Do you play with special characters?

[Bitrider]

I know some folks do and some folks don't. I like playing with them for the power and special rules. I like seeing the big names one the board. However, I know that some people have strong opinions on NOT playing with them even to the point of not playing an opponent if they see a special character in the opposing army list. This is included named characters as an upgrade.

What are your thoughts? Do you play with them?

[Pater Sin]

I have to use special characters with my Dark Eldar because Lelith is the only HQ unit I have. I only brought her because I liked the model, I didn't even know what ther rules were.

[Eberk]

I never used a special character in a battle and I don't think I ever will. I would rather make my own HQ unit and (through his battles) build him a story. (when I like a special character model, I will buy and use it but use 'normal' HQ stats)

Don't mind playing against a special character every once in a while but I draw the line when the SAME person uses the SAME special character in EACH of his games (come on... how boring is it to always see Kairos Fateweaver, Abaddon of Magnus Calgar appear in your battles)

[magickbk]

Some people are forced to use Special Characters in order to field their armies. For example, Grey Knights codex replaced Daemonhunters, and in order to field an army full of non-Grey Knights, you have to take Coteaz. Or, in order to field a Deathwing army, you have to take Belial. That is a little different than say, someone fielding Eldrad Ulthran in every game. I find most special characters to be over-pointed anyway, so I don't mind.

[Tyrendian]

I really don't see a reason not to allow named characters - they are in the books after all... even ones from FW are not a problem for me (or my gang), and when someone comes up with a cool concept for a character they would like to play we sometimes even meet to design rules for him/her in a joint effort (so as to keep it fair) and all look forward to seeing how our guy does on the field

[zenjah]

I never used a special character in a battle and I don't think I ever will. I would rather make my own HQ unit and (through his battles) build him a story. (when I like a special character model, I will buy and use it but use 'normal' HQ stats)

I like to build up a story for my own HQ as well. For me, using special character rules doesn't get in the way of that. They are just rules.

So my counts-as-Abaddon character has his own fluff. He also uses the rules for Abaddon. Works fine. I don't always use him, but I wouldn't feel bad about it if I did.

[Chexmix282]

Special characters used to be frowned upon, as some actually required your opponent's permission for use per the codex. Obviously GW has greatly changed their outlook on special characters, as now some of the best/most interesting army builds can only be constructed with the use of characters.

In my opinion, with today's army books, stating "I won't play against special characters" is similar to saying "I won't play against Assault Terminators". They are an entry in the codex and should only be treated as such.

[Gotthammer]

I've played with a quite few over the years:

- Lady Malys is fun to go up against, she always brings different lists and is trying new units out for fun, she seems to have three or four big armies and at least one in every system so it's never the same over and over again.
- Creed's tactical genius is overrated, dude insists guardian heavy footdar is viable... but we all know if it is in the new dex he won't shut up about it.
- Zogwort's apparently a great player and runs pure Deathwing like a pro, but his hygene has kept me from challenging him (take a shower buddy!).
- Kantor's big on fluff heavy armies but can be pretty aloof with his whole "I've been playing since first edition" act.
- Saint Celestine's green tide is a pain, and she's just started a Pan-O force that's shaping up to be nasty, but she's really nice and friendly so you at least have fun when she crushes you.
- I stay away from Eldrad, he's a little too into his panzers in FoW, if you know what I mean...
- Harker has an absolutely amazing Nurgle list - all converted, heaps of scratch builds and Forge World stuff. I'm surprised he's never won a Golden Demon, though lately he's been into a lot of LE resin stuff and not gaming so much. Hopefully when Arena Rex drops he'll be back at the tables.
- Whatever you do do not play the Sanguinor - he runs the cheesiest flavour of the month lists, three colour minimum if that and doesn't know the rules at all. Would be tolerable if it wasn't for his awful attitude and really suspect rolling. He brought this ridiculous 'cron airforce list to a tourney and was arguing the smallest rules and LoS issues but would freak out if anyone questions him. I think people only play him because Dante's such a nice guy.
- Never played Grimnar in 40k, but apparently he's got a new Tau list that's tough to crack (good Blood bowl player though) and his Haqisslam are triple tourney winners.
- Feel sorry for Azrael though, he always just hangs out at the painting table since nobody else plays LotR. At least he stopped bringing his Watchers in, they were always grabbing at stuff and breaking models or moving units in games... I think Calgar and Lysander were close to banning him from the store on game night which wouldn've sucked. He's a nice guy if a bit moody sometimes. Ghaz's kids are real nice though, he's getting them into the hobby through Freebooter's Fate.

[Denzark]

I think they are awesome. I think the only 2 codexes where you can build a warlord as good as the best named character, is probably SW and Chaos.

[Nabterayl]

I have a warboss named Skraga Blitzkrag da Patient, whose story was built up over a number of years. When IA8 came out, I started using Zhardsnark to represent him, because his special rules better the character my friends and I all knew better than the standard HQ did. My group pretty regularly uses special characters to represent our own characters when the SC's rules better represent the character concept we already have.