I know, I know, "Oh look, this thread again". I can't seem to find the others, that i'm sure exist. But at my FLGS, the only answer I get is "Because they're Squats". From what I can gather, it's because of the biker motif, but I don't think that's a reason to dispise them as much as they are...
Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
Because squats taste so goood!
People get all sentimental because GW cut them, but really they were just dwarves in space. They had their upsides, but they just didn't fit in with the whole "grimdark" thing.
In all seriousness I haven't really ever seen Squats hated, just "Squats should be brought back" being spammed to the point that might actually make some people hate them.
Orock wrote:Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
Orock wrote:Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
In all seriousness I haven't really ever seen Squats hated, just "Squats should be brought back" being spammed to the point that might actually make some people hate them.
I wouldn't even say that it makes people hate the Squats themselves.
Orock wrote:Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
Just to clarify, even if the rumor is true (wich I doubt), these won't be Squats, but Demiurg. Not abhuman miners-turned-dwarves, but xenos who may or may not look like dwarves.
Orock wrote:Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
Just to clarify, even if the rumor is true (wich I doubt), these won't be Squats, but Demiurg. Not abhuman miners-turned-dwarves, but xenos who may or may not look like dwarves.
In all seriousness I haven't really ever seen Squats hated, just "Squats should be brought back" being spammed to the point that might actually make some people hate them.
I wouldn't even say that it makes people hate the Squats themselves.
Grey Templar wrote:the squats were destroyed because they didn't fit into where 40k was going.
and they weren't the most popular of armies.
The 'not selling well' thing always comes up in these discussions, but from the comments I've seen over the years from actual studio members, they didn't sell any worse than any of the other RT armies.
The decision to drop them was (supposedly) purely based on the studio not being able to come up with a clear niche for them in the setting.
Grey Templar wrote:the squats were destroyed because they didn't fit into where 40k was going.
and they weren't the most popular of armies.
The 'not selling well' thing always comes up in these discussions, but from the comments I've seen over the years from actual studio members, they didn't sell any worse than any of the other RT armies.
The decision to drop them was (supposedly) purely based on the studio not being able to come up with a clear niche for them in the setting.
Really? I feel that they displayed the niche of Space Dwarves, quite well.
I also miss the squats since GW brutally and without due process, wrote them out of the game.
They made a lot of sense and were are pretty cool army to field as well. I do see they are still mentioned in the famous quotes of Leman Russ.
"Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millennia cut off from the Imperium and assailed from all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to all." (Meditations on Imperial Command, Book XVI)4
Zakiriel wrote:I also miss the squats since GW brutally and without due process, wrote them out of the game.
They made a lot of sense and were are pretty cool army to field as well.
If by "made a lot of sense" you mean "made no sense", then yes.
Miners and techys from high gravity colonies that over time made them more compact. How does that not make sense or is this just another version of gnome hatred from WoW from you?
I really need to get my stuff out of storage..... I actually still have the original info on Squats buried in there.... But the storage is in NC and I am currently in OK.
The official "reasons" and the rumoured ones asside.... Squats fulfilled a role in the (now defunct) Epic game that could not be translated into the normal game, Which is how the studio saw it.
The problem was that the Epic version didn't realy fit with the original 40k Squats, not the other way around. They had two different forces with the same name and could not find a way to link them.
It wouldn't have been hard to fit squats in at all, in fact they already had a niche. They were a crossover/hybrid army between IG and Space Marines. They have IG style equipped basic troops but hardier and braver (and less numerous than IG) and Space Marine type elites but not quite as wtfsuperawesome in every way and thus a little more numerous than SM's, all combined with slow but extremely heavily armed and armored battle engines and some Trikes. So basically you end up with an army that's larger than most SM armies, but smaller than most IG armies, with some of the advantages and disadvantages of both and really slow aside from Trikes. It wouldn't be hard to do, but literally the reason they were dropped was that nobody in the design studio wanted to work on them and bridge the gap between their Rogue Trader and Epic incarnations, so they got dropped.
The game is already Fantasy is Space...rather hardcore. It's already got Elves/Bad Elves and Orcs and Demons and Undead and Monsters, the inclusion/exclusion of Dwarves really doesn't do anything for or against that.
Dawi-Marine'Va wrote:Really? I feel that they displayed the niche of Space Dwarves, quite well.
The point was (again, according to the studio... I'm not the guy who decided to drop them from the game) that as Space Dwarves, they were doomed to be either short Imperial Guard, or short Space Wolves.
The only other angle that the studio could see for them was short space bikers, which the studio guys felt made them a bit of a joke army. And they didn't want Space Dwarves to be a joke army.
Dawi-Marine'Va wrote:Really? I feel that they displayed the niche of Space Dwarves, quite well.
The point was (again, according to the studio... I'm not the guy who decided to drop them from the game) that as Space Dwarves, they were doomed to be either short Imperial Guard, or short Space Wolves.
Had they not started off the boat with a variant SM list the latter wouldn't have been an issue. In the long run it's not hard to see where an actually truly different faction likely would have been more popular than a simple "SM's +1" Variant.
As it was laid out, I forget where, WD maybe, the studio didn't like the name in a 'what were we thinking?' way, were not fond of the trikes or the other 28mm design choices they'd made with them, and wanting to make 40k more than straight 'fantasy in space!' didn't have a clear idea of where to go with the squats, since as the grudge-bearing and the above models show, squats were closer to their fantasy kin then anything else.
The killing blow was not only was the studio unhappy with them, but nobody had the fire in their belly to be 'the squats guy' and tackle all their problems and rebuild them.
I'm pretty sure the GW had to drop Squats due to a copyright issue when they fired the guy that held the copyright to the "Squat" intellectual property, back when GW let their individual employees hold copyrights to their own work. So, the Squats had to die.
To bring them back, GW would need to adjust the look and background of the differently named units to at least 10% different to avoid legal issues. This from the guys to sue everybody over even remotely thinking about modeling your product close enough to their product to be competition.
It's because they're silly. Silliness obviously has no place in a universe where hardgay bondage elves from Space Hell fight sentient football hooligan fungi.
Orock wrote:Nobody hates squats, in fact there coming back as an auxilary army under the tau banner. If you take a demurge leader (new name for squats) you can use units of them as troops. One of the rumored new squat units is basically a unit of terminators with TH/SS equivilents. Tau with a kickass counter charge unit? yes please!
