TwilightSparkles wrote: With the move rule for transports, interestingly White Dwarf that's out this week has a column by Jervis discussing how people are often making understanding rules harder than they should because they aren't using them RAW or reading it wholly in context - taking single sentences.
Models disembarking with heavy weapons would count as moving , but otherwise those models can act as stated.
Maybe Jervis should spend less time complaining and more time writing rules properly? Or, because he's proven over decades he can't, spend time hiring someone who can?
or maybe you should stop trying to rules lawyer and take the rules written in context?
TwilightSparkles wrote: With the move rule for transports, interestingly White Dwarf that's out this week has a column by Jervis discussing how people are often making understanding rules harder than they should because they aren't using them RAW or reading it wholly in context - taking single sentences.
Models disembarking with heavy weapons would count as moving , but otherwise those models can act as stated.
Maybe Jervis should spend less time complaining and more time writing rules properly? Or, because he's proven over decades he can't, spend time hiring someone who can?
or maybe you should stop trying to rules lawyer and take the rules written in context?
Rules that are properly written work with or without "context". If following the rules results in "unintended" results, then you change the rules.
TwilightSparkles wrote: With the move rule for transports, interestingly White Dwarf that's out this week has a column by Jervis discussing how people are often making understanding rules harder than they should because they aren't using them RAW or reading it wholly in context - taking single sentences.
Models disembarking with heavy weapons would count as moving , but otherwise those models can act as stated.
Maybe Jervis should spend less time complaining and more time writing rules properly? Or, because he's proven over decades he can't, spend time hiring someone who can?
or maybe you should stop trying to rules lawyer and take the rules written in context?
Rules that are properly written work with or without "context". If following the rules results in "unintended" results, then you change the rules.
dude context is important in language. any sane rational person knows that.
TwilightSparkles wrote: With the move rule for transports, interestingly White Dwarf that's out this week has a column by Jervis discussing how people are often making understanding rules harder than they should because they aren't using them RAW or reading it wholly in context - taking single sentences.
Models disembarking with heavy weapons would count as moving , but otherwise those models can act as stated.
Maybe Jervis should spend less time complaining and more time writing rules properly? Or, because he's proven over decades he can't, spend time hiring someone who can?
or maybe you should stop trying to rules lawyer and take the rules written in context?
Rules that are properly written work with or without "context". If following the rules results in "unintended" results, then you change the rules.
Rules are always written in a context because without context language hjgchfhh klyygsg lojgghh.
Could someone please list the characters who can be given bikes in the new Codex? I know some, like Librarians, have been Index-only for a while, while others, like Captains, had codex bikes. Who can ride with my White Scars now? Vets? Apothecaries? Ancients? Chaplains with their new Litanies?
pretty sure it's just captains, and a captain on a bike might actually be White scars only now. (won't be sure till we can see the 'dex but a khan on bike entry in the WS supplement... yeah not promising)
BrianDavion wrote: pretty sure it's just captains, and a captain on a bike might actually be White scars only now. (won't be sure till we can see the 'dex but a khan on bike entry in the WS supplement... yeah not promising)
Khan on Bike is different than Captain on Bike. He has a unique weapon (the glaive, which is a mandatory weapon for him).
BrianDavion wrote: pretty sure it's just captains, and a captain on a bike might actually be White scars only now. (won't be sure till we can see the 'dex but a khan on bike entry in the WS supplement... yeah not promising)
Khan on Bike is different than Captain on Bike. He has a unique weapon (the glaive, which is a mandatory weapon for him).
ahh so captains on a bike is still a thing then? good to know.
BrianDavion wrote: pretty sure it's just captains, and a captain on a bike might actually be White scars only now. (won't be sure till we can see the 'dex but a khan on bike entry in the WS supplement... yeah not promising)
Khan on Bike is different than Captain on Bike. He has a unique weapon (the glaive, which is a mandatory weapon for him).
ahh so captains on a bike is still a thing then? good to know.
Yup. This wouldn't replace the Captain on Bike datasheet. And I suspect that some of these datasheets will be coming out in the update PDF Saturday-ish.
BrianDavion wrote: pretty sure it's just captains, and a captain on a bike might actually be White scars only now. (won't be sure till we can see the 'dex but a khan on bike entry in the WS supplement... yeah not promising)
Khan on Bike is different than Captain on Bike. He has a unique weapon (the glaive, which is a mandatory weapon for him).
ahh so captains on a bike is still a thing then? good to know.
Yup. This wouldn't replace the Captain on Bike datasheet. And I suspect that some of these datasheets will be coming out in the update PDF Saturday-ish.
not the captain oin bike, it'll be in the codex or not at all. the PDF stuff is going to be characters and the crusader squad. (although It'd be AWESOME if they essentially did a free "index units" update)
MacPhail wrote: Could someone please list the characters who can be given bikes in the new Codex? I know some, like Librarians, have been Index-only for a while, while others, like Captains, had codex bikes. Who can ride with my White Scars now? Vets? Apothecaries? Ancients? Chaplains with their new Litanies?
When asking questions like this, start by asking yourself "Do GW currently sell any miniatures that I could use to represent such a thing, or are any new miniature releases planned for this specific unit?".
If the answer is no, then no, you won't be able to do that.
I wouldn't say staple and I wouldn't say 6 Hellblasters, 5 hellblasters and a naked captain would likely be better.
The problem is that that's still more than 200pts of models in what is essentially a tin can. The competitive pricing makes the strategy viable for sure, perhaps even competitive, but even a 4++ is not that hard to break.
If you were going for impulsor/transport based list you'd want at least 5 total transports and enough chaff scouts to protect your deployment zone from things like bloodletter bombs or Slaanesh units that encircle a transport and prevent disembarkation.
TL: DR, If you're buying new transports, buy a couple.
Not going to disagree with your conclusion but it is worth pointing out that the Impulsor is a tricky thing for a Bloodletter bomb (or similar) to deal with. The -2" to charge distances against it really does count for a lot when charging out of reserves and as a vehicle with Fly it can use/abuse terrain to make that even more tricky. Park that Impulsor on a ruin and it is pretty much impossible for most armies to get a charge out of reserve against it - similarly if it is in craters or forest.
The Impulsor is actually a really strong screening unit against exactly those sorts of things. It is not a super-cheap disposable screen but it is pretty effective and quite durable. Also the ability to jump a squad out within 3" when the tank is destroyed can totally undo some assault strategies expecting to pile in and fight twice by finessing the nearest model to be one that was not on the table and so had no charge declared against it - see for example the Piranha T'au list that won the GT finals. Nothing is (or should be) entirely risk free but this really is game changing when it works.
Also the surround and kill thing is a lot harder to pull off in 8th than it was in previous editions - park it next to a ruin and anyone inside can jump out on top of the ruin because you measure from the hull not the base. They can jump out over a surrounding unit in doing so. Yes it can still be done by big enough surrounding units but combined with the -2" charge distance I think a canny player can avoid disaster in most cases.
Personally I am wondering if a couple of Impulsors with objective clearing squads of Intercessors (assault bolt rifles, powerfist/thunderhammer, optional Veterans upgrade depending on the opposition) might be a nice add to my list. Having been playing T'au for most of 8th I have a strong appreciation for a durable fast unit with Fly that can tie up enemy shooting, eat overwatch or just generally be a massive nuisance to the enemy. Marines are getting so much more killy that I think diverting a few points into something durable but not so killy might be worth trying out on the table.
I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
What fancy shmancy special rules would fit well for Silver Skulls? I only know their general lore about divinations and headhunting, not actual combat preference - except they seem to retreat instead of vainglorious last stands?
With such an easy painting scheme I might try and assemble a small Silver Skulls army out of the Dark Imperium and Shadow Spear dudes I didn't hack up for Kill Team.
The new Marine book out this Saturday still includes OldMarines and all their viable units?
If one plays say UMs and Scars you need - the base book, the UM supplement and the Scars supplement?
The next 3 supplement books are Wolves, DAs and BAs?
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
You can use DW stalker bolter, it's nearly identical save for slightly different flash supressor. Any DW player or bit site should have these, they are not very popular this edition.
MacPhail wrote: Could someone please list the characters who can be given bikes in the new Codex? I know some, like Librarians, have been Index-only for a while, while others, like Captains, had codex bikes. Who can ride with my White Scars now? Vets? Apothecaries? Ancients? Chaplains with their new Litanies?
When asking questions like this, start by asking yourself "Do GW currently sell any miniatures that I could use to represent such a thing, or are any new miniature releases planned for this specific unit?".
If the answer is no, then no, you won't be able to do that.
Cool, where I can buy ogryn bodyguard box? Or GK grand master in a walker? SM squatmarine lieutenant? Primaris sarge kit with any actual melee weapons? Etc, etc...
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
You can use DW stalker bolter, it's nearly identical save for slightly different flash supressor. Any DW player or bit site should have these, they are not very popular this edition.
MacPhail wrote: Could someone please list the characters who can be given bikes in the new Codex? I know some, like Librarians, have been Index-only for a while, while others, like Captains, had codex bikes. Who can ride with my White Scars now? Vets? Apothecaries? Ancients? Chaplains with their new Litanies?
When asking questions like this, start by asking yourself "Do GW currently sell any miniatures that I could use to represent such a thing, or are any new miniature releases planned for this specific unit?".
If the answer is no, then no, you won't be able to do that.
Cool, where I can buy ogryn bodyguard box? Or GK grand master in a walker? SM squatmarine lieutenant? Primaris sarge kit with any actual melee weapons? Etc, etc...
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
You can use DW stalker bolter, it's nearly identical save for slightly different flash supressor. Any DW player or bit site should have these, they are not very popular this edition.
MacPhail wrote: Could someone please list the characters who can be given bikes in the new Codex? I know some, like Librarians, have been Index-only for a while, while others, like Captains, had codex bikes. Who can ride with my White Scars now? Vets? Apothecaries? Ancients? Chaplains with their new Litanies?
When asking questions like this, start by asking yourself "Do GW currently sell any miniatures that I could use to represent such a thing, or are any new miniature releases planned for this specific unit?".
If the answer is no, then no, you won't be able to do that.
Cool, where I can buy ogryn bodyguard box? Or GK grand master in a walker? SM squatmarine lieutenant? Primaris sarge kit with any actual melee weapons? Etc, etc...
actually there is a old marine Leuitenant kit, the old space marine commander kit. it's not called a captain but a commander. so.. yeah doable.
The new Marine book out this Saturday still includes OldMarines and all their viable units?
If one plays say UMs and Scars you need - the base book, the UM supplement and the Scars supplement?
The next 3 supplement books are Wolves, DAs and BAs?
The new codex has all the old models in it, while the supplements have extra rules, relics, strats etc, specific to the respective chapter, along with any named characters and/or special units that chapter has.
They teased 6 supplements so I expect (and they’ve all but confirmed) it’ll be the 6 first founding chapters from the book getting the supplements. Unfortunately the DA, SW and the glorious Blood Angels probably won’t see an update for a while.
The new Marine book out this Saturday still includes OldMarines and all their viable units?
If one plays say UMs and Scars you need - the base book, the UM supplement and the Scars supplement?
The next 3 supplement books are Wolves, DAs and BAs?
The new codex has all the old models in it, while the supplements have extra rules, relics, strats etc, specific to the respective chapter, along with any named characters and/or special units that chapter has.
They teased 6 supplements so I expect (and they’ve all but confirmed) it’ll be the 6 first founding chapters from the book getting the supplements. Unfortunately the DA, SW and the glorious Blood Angels probably won’t see an update for a while.
I expect their FAQ'll give them shock assault and access to the new Primaris. and maybe adjust the points of a handful of units.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
The new Marine book out this Saturday still includes OldMarines and all their viable units?
If one plays say UMs and Scars you need - the base book, the UM supplement and the Scars supplement?
The next 3 supplement books are Wolves, DAs and BAs?
The new codex has all the old models in it, while the supplements have extra rules, relics, strats etc, specific to the respective chapter, along with any named characters and/or special units that chapter has.
They teased 6 supplements so I expect (and they’ve all but confirmed) it’ll be the 6 first founding chapters from the book getting the supplements. Unfortunately the DA, SW and the glorious Blood Angels probably won’t see an update for a while.
Well WD is suggesting something related to dark angels next month. Of course could be just fluff article or painting tutorial or something.
In any case DA/BA/Wolves gets the new angels of death and bunch of new units including impulsor etc as free PDF download.
The new Marine book out this Saturday still includes OldMarines and all their viable units?
If one plays say UMs and Scars you need - the base book, the UM supplement and the Scars supplement?
The next 3 supplement books are Wolves, DAs and BAs?
The new codex has all the old models in it, while the supplements have extra rules, relics, strats etc, specific to the respective chapter, along with any named characters and/or special units that chapter has.
They teased 6 supplements so I expect (and they’ve all but confirmed) it’ll be the 6 first founding chapters from the book getting the supplements. Unfortunately the DA, SW and the glorious Blood Angels probably won’t see an update for a while.
Well WD is suggesting something related to dark angels next month. Of course could be just fluff article or painting tutorial or something.
In any case DA/BA/Wolves gets the new angels of death and bunch of new units including impulsor etc as free PDF download.
Yeah totally, that stuff will be ace for the time being. Just looking forward to a full codex update. Would be cool to get something along the lines of Doctrines but related to the chapter, like 3 stages of the Red Thirst.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder how easy it will be to kitbash an Instigator Bolt Carbine. I am thinking of giving my Bolt Sniper Rifle squad of Eliminators one on the Sergeant. I am definitely thinking of doing two squads of Las Fusils as well with the Instigator Bolt Carbine since it allows them to do the Overwatch shenanigans. Since my BSR squad isn't ever going to have the Sergeant shoot, the Instigator Bolt Carbine is probably the way to go for him too.
