravens may explicitly have no known founding chapter, but they are, explicitly, presented as a chapter that follows the Codex: Astartes, and as such, use Codex: Space Marines.

I get the general rule, no doubt, that codex shopping is an advantage. But I don't think it's as much a problem for WYSIWYG as it is a problem because people resent the advantage.

I don't care that it is an 'advantage' - I'm not even sure it is. People are spending $1000+ to go to GTs, they can afford to have a few extra boxes of marines. I care that there's a double-standard being applied. That MEQ players are being exempted from following the WYSIWYG rule because "their models aren't as different". BS. If I can point out how the models are different from four feet away, then they're different enough to matter. Guardians are not orks, Space Marines are not Space Wolves. The models do not look the same.

While I get your point, I find any argument of the form "if you do not take your models as seriously as I do, don't play 40k." It's needlessly insulting. Arguing that calling my fully painted Star Owls Space Wolves instead of Ultramarines is the same as playing with chits is a gross exageration that does nothing to advance discussion.

I am not intending to imply that your models are not quality models. I am attempting to extend a different analogy. You are, self-admittedly, using the models from one codex, while using the rules from another because you believe the rules from the other are superior. I'm saying, if the rules are more important than the models, there are games, like ASL, that have such significantly better rules, that maybe if the rules, and not the models, are the more important thing to you, you should consider these other games with much better rules (though much worse models).

And this is part of the problem. I'm currently playing with Space Wolf Razor/Fang spam. 15 Missile Launcher long fangs, four min grey hunter squads with meltas, razors all around, three MM/HF landspeeders, and two dreads.

That's a stupid space wolf army. it's a pretty cool iron hands army (if anything). The rules don't even match the fluff of the army.

It's not my fault that everything I want to do with codex space marines (psykers, tacticals, and devs) is done better with the wolf book.

You're right, it's not your fault that GW wrote a stupid book. But, it is your choice to use it. You could play Eldar. You wouldn't choose to use Space Marine models in that case. How are your models visually recognizable as Space Wolves? How do I know what codex you're using by looking at your models? And if you don't want to play Space Vikings, then you can choose not to use the Space Wolves codex. I choose to use ork models - I choose not to use Codex Space Wolves with those models. You can make the same choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

whitedragon wrote:Here's a perfect example of some Marine "counts as" right here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/368049.page

Is this acceptable or not?

No. That model clearly has an Iron Halo. An Iron Halo is a piece of wargear that confers a game effect (4++). Mephiston does not have a 4++. Not WYSIWYG.

GW actively encourage using plain marines for certain space wolf troop types. Try and buy a box of long fangs and see what you get.
Granted you can try and wolfy them up by kit bashing. But I would not have thought it should be a tournament requirment.

Redbeard wrote:

Polonius wrote:So, by your logic, you can't play a successor chapter without having the appropriate bitz? So, even if I built a blood angel army from the ground up, if I don't use BA bitz or symbolism my army isn't WYSIWYG?

Not by my logic, by the logic inherent in the game, and the WYSIWYG rules.

You'll have to show what tournament ever defined WYSIWYG as such, otherwise you're proferring your opinion as fact.

A tournament puts forth the rules, "Unless otherwise specified in the event rules, or receiving tournament organizer approval, your army should be primarily constructed of models from the given game system and the appropriate model range(s)."

When I go to GW's site, and look under Space Marines, I am not shown Space Wolves. When I look under Space Wolves, I am not shown Space Marine Tactical Squads. This would seem to imply that they're not the same model range.

Dashofpepper wrote:To me, a space marine is a space marine.

I don't know the symbols on any of those helmets.

When I get my marines up and going (if ever) they're going to be pink and glittery - so decreed the wife. Does that mean that they are chaos marines? Presume that they are not. In which case, what codex are my pink/happy/butterfly/flowers space marines supposed to fit into?

They're called Pretty Marines.

Redbeard wrote:
Not by my logic, by the logic inherent in the game, and the WYSIWYG rules.

What rules? If there are actual rules, than cite them. The RAW on WYSIWYG is pretty loose, and tournaments are all over the board in their requirements.

