It is my opinion that the Dark Angels desperately need either a new codex or a rules update. Their rules are currently extremely outmatched by other codexes, and this gives us the disadvantage in most battles(except against the Ultra Marines. An example of the comparison of our rules to another new codex is basically any new Space Marine codex. They all have new units, and even though those units are better than ours, they still cost less than some of our units that are terrible compared to them. Then we go to a different codex, the new Grey Knights. Now, before I say anything, I must admit that they have some pretty cool models( although the nemesis dread could use some getting rid of the servos). They have(YES!!) epic Terminators. Our Terminators are 43 points each, and do almost nothing special apart from having a pretty epic Company Master. Their Terminators( correct me if I am wrong here) are 46 points per model, but are a heluva lot better than ours. They can upgrade, for a few points,to paladins, becomIng epic tools of destruction. And let's not forget about their leader. Anyways, I think it's about time that we get a new Codex.

Do DA deserve a new codex? Yes.
Should DA get a new codex? No.
Should any SM chapter have their own dex? No.

That said, DA are going to be a very hard job for GW seeing as how the army has no real identity left. The bike and terminator theme is available to nearly every army now and that is all they have going for them.

Now granted a lot of the other books didn't have anything substantial going for them either before their 5th edition books, but is the status quo enough of a reason to continue releasing 6 marine books every edition when GW clearly can't manage a single update for every codex for every edition as it is?

We have DE have have just got one 3 editions and 10 years later.

We have Necrons, Tau, Sisters, BT, and DA that are all on the verge of missing 5th edition. Sisters missed out on 4th too. It's a safe bet that if they didn't spend 3/4 of their cycle time working on imperial forces, these books wouldn't go 5-10 years without an update.

all that said, I voted yes simply because if GW is going to update all of the others, DA deserver theirs too.

The deathwing portion of the book doesn't need any more updating. The ravenwing part probably could use it. The rest of the book desperately needs it.

No, they just need 3 or 4 characters made part of the Codex Space Marine characters.

DarknessEternal wrote:No, they just need 3 or 4 characters made part of the Codex Space Marine characters.

This, sorry DA players, i love your fluff (most of it anyway), but everything you can do, C:SM can do better (except Deathwing AFAIK, that needs to be an added feature).

Claiming that SS/Cyclone FNP scoring termies are somehow bad feels a tad overdone. Claiming that no variant Marine Codex should exist without backing it up with arguments is, while common, in complete contrast to how one should conduct in a constructive discussion.

Back on topic, I think it'd be for the best if neither the Templars nor the Angels got a new Codex before 6th hits. The FAQs are enough to let us get by without getting a new dex that would only get out of date after a short while anyway, much like the current DA dex. With the BT/DA FAQ and the incoming SoB WD update, I get the feeling that GW might actually be learning from Fantasy, updating armies to the new edition with FAQs and PDFs. In my opinion this is a good trend, as it'll, if done properly, prevent any army from ever being as far behind as the current Necron dex.

Honestly the Deathwing and Ravenwing could be very easily made into two special characters in the Space marine codex.


I would rather see a Space Marine codex with more special characters that are NOT Ultras.
Ultras should have at most 2 special characters, the rest should be other 1st founding chapters, like the Iron Hands.


Belial makes terminators and assault terminators troops and Terminators trade Combat Tactics for Fearless. He can take a special terminator command squad.

Sammy makes bikes troops and Bikes/Attack bikes trade combat tactics for Scouts. There already is a bike command squad, they gain scouts too.

DONE.

Everything else DA is represented just fine by the rest of the codex as the other 8 Companies (mostly) follow the codex.

To be completely serious, I think that I would probably be fine if they put the Dark Angels specials into the Marine codex. I only have a problem with the other chapters that have their own codexes when they are soooooooo much better. And I also believe that they should do some updating with the Ravenwing and possibly the Librarians and Company Masters. And yes, they need to have a more varied H.Q choice in the marine codex and not like 20 Ultrarines choices(thanks svendrex).

As an afterthought, is I allowed to combine my codex with the regular SM codex?

There has easily been at least 10 threads on this topic in the last month. Should they? Yes, of course, they've had codices for a long time now, people who play an out of date army can cry all they want, the fact of the matter is that they will get a new one.

Something you guys need to keep in mind when making the comment of special character swaps for the DA is that you could have done the same thing with all of the books before they got their 5th edition things.

Space Wolf HQ: Doesn't count as an HQ, tactical marines get +1 attack.

Blood Angels HQ: Assault Marines are jump infantry and Veterans count as jump infantry for no additional cost.

Black Templar HQ: 1-10 scouts may join a tactical squad.

You get the general idea. This is all the other books really had going for them before their 5th edition updates and if you're going to continue to see SW, BT, GK, etc then we should continue to see DA.

But hopefully we wont see anything but Codex Astartes in 6th.

Yeah, those suggestions totally wouldn't make a mockery of the differing modus operandi of different Chapters that even the CSM Codex would recoil from in disgust. /sarcasm

What did SW have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

What did BA have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

What did BT have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

Like I said, until recently, these armies didn't have enough to warrant their own books and they only got them because of 2nd edition. But if we're going to flesh out BA, BT, GK, and SW, then I would hope they'd flesh out DA too.

They either need a new 'dex, or some special characters in White Dwarf and a little paragraph saying 'these may be taken in a Codex: Space Marines army as HQ choices.'

It would also put something useful in White Dwarf.

I voted no. I love the fluff, but, as has been said, they're just another SM codex that leaves far more unique codexes *coughNecronscoughTaucough* even more outdated.

Nvs wrote:What did SW have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

0-1 Leman Russ Exterminator, Wolf Scouts, 0-4 HQs, HQ Dreads, army wide wacky rules, etc so on. Check out the codex.

What did BA have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

Black rage, Death Company, etc so on.

What did BT have in their 3rd edition codex that set them apart from CSM?

First LR Crusader, vows, neophytes, army wide wacky rules.

Like I said, until recently, these armies didn't have enough to warrant their own books and they only got them because of 2nd edition.

Umm. No. BA had 2nd, 3rd and 4th (WD) codexes. (3.5 codexes counting 5th)
SW had 2nd and 3rd codexes. (3 codexes counting 5th)
BT started in 3rd as their own list in Codex: Arma and then got a 4th Ed codex. (2 codexes)

But if we're going to flesh out BA, BT, GK, and SW, then I would hope they'd flesh out DA too.

Though to be fair, DA had 2nd, 3rd and 4th codexes. So DA is actually ahead of the game, since they've gotten three codexes and BT only have had two.

Can a mod just delete this or merge it with the thread 1 or 2 pages back? DA are eventually getting a new codex no matter what anyone wants, marine dexes simply make GW too much money for that not to happen. But this topic has been done to death with both sides just feeling annoyed afterward.

svendrex wrote:Honestly the Deathwing and Ravenwing could be very easily made into two special characters in the Space marine codex.


I would rather see a Space Marine codex with more special characters that are NOT Ultras.

You do realize that excluding Calgar(who in reality is a 'unique' character, no matter how you try to spin it)--the rest of the "Ultras characters" were, just like the Imperial Guard characters meant to be a framework for counts-as characters of your own design yeah?

You had Chronus, who could easily be any experienced tank commander.
You had Sicarius, who could easily be any experienced field commander.
You had Telion, who could easily be any experienced or legendary Scout.
and so on and so forth

Ultras should have at most 2 special characters, the rest should be other 1st founding chapters, like the Iron Hands.

The Iron Hands 'character' is supposed to be The Master of the Forge.

Since y'know, they don't really like individuality and all. That's not meant to be a cop-out, but it's pretty much something that's true. The Iron Hands, from all the fluff available on them right now, just do not like anyone to really be 'too different'. They find that 'The Flesh Is Weak' and are very much like the Mechanicus in that they get rid of identifying features early on.

Really, all the Iron Hands needed was a return of their ability to put Terminator Sergeants into standard Tactical Squads and thunderhammers, etc.

Belial makes terminators and assault terminators troops and Terminators trade Combat Tactics for Fearless. He can take a special terminator command squad.

Except the Deathwing as it stands are only given 5 man squads so they could have Fearless.

They're also disallowed Transports, which is another issue but eh.

Sammy makes bikes troops and Bikes/Attack bikes trade combat tactics for Scouts. There already is a bike command squad, they gain scouts too.

Sammael and Belial were a big mistake to actually name them. Now everyone thinks they're supposed to be one-shot characters, rather than the placeholders that they were meant to be.

Oh well. Everyone thinks they can "fix" DA by just putting them into C: SM. That's not the problem. The problem is a combination of things, addressing it in the next response.

DONE.

Everything else DA is represented just fine by the rest of the codex as the other 8 Companies (mostly) follow the codex.

No, they don't actually.
Every Company has a veteran contingent. There are veteran scouts. There are veteran devastators. There are veteran assaulters, there are veteran tacticals, et al.

There's a reason the Dark Angels codex didn't have "Veterans" but "Company Veterans". You don't 'ascend' to the First Company or Second Company because of veterancy, necessarily.

You do it because of trust. That's the whole reason all the "Inner Circle" characters had the 'Deathwing' trait in the previous book.

However, as has been mentioned:
The reason "everything else DA is represented just fine by the rest of the codex"?

Because the vanilla Codex was done after Dark Angels, and Dark Angels was meant to be them trying something 'new' for Space Marine armies. It did not carry through.

Okay let me just put it this way.

I would rather see the CSM book divided into 2 books to better represent the fighting style of all nine Traitor Legions than to have another loyalist marine book with new invented differences.
(essentially a God Specific Cult Marine book, and a Chaos Undivided Marines+Human Cultists book)

In a perfect world, I would not mind having both, but GW has limited time to work on stuff.



What I meant was I would like to see more special characters with unique Combat Tactics, rather than the kinda bland Ultra Characters. For example an Iron hands character that Trades Combat tactics for something that represents Bionics (limited FNP or an INV save maybe?)

I know that the ultras do not have to be painted blue, but I would rather have special characters that changed up the play style than just being an extra good Chaplain for a few more points.




Company veterans can be represented by the Command squad, Sternguard, and Vanguard units. Yes they do not have the correct name, but that is what I meant by "Represents"
Veteran scouts, can not be represented, but they were also taken out of the Space Marine and Blood Angel books.


To put it simply, the biggest difference that the DA have are the Deathwing and the Ravenwing, which could be represented by a special character and some Combat tactics.
Everything else is very close to the Standard Codex organization (not exactly, but close enough that you could still play a fluffy list)

Of course they could invent all kinds of new stuff to make the DA different, but again I would rather they took away a separate DA book so they could make 2 CSM books.

I vote no. Dark Angels would be SM Codex number 5 since 5th Edition. Time and resources would be better spent in a Tau, Necron, Ork, Eldar or Chaos Space Marines Codex. Frankly, even a Squat codex would be more welcome than Over-powered, fluff-ignoring, ridiculously-named Space Marines part 5.

TEMPERUS MAXIMUS wrote:I vote no. Dark Angels would be SM Codex number 5 since 5th Edition. Time and resources would be better spent in a Tau, Necron, Ork, Eldar or Chaos Space Marines Codex. Frankly, even a Squat codex would be more welcome than Over-powered, fluff-ignoring, ridiculously-named Space Marines part 5.

Want some cheese?

Orks are in a much better position than DA at the moment, the Necrons are up next and the Chaos Space Marines are still Marines. I won't even bother with the "OP" part as it is blatantly false.

yep

I don't know how his OP comment was 'blatantly false' while the 3 most recent marine books are all ranked among the top 5 books in power rankings by players.

And it needs to be said again, that DA deserve a book for the same reasons that SW, BT, BA, and GK did/do. None of them offered much of anything until they were redone. It's safe to assume DA could/would/should get the same treatment.

Do Dark Angels need a new Codex?
Yes

Do Dark Angels need a new Codex NOW?
Probably not. FAQ made me perfectly playable again until their time comes.

Nvs wrote:I don't know how his OP comment was 'blatantly false' while the 3 most recent marine books are all ranked among the top 5 books in power rankings by players.

Overpowered is not the same thing as powerful. The fact that 5 out of the 6 most recent books are the most highly ranked suggests that this isn't something unique to marine books, but rather that GW is learning how to make good rules for 5th edition.

As a Dark Angels player, I feel that while we would benefit from a new codex just so that our models are competitively priced compared to the newer Codices (the proper spelling for the plural of Codex btw), I don't think we need a new Codex anywhere near as badly as Chaos Space Marines (which I also play), Tau, Eldar and Necrons. I would like to see GW give more time to non-Imperial armies, especially since 6 of the 8 Codices they have updated for 5th edition have been Imperial armies. The FAQ went a long way towards making Dark Angels and Black Templar more competitive in the current edition and those players can ride the FAQs until they eventually get a new book.

Also, the arguments for a single Space Marine codex would remove nearly all individuality from the non Codex Astartes chapters and homogenize what should be a rich and varied feel to the armies, both in story and how they are played. There is a reason they aren't currently all wrapped up in the C:SM Codex and it should stay that way. Just because you can take Korsarro Khan and field a White Scars biker army does not make them a Ravenwing equivalent just as a Terminator Captain allowing Terminator Troops would not make them a Deathwing army. You can draw similar conclusions for Blood Angels, Black Templars and Space Wolves. In fact, ask a Space Wolf player how he would enjoy having his Codex options rolled into a single C:SM book, see how well that goes over.

Zweischneid wrote:Do Dark Angels need a new Codex?
Yes

Do Dark Angels need a new Codex NOW?
Probably not. FAQ made me perfectly playable again until their time comes.