It's on the Phobos Captain.
Should be nice and easy to do.
Yeah, but I only have one of him. Since it is basically the same as a Stalker Boltgun, I will just use one of those. Or just leave him with a Bolt Sniper Rifle and call it good.
H.B.M.C. wrote: When asking questions like this, start by asking yourself "Do GW currently sell any miniatures that I could use to represent such a thing, or are any new miniature releases planned for this specific unit?".
If the answer is no, then no, you won't be able to do that.
Cool, where I can buy ogryn bodyguard box? Or GK grand master in a walker? SM squatmarine lieutenant? Primaris sarge kit with any actual melee weapons? Etc, etc...
There's a difference between "could" and "explicit kit". And in the case of Primaris Sgt, it requires some plastic surgery or acceptance that WYSIWYG is not a thing.
But on that note, where can you buy basic Intercessors that are any chapter except Ultramarines?
The GW store (UK) shows just the "Ultramarines" box and the Deathwatch.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
I’m not sure it is RAI though – or at least won’t be in the near future.
I use index options a fair amount (Banshee Mask Autarchs are models I love converting up etc) but, I do feel like there needs to be a cut off point now, and the sooner the better.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
Are we certain about that?
Seems likely if they don't issue an errata that is effectively "copy paste this to the front of your index and it applies to all space marines in the index that aren't already taken care of by the codex." They'll probably do it around the same time they issue "copy paste this to all the flavors of astartes." It'll probably be annoying at any tournaments in the 1-3 months it takes to hotfix that.
Anyone else notice that White Scars have their own tab on the GW store now? The regular space marines tab still has all the salamander, black templar etc characters, but the white scars got all moved to a unique group. Its a longshot, but it makes me hopeful they'll bring back Doomrider as someone for the White Scars to hunt/kill.
Galef wrote: Anyone know the USD$ for the Impulsor yet? I'm waiting to see if it's affordable to get 2 or if I'm gonna need to convert them out of Razorbacks.
-
It's not up for preorder this weekend, so it'll be a bit to know.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
Galef wrote: Anyone know the USD$ for the Impulsor yet? I'm waiting to see if it's affordable to get 2 or if I'm gonna need to convert them out of Razorbacks.
-
It's GW, it's not gonna be affordable. I would guess 60USD conservatively.
Galef wrote: Anyone know the USD$ for the Impulsor yet? I'm waiting to see if it's affordable to get 2 or if I'm gonna need to convert them out of Razorbacks.
-
It's GW, it's not gonna be affordable. I would guess 60USD conservatively.
Yeah that's what I'm expecting. My son has UMs and NEEDS 2 Impulsors for his 10 Hellblasters (otherwise they just die). He buys his own models with his allowance, so $120 is completely out of his range. $40-50 per model, however, is something he can at least pay most of, and I'll help him with the rest. As I can get Razorbacks for $40 new on eBay, I may be doing some converting for him
Galef wrote: Yeah that's what I'm expecting. My son has UMs and NEEDS 2 Impulsors for his 10 Hellblasters (otherwise they just die). He buys his own models with his allowance, so $120 is completely out of his range. $40-50 per model, however, is something he can at least pay most of, and I'll help him with the rest. As I can get Razorbacks for $40 new on eBay, I may be doing some converting for him
-
$60's the high end of what I'd think, but since it's not up for preorder this week it's a bit hard to guess.
I'd say they might drop it at as low as $50 since it's supposed to be the Rhino/Razorback equivalent--with a lotto winning odds chance of as low as $40. It's really going to depend upon how complex the kit and sprues are.
I'd be intrigued to know why not a Repulsor though. It'd be a bit more, but it would carry all 10 and offer anti-infantry right?
I'd be intrigued to know why not a Repulsor though. It'd be a bit more, but it would carry all 10 and offer anti-infantry right?
Its a giant 600+ point SHOOT ME NOW sign with no invuln.
Yeah that's pretty much why it's a no-go. Plus, with 2 Impulors, he can bring all 10 Hellblasters, his Capt and LT all at once. Repulsor also doesn't have the Assault vehicle rule
Still not sure how to feel about the Assault Vehicle rule.
Well, up until this release, we always put them in his list as a 10-man unit that would ALWAYS combat squad into 2, but with Impuksors, we may just field 2 units of 5 for the Sgts extra attack.
Personally, I think the Assault Vehicle rule is great. It opens up so many units that need to get close to have optimum efficiency. Since Primaris can't use Drop Pods, having an Assault vehicle services that purpose
Mud Turkey 13 wrote: This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The flamer looks good. I still do not like how the autocannons look like big stubbers though. There was clearly some disconnect between the designer and the rule writer.
Crimson wrote: The flamer looks good. I still do not like how the autocannons look like big stubbers though. There was clearly some disconnect between the designer and the rule writer.
Honestly, I thought so too at first--but after looking at the Icarus Array's Autocannons for the Onager, it looks like they're trying to redesign autocannons in general--differentiating 'versions' of them.
I think it's just an artifact of it being an "Ironhail" weapon.
Personally I hate the idea of getting rid of the Indexs, and am very glad that I do not play in the tournament environment where they may end up not being allowed. It again plays into IMBALANCE, which is of course one of biggest issues with the game.
By getting rid of Indexs this negatively effects each army in a specific and UNBALANCED way. Some armies still rely heavily on Index options (Orks for example) because without them their army would be gutted (specifically their characters) and in a significantly worse position.
It's the same argument as saying get rid of Points and just use Power Level. Sure that is fine for "narrative" play, though even in that case I wouldn't want to use them, because again they effect different armies in significantly different ways. PL is awesome for armies with tons of options, not so great for an army like Necrons who have very little customization for their units.
I'm all for having differing opinions, but when those opinions can negatively effect other people and their armies more than yours, I see something inherently wrong with that.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
The biggest issue with the lack of updates to the Index is for the models that they still sell! The Land Raider Excelsior and Rhino Primaris from Warhammer World are only in the Index and probably won't get the update. As far as I know, they are still for sale. Legion of the Damned are also still for sale and are only in the Index.
Having not had a FLGS in quite some time - but having one now - how does this usually work?
Will they have the new Marine Codex for sale on the 17th, or do new releases usually show up at FLGS' at a later date then the date listed on the GW site?
Alpharius wrote: Having not had a FLGS in quite some time - but having one now - how does this usually work?
Will they have the new Marine Codex for sale on the 17th, or do new releases usually show up at FLGS' at a later date then the date listed on the GW site?
Unless they're not ordering stuff on time or are going through a distributor rather than GW, they should have it on the 17th.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
The biggest issue with the lack of updates to the Index is for the models that they still sell! The Land Raider Excelsior and Rhino Primaris from Warhammer World are only in the Index and probably won't get the update. As far as I know, they are still for sale. Legion of the Damned are also still for sale and are only in the Index.
Well, the Lander Raider Excelsior, Rhino Primaris and Legion of the Damned are all in the new Apocalypse datasheets so it seems likely they will be in the new codex.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
The biggest issue with the lack of updates to the Index is for the models that they still sell! The Land Raider Excelsior and Rhino Primaris from Warhammer World are only in the Index and probably won't get the update. As far as I know, they are still for sale. Legion of the Damned are also still for sale and are only in the Index.
Well, the Lander Raider Excelsior, Rhino Primaris and Legion of the Damned are all in the new Apocalypse datasheets so it seems likely they will be in the new codex.
I wouldn't expect them to be in the new codex. Apocalypse was for long-time players who have large collections and thus had rules for OOP and exclusive models. The new codex will most likely follow the current trend of only having rules for models easily available to the majority of the player base. That would preclude the Warhammer World exclusives such as the Rhino Primaris and Land Raider Excelsior.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
EldarExarch wrote: Personally I hate the idea of getting rid of the Indexs, and am very glad that I do not play in the tournament environment where they may end up not being allowed. It again plays into IMBALANCE, which is of course one of biggest issues with the game.
By getting rid of Indexs this negatively effects each army in a specific and UNBALANCED way. Some armies still rely heavily on Index options (Orks for example) because without them their army would be gutted (specifically their characters) and in a significantly worse position.
It's the same argument as saying get rid of Points and just use Power Level. Sure that is fine for "narrative" play, though even in that case I wouldn't want to use them, because again they effect different armies in significantly different ways. PL is awesome for armies with tons of options, not so great for an army like Necrons who have very little customization for their units.
I'm all for having differing opinions, but when those opinions can negatively effect other people and their armies more than yours, I see something inherently wrong with that.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
I want to like that not-dreadnought, but it needs to be enclosed so it looks like a normal dreadnought and it suffers from nonsensical tacticool Primaris design. Guilliman can wield a heavy bolter built into his power fist no problem but a mech as big as he is has to wield it like a pistol and hinder its melee capabilities. Why?
I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
zend wrote: I want to like that not-dreadnought, but it needs to be enclosed so it looks like a normal dreadnought and it suffers from nonsensical tacticool Primaris design. Guilliman can wield a heavy bolter built into his power fist no problem but a mech as big as he is has to wield it like a pistol and hinder its melee capabilities. Why?
Guilliman can’t throw his heavy Bolter at the enemy when it runs out of ammunition.
Against many opponents smashing them with the HB is likely to have the same effect as the full power fiat anyway...
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
except we’ve had 2 years worth of tournies basically showing the index has nothing busted.
Having a bigmek not in mega Armour isn’t busted
Having a warlord in mega Armour or on bike isn’t busted
It just lack of options on themed lists.
The most busted thing irks have isn’t index it’s a relic from a campaign and units from the codex.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
Which would be a terrible design for a stealth suit and is why they left it out in the first place. The whole point of the dam thing is that it's supposed to be surprise attacking people out of cover and taking them by surprise. The marine inside has his armor on which should be plenty. This thing isn't SUPPOSED to be taking the type of return fire that would require a full dreadnought plate covering and so traded it out to be lighter and faster. If he's being led by a halfway decent commander it should always be more of a benefit than a liability to not have that heavy front plate.
I swear, people whine all the time about 40k units not making tactical sense and then they design a unit that looks perfectly reasonable for the thing they're trying to get it to do and suddenly everbody wants to slap impractical nonsense onto it.
Hey we should give it a spoiler and a subwoofer too, since we don't care about making less noise anymore.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
except we’ve had 2 years worth of tournies basically showing the index has nothing busted.
Having a bigmek not in mega Armour isn’t busted
Having a warlord in mega Armour or on bike isn’t busted
It just lack of options on themed lists.
The most busted thing irks have isn’t index it’s a relic from a campaign and units from the codex.
Orkz aren't the only army in the game.
Index units, because they're not updated like everything else is, risk breaking things when new books come out or points changes are made. An example of this is the Sisters of Battle Imagifier. The imagifier gives out an act of faith on a 4+. Well, AoFs don't work like they used to so the imagifier RAW can bypass Sister's new resource system and give out essentially 'free' AoFs. This is mostly fine because the new AoFs are terrible garbage but if AoFs suddenly became extremely powerful then the fact that GW didn't plan for this unit to exist means that it could potentially break the army and make it super OP.
Several units in the Forgeworld index have already needed to be nerfed off the face of the earth and as time goes on the likelyhood of even more index units becoming powerful in ways that wasn't intended increases.
Ideally the index units will kick around until GW get around to making new models for them, but if not the day may come where the game has changed enough that Index units end up dropped entirely.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
Which would be a terrible design for a stealth suit and is why they left it out in the first place. The whole point of the dam thing is that it's supposed to be surprise attacking people out of cover and taking them by surprise. The marine inside has his armor on which should be plenty. This thing isn't SUPPOSED to be taking the type of return fire that would require a full dreadnought plate covering and so traded it out to be lighter and faster. If he's being led by a halfway decent commander it should always be more of a benefit than a liability to not have that heavy front plate.
I swear, people whine all the time about 40k units not making tactical sense and then they design a unit that looks perfectly reasonable for the thing they're trying to get it to do and suddenly everbody wants to slap impractical nonsense onto it.
Hey we should give it a spoiler and a subwoofer too, since we don't care about making less noise anymore.
Personally, I think it is fine. It isn't a Dreadnought. It is a Warsuit. And yeah, the Marine is in his armor. I don't think some armor on the front would hinder the sound dampening, but it isn't the end of the world for the model not to have it. I was just throwing that idea out there for people that are extra butthurt about the model not looking the way they want it to.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
Which would be a terrible design for a stealth suit and is why they left it out in the first place. The whole point of the dam thing is that it's supposed to be surprise attacking people out of cover and taking them by surprise. The marine inside has his armor on which should be plenty. This thing isn't SUPPOSED to be taking the type of return fire that would require a full dreadnought plate covering and so traded it out to be lighter and faster. If he's being led by a halfway decent commander it should always be more of a benefit than a liability to not have that heavy front plate.
I swear, people whine all the time about 40k units not making tactical sense and then they design a unit that looks perfectly reasonable for the thing they're trying to get it to do and suddenly everbody wants to slap impractical nonsense onto it.
Hey we should give it a spoiler and a subwoofer too, since we don't care about making less noise anymore.
Personally, I think it is fine. It isn't a Dreadnought. It is a Warsuit. And yeah, the Marine is in his armor. I don't think some armor on the front would hinder the sound dampening, but it isn't the end of the world for the model not to have it. I was just throwing that idea out there for people that are extra butthurt about the model not looking the way they want it to.
