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

[SkimaskMohawk]

Rules wise, there wasn't and still isn't anything that dictates that scheme=keyword. Just certain keywords have slightly more restriction in terms of rules; an Ultramarines keyworded army always had to use the ultramarines rules and a Raptors keyworded army has to use the Raven Guard descendants rules now.

 

I don't think you understand what hyperbole is though...

Edited October 10, 2019 by SkimaskMohawk

[Bryan Blaire]

Where I play the armies must be painted correctly so if you don’t like it then you can concede or go elsewhere.

Would happily go elsewhere and never play with anyone with that attitude - I hope that you and all of your opponents can paint as 'Eavy Metal, otherwise none of their models or your's are painted correctly - after all, that's how GW shows the schemes on models in the Codexes.

 

And yes, that even applies if you are playing at Warhammer World.

[Marshal van Trapp]

Honestly this topic has devolved beyond repair and needs an Inq to come purge it. GW haven't made a rule requiring anything regardinga scheme playing a specific rule outside of anything except GW sanctioned GTs, which the rules of the TOURNAMENT state you must use the rules of your color scheme. But no where in any of the codexes nor the core rulebook is it EXPLICITLY stated that you have to play the rules of your color scheme and anyone arguing against it can kindly go play elsewhere and not in my FLGS

[Panzer]

That's why we are talking about our personal preferences instead of having this discussion in the OFFICIAL RULES subforum. 

[Son of Sacrifice]

My issue is, your army is blue. You could play it as ultramarines, but you're choosing to use another faction because you think it gives you a one up over me. That's kind of the dirty truth behind all the posturing. "I want to play as iron hands because I'll have a better chance of beating you."

 

I'm more than happy to play against iron hands. A friend of mine built his over the last five years, sourcing bionic parts and making conversions to all of his units. He put the effort in, so I'm happy he finally got some tasty rules.

[Lemondish]

My issue is, your army is blue. You could play it as ultramarines, but you're choosing to use another faction because you think it gives you a one up over me. That's kind of the dirty truth behind all the posturing. "I want to play as iron hands because I'll have a better chance of beating you."

 

I'm more than happy to play against iron hands. A friend of mine built his over the last five years, sourcing bionic parts and making conversions to all of his units. He put the effort in, so I'm happy he finally got some tasty rules.

I think you're making a poor assumption here, and because you've already decided the other player's intent, they are already condemned.

 

They could simply like the increased durability and tougher vehicles for their preferred playstyle and image of how marines fight. What's wrong with that?

 

Personally, I have no problem with sub factions being subbed in outside of a tournament.

Edited October 10, 2019 by Lemondish

[Son of Sacrifice]

Well I guess this thread is going to be locked up soon, and we'll all have to agree to disagree.

[Marshal Rohr]

Blue, Gold, with Ultima on the Shoulder = Specific Faction

Blue, Gold, with homemade symbol on the shoulder = not a Specific Faction

 

If your army is the top one, it Ultramarines and should use the rules for Ultramarines. If your army is the second one, you can choose your rules.

[Lemondish]

You know, I really respect everyone's perspective here. There are some interesting takes that kind of highlight the breadth of what brings people into this hobby. It has made me kind of rethink a lot of things about this topic. 

 

There are a few things I wanted to highlight, though. I see a little bit of demonizing power gaming tendencies. I'm not sure that's fair. After all, someone coming up to a table with a bunch of Ultramarines to be played as Iron Hands clearly doesn't care about Ultramarines, Iron Hands, or anything in between. And that's totally okay. They're making a decision to play what they feel are better rules for them. I respect that choice because they're being true to what they want from the game and the hobby. That is totally a valid position to hold. To them, crunch is king. 

 

The thing is - in most cases, that power gamer will likely have a much better time playing against someone with similar interests. They're unlikely to care or enjoy the narrative aspect. Crafting a story about how these two armies came to meet on the battlefield, what brought them there, or what they're fighting over would not be their main goal. 

