Counts-As: Your own thoughts on the matter, and when it gets taken too far?

[Kaika87]

So, I admit, I'm partially wanting to post this for the whole March contest dealie, but also I think that it's a topic that rarely gets a real discussion going. I remember months ago, a BoLS battle report had some Death Guard counts-as Black Templar, and the comments were full of seething, uncontrollable fury at the very notion. Especially as I near completion of my own counts-as army, I start to worry if that's really the dominant opinion on the idea. Obviously, there are instances of Counts-As that take it too far and are quite unacceptable, but then there are others.

From my perspective, I can identify 3 broad categories of Counts-As, and for the sake of discussion, let's talk about all of these from the perspective of seeing this unpacked across from you in a tournament environment, because with a friendly game, all bets are off. Hell, until I was sure of the army list for my current project, I was using Styrofoam 3-d cutouts of Rhinos in casual games.

Category 1 - "The Proxy": These are your players that have decided to change one of their current armies over to another with little no conversions done. WSIWYG is most certainly not in effect here, and instead you'll hear an explanation of how the models with dark lances instead are carrying heavy bolters, or how the squad of models without heads is a squad of Genestealers, not Skeletons. Really, this is the army that won't be allowed in a tournament setting in the way that I've explained it, as most tournaments enforce WSIWYG. I've seen a couple exceptions from local 3-game events, though, so it's not outside the realm of possibility.

The outermost edge of this category would be the Space Marine bandwagon-jumper. If you sit across from someone that has a beautiful Ultramarines army and then hear him start explaining that he's got Njal and 3 squads of Grey Hunters, you know you've found this type of Proxy army. In this case, everything is in fact WSIWYG, but it's still pretty obvious that this guy is adhering to the first sentence of this category, taking a current army and using it for a different codex.

Category 2 - "The Conversion": This is probably where the majority of actually-played-in-tournaments Counts-As armies fall. These are your World Eaters Counts-As Blood Angels, Thousand Sons Counts-As Grey Knights, and your Eldar Counts-As Dark Eldar. The player that made this army put at least some effort into changing over the models to be appropriate to the codex he's playing out of, and in some cases a great deal of effort. Effectively, this category attempts to blend the aesthetic of the models with the rules they're playing out of. Taking the World Eaters counts-as Blood Angels as an example, it'd be doing simple things like making Assault Marines out of Berzerkers, up through, for example, greenstuffing wings onto Bloodletters to make them into Sanguinary Guard, with plenty of gore and viscera lovingly adorning everything. This army could well be something the owner had previously been using under a different codex and converted over for one reason or another, or a project entirely taken from the ground up as a way of alternatively modelling units from a different codex. In either case, WSIWYG will most certainly be adhered to here, and again, attempts will be made to blend aesthetic and rule mechanics.

Category 3 - "You have too much free time on your hands.": I could go on a long explanation of this one too, but instead I'll just introduce (or re-introduce) you to a man named Michael Strange.

[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-S0aBe19I/AAAAAAAAIwE/ms9KF31WMGc/s1600/strange-03.jpg[/url]
[url]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-R3O4eE1I/AAAAAAAAIv8/nrHU727fV_k/s1600/strange-02.jpg[/url]
[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-THa6uh3I/AAAAAAAAIwU/ebIkvO7EG1Y/s1600/strange-05.jpg[/url]
[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-TR8oE50I/AAAAAAAAIwc/ht4kIY3deP8/s1600/strange-06.jpg[/url]



So those are the 3 categories. And now I ask you, which of these would you be comfortable sitting across the table from in a tournament? Why? Obviously you'd play it out assuming it was deemed legal by the TO, but would you feel like your opponent is trying to cheat you? Would you care at all?

Personally, I think that #1 is pushing it for a tournament, especially if there is no WSIWYG. I can understand if this was a last-minute idea, and you're just trying something out for fun (especially if it's the Ultra-Wolves I mentioned earlier and it's a local tournament), but for a big, weekend tournament I feel like you should pay the toll and make an army for that codex. Be it the actual GW models for the codex, a bunch of conversions, or....Mechanids. From a game mechanics standpoint, so long as I can identify a visually distinction between units and wargear, I'm satisfied, especially if I get to look at some eye-candy in the process.