An Invictor Tactical Warsuit is, in essence, a Redemptor Dreadnought that has been stripped back and redesigned with lighter, sound-dampening materials for use on covert operations. I don't know why a front plate really makes that much more noise... its still an effin dreadnaught.
Its bit of a lazy design IMO and a missed opportunity because its just another dreadnaught but I get why they did.
I think it's a really cool model straight outta avatar. I like its holster and stuff. Its just really cool, absolutely bonkers and makes no sense so its fine for 40k!
God i love the war suit. Yeah it’s almost straight out of avatar, but that’s part of the appeal for me.
Love how the primaris are going for the fun tacticool look. Hell I want that thing running through the jungle blasting away its heavy bolter with a massive combat sword in the other hand.
Failing that I’ll take six of them rappelling out of a flyer down to the ground on zip lines. Now that would be a cool sight on the table. If a little mad,,, might even see if i have a spare catachan bandana head for the marine . Lol. Good times.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
Except GW's typical codex creep leaves index stuff anything but not broken seeing GW deliberately upped the power levels in codexes over indexes to ensure they sell more stuff(especially as point costs were dropped down a lot to ensure players have to buy more models to fit again to 2000 pts)
Good news for those that thought the Khan on Bike would mean no Captain on Bike. The Captain on Bike is still in the new codex. And the villagers rejoice!
I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote.
At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.
Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?
casvalremdeikun wrote: I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
Which would be a terrible design for a stealth suit and is why they left it out in the first place. The whole point of the dam thing is that it's supposed to be surprise attacking people out of cover and taking them by surprise. The marine inside has his armor on which should be plenty. This thing isn't SUPPOSED to be taking the type of return fire that would require a full dreadnought plate covering and so traded it out to be lighter and faster. If he's being led by a halfway decent commander it should always be more of a benefit than a liability to not have that heavy front plate.
I swear, people whine all the time about 40k units not making tactical sense and then they design a unit that looks perfectly reasonable for the thing they're trying to get it to do and suddenly everbody wants to slap impractical nonsense onto it.
Hey we should give it a spoiler and a subwoofer too, since we don't care about making less noise anymore.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
except we’ve had 2 years worth of tournies basically showing the index has nothing busted.
Having a bigmek not in mega Armour isn’t busted
Having a warlord in mega Armour or on bike isn’t busted
It just lack of options on themed lists.
The most busted thing irks have isn’t index it’s a relic from a campaign and units from the codex.
Orkz aren't the only army in the game.
Index units, because they're not updated like everything else is, risk breaking things when new books come out or points changes are made. An example of this is the Sisters of Battle Imagifier. The imagifier gives out an act of faith on a 4+. Well, AoFs don't work like they used to so the imagifier RAW can bypass Sister's new resource system and give out essentially 'free' AoFs. This is mostly fine because the new AoFs are terrible garbage but if AoFs suddenly became extremely powerful then the fact that GW didn't plan for this unit to exist means that it could potentially break the army and make it super OP.
Several units in the Forgeworld index have already needed to be nerfed off the face of the earth and as time goes on the likelyhood of even more index units becoming powerful in ways that wasn't intended increases.
Ideally the index units will kick around until GW get around to making new models for them, but if not the day may come where the game has changed enough that Index units end up dropped entirely.
1) Is speculation (Sisters of Battle)
2) Is solved by the spirit of "let's talk to each other about what type of game we want to play and come to an agreement." So insert random player doesn't put his FW God List on the table in a casual pick up game. (FW Units)
3) Again is speculation, until an official statement from GW. (Index getting Squatted)
Does anyone know what kind of options will be on the table for regular Lieutenants and Terminator Ancients? I have a couple models designed and want to be sure before I buy more parts that I don't need. One Lieutenant with a Stormbolter and Master Crafted Bolter, the other with Thunder Hammer, Power Sword and Jump Pack? Anyone know if still a legal loadout?
I'm more thinking of the regular Lieutenants due to them not having official models, and just checking that some of the more silly options, like stormbolter/master crafted bolter, are still legal.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote.
At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.
Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?
It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>
I'm more thinking of the regular Lieutenants due to them not having official models, and just checking that some of the more silly options, like stormbolter/master crafted bolter, are still legal.
From one of the Youtube videos showing all the datasheets, the Lieutenants appear to be the same as in the previous Codex Space Marines. I'm not sure how you get both stormbolter and master-crafted bolter though, as even the old Codex doesn't allow that in the way I read it - I can only see an option for one gun and not two.
BrianDavion wrote: actually there is a old marine Leuitenant kit, the old space marine commander kit. it's not called a captain but a commander. so.. yeah doable.
Actually, you can't. The only way the Commander can be assembled from the box is with aiguillettes and cape. If you look at primaris officers, no lieutenant out of dozen we have so far has either, both are found only on primaris captains (and that's the bits you can't avoid, helmet, backpack, and iron halo also obviously point at captain). So, yeah, while you can call Commander model a lieutenant it would be just as unfluffy as chaplain without a skull helmet and crozius or librarian without a hood/force weapon. The only way to make squat Lt is 100% kitbash from something fancy-but-not-too-fancy.
Irbis wrote: Cool, where I can buy ogryn bodyguard box?
You know GW used to list the Ogryn box 4 times on the webstore, one of them being Ogryn Bodyguard w/2 other Ogryn, right?
And don't deny no mini = no rules. I know you dislike me, but arguing against such a thing just makes you look foolish.
If you mean the Nork Deddog box, you got the wrong one. I mean generic ogryn bodyguard, which is (like GK grand master in a walker or squatmarine lieutenant, two units you probably excised from my post because you were unable to find anything like it in GW store) a unit with no model whatsoever and you're supposed to make it from whatever bits you have on hand. Here, look at kitbash GW made and tell me with a straight face it resembles anything they have on their web store:
Also, I don't recall ever saying I dislike you so I'd appreciate not putting fiction in my mouth. If I dislike anything, it's arguments that are plainly and demonstrably falsified with available evidence, and if there is anything making one look foolish, it's repeating these ad nauseam after they were debunked hundreds of times already.
I'm more thinking of the regular Lieutenants due to them not having official models, and just checking that some of the more silly options, like stormbolter/master crafted bolter, are still legal.
From one of the Youtube videos showing all the datasheets, the Lieutenants appear to be the same as in the previous Codex Space Marines. I'm not sure how you get both stormbolter and master-crafted bolter though, as even the old Codex doesn't allow that in the way I read it - I can only see an option for one gun and not two.
Whoops! Don't know how I've misread my own spreadsheet but thanks for that! Somehow weapons got mixed up on the sheet! Thanks for the save!
If you mean the Nork Deddog box, you got the wrong one. I mean generic ogryn bodyguard, which is (like GK grand master in a walker or squatmarine lieutenant, two units you probably excised from my post because you were unable to find anything like it in GW store) a unit with no model whatsoever and you're supposed to make it from whatever bits you have on hand. Here, look at kitbash GW made and tell me with a straight face it resembles anything they have on their web store:
Also, I don't recall ever saying I dislike you so I'd appreciate not putting fiction in my mouth. If I dislike anything, it's arguments that are plainly and demonstrably falsified with available evidence, and if there is anything making one look foolish, it's repeating these ad nauseam after they were debunked hundreds of times already.
Not that I have to much skin in this fight, but as was posted earlier, all the stuff that comes from that Ogryn Bodyguard is found in the Ogryn Kit. Also, the Grand Master on Dreadknight is an interesting exception, and if you'll recall when it was released people were excited and speculating that maybe GW was going away from the No Model No Rules policy. Turns out, it was just a hiccup. That said, they did a white dwarf article when it was released explaining how to convert one using the Dreadknight kit and Grandmaster Voldus (or whatever his name is). Even with all of that, though, you can build the GMDK and the regular marine LT out of the existing plastic kits. For the GMDK, all of the options are in the kit and for the SM LT, pretty much all of the options are in the tactical marine kit. Sure, they may not look how you think they should look (i.e. fancier than their 'regular' counterparts), but GW makes stuff all the time that looks different than I think it should look (see the entire AoS line) but that's irrelevant because it's so subjective. With things like the GMDK and the LT, it's easy enough to give them a few extra purity seals, spend a few more moments on the paint job and jobs a good 'un.
I find Sternguard legs are quite good for lieutenants ( on Primaris). Add to that the Commander Torso and some higher bling shoulder pads and that looks ornate enough for it to work
casvalremdeikun wrote: I bet you could take the extra armor panel from the Redemptor Dreadnought and use it to better enclose the cockpit of the Invictor. Probably literally placing it right over the roll cage.
Which would be a terrible design for a stealth suit and is why they left it out in the first place. The whole point of the dam thing is that it's supposed to be surprise attacking people out of cover and taking them by surprise. The marine inside has his armor on which should be plenty. This thing isn't SUPPOSED to be taking the type of return fire that would require a full dreadnought plate covering and so traded it out to be lighter and faster. If he's being led by a halfway decent commander it should always be more of a benefit than a liability to not have that heavy front plate.
I swear, people whine all the time about 40k units not making tactical sense and then they design a unit that looks perfectly reasonable for the thing they're trying to get it to do and suddenly everbody wants to slap impractical nonsense onto it.
Hey we should give it a spoiler and a subwoofer too, since we don't care about making less noise anymore.
BaconCatBug wrote: Don't forget nothing in the Indexes get Shock Assault or Angels of Death.
I wish GW would just make Indexes Narrative Play only and be done with it.
You use Datasheet = Codex, Index = Wargear. So you get your ability.
If you using one that doesn't exist you can get your rules RAI/HIWPI.
The hate Index gets is weird, their official rules as of yet no word has come from GW to the effect of "you can no longer use Index"
This is something I was wondering about. I have a venerable dreadnought with autocannons. I was thinking it would still get all of the new rules since the unit's datasheet is in the new codex even though the weapon options are from the index. My friend has a chaplain on bike which does not have a datasheet in the new codex, so if he took that as an index entry he would lose doctrines.
The one exception is when you have drastically different rules. The example of that chaplain wouldn't get new prayers. Unless both players agreed.
What goes into the RAI of "Most important rule" basically if both players agree your "toy soldiers can do anything you want them to."
Index only options tend to has stupid points cost that are way higher than they should be anyway. Also it is totally RAI for units to get abilities as you use codex datasheet for rules/stats and index for wargear that is how the official chart tells you how to play. With updated points costs.
This sentiment is exactly why I don't get any of the hate at all. You don't like something? Don't include it in your games. They're *your* toy soldiers. You're one conversation with the person you're playing with from having exactly the game and rules you want. Unless you're a tourney player I just don't get all the hate that spews about whenever new rules/codices are dropped.
It's because most people who go out of their way to use index options tend to do so in order to bring stuff that has become busted over time.
except we’ve had 2 years worth of tournies basically showing the index has nothing busted.
Having a bigmek not in mega Armour isn’t busted
Having a warlord in mega Armour or on bike isn’t busted
It just lack of options on themed lists.
The most busted thing irks have isn’t index it’s a relic from a campaign and units from the codex.
Orkz aren't the only army in the game.
Index units, because they're not updated like everything else is, risk breaking things when new books come out or points changes are made. An example of this is the Sisters of Battle Imagifier. The imagifier gives out an act of faith on a 4+. Well, AoFs don't work like they used to so the imagifier RAW can bypass Sister's new resource system and give out essentially 'free' AoFs. This is mostly fine because the new AoFs are terrible garbage but if AoFs suddenly became extremely powerful then the fact that GW didn't plan for this unit to exist means that it could potentially break the army and make it super OP.
Several units in the Forgeworld index have already needed to be nerfed off the face of the earth and as time goes on the likelyhood of even more index units becoming powerful in ways that wasn't intended increases.
Ideally the index units will kick around until GW get around to making new models for them, but if not the day may come where the game has changed enough that Index units end up dropped entirely.
1) Is speculation (Sisters of Battle)
2) Is solved by the spirit of "let's talk to each other about what type of game we want to play and come to an agreement." So insert random player doesn't put his FW God List on the table in a casual pick up game. (FW Units)
3) Again is speculation, until an official statement from GW. (Index getting Squatted)
Your opinion doesn't count once you start your whole rambling about FW stuff being broken when it's decidedly not.
I'd actually be ok if GW stopped supporting Index UNITs that are no longer in the Codex, but I think they would be wise to continue supporting Index OPTIONS.
I can understand GW's policy of "no model, no rules" from a business standpoint, but options that still exist and are in the Codex as a whole should still be available on models that couls once take them. Twin-Autocannons on Dreads, basically all Autarch wargear options, etc. Those encourage good hobbying, which GW should be on board with.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote. At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.
Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?
It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>
I understand that about it, its just that from a game design standpoint its a terrible convention to have. I can imagine people making mistakes about the weapon profile, as they'll either give the Iron Hail stubber 4 shots or the Ironhail Autocannon Ap -2, on the basis that as they have the same "prefix", they must have the same special "modifier"
Kdash wrote: Just seen some pics of the UM and WS psychic powers, and i have a question due to not having seen the reviews yet... :facepallm:
Do Successor Chapters get access to the Chapter psychic powers, or not?
From what I've seen, it you decided to be a Successor from a specific first founding, you do get to use their Strats, WL traits & Powers (maybe Relics?). But you have to select one of the Successor trait abilities associated with that Chapter.
If, however, you decided to mix/match 2 Successor traits with no affiliation with a first founding, you do not get any of those
Kdash wrote: Just seen some pics of the UM and WS psychic powers, and i have a question due to not having seen the reviews yet... :facepallm:
Do Successor Chapters get access to the Chapter psychic powers, or not?
