Jump to content

Acceptable limts of proxying GW models for other GW models


Indefragable

Recommended Posts

It's a slippery and fluid topic and the attempts at delineating exact borders always cause an argument.

In general, my rules are such:
1) It has to be done in good spirit and intention. Ishagu makes up some kind of "but these are meltas / rocket launchers, not flamers!" scenario, which is a straight up roster cheat, not a proxy / counts as. If someone pulls that off, they can pack up right now. I'm not playing you.

2) It should be thematic and it absolutely CANNOT be antithematic and/or confusing.

3) Counts-as in my book is "something entirely different used as something else" but it has to at least generally resemble what it's supposed to be, even if it's a different army, a different unit - it's an ALTERNATIVE.

Say, "this Vindicator is really a less putrid version of that Death Guard mortar tank, OK?" - sure.

"That Kytan Daemon Engine is a Renegade Warden Knight, with the rotary cannon and the CCW?" - absolutely, mate.

"That Master of the Chapter mini is my Emperor's Champion" - right on.

"These Chaos Cultists and these Necromunda Gangers are my Renegade Guard" - do they have flashlights? They do? Yeah, works.

In Kill Team, I don't have Lictors and refuse to get scalped for fugly OOP models. I use the Space Hulk and Overkill Prime 'stealers as my "lictor brood leaders" along with regular genestealers. Reasonable, thematic, fits the bill.

3) Proxy is when "it entirely doesn't look like what it is supposed to be, but it's something else, it's a SUBSTITUTE".

"These, uh, Leman Russes without turrets are my Rhinos / Chimeras, I forgot my APCs, sorry?" - eh, OK. Not a biggie. Just place them on a Chimera sized paper base and any size measurement doubts are counted against you, deal?

"These two Ork flyers are Blood Axe mercenaries, they are my Guard's Avenger Strike Fighters, weird bedfellows, is that OK?" - sure, thematic!

 

"All my Black Templars are of the bolt pistol + ccw type, even if they have bolters. I just don't have enough of one type" - if it's across the board, there's no bolter Templars at all? Eh, sure, why not.

"Uh, in this unit the melta is a plasma. In that other one the plasma is a grav gun. In this one all flamers are heavy bolters. That heavy bolter squad of Scouts is snipers" - u wot m8? No. Confusing, you'll get lost in it yourself.

"This bloodthirster is my Flyrant, that Maulerfiend is a carnifex brood of three and these cultists are termagants. And that Heldrake is a Harpy, ok?" - no, get out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wouldn't disagree with your definition, sfPanzer, but that's gonna take a bit to get everyone on the same page.  In the end, is one going to be more heinous than the other if one is permanent and the other temporary? 

 

It's kind of along the same line as joke themed armies: unless I'm in on it, and it's 'That game' once a year or what not, is there a line?

Bryan Blaire has it correct. Counts-As is a specific subset of proxying. For example, my Counts-As Fabius Bile for my World Eaters:

tGYHRso.jpg

 

It clearly reads as it being a chaos apothecary like Fabius, even though its clearly NOT Fabulous Bill.

 

I'd actually go and say this is a proper conversion/kitbash to represent Fabius Bile. So already a step further than just a counts as. ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While that may be true for some, there are others that would disagree that there’s any such thing as a proper conversion, unless GW provided - for some, the GW model or something "officially recognized" (which was often used against FW models not long ago) is the only way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's mostly been said, but I've always viewed it thusly:

 

Counts-as means that you are using an unofficial model or conversion instead of the official models (or a conversion for something without a proper model), but the model still adheres to wysiwyg and relatively similar sizing. For example, I have a small counts-as Sisters of Battle army that I designed to be an elite Imperial Guard regiment. Every model is wysiwyg as far as equipment. Bolters are Bolters, Flamers are Flamers, power swords are swords, Rhinos are Rhinos, and even though they are humans in metallic purple gladiator-esque armour, they match up 100% wysiwyg with a "proper" Sisters of Battle army. My Daemons also have some red Chaos Hounds painted up as Flesh Hounds. They're fairly obvious in what they are, so I consider them more counts-as than a proxy.

I would also put things like "Ultramarines assault company using Blood Angels rules" or "Unarmoured human snipers as Ratlings" in this same category, as long as wysiwyg is observed.

