Is it a faux pas to use more than one detachment and allies

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I currently use three detachments - each a separate faction. If I go to the GW shop I will bring just my Space marines since it is mostly casual gaming. How do you view using multiple detachments and factions? Does it automatically make you a power gamer or can it be cool too ?

[Vykes]

I'll give the cop our response and say 'It depends' on a few factors: size of the game, theme, and usage.  When phrased as 'I have three detachments' then you might get some skeptical looks as the question immediately becomes 'okay... why?' as they expect something untoward to crop up dealing with special rules or the like.  

 

At 1500 points (or 75pl, what have you) having 3 might look excessive in a lot of contexts, in 2K it might be fine, in 3K I'd say it's probably expected.  So that's one thing.  

 

Theme, well fluff and the like might not be the 'be all, end all' for a lot of gamers, but often if things look 'right' then you can get around a lot of ill will.  3 detachments including Space marines, say an Imperial guard platoon, and a freeblade knight probably won't garner too much flak as it looks fluffy and cool.  Likewise, adding in something like Deathwatch or inquisition forces as a limited strike team can be just as convincing, and it feels pretty natural.  Some of the old soup mixes though just didn't feel right, look right, and thus came about as a way to exclude multiple detachments/allies.  

 

Usage.  If it's casual, keep it casual.  Kinda the general rule.  

 

So I think you'll probably be good, as long as its within reason 3 detachments including allies is perfectly good in my books. 

[Captain Idaho]

Really I'd say yes in Matched Play. What's your motivation? It's cool - then play open play where fairness doesn't matter.

 

 

Would you play the same army if GW puts limitations on it that makes it less powerful compared to a "straight" faction? If not then you aren't playing for fun and coolness. ;)

[Beams]

No. It's super common for people to take three detachments, as that is the limit given by GW.

[MARK0SIAN]

From my point of view it’s the models you play rather than the detachments that make someone a power gamer. It’s perfectly feasible to make a fair, fun and balanced list with three detachments, just as it’s perfectly feasible to make a horribly cheesy list with just one detachment.

 

If you’re using 3 detachments to spam the most broken units in the game then you’re powergaming. If you’re choosing balanced units and you’ve given some thoughts to the theme etc then you’re not.

 

Personally I like playing and facing a list with a lot of variety in it so three detachments is no problem for me.

 

NB: I would just say that I would expect the three detachments to be different factions. If you were using three variations of tyranids to get three different hive fleet traits for example, then I would consider that power gaming.

[Captain Idaho]

Detachments is cool yes. Allies/different factions raises eyebrows.

[Commander Dawnstar]

Detachments is cool yes. Allies/different factions raises eyebrows.

 

Personally I'd say that's entirely subjective. Allies don't inherently make a list stronger than it would be without them, nor are they some kind of innate marker of powergaming tendencies. If you're immediately concerned by the simple fact that another player is fielding allies (with no regard for their choices or motivations) then I think that's somewhat on you rather than them. I shouldn't expect to get dirty looks for fielding a legal army concept that appeals to me.

[Captain Idaho]

Nobody ever takes allies that makes their army weaker. Funny that.

[Captain Idaho]

Don't get me wrong. Do what you want with the hobby. But let's stop with this justification for making the most nasty lists you can or pretending allies don't unbalance the game.

[Commander Dawnstar]

Nobody ever takes allies that makes their army weaker. Funny that.

 

Maybe I'm just some sort of special snowflake but ... yeah, I absolutely do that. I'm under no illusions that dropping 700-ish points so I can field the Emperor's Champion and a Terminator bodyguard in a Crusader alongside my Sisters will improve my chances over more reliable options, nor do I think putting points into Daemonettes and Seekers is going to be more efficient than taking more Cultists and Iron Warriors firepower. Certainly I'll generally aim to have my choices of allies go some way to cover bases or have a degree of synergy with the rest of my army, but I think my newly-finished Renegade Knight is perhaps the only example in my possession of an allied force I would choose to field that would undeniably make its parent army better. Maybe there's an argument for my small Detachment of Angels Revenant Primaris too as they let my Sisters have a little Plasma.

 

Allies absolutely go some way to unbalance the game (and always have) and these problems are very apparent in age with CP, Faction Traits and Stratagems and many factions with limited or no access to allies whatsoever. Nonetheless that doesn't mean they innately ruin anything they touch, nor that they're only used by people looking to claim unfair advantages. I could generally make much harder lists by sticking within the bounds of my chosen primary factions than by using the units I've picked up to field alongside them as allies.

