View Full Version : "Counts as Armies"

24-04-2006, 03:20
I would like to start a Raven Guard army, but I don't particularly want their current color scheme. I am gonna paint thme a different color. My topic is this: Do you feel that in fun games, people would care if change an army's color scheme as long as you tell them that count as "[insert any army]?"

24-04-2006, 03:30
Of course not. I run a biel-tan list, call it Mor-Salo Craftworld, and have the aspects painted their own colors, tanks black and red (ulthwe) and no one cares. : D

Mr Evil
24-04-2006, 03:50
Just ask yourself if your an average wargamer, and if you'd care yourself if someone asked to count their army as another. Chances are you wouldn't care, and that people who would care would likely fall into a catergory of people you wouldn't want to play with in the first place.

Khaine's Messenger
24-04-2006, 04:03
There are some considerations...first, if you're playing the Raven Guard, fluff and all, then methinks a purist would demand you paint them "correctly" or at least as close to correctly as possible. However, most people would let you get by playing a RG army in different colors. If you're playing the RG for their rules (eg, Shrike) then the only major consideration is Shrike...but if you're never going to use him, who cares (and if you do use him, see previous comment)? If it's just the traits? You can paint them and call them however and whatever you like. In a fun game, I really don't think you have to worry.

24-04-2006, 04:05
Worst case its a *Successor Chapter*.;)

I use rulesets for armies that don't look like them all the time. My *Salamanders* are actually a Successor Chapter.

24-04-2006, 05:04
The only time this would even become an issue is when special Characters (like Shrike) get used and then only if your opponant is particularly anal.

24-04-2006, 05:56
What about if it's across codices?

I'm in the planning stages of my next marine army, which has a heavy ad-mech influence. I didn't feel that the marine codex allows for my vision of the army, so I looked to other codices. The 2 best lists that I found were LATD & CSM. LATD was probably going too ad-mech so I went with CSM. This allowed me to think up some really cool conversion opportunities like bionic possessed & the ever popular defiler titan. The group that I play with is fine with the idea, but I'm not sure it'd go down so well in a tournament.

Do you think my CSM, loyalist, ad-mech chapter is too extreme for a tournament, or would it just be a case of explaining to opponents what's what?

24-04-2006, 06:08
As far as I am concerned, as long as you use a Codex legal list, the models you use to represent the things on your list are less important especially if you are using things from the codex to represent something in your army, like Obliterators representing Praetorians, who could honestly have a problem with that?

If all else fails, knock up a extra couple of extra copies of your list with some quick key photo guides printed on.

24-04-2006, 06:11
Hey, Chem-Dog that's a good idea with the photo guide.:D

I'm perfectly happy with sub lists - as long as nothing is confusing, let's play.:D

24-04-2006, 06:36
You know, it just seems like we're talking about changing the colours you paint your little plastic soldiers.. I don't think it matters what colour they are, if you tell me your playing with X codex, I'll take your word for it. (unless you wanna use special chars. from other chapters .. that's different).

24-04-2006, 18:37
I think this is very situational. Two examples:

Example A. Person is a Blood Angels player at start of 4th edition. Once the Black Templars codex comes out, his Blood Angels "count as" Black Templars, still using his old background, because he feels the list is more powerful.

Example B. Person has just watched some sci-fi film and come up with an army idea based on an alien race in that film. He has converted an army representing that race, and uses the (say) Tyranid rules for them because they don't actually exist in 40K and he feels that the Tyranid rules are the most suitable to represent them.

Now, I don't know about the rest of you but I am only too happy to let player B play his list against me, whilst at the very least I'd raise an eyebrow and mutter something darkly under my breath if I came across player A..

So really it depends what the army is and, more importantly, why it counts as whatever it counts as.

EDIT: In other words, why do you want to play a Raven Guard army if you don't like their colour scheme?

24-04-2006, 19:07
[grins] Good point to Bloodied Sword... After all, if what you're after is fast striking, elite, jump-troops with a spiffy colour scheme, go for Night Lords. [grins again]

Anyhow, I also agree with Bloodied Sword's thoughts on the situation, as well as the "use of Special Characters" notes earlier [athough, in a successor army, different painting on a converted equivilant to Shrike, with different name and fluff, but using rules exactly as Shrike, might be quite spiffy]. Counts As is one of the best things in GW's current mindset. It allows modellers and painters to do some brilliant work as regards themed armies, whilst still getting to play with our toy soldiers. That is what it is for.