Even then, the purpose of the rules is to make it clear, by visual inspection, what rules are associated with what model. Now, you might be able to tell that a red painted marine with a bolter is a Blood Angel by looking at it's chapter badges, but GW sells the exact same box for DA, BA, and SM. Just because you think a person ought to be able to tell what chapter, and thus what rules, a power armored marine is using, doens't mean that's the normal standard.

How do we know what a brightlance is? Could I glue a (painted) drinking straw to my tank and say it was a brightlance? No, because we see pictures in the codex of what a brightlance is. We also see pictures of what a scatter laser is. Could I glue a piece of sprue to my tank, and, being neither a brightlance or a scatter laser, claim it was either? No - again, we know what a brightlance is because we are given pictures.

Wargear is different, as that's not a counts-as issue. Wargear can vary within and army and squad. Codex doesn't.

Okay, now consider the same with marines. How do we know what a Space Marine is? Because we are shown pictures. How do we know what a Space Wolf is? Because we are shown pictures. Those pictures are not the same.
Discounting colour - I'm certainly not arguing about the validity of DIY chapters of any sort - the models simply look different. You might claim, "well, they're not as different as orks and guardians", to which I say they're still noticeably different. Want to try an experiment? Go through all the power armour codexes you want. Take scans of any of the marines in them. Run them through a black&white filter. I bet I can name the codex they come from with at least a 90% success rate. The ones that might be tricky are Dark Angel/Blood Angel/Vanilla tacticals, but even then, there are tells.

I'm sure your parents must be happy you can do that. I tend to simply ask my opponent "what are those" and remember it. I find remembering "I'm playing against Blood Angels" is easier than trying to find blood drops on shoulder pads.

Space Wolves are not just Space Marines in Power Armour, they're space vikings. They have a distinct look to them. You can tell from the unpainted models that Space Wolves are different from Space Marines. And just because they're not as different as orks are from guardians, I don't see why they should be given any more leeway. Dark Eldar are not as different from Eldar as orks are either... Tau Firewarriors are not as different from Cadians as they are from Marines. These levels of distinction aren't relevant, what is relevant is that they are all different, and notably so.

What if I build my marines out of old Grey Hunter boxes, but don't use any of the wolf bitz? Does every space wolf model need a wolf bit on it somewhere to be acceptable?

While I get your point, I find any argument of the form "if you do not take your models as seriously as I do, don't play 40k." It's needlessly insulting. Arguing that calling my fully painted Star Owls Space Wolves instead of Ultramarines is the same as playing with chits is a gross exageration that does nothing to advance discussion.

I am not intending to imply that your models are not quality models. I am attempting to extend a different analogy. You are, self-admittedly, using the models from one codex, while using the rules from another because you believe the rules from the other are superior. I'm saying, if the rules are more important than the models, there are games, like ASL, that have such significantly better rules, that maybe if the rules, and not the models, are the more important thing to you, you should consider these other games with much better rules (though much worse models).

And I'm saying, as a person who does not suffer some cognitive disfunction, who has posted on this board for longer than a month, knows that the argument is only viable when you assume that everybody values the aspects of the hobby the same way you do.

it would be like me telling you that if you who are interested in making sure that markings and colors are appropriate, historical wargaming might be better for you. It's true, but it ignores that there are many reasons to play 40k.

You're right, it's not your fault that GW wrote a stupid book. But, it is your choice to use it. You could play Eldar. You wouldn't choose to use Space Marine models in that case. How are your models visually recognizable as Space Wolves? How do I know what codex you're using by looking at your models? And if you don't want to play Space Vikings, then you can choose not to use the Space Wolves codex. I choose to use ork models - I choose not to use Codex Space Wolves with those models. You can make the same choice.

You don't. You will never be able to figure out what codex I'm using if we play.

Redbeard wrote:A tournament puts forth the rules, "Unless otherwise specified in the event rules, or receiving tournament organizer approval, your army should be primarily constructed of models from the given game system and the appropriate model range(s)."

When I go to GW's site, and look under Space Marines, I am not shown Space Wolves. When I look under Space Wolves, I am not shown Space Marine Tactical Squads. This would seem to imply that they're not the same model range.

have a look at space wolves heavy weapons and fast attack ranges. there is nothing but plain marines.

