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.

Basically my Tau are painted as Sa'Cea but I intend to use the farsight enclave rules for the Dawnblade Contingent. What are your views on using rules but not painting them the same colour? So this or Ultra marines as white scars etc.

I wouldn't care as long as the gear is correct.

I'm not a big fan of it personally.

Just want to throw this out there though, are you sure that you have to be farsight enclave to use daw blade contingent?

I thought you could be tau empire and still take a dawn blade.

eleven11 wrote:
I'm not a big fan of it personally.

Just want to throw this out there though, are you sure that you have to be farsight enclave to use daw blade contingent?

I thought you could be tau empire and still take a dawn blade.

Hmm.. Me too, only a few of my models are painted but everything is based black. Not sure I'm keen on re-doing everything.

Nope, it's farsight enclave as far as I'm aware.

Don't the Tau change the colour of their armour depending on the mission and environment? I always thought Tau Septs did not have specific colour schemes.

They have sept markings and a standard colour, like enclaves being red and grey, Sa'Cea Blue and Orange.

 fatbudda319 wrote:
Basically my Tau are painted as Sa'Cea but I intend to use the farsight enclave rules for the Dawnblade Contingent. What are your views on using rules but not painting them the same colour? So this or Ultra marines as white scars etc.

So? I doubt they were the only tau ever to come up with that paint scheme.

My tau are green and my marines are blue. Non sept or chapter specific. They could be anyone. And are played as such.

What's the 'right' way to play? Answer - there isn't one.

They do, but its also common for that to be abandoned in favor of camouflage schemes.

The art always shows them in formal colors because rule of cool.

Yes but in my instance, enclave guys with orange helmets is a bit off?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Don't the Tau change the colour of their armour depending on the mission and environment? I always thought Tau Septs did not have specific colour schemes.

The T'au sept used to have a red scheme like Farsight uses now because of the planet they were fighting on. They changed it to the sandy orange because they were fighting the orks in a desert

For most armies, I don’t even know what the “official” paint job is, much less what rules are associated with them. Different tau with different rules? Whatever. The only time it would matter is id you were allying them together and I needed to be able to tell them apart.

For armies where it’s relevant (chapter tactics on marines comes to mind) it’s a fairly simple counts-as. If it’s not WYSWYG paint, I’d prefer it’s all consistent. “My whole army is White Scars today” is simple to keep track off. "These 3 units are WS, these 2 RG, and the lib and scouts are BA” when they all have the same paint job would drive me crazy.

But frankly I see enough primered/bare plastic armies across the table, I want to eliminate any potential barrier to getting people to paint. Sometimes the rules move away from the army people want to play. If someone is fed up with the BA codex, and wants to use the vanilla rules, I’m fine with that. As long as the minis are reasonable WYSWYG. If I want to play my UM bikers under WS rules, why should I be punished for painting my minis?

 fatbudda319 wrote:
Basically my Tau are painted as Sa'Cea but I intend to use the farsight enclave rules for the Dawnblade Contingent. What are your views on using rules but not painting them the same colour? So this or Ultra marines as white scars etc.

It doesnt help my immersion but do i actually care.... not really. I mean I have used models from various people that don't even match each other and because I just dont see color well, painting is a chore. so I guess to me its just kind of like: the hobby is time consuming and expsneive enough that I dont really blame people for needing to cut corners

It doesn't keep me from playing someone, but it would be nice if people put in some time to chase the power creep.

"This is my White Scars army that I spent countless hours painting to a quality level, but today I'm playing them as Blood Angels" said no one ever...

 fatbudda319 wrote:
Yes but in my instance, enclave guys with orange helmets is a bit off?

