Thoughts on using Codex: Space Marines for Chaos Marines

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.

**Jacksmiles**

Selym wrote:
There we go what?

There you go, do what you wish with your toy soldiers (I assume).

**ShieldBrother**

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nvm, this guy is either a troll or a hypocrite:

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
So I'm making a dark eldar army and I would like to use some talos, but the models just don't do it for me. I was browsing AOS stuff and saw the skaven stormfiends and they look pretty dark eldar-ish with all their tubed and modified limbs etc. So I was going to convert (pretty much paint them differently ) stormfiends as talos counts as.
My question is, would most gamers be okay with this? I know my group would be, but I don't want to get turned down at the gw when I visit. Second question, are they close to the same skze? I don't want to model for advantage but they look pretty similar in size, I just think the talos is taller. Third question, any ideas for the conversion? I.e. bits I could use etc. Because I think the rat heads could fly with some people because DE are messed up like that, but I'd rather some personality to them rather than aos models slapped into 40k.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
While I'm here;

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
I've been kicking around the idea of making another army, and I really like GK and Mechanicus. So, instead of making 2 armies I can make 1 big one. I stick to the fluff pretty religiously so while they're battle bros in game, is it common for these alliances to happen?

**kronk**

sturgeondtd wrote:
Just to clarify, I would NOT be using CSM wargear with SM chapter tactics, I would be using all SM wargear, with only the color scheme and spikey bits of CSM.

Got it.

You're playing the Space Marine Codex, with only space marine options for your Chaos Space Marines.

I have no problem with that. That is a reasonable way to play them as Renegade Space Marines that are not aligned with any Chaos Gods.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormonu wrote:
sturgeondtd wrote:
Just to clarify, I would NOT be using CSM wargear with SM chapter tactics, I would be using all SM wargear, with only the color scheme and spikey bits of CSM.

Why not? My son does C:SM and I wouldn't have an issue if he showed up with drop pods and a heldrake.

Some of us prefer NOT to play unbound, which is exactly what you described.

If you like Unbound, that's cool. But since you asked "Why not?", that is my answer for "Why Not?"

**kodos**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Space Wolves as iron hands? Lol, what? Are you going to have them riding robo wolves?

So you don't know anything about the fluff of some Legions and the possibilities about the Codex outside the usual Copy&Paste lists but argue that those people are only doing it for WAAC.

But just for you why the SW Codex suited Iron Hands better before they got their Sup (and is it still up to a point)

Techmarine and Dreadnought as HQ
Terminator armour for Troop Sergeant
the possibility to get more Dreadnoughts

If you go World Eaters with C:SW, than you are playing your Lord on Juggernaut as TWC

**ShieldBrother**

I was being facetious. I know Space Wolf lists can be more than t-wolves, and I know that iron hands are big on the techmarine and dreadnought thing. Still doesn't really explain Bloodclaws, (and all their variants), wolf priests, shield dreads, or anything else that isn't copy pasted from the space marine dex.

**kodos**

You don't need to use them (specially not for Iron Hands who are not into Bikes and Jump Packs, have no Priests and a shield Dread can be exactly that)
No one will use everything that a Codex provides, but if the one Codex that should be used is missing the essential possibilities to play a fluffy list while another Codex has them, why not change.

**Selym**

Because that would hurt SB's precious sensibilities.

**Talizvar**

The OP posing the question of just having CSM modes play as SM and use all the SM gear is reasonable and would be a "bound" army.
I see nothing going against the rules of the models not being represented "correctly".

Proposed "mix and match" troops that do not fit in a specific codex "but you want it anyway" then becomes an unbound list... simple as that (as outlined by the BA article: using all space marines) or you find a way to fit them in as allied troops.

This had more arguments than I thought.
Guys barely even blinked when I did the very thing proposed with my CSMs.
Well, if we didn't care, there would be no discussion...

**ShieldBrother**

Selym wrote:
Because that would hurt SB's precious sensibilities.

Cmon, no need to be like that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

kodos wrote:
You don't need to use them (specially not for Iron Hands who are not into Bikes and Jump Packs, have no Priests and a shield Dread can be exactly that)
No one will use everything that a Codex provides, but if the one Codex that should be used is missing the essential possibilities to play a fluffy list while another Codex has them, why not change.