This isn't true.
The FAQ made Deathwing and Ravenwing 'perfectly playable again until the time comes'.

But as has been stated repeatedly: Deathwing and Ravenwing are not necessarily the only 'unique' part that could be done with Dark Angels.

The problem is everyone just simply sees the kinds of threads out there regarding "The Green/Grey/Black and White/Red/Purple/Blue Space Marines" and jumps on the bandwagon.

With proper guidance and a little bit of elbow grease--Dark Angels can be made into something far more unique and interesting. They did not receive that when they were being redone. They were to be the glorious flagship launch of a revamped Space Marines line--but flopped on its face, because some of the design team didn't like it afterwards.

And quite frankly the constant saying of "I'd rather see the CSM book divided into 2 books to 'better represent the fighting style of all 9 Traitor Legions'." is a logical fallacy.

Two books would not cover the "fighting styles of all 9 Traitor Legions". It can, to be perfectly blunt, be done in one. Do you know why?
Because their fighting styles are not all that different. The only things that really separate the Alpha Legion from the Word Bearers is the methodology of their infiltrations.
The only thing that separates the Night Lords from the Iron Warriors is that they don't field artillery, but instead rely upon orbital assets and sabotage for their sieges.
The differences between the Black Legion and Red Corsairs are practically nonexistent as well. They both are forces where literally anything and everything within the scope and breadth of the forces of Chaos can be found. Traitor Guard, cultists, daemons, Cult troops, et al.

The list goes on and on. But yet, what would make them work for "2 or more books"?
Fluff and fleshing them out.

Which is exactly what Dark Angels needed, but did not get.

What sort of unique things would the Dark Angels have? Honest questions here, not being a jerk.


Unique Psy-powers.

Interrogator Chaplains (How are they different on the tabletop from normal chaplains?)

Mortis Dreads (Dreads with 2 shooting arms, like the 2x Auto cannon dread that everyone loves)

Extra Plasma stuff?

Company veterans (Again, how would they be different on the table top from Vanguard and Sterguard)

Fleet Based Chapter (extra Skimmers or Orbital assault rules, but if everyone gets the Storm Raven, then that might cover this role)

Would normal DA marines have some special rule to represent their hunt for the fallen? What could that rule be? (Preferred Enemy: Chaos Space Marines or something else)


Is there anything else in the DA fluff already that makes them different?
What sort of stuff would fit their theme to make them more different?

We need Belial and Azrael added as special characters in the next marine codex that let you take termies and bikes as troops respectively.

Oh my, did I just condense most of the Dark Angels' original flair into two character entries on a sheet of A4? Yeah, I did...

Henners91 wrote:We need Belial and Azrael added as special characters in the next marine codex that let you take termies and bikes as troops respectively.

Oh my, did I just condense most of the Dark Angels' original flair into two character entries on a sheet of A4? Yeah, I did...

Well you forgot that its Sammael who is the Master of the Ravenwing......

svendrex wrote:What sort of unique things would the Dark Angels have? Honest questions here, not being a jerk.


Unique Psy-powers.

Interrogator Chaplains (How are they different on the tabletop from normal chaplains?)

Mortis Dreads (Dreads with 2 shooting arms, like the 2x Auto cannon dread that everyone loves)

Extra Plasma stuff?

Company veterans (Again, how would they be different on the table top from Vanguard and Sterguard)

Fleet Based Chapter (extra Skimmers or Orbital assault rules, but if everyone gets the Storm Raven, then that might cover this role)

Would normal DA marines have some special rule to represent their hunt for the fallen? What could that rule be? (Preferred Enemy: Chaos Space Marines or something else)


Is there anything else in the DA fluff already that makes them different?
What sort of stuff would fit their theme to make them more different?

I've given ideas before, pages worth of them in fact. Things like making them the "artifact" book, where you can field repeater plasma guns on Terminator heavy weapon mounts, Dreadnoughts as leaders for Deathwing squads, etc. There's a lot that can be done--the problem is simply DOING IT. If it's done in a fairly good way, the book can effectively become a home for 'counts as' Iron Hands, Heresy/Crusade era forces, et al.

And by the by, despite being a fleet based Chapter and well-known for precision strikes and having pinpoint accuracy for their bombardments...they have not a single character with Orbital Bombardments within the book. And for some stupid reason, Azrael Master of the bloody Unforgiven Chapters, as in every single one of the Dark Angels Successors as well as the Dark Angels themselves answer to him, cannot take Deathwing Terminators as troops. Despite him clearly being the head of the Deathwing Order and Inner Circle both.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Henners91 wrote:We need Abaddon and Kharn added as special characters in the next marine codex that let you take CCWs and Terminators with combiweapons as troops respectively.

Oh my, did I just condense most of the Chaos Book's original flair into two character entries on a sheet of A4? Yeah, I did...

Fixed.

Kanluwen wrote:

The problem is everyone just simply sees the kinds of threads out there regarding "The Green/Grey/Black and White/Red/Purple/Blue Space Marines" and jumps on the bandwagon.

With proper guidance and a little bit of elbow grease--Dark Angels can be made into something far more unique and interesting. They did not receive that when they were being redone. They were to be the glorious flagship launch of a revamped Space Marines line--but flopped on its face, because some of the design team didn't like it afterwards.

People don't "jump on the bandwagon", people hate the massive over representation of one of the smallest (fluffwise) factions in the game. Every marine codex has exactly the same core units and statline. Saying they could be especially unique is simply saying "they could be the biker/stealthy/angry marines". Reading your last comment, all I saw was more plasma guns and dreadnought sergeants. It doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Kinda agree Troll, but if they are made unique, then they should be, IMO they arent unique atm and as such shouldnt have a new codex. So long as they are made different, then full steam ahead as it were.
Although you have just tried to justify the Hrud as being a faction 'large enough' to be called one (when they are far less well known/ encountered/ of them than Marines.

TrollPie wrote:t doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Except BA don't play the same as GK who don't play the same as SW who don't play the same as CSM.

Revenent Reiko wrote:
Although you have just tried to justify the Hrud as being a faction 'large enough' to be called one (when they are far less well known/ encountered/ of them than Marines.

There's certainly more than a million of them, and each one is pretty deadly-very difficult to spot, and living in close proximity to one can cause you to age decades in the space of a few months. (source: Lexicanum)

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

TrollPie wrote:t doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Except BA don't play the same as GK who don't play the same as SW who don't play the same as CSM.

But they do play the same as space marines with assault marines as troops.
They do play the same as space marines with psychic powers.
They do play the same as space marines with all heavy slots taken up by devestators.

The only thing that we know for certain is:

1.) This game doesn't need more than one space marine book because a single book with FOC swaps can mirror the same thing the older (non-5th) SM books offered.
2.) Other armies are suffering with the over-representation of marines because they go multiple editions without a codex update.
3.) That if DA were given the same attention as BA, SW, or GK they'd be just as diverse as BA, SW, or GK are now in their new book.
4.) DA are going to get their own book simply because they were given one in the past which is the only reason BA, SW, GK, and possibly BT were updated.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

TrollPie wrote:t doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Except BA don't play the same as GK who don't play the same as SW who don't play the same as CSM.

Except each relies on mostly mid-range shooting with varying emphasis on assault, have exactly the same basic statline and exactly the same core units. Contantly playing dreads, termies, razors & vindis in different combinations with mounds of 3+ armour gets really boring. Besides, you could get much more variety with IG, Daemons etc where you have hundreds of planets/minor Gods each with less standardised equipment and unique units that aren't "vanilla unit +1!!!1!"

TrollPie wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
Although you have just tried to justify the Hrud as being a faction 'large enough' to be called one (when they are far less well known/ encountered/ of them than Marines.

There's certainly more than a million of them, and each one is pretty deadly-very difficult to spot, and living in close proximity to one can cause you to age decades in the space of a few months. (source: Lexicanum)

Well it actually says 'premature aging' but OK.
There is no mention of numbers (apart from stating that they were 'all but wiped out', and now 'widely infest certain areas of the Galaxy', again no mention of numbers), i am not saying there arent more than a million (or the 1-2 mil that has recently been discussed), but theres no definitive answer.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nvs wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

TrollPie wrote:t doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Except BA don't play the same as GK who don't play the same as SW who don't play the same as CSM.

But they do play the same as space marines with assault marines as troops.
They do play the same as space marines with psychic powers.
They do play the same as space marines with all heavy slots taken up by devestators.

APart from all their unique rules and units you mean?

The only thing that we know for certain is:

1.) This game doesn't need more than one space marine book because a single book with FOC swaps can mirror the same thing the older (non-5th) SM books offered.
2.) Other armies are suffering with the over-representation of marines because they go multiple editions without a codex update.

True, no question, but thats not really an answer. The SMs are the Poster boys of 40k, they will always be garnished with attention. Its a shame the other races arent as well granted.

3.) That if DA were given the same attention as BA, SW, or GK they'd be just as diverse as BA, SW, or GK are now in their new book.

But you just said they arent diverse

4.) DA are going to get their own book simply because they were given one in the past which is the only reason BA, SW, GK, and possibly BT were updated.

As above. They are all totally different to Codex Marines, thats kinda the point.

I've said from the very beginning in this thread and many of the others that I hate the idea of 6 different marine books, that I think this game is harmed/hindered by it and players pay the price.

But I've also always said from the very beginning in this thread and many others that the only reason DA don't have anything unique is because their codex is so old and that none of the other books offered anything to warrant their own books until very recently (5th SW book). And that if DA get the same attention as the others, as they no doubt will (and arguably should), they'll be one of the most unique SM codex available.

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

TrollPie wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

TrollPie wrote:t doesn't matter how many things like that you can come up with, they'll still have essentially the same playing style as every other marine faction+plasma. Meanwhile literally dozens of far more unique, interesting codices could be made out of IG forces alone, not to mention things like Hrud and other small factions that could be awesome.

Except BA don't play the same as GK who don't play the same as SW who don't play the same as CSM.

Except each relies on mostly mid-range shooting with varying emphasis on assault, have exactly the same basic statline and exactly the same core units. Constantly playing dreads, termies, razors & vindis in different combinations with mounds of 3+ armour gets really boring.

Here's an idea then: complain to your group, not us. Introducing the problem to your group will help you find a solution. We, as the Internet, cannot solve your dilemma.

Besides, you could get much more variety with IG, Daemons etc where you have hundreds of planets/minor Gods each with less standardised equipment and unique units that aren't "vanilla unit +1!!!1!"

There's not really such a thing as "minor Gods" in 40k. There's just various Daemons who've ascended to a level where one might consider them as "minor gods".

And you're not going to get "much more variety with IG", simply because the equipment is in fact, standardized . Autoguns have roughly the same penetrative power as lasguns, just like a local variant of the battlecannon on a Leman Russ is going to be using the same stats as a normal Leman Russ.
At best, what you're going to get is "Flying Guard", "Walker Guard", "Tank Guard", and "APC Guard". And then we'll hear the exact same complaints, just swapping Valkyries/Vendettas for Razorbacks/Vindicators et al.

By the by, Hrud as an "army idea" is worse than the Jokaero getting a full list of their own. The Hrud aren't fighters. They aren't really anything except simply existing and scavengers.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

But company veterans are NOT stern/vanguard. They exist PER company instead of being first company only. In fact, since the first company is Deathwing, DA don't have anything like stern/vanguard. Kan pretty much already mentioned this.

Which would be a problem with blanket special characters. Allowing a special character in C:SM to take terminators as troops does not in any way represent the real Deathwing (no sg/vg) without having a bunch of rules like "But with this character you may not field etc."

CrazyThang wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

But company veterans are NOT stern/vanguard. They exist PER company instead of being first company only. In fact, since the first company is Deathwing, DA don't have anything like stern/vanguard. Kan pretty much already mentioned this.

I am well aware of this, but the introduction of Sternguard and Vanguard pretty much rules out the need for Company Veterans IMO. What do the Company Veterans do that isnt covered by one or the other?
Yeah maybe the DA can keep their 'normal' Veterans and that can be unique for them, but how in any way does this change what company they are from?

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

CrazyThang wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

But company veterans are NOT stern/vanguard. They exist PER company instead of being first company only. In fact, since the first company is Deathwing, DA don't have anything like stern/vanguard. Kan pretty much already mentioned this.

I am well aware of this, but the introduction of Sternguard and Vanguard pretty much rules out the need for Company Veterans IMO. What do the Company Veterans do that isnt covered by one or the other?
Yeah maybe the DA can keep their 'normal' Veterans and that can be unique for them, but how in any way does this change what company they are from?

Not sure I understand. DA literally do not have stern/vanguard. That and the fact that stern/vanguard are 1st company only and company veterans exist in every company.

I actually think I see. You are saying you could still take stern/vanguard and just call them veterans, yes?

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

I know, well that and Honour Guard, Sanguinary Priests and.. something else i cant remember, damn!

BUt then DA only have Deathwing, Ravenwing and Company Veterans...

Revenent Reiko wrote:

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Company Veterans are not covered by Sternguard and Vanguard.

The Deathwing is an Inner Circle, entirely sworn to the task of eradicating the Fallen and purging the slight upon the Dark Angels' honor. They're also not ascended to the position simply by dint of experience. They're ascended to the position by dint of trust.

The Ravenwing is, for all intents and purposes, the Dark Angels' Scout Company. Unlike other Chapters where Land Speeders, Bikes, etc are all part of individual Companies--the Ravenwing has them all grouped into a single formation that can be deployed at once. They're also, again, not simply given the position because of experience. They're given it because they're trusted enough to actively seek out a corrupting and insulting force upon the Dark Angels' honor.

