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

[chapter master 454]

I would agree with who said it earlier, this is a dispute between competitive, narrative and inbetween players.

I see myself as someone who can enjoy all aspects of the hobby, doing something that seems to be abhorrent to others: I will flip around and play the game in different ways depending on how I feel along with what faction. I do tend towards being about pushing lists to their limits, finding how to make them better but I rarely make use of the top tier stuff, instead using those as a target for my lists to beat (now how to give assault centurions fly...) and thus I will make use of and build my lists according to what works best on the table.

 

The simple fact is down in my signature: The point of the game is to have fun. The objective is to win. Don't confuse the two. For me, I don't enjoy lists that just run around and just flail hands at each other because they are gimped for narrative reasons, I don't like running many singleton units because it makes them far to vulnerable to getting myself handicapped in weaponry and THAT to me feels disrespectful to the game. I want to see each codex do the best it can, showing how potent it can be in its own way in as many ways as possible. That is one of my expressions for the love of this game.

 

However I do also enjoy lore. My own home brew chapter shows this, I still need to fix he formatting there but I am really proud of it (though again, you Dark Angel boys may not like it! Heh) and if you go over to find my Hall of Honour for my Imperial Knights, you will find them in proud House Taranis Colours and have never been fielded as anything other than Taranis (because I believe "Our Darkest Hour" is better than "Order of Companions"...its cooler too!) along with the fact 2 of them are actual lore based in their schemes (Archimaxes and Soberan...though some of the Icons on Archimaxes is wrong and it irks me...Why does the castellan kit have imperial markings and not mechanicus?).

 

I suppose some people like to play "pure" and some like to play "dirty" and for me, I play inbetween. I enjoy and respect the lore but let me tell you, don't let that make you play an army that makes your miserable. If you can enjoy playing against the odds, I applaud you and you win in your own way. You can only lose if you begin trying to force your style of play on others because at that point, the only person truly not enjoying the game anymore is you.

[Marshal Rohr]

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.

 

I agree with all of this, but its not the person saying Iron Hands need to look like Iron Hands that's engaging in gatekeeping, its the person saying Ultramarines are going to play as Iron Hands that is requesting accommodation. When a player does something 'different' from the baseline, the onus is on them to convince, not the other way around, no matter the community spirit. 

 

 

For the record, I do this all the time. It's on me to convince my friends to play against my deviations. Its not on them to just accept the deviations out of hand. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[SkimaskMohawk]

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?

You're not wrong, just that if he wants to use both Issodon and the raven guard tactic you're forced to use inheritors. Otherwise you can use any successor combination.

[BluejayJunior]

 

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.

 

I agree with all of this, but its not the person saying Iron Hands need to look like Iron Hands that's engaging in gatekeeping, its the person saying Ultramarines are going to play as Iron Hands that is requesting accommodation.  

 

I will somewhat disagree about gatekeeping. If anyone is saying, "you can't play unless", they are the ones that are gatekeeping. But at the end of the day, if one person thinks that if things are painted as Ultramarines, they have to use those rules and another person wants to use their Ultramarines as any other chapter (whether it's competitive or just because they like the other rules), those two people are not likely to have fun playing together. There's nothing wrong with saying, "Hey, I think we want different things from this game and won't have fun together, let's not play each other". It's only a problem if someone is saying, "You have to play this way or it's wrong". 

One thing to remember in this discussion, is to make sure you and your opponent are going into a game with the same expectations. Someone is always going to have a bad time if they are expecting something different from the game. 

And even if people do view the game differently, it doesn't mean that they can't have a fun game together. Even if we're on different sides of this conversation, I bet we could still have a fun game together. And since we're both in Georgia, we may get that chance at some point. 

Honestly, I think we play the game in similar way. I play my Blood Angels successor as Blood Angels and will continue to do so even if they could be more powerful using the new codex. We just disagree on whether paint scheme should be enforced. 

