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.

When I play marines I use a full Deathwing list which is obviously DA. I'm not thinking of specialised lists like Deathwing, Doublewing, Ravenwing when I ask this question.
What do you think makes a particular list DA as opposed to any other chapter or vanilla marines army? What is Dark Angelsness?? Do you think it has to do with shooty, counter assault? Use of plasma weapons? Mobility? Lots of vehicles due to cheaper cost?
It would seem to me that in lower points games like 500 then all marine lists will be pretty much the same - 2 troops, 1 hq etc and Dark Angelsness will not be obvious. So in higher points games what would this look like?

The men in dresses makes it Dark Angel.

Men in dresses ?????
I think you must mean the MANLY monk-warrior robes!!!!!

No, he means the men in hooded dresses. Seriously, a monk would have to flog himself twice for wearing a robe like that. First, it's fancy, fancy, fancy. Second, it makes the stuff female actors wear to the Oscars look butch and manly... All hail the repentant, in-denial monks in overly fancy robes!

Deathwing Assault. Unlike the codex-compliant Ultramarines who have terminators that like to Deep Strike, the not-codex-compliant Dark Angels have terminators that like to Deep Strike at the same time!!!!! And oftentimes they do this with teleport homers!!!!! Because of this highly unorthodox tactic Dark Angels are nothing like your typical run-of-the-mill codex chapter.

And also I'm being facetious.

I was gonna say men in dresses but everyone already beat me to the punch.

Unlike other chapters Dark Angels have a secret.

The secret is they're gay.

yup as per the teachings of their Primarch Lionel Johnson.

I find it reassuring that so many gamers are well read and are familiar with the suggested link between Lionel Johnston's poem about suppressed homosexuality and the dark secret. We are obviously not just morons who like to play at killing things!!!
Pity nobody has tried a serious answer to the original question.

OK, I think this thread shows that 10+ years after Angels of Death, 20+ years after rogue trader no one has found a way to make the DAs click.

They're like the hodgepoge of army ideas. All termis. All bikes. All tanks (the long-lost Ironwing).

Their original black armor is gone. Their gothic look has been spread to all other marines. Their Dark Secret was hinted at in 2nd edition, revealed in Angels Of Death and frankly was pretty lame.

DA were my first army but I've had no interest in them in a long time.

As much as we all like to believe what the DA's dark secret is, I propose that it might be really meta and is actually the opposite. Considering how marine subtext really points to one direction, the DA being the complete opposite would be totally rad.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Their Dark Secret was hinted at in 2nd edition, revealed in Angels Of Death and frankly was pretty lame.

That's the problem with things like Dark Secrets, is that after so much build up, when they are revealed (especially in this context) they inevitably don't live up to the hype. It probably would have been better had the Dark Secret only ever been hinted at, and never actually revealed.

It's sort of like the two missing Space Marine legions. If GW ever actually says who they were or specifically why they've been removed from the roster forever, I for one will be very disappointed. This is because I enjoy all of the conjecture, and also know that no reason GW gives is actually going to satisfy me (They were corrupted by......SUPER CHAOS LOL!).

They really are a hodgepodge of both fluff and gameplay elements. They used to hate allies, now they don't. They used to be the masters of plasma, now they pay more and have less access to plasma. They were always codex with a few alternate formations, now they are super duper orthodox, but can take termies as troops. They has rules and fluff making them a sort of tough, foot slogging infantry perfect for a shoot out. Now they can't take as many specials and lost stubborn or intractable or whatever that rule that nobody ever got right was.

It's been implied that after 5th, and presumably the new SM codex, all will be revealed, but seeing as how DA are only a year old, I'm shocked they redid them only to end up with such a blah result. I honestly think that the DA codex was simply a beta test for the new Space Marines. It's the only thing that makes sense (DA players seem to stick to DA regardless of codex quality or power).

stonefox wrote:As much as we all like to believe what the DA's dark secret is, I propose that it might be really meta and is actually the opposite. Considering how marine subtext really points to one direction, the DA being the complete opposite would be totally rad.

is this the theory that it was actually the Fallen who stayed loyal originally and are now being hunted to keep the other guys betrayal a secret? yeah i've heard that hinted at, i had hope Decent of Angels might reveal more but it didnt.

The best part of DA fluff is the enigma that is Cypher.

Let's also remember that very early in RT they were described as black armor and a pure black banner. So they were dark with extra darkness.

Then came Bill King's Deathwing story where they became American Indians.

Cool idea since GW's armies are still overwhelmingly white, but not exactly fitting to the theme. had he made them 'Raven Guard' it would have saved us some trouble.

Since then the Amerindian idea drifts in and out. Ignored for a while, now back with extra feathers for commanders.

Poor Dark Angels. That's why my marines joined the Dark Angles, a similar but diffterent chapter.

y'know I'd totally forgotten about the native american aspect to them "Weasel-Fierce" and that.

How does that fit in with Mitchell Scanlons space-Bretonians? (I'm sure Scanlon was told to show them in that manner so thats no slight against him).

