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.

I´m building a Flesh Tearers detachments but I am not allowed to use any named characters (except for Gabriel Seth). Is the Sanguinor a named character? The reason for my question is that you are only allowed to take one of them.

 Luusormi wrote:
I´m building a Flesh Tearers detachments but I am not allowed to use any named characters (except for Gabriel Seth). Is the Sanguinor a named character? The reason for my question is that you are only allowed to take one of them.

The game never explicitly defines 'named character'.

You'll need to discuss this with your opponent.

In page 74 of the BA codex it says "Note, however, that you cannot do this for named characters – for example, Commander Dante is the Chapter Master of the Blood Angels Chapter, and not any successor Chapter."
Of course I cannot use Dante or Mephiston since they are old school BA. Same with Lemartes, Corbulo and Tycho. Astorath is newer but still pure BA. That´s the reason for my question...

I’d say they’re a special character tbh, but in a game I’d have no issue with you using him. Maybe he’s come to save a Successor in the same way he’d save the BA.

 Luusormi wrote:
In page 74 of the BA codex it says "Note, however, that you cannot do this for named characters – for example, Commander Dante is the Chapter Master of the Blood Angels Chapter, and not any successor Chapter."
Of course I cannot use Dante or Mephiston since they are old school BA. Same with Lemartes, Corbulo and Tycho. Astorath is newer but still pure BA. That´s the reason for my question...

Agreed on all the others you mentioned, but Sanguinor is a grey area as we don't really know what it is exactly. Potentially it could manifest in a successor, they're all the blood of Sanguinius after all.

They really should have made a keyword for this.

As others have said, there is no definition what a named character is. To me, sanguinor sounds more like a blood angle specific rank, not like a real name. OTOH, he can only be included once in your army, like a named character, like dante, mephiston, astorath.

From what we can guess is the case in the lore of the game (so, not a game rule at all, but more of "how would I play it"), the Sanguinor is a warp-influenced entity borne of Sanguinius' herald, Alatron, during the Horus Heresy. Because of this, I think it's fair to say that he would act in support of any Son of Sanguinius, be they Blood Angel, Flesh Tearer, or whatever else in name and heraldry.

So, for me, I'd be happy with the Sanguinor coming to the aid of a Flesh Tearers army.

From a RAW perspective

The Warlord Trait bit of C:BA (pg .218) I think provides the RAW answer

NAMED CHARACTERS AND WARLORD TRAITS
If one of the following named characters is your Warlord, they must be given the associatedWarlord Trait shown below...

The Sanguinor is in the list, so on this basis by RAW is a named character, and thus can can’t be drawn from the BA Successor.

Having said that, outside of a tournament play there’s nothing to stop you and your opponent agreeing otherwise.

GW have never defined what a "Named Character" is. Some codexes have a points table titled "Named Characters", some do not.

Generally the consensus seems to be that if it's limited to 1 in the army and has the CHARACTER keyword, it's a Named Character.

Talk about it with opponent and you should figure it out.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW have never defined what a "Named Character" is. Some codexes have a points table titled "Named Characters", some do not.

Generally the consensus seems to be that if it's limited to 1 in the army and has the CHARACTER keyword, it's a Named Character.

I would agree that GW haven't formally defined what a 'Named Character' is.

This lack of general definition would appear to be unimportant to resolving this specific instance, based on the RAW: If a Character is listed in either the Points Table or Warlord Traits tables for 'Named Characters', then GW have defined each of the characters in those tables as a 'Named Character' (irrespective of the general defination which isn't provided).

It is possible for a character to be named in one and not the other if either a) They don't have a set Warlord Trait (as in pre-errata Sergeant Chronus), or b) They have war gear options (e.g. choice of heavy weapon on Bjorn the Fell Handed)

Cornishman is right. According to the Warlord traits list for named characters, he is on the list and so is "legit" only true BA and not successors. Thanks guys! Successor chapters are cool, but they are hard to get around sometimes

 Luusormi wrote:
Cornishman is right. According to the Warlord traits list for named characters, he is on the list and so is "legit" only true BA and not successors. Thanks guys! Successor chapters are cool, but they are hard to get around sometimes

Pre-SM19 codex, "custom" chapters/regiments/etc had no reason for existing and no actual advantages (with the sole exception of Astra Coptwritum, where a custom regiment could take the Storm Troopers doctrine) and only disadvantages (no named characters, limited relic selection). For Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Space Wolves there is really no reason to run a successor chapter (and no, FW characters don't count because they break the detachment bonus).

If you want to use the Blood Angels rules, the correct thing to do is to simply use the BLOOD ANGELS keyword on your roster, regardless of what your paint scheme is.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Space Wolves there is really no reason to run a successor chapter (and no, FW characters don't count because they break the detachment bonus).

If you want to use the Blood Angels rules, the correct thing to do is to simply use the BLOOD ANGELS keyword on your roster, regardless of what your paint scheme is.

Gabriel Seth has a datasheet in the BA codex, so if really want to use him then being a successor chapter is the only option,

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For Blood Angels [...] there is really no reason to run a successor chapter

Wrong, both Lamenters and Flesh Tearers have stuff of their own. You can argue much less than Blood Angels themselves, but it's still more than literally any other SM successor in the game, ironically, and if you like either chapter characters the only option is running them as is.

 Irbis wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For Blood Angels [...] there is really no reason to run a successor chapter

Wrong, both Lamenters and Flesh Tearers have stuff of their own. You can argue much less than Blood Angels themselves, but it's still more than literally any other SM successor in the game, ironically, and if you like either chapter characters the only option is running them as is.

You know you (I will charitably assume accidentally) omitted the part of my post that said FW characters don't count? Both from a subjective (the characters are bad and overpriced) and objective (they literally prevent the detachment getting the detachment bonus) viewpoint?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For Blood Angels [...] there is really no reason to run a successor chapter

Wrong, both Lamenters and Flesh Tearers have stuff of their own. You can argue much less than Blood Angels themselves, but it's still more than literally any other SM successor in the game, ironically, and if you like either chapter characters the only option is running them as is.

You know you (I will charitably assume accidentally) omitted the part of my post that said FW characters don't count? Both from a subjective (the characters are bad and overpriced) and objective (they literally prevent the detachment getting the detachment bonus) viewpoint?

They don't prevent the detachment from getting the bonus. You are only correct from pure RAW, and that isn't good enough when it is blindingly obvious what the intention is - this is such an instance.

I know you won't agree, but for the benefit of anyone with a modicum of ability to read context and intention of a rule - ignore BCB here, it does work.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For Blood Angels [...] there is really no reason to run a successor chapter

Wrong, both Lamenters and Flesh Tearers have stuff of their own. You can argue much less than Blood Angels themselves, but it's still more than literally any other SM successor in the game, ironically, and if you like either chapter characters the only option is running them as is.

You know you (I will charitably assume accidentally) omitted the part of my post that said FW characters don't count? Both from a subjective (the characters are bad and overpriced) and objective (they literally prevent the detachment getting the detachment bonus) viewpoint?

Gabriel Seth isn't Forge World.