I dont know what to say. I'm stunned. This is utterly ridiculous. In the vigilus defiant FAQGW ruled that BA, SW, DA, DW detachments are not space marines detachments. Now, with the new repulsor executioner update they are talking about space marine chapters not found in the codex space marines, like BA, DA, DW and SW.
So, a BA, DA, SW, and DW detachment is not a space marine detachment, but BA, DA, SW and DW are space marine chapters.
The Repulsor Executioner has been released for the forces of the Adeptus
Astartes, and its datasheet can be found in its construction guide. On
that datasheet is the <Chapter> Faction keyword, meaning it belongs
to Space Marine Chapters from Codex: Space Marines. You can, however,
take this unit as part of another Space Marine Chapter not found within
that publication. To do so, replace the <Chapter> keyword in every
instance on that unit’s datasheet with Blood Angels (or the keyword of
a Blood Angels successor Chapter, e.g. Flesh Tearers), Dark Angels
(or the keyword of a Dark Angels successor Chapter, e.g. Angels of
Absolution), Space Wolves or Deathwatch.
Q: Is a Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves or
Deathwatch Detachment also a Space Marines Detachment?
A: No. As defined in Codex: Space Marines, a Space
Marines Detachment is a Detachment that only includes
units with one of the following Faction keywords:
<Chapter>, Ultramarines, Imperial Fists,
Salamanders, White Scars, Raven Guard, Iron
Hands, Crimson Fists or Black Templars.
Even more hilarious consequence: if you make a custom chapter that uses the Ultramarines chapter tactics your detachment is not a space marine detachment. But if you use the ULTRAMARINES keyword and just write some out-of-game fluff about your custom chapter it counts as a space marine detachment.
What is the actual issue here? Is it just that a space marine detachment and a space chapter are different things and you think that shouldn't be the case? Or does it cause rule issues I'm missing?
Stux wrote: What is the actual issue here? Is it just that a space marine detachment and a space chapter are different things and you think that shouldn't be the case? Or does it cause rule issues I'm missing?
Just the inherent hilarity of iconic marine chapters not actually being marines if you look at the rules close enough.
Stux wrote: What is the actual issue here? Is it just that a space marine detachment and a space chapter are different things and you think that shouldn't be the case? Or does it cause rule issues I'm missing?
Just the inherent hilarity of iconic marine chapters not actually being marines if you look at the rules close enough.
Right... But it's just a way of delineating content from different Codexes. I really don't get why this is a big deal.
Peregrine wrote: Even more hilarious consequence: if you make a custom chapter that uses the Ultramarines chapter tactics your detachment is not a space marine detachment. But if you use the ULTRAMARINES keyword and just write some out-of-game fluff about your custom chapter it counts as a space marine detachment.
Nope. If you read there, it says <chapter> units.
<chapter> I believe is allowed to be anything EXCEPT deathwatch, blood angels, etc.
This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
p5freak wrote: This is not a rules question, thats why its not in YMDC. Its just that BA, DA, SW, DW are space marines, and they are not space marines.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
it's just p[art of the intellctually dishonest "duur it's too confusing, they need to consilidate the marines for 'ease" arguement.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Space Wolves have successors now due to Cawl. Deathwatch now have no connection to the Ordo Xenos.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Space Wolves have successors now due to Cawl. Deathwatch now have no connection to the Ordo Xenos.
I thought it was just Primaris successors, which I really don't count.
Deathwatch still have enough connection previously anyway that you can safely consolidate. If Grey Knights and Sisters used to work JUST FINE and have NO PROBLEMS, why are we giving an exception?
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
it's just p[art of the intellctually dishonest "duur it's too confusing, they need to consilidate the marines for 'ease" arguement.
Except Marines need to be consolidated as 95% of everything is shared. There's no point outside you just wanting to feel special when you honestly aren't. The Angels especially don't have enough deviation from organization that it even makes sense to pretend they need a separate codex to be represented, especially when a lot of the unique stuff is hardly unique. The Dark Angels fliers are easily the biggest offender.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
Inconsistencies like this shouldn't happen. At all.
It's not 95% though and having had to use imperium index 1 for longer than codex marine players, let me just say I never want to go back to a book that badly organised again.
Even ignoring the 16 named characters in codex space marines, there's 11 entries that the dark angels can't use. I just counted 69 non named units in the SM codex (not including shadow spear which isn't in yet). 69-11=58
58/69 it's 84%.
With named characters it's 58/85 it's 68%.
68% is still a lot of overlap but I was being generous by counting bikes, attack bikes and land speeders as the same as their ravenwing equivalents. I can't remember off hand if there's a difference other than jink but if there is, it becomes 65%.
That's a lot less than 95%. So please, don't make up wild statistics.
And before anyone says Deathwing are the same as normal terminators or assault terminators, no, they're not. That's like saying all aspect warriors could be combined into a single entry. Don't go there.
The game needs a lot less power armor, but not the way gw is making it happen. Consolidating the stupid snowflake marines and getting rid of dw would help with that.
Martel732 wrote: The game needs a lot less power armor, but not the way gw is making it happen. Consolidating the stupid snowflake marines and getting rid of dw would help with that.
Are there any separate codex chapters you don't want to squat?
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Sisters aren't space marines at all though. You'd be adding a codex worth of special rules to a codex with two codex worth of special rules already.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Sisters aren't space marines at all though. You'd be adding a codex worth of special rules to a codex with two codex worth of special rules already.
They're a military force often associated with a particular Inquisition branch. They were in a book together before. After all. So in the end, what more is the Deathwatch and Grey Knights into the fold? Inquisitors are just one entry where you attach a particular keyword and BAM you're done.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Space Wolves have successors now due to Cawl. Deathwatch now have no connection to the Ordo Xenos.
GW made grey knights and death watch space marine chapters that work WITH their respective part of the inqusition as opposed to FOR. which IMHO is honestly more thematic to how Marines are within 40k
Zustiur wrote: It's not 95% though and having had to use imperium index 1 for longer than codex marine players, let me just say I never want to go back to a book that badly organised again.
Even ignoring the 16 named characters in codex space marines, there's 11 entries that the dark angels can't use. I just counted 69 non named units in the SM codex (not including shadow spear which isn't in yet). 69-11=58
58/69 it's 84%.
With named characters it's 58/85 it's 68%.
68% is still a lot of overlap but I was being generous by counting bikes, attack bikes and land speeders as the same as their ravenwing equivalents. I can't remember off hand if there's a difference other than jink but if there is, it becomes 65%.
That's a lot less than 95%. So please, don't make up wild statistics.
And before anyone says Deathwing are the same as normal terminators or assault terminators, no, they're not. That's like saying all aspect warriors could be combined into a single entry. Don't go there.
I don't count named characters ever and to be honest I'm all for getting rid of some of them. Nobody is gonna miss Tellion or Asmodai, sorry.
Space Marine Fliers already cover the Dark Angel's ones with too many similarities, and I'm already annoyed the Stormhawk is a separate entry from the Stormtalon to be honest. That's one consolidation that could be made.
And yes Deathwing are exactly the same. Nobody makes a squad that's 1 LC dude, one TH/SS, one Chainfist, one Assault Cannon, and one Power Sword Sarge. You end up specializing the squad which is already done, surprise surprise, by the two entries done with Tactical/Assault Terminators. Hell, that would make it easier to do a fluffy Deathwing force by avoiding the silly Rule of 3, huh?
Regarding the Aspect Warriors, they actually have differing stats all over and LOTS of varying equipment. The only thing Deathwing have that's unique is the Plasma Cannon literally nobody uses.
Get over Deathwing being special, because they're not.
Quasistellar wrote: This all stems from having multiple codexes for space marines. The original vanilla codex is called "Space Marines". The snowflakes are called by their chapter name in the codex title. It's just a way to differentiate between codexes.
Can be solved by unifying all the Adeptus Astartes under one codex, barring Grey Knights.
Bingo. Consolidation fixes a lot. With Space Wolves having no successors though and ACTUALLY having a giant deviation in organization, they can probably stay by themselves. Angels as separate codices need to go though.
Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.
Sisters aren't space marines at all though. You'd be adding a codex worth of special rules to a codex with two codex worth of special rules already.
They're a military force often associated with a particular Inquisition branch. They were in a book together before. After all. So in the end, what more is the Deathwatch and Grey Knights into the fold? Inquisitors are just one entry where you attach a particular keyword and BAM you're done.
Inquisitors have been in books with both Grey Knighs and Sisters. None of the three (GK,DW, SOB) have ever been in the same book before. Furthermore, unlike the marines, none of them have units in common, and only two of them have 'some' rules in common. It would be a book the size of a phone book just to shoe horn them all together.
Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
Don’t care. Deathwatch stays, be butthurt.
I would be fine with consolidating Codices SM, BA, SW, DA into one, with the addendum that all other chapters introduced (such as the Blood Ravens of recent conflict) are auto-included into this publication.
I reckon it be easy enough. All shared things have the keyword replace bit. All unique things get “*” or subscript or maybe a little special box telling the reader the faction bespoke options. Unique units get put into a “Chapter Specific” section. Ideally, characters would go here, too.
I’ll note, if I was given control over 40K rules, being able to use named characters in your army would go into some kind of open-play only or “with opponent’s permission” scenario.
Martel732 wrote: Im not butthurt. Theyre just a really dumb faction written by a 12 year old.
Are you sure? I would consider it plausible that some of the best fighting organizations in the Imperium would have some of their best veterans team up with some of the best gear for off-the-books (codex-noncompliant) operations against one of humanity’s big threats.
No, its not at all. Because marines are already that. But then theres the MOAR MARINES of dw and gk. The dw gear would be standard for all marines. But they need to be more specialer.
Base marines are already stretching suspension of disbelief into knots.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
Martel732 wrote: Im not butthurt. Theyre just a really dumb faction written by a 12 year old.
Are you sure? I would consider it plausible that some of the best fighting organizations in the Imperium would have some of their best veterans team up with some of the best gear for off-the-books (codex-noncompliant) operations against one of humanity’s big threats.
trolls don't let the facts get in their way. and Martel is a troll. it's the only rational explination for why a guy who hates 40ks lore, hates the game, apparenty;y hasn't bought a mini since 4th edition..
still posts here.
Martel732 wrote: No, its not at all. Because marines are already that.
They are? Since when are the Ultramarines made up of veterans of the Salamanders and Blood Angels and ad nauseum? Gee, you are entirely wrong.
But then theres the MOAR MARINES of dw and gk. The dw gear would be standard for all marines. But they need to be more specialer.
Two incredibly powerful organizations—one made up of veterans of the best fighting organizations being assigned the best of gear for fighting a monumental threat without the restrictions of the dogma and doctrines that may have held them back before, and the other made up of much more powerful beings with warp control to fight the denizens of the warp. Pure beings that aren’t corrupted to join their enemies, unlike lesser beings and their organizations—provide very unique and special services to the Imperium that others can not. They get the better gear. Only make sense.
Base marines are already stretching suspension of disbelief into knots.
Yes, transhuman super guys that can dodge bullets, eat brains and gain memories, not sleep, etc, stretch it like taffy. Better, more-specialized transhumance just completely are too over the top. Good thing I like taffy, though.
Lol to all those wanting to cut back on marines. Sorry, meta gamers, but people like fluff and lore too. Asmodai is awesome in fluff and not too shabby in game supporting DW knights, if you can can get him upfield.
As for deathwatch, you want to get rid one of the cooler SM organizations currently available? Say wha?
Don't like, don't play, simples.
If tourny players don't like the bloat, that's up to the TO to introduce limitations, why ruin it for other players?
Isn't part of the main problem the inconsistencies in how GW writers behave when they are writing these book with such levels of crossover.
You get a intercessor with x list of situational buffs to choose from.
Oh your supper douper marine plus one so you get slightly better buff but no list to choose from ans cost the same points.
Oh your special ops marines well here have an entire page worth of rules that give you a 50% improvement in firepower for which you'll be paying 10% points increase.
Or you get the chapter specific unit options that while being very similar to other non special units stats seem to get either "free rules"
The marine codex's make this inconsistent approach very much more apparent that say trying to spot inconsistencies between codex orks and codex tau.
Well, I really don't understand the uproar here.
GW just wanted to point out the difference between the SM codes and the other SM codices like BA, DA, and whatnot.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I really don't understand the uproar here.
GW just wanted to point out the difference between the SM codes and the other SM codices like BA, DA, and whatnot.
Martel732 wrote: Im not butthurt. Theyre just a really dumb faction written by a 12 year old.
...You mean...like...Space Marines?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I really don't understand the uproar here.
GW just wanted to point out the difference between the SM codes and the other SM codices like BA, DA, and whatnot.
In the literal text of the rules a "Space Marine" detachment is a detachment from Codex: Space Marines while an "Adeptus Astartes" detachment includes all the other things that are in plain language usually referred to as Space Marines (BA, DA, SW, Deathwatch, GK). I don't know if it's an uproar so much as folks finding the disconnect between rules and usage comical.
In the literal text of the rules a "Space Marine" detachment is a detachment from Codex: Space Marines while an "Adeptus Astartes" detachment includes all the other things that are in plain language usually referred to as Space Marines (BA, DA, SW, Deathwatch, GK). I don't know if it's an uproar so much as folks finding the disconnect between rules and usage comical.
Martel732 wrote: Im not butthurt. Theyre just a really dumb faction written by a 12 year old.
...You mean...like...Space Marines?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I really don't understand the uproar here.
GW just wanted to point out the difference between the SM codes and the other SM codices like BA, DA, and whatnot.
In the literal text of the rules a "Space Marine" detachment is a detachment from Codex: Space Marines while an "Adeptus Astartes" detachment includes all the other things that are in plain language usually referred to as Space Marines (BA, DA, SW, Deathwatch, GK). I don't know if it's an uproar so much as folks finding the disconnect between rules and usage comical.
Space marine are at least a 12.5 year old. But they are pretty dumb, too, to be honest. Especially at the listed chapter sizes.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff. A regular librarian has access to the same powers.
Sorry dude, you're trying to gatekeep. Just because you like something doesn't mean it needs to go.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff. A regular librarian has access to the same powers.
Sorry dude, you're trying to gatekeep. Just because you like something doesn't mean it needs to go.
Rules imbalances can be fixed. Shocking, I know.
So yeah. You're smug. Not correct.
Tiggy at least costs more than a regular Librarian for what he does.
You do realize they made Crowe LOWER in cost than a regular Champ to make him still not as good as a regular Champ? A special character should NOT be cheaper than a generic option out of principle. Add in the terrible fluff and that adds to an entry and fluff piece that should've been deleted a long time ago.
Unless you can actually come up with a defense for Crowe besides "you're smug because you don't use him", he has no purpose in existing. Go.
IOW, special characters should always be Mary Sues/Marty Stus - in that they're just as good as anyone else in everything else, only even more betterer at their job?
Perhaps some individual examples of a specific role are better in some areas and worse in others?
Perhaps not everyone has to be exactly as skilled as everyone else in everything?
Perhaps some people like things you don't? Even worse, perhaps that's not a problem?
Bharring wrote: IOW, special characters should always be Mary Sues/Marty Stus - in that they're just as good as anyone else in everything else, only even more betterer at their job?
Perhaps some individual examples of a specific role are better in some areas and worse in others?
Perhaps not everyone has to be exactly as skilled as everyone else in everything?
Perhaps some people like things you don't? Even worse, perhaps that's not a problem?
Um, yeah kinda. This is why they're Special Characters and you only get one of each. They do more than the generic at a slightly higher cost for balance reasons. Hypothetically this works with all of them assuming appropriate pricing.
Crowe can't be priced correctly if he's still not taken at a lower cost than the frickin generic version. Add on the atrocious fluff and he really has no reason to exist. Hell, the ONLY reason he was taken in the 5th edition codex was because he made Purifiers troops. That was it.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff.
Yes, please let's do that! He can be replaced by generic 'Chief Librarian' that can be used by all chapters and can of course be used to represent Tigurius well. The same goes for many other special characters. Chronus should be replaced by a generic marine Tank Commander, Telion with a generic Scout HQ etc. Many other Special character could be just be replaced with more relics and more customisability with the generic characters.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: IOW, special characters should always be Mary Sues/Marty Stus - in that they're just as good as anyone else in everything else, only even more betterer at their job?
Special characters should be something that are truly unique. Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
IMHO, it should have been - codex marines, codex imperial agents (DW, GK, Custodes), codex astartes (DA, SW, BA).
But if that was the case GW would have lost 3 codex purchases just from me (marines, DW, Custodes, DA, SW, BA) and based on their most recent numbers those blood suckers aren't leaving any meat on the bone.
It's also frustrating the way ITC decided that by adding more astartes you can no longer compete for best astartes and instead get thrown into the Imperium pool with the big boys playing knights/ig. SW (astartes) +DW (astartes) = imperium and not astartes!?!?!?
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff.
Yes, please let's do that! He can be replaced by generic 'Chief Librarian' that can be used by all chapters and can of course be used to represent Tigurius well. The same goes for many other special characters. Chronus should be replaced by a generic marine Tank Commander, Telion with a generic Scout HQ etc. Many other Special character could be just be replaced with more relics and more customisability with the generic characters.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: IOW, special characters should always be Mary Sues/Marty Stus - in that they're just as good as anyone else in everything else, only even more betterer at their job?
Special characters should be something that are truly unique. Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
That said, making the Chief Librarian strat generic to outside Blood Angels is a good suggestion.
I'm also for making Relics bought instead of how they are now. Wanna know why the Castellan is overpowered? Because it gets a super weapon for FREE and it has to be costed as though it's taking it for terms of nerfing it. Then if you don't take Wrath you're buying a bad unit.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bananathug wrote: IMHO, it should have been - codex marines, codex imperial agents (DW, GK, Custodes), codex astartes (DA, SW, BA).
But if that was the case GW would have lost 3 codex purchases just from me (marines, DW, Custodes, DA, SW, BA) and based on their most recent numbers those blood suckers aren't leaving any meat on the bone.
It's also frustrating the way ITC decided that by adding more astartes you can no longer compete for best astartes and instead get thrown into the Imperium pool with the big boys playing knights/ig. SW (astartes) +DW (astartes) = imperium and not astartes!?!?!?
No, Angels need to be consolidated. They're not so different in organization and deviate even less than say Black Templars or Iron Hands. Seems to work okay for them.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I'm also for making Relics bought instead of how they are now. Wanna know why the Castellan is overpowered? Because it gets a super weapon for FREE and it has to be costed as though it's taking it for terms of nerfing it. Then if you don't take Wrath you're buying a bad unit.
Yes, absolutely. Relics not costing points was always a terrible idea.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I'm also for making Relics bought instead of how they are now. Wanna know why the Castellan is overpowered? Because it gets a super weapon for FREE and it has to be costed as though it's taking it for terms of nerfing it. Then if you don't take Wrath you're buying a bad unit.
Yes, absolutely. Relics not costing points was always a terrible idea.
Especially with how the AP system on weapons works now too, that you could in theory price a relic weapon that it isn't autotake but you might want to anyway. YEAH the Spartean was hot garbage in 7th, but now it makes sense as a 4 point weapon or so.
I'm also not a fan of only one relic per character as, if someone places all their eggs in one basket, that's on them. A Chapter Master copying Rogal Dorn with the Spartean/Primarchs Wrath and Teeth of Terra is reasonable to me and doesn't break anything.
Okay, so I didn't read all of this thread as closely as I usually do before I post, because I don't play space marines. But I have to jump in on some of this, because I think there are a lot of things that people are overlooking.
Anything in the vanilla SM book should be able to be taken by any of the special independent dex marines, but it doesn't go in reverse. Vanilla Marines can't have Fenris Wolves or the Ravenwing or Death Companies. For that reason, separate dexes do make sense, whether you like them or not. If you are suggesting that independent dexes lose their special units and rules so that they fit into one book, I would expect that a lot of BA, DA, SW players would be very upset with you.
Again, some of you don't think these units are important because maybe they don't win tournaments; I get that, but I'm not sure if you get the fact that there is way more to 40k than tournaments.
As for Deathwatch and Greyknights they are and always have been the chambers militant of the Xenos and Malleus respectively. They always will be. And that DOES absolutely mean that they work FOR the Inquisition.
Other chapters may be said to more accurately work WITH the Inquisition (and even that is debatable), but not these two.
Please note as well that because GW has gone to such great lengths to differentiate between radicals and monodominants and all the other political divisions within the Inquisition, we need to differentiate between the authority of an Inquisitor and the authority of the Inquisition.
An Inquisitor's request can be denied, possibly even by their chamber militant. The Inquisition, however, is arguably the greatest voice of authority in the Imperium, and denying a request from the organization as a whole has the capacity to get your entire planet exterminated. Even the High Lords of Terra are subject to the authority of the Inquisition.
When the Imperial Agents dex drops, and I suspect we will get one, it should clear a lot of this up.
PenitentJake wrote: Okay, so I didn't read all of this thread as closely as I usually do before I post, because I don't play space marines. But I have to jump in on some of this, because I think there are a lot of things that people are overlooking.
Anything in the vanilla SM book should be able to be taken by any of the special independent dex marines, but it doesn't go in reverse. Vanilla Marines can't have Fenris Wolves or the Ravenwing or Death Companies. For that reason, separate dexes do make sense, whether you like them or not. If you are suggesting that independent dexes lose their special units and rules so that they fit into one book, I would expect that a lot of BA, DA, SW players would be very upset with you.
Again, some of you don't think these units are important because maybe they don't win tournaments; I get that, but I'm not sure if you get the fact that there is way more to 40k than tournaments.
As for Deathwatch and Greyknights they are and always have been the chambers militant of the Xenos and Malleus respectively. They always will be. And that DOES absolutely mean that they work FOR the Inquisition.
Other chapters may be said to more accurately work WITH the Inquisition (and even that is debatable), but not these two.
Please note as well that because GW has gone to such great lengths to differentiate between radicals and monodominants and all the other political divisions within the Inquisition, we need to differentiate between the authority of an Inquisitor and the authority of the Inquisition.