Cross dressing and affinity for midgets. Thier fluff has been destroyed over the years and Descent of Angels has made them a laughing stock IMO.

stonefox wrote:As much as we all like to believe what the DA's dark secret is, I propose that it might be really meta and is actually the opposite. Considering how marine subtext really points to one direction, the DA being the complete opposite would be totally rad.

So... you're saying the Dark Angels AREN'T all into male-male rumpy bumpy (with the occasional psychic midget for variety)?

See KK, that's one thing I always wondered: why do people insist on making some fantasy ideal into one set of aesthetics and background? It's what's always bugged me about 40K's background and especially its players doing conversions.

When someone makes a converted army, they can't just have 1 squad made to look like colonial british troops. No, they have to make a whole army made of them and call them "Praetorians." What about an army made of one-half nazis and one-half american joes? Nope, people will say it looks "wrong." But this is supposed to be a fantasy! Why try make it a carbon copy of an existing idea IN SPACE? The same thing happens in the 40k background, it seems. Oh noes you can't just have half an army of high-tech aliens, you must have all of them and call them "Eldar". If they're all the opposite they're called "Orks." If they're half-half they're Tau+Kroot and people will complain that they "don't fit."

So why can't Dark Angels be a bunch of native americans who love midgets and cross dress? My future IG army's gonna have ww1 brit trench diggers with cadians in tanks and squads. It will look like a cohesive army, but people will complain that "you should've gone with ww1 brits or ww2 nazis but not both mixed in the same army."

There's probably a more elogant way of stating all of this but the main point is that it's a fantasy so I really don't understand when people complain that "oh it can only look like this army in this world's past, not a mix of several." DA are midget-loving, N. American native cross-dressers who happen to also be starship troopers. Pretty cool in my book.

sleazy wrote:

stonefox wrote:As much as we all like to believe what the DA's dark secret is, I propose that it might be really meta and is actually the opposite. Considering how marine subtext really points to one direction, the DA being the complete opposite would be totally rad.

is this the theory that it was actually the Fallen who stayed loyal originally and are now being hunted to keep the other guys betrayal a secret? yeah i've heard that hinted at, i had hope Decent of Angels might reveal more but it didnt.

The best part of DA fluff is the enigma that is Cypher.

Uh, sure. Let's go with that.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Poor Dark Angels. That's why my marines joined the Dark Angles, a similar but diffterent chapter.

I would assume their mastery of the arcane forbidden arts of geometry makes them excel at indirect fire tactics.

stonefox wrote:So why can't Dark Angels be a bunch of native americans who love midgets and cross dress? My future IG army's gonna have ww1 brit trench diggers with cadians in tanks and squads. It will look like a cohesive army, but people will complain that "you should've gone with ww1 brits or ww2 nazis but not both mixed in the same army."

I think there is a trick to doing this.

My Imperial Guard (Built as allies to my Witch Hunters, but with notes to how I'd field them as a full, current Codex IG force available) have detailed notes on why they're a mixed force and there is a gallery of pics, too.

Basically, my home-grown regiment's specialty is whipping recruited militia forces into shape. As such, they're divided into a 'core' and 'aux' force, although this is intermingled when fit into a 40k org chart. All of this is background and a few guides for troop selection: They're a stock IG force (for use as allies to my Witch Hunters) so I don't even sue doctrines when fielded normally.

I think they 'work' together. Partially it's because of the unified color scheme. Every model uses greys and greens on the models. On the Aux forces it may vary more: some have grey vests, while others may only have grey on their gear belts. The green is even less rigid: a few have nothing more than a green belt-pouch or bandanna while many have green outfits, hair, etc.

Anyway, there's an in-character explanation for this weird force and I feel it works pretty well. Maybe if 5th edition is interesting enough I'll be motivated to build it out to 1500 or so... Although that would require some interesting plastic kits and/or a lot of bits orders.

Haha, Dark Angels are the gay, it's not old at all.

Anyway, I don't know why, but I've always like the Dark Angels and a lot of players I know feel the same way. In a way, they are the 40k paradigm: The good guys, but not really. They fight for the Imperium, kill Xenos and heretics, but have their own secret agenda and are willing to go to ANY length to 1) fulfill that agenda and 2) keep it a secret (hence we have them blowing up a Black Templar's ship after they captured Cypher). That actually gives them a lot more personality than the goody-goody Ultras, the Blood-Crazed Blood Angels (who are second in my book for story), and the Vikings in Space... Wolves. They are the First Legion, heroes across a thousand worlds, yet in some ways are traitors. I think that duality is interesting.

I don't have the gay either.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Make sure you complain about the good old days of DA, even if you weren't playing during that time.

I've played DA since their codex came out in 2nd Ed. Even in that codex, the Native American theme was pretty subdued. Of course, they said the DA have this dark secret and then they told you what that secret was. With Angels of Darkness and Descent of Angels, they have opened the door that maybe the secret is even darker than what you already know.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

stonefox wrote:See KK, that's one thing I always wondered: why do people insist on making some fantasy ideal into one set of aesthetics and background? It's what's always bugged me about 40K's background and especially its players doing conversions.

