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.

Rules weren't clear on that part. Im guessing no.

Also since he makes sternguard scoring, but not troops, and only troops can capture objectives and such, what exactly is the benefit of having sternguard be a scoring unit?

Orock wrote:
Rules weren't clear on that part. Im guessing no.

We're not quite sure. I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.

Also since he makes sternguard scoring, but not troops, and only troops can capture objectives and such, what exactly is the benefit of having sternguard be a scoring unit?

The underlined is incorrect. Only scoring units can capture objectives and such.

Troops capture objectives because they're scoring units.
He makes them scoring units too...

So technically you could run 2 troops, and 3 sternguard, and still have 5 units able to capture?

Orock wrote:
So technically you could run 2 troops, and 3 sternguard, and still have 5 units able to capture?

With Kantor, that is exactly correct. Without Kantor, that would be 2 scoring units.

Orock wrote:
Subject: Can pedro kantor lead the imperial fists? Rules weren't clear on that part. Im guessing no.

Rules seem fairly cut and dry to me.

pg 158 tells us we may only use characters in a chapter that matches their chapter icon. In this case crimson fists.
pg 77 tells us we can run two chapters as a single detachment as long as they use the same chapter tactics, in this case imperial fists.
pg 109 of the BRB tells us what the force allocation chart needs for each detachment.

conclusion, Padro cantor of the crimson fists as a the only HQ choice of an imperial fists army is completely legal.

BUT his special rules say crimson fist sternguard count as scoring, so he wouldn't make the imperial fists ones scoring then. Which is his best feature.

well no. technically you can take crimson fist sternguard in your imperial fist detachment the same way you can take Padro.

mind you this is all based on the presumption he NEEDS to be pedro and not a 'counts as' model.

 DJGietzen wrote:
well no. technically you can take crimson fist sternguard in your imperial fist detachment the same way you can take Padro.

mind you this is all based on the presumption he NEEDS to be pedro and not a 'counts as' model.

A list in which Pedro Kantor is Warlord is a Crimson Fist detachment, which is identical in every way to a Imperial Fist detachment. If you took Lysander in the same list but didn't make him Warlord, he'd be a Crimson Fist Lysander. This is the only way that Kantor's Sternguard rule makes sense.

Pg 77 says you can run two chapters with the same tactics as the same detachment. It also tells us to choose our chapter, then select units. You can choose imperial fists as the chapter, then select a crimson fist units and count them as part of that same detachment.

And its all semantics.

BUT his special rules say crimson fist sternguard count as scoring, so he wouldn't make the imperial fists ones scoring then. Which is his best feature

I don't think there is any difference between Crimson Fist Sternguard or Imperial Fist Sternguard. They both share the Imperial Fist chapter tactics, and function identically in the game outside of specific rules like Oath of Rynn or Hold the Line. You are also allowed to field units from multiple chapters in the same detachment as long as they share the same Chapter Tactics. Even if you called your army an Imperial Fist army, you could field Pedro, and a unit of Sternguard and then call that Sternguard Crimson Fist and would be allowed to do so as per the rules.

Good, I like the color scheme better. He should look nice yellow.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Successor chapters use the same chapter tactics as their parent chapter (excluding Black Templars), chapters which use the same chapter tactics can be fielded as apart of the same detachment. Since they are apart of the same detachment Kantor can be the Warlord.

However as far as Kantors ability affecting Imperial Fists Sternguard my personal interpretation of it is that since Kantors rule specifically says Crimson Fists Sternguard then it wouldn't affect Imperial Fists Sternguard. If it said that his ability affected friendly Sternguard that would be a different story but it specifically says Crimson Fists.

As an example (I believe this still works since they're Battle Brothers) if you had a Black Templars army with an allied detachment of Blood Angels and Astorath was the allied HQ joined to a unit of BT assault marines his Honour of the Chapter rule would affect the squad since his rule states "He, and all members of a squad he has joined" instead of saying "He, and all members of a Blood Angels squad he has joined".

In contrast if the allied HQ was Captain Tycho his Rites of Battle rule would only affect the Blood Angels attachment because it specifically says "All other friendly Blood Angels units".

Yes but what is to stop a player from calling all his Sternguard "Crimson Fist Sternguard".

It does not matter if his primary detachment is Imperial fists. You are 100% allowed to field successor chapter units in the parent chapter detachment. You can have an all Imperial Fist army, minus the Sternguard, and simply call your Sternguard Crimson Fist.

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
However as far as Kantors ability affecting Imperial Fists Sternguard my personal interpretation of it is that since Kantors rule specifically says Crimson Fists Sternguard then it wouldn't affect Imperial Fists Sternguard. If it said that his ability affected friendly Sternguard that would be a different story but it specifically says Crimson Fists.