This alone is not the only "divergence".

Company Veterans are COMPANY VETERANS. They are not veterans from the First Company doled out as necessary to Companies going to war. They are a cadre of veterans, permanently within the Company, who help train and indoctrinate their fellow brothers into the mysteries of the Dark Angels' Inner Circle. Many of these Company Veterans have been at one point or another within the Deathwing or Ravenwing and are highly trusted individuals.

If the Space Wolves can be considered 'unique' because of the "Wolf Guard", then I'd say the Company Veterans are a FAR FAR more interesting version of veterans.
The Dark Angels are also one of the few Chapters where Librarians regularly lead forces, or where ostensibly the Master of Recruits can outrank a Captain due to the Master of Recruits being higher within the Inner Circle. Seeing a "Scout-Captain" and being able to field a shooty hero who would be y'know...unique.

I could go on, but I'd be getting into theorizing off mentions of small things within recent books and dropped hints.

Kanluwen wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

And I'd certainly rank DA at the very top next to space wolves as being the most divergent chapter and warranting their own book. Certainly more than BA or BT. GK I've never liked so won't get into it.

Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Company Veterans are not covered by Sternguard and Vanguard.

The Deathwing is an Inner Circle, entirely sworn to the task of eradicating the Fallen and purging the slight upon the Dark Angels' honor. They're also not ascended to the position simply by dint of experience. They're ascended to the position by dint of trust.

The Ravenwing is, for all intents and purposes, the Dark Angels' Scout Company. Unlike other Chapters where Land Speeders, Bikes, etc are all part of individual Companies--the Ravenwing has them all grouped into a single formation that can be deployed at once. They're also, again, not simply given the position because of experience. They're given it because they're trusted enough to actively seek out a corrupting and insulting force upon the Dark Angels' honor.

This alone is not the only "divergence".

Company Veterans are COMPANY VETERANS. They are not veterans from the First Company doled out as necessary to Companies going to war. They are a cadre of veterans, permanently within the Company, who help train and indoctrinate their fellow brothers into the mysteries of the Dark Angels' Inner Circle. Many of these Company Veterans have been at one point or another within the Deathwing or Ravenwing and are highly trusted individuals.

I know all this Kan, and im not disputing it.

If the Space Wolves can be considered 'unique' because of the "Wolf Guard", then I'd say the Company Veterans are a FAR FAR more interesting version of veterans.
The Dark Angels are also one of the few Chapters where Librarians regularly lead forces, or where ostensibly the Master of Recruits can outrank a Captain due to the Master of Recruits being higher within the Inner Circle. Seeing a "Scout-Captain" and being able to field a shooty hero who would be y'know...unique.

This i didnt know, thanks

I could go on, but I'd be getting into theorizing off mentions of small things within recent books and dropped hints.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

I know, well that and Honour Guard, Sanguinary Priests and.. something else i cant remember, damn!

BUt then DA only have Deathwing, Ravenwing and Company Veterans...

Which still fundamentally changes how the chapter works in terms of what you can take. Just like BTs mixing neophytes and initiates, just like SWs taking terminators as sergeants, just like... I don't know much about the newest BA 'dex actually.

EDIT:

Kan is giving far more information that I >.< I should have mentioned the trust as opposed to pure veterancy as well.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

I know, well that and Honour Guard, Sanguinary Priests and.. something else i cant remember, damn!

BUt then DA only have Deathwing, Ravenwing and Company Veterans...

Honor guard were a Command squad with jump packs, Sanguinary priests were Apothecaries. I forgot they also had the Baal. But ALL of those were added in 3rd to justify them getting their own book.

I didn't count the Company Vets when I stated that because, unlike the BA, the DA had no units added to give them a codex in 3rd. Everything in their 3rd ed book was simply taken from their 2nd ed book. GW literally had to pull out new things to make BA different enough for a new book, they didn't for DA.

CrazyThang wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

I know, well that and Honour Guard, Sanguinary Priests and.. something else i cant remember, damn!

BUt then DA only have Deathwing, Ravenwing and Company Veterans...

Which still fundamentally changes how the chapter works in terms of what you can take. Just like BTs mixing neophytes and initiates, just like SWs taking terminators as sergeants, just like... I don't know much about the newest BA 'dex actually.

I know it does, i already said ages ago that they need their Characters to allow the DW and RW to be taken as Troops or something (ie changing what you can take etc.)


I actually want some ideas from people for how to make them unique as a 'Dex, because right now i cant justify it in my own mind (yeah fair enough im nothing whatsoever to do with GW's Codex writing team but still )

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:Really, how come?
Since other than the Deathwing and Ravenwing, they are a Codex Chapter (please correct me if im wrong, and i dont mean Company Veterans btw, they are covered by Sternguard and VV)...

Honestly, until the 4th ed WD list, the only thing that differentiated BA from Codex Chapters was Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, and Vets with Jump Packs(and that was only intro'd in 3rd). It wasn't until relatively recently that they became more divergent than Dark Angels with regards to unique units and organization.

I know, well that and Honour Guard, Sanguinary Priests and.. something else i cant remember, damn!

BUt then DA only have Deathwing, Ravenwing and Company Veterans...

Honor guard were a Command squad with jump packs, Sanguinary priests were Apothecaries. I forgot they also had the Baal. But ALL of those were added in 3rd to justify them getting their own book.

I didn't count the Company Vets when I stated that because, unlike the BA, the DA had no units added to give them a codex in 3rd. Everything in their 3rd ed book was simply taken from their 2nd ed book. GW literally had to pull out new things to make BA different enough for a new book, they didn't for DA.

And 4th added Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikes, Librarians with different powers than vanilla marines, and interrogator chaplains. Not to mention the lack of some C:SM options.

Ahhh the Baal,thats what i forgot. Thank You Platuan4th!

Revenent Reiko wrote:
I know it does, i already said ages ago that they need their Characters to allow the DW and RW to be taken as Troops or something (ie changing what you can take etc.)


I actually want some ideas from people for how to make them unique as a 'Dex, because right now i cant justify it in my own mind (yeah fair enough im nothing whatsoever to do with GW's Codex writing team but still )

But taking them as troops doesn't a Deathwing make.

Kanluwen wrote:
Here's an idea then: complain to your group, not us. Introducing the problem to your group will help you find a solution. We, as the Internet, cannot solve your dilemma.

It's not quite as simple as your local group. People who have an SM army can have difficulty finding games if everyone is tired of playing them, and people aren't exactly willing to invest hundreds of pounds on a new army, or using an army they don't play anymore due to being outdated/boring to them if they're told the group needs more variety. In tournies or events, where you have little control over who you play, the experience is a whole lot worse when you're constantly hopping from playing marines 1 to marines 2.

Besides, you could get much more variety with IG, Daemons etc where you have hundreds of planets/minor Gods each with less standardised equipment and unique units that aren't "vanilla unit +1!!!1!"

There's not really such a thing as "minor Gods" in 40k. There's just various Daemons who've ascended to a level where one might consider them as "minor gods".

And you're not going to get "much more variety with IG", simply because the equipment is in fact, standardized . Autoguns have roughly the same penetrative power as lasguns, just like a local variant of the battlecannon on a Leman Russ is going to be using the same stats as a normal Leman Russ.
At best, what you're going to get is "Flying Guard", "Walker Guard", "Tank Guard", and "APC Guard". And then we'll hear the exact same complaints, just swapping Valkyries/Vendettas for Razorbacks/Vindicators et al.

I was just using them as an example to explain how other factions could have as much or more variety than SM variants if they got mini-dexes, without being drastically over represented when compared with their size in the fluff.

By the by, Hrud as an "army idea" is worse than the Jokaero getting a full list of their own. The Hrud aren't fighters. They aren't really anything except simply existing and scavengers.

Again, I'm simply using an example of a minor alien race that could be given a completely unique codex, if GW decided not to use an already overrused faction for a new army idea.

Revenent Reiko wrote:I actually want some ideas from people for how to make them unique as a 'Dex, because right now i cant justify it in my own mind (yeah fair enough im nothing whatsoever to do with GW's Codex writing team but still )

Ah, ok.

Taking cues from GW's past:

A new type of HQ(Kan's Scout-Captain fills that nicely)

Mortis Dreads(and not just Riflemen, I mean ALL variants)

Put in the Land Speeder Tempest as a new Fast Attack 'Flyer' for Ravenwing

A new Land Raider variant designed for the Death Wing, maybe even one designed for dedicated long range anti-tank

Give the DW the Plasmablaster as a heavy choice

Elite slots Librarians(like BA Chappies and Sanguinary Priests)

CrazyThang wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
I know it does, i already said ages ago that they need their Characters to allow the DW and RW to be taken as Troops or something (ie changing what you can take etc.)


I actually want some ideas from people for how to make them unique as a 'Dex, because right now i cant justify it in my own mind (yeah fair enough im nothing whatsoever to do with GW's Codex writing team but still )

But taking them as troops doesn't a Deathwing make.

True, but i did say 'or something'. As it stands, what else makes up the Deathwing then? (in fluff if not in game)

CrazyThang wrote:

And 4th added Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikes, Librarians with different powers than vanilla marines, and interrogator chaplains. Not to mention the lack of some C:SM options.

Umm, no, it didn't. The 2nd ed book had Ravenwing bikes, Interrogator Chaplain, and Deathwing Terminators. They even had different rules than the Blood Angels versions that were in the SAME BOOK.

As for the different powers than Codex Marines, every variant chapter in 3rd ed with Librarians had different powers(Salamanders had Fury of the Ancients, DA had Weaken Resolve, Blood Angels had Quickening).

Stop arguing something you apparently know nothing about.

I've always been a fan of allowing Deathwing squads to actually take a low level character in lieu of a Sergeant.

Something like a Librarian with a single, 'minor' power or a Deathwing 'Champion'.

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:I actually want some ideas from people for how to make them unique as a 'Dex, because right now i cant justify it in my own mind (yeah fair enough im nothing whatsoever to do with GW's Codex writing team but still )

Ah, ok.

Taking cues from GW's past:

A new type of HQ(Kan's Scout-Captain fills that nicely)

Mortis Dreads(and not just Riflemen, I mean ALL variants)

Put in the Land Speeder Tempest as a new Fast Attack 'Flyer' for Ravenwing

Yes to all of the above.
The Mortis Dread if nothing else should really be improved upon for the DA (having all the options i mean)

A new Land Raider variant designed for the Death Wing, maybe even one designed for dedicated long range anti-tank

LR Ultra? (sp?)or the Godhammer surely both fulfill this role?
But they should be allowed to take them yes. (im right in thinking they cant right now yes?)

Give the DW the Plasmablaster as a heavy choice

Elite slots Librarians(like BA Chappies and Sanguinary Priests)

Yes to both again.
Thanks for the ideas

Platuan4th wrote:

CrazyThang wrote:

And 4th added Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikes, Librarians with different powers than vanilla marines, and interrogator chaplains. Not to mention the lack of some C:SM options.

Umm, no, it didn't. The 2nd ed book had Ravenwing bikes, Interrogator Chaplain, and Deathwing Terminators. They even had different rules than the Blood Angels version that were in the SAME BOOK.

In that case, that supports my argument even better (having already had unique stuff).

The Deathwing in fluff.

As Kan mentioned, simply being a veteran does not get you into the Deathwing. You must be a HIGHLY trusted brother, as to join the Deathwing is to learn the truth of Luther, the betrayal of their chapter, and the hunt for the fallen.

The Deathwing also fight exclusively in terminator armor. All venerable dreadnoughts are in the Deathwing (please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm almost 100% sure I read that >.< ). I'm actually not sure about Land Raiders and how they fit in.

They do not have the normal structure of a first company. They are 20 5 man terminator squads with Belial and his command squad (apoth, standard bearer, and interrogator chaplain) at its head.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Platuan4th wrote:

CrazyThang wrote:

And 4th added Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikes, Librarians with different powers than vanilla marines, and interrogator chaplains. Not to mention the lack of some C:SM options.

Umm, no, it didn't. The 2nd ed book had Ravenwing bikes, Interrogator Chaplain, and Deathwing Terminators. They even had different rules than the Blood Angels versions that were in the SAME BOOK.

As for the different powers than Codex Marines, every variant chapter in 3rd ed with Librarians had different powers(Salamanders had Fury of the Ancients, DA had Weaken Resolve, Blood Angels had Quickening).

Stop arguing something you apparently know nothing about.

Really? Oh no I didn't play in 2nd edition. Sue me.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

A new Land Raider variant designed for the Death Wing, maybe even one designed for dedicated long range anti-tank

LR Ultra? (sp?)or the Godhammer surely both fulfill this role?
But they should be allowed to take them yes. (im right in thinking they cant right now yes?)

They can take the Ultra in Apoc and the standard Land Raider(I assume that's the Godhammer, which is actually what pattern the Lascannons are, not the Raider). I wouldn't call the standard dedicated as it's a very confused tank.

I mean more like a light version of the Ultra: no transport with a 3rd twin-linked AT gun(either lascannon or like a Helios with an AT/AA Hyperios Launcher instead of the Whirlwind launcher).

Actually, the 5 man Terminator squad thing is new. It used be that they were 10 10-man Terminator Squads with the Master of the Deathwing assigning himself a bodyguard from it as he chose.

Platuan4th wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

A new Land Raider variant designed for the Death Wing, maybe even one designed for dedicated long range anti-tank

LR Ultra? (sp?)or the Godhammer surely both fulfill this role?
But they should be allowed to take them yes. (im right in thinking they cant right now yes?)

