# tired of special characters



## angelXD19 (Feb 11, 2010)

i don't know if it's just me but I'm sick of seeing special characters constantly played. I don't mind people playing them once in a while but are people such bad generals they can't live without there precious ghaz or eldrad. 

here is my example

yesterday i went to a local gw store ( first time going ) since I wanted to play a different crowed. I played two games each of them were two on two. so i take my GK army. now first game I get teamed up with daemon player with fateweaver. we go against orks and DE. orks have gaz DE have vect. so boring

next game I get teamed up with a space wolf player with grimnar. our opponents were orks ( different player ) also with ghaz and a chaos marine player with abbadon. 

really can't they just use regular hq or do they suck that badly without them


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

there was another thread like this. You kind of sound like your raging about this, did you lose to them? is that it?

Consider this, I want to play a Salamanders SM army, how do I incorporate their masterful weapons of war, and their preferance for heat based weapons. WAIT! I'VE GOT IT! I'll use Vulkan He'stan.

I want to play a White Scars Army, but a captain on bike doesnt do it for me, wait a second..Khorsarro Khan?!

My Red corsairs need an iconic leader..whats this? Huron Blackheart?!

You get the idea. Of course people run them often, their good. Its only logical.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Yes, but then you get the... wait for it... homebrew Chapter led by Calgar/ Khan/ Vulcan/ whatever, for no logical reason other than they can't make their own Chapter Master/ Captain.
Or Ultramarines led by Khan/ Vulcan/ Cantor/ Shrike.
And so on on on ad nauseum.


----------



## Ascendant (Dec 11, 2008)

I think it would be good to think about what bothers you about special characters. They Have come a long way since needing armies of certain sizes and special permission to play them, and GW is pretty clearly making them have a larger role in game.

Do you hate the fact that, fluff-wise Ghaz seems to be leading every raiding party in the universe? Or do you just think that they're unbalanced? I feel like they are pretty well costed for the most part, and I like how they can allow armies to be run in different ways. Would footslog orks be as compelling without that delicious 6" Waaagh? Or would those players just start rolling in battlewagons as a safe alternative?


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Ascendant said:


> I think it would be good to think about what bothers you about special characters. They Have come a long way since needing armies of certain sizes and special permission to play them, and GW is pretty clearly making them have a larger role in game.
> 
> Do you hate the fact that, fluff-wise Ghaz seems to be leading every raiding party in the universe? Or do you just think that they're unbalanced? I feel like they are pretty well costed for the most part, and I like how they can allow armies to be run in different ways. Would footslog orks be as compelling without that delicious 6" Waaagh? Or would those players just start rolling in battlewagons as a safe alternative?


I never liked the permission thing, that's well rid-of... however, the armies of certain sizes/ leading specific armies should have been kept.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Ever think people just love the fluff around them? You seem particularly bitchy for no good reason.

I love to use a counts-as Logan Grimnar in my æsir army because he let's me field WG as troops. Does that make me a bad ge.... I am going to say player because calling yourself a general for playing with plastic toys sounds like the behavior of a pompous ass. But I digress. Does using him make me a bad player? Fuck no. It just means I have the intelligence to recognize my playing style and use the character that allows me to do that. 

You don't like it, don't play it.


----------



## jaws900 (May 26, 2010)

I take them for FLUFF. I have few named heros in my armys. 
Lysander - I play Imperial Fists
Prince Yriel - I play Iyanden Eldar
Baharroth - I have a large number of "crimson Vulters" or Swooping hawks
The Sanguinor - Can be use dfor any chapture and i love the mdoal more than anything else.
Gabriel Seth - I needed him for a tornment and i somethime suse him to prepsent a Captain.
Hawker - I play Catachan
My Chaos and Tyranid don't even have any special charatures.

I play fluffy and personly i think it's stupid someone complaing that you are playing a game fluffy or that you just love the modal


----------



## angelXD19 (Feb 11, 2010)

sven- tied the first ( good old football mission ) and won the second. 

don't get me wrong I do see how they can help armies seem more fluffy but when people just seem to want to run special characters constantly in there list it's just annoying.

ascendant- fluff reasons I suppose. would you really think all these big important people would be in this little battle at once.


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

Special Characters now-a-days aren't just cool guys with spiffy rules.

They're integral parts of an army list that changes the way the army plays on a fundamental level. You cannot run an all veteran list without Pedro. If somebody wants to play a Sternguard list, they are going to need him. So, I'm totally happy when I see a custom painted army that is using its 1st company vets, led by a count-as Pedro. 

Its fun, and adds variety.

The only problem you may find is when you run in to a special character that is too good NOT to take. Looking at you, vulkan.


----------



## Abomination (Jul 6, 2008)

I can understand why it's tiring to see them so often (although I think they're great myself) but that's jut how the game is these days. The special characters tend to be both a) awesome and b) add some sort of character or theme to the army. Chances are they won't be going away anytime soon.


----------



## Kinglopey (Sep 10, 2008)

It is the direction GW was going for to sell their Special Character Blisters... I mean why else remove restrictions like "Can only be fielded in an army of XXXX pts or Higher" Yes they are powerful... and some change the entire way an army plays, I haven't played with a lot of special characters in the past, but it's getting harder and harder not to. The new DE dex has some very good SC.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

I have not got a single Special Character, but I am planing to get all the Space Marine special character (UM, DA, BA, BT, SW and the rest) just to have them...


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Kinglopey said:


> It is the direction GW was going for to sell their Special Character Blisters... I mean why else remove restrictions like "Can only be fielded in an army of XXXX pts or Higher" Yes they are powerful... and some change the entire way an army plays, I haven't played with a lot of special characters in the past, but it's getting harder and harder not to. The new DE dex has some very good SC.


Out of curiosity, and it's an honest question: How is it getting harder not to use them?
Maybe if I understood that, I could get why they're so prevelent these days.


----------



## Kinglopey (Sep 10, 2008)

It's getting harder not to use them because of the value they bring to an army. Take Vulkan, his stats aside the benifit he give an army with Meltas, Flame Weapons and TH/SS is almost worth taking him even if you never intend to put him in combat.

For DE, the Baron giving all your vehicles DS capability in Larger games will pay for itself, then you get his super poison ability for 1 squad and 2 rolls on the Drug Chart

IG have the SC with the 24" area for issuing orders in addition to extra orders

those abilities are all hard to make up with just purchasing more squads to make up the point value.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Kinglopey said:


> It's getting harder not to use them because of the value they bring to an army. Take Vulkan, his stats aside the benifit he give an army with Meltas, Flame Weapons and TH/SS is almost worth taking him even if you never intend to put him in combat.
> 
> For DE, the Baron giving all your vehicles DS capability in Larger games will pay for itself, then you get his super poison ability for 1 squad and 2 rolls on the Drug Chart
> 
> ...


I see.
But to be honest, these reasons seem more like crutches, to me. No offense intended, just my view-point.
I don't use special characters 99% of the time; so I just devise tactics around the HQs that I build, as opposed to what someone else made.
I don't even play armies with special characters, meaning that I play my own Chapter/ Craftworld/ Kabal/ Legion, and play Wolf Brothers instead of Space Wolves. Really the only SC I use is Pask, or occasionally Tellion; and I see those as more along the lines of what any individual could achieve, as opposed to being entirely unique, and with unique war-gear. I do from time to time use a Phoenix Lord/ Drazhar, which really with Pask and Tellion accounts for the 1% I use a character not of my own devising.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

I've tried out both unnamed characters and named for my HQ options and I'll throw my two cents into the mix.

I run my CSM army 99% of the time with Kharn the Betrayer, it fits the build and my playstyle, as I love someone who's sole purpose in life is destruction. Is he better than an unnamed Khorne Lord? Absolutely, I don't have to worry about daemon weapon rolls, hits always on a 2+ regardless of opponent's WS, and is pretty much just awesome. But, there are drawbacks, as in chopping his own squad in half if I don't have time to detach him, and the fact that he isn't an Eternal Warrior (then again neither is an unnamed lord).

My BA army I've used either an unnamed Librarian or Astorath, as both give me different perks, but I'm willing to dump out an extra 130 points for the boosts that Astorath can potentially give me. It's a stylistic and a 'am I really gaining how much this guy costs' thing. If you want to be stingy with your HQ to maximize the rest of your army, so be it. If other people like playing with characters that GW have provided due to fluff/effectiveness, so be it. They're not running Logan to piss you off, they're doing it because it complements their army. Maybe, you should try it out and not bitch about it. Guess what, you can use them too!


----------



## Deathscythe4722 (Jul 18, 2010)

I love Special Characters. They add style and flavor to the army.

Too bad the only semi-viable SCs Chaos has are Failbaddon and Kharn


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I see.
> But to be honest, these reasons seem more like crutches, to me. No offense intended, just my view-point.
> I don't use special characters 99% of the time; so I just devise tactics around the HQs that I build, as opposed to what someone else made.
> I don't even play armies with special characters, meaning that I play my own Chapter/ Craftworld/ Kabal/ Legion, and play Wolf Brothers instead of Space Wolves. Really the only SC I use is Pask, or occasionally Tellion; and I see those as more along the lines of what any individual could achieve, as opposed to being entirely unique, and with unique war-gear. I do from time to time use a Phoenix Lord/ Drazhar, which really with Pask and Tellion accounts for the 1% I use a character not of my own devising.


