Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I am wondering if I want to play in a tournament type setting, would I be able to use dark angels with the new centurion models? I think they'd look pretty cool as deathwings, but it would be ashame if they were not even allowed to be played. I am just wondering what the rule is and I couldn't find anything on the search.

Are centurions in the dark angel codex? Then no you can not.

If you want them in your dark angel army you'll have to ally them in

 CrownAxe wrote:
Are centurions in the dark angel codex? Then no you can not.

If you want them in your dark angel army you'll have to ally them in

This.

Yeah wouldn't hold much hope for DA Centurions happening.

However surely GW must be considering adding grav guns to the first chapter's armoury.

Would it be frowned upon for me to say have a librarian, 5 scouts, and the centurions as imperial fists, but have them painted as dark angels, and the centurions specifically as deathwings?

You would need to have something on the allied units to make it clear to your opponent that they aren't actually Dark Angels, despite looking like them.

Niexist wrote:
Would it be frowned upon for me to say have a librarian, 5 scouts, and the centurions as imperial fists, but have them painted as dark angels, and the centurions specifically as deathwings?

No, it would be fine. Space marines of any chapter are still all space marines, and can be used interchangeably. As long as WYSIWYG is ok then there should be no problems.
Marine players have been switching their codices but keeping their models the same for years in an attempt to stay on the right side of the codex creep.

 insaniak wrote:
You would need to have something on the allied units to make it clear to your opponent that they aren't actually Dark Angels, despite looking like them.

This. It would be too easy to abuse/confuse them in game.

Ultimately its up to your TO though

 CrownAxe wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
You would need to have something on the allied units to make it clear to your opponent that they aren't actually Dark Angels, despite looking like them.

This. It would be too easy to abuse/confuse them in game.

Ultimately its up to your TO though

Confusing? Really? Tell your opponent that the scouts and the centurions are a C:SM allied detachment and you're done with. A lot of people paint their allied detachment in matching colors to their army. They are his models afterall.

Yes but a different colour around the model base could easily solve any issues of opponents being unsure about which is which with a quick glance.

Not differentiating them is just lazy IMO. It doesn't take that long to mark them as a different company (add a number, shoulder pad trim, etc...) to make it clear that they are different than your main detachment.

Niexist wrote:
Would it be frowned upon for me to say have a librarian, 5 scouts, and the centurions as imperial fists, but have them painted as dark angels, and the centurions specifically as deathwings?

I would like to see a visual difference, as some armies might be playing multiple Librarians and Scouts.
IF and DA have different special rules that might make a difference.

Easiest trick to differentiate them, paint the edge of their base a different colour. In this case paint the edge strip in yellow for the IF allies

So long as he isn't fielding a DA Librarian or Scouts I see absolutely no need for differentiation. All it takes is pointing to the Librarian, Scouts, and Centurion and saying these are my C:SM allied Detachment.

So long as there are no duplicate units that could be confused I would make sure and paint them in a matching color scheme to make the army look better on the table. We can paint our models any way we see fit and so long as there is no room for confusion ie DA Scouts and IF Scouts painted the same I see no issues.

The issue is the same as wysiwyg.
The DA codex has rules for a Libby and scouts. These rules are different from the SM codex (iirc). It's polite to make a visual identifier so that your opponent knows they're "special" instead of thinking they're DA.

The detachment is a separate army with completely separate army-wide rules. If you want to get permission to use models as count-as, then you should meet your opponent halfway. Going "all the Dark Angels are Dark Angels, except the Dark Angels that are Imperial Fists but look the same" and going "they are my models, I can paint them how I want" requires opponents permission. He can always walk away from the opportunity to game.

You can paint them however you want, its your army. But it's also common courtesy to make it easy to tell what is what.

It is really not hard to make it clear that they are a separate army and still paint them to match the main detachment. A small marking on the base, company numbers or markings, a different theme on the base.

I am all about the rule-of-cool, but I also want to make things as clear as possible for my opponent.

 d-usa wrote:
The detachment is a separate army with completely separate army-wide rules. If you want to get permission to use models as count-as, then you should meet your opponent halfway. Going "all the Dark Angels are Dark Angels, except the Dark Angels that are Imperial Fists but look the same" and going "they are my models, I can paint them how I want" requires opponents permission. He can always walk away from the opportunity to game.

Please cite the rule that requires me to make allies distinguishable by the colors they are painted in. RAW if i use the official models i could paint them how i want to.

Of course its polite to do it and maybe it will also look cool. But no rule requires you to do it. If you see it your way EVERY model and rule needs my opponents permission.

Other than that i see so many unpainted armies where you cant even tell whats what (especially when primed black) that i tend to be happy if they are painted at all.

 Mywik wrote:

Please cite the rule that requires me to make allies distinguishable by the colors they are painted in. RAW if i use the official models i could paint them how i want to.

Please cite the rules that allow you paint your models in the first place. That being said, it all comes down to sportsmanship. If an opponent has trouble because you won't give an inch to help him remember what is what during a game you may well have lost someone to play against in the future.

Anybody can refuse to play you for whatever reason they want to. Maybe they don't think that you used the official shade of blue for your Ultramarines.