An Inquisitor's request can be denied, possibly even by their chamber militant. The Inquisition, however, is arguably the greatest voice of authority in the Imperium, and denying a request from the organization as a whole has the capacity to get your entire planet exterminated. Even the High Lords of Terra are subject to the authority of the Inquisition.
When the Imperial Agents dex drops, and I suspect we will get one, it should clear a lot of this up.
A lot of those "special units" aren't actually special outside the case of Space Wolves. Blood and Dark Angels can be safely consolidated.
Darkshroud? Lieutenant Land Speeders? Dark Talons? Deathwing Knights? Deathwing characters that other chapters don't have equivalents of?
And I assume you aren't counting named characters, but still there's loads of them and most of them are pretty unique. 5++ aura, +1 attack aura, jet bike.
You'd throw that all away just to make things a bit tidier? Ridiculous.
I'm also not a fan of only one relic per character as, if someone places all their eggs in one basket, that's on them. A Chapter Master copying Rogal Dorn with the Spartean/Primarchs Wrath and Teeth of Terra is reasonable to me and doesn't break anything.
Except when you get to knight relics. The rules of unintended consequences also apply.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I'm also for making Relics bought instead of how they are now. Wanna know why the Castellan is overpowered? Because it gets a super weapon for FREE and it has to be costed as though it's taking it for terms of nerfing it. Then if you don't take Wrath you're buying a bad unit.
Yes, absolutely. Relics not costing points was always a terrible idea.
relics IMHO would be a lot more intreasting if they removed WEAPONS from it, if what you had was a choice of a 2+ suit of armor or some random tidbids that enhanced an aspect of the model (like extending it's aura etc) it'd be a lot more intreasting and proably fairer
Stux wrote: Darkshroud? Lieutenant Land Speeders? Dark Talons?
Give them to everyone, or merge it with a current Sheet, ie the Dark Talon.
Deathwing Knights?
Give the Chapters a Unit or Two Unique to them? Give more chapters "Veteran" Terminators?
Deathwing characters that other chapters don't have equivalents of?
The one Deathwing Character? Keep a couple of the Special Characters for each Chapter. Merge the basics, keep the truly unique. Drop some characters to make Generic Versions available to everyone.
Put BA, DA, SW into C:SM, since you can edit SM squads a bit to fit most of them well enough. Sanguinary Guard can be sorted by giving Honor Guard the option to buy Jump Packs and Relic Blades, DA, give Assault Terminators special rules for all stormshield squads and the option to buy power maces, etc. give bikes the option to buy TL Plasma Guns...
Keep a few of the more unique units as Chapter Specific, like how the terminus ultra is (IE, the DA Land Speeder) while giving some of the other things that would make sense in other chapters (Baal Preds, Librarian Dreads) to everyone. I'd love a Librarian Dread or the option for an HQ dread in C:SM outside of FW.
So.. show of hands here Space Marine players.. whom here would pay 80 bucks for a codex? people are already saying the Codices are too expensive, and consolidating the dark angels and blood angels codices would only expand this.
Let's assume for a minute that GW does this, dark angel;s and blood angles are given the 3 pages of fluff and sucessor chapters every other chapter in the book is given.
Let's assume that every character has a fluff entry in the codex, and let's assume 2 datasheets a page.
you're looking at adding somewhere in the ballpark of 25 pages to the codex from just HQs etc before adding any units.
Now beyond this blood angels could proably manage fine with Sanguigary guard being rolled into Honorguard. And Death Company could even be reduced to a strat (which might be seen as "meh" at first until blood angels realize they can start tossing out death company sanguigary guard and stuff)
Dark Angels might need some consolidation of their deathwing and ravenwing stuff so IMHO they'd risk losing more.
So basicly it could be done but the result would be a massive and expensive codex, that'd likely have a ton of exceptions etc in the rules.
“Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Sisters need to be consolidated into a single Inquisition codex. There's honestly not that many entries that it can't be done. Hell I'm pretty sure the Tyranid codex would only be slightly smaller based on the entries themselves.”
Make sure to send GW a letter with this little gem.
BroodSpawn wrote: You'd also be invalidating people's purchases by doing that kind of consolidation
or you'd have a 80 dollar plus phone book sized codex. neither of which is desirable.
It's why IMHO most of the people calling for consolidation proably don't actually play the armies in question.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff. A regular librarian has access to the same powers.
Sorry dude, you're trying to gatekeep. Just because you like something doesn't mean it needs to go.
Rules imbalances can be fixed. Shocking, I know.
So yeah. You're smug. Not correct.
Tiggy at least costs more than a regular Librarian for what he does.
You do realize they made Crowe LOWER in cost than a regular Champ to make him still not as good as a regular Champ? A special character should NOT be cheaper than a generic option out of principle. Add in the terrible fluff and that adds to an entry and fluff piece that should've been deleted a long time ago.
Unless you can actually come up with a defense for Crowe besides "you're smug because you don't use him", he has no purpose in existing. Go.
Sure Crowe has bad rules. Doesn't mean remove him. It means fix him.
Granted I've said that for four posts now. You'd think you'd have picked up on that by now.
Crowe is IMHO an example of a character with CHARACTER. he's not just a "chapter master with some additional rules and more relics" he's got some intreasting character to him. and I agree I think what he needs is improved rules to really nail down this character.
All marines can't all have access to everything. I mean, I know a lot of people are talking about marines being under powered lately, but giving everyone everything is not the solution.
Let me reiterate: this game is more than its rules, and you'd be destroying an unbroken 40 year legacy. Hey space marine players, wanna be just like every other space marine player?
As for the suggestion of putting all the chambers militant into a single book with their accompanying Inquisitors, hard no please, because now we are talking about my faction.
For starters, Sisters aren't just the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus, they are the standing army of the Ecclesiarchy, and that doesn't fit as tidily with the pattern. Each Ordo should have access to different henchmen- Jokaero make sense for Radical Ordo Xenos, but not so much Hereticus or Malleus; bound Daemons are for radical Malleus, etc. They need their own psychic disciplines; their own strats and relics...
Imperial Agents is absolutely the best way to go for the Inquisition. Each of the Ordos and all of their henchman, the Assassins, Sisters of Silence and maybe the Rogue Traders and Blackstone Heroes. That's a lot of units and a lot of pages. If your concern is that such a book would be light on content, believe me, it wouldn't be.
And if you give me less Sisters and Ecclesiarchy than I've got after I've been waiting for 15 years for what is now just around the corner... Well, I hope you can forgive my rather visceral disgust at the suggestion.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people. There's an easy solution to too many options: don't like it, don't play it.
There is no solution to too few options.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: those who want a simplified, streamlined, perfectly balanced yet tactically rich game would be happier just buying infantry squads as pawns, vehicles as rooks, knights and bishops and super heavies for the king and queen and playing chess on an over sized board.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
Let me reiterate: this game is more than its rules, and you'd be destroying an unbroken 40 year legacy.
Game is indeed more than rules. And no one is suggesting taking away the background of the different chapters.
Hey space marine players, wanna be just like every other space marine player?
But my army wouldn't be the same as everyone else's. From this huge pool of units I would choose the combination units that I like, and that would unlikely to be exactly the same than everyone else's choice. Blood Angels players could choose a larger number of jump pack units, Imperial Fists player more heavy support units and White Scars player more bike units. But it doesn't mean there needs to be special snowflake versions of those units for those chapters.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
Harliquins used to back in the day just be in codex Eldar. now they're their own codex. So it's NOT just marines. furthermore, deathguard and 1k sons now how their own codex.
why are there so many Marine spin off codices? there's a very simple answer.
BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE
Black Templars where folded into codex space marines. the conclusion, Black Templars just wheren't popular eneugh to justify keeping seperate. given that the other chapters haven't been. one can only conclude that there is sufficant demand to keep them seperate.
If GW thought a "Codex Biel-Tan" or "Codex Snakebite orks" would be popular eneugh to justify a codex? they'd fething do it.
GW is a company people not a goddamned charity. and that means the parts that are popular get more attention and detail.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
Taking away unit options and such is bad business.
I’m in favor of consolidating SM, SW, DA, and BA into one book, and I don’t play any of those armies. However, my army did have its own book and got folded into another. We lost codex Militarum Tempestus from last edition. I lost warlord traits and options on my vehicles. To be honest, aside from the lost warlord traits, the situation of Militarum Tempestus has improved, as I now have access to all the units in the Advisors and Auxillia list. Plus I can ally regular guard more easily if I really wanted.
^For what it's worth I quite like the 3rd Edition way of doing it, where there was a main SM book, and then "pamphlet" books that gave the appropriate adjustments for the alternates.
When Tempestus got folded back in, the only things lost that weren't 7th Ed only were the WL traits, so it wasn't much of a loss.
For SW/DA/BA, while they share a core of the army with Generic Marines (GM), they still have a large number of units each, more than you could easily put on a page or two in the codex for each.
It worked with BT, because aside from the Castilians (Not the knight), and Crusader squads, GM already had everything they did. And Castillians became Lieutenants anyway.
With BA, you'd have to include room for Sanguinary Guards, Death Companies, Death Company dreadnoughts, Furioso Dreads, Librarian Dreads, and Baal Preditors. That's not including their large stable of special characters.
Making SG just a few upgrade options for VVets would be less satisfying for many existing BA players, because they already have VVets.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
I'm a Deathwatch/Dark Angels player that says consolidation works for Inquisition forces and Marines.
I'm also not a fan of only one relic per character as, if someone places all their eggs in one basket, that's on them. A Chapter Master copying Rogal Dorn with the Spartean/Primarchs Wrath and Teeth of Terra is reasonable to me and doesn't break anything.
Except when you get to knight relics. The rules of unintended consequences also apply.
And ya know what? Weapon Relics costed appropriately solves that issue. You want a relic Chainsword AND Fist on your Knight? That's fine if they're costed fine.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: So.. show of hands here Space Marine players.. whom here would pay 80 bucks for a codex? people are already saying the Codices are too expensive, and consolidating the dark angels and blood angels codices would only expand this.
Let's assume for a minute that GW does this, dark angel;s and blood angles are given the 3 pages of fluff and sucessor chapters every other chapter in the book is given.
Let's assume that every character has a fluff entry in the codex, and let's assume 2 datasheets a page.
you're looking at adding somewhere in the ballpark of 25 pages to the codex from just HQs etc before adding any units.
Now beyond this blood angels could proably manage fine with Sanguigary guard being rolled into Honorguard. And Death Company could even be reduced to a strat (which might be seen as "meh" at first until blood angels realize they can start tossing out death company sanguigary guard and stuff)
Dark Angels might need some consolidation of their deathwing and ravenwing stuff so IMHO they'd risk losing more.
So basicly it could be done but the result would be a massive and expensive codex, that'd likely have a ton of exceptions etc in the rules.
Seeing as the Index handled a lot of it fine, who says it needs to be 80$ outside you?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff. A regular librarian has access to the same powers.
Sorry dude, you're trying to gatekeep. Just because you like something doesn't mean it needs to go.
Rules imbalances can be fixed. Shocking, I know.
So yeah. You're smug. Not correct.
Tiggy at least costs more than a regular Librarian for what he does.
You do realize they made Crowe LOWER in cost than a regular Champ to make him still not as good as a regular Champ? A special character should NOT be cheaper than a generic option out of principle. Add in the terrible fluff and that adds to an entry and fluff piece that should've been deleted a long time ago.
Unless you can actually come up with a defense for Crowe besides "you're smug because you don't use him", he has no purpose in existing. Go.
Sure Crowe has bad rules. Doesn't mean remove him. It means fix him.
Granted I've said that for four posts now. You'd think you'd have picked up on that by now.
Crowe has bad rules, bad fluff, and no purpose in existing, and already making him cheaper than a generic Champ breaks the main point of Special Characters existing, meaning he defies what makes a Special Character special. You can't fix him and he needs to go. Period.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
I'm a Deathwatch/Dark Angels player that says consolidation works for Inquisition forces and Marines.
So yeah it's my stuff too. Nice try though!
You'll notice I said almost...Try reading my post next time.
BroodSpawn wrote: You'd also be invalidating people's purchases by doing that kind of consolidation
Not an argument because anyone getting into 7th at the end of the edition had their purchases invalidated by 8th rolling in.
what Minis where invalidated by 8th edition?
You really wanna get into the whole Index vs Codex and ETC existing argument? I can name you a whole slew of Codices that invalidated people's models if you want.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Hardly. The Grey Knight codex is maybe 20~, give or take. Remove the entries that don't matter (nobody is going to miss Crowe or the obviously imbalanced GMDreadknight) and that's pretty easy. Deathwatch only look flooded in entries because of the addition of Primaris units. Otherwise they share a bunch of datasheets themselves from the vehicles.
So, it's another case of you thinking something is gak, so it has to go. Nevermind the fact that people use them.
It's still three codex worth of separate armies you're trying to cram together, simply on the grounds of some weird feeling of superiority.
Crowe has bad fluff and bad rules and shouldn't exist in general. I'm for getting rid of Dreadknight GMs because of the huge imbalance they cause against the entry of the regular Dreadknight.
It isn't some feeling superiority. It's for practicality. Practicality dictates that the Inquisition and the military forces associated with them be in one comprehensive codex.
So he needs his rules fixed. Just because you're smug in your not using him doesn't mean he should be removed. Practicality dictates that armies that have vastly separate rules, should be in separate codexes. So yes, it's you feeling that since you don't use them, they need to go.
Same as it's always been for your contributions to these posts.
Martel732 wrote: Or just get rid of DW. Because they are a dumb power fantasy.
Dawn take you.
yup because deathwatch don't have a fairly rich background dating back 20 years or so with multiple apperances in fluff, a RPG and all sorts of other things. nope they're just some dumb power fantasy.
Something can be a stupid power fantasy for 20 years. And have multiple sources indulge it. God forbid someone criticize GWs excessive use of power armor factions.
OR they go into a Inquisition codex and we remove the stuff that they don't really need (although being so Elite with not as many options it wouldn't be as big a cleanup. Getting rid of the Corvus entry and making them use the Stormraven would definitely save some room).
Or we can just keep DW/GK/SoB separate because outside of a piece of fluff, have never been part of each other, or worked together as a general force for oh...all of their existence. Nevermind the fact that they have vastly different units from each other, vastly different rules, and vastly different wargear. This isn't like trying to cram DA/BA together, where at least 1/3 of their books are in common. And while generic primaris do make a chunk of the DW units, they don't exist in the other two armies you want to cram together.
No, Crowe just needs to go. He serves no purpose in existing outside the fluff being atrocious. I'm not smug, I'm just correct. Use the model as a generic Champ and you'll have much better results.
The "model" for the GM Dreadknight doesn't even exist, so that's not a problem in removing the entry. It's far too imbalanced in terms of execution and concept.
Sure, let's remove Tigarius from the space marines, he doesn't serve any purpose outisde of fluff. A regular librarian has access to the same powers.
Sorry dude, you're trying to gatekeep. Just because you like something doesn't mean it needs to go.
Rules imbalances can be fixed. Shocking, I know.
So yeah. You're smug. Not correct.
Tiggy at least costs more than a regular Librarian for what he does.
You do realize they made Crowe LOWER in cost than a regular Champ to make him still not as good as a regular Champ? A special character should NOT be cheaper than a generic option out of principle. Add in the terrible fluff and that adds to an entry and fluff piece that should've been deleted a long time ago.
Unless you can actually come up with a defense for Crowe besides "you're smug because you don't use him", he has no purpose in existing. Go.
Sure Crowe has bad rules. Doesn't mean remove him. It means fix him.
Granted I've said that for four posts now. You'd think you'd have picked up on that by now.
[/spoiler]
Crowe has bad rules, bad fluff, and no purpose in existing, and already making him cheaper than a generic Champ breaks the main point of Special Characters existing, meaning he defies what makes a Special Character special. You can't fix him and he needs to go. Period.
Bad rules can be fixed, bad fluff is subjective, and he definitely serves a purpose, even if it's "be cheaper than a normal expensive brother captain is". The point of a special character existing (and I can't believe I have to tell you this) is to be different from the generic characters. Crowe certainly is.
As for fixing him, you fail 100% of the time when you don't try.
With BA, you'd have to include room for Sanguinary Guards,
Should be covered by giving generic Honour Guard an option to take jump packs.
Death Companies, Death Company dreadnoughts,
These can stay unique.
Furioso Dreads, Librarian Dreads, and Baal Preditors.
Everyone should get these.
That's not including their large stable of special characters.
Some can stay, other can be represented by relics you can give to generic characters.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
Sorry if I came across that way, but I'm not saying most space marine players want this. I'm saying that most of the people who do want the marines folded together are generic space marine players.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
Sorry if I came across that way, but I'm not saying most space marine players want this. I'm saying that most of the people who do want the marines folded together are generic space marine players.
In my experiance a lot aren't even space Marine players. a Lot of the loudest voices are disgruntled Xenos fans who think they'll magicly see more releases for them
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex. Add. Not take away. Because some people would love that Biel Tan or Snakebite Dex, and those who didn't could choose not to buy it. You complain about so many books without realizing that some factions would give an arm and a leg for your burden of choice. I told you I've been waiting 15 years for new sisters, and ya know what? If they dropped one dex for each Order and seventh for the Ecclesiarchy with unique HQ's and vehicle variants and specialist units, I'd buy every last item on the last and consider it the greatest thing to happen to the hobby since 1987.
If dexes get combined, options will be lost- certainly not all of them, and the ones that do get lost may not seem important to you, but I don't think you can credibly say there would not be a loss of options. Conversely you can already play the army you want with the rules you have, because you're allowed to take a blood angels detachment and a dark angels detachment and a space wolves detachment all in the same army, and you can also decide not to field the units that you consider unnecessary, ineffective or redundant. Granted, it does take multiple books, but it can at least be done.
In other words, status quo = everybody wins vs change = some people marginally happier and others devastated, invalidated, angry or merely indifferent.
Let me reiterate: this game is more than its rules, and you'd be destroying an unbroken 40 year legacy.
Game is indeed more than rules. And no one is suggesting taking away the background of the different chapters.
But I imagine that there are at least 15-20 pages of background in each of the dexes; if you combine all of them and then combine that with the generic material the book would be massive. They would have to cut some of the background out. I know you are not asking for that to happen directly, but you must understand that it would have to happen as a natural consequence of combining dexes. I mean, the whole premise of the death company is that it's a genetic failure in the geneseed, so how do you really suggest giving the ultramarines the option of having a death company while simultaneously claiming that you don't want to lose or alter the background?
PenitentJake wrote: But again, fix the problem by powering up the weak ones, not nerfing the good ones. Jeez, why is it always take away and never give more?
Combining the codices actually means giving everybody more options.
No one wants to pay $150 for a codex, hell no one wants to pay the $50 now.
And he's not talking about giving more options by throwing more stuff at people, he's talking about making existing options more relevant by bringing them more inline with the better units power wise.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, even though I know it is going to annoy some people - each of the original 18 should end up with their own 'dex (including any material for known Successors), with Codex: Adeptus Astartes and Codex: CSM becoming the Ultramarines and Black Legion books respectively. Not sure if that means Renegade SM need their own book, admittedly.
Also, holding pricing the same from book to book needs looking at, as depending on the focus of the army and the options available, unit costs may need to vary.
I don’t think it would be a half-bad idea to have all the unique named characters in a special expansion. This makes them not a part of the regular game. Perhaps either a full special characters book with all the factions in it, or faction specific like Space Marine Character or Necron Characters. At the smaller size, it could be a free digital asset.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
@Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
Not everyone has internet access and showing painted models in the book is helpful.
You do need the fluff, it's the biggest draw for most people for why they pick their army. Again, not everyone has internet access.
Don't forget that there are four armies being put into this. So one page for the generic ones, one page for the 'codex' marines chapter stratagems, and one page each for BA/DA?SW. One page each for each school of powers, one page each for each set of relics, plus one for codex chapter relics, three to six pages each for units particular to BA/DA/SW. At least a page to list what they don't get, each. At least a page, probably two for their special rules, again, each. 3 pages for special characters for each. That's 39 pages. That's not including any art, fluff, or model examples.
So that by itself is almost doubling the size of the book.
And that's with me probably underestimating it.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
Not everyone has internet access and showing painted models in the book is helpful. You do need the fluff, it's the biggest draw for most people for why they pick their army. Again, not everyone has internet access. Don't forget that there are four armies being put into this. So one page for the generic ones, one page for the 'codex' marines chapter stratagems, and one page each for BA/DA?SW. One page each for each school of powers, one page each for each set of relics, plus one for codex chapter relics, three to six pages each for units particular to BA/DA/SW. At least a page to list what they don't get, each. At least a page, probably two for their special rules, again, each. 3 pages for special characters for each. That's 39 pages. That's not including any art, fluff, or model examples.
So that by itself is almost doubling the size of the book. And that's with me probably underestimating it.
YAY MATH!
Then show some painted models. Showing some painted models is not painting guides. Hey guess what? GW used to sell whole books that were nothing but painting guides. Buy those.
You don't need the fluff. You don't BUY the codex to find out about the army you picked. You already read up about the army before you picked up the codex to buy it. Or did you really drop 50.00 on a complete unknown in the hopes that you would end up liking the stories and pictures? Also, no. Not MOST people. Don't assume anything about MOST peoples motivations without some solid data to back it up. You don't have anything to show that 51%+ of all players buy their codex and pick their armies because of fluff. And you DEFINITELY don't have anything to show us that says those players need that fluff in the codex to justify buying the shrink wrapped books to find out if they like the fluff.
6 powers do not take up an entire page.
Look at the index. 1 Page to list all the units they get from the whole single book and their special rules. 1 page for relics and psychic powers. MAYBE needing 1 more page for warlord traits but probably not. Again, you don't need the sheer volume of pictures and you don't need to reprint the land raiders 4 times. 1 datasheet for each variant probably on 2 pages with a single picture of a land raider will do, if that. The Nid codex has 2 pages as 1 big splash image with all the units with a little number next to them. Then at the bottom it lists which units are what by those numbers. It takes up minimal real estate and lets everyone know what everything is.
