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.

Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:A big portion of 30k’s appeal is that it’s like a historical game, you know the forces and what they did.

But we don't. We know *some* forces, and what *some* forces did, but we don't know *all* of it.

It's definitely got those historical aspects, sure, but it's also got plenty of flexibility for people who want that too. A big source of people's enjoyment could be "What If" scenarios too - such as "What If Lorgar was actually present at Calth and led a direct attack on Guilliman?" or "What If Horus had to physically bring Angron to heel at Istvaan III". Those aren't things that are "canon", but could well be covered in HH games.

Backspacehacker wrote:As long as they appear in some scheme that, that army either currently does, or has existed as, at some point in GW lore.
Thats considered lore accurate in my book.

Okay, but what happens if we don't know the whole lore, or when GW adds new stuff.
You're saying that if I showed up to you last week with red Raven Guard Terminators, you wouldn't play me, but now you would?

What happens when the lore says that there's plenty of room for alternative colour schemes or non-standard armour designs?

No, ravenguard had terminators why would they not have them?

If thats what the lore now said thats what the lore now said, as long as you are not showing up with things like candle apple red Luna wolves, im talking agregious color variations.

And no i would not NOT play you, i would just give you a whole lot of gak for the color scheme.

If anything lore currently even allows for you to do things like, having old old school sally colors vers their current scheme. Part of the....i guess, meta lore? of HH is that a lot of the information about the heresy is very convoluted and muddied so, showing up with previous schemes would still be kosher because at that point it only adds to the muddyness of the history of the HH.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
No, ravenguard had terminators why would they not have them?

It was specifically about red Terminators though, which before the EB didn't exist. So if someone showed up with red Raven Guard Terminators prior to the EB, you would have given them gak about it?

If thats what the lore now said thats what the lore now said, as long as you are not showing up with things like candle apple red Luna wolves, im talking agregious color variations.

So you give someone gak for painting their Sons of Horus with a red primary scheme, then a day later a new HH book comes out with a group of SoH that wears red as they are proto-CSM Khorne worshippers, so now it's OK? That's such a dumb way to go about it. You keep making up these things to hate and be afraid of, just stop.

And no i would not NOT play you, i would just give you a whole lot of gak for the color scheme.

So you'd be a prat. Very cool.

Yeah if the color scheme you painted it suddenly became lore friendly, i would be kosher with it because then at that point its lore accurate.

Whats so hard to get about that? If its not, then it is, i dont have a reason to poke fun at it any more.

Im not sure why you dont get that i have been very consistent on what i like and dont like.
If the army was at ever point a lore friendly color scheme that hey thats kosher, welcome aboard, if its not, im gonna poke and prod at you about it not being lore accurate. If suddenly the next day its lore accurate because GW updated, then i dont have a reaosn to poke and prod anymore.

If thats being a prat then sure, im a prat, but around here we call it banter.

Backspacehacker wrote:No, ravenguard had terminators why would they not have them?

Red Terminators.

If thats what the lore now said thats what the lore now said, as long as you are not showing up with things like candle apple red Luna wolves, im talking agregious color variations.

So, like red Raven Guard? Or red White Scars? Or black Ultramarines? Or black Imperial Fists?
What counts as egregious here?

And no i would not NOT play you, i would just give you a whole lot of gak for the color scheme.

But it's canon. It should be giving you gak for how you clearly don't know the Super Important Historical Lore - I suggest you do better research. The Raven Guard absolutely had red Terminators.

If anything lore currently even allows for you to do things like, having old old school sally colors vers their current scheme. Part of the....i guess, meta lore? of HH is that a lot of the information about the heresy is very convoluted and muddied so, showing up with previous schemes would still be kosher because at that point it only adds to the muddyness of the history of the HH.

Exactly - the convoluted and muddiness of the HH "lore" means that anything could be possible, because that "history" is so muddied and messy.

Congratulations - you've explained why any colour scheme could be valid.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Backspacehacker wrote:No, ravenguard had terminators why would they not have them?

Red Terminators.

