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.

JohnHwangDD wrote:If you have an army that is painted *exactly* as Black Tempars, using all-Black Templars bitz, copying the 'eavy Metal BT paint scheme and heraldry to every detail, then I expect it to be played under Codex: Black Templars, *NOT* Codex: Dark Angels.

If you play a Black Templars army as Dark Angels, then you are proxying the army is something that it isn't.

That is EXACTLY my point, DD.

I took the poll choices;

I beleive that the paint scheme that an army uses, no matter what it looks like, is irrelevant to the rules used by an army.
I beleive that using a paint scheme that another army is commonly associated with and using different rules is bad form and/or illegal.

to say:
1) Paint however you want, use whatever rules you want.
2) If you paint DA, use DA rules.


I strongly feel that you should use the rules that go with the paintjob you've chosen, where applicable. Red Paint Job? Should have red to get the perk. DA models, paint scheme, heraldry, and characters? Play DA rules. Purple and grey marines with smiley-face sunbursts on the shoulders? Play whatever rules you want, as there are no existing rules for these marines.
If you "use a paint scheme that another army is commonly associated with (DA) and use different rules" (BA), then I whole-heartedly see that as bad form.



Ghidorah

Generally I would look down on it but would by no means not play the person for it. I myself am guilty of playing my Greenwing with Vanilla SM Rules. (Though I use no Ravenwing or Deathwing in my Greenwing army.) But I have all of the panapoly of a Dark Angels force. I just don't think its fair that a Greenwing force from the DA should be at a disadvantage to a Vannilla force comprised of the exact same models. (I also don't use any special characters with my Greenwing. When I do I always use the Orig DA rules.)

I don't really mind it for a force that is built like seperate army of the same faction. So if you wanted to play Blood Angels but you wanted to run a tactical force instead of jumppack heavy I wouldn't begrudge you. However if you included Dante or death company with their special rules or without telling me they were just a basic captain with plasma pistol and jumppack, thats when it gets into bad form Using rules from multiple army lists I feel is not really good sporting.

colour scheme wise: have you ever seen a black templar? ..like in real life?

..then how do you know what he looks like?

if the rules you are using is cleared at the start of the game then no worries, go ahead, but if the guys being a w@nker about it (changing rules and whatnot) then forget him, let somebody know, and you win by default or at least there would be some penalty

Sorry for the double post, was meant to edit black templar and change to dark angel ...

Agreed, I don't really care what rules you use for the army, so long as you use that ONE codex. Doesn't matter what color they're painted, but if you insist on calling them Dark Angels when they're obviously Black Templars, I might raise an eyebrow. My Tau are not Eldar no matter what codex I'm using, but I don't mind playing proxies so long as it isn't too confusing.

And since we're talking about freaking power armored armies here I don't see what the big deal is. A Marine is a Marine is a Marine to me...

Ghidorah wrote:I strongly feel that you should use the rules that go with the paintjob you've chosen, where applicable. Red Paint Job? Should have red to get the perk. DA models, paint scheme, heraldry, and characters? Play DA rules. Purple and grey marines with smiley-face sunbursts on the shoulders? Play whatever rules you want, as there are no existing rules for these marines.
If you "use a paint scheme that another army is commonly associated with (DA) and use different rules" (BA), then I whole-heartedly see that as bad form.

This sums up my thoughts/feelings perfectly. I wouldnt paint Death Guard like Khorne Berzerkers, nor would I paint Dark Angels like Black Templars (then again, I wouldn't paint any normal marines; loyalst scum! ). If however the person in question modified things like the icon, slight variances in the colour scheme, and things of that nature... I would have no problem with that as it could then easily be classified as a successor chapter. However if someone were to have a Blood Angels army and decided that one day they want them to be Space Wolves, I would question their line of thought. Bad form, IMO!

anticitizen013 wrote:

Ghidorah wrote:I strongly feel that you should use the rules that go with the paintjob you've chosen, where applicable. Red Paint Job? Should have red to get the perk. DA models, paint scheme, heraldry, and characters? Play DA rules. Purple and grey marines with smiley-face sunbursts on the shoulders? Play whatever rules you want, as there are no existing rules for these marines.
If you "use a paint scheme that another army is commonly associated with (DA) and use different rules" (BA), then I whole-heartedly see that as bad form.

This sums up my thoughts/feelings perfectly. I wouldnt paint Death Guard like Khorne Berzerkers, nor would I paint Dark Angels like Black Templars (then again, I wouldn't paint any normal marines; loyalst scum! ). If however the person in question modified things like the icon, slight variances in the colour scheme, and things of that nature... I would have no problem with that as it could then easily be classified as a successor chapter. However if someone were to have a Blood Angels army and decided that one day they want them to be Space Wolves, I would question their line of thought. Bad form, IMO!

To me this would be fine so long as they were using models equipped properly to
match the codex in play. So he's not proxying his Blood Angels Devastator Squad
as a Grey Hunter pack, for example, but rather using the the heavy weapons in
a Long Fangs pack, etc.

Paint your models whatever color you want. It's really none of my business. I think that it's entirely appropriate to use the DA Codex for 1st Company armies, or the BA Codex for 8th Company. If you play Dark Angels and have a hard-on for thunderfire cannons and Redeemers, go ahead and use the Space Marine Codex. You're not taking unfair advantage of anyone, so there's no harm in it.

Once upon a time, I would have felt very strongly about this. The game, however, has changed significantly since 3rd edition. In 3E, there was a much more exclusive approach to including special rules. For example, to get access to this army build, these units must be excluded. Now, we get codices like the new Space Marine book which specifically says about special characters "you can use the model and rules for a named character to represent a mighty hero of a different chapter" .... "ust make sure your opponent is aware of what everything counts as."

I think it's clear that the philosophy in 5th edition has swung to allowing rules and models to be used to represent whatever force the player wants. In other words - everyone can have a Tigurius, but he'll just be a different colour.