Where's your "fluffy" iron hands dreadnought with an axe and shield? Doesn't make much sense, again. So you're saying ignore 3/4 of a codex because the 1/4 represents the way you want to play them? When the other codex is literally how they were intended to play?

**Talizvar**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Selym wrote:
Because that would hurt SB's precious sensibilities.
Cmon, no need to be like that.

It does point to the issue that say I took "proper" loyalist marine models and painted them all in the Iron Warrior colours and used the SM codex.
From what you said earlier, that would be unacceptable to you.
They would not be sufficiently WYSIWYG due to their army colours.
It makes a person VERY interested to want to find out why.
I agree that making things too confusing for your opponent is not fair but how is a paint scheme a road-block?

Inquiring minds want to know!

**ShieldBrother**

When did I say paint schemes mattered? I said I like to see them painted (in my eyes) the correct way. I have problems with swapping codices, not different paint schemes.

Besides, silver skulls have copy pasted iron warriors colours anyways, so I'd be completely fine with that.

**kodos**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Where's your "fluffy" iron hands dreadnought with an axe and shield? Doesn't make much sense, again. So you're saying ignore 3/4 of a codex because the 1/4 represents the way you want to play them? When the other codex is literally how they were intended to play?

I see, a WAAC Codex SM Iron Hands army with Pod Centurions and Grav Spam (non of them were used by the IH) is okay, while a fluffy list is not because it used the wrong book.

**Frazzled**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered? I said I like to see them painted (in my eyes) the correct way. I have problems with swapping codices, not different paint schemes.

Besides, silver skulls have copy pasted iron warriors colours anyways, so I'd be completely fine with that.

My Zincwarriors were white with each squad having its own shoulder pad color (as my eyes suck). As long as weaponry and gear are WYSIWYG would it matter to you what codex they used?

**Melissia**

Sure why not? They're all Marines in the end-- filthy mutant abominations that need to be cleansed, and only exist at the good graces of hte Emperor forgiving them for their betrayal.

**ShieldBrother**

Frazzled wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered? I said I like to see them painted (in my eyes) the correct way. I have problems with swapping codices, not different paint schemes.

Besides, silver skulls have copy pasted iron warriors colours anyways, so I'd be completely fine with that.

My Zincwarriors were white with each squad having its own shoulder pad color (as my eyes suck). As long as weaponry and gear are WYSIWYG would it matter to you what codex they used?

We're the models displayed in the codex entries the model you're putting on the tabletop?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

kodos wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Where's your "fluffy" iron hands dreadnought with an axe and shield? Doesn't make much sense, again. So you're saying ignore 3/4 of a codex because the 1/4 represents the way you want to play them? When the other codex is literally how they were intended to play?

I see, a WAAC Codex SM Iron Hands army with Pod Centurions and Grav Spam (non of them were used by the IH) is okay, while a fluffy list is not because it used the wrong book.

Yep. One is playing the game properly, the other is hopping between codices depending on what he decides he wants to play during breakfast.

**kodos**

So someone who don't want to be TFG is not playing the game properly

Got it.....

**Melissia**

The smug arrogance in this thread is astounding. Just get over it, you're all marine players in the end, none of you will never be one of the cool kids so accept each other and move on.

**ShieldBrother**

Melissia wrote:
The smug arrogance in this thread is astounding. Just get over it, you're all marine players in the end, none of you will never be one of the cool kids so accept each other and move on.

But my mom told me I was handsome!

**Frazzled**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered? I said I like to see them painted (in my eyes) the correct way. I have problems with swapping codices, not different paint schemes.

Besides, silver skulls have copy pasted iron warriors colours anyways, so I'd be completely fine with that.

My Zincwarriors were white with each squad having its own shoulder pad color (as my eyes suck). As long as weaponry and gear are WYSIWYG would it matter to you what codex they used?

We're the models displayed in the codex entries the model you're putting on the tabletop?

Sorry, please clarify. My minis predate the last several editions. Do you mean did they have the correct wargear- is so that would be yes.

Yep. One is playing the game properly, the other is hopping between codices depending on what he decides he wants to play during breakfast.

How is that playing the game improperly? As long as the list is follows the legal rules for that codex and is properly pointed, then they're legal.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:
The smug arrogance in this thread is astounding. Just get over it, you're all marine players in the end, none of you will never be one of the cool kids so accept each other and move on.

Be nice, we are having a discussion. Insults are unneeded. Besides IIRC you play witches. As we all know the only good witch is a dead witch.