The rule only works if Kantor is the Warlord. If he is the Warlord, your have a Crimson Fists primary detachment , because he is a Crimson Fist. It doesn't matter what color anything is. You can't have Imperial Fists Sternguard in the same army as Kantor, by definition.

The rule only works if Kantor is the Warlord

This is incorrect for Hold the Line. Its correct for Oath of Rynn.

Hold the Line only requires Kantor to be in the army, not the Warlord.

You can't have Imperial Fists Sternguard in the same army as Kantor, by definition

I also believe this to be incorrect. The rules for chapters specifically allow you to take units from multiple chapters in the same detachment as long as they all share the same Chapter Tactics Rule. There is nothing I can see that would stop you from taking a unit of Sternguard (IF) and a unit of Sternguard (CF) in the same detachment.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:

The rule only works if Kantor is the Warlord. If he is the Warlord, your have a Crimson Fists primary detachment ...

There is no evidence to support this assertion. Pg 77 Has you select your chapter before units. You could, if you realy wanted to be 'that guy' select imperial fists as your chapter and field an entire army of the fluffy bunny slayers an imperial fists successor chapter. You'd still by RAW have an imperial fists primary detachments.


and again, its all semantics. no one should ever question what your chapter is, just what chapter tactics you are using.

Lehnsherr wrote:
Yes but what is to stop a player from calling all his Sternguard "Crimson Fist Sternguard".

It does not matter if his primary detachment is Imperial fists. You are 100% allowed to field successor chapter units in the parent chapter detachment. You can have an all Imperial Fist army, minus the Sternguard, and simply call your Sternguard Crimson Fist.

Yes you are allowed to field successor chapter units in a parent chapter army as apart of the same detachment, I think we all agree on that.

But Kantors ability only affects Crimson Fists Sternguard. If the Sternguard are bright yellow and have an Imperial Fists icon then they are not Crimson Fists Sternguard they are Imperial Fists Sternguard. They may use the same Chapter Tactics and they may be able to be fielded together but that does not make them the same chapter.

Now to me if the player wants to use the Imperial Fists color scheme but use Kantor in his army as the warlord in my opinion the player could paint his Crimson Fists portion of his army in Imperial Fists colors but he/she would need to have something that marks the "Crimson Fists" out from the rest of the detachment i.e. Red fists on the hands or have it say Rynns World on the armor or something along those lines so as to determine which units are actually Crimson Fists units and so can be affected by the rule.

If he took Lysander as his 2nd HQ and Lysander had a special ability that only affected Imperial Fists Sternguard how would you determine which units where affected since they are all painted as Imperial Fists? You couldn't say that both rules affected all Sternguard because not all the Sternguard are Imperial Fists they are just painted in the chapters colors.

The distinction comes when you say "I have an Imperial Fists army with a Crimson Fists character as my Warlord" versus "I have a Crimson Fists army painted in Imperial Fists colors with a Crimson Fists character as my Warlord".

Now to me if the player wants to use the Imperial Fists color scheme but use Kantor in his army as the warlord in my opinion the player could paint his Crimson Fists portion of his army in Imperial Fists colors but he/she would need to have something that marks the "Crimson Fists" out from the rest of the detachment i.e. Red fists on the hands or have it say Rynns World on the armor or something along those lines so as to determine which units are actually Crimson Fists units and so can be affected by the rule.

I entirely agree with this. They must be clear at the start of the game which chapter each unit is part of. My argument was based solely on the fact that you can include Kantor as your HQ and still field Imperial Fist Sternguard if you so wanted, or have Lysander as your HQ, Kantor in the army, and have CF Sternguard that would benefit from Kantors Hold the Line.

As far as paint schemes go... I am personally using DA allies with my IF. I prefer the yellow scheme, so all my DA will be painted yellow. However, I have clearly indicated on each model that they are NOT Imperial Fists due to squad markings. I have not yet run into any issues doing so as I point out at the start of the game which units are DA and they are clearly painted differently (different color shoulders to represent the crusades of the DA) than the rest of the army.

The distinction comes when you say "I have an Imperial Fists army with a Crimson Fists character as my Warlord" versus "I have a Crimson Fists army painted in Imperial Fists colors with a Crimson Fists character as my Warlord".

This last part should not matter if they followed what you said earlier. As long as the squad can be clearly identified then the color they are painted is irrelevant.

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
If the Sternguard are bright yellow and have an Imperial Fists icon then they are not Crimson Fists Sternguard they are Imperial Fists Sternguard.

This is not true at all.

