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.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Daughters of Khaine its near impossible to tell one group from the other by painting alone.

These rules specify 40k, but yes, when I read this I could hear the argument in my head. "Those are clearly Khailebron they have blue on them.", "No these just have blue loincloths, I'm running them as Draichi."

Aye I picked them because I've got the Battletome, but I'm sure that they are not alone in having basically no actual way to tell the official schemes apart.

Also as pointed out some armies actually have fluff reasons for having the same uniform - Tyranids and Guard would both look the same even if they came from different fleets/cores.

What happens if an army doesn't have a variant way to paint in the codex, but you didn't paint it the right way. Like lets say you didn't bothered to do the knee and shoulder guards the way GW does it, and just left them in silver? Does it mean your army is tournament illegal then?

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named charictors but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named characters but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

If people wanted to chapter hop they shouldn't have painted a specific chapter. If you are playing in the tournament with a "I just want to play the absolute strongest unit and with the tournament" mindset that's fine. It's no different than buying and painting up a new flavor of the week unit or swapping out weapons. Just paint your stuff as a unique chapter or be prepared to use the rules for the chapter you went with.

A player that attends a tournament for the visual/ hobby side of the game shouldn't have to suffer you playing salamanders as UM.

Sure it sucks, but it was inevitable given how this edition works, the older Ed’s lacked the keyword dynamic as a limiter to sharing rules, now with that limiter it needs to be very clear to your opponent what is what and which army is which.

How does the opponent "suffer" if he's only really playing from the hobby side? Why should he care what rules are being used when all he should be caring about is how nicely painted is the other player's army.

You can't have it both ways if you're just in it for the painting then you shouldn't care about the rules as to what army is using which rules. If you're just in it to play then it doesn't matter how it's painted only how it's played.

Both of the above are very narrow minded approaches but they seem to be the mindsets of a lot of posters.

The chances of me flying all the way over to England to play with little toy soldiers at Warhammer World is about nill. Might be a once in a lifetime, epic trip and maybe someday I'll do it. Not for the next few years though.

This is just another tournament requirement like any other. Every tournament I've ever attended has had rules like "All models must be painted", and when that wasn't enough "All models must be painted with at least three colors, and the base must be painted". Or "You must field at least one detachment, and a maximum of three detachments". Etc., etc,. etc.

If the tournament organizers want a rule that says "If your Space Marines are painted like Ultramarines, then they must be played as Ultramarines and not Blood Angels", then OK. If I want to play in this tournament, then I'll abide by that rule. If I don't like it, then I won't play in the tournament. Seems pretty simple to me.

TLDR; If you don't like it, don't play in the tournament.

I think it's fine. It's really wierd to see ultramarines played as blood angels, or whatever. It's just for the event/s anyways. The reduction of cognitive dissonance and adherence to the hobby aesthetic is reason emough for me.

Meh, it's a slippery slopes to most tournaments and shops implementing this.

Still, this could have been all solved if the traits were just suggestions and you actually got the option to pick what ever you felt suited your particular squad. In a narrative game, for example, I might have ultramarines who are actually in a seige and have been trained to focus on buildings (so i would pick the Imperial Fists trait).

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
How does the opponent "suffer" if he's only really playing from the hobby side? Why should he care what rules are being used when all he should be caring about is how nicely painted is the other player's army.

You can't have it both ways if you're just in it for the painting then you shouldn't care about the rules as to what army is using which rules. If you're just in it to play then it doesn't matter how it's painted only how it's played.

Both of the above are very narrow minded approaches but they seem to be the mindsets of a lot of posters.

From the hobby side, I see it as fluff and paint mixed. A specific army painted in a specific way should operate as it does in the fluff/codex. I don't want to see BA operating like UM do according to the fluff. I don't want to see BA using special traits only usable by UM its part of what gives the universe depth and flavor. By playing BA as UM you are forcing fluff players to be less immersed in the game and hurting their experience.