If thats what the lore now said thats what the lore now said, as long as you are not showing up with things like candle apple red Luna wolves, im talking agregious color variations.

So, like red Raven Guard? Or red White Scars? Or black Ultramarines? Or black Imperial Fists?
What counts as egregious here?

And no i would not NOT play you, i would just give you a whole lot of gak for the color scheme.

But it's canon. It should be giving you gak for how you clearly don't know the Super Important Historical Lore - I suggest you do better research. The Raven Guard absolutely had red Terminators.

If anything lore currently even allows for you to do things like, having old old school sally colors vers their current scheme. Part of the....i guess, meta lore? of HH is that a lot of the information about the heresy is very convoluted and muddied so, showing up with previous schemes would still be kosher because at that point it only adds to the muddyness of the history of the HH.

Exactly - the convoluted and muddiness of the HH "lore" means that anything could be possible, because that "history" is so muddied and messy.

Congratulations - you've explained why any colour scheme could be valid.

Check my post just above yours for my stance.
Could =/= is.
If you painted pink SoH, im gonna make fun and tease you, in good jest, about pink SoH, if suddenly GW comes out and says "Yep there were pink SoH" i dont have a reason to poke and jest any longer.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Yeah if the color scheme you painted it suddenly became lore friendly, i would be kosher with it because then at that point its lore accurate.

Whats so hard to get about that? If its not, then it is, i dont have a reason to poke fun at it any more.

Im not sure why you dont get that i have been very consistent on what i like and dont like.
If the army was at ever point a lore friendly color scheme that hey thats kosher, welcome aboard, if its not, im gonna poke and prod at you about it not being lore accurate. If suddenly the next day its lore accurate because GW updated, then i dont have a reaosn to poke and prod anymore.

If thats being a prat then sure, im a prat, but around here we call it banter.

There is a difference between poking fun and giving people gak, they aren't the same thing.
But again, you're making up boogeymen to be annoyed at so...

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Yeah if the color scheme you painted it suddenly became lore friendly, i would be kosher with it because then at that point its lore accurate.

But you've just said how the lore is convoluted and messy - and evidently, the lore isn't all-encompassing on day one, because otherwise, you'd know about these red Raven Guard Terminators.

It's almost like it's an expansive setting, not a restrictive one.

Whats so hard to get about that?

Because it's absolutely ridiculous that you'd turn someone away at the start of the week for having models painted a certain way, and then by the end of that week, tell them that they're totally fine. It's absurd.

Im not sure why you dont get that i have been very consistent on what i like and dont like.

No, if anything, you're being consistent in inconsistency.
You're showcasing to us that you don't have your own standards, you just wait for someone at GW to tell you what's okay (even though those same people at GW have made it very clear that their setting is open to personal interpretation and creativity.)

If the army was at ever point a lore friendly color scheme that hey thats kosher, welcome aboard, if its not, im gonna poke and prod at you about it not being lore accurate. If suddenly the next day its lore accurate because GW updated, then i dont have a reaosn to poke and prod anymore.

Except it's not "prodding and poking", is it? It's pushing people away and ignoring how the setting encourages creativity
Why the hell would I ever want to come back and play with you now?

If thats being a prat then sure, im a prat, but around here we call it banter.

Yeah, no. Still being a prat. Sorry, just calling facts.

 Gert wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Yeah if the color scheme you painted it suddenly became lore friendly, i would be kosher with it because then at that point its lore accurate.

Whats so hard to get about that? If its not, then it is, i dont have a reason to poke fun at it any more.

Im not sure why you dont get that i have been very consistent on what i like and dont like.
If the army was at ever point a lore friendly color scheme that hey thats kosher, welcome aboard, if its not, im gonna poke and prod at you about it not being lore accurate. If suddenly the next day its lore accurate because GW updated, then i dont have a reaosn to poke and prod anymore.

If thats being a prat then sure, im a prat, but around here we call it banter.

There is a difference between poking fun and giving people gak, they aren't the same thing.
But again, you're making up boogeymen to be annoyed at so...