You can have crimson fists painted any color you like...

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
If the Sternguard are bright yellow and have an Imperial Fists icon then they are not Crimson Fists Sternguard they are Imperial Fists Sternguard.

This is not true at all.

You can have crimson fists painted any color you like...

Yes you can paint them any color you want, that isn't the point.

If the army is a hybrid of 2 or more different chapters and has rules that only affect models from a specific chapter you can't have them all be the same exact scheme because then there is no way to differentiate which units belong to which chapter and therefore which unit is affected by the rule. I could (theoretically) make an army that included a character and troop choice from all 5 Space Marine codices and as long as I modeled them all legally I could represent the entire force as Black Templars. I may have Ragnar Blackmane modeled and painted as a Black Templar because I can model and paint him however I want but that doesn't mean he benefits from rules that only affect Black Templars.

However if the entire army is entirely from 1 chapter and just happens to use the paint scheme of a different chapter per the painters preference that's perfectly fine because there can be no confusion as to which chapter each unit belongs to. If the Sternguard are painted in an IF paint scheme and have nothing to signify that they are a CF unit then a reasonable person would assume that they are IF Sternguard and not CF Sternguard unless told beforehand by their opponent. If I went to play a guy and his entire army was painted to be Ultramarines I would assume he is using Ultramarine rules/characters.

I have a friend who uses a Deathwing army with an allied contingent of Calgar. The army is painted and modeled to represent the Ultramarines 1st company but he still has signified which units are from the Ultramarines chapter and which are from the Dark Angels (Ultramarine units have white heraldry on their right knee) for rules purposes.

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:


If the army is a hybrid of 2 or more different chapters and has rules that only affect models from a specific chapter you can't have them all be the same exact scheme because then there is no way to differentiate which units belong to which chapter and therefore which unit is affected by the rule.

Citation needed.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:


If the army is a hybrid of 2 or more different chapters and has rules that only affect models from a specific chapter you can't have them all be the same exact scheme because then there is no way to differentiate which units belong to which chapter and therefore which unit is affected by the rule.

Citation needed.

You don't need an official rule for something that's common sense. I've given enough examples in this thread as to why someone would need to differentiate between units from different chapters that are in the same army.

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
I could (theoretically) make an army that included a character and troop choice from all 5 Space Marine codices and as long as I modeled them all legally I could represent the entire force as Black Templars

Not true. You can never have more then 2 of the space marine codices. As per pg 77 of the space marine codex we treat each of the chapter tactics as a its own codex, so with that understanding we have the fallowing space marine codecies

Space Marine: Ultramarines
Space Marine: White Scars
Space Marine: Imperial Fists
Space Marine: Black Templars
Space Marine: Iron Hands
Space Marine: Salamanders
Space Marine: Raven Guard
Dark Angels
Blood Angels
Space Wolves
Grey Knights

If you are playing less that 2000 points you may have 1 primary detachments of any of these, and 1 allied detachment of any thing else. If you are playing a larger game You may have a second primary detachment from the same codex as your 1st primary detachment. If you do you may have a second allied detachment from the same codex as your 1st primary detachment.

All units in primary detachments will come from the same codex. All units in allied detachments will come from some other codex. You need only differentiate which models are primary and witch are allied.

For example. I may play my Dark Angels. I decided to save on some points include an allied detachment of Space Marine: White Scars. I tell the other player(s) all the models in my allied detachment are painted to look like Ravenwing, and none of my models painted to look like ravenwing are in my primary detachment. The other player(s) and I can tell the difference even though thematically I am playing one chapter. If any one had a bitch fest over this I could always go fine. The green ones are dark angels and the black ones are the twilight wings, a white scars successor chapter.

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:


If the army is a hybrid of 2 or more different chapters and has rules that only affect models from a specific chapter you can't have them all be the same exact scheme because then there is no way to differentiate which units belong to which chapter and therefore which unit is affected by the rule.

Citation needed.

You don't need an official rule for something that's common sense. I've given enough examples in this thread as to why someone would need to differentiate between units from different chapters that are in the same army.

The rules state that you can include Pedro in the same detachment with Imp Fists.

Sternguard can be in the same detachment as the above.

How you paint your mini's does not matter as far as the rules are concerned and there are zero rules that dictate how crimson fist Sternguard should be painted.

Therefore, unless there is a rule restricting the permission given, you can paint your crimson fists however you want, that includes yellow with Imp Fists iconography.

Unless you have a rules citation stating otherwise, and your opinion on the matter does not cut it, it has to be a rulebook quote to back your position.


P.S. Common sense/Logic/how it works in the real world has no bearing.

Remember: The rules were not written to be "Modern day real world" logical.