Sounds like you are playing terribads if you feel ICs are a crutch. They open up new avenues of playing. I use them 3 of my 4 armies.

Blood angels. I really liked sanguinary guard. So figured that running dante makes a lot of sense in a an army with 3 squads of sanguard.

Space wolves. I wanted to run loganwing gunline space wolves. Logan lets me take wolf guards as troops, which means more rockets. 

Eldar-because eldar suck right now. And you need wonder twins to be competitive.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Vulkan isn't an auto-include... he's an auto-include if you want a certain style.

GW started making the special characters instead of releasing sub-army specific rules. Now, if you want to play Salamanders or a successor chapter you need him to make that style work. If you want SG to be scoring, you need the relevant special character, etc.

Some are just crap, but the ones you're seeing used left and right are there because GW has specifically stopped making sub-army booklets and instead unlocking bits of the army with special characters.


----------



## StalkerZero (Oct 3, 2010)

Deathscythe4722 said:


> I love Special Characters. They add style and flavor to the army.
> 
> Too bad the only semi-viable SCs Chaos has are Failbaddon and Kharn


I agree with line 1.

Line 2 is kinda meh to me. My only options are Deceiver and Nightbringer so...


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

Diversity is the name of the game.  People play with SC's because it promotes their style of play and gives some power behind it. Like what would a berserker khrone army be without Kharn? Yes i can run a Khorne Dp or Khrone lord, but those things wouldnt be as effective. Maybe I want to run a Tzeentch army and the regular Sorc sucks ass. So i take Ahriman to be number one man and a Tzeentch DP buddy. 

Without SC's people wouldnt be able to play in specialized play styles because the regular HQ's are just ment to be general and diverse, not very specialized unless equipped to be and even then arent that good because no special rules to make them so. They are mostly seen as cheap alternatives. lol


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

That is the problem with people. They play too much towards being competitive rather than plating for fun. It is more fun to use your own characters, it is more entertaining being original.

For the record not every army needs SC. People just exploit them and I personally hate the fact they can be used in every army variant and they can be used in any points game. Under the last codex Tyranids had no problem winning and they had no SC whatsoever. I would prefer having a points limit back on since lets be honest you know the game is stupid when Marneus Calgar can be seen leading a force of 500 points of marines!


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

Named characters are part of why 40k isn't as good as it used to be. They remove an element of creativity from the game-- creating your own characters using the unnamed options-- and they're a crutch for power gamers. There is a quantifiable value they have over regular characters, I think. That definable superiority encourages cookie cutter army lists and a sort of "combo" style of play like a collectible card game rather than a tactical play style worthy of a wargame. 

I always thought the game was better when named characters were something you brought for special occasions, when you and your opponent agreed you wanted to do something silly and ridiculous, or were an element in telling a story in the game. The modern "let's bring the Chapter Master to every little skirmish" just seems... I don't know. Somehow lame.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

I'm confused at saying SC's are a crutch? A crutch to what ends, you pay the points you get the abilities, no different to any other character. 

I rather like the Space Marine chapter masters that let you play the various chapters of Space marines. Or Dante letting you play SG based army, or the DE dude who changes your FoC. They all add to what would be a rather dry codex without them. It increases the number of builds available in the Codex and that's a good things, not a bad thing. Maybe Marneus Calgar is on a 500pt scouting mission. A mission so secret and important he couldn't risk anything other than his hand picked cadre of Marines. Dante almost certainly would tool off with some Guard to fuck someones shit up before the rest of the BA arrived on the scene just for fun.


----------



## Deathscythe4722 (Jul 18, 2010)

There is no reason a Chapter Master wouldn't be in a small skirmish. SM commanders lead from the front, so there is no reason for them to become lazy and fat just because they get promoted to Chapter Master.

Keep in mind that a full SM chapter is only around 1000 Marines. If you have 50 Marines on the Tabletop, you can assume they have some Apothecaries and Techmarines in tow, even if they don't field them, because they are an essential part of a strike force. Add in a few more who are manning the Strike Cruiser, and you have near on 100 marines. Thats a full tenth of the Chapter.


----------



## imm0rtal reaper (Jul 15, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> That is the problem with people. They play too much towards being competitive rather than plating for fun. It is more fun to use your own characters, it is more entertaining being original.


I call bullshit on this.

You might not find it fun to run SC, but I personally _Won't_ take a vanilla marine list without Lysander, the power he and a unit of th/ss termies brings is too awesome and entertaining not to bring for me. I wouldn't enjoy running regular marines without him because personally, the marine dex inst good for how I want to play, the wolf dex is.

So if I want to field terminators, I'll use lysander and the marine dex, otherwise I use the wolf dex.

On the other side however, I don't use SC in my wolf lists. I always take a cheap Rune priest with jaws though, because he is cheap as chips and has a really handy power.

I think a lot of people take SC, not for their names, but for what they bring. Who's to say, in my homebrew chapter, full of (for example) sternguard, that pedro ins't in fact a regular captain leading an elite band of marines?


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

imm0rtal reaper said:


> I think a lot of people take SC, not for their names, but for what they bring. Who's to say, in my homebrew chapter, full of (for example) sternguard, that pedro ins't in fact a regular captain leading an elite band of marines?


[Sarcasm]

See you're missing the point though. Even if you Convert a Pedro, write fluff for your chapter, paint your marines a different color, and rename the model something else it's STILL Pedro because it uses his rules. It shows you have no imagination and you're nothing but a WAAC player. Using any SC that gives you ability, even if it's marginally useful, means you are a horrible person and you should never play 40k again.

[/Sarcasm]

SCs don't break the game, and they don't make people any less creative. Just because you make a Capitan using the normal template rather then using Khan or Shrike doesn't make you more creative.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

I think special characters are fine, I', just not particularly fussed on the army wide special rules.

How many chapters is Sergeant Helion on loan to? How many battles have Vulkan and Pedro won for chapters other than their own. That's when things start to get a bit annoying IMO.

But then again some people online are worse as they demand the latest Black Library fictional characters should be included in the next codices. I swear if I hear about frickin Honsou and that bloody Night Lord need ing to be included as 'new' characters I'm going to go crazy. Better yet, give me a penny everytime they are mentioned and watch me get rich.

I personally like special characters, the Chaos dex wouldn't be the same without Abaddon, Ahriman, Lucius, Kharn etc. But it's when they become automatic choices or give army wide special rules for armies other than their own, that's what annoys me about them.

If your a fluffy Crimson Fists fan you should be rewarded with Pedro, but you shouldn't take him as 'counts as' for your silly home made chapters, that's just crap. 

Imagine if Lucius the Eternal gave an army wide special rule, but I used him as a 'counts as' for a Khorne warband, it's sickening.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

@immortal reaper:

You just proved my point. I am willing to bet that you did not take Lysander originally with his termies for the fluff but because they are awesome on the tabletop. I rarely use special characters and I believe that someday soon I will rip someones head off when they ask me why I have a normal seer when I could have Eldrad for my non Ulthwe army!


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> If your a fluffy Crimson Fists fan you should be rewarded with Pedro, but you shouldn't take him as 'counts as' for your silly home made chapters, that's just crap.


I strongly disagree there. As everyone has so vehemently expressed in this thread and others, this game is about 'your creativity.' So, it's being 'creative' until a player takes an established character and makes them their own. That's ridiculous.

So, if I have a fluffy Chaos Army with Khorne-tendencies, full of berserkers, but I don't want to call them the World Eaters so I can't run Kharn?

Basically, it seems like, at least for my codex, you are saying 'Unless you run the Death Guard, Black Legion, Thousand Sons, Emperor's Children or World Eaters you can't use the SC given.' Which is... well... ri-goddamn-diculous.


----------



## Alsojames (Oct 25, 2010)

I get sick of playing against SCs. 'specially when it's almost always the players who brag that they can beat everyone they play against simply because they've got xSC or ySC. 

Then they spend their time bitching that xSC is too weak or ySC should be improved.

Hell, I'm tempted to start a tournament disallowing SCs at all, and see how many people don't join or phael because they (gasp) have to play without that SC.

I think I know one guy other than me who can play well without SCs, and I tied him last Sunday (damn IG Valkerys....I spelled that wrong)


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

@BOC That is bullshit and you know it. The reason special characters are special is because they are UNIQUE (Its in the unit type) so in my mind I think Kharn should only be allowed in a World Eaters force because he is a World Eaters marine and how many other imposters are really running around the galaxy?

Think in future before you post more crap that just appears to fall from your mouth when you attempt to type on any goddamned computer!

@AlsoJames: When is that tournament and where so I can sign up for it?


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

The next codices need to have a SC generator for making individual and unique characters and not just allowing people to rename what is already preset/premade in the codex. 

Something like how you equip a necron lord, you choose from a list of upgrades. Now these lists need to be at least a page or two long and in small print so there are 50-100 options to choose from. Again, GW needs to add the much missed flavor back into the system.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> @BOC That is bullshit and you know it. The reason special characters are special is because they are UNIQUE (Its in the unit type) so in my mind I think Kharn should only be allowed in a World Eaters force because he is a World Eaters marine and how many other imposters are really running around the galaxy?
> 
> Think in future before you post more crap that just appears to fall from your mouth when you attempt to type on any goddamned computer!