 

It's important to recognize that there are different style of players (as we see from this very thread) with different interests. It's not inherently bad to hold those different interests just like that style isn't inherently bad. 

 

Let's have a bit of an experiment. How many of you name your models, with perhaps a backstory and history, either fictional or informed by their performance on the tabletop? Would it surprise you to learn some people do that? Would it surprise others to learn that to some, the models they place on the table aren't proxying a person but instead a faceless resource? 

 

I think the only unfair component to this whole concept is the idea that we must accept a standard way to play the game. Narrative players bothered by this power gaming move are not in the wrong. Power gamers annoyed by narrative focused gamers seemingly blocking their main interest for the sake of maintaining a consistent narrative are also not wrong for feeling that way. 

 

The only wrong thing is expecting that these two styles should give something up based on the rules. Power gamers care about crunch above fluff, while narrative gamers often care about fluff serving crunch. They can still very much enjoy a game together, but they'd probably get more out of it by playing with others that have the same style and focus. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Lemondish

[Vermintide]

My issue is, your army is blue. You could play it as ultramarines, but you're choosing to use another faction because you think it gives you a one up over me. That's kind of the dirty truth behind all the posturing. "I want to play as iron hands because I'll have a better chance of beating you."

 

I'm more than happy to play against iron hands. A friend of mine built his over the last five years, sourcing bionic parts and making conversions to all of his units. He put the effort in, so I'm happy he finally got some tasty rules.

That's one way of looking at it maybe. If using the new hotness puts them at a clear advantage and that's the only reason they want to do it, they're not the sort of person you want to play against.

 

The other way of looking at it is that if playing with their "official" rules puts them at a clear disadvantage, that becomes YOU looking for a one up by refusing to let them use something stronger.

 

This cuts both ways and comes down to good sportsmanship. There is sometimes an attitude ttending towards elitism, and that is, in my opinion, bad for the community.

[Marshal Rohr]

If you’re just trying to beat each other with the best rules available at the time to a specific army why not just use the Iron Hands boosts and Ultramarines boosts on the units they benefit? If color scheme isn’t important for a no holds barred brawl game, faction restrictions based on the narrative shouldn’t either. It’s a half measure to say, I’m going to play my Ultramarines as Iron Hands because the rules are better at this point in time and not just use the best benefits for each subfaction of space marines on the applicable units. Iron Hands have powerful rules because of narrative gaming. If the goal is to not let the narrative reduce the ability of your army on the table and you want to play marines, it doesn’t make sense to stop halfway. Edited October 10, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[BluejayJunior]

If you’re just trying to beat each other with the best rules available at the time to a specific army why not just use the Iron Hands boosts and Ultramarines boosts on the units they benefit? If color scheme isn’t important for a no holds barred brawl game, faction restrictions based on the narrative shouldn’t either. It’s a half measure to say, I’m going to play my Ultramarines as Iron Hands because the rules are better at this point in time and not just use the best benefits for each subfaction of space marines on the applicable units. Iron Hands have powerful rules because of narrative gaming. If the goal is to not let the narrative reduce the ability of your army on the table and you want to play marines, it doesn’t make sense to stop halfway.

Because Faction restrictions are a set rule of the game. The rules clearly state that Chapter Tacitcs and the uber combat doctrines don't work if you are mixing different factions. Nothing in the rules says what colors your army must be painted to be a certain Keyword. It's a specious argument to say that since the color doesn't matter so why don't we just mix whatever the best rules are together. 

[Marshal Rohr]

 

If you’re just trying to beat each other with the best rules available at the time to a specific army why not just use the Iron Hands boosts and Ultramarines boosts on the units they benefit? If color scheme isn’t important for a no holds barred brawl game, faction restrictions based on the narrative shouldn’t either. It’s a half measure to say, I’m going to play my Ultramarines as Iron Hands because the rules are better at this point in time and not just use the best benefits for each subfaction of space marines on the applicable units. Iron Hands have powerful rules because of narrative gaming. If the goal is to not let the narrative reduce the ability of your army on the table and you want to play marines, it doesn’t make sense to stop halfway.