They can take the Ultra in Apoc and the standard Land Raider(I assume that's the Godhammer, which is actually what pattern the Lascannons are, not the Raider). I wouldn't call the standard dedicated as it's a very confused tank.

I mean more like a light version of the Ultra: no transport with a 3rd twin-linked AT gun(either lascannon or like a Helios with an AT/AA Hyperios Launcher instead of the Whirlwind launcher).

Forgot the Ultra was Apoc only
(i know the Godhammer is the Lascannons, i just use that for ease of reference to the 'standard' LR in comparison to the others )
Agree its a bit confused, and a true AT LR would make a nice change.

Kanluwen wrote:Actually, the 5 man Terminator squad thing is new. It used be that they were 10 10-man Terminator Squads with the Master of the Deathwing assigning himself a bodyguard from it as he chose.

Yes and no. They were 20 5 man squads in 2nd, due to 2nd having fixed 5 man Termie squads for loyalists even in fluff(they actually did the same with Scouts being fixed squads of 4 initiates and a sgt even in fluff). They got moved to 10x10 in 3rd when that was changed.

Platuan4th wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Actually, the 5 man Terminator squad thing is new. It used be that they were 10 10-man Terminator Squads with the Master of the Deathwing assigning himself a bodyguard from it as he chose.

Yes and no. They were 20 5 man squads in 2nd, due to 2nd having fixed 5 man Termie squads for loyalists even in fluff(they actually did the same with Scouts being fixed squads of 4 initiates and a sgt even in fluff). They got moved to 10x10 in 3rd when that was changed.

What I was meaning is that in the minidex, it was 5 man squads with the *option* of getting the rest, and hinting at them commonly fielding in 10 man squads and then breaking up in deployment orders.

Kanluwen wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Actually, the 5 man Terminator squad thing is new. It used be that they were 10 10-man Terminator Squads with the Master of the Deathwing assigning himself a bodyguard from it as he chose.

Yes and no. They were 20 5 man squads in 2nd, due to 2nd having fixed 5 man Termie squads for loyalists even in fluff(they actually did the same with Scouts being fixed squads of 4 initiates and a sgt even in fluff). They got moved to 10x10 in 3rd when that was changed.

What I was meaning is that in the minidex, it was 5 man squads with the *option* of getting the rest, and hinting at them commonly fielding in 10 man squads and then breaking up in deployment orders.

I know, just pointing out that the fluff has been flexible on it.

Then it's time for 20 man Deathwing Squads! All of them Librarians!

For new DA units, I would like to see Chaplain Dreadnoughts that have large loud speakers for spouting their Litanies of Hate and granting that rule to all friendly units within 12", a Rosarius Invulnerable save, a super sized Crozus Arcanum DCCW and a Hurricane Bolter arm. I would also like to see it allowable for HQ and Elite slots on the FOC for a starting price of 225 points with options for other ranged weapons and Extra Armor.

I think Chaplains should be Elite choices in the same manner as Blood Angels Chaplains and Interrogator Chaplains should stay HQs.

Mortis Dreadnoughts have already been mentioned and I agree with them, and allow them to be Heavy Support options.

More special Dark Angel psychic powers, only having 2 isn't really cutting it and only Ezekiel has a third power. Powers that force Morale checks at a negative modifier (like the BA one whose name escapes me) or causes enemy units to not be able to move in the opponent's turn, including running in the Shooting Phase or making Assault moves.

Army wide Preferred Enemy: Chaos Space Marines.

Ravenwing Bikes have Locator Beacons instead of Teleport Homers but increase their base cost accordingly.

Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikers as Troops choices, but if both are fielded only either Deathwing or Ravenwing count as Troops while the other counts as Elites or Fast Attack as normal. That way you don't need a unique character to field an army of either.

Chaplains aren't really the Dark Angels' "signature" unit.


Frankly, they're the only one of the Astartes armies that don't have one.

However, I would go for Deathwing armies being able to take Dreadnoughts as both Elite and Heavy Support.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Henners91 wrote:We need Belial and Azrael added as special characters in the next marine codex that let you take termies and bikes as troops respectively.

Oh my, did I just condense most of the Dark Angels' original flair into two character entries on a sheet of A4? Yeah, I did...

Well you forgot that its Sammael who is the Master of the Ravenwing......

That... is embarassing.

Kanluwen wrote:

svendrex wrote:What sort of unique things would the Dark Angels have? Honest questions here, not being a jerk.


Unique Psy-powers.

Interrogator Chaplains (How are they different on the tabletop from normal chaplains?)

Mortis Dreads (Dreads with 2 shooting arms, like the 2x Auto cannon dread that everyone loves)

Extra Plasma stuff?

Company veterans (Again, how would they be different on the table top from Vanguard and Sterguard)

Fleet Based Chapter (extra Skimmers or Orbital assault rules, but if everyone gets the Storm Raven, then that might cover this role)

Would normal DA marines have some special rule to represent their hunt for the fallen? What could that rule be? (Preferred Enemy: Chaos Space Marines or something else)


Is there anything else in the DA fluff already that makes them different?
What sort of stuff would fit their theme to make them more different?

I've given ideas before, pages worth of them in fact. Things like making them the "artifact" book, where you can field repeater plasma guns on Terminator heavy weapon mounts, Dreadnoughts as leaders for Deathwing squads, etc. There's a lot that can be done--the problem is simply DOING IT. If it's done in a fairly good way, the book can effectively become a home for 'counts as' Iron Hands, Heresy/Crusade era forces, et al.

And by the by, despite being a fleet based Chapter and well-known for precision strikes and having pinpoint accuracy for their bombardments...they have not a single character with Orbital Bombardments within the book. And for some stupid reason, Azrael Master of the bloody Unforgiven Chapters, as in every single one of the Dark Angels Successors as well as the Dark Angels themselves answer to him, cannot take Deathwing Terminators as troops. Despite him clearly being the head of the Deathwing Order and Inner Circle both.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Henners91 wrote:We need Abaddon and Kharn added as special characters in the next marine codex that let you take CCWs and Terminators with combiweapons as troops respectively.

Oh my, did I just condense most of the Chaos Book's original flair into two character entries on a sheet of A4? Yeah, I did...

Fixed.

Come now, we'd at least need the special chars for each God to give us their troop choices Plague Marines and Berzerkers don't suck after all.

No, sorry. Plague Marines are just normal Marines with FNP. You just need an Apothecary to make those.

And notice I said "Kharn". As in Kharn the Betrayer, king berzerker.

Plague Marines are quite different from regular marines. They are riddled with disease and are extremely difficult to kill (T5, FNP), and use unique grenades using various plagues/diseases/toxins of Barbarus/etc.

As for the Dark Angels, they are a codex chapter with some dresses and emo angst tacked on. Keep the special characters that grant Deathwing and Ravenwing status, and you're done. There is nothing to differentiate them from other Chapters. Space Wolves and Black Templar? Sure, they follow a very different organization from other Chapters (they are more Legions than anything). Blood Angels really should be a codex chapter too, but at least they have Death Company and a lot of unique tech to set them apart (Furiosos, Baals, souped-up engines... they've had those staples for a while).

Omegus wrote:Plague Marines are quite different from regular marines. They are riddled with disease and are extremely difficult to kill (T5, FNP), and use unique grenades using various plagues/diseases/toxins of Barbarus/etc.

So defensive and offensive grenades, T5 and a built in Apothecary.

Bam. Finished. Death Guard army is entirely viable.

As for the Dark Angels, they are a codex chapter with some dresses and emo angst tacked on. Keep the special characters that grant Deathwing and Ravenwing status, and you're done.

The same can be said about any army in existence.
Tau are simply Eldar with hooves and forehead slits.

And frankly, you can take your "emo" garbage and put it where it belongs: the Blood Angels book.
At best, Dark Angels are obsessive.

Anyways, the fact that people continually focus on "Deathwing and Ravenwing" ignores the fact that the Dark Angels are not simply those two formations. They're supposed to be one of the few Chapters that regularly fields Terminators in most of their campaigns. They're also one of the few Chapters that is renowned for pinpoint assaults utilizing Drop Pods and teleport attacks in conjunction.

There is nothing to differentiate them from other Chapters. Space Wolves and Black Templar? Sure, they follow a very different organization from other Chapters (they are more Legions than anything).

This is a ridiculous fallacy that needs to be put to bed, here and now.
The Space Wolves and Black Templars are not organized like Legions.
Space Wolves being "organized like Legions" is conjecture. At most, each "Great Company" acts as a Successor Chapter. The organization of the Space Wolves is far closer to the Dark Angels than you seem to think.

Black Templars are, quite frankly, in the same boat. They are not organized "like a Legion". They are simply not splintered into Successor Chapters.
The only difference between them is that the Dark Angels, while retaining close ties with all of their Successor Chapters(read the codex sometime. The Chapter Masters of each Successor Chapter answer directly to the Chapter Master of the Dark Angels. He decides who is initiated into the Inner Circles of the Successor Chapters and their Deathwing/Ravenwing forces)--still have separated their Successor Chapters from the main fold.

If Azrael were to one day tell them "Okay guys, we're all going to start being Dark Angels" there would be no debate whatsoever.

[ Blood Angels really should be a codex chapter too, but at least they have Death Company and a lot of unique tech to set them apart (Furiosos, Baals, souped-up engines... they've had those staples for a while).

Furiosos as 'a staple' were simply Dreadnoughts with 2x CCWs and some of the army USRs.
Dark Angels didn't even GET their fething signature Dreadnought in their book, despite IA volume 2 featuring it(the Mortis pattern). It has been put into practically every Space Marine Codex since then, however.
The Baal is hardly "unique". It's a Predator with Assault Cannons. The only reason it's not widespread is that the Blood Angels zealously guard the plans for it--much like the Dark Angels do with the Mortis pattern Dreadnought...which they do not even fething get in their book.
The only reason Blood Angels "have a lot of unique tech to set them apart" is because work was put into them to seriously differentiate them from the Codex and they needed the work done to truly justify them getting their own book.

Let's keep it polite.-Mannahnin

DarknessEternal wrote:No, they just need 3 or 4 characters made part of the Codex Space Marine characters.

I agree completely.

Uhhuh.

Because clearly, the Dark Angels are the Chapter who spend their days writing poetry and painting artwork.

Waaaaait a second.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShatteredBlade wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:No, they just need 3 or 4 characters made part of the Codex Space Marine characters.

I agree completely.

And you'd be wrong. Completely.

No, they spend it wearing dresses, brooding and chasing midgets around their catacombs.

Kanluwen wrote:Uhhuh.

Because clearly, the Dark Angels are the Chapter who spend their days writing poetry and painting artwork.

Waaaaait a second.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShatteredBlade wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:No, they just need 3 or 4 characters made part of the Codex Space Marine characters.

I agree completely.

And you'd be wrong. Completely.

Considering the Space Marine codex practically stole everything from the Dark Angels Codex, I fail to see any reason why yet another Marine codex will be released while Sisters of battle, necrons, tau and Eldar are shoved to the side.

Omegus wrote:No, they spend it wearing dresses, brooding and chasing midgets around their catacombs.

So then they're not emo at all, they're a frat who throws excellent keggers?

Platuan4th wrote:

Omegus wrote:No, they spend it wearing dresses, brooding and chasing midgets around their catacombs.

So then they're not emo at all, they're a frat who throws excellent keggers?

TOGA TOGA TOGA!

ShatteredBlade wrote:
Considering the Space Marine codex practically stole everything from the Dark Angels Codex, I fail to see any reason why yet another Marine codex will be released while Sisters of battle, necrons, tau and Eldar are shoved to the side.

I'm sorry, where did anyone whatsoever say "Screw them, release Dark Angels now!"?
Oh right. Nowhere. Plus, releasing a poorly conceived book just to release a book is exactly what caused this problem leading to these terrible threads which are posted almost every other week lately in the first place.


By the by: Necrons and Sisters of Battle are all but confirmed to be in the pipeline, and approaching a release. Tau have been worked on as well, with Robin Cruddace stated to be the author.

Sisters of Battle are getting a crappy White Dwarf codex and will probably languish in that state for years. Cruddace does bad work, his books are notorious for horrible internal balance.

Necrons, Tau, and Eldar need to be updated, and Chaos probably deserves two books before Dark Angels get looked at.

ShatteredBlade wrote:
Considering the Space Marine codex practically stole everything from the Dark Angels Codex, I fail to see any reason why yet another Marine codex will be released while Sisters of battle, necrons, tau and Eldar are shoved to the side.

It's a lil' thing called cash money. Games Workshop likes it, and has long since discovered its customers will fork it over in exchange for Space Marines.

What you guys are doing is, essentially, telling McDonald's to stop selling so many varieties of burgers in order to start supporting the Filet-o-Fish better.

If they *must* remain a separate army? The FAQ did a lot, primarily by making SS's 3++, so they aren't in the dire need they were, but still aren't great, though the CSM's probably need it more as they don't have the SS spam gimmick.

That said, they really don't *need* their own book, neither really do the other loyalist variants, but certainly least of all the Dark Angels as they've never really been all that different from C:SM, at least not that a couple paragraphs and FoC swap options couldn't fix, and so really should be folded into C:SM.

Kanluwen wrote:
This is a ridiculous fallacy that needs to be put to bed, here and now.
The Space Wolves and Black Templars are not organized like Legions.
Space Wolves being "organized like Legions" is conjecture. At most, each "Great Company" acts as a Successor Chapter. The organization of the Space Wolves is far closer to the Dark Angels than you seem to think.