[pathwinder14]

I would love to sit across from #3. Heck, most of the time my stuff is so heavily converted I am one step removed from #3. Once I start my Orks they will deffinitely be a #3 type army.

[gendoikari87]

Category 1- I'd play em' but no respect

Category 2- Love to play props.

Category 3- Mad propps, just have **** labeled kay? (when the mechanicus rise again, this will be them)

[Rissan4ever]

#1 is inappropriate for tournaments, but ok for casual play IF you're trying out a new concept or still planning the army. Once it's beyond the planning stage, you should move on to #2.

#2 depends on the time and care put into the conversions. If they look cool, and I can tell what's what, it's fine. If the units aren't clearly distinguishable, then it's a problem.

#3 is 100% pure awesomeness. If someone spent this much time and effort making an army that looks that amazing, they can use whatever rules they want, and I won't care because I'll be too busy drooling.

[Faultie]

#2 and #3 are what make 40k armies stand out to me, because you can get so much diversity from the set of models that GW makes (and from other sources) when you mix and match and make something more than just "Codex: Space Marines" or "Codex: Imperial Guard". #1 I'm iffy on, but depends on the motive I guess.

[Night System]

Well I have a category 2 World Eaters army that I have unit conversions for different codexes, I have converted a chaotic style storm raven and some Jugganaut riders using Thunderwolve rules. As long as the conversions have more effort put into them than the model they are replacing I cannot really complain.

I also have a category 3 Exodite army, which is currently using the tyranid rules.

I have never had anybody refuse to play me.
On terms of category 1 however... I would play a game or two just for testing models before purchasing, but otherwise I don't like playing proxy games.

[ara989]

I'm fine with all of the above options. Though #1 can get annoying overtime if its a permanent switch rather than someone wanting to fiddle around with a different codex to get the feel for it or test stuff out prior to buying new models.

[ragnarcissist]

i love getting new ideas from ppls conversions, i personally cant stand fielding unpainted models, but will use "counts as" sometimes (like my metal wolfscout plasma gunner counts as melta) but dont like doing it often

[Grenadier]

I am fairly laid back on allowing counts as. I have but one real requirement of an opponent choosing to do counts as. And that is WYSIWYG. And this only applies to weapons. For the simple fact I don't want you to shoot me with a bolt pistol in one turn then blast me with a missile launcher in the next turn. Otherwise you can counts as much as you like.

Much in my army is a counts as kind of a deal. Mainly because I can't afford to buy entirely new squads and stuff when a codex update invalidates something in my army. Whenever there's a major change I'll painstakingly examine each model and reorganize in a manner that will let me be rules legal. Anyone who doesn't will then get rebuilt if my available bits permit it. If not then my only other options are to counts as or discontinue using the model.

I'm very easy going in letting models stand in for other models in an army. For example, I have enough Space Marines to make either 1 gigantic Black Templars army or 1 small Templar army and 1 small vanilla. Now, all the modles to some degree are "Templary." They have the shoulder badges, robes, etc. And many of them are painted as Templars. But because my battles always are huge Apoc scale ones I find sometimes I have to play them as two different armies. In which case I'll keep my Templar core intact and then create a separate vanilla list. That list then can make use of the new units vanilla's have that Templars don't have . In general the new vanila list makes up for the shortcomings of the Templars. As for justifying doing this and the fact everyone looks like a Templar I simply say my vanilla chapter is a successor chapter to the Templars. A crusade that for some reason was long isolated from the rest of the chapter and had to adopt new ways to survive.

Sometimes my opponent wants to do a counts as for vehicles. Often turning a Razorback into a Rhino. That's fair enough. If he can remove it I'll have him take off the heavy weapon. If he cant I ask him to rotate it backwards so it'll remind us that it is now a Rhino.

The way I see it as long as counting as is not excessively confusing then its ok.

