Bloodletters counts as

[Guest]

Okay, not a fan of the blood letter models, both past and present. I especially dislike their legs, which don't make much sense to be seated on a Blood Throne. Yet, I'm starting a Khorne Daemonkin army and inclusion of bloodletters is unavoidable. 

 

So I'm thinking, what if I just used human models with single swords/axes (probably a mix of two handed and 1 weapon only). I then paint them as khorne daemons, so red skin and glowing eyes. I'd focus on human models with lots of exposed skin (like some of the AOS Khorne Bloodreavers or the Skorne Nihilators). 

 

Does that seem reasonable, or should I look into another option?

[pretre]

Check my signature. ;)

[Guest]

Check my signature. ;)

Can you post it? I have those disabled.

[pretre]

Is the counts as cool, consistent and clear? If yes, it's fine.

[WestRider]

Also consider maybe Beastmen Gors. I'm using them as riders on my Bloodcrusher conversions, and they look the part pretty well.
 
 

Can you post it? I have those disabled.

 
 

 

WYSIWYG:
What you see is what you get. As a player convention, stock equipment is often not counted (i.e. Tactical marines often only are shown with bolters, not with Bolters, BP and grenades). This convention was supported in earlir editions in the WYSIWYG section.
I.e. A model that you paid points for a bolter on is carrying a bolter. If a model paid for a power axe and is armed with just a bolter, this is not WYSIWYG.
 
Counts-As: Something counting as something else.
I.e. A big monolith instead of a VSG; Space Wolf models with appropriate wargear instead of Codex: Marines, etc. If he plopped a coaster sized model on the table for the VSG, or something else not meeting the basic rules of counts-as (Cool, Consistent and Clear), then it would not be counts-as.
 
Proxy: Something being placed on the board for something else with no consideration of Cool, Consistency or Clearness.
I.e. This Plasma gunner is a Lascannon.
 
Modeling for Advantage: Making changes to your models purely for mechanical, game advantage.
I.e. Modeling all of your CC units to be crawling on the ground so they can get better cover saves or moving all the guns on a model to one side to get a better arc of fire.

[Guest]

Right, so as title, they'd be Counts-as. That's not really the question. The question is more, would this be a problem for other players, like you guys, if I showed up with this, instead of the actual bloodletter models?

[PourSpelur]

Blood reavers would be a great alternative. I'd suggest an inhuman skin tone to really differentiate them. Maybe a strong metallic skin? Bronze flesh and do all the armor/weapons as bone?

Keeps the Khorne aesthetic while clearly marking them as Daemons.

[WestRider]

In general, the first two options there are broadly accepted, and the third mostly only in casual/home games, and the last is widely frowned upon.

 

My standard for it is that if I (being at least reasonably familiar with the Codex in question) look at your Army List and the Army on the table, I should be able to tell what is what without having to ask. Or at the very least without having to ask more than once (i.e. you tell me the ones with red flesh are Bloodletters and the ones with human flesh are Culties, that's easy to keep track of). I feel like this would be fine in that regard.

[Guest]

Blood reavers would be a great alternative. I'd suggest an inhuman skin tone to really differentiate them. Maybe a strong metallic skin? Bronze flesh and do all the armor/weapons as bone?

Keeps the Khorne aesthetic while clearly marking them as Daemons.

I'm thinking a reverse of the Khorne marine armor, I've been doing. So presently doing Bright Red armor with Bright White boarders (the bright colors because I want to the dripping blood to stand apart from the armor...). So the Daemons will be Red skin with White Armor and Details. Not fully decided on hellblades, but probably a burning iron look. 

[PourSpelur]

Also, do you have cultists in the list? If not, it's a slam dunk.

[Guest]

In general, the first two options there are broadly accepted, and the third mostly only in casual/home games, and the last is widely frowned upon.

 

My standard for it is that if I (being at least reasonably familiar with the Codex in question) look at your Army List and the Army on the table, I should be able to tell what is what without having to ask. Or at the very least without having to ask more than once (i.e. you tell me the ones with red flesh are Bloodletters and the ones with human flesh are Culties, that's easy to keep track of). I feel like this would be fine in that regard.

It should be obvious enough, I agree. I don't foresee an issue, but I find it a good plan to ask in advance. 

 

Culties are presently OOP metal catachans (red clothes, tan skin, white khorne markings, black weapons), but I'm not sure if I'll keep that direction, since I don't really have that many of them and they would be confusing if I go this route. I've been kicking around the idea of using the Skorne Venator Reivers as my "Culties." I already have more of these for skorne, than I do the catachans, and these are less physically imposing. Plus they look like bald, evil elves, which I think fits with cultist persona. Weapon wise, they have an odd machinegun-crossbow hybrid, but they'd be easy to count as auto-guns without any confusion.

 

As for counts as, I'm of the opinion that chaos armies should almost never look like the GW product. They aren't bound by the STCs and they are known for deformatity, lower standards of recruitment, and mutations aplenty. I look down on chaos armies that are exclusively new models assembled exactly as GW posts....just terrible.  

[CaptainA]

I'd have no problem with it.

[generalripphook]

Post a picture with the two color schemes.

 

If they are different sounds good.

[Guest]

Post a picture with the two color schemes.

 

If they are different sounds good.

Fair request, but I'm so not there yet.

 

Though regarding AOS models, there is another khorne unit for AOS that GW paints their skin red instead of the flesh tones:

As opposed to:

 

I'll be using the models from the second photo, but, more or less, painting them like the first model.

[Guest]

So, on the list of counts as model conversions....

 

If I do change the bloodletters, I'm going to want to change them for everything, not just the actual blood letter unit.

 

So, in example, changing the riders for the bloodcrushers, the heralds, and the models mount on the Blood Throne/Skull Cannnon.

 

Speaking of, Blood Throne and Skull Cannons. I also dislike this model. Aside from it being plastic (and the armorcast version being nearly impossible to acquire in the case of the skull cannon), I think it looks goofy in a bad way. Profile-wise, it's AV12/12/10 and is the speed of a Walker, so I'm thinking that I could start with a Dreadnought, and convert from there. It'll look the part before I call it done, but they'll probably cost more this way.

 

So, again, if this sounds like"counts as" that would be problematic, tell me, so I can fix it before I purchase and convert models.

 

I do have a Throne of Judgement which I was planning to seat calgar on, but it would make a great addition to a Khorne army as a Blood Throne....

[WestRider]

I find that the Skull Cannon, at least, looks way better if you leave off the crew, and just say that it's a living, self-directed war machine.

[Guest]

Oh, speaking of, anyone else notice that the current bloodletter models are basically rabbits...? The way the legs are shaped, and how their "horns" are basically hardened bunny ears. Yeah, predatory and totally evil, but still rabbits.

[WestRider]

Oh, speaking of, anyone else notice that the current bloodletter models are basically rabbits...? The way the legs are shaped, and how their "horns" are basically hardened bunny ears. Yeah, predatory and totally evil, but still rabbits.

[Guest]

I find that the Skull Cannon, at least, looks way better if you leave off the crew, and just say that it's a living, self-directed war machine.

Probably would, but the crew provide actual rules benefits, I do kinda need to include them to remain WYSIWYG. Plus, they tie the army together better, since I I can use the paint scheme from the bloodletters to bridge between the vehicle paint scheme and the infantry one.

 

I'm undecided on the vehicle paint scheme, but I'm thinking something along the lines of "blood camo." You know, to make skull cannon not stand out when hidden in the ruins of castle made of blood...Speaking of, I should really make a set of ruins terrain where the idea is that they were actually cities of blood that got ruined.