You want the book to be compact and cost less? Stop filling it with bs. Then you have room for the rules in a more easily digestible format that makes everything easier to find.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
Not everyone has internet access and showing painted models in the book is helpful.
You do need the fluff, it's the biggest draw for most people for why they pick their army. Again, not everyone has internet access.
Don't forget that there are four armies being put into this. So one page for the generic ones, one page for the 'codex' marines chapter stratagems, and one page each for BA/DA?SW. One page each for each school of powers, one page each for each set of relics, plus one for codex chapter relics, three to six pages each for units particular to BA/DA/SW. At least a page to list what they don't get, each. At least a page, probably two for their special rules, again, each. 3 pages for special characters for each. That's 39 pages. That's not including any art, fluff, or model examples.
So that by itself is almost doubling the size of the book.
And that's with me probably underestimating it.
YAY MATH!
Then show some painted models. Showing some painted models is not painting guides. Hey guess what? GW used to sell whole books that were nothing but painting guides. Buy those.
You don't need the fluff. You don't BUY the codex to find out about the army you picked. You already read up about the army before you picked up the codex to buy it. Or did you really drop 50.00 on a complete unknown in the hopes that you would end up liking the stories and pictures? Also, no. Not MOST people. Don't assume anything about MOST peoples motivations without some solid data to back it up. You don't have anything to show that 51%+ of all players buy their codex and pick their armies because of fluff. And you DEFINITELY don't have anything to show us that says those players need that fluff in the codex to justify buying the shrink wrapped books to find out if they like the fluff.
6 powers do not take up an entire page.
Look at the index. 1 Page to list all the units they get from the whole single book and their special rules. 1 page for relics and psychic powers. MAYBE needing 1 more page for warlord traits but probably not. Again, you don't need the sheer volume of pictures and you don't need to reprint the land raiders 4 times. 1 datasheet for each variant probably on 2 pages with a single picture of a land raider will do, if that. The Nid codex has 2 pages as 1 big splash image with all the units with a little number next to them. Then at the bottom it lists which units are what by those numbers. It takes up minimal real estate and lets everyone know what everything is.
You want the book to be compact and cost less? Stop filling it with bs. Then you have room for the rules in a more easily digestible format that makes everything easier to find.
My mistake for originally calling the model pictures paint guides. Guess what? They've been part of every codex since there were codex. They serve a useful purpose.
You don't need the fluff. People do buy the codex for the fluff as well as the army rules, even if you don't. Most people read about a paragraph, assuming they weren't just told stuff by a friend. That's different than what is usually put into the codex. Some people do. Some people do their research and find the extra stuff in said codex to be fun/useful to them. Some people buy based on a recomendation. SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE INTERNET ACCESS. You don't have anything to show they don't. Good thing many stores have open copies of said codex.
They do when presented with art and any necessary rules. 1 page per school is about average for GW.
I own all of them. I was counting exactly that page. One per army in the codex. One page per army for relics, plus generic army relics for generic armies, plus one for the generic chapters like Ultramarines. Good thing I only counted each LR variant once. Assuming two data sheets per page, it takes at least four pages for just the Blood Angels unique units. Whoops! I had only estimated three pages for them before. Now we're up to +40 pages. The Nid Codex only has one army in it.
I never said I want the book to be compact and cost less. I want armies that only have passing relationships to other armies to not be in the same book at all.
edit: those blood angels pages aren't counting special characters.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Said index was also missing fluff, paint guides, almost all of the army wide stratagems, special rules, half the psychic powers, and a few other things I'm not remembering.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
Not everyone has internet access and showing painted models in the book is helpful. You do need the fluff, it's the biggest draw for most people for why they pick their army. Again, not everyone has internet access. Don't forget that there are four armies being put into this. So one page for the generic ones, one page for the 'codex' marines chapter stratagems, and one page each for BA/DA?SW. One page each for each school of powers, one page each for each set of relics, plus one for codex chapter relics, three to six pages each for units particular to BA/DA/SW. At least a page to list what they don't get, each. At least a page, probably two for their special rules, again, each. 3 pages for special characters for each. That's 39 pages. That's not including any art, fluff, or model examples.
So that by itself is almost doubling the size of the book. And that's with me probably underestimating it.
YAY MATH!
Then show some painted models. Showing some painted models is not painting guides. Hey guess what? GW used to sell whole books that were nothing but painting guides. Buy those.
You don't need the fluff. You don't BUY the codex to find out about the army you picked. You already read up about the army before you picked up the codex to buy it. Or did you really drop 50.00 on a complete unknown in the hopes that you would end up liking the stories and pictures? Also, no. Not MOST people. Don't assume anything about MOST peoples motivations without some solid data to back it up. You don't have anything to show that 51%+ of all players buy their codex and pick their armies because of fluff. And you DEFINITELY don't have anything to show us that says those players need that fluff in the codex to justify buying the shrink wrapped books to find out if they like the fluff.
6 powers do not take up an entire page.
Look at the index. 1 Page to list all the units they get from the whole single book and their special rules. 1 page for relics and psychic powers. MAYBE needing 1 more page for warlord traits but probably not. Again, you don't need the sheer volume of pictures and you don't need to reprint the land raiders 4 times. 1 datasheet for each variant probably on 2 pages with a single picture of a land raider will do, if that. The Nid codex has 2 pages as 1 big splash image with all the units with a little number next to them. Then at the bottom it lists which units are what by those numbers. It takes up minimal real estate and lets everyone know what everything is.
You want the book to be compact and cost less? Stop filling it with bs. Then you have room for the rules in a more easily digestible format that makes everything easier to find.
My mistake for originally calling the model pictures paint guides. Guess what? They've been part of every codex since there were codex. They serve a useful purpose.
Yeah. Ads for GW product.
You don't need the fluff. People do buy the codex for the fluff as well as the army rules, even if you don't. Most people read about a paragraph, assuming they weren't just told stuff by a friend. That's different than what is usually put into the codex. Some people do. Some people do their research and find the extra stuff in said codex to be fun/useful to them. Some people buy based on a recomendation. SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE INTERNET ACCESS. You don't have anything to show they don't. Good thing many stores have open copies of said codex.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
They do when presented with art and any necessary rules. 1 page per school is about average for GW.
I own all of them. I was counting exactly that page. One per army in the codex. One page per army for relics, plus generic army relics for generic armies, plus one for the generic chapters like Ultramarines. Good thing I only counted each LR variant once. Assuming two data sheets per page, it takes at least four pages for just the Blood Angels unique units. Whoops! I had only estimated three pages for them before. Now we're up to +40 pages. The Nid Codex only has one army in it.
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
I never said I want the book to be compact and cost less. I want armies that only have passing relationships to other armies to not be in the same book at all.
edit: those blood angels pages aren't counting special characters.
You certainly seemed upset about it getting bigger and costing more. When 80-90% of your army shares all the same units with the other army it's not a passing relationship. They are the same army. GSC and Tyranids share 1 unit. Thats it. 1. That is a passing relationship. BA, DA, and SM share more or less everything. Not including unique characters (which each chapter in the SM book has anyway) the BA, DA and SW have less than 10 unique units. When the army is comprised of more like... 6 times as many non unique character datasheets that's nothing. Again, BT have THEIR unique units in the dex. The rest can do the same.
Nope, painted models of everything in the codex. You know, so new players know what they look like. And before you say it: SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE INTERNET ACCESS.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I dn't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
I certainly don't need it. A brand new player likely does. And yes, you claim we don't need it, and yet have shown nothing to prove it. Well guess what? You made the claim first, so get those stats out.
That's nice about your stores. That doesn't invalidate my claim. I didn't. But then: SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE INTERNET ACCESS.
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
Hey, they've been expanded somewhat in the actual codex, and in the index still take far more than four pages. Said index also doesn't include painted model displays (not paint guides), fluff, special rules, most of the psychic powers, any stratagems, chapter traits, relics, ext. But we've been over this. If you like the index, keep using the index. Most of us actually like the codexi.
You certainly seemed upset about it getting bigger and costing more. When 80-90% of your army shares all the same units with the other army it's not a passing relationship. They are the same army.
I don't want the book to get bigger and cost more, because it will. More like share 30-50% of the same units, and yes: a passing relationship. They very much are not the same army. I'd rather pay $50 twice, than $180 once.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
You certainly seemed upset about it getting bigger and costing more. When 80-90% of your army shares all the same units with the other army it's not a passing relationship. They are the same army. GSC and Tyranids share 1 unit. Thats it. 1. That is a passing relationship. BA, DA, and SM share more or less everything. Not including unique characters (which each chapter in the SM book has anyway) the BA, DA and SW have less than 10 unique units. When the army is comprised of more like... 6 times as many non unique character datasheets that's nothing. Again, BT have THEIR unique units in the dex. The rest can do the same.
Because you edited your post.
10 unique units (not counting special characters) is still five pages. Each. Then you have the units that aren't in each army, which means if you're playing DA, (for example) are just a waste of space.
Black templar have one unique unit, again, not counting special characters.
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
the space Marine Codex is already over three hundred pages. I've told you that at a conservitive estimate rolling DAs and BAs into the Space Marine codex will add another 20-30 pages. and realisticly it'll proably be closer to another 40 pages, GW WILL raise the price. and the price of codex space marines is already kinda high. Yes they could cut that down if they removed all fluff, all characters and all the art. but I consider the games soul not worth the price. Maybe someone whose only intreasted in the game and doesn't care about the other aspects of the hobby might disagree. but the fluff and art? IMHO are the heart and soul of 40k
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
the space Marine Codex is already over three hundred pages. I've told you that at a conservitive estimate rolling DAs and BAs into the Space Marine codex will add another 20-30 pages. and realisticly it'll proably be closer to another 40 pages, GW WILL raise the price. and the price of codex space marines is already kinda high
My estimate is 30 pages with no model pictures, art, or fluff.
Again, you bandy around words like most and many as though you have any data to support it. Please, show your work. Where is that data?
I never stated my opinion on the fluff. I said I don't need it in the codex. I would be perfectly happy to have 1 concise rule book and a separate fluff book with all the pictures in the world. When I am playing the game I want the rules as easily accessible as possible with as little nonsense surrounding it as possible. Buying 4 50.00 books for what should be 1 30.00 book is dumb as feth. And exactly what you are arguing for.
DnD sold the 3rd ed players handbook for 35 dollars. It had more pages and more content for less cost while being the ONLY book needed to play the game AND had a spine that allowed the book to sit flat while open.
GW fethed you over with 4 books at higher individual cost with less content and features and you cheer them on as they do it.
Lance845 wrote: DnD sold the 3rd ed players handbook for 35 dollars. It had more pages and more content for less cost while being the ONLY book needed to play the game AND had a spine that allowed the book to sit flat while open.
And the 3rd edition core book was released in the year 2000 - not sure what relevance that has on books released in mid-2017 and onwards...
I like getting all the fluff and art when I buy a codex. GW are catering for more than one type of player, and I am a player who pretty much only plays campaigns and narrative games. For me, the fluff is just as important as the rules. I want both when I buy my codex. Looking at stuff on the interweb is simply not as good as reading it in a book. Sure, I don't need the fluff, but I don't need the rules either, as I don't have to play the game. Fluff and rules both fulfil different desires.
D&D also released somewhere in the ballpark of 70 supplements. each at a price of around 30 bucks. Which is proably where their real money came from (the core rules where avaliable online for free via the SRD after all. they cou;dn't make the books too expensive)
to bring D&D into the arguement, the current PHB costs 49.95 USD. so yes D&D is cheaper. but that shou;dn't suprise anyone. D&D is the biggest table top game out there. WOTC almost certainly has a economy of scale advantage over WOTC.
Lance845 wrote: Again, you bandy around words like most and many as though you have any data to support it. Please, show your work. Where is that data?
I never stated my opinion on the fluff. I said I don't need it in the codex. I would be perfectly happy to have 1 concise rule book and a separate fluff book with all the pictures in the world. When I am playing the game I want the rules as easily accessible as possible with as little nonsense surrounding it as possible. Buying 4 50.00 books for what should be 1 30.00 book is dumb as feth. And exactly what you are arguing for.
DnD sold the 3rd ed players handbook for 35 dollars. It had more pages and more content for less cost while being the ONLY book needed to play the game AND had a spine that allowed the book to sit flat while open.
GW fethed you over with 4 books at higher individual cost with less content and features and you cheer them on as they do it.
I responded to your claim...which you made without data. I already said I'll get data to support mine, once you pony up yours.
I said you don't need or want it. That's an opinion on fluff.
And many other people are perfectly happy having their army's fluff and models in their army's book, without having to make a separate purchase.
I also want the rules as easily accessible as possible, with as little nonsense getting in the way of that. Which is why codexes are typically divided by chapters, some for rules, some for models, some for fluff.
Buying two $50 books instead of having to buy one $180 is far more acceptable, particularly as GW wouldn't price a combined codex for less than that. Remember, the Indexes were only temporary. It's a fluke that any part of them has stayed in game circulation this long.
DnD is a completely different game by a completely different company, who sold the three core rule books in 2000 (not 2019) for a loss. Yes, a loss. Remember, at the same time, GW sold main codexes for $20-25 and suplemental dex for $10-15. And sure, a player officially only needed the core book, but hey, if you wanted any extra content, it was $20-$35 dollars for each additional book, of which there was close to 80. I know. I own most of them.
GW will feth you over even more with one book, and that doesn't end if you insist on selling fluff separately. But at least the current system doesn't have you buying armies you don't need.
Please don't use compound swear words as they often don't get caught by the filter- ingtaer.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To Ingtaer, my mistake. Wasn't intentional at all.
Speaking from a game design perspective. and from a perspective of accepting that space marines don't really work in the game the way it is at the moment. It could only be a good thing to have them consolidated.
This consolidation could retain the famous units for each sub group, and have unique rules and strategems for them, along with potentially providing the greater whole with some of the more useful strats of each sub faction.
But importantly this would mean there would be a single point for which GW could make alterations. If a space marine 2.0 codex came out, it would provide changes to everyone, and not leave BA, SW etc out in the cold.
3rd ed worked in a similar way with small sub codexes that required the core space marine codex to function. When the space marine codex was updated, those updates naturally trickled through to the sub codexes. Now if we had a similar system by merging the sub factions into a single book (while retaining their characteristics), only good things could come from this (other than having a heavier book).
to back up what Mmmpi is saying WOTC sold the D&D core books as loss leaders. and made their profit off the various supplements. back in the days of 3rd/3.5 WOTC was publishing two supplements a MONTH.
secretForge wrote: Speaking from a game design perspective. and from a perspective of accepting that space marines don't really work in the game the way it is at the moment. It could only be a good thing to have them consolidated.
This consolidation could retain the famous units for each sub group, and have unique rules and strategems for them, along with potentially providing the greater whole with some of the more useful strats of each sub faction.
But importantly this would mean there would be a single point for which GW could make alterations. If a space marine 2.0 codex came out, it would provide changes to everyone, and not leave BA, SW etc out in the cold.
3rd ed worked in a similar way with small sub codexes that required the core space marine codex to function. When the space marine codex was updated, those updates naturally trickled through to the sub codexes. Now if we had a similar system by merging the sub factions into a single book (while retaining their characteristics), only good things could come from this (other than having a heavier book).
Yeah, who decided what units get kept?
They all add flavor, and the indexes continuing popularity with players in general show people don't like losing choices.
Those sub codexes existed for Black Templar and...that's it. The other Marines had their own full books that referred directly to either the rule book, or held the info themselves.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: to back up what Mmmpi is saying WOTC sold the D&D core books as loss leaders. and made their profit off the various supplements. back in the days of 3rd/3.5 WOTC was publishing two supplements a MONTH.
I'm still trying to figure out how I kept up with half of that and still played 40K.
Mmmpi wrote: Yeah, who decided what units get kept?
They all add flavor, and the indexes continuing popularity with players in general show people don't like losing choices.
Those sub codexes existed for Black Templar and...that's it. The other Marines had their own full books that referred directly to either the rule book, or held the info themselves.
He's talking about 3rd edition, which did indeed have Codex: Space Marines and then sub-books for Blood Angels and Dark Angels which were just "here's the extra stuff, refer to Codex: Space Marines for the rest." IIrc they were 48 pages for the main book and 24 pages for the others.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
1. The responses in this thread indicate otherwise.
2. Nope. I've already discussed this. No point in continuing, outside of reminding you that you're just pushing your opinion on others.
3. Yes. No you don't, mostly because I won't bother to read it.
4. But those fliers aren't the same. Furiosos aren't the same. No one in tournaments mixes deathwing. You're correct about NCP's and apothecaries actually.
AKA most of us don't want you trying to push square pegs in round holes.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
1. The responses in this thread indicate otherwise.
2. Nope. I've already discussed this. No point in continuing, outside of reminding you that you're just pushing your opinion on others.
3. Yes. No you don't, mostly because I won't bother to read it.
4. But those fliers aren't the same. Furiosos aren't the same. No one in tournaments mixes deathwing. You're correct about NCP's and apothecaries actually.
AKA most of us don't want you trying to push square pegs in round holes.
1. The responses in this thread are the same fear mongering. The Index has been brought up many a time and you ignore the point completely. I wonder why that is?
2. Then go to the Proposed Rules section and fix Crowe. I know you won't though and I will put money in that.
3. There is clearly a good amount of bloat. Just because it isn't at 7th edition levels doesn't mean it's clearly going to reach there. I mean, look at the frickin Chaos Knight codex.
4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything), Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge. Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
1. The responses in this thread indicate otherwise.
2. Nope. I've already discussed this. No point in continuing, outside of reminding you that you're just pushing your opinion on others.
3. Yes. No you don't, mostly because I won't bother to read it.
4. But those fliers aren't the same. Furiosos aren't the same. No one in tournaments mixes deathwing. You're correct about NCP's and apothecaries actually.
AKA most of us don't want you trying to push square pegs in round holes.
1. The responses in this thread are the same fear mongering. The Index has been brought up many a time and you ignore the point completely. I wonder why that is?
2. Then go to the Proposed Rules section and fix Crowe. I know you won't though and I will put money in that.
3. There is clearly a good amount of bloat. Just because it isn't at 7th edition levels doesn't mean it's clearly going to reach there. I mean, look at the frickin Chaos Knight codex.
4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything), Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge. Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
1. I've addressed the indexes. I've also mentioned the indexes. But tell me more about how I ignore things by talking about them.
2. You're right, I'm not going to. Just like you're not going to stop dumping on other people's play styles, competitiveness or lack there of be damned.
3. There is some in some places, and a scarcity of content in others. But right now I consider that off topic.
4. You see, you only see them the same because you want to. The people who use them don't. As for the terminators, sure maybe they're not going to take one of everything, but that doesn't mean they don't mix and match. Don't forget, you tried forcing competative comp in other threads and got slapped down for it. Stop calling other metas stupid while you're at it.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
1. The responses in this thread indicate otherwise.
2. Nope. I've already discussed this. No point in continuing, outside of reminding you that you're just pushing your opinion on others.
3. Yes. No you don't, mostly because I won't bother to read it.
4. But those fliers aren't the same. Furiosos aren't the same. No one in tournaments mixes deathwing. You're correct about NCP's and apothecaries actually.
AKA most of us don't want you trying to push square pegs in round holes.
1. The responses in this thread are the same fear mongering. The Index has been brought up many a time and you ignore the point completely. I wonder why that is?
Yet most of the player base loves the depth of their Codex over the streamlining of the Index. I actually prefer the Indexes myself, but I'm a clear minority there. But the point is, Codexes are clearly different from the Indexes. Because they're bigger. They have a lot more stuff. So fitting that many Indexes in a book does not support fitting that many Codexes in a book at all. The point is only being ignored because it's indefensible. If anything, the Indexes being put in shared books because they were so streamlined *enhances* the point about such a shared book being too big.
2. Then go to the Proposed Rules section and fix Crowe. I know you won't though and I will put money in that.
Funny how Crowe can't possibly be good because he's a cheaper, worse (per model) option than something else.
But the Serpent/Falcon are a cheaper/worse (per model) Repulsor, and the forums are spasming over how bad Repulsors are.
3. There is clearly a good amount of bloat. Just because it isn't at 7th edition levels doesn't mean it's clearly going to reach there. I mean, look at the frickin Chaos Knight codex.
Sure. Some things could be removed. But hopefully what gets removed is decided by cooler heads than yours or mine.
4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything)
Aside from having different profiles, different weapons, etc? So in the same way that a Vanguard Vet and a Sternie are the same?
Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are
So "Super angry blood-crazed dread" is the same as "armor-reinforced dread"? They're both hyper related, being Dread upgrades. They could be more similar. But when I look at the Ironclad and Furioso datasheets, their options aren't anything alike.
, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge.
I've seen such mixed Deathwing squads. It happens. So not factually true.
Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
Or maybe they liked the look. Or maybe they use them differently. I'll agree it's certainly off-meta, and most likely not tactically ideal. But those are not the only reasons to do things.
Just because someone makes a different decision than you, that doesn't make it a bad decision.
Even worse, just because someone has different interests or priorities than you, that doesn't make their interests and priorities irrelevant.
And please stop abusing the word 'literally'. It's bad enough that it now means both it's original meaning and it's exact opposite. But neither are appropriate there.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: 4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything), Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge. Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
"They're really the same - apart from where they're different."
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: 4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything), Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge. Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
"They're really the same - apart from where they're different."
...did you type that with a straight face?
Oh yeah. The missiles having a different name on one of the Dark Angel's fliers totally makes it different from the Stormtalon that has missiles! Brilliant, simply brilliant.
Actually Slayer, what's not stupid is a Deathwing sqd with stormbolters, a heavy weapon (AC or cyclone) plus a single TH/SS (2 if a 10 man sqd) so you can have a 3+ invuln in your shooty sqds.
bullyboy wrote: Actually Slayer, what's not stupid is a Deathwing sqd with stormbolters, a heavy weapon (AC or cyclone) plus a single TH/SS (2 if a 10 man sqd) so you can have a 3+ invuln in your shooty sqds.
Precisely. I mentioned this in a similar derailed thread two weeks ago. Never mind that the Dark Talon is in a field of its own.
