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

[Marshal van Trapp]

 

 

You’re upset because people think Ultramarines should use the rules for Ultramarines. There’s only one unreasonable position here, and it’s not ‘Ultramarines use Ultramarines rules’.

This thread isnt about "I'm using blood Angels as Ultramarines" and I'll admit I went into that territory. This thread has been about "because of the Vague wording in the GW codex, you can't use successor chapters as first founding counts as because that's what Inheritors of the Primarch is for now." And I do not believe THAT is the correct approach!

If someone is playing a successor, and include the data sheet for Shrike as their Chapter Master for their successors with Inheritors, that’s not as much of a leap as the Ultramarines are Iron Hands. Like Iron Hands and Ultramarines are definite things. Your successor is not a definite thing. It’s difficult to justify for example, using Tor Garadon as and Ultramarine successor captain. It’s not as hard to make the leap with Tigurius.

This has literally been the crux of my argument! RAW you cant do the thing that you just said was not a giant leap (using shrike in a RG successor with Inheritors) because of the wording of inheritors, but prior to C:SM 2.0 the only way you could play a RG successor with "inheritors" was to do a counts as army, which would have allowed you to take shrike.

 

Now if I had a UM successor where I painted calgar in my chapters scheme, the interpretation of this thread is that I cant use him because it's not an UM army but a successor, do you think it would be fair to tell your opponent that he can't use the model he spent $55 on just because he is playing a "successor chapter"? Because THAT is what this thread has been about from the start and has shifted to the old "blue hands" defense

[Marshal Rohr]

Yes, but I’m saying for me personally as a narrative Gamer, I’d be inclined to let someone run Shrike with their Ash Crows or whatever their successor is called. I would not be likely to be cool with someone who’s Gravis Captain is Marneus Calgar but he’s playing Iron Hands.

[Marshal van Trapp]

Yes, but I’m saying for me personally as a narrative Gamer, I’d be inclined to let someone run Shrike with their Ash Crows or whatever their successor is called. I would not be likely to be cool with someone who’s Gravis Captain is Marneus Calgar but he’s playing Iron Hands.

See and I'm perfectly fine with that, honestly I'm just getting bent out of shape over the fact that my Destiny 2 Guardians themed Space Marines army cant use the CF chapter tactic (wouldn't even be using Kantor) just because of a weird vague wording on the successor chapter section of C:SM 2.0

[Iron Father Ferrum]

There's nothing vague about the wording of Inheritors of the Primarch. It is in fact really specific. You're just upset that the Chapter Tactics you want to use are not part of the Inheritors rule, so the only you can play your army the way you want to play is by

 

1. Doing something not permitted by the rules (using Inheritors to apply CT:CF)

 

2. Ignoring the keyword rules (using CT:CF even though your Chapter's name and thus keyword is the Destiny Guard or whatever)

 

3. Playing as Crimson Fists even though your army isn't appropriately painted as such, thus potentially breaking immersion for you or others

 

Two of these are violations of the rules. One is not, but is contentious (as this thread shows us). Now I and others have been saying for pages that we don't have any authority to dictate how you paint ir play your army. Our only control is over whether or not we will actually play against someone who is violating the rules or violating our immersion in the game.

 

You do you. We'll do us.

[Marshal van Trapp]

3. Playing as Crimson Fists even though your army isn't appropriately painted as such, thus potentially breaking immersion for you or others

Hey so real quick, can you post the page in the BRB or C:SM where it has the RULES for how crimson fists space marines should be painted? I explicitly want rules, not hobby or lore pages please.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Did I mention rules in point #3? No. I deliberately mentioned breaking rules in points #1 & 2, though, and the difference is important. If you go route #3, I have no rules I can say you're breaking...but as stated, you're breaking immersion. It's not accurate to the lore. You might not care about that but others do.

[Disruptor_fe404]

Worth noting that GW studio staff do actually harp on about using whatever rules suit your mental image of your models best (as evidenced by roughly all of VoxCast).

[Marshal van Trapp]

So where was the outrage prior to this new codex with all the pink calgars or orange shrikes?