 

Proxy, on the other hand, I classify as something that breaks wysiwyg or is a dissimilar size or footprint to what you are representing. Using spare Intercessors to bulk out a Helblaster squad is one type of example. Back in the day when Hormagaunts and Termagants were 8 each to a box, "all of these are X" was another common proxy. I also see a lot of "This Rhino is a Predator" and things like that.

Personally, I'm ok with short-term proxying in friendly games, but they should be limited. Conversely a well done counts-as, I'm ok with all the time, because they tend to be unique and make the army stand out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the definition that a counts-as is something which is broadly similar, easily identifiable and largely used to cover conversions - such as as these Fire Warriors with jet packs and carbines are Vespid. Proxies on the other hand are where there is no attempt to make one thing into another - such as these Intercessors count as Hellblasters (because I can’t find/don’t have enough Hellblaster models).

 

In a friendly game or a pickup game at my local club I pretty much say whatever goes, provided there’s a reason for it that isn’t to do with power gaming.

 

Want to try out Ballistarii but don’t want to commit to very expensive models before trying them out? Yeah sure a Dreadnought is close enough for a few games.

 

Have a really cool custom-made Star Wars themed army counting as Guard? You can play it so long as I can take pictures!

 

Converted up an Ork Snipa to count as a Vindicare Assassin (in a previous edition) because we’re playing at a higher points value than your army list is made for? I like that his gun has four barrels and six scopes, I can’t wait to cut him in half.

 

Miscounted the number of drop pods you needed to bring with you? Let me finish my drink and you can use the empty can (and buy me another one!)

 

Forgot to bring the box that has your tanks in it? You dipstick. Tear up bits of paper about the right size and write what they are on them. I’m going to tease you all game about your invisible ghost tanks.

 

You see that my list is full of Marines and suddenly all your plasma and Melta counts as Grav? Go home, buddy.

 

(Every one of those is a real example.)

 

At tournaments (aside from the local club tournament where everybody knows everybody and the whole thing’s a big laugh anyway) I’d expect any conversion that doesn’t use a hard-core wysiwyg to be checked by the TO first. Replacing the Power Sword on your Captain with the nicer Power Sword from the Vanguard Vets box is kosher, but using AoS treepeople to count as 40k Daemons should go past the TO first.

 

I’d expect a TO to judge such thing based on a couple of criteria:

 

- Is it on the correct base? (If not, will the different base size have a negligible effect on games and/or is there a workaround like shortening the range on the model’s aura abilities?)

- Is it roughly the right size/shape?

- Is it clear to an opponent?

- Is it consistent across the army?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While that may be true for some, there are others that would disagree that there’s any such thing as a proper conversion, unless GW provided - for some, the GW model or something "officially recognized" (which was often used against FW models not long ago) is the only way.

Those people can go play video games, as far as I'm concerned. The hobby has always been about creativity (and GW has always encouraged it).

 

Personally, I'm ready to allow for most proxying (which I take to be temporary stand-ins, used due to not having the real thing to hand) as long as it's consistent, not confusing and not supposed to be that way forever.

 

When it comes to counts-as (which I understand to be intended as a permanent replacement, whether it's conversions or alternate models), I'll accept it if it's consistent and not confusing. I might balk at a theme that I don't find appropriate, but that's another story and it's not my army so I'll generally be very easy-going, but I might not go out of my way to play with you as I'm mostly in the hobby/game because I like the setting.

For example, there's a guy who's made some reasonably well done Marines with lizardmen heads. I wouldn't refuse to play him in a campaign/tournament and he should obviously do his thing, but I personally find it totally lame and it doesn't fit in with the universe at all. Likewise with the Star Wars themed army used as an example earlier in the thread - people are free to do it and I hope it brings them joy, but it's never going to fit in with the setting in my perception (which absolutely does not mean that people shouldn't do it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I’ve always understood proxying to be using kitbashed models in place of the official ones, maybe with some non-standard parts but generally still identifiable as the model it is proxying for.

 

Counts as means taking any model and just saying it’s another, it could bear no actual resemblance to the intended model. Like taking a marine and pretending he’s a genestealer.

 

Like I said though, that’s only my understanding of it, I could be totally wrong.