[Captain Idaho]

Well we'd have a great game against each other. :)

[Ishagu]

It's very common and I wouldn't be concerned. It's very typical to see Custodes alongside Imperial Guard, with a Knight in support - and its actually somewhat thematic too.

 

Of course, it's important to moderate your list for each game and opponent. In casual play I like to ask what my opponent is bringing, and will scale my army to match his. If it's a new player with a fun, thematic force then I certainly won't take the Primarch and drop some of the hard hitting units for example, or I won't spend command points to make my Knight harder to kill, etc, etc

[Captain Idaho]

That is what I do and I wish more people focussed on fun like that - play the game you know both sides enjoy most.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Nobody ever takes allies that makes their army weaker. Funny that.

 

Not true - I run Ultramarines and play in a competitive meta.

[Captain Idaho]

You were claiming it was an Ultramarines army and now you're saying it's Custodes with Ultramarines added to be weaker...?

 

Besides, you're increasing your numbers and firepower of the Custodes with cheaper Marines. That's not weakening the army, it's circumnavigating a weakness of Custodes.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

It is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Custodes can do just fine as a single faction using the their dreadnaughts and grav tanks. I play SM because I like them, which some might tell you is in spite of myself.

[necroscope]

No it is not, but I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of penalty for taking more than two factions.  

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Personally I’m okay with three because you might want to bring an assassin (e.g., Auxiliary Detachment) for which there is the penalty of losing one command point which can be a big deal. I’m sure if four detachments were available for matched play you’d see some armies with that many. Like I said I enjoy playing only one detachment (Ultramarines) but it can be a bit of a constraint for competitive play.

[Raven1]

In my opinion absolutely not

[WarriorFish]

I don't think so, like most things it's what you do with it that counts - you can do great themed lists with it, but you can also bring out your Gandalf beard too. The same can be said of any part of the game though, so in that regard it's but a tool in the wider system.

 

That most people take it to have stronger lists isn't that much different from how plasma guns have all but replaced melta for many, in my mind. Plus I think a player's intent is easily seen so I don't worry about the methods

[Plasmablasts]

I have an Inquisitorial task force that I’ve gradually been putting together and evolving through Codex: Daemonhunters, Codex: Grey Knights (5th edition), the ePub Codex: Inquisition and Codex: Imperial Agents. To field a single 7th edition Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband now in 8th edition, I would have to put three detachments on the table (Inquisition, Astra Militarum and Adeptus Ministorum): adding Grey Knights or Deathwatch as the allied Chamber Militant would be illegal in competitive games. If anyone raised their eyebrows at that, they would be on the receiving end of the mother of all retaliatory eyebrow raises...

[Skaorn]

No. It's super common for people to take three detachments, as that is the limit given by GW.

Isn't the 3 detachments limit just a suggestion anyways, not a rule?

 

If you talk to your opponents about it you'll probably find plenty of players that will be fine with you using 3 detachments/multiple factions. You'll probably find people good with you running a 5+ DE style patrol army but using 5 different IoM armies (don't expect that DE CP bump though) or let you run an IG detachment that has the keyword Tau Empire with your Tau.

[Beams]

 

No. It's super common for people to take three detachments, as that is the limit given by GW.

Isn't the 3 detachments limit just a suggestion anyways, not a rule?

 

If you talk to your opponents about it you'll probably find plenty of players that will be fine with you using 3 detachments/multiple factions. You'll probably find people good with you running a 5+ DE style patrol army but using 5 different IoM armies (don't expect that DE CP bump though) or let you run an IG detachment that has the keyword Tau Empire with your Tau.

It's a suggestion, but in a lot of places GWs suggestions are taken as rules. At least around me.

[Atrus]

Not generally, depends on your area. Most people in my area use single detachments or at least single faction (army) with 2 detachments. Granted theyre mostly guard so theyre not exactly wanting for love.

Generally accepted that im going to be the guy that brings 3 to 4 detachments but thats due to army history.

Having started with the witch hunters codex back in the day. To field the old army, i need a detachment each for sororitas, inquisition, ministorum, and assassins. None of it is considered power gaming and falls into the fluff reasons category.

 

In my books youre good to go 3+ as long as youre not doing it for cheese.

[Kinstryfe]

Intent is definitely more important than outcome in this case. Playing Inquisition and need to work in Grey Knights, Stormtroopers, and Inquisition Detachments is very different from taking a Guard detachment and a Kreig detachment so you can double up on similar but technically different datasheets, for example. I've never seen a complaint unless someone comes up with a really broken combination.