PDA

View Full Version : Using 'counts as' to take unfluffy units.



J-man
06-05-2009, 23:24
I've always been one for giving roughly equal weight to the fluffiness and the effectiveness of an army. An army which is put together considering only effectiveness, to me, lacks character and takes away from the narrative quality of a game of 40k; whereas an army which is 100% fluffy but which lacks tabletop effectiveness will see you lose most of your games, and this isn't fun either.

Now say there's a unit you want to take for it's effectiveness, or just because it's fun, but it doesn't fit your fluff. You can either not take or come up with a 'counts as' solution. Eg I play a cc catachan army which would be greatly helped by a priest but in the fluff, catachans hate being joined by outsiders. So I modelled a drill seargent to count as one. Also I woiuld really like to use some storm troopers but again they're completely out of place in a catachan army, so thought about modelling some uber-camouflaged catachan vets, who always deepstrike and this counts as them coming out of ambush where they were previously hidden.

My question is, do people think this is a viable solution or just cheesy? Or does it depend on how good the explaination is for the unit being included? What 'counts as' units do you use and what are the storys behind them?

Acolyte
06-05-2009, 23:30
I actually love Counts-As stuff-it's a great way to get around stuff an army should have but doesn't-your Catachan example is a great way. I have no problem with any of it as long as someone explains it.

SimonL
06-05-2009, 23:34
When done with some thought and creativity, it's awesome :D

[SD] Bob Plisskin
06-05-2009, 23:52
The special characters are just bs anyway, who says that because you paint your army a certain colour and cant be bothered to make up your own background you can get the bonus of these special rules and wargear? If you can legally field the item and make it suit the theme of your army not just filling a power gap then I see no problems in that.

Ranger S2H
07-05-2009, 00:32
Im working on a storm trooper inquisitor, and I want a bound psyker to shield him from enemy psychic fireworks.
as I dont like the models nor the idea, I think Im gonna make somekind of technician with a lightning rod.
IMO its very simple: u can use any model for anything, as long as your opponenent knows what you are doing, and agrees with it.

Aitrus
07-05-2009, 00:39
I'm gonna be using 'count-as' solutions extensively in my IG army when I start building it.

Seeing as I'm going with a Gue'vesa army, playing the IG as a Tau-allied cadre, I can explain some of the IG choices, but some I just can't. For example, I want to use the regimental advisors (Astropath, Officer of the Fleet, and Master of Ordinance), but I can't really use the models that GW has released.

For the Officer, then, I'm going to use an Air Caste pilot, and I'm going to create an Earth Caste researcher for the Master. However, Tau aren't psychic, leaving me few choices for an Astropath. Instead, I'm going to use a Fire Caste commander, and explain his bonuses as the experience of a multitude of battles and campaigns telling him exactly where and when to bring in his forces.

Hashshashin
07-05-2009, 00:42
I do it as well and I support those who do.

It's not cheesy because it legal and restricting yourself because of fluff is your own chose, if the model looks cool and the explanation is good I say have at it

MajorWesJanson
07-05-2009, 00:46
I'm working on a Khorne Daemon army, but I want to use more than just the Khorne units, so I am using counts as for things like flamers, plaguebearers, horrors, and nurglings. For nurglings, I plan to put plastic skinks on a 60mm base is groups, and have them as "Gravelings." Small mischievous daemons who delight in setting up fatal accidents.

SimonL
07-05-2009, 00:51
For nurglings, I plan to put plastic skinks on a 60mm base is groups, and have them as "Gravelings." Small mischievous daemons who delight in setting up fatal accidents.

And have Orbital Bombardment represented by a toilet seat falling from orbit? :D

Cookie for anyone who gets that reference lol.

MajorWesJanson
07-05-2009, 01:43
I wish there were more than 2 seasons. And that is indeed where I got the idea.

CEO Kasen
07-05-2009, 01:43
At its best, "Counts As" is an exercise in creativity, both literary and artistic. Allow me to join in the throng calling for you to Go For It!

SimonL
07-05-2009, 01:49
I wish there were more than 2 seasons. And that is indeed where I got the idea.

As do I my friend. And the movie was terrible :cries:

Back on topic, I'm having fun creating my own versions of the characters in the new Marine 'dex. I've also got the Thrash Chrono-Gladiator from Inquisitor standing in as a Penitent Engine, representing a giant servitor.

Lord Humongous
07-05-2009, 02:51
Somehow I suspect that the net (gives +1 I) and demonic harpoon-gun (counts as "Lash of Submission") equipped demon prince leading my "World Eaters" wouldn't be quite as warmly embraced as the above examples. Its effective and makes the game a hell of a lot more fun (mass berserker rushes are BORING), and the model actually fits my theme nicely, but people just can't handle the fluff "violation", at least not when its chaos.

Ouroboros
07-05-2009, 03:10
I've always been one for giving roughly equal weight to the fluffiness and the effectiveness of an army. An army which is put together considering only effectiveness, to me, lacks character and takes away from the narrative quality of a game of 40k; whereas an army which is 100% fluffy but which lacks tabletop effectiveness will see you lose most of your games, and this isn't fun either.

Now say there's a unit you want to take for it's effectiveness, or just because it's fun, but it doesn't fit your fluff. You can either not take or come up with a 'counts as' solution. Eg I play a cc catachan army which would be greatly helped by a priest but in the fluff, catachans hate being joined by outsiders. So I modelled a drill seargent to count as one. Also I woiuld really like to use some storm troopers but again they're completely out of place in a catachan army, so thought about modelling some uber-camouflaged catachan vets, who always deepstrike and this counts as them coming out of ambush where they were previously hidden.

My question is, do people think this is a viable solution or just cheesy? Or does it depend on how good the explaination is for the unit being included? What 'counts as' units do you use and what are the storys behind them?