The fallacy lies with you, I'm afraid. Before you get so hot and bothered, you should get your facts straight.

The intro to the 3rd edition SW codex describes their organization as being "radically different to those found in other Chapters". The 5th edition codex states "the Space Wolves had and still have little regard for the dictates and military tradition of the Codex Astartes, instead holding sacred the teachings of Russ... even to this day."

The Black Templar codex states that despite new chapters being created from the ranks of the Imperial Fists, the majority (as in, way more than 1000 marines) were renamed Black Templar and "chose not to adhere to the Codex Astartes".

The Dark Angels, on the other hand, are very much a Codex Chapter, with the only deviation being having two companies that are either exclusively all terminators, or all bikers/speeders. If you take the half-page that explains the rules for Deathwing and Ravenwing out of their book, the remainder is stock vanilla. The only other purely in fluff difference is their predilection for plasma weapons.

What they really need to do with both loyalists and Chaos is to bring back the Index Astartes rules, perhaps expanding them a little.

Kanluwen wrote:

ShatteredBlade wrote:
Considering the Space Marine codex practically stole everything from the Dark Angels Codex, I fail to see any reason why yet another Marine codex will be released while Sisters of battle, necrons, tau and Eldar are shoved to the side.

I'm sorry, where did anyone whatsoever say "Screw them, release Dark Angels now!"?
Oh right. Nowhere. Plus, releasing a poorly conceived book just to release a book is exactly what caused this problem leading to these terrible threads which are posted almost every other week lately in the first place.


By the by: Necrons and Sisters of Battle are all but confirmed to be in the pipeline, and approaching a release. Tau have been worked on as well, with Robin Cruddace stated to be the author.

Way to deflect my argument and focus on something else My argument is opposed to releasing yet another marine codex whom really do not deserve it. They're codex marines, whom vary in the fluff but not in the crunch enough to warrent another book. You could just throw them into the Space Marine Codex. Its the same as when people are stating there should be a Salamanders codex I think. Putting yet another Marines codex in the pipeline is going to shove another army out of the way.

I don't quite understand why people get so riled up about old Dark Angel Codexes having little that seems unique.

That, certainly, will be easily changed. Wolves didn't ride Giant Wolves before their now book. Blood Angels had no shiny golden flying boys. Hell, Black Templar were by and large black Ultramarines before they got their own book. Fluff/Unit-History is irrelevant.

What matters is that Dark Angels have a fairly unique look with their Robed-Marines/Native-American-Termies. They also have a suitably large fanbase that goes for that look. Unique Minis + Fans who want to buy them = their own release. Fluff and Game Mechanics can and likely will be changed to fit.

ShatteredBlade wrote: Putting yet another Marines codex in the pipeline is going to shove another army out of the way.

I doubt it. The last 3 Marine Codex releases taken together had less new units than the Dark Eldar release all by itself. One release does not equal one release. And Marine releases, at best, are only 2 or 3 plastic boxes and 2 or 3 Finecast Characters at most. Not doing a Marine release will certainly not make room for a "large" (and less profitable.. because less double-use) Xenos-release. All it will do is reduce the number of available armies by 1 and thereby make the game less diverse.

Omegus wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
This is a ridiculous fallacy that needs to be put to bed, here and now.
The Space Wolves and Black Templars are not organized like Legions.
Space Wolves being "organized like Legions" is conjecture. At most, each "Great Company" acts as a Successor Chapter. The organization of the Space Wolves is far closer to the Dark Angels than you seem to think.

The fallacy lies with you, I'm afraid. Before you get so hot and bothered, you should get your facts straight.

The intro to the 3rd edition SW codex describes their organization as being "radically different to those found in other Chapters". The 5th edition codex states "the Space Wolves had and still have little regard for the dictates and military tradition of the Codex Astartes, instead holding sacred the teachings of Russ... even to this day."

The Black Templar codex states that despite new chapters being created from the ranks of the Imperial Fists, the majority (as in, way more than 1000 marines) were renamed Black Templar and "chose not to adhere to the Codex Astartes".

The Dark Angels, on the other hand, are very much a Codex Chapter, with the only deviation being having two companies that are either exclusively all terminators, or all bikers/speeders. If you take the half-page that explains the rules for Deathwing and Ravenwing out of their book, the remainder is stock vanilla. The only other purely in fluff difference is their predilection for plasma weapons.

What they really need to do with both loyalists and Chaos is to bring back the Index Astartes rules, perhaps expanding them a little.

The first and second company do not adhere to the codex at all. It's not just an all terminator option or an all bike option. They aren't self-sufficient companies like all other active companies should be per the codex. In addition to this, the purpose of these companies isn't the codex approved either as both have a specific function and for all intents and purposes don't exist to outsiders.

In addition to this, the successor chapters of the Dark Angels aren't their own chapter. They all answer directly to the inner council and azrael. If you're going to consider the great wolf companies as still being space wolves by and large, the same is true for the Dark Angels. I forget where it was written, but one of the 'successors' for the Dark Angels was specifically requested by the Dark Angels to be created and none except Azrael knows the reason for this (I've long since forgotten the name of the successor, but I'm sure others know it).

So yea, if we're going by most divergent chapters I'd argue that Dark Angels, that are effectively an intact legion just like the Space Wolves, who have 2 companies that don't adhear at all to the codex, a third armoured company that doesn't adhere to the codex, and enough pull to have 'successors' created at their whim to be far more deserving of a codex than BT (whos divergence is only found in their background) and blood angels (that until recently had nothing but assault troops that is a far cry from being divergent).

Zweischneid wrote:I don't quite understand why people get so riled up about old Dark Angel Codexes having little that seems unique.

That, certainly, will be easily changed. Wolves didn't ride Giant Wolves before their now book. Blood Angels had no shiny golden flying boys. Hell, Black Templar were by and large black Ultramarines before they got their own book. Fluff/Unit-History is irrelevant.

What matters is that Dark Angels have a fairly unique look with their Robed-Marines/Native-American-Termies. They also have a suitably large fanbase that goes for that look. Unique Minis + Fans who want to buy them = their own release. Fluff and Game Mechanics can and likely will be changed to fit.

ShatteredBlade wrote: Putting yet another Marines codex in the pipeline is going to shove another army out of the way.

I doubt it. The last 3 Marine Codex releases taken together had less new units than the Dark Eldar release all by itself. One release does not equal one release. And Marine releases, at best, are only 2 or 3 plastic boxes and 2 or 3 Finecast Characters at most. Not doing a Marine release will certainly not make room for a "large" (and less profitable.. because less double-use) Xenos-release. All it will do is reduce the number of available armies by 1 and thereby make the game less diverse.

To be fair, that Dark Eldar codex did take over a decade to come out.

ShatteredBlade wrote:Putting yet another Marines codex in the pipeline is going to shove another army out of the way.

And GW will do it in a heartbeat if they think it'll increase their profits. Want more xenos support? Get everyone you know to stop buying Space Marines and have them start buying Eldar or whatever. Then get the majority of all other Games Workshop customers to do it, too.

Nvs wrote:
So yea, if we're going by most divergent chapters I'd argue that Dark Angels, that are effectively an intact legion just like the Space Wolves, who have 2 companies that don't adhear at all to the codex, a third armoured company that doesn't adhere to the codex, and enough pull to have 'successors' created at their whim to be far more deserving of a codex than BT (whos divergence is only found in their background) and blood angels (that until recently had nothing but assault troops that is a far cry from being divergent).

Gonna pull out that bullgak again? No devastators, no Librarians, no organized squads, no Companies, no sergeants, no Whirlwinds, Vows, mixed Crusader Squads, Holy Hand Grenades etc etc etc. Having 6k+ Space Marines that don't adhere to the Codex is more divergent than having 3 Companies of Space Marines that don't adhere to the Codex, at least in the world I live in.

The Disciples of Caliban were the chapter you were thinking of. Azrael requested their creation, it was granted, their purpose is not known, unless someone can elaborate.

It wasn't Azrael who requested it.

It was one 'Anaziel'.

The reasoning for the creation is unknown, but the Dark Angels speculate that it was to hunt down Cypher as it was during one of his bigger shenanigans.

Bring back 4th ed space marine codex, add a few extra special characters. And there you have it. One book to a accurately represent every canon and non canon army.

Yeah...except not.

Toastedandy wrote:Bring back 4th ed space marine codex, add a few extra special characters. And there you have it. One book to a accurately represent every canon and non canon army.

That would pretty much kill the game.

At least 60 to 70% (my own estimate) of 40K players play Space Marines of one kind or another. Merging all Space Marines into one book would lead to 60 to 70% of the gaming community playing with just one book. That is stupid.

To guarantee the best possible spread of books-vs-players, given that 60% to 70% of the community plays Space Marine, the best spread would be achieved if 60% to 70% percent of the available Codexes being Space Marine books.

Watching the relative popularity of even variant Space Marine books like Grey Knights or Space Wolves compared the to under-utilized (and thus over-provided) Xenos-books, what we need is actually more Space Marine books, not less, to achieve an ideal of gaming diversity where roughly equal proportions of the player base play with each Codex in the range.

Kanluwen wrote:It wasn't Azrael who requested it.

It was one 'Anaziel'.

The reasoning for the creation is unknown, but the Dark Angels speculate that it was to hunt down Cypher as it was during one of his bigger shenanigans.

My bad, the names are similar, just mixed them up. Was it an Inner Circle decision?

Zweischneid wrote:

That would pretty much kill the game.

I dont see how it would kill the game. 4th ed space marine codex had a huge variety available. Obviously add more units, unique too certain chapters. But breaking the game? Very over the top IMO. How would every marine player using the same book exactly break the game?

They kinda of need it but Tau, Necrons, and Sisters need it more so i say no updates of marines till they get updated

Toastedandy wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:

That would pretty much kill the game.

I dont see how it would kill the game. 4th ed space marine codex had a huge variety available. Obviously add more units, unique too certain chapters. But breaking the game? Very over the top IMO. How would every marine player using the same book exactly break the game?

Because it would kill the diversity.

See... if the 40K gaming community would, in a simplified example, consist of 1000 players and 5 Codexes (Space Marine, Guard, Eldar, Ork, Daemons as examples), you might get a sample distribution like that:

Marines: 600
Guard: 200
Eldar: 50
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

Now, 60% of the games you play would be against the same book. Now, if GW releases a variant Eldar book, the distribution would look like this:

Marines: 600
Guard: 200
Eldar: 25
DEldar: 25
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

See? The effect on the overall distribution and diversity is nill. The community is fairly bland. Now, if GW had instead released another Marine book, the ideal distribution would look like this:

Marines 1: 300
Marines 2: 300
Guard: 200
Eldar: 50
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

See? Much better spread and a much more diverse and lively gaming environment.

Of course, this is a simplification which assumes everyone has only one army, no cross-codex jumping etc... . But it still gives an approximation to the problem in the current 40K environment. As I said, I would think 60% to 70% of players play Space Marines. But even if you count CSM as Marines, only 7 out of 16 available Codexes are Marines. GW thus underprovides, on a player-per-book-basis the Marine players and overprovides for the Xenos-et-al. players.

For a healthy, even spread in the 40K gaming community, we thus need more Marines (or at the very least refreshers of the less-used Marine book like Dark Angels)

I see what you mean, but you missed my point by a mile. I said use 4th ed codex layout, so ALL armies can be represented. thats Dark angels, black templars, salamanders etc Even your own chapters could have its own rules. The diversity would still be there. Its just in one book. Understand?

Iron Hands and Salamanders please, plus a separate codex for Chaos Legions.

What would be the advantage of that?

That one book would, in effect, just be multiple books between two covers compared to the other (presumably then much smaller Codexes).

And balancing/playtesting such a massive tome to rule all Space Marines would be a nightmare I would think. Not to mention that it would be a major pain to use.. different units in differen FoC-slots depending on the army (Assault Marines, Dreads), different equipment options for identical units (BA-Assault, vs regular Assault) or different stats for identically equipped units (Blood Claws?), etc.. etc.. .

Zweischneid wrote:What would be the advantage of that?

That one book would, in effect, just be multiple books between two covers compared to the other (presumably then much smaller Codexes).

And balancing/playtesting such a massive tome to rule all Space Marines would be a nightmare I would think.

I've got a feeling your just argueing for the sake of it.

It would be one book, every marine player could use. It would be relatively difficult to playtest, but you could represent EVERY chapter you could think. It would only need updating once , allowing other books to get the focus they deserve. What is wrong with this? or are you just trying to save face somehow?

Zweischneid wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:

That would pretty much kill the game.

I dont see how it would kill the game. 4th ed space marine codex had a huge variety available. Obviously add more units, unique too certain chapters. But breaking the game? Very over the top IMO. How would every marine player using the same book exactly break the game?

Because it would kill the diversity.

See... if the 40K gaming community would, in a simplified example, consist of 1000 players and 5 Codexes (Space Marine, Guard, Eldar, Ork, Daemons as examples), you might get a sample distribution like that:

Marines: 600
Guard: 200
Eldar: 50
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

Now, 60% of the games you play would be against the same book. Now, if GW releases a variant Eldar book, the distribution would look like this:

Marines: 600
Guard: 200
Eldar: 25
DEldar: 25
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

See? The effect on the overall distribution and diversity is nill. The community is fairly bland. Now, if GW had instead released another Marine book, the ideal distribution would look like this:

Marines 1: 300
Marines 2: 300
Guard: 200
Eldar: 50
Ork: 100
Daemons: 50

See? Much better spread and a much more diverse and lively gaming environment.