It's polite to make sure that your units are clearly distinguished from one another, even more so if they are from different armies. If you don't want to take the minimal effort to be a good sport then don't get upset if somebody doesn't want to play against you.

I know that there are quite a few of us who would walk away from a guy that is wanting to pick up a game and then demands that we show him RAW why we shouldn't have to spend each turn going "can you please remind me which Dark Angels are not really Dark Angels".

I play count-as armies. I am cool with them. Put your entire Dark Angel army on the table and say "these are Imperial Fists" or "these guys are Grey Knights". I am even cool with people going "my Blood Angels are Dark Angels today, and these Ultramarines are Imperial Fists".

The general accepted rule for "counts-as" armies is that everything is consistent throughout the army. No "this missile launcher is a ML, but this one is a Heavy Bolter".

If it is too much work for you to go "Hey, the 5th and 10th Company is really Imperial Fists" then I would probably just walk away from a game, especially once the "Show me RAW where I can't use the same models for two different armies at the same time" starts.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mywik wrote:

Please cite the rule that requires me to make allies distinguishable by the colors they are painted in. RAW if i use the official models i could paint them how i want to.

If an opponent has trouble because you won't give an inch to help him remember what is what during a game.

Tell me where i stated that one should do that.

Did you ever play against an unpainted army? Wheres the distinction between them in that case? Would you refuse to play someone because his army is unpainted?

 Mywik wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The detachment is a separate army with completely separate army-wide rules. If you want to get permission to use models as count-as, then you should meet your opponent halfway. Going "all the Dark Angels are Dark Angels, except the Dark Angels that are Imperial Fists but look the same" and going "they are my models, I can paint them how I want" requires opponents permission. He can always walk away from the opportunity to game.

Please cite the rule that requires me to make allies distinguishable by the colors they are painted in. RAW if i use the official models i could paint them how i want to.

Of course its polite to do it and maybe it will also look cool. But no rule requires you to do it. If you see it your way EVERY model and rule needs my opponents permission.

Other than that i see so many unpainted armies where you cant even tell whats what (especially when primed black) that i tend to be happy if they are painted at all.

I love how you chose not to quote the part where he says its common courtesy to distinguish them.
He never said there was a rule to distinguish them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mywik wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mywik wrote:

Please cite the rule that requires me to make allies distinguishable by the colors they are painted in. RAW if i use the official models i could paint them how i want to.

If an opponent has trouble because you won't give an inch to help him remember what is what during a game.

Tell me where i stated that one should do that.

Did you ever play against an unpainted army? Wheres the distinction between them in that case? Would you refuse to play someone because his army is unpainted?

If it was space marines allied with space marines with nothing to distinguish them?
Yes.

I think the biggest issue would be if you had a rule that covers "units from Codex: Dark Angels" or "units from Codex: Space Marines". That would be confusing to play against.

Otherwise - fill your boots.

I would liken it to having a table full of imperial guardsmen all painted the same. I can tell you that some are infantry, some are veterans, some are penal legion, some are special weapons squads, some are command squads and some are conscripts. Some special rules apply to some squads but not to others.

Can I do this? Yes.
Do the rules allow me to do this? Yes.
Can I stop my opponent from doing this? No.
Would I want to play against this opponent? Prolly not.

I think the easiest and fluffy way to do this if you do not have your heart set on painting them as Dark Angels is to paint them as one of the Dark Angels successor chapters. If you really want the green however painting the edge of the bases a different color is more then likely the way to go. Also take care you do not try to put the libby in a DA transport. It is against the rules and easy to over look if he is painted the same as the army.

If you do not use scouts anywhere else in the army, go with them and explain them to your opponent, paint centurions with 9th company colours on the knee pads to distinguish them, as for the character, although not as useful as a librarian, I would take it as good form to take the master of the 9th or tenth company. The Dark angels are described as a codex chapter beyond the second company after all.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

Niexist wrote:
Would it be frowned upon for me to say have a librarian, 5 scouts, and the centurions as imperial fists, but have them painted as dark angels, and the centurions specifically as deathwings?

No, it would be fine. Space marines of any chapter are still all space marines, and can be used interchangeably. As long as WYSIWYG is ok then there should be no problems.
Marine players have been switching their codices but keeping their models the same for years in an attempt to stay on the right side of the codex creep.

Is Dark Eldar and Eldar the same since they are all Eldar? So can I use Warriors as Dire Avengers and Guardians?
WYSIWYG means that using DA models mean you only get to use them as DA.

To be fair I would be well within my right to play a primary detachment of Dark Angels using the DA codex as well as using a 'custom chapter' that also happens to be called dark angels and are painted the exact same way but use the space marine codex. The only thing I should never do is play them both at the same time, and that's only SHOULD. I could actually paint them exactly the same and just inform you what units are from what chapter rules wise. Now If I wanted to play a primary detachment with the Dark Angels codex and an allied detachment of Ravenwing out of the SM codex as long as there are no Ravenwing models using the DA codex I will be fine. Nothing stopping my from having a custom chapter, painted all in black, that uses the raven wing emblem and calls itself the raven wing. I just need to make sure my opponent knows before the game starts what unit are governed by what codex.

This is off-topic, but why the hell don't have DA have access to Centurions?

Because Centurions were only just introduced with the new Marine codex...