As far as I'm concerned the fact that you take the time to come up with a counts as model for the thing you want to use that actually fits with the character of your army means you're repsecting the background really.

You could easily just plop down a priest straight out of the blister but you're not doing that. I don't see how anyone would have a problem with you making more extra work for yourself just to preserve your theme and background while only exercising the options the book affords you.

Even a converted lash prince would annoy me personally a lot less than just plopping down the stock model and/or just painting it red. At least then you're actually trying to do something creative while you take advantage of the most overpowered psychic power in the game, as oppossed to just tossing down the stock model as the easiest way of unlocking it.

SimonL
07-05-2009, 03:42
Somehow I suspect that the net (gives +1 I) and demonic harpoon-gun (counts as "Lash of Submission") equipped demon prince leading my "World Eaters" wouldn't be quite as warmly embraced as the above examples. Its effective and makes the game a hell of a lot more fun (mass berserker rushes are BORING), and the model actually fits my theme nicely, but people just can't handle the fluff "violation", at least not when its chaos.


Fantastic idea I think. I would love that, much more than a random Slaaneshi DP leading a bunch of WEs.

Jackmojo
07-05-2009, 03:48
+1 vote for awesome conversion idea coupled with perfectly fair play.

I myself have been thinking about using a Space marine adviser as a Stracken counts-as since he's so space marine-y in his stats.

Jack

dooombot
07-05-2009, 04:40
Somehow I suspect that the net (gives +1 I) and demonic harpoon-gun (counts as "Lash of Submission") equipped demon prince leading my "World Eaters" wouldn't be quite as warmly embraced as the above examples. Its effective and makes the game a hell of a lot more fun (mass berserker rushes are BORING), and the model actually fits my theme nicely, but people just can't handle the fluff "violation", at least not when its chaos.

i converted some 'Slaanesh Berserkers' for my Slaanesh CSM force...they are counts-as Khorne Berserkers which I call Cenobites, devotees of Slaanesh who are fixated upon the sensations they feel when slaughtering (and when being slaughtered ;)). They heavily use combat-stims, and whip themselves into a frenzy before they charge into combat.

Some may find that "lame", but I won't field big red Khornies in my Slaanesh force. It lets me be creative and do some conversion/modelling work, and helps make my army my own.

Acolyte
07-05-2009, 04:44
Hey, for my planned Iron Warriors Siegebreakers army, I was going to use a converted Pentinent Engine with a huge flamethrower and a hammer for a Deamon Prince with Winds of Chaos. And, hell, I wasn't even going to use Iron Warriors for it-I was using Nurgle. Trade layers of rotted flesh and nerves for loads of cybernetics for the Toughness increase, and set.

Born Again
07-05-2009, 05:01
Well you've come up with a great expanation for your Catachans that really isn't a stretch of the fluff at all so why not! My Goffs are going to be including some Lootas to add some much needed shootiness. My explanation was suggested by someone else here on Warseer: the warboss punishes boyz who step out of line by making them stay at the back "manning da gunz"!

chromedog
07-05-2009, 05:04
And have Orbital Bombardment represented by a toilet seat falling from orbit? :D

Cookie for anyone who gets that reference lol.

"Dead like me".

George was cool.
A teen p'd off by her untimely and rather pointless death (by orbital re-entry toilet seat), and her fellow 'reapers'.

Haven't seen the movie yet (but it is scheduled to show up on our "showtime" cable channel sometime this year.).

mattschuur
07-05-2009, 05:09
Dead like me was awesome and by the sound of it, probably a good thing I didn't see the movie.

Counts as is all well and good by me. Before the new Guard dex i used converted Cultists, which i originally made for my Alpha Legion army, as warrior weapon Conscripts in my traitor guard army. Sadly now they will only be used for Dark Heresy games or apoc.

One thought on the tau guard idea. The Tau vehicle sprues come with a tank commander with legs, use him as either master of Ordinance or as a commander. Ethereal's might make good Master's of the fleet or astropath.

Guy i knew used a model he made with his IG commander in a hot tub. Counted as bionics and a trademark item. Pretty hilarious.

matt schuur

Clang
07-05-2009, 05:59
So long as you make an effort to write some justifying fluff, and make the model look like it matches its game stats, I'm all for Counts As.

Eulenspiegel
07-05-2009, 09:19
(...) but people just can't handle the fluff "violation", at least not when its chaos.
That has nothing to do with Chaos per se, but everything with you pulling an excuse out of your ar$e to include Lash in a Khorne Force ;)

J-man
07-05-2009, 20:47
And I thought I was the only one... This is good stuff, keep it coming! Another idea I had for my catachans was to use an ambush/trap specialist to represent an officer of the fleet - he hinders the arrival of opposition forces by setting traps etc - and an uber-camo forward scout to represent the astropath. The only thing I really can't justify is a commissar. Catachans shooting their brothers is just not right. Of course there are times when commissars are forced on a catachan regiment by the higher-ups but these ones often meet with 'unfortunate accidents'.

Grimtuff
07-05-2009, 21:13
I do this for my Khorne Daemon force.

I have "Goreforgers", these are the unfortunate slaves to Khorne, the warriors who died in their sleep who toil in his forges creating weapons for the higher Daemons. They step into battle clad head to toe in brass armour and carry huge Bloodglaives a weapon magically attuned to go for the victim's neck no matter where the Daemon wields it.

I count these as Plaguebearers. The armour representing the T5, FNP and S&P and the axes representing the poisoned attacks. :)

I also have "Charnel Knights". These are vanguard of Khorne's armies, directing the Fleshounds to seek out those who displease Khorne.

I count these as Fiends of Slaanesh.

I will eventually do the same with the Slaanesh portion. With them having "Gluttons" (Plaguebearers) and "Sunderserpents" (Flamers).