The established Chapters with Codexes have a long history in the game. They have had distinct books in every edition, although the form of the books has indeed evolved. Heck, the Space Wolves had the first Codex of anybody. I think they have endured for a number of reasons. They have distinct and established lore that transcends a single book or video game. They have distinct organizations that deviate from the Codex Astartes. They have distinct units. They have distinct play-styles. They are also popular. The market has put them where they are.
I know Dark Angels best. I can make three distinct armies from the Codexeathwing, Ravenwing and mixed-Wing. Terminators are n a tough spot this Edition - not the fault of separate Codexes. I have access to units that others do not, and lose access to others.
Regarding the bloat that some love to mention, having the separate books actually keeps it down. Don't careabout Dark Angels stuff but you play Ravenguard? Great -you don't need the Dark Angels book and it keeps your main book shorter.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
go count the pages in idex Imperium 1. go on, get to it chop chop.
and remember the index has no art. no fluff, no stratigiums, it is the BARE BONES
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
go count the pages in idex Imperium 1. go on, get to it chop chop.
and remember the index has no art. no fluff, no stratigiums, it is the BARE BONES
It has a bunch of pictures and some art. But okay, sure.
Going through the first part of the book that's 61 pages. Consolidation of unit entries (Land Raiders don't need to be separate entries come on, and the Terminator variant armors are super hilarious seeing as different Mk power armor does nothing different) and you'd probably cut down a good number (let's be conservative for you just say that's 58 pages). Add in 2 pages for each Chapter's special units (3-4 for each one) for a total of 16 pages onto that. Special Characters would be around 10-12 (we hadn't gotten into which special characters actually have a purpose). Strategems are mostly universal (I counted three in the Dark Angels and Vanilla codex) with each Chapter maybe getting 3 or so unique to them, totalling maybe 5 pages. Wargear and unit points would be about 4 pages probably.
You're at less than 100 pages and then you get 50-75 pages of the fluff stuff. Look at that, we ended up at LESS than the 208 pages of the Vanilla codex!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: Actually Slayer, what's not stupid is a Deathwing sqd with stormbolters, a heavy weapon (AC or cyclone) plus a single TH/SS (2 if a 10 man sqd) so you can have a 3+ invuln in your shooty sqds.
I cAn PuT iN oNe StOrM sHiElD tHaT mAkEs ThEm UnIqUe
That's literally what your whole argument hinges on and that's hilarious to me.
Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
Stux wrote: What is the actual issue here? Is it just that a space marine detachment and a space chapter are different things and you think that shouldn't be the case? Or does it cause rule issues I'm missing?
Just the inherent hilarity of iconic marine chapters not actually being marines if you look at the rules close enough.
Right... But it's just a way of delineating content from different Codexes. I really don't get why this is a big deal.
Its the difference between FLYERS and FLY all over again. Had they done a better job with Keywords in the flrst place this wouldn't even be an issue.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: They're space marines in architecture and lore, but they're not Codex Space Marines, because they're special and something else. It makes sense to me.
We all understand the concept they're not CODEX Space Marines - the issue is how lazy they've been with the Keyword system. It would have been easy to establish a keyword level to differentiate between CODEX and NON-CODEX chapters. But they didn't. And on top of that, they're repeating the similarly enough names to generate confusion in newer people mistake - as mentioned the difference between a FLYER and a model that can FLY.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
go count the pages in idex Imperium 1. go on, get to it chop chop.
and remember the index has no art. no fluff, no stratigiums, it is the BARE BONES
It has a bunch of pictures and some art. But okay, sure.
Going through the first part of the book that's 61 pages. Consolidation of unit entries (Land Raiders don't need to be separate entries come on, and the Terminator variant armors are super hilarious seeing as different Mk power armor does nothing different) and you'd probably cut down a good number (let's be conservative for you just say that's 58 pages). Add in 2 pages for each Chapter's special units (3-4 for each one) for a total of 16 pages onto that. Special Characters would be around 10-12 (we hadn't gotten into which special characters actually have a purpose). Strategems are mostly universal (I counted three in the Dark Angels and Vanilla codex) with each Chapter maybe getting 3 or so unique to them, totalling maybe 5 pages. Wargear and unit points would be about 4 pages probably.
You're at less than 100 pages and then you get 50-75 pages of the fluff stuff. Look at that, we ended up at LESS than the 208 pages of the Vanilla codex!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: Actually Slayer, what's not stupid is a Deathwing sqd with stormbolters, a heavy weapon (AC or cyclone) plus a single TH/SS (2 if a 10 man sqd) so you can have a 3+ invuln in your shooty sqds.
I cAn PuT iN oNe StOrM sHiElD tHaT mAkEs ThEm UnIqUe
That's literally what your whole argument hinges on and that's hilarious to me.
Yeah! If we cut things down exactly like you think it should be done, we get it all squeezed into 110 pages! Too bad you're not GW, who have their own methodology.
No, the argument about Deathwing is that some people do customize that way, and they aren't wrong to do it. You're mistaking your personal preferences for those of the entire community. Again.
Sir Fred wrote:One thing I’ve noticed is players who want all chapters rolled into codex tend to be disgruntled have lots of salty issues.
Mmmpi wrote:They also seem to have an unrealistic expectation that this will somehow mean fewer marine players.
Neither of these things are true..
I don't care who plays what army. I don't care if 90% of the players are SM and I have no salty issues.
It just makes more sense to put them all in one dex. The special units can be there just like the Black Templars special units are there. The units that don't have enough about them to be worth being special can be folded into the normal datasheets and get their special bits and paint schemes. Nobody is suggesting to wipe out the chapters. They are only saying it's dumb that they get their own book so that idiotic gak like the things that started this thread have to be done for them.
You want the price to stay down? Well GW released all the datasheets for Apoc for free. Just like they did for AoS. Expect 9th to do the same. If you want to send the money on the big fat book at that point so you can read the same dozen stories about your dudes again then thats on you.
Congratulations on being a special snowflake who doesn't match up with the majority of people who make the complaint. Do you want a cookie?
It makes sense until you realize you'd have a 200 page tomb just counting the units.
Why should they be generic Honor guard? They aren't.
They are BA equivalent and there is really no reason for BA to be the only chapter that can give their HG jump packs. I'm sure Raven Guard would like to do that as well for example.
As for special characters, who decided which stay and go? I'm sure we can find someone who would be able to defend the inclusion of each.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Bingo. So in the case of eliminating Crowe:
1. Ends up with a generic CCW instead of an actual weapon, making him worse against several targets even with his exploding hits
2. Has the same useless Smite as Purifiers
3. Doesn't make Purifiers into Troops anymore
4. Was made cheaper than a generic Champ and is still not looked at as a choice
5. Honestly he hasn't had much a role outside the Purifier troops since they eliminated that
Ergo there's no point to him existing. The model can be used as an actual Champ instead and with better results.
[
Nevermind the fact that Crowe has more than just a relic. You just keep beating that horse though.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
My point exactly. I'm saying make the Biel Tan Dex, Make the Snakebite Dex.
We absolutely need to eliminate the bloat, not add. GW already did a crap job with those Craftworld and Klan rules in the first place and you want them to ADD?
I'll never understand why taking away options is the go to fix for so many people.
You'll notice it's almost never their army that's getting folded in. It's almost always generic Space Marine players, who want their book to absorb the other chapter books.
you kidding? I play generic space Marines and thats the LAST thing I want. I don't play Dark Angels, why would I want to pay an additional 20 bucks to shove a buncha rules I don't want in my codex? Hell I think it's a shame black templars where folded into codex space marines, especially in light of the massive explosion of new codices we saw shortly afterwards. I'd be all for Black Templars getting their codex back.
It isn't 20$ extra. You keep acting like it'll turn the codex into a phonebook or something.
A 200-300 page hardcover book wouldn't be cheap. Unless you're planning on reducing five armies to nothing but paint schemes.
Oh wait...you are.
1. This 200 page nonsense is something you're not selling well. Look at the Index armies for example. Pretty concise if you ask me.
2. Crowe IS nothing more than a Relic, and a bad one at that. He can't do anything special based on the list I have given, and you can't even bother to refute it. Please by all means tell us how to fix him, like making him HALF the cost of a Champ! That's a great way to show off a special character!
Oh wait it isn't.
3. ...did you REALLY ask what bloat? Do I need to give you a list?
4. What options are being taken away? The Dark Angels fliers are almost exactly the same as the Vanilla ones. Furiosos are already almost like Ironclads. Nobody mixes their Deathwing so much that the basic Tactical/Assault profiles can't just be used. Novice Sanguine Priests are really just fancy Apothecaries.
AKA your models are still fine.
1. The responses in this thread indicate otherwise.
2. Nope. I've already discussed this. No point in continuing, outside of reminding you that you're just pushing your opinion on others.
3. Yes. No you don't, mostly because I won't bother to read it.
4. But those fliers aren't the same. Furiosos aren't the same. No one in tournaments mixes deathwing. You're correct about NCP's and apothecaries actually.
AKA most of us don't want you trying to push square pegs in round holes.
1. The responses in this thread are the same fear mongering. The Index has been brought up many a time and you ignore the point completely. I wonder why that is?
Yet most of the player base loves the depth of their Codex over the streamlining of the Index. I actually prefer the Indexes myself, but I'm a clear minority there. But the point is, Codexes are clearly different from the Indexes. Because they're bigger. They have a lot more stuff. So fitting that many Indexes in a book does not support fitting that many Codexes in a book at all. The point is only being ignored because it's indefensible. If anything, the Indexes being put in shared books because they were so streamlined *enhances* the point about such a shared book being too big.
2. Then go to the Proposed Rules section and fix Crowe. I know you won't though and I will put money in that.
Funny how Crowe can't possibly be good because he's a cheaper, worse (per model) option than something else.
But the Serpent/Falcon are a cheaper/worse (per model) Repulsor, and the forums are spasming over how bad Repulsors are.
3. There is clearly a good amount of bloat. Just because it isn't at 7th edition levels doesn't mean it's clearly going to reach there. I mean, look at the frickin Chaos Knight codex.
Sure. Some things could be removed. But hopefully what gets removed is decided by cooler heads than yours or mine.
4. The Fliers REALLY are the same outside stupid minor differences and Strategems (which don't count for anything)
Aside from having different profiles, different weapons, etc? So in the same way that a Vanguard Vet and a Sternie are the same?
Furiosos are the same kinda-tough melee Dread that Ironclads are
So "Super angry blood-crazed dread" is the same as "armor-reinforced dread"? They're both hyper related, being Dread upgrades. They could be more similar. But when I look at the Ironclad and Furioso datasheets, their options aren't anything alike.
, and not even casual players are going to make a Deathwing squad that's 1 LC, 1 TH/SS, 1 Chainfist, 1 Assault Cannon, and 1 Power Sword Sarge.
I've seen such mixed Deathwing squads. It happens. So not factually true.
Know why? It's stupid. It's literally stupidity.
Or maybe they liked the look. Or maybe they use them differently. I'll agree it's certainly off-meta, and most likely not tactically ideal. But those are not the only reasons to do things.
Just because someone makes a different decision than you, that doesn't make it a bad decision.
Even worse, just because someone has different interests or priorities than you, that doesn't make their interests and priorities irrelevant.
And please stop abusing the word 'literally'. It's bad enough that it now means both it's original meaning and it's exact opposite. But neither are appropriate there.
1. See my above outline of how a codex could be done in this way.
2. I already explained how making Crowe cheaper than the generic version breaks the tenants of what makes a Special Character special at all since the dawn of them actually existing. That has literally nothing to do with your precious Eldar and a generic option vs generic option. Like, really. You couldn't grasp that at all?
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
Hell we can give a page in the Marine codex to do the same thing to actually represent Renegades too. I've been saying that for a while that, as is, Renegades make no sense because the moment they go Renegade they get Autocannon Havocs and lose Drop Pods.
4. They fill the same exact roles though is the key. Stormhawk has the Twin Assault Cannon, Twin Heavy Bolter, and Stormcannon. The Nephilim has the Megabolter (almost the same exact stats as the Twin Assault Cannon, look at that!), the Twin Heavy Bolter, and the two missiles thing (which is functionally the same as the Icarus or Lastalon or takes). At that point, what's the point in pretending they're that different? They really aren't. The proxy works fine and you lost none of your models. How cool is that? Yeah the other flier can probably stay unique though.
5. Seeing as they both have everything in common outside the T7-8 (and I'm 100% in the know they had the same AV13, which is bizarre that didn't become even) yeah I can say they can safely become the same entry. Blood Talon can be the Dread Chainfist for stats easily.
The "Blood Crazed" one you're thinking of is the Death Company Dread. Sure that's it's own unique thing, that can stay.
6. Some kid putting together a bunch of models with no thought behind how they function doesn't count, especially because they aren't going to do anything except be used in a Soace Hulk game. It isn't even off meta (which isn't even an excusable defense in this instance). It has no purpose whatsoever, at all. So please don't act like it does. It doesn't even LOOK good on a table.
7. No, it IS a stupid decision unless you're using the models for Space Hulk.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
Yeah I know. My layout of a consolidated Marine codex is perfectly reasonable and they won't even listen to which units should be consolidated. I mean, there's no way they'd argue Land Raiders should all still be separate entries instead of just one where you buy the guns on the chassis, right?
Except Marines need to be consolidated as 95% of everything is shared. There's no point outside you just wanting to feel special when you honestly aren't. The Angels especially don't have enough deviation from organization that it even makes sense to pretend they need a separate codex to be represented, especially when a lot of the unique stuff is hardly unique. The Dark Angels fliers are easily the biggest offender.
The Flyers - like the stasis bomb for Fallen Hunting. Their entire second company including the Talonmaster. Inner Circle. My hopes for a return of the Ravenwing Squadron of 6 bikes, an attack bike, and a speeder for a cool 10 man squad that works numerically, and is rather different. The Death Company. Sanguinary Guard. Libby Dreads, Furioso Dreads - which probably should be all chapters given their cross over in the video games and the cross over of CCW focused characters i.e. Shrike, Lysander, etc.- Baal Predator, The two support Land Speeders. Plus the unique space wolf stuff, plus the unique Space Marine stuff - Victrix/Honor guard, Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
Where have you been logical in defending Crowe? I'd like to see that please.
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
funny chaos players have wanted this for a long time. honest to god question, whats it to you if GW puts out new material for other players?
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
funny chaos players have wanted this for a long time. honest to god question, whats it to you if GW puts out new material for other players?
This isn't about taking something away from anybody. Nobody is advocating to squat your army. It would be BETTER if the Knight codex was written from the get go to be for both imperium and chaos knights. It's so few units and all of them should be interchangeable between both armies. Why are you happy to have 2 50.00 purchases instead of 1 efficient one?
GW bends you over a barrel to sell you what... 5 datasheets at 10.00 a piece wrapped in a hardcover with a crap binding and you are glad for it? Are you only happy because before you went without and hey, a slap in the face is better then a kick while on the ground?
This should be better for cheaper. Don't be happy with your scraps. You should have the entire knight line at your disposal with simple rules to access a different set of strategems and swapping a single keyword on the datasheets. Instead you got screwed. And as imperium releases more and more knight varrients you are going to sit around wondering when your next update will be.
By the same token it's real nice that SM get all these ancient rediscovered legacy technology from pre heresy like the Leviathan Dread. Is there a chaos Leviathan dread? If so did it get released at the same time as the standard? Why the feth not? Do you see the issue yet?
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
Where have you been logical in defending Crowe? I'd like to see that please.
Reread my posts. You might have to first look up what a logical argument is though, since you don't seem to recognize one when you see it.
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
funny chaos players have wanted this for a long time. honest to god question, whats it to you if GW puts out new material for other players?
Everything new, and everything they don't use is bloat to them. You can see it every time these 'debates happen.
I don't count named characters ever and to be honest I'm all for getting rid of some of them. Nobody is gonna miss Tellion or Asmodai, sorry.
Space Marine Fliers already cover the Dark Angel's ones with too many similarities, and I'm already annoyed the Stormhawk is a separate entry from the Stormtalon to be honest. That's one consolidation that could be made.
And yes Deathwing are exactly the same. Nobody makes a squad that's 1 LC dude, one TH/SS, one Chainfist, one Assault Cannon, and one Power Sword Sarge. You end up specializing the squad which is already done, surprise surprise, by the two entries done with Tactical/Assault Terminators. Hell, that would make it easier to do a fluffy Deathwing force by avoiding the silly Rule of 3, huh?
Regarding the Aspect Warriors, they actually have differing stats all over and LOTS of varying equipment. The only thing Deathwing have that's unique is the Plasma Cannon literally nobody uses.
Get over Deathwing being special, because they're not.
You keep saying that, and I've already told you I'd miss Asmodai. I still miss Sapphon. I'm even more fond of Telion, though I liked it better when he replaced a Scout Squad Sergeant. I make that squad - I have LC dudes, TH/SS dudes, Magnetized Chain Fists, and power sword Sarge's. I have Plasma Cannon dudes. Maces of Absolution and Flails of the Unforgiven, Watchers in the Dark, and Deathwing Command Squads also add up to LOTS of varying equipment. Get over Deathwing being special, because they are, and they'll stay that way.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Wooo! Psychology!
No it isn't. It's a blanket statement about a lot of people with diverse likes and motivations said to make a sad attempt at supporting your position with nothing to back it up. It's less then logical. At best it's a fallacy. At worst it's a lie. Good try though.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Wooo! Psychology!
No it isn't. It's a blanket statement about a lot of people with diverse likes and motivations said to make a sad attempt at supporting your position with nothing to back it up. It's less then logical. At best it's a fallacy. At worst it's a lie. Good try though.
"a lot of people like this and want it" is a sad attempt at supporting a position now? you're clutching at straws. and sounding out and out selfish and self centered. apparently no body else's opinion matters and GW should cater only to you?
Crimson wrote: Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Yes, and Abbaddon should just be replaced by.. um.. by... Generic 10,000 year old uber almost a primarch Chaos Lords. And Marneus Calgar isn't unique, you can just replace him with... the generic Primaris Chapter Master with unique gear and special CP generating abilities.
The idea that this unique guy with a name and special rules is unique, and that unique guy with a name and special rules isn't doesn't carry a lot of water.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Wooo! Psychology!
No it isn't. It's a blanket statement about a lot of people with diverse likes and motivations said to make a sad attempt at supporting your position with nothing to back it up. It's less then logical. At best it's a fallacy. At worst it's a lie. Good try though.
"a lot of people like this and want it" is a sad attempt at supporting a position now? you're clutching at straws. and sounding out and out selfish and self centered. apparently no body else's opinion matters and GW should cater only to you?
1) SOME people like this and want it. I agree with that statement. It's also not a logical one. It's an emotional one. A lot is how much? 100 people? 1000? 5000? Also, he doesn't say "a lot". He says "most" or "People who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" despite all the grey plastic everyone on here has seen as evidence to the contrary. So yes. Blanket statements are a sad attempt at supporting a position built on sand. He's got no data to support his "most" or your "a lot" or anyones "people who buy GW products".
2) Sorry if you think I sound selfish because I think it's dumb that they made 2 different knight codexes when they could have made 1 that gave all knights to both armies. I totally see your point about how mean and greedy I am that I wish YOU had to spend LESS money to get access to MORE units. I guess I should reassess my position on how much better it could be for everyone if GW did things more efficiently and stopped thinking only of myself when arguing those points.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Wooo! Psychology!
No it isn't. It's a blanket statement about a lot of people with diverse likes and motivations said to make a sad attempt at supporting your position with nothing to back it up. It's less then logical. At best it's a fallacy. At worst it's a lie. Good try though.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Stux wrote: Darkshroud? Lieutenant Land Speeders? Dark Talons?
Give them to everyone, or merge it with a current Sheet, ie the Dark Talon.
Deathwing Knights?
Give the Chapters a Unit or Two Unique to them? Give more chapters "Veteran" Terminators?
Deathwing characters that other chapters don't have equivalents of?
The one Deathwing Character? Keep a couple of the Special Characters for each Chapter. Merge the basics, keep the truly unique. Drop some characters to make Generic Versions available to everyone.
Give them to everyone. Why bother having a Codex at all? Just let everyone use whatever they want, mix and match, and they can make up their own special rules too? Why bother having more than one army? Everyone can just play Guard.
Also the Deathwing "characters" they're referring to are the Death Wing Command squad split-offs. The Ancient, the Apothecary, the Champion not necessarily just Belial. Though I suspect they'll get merged back into a command squad for next edition. This new system is too expensive and too clunky. In the best world, they'd remain available as the command squad with a price reduction/rebate, and seperately at a higher cost premium - but still unique for the Ancient and Champion. There is only the one flag bearer, and one champion per company, while I would assume there could be multiple apothecaries.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: So.. show of hands here Space Marine players.. whom here would pay 80 bucks for a codex? people are already saying the Codices are too expensive, and consolidating the dark angels and blood angels codices would only expand this.
Let's assume for a minute that GW does this, dark angel;s and blood angles are given the 3 pages of fluff and sucessor chapters every other chapter in the book is given.
Let's assume that every character has a fluff entry in the codex, and let's assume 2 datasheets a page.
you're looking at adding somewhere in the ballpark of 25 pages to the codex from just HQs etc before adding any units.
Now beyond this blood angels could proably manage fine with Sanguigary guard being rolled into Honorguard. And Death Company could even be reduced to a strat (which might be seen as "meh" at first until blood angels realize they can start tossing out death company sanguigary guard and stuff)
Dark Angels might need some consolidation of their deathwing and ravenwing stuff so IMHO they'd risk losing more.
So basicly it could be done but the result would be a massive and expensive codex, that'd likely have a ton of exceptions etc in the rules.
I'd be pissed enough at three pages of Fluff for the Non-Codex chapters, before you even got the $80.
1) SOME people like this and want it. I agree with that statement. It's also not a logical one. It's an emotional one. A lot is how much? 100 people? 1000? 5000? Also, he doesn't say "a lot". He says "most" or "People who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" despite all the grey plastic everyone on here has seen as evidence to the contrary. So yes. Blanket statements are a sad attempt at supporting a position built on sand. He's got no data to support his "most" or your "a lot" or anyones "people who buy GW products".