Because Faction restrictions are a set rule of the game. The rules clearly state that Chapter Tacitcs and the uber combat doctrines don't work if you are mixing different factions. Nothing in the rules says what colors your army must be painted to be a certain Keyword. It's a specious argument to say that since the color doesn't matter so why don't we just mix whatever the best rules are together. 

 

 

That isn't true. Chapter Tactics are not give/take. To take Raven Guard tactics, you don't lose the ability to take certain units. That means that under the umbrella of non-Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Wolves you can add Raven Guard CTs to Ultra CTs and there is no drawback. If someone is just trying to beat face, and the subfaction within the faction isnt relevent to beating face as evidenced by Ultramarines using Iron Hands rules, there no reason not to amalgamate and use every available rule boost within the Space Marine faction to play your game. If the color doesn't matter, subfaction doesn't matter. 

[Son of Sacrifice]

 

My issue is, your army is blue. You could play it as ultramarines, but you're choosing to use another faction because you think it gives you a one up over me. That's kind of the dirty truth behind all the posturing. "I want to play as iron hands because I'll have a better chance of beating you."

 

I'm more than happy to play against iron hands. A friend of mine built his over the last five years, sourcing bionic parts and making conversions to all of his units. He put the effort in, so I'm happy he finally got some tasty rules.

That's one way of looking at it maybe. If using the new hotness puts them at a clear advantage and that's the only reason they want to do it, they're not the sort of person you want to play against.

 

The other way of looking at it is that if playing with their "official" rules puts them at a clear disadvantage, that becomes YOU looking for a one up by refusing to let them use something stronger.

 

This cuts both ways and comes down to good sportsmanship. There is sometimes an attitude ttending towards elitism, and that is, in my opinion, bad for the community.

Your point is absolutely valid. We have local players who have homebrew chapters who have written lore and origin for their chapters, with room for flexibility. All good.

 

But we also have local players who have unaffiliated space marine armies, so that they can jump to the most powerful chapter tactic at any time. One week they play deathwatch, the next its Ultras so they can run Guilliman, and now it's Iron Hands. I find it disrespectful to the game, and to myself. That's just my opinion. I have a good relationship with most of those guys, and sometimes they'll get a game out of me. But usually they are the ones that struggle to find opponents.

 

I suspect if we did a poll of the board members, considering that this is the Bolter and Chainsword, most members would rule out ever running their intended chapter as another.

 

The rules allow it, all good. It's not hobby elitism, it's the opinion of a large number (if not most) of us. Or I can go and buy Guilliman and spray him yellow, pretend he's Dorn. Let me hobby my way Gosh darn it.

[Panzer]

 

 

If you’re just trying to beat each other with the best rules available at the time to a specific army why not just use the Iron Hands boosts and Ultramarines boosts on the units they benefit? If color scheme isn’t important for a no holds barred brawl game, faction restrictions based on the narrative shouldn’t either. It’s a half measure to say, I’m going to play my Ultramarines as Iron Hands because the rules are better at this point in time and not just use the best benefits for each subfaction of space marines on the applicable units. Iron Hands have powerful rules because of narrative gaming. If the goal is to not let the narrative reduce the ability of your army on the table and you want to play marines, it doesn’t make sense to stop halfway.

Because Faction restrictions are a set rule of the game. The rules clearly state that Chapter Tacitcs and the uber combat doctrines don't work if you are mixing different factions. Nothing in the rules says what colors your army must be painted to be a certain Keyword. It's a specious argument to say that since the color doesn't matter so why don't we just mix whatever the best rules are together. 

