Successor Chapters and the future

[Cpt_Reaper]

There are rules placing restrictions. I have asked both local groups and groups further away with people I know to review my interpretation of them to see if it is accurate.

 

100% of the time I get the same response: Only a Dark Angels army may use the keyword Dark Angels. If you used the same Keyword with a different army then your opponent is well within their right to declare your army invalid.

 

Thus I am seeking to change the rules on the pages I have referenced so that such a thing cannot be done.

[Panzer]

This is just hopeless...

 

Please tell me in what area you game so I make sure to never go there then lol

[Cpt_Reaper]

I do not understand what the problem is. There is a rule in the codex that takes away and does not give, is enforceable by precedent (the Ultramarines as Blood Angels ruling) that I would like to see changed and the response is "your gaming group is bad for not ignoring a rule".

 

I stopped wishlisting and I made an attempt to begin the process of gathering ideas to give to GW to fix this in Chapter Approved. I don't like the rule so I wish to see it changed. Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't mean it isn't a problem for a lot of people.

[Bryan Blaire]

I think you greatly overestimate your evaluation of "a problem for a lot of people." Have you done a statistically valid survey of the 40K gaming population world-wide? Is your survey using questions written with "easily understood without personal interpretation" and unbiased wording? Do you have properly analyzed mathematical results?

 

We can all post anecdotes, they don't amount to "a lot of people" relative to the actual 40K gaming population. I would guess that most of our anecdotes wouldn't even carry statistical relevance for "a lot of people" in the individual "state" (or other utilized subdivision of nation where one resides) that we play in (although this doesn't account for areas where you and your friends may be the actual only players of the game in your "state" due to numerous outside factors).

 

Honestly, your group might as well state "Don't play with anything not painted to exact standards of the 40K rulebooks, otherwise your army isn't valid." Is each member of your group's army painted up to that standard? If not, how do you actually know they are properly representing the army? They might just be misguided Successors with subpar equipment and servitors.

[Kinstryfe]

Only a Dark Angels army may use keyword Dark Angels. Note that this does not apply to color schemes on models. What this means is that if there is a character, trait, or relic that may only be taken in a successor chapter X, then it requires them to use keyword X. There is not, however, a RULE stating that Dark Angels must be painted with XYZ paint scheme. That's where your interpretation is falling apart.

 

An army of <Angels of Caliban>, including Knighty McKnightface, a special character usable only by <Angels of Caliban>, must use that keyword. An army of Angels of Caliban using no special restrictions may be fielded as <Dark Angels> unless an event you are in is specifically stating otherwise. In this case, you are playing as differently painted Dark Angels, which is fine because there is no rule stating how you should paint your army.

 

You can go further and look at the intent behind the rule if you need to. The rule's intent is so that you cannot mix things from one <chapter> with another <chapter>. The intent behind the added on tournament restriction is to prevent people using one Codex's official paint scheme as another Codex's rules. For example, me showing up with my Ultramarines but saying they are Blood Angels would be very confusing for my opponent, as Ultramarines have another rule set. The intent has never been voiced as preventing units from being used in their own successor chapters, which is why there is no standard rule about paint jobs.

 

Another way to look at it: By this logic, your beautifully painted successor chapter is weaker than my box of old metal Dark Angels veterans because mine don't yet have the "wrong" colour scheme on them, so metal Azrael is ok but red Azrael is officially unable to ever be fielded in a matched play game. This flies against the spirit of the hobby in so many ways there's a reason every response is trying to outline why it's a poorly worded and thought out rule in the first place.

 

tl:dr You are correct that only a Dark Angels army may use keyword Dark Angels, but it is up to you and not your opponent to determine whether your models are Dark Angels, regardless of paint job.

[Panzer]

I do not understand what the problem is. There is a rule in the codex that takes away and does not give, is enforceable by precedent (the Ultramarines as Blood Angels ruling) that I would like to see changed and the response is "your gaming group is bad for not ignoring a rule".