Haha maybe you should wipe the tears from your computer keyboard as well. It could mess with the electronics :victory:

Thank you, however, for explaining to me the meaning of the word 'unique.'

Edit: Hell, on the bright side I admit to taking Kharn because he's a good unit instead of spouting some BS fluff-based justification.

And, last time I had checked, winning is more fun than losing, anyone that says otherwise was probably one of those kids who's parents bought them trophies for getting last place in everything they've ever done. Sportsmanship be damned


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Lets make a tournament where if your special character dies you automatically lose.


----------



## Alsojames (Oct 25, 2010)

How about that tournament I mentioned earlier without any SCs at all? 

@ Stephen in Canada (eh?) but I might organize a Vassal40k tourney for the forum.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Just make sure to plan for timezones.


----------



## Kinglopey (Sep 10, 2008)

Honestly... I can play with or without SC's... I don't have "A" list I play. I pick a theme and go with it every time I play... I don't have a spotless winning record, but I have fun every time I play. Sometimes it works, some times it doesn't, sometimes I have a SC in, sometimes I wish I didn't need an HQ...

Everyone has different playing styles and including an HQ is no more of a crutch then including any other unit in the game.

I'd be happy to play in an SC-less Tournament, the first League I played in was a No SC League...


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> @BOC That is bullshit and you know it. The reason special characters are special is because they are UNIQUE (Its in the unit type) so in my mind I think Kharn should only be allowed in a World Eaters force because he is a World Eaters marine and how many other imposters are really running around the galaxy?
> 
> Think in future before you post more crap that just appears to fall from your mouth when you attempt to type on any goddamned computer!


First off, chill the fuck out.

Secondly, if you limit the special characters to the chapter/legion/sept/clan/regiment/sorority/fraternity/coven or whatever, you will see nothing but those chapter/legion/sept/clan/regiment/sorority/fraternity/coven or whatever and then we will hear you do nothing but bitch and complain that all you ever see is World Eaters/Ultramarines or whatever it is that you don't like. 
You are the type of person that would bitch about getting a bad blowjob. Me, a bad one is far better than none at all! :laugh:


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Actually, I saw plenty of Chapters/ Craftworlds/ et cetera that didn't have the SCs in the previous editions.
More often than not, in point of fact.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Vrykolas2k said:


> Actually, I saw plenty of Chapters/ Craftworlds/ et cetera that didn't have the SCs in the previous editions.
> More often than not, in point of fact.


If I have read a terrible example, it is this one. Back in the wonderful years of 3rd and 4th edition you didnt need special characters. 

I want to run a biker marine army. I buy the necessary traits, or get the list out of index astartes. Now adays I either need to run a bike captain or khan. 
What if I wanted a salamanders type army? I could use codex armageddon or traits. Now to represent better melta/flamer weapons I need to take vulkan. 

A lot of people who run special characters do so in order to better get the playstyle they want. I dont particularly care if someones ultramarines are led by vulkan. The only people that do are cry babies who have some sort of strange need to constrain what other people are running. 

Fuck off and play the game. Nobody ever won or lost because of a character, theres a reason a lot of the best army lists out there dont use any characters. They are only OP over in scrubville. In Pro-land, special characters hardly make a different as far as power levels go.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> Fuck off and play the game. Nobody ever won or lost because of a character, theres a reason a lot of the best army lists out there dont use any characters. They are only OP over in scrubville. In Pro-land, special characters hardly make a different as far as power levels go.


I don't know. One time I saw a Mephiston wipe out an entire 1000pt necron army on his own. I mean the blood angel player just fielded Mephiston to see what would happen.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> @BOC That is bullshit and you know it. The reason special characters are special is because they are UNIQUE (Its in the unit type) so in my mind I think Kharn should only be allowed in a World Eaters force because he is a World Eaters marine and how many other imposters are really running around the galaxy?


Except in the case of someone like Kharn you can run him in a random Chaos force because the World Eaters are no longer a legion.



Unforgiven302 said:


> The next codices need to have a SC generator for making individual and unique characters and not just allowing people to rename what is already preset/premade in the codex.
> 
> Something like how you equip a necron lord, you choose from a list of upgrades. Now these lists need to be at least a page or two long and in small print so there are 50-100 options to choose from. Again, GW needs to add the much missed flavor back into the system.


I agree that more flavor is good, but how is it any different if you generate your own character vs renaming a unit? As an example:

6th Space Marine Codex comes out, and I "make" a Chapter Master unit with a Power fist, Storm Bolter, makes all my units Stubborn, and makes my elites choices scoring (because the choices would get insane if we could just pick and choose which units get affected). I then name him Kedro Pantor (great name I think).

How does that make it different from taking Pedro Kantor of the Crimson Fists rules, and make a character named Marcus Thurgadin Master of the Fleet and Capitan of the 4th Company of the Seraphim of Salvation?

It doesn't make it any different at all. I'm no less creative because I made a character from a list of options (which I could have used to recreate a character anyway) or I take an exisiting character (again, who I could have made with the list anyway) and rename him to fit my own fluff?

Or are all the people that want SC's gone because they don't offer creativity against writing your own fluff?

This whole argument seems full of holes.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Necrosis said:


> I don't know. One time I saw a Mephiston wipe out an entire 1000pt necron army on his own. I mean the blood angel player just fielded Mephiston to see what would happen.


Heres another example of how not to make an argument. 

Necrons are quite possibly the worst army in the game right now. I think that pure grey knights are probably worse, but its close. Furthermore necrons have trouble dealing with 

high save models
high toughness models
things that move fast and punch them to death

Since mephiston is all 3 its very possible he could phase 1000 points of necrons. This isnt a problem with special characters. If you look at any of the good armies, or talk to good players, mephiston is only a good choice. He is by no means broken or over powered.

When collecting data, its generally a good idea to throw out all outliers. I shot 12 melta guns, 4 bright lances, and a linked prism shot at a land raider in one turn, to shake it once. I cant assume then that eldar have no means of dealing with armor.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

> This whole argument seems full of holes.


It is full of holes, and is perpetuated by whiners and cry babies who feel that everything should be their cookie cutter sense of balanced, as opposed to a game that has more fluff.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> Heres another example of how not to make an argument.
> 
> Necrons are quite possibly the worst army in the game right now. I think that pure grey knights are probably worse, but its close. Furthermore necrons have trouble dealing with
> 
> ...


So basically to sum what you said. I'm an idiot and don't play necrons.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> If I have read a terrible example, it is this one. Back in the wonderful years of 3rd and 4th edition you didnt need special characters.
> 
> I want to run a biker marine army. I buy the necessary traits, or get the list out of index astartes. Now adays I either need to run a bike captain or khan.
> What if I wanted a salamanders type army? I could use codex armageddon or traits. Now to represent better melta/flamer weapons I need to take vulkan.
> ...


Not only more rude than necessary, but also incorrect.
You DON'T need special characters in this edition. And if you have a preference in play-style, how hard is it to just collect the army in question?
People do fine without them. Some people do get tired of them being as generic as they currently are, however. Which is my gripe.
Not that they're, "O noes, gamebreaking!!!11!11!one!!1!".


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Necrosis said:


> So basically to sum what you said. I'm an idiot and don't play necrons.


Don't be too harsh, necrons aren't THAT bad.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Necrosis said:


> So basically to sum what you said. I'm an idiot and don't play necrons.


To sum up what I said
You created a bad argument, and I proved it false. Everyone makes bad arguments from time to time. I cant take this one instance and claim it makes you an idiot. Same as you cant take one rare and strange instance and use it as an argument against special characters. I could run 5 sanguard with no upgrades, and a priest with jump pack and beat 1000 points of necrons. Im pretty sure that 4 thunderwolves with frost blades would handle a 1000 points of necrons. Gazghull in a trukk could handle 1000 points of necrons. 

Necrons lost because they are bad, not because of mephiston. 

Same thing with my argument about eldar shooting that land raider. The dice rolling was bad, not the eldar.

I am not quite sure where you get the impression I said that you dont play necrons.




Vrykolas2k said:


> Not only more rude than necessary, but also incorrect.
> You DON'T need special characters in this edition. And if you have a preference in play-style, how hard is it to just collect the army in question?
> People do fine without them. Some people do get tired of them being as generic as they currently are, however. Which is my gripe.
> Not that they're, "O noes, gamebreaking!!!11!11!one!!1!".


Sure people do fine without them. My nids do great without them. And my friends lash chaos/guard have done well without any special characters.

I personally like sanguard. I like the look of the models, the playstyle of highly elite jump infantry, and the fluff. So I have a blood angels army with dante, 2 sanpriests with jump packs, 15 sanguard, 20 assault marines, and 3 autolas predators. Do you feel I should drop dante for a generic captain so you dont have to look at him across the table from you? 

What about my loganwing. Ive always like gunline marine armies. He lets me take wolfguard as troops. Which means more missiles. Should I drop him so my army isnt as generic? 

Im not really sure what your argument is here.


----------



## Bhaal006 (Apr 11, 2010)

as soon as GW releases Codex: Salamanders or Codex: Ravenguard, you might have an argument. On second thought, no you wouldn't. 

It's my money and my army and if I want Tigurius, Calgar, Vulkan, Shrike, Lysander, Dante, or Logan in my army(also since I bought the paints and happen to hold the brush I can call them whatever I want) I don't understand why it would upset you.