I’ve always understood it as exactly the other way around, specifically due to the definition of “proxy”. A proxy is by definition someone authorized to act for someone else or something defined to stand in for something else (usually for calculation purposes) and they can be very long term: a power-of-attorney document is a legal contract allowing one person or group to legally proxy in either a defined way or in all fashions for the signatory of the contract that lasts until specifically nullified by termination terms in the contract and acted upon legally (such as fulfilling the terms leading to termination or if one party or the other can legally void the document based on contract terms, typically in writing).

 

So proxies are anything where you are saying “this is actually representing this”.

 

Counts-as, IMO, has always been a sub-set of “proxying” in that you have something armed, converted, etc, to stand in for something else, which likely resembles said official model, but isn’t.

Fair enough, I’m happy to go with your definition, like I said, it was always just my idea about how it worked, turns out I got it the wrong way round :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Firstly, proxying =/= counts as.

 

Termagants with kroot heads being used as Kroot hounds = no problem.

Eldar rangers painted like guard being used as ratlings = no problem. 

Death guard plague marines as Tyrant guard = problem. 

 

Internal rules for proxying: Must be models from the same army, same base size, roughly the same model size, no more than 1 - 2 games before I start making fun of you.

 

So that we're all on the same page, what is the difference between proxying and counts-as in your book?

 

Secondly, in your above examples, what makes the Death Guard example a problem? (looking to understand specifics).

 

As has been explainerd, DG, even DG terms are on 32 or 40mm bases compared to the 50mm of the hive guard. Hive guard are also all closer to dreadnought size. It would be like proxying scouts as terminators.

 

All of this terminology is subjective, but in my head:

 

Counts-as: models used reflect unit statline, wargear and faction in some way, e.g.

S3 T3 sv5+ Eldar rangers with sniper rifles used as S3 T3 sv5+ guardsmen/ratlings with sniper rifles

Tactical marines with power armour, bolter, MEQ statline used as Sternguard with power armour, bolter, MEQ statline

This tactical marine with a plasma gun counts as a tactical marine with a melta gun

This terminator sergeant counts as a captain in TDA for this game

These blood angels count as ultramarines

 

Proxying: models do no reflect faction, model profile or wargear of datasheet used in some way, e.g.:

Terminator counts as hive guard (Wrong faction, base size, model silhouette, weaponry, armour)

these marines count as guardsmen (Wrong faction, base size, model silhouette, weaponry, armour)

This predator is a land raider for this game (Wrong model silhouette, weaponry, armour)

This coke can is a drop pod (no, just no)

 

It's really a grey area, but i think in your own heart, you'll know when 'counts-as' is being abused. 

 

I wouldn't refuse to play against someone that used a lot of proxy models, but I'd make fun of them constantly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a slippery and fluid topic and the attempts at delineating exact borders always cause an argument.

 

In general, my rules are such:

"Uh, in this unit the melta is a plasma. In that other one the plasma is a grav gun. In this one all flamers are heavy bolters. That heavy bolter squad of Scouts is snipers" - u wot m8? No. Confusing, you'll get lost in it yourself.

 

 

 

Yes, this. This would be my main concern with proxies and stand-ins - it has the potential to confuse both players.

 

Examples of my own army where I'm not going to do WYSIWYG are:

Squad of 5 terminators, currently armed with combi-meltas. Reports say that meltas aren't great so I may try them with combi plasma instead. Am I going to convert them for one game? No. I would, however, always use them as either ALL meltas or ALL plasma.

 

I'm building up tons of berserkers, all of whom will be armed chainsword + chainaxe (except the champions). I already got bored of that set up on every model so I've got a guy with a  double-handed chainaxe and a guy with a double handed chain-glaive. My intention is they all 'count-as' chainsword chainaxe. I can't see that would ever be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys really gotta stop playing pick up games if you’re constantly having to haggle with your opponents. 40k needs the small group to come back in big way in 8th Edition to end this last decade of pick up game culture being the dominant force in the hobby. So many problems are caused by people playing people they don’t know well, and that seeps into everything from demand rules changes to complaints about model sizes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to keep in mind that 40k is a visual game.

 

If your army is modelled correctly and well painted you're enriching the experience for yourself and your opponent.

