Apple Peel wrote:

OH! It’s gonna be so much bigger! People will break their backs carrying it! Oh the humanity! Two books at current Space Marine Price on the other hand...

Fun fact: check the page count on C: Space Marines(the initial 8th edition book) compared to the one that came out with the Vanguard and supplements.

Did you know that the new one, despite having an entirely new range of models that dropped with it, has less pages?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

OH! It’s gonna be so much bigger! People will break their backs carrying it! Oh the humanity! Two books at current Space Marine Price on the other hand...

Fun fact: check the page count on C: Space Marines(the initial 8th edition book) compared to the one that came out with the Vanguard and supplements.

Did you know that the new one, despite having an entirely new range of models that dropped with it, has less pages?

Did you add in the page count for the DA, BA, SW, and (optionally) BT? That’s the one book space marine option.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And what about the person who only wants to play one Chapter, having to cart around a massive book?

If I remember correctly, Imperial Index 1 (the one with all the space marines) was 224 pages, and that didn't stop anyone form buying it. So clearly it's not a big enough problem to stop people from playing the game, nor does having to share the book with other factions stop people from playing, you know, literally every other codex in the game.

The Indexes were softback and something like $25 a pop...additionally they were the only ways to get the rules for your factions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

OH! It’s gonna be so much bigger! People will break their backs carrying it! Oh the humanity! Two books at current Space Marine Price on the other hand...

Fun fact: check the page count on C: Space Marines(the initial 8th edition book) compared to the one that came out with the Vanguard and supplements.

Did you know that the new one, despite having an entirely new range of models that dropped with it, has less pages?

Did you add in the page count for the DA, BA, SW, and (optionally) BT? That’s the one book space marine option.

Figure it out yourself. It's your idea.

I'm telling you, however, that with the characters and their fluff stripped out and Vanguard added in? The new book still came up less with less of a page count.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And what about the person who only wants to play one Chapter, having to cart around a massive book?

If I remember correctly, Imperial Index 1 (the one with all the space marines) was 224 pages, and that didn't stop anyone form buying it. So clearly it's not a big enough problem to stop people from playing the game, nor does having to share the book with other factions stop people from playing, you know, literally every other codex in the game.

The Indexes were softback and something like $25 a pop...additionally they were the only ways to get the rules for your factions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

OH! It’s gonna be so much bigger! People will break their backs carrying it! Oh the humanity! Two books at current Space Marine Price on the other hand...

Fun fact: check the page count on C: Space Marines(the initial 8th edition book) compared to the one that came out with the Vanguard and supplements.

Did you know that the new one, despite having an entirely new range of models that dropped with it, has less pages?

Did you add in the page count for the DA, BA, SW, and (optionally) BT? That’s the one book space marine option.

Figure it out yourself. It's your idea.

I'm telling you, however, that with the characters and their fluff stripped out and Vanguard added in? The new book still came up less with less of a page count.

Stripping out characters, (all) the fluff—See there’s a problem. That’s good for the inferior supplement system with ten total books and corresponding errata documents. We aren’t arguing on the same level and it’s dishonest.

Speaking from a csm perspective, the 3.5 codex covered all the legions better than what we have currently in less pages than just the current "vanilla" csm codex. Return to that design philosophy and bump the page count up to the current ig codex and you could make all the legions feel unique with a single book, instead of making them all feel like Black Legion with different paint schemes like the current one. Preferably with far less reliance on strategems for legion flavor.

This approach would work with other factions.

But isn't this all like digital games? take a game, cut stuff from it and turn it in to DLCs, and battle passes etc. Of course GW could make a GK player have all in one book, but why would they do that, if they can make us buy 2-3 books, followed by a yearly battle pass type of book. It is in GWs interest to split the content and make as many books as possible. Plus it is a bonus for them while dealing with people like me. I was willing to wait for 2 years for a fix to my army, while the more sensible thing to do, would probably be to drop the army, and maybe the game.