 

I stopped wishlisting and I made an attempt to begin the process of gathering ideas to give to GW to fix this in Chapter Approved. I don't like the rule so I wish to see it changed. Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't mean it isn't a problem for a lot of people.

 

The problem is that you don't understand what we're trying to tell you at all.

You say the colour scheme of a model dictates the faction keyword one has to use. We tell you that's not the case since there's no rule that forces people to paint their models in a specific way.

We don't argue that units with a successor chapter keyword can't use all the fancy relics etc from the Codex. We argue that since there's no rule that forces you to paint your models in a specific way it's up to YOU to decide which faction keyword you use and if you say you use <DARK ANGELS> then you can use any relics etc from the Codex Dark Angels you want regardless of whether your Marines are dark green, slightly brigther green, use numbers for squad designation instead of the Codex Astartes approved markings, are pink, use different Marks of armour or whatever.

 

Also just as a random note, the Codex Astartes talks about camouflage being a viable thing to do for Astartes, so if GW wouldn't ignore that part you should see Dark Angels in lots of different colours on the battlefield depending on where they are deployed. Just saying.

[Cpt_Reaper]

It is a poorly written rule that does indeed go against the spirit of the hobby.

 

But it is a rule. I have pointed out the pages on which both rules are written. Dark Angels are Dark Angels. Disciples of Caliban are Disciples of Caliban. The wording provided does not allow for any other interpretation, unlike those found in Codex Space Marines regarding successors.

 

I was wrong in claiming that a lot of players will be facing this issue. What my intent was to say that if any players face this issue the rule needs to be changed. It could very well be only my group and the other groups I have asked. Said amount of players could be .5% of players only within Australia. But that is too many to be restricted by a rule that goes against the spirit of the hobby and goes against every past edition.

[Panzer]

It is a poorly written rule that does indeed go against the spirit of the hobby.

 

But it is a rule. I have pointed out the pages on which both rules are written. Dark Angels are Dark Angels. Disciples of Caliban are Disciples of Caliban. The wording provided does not allow for any other interpretation, unlike those found in Codex Space Marines regarding successors.

 

 

You quoted the rule and pointed out the pages. We don't(!) disagree with how the rule works.

We disagree with your opinion that you can't use the Faction Keyword of the parent chapter if you don't follow the parent chapters colour scheme to the letter.

 

You still completely ignored my question of how it's supposed to work for people who have an army from times before GW decided to change their colour scheme and/or heraldry a bit. Is that army suddenly not viable to use their rules anymore in your group until that player who probably has several thousands of points since forever has repainted them all?

[Cpt_Reaper]

As such a situation has not come up I hadn't thought about it. I imagine that an army painted to represent the old colour scheme of the Dark Angels is still legal on the grounds that they are Dark Angels.

 

However, my own models that I have converted to include Dark Angels characters with the colour scheme of my own Chapter is no longer legal if I include said characters. This has indeed happened to me in a number of local tournaments and in local games. I was told if I didn't like the rule I should play another game (said by players who were less than pleased with GW, seeing such a rule as justification of their dislike of the company).

[Panzer]

 

However, my own models that I have converted to include Dark Angels characters with the colour scheme of my own Chapter is no longer legal if I include said characters. This has indeed happened to me in a number of local tournaments and in local games. I was told if I didn't like the rule I should play another game (said by players who were less than pleased with GW, seeing such a rule as justification of their dislike of the company).

 

Okay I'll stick with my earlier request ... please tell me the area you game in so I never go there. Sounds like a terrible community to play warhammer in.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Then I humbly ask for suggestions to place into a request for GW to change this rule so that such an issue goes away.

[Phoebus]

I don’t think the OP has any doubts regarding how this should work. Yes, references have been made to official work-arounds from past editions; yes, there are creative ways to imagine how Dark Angels might look different than advertised; no, there technically is no rule that says a Dark Angels army has to be painted a specific way.