Of course, this is a simplification which assumes everyone has only one army, no cross-codex jumping etc... . But it still gives an approximation to the problem in the current 40K environment. As I said, I would think 60% to 70% of players play Space Marines. But even if you count CSM as Marines, only 7 out of 16 available Codexes are Marines. GW thus underprovides, on a player-per-book-basis the Marine players and overprovides for the Xenos-et-al. players.

For a healthy, even spread in the 40K gaming community, we thus need more Marines (or at the very least refreshers of the less-used Marine book like Dark Angels)

Except if they were combined in to one book, then they're no where near as over represented, and newer players will be more encouraged to pick different factions. Adding a new Marine book will piss a lot of veterans off. Of course, GW doesn't care about veterans so they will.

Toastedandy wrote:I see what you mean, but you missed my point by a mile. I said use 4th ed codex layout, so ALL armies can be represented. thats Dark angels, black templars, salamanders etc Even your own chapters could have its own rules. The diversity would still be there. Its just in one book. Understand?

I'm gonna cite a little something for you that completely demolishes the 4th edition codex layout ideas.

This is a reply printed by one "Dirty" Steve in White Dwarf #303(April 2005) in response to a question about "Will Codex: Space Wolves be revamped?".

I believe that there are plans for making a Codex for each of the main Space Marine Chapters (Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and yes, Space Wolves). I don't know when these books will be released, nor in which order. I doubt that you'd see any of them before the end of the year.

Now remember. This is your vaunted 4th edition Codex, which EXPLICITLY left out Space Wolves and the Angels.

Even GW didn't think it would work.

There is no feasible way they could put all the current codices into one book without making it a massive complicated tomb that is even more un-wanted than the current method.

Kanluwen wrote:
Now remember. This is your vaunted 4th edition Codex, which EXPLICITLY left out Space Wolves and the Angels.

Even GW didn't think it would work.

They already had there own codex(s?) Doesnt mean they didnt think it would work, they just didnt do it

Then it would change from "I hate that Marines have so many codices whilst not being very diverse" to "I hate that Marines have such a big book with even more effort and content put into it than all the others, they should just have WD editions for divergent chapters ", which would lead to "Why do only marine variants have their own WD editions? I want one for my even less original Tau sept".

iproxtaco wrote:There is no feasible way they could put all the current codices into one book without making it a massive complicated tomb that is even more un-wanted than the current method.

4th ed space marines codex wasnt compicated at all and easily represented all chapters except the big 4

Toastedandy wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Now remember. This is your vaunted 4th edition Codex, which EXPLICITLY left out Space Wolves and the Angels.

Even GW didn't think it would work.

They already had there own codex(s?) Doesnt mean they didnt think it would work, they just didnt do it

Why not take it to the extreme? One book to cover every army, they've done it before(3rd ed rule book).

Toastedandy wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:There is no feasible way they could put all the current codices into one book without making it a massive complicated tomb that is even more un-wanted than the current method.

4th ed space marines codex wasnt compicated at all and easily represented all chapters except the big 4

Yeah, key point being that the big four weren't in it. I doubt they represented the other divergent chapters as well either.

iproxtaco wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:There is no feasible way they could put all the current codices into one book without making it a massive complicated tomb that is even more un-wanted than the current method.

4th ed space marines codex wasnt compicated at all and easily represented all chapters except the big 4

Yeah, key point being that the big four weren't in it.

They could easily be added into it. At the moment your army is either codex astratus, or a shameless copy of one of the others. How is this a bad idea?

Toastedandy wrote:
It would be one book, every marine player could use. It would be relatively difficult to playtest, but you could represent EVERY chapter you could think. It would only need updating once , allowing other books to get the focus they deserve. What is wrong with this? or are you just trying to save face somehow?

And due to the increased amount of rules and playtesting required it would take as long as all the current books put together or we lose diversity. Thus all it'd accomplish would be to increase the price of the SM Codex, forcing the marine players who don't jump from Codex to Codex because they like the different playstyle (GASP!) of the marine Codex they're currently using to pay for rules they'll never, ever use. Don't tell GW this, it sounds just like the kind of move they'd attempt to pull off!

Toastedandy wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:What would be the advantage of that?

That one book would, in effect, just be multiple books between two covers compared to the other (presumably then much smaller Codexes).

And balancing/playtesting such a massive tome to rule all Space Marines would be a nightmare I would think.

I've got a feeling your just argueing for the sake of it.

It would be one book, every marine player could use. It would be relatively difficult to playtest, but you could represent EVERY chapter you could think. It would only need updating once , allowing other books to get the focus they deserve. What is wrong with this? or are you just trying to save face somehow?

And I've got a feeling you're doing the exact same.

Every Marine player would likely not want to use the single codex. That's the flaw that you lot seem to always ignore. NOBODY wants to pay for a book where the majority of the contents will never be fielded by their army. I don't want a huge Codex that I have to carry around with me filled with special characters for every single Chapter.

Not every single Marine player is a bandwagon hopping FOTM player. I have no interest in being able to constantly alter my list because hey, there's a new book. I want MY army to remain MY army, not a fething sublist in a book.

And quite frankly even if Marines were compiled into one book, it wouldn't end this ridiculous notion of "Xenos don't get more love than the Imperials!".
You think it took them 10 years to redo the Dark Angels Codex when it was done? Feth no. They had that thing out in 5 years.
The Dark Angels minidex 2nd edition was released in 2002.
In April 2005 the Dark Angels were "rumored" to be redone and that was within the design studio proper.
In March 2007 they were released--with all of four sprues and a single metal character for their own Chapter first full Codex all for themselves launch.
They had some other items released alongside them, I won't dispute that. But none of the Chaplains or Librarians or the Scout-Sniper figures were to be "Dark Angels exclusive" units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toastedandy wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Now remember. This is your vaunted 4th edition Codex, which EXPLICITLY left out Space Wolves and the Angels.

Even GW didn't think it would work.

They already had there own codex(s?) Doesnt mean they didnt think it would work, they just didnt do it

Their own codices required Codex: Space Marines to work.

When Codex: Space Marines was redone, they were invalidated.

Toastedandy wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:There is no feasible way they could put all the current codices into one book without making it a massive complicated tomb that is even more un-wanted than the current method.

4th ed space marines codex wasnt compicated at all and easily represented all chapters except the big 4

Yeah, key point being that the big four weren't in it.

They could easily be added into it. At the moment your army is either codex astratus, or a shameless copy of one of the others. How is this a bad idea?

So just the entire codex printed into the book? That wouldn't solve the problem, just make people less willing to buy it. Or do you want some stupidly complicated system involving multitudes of restrictions and charts, making it unwieldy and frustrating to use? My army? I only actually play Grey Knights as a whole army.

I think your all missing my point. Its not too encourage band wagoning. Its to create diversity. At the moment (as i already said) your either a vanilla marine, or one of the other 4.

iproxtaco wrote: making it unwieldy and frustrating to use?

This is different than today's Codexes how?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toastedandy wrote:I think your all missing my point. Its not too encourage band wagoning. Its to create diversity. At the moment (as i already said) your either a vanilla marine, or one of the other 4.

5.

6, if you count Chaos Marines.

More if you count the FW Variants.

Platuan4th wrote:

iproxtaco wrote: making it unwieldy and frustrating to use?

This is different than today's Codexes how?

Even more so! It would be like trying to find a glock in a labyrinth whilst being chased by The Minotaur.

Toastedandy wrote:I think your all missing my point. Its not too encourage band wagoning. Its to create diversity. At the moment (as i already said) your either a vanilla marine, or one of the other 4.

And the thing you're missing is that lumping everything into one book isn't going to "create diversity". Even if you put the trait system back in(which again, won't "create diversity" in tournament settings which is where the argument is always cropped up about "too much marinez!" because EVERYONE will take the same general traits[the ones that win]) you're not going to succeed in "creating diversity".

The problem that you lot continually ignore is that as it stands, right now, the codices can very easily be done as general archetypes for stupidly diverse amounts of Chapters.

If GW actually builds off that idea, it goes quite nicely and "creates diversity".

Zweischneid wrote:And balancing/playtesting such a massive tome to rule all Space Marines would be a nightmare I would think.

That assumes that GW balances/playtests their stuff to begin with.


They don't.

Kanluwen wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:I think your all missing my point. Its not too encourage band wagoning. Its to create diversity. At the moment (as i already said) your either a vanilla marine, or one of the other 4.

And the thing you're missing is that lumping everything into one book isn't going to "create diversity".

No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells. Humans are the most popular race chosen in any RPG that has them - not because there aren't enough non-humans around, but because people like what they can relate to. Space Marines are Humans+. They're always going to be the most popular for people entering the hobby, and it's not because GW goes out of their way to make them so.

You take Space Marines down to one book, and people don't suddenly realize that they love Eldar. Nor do new players suddenly stop being attracted to the ease of assembly, ease of painting, the Mary Sueism of the fluff, or the general look of Space Marines. Instead, you just get the vast majority of 40K players using one book rather than one of five.

It's not going to happen. GW's a business. They're going to make as much money as they can, and they know that Space Marines are their moneymakers.

@ Seaward, Marines are also the one thing GW can claim is remotely actually theirs. Marines pretty much define the GW aesthetic nowadays.

Platuan4th wrote:@ Seaward, Marines are also the one thing GW can claim is remotely actually theirs. Marines pretty much define the GW aesthetic nowadays.

That and green-skinned Orks.

Wouldn't be hard to do.
Wouldn't be hard to balance.
And wouldn't take the same time as 5 different books.

If GW only had one rules writer perhaps you'd have a point. But they don't. Matt Ward could take a year to do the Marine book if he wanted while the others worked on the rest.

Since before 5th edition books none of the books offered much in the way of diversity as it was, and most could have been mirrored with a little more variety in unit layout and FOC swaps through special characters I see no reason they couldn't have done this.

Of course now with 5th and the whacked out crazy things they've added, now the books that once had nothing to offer are slightly more diverse. I believe this is the point the DA players have repeatedly tried to make.

Back in third, ravenwing and deathwing alone made DA stand out among all the competition. It means nothing now of course, but that's because their book hasn't been updated for all intents and purposes since. The 4th edition book may as well be called a 2nd edition book along the same lines as the Dark Eldar codex update back in 2002ish.

But no, I see no harm in putting all the marines in a single book and having a single set of rules for players to choose if they want to play to a specific type of chapter or just make a generalist list.

But at the same time, I'd love to see what whacked out crazy stuff that has no point of being in the game they come out with for the DA after we see things like Priests, Dreadknights, and Wolf Cavalry.

Nvs wrote:
But no, I see no harm in putting all the marines in a single book and having a single set of rules for players to choose if they want to play to a specific type of chapter or just make a generalist list.

It would hurt GW's bottom line, which is the only thing that matters in this discussion.

Only really through codex sales, which I'd wager aren't GW's primary sellers to begin with.

The players would still buy the models. Heck, may even sell more models as a player who plays Dark Angels may decide he wants a unit of grey knight terminators for his next game.

But it's not worth arguing really, we all know GW wouldn't do it.

I'm building a Dark Angel army at the moment. I'm using the C:SM 'dex. I do, however, think it'd be a mighty bloody shame for the 1st Legion and all the history and lore built up over the editions to get reduced to half a page in a Codex: Ultramarines book.

L. Wrex

I be quite happy to see a new Dark Angel Codex and figures - but not next - I'd rather see Necrons, Sisters of Battle (and Silence?) and the Mechanicus first. but thats unlikely.

If ithe DA codex can be as good as the Dark Eldar Codex that would be great as I enjoyed the fluff there which built nicely on the older codexes. I personally did not like the Grey Knights version and I think its a shame that the Sistser codex is likely a WD only one (if thats true) as again it will be the fluff that is lost sadly.

Sisters really don't have that much fluff. It hasn't been developed much since 2nd. Unfortunately, neither has Dark Angels either.

But yea, the fluff would be an enormous loss. I would hope GW would figure out they have a website at some point and actually make use of it by posting a lot of the backstory for the armies they support.

Make it so the codex fluff is there primarily to move the story line forward for the armies between updates as opposed to just rehashing the same old stuff.

And yea, some ultra sinister terminators in robes and some more detailed robed marines would make an amazing addition to the marine line imo.

Something akin to these:
http://www.coolminiornot.com/browse/page/1/submitter/Semi

Nvs wrote: Unfortunately, neither has Dark Angels either.

What?

Dark Angels had a big change of fluff that happened between 3rd and 4th ed books.

2 Masters died and were replaced(3rd ed had Belial and Sammael still as Masters of the 3rd and 4th respectively, Gabriel was still Master of the 2nd).

3 entire Chapters were added to the list of successors.

There was NO mention of the Ravenwing even having a Jetbike pre-4th ed book. Before that, it was a Bike or a Land Speeder.

Nvs wrote:Sisters really don't have that much fluff. It hasn't been developed much since 2nd. Unfortunately, neither has Dark Angels either.

You are kidding right?
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Dark_Angels
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Adepta_Sororitas
And thats just what has been added to Lexicanum....

But yea, the fluff would be an enormous loss. I would hope GW would figure out they have a website at some point and actually make use of it by posting a lot of the backstory for the armies they support.

Theres no way they would do this. Thats what the Black Library is for, and Codexii for that matter.

Make it so the codex fluff is there primarily to move the story line forward for the armies between updates as opposed to just rehashing the same old stuff.