Then there might be a lost in translation thing going on here.
In burgerland, "Giving someone gak" is the same as jest and banter.


At the end of the day, if someone shows up with a rainbow color scheme and says well it could be a thing, im still gonna gak (jest and pordding over in burgerland) about the color scheme. Im not gonna rip on their painting level or skill, but the scheme itself i will, as everyone in my area acts this way and everone understands its not spiteful or with mal intent.
If suddenly GW comes out and goes "Hey rainbow warriors were in the HH" ill probably give, and expect back, equal levels of gak for said person being a prophet for GW and ask him to paint up something else to see if GW will pick that up.

If anything you are all making a non issue outta somethat that I do, and everyone in my community does, over the way we interact with other players. I just dont get it hoenstly.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Could =/= is.

Two weeks ago, the Raven Guard didn't have red Terminators according to you. Hell, you STILL didn't know until just now. I guess you're really not in a position to be talking about the canon, I guess.

If you painted pink SoH, im gonna make fun and tease you, in good jest, about pink SoH, if suddenly GW comes out and says "Yep there were pink SoH" i dont have a reason to poke and jest any longer.

But why? What is there to make fun of? Sounds like you're just looking for excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
In burgerland, "Giving someone gak" is the same as jest and banter.

And "banter" when someone doesn't want it is just being an insensitive prat.
Banter and jest only work when all parties agree that it is.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Could =/= is.

Two weeks ago, the Raven Guard didn't have red Terminators according to you. Hell, you STILL didn't know until just now. I guess you're really not in a position to be talking about the canon, I guess.

If you painted pink SoH, im gonna make fun and tease you, in good jest, about pink SoH, if suddenly GW comes out and says "Yep there were pink SoH" i dont have a reason to poke and jest any longer.

But why? What is there to make fun of? Sounds like you're just looking for excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
In burgerland, "Giving someone gak" is the same as jest and banter.

And "banter" when someone doesn't want it is just being an insensitive prat.
Banter and jest only work when all parties agree that it is.

Because i dont stay glued to every single announcement that GW makes, especially if its over social media because i dont use it.
When i find out about something does not really have anything to do with the conversation.

Because at no point did they have pink SoH and i would think it would be silly, to go that far out there with them.

Then i guess....deal with it? If im a dick im a dick, but tahts how we operate over here.

Backspacehacker wrote:If anything you are all making a non issue outta somethat that I do, and everyone in my community does, over the way we interact with other players. I just dont get it hoenstly.

You know what I think is the real case of "making a non-issue" out of? Ripping into people over the colour scheme of their little plastic and resin toys and saying you wouldn't play with them over it. I don't get it honestly.

So - still wanna play with these red Raven Guard Terminators?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Backspacehacker wrote:If anything you are all making a non issue outta somethat that I do, and everyone in my community does, over the way we interact with other players. I just dont get it hoenstly.

You know what I think is the real case of "making a non-issue" out of? Ripping into people over the colour scheme of their little plastic and resin toys and saying you wouldn't play with them over it. I don't get it honestly.

So - still wanna play with these red Raven Guard Terminators?

10/10 would play, even if they were pink i would still play you, i would just make sure that every time i would be throwing out one liners like "Going to be shooting the pink panthers," or "Firing at the neon army" if things like that dont bother you then here i come.
Then after drag you outta that store and

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Because i dont stay glued to every single announcement that GW makes, especially if its over social media because i dont use it.

Gee - doesn't sound like you're *that* dedicated then. Guess you're not really that much of an authority on the 'true historical nature' of 30k then.

And yeah, if that sounds hyperbolic, I guess I'm just matching the absurdity of "I'd give you gak over your models until GW said otherwise, and then you're fine" - it's absolute lunacy.

Because at no point did they have pink SoH and i would think it would be silly, to go that far out there with them.

Why? And why wouldn't they have pink Sons of Horus? Why is that any more ridiculous than black Ultramarines, or black Imperial Fists, or red White Scars, or red Raven Guard, or grey Word Bearers? It's just a colour.