The lot of you naysayers have no reasonble/Logical grounds to object to my choices. My "lack of creativity" effects you in no way.(If you happpen to be in the camp that states that SC's aren't OP; and if you believe they are infact OP then to that I say Bollocks.)


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I agree special characters are simply for character and bring the fluff to the game. They are in no way over powered and it's ridiculous to even assume so. Also there was a time when you could customize (re:Rogue Trader) and yeah I don't want to see Bloodthirsters running around with lascannons, no thanks.

Hell in second edition when there was a psychic turn an entire battle could be turned on it's head just from one round between two psykers, but the game has significantly changed since those days.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I am not saying SC are OP or ruin the game by being unbalanced. Heck I don't even have a problem if you use Vulkan in your Salamanders army. I am saying they are used to over holes in ones army and hardly ever taken because of the fluff. People look over their rules, go gooey over something (WOW! Twin linked melta weaponry!) and then pick it. Or even worse dress the guy in different colours and say he is something original. You can claim your new captain is Casterre Nobryl, Scourge of the Tyranids but I just see Vulkan in Sunburst Yellow.

If you care more about winning than about having fun you play the game too much and need to get a grip on reality and need to learn that you cannot win everything. Hell most of us lost out on the top of the foodchain category because we play this game!

My marines are yet another army that draws interest. It is painted in tiger stripes and includes a large number of Sternguard. A lot of people think I need Kantor because those Sternguard become scoring but the fact really is you don't. A better general wins using the basic troops and tools at his disposal rather than relying on men with superpowers.

@Huggindatcharade: You answered your question yourself. You do not need Khan to take a bike mounted army. You could use a Space Marine Captain on a bike.

On a side note I wish that the next generation of codexes allows one to build their own special characters by having a list of options in each codex. For example pay 35 points extra if you wish your character bestow stubborn to the entire army. That would create originality and I bet people would use that instead of SC because you tournament gaming dicks care more about winning as opposed to being a human being, you freaks!

I do not like getting angry but there are so many fucking idiots that sometimes the moronicness of these people really piss me off!


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

lolumad bro?

Way to logic-fail.



> I am not saying SC are OP or ruin the game by being unbalanced.





> you tournament gaming dicks care more about winning





> People look over their rules, go gooey over something (WOW! Twin linked melta weaponry!) and then pick it





> If you care more about winning than about having fun you play the game too much


So according to your first post special characters are not broken or unbalanced. The rest is just the normal blahblahb WAAC strawmen arguments and other crap that those who are severely ill with forumitis say. 

I am going to go slow with this, so you can understand my argument. Put your thinking cap on, and bring your sharpest number 2 pencil for note taking. Because you are about to go to school, sucker. 

So special characters are balanced right? But I only care about winning and never leave my basement. If i only care about winning then I am going to use the best possible option for my army. If SC are balanced (which they are) than I have no incentive to take one over a regular character right? So why else would I take one? Perhaps for the flavor it gives me!


----------



## Bhaal006 (Apr 11, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I am not saying SC are OP or ruin the game by being unbalanced. Heck I don't even have a problem if you use Vulkan in your Salamanders army. I am saying they are used to over holes in ones army and hardly ever taken because of the fluff. People look over their rules, go gooey over something (WOW! Twin linked melta weaponry!) and then pick it. Or even worse dress the guy in different colours and say he is something original. You can claim your new captain is Casterre Nobryl, Scourge of the Tyranids but I just see Vulkan in Sunburst Yellow.


So basically The other person stupid because you have no imagination?



Stephen_Newman said:


> If you care more about winning than about having fun you play the game too much and need to get a grip on reality and need to learn that you cannot win everything. Hell most of us lost out on the top of the foodchain category because we play this game!


So we should apologize for enjoying a different aspect of the game? 



Stephen_Newman said:


> My marines are yet another army that draws interest. It is painted in tiger stripes and includes a large number of Sternguard. A lot of people think I need Kantor because those Sternguard become scoring but the fact really is you don't. A better general wins using the basic troops and tools at his disposal rather than relying on men with superpowers.


A better General wins because he uses the resources at his disposal better than his opponent, if we both have a lot of Sterngaurd in our army and I use Pedro and you don't who's using them most effectively? I'm not saying your wrong to exclude Kantor, but by what right do you persecute others for playing differently, your way is not necessarily the right/best way.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Stephen dunceman has every right to persecute us WAAC players. Clearly he is a superior human being. You can tell by his flawless style when arguing his points. Or by his amazingly painted tiger marines!


----------



## Deathscythe4722 (Jul 18, 2010)

If anything SCs (at least in C:SM, where most of the examples seem to be coming from) encourage creativity more the discourage it.

Look at it this way: I want a Sternguard-Heavy army, and i want my special rules to reflect this. I then have a choice, i can use a regular Captain and get generic Chapter Tactics, or i can throw in Kantor and get a rule tailored specifically for the army i'm trying to play. Now that my Sternguard are scoring, i don't have to water down my force with too many lesser, non-elite chumps, because regular Troops are for punks. 

If i don't include Kantor, I have to devote more points towards Troops units, thus kicking my idea of a super-elite strike force in the nuts before it even gets off the ground.

Furthermore, if i want a lolcalvary Bike army that outflanks, i use Kor'Sarro Khan on Moondraken

If i want my marines to be THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL:laugh: (or Angry Marines) i use Marneus Calgar.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

> I strongly disagree there. As everyone has so vehemently expressed in this thread and others, this game is about 'your creativity.' So, it's being 'creative' until a player takes an established character and makes them their own. That's ridiculous.
> 
> So, if I have a fluffy Chaos Army with Khorne-tendencies, full of berserkers, but I don't want to call them the World Eaters so I can't run Kharn?


Basically, it seems like, at least for my codex, you are saying 'Unless you run the Death Guard, Black Legion, Thousand Sons, Emperor's Children or World Eaters you can't use the SC given.' Which is... well... ri-goddamn-diculous.

You're exactly right Boc, people should not be punished for trying to be a bit creative. That goes against the whole ethos of the game. 

I play Blood Angels, that's how my army is painted so I have lots of SC to choose from, I often used Dante or Mesphiston or a plain old regular libby. My friend plays Flesh Tearers, that's how he's painted up. So he can have Gabriel Seth, Asteroth and the Sanginor in his force. He can also have Brother Corbulo though, someone who although is not Brother Corbulo fufils the same role for the Flesh Tearers. Maybe not in the same way with exactly the same tools, but functionally identical. I'm not going to turn around to him and slag him off for scratch building a Flesh Tearers Corbulo when I'm using the model off the shelf. It is me who is being uncreative not him.


----------



## Daddysen (May 31, 2010)

Wow mucho hostility.
here i go. 
I think If we had options to Tailor make our own special characters that would be awesome. But Even if i Had such List and i could make a character Carbon copy of Kharn abilities and all i wouls still take Kharn casue i really like him. 
I am sorry if this upsets you. but if you asked nicely I would run the Much more hardy Daemon Prince with the Mark of Nurgle and Warptime.
In fact i played a game a while back with someone who said he was gonna change his whole list if i fielded abbadon, while i thought this was crazy i just used the points for 2 plain Daemon princes with wings and warptime with no mark, I think he would have had an easier time dealing with abbadon.

If you really have a mental issue with special character to the point that you start to twitch and mumble to yourself the whole time just kindly explain to your opponant that you are a douche bag and you don't give a flying fuck how much time and money they put into their army or if they even have fun. because you have issues and damnit they demand to be satiated. 

or you could say hey or you gonna be running so and so special character cause i am really tired of playing against him , if you don't use that character ill let you pick something from my list that i will not use. 

it might work and you both would be loosing a vital part of each armies strategy. becasue just becasue your list doesn't include a special character does not mean its a bad list and neither does having them in your army mean its an awesome list.

but i will say with the way things are now especially with space marines not choosing a character can make your army illegal. so if you are willing to let your opponet bend the rules just so you don't see a special character then you can complain all you want.

for example my deamon prince will be rinding in the Land raider with the bezerkers he is joined to becasue thats where Kharn usually sits but since looking at Kharn chaps your ass Ill do this instead. haha dude you need to meditate and let it go. they already over price all special characters as it is.

I wonder if you also have a problem with Suck ass special characters. Like Fabius Bile I used to run him just for fun never won a damn game with him but i still had a blast. any way i am done now.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I am not saying SC are OP or ruin the game by being unbalanced. Heck I don't even have a problem if you use Vulkan in your Salamanders army. I am saying they are used to over holes in ones army and hardly ever taken because of the fluff. People look over their rules, go gooey over something (WOW! Twin linked melta weaponry!) and then pick it. Or even worse dress the guy in different colours and say he is something original. You can claim your new captain is Casterre Nobryl, Scourge of the Tyranids but I just see Vulkan in Sunburst Yellow.


That is because you lack the imagination or ability to grasp the basic principles of the hobby. The codex does not describe every living person in the entire galaxy. Casterre Nobryl may look like Vulkan and act like Vulkan but He is explicitly NOT Vulkan. He is Casterre Nobryl, he has a name badge and everything. 




> If you care more about winning than about having fun you play the game too much and need to get a grip on reality and need to learn that you cannot win everything. Hell most of us lost out on the top of the foodchain category because we play this game!


