Let's talk about GW's recent wording with successors

[MegaVolt87]

I don't see an issue with known successors using inheritors, which are tied to the founding chapter instead of a different first founding chapter. Eg- Raptors> inheritors > RG traits or just pick two from the list instead of inheritors. Official GW chapters with known origins should be respected when/if using inheritors. The generic traits work as well because it could also be a commander's preference for a specific campaign/ battle etc. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

As long as it’s all painted accordingly I has no problem with it.

[chapter master 454]

To be honest, its all a big warp storm of a mess.

 

I mean, an example of my Angels of Justice. I have made them to be made from Dark Angel stock but taught by Ultramarine successors (I just wanted to have stable stock and not have to dip into ultramarine stock as every other chapter does for stable stock but didn't want the baggage of Dark Angel memes).

 

I want you to tell me who they should play as. After all, technically they are successors of the Dark Angels BUT I also have equal claim to them using Ultramarine toys. Yet here I am running them around as whatever I feel like because hey...grey marines have no colours to pick ;p

 

In all seriousness, I don't agree with locking someone into a chapter because they used the colour scheme of that chapter. Yes, even if you painted them ultramarine I would be fully in agreement with allowing you to use Iron Hand toys instead of your Ultramarine ones. You paint your army to look how you want it, and if you LOVE how ultramarines look (lets be fair, they rock that blue well) then you should be able to enjoy the colour scheme you want and not have that dictate how your army plays.

 

By all accounts, it does enhance it when they are played correctly but I don't force it on anyone. When I feel narrative with my lists, my chapter goes to war with ultramarine toys because that is how the lore for them works. However when I am doing my thing, list building a storm (I REALLY enjoy building lists) then I don't restrict myself to just what my paint brush put on the plastic soldier.

 

Your army's appearance in terms of colours should not dictate their effects (unless your orks...red ones go fasta!!!)

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Dark Angels and Ultramarines sounds like quite a stretch to me.

 

Your army's appearance in terms of colours should not dictate their effects ...

 

I clearly gave an example of using Blood Angels to represent another Chapter... it’s just bad feels man.

[Panzer]

You can be as much blue as you want but if you are also rocking the toilet seat and stuff you are a Ultramarine and should use Ultramarine rules.

[Lord_Caerolion]

What sfPanzer said. In a friendly game, I wouldn't be opposed to playing under different rules, but yes, by and large you should play an army as what it is. Otherwise we enter the realms of "well, I like the look of stock Ork models, but I hate the gameplay, so I'm using Tau rules."

[Trevak Dal]

Man I'm still confused with how you can use the supplements (say Ultramarines one) but not be Ultramarines (say, sons of orar or Genesis Marines "we feel it coming in the air tonight" being their battle cry I guess) and still pick other non Ultramarine chapter tactics (on top of Ultramarine chapter tactics) but don't get access to the Ultramarine specific relics.

 

I thought that, if you were an Ultramarine successor, you used ultramarine chapter tactics...and that's it. But appearently this is not so?

[Disruptor_fe404]

Man I'm still confused with how you can use the supplements (say Ultramarines one) but not be Ultramarines (say, sons of orar or Genesis Marines "we feel it coming in the air tonight" being their battle cry I guess) and still pick other non Ultramarine chapter tactics (on top of Ultramarine chapter tactics) but don't get access to the Ultramarine specific relics.

 

I thought that, if you were an Ultramarine successor, you used ultramarine chapter tactics...and that's it. But appearently this is not so?

 

Successor Chapters basically pick their Parent and their Successor Chapter Tactics. Their Parent defines which Supplement they use as second-class versions of their Parent (ie: no Relics without spending CP and no special characters from the Parent). Their Chapter Tactics can be whatever they choose from the Codex, but if they pick Inheritors, it has to match their Parent's.