Then i guess....deal with it?

You know, maybe if you're concerned about these allegations of gatekeeping, maybe that's the attitude that people are talking about. You don't really get to kick up a fuss about people being worried about gatekeeping when you make comments like that.

Personally don't really care about "wrong" color schemes for legions, since we've already seen variations in companies across legions *cough*first company SoH*cough*.

What would rub me the wrong way would be taking the 40k successor chapters and insisting they're era accurate. Want to play red RG? Rock on dude.
Calling them Blood Ravens and insisting they existed in the heresy? Slow down cowboy.

Ok so be it?
I have a big group of people i play with and thats just how we all play together, we dont intend to change so thats how its going to be.

We play for fun, we play for accuracy to lore that exists or has existed, we banter and tease, then we drink after.
If someone new comes in we expect them to conform to that, thats all we ask for and all we want.

 AdmiralRon wrote:
Personally don't really care about "wrong" color schemes for legions, since we've already seen variations in companies across legions *cough*first company SoH*cough*.

What would rub me the wrong way would be taking the 40k successor chapters and insisting they're era accurate. Want to play red RG? Rock on dude.
Calling them Blood Ravens and insisting they existed in the heresy? Slow down cowboy.

Yeah, now that's fair - or hell, even if you took things like a successor Chapter but flavoured it as "yeah, these are *insert Chapter here*, they're still *insert Legion*, but they're later gonna become *Chapter*, and this is the colour scheme they were using on XYZ Campaign".

It's how you can get things like Black Templar iconography and designs in Imperial Fist armies, or Carcharadon designs in a Raven Guard army. More than anything, it just comes down to effort and honesty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
We play for fun, we play for accuracy to lore that exists or has existed

Yeah, but that's the issue - that "accuracy" is a moving target, and it's not even all-encompassing. FW have made it very clear that the Heresy was expansive and massive in scale, and that alternative uniforms and unconventional forces weren't uncommon. If you *want* to be truly accurate to "lore that exists or has existed", then you should be open to personal creativity.

If it's people clearly having no effort or care, that's a different matter, but don't mistake someone going for a non-standard army as someone who doesn't care about the setting.

That's the core of this back and forth. Like I said before, if there wasn't a starter box for me to buy in a few months, my plan would be/was to use CSM for EC
but I would put in effort to convert them to be something passable as late heresy.

In fact, I have a few models where I filed off any Eye of Horus or Eight-Point Star iconography on the torsos/legs,
then took MK IV helmets, arms and backpacks that I had laying around from a bits lot I bought years ago. They looked okay.

I've made SM out of CSM before. That old CSM kit actually makes for some nice baroque looking marines once you give em the de-spiking treatment. I may actually go that route if I decide I want to add more bodies to the RG list.

Now that said, knights being your dudes i say go for it.
Part of the reason i like knights is they are the most "Your dude" army out there, im HOPING in 2.0 they are in a nice balance spot where they are not to strong and not to weak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hairesy wrote:
I've made SM out of CSM before. That old CSM kit actually makes for some nice baroque looking marines once you give em the de-spiking treatment. I may actually go that route if I decide I want to add more bodies to the RG list.

Just syaing....making a whole army of the mutated loyal raven guards, i forgot their name from deliverance lost, that would be really cool.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Then i guess....deal with it? If im a dick im a dick, but tahts how we operate over here.

You could... choose not to be a dick about it, though? I'd start by considering why you seemingly don't want to.

Catulle wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Then i guess....deal with it? If im a dick im a dick, but tahts how we operate over here.

You could... choose not to be a dick about it, though? I'd start by considering why you seemingly don't want to.

Again, its just the way we operate as a group of friend, we dicks to each other, its how we push ourselves.
We do it in the gym as well, same thing, we all know its not spiteful or in malice we just are dicks like taht because we use it to push our selves, same thing in painting, and in the game. Except i nthe game we push to keep it what we like, the fluffy armies and thematic/dramatic battles. not tourny style.