[Marshal Rohr]

I'm saying they're not engaging in gatekeeping to expect an Iron Hands army to be Iron Hands. If they refuse the request to let the Ultramarines army to play as Iron Hands, then they've engaged in a form of (arguably understandable) gatekeeping, but the expectation that Imperial Fists or whatever be Imperial Fists isn't something I'd consider to be grognardly. If someone is fond of using different rulesets and rotating them around depending on their mood, and they've painted their army in a DIY scheme, I'd be disinclined to support anyone telling them they can't do that, simply because the player has built in the option to change their rules by choosing a personalized scheme. If it was a campaign or escalation league, I'd expect them to keep the same chapter tactics through the league/campaign, but I don't think that is all that out there or unreasonable. If it comes down to it, and its a competitive pick up game, there's no point to enforce a color scheme as long as all they are asking is to just use different CTs, it's a one off. It would honestly come down to my personal relationship with the other person.

[Lemondish]

Oh, does the word "gatekeeping" ever sound ominous!

 

Bluejay mentioned it above - there's a social contract in place every time to walk up to a table for a game. Best way to avoid breaching that contract is to ensure everyone is on the same page.

[Vermintide]

Inquisitors log.../// M.39.234

Thought for the day: Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise

----

 

Begin transmission.

 

Today I fought alongside a deachment of Blood Angels of the 5th company. There was a call to action in the [REDACTED] sector after vox-comms were intercepted from [REDACTED]. We deployed post haste- My work could wait, for the valiant sons of Sanguinius were few in number and required aid.

We deployed in dropzones across the battlegrid 2345.2342 on the hostile ice moon of [REDACTED]. Enemy presence was not at first obvious- We sighted through holo-scopes what appeared to be battle brothers of the 4th company Imperial Fists. But at once their barrage landed upon us, and we knew there were not loyal inheritors of Dorn's creed. There was a deep and treacherous heresy afoot.

The battle was long, and claimed many lives. The usurpers fought with strategies and tactics recognisable as the inheritance of a different founding legion entirely. What daemonic possession had seized these once noble Astartes? I will remain in the system to investigate further. Previous duties temporarily suspended.

The emperor protects.

---Transmission terminates---
 

 

See, you can still make it fluffy, and the best part is, your tryhard WAAC meta-chasing opponent wouldn't even know. You could trick them into playing a narrative game the entire time and they would be none the wiser!

[Marshal van Trapp]

I honestly think this is a case of RAW vs RAI but instead of rules as intended its Lore as intended (LIA?) within the rules of the game, nothing says you cant paint your ultramarines red or your blood angels blue, but the lore is strictly against it.

 

All of this said, I have a friend would like the look and lore of the Ultramarines, and paints literally ALL of his armies in the same blue and gold (even his guard, chaos and knights!) But he doesnt necessarily like the rules of the ultramarines so he uses them as whatever he wants to run them as (he isnt a competitive player but he likes to win with what he has) He has stated multiple times that he is NOT going to repaint his models or buy a whole second army just to try out IH rules or WS rules, he just used the old "counts as" rules because before 2.0 there were no restrictions on what color a specific army was, and guess what? There still isnt. If he wants to run his ultras as IH and has Ferrios painted in Ultra colors, guess what, I'm going to let him, because there are no rules saying that he cant! If that's not your cup of tea then dont play people like him, but it's not WAAC to play Blue Hands, or Blue Scars. It may be against the lore but at its heart 40k is a GAME that just so happens to have a lot of lore surrounding it!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Switching to Iron Hands is power gaming.

[Marshal van Trapp]

Switching to Iron Hands is power gaming.

Is stripping and repainting an entire army also power gaming? Is liking a specific armys playstyle over your own power gaming? Is buying the next hot army power gaming? I suppose if I bought a whole tau army with triptide I'd be power gaming too right?

[Iron Father Ferrum]

 

Switching to Iron Hands is power gaming.

Is stripping and repainting an entire army also power gaming? Is liking a specific armys playstyle over your own power gaming? Is buying the next hot army power gaming? I suppose if I bought a whole tau army with triptide I'd be power gaming too right?