That just sounds completely fething stupid. I really hope thats just fans wishlisting. Seriously the Squats are silly and deep down every knows it.
jeffersonian000 wrote:I'm pretty sure the GW had to drop Squats due to a copyright issue when they fired the guy that held the copyright to the "Squat" intellectual property, back when GW let their individual employees hold copyrights to their own work. So, the Squats had to die.
No idea who made that story up, but it sounds like someone's gotten confused with the (also unconfirmed) backstory for the Chaos God Malal.
There's never been any suggestion that the ownership of the Squats was in doubt, and their continuation in Epic after being dropped from 40K would seem to prove that this story isn't true...
If GW had opted for removing all that's silly from 40k Orks wouldn't have made it past 2nd edition... Just remember Madboyz, Squig Catapults...
Doing a bit of... uh... creative reading of Jarvis' famous letter on the Squats, it occurs to me that the main reason behind the Squats' demise was just that, beyond three-feet-tall hell's angels and units that more or less aped their WHFB dwarven counterparts, the creative minds behind GW were dry of ideas.
I'm sure it's been posted a gazillion times before, but here's a link to said letter, just in case anyone wants to check.
Agent_Tremolo wrote:If GW had opted for removing all that's silly from 40k Orks wouldn't have made it past 2nd edition... Just remember Madboyz, Squig Catapults...
Take a look at the 3rd edition Ork Codex. They did indeed take a crack at removing the silliness... The current codex took a stab at putting back some of the stuff that made Orks so much fun, but for most of two editions they were very, very dry.
Agent_Tremolo wrote:If GW had opted for removing all that's silly from 40k Orks wouldn't have made it past 2nd edition... Just remember Madboyz, Squig Catapults...
Take a look at the 3rd edition Ork Codex. They did indeed take a crack at removing the silliness... The current codex took a stab at putting back some of the stuff that made Orks so much fun, but for most of two editions they were very, very dry.
True!
Still, orks "survived" GW's turn to a more serious tone in 3rd ed. What puzzles me is why Squats didn't.
Couldn't their rules and fluff be rewritten to match the darker setting?. Miniatures redesigned?. Fun and jokes expunged?. It worked for a race that, in its previous incarnation, was lobbing cans full of buzzer squigs at their foes. I'm sure it'd have worked for the leather-clad biker dwarves as well...
My only explanation is that, as said before, the creative staff ran dry of decent ideas. Or maybe the serious route for the Squats put them in direct collision course with an existant or planned race. Who knows!
On the 'removed for copyright' thing: that was Malal, another much missed part of warhammer/sort of 40k.
*DREADAXE THIRSTS FOR YOU!*
...achem, where was I? oh, yes, squats...
People who want squats back generally fall into two camps: squats fans, and people who resent the way GW treats it's customers, since nothing seems to get under a GW employee's skin faster then tshirts proclaiming 'Where's the Squat?' followed by 'got squat?' and then 'Squat' (with a picture of a dwarf in the 'Obama Hope' poster colors.) Once the next meme takes place, we'll shoehorn squats into that one too.
What I don't understand is why so many people want them back. Even people who came to the game years after they were removed.
It is like people saying "Yeah, that incredibly harmful lead paint coated asbestos you took out of my house before I moved in? Can you put it back in please?"
Grey Templar wrote:the main thing you do with things like this is archtypes.
you have fast, but fragile armies(Eldar, Dark Eldar)
Technologically advanced weaponry, but fairly fragile(Tau)
Super resiliant, powerful elite troops, good weaponry(Space Marines)
massed numbers, powerful weaponry(IG)
massed numbers of expendable troops(Nids, Greentide orks)
I'm not sure if those are really that accurate; Eldar are rather resilient compared to anything but Space Marines (on an individual basis), but also a low model-count army (reverse this for Dark Eldar; Glass Cannon ftw); Tau more or less fill a role between Guard and Marines, being more resilient individually than Guard, but sacrificing firepower and numbers, though still having both in excess of Space Marines.
Vaktathi wrote:It wouldn't have been hard to fit squats in at all, in fact they already had a niche. They were a crossover/hybrid army between IG and Space Marines. They have IG style equipped basic troops but hardier and braver (and less numerous than IG) and Space Marine type elites but not quite as wtfsuperawesome in every way and thus a little more numerous than SM's, all combined with slow but extremely heavily armed and armored battle engines and some Trikes. So basically you end up with an army that's larger than most SM armies, but smaller than most IG armies, with some of the advantages and disadvantages of both and really slow aside from Trikes. It wouldn't be hard to do, but literally the reason they were dropped was that nobody in the design studio wanted to work on them and bridge the gap between their Rogue Trader and Epic incarnations, so they got dropped.
Isn't that basically the role the Tau eventually filled? Smaller numbers and less firepower than Guard, higher numbers and more firepower than Marines? I suppose squats might have had more close combat power, but I'm not too familiar with them so I wouldn't know. Makes sense for why Tau are getting their revised version as auxiliaries, if their addition to BFG is any indication of things to come; I'll go out on a limb and guess they'll be overpriced or ill-suited to their role, if that role is close combat, because that seems to be the general trend in codices: overprice and/or otherwise gimp anything that strays from the overarching strengths of the army, like the non-force multiplying coven units in the DE codex (and the force multipliers are only good as that, being mediocre or bad in every other way).
This actually makes me wonder what role Space Marines play aside from "poster-filler". They're... moderately resilient? Ignoring exploitable variants of their extraneously codices, they're not really any good at shooting, they're generally pretty terrible in close combat, the models are absurdly expensive both monetarily and points-wise, all they've got going for them is a slightly better armor save than is typical? Perhaps I have a bit of a skewed view on what constitutes "good" shooting or assault from playing DE...
After having read the letter you linked from Jervis Johnson on the subject of the squats demise, I would have to agree with the last bit and would love to see the squat figures working their way into fielded Imperial Guard armies. Higher gravity colonies making their troops a bit more, squat. >.<
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
This actually makes me wonder what role Space Marines play aside from "poster-filler". They're... moderately resilient? Ignoring exploitable variants of their extraneously codices, they're not really any good at shooting, they're generally pretty terrible in close combat, the models are absurdly expensive both monetarily and points-wise, all they've got going for them is a slightly better armor save than is typical? Perhaps I have a bit of a skewed view on what constitutes "good" shooting or assault from playing DE...