 

EDIT: Traits -> Chapter Tactics

[Trevak Dal]

So going with Ultramarines successors Genesis Marines,

 

They would have the +1 leadership and able to fall back out of combat and shoot on a 4+ (if they took inheritors) or be able to take 2 of the codex chapter traits and still get access to...what the "enhanced doctrine" of the Ultramarines?

[Lord_Caerolion]

So going with Ultramarines successors Genesis Marines,

 

They would have the +1 leadership and able to fall back out of combat and shoot on a 4+ (if they took inheritors) or be able to take 2 of the codex chapter traits and still get access to...what the "enhanced doctrine" of the Ultramarines?

Basically, the First Founders get a unique tactic that’s not completely able to be replicated from the Successor Tactics, and native access to their Relic list. Everyone gets their Doctrine buff, psyker powers, Warlord traits, objectives, “special issue gear”, and Stratagems. One of those Stratagems allows a Successor to pick a Chapter Relic.

[Panzer]

Being a successor just means that you have to pay a CP for a parent chapter relic and not being able to take the parent chapter named characters. That's all. In return you can build your own chapter tactic if you want to.

[Lemondish]

To be honest, its all a big warp storm of a mess.

 

I mean, an example of my Angels of Justice. I have made them to be made from Dark Angel stock but taught by Ultramarine successors (I just wanted to have stable stock and not have to dip into ultramarine stock as every other chapter does for stable stock but didn't want the baggage of Dark Angel memes).

 

I want you to tell me who they should play as. After all, technically they are successors of the Dark Angels BUT I also have equal claim to them using Ultramarine toys. Yet here I am running them around as whatever I feel like because hey...grey marines have no colours to pick ;p

 

In all seriousness, I don't agree with locking someone into a chapter because they used the colour scheme of that chapter. Yes, even if you painted them ultramarine I would be fully in agreement with allowing you to use Iron Hand toys instead of your Ultramarine ones. You paint your army to look how you want it, and if you LOVE how ultramarines look (lets be fair, they rock that blue well) then you should be able to enjoy the colour scheme you want and not have that dictate how your army plays.

 

By all accounts, it does enhance it when they are played correctly but I don't force it on anyone. When I feel narrative with my lists, my chapter goes to war with ultramarine toys because that is how the lore for them works. However when I am doing my thing, list building a storm (I REALLY enjoy building lists) then I don't restrict myself to just what my paint brush put on the plastic soldier.

 

Your army's appearance in terms of colours should not dictate their effects (unless your orks...red ones go fasta!!!)

 

I will quote the Ultramarines supplement to help you...

 

"Otherwise, choose a founding Chapter that best fits your successor Chapter's character."

Sounds like your Chapter's character is Ultramarines, but since they're made up and don't exist in any GW publications, you can technically be whatever you want (I like that colour scheme you posted for them over in Liber Astartes, by the way). It seems your major hang up is this disconnect between fluff and crunch that you feel is not giving you a clear answer on allowing you to be a Dark Angels successor for narrative purposes while playing as an Ultramarines successor for rules purposes. I'd say your army should be played however you want - the rules supplied in the Supplement and Rulebook are open enough that nobody is telling you what to do. For the record, that's called freedom of choice, not "a warp storm of mess" ;)

 

If you walk up to a table for a friendly match and say you're a Dark Angels successor for the narrative, but due to the way your army fights it makes more sense to use Ultramarines supplement and rules, I don't think anybody would reasonably challenge you on that in any way. Unreasonable people may, but you probably shouldn't want a game with them. 

 

As far as competitive tournaments go, I think there's a higher standard placed on visual components that identify an army or units based on the rules. Prior to the new supplement book set up, I honestly don't think there would have been any issue with Ultramarines playing as Iron Hands. Now, I think it is 100% fair for a tournament organizer to say an army clearly painted to look like one particular Chapter from a specific supplement should probably be playing as that Chapter and not anything else.