2) Sorry if you think I sound selfish because I think it's dumb that they made 2 different knight codexes when they could have made 1 that gave all knights to both armies. I totally see your point about how mean and greedy I am that I wish YOU had to spend LESS money to get access to MORE units. I guess I should reassess my position on how much better it could be for everyone if GW did things more efficiently and stopped thinking only of myself when arguing those points.
I suggest rereading my posts to point out where I say everyone likes everything and wants everything. You'll be awhile, because I never actually said that. It's also a logical one, because it has to do with sales for the product. How many? Enough that GW keeps doing it, and keeps feeling the need to expand on the fluff portions, even after they started doing actual market research. So yeah, a blanket statement about how economics of the enterainment industry works.
As for data, you have yet to supply anything for the claim you made prior to mine. Pony up.
Sad you don't get that.
You do sound selfish. Everything you've posted is about what you want.
Maybe you should start thinking about other people.
Why? Why there are not bunch of dedicate Biel-Tan units in a Biel-Tan codex and bunch of dedicated Snakebite units in a Snakebite codex? Why it is only marines who need to be scattetred across several redundant books?
Lets ask the Genestealer Cults. And the Thousand Sons. And the Deathguard.
Let me reiterate: this game is more than its rules, and you'd be destroying an unbroken 40 year legacy.
Game is indeed more than rules. And no one is suggesting taking away the background of the different chapters.
I'm old I can't read type small enough to fit an entire codex's fluff in three pages. Even with my magnifiying painting visor.
Hey space marine players, wanna be just like every other space marine player?
But my army wouldn't be the same as everyone else's. From this huge pool of units I would choose the combination units that I like, and that would unlikely to be exactly the same than everyone else's choice. Blood Angels players could choose a larger number of jump pack units, Imperial Fists player more heavy support units and White Scars player more bike units. But it doesn't mean there needs to be special snowflake versions of those units for those chapters.
No they can't. You can't make an effective and fluffy Combi-Wing army NOW, let alone if you consolidated it. They screwed up by not keeping the Sammael/Belial Force Org flux. White Scars have it just as bad.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
Sorry, you still haven't proven you understand a logical argument. Please try again.
1) SOME people like this and want it. I agree with that statement. It's also not a logical one. It's an emotional one. A lot is how much? 100 people? 1000? 5000? Also, he doesn't say "a lot". He says "most" or "People who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" despite all the grey plastic everyone on here has seen as evidence to the contrary. So yes. Blanket statements are a sad attempt at supporting a position built on sand. He's got no data to support his "most" or your "a lot" or anyones "people who buy GW products".
2) Sorry if you think I sound selfish because I think it's dumb that they made 2 different knight codexes when they could have made 1 that gave all knights to both armies. I totally see your point about how mean and greedy I am that I wish YOU had to spend LESS money to get access to MORE units. I guess I should reassess my position on how much better it could be for everyone if GW did things more efficiently and stopped thinking only of myself when arguing those points.
I suggest rereading my posts to point out where I say everyone likes everything and wants everything. You'll be awhile, because I never actually said that.
Mmmpi wrote: "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models"
Didn't really take that long.
It's also a logical one, because it has to do with sales for the product. How many? Enough that GW keeps doing it, and keeps feeling the need to expand on the fluff portions, even after they started doing actual market research. So yeah, a blanket statement about how economics of the enterainment industry works.
As for data, you have yet to supply anything for the claim you made prior to mine. Pony up.
I have never made a claim that required data to support it that I did not point towards data to support it. I.E. You can fit them all into one book without increasing the price.= Indexes.
Sad you don't get that.
You do sound selfish. Everything you've posted is about what you want.
Maybe you should start thinking about other people.
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Which ones are the generic character with a relic? As near as I can tell they all have a fluff, and most if not all have special rules to go with their relic(s) or they're a generic character without a relic?
Those who are actually unique like Mephiston can stay. If they're basically just a generic character with a relic they don't need dedicated rules.
Which ones are the generic character with a relic? As near as I can tell they all have a fluff, and most if not all have special rules to go with their relic(s) or they're a generic character without a relic?
Fluff doesn't justify the unit existing as it's own unique unit. Kit bash a champion or whatever to make it look unique and give it a name of a guy you like. You don't need a datasheet and model for every character that has ever been mentioned in the fluff.
1) SOME people like this and want it. I agree with that statement. It's also not a logical one. It's an emotional one. A lot is how much? 100 people? 1000? 5000? Also, he doesn't say "a lot". He says "most" or "People who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" despite all the grey plastic everyone on here has seen as evidence to the contrary. So yes. Blanket statements are a sad attempt at supporting a position built on sand. He's got no data to support his "most" or your "a lot" or anyones "people who buy GW products".
2) Sorry if you think I sound selfish because I think it's dumb that they made 2 different knight codexes when they could have made 1 that gave all knights to both armies. I totally see your point about how mean and greedy I am that I wish YOU had to spend LESS money to get access to MORE units. I guess I should reassess my position on how much better it could be for everyone if GW did things more efficiently and stopped thinking only of myself when arguing those points.
I suggest rereading my posts to point out where I say everyone likes everything and wants everything. You'll be awhile, because I never actually said that.
Mmmpi wrote: "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models"
Didn't really take that long.
It's also a logical one, because it has to do with sales for the product. How many? Enough that GW keeps doing it, and keeps feeling the need to expand on the fluff portions, even after they started doing actual market research. So yeah, a blanket statement about how economics of the enterainment industry works.
As for data, you have yet to supply anything for the claim you made prior to mine. Pony up.
I have never made a claim that required data to support it that I did not point towards data to support it. I.E. You can fit them all into one book without increasing the price.= Indexes.
Sad you don't get that.
You do sound selfish. Everything you've posted is about what you want.
Maybe you should start thinking about other people.
Yeah okay.
Point out the word everybody.
Yeah, you said nobody wants it. So if me saying people requires data, you saying nobody requires data.
Still waiting for your demonstration that you understand a logical argument.
1) SOME people like this and want it. I agree with that statement. It's also not a logical one. It's an emotional one. A lot is how much? 100 people? 1000? 5000? Also, he doesn't say "a lot". He says "most" or "People who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" despite all the grey plastic everyone on here has seen as evidence to the contrary. So yes. Blanket statements are a sad attempt at supporting a position built on sand. He's got no data to support his "most" or your "a lot" or anyones "people who buy GW products".
2) Sorry if you think I sound selfish because I think it's dumb that they made 2 different knight codexes when they could have made 1 that gave all knights to both armies. I totally see your point about how mean and greedy I am that I wish YOU had to spend LESS money to get access to MORE units. I guess I should reassess my position on how much better it could be for everyone if GW did things more efficiently and stopped thinking only of myself when arguing those points.
I suggest rereading my posts to point out where I say everyone likes everything and wants everything. You'll be awhile, because I never actually said that.
Mmmpi wrote: "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models"
Didn't really take that long.
It's also a logical one, because it has to do with sales for the product. How many? Enough that GW keeps doing it, and keeps feeling the need to expand on the fluff portions, even after they started doing actual market research. So yeah, a blanket statement about how economics of the enterainment industry works.
As for data, you have yet to supply anything for the claim you made prior to mine. Pony up.
I have never made a claim that required data to support it that I did not point towards data to support it. I.E. You can fit them all into one book without increasing the price.= Indexes.
Sad you don't get that.
You do sound selfish. Everything you've posted is about what you want.
Maybe you should start thinking about other people.
Yeah okay.
Point out the word everybody.
Ahhh! I see now. You don't actually understand how English works. You see here is how your sentence breaks down.
People who buy GW products is the subject. It is all encompassing. All people who buy GW products. Because you didn't put in another word like some or whatever. It clearly states that of all the people in the world, those that buy GW products....
"like fluff and painted models"
It's a definitive statement about all people who fit the description of the subject and then declares a "fact" about them and their likes. If you don't want to say that everyone who buys GW products like fluff and paint then you need to include some other words in there to refine the subject to be more open ended and less all encompassing.
Yeah, you said nobody wants it.
No I didn't. Quote me.
So if me saying people requires data, you saying nobody requires data.
Still waiting for your demonstration that you understand a logical argument.
There is no rational argument I can make to the irrational that will satisfy them. As this quoted post proves. I thought you were going to start ignoring me?
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
And none of the fluff.
Also :
224-page softback book
It includes 207 datasheets
How exactly does a 224 page softback book including 207 datasheets count as "isn't 200 pages"?
Codex:SM has somewhere around 286 pages of fluff and artwork. Codex DA: has somewhere around 156. If BA and SW have about the same - That's 978 pages. 156*3= 468+286 =754 + 224.
Do you look this stuff up before you decide to make it up? I mean, its not that hard to type Index Imperium 1 into a google search.
Add those in to the book, and you're looking at tripling it's size.
1) You don't need painting guides in the book. Painting guides are everywhere for free including GWs own website.
I do need the painting guides. I don't always have a good internet connection when I visit family on the farm.
2) You don't need the fluff. The fluff is all over the place for free including GWs own website.
I do need the fluff, sometimes I want to read it.
3) Army wide strategems take up 2 pages each. So 8 more pages. Psycihc power and relics take up 1 page. So 4 more pages max. +12 pages to the index page count - all the datasheets for the armies I said wouldn't even be included. You have a cheaper book with all the rules and none of the garbage getting in the way of the rules. Of course since it's GW they will add another 50 pages of splash pages showing you models as what amounts to an ad for their products right in the middle of the rules content making the book less easy to use. But thats just how GW does things. Not how a good RULES book should be made.
Tripling it's size my ass. Stop catastrophizing. You undermine your own arguments by blowing everything wildly out of proportion.
My DA codex has Relics covering TWO pages by itself, and the Interomancy Discipline taking up a third all by itself. I ask again, do you not bother looking this up first out of laziness, or out of a desire to lie?
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
your claim that the codex system as it stands is "flawed" however is your opinion being presented as fact. I mean at what point does something become a unique eneugh army to merit it's own distinct codex, as opposed to being mixed in with someone elses?
Is Deathguard distinct eneugh from Chaos Space Marines? surly they COULD be folded into codex CSM (until this edition they where) of course now that they are distinct they very much have their own character. (I'm using this as a pure example BTW, GW did a much better job of making Death Guard feel like a independant codex was warrented) why not fold sisters of Battle into codex Space Marines? toss in a page of rules reducing their str and toughness, give them a invul save and faith abilities, and maybe 1 or two distinct units. surely thats just a page or two of unqiue rules right? why do we need a seperate codex for them?
and why not just fold Space Marines into the guard codex, as "codex Imperium" give everyone access to the tanks, and just slide in tac, devestator and assault marines!
I apologize for the reduco absurdium. but the point I'm getting at here is you can make all sorts of arguments for consoladation, and right now, it ain't going to happen because GW is expanding codex choice. yes you might view having to buy another book as a down side, (for the record I doubt GW anticipates their regular customers buying more then a half dozen codices at most. Most people'll buy the proper flavor of space marine codex for them and thats that) but I doubt Games Workshop sees it that way. They like money!
as for the focus on people who like GW;'s products liking fluff and art. I'd be willing to bet thats truer then it isn't. warhammer 40k is a visual medium with a lot of story people like that, several Horus Heresy books where on the NYT best seller list. I suspect more people are intreasted in 40k for the fluff then play the game. so yeah I think it's safe to assume most 40k fans like that stuff.
Then show some painted models. Showing some painted models is not painting guides. Hey guess what? GW used to sell whole books that were nothing but painting guides. Buy those.
I did. They're no longer accurate as the paints and methodology has changed quite a bit since then. For starters, UM don't paing their guns red anymore.
You don't need the fluff. You don't BUY the codex to find out about the army you picked. You already read up about the army before you picked up the codex to buy it. Or did you really drop 50.00 on a complete unknown in the hopes that you would end up liking the stories and pictures? Also, no. Not MOST people. Don't assume anything about MOST peoples motivations without some solid data to back it up.
Irony and Self-Awareness Alert. Aren't you the guy telling us what we do and don't need based off your desire to support your previous attempt to tell us what we do and don't need?
You don't have anything to show that 51%+ of all players buy their codex and pick their armies because of fluff. And you DEFINITELY don't have anything to show us that says those players need that fluff in the codex to justify buying the shrink wrapped books to find out if they like the fluff.
6 powers do not take up an entire page.
Despite how many times they... do. Interomancy and the Librarius Discipline both take a full page in my ebooks. Anyone have the Vanguard codex supplement? I'm pretty sure Obscuration takes a full page. My google search suggests it does. This is really getting embarassing. I'ts also getting harder to believe you're ACCIDENTALLY wrong so often.
Look at the index. 1 Page to list all the units they get from the whole single book and their special rules. 1 page for relics and psychic powers. MAYBE needing 1 more page for warlord traits but probably not. Again, you don't need the sheer volume of pictures and you don't need to reprint the land raiders 4 times. 1 datasheet for each variant probably on 2 pages with a single picture of a land raider will do, if that. The Nid codex has 2 pages as 1 big splash image with all the units with a little number next to them. Then at the bottom it lists which units are what by those numbers. It takes up minimal real estate and lets everyone know what everything is.
You want the book to be compact and cost less? Stop filling it with bs. Then you have room for the rules in a more easily digestible format that makes everything easier to find.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
And none of the fluff.
Also :
224-page softback book
It includes 207 datasheets
How exactly does a 224 page softback book including 207 datasheets count as "isn't 200 pages"?
Because it also included all the datasheets and information for deathwatch and grey knights which nobody was suggesting be merged in with the standard SM codex. So How many pages did it just drop down by?
Codex:SM has somewhere around 286 pages of fluff and artwork. Codex DA: has somewhere around 156. If BA and SW have about the same - That's 978 pages. 156*3= 468+286 =754 + 224.
Do you look this stuff up before you decide to make it up? I mean, its not that hard to type Index Imperium 1 into a google search.
You don't need every page of fluff from DA, BA, and SW. Every edition new stories get added and older stories get reduced or cut all together. A merged codex preferably has NONE of the fluff or painting guide and instead you got to purchase, separately, an actual painting guide that covered more in depth your preferred chapters schemes and heraldry based on company and all that. You would get even more room to have even more indepth fluff with even more guides for the paint including color selection and technique tips. without getting in the way of the rules you need while at the table. 1 SM codex for rules. Many fluff and paint guides for each chapter so they can actually focus in on each of them and give the fluff the space it needs to breath free of rules. More room for successor information and schemes. More room to focus on what the book is for.
Again, I am not against the fluff. I just think it's dumb as feth how they format the books now.. And making everyone pay 50.00 for inferior products that most repeat the same information as 3 other 50.00 products is bs. You could have 1 30.00-40.00 index style book for rules and another 30.00 book for fluff and paint and you would get a better version of all of it for everyone.
ohh so your master plan is instead of buying one codex that contains the rules I need for the chapter I want to play, I have to buy two. seriously your proposeal is to soak the "filthy casuals" for more money, so the die hards can save money? yeah that makes busniess sense! ohh wait it doesn't!
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
Didn't you just tell someone who claims to be motivated by a NEED for the fluff and pictures they don't NEED to fluff and pictures? So you are making claims about what motivates most people?
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
It's more than 200 pages. It's still 224 pages. No matter how many times you "accidentally" get something wrong, this won't make it correct. It'll be roughtly 978 pages. I already did the estimation and math for you.
BrianDavion wrote: ohh so your master plan is instead of buying one codex that contains the rules I need for the chapter I want to play, I have to buy two. seriously your proposeal is to soak the "filthy casuals" for more money, so the die hards can save money? yeah that makes busniess sense! ohh wait it doesn't!
What I would support is something like what Kings of War has done, where they released two army books. One is just the rules, the other has both rules, modeling content, and fluff. The 2nd was (at the time) about 60% more expensive.
But if the choice was one codex with everything for a specific army, or one rule book and one fluff book per army, I'd choose the former choice.
NOTE FOR READERS: This is the first time in this discussion that I've listed my personal preferences.
Stop claiming the internet thing. I never said everybody did. You are arguing a point never made.
It does invalidate your claim.
I never said everybody had the internet. I just said they could go on the internet they don't have for a painting guide. You lose, I win, because I said so.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
Didn't you just tell someone who claims to be motivated by a NEED for the fluff and pictures they don't NEED to fluff and pictures? So you are making claims about what motivates most people?
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
It's more than 200 pages. It's still 224 pages. No matter how many times you "accidentally" get something wrong, this won't make it correct. It'll be roughtly 978 pages. I already did the estimation and math for you.
Yeah, he apparently knows more about us than we do. I guess his 'over the internet mind-reading device' is broken.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
your claim that the codex system as it stands is "flawed" however is your opinion being presented as fact. I mean at what point does something become a unique eneugh army to merit it's own distinct codex, as opposed to being mixed in with someone elses?
When it doesn't use 80% of the same datasheets. GSC and Nids share 1 datasheet. Genestealers. Distinct armies. DA and Ultramarines? Same army.
Is Deathguard distinct eneugh from Chaos Space Marines? surly they COULD be folded into codex CSM (until this edition they where) of course now that they are distinct they very much have their own character. (I'm using this as a pure example BTW, GW did a much better job of making Death Guard feel like a independant codex was warrented) why not fold sisters of Battle into codex Space Marines? toss in a page of rules reducing their str and toughness, give them a invul save and faith abilities, and maybe 1 or two distinct units. surely thats just a page or two of unqiue rules right? why do we need a seperate codex for them?
Because they actually have different units and share almost nothing with standard codex CSM.
and why not just fold Space Marines into the guard codex, as "codex Imperium" give everyone access to the tanks, and just slide in tac, devestator and assault marines!
Because they don't share all those units.
I apologize for the reduco absurdium. but the point I'm getting at here is you can make all sorts of arguments for consoladation, and right now, it ain't going to happen because GW is expanding codex choice. yes you might view having to buy another book as a down side, (for the record I doubt GW anticipates their regular customers buying more then a half dozen codices at most. Most people'll buy the proper flavor of space marine codex for them and thats that) but I doubt Games Workshop sees it that way. They like money!
I agree with this assessment and it's sort of my point. The codexes isn't really where GW makes their money. It's the models. Most people probably buy 1 codex. Maybe 2. And with the rate at which the information in them is invalidated anyway it's mostly pointless to buy them at all.
as for the focus on people who like GW;'s products liking fluff and art. I'd be willing to bet thats truer then it isn't. warhammer 40k is a visual medium with a lot of story people like that, several Horus Heresy books where on the NYT best seller list. I suspect more people are intreasted in 40k for the fluff then play the game. so yeah I think it's safe to assume most 40k fans like that stuff.
I think it's fair to assume SOME people exclusively like the fluff. Especially because I have met many who think the game is just flat out bad. I have also met many who don't give a damn about the fluff. They want to win games and buy exactly what they need to do that. And then I have met many who sit in the middle and want to play some good games and enjoy the fluff for it's absurdity. People who buy GW products exist on a spectrum. They are not all one thing. I wouldn't presume to tell anyone what everyone thinks.
You're going to have to give us some hard numbers for that last bit.
"I think it's fair to assume SOME people exclusively like the fluff. Especially because I have met many who think the game is just flat out bad. I have also met many who don't give a damn about the fluff. They want to win games and buy exactly what they need to do that. And then I have met many who sit in the middle and want to play some good games and enjoy the fluff for it's absurdity. People who buy GW products exist on a spectrum. They are not all one thing. I wouldn't presume to tell anyone what everyone thinks. "
How exactly does the ratios break down, I'll need all the metrics.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
Didn't you just tell someone who claims to be motivated by a NEED for the fluff and pictures they don't NEED to fluff and pictures? So you are making claims about what motivates most people?
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
It's more than 200 pages. It's still 224 pages. No matter how many times you "accidentally" get something wrong, this won't make it correct. It'll be roughtly 978 pages. I already did the estimation and math for you.
Need and like are 2 different things. You are quoting me from several pages ago out of context.
My estimate is 30 pages with no model pictures, art, or fluff.
Its easy enough to figure out. The outer book is organized into several inner books. You just look for the last page before the datasheets start. In Codex DA that's page 156. 156 pages of fluff and art. Assume something similar for the BA and SW. 286 for Codex SM. Add 224 pages for the Index Imperium 1. Index Imperium 1 contains more armies, but no warlord traits, relics, etc - I'd bet at (checking my DA book again - 3 pages for Stratagems, 2 pages for Relics, 1 page for Warlord Traits, 1 page for psychic disciplines, and 1 page for Tactical Objectives - 8 pages x 3 = 24 pages it's pretty close to the number of pages taken in the Index for the Corvus Blackstar, and such.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
Didn't you just tell someone who claims to be motivated by a NEED for the fluff and pictures they don't NEED to fluff and pictures? So you are making claims about what motivates most people?
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
It's more than 200 pages. It's still 224 pages. No matter how many times you "accidentally" get something wrong, this won't make it correct. It'll be roughtly 978 pages. I already did the estimation and math for you.
Need and like are 2 different things. You are quoting me from several pages ago out of context.
I quoted EXACTLY what you said, so it isn't "out of context". You are telling people what they do or don't NEED - which is pretty much everyone's primary MOTIVATION. And now you're trying to play semantics about NEED vs WANT in a hobby/luxury item. And it's STILL 224 pages DESPITE you claiming it's less than 200.
My estimate is 30 pages with no model pictures, art, or fluff.
Its easy enough to figure out. The outer book is organized into several inner books. You just look for the last page before the datasheets start. In Codex DA that's page 156. 156 pages of fluff and art. Assume something similar for the BA and SW. 286 for Codex SM. Add 224 pages for the Index Imperium 1. Index Imperium 1 contains more armies, but no warlord traits, relics, etc - I'd bet at (checking my DA book again - 3 pages for Stratagems, 2 pages for Relics, 1 page for Warlord Traits, 1 page for psychic disciplines, and 1 page for Tactical Objectives - 8 pages x 3 = 24 pages it's pretty close to the number of pages taken in the Index for the Corvus Blackstar, and such.