Mostly, they don't suck at anything. They're a pretty balanced army, with all rounded units. Nothing too specialized or too brilliant, but it works: it's hard to mess up completely. So they're quite a good army as a first approach, and being that they are the poster guys it works quite well in that sense.
Kanluwen wrote:If by "made a lot of sense" you mean "made no sense", then yes.
You're doing it again...
Nothing in my post said 'you can't have them'. It just implied that they were silly and made no sense as 40k switched from the 'silly' 40k to 'grimdark'
Anyways:
Squats weren't in our contract! They're an exception to the rule!
Well, way back in the day, I played against Squats as often as anything else. I watched them fight Orks, IG, SM, BA, Nids, Eldar (me), etc... they never won, but I can say that the guy who owned them loved his Dwarves in Space and had fun every time.
Personally I'd love to see them come back... and if they do come back under the Tau banner, it would be weird, but I hope they come back big enough to fight as an army unto it self (HQ, troops, etc).
wow the concept sounds so much like april fools joke.
Or you could say it like they are, Dwarves in space. And in a universe that has (Dark) Elves, Orcs, and Skellies in space, why should Dwarves be the April Fools joke??
wow the concept sounds so much like april fools joke.
Or you could say it like they are, Dwarves in space. And in a universe that has (Dark) Elves, Orcs, and Skellies in space, why should Dwarves be the April Fools joke??
Because, the "Dwarves" in space are tolerable for you because on a personal level you perceive them as such.
From my point of view , its different. I see , pointed aliens with long ears that looks quite cool and pretty , i see shaved gorillas painted green ,
wow the concept sounds so much like april fools joke.
Or you could say it like they are, Dwarves in space. And in a universe that has (Dark) Elves, Orcs, and Skellies in space, why should Dwarves be the April Fools joke??
Not to mention Vikings, vampires, and fish-people... Space dwarves sounds perfectly logical to me with all the other insane stuff going in the 41st millennium.
I guess that's fair enough. We have our personal tastes and that's totally good and acceptable. But if GW pulled out Squats completely because they are not cool or grim enough, is like saying that nobody is allowed to like them.
For a company, who does almost anything to increase sales, this is odd behaviour. I'm willing to believe that Squats were discontinued for copyright reasons. It seems to be the most plausible explanation.
Jani wrote:For a company, who does almost anything to increase sales, this is odd behaviour.
That's making the rather large assumption that including Squats past 2nd edition would have done anything significant to increase sales.
If the design studio couldn't find a clear direction for the army, pumping out a blah codex just to keep them in the game would not necessarily have done that. Better to drop them than waste time and money developing a codex and mini range for a sub-par army that isn't going to sell.
I'm willing to believe that Squats were discontinued for copyright reasons. It seems to be the most plausible explanation.
You can believe it all you want, but there is no evidence whatsoever that it's in any way true.
Twas hubris that laid the Squat low. The official story is they were eaten by tyranids, but that's to cover up the reality of another Chaos incursion by Slaanesh annihilating yet another over-proud space civilization. We still retain some records of their blinding arrogance.
Kanluwen wrote:Nothing in my post said 'you can't have them'. It just implied that they were silly and made no sense as 40k switched from the 'silly' 40k to 'grimdark'
Thereby implying via your unilateral declaration of inherent 'silliness' that they cannot be had, as they are 'silly' by your own definition, a definition that does not allow for any modification for the 'Squat' concept. This in turn is amusing because there are other races that have gone through revamps of their style and character (Orks and Dark Eldar being two fairly good examples), yet you seem to be of the opinion that the same method of transformation (be it via the Demiurge or whatever) cannot happen with the 'Squat' concept, and that brings us back to "you can't have them".
You don't have to use the words Kan. A simple declaration of opinion as if it were fact on your part is enough to satisfy the requirements for the KCoA (the Kan Scale of Allowing-ness).
Kanluwen wrote:Nothing in my post said 'you can't have them'. It just implied that they were silly and made no sense as 40k switched from the 'silly' 40k to 'grimdark'
Thereby implying via your unilateral declaration of inherent 'silliness' that they cannot be had, as they are 'silly' by your own definition, a definition that does not allow for any modification for the 'Squat' concept. This in turn is amusing because there are other races that have gone through revamps of their style and character (Orks and Dark Eldar being two fairly good examples), yet you seem to be of the opinion that the same method of transformation (be it via the Demiurge or whatever) cannot happen with the 'Squat' concept, and that brings us back to "you can't have them".
You really, really, really need to stop reading too much into my post.
And we're not talking about the Demiurg here. We're talking about Squats.
Demiurg, as it stands, are the 'revamped' Squats with a concept being brought more in line with 40k as it stands.
You don't have to use the words Kan. A simple declaration of opinion as if it were fact on your part is enough to satisfy the requirements for the KCoA (the Kan Scale of Allowing-ness).
God forbid someone not state their opinion on the internet!
Get off my back and go find someone else to bother.
insaniak wrote:It doesn't need to say that 2nd ed rules are invalid... they just don't work, as they were written for a completely different ruleset.
You could adapt them, certainly... but it would take a lot of re-writing and re-statting to bring it them in line with the current game.
Actually, restating them isn't that difficult. As I recall, they were: ws-4, bs-3, s-3, t-4, w-1, i-2, a-1, ld-9. That Initative of 2 would be a hell of an equalizer with most armies. (the actual statlines are burried somewhere in the Gallery, just too lazy to look them up.)
Weapons would be a mix of Guard and SM gear.
The only sticking point would be Save, though a 5 (mesh) or 4 (carapace) wouldn't be too far off. Exo suits could be equal to SM artificer armor, it wouldn't be much of a stretch.
Doing a major rewrite... yeah that would be rough. Tried that back when they were first "killed off" with some net friends..... it was ...... Ugly.