From what I've seen, it you decided to be a Successor from a specific first founding, you do get to use their Strats, WL traits & Powers (maybe Relics?). But you have to select one of the Successor trait abilities associated with that Chapter.
If, however, you decided to mix/match 2 Successor traits with no affiliation with a first founding, you do not get any of those
-
So its Pick 1 Successor trait, plus 1 First Founding Trait OR an additional Successor trait? And the first founding themselves just get their own first founding trait?
So its Pick 1 Successor trait, plus 1 First Founding Trait OR an additional Successor trait? And the first founding themselves just get their own first founding trait?
Sort of. I have not seen the book yet, but from what I have seen of screen shots and on the Warhammer community, all first founding traits have 2 parts. Salamanders, for example, have reroll 1 hit and 1 wound AND AP-1 counts as AP-0 A Salamanders successor would retain the reroll 1 hit and 1 wound part, but select another Successor trait, like +3 to ranged weapons
That successor would still count as SALAMANDERS for a bunch of rules (unclear which, but pretty sure Strats are included)
But if you mix-match 2 Successor traits without selecting one that is specific to a First founding, you do not get to count as that first founding for any rules
So its Pick 1 Successor trait, plus 1 First Founding Trait OR an additional Successor trait? And the first founding themselves just get their own first founding trait?
Sort of. I have not seen the book yet, but from what I have seen of screen shots and on the Warhammer community, all first founding traits have 2 parts.
Salamanders, for example, have reroll 1 hit and 1 wound AND AP-1 counts as AP-0
A Salamanders successor would retain the reroll 1 hit and 1 wound part, but select another Successor trait, like +3 to ranged weapons
That successor would still count as SALAMANDERS for a bunch of rules (unclear which, but pretty sure Strats are included)
But if you mix-match 2 Successor traits without selecting one that is specific to a First founding, you do not get to count as that first founding for any rules
-
This is not correct. A successor chapter does not have to have any part of the chapter tactics of their founding chapter to 'count as' that chapter (as a successor). Black Templars, one of the most known successor chapters is a prime example of this. Also, some founding chapter tactics aren't even represented in the successor lists which would make your statement further false. For example, there are no Imperial Fists chapter tactic parts in the successor section.
It's spelled out in the Ultramarine and White Scars supplement. A player can pick any two chapter tactics and call it a successor of any founding chapter. Page 56, White Scars supplement (emphasis mine), "If the successor Chapter you have chosen does not have a known founding Chapter but has the Inheritors of the Primarch Successor Tactic and you selected the Chapter Tactic of a First Founding Chapter, your chosen Chapter is a successor of that First Founding Chapter. Otherwise, choose a founding Chapter that best fits your successor Chapter's character."
This is saying a player can't take the Ultramarines Chapter tactic via Inheritors and claim they are then a White Scars successor. But a player could choose any two (non-Inheritors) tactics from the list and then choose their first founding.
A successor chapter gets access to stratagems (further explained on page 56), warlord traits, psychic powers, and special-issue wargear (which is the 'generic' relic section). So they lose access to main relics. Although there is a stratagem that can be taken that allows a successor one relic from the main section of their first founding chapter.
It's only a requirement to choose a first founding chapter if those extra supplement choices are used. But competitively speaking, there's no reason not to. A player would lose out on an entire supplement of extra options.
I can certainly see players playing narrative or casual games with chapters that have no known first founding chapter and accordingly don't use any supplement options.
I think they've also designed the books so that you can still play as a First Founding (or Successor) without needing the Chapter Supplements. I like that you don't HAVE to get the UM book to play UM. But as you say, why wouldn't you?
BrianDavion wrote: actually there is a old marine Leuitenant kit, the old space marine commander kit. it's not called a captain but a commander. so.. yeah doable.
Actually, you can't. The only way the Commander can be assembled from the box is with aiguillettes and cape. If you look at primaris officers, no lieutenant out of dozen we have so far has either, both are found only on primaris captains (and that's the bits you can't avoid, helmet, backpack, and iron halo also obviously point at captain).
The artwork for the complete Ultramarines Second Company in the original 8th Edition Codex shows a non-Primaris lieutenant. It uses the backpack from the Space Marine Commander model, and possibly the front of the torso, but doesn't have the cloak.
For mine, I used Vael Donatus from Kill Team Cassius, but with different arms and the Commander backpack without the iron halo.
Mchagen wrote: It's only a requirement to choose a first founding chapter if those extra supplement choices are used. But competitively speaking, there's no reason not to. A player would lose out on an entire supplement of extra options.
.
Not just options, but flat out bonuses. The improved doctrines are close to a third chapter tactic in power. (Or third clause, in the case of first founding tactics). That you can mix and match more combos as well is just an extra helping of much more better.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote.
At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.
Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?
It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>
I understand that about it, its just that from a game design standpoint its a terrible convention to have. I can imagine people making mistakes about the weapon profile, as they'll either give the Iron Hail stubber 4 shots or the Ironhail Autocannon Ap -2, on the basis that as they have the same "prefix", they must have the same special "modifier"
GW has moved away from universal rules and quarantees of uniformity. You literally need to check every weapon as there\s no quarantee similar things work same way.
People wanted bespoke rules rather than universal rules. Enjoy now that you got them
I agree. There is no reason what so ever to not have a custom chapter using the UM or WS rules right now, competitively (unless you want to use the UM or WS special characters).
That said, an event i am going to on the last weekend of this month has already come out and said that the new books will be valid for play BUT the successor chapter tactics will not be in use. Hopefully this is due to the individual tournament and not something that will be repeated across the wider scene as i think it'll make play with, and against, marines different the majority of the time.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote. At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.
Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?
It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>
I understand that about it, its just that from a game design standpoint its a terrible convention to have. I can imagine people making mistakes about the weapon profile, as they'll either give the Iron Hail stubber 4 shots or the Ironhail Autocannon Ap -2, on the basis that as they have the same "prefix", they must have the same special "modifier"
GW has moved away from universal rules and quarantees of uniformity. You literally need to check every weapon as there\s no quarantee similar things work same way.
People wanted bespoke rules rather than universal rules. Enjoy now that you got them
That's still no excuse for inconsistency I would like a return of USR though. It was easier to keep track of them. Bring back the old codex format as well, because this thing where you have to flip to the back of the book to see points values of weapons, then flip back to see points, and the lack of reference sheet for units, is pretty crap.
or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.
BrianDavion wrote: or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.
It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.
BrianDavion wrote: or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.
It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.
p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.
BrianDavion wrote: or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.
It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.
p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.
.. that explains it then, being able to pair relics (and the doctrine ability?) with design your own CTs is ABSURDLY powerful. and some of the relics in the core book are good eneugh that you can just snag a coire book relic and then buy a UM relic.
I was very excited for news of this book. Finally a way to give Relictors some rules!!
It I’m sad that a chapter master cannot be a primaris and that honor guard are exclusively a UM thing.. which is weird because every chapter has a tradition of having their own version.
I’m not wanting to deal with normal marines anymore, the time line currently couldn’t support standard marines still living or being in production. I just wish they did a solid job of integrating things better
BrianDavion wrote: or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.
It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.
p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.
You are. You can.
It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.
In terms of FAQ-fodder, I have the sinking suspicion that GW will release Shock Assault saying all Adeptus Astartes and Heretic Astartes, then have to FAQ it to include Fallen. Bolter Discipline forgot the Fallen during its first iteration, odds are that GW won't learn from that (admittedly corner-case) mistake.
It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.
No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.
Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.
It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.
No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.
Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.
Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.
It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.
No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.
Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.
Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.
Because players want to play with the best rules they can for their army (Except for a very very very small amount of players that just love to be contrarian). Supplements give you extra free abilities for no downside, plus GW can sell you a full codex for 70$ instead of just 40$!
It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.
No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.
Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.
Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.
Because players want to play with the best rules they can for their army (Except for a very very very small amount of players that just love to be contrarian). Supplements give you extra free abilities for no downside, plus GW can sell you a full codex for 70$ instead of just 40$!
Well yeah, beyond the cash grab at least the only point is you get special characters locked to parent chapter at least but that seems to be it.
AduroT wrote: Are all the Salamanders’ stuff in the new book or is that something we should expect a supplement for?
Just the Chapter Tactic and a Warlord trait. The rest will most assuredly be in the supplement (if they get one, and they will). Hopefully we will find out soon what the next supplement is. My guess is Sunday will have the release for one or two of them, but I also said that this past Sunday and was wrong.
I really wish they release the supplements rapidly, or at least announce the schedule. I bought the codex but I didn't buy either of the supplements, as I want to first know what all my options are.
Crimson wrote: I really wish they release the supplements rapidly, or at least announce the schedule. I bought the codex but I didn't buy either of the supplements, as I want to first know what all my options are.
Agreed, though I take hope from the trickle that each supplement will have a model release attached to it. But after seeing the options in both supplements so far, I would take no model in exchange for the supplement early.
Crimson wrote: I really wish they release the supplements rapidly, or at least announce the schedule. I bought the codex but I didn't buy either of the supplements, as I want to first know what all my options are.
Agreed, though I take hope from the trickle that each supplement will have a model release attached to it. But after seeing the options in both supplements so far, I would take no model in exchange for the supplement early.
I doubt it's going to take too long to get the other supplements, considering how much the model releases for the generic units are drawn out. That kind of looks like GW wants to ride the Marine wave for a while with something like two supplements one week, as few generic models as they can get away with the next week, then another two supplements and their respective characters the following week, and so on, for six or seven weeks of Marine releases and easy money. Might not be going that way, but that's my guess.
We'll get a preview of something tonight from an event I've never heard of before. Maybe that's going to include the next supplements.
Some Middle Earth one according to the banner on Warhammer Community:
Spoiler:
Might just be about Middle Earth stuff. Might be I was tired and imagining things but I could swear that GW changed the banner twice from the version they had up yesterday and it didn't originally have the big Middle Earth part.
Crimson wrote: I really wish they release the supplements rapidly, or at least announce the schedule. I bought the codex but I didn't buy either of the supplements, as I want to first know what all my options are.
They know every time they get you to crack open your wallet its an opportunity where you might buy more than just that codex or supplement. Even if forcing two separate purchases only coaxes 1% of people into buying anything extra, they come out $1M on top. Its the sort of marketing that only works because they know they have such an addicted and captive customer base.
Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
I see a whole bunch of buffs, improved rules and new units to choose from. Can't find the 'fethed over' page in these PDFs.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
They just reprinted their old rules. Presumably any Primarisified versions (if we get them) would get new datasheets in the supplement.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
That is certainly just a copy-paste fuckup. They just copied the datasheets from the old codex. The stratagem updated CM in the new codex has same wording than Calgar.
I see a whole bunch of buffs, improved rules and new units to choose from. Can't find the 'fethed over' page in these PDFs.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
They just reprinted their old rules. Presumably any Primarisified versions (if we get them) would get new datasheets in the supplement.
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So can I get some clarification. I am a Blood Angels player and my friend whom I play with is a Space Wolves player, is there literally any reason for us to purchase the new Space Marine Codex or is this PDF update all we really need. Do any of these new strats like forward advance and the bolter stuff actually effect our armies or are the strats only for codex compliant armies within the book?
EldarExarch wrote: So can I get some clarification. I am a Blood Angels player and my friend whom I play with is a Space Wolves player, is there literally any reason for us to purchase the new Space Marine Codex or is this PDF update all we really need. Do any of these new strats like forward advance and the bolter stuff actually effect our armies or are the strats only for codex compliant armies within the book?
casvalremdeikun wrote: Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
That is certainly just a copy-paste fuckup. They just copied the datasheets from the old codex. The stratagem updated CM in the new codex has same wording than Calgar.
I sent them a message on Facebook to update them properly. Time will tell if they pull their heads out of their asses regarding an easily fixed problem.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
You are looking at it out of context. Yes, objectively when looked at in a vacuum the PDF download is an improvement. However, when looked at as a whole in comparison with the new Space Marine codex and all of the new bonuses that they get all non-codex compliant chapters are indeed fethed over.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
I will repeat my question. Which of the fundamental flaws in the above armies are now fixed as a result of getting one additional attack?
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
TBF I wasn't really expecting anything more than 'official' word on what chapters get what in terms of new units, Shock Assault, Bolter discipline etc. So it's sort of an update and not one at the same time.
New stratagems, proper combat doctrines and all that good stuff updates should come with revised codexes/supplements later on.
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
It just sucks because I basically have to shelve my Dark Angels until such a time as GW decides to release a new codex/supplement. Hopefully September if the White Dwarf leaks are anything to go off of.
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
Deathwatch have been waiting six months for the Shadowspear units and still haven’t gotten them. Grey Knights have been fethed for years.
Not getting something in a release isn’t remotely an indication that an army will get something “soon tm “
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
This is indeed more than likely. A bit awkward in the meanwhile though. Oh well, one can always play those armies using vanilla codex rules, even though it is a somewhat unsatisfying solution.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
This is indeed more than likely. A bit awkward in the meanwhile though. Oh well, one can always play those armies using vanilla codex rules, even though it is a somewhat unsatisfying solution.
If I end up wanting to play power armor enough before DA gets a supplement of their own thats what I'll have to do I guess, call my stuff a successor chapter or something except I wont be able to bring any DA specific stuff like Dark Shroud etc.
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
Yeah, which last time meant Space Wolves played 18 months straight Index without strats, etc.. while Guilliman and Strom Ravens and Raven Guuard Aggressor Rush were still viable and actually good, only to get a sad copy&paste book that would‘ve been mediocre in June 2017, and now have to wait another 18 months to be brought in line with the summer 2019 power creep? Probably 3 weeks before 9th Edition or Space Marines 3.0 hits the stores ..