I enjoy playing the Sanguinary Guard armies. I think it's fun and looks really good on the Tabletop. Are you seriously saying we need to get a grip on reality when playing with my toy soldiers pretending their from 38,000 years in the future?



> My marines are yet another army that draws interest. It is painted in tiger stripes and includes a large number of Sternguard. A lot of people think I need Kantor because those Sternguard become scoring but the fact really is you don't. A better general wins using the basic troops and tools at his disposal rather than relying on men with superpowers.


You copied your idea from someone else, you should probably show a little creativity and originality and make it your own. A 'Counts As' Pedro would make perfect sense for you force.



> On a side note I wish that the next generation of codexes allows one to build their own special characters by having a list of options in each codex. For example pay 35 points extra if you wish your character bestow stubborn to the entire army. That would create originality and I bet people would use that instead of SC because you tournament gaming dicks care more about winning as opposed to being a human being, you freaks!
> 
> I do not like getting angry but there are so many fucking idiots that sometimes the moronicness of these people really piss me off!


If you build them yourself they are not SC's are they, they're just Characters. I want to be able to play my Blood Angels with Dante, not someone a bit like Dante. But at the same time I'm not going to moan with someone playing Knights of Blood with their 'counts as' Dante. You're right people would use your idea, because it's broken, fundamentally flawed.


----------



## coke123 (Sep 4, 2010)

So using a counts-as special character is unimaginative, and makes me a WaaC player, eh?

What if I want to play Alien Hunters. The best way to represent this is to run my 'Death Watch Captain', who just happens to use a powerfist, powered up 'anti-alien' stormbolter, and has a company standard. and since my guys are alien hunters, they've seen pretty much every vile alien across the galaxy, so they're going to be stubborn. and since the Deathwatch is renowned for special ammo, of course I'm going to have plenty of sternguard equivalents, which are going to have to be able to score, since they're the primary fighting force of the alien hunters. I will have a few new guys in my force who have yet to get their special ammo, but of course one of the premier fighting forces of the galaxy is going want it's initiates to prove themselves, hence the presence of basuc tac squads.

Oh wait, what was that- I just described pedro kantor in his entirety! without a single reference to the crimson fists! in fact, I've just used kantor to form an inquisitorial force. How does that lack imagination. If I want to play this army, and just buy a marine captain with powerfist, stormbolter and company standard, and give my opponent a heads up, what is wrong with that? He's got all the equipment of Kantor, except he's not Kantor- he's Deathwatch Captain Killwin! (couldn't think of a better name off the top of my head)

Counts-as special characters are hardly unimaginative. In fact I would encourage them.

EDIT: And as for having special rules be applied to a basic template captain/chapter master, I initially thought this would be a good idea. Until I realised that this could lead to a horrifying ordeal of combining special character rules that goes something like this.

Player 1- "Hey guys, this is my very own character. His name is Marneus Vulkan Kantor-Shrike. He is the love child of Vulkan, Marneus, Shrike and Pedro. Marines are kinky that way. He gives my entire army both stubborn and fleet, makes my sternguard scoring, makes my flamers and meltas twin-linked, and allows me to decide whether I pass or fail any morale check."

Player 2- "Oh fuckballs"

How is this template going to improve the 'evil WaaC players' using special characters as a crutch?


----------



## Alsojames (Oct 25, 2010)

I think what we meant by adding special rules is that paying points to add special rules to a character.

For example, making that bastard child you just listed up there worth around 500 points by himself. Without any weapons.

And/or we could just do what WHFB did and place a points limit on HQs. Although I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more Apocalypse games if HQs were limited to say, 25% or 50% of an army's point list.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Stephen_Newman said:


> That is the problem with people. They play too much towards being competitive rather than plating for fun. It is more fun to use your own characters, it is more entertaining being original.


I'd forgotten that the entire world has to have fun the same way that you do or they're WAAC assholes.

Seriously, how do you get through life being so insanely closed-minded? I don't understand.


----------



## Alsojames (Oct 25, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> I'd forgotten that the entire world has to have fun the same way that you do or they're WAAC assholes.
> 
> Seriously, how do you get through life being so insanely closed-minded? I don't understand.


 
QFT Katie. Some people have fun by winning, but I have fun by having a good game with a good player. Not everyone has fun the same way.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

One of the main aspects of having SC is that they have unique wargear. Since technology in the 4st millenium is not evolving how are you explaining that very rare and sacred artifacts such as Dorns Arrow and the Spear of Vulkan, which were used y the supermen named primarchs have in fact dozens of similar acting artifacts just lying in nearly every force around the galaxy?

I do have fun without compulsory winning all the time. I win more than I lose and I think that losing people that you might consider friends or making enemies then you are putting yourself too much into the game and need to find another outlet on life to be arrogant dicks who deny everything-like commenting on forums!

On a further note. I have no problem playing Marneus-Vulkan-Kantor-Shrike provided he is appropiately priced in points. Espcially since all those points have been wasted on 1 model that cannot score and troops choices have to be factored in still. It is the price of using all those special abilities.

I certainly do not consider myself above anybody else. I try to be modest but when you keep shouting the same crap in an attempt to prove yourselfs like I am the one with no imagination or am shit because I do not use SC's. You made up that accusation not me stupid deaf individuals. Think before you type a reply or I may just get angry.

Gah! Gotta calm down before I sound too much like LordWaffles.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> I'd forgotten that the entire world has to have fun the same way that you do or they're WAAC assholes.
> 
> Seriously, how do you get through life being so insanely closed-minded? I don't understand.


Talk about a leap of judgement (did I just make that up?). Just because he likes to play a certain way, and is an advocate of that playstyle he is suddenly 'closed-minded'. When he starts herding people into trucks, I think that'll be the point were we can say he is seriously closed minded.

Personally I agree to an extent. How many people liked Salamanders before Vulkan rules, I mean really, how many? And don't anyone try and give me the bullshit that "Oh at my local GW (that we can't visit) loads of people played Salamanders for the paint scheme and the shits and giggles.

Fact is Crimson Fist Pedro's and Salamanders Vulkan's (or their flipping counts as) have multiplied so that everyone is practically running them these days.

Also what is with that argument that it allows you to play a certain way, so thats why people use them as 'counts as' in their armies?

Yeah like people were sitting around lamenting the fact that Sternguard couldn't score as that would be their tactic (that they developed all by themselves of course) and so GW magiced their wish true like a big fat fairy God Mother or whatever. 

Fact is it takes no brains to make a Vulkan list, it writes itself. Right now I'm trying to figure out how to use some Attack Bikes I have lying around, in a Vulkan list it's automatic Multi-melta, i.e. no thinking for me, yes?

In saying that I ACTUALLY LIKE SPECIAL CHARACTERS, I just hate it when people 'like' a character because he has awesome rules. I like the character Lucius the Eternal, but he doesn't have awesome rules, but I like him anyway. 

Rant over


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I do have fun without compulsory winning all the time. I win more than I lose and I think that losing people that you might consider friends or making enemies then you are putting yourself too much into the game and need to find another outlet on life to be arrogant dicks who deny everything-like commenting on forums!
> 
> I certainly do not consider myself above anybody else. I try to be modest but when you keep shouting the same crap in an attempt to prove yourselfs like I am the one with no imagination or am shit because I do not use SC's. You made up that accusation not me stupid deaf individuals. Think before you type a reply or I may just get angry.


Its not compulsory winning, just that when you have something called a 'type A' personality, you are a wee bit more, shall we say, competitive. If I go play mini golf with the wife, I try to win. If I am playing basketball with some friends, I try to win. If I play a pick up game in my local gaming shop, I try to win. Do I have fun if I lose? Usually. Do I have more fun when I win? Normally, yep.

And trust me, my real life is also an outlet for being an arrogant dick, but there's just so much awesomeness in this one person that it overflows onto the forums as well. Don't get too mad, you may burst a blood vessel. INTENSITYYYYY


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I certainly do not consider myself above anybody else. I try to be modest but when you keep shouting the same crap in an attempt to prove yourselfs like I am the one with no imagination or am shit because I do not use SC's. You made up that accusation not me stupid deaf individuals. Think before you type a reply or I may just get angry.


You condemn an entire group of people by calling us, what was it? Tournament playing dicks? Yet you don't consider yourself above anyone... I smell bullshit.

Nobody says you have no imagination or are bad at the game for not using Special Characters. I and others are saying you're being a 'tard for hating on people that take them because they want an in-game advantage. As for you getting angry... I'm absolutely shaking in my booties. :laugh:


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> I'm absolutely shaking in my booties. :laugh:


Bootie...S? This concept is intriguing to me.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Boc said:


> Bootie...S? This concept is intriguing to me.


Yeah, it's 'cute' way of saying "boots". It doesn't mean to refer to anyone's behind.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Ah, nevermind. Damn dialect differences!


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Boc said:


> Its not compulsory winning, just that when you have something called a 'type A' personality, you are a wee bit more, shall we say, competitive. If I go play mini golf with the wife, I try to win. If I am playing basketball with some friends, I try to win. If I play a pick up game in my local gaming shop, I try to win. Do I have fun if I lose? Usually. Do I have more fun when I win? Normally, yep.
> 
> And trust me, my real life is also an outlet for being an arrogant dick, but there's just so much awesomeness in this one person that it overflows onto the forums as well. Don't get too mad, you may burst a blood vessel. INTENSITYYYYY


Lol I love how this could potentially be interpreted so you sound like such an a**. "Hey I have a type A personality" ... what does that stand for a**hole? But I know what you are trying to say.