Karol wrote:
But isn't this all like digital games? take a game, cut stuff from it and turn it in to DLCs, and battle passes etc. Of course GW could make a GK player have all in one book, but why would they do that, if they can make us buy 2-3 books, followed by a yearly battle pass type of book. It is in GWs interest to split the content and make as many books as possible. Plus it is a bonus for them while dealing with people like me. I was willing to wait for 2 years for a fix to my army, while the more sensible thing to do, would probably be to drop the army, and maybe the game.

We're not talking about what GWs interest is though. This process is what leads to 6th and eventually 7th *shudders*. People say they want oodles and oodles of stuff added until they actually see what happens. It also just so happens people have short term memory here apparently and forgot that the last two editions were a fething mess.

 Apple Peel wrote:

Stripping out characters, (all) the fluff—See there’s a problem. That’s good for the inferior supplement system with ten total books and corresponding errata documents.

Out of the Raven Guard, Ultramarines, Iron Hands, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, and White Scars?
Only two of those books had multiple characters--Ultramarines and the Imperial Fists.

If you want to pretend that there is some kind of finite number of errata documents that they can publish? That's dishonest as hell. Remember that we only saw the errata staggered out with the supplements because the supplements were staggered out.

We aren’t arguing on the same level and it’s dishonest.

Fine, you want a finite count?
Current Codex: Space Marines is 76 datasheets. That is with every named character and the few Chapter specific units stripped out.
Dark Angels is 76 datasheets before the addition of the Vanguard and the Repulsor Executioner.
Space Wolves and Blood Angels are 77 datasheets each, before the addition of the Vanguard and the Repulsor Executioner.

Each of those would receive an additional 10 datasheets, thanks to the Phobos lineup and the Repulsor Executioner.

Except we don't need all the redundant Captain entries either.

Arguable. I'd rather see more unique entries/abilities start cropping up for the various types than I would seeing them all rolled into a "Take X for Y points".

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Karol wrote:
But isn't this all like digital games? take a game, cut stuff from it and turn it in to DLCs, and battle passes etc. Of course GW could make a GK player have all in one book, but why would they do that, if they can make us buy 2-3 books, followed by a yearly battle pass type of book. It is in GWs interest to split the content and make as many books as possible. Plus it is a bonus for them while dealing with people like me. I was willing to wait for 2 years for a fix to my army, while the more sensible thing to do, would probably be to drop the army, and maybe the game.

We're not talking about what GWs interest is though. This process is what leads to 6th and eventually 7th *shudders*. People say they want oodles and oodles of stuff added until they actually see what happens. It also just so happens people have short term memory here apparently and forgot that the last two editions were a fething mess.

I know only stories about those editions, so hardly any real knowladge. \maybe GW alawys makes a mess, maybe they are not intersted in making a good game and just making money. I had this revelation lately about my trainers, they don't really care about me or other people. They care about having jobs and getting us in to good clubs, so they can make money selling us supplements etc. Maybe GW is just like that. They want people money, they want good sells, people that work at GW want to keep their jobs and have a good salary. Making , what ever counts as good, games is maybe not even a real goal for anyone.

 Kanluwen wrote:
To avoid starting a new off-topic tangent in the Psychic Awakening thread for Pariah, Deathwatch, and the Harlequins I thought I would pull a quote out that I found interesting:

ERJAK wrote:

If we're eliminating bloat it starts and ends with marines. There's half a dozen totally unnecessary codexes with another half dozen completely superfluous supplements in kicking around now.

You could get rid of half of all the books in the game by just bringing marines down to something reasonable.

For a long time, there were complaints about the size of the Marine book. Even before the Primaris were around, Codex: Space Marines was one of the heftier books. Cut to supplements expanding the Codex Chapters(and Black Templars, I guess? ) which contain:
-Characters for that faction
-Stratagems
-Relics
-Special Rules for a pure faction army.

And all of a sudden each book is being treated as "necessary"? Why do I need Iron Hands if I play Salamanders? Why would I need Ultramarines if I play Imperial Fists?

Yeah, I get it that people still have bees in their bonnets about the existence of Space Wolves, Dark Angels, and Blood Angels as separate books. Would DA, BA, and SW players bat an eye if their codices were instead set up as Supplement Books like Raven Guard, Iron Hands, and the other Codex Chapters?