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Except we didn't even get something as small as the 1 point drop in the cost of tactical marines.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
All the melee-focused chapters getting meaningfully improved by a flat +1A when charging or charged? Don't talk crazy talk.
Now, don't get me wrong, as someone who's only marine faction is Deathwatch I will be asking my opponents if they mind if I use the new rules for Chaplains, and some of the points changes would have been nice to have. But saying it's not an improvement is just dumb. It's obviously an improvement. Just not as big of an improvement as you wanted.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Except we didn't even get something as small as the 1 point drop in the cost of tactical marines.
They don't typically like to mess with point costs. When they "updated" the Knights from FW post Codex Chaos Knights they didn't touch the points despite a significant changes to rules. It' seems to be just a policy choice to avoid changing points until Chapter Approved or a new Codex.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Except we didn't even get something as small as the 1 point drop in the cost of tactical marines.
They don't typically like to mess with point costs. When they "updated" the Knights from FW post Codex Chaos Knights they didn't touch the points despite a significant changes to rules. It' seems to be just a policy choice to avoid changing points until Chapter Approved or a new Codex.
Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks for pointing that out.
You are looking at it out of context. Yes, objectively when looked at in a vacuum the PDF download is an improvement. However, when looked at as a whole in comparison with the new Space Marine codex and all of the new bonuses that they get all non-codex compliant chapters are indeed fethed over.
Following this logic, every time a new codex comes out for any faction, non-codex compliant chapters are 'fethed over'. Therefore GW should release rules improvements for BA / DA / GK / SW every time they publish a new codex to avoid this?
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
That depends, did my parents also rule out the possibility of them giving me $1000 and my brother $10 in a few months time?
I'd also object to those numbers a bit. This is more than one rule change. Depending on the faction it's up to 10 new datasheets plus buffs to many other weapons & units. GK got $10, BA / DA / SW definitely got more.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Notice the Chapter Masters only reroll failed to-hit rolls in the PDF rather than hit rolls like Roboute and Calgar give. Big surprise there... GW just can't not continue their Ultra-fellatio.
This really me off. Like seriously you have been updating Chapter Master rule to include the new improved text of "re-roll hit rolls" and just copy paste the old rules. This reeks of incompetence on the part of whoever wrote the "free update." GW working as intended then. A day 1 FAQ that needs another day 1 FAQ .
You are looking at it out of context. Yes, objectively when looked at in a vacuum the PDF download is an improvement. However, when looked at as a whole in comparison with the new Space Marine codex and all of the new bonuses that they get all non-codex compliant chapters are indeed fethed over.
Following this logic, every time a new codex comes out for any faction, non-codex compliant chapters are 'fethed over'. Therefore GW should release rules improvements for BA / DA / GK / SW every time they publish a new codex to avoid this?
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
That depends, did my parents also rule out the possibility of them giving me $1000 and my brother $10 in a few months time?
I'd also object to those numbers a bit. This is more than one rule change. Depending on the faction it's up to 10 new datasheets plus buffs to many other weapons & units. GK got $10, BA / DA / SW definitely got more.
Lol you pretty much hit the nail on the head there.
Not to be rude but the folks miffed because DA/BA/GK/SW/DW didn't get brand new rules and updates all at the same time as the vanilla marines strike me as really childish.
When has GW ever released all the marines rules all together? You play non-compliant chapters specifically because they're different and unique. But when vanilla gets new rules you're mad because your dudes aren't rolled in with the rest? Talking about shelving your army because another army got new rules?
I do find it hilarious that they specifically picked out the high-tech commando themed space marine chapter to bar from having access to the new marine datasheets, but then go "You know who these guys really mesh with thematically? The Space Wolves!"
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Except we didn't even get something as small as the 1 point drop in the cost of tactical marines.
But we also did not get the 40 pts Thunder Hammers
Did you really think we would get significant new stuff in a free PDF?
You are looking at it out of context. Yes, objectively when looked at in a vacuum the PDF download is an improvement. However, when looked at as a whole in comparison with the new Space Marine codex and all of the new bonuses that they get all non-codex compliant chapters are indeed fethed over.
Following this logic, every time a new codex comes out for any faction, non-codex compliant chapters are 'fethed over'. Therefore GW should release rules improvements for BA / DA / GK / SW every time they publish a new codex to avoid this?
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
That depends, did my parents also rule out the possibility of them giving me $1000 and my brother $10 in a few months time?
I'd also object to those numbers a bit. This is more than one rule change. Depending on the faction it's up to 10 new datasheets plus buffs to many other weapons & units. GK got $10, BA / DA / SW definitely got more.
Lol you pretty much hit the nail on the head there.
Not to be rude but the folks miffed because DA/BA/GK/SW/DW didn't get brand new rules and updates all at the same time as the vanilla marines strike me as really childish.
When has GW ever released all the marines rules all together? You play non-compliant chapters specifically because they're different and unique. But when vanilla gets new rules you're mad because your dudes aren't rolled in with the rest?
Grow up.
I'm mostly annoyed because this means we'll have another agonizing six months of freaking Space Marine releases to slowly grunt and strain until all 253 flavors of subfaction get the same new units, the same new rules, the same new stratagems, and every other army gathers dust in the meantime.
You are looking at it out of context. Yes, objectively when looked at in a vacuum the PDF download is an improvement. However, when looked at as a whole in comparison with the new Space Marine codex and all of the new bonuses that they get all non-codex compliant chapters are indeed fethed over.
Following this logic, every time a new codex comes out for any faction, non-codex compliant chapters are 'fethed over'. Therefore GW should release rules improvements for BA / DA / GK / SW every time they publish a new codex to avoid this?
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
That depends, did my parents also rule out the possibility of them giving me $1000 and my brother $10 in a few months time?
I'd also object to those numbers a bit. This is more than one rule change. Depending on the faction it's up to 10 new datasheets plus buffs to many other weapons & units. GK got $10, BA / DA / SW definitely got more.
Lol you pretty much hit the nail on the head there.
Not to be rude but the folks miffed because DA/BA/GK/SW/DW didn't get brand new rules and updates all at the same time as the vanilla marines strike me as really childish.
When has GW ever released all the marines rules all together? You play non-compliant chapters specifically because they're different and unique. But when vanilla gets new rules you're mad because your dudes aren't rolled in with the rest? Talking about shelving your army because another army got new rules?
Grow up.
I'm not mad that the DA supplement didn't come out at the same time. I'm annoyed at the hamfisted approach to updating non-codex compliant chapters. They could have very simply stated that DA/BA/SW/etc get doctrines and that their vehicles also get their chapter tactic. That plus the new PDF and boom - at least mostly playable until the new supplements.
Without those changes already poor performing armies got objectively worse in comparison to the other space marine armies that were ALREADY performing better. That's why people are upset about it.
I'm super excited about the new codex, I love power armored armies. I'm just annoyed I don't feel excited to play MY army right now.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
The mistake is in thinking this was intended to do more than just keep existing rules consistent throughout the books. Besides the occasional typographical fix, that's all these first post-codex erratas typically address.
Except we didn't even get something as small as the 1 point drop in the cost of tactical marines.
But we also did not get the 40 pts Thunder Hammers
Did you really think we would get significant new stuff in a free PDF?
No but doctrines and chapter tactics applying to vehicles would've been fair to expect.
I'm not mad that the DA supplement didn't come out at the same time. I'm annoyed at the hamfisted approach to updating non-codex compliant chapters. They could have very simply stated that DA/BA/SW/etc get doctrines and that their vehicles also get their chapter tactic. That plus the new PDF and boom - at least mostly playable until the new supplements.
Without those changes already poor performing armies got objectively worse in comparison to the other space marine armies that were ALREADY performing better. That's why people are upset about it.
I'm super excited about the new codex, I love power armored armies. I'm just annoyed I don't feel excited to play MY army right now.
I think it's a slap in the face that GW even pointed out that "hey we FAQ'd your Bolter Discipline + SIA because it was too good" and then decided it was still TOO good while giving the entire Space Marine codex pretty much that...
Also the lack of litanies on our Chaplains in other armies really really blows.
So if I made an entire army out of FW "Deathwatch" models they would get access to Doctrines? Neat...
Now, don't get me wrong, as someone who's only marine faction is Deathwatch I will be asking my opponents if they mind if I use the new rules for Chaplains, and some of the points changes would have been nice to have. But saying it's not an improvement is just dumb. It's obviously an improvement. Just not as big of an improvement as you wanted.
Congratulations, you can settle for mediocrity and laziness, while at the same time explicitly admitting you want to break the rules you just accepted.
So if I made an entire army out of FW "Deathwatch" models they would get access to Doctrines? Neat...
Nope. DW codex doesnt have the doctrines. While your models on the table would have the appropriate keyword, your army wouldnt gain any benefit from it.
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Umm you realize right that power levels are relative don't you? Ergo just because they got something doesn't mean their situation really improved when codex marines took even bigger leap. No point taking ba/da when their roles are done better with codex space marines
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Umm you realize right that power levels are relative don't you? Ergo just because they got something doesn't mean their situation really improved when codex marines took even bigger leap. No point taking ba/da when their roles are done better with codex space marines
Yeah. I think most people forget that power levels are relative. I play Necrons. Space Marines just got better. By comparison, my Necrons are now worse. Nothing new, really. Competitively speaking, armies that are rarely updated are constantly facing tougher and tougher foes. It's like inflation. A dollar is always worth a dollar, but it buys less and less stuff each year. That dollar has effectively been "nerfed".
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Umm you realize right that power levels are relative don't you? Ergo just because they got something doesn't mean their situation really improved when codex marines took even bigger leap. No point taking ba/da when their roles are done better with codex space marines
If you're taking an army for it's perceived role and nothing else I don't know why you'd be that mad about it. My melee army doesn't melee as well as another army doesn't really strike me as a serious issue to have, unless you're just that dead-set on having the best army out there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm not mad that the DA supplement didn't come out at the same time. I'm annoyed at the hamfisted approach to updating non-codex compliant chapters. They could have very simply stated that DA/BA/SW/etc get doctrines and that their vehicles also get their chapter tactic. That plus the new PDF and boom - at least mostly playable until the new supplements.
Without those changes already poor performing armies got objectively worse in comparison to the other space marine armies that were ALREADY performing better. That's why people are upset about it.
I'm super excited about the new codex, I love power armored armies. I'm just annoyed I don't feel excited to play MY army right now.
This would make sense, if not for the fact that to me it says GW is planning on releasing the other codices so soon that a stop-gap measure would be pointless. Especially since they'll probably be receiving their own versions.
I'm not mad that the DA supplement didn't come out at the same time. I'm annoyed at the hamfisted approach to updating non-codex compliant chapters. They could have very simply stated that DA/BA/SW/etc get doctrines and that their vehicles also get their chapter tactic. That plus the new PDF and boom - at least mostly playable until the new supplements.
Without those changes already poor performing armies got objectively worse in comparison to the other space marine armies that were ALREADY performing better. That's why people are upset about it.
I'm super excited about the new codex, I love power armored armies. I'm just annoyed I don't feel excited to play MY army right now.
Ding ding ding.
It's almost as though you're actually more codex compliant than you think you are and consolidation would help fix a bunch of issues regarding updates. Hmm
This would make sense, if not for the fact that to me it says GW is planning on releasing the other codices so soon that a stop-gap measure would be pointless. Especially since they'll probably be receiving their own versions.
I'm hopeful that's the case, apparently there are leaks that the September White Dwarf issue is about Dark Angels.
If not though, all my unpainted Space Marine stuff will not be painted as Dark Angels unfortunately.
This would make sense, if not for the fact that to me it says GW is planning on releasing the other codices so soon that a stop-gap measure would be pointless. Especially since they'll probably be receiving their own versions.
I'm hopeful that's the case, apparently there are leaks that the September White Dwarf issue is about Dark Angels.
If not though, all my unpainted Space Marine stuff will not be painted as Dark Angels unfortunately.
WD doesn't really cover releases like it used to. It could very well just be a lore article about how the Dangles integrate Primaris marines.
'fethed over' as in no doctrines and no improved chapter tactics.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Umm you realize right that power levels are relative don't you? Ergo just because they got something doesn't mean their situation really improved when codex marines took even bigger leap. No point taking ba/da when their roles are done better with codex space marines
Ah, condescension. That tried and tested approach to winning an Internet debate!
So you propose that instead of being happy that my DA are better than then were yesterday, I should instead be angry that my AdMech, DA, GSC & Nids are all relatively worse?
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
This is indeed more than likely. A bit awkward in the meanwhile though. Oh well, one can always play those armies using vanilla codex rules, even though it is a somewhat unsatisfying solution.
If I end up wanting to play power armor enough before DA gets a supplement of their own thats what I'll have to do I guess, call my stuff a successor chapter or something except I wont be able to bring any DA specific stuff like Dark Shroud etc.
I personally would have little issue with you playing a Codex: Space Marine custom Dark Angels army meaning you can use the new space marine rules but still include Dark Angels stuff. Especially, if you let me use my Storm Raven to transport Primaris. I would even let you borrow my Space Marine codex so you wouldn't have to buy one to hold you over until the non-codex chapters see full updates. But I suppose that is all down to how flexible your gaming group is, if you are forced to abide GW store rules or if you are a tournament type player.