Lol of course the point of 40k is to try and win, if one person in any game isn't playing to win then there is a serious problem. The point he is making is that people who play the game in terms of pure black and white, winning and losing are the ones who are annoying. 

Play to win at mini-golf with your wife by all means, but if you actively sought out every possible advantage you could have in order to win at mini-golf then your just a douche. It's the same with 40k, they are plastic figures, but some people put so much effort into winning that it's almost unreal.

Also he's quite right, if your a WAAC douche, don't bother saying hey this is Captain X, just say I'm a WAAC douche who has no interest in the Salamanders (or even Astartes for that matter) but I like to win, so here he is in my list. Then at least that would show both balls and would allow us more fluffy and creative thinkers to avoid you.



Katie Drake said:


> You condemn an entire group of people by calling us, what was it? Tournament playing dicks? Yet you don't consider yourself above anyone... I smell bullshit.
> 
> Nobody says you have no imagination or are bad at the game for not using Special Characters. I and others are saying you're being a 'tard for hating on people that take them because they want an in-game advantage.


I went back and read that original post of his a page ago and I just find it hilarious that you identified yourself with the groups he was calling d*cks.

Imagine this scenario.

Him, "I hate WAAC d*cks they really ruin the fun of having a game of 40k, don't you agree?"

You, "Hey I'm not a d*ck!"

Lol, like I said, that seems like a really weird form of hailing, instead of him saying "Hey you there" and you responding, he said "Hey you there you d*ck" and then you responded lol.

And if your trying to defend WAAC players fine. As both he and you brought it up, WAAC players are d*cks, if thats you or anyone else I'll let you do the math on that one.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

D-A-C said:


> I went back and read that original post of his a page ago and I just find it hilarious that you identified yourself with the groups he was calling d*cks.


I'd be hard-pressed to not consider myself a tournament player considering that I _play in tournaments_.



> Imagine this scenario.
> 
> Him, "I hate WAAC d*cks they really ruin the fun of having a game of 40k, don't you agree?"
> 
> You, "Hey I'm not a d*ck!"


I stand up for myself and other people with similar interests to me. Competitive/Tournament players get all kinds of flak from the 40K community here and elsewhere. Note I'm talking about competitive gamers, not WAAC gamers. KingofCheese wrote a thread about this a short while ago. I suggest you read it to familiarize yourself with the difference.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> Lol I love how this could potentially be interpreted so you sound like such an a**. "Hey I have a type A personality" ... what does that stand for a**hole? But I know what you are trying to say.
> 
> Lol of course the point of 40k is to try and win, if one person in any game isn't playing to win then there is a serious problem. The point he is making is that people who play the game in terms of pure black and white, winning and losing are the ones who are annoying.
> 
> ...


I actually consider myself quite a fluff-oriented individual, if you'd check out the original works forum you'd see. However, I know the person I am playing against hasn't read my backstory, so I don't tell him 'Well this is the warband's leader named blah blah.' I just say 'Kharne is my HQ' or just show him my Army Builder datasheet.

I do see the point you are making, I just disagree with it. To be honest though, I have really had minimal interaction with people that build fluffy lists that make more sense to the actual lore of 40k. Having only played in 1 tournament, the vast majority of these guys that build some tough lists are just 'casual-ish' players that like to have good, competitive matches but only one person I have ever played (at a tournament, incidentally), has really come across as a real douche.

It could just be a regional thing, but I legitimately never even met someone that is actually offended by special characters.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> I'd be hard-pressed to not consider myself a tournament player considering that I _play in tournaments_.
> 
> 
> 
> I stand up for myself and other people with similar interests to me. Competitive/Tournament players get all kinds of flak from the 40K community here and elsewhere. Note I'm talking about competitive gamers, not WAAC gamers. KingofCheese wrote a thread about this a short while ago. I suggest you read it to familiarize yourself with the difference.


I know the difference as I started this thread about the topic, I also glanced at that KOC one too :

http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=75008

In saying that, as a tournament player by your own admission (you see I am establishing your degree of guilt already lol) do you not think its a sad state of affairs that anyone who wants to participate in a tournament has to face the fact that everyone who attends them usually spams these so called 'power builds'. So instead of getting to face a variety of units, there is like 2 Vulkans, 3 Lashes, a couple of Pedros etc and thats it.

How is that in anyway indictive of being good at 40k? Yay I beat all those power lists, with a little luck and my own power list, that on another day without the luck would have lost to soemone else's power list. Yay, I'm super dooper awesome, where is my medal and trophy? Take my photo while I wear sunglasses in doors, cuz I'm the bomb. 

As I stated the problem with special characters only becomes apparent when they are automatic takes. Twin-linking every melta and flamer and master-crafting thunder hammers ontop of being a good stand alone character is overpowered for 190pts to the extent why wouldn't you not take him. 

Thus, Vulkan is everywhere and so he becomes gay, even if you liked Salamanders and Vulkan before, taking him and tailoring your list with only melta and flamers, (so no heavy bolters or plasma etc) is just crap and no fun. Unless winning is all you care about.

Bit of a circular argument here methinks.


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> Thus, Vulkan is everywhere and so he becomes gay, even if you liked Salamanders and Vulkan before, taking him and tailoring your list with only melta and flamers, (so no heavy bolters or plasma etc) is just crap and no fun. Unless winning is all you care about.
> 
> Bit of a circular argument here methinks.


Most competitive vanilla marine lists do not include vulkan. Most usually run a libby. And I can't believe you threw out Lash as a powerbuild. 

I now cannot take you seriously on this subject.



I think the problem I see here is that one group of Fluff Nerds thinks that Special Characters are *Special* and can't be used to represent anything else. Combined with another Fluff Nerd subgroup: "You only like Special Characters because of the rules, not because you are Fluffy"- it truly lends itself to Nerdrage over something quite silly. 

Counts-as characters provides MODEL VARIETY. If you could not use counts as, people who wanted to use an Elite-Sternguard Army would HAVE TO PLAY CRIMSON FISTS. 

If you can't see how thats retarded, then just tie that fluffy noose around ya neck.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> I stand up for myself and other people with similar interests to me. Competitive/Tournament players get all kinds of flak from the 40K community here and elsewhere. Note I'm talking about competitive gamers, not WAAC gamers. KingofCheese wrote a thread about this a short while ago. I suggest you read it to familiarize yourself with the difference.


He's not just giving tournament players shit. I don't consider myself a particularly competitive gamer, but I still use half a dozen 'count as' special characters and play whole 'count as' armies. Apparently I'm a WaaC player because I don't just want a beautifully painted/converted army but one that is actually half decent on the table. 

Everybody please forgive me for not painting my pieces of plastic the right colours.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

gally912 said:


> Most competitive vanilla marine lists do not include vulkan. Most usually run a libby. And I can't believe you threw out Lash as a powerbuild.
> 
> I now cannot take you seriously on this subject.
> 
> ...


You can't take me seriously? Then head over to the CSM Armylist section here at heresy and see the amount of people that are still retarded enough to use x2 Lash DP's or Sorcerers. I don't use it, but people are still heavily fixated on it. 

Also how the hell is Vulkan not one of the most competitive SM builds? Don't be retarded.

Lol we are playing with tiny plastic figures, if it's not for the enjoyment of the fluff aspect of the game, and it's about winning then WTF does that say about some people?

As for your model variety crap, it isn't model variety if the only two models that get taken for HQ's are Vulkan and Pedro. 

If you want Sternguard fine, but why spam three of them and Pedro, that's not much variety now is it?

How about x1 Dreadnought, x1 Sternguard, x1 Terminator squad, led by your own created and customised Chaplain, Librarian, Captain or Chapter Master. Now that's alot more model variety don't you think?


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> He's not just giving tournament players shit. I don't consider myself a particularly competitive gamer, but I still use half a dozen 'count as' special characters and play whole 'count as' armies. Apparently I'm a WaaC player because I don't just want a beautifully painted/converted army but one that is actually half decent on the table.
> 
> Everybody please forgive me for not painting my pieces of plastic the right colours.


Ha Ha Ha, I nearly died laughing when I read this.

Especially the part "He's not just giving tournament players shit".

Lol I imagined you shouting that, then the two groups that have arisen over this topic, the WAAC douches vs us Fluff Caring Awesome People, beginning to click our fingers and circle each other and then suddenly all hell will break loose and the following happens :

*We burst into song!!!*


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> You can't take me seriously? Then head over to the CSM Armylist section here at heresy and see the amount of people that are still retarded enough to use x2 Lash DP's or Sorcerers. I don't use it, but people are still heavily fixated on it.


Well now you're just being a hypocrite. You include it in a list of powerbuilds and then trash it next post? Pick a side. 


> Also how the hell is Vulkan not one of the most competitive SM builds? Don't be retarded.


 Because it includes no psychic defense, and believe it or not, vulkans abilities are more icing than substance. Most SM lists pack enough melta and TH/SS Termies are more than killy enough to not need the extra boost. Its Nice, not Necessary by any means. 


> Lol we are playing with tiny plastic figures, if it's not for the enjoyment of the fluff aspect of the game, and it's about winning then WTF does that say about some people?


 That its a GAME. A WAR GAME. A GAME that people play, to, you know, win. Thats one of the definitions of a GAME. 