 

Your army, should it be following that custom scheme you devised, isn't clearly anything so you get to decide tournament to tournament if you so wish. That's true freedom right there. It takes one casualty for this to work - your own narrative. Since tournaments are far and away the complete opposite of a narrative focused experience I don't think that's much of a thing to give up. Just cross your fingers behind your back when people ask you what you are and you say Ultramarines - best loophole. 

[Mandragola]

An example I’m considering is to create a ravenguard successor. I find the ravenguard CTs, which help you when you’re infantry far away in cover, don’t synergise all that well with their stratagems and warlord traits, which are all about getting up close to things.

 

I could build a successor with traits like +3” range on flamers and one of the various ones to make you better in assault. I’d get the super doctrine to kill characters (not actually a very big deal) and access to warlord traits, psychic powers and stratagems. I wouldn’t be able to take Shrike and I’d have to pay if I wanted any RG chapter relics – though special issue wargear would be available.

 

I’m vaguely considering making a successor chapter with camouflage painted on their armour. I could then use them as any chapter I want. But I’m going to wait till I see the rules for my Crimson Fists before making any commitments.

[FelipeFlops]

Basically there are three routes per supplement (using Ultramarines as an example);

 

1. Be Ultramarines;

 

You get access to Ultramarines CT, Ultramarine Super Doctrine, Named Characters/Special Units, Ultramarine relics, Special Issue Wargear, Ultramarine Stratagems, Ultramarine Psychic Discipline and Warlord Traits. Plus everything from C:SM.

 

2. Be an Ultramarine 'Inheritor of the Primarch';

 

You get access to Ultramarines CT, Ultramarine Super Doctrine, Special Issue Wargear, Ultramarine Stratagems, Ultramarine Psychic Discipline and Warlord Traits. Plus everything from C:SM. (Spend CP to access Ultramarine Relics).

 

3. Be an Ultramarine Successor;

 

You get access to 2x Successor CT from C:SM, Ultramarine Super Doctrine, Special Issue Wargear, Ultramarine Stratagems, Ultramarine Psychic Discipline and Warlord Traits. Plus everything from C:SM. (Spend CP to access Ultramarine Relics).

[chapter master 454]

 

To be honest, its all a big warp storm of a mess.

 

I mean, an example of my Angels of Justice. I have made them to be made from Dark Angel stock but taught by Ultramarine successors (I just wanted to have stable stock and not have to dip into ultramarine stock as every other chapter does for stable stock but didn't want the baggage of Dark Angel memes).

 

I want you to tell me who they should play as. After all, technically they are successors of the Dark Angels BUT I also have equal claim to them using Ultramarine toys. Yet here I am running them around as whatever I feel like because hey...grey marines have no colours to pick ;p

 

In all seriousness, I don't agree with locking someone into a chapter because they used the colour scheme of that chapter. Yes, even if you painted them ultramarine I would be fully in agreement with allowing you to use Iron Hand toys instead of your Ultramarine ones. You paint your army to look how you want it, and if you LOVE how ultramarines look (lets be fair, they rock that blue well) then you should be able to enjoy the colour scheme you want and not have that dictate how your army plays.

 

By all accounts, it does enhance it when they are played correctly but I don't force it on anyone. When I feel narrative with my lists, my chapter goes to war with ultramarine toys because that is how the lore for them works. However when I am doing my thing, list building a storm (I REALLY enjoy building lists) then I don't restrict myself to just what my paint brush put on the plastic soldier.

 

Your army's appearance in terms of colours should not dictate their effects (unless your orks...red ones go fasta!!!)

 

I will quote the Ultramarines supplement to help you...

 

"Otherwise, choose a founding Chapter that best fits your successor Chapter's character."