No, YOU don't NEED it either. You might LIKE it. But you don't NEED it. I don't have anything to show. But then, I am not making claims about what motivates MOST people. Or what MANY stores do or don't do. I can speak to the experiences I have had. Of the 5 local stores that sell GW product 1 has had SOME codexes open. Not all. Again, did you spend 50.00 on your codex without knowing about the army first?
Didn't you just tell someone who claims to be motivated by a NEED for the fluff and pictures they don't NEED to fluff and pictures? So you are making claims about what motivates most people?
Hey guy, EVERY unique unit for the BA is in the index. The index is less than 200 pages with MORE armies then I am saying go in the SM dex. ALL the unique datasheets fit in there nice and snug.
It's more than 200 pages. It's still 224 pages. No matter how many times you "accidentally" get something wrong, this won't make it correct. It'll be roughtly 978 pages. I already did the estimation and math for you.
Need and like are 2 different things. You are quoting me from several pages ago out of context.
I quoted EXACTLY what you said, so it isn't "out of context". You are telling people what they do or don't NEED - which is pretty much everyone's primary MOTIVATION. And now you're trying to play semantics about NEED vs WANT in a hobby/luxury item. And it's STILL 224 pages DESPITE you claiming it's less than 200.
No, it is VERY out of context. He said he NEEDED the fluff inside of the codex. That he NEEDED the painting guides. As though without those things he would die. Quoting me disputing the vernacular he used as though I was making a point besides that is taking it out of context. Again, why are you quoting snippets of conversation from 2 pages ago?
When it doesn't use 80% of the same datasheets. GSC and Nids share 1 datasheet. Genestealers. Distinct armies. DA and Ultramarines? Same army.
GSC has the Tyranids Keyword. Same Army.
Is Deathguard distinct eneugh from Chaos Space Marines? surly they COULD be folded into codex CSM (until this edition they where) of course now that they are distinct they very much have their own character. (I'm using this as a pure example BTW, GW did a much better job of making Death Guard feel like a independant codex was warrented) why not fold sisters of Battle into codex Space Marines? toss in a page of rules reducing their str and toughness, give them a invul save and faith abilities, and maybe 1 or two distinct units. surely thats just a page or two of unqiue rules right? why do we need a seperate codex for them?
Because they actually have different units and share almost nothing with standard codex CSM.
Wait? Deathguard units are different? Aren't they just Terminators with a keyword and a special rule? It's interesting that you don't apply your "logic" consistently. Apparently power armored Death Guard marines are MUCH different than Power Armored Chaos marines, just because of a couple minor rules tweaks, but DeathWING are just Terminators and should be folded in.
When it doesn't use 80% of the same datasheets. GSC and Nids share 1 datasheet. Genestealers. Distinct armies. DA and Ultramarines? Same army.
GSC has the Tyranids Keyword. Same Army.
Is Deathguard distinct eneugh from Chaos Space Marines? surly they COULD be folded into codex CSM (until this edition they where) of course now that they are distinct they very much have their own character. (I'm using this as a pure example BTW, GW did a much better job of making Death Guard feel like a independant codex was warrented) why not fold sisters of Battle into codex Space Marines? toss in a page of rules reducing their str and toughness, give them a invul save and faith abilities, and maybe 1 or two distinct units. surely thats just a page or two of unqiue rules right? why do we need a seperate codex for them?
Because they actually have different units and share almost nothing with standard codex CSM.
Wait? Deathguard units are different? Aren't they just Terminators with a keyword and a special rule? It's interesting that you don't apply your "logic" consistently. Apparently power armored Death Guard marines are MUCH different than Power Armored Chaos marines, just because of a couple minor rules tweaks, but DeathWING are just Terminators and should be folded in.
No, it is VERY out of context. He said he NEEDED the fluff inside of the codex. That he NEEDED the painting guides. As though without those things he would die. Quoting me disputing the vernacular he used as though I was making a point besides that is taking it out of context. Again, why are you quoting snippets of conversation from 2 pages ago?
You're stripping the context of "TO ENJOY THE GAME THE WAY I WANT TO" out of his NEED. You're the one trying to remove context to play Semantics- He doesn't NEED to get into the hobby at all. But anyone intellectually honest enough would know that the context of needing within the CONTEXT of enjoying the hobby is part of how he was using that NEED. And it's 224 pages.
Getting far too many alerts over this thread so its orange text time. Please remember that being polite is mandatory, if you cannot reply politely then do not reply at all. I would normally say stay on topic as well but I am actually struggling to work out what the topic is here.
How many of the wargear options usable by deathguard units are shared with the CSM equivalents? Not in what combinations they can be taken. Just the profiles. Is the standard CSM bolter the same one used by the stock DG troops? Are the DG plague scythes usable by CSM? How about vehicles? Deamon engines? How about Tsons? Their bolters are just the normal guys for CSM right? Totally the same and not at all a unique wargear list.
Just like the specialty units in the loyalist codexes are totally interchangeable.
They aren't. Many have specialty weapons or gear.
How many marine units have access to Angelius bolters?
Terminators with maces and special shield rules?
Death masks?
Inferno pistols?
On the other side,
There's no reason you can't just use a stratagem for inferno bolters, they don't need to be special right? Let's make all the Death guard stuff T4, bring them in line with the other marine stuff.
Mmmpi wrote: Just like the specialty units in the loyalist codexes are totally interchangeable.
Oh wait.
They are. A power sword is a power sword. The bolter is a bolter. A storm bolters a storm bolter. Outside of relics how many unique wargear options exist for DA or BA? SW at least have their ice weapons. Or had in 7th. They might just be power weapons by a different name in 8th. Il check in with my local SW player tomorrow to confirm. The DA and BA are not running around with any wargear SM don't just have already. Again, same army. Literally the same datasheets reprinted 4 times.
Mmmpi wrote: Just like the specialty units in the loyalist codexes are totally interchangeable.
Oh wait.
They are. A power sword is a power sword. The bolter is a bolter. A storm bolters a storm bolter. Outside of relics how many unique wargear options exist for DA or BA? SW at least have their ice weapons. Or had in 7th. They might just be power weapons by a different name in 8th. Il check in with my local SW player tomorrow to confirm. The DA and BA are not running around with any wargear SM don't just have already. Again, same army. Literally the same datasheets reprinted 4 times.
An angeles bolter is a bolter?
An encarmine sword, or frost axe is a basic power weapon?
Which generic SM unit uses death masks?
All three non-codex chapters have wargear that isn't in other codexes.
Just like death guard get plasma guns.
So no, literally not the same army four times over.
No no. You are having trouble keeping up. NONE of the wargear for DG or Tsons matches up for CSM. The basic CSM troop is not carrying the same gun as the DG or the TSons.
Tac marines are carrying the same bolter as the BADA and SW.
The Tac Marines for BA don't have death masks. I never said DA should loose their unique units. I said the vast majority of their units are exactly the same and belong in the same dex because of it.
I don't want crusader squads to get squatted and I don't want most of the unique units for BADA and SW to get squatted either (those that are actually distinct). Those few units don't justify an entire codex. Of the 3 SW have the strongest case for their own dex. But DA and BA don't have a case at all.
Lance845 wrote: No no. You are having trouble keeping up. NONE of the wargear for DG or Tsons matches up for CSM. The basic CSM troop is not carrying the same gun as the DG or the TSons.
Tac marines are carrying the same bolter as the BADA and SW.
The Tac Marines for BA don't have death masks. I never said DA should loose their unique units. I said the vast majority of their units are exactly the same and belong in the same dex because of it.
I don't want crusader squads to get squatted and I don't want most of the unique units for BADA and SW to get squatted either (those that are actually distinct). Those few units don't justify an entire codex. Of the 3 SW have the strongest case for their own dex. But DA and BA don't have a case at all.
Death guard are equipped with bolters, plasma, melta, flamers, and combi-bolters.
Just like Tac Marines...
I never said BAtac marines did. I did say some of their specialty units did.
Crusader squads don't justify a codex. The nearly 10 pages of specialty/unique units and characters, and five pages of rules, psychic power schools, and stratagems (these numbers are each, not total), plus 20-70 pages of background fluff do justify separate books.
At least a third of each of the non-codex chapters are unique, and they don't all use the whole repertoire of core units. DA don't use most of the codex fliers for example.
So right now, we have you cherry picking what is distinct, while ignoring it in other armies.
Mmmpi wrote: Just like the specialty units in the loyalist codexes are totally interchangeable.
Oh wait.
They are. A power sword is a power sword. The bolter is a bolter. A storm bolters a storm bolter. Outside of relics how many unique wargear options exist for DA or BA? SW at least have their ice weapons. Or had in 7th. They might just be power weapons by a different name in 8th. Il check in with my local SW player tomorrow to confirm. The DA and BA are not running around with any wargear SM don't just have already. Again, same army. Literally the same datasheets reprinted 4 times.
So for loyalist marines an Angelus bolter is just a bolter, but for Chaos SM, an inferno Bolter isn't just a bolter. You're on fire with this intellectual honesty thing.
I'm also looking forward to taking those Flails of Unforgiven and Maces of Absolution on my Imperial Fist Terminators backing up Lysander. Possibly more than my Stormraven dropping Stasis Bombs.
The stuff I say is different IS DIFFERENTbecause I say so. Try and keep up.
NONE of the wargear for DG or Tsons matches up for CSM. The basic CSM troop is not carrying the same gun as the DG or the TSons.
Um, I just looked and you should probably tell Battlescribe They have Deathguard Plaguemarines carring the common bolter. How many times are you going to make a ridiculously wrong claim without looking it up first? I realize you can't LINK a datasheet, but you can google one. Oh well, it's your credibility not mine. If you want to toss it away by lying all the time, that's your business.
Tac marines are carrying the same bolter as the BADA and SW.
And apparently the same as the Deathguard Plaguemarines. And the Imperium Index is 224 pages.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: for the record on the subject of crusader squads, I'd honestly like to see black templars be spun of out to their own codex again.
I'm Meh on that. I wouldn't mind, but it's not high on my priority list. If they did, I'd prefer it if they took Imperial Fists, and Crimson Fists with them. Put all the Sons of Dorn in the same book, and let them go to town expanding all three. Especially for as hard as close combat is sucking right now.
Mmmpi wrote: A Sons of Dorn book would be cool, or even a Crusade chapter book, which had BT, and several options for crusade style and fleet style chapters.
I mentioned a Sons of Dorn codex because if they're going to bring back more loyalist primarchs - and I think they will - they should add a <Legion> keyword to marines that works like the <Chapter> keyword, and write the Primarch reroll rule to work off the Legion keyword. Successor Chapters are just as likely to perk up and perform better if Daddy is watching, whoever Daddy is.
Mmmpi wrote: A Sons of Dorn book would be cool, or even a Crusade chapter book, which had BT, and several options for crusade style and fleet style chapters.
I mentioned a Sons of Dorn codex because if they're going to bring back more loyalist primarchs - and I think they will - they should add a <Legion> keyword to marines that works like the <Chapter> keyword, and write the Primarch reroll rule to work off the Legion keyword. Successor Chapters are just as likely to perk up and perform better if Daddy is watching, whoever Daddy is.
Mmmpi wrote: A Sons of Dorn book would be cool, or even a Crusade chapter book, which had BT, and several options for crusade style and fleet style chapters.
I mentioned a Sons of Dorn codex because if they're going to bring back more loyalist primarchs - and I think they will - they should add a <Legion> keyword to marines that works like the <Chapter> keyword, and write the Primarch reroll rule to work off the Legion keyword. Successor Chapters are just as likely to perk up and perform better if Daddy is watching, whoever Daddy is.
What if their Primarch is one of the traitors?
Dorn isn't. We already know who are and aren't. I expect to see at least 5 of each. I'm not sure Dorn is one of the ones that will come back, but between IF/CF/BT I wouldn't be surprised.
There are a lot of Chapters who were custom made. They'll either get to pick the Legion keyword they want, have one assigned so we do know, or they'll be locked out of picking one that matters depending on who's in control of their fluff and where they want to go with it.
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
funny chaos players have wanted this for a long time. honest to god question, whats it to you if GW puts out new material for other players?
You didn't even bother to look at the "content" in the Chaos Knight codex I bet. In fact, I already know you didn't.
Basically all shared datasheets, not a lot of new fluff. You really don't think that a page dedicated to switching keywords would be handled everything and gave Chaos players (like me) what they wanted? The answer is yes it would have. You're being naive on purpose to say otherwise.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
No you haven't. "I like fluff and pictures of painted models" isn't a logical argument. It's an emotional one.
On the one hand I don't mean to be insulting. On the other I don't actually care how you feel about it..
No, but "people who buy GW products like fluff and painted models" is a logical argument.
On the one hand it doesn't matter if you meant to, on the other, you're just lashing out because you're wrong about everything in this thread.
Lance845 wrote: Slayer, this isn't a logical argument for them. It's an emotional one. They want because they want and no amount of reasoning will matter next to those wants.
It doesn't matter that you could just give ALL terminators the option to take a single storm shield and it wouldn't make any difference. They want Deathwing to have their own datasheet for reasons.
lance845, we've been nothing but logical with our arguments, and your dismissiveness is insulting. Grow up.
Where have you been logical in defending Crowe? I'd like to see that please.
Reread my posts. You might have to first look up what a logical argument is though, since you don't seem to recognize one when you see it.
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
funny chaos players have wanted this for a long time. honest to god question, whats it to you if GW puts out new material for other players?
Everything new, and everything they don't use is bloat to them. You can see it every time these 'debates happen.
As already stated by Lance you weren't logical in your argument in defending the unit entry for Crowe. It's pointless and it's bloat and it needs to go.
Crimson wrote: Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Yes, and Abbaddon should just be replaced by.. um.. by... Generic 10,000 year old uber almost a primarch Chaos Lords. And Marneus Calgar isn't unique, you can just replace him with... the generic Primaris Chapter Master with unique gear and special CP generating abilities.
The idea that this unique guy with a name and special rules is unique, and that unique guy with a name and special rules isn't doesn't carry a lot of water.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
There's several characters that don't need entries actually. Outside Tellion and Chronus and Asmodai, we can lose the entries for Crowe, Corbulo, Lemartes (as Death Company should've been Fearless again in the first place), Artemis, Faaaaabulous Bile, and possibly Androcles off the top of my head.
"People like [thing] therefore [conclusion] to make them happy" is a logical argument based on emotional claims.
"I like Crowe.
Therefore, nobody liking Crowe is inaccurate.
Therefore, removing him would remove something that is liked.
Therefore, removing the unit based on the rationale that nobody likes it is unfounded."
Is a very logical argument. A very basic and logical siligism based on a single emotional claim.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
Ding ding ding we have a winner! Anyone saying it can't be done didn't even bother to look at how I would format the codex a couple pages back.
Crimson wrote: Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Yes, and Abbaddon should just be replaced by.. um.. by... Generic 10,000 year old uber almost a primarch Chaos Lords. And Marneus Calgar isn't unique, you can just replace him with... the generic Primaris Chapter Master with unique gear and special CP generating abilities.
The idea that this unique guy with a name and special rules is unique, and that unique guy with a name and special rules isn't doesn't carry a lot of water.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
There's several characters that don't need entries actually. Outside Tellion and Chronus and Asmodai, we can lose the entries for Crowe, Corbulo, Lemartes (as Death Company should've been Fearless again in the first place), Artemis, Faaaaabulous Bile, and possibly Androcles off the top of my head.
We don't need entries for Tac Marines. Or Intercessors. Scouts. Or anything else. In fact, we don't need Astartes. In fact, we don't need the Imperium. In fact, we don't need 40k.
It's not a question of absolute need. It's a question of relative value. Because "need" is relative; it only has meaning in relation to a demand. We "need" food "to live". We "need" rules to "play a rules-based games".
So what's the "need" we're trying to satisfy?
The "need" you're trying to satisfy is "SM should be one book" - so any argument based on that is circular.
Crimson wrote: Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Yes, and Abbaddon should just be replaced by.. um.. by... Generic 10,000 year old uber almost a primarch Chaos Lords. And Marneus Calgar isn't unique, you can just replace him with... the generic Primaris Chapter Master with unique gear and special CP generating abilities.
The idea that this unique guy with a name and special rules is unique, and that unique guy with a name and special rules isn't doesn't carry a lot of water.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
There's several characters that don't need entries actually. Outside Tellion and Chronus and Asmodai, we can lose the entries for Crowe, Corbulo, Lemartes (as Death Company should've been Fearless again in the first place), Artemis, Faaaaabulous Bile, and possibly Androcles off the top of my head.
We don't need entries for Tac Marines. Or Intercessors. Scouts. Or anything else. In fact, we don't need Astartes. In fact, we don't need the Imperium. In fact, we don't need 40k.
It's not a question of absolute need. It's a question of relative value. Because "need" is relative; it only has meaning in relation to a demand. We "need" food "to live". We "need" rules to "play a rules-based games".
So what's the "need" we're trying to satisfy?
The "need" you're trying to satisfy is "SM should be one book" - so any argument based on that is circular.
The need is to get rid of unnecessary bloat from characters that aren't worth keeping around. Can you say with a straight face Artemis something TRULY unique that deserves his own entry?
I never really understood why people like special characters. I would much rather have a flexible rules for generic characters with a lot of customisability that would allow people to create a number of their own unique characters, as well as represent the official GW lore characters.
Same with chapters and units. I would rather have a big customisable sandbox than limited predetermined builds.
But some people just seem to love (to me) pointless restrictions.
To them it is 'flavour' that red marines can have an options A, B and C and blue marines options A, B and D (and if you think your custom chapter would be best represented by options A, C and D you're out of luck.) Instead of, you know, having marines with options A, B, C and D and letting every player to choose what they like.
Crimson wrote: Primarchs, Phoenix Lords etc. Everything else can be represented by just adding more customisablity to the generic characters.
Yes, and Abbaddon should just be replaced by.. um.. by... Generic 10,000 year old uber almost a primarch Chaos Lords. And Marneus Calgar isn't unique, you can just replace him with... the generic Primaris Chapter Master with unique gear and special CP generating abilities.
The idea that this unique guy with a name and special rules is unique, and that unique guy with a name and special rules isn't doesn't carry a lot of water.
Maybe not Tiggy, but I have made mention of removing Chronus and Tellion before. Nobody will miss them and they'd be perfect as generic stand-ins for the purposes you listed.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
There's several characters that don't need entries actually. Outside Tellion and Chronus and Asmodai, we can lose the entries for Crowe, Corbulo, Lemartes (as Death Company should've been Fearless again in the first place), Artemis, Faaaaabulous Bile, and possibly Androcles off the top of my head.
So you say. There are people who disagree with you. Stop presenting your opinion as fact.
Crimson wrote: I never really understood why people like special characters. I would much rather have a flexible rules for generic characters with a lot of customisability that would allow people to create a number of their own unique characters, as well as represent the official GW lore characters.
Same with chapters and units. I would rather have a big customisable sandbox than limited predetermined builds.
But some people just seem to love (to me) pointless restrictions.
To them it is 'flavour' that red marines can have an options A, B and C and blue marines options A, B and D (and if you think your custom chapter would be best represented by options A, C and D you're out of luck.) Instead of, you know, having marines with options A, B, C and D and letting every player to choose what they like.
Yeah. Did you know Dark Angels and their successors can't have Centurions, a unit that clearly fits their fighting doctrine, and have never had access to them ever for...reasons? So unique everyone! Buy the whole unnecessary codex!!!
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The argument against merging is firmly footed in whether being inclusive is worth having the same unit in multiple forces (although reprinting vs referencing runs orthogonal to it). That is no more emotional an argument than "Marines shouldn't be 100ppm for current stats because it'd make the game bad".
Dismissing the argument as not relevant to the merge-or-not question is like dismissing relativity from the GPS system; sure, it might make more sense for people who don't really grasp the whole question, but you've made it pointless.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact".
Here's where you're way off. His argument is "Your solution is worse than the problem". Similarly, if my problem is my car is too dirty, lighting it on fire is one possible solution. Pointing out that that solution is worse than the problem is very much logical.
Further, he's not saying "everyone who buys GW likes it". You're saying "I don't, therefore those that do are being emotional".
I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby.
Only so far as they confine themselves to what you think is best. Because you know best.
I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
I am all for people being able to buy what they want. Ideally, you could buy the book you want. I wish GW would make it so I didn't have to buy BA, DA, and SW books so I can play my UltraMarine descendants (he said sarcastically).
First, people only need to buy the book they want to play. The idea that you must buy all four is silly. Unless you want to play all four armies. And people who actually *do* want to collect and play a BA army independant of their SW army are highly unlikely to want BA and SW to be identical. Further, if they did, they could use BA rules to play their SW army today. So your solution doesn't help. And certainly hurts.
Ding ding ding we have a winner! Anyone saying it can't be done didn't even bother to look at how I would format the codex a couple pages back.
We could put all of 40k in 1 book. Even without removing anything. But it'd be a huge fething book. We could make it smaller by removing stuff. But then we've lost content. It's all a tradeoff. But the amounts of content (or the resulting size) of such a book would be far too much of a tradeoff from the status quo to be reasonable.
You laid out an argument. That argument contains flaws. Those flaws are being pointed out. You're doing no one any favors by blindly ignoring them.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact". I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby. I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
Ding ding ding we have a winner! Anyone saying it can't be done didn't even bother to look at how I would format the codex a couple pages back.
How you would have formated the codex...yes we did notice. No one but people like you and Lance want to buy a printed out word doc. Oh wait, I addressed that when you first said it.