 

We all have to try, and those that don't are ultimately not respecting the efforts of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh I`m with the good Marshall on this one, I mean quite a bit (Chaos Warhounds for flesh hounds and I`m about to build an entire slaanesh daemon army using the new nighthaunt minis) now i haven`t had an issue with the flesh hounds when i have played random people but I know for a fact that if i played someone i had never met before and brought my slaanesh army they would most likely refuse to play me. My close gaming friends however, would be down for it 100% and some of them are actively encouraging me to go ahead with the army. If i got to know someone and then played with my proxy army and i knew they were cool with it, that's fine. Playing a random person and having to explain everything about four times to ensure that he knows everything and that i don`t seem like "That Guy" nahhh, i`m good :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to keep in mind that 40k is a visual game.

If your army is modelled correctly and well painted you're enriching the experience for yourself and your opponent.

We all have to try, and those that don't are ultimately not respecting the efforts of others.

And that may be true for you, Ishagu, but it may not be for others, so we'll let everyone on the board figure out where the line on respect or disrespect of effort and for others lies, won't we?

 

Some folks can have just as much fun playing the game on or against empty bases tagged with numbers or colors as they can against a Golden Daemon paint level army. They enjoy playing the game more than they do the modeling, painting or converting aspects of the hobby. Others are just fine with Sprue Grey or even Sprue mixed colors, Primer White/Grey/Black, or a single base color, and some may not enjoy gaming against an army that doesn't have any conversion or kit-bashing, because every model looks identical to one in another squad (one of the drawbacks of the more detailed modern GW models).

 

Personally, my experience is not "enriched" gaming-wise by a well-modeled, well-painted army. I've had better and tougher games against opponents with grey armies, and ones that used proxies and never felt disrespected by my opponents(I've found that good sportsmanship and respectful play are totally disconnected from a person's efforts on their army), so clearly your statements aren't universal - if anything, trying to tell others they aren't respectful in blanket statements is probably one of the more disrespectful things a person can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys really gotta stop playing pick up games if you’re constantly having to haggle with your opponents. 40k needs the small group to come back in big way in 8th Edition to end this last decade of pick up game culture being the dominant force in the hobby. So many problems are caused by people playing people they don’t know well, and that seeps into everything from demand rules changes to complaints about model sizes.

 

Eh? Pick up games have been the majority of games I have played for the past 20 years, albeit against people from the same clubs.

 

With a small gaming group, go nuts, but for the pick up style games (which are probably 90% of games played), it's just common courtesy for your army to be what it looks like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try not to proxy very much. I'm not sure how I really feel about it as a subject. Proxy something once or twice whit the intent to get the thing you were trying to proxy, sure not really a problem.  I was told on another forum to just proxy all my Mek gunz as one specific one because no one can tell them apart. that's a no go.  I have modeled them as I wanted them and won't bring more that what ever number of each that I have. I think it's bad sportsmanship, if I were to just say all 12 of them are traktor kannons now because we got a new codex and that the "best one" so that's what they all are.  As a laugh, maybe once I can see that but I wouldn't do that weekly or even at a tournament. I will take issue with anyone doing that all the time or in a tournament game. If  there are soft scores it will affect their over all. I really see it as a form of cheating.  
I do not put  conversions for counts as in the same category as a proxy.  
If some one is going to kitbash up 18 of their own artillery then cool.  Not a problem.

I know I probably sound a bit hypocritical.  I guess it's just difficult to articulate how I feel about it and you either get it or don't. 
In my experience players who would proxy the cheesy units repeatedly are people I didn't care to play against and more or less avoided because they were just there for an easy button win and not a game they had to win. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All good points (and 95% civil!) being raised.

 

I think the pickup vs club vs only-ever-with-my-besties vs only-ever-when-its-a-televised match thing is for another topic, especially since people the world 'round have much different experiences, and are often only ever able to have a single type available at a given time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind proxying as long as it's clear and consistent, as many others have said. 

 

"I don't have any Kroot Hounds but I wanted to try them out so I'm using Termagants." Fine, no problems, there's no way I'm going to confuse them for anything else in a Tau army.

 

"I also don't have any Vespids so I'm using Termagants that are a different colour" No; if you've got two units that are the same models, they need to represent the same unit type. If you're proxying Gargoyles as Vespids, that I can deal with.

 

Those things apply even to models in the correct faction too; "These Guardsmen with Lasguns are Guardsmen with Lasguns, but these Guardsmen with Lasguns are actually Veterans with Shotguns" isn't clear enough, probably not even for the controlling player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres food for you guys then.... when talking about base size being important for proxing

 

sister of battle, Saint Celestine, 25mm base (3rd ed model) or 50(? ...what ever it is) 7th Ed model.... which one do I use?  which one is correct?