Lord Humongous
07-05-2009, 21:38
That has nothing to do with Chaos per se, but everything with you pulling an excuse out of your ar$e to include Lash in a Khorne Force ;)

That's my point; I shouldn't need to make any excuses just because its a "Khorne" force. Its no different from a blue + gold painted marine army using a "Vulkan He'stan".

Meriwether
07-05-2009, 21:43
I have no issues whatsoever with "counts as".

...but then again, I have no issue with building a legal army that makes fluff(r)nut(er)s' heads burst, either. If it's legal, you can do it. If you want to do it, and you can do it, do it. It's your hobby time. It's your money. Have fun. If other people don't like it... Who cares? It's *still* your money and your time.

I find the notion that anyone has to defend a legal army list to a fellow player *absurd*. As in literally, laugh-out-loud ridiculous. Fluff-tyrants are every bit -- if not more -- annoying than Easter-Egg hunting cheese-mongers, IMNHO.

Meri

Kaihlik
07-05-2009, 22:17
The cooler the conversion the easier "counts as" goes down. If someone just wants to use other models because he cant be bothered getting the proper ones (or ones close enough) then it smacks of lazieness. If someone converts loads of units with a cool theme and then trys to fit it in the army the best he can then thats cool. Likewise if they use a rules to come up with their own variant, as long as it looks cool.

Meriwether
07-05-2009, 22:46
If someone just wants to use other models because he cant be bothered getting the proper ones (or ones close enough) then it smacks of lazieness.

Ok... Why would you care if someone wants to use their hobby time in a lazy way?

Meri

Vishok
08-05-2009, 00:21
I don't think anything in a list that is put into it is unfluffy. It had to be fluffed at some point. Even if it seems unfluffy, I promise you there is something in the 40k lore that can justify it, even if it is "the galaxy is a huge and terrible place!"

I say put a few commissars in there and the stormtroopers and let the Catachans just deal with it. It's not like Catachan is autonomous - they ALL answer to the word of the Emperor!!

No more problems with list legality, no more fluff mongers (unless they haven't done their homework) and no conversion work to do (unless your heart bleeds if you use unaltered models).

Your fluff could be they put the Commissar with the crappiest squad in all the army. cuz they hate him. Or he runs with the ST. Cuz everyone hates them. Or he executes them a lot. And they hate him.

Go with a Commissar Lord and it becomes HIS army. Plenty of Stormtroopers. The Catachans are just tools, like all the other IG anyway. Throw in the Penal Legion based on Catachans to represent the more rebellious elements that the Lord wants to do away with.

Read the 3rd Ed Catachan codex if you haven't already.

Clang
08-05-2009, 03:59
Just one other 'counts as' issue: make sure your model is about the same size as whatever it 'counts as' - e.g. don't make a Sentinel-sized model which counts as a Leman Russ - opponents will suspect (rightly or wrongly) that you're trying to get some unfair advantage. If you have an absolutely fabulous wrong-sized model, there are sometimes ways around this - e.g. to continue the example, you could put the Sentinel-sized model on a Russ-sized base with some appropriately Russ-sized base decoration and explain that it counts as being the size of a Russ for all gaming purposes. (Making a bigger model count as a smaller model isn't as easy :) )

MF3000
08-05-2009, 05:13
Count as stuff is just an extension of fluff writing; which is a fundamental aspect of this hobby... I have no qualms about count as stuff; I can always ask about stuff I don't know about in the opponent's army.

I think the problem starts when some players just 'assume' everything GW produces as unchanging canon that cannot ever be challenged or changed. I hate those players, and sometimes I just want to burn all their miniatures on the table top, and force feed into their eyeballs just to make the point clear; fluff is fluff, and this is a creative hobby, we can screw things around and explain it (although not justify it).

sj

CEO Kasen
08-05-2009, 05:15
I don't think anything in a list that is put into it is unfluffy. It had to be fluffed at some point. Even if it seems unfluffy, I promise you there is something in the 40k lore that can justify it, even if it is "the galaxy is a huge and terrible place!"

Indeed! 40K contains nearly every form of sci-fi (and often fantasy) handwavium imaginable; Genetic manipulation, FTL travel, psychic powers, unexplored alien races, an alternate energy dimension, demons, ancient gods, and frickin' sorcery, and that doesn't cover the half of it; If you want to justify it or have a battle over it, 40K gives you the tools to do so, and says "Have fun!" :D

Given how easy it is, it's only vexing when people take no steps to justify a power-combo eyebrow-raiser.

Ddraiglais
08-05-2009, 05:46
When done right, 'counts as' is one of the greatest things to happen to 40K. If you put some thought into it, it makes the game so much better. I use 'counts as' all the time to justify things in my IW army. Since I'm a fluff nazi, I won't take unfluffy units; but I don't want to be too hindered by my lack of choices either.

Jackmojo
08-05-2009, 06:44
Just one other 'counts as' issue: make sure your model is about the same size as whatever it 'counts as' - e.g. don't make a Sentinel-sized model which counts as a Leman Russ - opponents will suspect (rightly or wrongly) that you're trying to get some unfair advantage. If you have an absolutely fabulous wrong-sized model, there are sometimes ways around this - e.g. to continue the example, you could put the Sentinel-sized model on a Russ-sized base with some appropriately Russ-sized base decoration and explain that it counts as being the size of a Russ for all gaming purposes. (Making a bigger model count as a smaller model isn't as easy :) )

I've heard this arguement made in earnest several times before, i.e. that a given conversion was made specifically for game advantage and personally, while its certainly possible, I tend to write it off as poor sprotsmanship on the part of the complainer myself. The 40k ruleset is not so finely tuned that changes to the models used are going to break what 'balance' it has, so I encourage folks to make all those neato models and worry about game stuff later (if at all).

A good example would be a friend's Praetorian army, which he ordered back in the day spcifically to have his guys in a double firing line with kneeling guys in front. Certainly the kneeling troopers can shelter behind lower walls and avoid being shot, but its hardly a game breaking advantage even on the times he specifically moves them so it does occur.