 

The Codex text nonetheless makes the distinction between playing the parent Chapter and a Successor Chapter. That distinction is not limited to an Ultramarines army moonlighting as the Unforgiven. Whatever their intent before, Games Workshop do not want people fielding named characters or Relics (other than a Heavenfall Blade) as part of a Successor Chapter. They provide mechanics that allow Azrael to fight alongside a Successor Chapter, but they have made it clear their intent is not for him to “count as” that force’s Chapter Master.

 

The OP doesn’t like this rule. He’s seeking support in securing an official change. It would appear the preponderance of the people interested enough in this topic to respond aren’t bothered enough by the rule as it stands to offer said support — and that’s fine! I’m not sure that recommendations re: paint schemes and his gaming group, or a debate on what the rules mean (they are rather clear on this matter) will provide closure to his dilemma, though.

[Panzer]

I decline. It's not a rule that bothers me or anybody I know except for you since it's so obviously easy to circumvent it. It's only an issue for people who make it an issue.

Also GW knows that people aren't super happy with it but I doubt it's high on their priority list. They'll tell you the exact same thing we told you if you ask them and tell them you really have a problem with it.

Hell it's not even high on my priority list because of the above mentioned reasons. There are LOTS of things I'd ask GW to change before I'd even mention this.

[Bryan Blaire]

Then I humbly ask for suggestions to place into a request for GW to change this rule so that such an issue goes away.

What suggestions can anyone make for such a localized rule? Seriously, you are asking for the use of precious written official text to satisfy something that isn't really an issue.

 

The next time any player says that you can't use your army for your 40K Dark Angels, you should ask them "Where is the rule written that states when I assign a Faction key word to my army based on the color scheme? What point in the game/pre-game phases does this happen in?" If they point to a Codex or the main rule book, ask them to see one of their figures and the corresponding picture of the faction color scheme - then point out to them that they don't look alike: they don't use the same smooth gradients across the armor, they don't use the exact same markings, the battle damage isn't the same, etc., so based on the argument they are making, their army is not the one they have assigned the faction key word to and therefore they are disqualified and must forfeit the game to you.

 

If they say that you don't assign the faction key word, it is selected for you by your scheme, opponent, etc., then inform them you've selected a Successor of the army they want to play, sorry to be them, but you can't acknowledge an army that clearly isn't GW's "whatever" as that, so they will have to play something else.

[Phoebus]

That’s not what he’s asking for, though, Bryan. “I disagree” is a perfectly valid answer to what he’s posing. :)

[Panzer]

That’s not what he’s asking for, though, Bryan. “I disagree” is a perfectly valid answer to what he’s posing.

If he doesn't want any comments on his idea he shouldn't have posted it in a topic and just start a petition or something.

He has a problem. We are trying to help with that. There are more solutions to a problem than just one.

[Cpt_Reaper]

I present you the following scenarios:

 

1. I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.
2. I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is not official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.

With the way the rules are written, I cannot deny the judgement. Simply put I am not using Dark Angels. The second I chose to use a Successor, Sammael and other named characters became illegal in my army.

[Bryan Blaire]

I present you the following scenarios:

 

 

• I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.
• I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is not official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.

With the way the rules are written, I cannot deny the judgement. Simply put I am not using Dark Angels. The second I chose to use a Successor, Sammael and other named characters became illegal in my army.

So invalidate your opponent's army based on not matching the official paint scheme too, I.e. Your game together was never legal in the first place. Now, do you both want to play, or do you want to be rigid pains in each other's posteriors?

 

OR

 

You show up to the game, put your army on the table and say "These are my Dark Angels. We playing?". If there is an objection or a non-answer, repeat the question. If there is an objection based on scheme, follow advice above: ask opponent for figure from their army, open official rule book or Codex and show them how their army is not painted the same, therefore they can't use the rules they want. Restart scenario.

[Phoebus]

sfPanzer,

 

I’m not saying he doesn’t want comments. I’m saying most of the comments he’s getting aren’t really addressing what he’s posing. He’s essentially saying he doesn’t like the chocolate he was given, and you’re essentially trying to convince him to try watermelon, instead.