 

 

That isn't true. Chapter Tactics are not give/take. To take Raven Guard tactics, you don't lose the ability to take certain units. That means that under the umbrella of non-Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Wolves you can add Raven Guard CTs to Ultra CTs and there is no drawback. If someone is just trying to beat face, and the subfaction within the faction isnt relevent to beating face as evidenced by Ultramarines using Iron Hands rules, there no reason not to amalgamate and use every available rule boost within the Space Marine faction to play your game. If the color doesn't matter, subfaction doesn't matter. 

 

 

That's just plain wrong. Subfactions and their rules are bound to keywords and follow strict rules.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

 

If you’re just trying to beat each other with the best rules available at the time to a specific army why not just use the Iron Hands boosts and Ultramarines boosts on the units they benefit? If color scheme isn’t important for a no holds barred brawl game, faction restrictions based on the narrative shouldn’t either. It’s a half measure to say, I’m going to play my Ultramarines as Iron Hands because the rules are better at this point in time and not just use the best benefits for each subfaction of space marines on the applicable units. Iron Hands have powerful rules because of narrative gaming. If the goal is to not let the narrative reduce the ability of your army on the table and you want to play marines, it doesn’t make sense to stop halfway.

Because Faction restrictions are a set rule of the game. The rules clearly state that Chapter Tacitcs and the uber combat doctrines don't work if you are mixing different factions. Nothing in the rules says what colors your army must be painted to be a certain Keyword. It's a specious argument to say that since the color doesn't matter so why don't we just mix whatever the best rules are together. 

 

 

That isn't true. Chapter Tactics are not give/take. To take Raven Guard tactics, you don't lose the ability to take certain units. That means that under the umbrella of non-Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Wolves you can add Raven Guard CTs to Ultra CTs and there is no drawback. If someone is just trying to beat face, and the subfaction within the faction isnt relevent to beating face as evidenced by Ultramarines using Iron Hands rules, there no reason not to amalgamate and use every available rule boost within the Space Marine faction to play your game. If the color doesn't matter, subfaction doesn't matter. 

 

 

That's just plain wrong. Subfactions and their rules are bound to keywords and follow strict rules.

 

 

Subfactions are defined by their color scheme as much as their keyword. If one is fungible, the other is fungible. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[Son of Sacrifice]

I'd also point out this is kind of a unique thing to Space Marines, and Chaos Marines. Tau Sept or Forge World, who cares? It's not the same thing.

 

Would an Iron Warriors player run as Alpha Legion? I can't ever imagine that happening.

[BluejayJunior]

But you're implying that color = keyword, when there is no such rule in the game. You may not agree with what those people are doing, but they are not bending any rules in the rulebook by what their doing. They are just playing in a way that does not match the lore of that army. 

[Marshal Rohr]

 

But you're implying that color = keyword, when there is no such rule in the game. You may not agree with what those people are doing, but they are not bending any rules in the rulebook by what their doing. They are just playing in a way that does not match the lore of that army. 

 

Thus there is no reason not to use all of the available rules to Codex Space Marines and its sub-factions. 

[BluejayJunior]

 

 

But you're implying that color = keyword, when there is no such rule in the game. You may not agree with what those people are doing, but they are not bending any rules in the rulebook by what their doing. They are just playing in a way that does not match the lore of that army. 

 

Thus there is no reason not to use all of the available rules to Codex Space Marines and its sub-factions. 

 

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying.

The Keywords, Chapter Tactics, Combat Doctrines, and detachments all limit what rules you can use. This is coming directly from the codex and supplements. You can certainly take multiple chapters in a detachment, but they lose the Chapter Tactics. You can have a detachment of Ultramarines and a detachment of White Scars, but would lose out on the super Doctrines for each of them. These are all things that are baked into the rules. No one is suggesting that we break any of these rules to just use whatever is best from the codex without any penalties. 