Jack

Occulto
08-05-2009, 07:38
I do this for my Khorne Daemon force.

I have "Goreforgers", these are the unfortunate slaves to Khorne, the warriors who died in their sleep who toil in his forges creating weapons for the higher Daemons. They step into battle clad head to toe in brass armour and carry huge Bloodglaives a weapon magically attuned to go for the victim's neck no matter where the Daemon wields it.

I count these as Plaguebearers. The armour representing the T5, FNP and S&P and the axes representing the poisoned attacks. :)

I also have "Charnel Knights". These are vanguard of Khorne's armies, directing the Fleshounds to seek out those who displease Khorne.

I count these as Fiends of Slaanesh.

I will eventually do the same with the Slaanesh portion. With them having "Gluttons" (Plaguebearers) and "Sunderserpents" (Flamers).

That's really cool. Got any pics?

More for WHFB, but I bought 24 of the old, old fiends off a friend. Considering how much they cost point wise, 24's overkill - so I'm going to use them as Hounds of Slaanesh using the Flesh Hound rules. They're about the same size as Flesh Hounds.

Similarly, I've got 4 Dragon Ogres that'll never be part of a Beasts army so I intend to convert them to use as Blood Crushers (aka some kind of Harem Guard type "enforcers").

The thing is, 40K's so broad as a system, that just about anything goes. Generally, if you're doing it to be interesting - people will be pretty much OK with it. Stick a good, converted unit down and most people will enjoy something out of the ordinary.

If it's obvious that you're just doing it to smack your opponent round, then obviously some people are going to grumble. But really, sometimes I think no matter what you do, seems someone's going to find fault. :p

Tanner MIrabel
08-05-2009, 08:06
DH/WH Inquisitors lend themselves to counts-as very well. With a bit of imagination you can have almost any model in a warband. For example, among my counts-as Inquisitors are:

- An ad-mech magos and his servitor retinue (old-school techmarines as acolytes in power armour)
- A cardinal and his entourage (lots of priests and robes)
- An arbites judge

Basically, if I like a figure, I can have it in my force somewhere - almost without exception.

borithan
08-05-2009, 08:28
Eg I play a cc catachan army which would be greatly helped by a priest but in the fluff, catachans hate being joined by outsiders. So I modelled a drill seargent to count as one.OK, so a slight fluff problem there... maybe. Are there not any native Catachan Priests? But anyway, as long as there is good justification for the "counts as" figure doing what the thing it counts as I don't see any problem. So, basically I would have a problem with you trying to justify a single infantry figure operating like a Leman Russ, but besides that and similar things, as long as you can give a good justification for it I see no issues.



Also I woiuld really like to use some storm troopers but again they're completely out of place in a catachan army,Are they? Stormtroopers are meant to serve pretty much everywhere with every unit out there. True, you may not think they fit with the visual look of your army, but background wise I see no problem with using normal Stormtroopers. They would be operating alongside the Catachans, not bossing themabout, which is what I always thought the problem was (ie, their dislike of Commissars etc).



so thought about modelling some uber-camouflaged catachan vets, who always deepstrike and this counts as them coming out of ambush where they were previously hidden.Well, they would have to be carapace armoured catachans... which sounds like quite a bit of work... but hey, if you want to do that, I see no problem.

Grimtuff
08-05-2009, 08:33
That's really cool. Got any pics?


Check my sig, they're all in my plog. ;)

The Goreforgers are the Chosen models (so, yes it was just an excuse to get some damn cool looking models in a Daemon army. :p)
The Charnel Knights are simply Chaos Knights with Bloodletter heads. :)

Occulto
08-05-2009, 08:35
Check my sig, they're all in my plog. ;)

Ahh.

(I have sigs switched off)

Master Stark
08-05-2009, 09:03
Ok... Why would you care if someone wants to use their hobby time in a lazy way?

Meri


Not answering for Kaihlik, but I feel the same way he does.

People can do whatever they want, it's their hobby and their time, after all. But when we play a game together, it is no longer just their time. It is shared time.

And I prefer to share my time with players who take the time and put in the effort to have nicely painted and converted armies. Not to say I won't play someone else, or that a nicely painted and converted army is the most important consideration, but it is something I take into consideration when choosing opponents.

destroyerlord
08-05-2009, 10:59
I use my old Iron Warriors warsmith as a traitor chaos lord. (Its not just renegade marines, my army is based on an entire rogue system). Anyway, his servo arm counts as a second lightning claw since the new codex got rid of the option (not that a single powerfist attack was ever worth the 30 points it cost in the old codex anyway). Not quite ideal, and not as poetic as the OP's examples, but since his actual load out is illegal I find that this is the 'next best' option (unless I count it as a daemon weapon, which I'd prefer not to).

Meriwether
08-05-2009, 12:12
Not answering for Kaihlik, but I feel the same way he does.

People can do whatever they want, it's their hobby and their time, after all. But when we play a game together, it is no longer just their time. It is shared time.

True. Personally, I would rather play against someone with a barely-assembled, unpainted slag heap of an army that is effectively designed and is very well played by my opponent than a fluffy, awesomely converted and painted army that puts my opponent at a severe strategic disadvantage played by a numbskull.

Ideally, we'd all be butt-kicking, name-taking tournament-level players with Golden Daemon winning armies... But of course that's not going to happen.

So I guess I'll just chalk it up to a matter of priorities and preferences. I don't understand why anyone would care what their opponent's armies look like (or whether or not the composition is fluffy) -- but I guess I don't have to. It is, after all, your hobby time as well.

Meri

aberrant_unc
08-05-2009, 12:27
Using fluff and conversions to justify otherwise unfluffy choices is very cool- unless you are doing it just to take the power army / power unit du jour.

My nurgle prince with tentacles count as lash - my plague mortar teams fire disease filled skulls - they count as obliterators!