 

Sisters of battle, saints bodyguard... 7th ed come on 32mm bases, if I use 2 serephim on 25mm bases are they proxies?  even though they have the same kit, and from the same army?

 

Sisters of Battle, Canoness V(cant spell.. wont spell) alongside a standard canoness model... ones on a 32mm base the other is a 25mm base

 

 

 

As an aside... my stance is so long as its clear go for it... all base sizes have positives and negatives going for them  and so long as you have a standard model on the table that can be used for TLOS if needed who cares if your model is a bit bigger or smaller?  If your the one proxying the model then you have to be more leanenant  in allowing 50 /50 calls 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres food for you guys then.... when talking about base size being important for proxing

 

sister of battle, Saint Celestine, 25mm base (3rd ed model) or 50(? ...what ever it is) 7th Ed model.... which one do I use?  which one is correct?

 

Sisters of battle, saints bodyguard... 7th ed come on 32mm bases, if I use 2 serephim on 25mm bases are they proxies?  even though they have the same kit, and from the same army?

 

Sisters of Battle, Canoness V(cant spell.. wont spell) alongside a standard canoness model... ones on a 32mm base the other is a 25mm base

 

 

 

As an aside... my stance is so long as its clear go for it... all base sizes have positives and negatives going for them  and so long as you have a standard model on the table that can be used for TLOS if needed who cares if your model is a bit bigger or smaller?  If your the one proxying the model then you have to be more leanenant  in allowing 50 /50 calls 

 

Same answer as always when it comes to bases. The one the model came with or the one the latest version of the model comes with. Model here of course is the model of the unit you want to proxy, not the proxy you're going to use.

 

Also SoB is a kinda difficult example since they're really old, didn't have a Codex for a long time and are currently getting re-done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres food for you guys then.... when talking about base size being important for proxing

 

sister of battle, Saint Celestine, 25mm base (3rd ed model) or 50(? ...what ever it is) 7th Ed model.... which one do I use?  which one is correct?

 

Sisters of battle, saints bodyguard... 7th ed come on 32mm bases, if I use 2 serephim on 25mm bases are they proxies?  even though they have the same kit, and from the same army?

 

Sisters of Battle, Canoness V(cant spell.. wont spell) alongside a standard canoness model... ones on a 32mm base the other is a 25mm base

 

 

 

As an aside... my stance is so long as its clear go for it... all base sizes have positives and negatives going for them  and so long as you have a standard model on the table that can be used for TLOS if needed who cares if your model is a bit bigger or smaller?  If your the one proxying the model then you have to be more leanenant  in allowing 50 /50 calls 

 

 

I think this case is a bit more clear cut, having those models on smaller bases and visual profiles would be a clear advantage. In a comp setting I would hope that would have been corrected by a TO prior to the event.

 

That said if the player did something cool and creative to get a bit closer to the size by manipulating the base thatd be super cool and there is tons of leeway there IMO.

 

I did a similar thing with my wulfen, preferring the EoT style but modeled the bases on the 40mm with a bit of a height boost to account for the current models being absolute units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Heres food for you guys then.... when talking about base size being important for proxing

 

sister of battle, Saint Celestine, 25mm base (3rd ed model) or 50(? ...what ever it is) 7th Ed model.... which one do I use? which one is correct?

 

Sisters of battle, saints bodyguard... 7th ed come on 32mm bases, if I use 2 serephim on 25mm bases are they proxies? even though they have the same kit, and from the same army?

 

Sisters of Battle, Canoness V(cant spell.. wont spell) alongside a standard canoness model... ones on a 32mm base the other is a 25mm base

 

 

 

As an aside... my stance is so long as its clear go for it... all base sizes have positives and negatives going for them and so long as you have a standard model on the table that can be used for TLOS if needed who cares if your model is a bit bigger or smaller? If your the one proxying the model then you have to be more leanenant in allowing 50 /50 calls

Same answer as always when it comes to bases. The one the model came with or the one the latest version of the model comes with. Model here of course is the model of the unit you want to proxy, not the proxy you're going to use.

 

Also SoB is a kinda difficult example since they're really old, didn't have a Codex for a long time and are currently getting re-done.