Sounds like your Chapter's character is Ultramarines, but since they're made up and don't exist in any GW publications, you can technically be whatever you want (I like that colour scheme you posted for them over in Liber Astartes, by the way). It seems your major hang up is this disconnect between fluff and crunch that you feel is not giving you a clear answer on allowing you to be a Dark Angels successor for narrative purposes while playing as an Ultramarines successor for rules purposes. I'd say your army should be played however you want - the rules supplied in the Supplement and Rulebook are open enough that nobody is telling you what to do. For the record, that's called freedom of choice, not "a warp storm of mess"

 

If you walk up to a table for a friendly match and say you're a Dark Angels successor for the narrative, but due to the way your army fights it makes more sense to use Ultramarines supplement and rules, I don't think anybody would reasonably challenge you on that in any way. Unreasonable people may, but you probably shouldn't want a game with them. 

 

As far as competitive tournaments go, I think there's a higher standard placed on visual components that identify an army or units based on the rules. Prior to the new supplement book set up, I honestly don't think there would have been any issue with Ultramarines playing as Iron Hands. Now, I think it is 100% fair for a tournament organizer to say an army clearly painted to look like one particular Chapter from a specific supplement should probably be playing as that Chapter and not anything else.

 

Your army, should it be following that custom scheme you devised, isn't clearly anything so you get to decide tournament to tournament if you so wish. That's true freedom right there. It takes one casualty for this to work - your own narrative. Since tournaments are far and away the complete opposite of a narrative focused experience I don't think that's much of a thing to give up. Just cross your fingers behind your back when people ask you what you are and you say Ultramarines - best loophole. 

 

 

First, thank you for the compliment on the colour scheme. To be honest on the table, what few models actually have it done do look quite good.

 

Second: my annoyance is that people get locked into a full set of rules just because they picked a blue paint pot over red, green or yellow. Some went full strawman on my statement and used silly examples like ork models for tau ones. This topic is purely on the idea that in a tournament setting run by some could have you forced to play a sub-optimal list because "no, yo didn't paint them blue. Go back and buy another grand plus of plastic and paint and do it right this time" which is complete bunk. Basically people here are saying that in this rather expensive hobby, you could be trapped into a crap army because you wanted to have a cool colour scheme? My friend would be screwed with his Tau army then because he painted them Far'Sight Enclave because he loved their lore and colour scheme and picked them for that and that alone, come to rules they are one of the worst factions in Tau to use so when using lists, we do just have them be whatever sept is best for the list being used (Normally Tau Sept and who here likes Tau Sept colours? Power to whoever you are but for me, and especially my friend, they are boring as sin to look at).

 

Sorry, you orks don't have blue paint on them, no deathskulls. Wheres the yellow? No bad moons. WHATS THIS? One vehicle is painted red then you are Evil Suns. I don't care that you can't afford another small fortune of plastic just to play ONE OTHER SUB-FACTION within the army you are playing.

 

If we go back to my friend, taking Far'Sight Enclave is a massive gimping in terms of HQs as because of the HQ choices in Tau, you can only barely get to 3 battalions because of the commander limit per detachment and the only other option being cadres (which when a part of your list is dictated by something not your choice, it really sucks).

 

Paint them how you like. Model them appropriately (correct weapon choices, a heavy bolter is a heavy bolter, not a lascannon. An assault marine is a vanguard veteran, not an aggressor). Play them how you like.

 

Also lemon, no I don't want to use Dark Angels. I am a LOYAL servant of the Emperor thank you very much! ;P

[Iron Father Ferrum]

You see, you say that about being locked in to a specific subfaction's rules purely because of color scheme...and I can't help but shake my head. Maybe it's a grognard thing - I don't know your history with the game - but loyalty to a subfaction was why people played with bad rules. I've played my Iron Hands as Iron Hands since I started them in 3rd/4th Edition. I could have used Codex: Space Wolves in 5th because they were arguably a better representation than the no-rules the Chapter had in 5th...but I didn't. I could have used Codex: Blood Angels too, because better-Razorbacks and deep striking Land Raiders sounds pretty Medusan to me...but I didn't. Despite both of those codices being better than C:SM at the time, I had an Iron Hands army. Not a black Space Wolf army. Not a black Blood Angels army. Because I love my army. I love(d) their lore, I loved the scheme, I took ownership of them as "mine." Nothing about them was disposable because I was loyal to my faction.