A cheesy, beardy army is a cheesy, beardy army no matter how you justify it.

On the other hand, if you convert up big flies to be your nurgle raptors, or huge slugs for nurgle bikers, that is super cool - because those units aren't cheesy and you are just coming up with a nifty reason to have an otherwise not that fluffy option in your list.

Aegius
08-05-2009, 12:53
Not answering for Kaihlik, but I feel the same way he does.

People can do whatever they want, it's their hobby and their time, after all. But when we play a game together, it is no longer just their time. It is shared time.

And I prefer to share my time with players who take the time and put in the effort to have nicely painted and converted armies. Not to say I won't play someone else, or that a nicely painted and converted army is the most important consideration, but it is something I take into consideration when choosing opponents.


True. Personally, I would rather play against someone with a barely-assembled, unpainted slag heap of an army that is effectively designed and is very well played by my opponent than a fluffy, awesomely converted and painted army that puts my opponent at a severe strategic disadvantage played by a numbskull.

Ideally, we'd all be butt-kicking, name-taking tournament-level players with Golden Daemon winning armies... But of course that's not going to happen.

So I guess I'll just chalk it up to a matter of priorities and preferences. I don't understand why anyone would care what their opponent's armies look like (or whether or not the composition is fluffy) -- but I guess I don't have to. It is, after all, your hobby time as well.

Meri

I agree with both of you. I do things slightly differently though. I have put a lot of time into painting my models and I have also spent a lot of time making the terrain that my opponents play on. If I've put all this time into painting my army and the table that they get to play on, don't they at least owe me the courtesy of accurately modelling their powerlists?

As I've put MY time into making their scenery, doesn't that make their hobby shared time without me even taking my army to the table. There are far too many people out there that use the 'its my money and my time' arguement. In my mind they are inconsiderate and selfish.

On saying this, I don't refuse to play against this sort of person, but 1 nicely painted army on a nicely modelled board looks very good until the other person puts their abortion of an army on the other side of the table. I may as well have not put any effort into my army at all and used books as hills etc. They have wasted my time and ruined my hobby, whilst at the same time waxing lyrical about how 'I have no right to complain as it is their time and money.' First of all, how is partially sticking their models an excuse as to it being their time? they've spent barely any time at all assembling their models. Secondly, I've spent my time and money on building the terrain that they are playing on, how many of the CoD buildings that they are playing on have they paid for? thats right.......zero. How many hours of their time have they put into painting said buildings? again........zero. This sort of person takes without giving, whilst making you feel bad for wanting to take a little bit too.

I'm lucky and I don't have to play against this type of opponent very often. I do get sick of reading their 'moral high ground' arguements on forums though.

On the flip side of the coin, someone that spends hours meticulously painting their models because they are 'pretty' but doesn't bother 'bringing it' is also paying me a dis-service as there is no challenge in the game.

out of the 2, I get more annoyed with people not painting their armies whilst scorning me with selfish arguements than I do with people not writing decent lists or bothering with tactics. My reason for this is because I've met the first type of opponent more than half way and the second type will quite often accept help in list building and tactics, sometimes the reason they aren't fielding effective lists is because they don't want to use unpainted models. A way around this is to have a rule in your group that all armies must be at least 'a little more painted than in the previous game.' I've been applying this in my gaming and it is actually motivating me to paint a little more than I usually would have, even if it is only base coating a unit that I probably would never have bothered painting at all. This allows me to use units that are maybe not the most effective in the game more than just the first time when I'm trying them out.

I'm sorry about the ranting and the off topicness, but I just had to get this out there.

Meriwether
08-05-2009, 13:28
You could always charge a small fee for table usage. That's what my LGS does -- it's for upkeep cost for the scenery, not for profit-taking.

As for the time issue: If I have very limited time to game in general, I would rather spend it playing than painting. When I have time to paint, I paint. (And I have over thirty thousand points in painted models amongst my seven armies). But often enough I do *not* have time to paint, and so I end up fielding something without paint on it.

I don't think I deserve scorn for that, any more than people who bring crappy lists (and crappier tactics) deserve scorn -- they should just seek out those of like mind to play games against.

As to the 'must be a little more painted than in the previous game' rule... Do you actually turn people away, and refuse to let them play, if they have not had (or made) time to paint something? Truly?

Meri

Aegius
08-05-2009, 14:08
You could always charge a small fee for table usage. That's what my LGS does -- it's for upkeep cost for the scenery, not for profit-taking.

As for the time issue: If I have very limited time to game in general, I would rather spend it playing than painting. When I have time to paint, I paint. (And I have over thirty thousand points in painted models amongst my seven armies). But often enough I do *not* have time to paint, and so I end up fielding something without paint on it.

I don't think I deserve scorn for that, any more than people who bring crappy lists (and crappier tactics) deserve scorn -- they should just seek out those of like mind to play games against.

As to the 'must be a little more painted than in the previous game' rule... Do you actually turn people away, and refuse to let them play, if they have not had (or made) time to paint something? Truly?

Meri

I game with a group of friends. I'm not going to charge for using the terrain I have built. My point of view is a theoretical one more than anything, directed more to the interwebz than any individuals.

The standards I have put down here are standards I hold MYSELF to. I don't game with fully painted armies anymore, I used to, but I found that I was restricting myself too much, meaning that I wasn't able to truely 'bring it'. As long as I have put a bit more paint on MY models between games I feel better about having a unit or two of not fully painted models on the board. This also gets around the whole 'not having time' issue, as you only need to spend about 5 minutes a week or so if you are pushed for time.
I have used these methods to allow me to move away from both of the extremes of the hobby and put myself somewhere in the middle, a little bit of give and a little bit of take.

In my group I am the only person with an army that is even close to fully painted. I play against unpainted armies most of the time. It's frustrating, but I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face. The reason I only play against my friends now is because I got bored of playing at my local GW against people that didn't even bother to undercoat their models. Not only were the models unpainted, but the players didn't have the slightest grasp of tactics and army building. I've gone for the lesser of 2 evils.