I mean there's really no point in arguing it now as GW seems to see it the exact same way and if you wanna play at GW official events your going to have to follow the rules

Asmodios wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named characters but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

If people wanted to chapter hop they shouldn't have painted a specific chapter. If you are playing in the tournament with a "I just want to play the absolute strongest unit and with the tournament" mindset that's fine. It's no different than buying and painting up a new flavor of the week unit or swapping out weapons. Just paint your stuff as a unique chapter or be prepared to use the rules for the chapter you went with.

A player that attends a tournament for the visual/ hobby side of the game shouldn't have to suffer you playing salamanders as UM.

You keep talking abouy marines like this only applies to them. It applies to all armies.
Painted your Tau white even though in their original codex their wasn't a white sept well tough for you you can only play Tau sept.

Got an Imperial Guard army if its plastic you better be playing cadian as those are clearly cadian models.

Why are your tallern dessert raiders rocking an artic camo.
TO he's playing valhallan's as Tallarn.

My own Tau army for example doesn't match any current sept colour scheme but would having 2 septs with the models in a consistent camo pattern but different markings be good enough or not. Would one sept being sand based and one being grass bassed be different enough?

The reason for not talking marines is they have been seprate colours for years, I don't object so much but for other armies where subfactions never made any difference where do you draw a line.

What is fair, should an IG player need to bring metal infantry to play valhallan's or is plasstic cadians in winter camo OK.

This is a fine rule for narrative events but don't try and enforce visualistic rules onto a competitive setting.

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named characters but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

If people wanted to chapter hop they shouldn't have painted a specific chapter. If you are playing in the tournament with a "I just want to play the absolute strongest unit and with the tournament" mindset that's fine. It's no different than buying and painting up a new flavor of the week unit or swapping out weapons. Just paint your stuff as a unique chapter or be prepared to use the rules for the chapter you went with.

A player that attends a tournament for the visual/ hobby side of the game shouldn't have to suffer you playing salamanders as UM.

You keep talking abouy marines like this only applies to them. It applies to all armies.
Painted your Tau white even though in their original codex their wasn't a white sept well tough for you you can only play Tau sept.

Got an Imperial Guard army if its plastic you better be playing cadian as those are clearly cadian models.

Why are your tallern dessert raiders rocking an artic camo.
TO he's playing valhallan's as Tallarn.

My own Tau army for example doesn't match any current sept colour scheme but would having 2 septs with the models in a consistent camo pattern but different markings be good enough or not. Would one sept being sand based and one being grass bassed be different enough?

The reason for not talking marines is they have been seprate colours for years, I don't object so much but for other armies where subfactions never made any difference where do you draw a line.

What is fair, should an IG player need to bring metal infantry to play valhallan's or is plasstic cadians in winter camo OK.

This is a fine rule for narrative events but don't try and enforce visualistic rules onto a competitive setting.

All your questions answer themselves if you read the actual post by GW
>Cadian models painted a Cadian better be playing them as such
>Mordian models with orange coats? cool what type of rules do they represent
Its super simple just take a breath and read the announcment again

Asmodios wrote:

All your questions answer themselves if you read the actual post by GW
>Cadian models painted a Cadian better be playing them as such
>Mordian models with orange coats? cool what type of rules do they represent
Its super simple just take a breath and read the announcment again

It realy doesn't it gives the simplest example and leave the ability to change their mind at any point.
Why do blue mordians have to be mordian but orange an be who ever they like?
Also I'll point out here that the old 2nd edition IG codex used to have different paint schemes for the different regiments aswell and Modrians came in a lot of colours depending on if they where the 1st mordian through to 8 hundred and somthing mordian but where still mordians.

Also you never answered if plastic cadians can only be cadians or are blue cadians allowed to be Iron Guard aswell?

Anyone mention how super confusing it is to see Iyanden models played as Alaitoc, or Ultramarines played as Salamanders?

Sure you could tell me, but I'll probably forget half a dozen times during the game just because the visual does not match the technical.

A step further: I have a Siam-Hann painted army, but I want my ranged guys to be Alaitoc and my closer guys to be Ulthwe...