Consequently, it has to be said, in Epic squats were absolutely amazing. They had rock hard infantry and powerful, Titan-like superheavies such as;
Collossus with multiple battlecannons, doomsday cannons and attendant gyrocopter
Cyclops with a mounted Hellfury cannon - a huge starship weapon and Titan Killer
Overlord Airship
Goliath mega-cannon
They were a brilliant army to play. I seem to remember in an interview Jervis gave that the gulf between how 40k Squats worked (Very Badly) and how Epic Squats worked (Really Well) was large and partially lead to the decision to not re-do them for 40k.
ChocolateGork wrote:Tau are 6-7 years old now right?
Its always possible the demigurg could be the next race.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dawi-Marine'Va wrote:
ChocolateGork wrote:Are the squats still legal to use?
As long as you use GW models and have them be a counts-as army, they're still legal.
So you cant use 2nd ed rules ?
you would have to find someone willing to play with the 2nd ed rules, and a copy of the rule book, and a codex for your opponents army, and the squat codex.
thats the easy part.
now you gotta learn the rules.
unless you arn't overly attached to your hair, I wouldn't reccomend you use any vehicles. the damage charts and targeting mechanisims will rape your mind.
helgrenze wrote:Actually, restating them isn't that difficult. As I recall, they were: ws-4, bs-3, s-3, t-4, w-1, i-2, a-1, ld-9. That Initative of 2 would be a hell of an equalizer with most armies. (the actual statlines are burried somewhere in the Gallery, just too lazy to look them up.)
That's fine for the basic troops... but you need to revise pretty much everything else, as character and elite statlines were mostly revised downwards between 2nd ed and 3rd ed. And points costs were balanced around a 2000 point game that involved quite a few less models.
Kanluwen wrote:Get off my back and go find someone else to bother.
Samething can be said to you when you dictate to others what they can or cannot do.
Dont want to create a misunderstanding? easy , dont criticize about what others are allowed to have fun with or not.
Aslong as they arnt interpreting the rules wrong , why be so upright?
jeffersonian000 wrote:Remember Beastmen as an Imperial Guard unit? Or when Squats and Ratelings where common Guard units? Those were the days.
SJ
Hey they only did away with Beastmen with the latest edition of the Guard codex, and the death of chapter approved. =/
Beastmen were done away with awhile ago, not "the latest edition".
It's also worth noting that the Khornate Cult list in the Vraks books return Beastmen in there, and nothing's stopping you from using them as Conscripts or Penal Legion.
Kanluwen wrote:
Beastmen were done away with awhile ago, not "the latest edition".
It's also worth noting that the Khornate Cult list in the Vraks books return Beastmen in there, and nothing's stopping you from using them as Conscripts or Penal Legion.
Not exactly an IG list there Kan. These were loyalist beastmen. And that's like saying 'well, they removed the AC list, but you can build something like one if you don't mind having to take a squishy HQ and three squishy units because they're the only thing that counts for objectives now."
Something of a change of flavor there. Tossing Chapter approved (and the revisions to codex: IG) really irritated a lot of people that liked oddball lists.
And, BTW: beast men were done away with with the end of CHapter Approved: which means that, actually, yes, they were done away with in the latest edition. (Since they were in Chapter Approved's abhuman list for IG under 'Homo Sapiens Veritus')
This whole grimdark excuse is getting old its a load of B.S. one word......storyline....the storyline for several codex's/armybooks has changed drastically and sometines multiple times for many 40k and fantasy armies. Why didn't they just change the story. it is clear a stand alone army would do very well in the market....who said they have to be the empires best friends or even a goody goody race. grimdark excuse rubbish i say.
Kanluwen wrote:
Beastmen were done away with awhile ago, not "the latest edition".
It's also worth noting that the Khornate Cult list in the Vraks books return Beastmen in there, and nothing's stopping you from using them as Conscripts or Penal Legion.
Not exactly an IG list there Kan. These were loyalist beastmen. And that's like saying 'well, they removed the AC list, but you can build something like one if you don't mind having to take a squishy HQ and three squishy units because they're the only thing that counts for objectives now."
The Khornate Cult list is plenty acceptable as an IG list, Baron. If Space Wolves continually get used as a 'Betterized' Deathwing--it's fine to use a Khorne cult as loyalist Guard.
Something of a change of flavor there. Tossing Chapter approved (and the revisions to codex: IG) really irritated a lot of people that liked oddball lists.
And, BTW: beast men were done away with with the end of CHapter Approved: which means that, actually, yes, they were done away with in the latest edition. (Since they were in Chapter Approved's abhuman list for IG under 'Homo Sapiens Veritus')
I really hate to say it but good riddance to Chapter Approved. The ideas were good, but they were rarely executed well.
With that said: I lost my all Kasrkin(aka 3x Stormtrooper squads as Troops and 3x Stormtrooper Squads as Elites) list in the changeover from the doctrines book to the new one. You win some, you lose some. It sucks, but it's best to move on and try to either work up house rules for it or find a way to do 'counts as'.
Kanluwen wrote:
Beastmen were done away with awhile ago, not "the latest edition".
It's also worth noting that the Khornate Cult list in the Vraks books return Beastmen in there, and nothing's stopping you from using them as Conscripts or Penal Legion.
Not exactly an IG list there Kan. These were loyalist beastmen. And that's like saying 'well, they removed the AC list, but you can build something like one if you don't mind having to take a squishy HQ and three squishy units because they're the only thing that counts for objectives now."
The Khornate Cult list is plenty acceptable as an IG list, Baron. If Space Wolves continually get used as a 'Betterized' Deathwing--it's fine to use a Khorne cult as loyalist Guard.
Something of a change of flavor there. Tossing Chapter approved (and the revisions to codex: IG) really irritated a lot of people that liked oddball lists.
And, BTW: beast men were done away with with the end of CHapter Approved: which means that, actually, yes, they were done away with in the latest edition. (Since they were in Chapter Approved's abhuman list for IG under 'Homo Sapiens Veritus')
I really hate to say it but good riddance to Chapter Approved. The ideas were good, but they were rarely executed well.
With that said: I lost my all Kasrkin(aka 3x Stormtrooper squads as Troops and 3x Stormtrooper Squads as Elites) list in the changeover from the doctrines book to the new one. You win some, you lose some. It sucks, but it's best to move on and try to either work up house rules for it or find a way to do 'counts as'.
I agree, the "chapter approved" concept in 2nd ed didn't work.
Rune Stonegrinder wrote: Why didn't they just change the story.