As for your 30k of painted models merri. That is quite an achievement, people like you are not the sort of people that I'm refering to when I talk about unpainted models. I'm talking about the people that barely even stick their models together let alone undercoat them. The sort of person that has 30k of unpainted models that aren't even primered.

Meriwether
08-05-2009, 14:19
As for your 30k of painted models merri. That is quite an achievement, people like you are not the sort of people that I'm refering to when I talk about unpainted models. I'm talking about the people that barely even stick their models together let alone undercoat them. The sort of person that has 30k of unpainted models that aren't even primered.

What if I also have 30K of unpainted models that aren't even primered, and I use them anyway? (That's not hypothetical, by the way. I have an addiction...)

Meri

Aegius
08-05-2009, 14:37
What if I also have 30K of unpainted models that aren't even primered, and I use them anyway? (That's not hypothetical, by the way. I have an addiction...)

Meri

'my name is meri and I'm a 40kaholic'

lol

In answer to your question. If they were in the same state the second time I played them, I'd not refuse to play you, the same as I wouldn't refuse to play my friends. It really wouldn't take long to give them a quick coat of primer though would it? The third time, I'd play you again, but wouldn't it be nicer if they had a teeny bit of basecoat on this week? I'm not after golden demon standard models, but a little bit of effort wouldn't go amiss would it? As I said previously, I'm giving by playing against an army that doesn't meet up to the standards I hold myself to. (yes, I do get a game out of it, but to me, that is just a part of the hobby as a whole.) It would also be nice if my opponent gave a little, by just applying a little bit of paint to the models every week. I'm not asking them for it, I'm not going to moan to the person I'm playing, it would just be nice if there was a little bit of give on their behalf.

The Song of Spears
08-05-2009, 14:37
Now say there's a unit you want to take for it's effectiveness, or just because it's fun, but it doesn't fit your fluff. You can either not take or come up with a 'counts as' solution. Eg I play a cc catachan army which would be greatly helped by a priest but in the fluff, catachans hate being joined by outsiders. So I modelled a drill seargent to count as one. Also I woiuld really like to use some storm troopers but again they're completely out of place in a catachan army, so thought about modelling some uber-camouflaged catachan vets, who always deepstrike and this counts as them coming out of ambush where they were previously hidden.

My question is, do people think this is a viable solution or just cheesy? Or does it depend on how good the explaination is for the unit being included? What 'counts as' units do you use and what are the storys behind them?

These are both wonderful ideas i 100% support creative ideas like you have mentioned here. Saying anything against these ideas is just pedantic in the most sad way.

Talos
08-05-2009, 15:24
Not answering for Kaihlik, but I feel the same way he does.

People can do whatever they want, it's their hobby and their time, after all. But when we play a game together, it is no longer just their time. It is shared time.

And I prefer to share my time with players who take the time and put in the effort to have nicely painted and converted armies. Not to say I won't play someone else, or that a nicely painted and converted army is the most important consideration, but it is something I take into consideration when choosing opponents.

I agree 100% if I play someone that has a unpainted army thats fine but if in a few weeks time its still unpainted or show no effort, I am not playing them again. There is nothing better then seeing two painted armies battle it out.
I dont mind playing against unfluffy armies but I would much more enjoy a fluffy army. I love the fluff its what makes GW so good without the fluff its just plastic soliders.
Also if you arnt going to paint your models or even try to stick to the background then why dont you buy cheap prepainted models and just use GW rules ? (this is not directed towards anybody just my thoughts when I see unpainted and unfluffy armies)

I have never fielded Unpainted units every or even primed. When I buy a unit or model I paint it before I use it. This may limited me but most of the time I only have a game once a week. So I normally have my game on the weekend i then buy some models after the game then spend the week painting them. I dont find this limits me as before I start a new army I right up 2 lists I like and get the models for them. So by the time I have most of my army painted I already have the core so somethings I only need to add a dread or a another pred etc which is easy to paint in a week. I have yet to run into the problem oh I wish I could field that squad this week, if only they where painted. Although this could all change with my new Traitor guard army as I have never played a horde army before :)
I only takes about 30 mins a day for a week to get a whole squad or a few characters painted up to a nice standard. With the inks and foundation paint it takes even less time.

Now back to the topic I am all for count as to take unfluffy units. As there arnt many options in the Chaos dex which dont led to unfluffy armies I have started using count as. So far I have made Slaanesh Zerkers. These are just normal Slaanesh marines but with Bolt pistols and whips although a few have halberds. I have also given them all the back pack that Lucious has to show the combat drugs. I think the models show the added combat weapons and drugs for extra attacks and fucious charge.

satanslandlady
08-05-2009, 17:41
I personally plan to make dryads into 'Lustbearer's of Slaanesh' to count as plaguebearers... I theorize they're too busy touching themselves to move any faster and its harder to find the will to kill naked female creatures touching themselves XD. Yes.. fluff logic...cause I don't like plaguebearers but their stats could be useful.

jsullivanlaw
08-05-2009, 18:29
Somehow I suspect that the net (gives +1 I) and demonic harpoon-gun (counts as "Lash of Submission") equipped demon prince leading my "World Eaters" wouldn't be quite as warmly embraced as the above examples. Its effective and makes the game a hell of a lot more fun (mass berserker rushes are BORING), and the model actually fits my theme nicely, but people just can't handle the fluff "violation", at least not when its chaos.

It bothers me that the chaos players tend to accuse each other of being unfluffy quite a bit. You just got to understand that it's CHAOS. They don't follow strict guidlines. The gods of chaos do fight wars but they work together often as well. They do what they want. And regardless of how the Gods feel about each other, their mortal followers are pretty far removed from the Gods and can make their own decisions.