I personally would have little issue with you playing a Codex: Space Marine custom Dark Angels army meaning you can use the new space marine rules but still include Dark Angels stuff. Especially, if you let me use my Storm Raven to transport Primaris. I would even let you borrow my Space Marine codex so you wouldn't have to buy one to hold you over until the non-codex chapters see full updates. But I suppose that is all down to how flexible your gaming group is, if you are forced to abide GW store rules or if you are a tournament type player.
This is a great sentiment (and im fortunate enough to have a local environment that is pretty similar), but the onus should never be on the playerbase to unfeth what GW feths up.
Tiberius501 wrote: Don’t worry everyone, we’re going to get our own updates soon, this actually proves it I’d say. We’re purposefully not getting certain things like stratagems or Doctrines. I’d say it’s because DA/SW/BA/etc, are going to get their own versions in their books when they come.
Just a hunch anyway, I could be wrong, but I hope I’m right haha.
This is indeed more than likely. A bit awkward in the meanwhile though. Oh well, one can always play those armies using vanilla codex rules, even though it is a somewhat unsatisfying solution.
If I end up wanting to play power armor enough before DA gets a supplement of their own thats what I'll have to do I guess, call my stuff a successor chapter or something except I wont be able to bring any DA specific stuff like Dark Shroud etc.
I personally would have little issue with you playing a Codex: Space Marine custom Dark Angels army meaning you can use the new space marine rules but still include Dark Angels stuff. Especially, if you let me use my Storm Raven to transport Primaris. I would even let you borrow my Space Marine codex so you wouldn't have to buy one to hold you over until the non-codex chapters see full updates. But I suppose that is all down to how flexible your gaming group is, if you are forced to abide GW store rules or if you are a tournament type player.
I don't think my local gaming group would have an issue, and it is an option I have considered. It just doesn't feel great to have to house rule an entire chapter I guess.
I personally would have little issue with you playing a Codex: Space Marine custom Dark Angels army meaning you can use the new space marine rules but still include Dark Angels stuff. Especially, if you let me use my Storm Raven to transport Primaris. I would even let you borrow my Space Marine codex so you wouldn't have to buy one to hold you over until the non-codex chapters see full updates. But I suppose that is all down to how flexible your gaming group is, if you are forced to abide GW store rules or if you are a tournament type player.
This is a great sentiment (and im fortunate enough to have a local environment that is pretty similar), but the onus should never be on the playerbase to unfeth what GW feths up.
Agreed.
Also, I think if GW would just post a roadmap saying something like SW September, BA October, GK November, DA December, etc. nobody would have an issue at all, because they KNOW fixes are coming and that there is hope.
Right now all I have to go off of as far as hope my army will be competitive is a potential White Dwarf leak...
I personally would have little issue with you playing a Codex: Space Marine custom Dark Angels army meaning you can use the new space marine rules but still include Dark Angels stuff. Especially, if you let me use my Storm Raven to transport Primaris. I would even let you borrow my Space Marine codex so you wouldn't have to buy one to hold you over until the non-codex chapters see full updates. But I suppose that is all down to how flexible your gaming group is, if you are forced to abide GW store rules or if you are a tournament type player.
This is a great sentiment (and im fortunate enough to have a local environment that is pretty similar), but the onus should never be on the playerbase to unfeth what GW feths up.
I dunno, I've always been a pretty big advocate for "Rule Zero"
Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Stormonu wrote: Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Playing by the rules Dark Angels don't get the new strategems and doctrines. Neither do any of the non-codex compliant chapters (eg. space wolves, blood angels, etc).
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
If it's your brothers birthday and not yours and you still get the ten dollars then complaining that you only where given ten dollars is just being selfish. It's the Space Marine codex that released. thus yeah space Marines get all this stuff, it's "our birthday" as it is the Doctrines are something I'd hope to see GW MODIFY for the "snowflake chapters"
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
If it's your brothers birthday and not yours and you still get the ten dollars then complaining that you only where given ten dollars is just being selfish. It's the Space Marine codex that released. thus yeah space Marines get all this stuff, it's "our birthday" as it is the Doctrines are something I'd hope to see GW MODIFY for the "snowflake chapters"
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Stormonu wrote: Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Playing by the rules Dark Angels don't get the new strategems and doctrines. Neither do any of the non-codex compliant chapters (eg. space wolves, blood angels, etc).
Won’t there be a blurb in the base SM codex that will state that they can be used?
I guess for me, even if it doesn’t I’m not affected (and will be using them) because I don’t do tournaments, just home games.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
If it's your brothers birthday and not yours and you still get the ten dollars then complaining that you only where given ten dollars is just being selfish. It's the Space Marine codex that released. thus yeah space Marines get all this stuff, it's "our birthday" as it is the Doctrines are something I'd hope to see GW MODIFY for the "snowflake chapters"
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
So the correct answer here was to not give ANY of the space marine chapters anything special and have all of them go out of this one book. That way it'd be completely fair AND we wouldn't need to keep doing seperate releases for 18 million friggin marine armies.
Stormonu wrote: Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Playing by the rules Dark Angels don't get the new strategems and doctrines. Neither do any of the non-codex compliant chapters (eg. space wolves, blood angels, etc).
Won’t there be a blurb in the base SM codex that will state that they can be used?
I guess for me, even if it doesn’t I’m not affected (and will be using them) because I don’t do tournaments, just home games.
GW confirmed on Facebook that by the rules non-codex compliant chapters do not get access to the doctrines or strategems.
This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Nah. The Ultras and Sallies are twins. DA don't share the birthday. Sorry.
For those playing a Legion without a splat book yet, the PDF looks liek the old datasheets just with Aand they shall know no fear swapped for Angeles of death.
They may be updated and worded as per the codex in their new datasheets
All the melee-focused chapters getting meaningfully improved by a flat +1A when charging or charged? Don't talk crazy talk.
Lets talk crazy talk. What BA, SW, DW or DA units are going to see serious play that werent before because of that additional +1A?
Aggressors, since they also got big bonus to their statline. Maybe.
But none of those factions were in "serious play" and today's updates won't change that. Popularity of Blood Angels and Deathwatch will probably stay the same: some representation but rarely reaching the top 4 of large events.
Crimson wrote: This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Nah. The Ultras and Sallies are twins. DA don't share the birthday. Sorry.
This.
Rather than wait for his own birthday, Slaul is pouting, stomping his feet and demanding he get a present as good as his brother's, despite being offered the chance to play with it too.
Crimson wrote: This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
I suspect that'll happen naturally. The next Codex Angels and mostly-kinda-sorta-not-Codex Wolves will actually be supplements that tie into the Space Marines codex same as everyone else.
Crimson wrote: This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
I suspect that'll happen naturally. The next Codex Angels and mostly-kinda-sorta-not-Codex Wolves will actually be supplements that tie into the Space Marines codex same as everyone else.
I really hope that is the case. It would make perfect sense and limit the sort of issues the variant chapters are having now.
Crimson wrote: This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Nah. The Ultras and Sallies are twins. DA don't share the birthday. Sorry.
This.
Rather than wait for his own birthday, Slaul is pouting, stomping his feet and demanding he get a present as good as his brother's, despite being offered the chance to play with it too.
There is no need to be rude about it. I'm not sure how you don't understand why people that play these other chapters aren't as happy.
So something that gets objectively better than it was previously with no downsides, can be described as 'fethed over'?
Got it.
Im genuinely very confused as to how you think Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or Blood Angels are in any meaningful way improved by this update.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or just didn't read any of the PDFs.
If your parents give your brother $1000 and give you $10 you are objectively better off than before but are still allowed to be upset at how unfair the situation is and how worse off you are in comparison.
If it's your brothers birthday and not yours and you still get the ten dollars then complaining that you only where given ten dollars is just being selfish. It's the Space Marine codex that released. thus yeah space Marines get all this stuff, it's "our birthday" as it is the Doctrines are something I'd hope to see GW MODIFY for the "snowflake chapters"
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
ohh I'm sorry did a dark angels codex drop alongside the space marine one? No? then they don't share the same birthday.
Crimson wrote: This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Nah. The Ultras and Sallies are twins. DA don't share the birthday. Sorry.
This.
Rather than wait for his own birthday, Slaul is pouting, stomping his feet and demanding he get a present as good as his brother's, despite being offered the chance to play with it too.
There is no need to be rude about it. I'm not sure how you don't understand why people that play these other chapters aren't as happy.
Because this happens every time a codex gets released. A small group has to make a big fuss about how some other faction isn't getting updated this very instant. After multiple decades of one codex at a time, its simply tiresome to see people complain because they don't have theirs right now.
The fact that in this case its ironic (because you are getting updates) just makes it more annoying.
If you've really just have to complain, the news and rumor thread doesn't seem like the place- there's multiple places in general discussion devoted to complaining about space marines.
I agree that is is a sucky situation for the variant chapters, but every time I suggest that they would be folded in the vanilla codex so that the rules would be unified the shrieking is deafening...
Crimson wrote: I agree that is is a sucky situation for the variant chapters, but every time I suggest that they would be folded in the vanilla codex so that the rules would be unified the shrieking is deafening...
Exactly. They won't be missing much and they can get their couple of unique units that are actually unique. Granted White Scars could've gotten a couple more but Ultramarines got a special Honour Guard and the Tyrannic War Vets.
I really hope BA, SW, and DA are suppliments, and not full on codexes. It would make things SO much simpler, and the snowflakes get to have all their special units along with all the vanilla units.
Deathwatch I'm not sure. . . they only really have 2 unique units, and only 1 is truly unique--the corvus blackstar. The watch master is just a chapter master. What sets them apart is that they really have considerably LESS units, and I'm not sure with the special issue ammunition you can easily just plug in vanilla stuff and expect it to be balanced.
And honestly when you think about the fluff, they probably shouldn't have all the things, either. Fewer units, but rules to make them a little better--which fits the fluff of them being regular marines, but the best of them, sent to fight xenos scum.
Really DW just need a couple little tweaks, like giving vehicle storm bolters SIA and giving the Corvus Blackstar PotMS. Or maybe giving the Corvus the Assault Vehicle rule when in Hover mode or something.
The upgrades to auto bolt rifles, stalker bolt rifles, aggressors and inceptors are significant for DW and should not be overlooked. A squad of 5x auto bolt rifle intercessors, 4 aggressors, and 1 inceptor is now much more deadly and harder to kill (25 T5 wounds, effectively). Though you can argue their improvement is offset by being shot at by C:SM marines with extra -1 AP on many of their weapons :/
Perhaps there's no answer for this yet (as the codex isn't full out). But I had wanted to have my Primaris marines be an offshoot of my salamanders army. Is there a way for them to have slightly different traits, but still all be a 'battleforged' or 'cohesive' army? Sorry if I'm not articulating that well enough.
Essentially, I'm looking to have my primaris have a slightly different trait, but still work as part of a salamanders army.
skullking wrote: Perhaps there's no answer for this yet (as the codex isn't full out). But I had wanted to have my Primaris marines be an offshoot of my salamanders army. Is there a way for them to have slightly different traits, but still all be a 'battleforged' or 'cohesive' army? Sorry if I'm not articulating that well enough.
Essentially, I'm looking to have my primaris have a slightly different trait, but still work as part of a salamanders army.
That's absolutely possible. In fact they use Salamanders as an example of creating a successor chapter:
Stormonu wrote: Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Playing by the rules Dark Angels don't get the new strategems and doctrines. Neither do any of the non-codex compliant chapters (eg. space wolves, blood angels, etc).
Both blood angels and dark angels are codex compliant. GW really needs a new excuse seeing as black templars somehow get them
Quasistellar wrote: Deathwatch I'm not sure. . . they only really have 2 unique units, and only 1 is truly unique--the corvus blackstar. The watch master is just a chapter master. What sets them apart is that they really have considerably LESS units, and I'm not sure with the special issue ammunition you can easily just plug in vanilla stuff and expect it to be balanced.
That's the thing, tho. Most of primaris stuff doesn't get SIA anyway, so they could have just let DW have access to vanguard as is and put little note they might get SIA in updated codex, done. Or just give them all the damn SIA, seeing Codex units now have virtually the same thing in their doctrines, so any arguments about lack of balance would have been completely laughable. In fact, seeing DW tactics are now inferior to Codex chapter traits, SIA should have been reduced to zero points because doctrines are free and DW is pretty much SM -2 now.
And honestly when you think about the fluff, they probably shouldn't have all the things, either. Fewer units, but rules to make them a little better--which fits the fluff of them being regular marines, but the best of them, sent to fight xenos scum.
DW have been pretty much worse Sternguard for 5 books now, with slight exception of most of last year. They are back to sucking, though, given the new SM don't have dumb rule preventing using doctrines with bolter discipline (SIA does), and they can freely stack all their AP bonuses with 1 or 2 exceptions, while SIA is capped making it essentially half useless on stalker bolters.
The upgrades to auto bolt rifles, stalker bolt rifles, aggressors and inceptors are significant for DW and should not be overlooked. A squad of 5x auto bolt rifle intercessors, 4 aggressors, and 1 inceptor is now much more deadly and harder to kill (25 T5 wounds, effectively).
Except SM have got point drops on top of it, while a lot of DW stuff stayed as is, badly overpriced, and that's without even considering extra SIA tax and the fact all SM are now far superior in bolter use to supposed elite veterans. 1 extra wound does nothing when your codex equivalent outshoots you by a big margin now...
xttz wrote: Rather than wait for his own birthday, Slaul is pouting, stomping his feet and demanding he get a present as good as his brother's, despite being offered the chance to play with it too.