If you got:
-Characters+special units/errata to grant keywords(ie: Intercessors or Tactical Squads could be given the 'Grey Hunters' keywords for SW for a pointed upgrade)
-Stratagems
-Relics
-Special Rules for a pure faction army.
Would you consider it a fair trade for being updated whenever the generic Marine book got updated?

Would other factions be interested in a similar treatment, if it's possible(the ones that immediately spring to mind are Aeldari, Drukhari, Chaos Marines[vanilla] and some of the Guard subfactions)?

I've added a poll to the top that will run for 5 days. Feel free to explain your vote choice.

I would object to being a supplement like the others, but not because I think we deserve our own codex, but more because I don't want to buy a $40 codex and a $40 supplement and a $40 psychic awakening.

I think there's no reason to even have all these supplements and extra codecies and everything in the first place. Space Marine codecies and chapters are all more similar to each other than different IG regiments, and is a little blurb and three rules is good enough for the other factions it's good enough for the Space Marines.


I'm honestly not interested at all in any faction getting that treatment. I don't even thing Chapter Tactics, Regimental Doctrines, etc. are even necessary to have, and are all in all counterproductive to the spirit of Your Dudes.




As a further note, the Space Marines have some serious bloat. They have so many units and unit options, many of which never see the table or are totally forgotten for extended periods of time, and many of which overlap with each other in capability.

I'm actually OK with the idea of the supplements for marines, but consolidate the copy paste stuff into codex space marines, make the chapter specifics into supplements referring back to the codex ala 3rd ed.

Could do the same with chaos marines, although I feel the legions are a bit more divergent in range and scope than the marines.

Xenos have their faction specific books as per now, with the option to expand into corairs or speed waaaghs or w/e.

Canadian 5th wrote:We'd get less lore, fewer pieces of unique chapter-specific art, less attention paid to special rules and unique units.

How can you say that for certain?

I'd rather see each and every major player in 40k get their own book that is given as much love and care as Codex Ultramarines. Baring that the current level of unique releases is preferable to consolidating things down into bland bundles where nobody gets as much love.

Eh, not quite my approach, but as long as you're okay with everyone getting Codex treatment, I can't argue with that.

Luke_Prowler wrote:If I remember correctly, Imperial Index 1 (the one with all the space marines) was 224 pages, and that didn't stop anyone form buying it. So clearly it's not a big enough problem to stop people from playing the game, nor does having to share the book with other factions stop people from playing, you know, literally every other codex in the game.

I have to say, I really liked the Index approach.

Why aren't we all more happy with that?

I'd be fine with an index type thing that was the only rules available for matched/tournament style play. everyone has the same # of strats available that are fixed along with CP. Fixed Psychic powers that work same/same warp charge. Fixed deployment maps/objectives. That way all can be balanced relative to each other in an objective, rather than the subjective way, which other posters seem to imply.

It gives people who only care about rules, can buy that book & everyone else who likes the game can buy the codex & supplements.

No condensation of the Angel's, Wolves, Templars, Knights, Watch(unless you want that, which is solved above). Putting all Terminator armour marks on one dataslate(if that's what you want, see above), and whatever other complaints that only pertain to "competitive play"(see above).

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I would object to being a supplement like the others, but not because I think we deserve our own codex, but more because I don't want to buy a $40 codex and a $40 supplement and a $40 psychic awakening.

Flawed assumption that Psychic Awakening will remain a 'must have'.

I think there's no reason to even have all these supplements and extra codecies and everything in the first place. Space Marine codecies and chapters are all more similar to each other than different IG regiments, and is a little blurb and three rules is good enough for the other factions it's good enough for the Space Marines.

Do you even Guard? I mean seriously, you're talking about a faction that is supposed to be issued standardized equipment (with the variations being based upon local manufacture patterns) and that is known for wasting specialist trained personnel in the usage of the 'standard' tactics.

I'm honestly not interested at all in any faction getting that treatment. I don't even thing Chapter Tactics, Regimental Doctrines, etc. are even necessary to have, and are all in all counterproductive to the spirit of Your Dudes.

So basically, "screw you" to anyone who likes any of the stuff that already exists but "yay" to whatever fanwank nonsense people like to throw out?