[Hellebras]

Outrage? No more present than it is now. But I remember people not necessarily liking it when people proposed running their... oh, let's say Night Lords using Blood Angels rules in 5th edition. I also remember people being fine using special characters as counts-as in DIY chapters. Which has been mentioned as less off-putting at least once in this thread, and I'm inclined to agree that it doesn't bug me nearly so much. The whole point of successor chapters is creative freedom, after all.

[Panzer]

I honestly hope I never meet someone like the nitpickers in this thread, if I had when I started out I probably wouldnt have stuck with the game for as long as I have. As Lord Blackwood and several others in this thread have already said, if you have a problem with the way someone decides to paint the models that they bought with their money, go find another opponent

 

And as plenty others have already said, that's exactly what we'd do. We don't try to force anybody to do anything. We only talk about our preferences and how things are handled on tournaments because then you are expected to follow the TOs rules.

The same way you hope to never meet some of us "nitpickers" I certainly hope to never meet someone who completely misses the point and decides to get into a tantrum instead of talking about it like an adult.

[Marshal van Trapp]

 

I honestly hope I never meet someone like the nitpickers in this thread, if I had when I started out I probably wouldnt have stuck with the game for as long as I have. As Lord Blackwood and several others in this thread have already said, if you have a problem with the way someone decides to paint the models that they bought with their money, go find another opponent

 

And as plenty others have already said, that's exactly what we'd do. We don't try to force anybody to do anything. We only talk about our preferences and how things are handled on tournaments because then you are expected to follow the TOs rules.

The same way you hope to never meet some of us "nitpickers" I certainly hope to never meet someone who completely misses the point and decides to get into a tantrum instead of talking about it like an adult.

 

if you guys actually listened to what i had to say instead of dismissing my intentions as "power gaming" or "cheesing" i'd be less prone to "sudden outbursts of frustration" Rohr has clearly gotten around to understanding what i was trying to get at, I honestly don't know how to phrase it so that you'd understand but clearly "In my head, my army fights like X army so i want to use X army's rules" is not the way 

 

I literally just want to play a SM chapter that specializes in operating in small fireteams against innumerable opponents and in my HEAD that screams Crimson Fists but seeing as there is no way to get the Chapter Tactic of the CF unless I'm playing the army (because none of the chapters' tactics can be 100% recreated with the Successor Tactics rules) I'm stuck with either mismatched rules or color schemes i don't like

[FelipeFlops]

So in a nutshell, you choose your marines to be successors of X chapter, you pick two traits, and the only thing you miss out on of your parent chapter is special characters and have to pay a CP to use a relic? But you still get warlord traits, pysker powers, special wargear, doctrine ability, and stratagems?

 

That's correct 

[Schlitzaf]

 

 

 

 

I honestly hope I never meet someone like the nitpickers in this thread, if I had when I started out I probably wouldnt have stuck with the game for as long as I have. As Lord Blackwood and several others in this thread have already said, if you have a problem with the way someone decides to paint the models that they bought with their money, go find another opponent

And as plenty others have already said, that's exactly what we'd do. We don't try to force anybody to do anything. We only talk about our preferences and how things are handled on tournaments because then you are expected to follow the TOs rules.

The same way you hope to never meet some of us "nitpickers" I certainly hope to never meet someone who completely misses the point and decides to get into a tantrum instead of talking about it like an adult.

if you guys actually listened to what i had to say instead of dismissing my intentions as "power gaming" or "cheesing" i'd be less prone to "sudden outbursts of frustration" Rohr has clearly gotten around to understanding what i was trying to get at, I honestly don't know how to phrase it so that you'd understand but clearly "In my head, my army fights like X army so i want to use X army's rules" is not the way

 

I literally just want to play a SM chapter that specializes in operating in small fireteams against innumerable opponents and in my HEAD that screams Crimson Fists but seeing as there is no way to get the Chapter Tactic of the CF unless I'm playing the army (because none of the chapters' tactics can be 100% recreated with the Successor Tactics rules) I'm stuck with either mismatched rules or color schemes i don't like

As long as you don’t run any actual named characters or chapter unique units your fine. You can paint your Crimsons Fists as Pink Manly Marines. What you cannot do is run for example Gabriel Seth or FW Character and do CF tactics.