Like ok, example here, i know im a bad painter, and we joke about how bad i am at painting, i know its not in malice, and we end up showing each other how to fix speceific problems.
Outside looking in, it looks super hostile, but its really not, its how we are.

I mean, it sounds a lot like the Yorkshire Cricket defence...

Catulle wrote:
I mean, it sounds a lot like the Yorkshire Cricket defence...

I wish, as a burger lander, i knew what that meant, but im sure a brit bong will be able to clarify it for me.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Except i nthe game we push to keep it what we like, the fluffy armies and thematic/dramatic battles. not tourny style.

Yeah, but "fluffy" isn't a fixed thing, is it? Hence the problem of the red Terminators I just mentioned.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
im a dick

Well, glad we could just cut to the chase and get to the heart of the matter.

 AdmiralRon wrote:
Personally don't really care about "wrong" color schemes for legions, since we've already seen variations in companies across legions *cough*first company SoH*cough*.
What would rub me the wrong way would be taking the 40k successor chapters and insisting they're era accurate. Want to play red RG? Rock on dude.
Calling them Blood Ravens and insisting they existed in the heresy? Slow down cowboy.

100% this. The "it has to be official" nonsense ignores the part where GW has been very clear in saying that despite the legions having certain standard colors and symbols, etc. there were all sorts of special snowflake units and subdivisions within them that had their own separate appearances and traditions. Hell, GW has explored a number of these officially (Black Templars within the the Imp Fists, for example) in order to demonstrate what this looks like. The fluff is open ended and exists to allow a framework for people to create their own stuff within it. Want pink SoH? Go for it, its a 100% legitimate (as opposed to "official") approach within the construct of the framework and guidelines GW has provided to us, all you need is the thinnest veneer of fluff to justify it, and nobody has any right to tease or jest about it based on their ill-conceived notions of illegitimacy.

If you want to be a dick and enforce standards of "accuracy", go play historicals, theres not nearly as much room for subjectivity there.

got the leaked rulebook, anyone want to know anything ?

is it that bad as some thought with the amount of reactions there are?

 kodos wrote:
is it that bad as some thought with the amount of reactions there are?

there are 6 core reactions, 2 for movement, 2 for shooting and 2 for assault phases +1 for each of the legion specific ones

Advance and withdrawer for movement phase

return fire and evade (give 5+ damage mitigation role for shrouded) for shooting

overwatch and hold the line for assault phase

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
im a dick

Well, glad we could just cut to the chase and get to the heart of the matter.

 AdmiralRon wrote:
Personally don't really care about "wrong" color schemes for legions, since we've already seen variations in companies across legions *cough*first company SoH*cough*.
What would rub me the wrong way would be taking the 40k successor chapters and insisting they're era accurate. Want to play red RG? Rock on dude.
Calling them Blood Ravens and insisting they existed in the heresy? Slow down cowboy.

100% this. The "it has to be official" nonsense ignores the part where GW has been very clear in saying that despite the legions having certain standard colors and symbols, etc. there were all sorts of special snowflake units and subdivisions within them that had their own separate appearances and traditions. Hell, GW has explored a number of these officially (Black Templars within the the Imp Fists, for example) in order to demonstrate what this looks like. The fluff is open ended and exists to allow a framework for people to create their own stuff within it. Want pink SoH? Go for it, its a 100% legitimate (as opposed to "official") approach within the construct of the framework and guidelines GW has provided to us, all you need is the thinnest veneer of fluff to justify it, and nobody has any right to tease or jest about it based on their ill-conceived notions of illegitimacy.

If you want to be a dick and enforce standards of "accuracy", go play historicals, theres not nearly as much room for subjectivity there.

I do think there has to be SOME visual tie back to the parent Legion IMO (unless you're doing Blackshields); even just the Legion symbol somewhere would be fine by me.

Using the time I'm writing this, if someone were to paint pastel white, purple, green, and yellow World Eaters, I'd still want to see the World Eaters Legion symbol somewhere, and I'd encourage whoever brought them to have or make up some kind of fluff behind their choice.