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.

What is the general consensus on count as armies? what is their legality status?

I have my kroot merc force from back when the CA was still more or less valid and I am looking at doing some heavy work on them and turning them into a count as Dark Eldar force.

Band wagon, yes. But Dark Eldar were a big part of their fluff.

Most people would be fine as long as you put in the hard yards in terms of modeling and dont seem to be doing it for WAAC reasons.

Kroot kinda suite raiders IMO so be sure to post some pics =)

If I get the motivation to do it I will.

I just wanted so opinions about it before I started this project.

sounds like the best possible use for kroot

I think most people have the opinion that a themed army using counts as list are fine (and some times ace), while someone with unpainted orks using a blood angels codex (power gamer) won't get any games.

BluntmanDC wrote:I think most people have the opinion that a themed army using counts as list are fine (and some times ace), while someone with unpainted orks using a blood angels codex (power gamer) won't get any games.

Couldn't agree more with this.

I was thinking about doing the same. Kroot really fit the DE army style.

I think the key to counts as is to make it clear that you are doing it for the theme rather than jumping on the band wagon.

Make sure your units fit what they are meant to represent, keep weapons consistent throughout and be prepared to explain it to your opponent pregame (a printout with some explanations could save time).

Yer counts as armies go alot smoother if you provide unit keys (pictures of a units standard model with what it represents in the army).

going by my fluff, Kroot will probably only represent Warriors/trueborn warriors and HQ choices. and weapons will be converted over to be Dark Eldar.

As long as you put in the time to make the force look cohesive, I like "counts as" armies.


Of course My Little Ponies and Battle Beasts that "count as" Blood Angels are NOT included in my statement.

I have 1. My Emperor's Children army uses blood Angel rules. However, I don't have anything silly in it. No storm ravens, no libby dreads. All models have approperate wargear (a Pfist is a p-fist. Plasma pistols/guns are plasma pistols/guns). So its 100% painted WYSIWYG.

Doing that with marines is easy, so there hasn't been any issues at all.

Without Counts As, Orks couldn't even use all the units in their army list.

Generally, having WYSIWYG means that you can do whatever you want with the rest of the model. However if you put sufficient effort into your count-as pieces, then most opponents would let you use them purely out of respect. I remember one converted army on the GW website where the guy used a Mono-tzeentch army, but wanted to use a Bloodthirster. To keep it fluffy he sculpted a horror turning into the BT and said it was the Changeling taking on the form. That's a perfectly good count-as (on a model to model scale, but you get the idea). If someone just put the changeling on a large base and changed it around every time you wanted a new Greater Daemon, alot of people would call shenanigans on you.

As said. As long as you can model it so it resembles something that could be what your fielding within reason have at it. Just be sure to make clear in no uncertain terms what counts for what when playing an opponent. If you model it well they'll be asking you what everything is anyway.

Jayden63 wrote:I have 1. My Emperor's Children army uses blood Angel rules. However, I don't have anything silly in it. No storm ravens, no libby dreads. All models have approperate wargear (a Pfist is a p-fist. Plasma pistols/guns are plasma pistols/guns). So its 100% painted WYSIWYG.

Doing that with marines is easy, so there hasn't been any issues at all.

Srry off topic but I have to ask as a EC player... why the BA codex for them?

I agree with everyone else. As long as everything is propperly represented I dont see any problem with it and is in fact a great idea. If you need any advice as what should "count as" what in the DE codex ask away!

Counts as armies can be amazing.

I remember a thread from a whiel ago where someone made a Trade Federation (Star Wars) army and played it with Tau rules. It looked awesome and i'm assuming it played pretty well because it would have been using official rules.

Tau were probably in part based on the trade federation, they even look and talk like them XD

And of the three close combat marine codexes available, the BA one is more suited to EC, using faster, more elegant weaponry than the brutish and viking Space Wolves, while being more up to date than the Black Templars.

Praxiss wrote:Counts as armies can be amazing.

I remember a thread from a whiel ago where someone made a Trade Federation (Star Wars) army and played it with Tau rules. It looked awesome and i'm assuming it played pretty well because it would have been using official rules.

I've played a Star Wars army once at a tournament. My first thought was actually "Ow, Gawd!... " But as it turned out, it was no problem at all. The guy was a whole lot less nerdier than I expected and did everything possible to avoid confusion. The army played as Imperial Guard with Daemon Hunter allies. His AT-AT "Landraider" had a Landraider footprint sized base and his Storm Trooper jetbikes were Rough Riders, without the Boom!-lances. Just because he thought it didn't fit the models. (He knew full well that Roughriders without their lances were a horrible tactical choice)

Point is; as long as it is well worked out and not WAAC, you'll get away with a lot of counts-as'ing.

Laughing God wrote:

Jayden63 wrote:I have 1. My Emperor's Children army uses blood Angel rules. However, I don't have anything silly in it. No storm ravens, no libby dreads. All models have approperate wargear (a Pfist is a p-fist. Plasma pistols/guns are plasma pistols/guns). So its 100% painted WYSIWYG.

Doing that with marines is easy, so there hasn't been any issues at all.

Srry off topic but I have to ask as a EC player... why the BA codex for them?

Two reasons -
First - My old EC army was an assault based army. I didn't go all out for the whole sonic weapon thing. My guys tore stuff up in hand to hand, so on that front, FC lets my guys strike first, at least some of the time, just like what warp scream did. The ability for BA to take assault squads as troops lets me use all of my 6 man BP/ccw armed models in troops (just like they used to under the old rules).

Second - With the inclusion of Baals and dreads in every FOC category, I could actually field most of the models I have for the army in a legal list. It wasn't really for the power, more for the convince that everything just sort of fit. And now the list plays once again like it did with the 3.5 codex. That was the important part. The list now plays like it was designed. Not something that could be done with the current chaos codex.

The only models that I can't get in are the damonetts (there just isn't a satifactory wysiwyg representation for them) and the defiler is a bit of a stretch as a vindicator but it works ok with everyone I've asked. Happily my DP is an awesome representation of the Sanginuor model.

Bottom line. This is fine as long as everything is clear with your opponent