The Imperium has been around for 10,000 years and the Dark Angles are the 1st Legion, you think their history doesnt matter to them?
O thats right, it pretty much all they think about (i only mean in terms of the Fallen and their status as the Unforgiven).

So stick to the general theme of adding another paragraph to the story of the chapter's organization with every revision routine?

I question if you people even read posts or jump straight to trolling.

I mean you discredit the idea of putting the general lore online and then remark about the following comment completely out of context because you discredited the lead-in? /bravo.

And I didn't say they don't have a lot of fluff... I said that it hasn't changed much over the past 10 years or so. Which is somewhat fine considering most of the 40k universe is stagnant. But this is also the typical complaint with the 40k universe too.

Nvs wrote:So stick to the general theme of adding another paragraph to the story of the chapter's organization with every revision routine?

I question if you people even read posts or jump straight to trolling.

I mean you discredit the idea of putting the general lore online and then remark about the following comment completely out of context because you discredited the lead-in? /bravo.

And I didn't say they don't have a lot of fluff... I said that it hasn't changed much over the past 10 years or so. Which is somewhat fine considering most of the 40k universe is stagnant. But this is also the typical complaint with the 40k universe too.

No, i discredited the idea that GW would put the lore online. Lexicanum is not affiliated with GW AFAIK.
The fact that the lore hasnt changed isnt a bad thing. Do you mean to say retcons are good?

Nope. Not a fan of the Dark Angels. I'd like to see a new Codex supplement with nothing but special HQ characters for Space Marines like the ones already in the Space Marine main Codex. I think that was a nice, simple solution that enabled multiple Chapters to be covered with one book, and adding new options to represent other Chapters is a nice middleground kind of option.

Jimsolo wrote:Nope. Not a fan of the Dark Angels. I'd like to see a new Codex supplement with nothing but special HQ characters for Space Marines like the ones already in the Space Marine main Codex. I think that was a nice, simple solution that enabled multiple Chapters to be covered with one book, and adding new options to represent other Chapters is a nice middleground kind of option.

But why?

If you do a "mini-release" anyhow, there's no harm done in adding a few pages of fluff, adopting basic Space Marine units, and whip up a list/FoC that is a bit more "Dark Angels", ideally with some spiffy new unit that gets a new mini.

It is beyond me that people who admit to not even like Dark Angels bother about how they are they released. What does it matter to you? I can honestly see no reason to do them in one back beyond some misguided and unfounded sense of "symmetry" that tries, for some unfathomable reason, to impose the "in-game" fluff of who is fighting who (or not) in 40K on the production schedule of what GW actually produces.

Nvs wrote:
Since before 5th edition books none of the books offered much in the way of diversity as it was, and most could have been mirrored with a little more variety in unit layout and FOC swaps through special characters I see no reason they couldn't have done this.

Again, look at the Black Templars. No sergeants, no devastators, no Librarians, vows, army-wide "I HATE YOU!" rule, fearless in CC, only guys with LRC until everyone else got it, Emperor's Champion etc. Do you really want GW to make Helbrecht and Grimaldus SCs in the vanilla Codex and have them change the FOC and army wide rules so that the above stayed true?

Regarding the "they have more than one writer" part: Guess what? They don't work on the same Codex! While Mat Ward (*shudder*) works on the Marine armies, Kelly and Cruddace are labouring along, trying to bring you your coveted Xenos Codex.

I think they should, because with a new codex would come new models, and you've got to admit, deathwing models with the level of detail of GK or DC would be awesome!

But before that, IH need a new, separate codex! Because they are even more unloved by GW! D:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Nvs wrote:
Since before 5th edition books none of the books offered much in the way of diversity as it was, and most could have been mirrored with a little more variety in unit layout and FOC swaps through special characters I see no reason they couldn't have done this.

Again, look at the Black Templars. No sergeants, no devastators, no Librarians, vows, army-wide "I HATE YOU!" rule, fearless in CC, only guys with LRC until everyone else got it, Emperor's Champion etc. Do you really want GW to make Helbrecht and Grimaldus SCs in the vanilla Codex and have them change the FOC and army wide rules so that the above stayed true?

Regarding the "they have more than one writer" part: Guess what? They don't work on the same Codex! While Mat Ward (*shudder*) works on the Marine armies, Kelly and Cruddace are labouring along, trying to bring you your coveted Xenos Codex.

As I said, there’s no real reason to put those limitations on the Marines as far as the rules are concerned. If the player wants to play as Black Templar then the player can choose to follow the fiction as laid out by GW and build their army list to that ideal. If they want to play Black Templar fighting along side a small unit of X, the codex would also allow it.
I’m a firm believer of the rules and the fluff should be separate. Otherwise you’ll never have a balanced game and always run into issues where one codex’s sole purpose is to outshine the codex that came before it. The framework is all that’s needed to get the rules done. Let the players choose the specifics they want to play toward etc.

As for your second remark… that’s kind of the point. Instead of one person working on black templar, another working on grey knights, and a third working on space wolves all at the same time, you’d instead have one working on the space marine compilation, another working on non-marine codex 1, and another working on non-marine codex 2.

And the benefit to doing it this way is you don’t have the issues of crazy whacked out rules/units coming out simply so X outshines Y by providing Z.

Nvs wrote:

As I said, there’s no real reason to put those limitations on the Marines as far as the rules are concerned. If the player wants to play as Black Templar then the player can choose to follow the fiction as laid out by GW and build their army list to that ideal. If they want to play Black Templar fighting along side a small unit of X, the codex would also allow it.
I’m a firm believer of the rules and the fluff should be separate. Otherwise you’ll never have a balanced game and always run into issues where one codex’s sole purpose is to outshine the codex that came before it. The framework is all that’s needed to get the rules done. Let the players choose the specifics they want to play toward etc.

As for your second remark… that’s kind of the point. Instead of one person working on black templar, another working on grey knights, and a third working on space wolves all at the same time, you’d instead have one working on the space marine compilation, another working on non-marine codex 1, and another working on non-marine codex 2.

And the benefit to doing it this way is you don’t have the issues of crazy whacked out rules/units coming out simply so X outshines Y by providing Z.

Good idea. By the same token, I think merging Eldar and Dark Eldar would work wonders to reduce the amount of books. Players could opt to play fluffy or perhaps play a small Coven alongside some Aspect Warriors. Thinking of it, Tau could also be put into the same book. Players would just have to play it fluffy and not move their skimmers as fast as they could and perhaps even IG if the player just ignores that skimmers are skimmers (Valkyrie excepted) and moves their Falcons around as Count-as Leman Russ.


Honestly, you say that fluff and rules should be seperate. Why then is it so difficult for you to accept that things like Dark Angels and Blood Angels are simply different armies in the Game with a unique aesthetic of their one, and each with a different (and sufficiently large) player-base, even if, in the fluff, they may have a connection as coming from the same broad faction of the in-fluff universe the game is set in?

Kanluwen wrote:

Omegus wrote:Plague Marines are quite different from regular marines. They are riddled with disease and are extremely difficult to kill (T5, FNP), and use unique grenades using various plagues/diseases/toxins of Barbarus/etc.

So defensive and offensive grenades, T5 and a built in Apothecary.

Bam. Finished. Death Guard army is entirely viable.

Your logic is a bit flawed if you're going to ridicule a unit with five attributes (we forgot the close combat weapon :p) that make it different from a standard Space Marine and suggest that the difference is thusly not at all pronounced. The problems people are expressing with the Dark Angels mostly seem to concern the fact that theirs is an army that, mostly, is not markedly set apart from Space Marines and only has (off the top of my head) three unique units to it? Deathwing, Ravenwing, Company Veterans... I'm not a top dog when it comes to Ravenwing, but Deathwing might as well just be Terminators granted fearlessness (at the expense of Combat Tactics, as suggested) as a chapter tactic. Veterans, imo, are outmoded by Sternguard/Vanguard anyway.

Seaward wrote:
No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells.

And the thing your missing, is that by diversity I meant in space marine chapters, not xenos. 4th ed codex allowed this, 5th ed, not at all

Toastedandy wrote:

Seaward wrote:
No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells.

And the thing your missing, is that by diversity I meant in space marine chapters, not xenos. 4th ed codex allowed this, 5th ed, not at all

So the multiple Marine Codexii dont allow diversity now?

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

Seaward wrote:
No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells.

And the thing your missing, is that by diversity I meant in space marine chapters, not xenos. 4th ed codex allowed this, 5th ed, not at all

So the multiple Marine Codexii dont allow diversity now?

Nope. Well, a little, but not on the scale of 4th ed marines

Toastedandy wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

Seaward wrote:
No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells.

And the thing your missing, is that by diversity I meant in space marine chapters, not xenos. 4th ed codex allowed this, 5th ed, not at all

So the multiple Marine Codexii dont allow diversity now?

Nope. Well, a little, but not on the scale of 4th ed marines

And what exactly was so great about 4th Marines that you think means all Marines should be in one giant, uselessly complex Codex?

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:

Seaward wrote:
No, the thing he's missing is that cutting down on the number of SM codices doesn't automatically translate into a whole bunch of people playing xenos.

I'll say it for about the third time in this thread: Games Workshop pushes what sells.

And the thing your missing, is that by diversity I meant in space marine chapters, not xenos. 4th ed codex allowed this, 5th ed, not at all

So the multiple Marine Codexii dont allow diversity now?

Nope. Well, a little, but not on the scale of 4th ed marines

And what exactly was so great about 4th Marines that you think means all Marines should be in one giant, uselessly complex Codex?

Read it and find out

Zweischneid wrote:

Nvs wrote:

As I said, there’s no real reason to put those limitations on the Marines as far as the rules are concerned. If the player wants to play as Black Templar then the player can choose to follow the fiction as laid out by GW and build their army list to that ideal. If they want to play Black Templar fighting along side a small unit of X, the codex would also allow it.
I’m a firm believer of the rules and the fluff should be separate. Otherwise you’ll never have a balanced game and always run into issues where one codex’s sole purpose is to outshine the codex that came before it. The framework is all that’s needed to get the rules done. Let the players choose the specifics they want to play toward etc.

As for your second remark… that’s kind of the point. Instead of one person working on black templar, another working on grey knights, and a third working on space wolves all at the same time, you’d instead have one working on the space marine compilation, another working on non-marine codex 1, and another working on non-marine codex 2.

And the benefit to doing it this way is you don’t have the issues of crazy whacked out rules/units coming out simply so X outshines Y by providing Z.

Good idea. By the same token, I think merging Eldar and Dark Eldar would work wonders to reduce the amount of books. Players could opt to play fluffy or perhaps play a small Coven alongside some Aspect Warriors. Thinking of it, Tau could also be put into the same book. Players would just have to play it fluffy and not move their skimmers as fast as they could and perhaps even IG if the player just ignores that skimmers are skimmers (Valkyrie excepted) and moves their Falcons around as Count-as Leman Russ.


Honestly, you say that fluff and rules should be seperate. Why then is it so difficult for you to accept that things like Dark Angels and Blood Angels are simply different armies in the Game with a unique aesthetic of their one, and each with a different (and sufficiently large) player-base, even if, in the fluff, they may have a connection as coming from the same broad faction of the in-fluff universe the game is set in?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole

Henners91 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Omegus wrote:Plague Marines are quite different from regular marines. They are riddled with disease and are extremely difficult to kill (T5, FNP), and use unique grenades using various plagues/diseases/toxins of Barbarus/etc.

So defensive and offensive grenades, T5 and a built in Apothecary.

Bam. Finished. Death Guard army is entirely viable.

Your logic is a bit flawed if you're going to ridicule a unit with five attributes (we forgot the close combat weapon :p) that make it different from a standard Space Marine and suggest that the difference is thusly not at all pronounced.

Your logic is just as flawed if you think that five special rules associated with a special character couldn't make Plague Marines work within C: SM.

On another note, the 'toxins of Barbarus' are exclusive to the Death Guard. Not the Plague Marines as a whole. All Death Guard are Plague Marines, but not all Plague Marines are Death Guard.

The problems people are expressing with the Dark Angels mostly seem to concern the fact that theirs is an army that, mostly, is not markedly set apart from Space Marines and only has (off the top of my head) three unique units to it? Deathwing, Ravenwing, Company Veterans... I'm not a top dog when it comes to Ravenwing, but Deathwing might as well just be Terminators granted fearlessness (at the expense of Combat Tactics, as suggested) as a chapter tactic.

And once again, when Codex: Dark Angels was done many of these "unique" units did not exist. Sternguard, Vanguard, Thunderfire Cannons, Land Raider Redeemers--none of them were in C: SM. Blood Angels, during the timeframe of Dark Angels receiving their codex, had all of four 'unique units'(Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, Baal Predators, and 'Honor Guard'--which wasn't really that unique though).

And yet, now look at C: BA. How far have they gone from simply being a book the thickness of an instruction manual to a full blown Codex?
It all once again hails back to the design methodology that was being garnered at the time. Dark Angels was them trying to do fully independent Codex, with no reliance upon C: SM. They didn't WANT you to have to refer to two different books and your book being invalidated if the one it relies upon is redone.

Veterans, imo, are outmoded by Sternguard/Vanguard anyway.

This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

They should get one but in 6 edition with the Black Templars.

Kanluwen wrote:
This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

They look like CSM Chosen more than anything. The fact that they aren't Sternguard/Vanguard vets has little to do with DA's vets really being different in a fluff capacity than Sternguard/Vanguard vets just not having been invented yet. The DA Company Vets are closer to Sternguard vets than the old 3E/4E C:SM Veterans ever were.