Well at the end of the day miniature gaming, and 40k in particular is not big on sublety. With 100s of 1" tall figures seen en mass you want some consistancy that clearly communicates what they are.

I've seen people do IG scratch armies before, each unit in a different uniform, and it always looks like a mess. Individual models might be fantastically painted, but the collective does not work.

In the same way a DA army that's green, and white and black and combines medival monk with knights with native americans just looks confused.

Yeah some people can pull it off, but its hard.

And the question at hand is what is Dark Angelness, what is the one thing that characterizes them. In real life no one can sum up an whole country or even a person in one sentence, but fiction is not real life. We look to fiction for a more orderly world where you can sum something up.

With 100s of 1" tall figures seen en mass you want some consistancy that clearly communicates what they are.

Yep that's what I mean. To me, it doesn't make "sense" that someone has nazis IN SPACE or WW1 brits IN SPACE or even green dudes IN SPACE. Yet people seem to think that when you make an army everything must ascribe to some well-known, historical aesthetic. What's really funny is that Bretonnians are the best examples of armies with a completely ridiculous aesthetic: lame peasants mixed with awesome, well-armored knights. It shouldn't make sense this those two just clash! But people will let it go cuz it happens to have a basis on a historical army of some sort. It's really, really odd.

Even in your uniform example. Brets have lots of dirty brown peasants mixed with glorious white, red, blue, and yellow knights. The aesthetics clash! It doesn't make sense! But people let it go regardless.

Anyway, that's the last I say of that. I hope someone has a word of this. I think I would just prefer calling it lack of imagination.

And the question at hand is what is Dark Angelness, what is the one thing that characterizes them. In real life no one can sum up an whole country or even a person in one sentence, but fiction is not real life. We look to fiction for a more orderly world where you can sum something up.

I would like to disagree. Science fiction, especially, is a realm that allows you to explore possible future ethics, moral dilemmas, and all sorts of weird technological loopholes that fiction hasn't been able to cover. You can mix-and-match background to achieve this effect too, if necessary. REally, I don't see why DA should just be "the blackest, darkest marine chapter." Why can't it have that and a native american theme too? Or a fascination with midgets? All wrapped up in homosexual allegory I guess. Why not?

As we have all pointed out we seem to be at the mercy of GW and the whims of the writers of new editions of a codex - story lines not thought out and changes to army structure that will influence /change game play in order to sell models.
An important lesson seems to be not to take the background and story lines too seriously - they will change stuff in the future as it suits them to improve sales.
So if a chapter is not obviously cc or shooty then it just kind of merges into a bit of everything or like everyone else and identity becomes as much the look and colour scheme of the models as anything else.
I happen to like DA because I want to play an all terminator army with dreads and landraiders

And there you go, there's your Dark Angelness right there - you want Terminators and Dreads and Land Raiders. Mind you, the last DA Codex was better than the current ones, before the dark times, before it got Jervis'ed, but the reason you play DA is what makes up your Dark Angelness.

I mean, I've played Ultras since time began (seriously!) and despite the fact that they don't really have any fancy special rules, and they haven't got your typical cliche 'dark secret' or 'genetic defect' or 'too yellow' or anything like that, I still like 'em. I can't really work out why... except maybe when I started playing the only difference between a Blood Angel, Salamander or Ultramarine was the colour of their armour, and I like blue more than Red or Green.

But I think the comments about them being confused from a background standpoint and from a cohesive army 'look' standpoint are true. They're a mish-mash of emo, dark secret, Red Indian, midgets, dresses and not-so-subtle gay subtext (this includes the love of bikes... bikes and feathers and dresses and dark secrets, c'mon people - old as it may be it's still so unintentionally funny) and nothing meshes together.

I mean, one thing Marines have had going for them is their day-glo colour schemes. As Kyoto often points out, we have the Blue Marines, the Red Marines, the Black Marines the Other-Black Marines, the Grey Marines, the Green Marines and Other-Green Marines, the Yellow Marines and the White Marines. Not so original, but it's cohesive

Dark Angels, whilst being the first of the two Green Marine Chapters (although they should be second as they stole their current colour from the Salamanders), also have Bone-White Marines and the Other-Other-Black Marines. So they end up as a mush-mash of colour and theme.

Now, sure, there's nothing stopping anyone from doing a DIY Chapter with Blue Tac Squads, Red Assault Squads and Hot-Pink Dev squads, but GW has spent so much time and so many words of text explaining to us in huge detail the way that Marines colour themsleves (rather than, y'know, telling us how certain armies like the Eldar are structured at all), that we're left with the idea of these super-elite super-men who all come to battle dressed to impress in one colour, or one colour scheme.

As a Chapter that shows up with varying amounts of colour and sequins... the Dark Angels just don't fit with the other Chapters. I guess that's because they're gay...

BYE

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Let's also remember that very early in RT they were described as black armor and a pure black banner. So they were dark with extra darkness.

Blacker than the blackest black! Times infinity.