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.

 Peregrine wrote:


The rules never give you permission to use anything other than the standard Citadel kit for a model, assembled according to the directions included in that kit.

I have not found anything regarding this in my rulebook. They even have a kitbash and conversion topic on the big rulebook.

Only thing I have found regarding this preventing to use models that are intentionally modeled to gain advantage.

So what must I do with my warrior acolytes. They have plenty of weapon choices and no real model available so please let me know where to get standard Citadel kit with assembly instructio s for my acolytes.

Also I must dispose my inquisitors as they have greenstuffed Inquisition marks amd also my reaver windrider hybrids.

Is this kind of attitude even possible

They do not explain what Citadel miniatures means in the book.

Can a model be 100% citadel parts and considered a Citadel miniature?

It has to be if you want anything other than a Force Staff on a terminator SM Librarian as the kit only comes with a Staff. So the options in the Codex tell you what is on the model, but we are not told how to represent it.

But how does this work for things like the Mycetic Spore? There is no Citadel miniature for that unit, so are we even alloed to use Mycetic Spores in our games?

Well the rules just do not cover it, and we have to figure out player conventions to make it work reasonably, ethically, and in a sporting manner.

40k BRB wrote:
The Citadel miniatures used to play the game of Warhammer 40,000...

FinnSeer wrote:
Is this kind of attitude even possible

You're kind of missing the point.

RAW you can't use anything other than the appropriate Citadel kit. So yes, you would not be allowed to use things like mycetic spores or warrior acolytes with the weapons you want.

However, virtually everyone plays with a house rule that "reasonable" conversions/proxies/etc are allowed. The point is not that a bunch of units are banned because they don't have official models, it's that conversions are outside the scope of the game and therefore claiming that your dreadnought with 24" guns (to gain extra range) is "legal" is just stupid. It isn't legal RAW, and nobody is obligated to give you that special permission and accept MFA if they don't want to.

 Peregrine wrote:

RAW you can't use anything other than the appropriate Citadel kit.

It only says 'Citadel miniatures'. An Empire flagellant converted to carry a bolter to represent an Inquisitorial Acolyte is still a Citadel miniature.

 Crimson wrote:
It only says 'Citadel miniatures'. An Empire flagellant converted to carry a bolter to represent an Inquisitorial Acolyte is still a Citadel miniature.

But it's still a Citadel Empire Flagellant. You are never given permission to convert it into an Inquisitorial Acolyte. This is no different than trying to use a Valkyrie to represent a guardsman with a lasgun.

 Peregrine wrote:

But it's still a Citadel Empire Flagellant. You are never given permission to convert it into an Inquisitorial Acolyte.

Yes you have, there's an entire section for that in the BRB.

Is that in the rules section? I didn't think so.

Thing is, there is nothing in the rules about what model you're supposed to represent what. No, not even that you have to use a space marine model instead of a grot to represent an Ultramarine. All that is equally just a convention.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

RAW you can't use anything other than the appropriate Citadel kit.

It only says 'Citadel miniatures'. An Empire flagellant converted to carry a bolter to represent an Inquisitorial Acolyte is still a Citadel miniature.

What if its a Marauder miniature? http://www.solegends.com/marauder/mm65flagellants.htm

Technically Peregrine is correct, the very first sentence of the 'rules' section of the 40k Rulebook starts with: "the Citadel miniatures used to play games of warhammer 40k......". On the other hand there is a section in the hardback book specifically about conversions and exactly what a Citadel miniature is is never explained fully (or if it is I can't be bothered to look).

I am sure that GW rules have been starting with that exact same sentence for years and it has been roundly ignored so I don't see why it should have any particular relevance now.

 Palindrome wrote:
I am sure that GW rules have been starting with that exact same sentence for years and it has been roundly ignored so I don't see why it should have any particular relevance now.

It doesn't really have any relevance because virtually everyone plays with a house rule that modifies (or even ignores) it. The reason I brought it up in the other thread is to point out that conversions are outside the rules, so insisting that your MFA is "legal" and therefore everyone has to accept it is just stupid.

This topic makes no sense. Unless someone can produce a page number with a rule that specifically says only citadel models can be used to play a game of warhammer 40k then it is a non issue

kranki wrote:
This topic makes no sense. Unless someone can produce a page number with a rule that specifically says only citadel models can be used to play a game of warhammer 40k then it is a non issue

Again, this is backwards. You aren't allowed to do anything in 40k unless the rules specifically give you permission to do it. The rules give you permission to use appropriate Citadel models. They do not give you permission to use anything else.

Pg number and rule please....

A summary of this thread: Taking a sentence out of context and running it to its most illogical conclusion.

kranki wrote:
Pg number and rule please....

Yes, please provide one giving permission to use anything other than appropriate Citadel models.

 Peregrine wrote:

kranki wrote:
This topic makes no sense. Unless someone can produce a page number with a rule that specifically says only citadel models can be used to play a game of warhammer 40k then it is a non issue

Again, this is backwards. You aren't allowed to do anything in 40k unless the rules specifically give you permission to do it. The rules give you permission to use appropriate Citadel models. They do not give you permission to use anything else.

You keep adding "appropriate"; you keep adding to the rule that simply doesn't exist.