Nvs wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole

From Wikidictionary:
"Hyperbole is an exaggeration that, while not intended to be taken literally, still describes a situation or image.

Examples: "I have been waiting for hours for the end of your 'short' coffee break." is a hyperbole"

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

They look like CSM Chosen more than anything. The fact that they aren't Sternguard/Vanguard vets has little to do with DA's vets really being different in a fluff capacity than Sternguard/Vanguard vets just not having been invented yet. The DA Company Vets are closer to Sternguard vets than the old 3E/4E C:SM Veterans ever were.

Which is more because Dark Angels are a predominantly 'shooty' force. Of course their Veterans are closer to the shooty vetes.

Right, but that said, if/when DA's get a new book, I'd be highly surprised if Company Veterans stayed and Sternguard/Vanguard vets did not make their way in.

I would be too. Unless we get someone like Andy Hoare or Phil Kelly.

In which case I expect Dark Claws and Dark Blades.

Kanluwen wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

They look like CSM Chosen more than anything. The fact that they aren't Sternguard/Vanguard vets has little to do with DA's vets really being different in a fluff capacity than Sternguard/Vanguard vets just not having been invented yet. The DA Company Vets are closer to Sternguard vets than the old 3E/4E C:SM Veterans ever were.

Which is more because Dark Angels are a predominantly 'shooty' force. Of course their Veterans are closer to the shooty vetes.

IF you build them that way. The great thing is they have plenty of non-shooty options for those of us(like me) that want assaulty vets for our shooty forces.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:I would be too. Unless we get someone like Andy Hoare or Phil Kelly.

In which case I expect Dark Claws and Dark Blades.

And if we get Matt Ward, we'll get Dark Guardians wielding Dark Glaives with Dark Wings of Darkness jump packs and wrist mounted Dark Bolters that shoot Darkshard rounds.


Dark.

I want Darkshard Rounds.

And Darkbrands.

Kanluwen wrote:Your logic is just as flawed if you think that five special rules associated with a special character couldn't make Plague Marines work within C: SM.

Well sure, but GW would never release the super bumper Marines of all variety codex that would be just fine... Obviously they want to make money from having several codices... Hell, it probably isn't good business sense to put DAs and BTs into a Marine Codex, it's simply being argued here on grounds of principles of similarity.

Kanluwen wrote:On another note, the 'toxins of Barbarus' are exclusive to the Death Guard. Not the Plague Marines as a whole. All Death Guard are Plague Marines, but not all Plague Marines are Death Guard.

"Though Many other Space Marines have dedicated themselves to Nurgle since the Horus Heresy, few ever achieve the ranks of the Plague Marines. Those who wish to join this most elite of foetid cadres swear loyalty to the Death Guard and their Primarch Mortarion. Only then will Nurgle bestow upon them the corrupting Ague that created the Plague Marines (Codex: Chaos Space Marines, pp38). Sorry, all Death Guard are Plague Marines and all Plague Marines are (nominally) Death Guard.

Kanluwen wrote:And once again, when Codex: Dark Angels was done many of these "unique" units did not exist. Sternguard, Vanguard, Thunderfire Cannons, Land Raider Redeemers--none of them were in C: SM. Blood Angels, during the timeframe of Dark Angels receiving their codex, had all of four 'unique units'(Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, Baal Predators, and 'Honor Guard'--which wasn't really that unique though).
And yet, now look at C: BA. How far have they gone from simply being a book the thickness of an instruction manual to a full blown Codex?
It all once again hails back to the design methodology that was being garnered at the time. Dark Angels was them trying to do fully independent Codex, with no reliance upon C: SM. They didn't WANT you to have to refer to two different books and your book being invalidated if the one it relies upon is redone.

Sure, and Ward rather killed that army's feel for me: I'm a happy man with Dark Angels retaining their current aesthetic... we don't need some silver-armoured 'honour guard' of some variety, probably 'Emopoetkin' or some rubbish like that. The way things stand, without them transformed, they would do fine in another codex. Furthermore, why would you be relying on a text if it's the SAME book? People are arguing for putting ICs in the next Marine Codex, not for an 'expansion'.

Kanluwen wrote: This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

I apologise for failing to differentiate between a complaint concerning fluff and one concerning gameplay. I feel that Company Veterans fulfill the same role within a company's organisation as Sternguard/Vanguard vets and afaik nobody really takes advantage of the models themselves; so I shouldn't miss them terribly if they were gone.

No, dark angels don't. If you had said Fallen Angels, then yes, because Chaos space marines are the provenience of all awesomeness for 40k. Plus Space Marines always get updates and it gets boring for us heretics and alien things.

And I'm bored waiting for my next marine codex. Go figure, you're not the only ones.

Henners91 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Your logic is just as flawed if you think that five special rules associated with a special character couldn't make Plague Marines work within C: SM.

Well sure, but GW would never release the super bumper Marines of all variety codex that would be just fine... Obviously they want to make money from having several codices... Hell, it probably isn't good business sense to put DAs and BTs into a Marine Codex, it's simply being argued here on grounds of principles of similarity.

And principles of similarity mean that Death Guard, Thousand Sons, and all the "variant Cult" armies fit into the Chaos Space Marines codex.

Oh. Wait. They really don't fit all that well, do they? The only reason they can get away with it in CSM is because those particular pieces are singular units that can be fielded in Undivided lists as unique units.

Until you get "Dark Angels", "Blood Angels", and "Raven Guard/Space Wolf/Black Templar/Imperial Fists" as unique squads--that methodology doesn't work for C: SM.

Kanluwen wrote:On another note, the 'toxins of Barbarus' are exclusive to the Death Guard. Not the Plague Marines as a whole. All Death Guard are Plague Marines, but not all Plague Marines are Death Guard.

"Though Many other Space Marines have dedicated themselves to Nurgle since the Horus Heresy, few ever achieve the ranks of the Plague Marines. Those who wish to join this most elite of foetid cadres swear loyalty to the Death Guard and their Primarch Mortarion. Only then will Nurgle bestow upon them the corrupting Ague that created the Plague Marines (Codex: Chaos Space Marines, pp38). Sorry, all Death Guard are Plague Marines and all Plague Marines are (nominally) Death Guard.

Nope. "Swearing loyalty to the Death Guard and their Primarch Mortarion" doesn't actually make you part of the Death Guard, especially when it's Nurgle that has to "bestow the corrupting Ague" that created the Plague Marines.

Semantics of course, but it doesn't make my statement incorrect nor does it make yours correct.

Kanluwen wrote:And once again, when Codex: Dark Angels was done many of these "unique" units did not exist. Sternguard, Vanguard, Thunderfire Cannons, Land Raider Redeemers--none of them were in C: SM. Blood Angels, during the timeframe of Dark Angels receiving their codex, had all of four 'unique units'(Death Company, Furioso Dreadnoughts, Baal Predators, and 'Honor Guard'--which wasn't really that unique though).
And yet, now look at C: BA. How far have they gone from simply being a book the thickness of an instruction manual to a full blown Codex?
It all once again hails back to the design methodology that was being garnered at the time. Dark Angels was them trying to do fully independent Codex, with no reliance upon C: SM. They didn't WANT you to have to refer to two different books and your book being invalidated if the one it relies upon is redone.

Sure, and Ward rather killed that army's feel for me: I'm a happy man with Dark Angels retaining their current aesthetic... we don't need some silver-armoured 'honour guard' of some variety, probably 'Emopoetkin' or some rubbish like that.

Do not bring Ward into this. It has not one iota to do with him, so stop before you even consider bloody starting. If you want to whine about him, go find one of the other halfdozen threads doing such a thing. This whole mess is Alessio Cavatore and Jervis Johnson, the two studio 'honchos' at that time trying to push a new direction and Dark Angels was supposed to be some kind of "triumphant start"--that flopped on its face with the release of Codex: Space Marines.

One step forward, five steps back.

The way things stand, without them transformed, they would do fine in another codex. Furthermore, why would you be relying on a text if it's the SAME book? People are arguing for putting ICs in the next Marine Codex, not for an 'expansion'.

You really need to actually read posts before commenting on things.

Kanluwen wrote: This proves you need to actually read the book again. Company Veterans are not Sternguard/Vanguard in any way, shape, or form. The role they have isn't similar, with Company Veterans mostly being a ranged unit with the capability to take a CC loadout.
They're not even similar to SG/VG in a fluff capacity.

I apologise for failing to differentiate between a complaint concerning fluff and one concerning gameplay. I feel that Company Veterans fulfill the same role within a company's organisation as Sternguard/Vanguard vets and afaik nobody really takes advantage of the models themselves; so I shouldn't miss them terribly if they were gone.

You're aware that the "Company Veteran" 'box' is simply a Dark Angels upgrade sprue with a Tactical Marine sprue, yeah?

Toastedandy wrote:

Nope. Well, a little, but not on the scale of 4th ed marines

4th edition codex was crap when it came to diversity. Every list just picked whatever the two or three traits were pronounced by the interwebz to be the most competitive, and rolled with it.

Space Marine books are easy revenue for GW, since they need relatively few plastic kits.

I know this a subject near and dear to the hearts of a few of you but please keep the debate in perspective. Take some time away from the computer before responding, for example. In any case, keep Rule Number One at the forefront of your mind.

iproxtaco wrote:And I'm bored waiting for my next marine codex. Go figure, you're not the only ones.

Geez, I am only saying there has been so many Imperial books, especially the Marines, that it would be good to have a change. Don't get your knickers in a twist! Any way, hopefully the next codex will be the Necrons.

Nvs wrote:
As I said, there’s no real reason to put those limitations on the Marines as far as the rules are concerned. If the player wants to play as Black Templar then the player can choose to follow the fiction as laid out by GW and build their army list to that ideal. If they want to play Black Templar fighting along side a small unit of X, the codex would also allow it.
I’m a firm believer of the rules and the fluff should be separate. Otherwise you’ll never have a balanced game and always run into issues where one codex’s sole purpose is to outshine the codex that came before it. The framework is all that’s needed to get the rules done. Let the players choose the specifics they want to play toward etc.

So you'd shoehorn every competetive marine player into playing one Chapter for the sake of "vareity"? Yeah, that won't lead to massive complaints at all. In case you didn't notice, all the armies updated to 5th edition actually have a fair chance at winning, even if SW and IG are slightly stronger while the Nids and (arguably) the Vanilla Codex is weaker. There hasn't been any "outshining", they're good in different ways.

Nvs wrote:
As for your second remark… that’s kind of the point. Instead of one person working on black templar, another working on grey knights, and a third working on space wolves all at the same time, you’d instead have one working on the space marine compilation, another working on non-marine codex 1, and another working on non-marine codex 2.

Way to miss the point. That's already how it works.

Platuan4th wrote:
And if we get Matt Ward, we'll get Dark Guardians wielding Dark Glaives with Dark Wings of Darkness jump packs and wrist mounted Dark Bolters that shoot Darkshard rounds.


Dark.

I see what you did there.

Arm.chair.general wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:And I'm bored waiting for my next marine codex. Go figure, you're not the only ones.

Geez, I am only saying there has been so many Imperial books, especially the Marines, that it would be good to have a change. Don't get your knickers in a twist! Any way, hopefully the next codex will be the Necrons.

And I'm only saying that Marine players also want a new codex just as much as people who play Xenos want theirs.

Ever thought that some people, god forbid, like playing marines as their first and only army?

Except Marine players constantly get new books, while Xenos players often have to wait the better part of a decade.

That's like a starving child asking for a sandwich, and your response is "tough! fat kids want sandwiches, too!"

Which isn't entirely true. I'm simply saying that there are plenty of marine players, so the xenos guys aren't the only ones allowed an opinion on the matter.

Omegus wrote:Except Marine players constantly get new books, while Xenos players often have to wait the better part of a decade.

That's like a starving child asking for a sandwich, and your response is "tough! fat kids want sandwiches, too!"

I guess you missed the part where not everyone is a band-wagon hopper, Why would I care if the Blood Angels got a new Codex, I play Black Templars!

A WD article would be fine.

I'd like to see them wait until 6th was out and give us something on par with the current marine codex personally.
My biggest problem is these nice scoring bikes and terminators IF we take a special character... I've never been a fan of them perhaps a throwback to 2nd ed where they could easily dominate the game. No army should need a special character to give it flavour, bring back the traits, or add chapter specfic changes as an appendix with their own special army wide rules.
Biggest problem for me therefore with DA is the elites section being overcrowded, get scouts back to troops and give them their teleport homers back, even keep the ravenwing with them after all, they have 100 suits of terminator armour so having homers everywhere would make sense
Honestly though I can't see the DA getting justice done to them again with the latest quality of writings. Spesh marines are the awesumnuss ug style writings is one of the major boredom factors with 40k for me now, I shelved my DA's back in 4th after thinking wow I could do a nice army with that stuff, doing it and realising the glut of SM players. Then came 5th ed and they just got... terrible...

Ignore this space.

Omegus wrote:
Every list just picked whatever the two or three traits were pronounced by the interwebz to be the most competitive, and rolled with it.

Yeah, its not like people do that now.

Sort of. Their FAQ needs a bit of tinkering. There's elements of their organisation that could be better represented (the Veterans organisation), said elements would not sit very well in C:SM as they are a big breakaway from the Codex, but this would still be a minor change that requires a new Codex and does not IMO warrant higher priority than Tau, Necrons etc.

They don't deserve a codex right now more than Witchhunters or Necrons, but since they're both fairly equal in uselessness, they don't necessarily deserve to be overlooked to give The Tau a new codex.