Ddraiglais
09-05-2009, 07:29
It bothers me that the chaos players tend to accuse each other of being unfluffy quite a bit. You just got to understand that it's CHAOS. They don't follow strict guidlines. The gods of chaos do fight wars but they work together often as well. They do what they want. And regardless of how the Gods feel about each other, their mortal followers are pretty far removed from the Gods and can make their own decisions.

Ummm, no. Up until the current abomination (some call it the 4th ed codex), there were special rules for who hated who (Khorne/Slaanesh and Nurgle/Tzeentch). AFAIK, this goes back at least until 2nd. Whether the rules allow it or not, it's wrong to a lot of us who have been playing for a long time. It'd almost be like having the UM turn to Chaos or Ork peace loving hippies.

The only acceptable way I can think of to get around having units from opposing gods in the same army is having a powerful (Undivided) lord such as Abby present. Now 'counts as' is a wonderful way to get around this without going against fluff. I'd have no problem with someone using a nicely converted miniature as a 'counts as' thirster in a Slaanesh army if it looked like a Slaanesh daemon with thirster stats. As a matter of fact, I think that's pretty sweet when people do it.

To address all the painting nazis out there. What about an attempt at painted? I pour my heart into painting; but sadly after a decade and a half, my minis still look like crap. The skills just aren't there. Would I be able to play against your well painted armies on your nice boards?

Aegius
09-05-2009, 07:48
To address all the painting nazis out there. What about an attempt at painted? I pour my heart into painting; but sadly after a decade and a half, my minis still look like crap. The skills just aren't there. Would I be able to play against your well painted armies on your nice boards?

Even though I'll never turn down a game just because my opponent hasn't painted their models, I'll put myself as one of these 'painting nazis'.

The answer to your question is 'yes, I'd absolutely play you.'. You've put in the effort to try and make your models look as nice as possible. I'd enjoy playing against you, because you've made the effort. If someone doesn't make the effort to paint their models, you have to wonder what other parts of the game they've only paid lip service to. A good soldiers uniform will be immaculate, as This shows attention to detail. I carry this theory across to my hobby. In my experience, unpainted models = lack of general interest.

Please remember, I'm not talking about 1 game here, I'm talking about people that regularly field the same army, but you never see any progression in the painting.

As I posted above, its all about embracing the hobby in its entirety and meeting your opponent half way. If you have put the effort in, who is to say that your minis look like crap anyway. Its purely subjective. I think that John Blanche's artwork is utter crap, but many many people love it. Am I wrong? no I'm not, its just my opinion, the same as my opinion on unpainted models.

Treadhead_1st
09-05-2009, 19:10
I have unpainted hordes, so I wouldn't ever refuse to play an unpainted army (hypocrisy isn't a good trait), however ideally I'd like to be playing a fully-painted force and facing the same, on a (nice) custom terrain board, not the junk we have at our local GW.

Back to the OP:

I tend to let "counts-as" slide to allow players to include "unfluffy" things. After all, the counts-as makes it fluffy for the army.

It also depends on the situation - if someone is using "counts-as" because they thought they could make a cool conversion (we've all thought about it), or because their army is seriously (and I mean seriously) hamstrung without that unit (say...someone doesn't like Inquisitorial Storm Troopers or Sisters of Battle but uses Skitarii instead - playing withouth a legal Troops chioce would be hard). However, if someone is bunging a unit in because "it's leet and in all the tournament armies" then I'd begin to question it (mainly because a lot of the copy+paste lists/units from the Net aren't so hot, at least when taken if other peoples' armies, but that's another topic).

I'd still not refuse a game though. I like, you know, being able to play with my toy soldiers.

Kaihlik
09-05-2009, 21:41
Ok... Why would you care if someone wants to use their hobby time in a lazy way?Go ahead its not my problem if you do. If im playing you though and your lasgun is a lascannon and a rocket launcher and a heavy bolter depending on your squad then dont expect me to be happy about it or to want to play against it again. I dont see a problem with that.

You (not directing this at you Meri) can be as lazy as you want but if I am your opponent then you cant expect me to have to bother with you not trying. I am not asking for a beautifly painted army full of conversions, although that is alot nicer to play against, but to have the models with the right equiptment so that I know what I am playing against surely isn't too much of a request.

I have played against count as armies before and it isn't necissarily a problem for example (although this is a fantasy case) I played against a lizardman army with all kinds of wierd stand in's. It wasn't too much of a problem at the time because we discussed his counts as and nothing was representing different units but I dont really want to play against that on a regular basis. It also helped that they guy I was playing actually is an awsome painter and converter and has armies full of stunning conversions and paint jobs (as well as being a GT player).

Anyway too each his own but I just tend to feel that playing a game is a shared experiance and as such I think it is a mistake to discount your opponents opinions because you want to be lazy. (I'm fairly sure that this post does not accurately convey my point but I have a headache so dont read too much into what I have written here.)

Kaihlik

Meriwether
09-05-2009, 22:24
Go ahead its not my problem if you do. If im playing you though and your lasgun is a lascannon and a rocket launcher and a heavy bolter depending on your squad then dont expect me to be happy about it or to want to play against it again. I dont see a problem with that.

Fair enough -- I expect a certain amount of wysiwyg myself, although I do accept a certain amount of proxy, too... But if I have to concentrate really hard just to remember what is supposed to be what, it's probably too far!

Meri

shutupSHUTUP!!!
09-05-2009, 22:47
I'm perfectly fine with counts as models. Personally I dislike fluffy armies that take things to extremes on the other hand. For instance if you play an Iyanden army, sure, throw a Wraithlord and a squad of Wraightguard in there to show it's an Iyanden army, but use them in numbers that makes sense for the size of the game and try to create some synergy with the rest of your army.