I do not distinguish because I am a super player with elephant memory... how many times would it be easy to grant my infantry -1 to hit during the first turn of the game... or my tanks a feel no pain...

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named characters but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

If people wanted to chapter hop they shouldn't have painted a specific chapter. If you are playing in the tournament with a "I just want to play the absolute strongest unit and with the tournament" mindset that's fine. It's no different than buying and painting up a new flavor of the week unit or swapping out weapons. Just paint your stuff as a unique chapter or be prepared to use the rules for the chapter you went with.

A player that attends a tournament for the visual/ hobby side of the game shouldn't have to suffer you playing salamanders as UM.

You keep talking abouy marines like this only applies to them. It applies to all armies.
Painted your Tau white even though in their original codex their wasn't a white sept well tough for you you can only play Tau sept.

Got an Imperial Guard army if its plastic you better be playing cadian as those are clearly cadian models.

Why are your tallern dessert raiders rocking an artic camo.
TO he's playing valhallan's as Tallarn.

My own Tau army for example doesn't match any current sept colour scheme but would having 2 septs with the models in a consistent camo pattern but different markings be good enough or not. Would one sept being sand based and one being grass bassed be different enough?

The reason for not talking marines is they have been seprate colours for years, I don't object so much but for other armies where subfactions never made any difference where do you draw a line.

What is fair, should an IG player need to bring metal infantry to play valhallan's or is plasstic cadians in winter camo OK.

This is a fine rule for narrative events but don't try and enforce visualistic rules onto a competitive setting.

Well this also be for GWs own event. its going to look bad for them if people are playing loosey goosy with a ton of cadians played as steel legion or some marines as other best marines or chaos or whatever. especially because it puts a spot light on how some of their army lines are hot garbage.

and thats fine for their own event.

They might look like Blood Angels, but they're actually the Jam Eagles.

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I think this is great. You should play a specific chapter if that's what you painted out of the book. If you painted blue marines and added the ultramarine logo to every shoulder pad then I expect you to play ultramarines. If the fluff of a specific chapter encouraged you to paint your entire army that way then you should use your army as described in the codex. If you want to change what your marines are every week don't paint a specific chapter

If the sub factions were remotely balanced that would be great and if your just talking marines who have had clear and consistent this is how X sub faction looks for years.

Go to Some other factions and what happens if you have painted your models a way that looks a lot like a sub faction but you have no intrest in playing that subfaction as their rules don't work with your units/play style. You play a weakened army for a competitive event just cause someone might be fluff offended or do you expect people to repaint their armies just to match GW's codex power creep.

I can get the no named characters but the rest just feels very much like forcing a narrative play style onto a competitive setting which is not the right thing in my opinion.

If people wanted to chapter hop they shouldn't have painted a specific chapter. If you are playing in the tournament with a "I just want to play the absolute strongest unit and with the tournament" mindset that's fine. It's no different than buying and painting up a new flavor of the week unit or swapping out weapons. Just paint your stuff as a unique chapter or be prepared to use the rules for the chapter you went with.

A player that attends a tournament for the visual/ hobby side of the game shouldn't have to suffer you playing salamanders as UM.

You keep talking abouy marines like this only applies to them. It applies to all armies.
Painted your Tau white even though in their original codex their wasn't a white sept well tough for you you can only play Tau sept.

Got an Imperial Guard army if its plastic you better be playing cadian as those are clearly cadian models.

Why are your tallern dessert raiders rocking an artic camo.
TO he's playing valhallan's as Tallarn.

My own Tau army for example doesn't match any current sept colour scheme but would having 2 septs with the models in a consistent camo pattern but different markings be good enough or not. Would one sept being sand based and one being grass bassed be different enough?

The reason for not talking marines is they have been seprate colours for years, I don't object so much but for other armies where subfactions never made any difference where do you draw a line.

What is fair, should an IG player need to bring metal infantry to play valhallan's or is plasstic cadians in winter camo OK.

This is a fine rule for narrative events but don't try and enforce visualistic rules onto a competitive setting.