 

So when you say, "people get locked into a full set of rules just because they picked a blue paint pot," what I'm hearing is "I want to play the army of the month and color shouldn't matter." Your lens is wrong. It's not a blue army, it's an Ultramarine army. It's not a yellow army, it's an Imperial Fist army. I applaud your friend for picking a scheme he likes with lore he likes but instead of running his Farsight Enclaves as T'au Sept, I'd recommend finding what *works* for Farsight. Find the joy in a hard fight with his favorite faction instead of looking for easier wins by betraying his own likes and dislikes. 8th isn't perfectly balanced and the new run of rules we're getting with C:SM2.0 will take a while to catch up with the rest of the game and level out the playing field. But in the meantime, my personal opinion is that if you have a Space Marine that's painted as Ultramarines...play them as Ultramarines. I can't force you to do so, I may not be able to convince you to do so. But I also don't have to play against you, either.

[chapter master 454]

You see, you say that about being locked in to a specific subfaction's rules purely because of color scheme...and I can't help but shake my head. Maybe it's a grognard thing - I don't know your history with the game - but loyalty to a subfaction was why people played with bad rules. I've played my Iron Hands as Iron Hands since I started them in 3rd/4th Edition. I could have used Codex: Space Wolves in 5th because they were arguably a better representation than the no-rules the Chapter had in 5th...but I didn't. I could have used Codex: Blood Angels too, because better-Razorbacks and deep striking Land Raiders sounds pretty Medusan to me...but I didn't. Despite both of those codices being better than C:SM at the time, I had an Iron Hands army. Not a black Space Wolf army. Not a black Blood Angels army. Because I love my army. I love(d) their lore, I loved the scheme, I took ownership of them as "mine." Nothing about them was disposable because I was loyal to my faction.

 

So when you say, "people get locked into a full set of rules just because they picked a blue paint pot," what I'm hearing is "I want to play the army of the month and color shouldn't matter." Your lens is wrong. It's not a blue army, it's an Ultramarine army. It's not a yellow army, it's an Imperial Fist army. I applaud your friend for picking a scheme he likes with lore he likes but instead of running his Farsight Enclaves as T'au Sept, I'd recommend finding what *works* for Farsight. Find the joy in a hard fight with his favorite faction instead of looking for easier wins by betraying his own likes and dislikes. 8th isn't perfectly balanced and the new run of rules we're getting with C:SM2.0 will take a while to catch up with the rest of the game and level out the playing field. But in the meantime, my personal opinion is that if you have a Space Marine that's painted as Ultramarines...play them as Ultramarines. I can't force you to do so, I may not be able to convince you to do so. But I also don't have to play against you, either.

 

I appreciate the concept you have and I applaud it. It is something I couldn't do and admit it fully because I am someone who enjoys using the full length and breadth of a codex and multiple of them. To me, I don't see C:SM + 1 supplement. I see them all. As I said, I am a list builder person and I enjoy building lists over and over again. It was something I also enjoyed in card games, I enjoyed building decks.

 

Also...finding what works for Far'Sight Enclave? Trust me brother, we tried. It doesn't work. The trait wouldn't be bad if it weren't for the fact it just doesn't mesh well with tau. He would LOVE to play Far'Sight enclave as they are described in lore, close the enemy and doing damage but the lack of any melee option and crisis suits being straight garbage right now (cost way too much) just means it isn't viable nor effective.

 

I suppose I should add something quick: I tend to play in a fairly competitive area where many of the players are tournament players and regularly will want to test those lists for upcoming events. So it is possible my mindset is different to yours because of our play groups.

Again, I respect your point and it is valid but I couldn't do it. I want to play with ALL the toys!