No, no, yes, depends on why you bought triptides.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Depends, are you just using Iron Hands/Successors, and playing them for fun, or are you taking triple Leviathans centering around an Ironstone Techmarine/Librarian? Basically, unless you're being That Guy, moving armies isn't particularly a big deal. If you're moving, and changing purely to the main net-list because that's what the WAAC crowd are saying is the Next Big Thing, then yeah, you're being That Guy, and a powergamer.

If you just think the Iron Hands rules are cool, and want to have an awesome technomancer blow up a tank and throw the shrapnel at other guys, then all power to you.

[MegaVolt87]

Depends, are you just using Iron Hands/Successors, and playing them for fun, or are you taking triple Leviathans centering around an Ironstone Techmarine/Librarian? Basically, unless you're being That Guy, moving armies isn't particularly a big deal. If you're moving, and changing purely to the main net-list because that's what the WAAC crowd are saying is the Next Big Thing, then yeah, you're being That Guy, and a powergamer.

If you just think the Iron Hands rules are cool, and want to have an awesome technomancer blow up a tank and throw the shrapnel at other guys, then all power to you.

 

I could care less if someone band wagons/ WAAC using a DIY force, they can be anything and be everything. DIY is someones unique work, vision and imagination. Blue UM using IH rules or IH using the new IF rules, if the rumours are true on them being OP as well. That is the problem because GW official sub factions, they anchor the setting and are the foundations of the lore and IP. There is a respectful way to power game and that is using a DIY force to do it. At least give the official game setting that respect. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

IF is rumored not to be nearly as OP as IH. Anyone wanting to do a DIY army now for funsies might wanna avoid going the Iron Hands route.

 

Marshall von Tripster - bear meet woods. :D

[Marshal van Trapp]

 

 

Depends, are you just using Iron Hands/Successors, and playing them for fun, or are you taking triple Leviathans centering around an Ironstone Techmarine/Librarian? Basically, unless you're being That Guy, moving armies isn't particularly a big deal. If you're moving, and changing purely to the main net-list because that's what the WAAC crowd are saying is the Next Big Thing, then yeah, you're being That Guy, and a powergamer.

If you just think the Iron Hands rules are cool, and want to have an awesome technomancer blow up a tank and throw the shrapnel at other guys, then all power to you.

I could care less if someone band wagons/ WAAC using a DIY force, they can be anything and be everything. DIY is someones unique work, vision and imagination. Blue UM using IH rules or IH using the new IF rules, if the rumours are true on them being OP as well. That is the problem because GW official sub factions, they anchor the setting and are the foundations of the lore and IP. There is a respectful way to power game and that is using a DIY force to do it. At least give the official game setting that respect.

I think the issue is that if you do DiY under these people's ruling then no calgar, no ferrius, no special characters at all, and at that point why play them as a diy inheritor?

 

@blowfly - I dont understand what you're referencing, I am familiar with the phrase (does a bear :cuss in the woods) but I do not see how it applies with anything I've said?

 

Also while I agreed with letting people play their models how they like its not like I personally am going to paint up ultra and use them as IH (although I wanna run a CFists list but I hate their scheme so I'm open to suggestions) I just think if someone wants to play a specific way and there is not WRITTEN RULES saying that they cant, I personally am going to let them, because life is too short to argue over why an army painted one color has rules for a different army. I've said it once and I'll say it again, this is not the hill worth dying on!

[Iron Father Ferrum]

WYSIWYG is gone which means there's no longer a written rule preventing you from claiming that Fire Warriors are Ork Boyz.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Just paint army pink they can represent anything.

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

Depends, are you just using Iron Hands/Successors, and playing them for fun, or are you taking triple Leviathans centering around an Ironstone Techmarine/Librarian? Basically, unless you're being That Guy, moving armies isn't particularly a big deal. If you're moving, and changing purely to the main net-list because that's what the WAAC crowd are saying is the Next Big Thing, then yeah, you're being That Guy, and a powergamer.

If you just think the Iron Hands rules are cool, and want to have an awesome technomancer blow up a tank and throw the shrapnel at other guys, then all power to you.

 

I could care less if someone band wagons/ WAAC using a DIY force, they can be anything and be everything. DIY is someones unique work, vision and imagination. Blue UM using IH rules or IH using the new IF rules, if the rumours are true on them being OP as well. That is the problem because GW official sub factions, they anchor the setting and are the foundations of the lore and IP. There is a respectful way to power game and that is using a DIY force to do it. At least give the official game setting that respect. 