Except it outright says in the Guard book that many non-Cadian regiments use Cadian style armour.

The colour of the main Tau armour isn't what defines their sept. It's the smaller coloured Sept markings, not the white or ochre coloured plates.

Ice_can wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

All your questions answer themselves if you read the actual post by GW
>Cadian models painted a Cadian better be playing them as such
>Mordian models with orange coats? cool what type of rules do they represent
Its super simple just take a breath and read the announcment again

It realy doesn't it gives the simplest example and leave the ability to change their mind at any point.
Why do blue mordians have to be mordian but orange an be who ever they like?
Also I'll point out here that the old 2nd edition IG codex used to have different paint schemes for the different regiments aswell and Modrians came in a lot of colours depending on if they where the 1st mordian through to 8 hundred and somthing mordian but where still mordians.

Also you never answered if plastic cadians can only be cadians or are blue cadians allowed to be Iron Guard aswell?

When you paint your mordians blue and give them mordian transfers they are now mordian as defined in the books/codex. Orange might be mordian or could be 1 of a million planets with unique traditions/dress. As soon as you deviate from the codex you can be whatever you want. Simply don't paint an exact regiment out of the codex and then expect to use it as something else.

Plastic Cadians can be whatever as long as they aren't painted and marked as cadian. Its official fluff that many worlds use the same style gear........ they don't paint cadia on the sides of their tanks though

So, if I paint my cadian army purple with bright yellow stripes can I call them catchacans and take Sgt Harker? Likewise if I paint my SM black with white stripes and pink polka dots am I excluded from taking Rowboat even if I say that they are a special detachment of UM?
The rule does say that if I have blue SM that are painted similar to UM that I have to use UM rules. But what about gradations of blue or what if my trim doesn't exactly match UM specs. Am I still forced to be UM or am I banned from being UM?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
So, if I paint my cadian army purple with bright yellow stripes can I call them catchacans and take Sgt Harker? Likewise if I paint my SM black with white stripes and pink polka dots am I excluded from taking Rowboat even if I say that they are a special detachment of UM?
The rule does say that if I have blue SM that are painted similar to UM that I have to use UM rules. But what about gradations of blue or what if my trim doesn't exactly match UM specs. Am I still forced to be UM or am I banned from being UM?

Blue does not = UM
Blue with UM markings= UM
So yes painting cadian models with a unique theme lets you take them as whatever you want, same with SM.
Seriously its really easy and if somehow its that difficult for you send them a pic of what you have and they will let you know.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
So, if I paint my cadian army purple with bright yellow stripes can I call them catchacans and take Sgt Harker? Likewise if I paint my SM black with white stripes and pink polka dots am I excluded from taking Rowboat even if I say that they are a special detachment of UM?
The rule does say that if I have blue SM that are painted similar to UM that I have to use UM rules. But what about gradations of blue or what if my trim doesn't exactly match UM specs. Am I still forced to be UM or am I banned from being UM?

I mean, the announcement is pretty straight forward about custom color schemes. Why is this even a question?

As for blue marines, I'd say it depends on their heraldry. If they're blue with a big upside-down omega symbol, those are Ultramarines. If they're blue with a different symbol, then they aren't. Pretty easy imo. If they're not supposed to be Ultramarines, there just needs to be a clear visual distinction that they aren't.

I have a marine army painted white. But they don't have a White Scar symbol (they have a custom one) and they have some UM looking details (like crested helmets here and there) so I suspect I can use them as Ultramarines (successor). I'm not worried about this.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
So, if I paint my cadian army purple with bright yellow stripes can I call them catchacans and take Sgt Harker? Likewise if I paint my SM black with white stripes and pink polka dots am I excluded from taking Rowboat even if I say that they are a special detachment of UM?
The rule does say that if I have blue SM that are painted similar to UM that I have to use UM rules. But what about gradations of blue or what if my trim doesn't exactly match UM specs. Am I still forced to be UM or am I banned from being UM?