We already covered that. They didn't 'just' change the story because they (supposedly) couldn't come up with an alternative that they liked enough to be worth the hassle.
Byte wrote:I agree, the "chapter approved" concept in 2nd ed didn't work.
I suspect you're getting 2nd and 3rd edition confused...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Worglock wrote:Using your (terribly shoddy) reasoning, there should never be another Speds Mahreenz codex. Ever.
It's not his terribly shoddy reasoning. It's the terribly shoddy reasoning given by one of the members of the design studio who was involved in the decision to drop them... and has no real bearing on the studio's current design philosophy.
Remeber Kids: Chapter Approved was terrible half-cocked rules that made no sense, but Mat "The Butcher of Belgrade" Ward does nothing but write the best rules and fluff ever*.
*If you don't agree with this, Mat "The Beast of Boston" Ward will use his giant psychic abilities to make Kanluwen travel through space and time to carve his initials INTO YOUR HEART.
insaniak wrote:It doesn't need to say that 2nd ed rules are invalid... they just don't work, as they were written for a completely different ruleset.
You could adapt them, certainly... but it would take a lot of re-writing and re-statting to bring it them in line with the current game.
Wha?! You could say the same baout various other codexes...
htj wrote:
ChocolateGork wrote:I'm not trying to be a douche but where about's does it say 2nd ed is invalid?
Might have difficulty with the M characteristic. Could be a bit of a drawback.
No it wouldnt. Accept that all movement for the various unit types (Ie Infantry, Cavalry, Walker) are the same as they are across the other codexes. Adapt those rules which are not represented or have been re-imagined.
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:Nothing in my post said 'you can't have them'. It just implied that they were silly and made no sense as 40k switched from the 'silly' 40k to 'grimdark'
Thereby implying via your unilateral declaration of inherent 'silliness' that they cannot be had, as they are 'silly' by your own definition, a definition that does not allow for any modification for the 'Squat' concept. This in turn is amusing because there are other races that have gone through revamps of their style and character (Orks and Dark Eldar being two fairly good examples), yet you seem to be of the opinion that the same method of transformation (be it via the Demiurge or whatever) cannot happen with the 'Squat' concept, and that brings us back to "you can't have them".
You don't have to use the words Kan. A simple declaration of opinion as if it were fact on your part is enough to satisfy the requirements for the KCoA (the Kan Scale of Allowing-ness).
Mr H, you forgot:
Eldar
Necrons
Space Marines
IG Tyranids
Have all been re-imagined since 2nd Ed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Worglock wrote:Remeber Kids: Chapter Approved was terrible half-cocked rules that made no sense, but Mat "The Butcher of Belgrade" Ward does nothing but write the best rules and fluff ever*.
*If you don't agree with this, Mat "The Beast of Boston" Ward will use his giant psychic abilities to make Kanluwen travel through space and time to carve his initials INTO YOUR HEART.
Nonsense, he will just re-write your favourite Codex...
AvatarForm wrote:Wha?! You could say the same baout various other codexes...
Er... yes? I would say the same about any of the 2nd edition codexes.
Anything written before 5th edition needs a certain amount of tweaking to fit the current rules, but from 3rd edition onwards the codexes were all designed for the same basic game, and with an ongoing design philosophy.
The key difference in that philosophy from 2nd edition being that characters and elite units were all less 'heroic'... Not as far above the regular troops, stat-wise. Marneus Calgar in his current incarnation has lower stats than a regular 2nd edition Marine Captain (but is a heck of a lot more expensive), and is more or less on par with a 2nd edition Imperial Guard Colonel. Hence the comment about needing to re-stat and re-point cost everything... just taking the 2nd edition Squat list and flinging it straight into 5th edition would result in a horribly unbalanced list by the standards of today's game.
ok, as one of the guys who simply loves count as armies... why not take a IG or SM army and turn it into squats? greenstuff beards are not that hard to make.
Worglock wrote:Remeber Kids: Chapter Approved was terrible half-cocked rules that made no sense, but Mat "The Butcher of Belgrade" Ward does nothing but write the best rules and fluff ever*.
Hey now. Hey. Hey. I said that Chapter Approved was full of good concepts--but the rules written were generally not good.
But that describes most of what Andy Chambers did, really. He was a good concept guy--but when it came to execution he was generally found wanting.
*If you don't agree with this, Mat "The Beast of Boston" Ward will use his giant psychic abilities to make Kanluwen travel through space and time to carve his initials INTO YOUR HEART.
...Not gonna lie, a GW sponsored psychadelic trip through space and time to rant against people who disagree with me?
Worglock wrote:Remeber Kids: Chapter Approved was terrible half-cocked rules that made no sense, but Mat "The Butcher of Belgrade" Ward does nothing but write the best rules and fluff ever*.
Hey now. Hey. Hey. I said that Chapter Approved was full of good concepts--but the rules written were generally not good.
But that describes most of what Andy Chambers did, really. He was a good concept guy--but when it came to execution he was generally found wanting.
Fun fact: Andy Chambers, former Ork Savant, could never defeat Squats, there were a couple of battle reports that proved this. Under his guidance, Third ed was crafted, in 3rd ed Squats were "eliminated"..... I don't believe in coincidence.
I don't really see why Squats needed to have a super distinctive "niche" .
Why is we can have 8 different variations on Space Marines, but we can't have short Imperial guard?
Squats were unique enough for me, and they were one of the few 2nd edition armies that felt really different to play. They didn't wet their pants and run away all the time like IG. They were also quite a competitive army because of all the points breaks they seemed to get for being slow (which was usually quite manageable).
Smacks wrote:I don't really see why Squats needed to have a super distinctive "niche" .
Why is we can have 8 different variations on Space Marines, but we can't have short Imperial guard?
We didn't have "8 variations on Space Marines" at that time.
Squats were unique enough for me, and they were one of the few 2nd edition armies that felt really different to play. They didn't wet their pants and run away all the time like IG. They were also quite a competitive army because of all the points breaks they seemed to get for being slow (which was usually quite manageable).
Like has been said: Squats on the tabletop for 40k were a mix of Marines and Guard, with no particular defining attributes.
In Epic, that was an entirely different story. But Epic was not the direction they wanted to go with Squats and thusly they got axed.
for me, space wolves are the perfect for making space dwarfs, there are a couple of big bearded ones, and lets be serious, those hammers space marines uses, are dwarf trade mark weapons.