 

 

I don't disagree, that was in response to someone asking if stripping/repainting, or buying a whole new army counted as power-gaming.

[Commander Dawnstar]

Personally I wouldn't have any problem playing against someone who wanted to use their army with rules other than those of the faction they're painted as, at least outside of a tournament setting enforcing strict WYSIWYG. Certainly there might be a little jolt of surprise on learning about their plans but beyond that I really don't see how it matters. I'm sure we've all painted armies before that have been screwed over by changes in edition or wanted to play lists that are better represented by another sub-faction's rules - I considered using my Iron Warriors as The Purge after Vigilius II -  and ultimately I think it's a bit of a jerk move to tell the other person they can't play what they want to play for aesthetic reasons alone. It's not like they're trying to proxy Coke bottles as tanks or using a random mishmash of figures to represent a coherent army, and even then I could excuse the latter if they were trying to experiment with an army before buying into it. It's a game, and we don't all have the time, energy, money or desire to collect multiple armies or repaint our existing ones in order to change our gameplay experience in ways that can be easily done through the social contract.

 

You (presumably) wouldn't tell someone with an as-of-yet unpainted army that they weren't allowed Chapter Tactics, so why is it a problem when they want to use Ultramarines as Iron Hands?

[Schlitzaf]

Here my opanion; whenever someone plays their army as a count as something else, the first question I ask is “why?”.

 

If they say “well my army actual rules are (insert whatever euphemism you prefer)” or “my models are only competitive with (other subfaction rules)”. I then either, back up my boys or then push a bit more. The two classic examples are 8th Edition Count as Ultramarines then the loyal 32 whiners. I’ll explain the latter in a second.

 

The Ultramarines, were common due to Gulliman (whom you saw running around with the NotUltras). Now I will say in fairness I never fought an UltraGulli list but the various pseudo competitive “UltraGulliman” lists I have seen that weren’t actually competitive, the players made several severe tactical errors.

 

Foremost among those were what I called 3 Naked Tacticals Triple Plasma And 800 points in two units elite. The list would skimp on bodies to give everyone the bestest toys notably Hammerators and Hammer&Shield Vang. What happened is every game those units died painfully and player would get tabled.

 

Or complain how Gulliman died super easily. And then when given list suggestions (Claws Termi or Chain Vang for example to keep points down) or replacing Gulliman with two HQs to unlock second Battlelion they would say “But I NEED Gulliman and look at this theoretical high output if I connect.” Generally not recognizing both the limited mobility Gulli presented how despite his WT and extra CP he grants he actually results in losing CP.

 

These players then would say “I need a loyal 32” and claiming “I need them for CP”. Which if as noted above, they could easily drop Gulliman for 2-3 HQ’s. And even pre-tactical point reduction, 3 tactical squads are only 5 points more than a 32. And marine HQ’s aren’t taxes. Now why do I mention these questions?

 

Because it shows these are players who don’t understand WHY x is truly competitives/marines viable or why something 32 is used. Instead parrot Internet memes. This is espacially notable when they claim are “well I do this because I play a lot of tournament players and I need to do this to keep up.”

 

Which is the issue at hand something else here entirely. Their lack of ability to tactically or be strategically minded in a game of Warhammer 40k. I am not a “real” competitive, I don’t do GT’s, not interested in them really. Also I hate painting.

 

But I have played and play against a lot of folks who do GT and as part of that, when I game I want someone who can challenge me strategically and tactically. Which if instead of those above answers they gave me;

 

“I use Gulliman as its only viable way to play marines, because it increases the lackluster raw output of marine shooting, when combined with Bolter discipline on my Intercessors Squads to setup a firebase that is able to aggressively engage or stand still. While also presenting a durable hard to target or remove threat in the form of Gulliman for melee. Something marines lack outside of flyers and smash cpts.” Informs me they both understand why the unit itself is competitive and what makes it so over other options.