[Panzer]

You see, you say that about being locked in to a specific subfaction's rules purely because of color scheme...and I can't help but shake my head. Maybe it's a grognard thing - I don't know your history with the game - but loyalty to a subfaction was why people played with bad rules. I've played my Iron Hands as Iron Hands since I started them in 3rd/4th Edition. I could have used Codex: Space Wolves in 5th because they were arguably a better representation than the no-rules the Chapter had in 5th...but I didn't. I could have used Codex: Blood Angels too, because better-Razorbacks and deep striking Land Raiders sounds pretty Medusan to me...but I didn't. Despite both of those codices being better than C:SM at the time, I had an Iron Hands army. Not a black Space Wolf army. Not a black Blood Angels army. Because I love my army. I love(d) their lore, I loved the scheme, I took ownership of them as "mine." Nothing about them was disposable because I was loyal to my faction.

 

So when you say, "people get locked into a full set of rules just because they picked a blue paint pot," what I'm hearing is "I want to play the army of the month and color shouldn't matter." Your lens is wrong. It's not a blue army, it's an Ultramarine army. It's not a yellow army, it's an Imperial Fist army. I applaud your friend for picking a scheme he likes with lore he likes but instead of running his Farsight Enclaves as T'au Sept, I'd recommend finding what *works* for Farsight. Find the joy in a hard fight with his favorite faction instead of looking for easier wins by betraying his own likes and dislikes. 8th isn't perfectly balanced and the new run of rules we're getting with C:SM2.0 will take a while to catch up with the rest of the game and level out the playing field. But in the meantime, my personal opinion is that if you have a Space Marine that's painted as Ultramarines...play them as Ultramarines. I can't force you to do so, I may not be able to convince you to do so. But I also don't have to play against you, either.

 

So much this.

 

With one exception. Just the colour doesn't make a chapter. It also takes the chapter heraldry, symbol included. As soon as you apply the right chapter emblem together with the right colour you are locked. If you use any other chapter emblem you are free to pick whatever you want. If you don't apply any chapter emblem your models are strictly speaking unfinished and to avoid confusion should use rules that people would associate with just the colour.

[RandomMarine]

So my IH army has a black and red scheme that is a canon 30k variant colour scheme from the 30k BBB but because its fairly obscure do have i to prove its a valid scheme now if want to use all My chapters rules?

 

If TO's and the community is being that pedantic something has gone very wrong. Marines are marines as long as its wysiwyg and your clear one the rules your using you could have neon pink Raven guard.

[Cap'm Heckus]

This is why my power armor is Brown and Black. No one tells me what my rules my Badgers can/can’t use. They started as Ultra-badgers ( back in 5th before CT were a thing), and then went Blood Badgers, Imperial Badgers, and Iron Badgers before settling on “Badger Scars”. We’re versatile... or have major identity issues.

 

I did this because it never felt right using my Black Templar’s as anything else. I’d rather field unpainted minis than say my Templar’s are Ultras or Dark Angel (yuck).

[BluejayJunior]

You see, you say that about being locked in to a specific subfaction's rules purely because of color scheme...and I can't help but shake my head. Maybe it's a grognard thing - I don't know your history with the game - but loyalty to a subfaction was why people played with bad rules. I've played my Iron Hands as Iron Hands since I started them in 3rd/4th Edition. I could have used Codex: Space Wolves in 5th because they were arguably a better representation than the no-rules the Chapter had in 5th...but I didn't. I could have used Codex: Blood Angels too, because better-Razorbacks and deep striking Land Raiders sounds pretty Medusan to me...but I didn't. Despite both of those codices being better than C:SM at the time, I had an Iron Hands army. Not a black Space Wolf army. Not a black Blood Angels army. Because I love my army. I love(d) their lore, I loved the scheme, I took ownership of them as "mine." Nothing about them was disposable because I was loyal to my faction.