St Celestine for a while actually came with two different bases. Which always made that difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t speak for tournaments, having never played one.

 

In the group of people I play regularly, we proxy sometimes, but not prolifically - rarely more than a unit at a time, mostly to try things or for a bit of variety. Keeping it to a unit or so at a time makes it easy to remember what’s going on.

 

Unless we’d planned for it, I wouldn’t expect anyone to turn up with a whole army of proxies. Remembering what multiple units are is tricky, and that makes it less fun. I would expect that to be doubly true if I were playing a serious tournament match - I should be able to concentrate on units and tactics, not remembering whether the red or blue rhino is really the wave serpent or the fire prism.

 

When it comes to counts-as, I’ve always understood that to refer to models put together specifically to represent another (rather than being pressed into service as a proxy). As someone said above, three veterans modelled on a single base as a counts-as Primarch. Or marine painted with white armour and a fancy backpack as a counts-as apothecary.

 

Again, a whole army might be tricky, but if it’s well executed and clear, we’re good.

 

Having said all that, I’m a gamer first and foremost. I model, paint, build scenery and all the rest in order to play the game. As a kid, I had whole fantasy battle armies made up of cardboard rectangles with grids drawn on them and little illustrations for banners and leaders, because the desire to play outstripped the ability to pay for troops or to paint the ones I had.

 

So when it comes right down to it, I’d rather play than not. And if that means you have two tin cans as dreadnoughts and an airfix panzer as a rhino, well, it’s better than no game at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never had anything but compliments on my converted Vindicators that I use as Repressors.

 

I think it really comes down to: is it a proxy, a "counts-as" or a conversion, and I think that third category is more than necessary. A counts as, to me, is one unit replacing the other, a proxy is something not from GW, and a conversion is something you've put time into to get it to work as that unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting discussion, and some very varied points of view.
The topic very much relates to my current army project, as I will heavily rely on using other models than the standard GW ones.
My army project actually started by me asking myself which models I would like to paint and use, but never have either because of cost or because they didn't fit into any of my previous projects - So it was sort of an "all star collection", which I then looked at the 40k rules and tried to figure out how I could make a legal army out of it.


***Imperial Guard Battalion detachment 5CP
HQ 136
45 Tempestor Prime, Command Rod 40+5
45 Tempestor Prime, Command Rod 40+5
46 Primaris Psyker, Force Stave 38+8
TROOPS 160
60 Tempestus Scions x6 6*9+1
50 Tempestus Scions x5 5*9+1
50 Tempestus Scions x5 5*9+1
ELITES 302
126 Bullgryn x3, Brute shield, Maul 35+7*3
 88 Tempestus Command Squad, Plasma gun, 4x9+13
 88 Tempestus Command Squad, Plasma gun, 4x9+13
598pts

***Imperial Knights Super Heavy detachment 3CP
457 Crusader, Avenger Gatling, H.Flamer, Thermal cannon, H.Stubber 285+75+17+76+4
432 Warden, Avenger Gatling, H.Flamer, Thunderstrike gauntlet, H.Stubber, Ironstorm missile pod 285+76+17+35+4+16
174 Armiger Helverin, H.stubber 170+4
174 Armiger Helverin, H.stubber 170+4
1237pts

***Space Marines Auxiliary detachment -1CP
165 Contemptor Dreadnought, Combi-bolter, Kheres assault cannon, Dreadnought close combat weapon 98+2+25+40
2000pts 10CP (5+3+3-1)


It has resulted in me wanting to use Solar Auxilia Veletaris Storm section as a Scion all-Plasma Command Squad, with a slight conversion to have the open-helmted guy become a Tempestus Prime.
Solar Auxilia Las Rifle section as basic hot-shot lasgun Scion troops, and Charonite Ogryns as Bullgryns with brute shields and mauls. Even a Domitar Battle-Automata counting as a Contemptor Dreadnought with Kheres autocannons.
Only the Imperial Knights are what they are, as the Psyker is kitbashed from some AoS wizard parts.

Now I am not sure if this is proxy or Count-as, or if it is acceptable or over the line for most people. The people that I am likely to play will not care though.
Personally I condone this sort of thing, as long as the models you're using instead are as cool or cooler than the official ones. Show that you have made an effort into making it look good. Then it's fine by me :-)


 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.