Citadel miniatures are models. which citadel miniature you use does not matter. so long as you base your miniature off of citadel parts you have a citadel miniature(even if it is a converted citadel miniature, because "converted" is an adjective to the base "citadel miniature").

 Melissia wrote:
A summary of this thread: Taking a sentence out of context and running it to its most illogical conclusion.

It's not really illogical when you consider that virtually everyone has a house rule that modifies it. The end result in practical terms is that because the rules never approve any conversion/proxy models you can't claim that MFA is legal and insist that your opponent has to accept it. The original context of this debate was an argument about a hypothetical dreadnought with 24" long guns, a model which will never be allowed in a real game.

 Peregrine wrote:
It's not really illogical

Your reasons for it not being complete and utter nonsense do not actually prove that it is complete and utter nonsense, in fact, all it does is prove that this interpretation is complete and utter nonsense.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Citadel miniatures are models. which citadel miniature you use does not matter.

Of course it matters. Each Citadel miniature has a label telling you what it can be used for. If you buy a Rhino for your C:SM army you are required to use the Citadel Space Marine Rhino kit (assembled according to the instructions) to represent it. There's only "ambiguity" in this situation if you ignore the instructions GW has provided and assume that only one particular sentence counts.

The alternative argument of "Citadel is Citadel" allows you to use a single guardsman as a Land Raider because hey, it's still a Citadel model.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Citadel miniatures are models. which citadel miniature you use does not matter.

Of course it matters. Each Citadel miniature has a label telling you what it can be used for. If you buy a Rhino for your C:SM army you are required to use the Citadel Space Marine Rhino kit (assembled according to the instructions) to represent it. There's only "ambiguity" in this situation if you ignore the instructions GW has provided and assume that only one particular sentence counts.

The alternative argument of "Citadel is Citadel" allows you to use a single guardsman as a Land Raider because hey, it's still a Citadel model.

Show me the rule.

 Melissia wrote:
Your reasons for it not being complete and utter nonsense do not actually prove that it is complete and utter nonsense, in fact, all it does is prove that this interpretation is complete and utter nonsense.

It's only "nonsense" if you want conversions/counts-as/proxies to be supported by the rules. If you're content to leave them as something outside the rules that the individual players in a game agree on then it's not illogical at all. And it has the nice side benefit of telling TFG to STFU and go away when they try to bring a dreadnought with 24" guns because "GW never says I can't".

 Peregrine wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Citadel miniatures are models. which citadel miniature you use does not matter.

Of course it matters. Each Citadel miniature has a label telling you what it can be used for.

This label isn't mentioned in the rulebook and therefor, according to your bizarre and out of context interpretation to the rules, you cannot use it to determine what the model is to be used for.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Show me the rule.

The rule is in the product title. GW assumes that you're intelligent enough to figure out that "use Citadel models" means "use the Citadel model with that unit name", not "use any Citadel model you want, regardless of how appropriate it is". It's kind of like how the movement rules never explicitly state that you pick up the model and move it to its new location, since everyone capable of reading and understanding the rulebook knows that's what you're supposed to do.

 Peregrine wrote:
It's only "nonsense" if you want conversions/counts-as/proxies to be supported by the rules

You're working your mind in twists and leaps. Try not to get it in a knot.

 Melissia wrote:
This label isn't mentioned in the rulebook and therefor, according to your bizarre and out of context interpretation to the rules, you cannot use it to determine what the model is to be used for.

You're assuming that only rules provided in the rulebook count. GW disagrees, as demonstrated by their use of online FAQs/errata, codex supplements, etc.

 Peregrine wrote:
GW assumes that you're intelligent

See: One-Click Deals.

 Peregrine wrote:
You're assuming that only rules provided in the rulebook count.

That's because I'm using your so-called "logic".

The exact same logic you are using in this thread comes to the conclusion that you just quoted and said was wrong.

 Melissia wrote:
That's because I'm using your so-called "logic".

No you aren't. Nothing in my argument goes from "you can only use the models GW gives you permission to use" to "only the rules published in this one specific source count, regardless of how GW decides to publish rules".

Oh, So you are making them up.

An Empire Handgunner with converted 40K weaponry to be used as an acolyte is 100% a citadel model; and there is no Marketed miniature for such a model.

So when we have Units with no miniatures; GW must be assuming we are all smart enough to proxy that model right?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
So when we have Units with no miniatures; GW must be assuming we are all smart enough to proxy that model right?

Nope, that just means you can't use that unit by strict RAW. Fortunately GW has stopped making units that don't have models when the codex is released, and hopefully they'll eventually get around to making those missing models.

Fortunately we as players have provided house rules (with near unanimous agreement) that those models are acceptable because they are a reasonable conversion. But that doesn't mean that a dreadnought converted to have 24" guns must also be accepted.

 Peregrine wrote:
No you aren't. Nothing in my argument goes from "you can only use the models GW gives you permission to use" to "only the rules published in this one specific source count, regardless of how GW decides to publish rules".

You're stating that the modeling section of the BRB doesn't count, only the rules section counts. Ergo... why should other things that are not in the rules section count, either?

The only thing I can think of is you distinguish between the two using a silly, arbitrary method, which you've designed specifically and solely so you can attack a certain kind of player, rather than actually logically following from the rules as written.

Which, by the way, you yourself admitted is in fact the case.