 

Neither of you is wrong in my eyes. Your solutions, however, while valid, may not be applicable to his situation.

 

Cpt_Reaper,

 

I’m inclined to agree with the folks telling you it’s unlikely GW will respond to a petition for this kind of rule change, especially in light of the fact that so much of the larger game is geared toward armies that aren’t entirely homogeneous. Fielding, e.g., a Supreme Command Detachment of Dark Angels characters as part of a battle-forged army primarily comprised of a Successor Chapter isn’t a perfect arrangement in more ways than one... but would address your legality issues and has a precedent in the lore.

[Cpt_Reaper]

If he were playing a Successor, using Codex Space Marines, and included Calgar then I would indeed point out the illegality of his or her army.

 

It is, by the Dark Angels codex, illegal to play a Dark Angels Successor using Dark Angels named characters or relics other than the heavenfall blade.

 

I play a Successor. I disagree with the restrictions meaning I cannot use a Chapter Master or Master of the Ravenwing. I cannot speak for the Blood Angels Codex as I do not have it, but under Codex Space Marines Successors still have access to Chapter Masters. We cannot take Masters on Bikes so are locked into taking Talonmasters for HQs for Successor Ravenwing.

[Panzer]

I present you the following scenarios:

 

1. I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.
2. I turn up to a game. My army is a Successor Chapter that is not official. I have included a model using the rules of Sammael on Corvex. I claim that I am using the Dark Angels keyword for my army. My opponent points out that only the Dark Angels may use the Dark Angels Keyword. My army is not legal.

With the way the rules are written, I cannot deny the judgement. Simply put I am not using Dark Angels. The second I chose to use a Successor, Sammael and other named characters became illegal in my army.

 

I represent you with what any sane player would do and usually does:

1. Tell your opponent that there is no rule to how to paint an army and you are free to use the Dark Angels keyword if you want to.
2. See 1.

Alternatively do what Bryan suggests and be just as pedantic about their army and if they even got one marking wrong tell them that's not official so they aren't allowed to use their rules. However that 1) requires you to know your opponents army fluff 2) makes you step as low as they are 3) only makes people mad since it's not an actual solution and more of an eye for an eye approach.

[Bryan Blaire]

Sounds like your real decision should be to stop playing your creation - that’s what you really seem to want to do.

[Panzer]

Sounds like your real decision should be to stop playing your creation - that’s what you really seem to want to do.

Yeah seriously. I've never seen anybody fight so hard against an easy solution. It's like talking against a wall.

[Phoebus]

... but under Codex Space Marines Successors still have access to Chapter Masters. We cannot take Masters on Bikes so are locked into taking Talonmasters for HQs for Successor Ravenwing.

For the life of me, I don’t understand what drives that part of Codex design. Every First Founding Chapter sans the Salamanders and Space Wolves has known Successors. For whatever reason, though, only Codex: Space Marines provides both the flexibility and the sanctioned templates to field a Successor Chapter from top to bottom.

 

Even failing to provide templates to make a Successor Chapter Master or Grand Masters of the Deathwing and Ravenwing, it would have been such a simple matter to use UNFORGIVEN as the Faction Keyword instead of DARK ANGELS. How does it help or balance the game in any way to say that you can only use a certain relic or character if you pretend your Successors are something they’re not, or if you and your fellow players ignore an arbitrary rule?

[Cpt_Reaper]

I want to play my Successor. I want anyone to play any Successor without unreasonable restrictions. Every Chapter should have access to a Chapter Master, and every relic within their relevant Codex.

 

I am fighting against the solution of "ignore the rule". I will not ignore any rules because, to me, that is tantamount to cheating. If you declare you are playing a Successor, you're locked out of options. If you declare you're playing Dark Angels and your army is clearly not Dark Angels, then by official precedent your opponent may challenge the validity of your army.

 

Phoebus that is a good method for fixing the issue. May I add that to the list of suggested changes to which I will send to GW?