And I like how several people came here to post laughably biased gak when the whole point of 8th edition is 'points identical on everything alike' so the least GW should have done was to give all variant chapters point drops to SM level, seeing they are now across the board inferior to new SMand cost more. Try to twist it however you want, it makes no sense besides being insulting, as is keeping the nonsense SIA limitations when SM now get to laugh at it. I get GW might be too lazy to give people doctrines and better tactics, sure, that might wait for new book, but not spending 2 minutes copy-pasting points costs from new book is just crass.
Crimson wrote: I agree that is is a sucky situation for the variant chapters, but every time I suggest that they would be folded in the vanilla codex so that the rules would be unified the shrieking is deafening...
And maybe this is an elaborate scheme to soften those screams once they release Supplement: Blood/Dark Angels books.
It'll be a bonus to have been rolling into the vanilla codex because now they'd get 100% of the goodies while still keeping their unique stuff, so they'll have nothing legit to complain about It's an obvious win-win for both GW and the players
skullking wrote: Perhaps there's no answer for this yet (as the codex isn't full out). But I had wanted to have my Primaris marines be an offshoot of my salamanders army. Is there a way for them to have slightly different traits, but still all be a 'battleforged' or 'cohesive' army? Sorry if I'm not articulating that well enough.
Essentially, I'm looking to have my primaris have a slightly different trait, but still work as part of a salamanders army.
If those Primaris are in a separate Detachment, they can have a custom trait and work fine alongside a Salamanders Detachment. That army would be battleforged and also benefit from Combat Doctrines (as long as there aren’t other allies), but things like re-roll auras, etc.. wouldn’t work across Detachments.
Automatically Appended Next Post: It‘s kinda funny Blood Angels and Dark Angels from the Original Angels of Death Codex aren’t Angels of Death
Stormonu wrote: Must be something I don’t understand. I have the Dark Angels codex, I have the PDF they just released and I intend to pick up the new SM card pack for the new stratagems (and doctrines). What am I missing?
Playing by the rules Dark Angels don't get the new strategems and doctrines. Neither do any of the non-codex compliant chapters (eg. space wolves, blood angels, etc).
DA/SW/BA players just needs those faq/errata and their codexes. To get doctrines and all those things we will have to wait for their new codexes, which will most likely be after all the supplement (i.e. in a long time).
Crimson wrote: I agree that is is a sucky situation for the variant chapters, but every time I suggest that they would be folded in the vanilla codex so that the rules would be unified the shrieking is deafening...
And maybe this is an elaborate scheme to soften those screams once they release Supplement: Blood/Dark Angels books.
It'll be a bonus to have been rolling into the vanilla codex because now they'd get 100% of the goodies while still keeping their unique stuff, so they'll have nothing legit to complain about
It's an obvious win-win for both GW and the players
-
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
GW is just releaseing that PDF to invite DA/BA/SW players to still buy their new merch, but the rules are not changed.
Crimson wrote: I agree that is is a sucky situation for the variant chapters, but every time I suggest that they would be folded in the vanilla codex so that the rules would be unified the shrieking is deafening...
Problem is when this kind of argument is made it is made by people that want those variant chapters to basically lose all their specificity, by giving their specific units to all or just discontinue those specific units, which is frankly ridiculous.
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
No I think it's pretty clear BAs, DAsSWs are keeping their own codex. GW would have mentioned the intent to "supplementize them" and honestly there's not much point in it anyway. perhaps the snowflake chapters should be best viewed as "stand alone supplements"
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
No I think it's pretty clear BAs, DAsSWs are keeping their own codex. GW would have mentioned the intent to "supplementize them" and honestly there's not much point in it anyway. perhaps the snowflake chapters should be best viewed as "stand alone supplements"
You're going to have to explain what makes it 'pretty clear.'
GW not mentioning future plans isn't evidence. It's still pretty standard operating procedure, beyond hints in cropped images of individual model bits and vague videos.
As for 'not much point,' yeah, there is. There really obviously is, given that they just did three separate pdfs to catch people up on changes. They can modify the basic Codex once for common things, rather than 5-6 times, and only once for special snowflake things (that being stuff exclusive to a particular chapter supplement). That's far less of a pain in the backside for everyone, including them.
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
No I think it's pretty clear BAs, DAsSWs are keeping their own codex. GW would have mentioned the intent to "supplementize them" and honestly there's not much point in it anyway. perhaps the snowflake chapters should be best viewed as "stand alone supplements"
You're going to have to explain what makes it 'pretty clear.'
GW not mentioning future plans isn't evidence. It's still pretty standard operating procedure, beyond hints in cropped images of individual model bits and vague videos.
As for 'not much point,' yeah, there is. There really obviously is, given that they just did three separate pdfs to catch people up on changes. They can modify the basic Codex once for common things, rather than 5-6 times, and only once for special snowflake things (that being stuff exclusive to a particular chapter supplement). That's far less of a pain in the backside for everyone, including them.
pretty sure they'd have advertised a new way of doing things. Ignoring Space Wolves for a moment (we all agree they're the most divergant, let's look at the Dark angels a moment shall we? (I say this because they're the MOST codex of the chapters)
A Dark Angels supplement would give the strats, psykic powers etc. but their supplement would have 5 special characters, and a DOZEN seperate units. that might be a bit much to add into a supplement, I mean There are a few core codices that lack a dozen units of their own. So at this point it's proably worth while giving dark angels their own codex. which as I said are essentially stand alone supplements
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
No I think it's pretty clear BAs, DAsSWs are keeping their own codex. GW would have mentioned the intent to "supplementize them" and honestly there's not much point in it anyway. perhaps the snowflake chapters should be best viewed as "stand alone supplements"
You're going to have to explain what makes it 'pretty clear.'
GW not mentioning future plans isn't evidence. It's still pretty standard operating procedure, beyond hints in cropped images of individual model bits and vague videos.
As for 'not much point,' yeah, there is. There really obviously is, given that they just did three separate pdfs to catch people up on changes. They can modify the basic Codex once for common things, rather than 5-6 times, and only once for special snowflake things (that being stuff exclusive to a particular chapter supplement). That's far less of a pain in the backside for everyone, including them.
pretty sure they'd have advertised a new way of doing things. Ignoring Space Wolves for a moment (we all agree they're the most divergant, let's look at the Dark angels a moment shall we? (I say this because they're the MOST codex of the chapters)
A Dark Angels supplement would give the strats, psykic powers etc. but their supplement would have 5 special characters, and a DOZEN seperate units. that might be a bit much to add into a supplement, I mean There are a few core codices that lack a dozen units of their own. So at this point it's proably worth while giving dark angels their own codex. which as I said are essentially stand alone supplements
17? Depending on layout, that's probably 7-9 pages. The WS supplement is 64 pages, the Ultra's is 80 pages (which has 12 datasheets, so 17 for DA is not a lot more). I think they can manage to fit 5 more datasheets into the DA supplement and match it to the Ultra's page count.
As much as I’d love for the non-codex chapters to be roled into supplements, (blood angels follow the codex so they’d make plenty of sense) I have a feeling it’s going to be new codexes.
Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
However I do think we’ll get our own Doctrines, or something in the place of them, and our own litanies and new relics and all that fun jazz. Just hope it’s not too far off. In the meantime I’m still happy I got +1 attack for all my bros, and that my Inceptors went up to 3 wounds.
Crimson wrote:This is a result of having a separate codices for variant chapters. Sometimes you get more rules, sometimes you get less rules. If you want all the same stuff than Vanilla marines and at the same time, then you need to join the rest of us in that one book and become a subset of that codex just like Black Templars.
To continue your analogy the siblings in this case are non-identical twins. They share a 'birthday'. All of the non-codex compliant chapters are still Space Marines.
Nah. The Ultras and Sallies are twins. DA don't share the birthday. Sorry.
That's a pretty jacked up thing to say. I wouldnt even say the UM are anyone's twin...except for BL.
All are obsolastartes though, no unique primaris units, am I right? See where this goes?
no Because I'm not one of the people running around wearing a tinfoil hat screaming "OLD MARINES ARE GOING AWAY IN A YEAR!" because the evidance is overwhelmingly that they're not going anywhere
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I think Space Wolves should‘ve been first. They played Index the longest. With the rest staggered out by as long as they had a Codex pre-Space Wolves with CSM and finally Codex Marines last. That would‘ve been the fairest approach.
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine.
But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
No I think it's pretty clear BAs, DAsSWs are keeping their own codex. GW would have mentioned the intent to "supplementize them" and honestly there's not much point in it anyway. perhaps the snowflake chapters should be best viewed as "stand alone supplements"
You're going to have to explain what makes it 'pretty clear.'
GW not mentioning future plans isn't evidence. It's still pretty standard operating procedure, beyond hints in cropped images of individual model bits and vague videos.
As for 'not much point,' yeah, there is. There really obviously is, given that they just did three separate pdfs to catch people up on changes. They can modify the basic Codex once for common things, rather than 5-6 times, and only once for special snowflake things (that being stuff exclusive to a particular chapter supplement). That's far less of a pain in the backside for everyone, including them.
pretty sure they'd have advertised a new way of doing things. Ignoring Space Wolves for a moment (we all agree they're the most divergant, let's look at the Dark angels a moment shall we? (I say this because they're the MOST codex of the chapters)
A Dark Angels supplement would give the strats, psykic powers etc. but their supplement would have 5 special characters, and a DOZEN seperate units. that might be a bit much to add into a supplement, I mean There are a few core codices that lack a dozen units of their own. So at this point it's proably worth while giving dark angels their own codex. which as I said are essentially stand alone supplements
17? Depending on layout, that's probably 7-9 pages. The WS supplement is 64 pages, the Ultra's is 80 pages (which has 12 datasheets, so 17 for DA is not a lot more). I think they can manage to fit 5 more datasheets into the DA supplement and match it to the Ultra's page count.
I did mention it a bit back, but on the price side of it, it’s more $40+$40 for DA,BA,SW.
GW mentioned that they can use all the units in the new Codex, so to get the best out of your armies, you need to buy the SM book too.
But yeah I just don’t see them getting rid, when they can make more money by keeping them as separates..
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
Agreed completely with both the "pretend" unique Space Wolf units (*) and the sheer awfulness of the Dreadknight model - on a par with Centurions.
I might pick up the new supplements if there is a good amount of lore in them
(*) especially since other DA/BA/SW players are often extremely vocal that they want ALL their snowflake units AND any new Marine unit - because..........
It is pretty clear that DA/BA and SW are not going to have codex "supplements". They will get full fledged codexes, and GW is doing so in order to completly separate those different flavor of marines (because it is just better from a business standpoint, even if it is weird from a rule standpoint). And the best proof we have of that is that DA/BA/SW don't get doctrines - if a codex 2.0 gets out, those chapters will most likely get their own specific doctrines, cementing the differences between chapters.
That isn't clear at all. Getting their own variant or even special snowflake doctrines is easily within the bounds of a supplement book (given that both so far do exactly that: provide additional doctrine modifiers). Its no harder there than in a completely separate codex, and gives rules to the 'differences' between chapters just fine. But as far as business goes, getting money from base codex ($40) + supplement ($30) is more than getting money from special snowflake codex ($40). $30+$40 > $40.
As far as Angels and Wolves not getting doctrines in the 'datasheets for new models' PDFs, that isn't proof of anything beyond an unwillingness to do major rules mechanics in a free download. Which isn't exactly a shock.
You have a hard time understanding the word supplement so I will help you : all SM who have a supplement gets everything from the codex SM (including the doctrines) plus the few tweaks that are in the supplements (i.e. there's a template). From the white scars and the ultramarines supplements we also know what supplement chapters gets : a few units, mostly characters, a chapter tactic, relics, a discipline for librarians. Suffice to say all supplement chapter get the doctrines, and DA/SW/BA not getting that rule means it will not get be part of those supplements. Plus we know the numbers of supplement already. Just move on.
As for the business perspective you are getting all that wrong : if SW/DA/BA have separate codex, separate rules (for all we know, DA/BA/SW having specific doctrines can mean that if you mix DA/SW/BA and SM detachment in an army, you don't get doctrines at all) and more specific units, then they become full fledged armies : hence GW has created an incentive so that people buy a SM codex army and also those non codex SM.
This discussion is going on in two separate thread, by the same people with the same arguments all because there's some absurd (but funny) frustration over the fact that GW use more ressources on some chapters and some factions than over. For some faction this makes sense, for others, it's a bit childlish.
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
Agreed completely with both the "pretend" unique Space Wolf units (*) and the sheer awfulness of the Dreadknight model - on a par with Centurions.
I might pick up the new supplements if there is a good amount of lore in them
(*) especially since other DA/BA/SW players are often extremely vocal that they want ALL their snowflake units AND any new Marine unit - because..........
Wolves are a lot harder to consolidate, but there's no good argument to not consolidate the Angels at this point.
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
Agreed completely with both the "pretend" unique Space Wolf units (*) and the sheer awfulness of the Dreadknight model - on a par with Centurions.
I might pick up the new supplements if there is a good amount of lore in them
(*) especially since other DA/BA/SW players are often extremely vocal that they want ALL their snowflake units AND any new Marine unit - because..........
Wolves are a lot harder to consolidate, but there's no good argument to not consolidate the Angels at this point.
Npe not really - people pretend they are but all or almost all of the units would be present in some other Chapters, most are doable with a simple rules line/option - nothing get removed, we just stop pretending that these units are unique.
This discussion is going on in two separate thread, by the same people with the same arguments all because there's some absurd (but funny) frustration over the fact that GW use more ressources on some chapters and some factions than over. For some faction this makes sense, for others, it's a bit childlish.