 

For loyal 32 “it’s because both board prescence and the order of move move move allows me to quickly secure objectives with ease while access to cheap support units like mortar teams.”

 

That my feeling

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I’m so glad GW tightened down on CP farming. I rarely see IG anymore except for people who truly love their guard and play it mono faction.

[Marshal van Trapp]

EDIT: I should have prefaced this with, I'm playing a super fluffy non competitive list that is nothing but primaris infantry (infiltrators, intercessors, reivers, inceptors, suppressors, hellblasters, eliminators, and a bunch of characters) and I have no intention of power gaming, I play for fun not to win

 

Ok how about my current situation, I want to play either Crimson or Imperial fists (I like how their tactics work even without any kind of crazy doctrine buff) but I do not like painting yellow and I dislike the Crimson Fists general scheme, I can play a DiY chapter but it locks me out of 2 things Special Characters (not that I planned to use them) AND i cant use the crimson fist chapter tactic because it's not a first founding chapter so Inheritors doesnt give me access. So now what are my options?

 

1. paint MY models that I paid for in a color scheme that I dont like just to get access to a specific trait that I think I'll enjoy

 

2. Paint my models however I want and be force to play with either custom tactics or only have access to the IF tactic through inheritors.

 

3. Paint my models however I like and just say they're crimson/imperial fists so I get to use that tactic the way I want

 

 

Why can I not pick option 3 and am forced to pick either 1 or 2, just because some pictures and paragraphs of LORE say so?

Edited October 11, 2019 by Marshal van Trapp

[Lord_Caerolion]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Imperial Fists supplement allows use of the Crimson Fists/Black Templars for Inheritors. RAW though, and taking into context the basic assumptions that the game runs on, actual Ultramarines must be blue with the white "ultima" on their shoulderpad, Imperial Fists must be yellow, etc. Friendly game? Sure, I'd definitely allow it. GW-run tournaments wouldn't allow it, though.

 

I mean, not to be rude, but this whole game revolves around "you must use specific models to use specific rules". To play Iron Hands I'll still have to use Space Marine models, so no matter how badass that Carnifex looks, I can't call it a Dreadnought, even if I bought it.

[Lemondish]

Switching to Iron Hands is power gaming.

It can be, yes.

 

Though power gaming is just a play style. It isn't inherently bad.

[Sloeberjong]

Man, Iron Hands players should feel filthy if I read all this correctly...I almost feel bad about wanting to try the IH rules because my army just happens to be vehicle heavy. 

 

I'm so glad my local gaming community is relaxed and like to have fun. My super orange marines can play with whatever rulesset they like and my buddies encourage me to play IH since it fits my 2 repulsors, 2 redemptors and aggressors...and non of us play very competitively, just whatever models we like. I also play deathwatch with them and Raven Guard. Maybe I'll try White Scars too sometime, and Ultramarines (dubble shooting aggressors, yes please). It's not power gaming at all, it's just playing different styles for fun and I'm not going to change the colours of my army everytime and I will also use special characters because they bring flavour to "general" characters.

 

The rules' balance doesn't change with the colour of the marines and there aren't any rules concerning colour and rulesset. So unless the tournament makes it explicit you'll have to play a blue Iron Hands army if you face it or give up. The only place I know has these specific rules is Warhammer World. 

 

I mean, I get that it might get in the way of your immersion, but that's an aspect you enjoy personally. Someone else can and will see the differentiation of lore and rules. Luckily you'll have the choice of not playing anybody you don't see eye to eye to. Me, I'll avoid WAAC players (the attitude, not the armies) if I can. I hardly play tournies because of this, except local. But I won't avoid someone who wants to play his blue army as Iron hands for a change or as white scars. Rules are just rules, if the army looks good then I don't really care about what rulesset you use. If you have a nice conversion of a special character or have it painted in another colour then the lore dictates I don't care, the rules don't change...

 

Honestly, reading all this and also the rules' discussions sometimes I think a lot of hobbyists should lighten up and have fun with playing their plastic soldiers...to each their own though. It just saddens me sometimes, because both sides go into the extremes and dig in, there's no reasonable middle road possible anymore.