Infact in the space wolf HQ section there is a space marine captain model.

Redbeard wrote:A tournament puts forth the rules, "Unless otherwise specified in the event rules, or receiving tournament organizer approval, your army should be primarily constructed of models from the given game system and the appropriate model range(s)."

When I go to GW's site, and look under Space Marines, I am not shown Space Wolves. When I look under Space Wolves, I am not shown Space Marine Tactical Squads. This would seem to imply that they're not the same model range.

So in other words, no you don't have any rules to back you up. got it.

You also can have fun with interpreting the phrase "appropriate model range(s)"

The (s) modifier implies that some armies can be built out of more than one model range.

Appropriate is also a term that is subjective.

So... Would this be WYSIWYG...

A standard marine, of the 'nilla variety.
Give him a halberd / sword from the fantasy range (old chaos warriors had nice big chunky ones)
Give him an angellus boltgun / stormbolter / cut-down bolter(or pistol) stuck to his arm with a double barrel.
Give him a lick of silver paint.

It's definetly NOT a grey knight (as in, the ones in the box), its a 'nilla marine. But he is armed with a halberd and a double barrelled bolter weapon and is silver, so what else could he be but a GK?

My standard is thus...

If I look at your models, assuming I'm vaguely familiar with your codex and it's capabilities... can I understand what I'm looking at? Can I recognize your units and their war gear so that I can make good battlefield decisions while our game is going on?

If the answer to that is "yes", then any other issues I chalk off to artistry, personal preference, or laziness at worst.

If the answer is "no", then I have an issue for the TO.

Redbeard wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whitedragon wrote:Here's a perfect example of some Marine "counts as" right here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/368049.page

Is this acceptable or not?

No. That model clearly has an Iron Halo. An Iron Halo is a piece of wargear that confers a game effect (4++). Mephiston does not have a 4++. Not WYSIWYG.

Look at Captain Tycho in the GW store. He does not have a Iron Halo modeled on him, but in the codex he does have an Iron Halo. So even Tycho is not WYSIWYG.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440191a&prodId=prod1100001

Polonius wrote:
Even then, the purpose of the rules is to make it clear, by visual inspection, what rules are associated with what model. Now, you might be able to tell that a red painted marine with a bolter is a Blood Angel by looking at it's chapter badges, but GW sells the exact same box for DA, BA, and SM. Just because you think a person ought to be able to tell what chapter, and thus what rules, a power armored marine is using, doens't mean that's the normal standard.

But they don't sell the exact same box for a Space Wolf and a Space Marine. And Space Wolves have several rules that would be nice to know about by looking at the models, no? If the purpose of the rules is "to make it clear, by visual inspection, what rules are associated with what model." then that goes for things like night vision and counter attack too. Those are rules, and they're not hard for you to make it clear that they're associated with your models.

I'm sure your parents must be happy you can do that. I tend to simply ask my opponent "what are those" and remember it. I find remembering "I'm playing against Blood Angels" is easier than trying to find blood drops on shoulder pads.

Asking and remembering is exactly why we require WYSIWYG - read a few pages ago. I believe that the eldar player was told, in no uncertain terms, that it was unreasonable to ask his opponent to remember that his brightlances were actually scatter lasers. Why is it so hard to do the same with the basic models in your army?

You don't. You will never be able to figure out what codex I'm using if we play.

Exactly, that's why this is a problem.

Frazzled wrote:
So in other words, no you don't have any rules to back you up. got it.

Show me the rules that say I cannot use an ork as a space wolf. It's the same thing. A Space Wolf is not a Space Marine. While portions of those model ranges overlap, the basic models do not. Portions of the Grey Knight range overlaps with the Imperial Guard range, that doesn't mean I can throw down an ogryn as a paladin or marbo as coteaz. Portions of the Eldar and Dark Eldar ranges overlap, but that doesn't mean a wych is a banshee. Some models are shared between Space Wolves and Space Marines. That doesn't mean the basic Space Wolf is the same as the basic Space Marine. They're different models.

Again, you've noted a general rule which, as Polonius has noted, you've interepreted narrowly only to your interpretation.