You could always just ask the TO in advance.

in a PUG inform your opponent.

yall can sit there and try and justify your positions all day but its all going to come down to what the TO, Lfgs owner, host house rules say.

some people are more into the fluff and will probably not enjoy a game with clearly marked blood angles with blood marks as space wolves because you want to take advantage of some rule or something or if its a super competitive store and you are practicing for a tourney then i highly doubt an opponent that wants to do the same will care.

then if you are going to a warhammer GT its on you to make sure your army color and conversions are kosher with the TO.

simple no?

The consult the TO/opponent answer is always the best answer for these questions.

I guess my bigger question is based on this rule can I take UM characters when my armor isn't a standard UM paint scheme? The rule says that if I have my army painted as UM then I must play UM but it doesn't say that only those armies painted as UM can play UM. That's a big deal since that would allow "custom" paint schemes to use special characters.

In the past it's always been fine for a successor to use the characters. Unless that's been specifically addressed I'd assume it was still the case. "Counts as Calgar" is still valid, afaik. E.g. my army is led by Chapter Master Marius Alexandar Kreiger, who happens to have Terminator Armor and some sweet Powerfist Storm Bolter combi-weapons.

Love this. But I’ve always been a paint scheme first, specific rules second person. I can see it’s not for everyone, but there are plenty of other events you can go to if gaming the system in your favour is your priority.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Personally, I’d solve the named character issue by just removing them, but that’s obv not going to happen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 Insectum7 wrote:
In the past it's always been fine for a successor to use the characters. Unless that's been specifically addressed I'd assume it was still the case. "Counts as Calgar" is still valid, afaik. E.g. my army is led by Chapter Master Marius Alexandar Kreiger, who happens to have Terminator Armor and some sweet Powerfist Storm Bolter combi-weapons.

It has been addressed. Calgar has the ULTRAMARINES keyword and not the <CHAPTER> keyword. So if you want to play a successor of the Ultramarines (e.g., Novamarines) you would replace <CHAPTER> with NOVAMARINES. Calgar's ULTRAMARINES keyword would not change to NOVAMARINES.

Painting for different detachments=fine. Painting for CTs=bullgak.

All this means is that you say 'this is my successor chapter to the salamanders, they're ultramarines fanboys so they use the same color scheme and chapter marking and special characters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nazrak wrote:
Love this. But I’ve always been a paint scheme first, specific rules second person. I can see it’s not for everyone, but there are plenty of other events you can go to if gaming the system in your favour is your priority.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Personally, I’d solve the named character issue by just removing them, but that’s obv not going to happen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This was fine until the 'gaming the system' part, and then it became a whine. Fluff is fluff and should stay in the fluff. People trying to bring the fluff into the crunch is how you end up with 'Invisibility' and 'Shifting worldscape' and 'free splitting horrors' and 'd-weapons' and all the other gamebreakingly stupid rules GW have come out with.

Sounds good to me. This is an event you choose to attend, no one is entitled to anything at an event hosted by a private entity. If they insisted that everything is based on 50mm round bases...they can do whatever they like. You can, by the same token, elect not to go.

I understand the approach though as GW is hosting this themselves - correct? They have a vested interest in protecting the IP of their product, and you're choosing to partake in their event - their product. If they're selling that product (and by extension 40K as an IP) then they will control how it's presented at their event. Good on them.

Well, GW really doesent want me using my bike Marine army anymore... Lots of Bike mounted characters index only, with White Scar models, painted Red, with Salamanders decals. Yea, I am serious. I call them my Custom hunting Chapter, the Trophy Keepers. I also made them 8th company reserve with Grey trim even though 6th Co is the Biker Reserves. Grey just looked better against red than orange.

It's a custom chapter disaster. I love it.

Good grief. How many people whining and carrying on about this are actually going to participate in this event?

Probably none of you.

Get over it. As stated it would be ridiculous for Games Workshop to allow armies to be played in THEIR tournament that look nothing like what they have said those armies should look like.

Its like arguing that your Mazda RX7 with chevy LS motor should be allowed to race in a Mazda factory spec event.