The rules are an abstract system used to simulate a battle in the year 40,000.

What would happen in the modern day real world has nothing to do with the RAW, or the simulation of a battle fought 38,000 years from now.

As such they need to have some compromises to make the game playable.

I think you are over looking what he is trying to put forth here DeathReaper.

What the warboss Imbad Ironskull is talking about has nothing in relations to rule or even combination of rules, it has to do with determining which model on the table is doing what. If you take two identical models, each with different rules governing them, then it is only common sense that you do something to ensure you can tell the two identical models apart. Be it paint them different colors, use different colour bases, even modify one model so it looks greatly different to the normal. This is to prevent you and your opponent from being confused as to which model is which, something that is a very real likelihood if the models all look identical.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
I could (theoretically) make an army that included a character and troop choice from all 5 Space Marine codices and as long as I modeled them all legally I could represent the entire force as Black Templars

Not true. You can never have more then 2 of the space marine codices. As per pg 77 of the space marine codex we treat each of the chapter tactics as a its own codex, so with that understanding we have the fallowing space marine codecies

Space Marine: Ultramarines
Space Marine: White Scars
Space Marine: Imperial Fists
Space Marine: Black Templars
Space Marine: Iron Hands
Space Marine: Salamanders
Space Marine: Raven Guard
Dark Angels
Blood Angels
Space Wolves
Grey Knights

If you are playing less that 2000 points you may have 1 primary detachments of any of these, and 1 allied detachment of any thing else. If you are playing a larger game You may have a second primary detachment from the same codex as your 1st primary detachment. If you do you may have a second allied detachment from the same codex as your 1st primary detachment.

All units in primary detachments will come from the same codex. All units in allied detachments will come from some other codex. You need only differentiate which models are primary and witch are allied.

For example. I may play my Dark Angels. I decided to save on some points include an allied detachment of Space Marine: White Scars. I tell the other player(s) all the models in my allied detachment are painted to look like Ravenwing, and none of my models painted to look like ravenwing are in my primary detachment. The other player(s) and I can tell the difference even though thematically I am playing one chapter. If any one had a bitch fest over this I could always go fine. The green ones are dark angels and the black ones are the twilight wings, a white scars successor chapter.

Codex: Space Marines only really tells us that when choosing a detachment, whether primary or allied, we must choose a chapter for it. Additional primary (and allied) detachments must be taken from the same codex, but I'm not sure that's to say that we must choose the same chapter tactics for both primary detachments.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that each chapter tactics choice counts as its own codex for these purposes.

Codex: Space Marines only really tells us that when choosing a detachment, whether primary or allied, we must choose a chapter for it. Additional primary (and allied) detachments must be taken from the same codex, but I'm not sure that's to say that we must choose the same chapter tactics for both primary detachments.

I am confused by the bolded and italicized part. The C:SM is very clear on page 77 as to how to treat detachments. If the chapters you have chosen all have the same Chapter Tactics, they can be part of the same detachment (primary). If they use different chapter tactics they are not considered to be the same detachment (allies). The BRB only allows you to have 1 ally.

In practice this means you could field an Ultramarines Primary Detachment. Within that Ultramarines detachment you could have Genesis Chapter, Iron Snakes and Ultramarines. You could then field an allied detachment of White Scars, and within the White Scars you could have Storm Lords and Dark Hunters.

Most of the time this will not do anything in game. There are certain chapters however that you can have that might have an impact (in this case Crimson Fists and Kantor's Hold the Line rule).

Lehnsherr wrote:
I am confused by the bolded and italicized part. The C:SM is very clear on page 77 as to how to treat detachments. If the chapters you have chosen all have the same Chapter Tactics, they can be part of the same detachment (primary). If they use different chapter tactics they are not considered to be the same detachment (allies). The BRB only allows you to have 1 ally.

What I mean to say is that we're given some guidance as far as allied detachments is concerned, but not for additional primary detachments. Different chapter tactics are treated as different codices for the purposes of allies, but no such distinction is made for additional primary detachments, which means they're treated as the same codex for additional primary detachment purposes. That suggests to me that in games of 2000 points or greater we can take two primary detachments, each with different chapter tactics.

Oh I get ya now.

Yes, for games of 2k or bigger you would be allowed to have 2 primary detachments. In this case, my initial reading would be that you would be allowed to have 2 different primary detachments with different chapter tactics. I also believe you could field 2 different detachments from the same Chapter as well.

Top of page 77 says that you may field models from 2 different chapters in the same detachment. Nothing would stop you from choosing not to field them in that way. So in a 2k game you could have 2 primary detachments of Ultramarines for example.