[Spinsanity]

I have to admit, it’s surprising seeing some people become so aggravated when others suggest they play the army they painted their models as. Sure it’s your models, do as you want, I get it. But why dis you paint them as <Chapter> if that’s not what you wanted to play? Why not give them a different chapter icon instead so there’d be no confusion?

 

Just make sure you steer clear of 30k, everyone playing that game cares for the narrative way more...

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

3. Playing as Crimson Fists even though your army isn't appropriately painted as such, thus potentially breaking immersion for you or others

Hey so real quick, can you post the page in the BRB or C:SM where it has the RULES for how crimson fists space marines should be painted? I explicitly want rules, not hobby or lore pages please.

 

 

How about you point me the page in the BRB that says Tau use Tau models, and not Eldar? WYSIWYG may have been a rule, but where is the actual RULE on what a bolter looks like? Where is the rule on what a Tactical Marine looks like? 

 

The fact remains, GW introduced Inheritors of the Primarch for a reason. They don't seem to want homebrew Chapters to actually be Ultramarines, for example, but to have the keyword of their Chapter name, and use Inheritors, or their choice of Successor Tactics. RAW, this is the case. My Sons of Sobek, despite being Iron Hands successors, can only take Inheritors, they cannot be Iron Hands ruleswise. 

In actual practice, hells no I'm not going to be that strict. You want to play your Ultraguys with Marneus Calguy? No problem. It's just that that isn't RAW, or apparently even RAI.

[Marshal van Trapp]

 

 

 

3. Playing as Crimson Fists even though your army isn't appropriately painted as such, thus potentially breaking immersion for you or others

Hey so real quick, can you post the page in the BRB or C:SM where it has the RULES for how crimson fists space marines should be painted? I explicitly want rules, not hobby or lore pages please.

How about you point me the page in the BRB that says Tau use Tau models, and not Eldar? WYSIWYG may have been a rule, but where is the actual RULE on what a bolter looks like? Where is the rule on what a Tactical Marine looks like?

 

The fact remains, GW introduced Inheritors of the Primarch for a reason. They don't seem to want homebrew Chapters to actually be Ultramarines, for example, but to have the keyword of their Chapter name, and use Inheritors, or their choice of Successor Tactics. RAW, this is the case. My Sons of Sobek, despite being Iron Hands successors, can only take Inheritors, they cannot be Iron Hands ruleswise.

In actual practice, hells no I'm not going to be that strict. You want to play your Ultraguys with Marneus Calguy? No problem. It's just that that isn't RAW, or apparently even RAI.

This whole response drips of hypocrisy and hyperbole, we're not talking about different factions, this is all down to the color you decide to paint your army and how now that has definitive influence on what rules you can and can't use now

 

I have to admit, it’s surprising seeing some people become so aggravated when others suggest they play the army they painted their models as. Sure it’s your models, do as you want, I get it. But why dis you paint them as <Chapter> if that’s not what you wanted to play? Why not give them a different chapter icon instead so there’d be no confusion?

 

Just make sure you steer clear of 30k, everyone playing that game cares for the narrative way more...

And what army should my primarily white with blue and red accent space marines play as? Because as discussed, the codex doesnt HAVE lore or otherwise for them because I made them up myself.

 

I've said it once and I'll say it again, it's not about using ultramarines as iron hands, it's about not being allowed to use your DiY paint scheme for any chapter you want!

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

 

 

3. Playing as Crimson Fists even though your army isn't appropriately painted as such, thus potentially breaking immersion for you or others

Hey so real quick, can you post the page in the BRB or C:SM where it has the RULES for how crimson fists space marines should be painted? I explicitly want rules, not hobby or lore pages please.

How about you point me the page in the BRB that says Tau use Tau models, and not Eldar? WYSIWYG may have been a rule, but where is the actual RULE on what a bolter looks like? Where is the rule on what a Tactical Marine looks like?