**ShieldBrother**

Frazzled wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered? I said I like to see them painted (in my eyes) the correct way. I have problems with swapping codices, not different paint schemes.

Besides, silver skulls have copy pasted iron warriors colours anyways, so I'd be completely fine with that.

My Zincwarriors were white with each squad having its own shoulder pad color (as my eyes suck). As long as weaponry and gear are WYSIWYG would it matter to you what codex they used?

We're the models displayed in the codex entries the model you're putting on the tabletop?

Sorry, please clarify. My minis predate the last several editions. Do you mean did they have the correct wargear- is so that would be yes.

Yep. One is playing the game properly, the other is hopping between codices depending on what he decides he wants to play during breakfast.

How is that playing the game improperly? As long as the list is follows the legal rules for that codex and is properly pointed, then they're legal.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:
The smug arrogance in this thread is astounding. Just get over it, you're all marine players in the end, none of you will never be one of the cool kids so accept each other and move on.

Be nice, we are having a discussion. Insults are unneeded. Besides IIRC you play witches. As we all know the only good witch is a dead witch.

I mean are they from the codex you are using? i.e. the chaos space marine box of models being used for chaos space marines. If they were wyches from 3 editions ago, sure, as long as you use the dark eldar codex and the wych unit. (and yes, correct wargear is important)

And to me playing the game properly is using the correct models for the correct codex. Mixing Iron Hands and Space Wolves is not "proper" to me.

**Jacksmiles**

You realize that playing an "Iron Hands" army using "Space Wolves" rules is really playing "Space Wolves" and doing nothing more than using the words "Iron Hands" when you tell someone what your army is called, right?

**ShieldBrother**

Yeah but they're space wolves painted black with a bunch of cybernetic implants.

**Peregrine**

TL;DR: "play the game the way I play it or you're not playing properly and you're probably TFG".

**kodos**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered?

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Yeah but they're space wolves painted black with a bunch of cybernetic implants.

just stop trolling

**Frazzled**

I mean are they from the codex you are using? i.e. the chaos space marine box of models being used for chaos space marines. If they were wyches from 3 editions ago, sure, as long as you use the dark eldar codex and the wych unit. (and yes, correct wargear is important)

They are converted (and badly! in your face golden demons I have the power of play do and marks alot markers!) so your question is not relevant.

**Jacksmiles**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Yeah but they're space wolves painted black with a bunch of cybernetic implants.

Cool. And? Also, see Kodos's post above. Remain consistent!

**ShieldBrother**

kodos wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
When did I say paint schemes mattered?

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Yeah but they're space wolves painted black with a bunch of cybernetic implants.

just stop trolling

Let me clarify.

I meant paint schemes didn't matter in his scenario "yellow tau aren't tau" however, changing 2 pre established chapters is a very different thing. Space wolves are grey, iron hands are black. End of.

**kodos**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Space wolves are grey, iron hands are black. End of.

No, IH also have their successor chapters with different colours
same like SW companies can have slightly different shades of grey

so how do you know that those dark grey wolves are not an pre-heresy wolves army or an IH successor chapter?

If paint scheme doesn't matter you cannot tell

If it does, than there is no possibility for people crating their own chapter or use a paint scheme that is not shown in the codex

**Peregrine**

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
I meant paint schemes didn't matter in his scenario "yellow tau aren't tau" however, changing 2 pre established chapters is a very different thing. Space wolves are grey, iron hands are black. End of.

IOW: "PAINT YOUR MODELS LIKE I WANT YOU TO PAINT THEM OR YOU ARE TFG"

**ShieldBrother**

Everyone calm down, he asked for people's opinions and I gave them. I don't like people swapping codices and I don't like people using ridiculous colours for their faction. And @kodos, no, all SW are the same colour. Where'd you get the idea different companies are different colours? And iron hands and iron hand successors are 2 different things.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Peregrine wrote:
#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
I meant paint schemes didn't matter in his scenario "yellow tau aren't tau" however, changing 2 pre established chapters is a very different thing. Space wolves are grey, iron hands are black. End of.

IOW: "PAINT YOUR MODELS LIKE I WANT YOU TO PAINT THEM OR YOU ARE TFG"

Never said it like that. Do you prefer your models a certain way? Realistic? Stylized? I like mine as how they're depicted in the books. It's simply my preference.