3. Everyone knows that the Chaos Knight codex shouldn't exist as is. Look at how little it has in content. At most you need 1 page in the main Knight codex to explain how switching keywords makes them enemies of the Imperium and we can give you 5 pages of fluff on how they go Renegade or chaotic sometimes.
you'd be wrong, I own the codex, I'm sorry Slayer-fan should I be insulted at the rules of this book too?
the differance between us is I reckongize Codex Chaos Knights for what it is. A good start we;ve long had a single page of rules telling us how to run Knight 's as chaos. https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ENG_Index_Renegade_Knights.pdf remember this? unsuprisingly chaos knight players wanted something more. and they where given it. GW however had certain perimeters they had to work within. the first was that they'd already given chaos knights certain things in that PDF, which meant they had to ensure they didn't remove any options. (this is kinda important when the knight renegade index is less then 6 months old and each model in an army costs over a hundred and fifty USDs) now that chaos Knights have their own codex, GW can in future editions make it more distinct. GW's taking a long game with regards to the chaos knights codex. you meanwhile are taking the short term view.
Crimson wrote: I never really understood why people like special characters. I would much rather have a flexible rules for generic characters with a lot of customisability that would allow people to create a number of their own unique characters, as well as represent the official GW lore characters.
Same with chapters and units. I would rather have a big customisable sandbox than limited predetermined builds.
But some people just seem to love (to me) pointless restrictions.
To them it is 'flavour' that red marines can have an options A, B and C and blue marines options A, B and D (and if you think your custom chapter would be best represented by options A, C and D you're out of luck.) Instead of, you know, having marines with options A, B, C and D and letting every player to choose what they like.
They were less of a big deal when we actually could customize characters. Now many of them can't be. Besides, it's not my place to tell someone they can't enjoy a legal model, even if my preferences towards characters are more in line with you.
As for armies though, that really doesn't work as well.
I would like consolidated codexes, but I'd settle for better keywords AND:
Datasheet consolidation of the main space marine codex, and changing some of the old Ultramarines unique characters to generic upgrades. For example, change Telion to "veteran scout sergeant". Change Chronus to "astartes tank commander". These types of units should not be limited to Ultramarines. I'm not saying to get rid of all unique characters, but spread the love with some of them.
Consolidate captains to 2 datasheets. Captain, and Primaris Captain. Land Raiders should be 1 datasheet. Etc.
Make Chapter Master a 50 to 75 point ungrade instead of 3 CP.
You mean my posts acknowledged that people with different tastes and wants purchase codexes, which are currently designed to appeal to as many of them as possible, while your posts are trying to force your own personal view on it?
Yeah, totally a mistake on my part. How dare I consider people who aren't me.
The fact that you don't recognize the logic behind having a product that is as inclusive as possible is worrisome. I'm not sure you're properly equipped to be having this discussion. Until you actually start figuring out what a real logical argument is, consider your posts in this thread to be ignored for their lack of value.
Nice try though Cupcake.
This discussion starts and ends with why the same datasheets are reprinted over and over again in different publications and the merits or flaws of merging them into a single codex.
The argument against merging is firmly footed in whether being inclusive is worth having the same unit in multiple forces (although reprinting vs referencing runs orthogonal to it). That is no more emotional an argument than "Marines shouldn't be 100ppm for current stats because it'd make the game bad".
Dismissing the argument as not relevant to the merge-or-not question is like dismissing relativity from the GPS system; sure, it might make more sense for people who don't really grasp the whole question, but you've made it pointless.
The current codex format is flawed. And your arguments for their current format is "But I like it, and I think a majority of other people also like it so I am going to state that everyone who buys GW likes it as though it's a fact".
Here's where you're way off. His argument is "Your solution is worse than the problem". Similarly, if my problem is my car is too dirty, lighting it on fire is one possible solution. Pointing out that that solution is worse than the problem is very much logical.
Further, he's not saying "everyone who buys GW likes it". You're saying "I don't, therefore those that do are being emotional".
I am all for products that support everyone's favorite aspects of the hobby.
Only so far as they confine themselves to what you think is best. Because you know best.
I am not for selling people 4 books when you could sell them 1.
I am all for people being able to buy what they want. Ideally, you could buy the book you want. I wish GW would make it so I didn't have to buy BA, DA, and SW books so I can play my UltraMarine descendants (he said sarcastically).
First, people only need to buy the book they want to play. The idea that you must buy all four is silly. Unless you want to play all four armies. And people who actually *do* want to collect and play a BA army independant of their SW army are highly unlikely to want BA and SW to be identical. Further, if they did, they could use BA rules to play their SW army today. So your solution doesn't help. And certainly hurts.
Ding ding ding we have a winner! Anyone saying it can't be done didn't even bother to look at how I would format the codex a couple pages back.
We could put all of 40k in 1 book. Even without removing anything. But it'd be a huge fething book. We could make it smaller by removing stuff. But then we've lost content. It's all a tradeoff. But the amounts of content (or the resulting size) of such a book would be far too much of a tradeoff from the status quo to be reasonable.
You laid out an argument. That argument contains flaws. Those flaws are being pointed out. You're doing no one any favors by blindly ignoring them.
Tacs and Custodes are both generic choices for their armies. What in the cornbread hell are you babbling about?
That Tacs aren't simply Custodes. That some armies will use Tacs, other armies will use Custodes.
That Crowe isn't simply a Generic but worse. That a model can have same-but-worse rules, but with a lower price point, can still be just as good (or better). The idea that a model can't be worth it's points regardless of how low they go just because something (for more points) is stronger is mind-bogglyingly stupid.
I love the 'cornbread hell' pejorative, though. Nice touch.
Kindly use spoiler tags.
As an ad-hoc "Just sell two books, so I can get my Index-replacement, and fluffbunnies can pound sand" not-answer.
Codex Compliant Space Marines: This book deals with the Chapters that are Codex Compliant, including the First Founding Legions and Second Founding Chapters that adopted the codex completely with maybe fancy local names for things. So Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Crimson Fists, Raven Guard for certain, perhaps Salamanders and White Scars too.
Codex Deviant Space Marines: This book deals with Chapters that accepted the Codex Astartes but have minor/major modifications to the core structure. This book would include Blood Angels and Dark Angels, with perhaps Salamanders or White Scars.
Wipes their Arse with the Codex Space Marines: For the Chapters that don't utilise the Codex Astartes whatsoever. These would be the Space Wolves, the Iron Hands (Damn you GW it's been how many decades make the rules reflect the Lore Emperor Damn It) and Black Templars.
My preferred:
Codex Astartes All the rules for current Astartes kit available to all chapters. Can include the almost-entirely-compliant chapters (UM, IF, etc).
Blood Angels A suppliment that lists all the differences between them and entirely-compliant chapters. So it'd have Furiosos, Sanguinary Priests, any replacement Traits/Strats/etc, relics, and so forth. It'd also list (blacklist) all choices in the Astartes book that are unavailable. As a blacklist, it'd mean added Astartes kit (such as the new tank) would default to be allowed, not disallowed.
Dark Angels As above
And soforth.
Each of these supliments would be a "minidex", not a full book. It would not list the shared units (aside from pointing out the variants - like Heavy Flamers on BA Tacs).
This means no duplicate entries. And it means buy-what-you-want (a-la-carte consumption). While increasing the ability to differentiate chapters. And fixes the "But can BA take it?" confusions.
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
it's just p[art of the intellctually dishonest "duur it's too confusing, they need to consilidate the marines for 'ease" arguement.
Not confusing, pointless waste of book realestate. You could have 4 more interesting armies if you jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.
ERJAK wrote: Not confusing, pointless waste of book realestate. You could have 4 more interesting armies if you jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.
That's not how it works. It isn't a Zero Sum game.
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
it's just p[art of the intellctually dishonest "duur it's too confusing, they need to consilidate the marines for 'ease" arguement.
Not confusing, pointless waste of book realestate. You could have 4 more interesting armies if you jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.
GW hasn't exactly shown that they care how many armies they have when it comes to adding more. Having four different flavors of marines isn't holding anything new back. GW's perception on how well they can sell said new armies is.
ERJAK wrote: Not confusing, pointless waste of book realestate. You could have 4 more interesting armies if you jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.
That's not how it works. It isn't a Zero Sum game.
Bharring wrote: Except that there's really nothing to fix here. I've never seen this misplayed or be a serious problem. Blood Angels from the "Ultramarines" chapter use the BA book, not the SM book.
it's just p[art of the intellctually dishonest "duur it's too confusing, they need to consilidate the marines for 'ease" arguement.
Not confusing, pointless waste of book realestate. You could have 4 more interesting armies if you jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.
no if GW jammed all the special snowflake marines into one book.. you would have 4 less armies. that is all. GW doesn't have some magical required number of codexes. GW didn't give us Codex Imperial Knights simply because the Black Templars where folded into codex space marines.
You keep adding to this list of characters you've decided the people arguing against squatting them wouldn't miss - as an argument for why they wouldn't miss them. I've got Telion, and I use him all the time, loved him as a Scout Squad upgrade. I've got Chronus. Use him less than all the time but still fairly often. I'd miss him. And I'd miss Asmodai. And I still miss Sapphon. I even miss Invictus now that we have a way to kitbash a model for him. Any others you want to add to the list?
There's several characters that don't need entries actually. Outside Tellion and Chronus and Asmodai, we can lose the entries for Crowe, Corbulo, Lemartes (as Death Company should've been Fearless again in the first place), Artemis, Faaaaabulous Bile, and possibly Androcles off the top of my head.
Lemartes has special rules in addition to his relic, so doesn't meet the criteria of being a normal guy with a relic. Nor is Morale the only time one takes a Leadership test. I'm sure Death Company being hit by Psychic Scourge will be happy to use Lemartes 2 extra LD. Brother Corbulo also has a special rule outside of his Relic. Fabius Bile has a special rule outside of his Relic(s) - and in fact has multiple relics something a generic character can't do. And I'd miss them too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: I never really understood why people like special characters. I would much rather have a flexible rules for generic characters with a lot of customisability that would allow people to create a number of their own unique characters, as well as represent the official GW lore characters.
Same with chapters and units. I would rather have a big customisable sandbox than limited predetermined builds.
But some people just seem to love (to me) pointless restrictions.
To them it is 'flavour' that red marines can have an options A, B and C and blue marines options A, B and D (and if you think your custom chapter would be best represented by options A, C and D you're out of luck.) Instead of, you know, having marines with options A, B, C and D and letting every player to choose what they like.
That was sort of how Special Characters started. They gave you 75-80% of the choices you could make predetermined, and you got to flesh out the last little bit (usually one wargear card roughly equivalent to Relics) to replicate that character having access to most of if not the entire armory to draw gear from to put in their Batman Utility Belt based on their current mission and whimsy. It did not work especially well. Marneus Calgar with a 2+ invulnerable field that didn't work in close combat while his gauntlets made him practically invulnerable in close combat (Back then subsequent attacks got a "Swarming" bonus of +1A and +1S per attacker before them. So the 20th Grot had 21 attacks at S23 or some such. Except against Calgar.) I don't remember the Abby combo, but it was even worse.
They did try giving people a chance to "Wing" their own chapter with some sort of custimizable construction point system where Veteran Sergeants could become Apothecaries with Nartheciums and such, but it didn't last sadly. I'm not sure how abused/abusable it was. And I think they tried to dip their toe in that water again with Create Your Own Vehicle stuff, but they just haven't been willing to give it enough of a system/effort for it to hang around permanently/long term yet.
So exciting! What could have been condensed into a single book is now being spread out into a single core and a whole series of supplements. Now BA, DA, and SW are going to have to buy 2 books to get their most current rules. And so will ultramarines and everyone else.
I would bet money that the combined cost is going to be 80.00-100 minimum.
Again, comparison.
Pathfinder 2nd Ed. Just released. 59.99 600+ page hardcover with a great binding that allows the book to sit flat when open and jam packed with rules art and fluff with logical good formatting and indexes and such for quick reference. 15.99 for the pdf version.
GW. 2 hardcovers with a gak binding required for you to play a single army. No prices yet, but if previous codexes are any indicator then 50.00 each for maybe 250ish pages a piece. PDFs will cost 34.99 each. Thats right. It will cost more money for less pages in PDF form then it does for Pathfinders book in hardcover.
But hey! This is basically what you wanted! More books!
Lance845 wrote: So exciting! What could have been condensed into a single book is now being spread out into a single core and a whole series of supplements. Now BA, DA, and SW are going to have to buy 2 books to get their most current rules. And so will ultramarines and everyone else.
I would bet money that the combined cost is going to be 80.00-100 minimum.
Again, comparison.
Pathfinder 2nd Ed. Just released. 59.99 600+ page hardcover with a great binding that allows the book to sit flat when open and jam packed with rules art and fluff with logical good formatting and indexes and such for quick reference. 15.99 for the pdf version.
GW. 2 hardcovers with a gak binding required for you to play a single army. No prices yet, but if previous codexes are any indicator then 50.00 each for maybe 250ish pages a piece. PDFs will cost 34.99 each. Thats right. It will cost more money for less pages in PDF form then it does for Pathfinders book in hardcover.
But hey! This is basically what you wanted! More books!
So much dishonesty:
More options doesn't necessarily mean more books.
The non-codex compliant chapters now take their units from the main book. This is closer to what you wanted... merging them all.
The Current Codex Dark Angels - with all those duplicative datasheets you railed about as evidence they needed to be merged was 240 pages.
At 2 pages of fluff, and 1 page of datasheet for the unique units and special characters, that's 34 +17 = 51 pages, + 36 pages of color photos. and 50 pages of Introcution, and Chapter Fluff. 137 pages.
Was it you who said the Index Imperium 1 was under 200 pages? It was 224 not?
The Current Codex: Space Marines with fluff, and datasheets for what, 8 chapters - was 410?
Surely the supplements won't have all those duplicated fluff and datasheets anymore, and will end up being smaller? Because you said that was how it was going to work. You'll understand if I take your estimations of page counts with a grain of salt won't you?
Lance845 wrote: So exciting! What could have been condensed into a single book is now being spread out into a single core and a whole series of supplements. Now BA, DA, and SW are going to have to buy 2 books to get their most current rules. And so will ultramarines and everyone else.
I would bet money that the combined cost is going to be 80.00-100 minimum.
Again, comparison.
Pathfinder 2nd Ed. Just released. 59.99 600+ page hardcover with a great binding that allows the book to sit flat when open and jam packed with rules art and fluff with logical good formatting and indexes and such for quick reference. 15.99 for the pdf version.
GW. 2 hardcovers with a gak binding required for you to play a single army. No prices yet, but if previous codexes are any indicator then 50.00 each for maybe 250ish pages a piece. PDFs will cost 34.99 each. Thats right. It will cost more money for less pages in PDF form then it does for Pathfinders book in hardcover.
But hey! This is basically what you wanted! More books!
So much dishonesty: More options doesn't necessarily mean more books.
To suggest that an Imperial Fist and a White Scar fight in the same way is nearly heresy – and the new codex and codex supplements really lean into the distinct identities of each Chapter to ensure they work on the tabletop the way they do in the lore. Codex: Space Marines has everything you need to play with an army of gene-enhanced super-soldiers, and each of the supplements offers you additional, Chapter-specific datasheets and thematic rules that emphasise their unique heritage and the genetic legacy of their Primarch.
It's more books.
The non-codex compliant chapters now take their units from the main book. This is closer to what you wanted... merging them all.
And yet not. Because it's more books not less.
The Current Codex Dark Angels - with all those duplicative datasheets you railed about as evidence they needed to be merged was 240 pages. At 2 pages of fluff, and 1 page of datasheet for the unique units and special characters, that's 34 +17 = 51 pages, + 36 pages of color photos. and 50 pages of Introcution, and Chapter Fluff. 137 pages.
Yup. Look at that page count. Look at the price to content. And then look at Pathfinder. And then consider how badly you were being ripped off. Now go look at what they are going to make you do with 2 books. And consider how much worse it's about to get. Especially now that you have to reference 2 books in place of 1 to access your rules at the table. Still with crap binding that doesn't sit flat when open.
Was it you who said the Index Imperium 1 was under 200 pages?
Incorrect. I said the datasheets for the codexes that we were suggesting get merged were under 200 pages. Remove everything GK and DW from the index. Remove the redundant pointless units.
It was 224 not? The Current Codex: Space Marines with fluff, and datasheets for what, 8 chapters - was 410?
Surely the supplements won't have all those duplicated fluff and datasheets anymore, and will end up being smaller? Because you said that was how it was going to work. You'll understand if I take your estimations of page counts with a grain of salt won't you?
And you think smaller will mean cheaper? Codex GSC ALSO costs 50.00 and doesn't have 410 pages. All the chapter specific fluff will get cut from the core SM book and saved for the supplements. The page count of core SM will plummet from that. The cost won't. Good luck my friend. You are about to get fethed.
You can put more options in books without making more books, so suggesting people who wanted more options wanted more books was... wait for it... dishonest.
Was it you who said the Index Imperium 1 was under 200 pages?
Incorrect. I said the datasheets for the codexes that we were suggesting get merged were under 200 pages. Remove everything GK and DW from the index. Remove the redundant pointless units.
Lance845 wrote: @Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
I repeat:
Lance845 wrote: Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages
I think its great that more Chapters are getting some love from GW. Of course I'll buy the new Codex: I'll get great use out of it and they made it compatible with Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves so we don't have to wait for a new book to use the new models. They also gave buffs to all the Chapters at once. I won't buy all the supplements, but it'll be good to see more fleshed-out Chapters on the tabletop.
We can choose to buy and play what we want. It looks like GW figures that many people do indeed buy and play the various Space Marines chapters. Let the market decide!
Lance845 wrote: So exciting! What could have been condensed into a single book is now being spread out into a single core and a whole series of supplements. Now BA, DA, and SW are going to have to buy 2 books to get their most current rules. And so will ultramarines and everyone else.
I would bet money that the combined cost is going to be 80.00-100 minimum.
Again, comparison.
Pathfinder 2nd Ed. Just released. 59.99 600+ page hardcover with a great binding that allows the book to sit flat when open and jam packed with rules art and fluff with logical good formatting and indexes and such for quick reference. 15.99 for the pdf version.
GW. 2 hardcovers with a gak binding required for you to play a single army. No prices yet, but if previous codexes are any indicator then 50.00 each for maybe 250ish pages a piece. PDFs will cost 34.99 each. Thats right. It will cost more money for less pages in PDF form then it does for Pathfinders book in hardcover.
But hey! This is basically what you wanted! More books!
They haven't said that at all for SW, BA, and DA. Only for the six supplementals.
Pathfinder 2nd ed is also going to try and print and sell 1-2 books a month (they did for their first edition), at 30-50 dollars each. We've been over a lost leader item before, and this core book is one of them.
Not sure why you keep harping on the 'sit flat' issue. All of my hard covers sat flat for GW.
GW requires two books to play a specialty of a generic army. This isn't anything new for them, and has nothing to do with our previous topic.
I can see this being the future for all codex should they sell as well as GW hope.
Main book with 90% of the rules for £30 then faction specific book with last 10% for another £20. Bargintastic as both those prices are less than the current codex go new GW
Lance845 wrote: So exciting! What could have been condensed into a single book is now being spread out into a single core and a whole series of supplements. Now BA, DA, and SW are going to have to buy 2 books to get their most current rules. And so will ultramarines and everyone else.
I would bet money that the combined cost is going to be 80.00-100 minimum.
Again, comparison.
Pathfinder 2nd Ed. Just released. 59.99 600+ page hardcover with a great binding that allows the book to sit flat when open and jam packed with rules art and fluff with logical good formatting and indexes and such for quick reference. 15.99 for the pdf version.
GW. 2 hardcovers with a gak binding required for you to play a single army. No prices yet, but if previous codexes are any indicator then 50.00 each for maybe 250ish pages a piece. PDFs will cost 34.99 each. Thats right. It will cost more money for less pages in PDF form then it does for Pathfinders book in hardcover.
But hey! This is basically what you wanted! More books!
They haven't said that at all for SW, BA, and DA. Only for the six supplementals.
Pathfinder 2nd ed is also going to try and print and sell 1-2 books a month (they did for their first edition), at 30-50 dollars each. We've been over a lost leader item before, and this core book is one of them. Not sure why you keep harping on the 'sit flat' issue. All of my hard covers sat flat for GW.
GW requires two books to play a specialty of a generic army. This isn't anything new for them, and has nothing to do with our previous topic.
Codexes are loss leader items. GW is not making the vast majority of it's profits on a codex. They sell you a codex for the rules and then make their money on the models. It's why a single model can cost you 20-150 dollars. Except then GW charges you dumb ass price they do so it doesn't have to be a loss leader item. But hey, you want other examples with lower productions.
This is the forbidden lands start box. It's 50.00. It includes 2 faux leather hardcovers a map and other materials for 50.00. A total of 454 pages packed with lore rules and art. Both books have a binding that allows them to sit flat when open. Forbidden lands is not releasing 1 book every month. It's not releasing 1 book every 2 months.
It has a 50.00 hardcover packed with art lore and rules for 50.00 with a binding that allows the book to sit flat when open at 384 pages of content.
There are currently 6 books released for coriolis. most of those book are softcovers at less than 20.00. It came out in 2017.
NONE of your GW hardcovers are bound to actually sit flat. None of them have a binding really designed for it except the core book. If you look at the pages from the side you will see that they are all glued to the spine as a single chunk. A book actually design to fit flat is bound to the spine in many smaller chunks with that fabric bit a little looser so that the individual chunks can move to one side or the other without pulling the chunk you are currently in and having the weight drag to different sides.
You see how it bends in the middle to allow the pages to actually move to one side or the other? Now bust out your codex and try to get it to do that. Don't try too hard. You will break it.
Are you seriously so oblivious to the writing on the wall? Every character they are keeping in the long run is going to get a primaris version. And those Primaris versions are going to get released around the supplement. Including BADA and SW. GW can over charge you for buying 2 when they could all be in 1 and you are happy for it. You will ALL get a new second book. It's not a question of if. It's a question of when.
"Codexes are loss leader items. GW is not making the vast majority of it's profits on a codex. They sell you a codex for the rules and then make their money on the models. It's why a single model can cost you 20-150 dollars. Except then GW charges you dumb ass price they do so it doesn't have to be a loss leader item."
So what you're saying is that the Codexes aren't loss leaders at all then.
"This is the forbidden lands start box. It's 50.00. It includes 2 faux leather hardcovers a map and other materials for 50.00. A total of 454 pages packed with lore rules and art. Both books have a binding that allows them to sit flat when open. Forbidden lands is not releasing 1 book every month. It's not releasing 1 book every 2 months."