Good job GW have infinite time and resources to make your ill thought defence make any sense. Oh and Spoiler Alert - some of us saying this HAVE Space Wovles, Dark Angels armies......I know I do.
A supplement version of the DA/SW/BA rather than reprint codexs would be a step in the right direction but I doubt it.
Tiberius501 wrote: Space Wolves especially, as every single unit is slightly different in some way, they wouldn’t be able to be squeezed into a supplement.
"Wouldn't" when they were able to squeeze them into Index SM?
All it would take is something like "Wolf Lord - see Captain datasheet. He can also take wolfwolfwolfsword and wolfyiffaxe". There, done. Wolves have like 5 really unique units, rest is either tiny variation on Codex one or completely identical to it.
cuda1179 wrote: I think Grey Knights deserve a look at well before the other three.
I still find it funny (and kind of sad) how virtually all proposed fixes for them I see can be boiled down to "reprint their 5th edition codex and fire everyone who did any subsequent GK book as obviously incompetent in basic math and fluff knowledge"...
Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
Agreed completely with both the "pretend" unique Space Wolf units (*) and the sheer awfulness of the Dreadknight model - on a par with Centurions.
I might pick up the new supplements if there is a good amount of lore in them
(*) especially since other DA/BA/SW players are often extremely vocal that they want ALL their snowflake units AND any new Marine unit - because..........
Wolves are a lot harder to consolidate, but there's no good argument to not consolidate the Angels at this point.
Npe not really - people pretend they are but all or almost all of the units would be present in some other Chapters, most are doable with a simple rules line/option - nothing get removed, we just stop pretending that these units are unique.
This discussion is going on in two separate thread, by the same people with the same arguments all because there's some absurd (but funny) frustration over the fact that GW use more ressources on some chapters and some factions than over. For some faction this makes sense, for others, it's a bit childlish.
Good job GW have infinite time and resources to make your ill thought defence make any sense. Oh and Spoiler Alert - some of us saying this HAVE Space Wovles, Dark Angels armies......I know I do.
A supplement version of the DA/SW/BA rather than reprint codexs would be a step in the right direction but I doubt it.
I'm not defending GW at all, I'm just saying the discussion is over since we have all the proof we need those three chapters are not going to get a supplement. You can continue flapping your gum tho.
WhiteDog wrote: we have all the proof we need those three chapters are not going to get a supplement.
No we don't.
1. no access to doctrines ;
2. we know the numbers of supplements already ;
3. all the supplement codexes already have rules and chapter traits in the SM codex, the supplements only adding content, but there are no mentions of the DA/BA/SW.
This is wrong - SM vehicles and stuff from Forge World book taken by BA/SW/DAhave doctrines, only the ones taken by Grey Knights were excluded. You were saying?
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Reboot back to the third edition daemon hunters codex, and I will potentially forgive the ridiculous additions such as the dreadknight and allow it to go into the book, otherwise nothing will repair the GK's.
You mean the garbage book which was seriously below underpowered even in 3rd edition, never mind being complete trash in 4th and 5th? The one with GKcaptains having a single wound and statline of SM sergeants? Where nemesis force weapons were AP - for half the units? There is being nostalgic, and there is clamoring for being dumped straight into a cesspool, especially when the alternative is competently written, balanced 5th edition Codex, the only one ever that was both fluffy and viable...
WhiteDog wrote: we have all the proof we need those three chapters are not going to get a supplement.
No we don't.
1. no access to doctrines ;
2. we know the numbers of supplements already ;
3. all the supplement codexes already have rules and chapter traits in the SM codex, the supplements only adding content, but there are no mentions of the DA/BA/SW.
"we don't".
While I agree the supplements we know are coming probably won't include those 3, I'd argue that the lack of updating their Chapter Tactics or giving them Doctrines makes the FAQ feel like a stop-gap until those 3 do get a supplement to replace their codex.
GW is probably just saving them for a later release, but it's almost guaranteed that they've thought about it, have some ideas in development, and if the current supplements are successful, we'll see those 3 sooner than later
You have a hard time understanding the word supplement so I will help you : all SM who have a supplement gets everything from the codex SM (including the doctrines) plus the few tweaks that are in the supplements
Black Templars say 'Hello. We now have multiple models from the base codex we can't take (additional types of librarians), in addition to a long standing special snowflake unit of our own.'
Suffice to say all supplement chapter get the doctrines, and DA/SW/BA not getting that rule means it will not get be part of those supplements.
And until today, Ultras, WS, Sallies, etc didn't have doctrines either. Magically, GW was able to add doctrines to the main codex and modifiers to the doctrine rules in the supplements. This is not hard.
Plus we know the numbers of supplement already. Just move on.
We know the number of announced supplements. We don't know how many more will be made over the course of the next year+.
1. no access to doctrines ;
2. we know the numbers of supplements already ;
3. all the supplement codexes already have rules and chapter traits in the SM codex, the supplements only adding content, but there are no mentions of the DA/BA/SW.
"we don't".
This only means that their supplements are not among the six they release first.
1. no access to doctrines ; 2. we know the numbers of supplements already ; 3. all the supplement codexes already have rules and chapter traits in the SM codex, the supplements only adding content, but there are no mentions of the DA/BA/SW.
"we don't".
This only means that their supplements are not among the six they release first.
This means that if they want to release DA/SW/BA as supplements they need to change the SM codex.
This is wrong - SM vehicles and stuff from Forge World book taken by BA/SW/DAhave doctrines, only the ones taken by Grey Knights were excluded. You were saying?
Nitpick much. It might even be a mistake for all we know.
You have a hard time understanding the word supplement so I will help you : all SM who have a supplement gets everything from the codex SM (including the doctrines) plus the few tweaks that are in the supplements
Black Templars say 'Hello. We now have multiple models from the base codex we can't take (additional types of librarians), in addition to a long standing special snowflake unit of our own.'
Suffice to say all supplement chapter get the doctrines, and DA/SW/BA not getting that rule means it will not get be part of those supplements.
And until today, Ultras, WS, Sallies, etc didn't have doctrines either. Magically, GW was able to add doctrines to the main codex and modifiers to the doctrine rules in the supplements. This is not hard.
Plus we know the numbers of supplement already. Just move on.
We know the number of announced supplements. We don't know how many more will be made over the course of the next year+.
BT are in the SM codex. They have a chapter traits and a few lines. They might get more things in a sons of Dorn supplement, but you can already play them out of the SM codex, like all supplements chapters, and unlike SW/DA/BA. Damn it's not that hard to understand really ...
This is wrong - SM vehicles and stuff from Forge World book taken by BA/SW/DAhave doctrines, only the ones taken by Grey Knights were excluded. You were saying?
The doctrines do not work if the army has units without them though, so they do currently nothing for non-vanilla marines.
I'm just pointing out that all the chapters that will get a "supplement" already have the basic rules in the SM codex. It is not hard to understand that this was intended and that there is a template that GW made to release those supplements, a template that does not include SW/DA/BA yet. This might be a bad thing, but that's just how it is.
WhiteDog wrote: I'm just pointing out that all the chapters that will get a "supplement" already have the basic rules in the SM codex. It is not hard to understand that this was intended and that there is a template that GW made to release those supplements, a template that does not include SW/DA/BA yet. This might be a bad thing, but that's just how it is.
Printing the chapter tactic in the supplement is hardly difficult. We know that the six supplement are probably coming quite fast and none of those armies have their own codex currently. Putting the DA/BA/SW traits in the main codex when they still have their own books and it might get a while until they get their supplements would have just unnecessarily confused people. "Wait, there is a BA trait in the vanilla marine codex? Am I supposed to play my BA with that book or my BA codex?" It would have been a mess.
WhiteDog wrote: I'm just pointing out that all the chapters that will get a "supplement" already have the basic rules in the SM codex. It is not hard to understand that this was intended and that there is a template that GW made to release those supplements, a template that does not include SW/DA/BA yet. This might be a bad thing, but that's just how it is.
Printing the chapter tactic in the supplement is hardly difficult. We know that the six supplement are probably coming quite fast and none of those armies have their own codex currently. Putting the DA/BA/SW traits in the main codex when they still have their own books and it might get a while until they get their supplements would have just unnecessarily confused people. "Wait, there is a BA trait in the vanilla marine codex? Am I supposed to play my BA with that book or my BA codex?" It would have been a mess.
Not having chapter traits in the SM codex means you can't play DA/BA/SW with the SM codex, unlike all the other chapters that will get a supplement. It's not difficult at all to understand really. There is no reason for a DA/BA/SW player to buy the SM codex, and GW specifically said that such players could buy it "for the lore" if they want... So why would they write a "supplement" for DA/BA/SW to a codex that they don't need to buy as of now ? That's just silly.
And if that was the case, why would GW take the time to specify that DA/BA/SW don't get angel of death rule but just the shock assault ? What's the point of all that shennanigan ?
Not having chapter traits in the SM codex means you can't play DA/BA/SW with the SM codex, unlike all the other chapters that will get a supplement. It's not difficult at all to understand really. There is no reason for a DA/BA/SW player to buy the SM codex, and GW specifically said that such players could buy it "for the lore" if they want... So why would they write a "supplement" for DA/BA/SW to a codex that they don't need to buy as of now ? That's just silly.
Now you're just babbling.
I really do not know if those chapter will get supplements or full codices, but nothing of what we've seen would preclude the supplement model. Now they use their own codex, and to avoid the confusion, their chapter traits are not in the vanilla codex. If they release supplements for them, they will transition to using vanilla codex + supplement. Chapter traits will be in those supplements. It would make perfect sense and would work just fine.
why do we keep assuming they're going to make supplements out of the DA/BA/SW chapters?
there's no evidance they're not going to get a codex per norm. until GW does anything to signify otherwise the proper assumption is the status quo.
BrianDavion wrote: why do we keep assuming they're going to make supplements out of the DA/BA/SW chapters? there's no evidance they're not going to get a codex per norm. until GW does anything to signify otherwise the proper assumption is the status quo.
Because Crimson think that repeating the same arguments over and over ("it makes sense") will make it come true.
BrianDavion wrote: why do we keep assuming they're going to make supplements out of the DA/BA/SW chapters?
We are not assuming that, but unlike some posters think, it s perfectly possible, and would in fact be a clear improvement to the current setup. And not even unprecedented. All those chapters were handles via similar supplement system in the third (probably third..) edition.
BrianDavion wrote: why do we keep assuming they're going to make supplements out of the DA/BA/SW chapters?
We are not assuming that, but unlike some posters think, it s perfectly possible, and would in fact be a clear improvement to the current setup. And not even unprecedented. All those chapters were handles via similar supplement system in the third (probably third..) edition.
Yes, that was In 3rd and it was utter crap. Especially when 4th SM dropped and SWs weren't allowed to use the new rules and didn't get an update until 5th.
BrianDavion wrote: why do we keep assuming they're going to make supplements out of the DA/BA/SW chapters?
We are not assuming that, but unlike some posters think, it s perfectly possible, and would in fact be a clear improvement to the current setup. And not even unprecedented. All those chapters were handles via similar supplement system in the third (probably third..) edition.
Yes, that was In 3rd and it was utter crap. Especially when 4th SM dropped and SWs weren't allowed to use the new rules and didn't get an update until 5th.
Yeah, the SM book had no chapter tactics, no reference to any first founding chapters, outside a double page on the ultramarine strategic organisation with no information on the fact that they were Guilliman's sons, and a few chapter specific characters. It's a 48 page long book....
1. No, SW/BA/DA players won't be buying both. The updated data sheets will be free to download until...
2. They get their updated codices. Same with Grey Knights. As for who "deserves it" first - it doesn't matter. They all went under the knife at the same time. They will have full codices, not supplements. Which also means...
3. They will not be able to soup with other Marines and still get doctrine-style benefits. Like Ultramarines and White Scars, if you want all their goodness, you can't mix them. GW is trying to make Marines competitive without the Loyal 32, Imperial Knights, or a rainbow detachment of chapters.
(SIDE NOTE): They will be doing so for Astra Militarum as well. You will be able to still ally, but all the best rules will come from staying within 1 faction.
Only First Founding loyalists. With DA/BA/SW getting their own books, that's all of them. Successors will be with each supplement/Codex. I, for one, think it's a tidy way to give all the chapters their due. Second foundings and successors should NOT be splintered into further books. That type of fractured bloat was one of many problems with 7th.
Chaos will ultimately mirror this (in a way) down the road, with their current "undivided" Codex already having more variety than the new Marine one.
brassangel wrote: (SIDE NOTE): They will be doing so for Astra Militarum as well. You will be able to still ally, but all the best rules will come from staying within 1 faction.
Or they will just put the pages that DA/SW/BA need in the next Chapter Approved as a selling point - plenty of room as they fitted an entire Beta Codex in last time.
Second foundings and successors should NOT be splintered into further books. That type of fractured bloat was one of many problems with 7th.
at least nine supplements for one subfaction is not considered bloat???
I'm not sure they'll do the same for AM but I'd not be suprised. I'd not be suprised to see GW do it for a number of codices that by all rights damn well should be capable of standing alone.
Incorrect at above the 8 chapters in the codex Space Marines 8.5 ED or "enhanced chapter tactics" are all getting a supplement.
Confirmed on podcast one of the ITC peeps.
feels bad man. Feels bad.
me off. Like seriously you have been updating Chapter Master rule to include the new improved text of "re-roll hit rolls" and just copy paste the old rules. This reeks of incompetence on the part of whoever wrote the "free update." 
.
Oh and Spoiler Alert - some of us saying this HAVE Space Wovles, Dark Angels armies......I know I do.
