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.

Right so i cant stand the Belakor model. It just doesnt feel like a 350 point model. Instead i want to use a normal Daemon prince with a sword, no power armour and wings to represent it. I've done some mild conversions on the face etc (although im reletively crap at painting). I can understand this will cause some divisions but would you guys allow me to use my daemon prince as belakor ( you can only win tbh because i get less cover benefits with this model). Many thanks all replies appreciated

I use my old second hand metal Daemon Prince as belakor all the time. Used him in a League Game. The differences are minimal, basically hes a more refined sculpt of a daemon prince.

I see no issue with it. I am sure there are some out there that would throw a fit, but really they would have to point out why its wrong.

Seeing as a regular daemon prince is actually bigger than the Be'lakor model, I'd have a hard time figuring out why anyone would refuse to play against it.

Go for it. He's very similar, Belakor's just slimmer than a DP.

In my opinion you have made the right decision, the Belakor model is ugly and if you can find a similar sized but better looking model to represent him then I'd say go for it.
If you run into someone who has a problem with this just show them google images of the proper model and explain your reasons.
From a fluff point of view you might also argue that daemons could change their physical form/appearance if they so chose

I wouldn't take issue with it, as long as there's some conversion work or some sort of marker to distinguish it as Big Boy Bel. If it was a vanilla daemon prince, I would request something be added to make its identity clear in the game.

Well the great thing about warhammer in general is that you can use all kinds of conversions and models to represent something else. That's what the hobby is all about.

But god damn if that plastic daemon prince isn't one of the ugliest minis ever produced. Be'lakor is by far the best daemon prince model they've ever sculpted. I actually do the opposite of what you are proposing and use his model to represent a standard daemon prince.

I like the Be'lakor model (especially the head) but I agree that it is too small and doesn't feel like the epic guy it is supposed to represent.
I would not mind you using a plastic Daemon Prince as long as he is easily distinguishable from a regular Daemon Prince. You would need to do some conversion. Maybe you could use the Balrog model? Or just cut the head of Be'lakor and stick it on the regular DP body? It doesn't have to be complicated as long as it clearly says: this is Be'lakor.

I'd be totally fine with it, especially since that's what I plan to do (the current be'lakor is comically tiny compared to everything else. Hell Skulltaker is almost his size!). I could even argue that the plastic prince was largely based on be'lakor (the knee armor, chest runes, wings, tail and even the pose). I think the only real change you need to do is give him more horns, but for a chaos army that shouldn't be hard to find.

Plus I doubt anyone would raise a stink at you, considering the plastic prince is more expensive (at least in canada) than Be'lakor.

 TheEyeOfNight wrote:
I wouldn't take issue with it, as long as there's some conversion work or some sort of marker to distinguish it as Big Boy Bel. If it was a vanilla daemon prince, I would request something be added to make its identity clear in the game.

See even this kind of request is way over the line to me. You're essentially trying to dictate how he chooses to use his models in his own army. This game is intended to allow the general to make his force however he pleases. Games workshop creates models as a baseline for people to use to represent specific units, but it doesn't mean those are the only acceptable ones. The existence of studio models doesn't mean that it is the only and correct option.

What if he wanted his own created daemon prince as Belakor to represent his power on the table top?

It's more of the proxy problem. If you have a unit carrying meltaguns, and you want to say they're flamers, that's fine as long as they're some indicator that they're flamers. Otherwise by Turn 3 your opponent might not recall it and think that it's what it looks like: a unit of meltas.

The daemon prince model looks like a daemon prince. But if I were an opponent, I'd have to ask for some clear indicator that this daemon prince is different, whether it's the paint, conversion, or tossing a nickel on its base.

Funny, my friend was just about to order the Daemon Prince to use as Be'lakor.

I would have no issue with it.

 TheEyeOfNight wrote:
It's more of the proxy problem. If you have a unit carrying meltaguns, and you want to say they're flamers, that's fine as long as they're some indicator that they're flamers. Otherwise by Turn 3 your opponent might not recall it and think that it's what it looks like: a unit of meltas.

The daemon prince model looks like a daemon prince. But if I were an opponent, I'd have to ask for some clear indicator that this daemon prince is different, whether it's the paint, conversion, or tossing a nickel on its base.

I don't define it as a proxy personally. And sure. If I was playing someone who had more than one daemon prince model, I'd appreciate them being painted different or modeled different, or even just a counter placed next to them to identify which one it is. But if it's just the one daemon prince, I could care less if it's modeled exactly following the directions for the plastic basic daemon prince. I'm not going to look at it mid game and forget that it's a 350 point hugely important model.

Be'lakor is an ugly mofo, I use my regular DP as him on the occasion I run him. I don't use and other Princes in my army, though, so it's not like he can be confused for any others. Still, you should be fine.

 Ignatius wrote:

I don't define it as a proxy personally. And sure. If I was playing someone who had more than one daemon prince model, I'd appreciate them being painted different or modeled different, or even just a counter placed next to them to identify which one it is. But if it's just the one daemon prince, I could care less if it's modeled exactly following the directions for the plastic basic daemon prince. I'm not going to look at it mid game and forget that it's a 350 point hugely important model.

This is an excellent point. If it's the only daemon prince on the table? No problem at all, easy enough.

I like the Belakor sculpt, but wish it was bigger, plastic, and a bit modernized.

I would never forget what daemon prince was Belakor if you told me before the game, but I'm a daemons player. I can see how others would want some sort of identification.