So, I admit, I'm partially wanting to post this for the whole March contest dealie, but also I think that it's a topic that rarely gets a real discussion going. I remember months ago, a BoLS battle report had some Death Guard counts-as Black Templar, and the comments were full of seething, uncontrollable fury at the very notion. Especially as I near completion of my own counts-as army, I start to worry if that's really the dominant opinion on the idea. Obviously, there are instances of Counts-As that take it too far and are quite unacceptable, but then there are others.

From my perspective, I can identify 3 broad categories of Counts-As, and for the sake of discussion, let's talk about all of these from the perspective of seeing this unpacked across from you in a tournament environment, because with a friendly game, all bets are off. Hell, until I was sure of the army list for my current project, I was using Styrofoam 3-d cutouts of Rhinos in casual games.

Category 1 - "The Proxy": These are your players that have decided to change one of their current armies over to another with little no conversions done. WSIWYG is most certainly not in effect here, and instead you'll hear an explanation of how the models with dark lances instead are carrying heavy bolters, or how the squad of models without heads is a squad of Genestealers, not Skeletons. Really, this is the army that won't be allowed in a tournament setting in the way that I've explained it, as most tournaments enforce WSIWYG. I've seen a couple exceptions from local 3-game events, though, so it's not outside the realm of possibility.

The outermost edge of this category would be the Space Marine bandwagon-jumper. If you sit across from someone that has a beautiful Ultramarines army and then hear him start explaining that he's got Njal and 3 squads of Grey Hunters, you know you've found this type of Proxy army. In this case, everything is in fact WSIWYG, but it's still pretty obvious that this guy is adhering to the first sentence of this category, taking a current army and using it for a different codex.

Category 2 - "The Conversion": This is probably where the majority of actually-played-in-tournaments Counts-As armies fall. These are your World Eaters Counts-As Blood Angels, Thousand Sons Counts-As Grey Knights, and your Eldar Counts-As Dark Eldar. The player that made this army put at least some effort into changing over the models to be appropriate to the codex he's playing out of, and in some cases a great deal of effort. Effectively, this category attempts to blend the aesthetic of the models with the rules they're playing out of. Taking the World Eaters counts-as Blood Angels as an example, it'd be doing simple things like making Assault Marines out of Berzerkers, up through, for example, greenstuffing wings onto Bloodletters to make them into Sanguinary Guard, with plenty of gore and viscera lovingly adorning everything. This army could well be something the owner had previously been using under a different codex and converted over for one reason or another, or a project entirely taken from the ground up as a way of alternatively modelling units from a different codex. In either case, WSIWYG will most certainly be adhered to here, and again, attempts will be made to blend aesthetic and rule mechanics.

Category 3 - "You have too much free time on your hands.": I could go on a long explanation of this one too, but instead I'll just introduce (or re-introduce) you to a man named Michael Strange.

[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-S0aBe19I/AAAAAAAAIwE/ms9KF31WMGc/s1600/strange-03.jpg[/url]
[url]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-R3O4eE1I/AAAAAAAAIv8/nrHU727fV_k/s1600/strange-02.jpg[/url]
[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-THa6uh3I/AAAAAAAAIwU/ebIkvO7EG1Y/s1600/strange-05.jpg[/url]
[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4nzgPbHlNo4/TF-TR8oE50I/AAAAAAAAIwc/ht4kIY3deP8/s1600/strange-06.jpg[/url]



So those are the 3 categories. And now I ask you, which of these would you be comfortable sitting across the table from in a tournament? Why? Obviously you'd play it out assuming it was deemed legal by the TO, but would you feel like your opponent is trying to cheat you? Would you care at all?

Personally, I think that #1 is pushing it for a tournament, especially if there is no WSIWYG. I can understand if this was a last-minute idea, and you're just trying something out for fun (especially if it's the Ultra-Wolves I mentioned earlier and it's a local tournament), but for a big, weekend tournament I feel like you should pay the toll and make an army for that codex. Be it the actual GW models for the codex, a bunch of conversions, or....Mechanids. From a game mechanics standpoint, so long as I can identify a visually distinction between units and wargear, I'm satisfied, especially if I get to look at some eye-candy in the process.

[turiya64]

2 and 3 are both great. but 1 i would be less then excited to play