As a further note, the Space Marines have some serious bloat. They have so many units and unit options, many of which never see the table or are totally forgotten for extended periods of time, and many of which overlap with each other in capability.

Unit bloat, as mentioned previously. is not the topic of this thread. Make your own thread if you want to talk about it.

But for the record:
A lot of the issue comes from the splits we saw with the Ward era books. Sternguard and Vanguard Veterans didn't have to be a thing, nor did we need the Centurion variants, or the (as of right now) wasteful Captain/Librarian/Chaplain profiles that don't actually do anything differently.

Imo, the indexes were far superior to codexes because they actually had all the rules we needed in one place (especially for inquisition and assassins). The idea that we need an entire book for one faction or sub faction is just bafflingly inefficient.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I would object to being a supplement like the others, but not because I think we deserve our own codex, but more because I don't want to buy a $40 codex and a $40 supplement and a $40 psychic awakening.

Flawed assumption that Psychic Awakening will remain a 'must have'.

Replace “Psychic Awakening” with any other Space Marine Supplement under the supplement system.
I don’t know what you meant earlier about a finite amount of errata documents. I think many people would agree that, if they wanted to keep up with the rules and check out any errata, that people would rather look on one big (or two, codex compliant and non-compliant idea) than 10 (or 11 with Black Templars) documents for errata.

 Kanluwen wrote:
And what about the person who only wants to play one Chapter, having to cart around a massive book?

They'll survive.

BrianDavion wrote:
invalid comparison the Tau septs are far less developed.

Man, you'd almost think that one particular race (and I name no names) had been hogging all the development and production.

 vipoid wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
invalid comparison the Tau septs are far less developed.

Man, you'd almost think that one particular race (and I name no names) had been hogging all the development and production.

And then they get all the attention, and then the rules, and then they get the models, so they get all the development and production- huh, sounds like a vicious cycle.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I would object to being a supplement like the others, but not because I think we deserve our own codex, but more because I don't want to buy a $40 codex and a $40 supplement and a $40 psychic awakening.

Flawed assumption that Psychic Awakening will remain a 'must have'.

Replace “Psychic Awakening” with any other Space Marine Supplement under the supplement system.

Not really, with the exception that a new Space Marines codex comes out and removes the supplements from play entirely.

Psychic Awakening and Vigilus both are examples of 'campaign books'. They always have an end date built in.

I don’t know what you meant earlier about a finite amount of errata documents. I think many people would agree that, if they wanted to keep up with the rules and check out any errata, that people would rather look on one big (or two, codex compliant and non-compliant idea) than 10 (or 11 with Black Templars) documents for errata.

Given that you never actually explained your opposition to "multiple erratas", the only reason I can assume someone would be so vehemently opposed to characters and the like being in supplements is that they were under the mistaken belief that the erratas took more time than they do to produce.

It takes no more effort to have multiple printouts than it does to have multiple tabs open on a device. I don't need to look at BT errata to find out what I need to know for RG either.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
invalid comparison the Tau septs are far less developed.

Man, you'd almost think that one particular race (and I name no names) had been hogging all the development and production.

And then they get all the attention, and then the rules, and then they get the models, so they get all the development and production- huh, sounds like a vicious cycle.

and that ladies and gentlemen reveals what this is really about.

Initially said no, but may have changed my mind.

I don't think the existence of multiple factions - marine chapters or otherwise - and the resulting codexes is bloat.

Bloat to my mind is DLC.
You don't *need* Codex Ironhands to play Ironhands. You don't need Faith and Fury to use SM characters. But if you don't have them you are gimping yourself (on the basis of no book=no using of rules). So they are essentially mandatory - and therefore its just added bloat you need to play the game.

If Codex SM had another 60-100 pages of rules in it, it might be heavy, but that isn't bloat. You own it, you've got the rules. Frankly one heavy book is easier to carry around than a seemingly ever expanding list of supplements.

I mean looking at Greater Good for GSC. I could probably squeeze the relevant bits onto a page. (Not difficult tbh - we only got 5 pages to begin with). But now I have to cart around this book if I want to use two stratagems and a psychic power from it. How is this possibly good design?