Angels of Death wasn't one book, it was two codex books under one cover. It had two separate backgrounds, separate Special Characters, separate army lists, even separate colour pages. The only thing that was shared was some of the early fluff about the creation of marines, and the explanation for generic stuff like Rhinos (which was largely copypasta from Codex Ultramarines).
In any case 2nd edition wasn't really under fire, since it did have Squats in it. 3rd edition was where GW suddenly dropped a bridge on them.
In any case we ended up with lots of Marine Armies which weren't exactly a million miles from each other in terms of uniqueness.
Blue Marines
Red Marines
Green Marines
Black Marines
Wolf Marines
Silver Marines
Evil Marines
And of course lets not forget, Lady Marines.
And yet Squats aren't unique enough? I don't really see the logic in that.
Smacks wrote:In any case 2nd edition wasn't really under fire, since it did have Squats in it. 3rd edition was where GW suddenly dropped a bridge on them.
3rd is where they were finally officially removed... but 2nd edition was where the decision was actually made. They had a basic army list in the 'black codex' that came with the starter set, but had no models available throughout 2nd edition (other than leftovers that had been hanging around in stores since Rogue Trader) and never received a proper Codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
helgrenze wrote:As I recall the "evil Marines" were subdivided as well... basically:
sick marines
metal marines
blood marines
magic marines.....
They've always been a single codex. You just had options to create themed lists.
Smacks wrote:In any case 2nd edition wasn't really under fire, since it did have Squats in it. 3rd edition was where GW suddenly dropped a bridge on them.
3rd is where they were finally officially removed... but 2nd edition was where the decision was actually made. They had a basic army list in the 'black codex' that came with the starter set, but had no models available throughout 2nd edition (other than leftovers that had been hanging around in stores since Rogue Trader) and never received a proper Codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
helgrenze wrote:As I recall the "evil Marines" were subdivided as well... basically:
sick marines
metal marines
blood marines
magic marines.....
They've always been a single codex. You just had options to create themed lists.
By this line of logic, anything that didn't have a "proper Codex" dosn't count as being an actual army then. Thus any "themed" army, despite its outward look and play style is irrelevent.
So Khorne Berserkers, Thousand Sons, Plague Marines, Iron Warriors, and all are not "Real armies"?
helgrenze wrote:By this line of logic, anything that didn't have a "proper Codex" dosn't count as being an actual army then.
Only if you completely ignore the rest of my post.
The point wasn't just that Squats didn't have a proper codex. The point was that they weren't supported at all in 2nd edition aside from being included in the initial game release. They never received an actual codex because the decision was made to drop them instead of giving them a codex.
So Khorne Berserkers, Thousand Sons, Plague Marines, Iron Warriors, and all are not "Real armies"?
They were all options within the Chaos Space Marine army list. Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're getting at.
Feliw wrote:for me, space wolves are the perfect for making space dwarfs, there are a couple of big bearded ones, and lets be serious, those hammers space marines uses, are dwarf trade mark weapons.
What country is your flag? i cant help notice how cool it looks @_@
helgrenze wrote:By this line of logic, anything that didn't have a "proper Codex" dosn't count as being an actual army then.
Only if you completely ignore the rest of my post.
The point wasn't just that Squats didn't have a proper codex. The point was that they weren't supported at all in 2nd edition aside from being included in the initial game release. They never received an actual codex because the decision was made to drop them instead of giving them a codex.
So Khorne Berserkers, Thousand Sons, Plague Marines, Iron Warriors, and all are not "Real armies"?
They were all options within the Chaos Space Marine army list. Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're getting at.
The point is, that whether they had a seperate codex or not, there are maybe a dozen variations on "Space Marine" most of which come down to background or "fluff", and not really any true difference in the actual Basic elements of the army. Most of the "Space Marine" armies are nothing more than "options" and paint scheme.
and No, Squats didn't get a "proper codex" even though one was confirmed to be planned and was rumored to be "in the works". Even the "official" reasons suggest a lack of creativity more than a lack of interest.
Smacks wrote:In any case 2nd edition wasn't really under fire, since it did have Squats in it. 3rd edition was where GW suddenly dropped a bridge on them.
3rd is where they were finally officially removed... but 2nd edition was where the decision was actually made. They had a basic army list in the 'black codex' that came with the starter set, but had no models available throughout 2nd edition (other than leftovers that had been hanging around in stores since Rogue Trader) and never received a proper Codex.
Even Chaos had only a handful of RT models for most of 2nd edition. Until they finely got an overhaul about a year before the end, but now I'm digressing.
There is lots of overlapping of themes in 40k, and it doesn't cause a problem. The marine armies certainly overlap with each other, some of them even have almost identical niches. For example Raven Wing and White Scars both having the bike theme, Raven Guard and BA both having the jump pack assault theme. Yet they are all popular armies, all having models, rules and special characters out.
Then people turn around and say that Squats had to go because they are too similar to Space Wolves and the universe somehow isn't big enough? What really?
This argument doesn't make any sense to me. Even if Squats were similar to Space Wolves in character (which they weren't especially), that doesn't mean they had to go. I had Squat and Space Wolf armies during 2nd edition and didn't ever feel that either was redundant. Space Wolves can have the viking thing, I always saw squats more as Miners.
Grey Templar wrote:when 2nd was changed to 3rd the rule sets were so radically different that the squats became essentially unplayable.
2nd edition was a Fantesy in Space DnD-esk game.
3rd was more like the game we know today(a miniature battle)
The only thing that made Squats unplayable was not getting any rules. Also 2nd ed wasn't fantasy in space DnD-esque, Rogue Trader maybe. 2nd edition might not have been quite as simplified as 3rd edition, but it was otherwise identical in character and style to the modern game.
The Space Wolves = Squats arguement never made sense to me either.
Even in 2nd ed there were few, if any, similarities in the armies or play styles.
SW rarely used bikes, they were almost essential in a Squat army.
Squats could field heavy weapons as "troops", and had nearly no limit on how many they could field.
helgrenze wrote:The Space Wolves = Squats arguement never made sense to me either.
As I understand it, it was more down to looks than play style... By the time they came to redoing Squats, Space Wolves had already taken the 'Space Viking' motif.