Again, what tourney has ever actually applied your rule? What tourney has applied the rule that, to be WYSIWYG not only do you have to have the correct weapons, but you have to have the correct paint jobs, down to squad marks. I'll go get lunch and a book. It'll be a long wait.

Is it just me, or is the idea of using nobz and black ork bodies to build a space wolf army actually pretty cool?

Use looted rhinos, a mix of shootas and sluggas, armor up all the boys, and rock and roll.

We haven't even touched on the concept of successor chapters with different schemes and marks, some of which are in the codexes and some of which aren't.

@Polonius

There are a few excellent examples done by someone in the Wrecking Crew of Orks up-armored and built as a counts-as marine force. I think he's even using different clans to represent different SM codexes (i.e. Evil Sunz=Blood Angels). It's pretty sweet. I'm torn right now on building a Admech force that counts-as DE now that I've seen the size of the venom.....

Hulksmash wrote:@Polonius

There are a few excellent examples done by someone in the Wrecking Crew of Orks up-armored and built as a counts-as marine force. I think he's even using different clans to represent different SM codexes (i.e. Evil Sunz=Blood Angels). It's pretty sweet. I'm torn right now on building a Admech force that counts-as DE now that I've seen the size of the venom.....

Ignore the intranetz rage. If it looks good it will be well appreciated. PM how you plan on laying this out or linky to the thread.

dayve110 wrote:So... Would this be WYSIWYG...

A standard marine, of the 'nilla variety.
Give him a halberd / sword from the fantasy range (old chaos warriors had nice big chunky ones)
Give him an angellus boltgun / stormbolter / cut-down bolter(or pistol) stuck to his arm with a double barrel.
Give him a lick of silver paint.

It's definetly NOT a grey knight (as in, the ones in the box), its a 'nilla marine. But he is armed with a halberd and a double barrelled bolter weapon and is silver, so what else could he be but a GK?

As long as you play him as a strike squad member with a halberd and storm bolter. The point is, I don't have to remember what that model is equipped with. Oh, and also you need to make sure that if you want him to be an interceptor that you stick some antennae on his book bag. According to the current way of things.

I for one, personally resent the idea that all the marines with the exception of the Grey Knights are allowed to codex hop whenever they wish. If we are now differentiating between different minutia of Space Marines when considering who can and can't swap codexes whenever they damn well please, then I say that any marine that is not bearded or painted light blue can never count as a space wolf, anything that isn't covered in blood drop icons can't be counted as Blood Angels, and anything that isn't blue with lots of white arrows aren't Ultramarines.

It is certainly true that Grey Knights have significantly different looking weaponry as well as helmets that go against the norm of Spesh Mahreens. But if we are now saying, that a basic deviation of the space marines can't play count's as? Then I say we disallow it completely. If I spend hard earned time and money making my grey knights WYSIWYG then I damn well expect it from the others playing their respective codexes.

It's almost saying that they value the money of those who play Blood Angels or Ultramarines more, because they can get more for their money! Three armies for the price of one.

Frazzled wrote:Again, you've noted a general rule which, as Polonius has noted, you've interepreted narrowly only to your interpretation.

Again, what tourney has ever actually applied your rule? What tourney has applied the rule that, to be WYSIWYG not only do you have to have the correct weapons, but you have to have the correct paint jobs, down to squad marks. I'll go get lunch and a book. It'll be a long wait.

Now you're making stuff up. I've never said anything about paint jobs or squad markings. And while several tournaments do have rules that state that you must use models from the correct range, there is also a "counts-as" rule that exists specifically to allow for interesting conversions. I believe that marine players using this counts-as rule to simply hop from one codex to another is an exploitation of the counts-as rule. There is no conversion involved in having a tactical marine count-as a space wolf, and it's certainly not very interesting.

And, Frazzled, this isn't about rules, it's a discussion. People are talking about WYSIWYG. It is my opinion that Space Marine models are not WYSIWYG in Space Wolf armies. There are specific in-game advantages that Space Wolf models get, and having a visual representation that you're facing an army that has these advantages is no different than having a visual representation of which weapon choice your opponent put on their ship.