> As for your model variety crap, it isn't model variety if the only two models that get taken for HQ's are Vulkan and Pedro.


 See, again, where I can't take you seriously. Thats more a problem with your local meta than a problem with the game, because Pedro isn't close to being optimal. Thats just a bunch of people liking to play certain kinds of armies. 


> If you want Sternguard fine, but why spam three of them and Pedro, that's not much variety now is it?
> 
> How about x1 Dreadnought, x1 Sternguard, x1 Terminator squad, led by your own created and customised Chaplain, Librarian, Captain or Chapter Master. Now that's alot more model variety don't you think?


 Nice straw-man argument you have going there. Learn2play, nub.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

D-A-C said:


> do you not think its a sad state of affairs that anyone who wants to participate in a tournament has to face the fact that everyone who attends them usually spams these so called 'power builds'. So instead of getting to face a variety of units, there is like 2 Vulkans, 3 Lashes, a couple of Pedros etc and thats it.


No, I don't think it's a sad state of affairs. Do I wish that there were more varied lists that were suitable for competitive environments? Sure. Is the fact that there aren't a deal breaker? No.



> How is that in anyway indictive of being good at 40k? Yay I beat all those power lists, with a little luck and my own power list, that on another day without the luck would have lost to soemone else's power list. Yay, I'm super dooper awesome, where is my medal and trophy? Take my photo while I wear sunglasses in doors, cuz I'm the bomb.


Cute, but if you don't suck, this isn't how it goes.



> As I stated the problem with special characters only becomes apparent when they are automatic takes. Twin-linking every melta and flamer and master-crafting thunder hammers ontop of being a good stand alone character is overpowered for 190pts to the extent why wouldn't you not take him.


This sort of illustrates a lack of understanding of what makes a good vanilla Space Marine list. Contrary to what every 'tard on a forum will tell you, Vulkan isn't an auto-take at a high level of play. He's good, don't get me wrong - even _extremely_ so. But he's not an auto-buy. If in any given area there are an inordinate amount of people taking Vulkan in their vanilla Marine armies simply because he's Vulkan then I'd have to suggest that those players probably don't understand their armies very well.



> Thus, Vulkan is everywhere and so he becomes gay, even if you liked Salamanders and Vulkan before, taking him and tailoring your list with only melta and flamers, (so no heavy bolters or plasma etc) is just crap and no fun. Unless winning is all you care about.


Taking only meltaguns and flamers will result in a fucking disaster of an army with little to no capabilities in the long-ranged firepower department, so if people are going to do that when I play them in tournaments, I'm not about to suggest otherwise (at least until after the game, that is  ).


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

D-A-C said:


> the WAAC douches vs us Fluff Caring Awesome People


LoLs. He be Trollin, we be hatein. :laugh:


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> Lol I imagined you shouting that, then the two groups that have arisen over this topic, the WAAC douches vs us Fluff Caring Awesome People, beginning to click our fingers and circle each other and then suddenly all hell will break loose and the following happens :
> 
> *We burst into song!!!*


I'm going to tell you the same thing I told the comedian at that strip joint in Reno... I'm not here for the jokes.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Another potentially good thread on heresy ruined by the constant cries of waac and horribly stupid arguments of a few idiots.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

I dont think this thread was destined to be "good" I dont see how this OT has anything to do with who is a WAAC player and who isnt. Another thread hijacked into a useless arguement.


----------



## angelXD19 (Feb 11, 2010)

wow what the hell did i make. geez i was just letting out some steam of seeing so many characters constantly that is all.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

angelXD19 said:


> wow what the hell did i make. geez i was just letting out some steam of seeing so many characters constantly that is all.


Back in yonder times. The shitty 'glory days' of point limit and opponent permission on characters your regular dudes were better, and you still saw the same old epistolary leading every marine army.



> I dont think this thread was destined to be "good" I dont see how this OT has anything to do with who is a WAAC player and who isnt. Another thread hijacked into a useless arguement.


Thats sadly how it is with a lot of the.....I dont know what to call them. They arent really fluff players, or good painters, they just hate losing. We will call them the butthurts. Because they suck at the game, are too competitive, and cant take losing. Theyll ignore any argument that destroys theirs. They will just repeat their inane drivel over and over. 

Ive noticed something in life in general. At least where im from. The 40k players who play in tournaments are generally more successful people. Have jobs, have girlfriends, are more physically fit, and more socially active. By that I mean have friends outside of events. The DACs and Stephen Newmans of my area are generally socially retarded, chronic virgins, who have lost the evolutionary battle to spread their genetic code. I hate to resort to that, but its an honest assertion.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I feel the same but unfortunately idiots like Huggindatcharade are complete morons. They refuse to counter my arguments with a equally sensible argument because they are too narrow minded themselves or just ridiculously stubborn to believe any different. You proof that I make sense. You ask the same question 5 years ago and no-one would know what the hell you were smoking. Ever since the wannabe licence set out by the 5th edition marine codex SC are more common.

Wake up and smell the cheese for goodness sakes before I have to come over and shove this laptop down your throat so that you may taste the shit I am currently reading.

EDIT: Just read the post above and search me on Facebook. Then we see who is successfull and overweight you cocky, assuming, completely naive twat!


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I feel the same but unfortunately idiots like Huggindatcharade are complete morons. They refuse to counter my arguments with a equally sensible argument because they are too narrow minded themselves or just ridiculously stubborn to believe any different. You proof that I make sense. You ask the same question 5 years ago and no-one would know what the hell you were smoking. Ever since the wannabe licence set out by the 5th edition marine codex SC are more common.
> 
> Wake up and smell the cheese for goodness sakes before I have to come over and shove this laptop down your throat so that you may taste the shit I am currently reading.


What the fuck are you even talking about? You should be honestly glad that breathing and heart beat are automatic processes done by the nervous system, as I dont think your brain could figure them out.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Ah fuck, here we go. Lets not attack each other.... come on people, we are all adults, for the most part, here. Maybe we should start acting like it.

@ above poster,
No one likes a troll.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

More than happy to when other arrogant arseholes stop coming out with complete shit and bollocks to block up the Augean stables!


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

This has already devolved into a shit fit between competitive players and fluffers, we don't need it to devolve any further and become a flame war. Just ignore the dude.


----------



## angelXD19 (Feb 11, 2010)

i just say just close the thread and ta da problem solved


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> This has already devolved into a shit fit between competitive players and fluffers, we don't need it to devolve any further and become a flame war. Just ignore the dude.


Youre right. Its dissolved into shit flinging and I will back out of that part. 

Its not an argument between competitive gamers and fluffers. I dont really know what its about tbh. Im not playing sanguard blood angels for any reason other than they look cool. I dont see how taking dante is a problem.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> Ah fuck, here we go. Lets not attack each other.... come on people, we are all adults, for the most part, here. Maybe we should start acting like it.
> 
> @ above poster,
> No one likes a troll.





gen.ahab said:


> This has already devolved into a shit fit between competitive players and fluffers, we don't need it to devolve any further and become a flame war. Just ignore the dude.


Hey gen.ahab :










We'll fight if we want to.

I just think the WAAC players are getting a taste of their own medicine, and what a bitter taste it must be. Us fluffy carebear types are slow to anger, but when we get there we go CRAZY!


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Finally! He may have realised what a tool he was being and backed out. (Or maybe after calling me stupid had to research the Augean stables? Whos stupid now?)


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Finally! He may have realised what a tool he was being and backed out. (Or maybe after calling me stupid had to research the Augean stables? Whos stupid now?)


Intelligence is the ability to acquire and make use of knowledge. I dont see how knowing an old greek story makes you smart.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)




----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Rudeness and name-calling shows a definate lack of maturity and intelligence.
I'll now go to a thread with more civil discourse.

edit: But as an addendum, I would like to say that if you want to use SC "A", why not just use him/ her in their own Chapter colours, and say your Chapter is a later Founding?
That suits both you build and the fluff players, most of whom would happily accept that... as opposed to there being multiple people with the same unique war-gear and abilities as Vulcan or Khan or Calgar or Logan...


----------



## Jezlad (Oct 14, 2006)

Move along people, nothing to see here except grown men arguing over spacemen....err wait opcorn:


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

@Jezlad: Glad to see this is entertaining you in some regard!

@Idiot that calls it Chuggindatcharade I just used an example of intelligence by using knowledge acquired in my recent studies in preparation to hopefully study Ancient history and then used it to show what your mumblings may turn into.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

You guys just arent going to act like grown ups about this..are you?


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Naahh. That would be too easy. Childish name calling it is!


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Naahh. That would be too easy. Childish name calling it is!


That’s good because that’s all your "argument" seems to have at this point.

Looking back at this thread people have countered both yours and DACs arguments with logical points, yet you both display a lack of intelligence in combating arguments presented against your point of view. Most of the time they are just ignored or you label the player as a WAAC type and declare his/her points invalid.

We've shot your argument full of holes to the point it looks like Swiss cheese, yet you persist in keeping up this "argument" by throwing insults at anyone who disagrees with you.

Also throwing out "Look at my facebook" shows a real lack of maturity.


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

Wow and too think some people complain about the 14 year olds playing the game. Sure they may paint crappy models, buy what GW tells them too and wouldn't know the rules for a bar of soap. But I'm fairly sure they wouldn't bicker like this over a few Special Characters.