SW rarely used bikes, they were almost essential in a Squat army.
...which contributed to their downfall, as the studio thought that the short Space Bikers motif made them more comical than they wanted them to be.
It's a short sighted approach, to be sure... surely they could have given them different, less comical looking vehicles if they wanted to go down that route. Although they were hampered somewhat by the technology of the time. Plastics weren't as widespread yet, and would have been pretty much required to make a viable vehicle-heavy army.
Smacks wrote:
Then people turn around and say that Squats had to go because they are too similar to Space Wolves and the universe somehow isn't big enough? What really?
This argument doesn't make any sense to me.
It shouldn't. Games Workshop isn't going to come out and say, "Yeah, look, this range of miniatures wasn't selling as well as we wanted, so, thanks for buying them, but we're removing support for them in order to try and make something that sells better."
GW's plethora of Space Marine codices has nothing at all to do with GW's love of expanding the game and providing variety and everything to do with their love of their customers' cash.
Yeah, with their wenching, and feasting, and riding wolves into battle... or were you talking about squats?
Both. The Vilka Fenrika do not do any wenching, both races I'm sure feast in equal amounts, and there are no wolves on Fenris... they ride mutant initiates.
A cursory examination has found one instance: the legend of Lukas the Trickster sharing a bed with a dozen women in one night, before "his elevation to the ranks of the Space Wolves."
Astartes are chemically sterile or flat out neutered. In any case, in the almost 20 years I've been in this hobby, I don't remember a single instance of an Astartes having anything remotely approaching a sex drive. In the HH novels, there are instances where an Astartes found a human female beautiful or pleasant to look at, but in the same sentence the very idea of intimacy or even attraction is outright rejected as impossible. Even the Noise Marines get their jollies off from massive explosions, wholesale slaughter and rendering people down into drugs, rather than any kind of "wenching".
A cursory examination has found one instance: the legend of Lukas the Trickster sharing a bed with a dozen women in one night, before "his elevation to the ranks of the Space Wolves."
Astartes are chemically sterile or flat out neutered. In any case, in the almost 20 years I've been in this hobby, I don't remember a single instance of an Astartes having anything remotely approaching a sex drive. In the HH novels, there are instances where an Astartes found a human female beautiful or pleasant to look at, but in the same sentence the very idea of intimacy or even attraction is outright rejected as impossible. Even the Noise Marines get their jollies off from massive explosions, wholesale slaughter and rendering people down into drugs, rather than any kind of "wenching".
Stop and think: Space Marines are recruited as prepubescents. How would he have bedded a dozen women in one night before implantation? I interpreted it to mean he did it before becoming a full battlebrother.
Also: Page 20 - Svengar the Red makes a pass at the ladies and discovers that they aren't human.
How about you follow your own advice? Space Wolves are NOT recruited as prepubescents, they recruit proven and hardy warriors (usually last survivors of some major battle or some such).
I can just see it now... whole Space Wolf squads being lost because they got drunk and hit the brothels the night before, and couldn't concentrate during battle due to that burning, itching sensation from a wicked case of Catachan Crabs they caught from that girl that could do that thing with her knees.
you have to take into account that, in a warrior society like Fenris has, you are a man at age 12-13.
you could easily be a proven warrior by the age of 14-16. still undergoing puberty(which seems to be the primary requirement. that the initiate still be in, or shortly before, puberty)
the Space Wolf geneseed also seems to be different from all other geneseed.
its only compatable with Fenrisians. which could explain older recruits being taken.
Omegus wrote:How about you follow your own advice? Space Wolves are NOT recruited as prepubescents, they recruit proven and hardy warriors (usually last survivors of some major battle or some such).
I can just see it now... whole Space Wolf squads being lost because they got drunk and hit the brothels the night before, and couldn't concentrate during battle due to that burning, itching sensation from a wicked case of Catachan Crabs they caught from that girl that could do that thing with her knees.
It's a case of contradicting fluff: Creation of a Space Marine and Codex: Space Marines insist that the subjects have to be prepubescents for the implants to work turning the subjects into Space Marines over several years, but Codex: Space Wolves has them drinking geneseed (HUH?) and turning into Astartes apparently almost instantly. But supposedly other then the canis helix, Space Wolf geneseed is similar to other chapters geneseed.
They don't have to be prepubescent, multiple chapters recruit more adult specimen (BA is another example). The younger the better, but the process can still work. Perhaps the older age of most applicants is partially responsible for all the mutated failures wandering the wastes of Fenris.
Oh, and if "a casual pass" is your best evidence, your argument is tenuous indeed. Space Wolves retain a lot of their memories and personality, and are described frequently in the codex and novels as having a pretty adolescent sense of humor.
Svengar: " Daaaeem girl, you got yoself some tig ol' bitties! I bet the mortal boys back on Fenris would love to show you what-what!"
*whole company roars appreciatively with laughter*
*"girl" turns around, revealing that the tig ol' bitties are actually pig ol' blasma cannons*
Svengar: "CREEEEEEEEEEEED!!!!!"
BaronIveagh wrote: Creation of a Space Marine and Codex: Space Marines insist that the subjects have to be prepubescents for the implants to work ...
No it doesn't. It just says they have to be young, before they become too mature to accept the implants.
Exactly what constitutes 'young' and 'too mature' are not explained.
Other fluff over the years has suggested that younger is generally better, with the process being more difficult the older the aspirant gets. Which would fit with the apparently high failure rate amongst Space Wolves.
And the drinking of the Canis Helix is just the first step in the process, and is stated to be unique to the Space Wolves... so no contradiction there. It simply prepares the way for the body to accept the rest of the process.
Omegus wrote:They don't have to be prepubescent, multiple chapters recruit more adult specimen (BA is another example). The younger the better, but the process can still work. Perhaps the older age of most applicants is partially responsible for all the mutated failures wandering the wastes of Fenris.
I don't have Codex: BA handy here to look at, but would not suggest using them as an example of "but *other chapter* can do it!' because, IIRC, didn't at one point in fluff they infuse a *gasp* woman with a tiny amount of their magic space vampire blood and give her some BA-like traits (absurd longevity, IIRC) in the process but not go all the way, in order to dodge the 'no female space marines' thing? Since the process the BA's use pretty much throws out the window the explanation of why there can't be such a thing?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote:
BaronIveagh wrote: Creation of a Space Marine and Codex: Space Marines insist that the subjects have to be prepubescents for the implants to work ...