On the other side, there isn't a rule that dictates what color your army has to be painted to benefit from a particular Chapter Tactic or that says that all Iron Hands have to be painted this exact way and any deviations mean it can't be Iron Hands.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

 

But you're implying that color = keyword, when there is no such rule in the game. You may not agree with what those people are doing, but they are not bending any rules in the rulebook by what their doing. They are just playing in a way that does not match the lore of that army. 

 

Thus there is no reason not to use all of the available rules to Codex Space Marines and its sub-factions. 

 

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying.

The Keywords, Chapter Tactics, Combat Doctrines, and detachments all limit what rules you can use. This is coming directly from the codex and supplements. You can certainly take multiple chapters in a detachment, but they lose the Chapter Tactics. You can have a detachment of Ultramarines and a detachment of White Scars, but would lose out on the super Doctrines for each of them. These are all things that are baked into the rules. No one is suggesting that we break any of these rules to just use whatever is best from the codex without any penalties. 

On the other side, there isn't a rule that dictates what color your army has to be painted to benefit from a particular Chapter Tactic or that says that all Iron Hands have to be painted this exact way and any deviations mean it can't be Iron Hands.

 

 

"There isnt a rule" besides the fact that all Ultramarines/Iron Hands/Raven Guard adhere to specific heraldry and sub-heraldry, represented on a model as clearly defining as ork muscles or tau combat armor. 

[Panzer]

I'd also point out this is kind of a unique thing to Space Marines, and Chaos Marines. Tau Sept or Forge World, who cares? It's not the same thing.

 

Would an Iron Warriors player run as Alpha Legion? I can't ever imagine that happening.

 

People who know care. I for one care about Hivefleets, Forge Worlds and T'au Septs just as much.

[BluejayJunior]

Yes, in the lore that is correct. But the rulebook doesn't say that your Ultramarines have to be painted as this exact color scheme in order to be Ultramarines.

If I don't have the tactical arrows on all my troops, does that mean they aren't Ultramarines because I haven't painted them exactly as they are in the lore?

[taikishi]

I'm curious about something.

 

Where does it say that if OP takes Lias Issodon he must use Inheritors of the Primarch as his successor tactic? I can't seem to find that anywhere. My understanding is that the only restriction is that taking IotP requires you to take CT: Raven Guard and that's it, but otherwise taking the Raptors keyword unlocks access to Issodon.

 

Am I wrong? Have I missed something?

[Iron Father Ferrum]

And this circles back to the fluff vs crunch topic. You're right, there's no crunch that says "To have the IMPERIAL FISTS keyword, you must paint your models yellow." But go Google "Imperial Fist Space Marines" and every canonical image will show them in predominantly yellow armor...because the fluff says so.

 

There's a reason I fall back to the lore in discussions like this all the time: because that is what makes the game. There are other scifi games out there I could be playing that have better models or a more balanced ruleset. Infinity is ten times better than 40K for competitive play, with a much tighter ruleset and flatter balance across factions. BattleTech has everything 40K has except psykers and daemons: big stompy robots, huge tanks with more guns than you can shake a stick at, and genetically enhanced super soldiers in powered armor. So why do I keep playing 40K?

 

The lore. The grimdark. The endless warfare, the soul-crushing monotony of hive life, the laughter of thirsting gods. BattleTech has sorta-Space Marines, but they're just soldiers. They are not warrior-monks who lop off weak flesh for bionics and worship a binary God who is part man and part machine; they do not risk soul-shredding damnation every time they travel from world to world; their minds are not clouded by rage and despair at the death of their founding father to the point that they deliberately suppress all emotion. I get that from 40K, I get that from my Iron Hands.

 

I know not everyone feels the same. I've been in the hobby long enough to have even vacillated between the two extremes a little. I understand that what bothers me doesn't bother everyone, and I have no authority to demand my way or the highway...but again, this is a cooperative hobby. I don't have to play you and probably won't.