*Notices Jez said move along* Hmm if I'm concise and polite can I still post 

Lets think of the reasons Special Characters are taken. Well people take them because they like the model. Check. People like the rules of the character, and can see how this can influence their army. Check. HQ Special Characters give a little more kick than a regular HQ can. Check. People DO like the fluff behind a character. Check.

I'm sure there are more reasons as well, but they are a few. Personally I haven't had a game in awhile, but that doesnt stop me from making lists, looking at others' lists and watching a game every now and again. Are fielding Special Characters really that much of an issue for some people? To be honest if someone likes Pedro Kantor because <insert reason for liking said character> then why shouldn't they field it. What if for a homemade Chapter they great extensive fluff for the character and they create a kitbashed model to represent the wargear of the character? What if the only way to know this character isn't a default Chapter Master is beacause the owner tells you its a 'counts-as' Pedro? Would you still label this person as a 'WAAC' or a powergamer or whatever other suitably dumb names you call other people interested in the same hobby.

A Special Character (bar the OP ones >.> Mephiston XD) should not be the point of the arrow, which is your army. Rather it should be the fletching which helps balance and give direction to the arrow, so that the point, the rest of your army, can get it's target. It may sound like a stupid metaphor, but it holds truth.

I myself have a Pedro Kantor in my Space Marine army, the Red Wolves. I have created large amounts of fluff to support the character, a new name, a new colour scheme and a new life. This doesn't make me a 'WAAC' player, I don't even play enough to care if I win or lose. I plan on ultimately having the whole 5th Company of the Red Wolves, and their will be other Special Characters in there. A 'counts-as' Telion and Chronus will be there, along with Pedro. BUT I DON'T CARE. New background, new schemes and new life. I don't plan on running them all together in a list, unless it was Apocalypse, and even then, the enemy would have a few Special Characters as well.

I select my characters based on model, fluff and what they introduce to my army. For example; how many lists will run Chronus in one of their tanks? How many people have claimed that Telion is not worth the points? How many people have stated that Pedro Kantor has inferior wargear compared to other characters, and that his benefit to the army is not that great? Answer to all these, plenty of people have, and I'm sure will continue to. But do I care? No I don't.

Now if people are seeing Special Characters over and over, maybe they need to expand their gaming area? Maybe people fielding Special Characters need to take the time to not just paint them a different colour, but also convert them. For a character like Ghaz, he has issues, GW only has one Mega armoured Ork Warboss, and it's the big guy. So what. Ghaz is an extremely potent character, and he show's it in his points cost, and people like that. But again fluff, model and rules. Different reasons are used by different players.

In my opinion if a player is willing to sit down and think up an extravagant back story to a character and convert the character to suit their army or model look, then they should darn well be allowed to field that model as whoever they want. This is meant to be a friendly community hobby. At least I thought it was. Then I see threads like this with immature bickering over a few characters. For god sake they are plastic (and pewter) space things. Who really cares if there are 50 bazillion Marneus Calgar's or 45 million Kharn's. It's not like you can't kill them right?

I grow weary of such topics because it's a players game. If Bob wants to run a converted one eyed one horned purple people eater named Randy Horniemonger who 'counts-as' Gabriel Seth, then so be it. At least they had the 'imagination' to not just take the GW blister model, spray it in blue and say its an Ultramarine (despite the Fleash Tearers symbols) as some players are like to do. Maybe instead of pushing people's choices away, you should embrace them. 

Anywho, from me you'll hear no qualm about the use of special characters, because even if they all boast the same rules, it's nice to see a special character hit up the table as a conversion of a players interpretation, in a different colour scheme, and possibly used with tactics outside of the normal groove.

I leave you know with some questions to ponder. If a character adds versatility to a list, that places it outside of a 'competitive' or 'WAAC' list, is this a bad thing? If a player values the hard work they put into a converted model and/or detailed background on the character, how do you think they feel about your 'WAAC' stereotyping? Are your games that affected by characters? Do you struggle to kill them, and this is the roots to your dislike of them? Are you just afraid that all HQs will become characters with no regular HQs? Aren't most regular HQs made to be 'competitative' in order to go toe to toe with special characters? What is the difference between a WAAC player taking a competitative regular HQ and a WAAC player taking a special character? And the same but for non WAAC players? Is it fair to label and stereotype people that use characters as being 'WAAC'?

Grish


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Actually I do not remember calling anybody WAAC's and I certainly do not remember a certain point your side of the argument contributed that others did not shoot down either. 

I used my Facebook hoping that that particular idiot in the tiny idea I had at the time for him to realise that I am not what he calls "a chronic virgin with no social life, inactive, overweight person" but would in fact find a person who is of a healthy weight, enjoys physical activity, has a social life outside of this hobby and still realise I have potential to be successful.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Link plox, stephen newman turns up way too many results.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Refine it to the west midlands area.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

No results


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Got a better idea. Link me to yours.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

I sense a budding romance.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

http://www.facebook.com/PeterNorth

there you go bruh. 

Now to get this back on topic. If thats even possible. What do you guys want to see from special characters in the grey knights book?


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

A return of the current SC but with maybe Brother Captain who defeated Angron although that may be wishlisting from my part.

Nice facebook page.


----------



## Nave Senrag (Jul 8, 2010)

I wouldn't mind seeing a Sc who isn't a Gray Knight, or inquisitor. Surely, the inquisitorial stormtroopers have a leader, or an elite squad (actually that is rather interesting. Does any other army have a squad that is a special character?). If not them then any of the various assassins' grandmaster or something alike would work. Hell, even a sentient vehicle would do.


----------



## Laetos (Dec 8, 2010)

Special characters have been make for being played. But they can be use only if you agree. There are rules so...Maybe you can't win against a special character?


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Special characters are here to stay as far as I can tell. Jervis has pretty much said that they mae the special chaarcter models and want to sell them so thats why they changed it from consent only choices.

As a long time tournament player I never took special characters as it was against most tournaments rules. Now I can take them, I do. Not because they make me more competative, but because they make me have a certain play style to my army. Currently I have a 'count as' Vulkan in my Jade Dragon's army. I could drop him and swap around a couple of things and still field my army, but where is the fun in that.

Bear in mind that I am not an ultra competative gamer, as anybody who plays me could confirm. I play for fun and dont mind loosing as long as the game was funny.

Is this kitbashed enough? (This is an old pic and the combi bolter is now a converted heavy flamer.)


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

It makes my kitbashed dante jealous.


----------



## Rayza (Mar 3, 2009)

This thread has really made me laugh to be honest

First of all EVERYONE CALM DOWN :')

As a lot of you have said its a game.......exacly its a game, stop bitching an just enjoy playing it 

If you don't like playing against armies that use SC then don't play against them...simple 
but if you do play against them don't bitch about that players specific game plan/ tactics
just because of the SC's


 just smile and have fun 
i mean this is what 40k is all about i'snt it


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Rayza said:


> This thread has really made me laugh to be honest
> 
> First of all EVERYONE CALM DOWN :')
> 
> ...


I agree with you for the most part. I just dont enjoy being berated, even on the internet, because I run special characters. I just spent 12 ish hours painting the gold armor on the 15 sanguard for my blood angels. Thats just the gold, nothing else. Sounds a lot like a fluff/modeling army to me.


----------



## the cabbage (Dec 29, 2006)

I like the extra depth a special character adds to the game. It allows different builds out of the same codex. They also bring different gaming challenges to the table. An army which relies too much on an SC immediately brings an assassination secondary objective to the game, that can only be good.

As a club rather than tournie player I play a lot more guys who form an army around an idea. Not really fluffy as they don't name squads or make up back stories. For example picking khorne as they like the back story and then trying to build the best khorne force they can within a reasonable amount of fluff, and then painting appropriately.

However I do intend to go to a tournie next year and I suppose if I have to face 4 ork armies led by ghaz over the weekend it might get samey.

I have been playing for several editions now and never fielded an SC until this one. My orks now have Ghaz and my SW have Ragnar (And i'm looking at Njal). Ghaz is included for gaming advantage and Ragnar added because I wanted pods and he's fluffy for it. However if he proves to be shit he'll be sitting out the tournie :laugh:


----------



## Shadowfane (Oct 17, 2007)

Wow.... is this thread STILL going? I gotta say, my first thought after reading through it was "Owwww.... my head hurts".....

Now I'll freely admit to being someone who tends to not use SCs, partly because I started playing when they were only allowed with permission/certain point sizes, and thats still stuck in my subconscious a little, but also because I tend to play with the same group of people, and in that time my own characters have evolved their own history and whatnot - its a very rare dark elf army I field that isnt led by Surayon the Tainted, for example.

I have no particular problem with SCs though, and I certainly dont object to their use - in the current edition, its sometimes the only way to get an army to play the way you want to play it!

It may just be because I don't tend to play tournament players that often - in fact, the only tournamant I regularly attend is the warhammer doubles at nottingham (note, I'm in no way trying to insult/offend tournament players, you guys/girls have my total respect for playing the games at a much higher level than I can), so I don't see the common "power builds" out there - most of my opponents build fluff based, or historical-based armies, or just things they think'll look cool on the battlefield. I just don't *get* the complaints some people make about things like Vulkan, Kantor and the like.
If anything, its occasionally MORE fun to see those armies because it forces me to play differently against them!


----------