24-04-2006, 19:12
i had a marine force for which, depending on mood, used the Blood angel or the Space wolf codex... i liked both army's, and they represented the 1st and 2nd company of my chapter...
now i use a Deamonhunter armylist for my rogue trader force... storm troopers as Ship-Guard, Slann as Deamonhosts, tau and a squat in his bodyguard, etc, etc...

use the army lists how u like... just make sure ur opponents know what they are before u go: but this bla bla has this power because its an obliterator and not a whatchamacall it

24-04-2006, 19:24
Heck I'm building an entire Harlequin army the *counts as* a Dark Eldar Wych Cult.:eek:

*Counts as* is a cool tool for gamers. As long as clarity is maintained, its all good with me.:D

24-04-2006, 19:28
I don't mind it too much if the opponent put thought into it. Proxying minis for stupid reasons just turns me off.

It's confusing to opponents and generally annoying. If you want to play Raven Guard, play Raven Guard. If you don't want to play Raven Guard, then don't.

"Counts as" is more often than not simply a tool for powergamers.

24-04-2006, 19:37
"Counts as" is more often than not simply a tool for powergamers.

How Cynical ;) I usually find it goes the other way, when talking about entire armies anyway. Be it Adeptus Mechanicus armies using Imperial Guard/Daemonhunters, Genestealer Covens using LatD/CSM or An Ork Mega-Armour army using the Deathwing rules, the player usually sacrifices a lot in order to get a characterful army that goes some way to representing the way the desired units work.

24-04-2006, 22:47
"Counts as" is more often than not simply a tool for powergamers.I don't see why. As long as a list is legal, then why would a powergamer bother to use 'counts as' at all? It is a way of matching the rules to the background, powergames generally don't care about background so it wouldn't happen.

The exception is of course BloodiedSword's example with a new codex. But even then I think this is in the vast minority.

Dawn of the Dogs
25-04-2006, 02:48
i dont see any problem with "counts as" armies, unless its something that doesnt fit.

eg. marine chapter = other marine chapter - is ok in my eyes, they just look different, and as long as you tell your opponents beforehand, there really isnt a problem. however
IG/humans = marine chapter - then that doesnt work for the obvious reasons.

25-04-2006, 13:35
unless you wanna use special chars. from other chapters .. that's different

How so?

Personally I'd be happier using SC rules for a homebrewed character in a chapter of my own devising.

25-04-2006, 16:59
Hrm. As a player I make extensive use of counts as concept, both with my guard and my marines.
With my marines it's via using different chapter's rules for each company, while still keeping them all in the original colour scheme and fluff of my DIY, i.e. the 3rd Company are very penitent and zealous, so they use BT rules, the 4th are free spirits and don't see things the same way, so they use SW rules and so on. In an ideal world I'd buy a new army for all of them and not have an assault squad covered in templar insignia running around in other armies, but then in an ideal world buying enough marines to fill the current rules (DIY, BTs, DA & Ultras, depending on mood) I play with wouldn't cost me a kidney...
As for the guard...I like counts as because it means I can replace those god damned HIDEOUS rough riders with nice pretty Knights of the Realm, and slide around armament rules in a few places too, i.e. a junior officer who carries an autopistol which, due to me not having any spares, counts as a bolt pistol.
It's a time, money and hassle saving thing.

Brush your teeth
25-04-2006, 17:15
i think the count as armies are great, as long as you put a bit of reason behind them. i myself have an eldar army in my own scheme but i use the beil tan rules as they are a elite battle trained force.

anothe good point about this is you can in some games use a different rules set (e.g i can play my eldar as ulthwe)

Lame Duck
25-04-2006, 18:17
I would like to start a Raven Guard army, but I don't particularly want their current color scheme. I am gonna paint thme a different color. My topic is this: Do you feel that in fun games, people would care if change an army's color scheme as long as you tell them that count as "[insert any army]?"

It would probably be fine, as long as you dont use any of their special characters. That would be pushing it i guess

Corn Berserker
25-04-2006, 18:26
I have my own colour scheme for my Chaos army but I like to change what rules I use, only ever for the undived factions though. When I'm playing under one of the Chaos gods I use the correct models - World Eaters don't feel like World Eaters when your using siver and red marines.

I've never met a player who objects, the models are yours - paint them how you want!

Inquisitor lorr
25-04-2006, 18:35
I think that 'count as' armies are really cool and often create very characterful armies

ps-i emailed the events team with regards to the use of the EoT rules-and they said no:cries: but said that i would probably manage a 13th company army using the new 'counts as rules' they will be including in this years GT:D