 

So when you say, "people get locked into a full set of rules just because they picked a blue paint pot," what I'm hearing is "I want to play the army of the month and color shouldn't matter." Your lens is wrong. It's not a blue army, it's an Ultramarine army. It's not a yellow army, it's an Imperial Fist army. I applaud your friend for picking a scheme he likes with lore he likes but instead of running his Farsight Enclaves as T'au Sept, I'd recommend finding what *works* for Farsight. Find the joy in a hard fight with his favorite faction instead of looking for easier wins by betraying his own likes and dislikes. 8th isn't perfectly balanced and the new run of rules we're getting with C:SM2.0 will take a while to catch up with the rest of the game and level out the playing field. But in the meantime, my personal opinion is that if you have a Space Marine that's painted as Ultramarines...play them as Ultramarines. I can't force you to do so, I may not be able to convince you to do so. But I also don't have to play against you, either.

That's fine. That is the way that you enjoy the hobby and there is nothing wrong with that. I will be sticking with my Blood Angels instead of running them as something else that could be more powerful from the new codex. But not everyone enjoys the hobby the same way. No way is more correct or virtuous. 

[Vermintide]

It all comes down to special characters.

There's nothing stopping you playing your Ultramarines, complete with blue and gold colours and UM markings, as whatever chapter you want. There's no rule anywhere that says you have to paint your models to match the rules you are using.

HOWEVER.

There are keywords that certain characters have, and those keywords lock you into that faction, for the purposes of other rules. Arguably this is made necessary because of "balance"- Feirros is designed to be used with IH, and would horribly tip the scales if you could use him with UM, for example. (Of course, whether or not you think that "balance" stands up is an entirely separate discussion, so it can seem arbitrary, but that's why it's there in technical terms.)

So, in summary, this is why you shouldn't use special characters, and then you can do whatever you want. There was a time you could only use them in 2,000+ point games, with your opponent's consent, and many of them were canonically already dead. So you already know on some level you're being that guy for bringing them in the first place.

Even then, back in the old days my buddies had no problem with me saying "This is Flarneus Balgar, he's the Black Templar version of Marneus Calgar." I'm even fairly certain I took Flarneus to a tournament at WHW and nobody said anything.... Although in fairness I must have only been like, 12

Secondly, I think it's worth remembering one thing- People start armies, and often pick their paint schemes, without knowing anything about the fluff or rules. People just choose what looks cool. I admire the dedication to your army mindset, but it's also unfair to expect newer players to know exactly what they are getting in for, or to expect them to spend more money on duplicate models, or entirely repaint their army, if it turns out they don't enjoy playing what they picked. That person might simply misunderstand what's going wrong, and drop out of the hobby.

Sure, over the course of painting an army, you'll usually develop that sense of attachment- But just because something applies to people like us, doesn't mean it's the case for everyone. We have to acknowledge that, for some people, having garbage rules simply isn't fun. Sure I like playing my Blood Angels despite the fact they're one of the weakest mono-faction armies right now. But I play in an intensely casual setting in the first place. Likewise, if you only play with other fluff-bunny grognards, you're going to enjoy your army despite the weak rules, more so than somebody who only gets games at a local store with tournament try-hards who don't even care about fluff.

TL;DR Special characters bad. Colour scheme flexibility good.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

@ Chapter Master ###

 

It has always been quite obvious you are more of a competitive player than a SM enthusiast and that if fine for you but that is where it ends. Paint em grey and just call em Aggro Marines. :D

[chapter master 454]

@ Chapter Master ###

 

It has always been quite obvious you are more of a competitive player than a SM enthusiast and that if fine for you but that is where it ends. Paint em grey and just call em Aggro Marines. :D

I am competitive but I won't take the implication of not being an sm enthusiast. By all accounts I would think myself as enthused as any chapter loyal player, especially when I get to read lore points like the raven guard destroying an iron hands relic so they play ball with imperial fists!

[Lord_Caerolion]

I'd say the Farsight Enclaves player would just be able to just play as another Sept, as the Tau are the one race that does commonly use different schemes for their faction, only keeping the sept colour the same. Their base red colour doesn't really matter, just say that they're another Sept battling in a planet that that colouration fits.