I prefer to see armies that show the flavour of the faction to an extent, without the erroneous belief that they may only use 1/4th of the codex or something. Back in 3rd/4th edition I regularly heard that Devastators were an unfluffy unit for Blood Angels, despite the fact that technically the Blood Angels have just as many Devastators as the Ultramarines and Imperial Fists.

Lord Humongous
10-05-2009, 03:39
So I guess I'll just chalk it up to a matter of priorities and preferences. I don't understand why anyone would care what their opponent's armies look like (or whether or not the composition is fluffy) -- but I guess I don't have to. It is, after all, your hobby time as well.

Meri

I care because the look of the game is a major part of why I play it. I don't much like using my own unpainted models for the same reason. If all the models are decently painted (it hardly has to be GD level) the game is a lot nicer to look at, and that goes a long way (for me) to making it funner to play. Its not like I play because the rules are so great....
Also, unpainted (and even some badly painted) figs are hard to tell apart, let alone make out the equipment on. One flat silver or grey gun (painted or not) looks much like another; decent painting helps bring out the shape.

Not arguing at all, just trying to make it easy to understand. I guess some people have fun playing with paper chits, and I can get that, I suspect even those folks care what an army looks like, in that they'd find a good looking army more fun to play against, all else equal.

Occulto
10-05-2009, 06:45
I'm perfectly fine with counts as models. Personally I dislike fluffy armies that take things to extremes on the other hand. For instance if you play an Iyanden army, sure, throw a Wraithlord and a squad of Wraightguard in there to show it's an Iyanden army, but use them in numbers that makes sense for the size of the game and try to create some synergy with the rest of your army.

I prefer to see armies that show the flavour of the faction to an extent, without the erroneous belief that they may only use 1/4th of the codex or something. Back in 3rd/4th edition I regularly heard that Devastators were an unfluffy unit for Blood Angels, despite the fact that technically the Blood Angels have just as many Devastators as the Ultramarines and Imperial Fists.

I hear you.

"Has more of <unit X>" inevitably gets taken to mean: "May only take <unit X>"

If someone wants to build an Alpha Legion army that isn't all whisper quiet infiltrate, then good luck to them. Nothing wrong with seeing a converted up Alpha Legion mechanised force.

Interestingly enough, in the bad old days of the last BA codex, the most balanced and fun BA armies to play were written as a "Codex army that just happened to have these additional rules."

Thanatos_elNyx
10-05-2009, 10:17
Nah its completely fine. I plan on converting some Thousand Sons to have chainswords and counts as Khorne Berserkers.
Quite unfluffy but I think it'll look cool so I am going to go ahead with it.


In my experience, unpainted models = lack of general interest.

That is harsh, I am crap at paint but love converting.
As soon as I have finished one conversion I am working on the next.
I love playing the game and while I do generally get around to painting it still means I play a lot of games with only undercoated minis.

zoggin-eck
10-05-2009, 11:21
I prefer to see armies that show the flavour of the faction to an extent, without the erroneous belief that they may only use 1/4th of the codex or something. Back in 3rd/4th edition I regularly heard that Devastators were an unfluffy unit for Blood Angels, despite the fact that technically the Blood Angels have just as many Devastators as the Ultramarines and Imperial Fists.

Again, I agree too.

I think the new Guard codex addresses this somewhat. Whether you like it or not, guardsmen are all very similar on the table. If you want catachan, go with some appropriate options, and play them appropriately. Doesn't mean that every battle they fight in is on their own terms, with every trooper charging out of bushes.

There is some artwork of catachan infantry and a commissar manning a wall as steel legion (I assume) advance, supported by tanks, flyers etc. I liked this, kind of showed that on every battlefield they wouldn't be all armed with flamers. Out of their element, they would seem like any other guardsmen.

Back to the original post, though. I quite like the examples given, J-man, and would love to see them.

I take some inspiration from the people who put together Adeptus Mechanicus lists out of a current codex. The same goes for mono god chaos daemon armies, where the player wants to have more choices than just the two or three unit choices. Flying Daemonettes or harpies instead of Furies is fun, swarms of Tzeentch-mutated humans instead of Nurglings are cool too, so why not other armies?

There are of course people who just do it to fill a gap, like in fantasy the number of "themed" mercenary cannons used in chaos and undead armies is funny, but really I have no trouble with. They would be choosing a supposedly competitive army even if they were not using the odd proxy

blameless
12-05-2009, 02:31
Ahhhhh I hate CC gaurd! they killed my lysander!

But seriously, J-mans army is very cool and feels very fluffy to play against...
even if you do out CC the toughest space marine in the game!

noobzilla
12-05-2009, 02:54
I know that my idea has been done before, but I always loved the idea of Rough Riders... unfortunately Cadians don't really use horses. So I wanted to do bikes... I have Rough Rider Bikes for my Cadians.

TheDarkDuke
12-05-2009, 03:02
Im all for things like this most of the time. There are times I just don't see it as fluffly. There was an army list on here for a Bad Moons army but contained nothing Bad Moons but 60 Shoota Boyz. To me if your picking a fluff army you should at the very least have 80% of that army as it should be. This particular list was clearly Goffs with Thraka, plain and simple and asked how he would be scored in a tournament but claimed to be Bad Moons.

I have a DG army, and wanted a infantry only. It would be more effective with some rhinos but I wanted pure infantry. To make up for the foot slogging (only 1 unit of Terminators by the way) At 2000 points I decided a unit of Nurgle Raptors would add in some quick strike/disruptive ability I was lacking but maintained the "infantry only" despite being quite unfluffy in terms of DG. The rest of my armies are quite fluffy without really any unfluffy choices. I have BT (no scouts as I just didn't want any) Goff Based Orks, no fancy units, guns or sneaking around... just good ol' ladz getting to 'urt sumfing (terrible ork speak I know) and A veteran scouting/intercepting army consisting of a Company Command Squad, 6 Vet squads, 4 Sentinel, 3 Chimera and a Executioner.