 

The fact remains, GW introduced Inheritors of the Primarch for a reason. They don't seem to want homebrew Chapters to actually be Ultramarines, for example, but to have the keyword of their Chapter name, and use Inheritors, or their choice of Successor Tactics. RAW, this is the case. My Sons of Sobek, despite being Iron Hands successors, can only take Inheritors, they cannot be Iron Hands ruleswise.

In actual practice, hells no I'm not going to be that strict. You want to play your Ultraguys with Marneus Calguy? No problem. It's just that that isn't RAW, or apparently even RAI.

This whole response drips of hypocrisy and hyperbole, we're not talking about different factions, this is all down to the color you decide to paint your army and how now that has definitive influence on what rules you can and can't use now

 

We kind of are, though. You get access to entirely different Supplements. Let's make it actually about full Codices, and make it about the differences between Blood Angels and Space Wolves. What makes a Space Wolf model? You're talking about rules for a specific paint scheme, and I'm just pointing out that nothing even remotely close to that exists for anything. There is no rule "Crimson Fists are dark blue with a red fist", any more than there are rules for "Eldar use Eldar models, and not Tyranid".

 

 

And what army should my primarily white with blue and red accent space marines play as? Because as discussed, the codex doesnt HAVE lore or otherwise for them because I made them up myself.

 

I've said it once and I'll say it again, it's not about using ultramarines as iron hands, it's about not being allowed to use your DiY paint scheme for any chapter you want!

 

And again, you can pick whatever you want, it's just that per RAW you cannot have your marines from the YourGuys Chapter actually have the Ultramarine Keyword. RAW, they must use the rules for Successor Tactics, which means they can pick Inheritors, but they cannot actually be a different Chapter, as they're YourGuys, not White Scars.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Lord_Caerolion

[Son of Sacrifice]

Part of the fun of creating your own chapter is getting to build your own tactics using the options presented in the rule book, no? I don't understand why you keep freaking out so much. If your army is painted and fleshed out, well done, nobody is calling you out as power gamer. But at the same time, why not use the new chapter creation tools? That's why they exist.

[Spinsanity]

This whole response drips of hypocrisy and hyperbole, we're not talking about different factions, this is all down to the color you decide to paint your army and how now that has definitive influence on what rules you can and can't use now

 

I've said it once and I'll say it again, it's not about using ultramarines as iron hands, it's about not being allowed to use your DiY paint scheme for any chapter you want!

Donyou adhere strictly to WYSIWYG, or do you often go along and use proxies?

 

In a tournament setting, would you expect your opponent’s army to follow that principle?

 

If so, why is it not right to use inaccurate models, but it is to use inaccurate paint schemes?

 

By the way, are you saying it’s not right for an Ultramarines player to play his army as Iron Hands? If you can using your DIY chapter, why can’t a UM player?

[Frostbit3]

Until this last codex there were no successor rules like this. So if I painted my dudes as pink manly marines and made Marneus pink no one cared a bit. Suddenly people have a problem with it. No one seems to care about any other race following their paint scheme though.

Do you also refuse to play against tyranids with the wrong scheme? What about guard? If they are playing as Mordian using cadian models do you refuse to play them?

[Marshal Reinhard]

I personally don't see a problem unless the army has a picture perfect adherence to something else than what they're being played as, and then only really in a tournament setting. In a private setting I would ask myself why the fellow across the table insists his red, blood drop wearing marines really are iron hands.

 

Why any of this should matter to DIY schemes I don't get.

 

Sure, as more and more powerful rules are being attributed to essentially what canonical paint scheme you have, more people will want what's on the table to reflect that, but still...

[WarriorFish]

It seems this topic has got stuck in a rut, and little productive is coming from it. I would remind everyone that the B&C is here for constructive discussion and going in circles is not productive. Sometime we must agree to disagree and leave it at that. It's unfortunate to also see some poor posting, please remember that respectful dialogue goes both ways and is the expected norm as detailed in the rules.

 

We will return to see about reopening this topic at a later time. Thanks.