No it doesn't. It just says they have to be young, before they become too mature to accept the implants.
Exactly what constitutes 'young' and 'too mature' are not explained.
Other fluff over the years has suggested that younger is generally better, with the process being more difficult the older the aspirant gets. Which would fit with the apparently high failure rate amongst Space Wolves.
And the drinking of the Canis Helix is just the first step in the process, and is stated to be unique to the Space Wolves... so no contradiction there. It simply prepares the way for the body to accept the rest of the process.
Initial Implantation of the phase 1 implants takes place between the ages of 10 and 12. An initiate receives training before joining the ranks as a full brother. A Marine usually joins the ranks between the ages of 16-18.
It's nice that some editions of the text actually put numbers on how old is too old, etc.
Don't know about this vampire space lady you're talking about, but White Scars are another chapter that recruit older initiates. Some editions may outline the specific ages, but those are guidelines for ideal circumstances.
And yes, this is off topic. The topic was that Space Marines can't get boners.
Omegus wrote:Don't know about this vampire space lady you're talking about, but White Scars are another chapter that recruit older initiates. Some editions may outline the specific ages, but those are guidelines for ideal circumstances.
As I said, it's a case of inconsistency in fluff, the most glaring example of which would be the BT, who in their codex, while they are structurally unique, they're actual implantation process is said to be similar to the Imperial Fists, who use the process outlined in Creation of a Space Marine (supposedly). And then you see them in Damnation Crusade selecting recruits that, if those are prepubescents, then Arnold Schwarzenegger hasn't reached puberty yet.
I just ignore the differences as Author Didn't Do the Research.
Grey Templar wrote:How did a Squat thread turn into another space marine junk discussion???
Oh, easy: Omegus insisted that SW can't go wenching, when their codex mentions it. His rebuttal to trot out the old song and dance about SM being impotent (which is different from Infertile, which fluff says they are) and mention section in Fulgrim where SM struggle with their sexuality and then sublimate it into violence (something that the Red Redemption also does without the benefits of being genetic supermen. In fact, come to think of it, in Warhammer 40k in general most sexuality seems to be immediately sublimated into violence by the characters. I suspect that GW is trying to steer clear of unacceptable sex by embracing acceptable violence where the authors can't gloss over it or simply imply that sex took place off camera. In a 40k in setting movie, they'd film decapitations in the same manner as cum shots in porn, IMHO)
Hah, so we're making this personal now? Fair enough, I'll be your huckleberry. Your one example of them wenching is extremely tenuous, and your dismissal of the authors is ignoring clearly established fluff. Space Wolves and others of their ilk have been recruiting proven warriors rather than children since their inception. - Personal attack removed by insaniak. Keep it civil. -
As for Fulgrim, sexuality comes up a total of three times in the whole novel: once where Bequa (a remembrancer) is trying to seduce Ostian (another remembrancer), once in a description of daemonettes, and again in the description of the rites of the Laer. Scribd and CTRL+F is your friend... or in this case, your enemy.
I always though the hive world fleet thing was sort of funny, since squats had a homeworld in the Armageddon sector...
But no 'nids ever showed up there!
On the OTHER topic, I'll open another thread so we can discuss it, and I recommend reading books over scanning through them with Cntl + f looking for the word 'sex'. You might find there's a little more to it then that.
BaronIveagh wrote:I always though the hive world fleet thing was sort of funny, since squats had a homeworld in the Armageddon sector...
But no 'nids ever showed up there!
On the OTHER topic, I'll open another thread so we can discuss it, and I recommend reading books over scanning through them with Cntl + f looking for the word 'sex'. You might find there's a little more to it then that.
it was Hive Fleet Jervis. they ate a civilization of Ninjas on the way into the galaxy.
BaronIveagh wrote:I always though the hive world fleet thing was sort of funny, since squats had a homeworld in the Armageddon sector...
But no 'nids ever showed up there!
On the OTHER topic, I'll open another thread so we can discuss it, and I recommend reading books over scanning through them with Cntl + f looking for the word 'sex'. You might find there's a little more to it then that.
Okay, not to bring up again an off-topic conversation in a thread that was silly to begin with, but I had used quite a few more keywords than "sex" in my original search, including "urge", "desire", "need", "want" and pretty much anything else that could remotely be construed sexually. Nothing relevant came up.
But yes, you're right that such a search does not compare to actually reading the book. Well, I'm about 85% through the book so far, and I see no evidence of what you're claiming. So unless they all start fething like bunnies in the last 20 pages or so, I'm calling bs on your whole argument. Considering you haven't created another thread, I'm going to assume that you finally realized you're incredibly, super-duper 1000% wrong.
I never really thought they were that well thought out in 40k and the few times I played against them they weren't very good. Epic however was another story, my friend had a squat army, they were pretty cool.
They were slow and eldar were fast. But the M characteristic was just too hard for people, much like hit modifiers, see GW's target market 10 year olds can't do math.
BaronIveagh wrote:I always though the hive world fleet thing was sort of funny, since squats had a homeworld in the Armageddon sector...
But no 'nids ever showed up there!
On the OTHER topic, I'll open another thread so we can discuss it, and I recommend reading books over scanning through them with Cntl + f looking for the word 'sex'. You might find there's a little more to it then that.
Okay, not to bring up again an off-topic conversation in a thread that was silly to begin with, but I had used quite a few more keywords than "sex" in my original search, including "urge", "desire", "need", "want" and pretty much anything else that could remotely be construed sexually. Nothing relevant came up.
But yes, you're right that such a search does not compare to actually reading the book. Well, I'm about 85% through the book so far, and I see no evidence of what you're claiming. So unless they all start fething like bunnies in the last 20 pages or so, I'm calling bs on your whole argument. Considering you haven't created another thread, I'm going to assume that you finally realized you're incredibly, super-duper 1000% wrong.
Several people talked about it briefly without really coming to a consensus, and then it more or less got dropped. And I didn't say they screwed like bunnies, I said they struggled with their sexuality. It's not always as blatant as a trashy romance novel.
to both the above points 