My Sept was the Tau Eastern Expeditionary force. Sent to kickstart our progress going that way and give some relief to the septs there. My Sept has yellow markings for it, but story events occur and the septs leader is falsely accused of being a traitor. Instead of taking his life when ordered he goes renegade. So he gets rescued by the men under his command who say they'll follow him to the ends of the universe if need be. The colony ship I was going to be in charge (the only one left of the small flotilla) of instead makes a beeline north for the Enclaves. So we settled as a new colony world there but with no true colony fleet and support it will be a long time before our world is a true and powerful sept like it was intended. I paint my army in their sept colours, but add a dash of Enclaves red to the left pauldrons of everything in remembrance. This allows the troops to remember what the Ethereals stopped them from doing, but shows my allegiance to the Enclaves.

If I can make that up then I'm sure you can find out some reason you have an orange coloration. As the Enclaves grow there will only be more and more diverse septs in them that don't necessarily stick to the classic theme.

Just keep it consistent and no ones minds.

I would be really annoyed if they all look the same but have different rules. If your whole army is fSE colour doesn't matter just make sure you opponent knows what you play.
Still vior'la sept fse are close in scheme so Thats how did it I just like red and white bloke combo

Remember when the Blood angels suddenly seemed to adopt the rainbow as their colors in 5E?

We had White Blood angels and black ones and we had yellow ones... Lol.

I find it extremely petty when someone has a problem with the color scheme matching the rules they use. Things like chapter tactics and supplements add another dimension to the rules and allow players to play in different ways. They aren't there to give more freedom only to those players who painted their army a certain way.

In your example the Farsight Enclaves supplement is way for players to represent on the battlefield their forces in a way that is different than the main codex. It doesn't mean that it's only for those who have Red Tau. What's stopping you from saying that your army is organized and fights similarly to the Enclaves? Nothing. Nothing is.

 Jancoran wrote:
Remember when the Blood angels suddenly seemed to adopt the rainbow as their colors in 5E?

We had White Blood angels and black ones and we had yellow ones... Lol.

I actually run a white/red blood angels successor chapter but they were always that way haha.

P.S they are white and red.

I find forging the narrative solves a lot of problems.

Yeah they're my Chrimson skulls and everyone knows they've always been that way I was more thinking if I turned up against a stranger in a tournament for instance what would they think.

I think if you can provide a list and clearly indicate what each model has then any issues that do arise won't be because you painted it differently.

 fatbudda319 wrote:
Basically my Tau are painted as Sa'Cea but I intend to use the farsight enclave rules for the Dawnblade Contingent. What are your views on using rules but not painting them the same colour? So this or Ultra marines as white scars etc.

There has never been a rule that you have to paint your little men a certain way. The closest thing was the "Red Paint Job" upgrade in the Ork codex, and even then there was no stipulation that your stuff actually had to be painted red to take the upgrade.

This is the RAW interpretation. In practice, people occasionally complain about people jumping ship from Marine dex to Marine dex. That said, in other games (Infinity for one), proxying is commonly accepted, and there are many more weapons options in that game than 40k. Basically it all has to do with Marine players having a ton of flexibility in codex selection, and players who run other factions complaining about it.

In terms of game rules, other than some old versions of Red Paintjob (for obvious reasons), the color of the model NEVER affects the rules of it. You can paint your Farsight in T'au colors and still use the Farsight Enclaves as long as the gear and choices are correct.

Run your Black Templars as Space Wolves for all I fething care. Just make sure the Malta guns look like melts gums and the lascannons are not missile launchers....

I think limiting paint schemes to match the rules takes away from the creativity of the game. I like to see unusual paint schemes; otherwise certain armies look too same-y. Take my Tau for instance; I'm doing blue armor with yellow sept markings because I like the way the two colors look together. Yellow is the sept color for Kel'shan sept, but as far as I know they've never been described as having deep blue armor. I just use the scheme because IMO it looks good.

The only caveat is that I don't get confused by the paint scheme.

For example if you wanted to have a uniformed army but use two different SM rules, try not to have the two armies be too close. If you have two tactical squads but one is from Dark Angels and one is from Salamanders, I'd like to be able to tell them apart at a glance.