I don't know enough about the game to know if that's true. Having said that, I also don't know their print quality either.
"NONE of your GW hardcovers are bound to actually sit flat. None of them have a binding really designed for it except the core book. If you look at the pages from the side you will see that they are all glued to the spine as a single chunk. A book actually design to fit flat is bound to the spine in many smaller chunks with that fabric bit a little looser so that the individual chunks can move to one side or the other without pulling the chunk you are currently in and having the weight drag to different sides. "
Mine do after the first two or three uses. The front and back covers lying mostly flush with the spines. Not sure why yours don't.
"Are you seriously so oblivious to the writing on the wall? Every character they are keeping in the long run is going to get a primaris version. And those Primaris versions are going to get released around the supplement. Including BADA and SW. GW can over charge you for buying 2 when they could all be in 1 and you are happy for it. You will ALL get a new second book. It's not a question of if. It's a question of when."
What does primaris characters have to do with any part of this discussion? GW said that the new generic units will be fully compatible with DA/BA/SW, not that it would be the only place for the rules. So no, while many people will buy it to get a half update to their codex early, they don't have to, at least with the info GW's currently released.
Furthermore, this has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion that's dominated this thread.
Finally, YOU were one of the people advocating more books, with a rules and a fluff book, to get the same content one codex gives now. So far the non-codex marines are still getting their own books.
So what you're saying is that the Codexes aren't loss leaders at all then.
The purpose of a loss leader item is a upfront purchase that leads to more profitable secondary purchases. The codexes are that. GW just knows they can charge you more for less content and you will eat it up. It's why their pdfs cost 35 dollars when everyone else releasing pdfs for 50.00+ books sell them for 15. You just get overcharged for their loss leader items.
"This is the forbidden lands start box. It's 50.00. It includes 2 faux leather hardcovers a map and other materials for 50.00. A total of 454 pages packed with lore rules and art. Both books have a binding that allows them to sit flat when open. Forbidden lands is not releasing 1 book every month. It's not releasing 1 book every 2 months."
I don't know enough about the game to know if that's true. Having said that, I also don't know their print quality either.
Coriolis - The Third Horizon was awarded the ENnies Judges' Spotlight 2017 and is produced by the makers of critically acclaimed Mutant: Year Zero (six-time nominee and winner of a Silver ENnie for Best Rules 2015).'
When Coriolis: The Third Horizon landed on my doormat I was already intrigued about the game. I'd read about it and enjoyed the excellent artwork, and the game felt like something I'd love to play. Mysterious, dark science fiction with mystical powers and supernatural, sometimes horrific occurences. That sounded like my kind of game.
I had no experience with Free League's other games such as 'Mutant: Year Zero' or 'Tales From the Loop' and I knew little about the game's system, so when I cracked open the 388-page book and started reading it I was expecting a comprehensive, detailed system so I was quite surprised by the light rules and the expansive setting.
The hardback tome is of excellent quality and the cover illustration by Martin Bergström, showing three about-to-get-into-trouble characters on a dark, forbidding world really starts the mood. In fact, the artwork throughout the book is of high quality with some shadowy, inspirational images and it's supplied by Christian Granath, Martin Bergström, Gustaf Ekelund, Christian Granath, Magnus Fallgren, Tobias Tranell and Joakim Ericsson.
The thing with these RPG books is if you go to your local RPG store you can just open the book and read it. They don't often come in shrink wrap. You can look at their quality, layout, art, and content for free. Forbidden Lands comes in a box set, so that would be the exception.
Mine do after the first two or three uses. The front and back covers lying mostly flush with the spines. Not sure why yours don't.
Mind sharing a picture? Because the issue isn't that it doesn't have the cloth binding separated from the spine. It does. The issue is that it's bound so tightly that it can't itself bend. It's pulled taught between the 2 covers. The whole spine can be horizontal or vertical in it's alignment but it can't sit with the spine down and the fabric bent.
What does primaris characters have to do with any part of this discussion? GW said that the new generic units will be fully compatible with DA/BA/SW, not that it would be the only place for the rules. So no, while many people will buy it to get a half update to their codex early, they don't have to, at least with the info GW's currently released.
Furthermore, this has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion that's dominated this thread.
Finally, YOU were one of the people advocating more books, with a rules and a fluff book, to get the same content one codex gives now. So far the non-codex marines are still getting their own books.
Primaris characters is why this is happening. Do you really think BADA and SW are going to get a FULL new codex lol? Thats amazing.
SeanDrake wrote: I can see this being the future for all codex should they sell as well as GW hope.
Main book with 90% of the rules for £30 then faction specific book with last 10% for another £20. Bargintastic as both those prices are less than the current codex go new GW
Going by what they say, if you don’t make a specific successor that would use a specific chapter’s rules, you don’t need anything more than the base codex.
SeanDrake wrote: I can see this being the future for all codex should they sell as well as GW hope.
Main book with 90% of the rules for £30 then faction specific book with last 10% for another £20. Bargintastic as both those prices are less than the current codex go new GW
You are dreaming for those price points.
Codex Chaos knights is only 72 pages and costs 40.00 for 5 datasheets.
So what you're saying is that the Codexes aren't loss leaders at all then.
The purpose of a loss leader item is a upfront purchase that leads to more profitable secondary purchases. The codexes are that. GW just knows they can charge you more for less content and you will eat it up. It's why their pdfs cost 35 dollars when everyone else releasing pdfs for 50.00+ books sell them for 15. You just get overcharged for their loss leader items.
"This is the forbidden lands start box. It's 50.00. It includes 2 faux leather hardcovers a map and other materials for 50.00. A total of 454 pages packed with lore rules and art. Both books have a binding that allows them to sit flat when open. Forbidden lands is not releasing 1 book every month. It's not releasing 1 book every 2 months."
I don't know enough about the game to know if that's true. Having said that, I also don't know their print quality either.
Coriolis - The Third Horizon was awarded the ENnies Judges' Spotlight 2017 and is produced by the makers of critically acclaimed Mutant: Year Zero (six-time nominee and winner of a Silver ENnie for Best Rules 2015).'
When Coriolis: The Third Horizon landed on my doormat I was already intrigued about the game. I'd read about it and enjoyed the excellent artwork, and the game felt like something I'd love to play. Mysterious, dark science fiction with mystical powers and supernatural, sometimes horrific occurences. That sounded like my kind of game.
I had no experience with Free League's other games such as 'Mutant: Year Zero' or 'Tales From the Loop' and I knew little about the game's system, so when I cracked open the 388-page book and started reading it I was expecting a comprehensive, detailed system so I was quite surprised by the light rules and the expansive setting.
The hardback tome is of excellent quality and the cover illustration by Martin Bergström, showing three about-to-get-into-trouble characters on a dark, forbidding world really starts the mood. In fact, the artwork throughout the book is of high quality with some shadowy, inspirational images and it's supplied by Christian Granath, Martin Bergström, Gustaf Ekelund, Christian Granath, Magnus Fallgren, Tobias Tranell and Joakim Ericsson.
The thing with these RPG books is if you go to your local RPG store you can just open the book and read it. They don't often come in shrink wrap. You can look at their quality, layout, art, and content for free. Forbidden Lands comes in a box set, so that would be the exception.
Mine do after the first two or three uses. The front and back covers lying mostly flush with the spines. Not sure why yours don't.
Mind sharing a picture? Because the issue isn't that it doesn't have the cloth binding separated from the spine. It does. The issue is that it's bound so tightly that it can't itself bend. It's pulled taught between the 2 covers. The whole spine can be horizontal or vertical in it's alignment but it can't sit with the spine down and the fabric bent.
What does primaris characters have to do with any part of this discussion? GW said that the new generic units will be fully compatible with DA/BA/SW, not that it would be the only place for the rules. So no, while many people will buy it to get a half update to their codex early, they don't have to, at least with the info GW's currently released.
Furthermore, this has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion that's dominated this thread.
Finally, YOU were one of the people advocating more books, with a rules and a fluff book, to get the same content one codex gives now. So far the non-codex marines are still getting their own books.
Primaris characters is why this is happening. Do you really think BADA and SW are going to get a FULL new codex lol? Thats amazing.
I was the one who told you what a loss leader is. The codexes aren't that.
Maybe they aren't shrink wrapped. Some companies do, some don't. But as far as pricing goes, who knows? No one didn't say GW wasn't expensive, and a 450 page book isn't that far a jump from 300 if you either have a large pool of sales, or are printing on the cheap. I do notice you've dropped the Pathfinder/D&D example though. I guess we were right about them huh?
I'd love to share a picture if I have one of my 8th ed codexes with me. While I can get you one, you'll have to wait a few days until I have access to the books again. (Mine are in a storage box, I'll be using a friends). Still waiting for you to provide your data from earlier though.
Yes, I do. Because nothing GW has said changes that. That may change, but with the information right now they are still independent books. The rest is irrelevant to any of this discussion.
The purpose of a loss leader item is a upfront purchase that leads to more profitable secondary purchases. The codexes are that. GW just knows they can charge you more for less content and you will eat it up. It's why their pdfs cost 35 dollars when everyone else releasing pdfs for 50.00+ books sell them for 15. You just get overcharged for their loss leader items.
no a loss leader is a product sold at a considerable discount, often in fact a LOSS (this is most notable with consoles which are often, especially once the price wars between compeition starts, sold at a outright loss) the codex is NOT a "loss leader" the loss leader for 40k is Dark Imperium and their other box sets. sold at a CONSIDERABLE discount for what you get in the army. ybut hey if you really don't like this, don't but it. I'm happy to see GW giving us more in depth info on the various first founding chapters.
Lol. You didnt tell me gak. I am very aware of the buisness practice of selling a upfront product at a loss to gain profit from supplements. Video game systems have been doing it since they started being sold as house hold devices.
I didnt drop pf or dnd. Again, by comparison, every other rpg out there with much slower publication schedules is selling their books for the same price point.
Whats more likely is you just dont understand publication costs and exactly how high gws mark ups are. Again, 35.00 pdfs.
You wont get more in depth information. You will get the same information thats been reprinted ad nauseam.
I don't see GW permanently changing the way they handle codexes by cutting out everything but rules. As long as that's the case then combining the four marine books into one is just no practical and not something I would support.
I only play space marines so I have no use for DA, BA, and SW fluff, pictures and model galleries. Additionally even assuming you combine things that are relatively easy to put into one data sheet, like terminators or some kind of generic honor guard bandage, you end up with a lot units that you can't do that with even if you just open the floodgates and let everyone have access to everything.
DA speeders and planes do not line up size or weapon wise with anything that's available to generic marines. BA and SW also have plenty of units that again cannot be rolled in with out additional pages.
The space marine codex is already big and annoying to carry around with out adding 50 to 100 pages.
Lance845 wrote: Lol. You didnt tell me gak. I am very aware of the buisness practice of selling a upfront product at a loss to gain profit from supplements. Video game systems have been doing it since they started being sold as house hold devices.
I didnt drop pf or dnd. Again, by comparison, every other rpg out there with much slower publication schedules is selling their books for the same price point.
Whats more likely is you just dont understand publication costs and exactly how high gws mark ups are. Again, 35.00 pdfs.
You wont get more in depth information. You will get the same information thats been reprinted ad nauseam.
We did, because you had no clue of the concept (based on your posts) until it was pointed out. Even then, it took several attempts to get you to clue in, and you still didn't get it right until this post.
I do understand them, and 35 for a PDF is insane. So what you're saying is that currently, if I buy the BA book, I won't have to buy the SM book to get the fluff I want to read? Because that's a good thing.
as for how much information we'll get, assuming the supplements are 100 pages? that's actually a LOT of room for information. Codex Death Guard is about 100 pages, how much new info was in that? and rememebr the death guard had pages devoted to data sheets etc that these supplements won't
Lance845 wrote: Lol. You didnt tell me gak. I am very aware of the buisness practice of selling a upfront product at a loss to gain profit from supplements. Video game systems have been doing it since they started being sold as house hold devices.
I didnt drop pf or dnd. Again, by comparison, every other rpg out there with much slower publication schedules is selling their books for the same price point.
Whats more likely is you just dont understand publication costs and exactly how high gws mark ups are. Again, 35.00 pdfs.
You wont get more in depth information. You will get the same information thats been reprinted ad nauseam.
We did, because you had no clue of the concept (based on your posts) until it was pointed out. Even then, it took several attempts to get you to clue in, and you still didn't get it right until this post.
I do understand them, and 35 for a PDF is insane. So what you're saying is that currently, if I buy the BA book, I won't have to buy the SM book to get the fluff I want to read? Because that's a good thing.
You didnt. Because the concept was besides the point. And i made OTHER examples to get you back on track with the actual point. Gws books are over priced and of lower quality with worse content. Its true of dnd and pathfinder in any edition. Its true of smaller publications with less often releases and slower production schedules. Its true of other wargames.
What i am saying is it is bad for you and everyone else to have to reference 2 books to get your rules. 3 if you want to use index options. 4 if you want ca point updates. 8 if you want the faq errata.
SeanDrake wrote: I can see this being the future for all codex should they sell as well as GW hope.
Main book with 90% of the rules for £30 then faction specific book with last 10% for another £20. Bargintastic as both those prices are less than the current codex go new GW
Well that's not going to happen. They're not going to sell you what you had before for more work for them, and less money from you than it was before. I'd expect to pay a little more for the base book and the supplement, but not the double Lance was "claiming" it would be.
We did, because you had no clue of the concept (based on your posts) until it was pointed out. Even then, it took several attempts to get you to clue in, and you still didn't get it right until this post.
I do understand them, and 35 for a PDF is insane. So what you're saying is that currently, if I buy the BA book, I won't have to buy the SM book to get the fluff I want to read? Because that's a good thing.
Remember this is the guy who didn't say the Index Imperium 1 was under 200 pages. And got VERY quiet when he was quoted on it which is why you're now talking about what he doesn't know about loss leaders.
Was it you who said the Index Imperium 1 was under 200 pages?
Incorrect. I said the datasheets for the codexes that we were suggesting get merged were under 200 pages. Remove everything GK and DW from the index. Remove the redundant pointless units.
And yet:: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/150/778495.page#10522795 Lance845 wrote:
@Mmmpi You wouldn't. The datasheets have so much in common across all the codexes that you just don't need that many pages. Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
No you guys just have trouble reading whole sentences or carry a thought past a period. Which is why you keep misquoting and circling back to statements without being able to follow the point of said statements. Its fine. Youll spend 80-100 on your 2 books to play a single army and il keep laughing about it.
Lance845 wrote: Lol. You didnt tell me gak. I am very aware of the buisness practice of selling a upfront product at a loss to gain profit from supplements. Video game systems have been doing it since they started being sold as house hold devices.
I didnt drop pf or dnd. Again, by comparison, every other rpg out there with much slower publication schedules is selling their books for the same price point.
Whats more likely is you just dont understand publication costs and exactly how high gws mark ups are. Again, 35.00 pdfs.
You wont get more in depth information. You will get the same information thats been reprinted ad nauseam.
We did, because you had no clue of the concept (based on your posts) until it was pointed out. Even then, it took several attempts to get you to clue in, and you still didn't get it right until this post.
I do understand them, and 35 for a PDF is insane. So what you're saying is that currently, if I buy the BA book, I won't have to buy the SM book to get the fluff I want to read? Because that's a good thing.
You didnt. Because the concept was besides the point. And i made OTHER examples to get you back on track with the actual point. Gws books are over priced and of lower quality with worse content. Its true of dnd and pathfinder in any edition. Its true of smaller publications with less often releases and slower production schedules. Its true of other wargames.
What i am saying is it is bad for you and everyone else to have to reference 2 books to get your rules. 3 if you want to use index options. 4 if you want ca point updates. 8 if you want the faq errata.
Why are you happy about this?
Ah, I see. You're ignoring your own words again. And it's only besides the point because we called you on it. Got it.
No, you attempted to deflect from the original conversation with your other examples.
GW books are over priced. Pushing three to four more codexes into the SM book will only make that worse, not better.
Wait, now you're saying D&D and pathfinder are over priced? But you just admitted a few posts back that you knew what a lost leader was, and dropped the argument that they weren't LL's in favor of some small time games no one has ever heard of.
No, what you're saying now is that it's bad for people to do that. Before you were saying it was bad for BA/DA/SW to have their own rules in self-contained books, even if some of those rules and units were identical to each other, or the SM core book. As for the rest, GW's done that since the mid 90's at least, if not longer.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: No you guys just have trouble reading whole sentences or carry a thought past a period. Which is why you keep misquoting and circling back to statements without being able to follow the point of said statements. Its fine. Youll spend 80-100 on your 2 books to play a single army and il keep laughing about it.
Says the guy who is having his own posts thrown back at him.
No, you'll buy all seven new books. And we'll laugh about it.
Lance845 wrote: Lol. You didnt tell me gak. I am very aware of the buisness practice of selling a upfront product at a loss to gain profit from supplements. Video game systems have been doing it since they started being sold as house hold devices.
I didnt drop pf or dnd. Again, by comparison, every other rpg out there with much slower publication schedules is selling their books for the same price point.
Whats more likely is you just dont understand publication costs and exactly how high gws mark ups are. Again, 35.00 pdfs.
You wont get more in depth information. You will get the same information thats been reprinted ad nauseam.
We did, because you had no clue of the concept (based on your posts) until it was pointed out. Even then, it took several attempts to get you to clue in, and you still didn't get it right until this post.
I do understand them, and 35 for a PDF is insane. So what you're saying is that currently, if I buy the BA book, I won't have to buy the SM book to get the fluff I want to read? Because that's a good thing.
You didnt. Because the concept was besides the point. And i made OTHER examples to get you back on track with the actual point. Gws books are over priced and of lower quality with worse content. Its true of dnd and pathfinder in any edition. Its true of smaller publications with less often releases and slower production schedules. Its true of other wargames.
What i am saying is it is bad for you and everyone else to have to reference 2 books to get your rules. 3 if you want to use index options. 4 if you want ca point updates. 8 if you want the faq errata.
Lance845 wrote: GW has less stuff in less pages for same price as dnd/pathfinder/everyone else who has more stuff in more pages.
Because it's a loss leader for Pazio. Who knows about the others. Maybe they had to sacrifice quality for the price. Who knows. GW is expensive though.
Lance845 wrote: GW sell you 2 books instead of 1 and you're happy. You should be sad. Says something about you.
You tried to get us to buy two books instead of one (rules and fluff), so you don't have a leg to stand on.
Lance845 wrote: No you guys just have trouble reading whole sentences or carry a thought past a period. Which is why you keep misquoting and circling back to statements without being able to follow the point of said statements. Its fine. Youll spend 80-100 on your 2 books to play a single army and il keep laughing about it.
I quoted the Complete sentences verbatim with Copy and Paste.. But you keep lying about what you've said.
Evidence, Index Imperium 1. It has all the datasheets and isn't 200 pages and includes the other armies people are not suggesting get folded into the SM dex. GK and DW can get folded into a agents of the imperium dex with sisters of silence and the assassins.
Incorrect. I said the datasheets for the codexes that we were suggesting get merged were under 200 pages. Remove everything GK and DW from the index. Remove the redundant pointless units.
The hypothetical codex will be under 200 pages after removing GK and DW - But you said Index Imperium 1 wasn't 200 pages and INCLUDED the other armies. So how did this hypothetical codex you weren't talking about get named Index Imperium 1, and both INCLUDE the other armies people aren't suggesting get folded in and NOT include the other armies people are suggesting get folded in? Maybe it's a loss leader. And 224 pages.
The sentence before that says ". Gws books are over priced and of lower quality with worse content. Its true of dnd and pathfinder in any edition. Its true of smaller publications with less often releases and slower production schedules. Its true of other wargames." So either you said what I claim, or you failed at English so badly that what you meant wasn't evident.
It's very reasonable that I have made an argument that dnd is overpriced despite several pages of saying otherwise. And all of that is very important in context to the actual point of it as an example to compare gws books to. Which is itself an example to point out the price gouging tactics and selling you multiple product to play the game. But you can't keep it all straight.
It's fine. Enjoy your lack of understanding if it means you feel like you've won or something.
GW will release codex SM. You will buy it.
GW will release supplement your chapter. You will buy it.
You will spend close to if not 100.00 on multiple books to play a single army so you can reread the same stories from the last few codexes you purchased while rules referencing will get less and less convenient. It is after all what you want.
Praise be to GW! They do no wrong! The state will provide!
Lance845 wrote: It's very reasonable that I have made an argument that dnd is overpriced despite several pages of saying otherwise. And all of that is very important in context to the actual point of it as an example to compare gws books to. Which is itself an example to point out the price gouging tactics and selling you multiple product to play the game. But you can't keep it all straight.
I never made that argument. You did. I said it wasn't as cheap as you were making it out to be (as was BrianDavion). And the context is that you didn't know that D&D and pathfinder were selling their core books as loss leaders, based on the fact that you didn't notice it, and that it took you at least three pages and two days to actually get it (or stop arguing about it). Sorry you can't follow your own argument. It's why you have to keep resorting to Ad Hominum attacks, claiming we don't have logic, after we used math to show our points.
Lance845 wrote: It's fine. Enjoy your lack of understanding if it means you feel like you've won or something.
You still don't understand why many people want fluff in their codexes, and don't want to pay for a 600 page SM codex, particularly as you yourself has pointed out GW's high prices. Right now I am winning. You've been trying to deflect from the original topic for at least 12 hours now.
Lance845 wrote: GW will release supplement your chapter. You will buy it
I don't play space marines, so I'm not going to buy a supplement.
Lance845 wrote: You will spend close to if not 100.00 on multiple books to play a single army so you can reread the same stories from the last few codexes you purchased while rules referencing will get less and less convenient. It is after all what you want.
You will too.
Lance845 wrote: Praise be to GW! They do no wrong! The state will provide!
eathwing, Ravenwing and mixed-Wing. Terminators are n a tough spot this Edition - not the fault of separate Codexes. I have access to units that others do not, and lose access to others.