Now to some degree you can solve this for Marines by abolishing codex SM - you just have that in "Codex Ironhands" - in the same way as the Angels or Wolves codexes. I wouldn't consider that bloat. GW could write as many such books for as many factions as they like - but I don't think you should need to carry round a small library to have the current rules.

The fact there is a Harlequins Faction with a Harlequins book isn't bloat. The fact to play them to the current standard you might potentially need Codex Harlequins, a copy of White Dwarf #453 and "Psychic Eating Breakfast IV: Edgelord" is.

Just look at how Forge World does it.
A single books for ALL the legions. Yes sirs. All of the special rules, characters and units of the legions.
And then, a single books with all the shared units.
And it costs around the same as codex + supplement

All Marines should be rolled into a single Codex.

There are 17 Terminator unit entries across SM, BA, DA, SW & DW which could all fold into a single datasheet easily.

Similarly there are 21 (?!) Dreadnought entries (even with some Chapters not getting certain types for no reason) which could be three just datasheets.

It would be relatively simple to merge the lists together, probably without ending up with any more units than are currently in the generic Marine list.

I think the problem is what we define as "bloat". Although I think it could have been handled in a single book, I don't consider the supplements bloat, as they served a function in that they added rules and fluff for the various chapters that only players of those chapters would be interested in, so they were not a requirement. The sm content in Faith and Fury however, was, as there was no reason that couldn't have been included in the codex, freeing up space that could have been given to the Black Templars and the legions. There is no good reason that sm players should have needed another book for that content so soon after the release of the new codex.

I think you're all asking the wrong question.

You shouldn't be asking "Should this sub-faction been in its own codex?".

You should be asking "When this new sub-faction gets released, would you rather (a) buy version X+1 of your main codex, or (b) a codex for the sub-faction?"

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I would object to being a supplement like the others, but not because I think we deserve our own codex, but more because I don't want to buy a $40 codex and a $40 supplement and a $40 psychic awakening.

Flawed assumption that Psychic Awakening will remain a 'must have'.

Sure, Whatever. I was being generous by including PA. If we ignore PA, I would have to pay 2x as much, instead of 1.5x as much, for books.

 Kanluwen wrote:

I think there's no reason to even have all these supplements and extra codecies and everything in the first place. Space Marine codecies and chapters are all more similar to each other than different IG regiments, and is a little blurb and three rules is good enough for the other factions it's good enough for the Space Marines.

Do you even Guard? I mean seriously, you're talking about a faction that is supposed to be issued standardized equipment (with the variations being based upon local manufacture patterns) and that is known for wasting specialist trained personnel in the usage of the 'standard' tactics.

I'm honestly not interested at all in any faction getting that treatment. I don't even thing Chapter Tactics, Regimental Doctrines, etc. are even necessary to have, and are all in all counterproductive to the spirit of Your Dudes.

So basically, "screw you" to anyone who likes any of the stuff that already exists but "yay" to whatever fanwank nonsense people like to throw out?

As a further note, the Space Marines have some serious bloat. They have so many units and unit options, many of which never see the table or are totally forgotten for extended periods of time, and many of which overlap with each other in capability.

Unit bloat, as mentioned previously. is not the topic of this thread. Make your own thread if you want to talk about it.

But for the record:
A lot of the issue comes from the splits we saw with the Ward era books. Sternguard and Vanguard Veterans didn't have to be a thing, nor did we need the Centurion variants, or the (as of right now) wasteful Captain/Librarian/Chaplain profiles that don't actually do anything differently.

Do you Guard?

Is it just me, or were there no less than at least eight different sets of models to represent the Imperial Guard infantry line not including Forgeworld, with two still remaining available as completely different sets of models. Space Marines have, at best, upgrade sprues that are just moulded shoulder pads, and the only difference between them being paint scheme, plus Grey Hunters.


It's also not a screw you. This hobby is A: built on the idea of "Your Dudes", and B: for an extended period of time, didn't have to have specific rules for a small handful of selected subfactions, much less an entire book full of them for a small set of the established subfactions. We got along just fine without Chapter Tactics and Regimental Doctrines for quite a while.

Anyone remember how nice it was when we just had like, 5 indexes and that was everything, for every faction?

Bloat is absolutely the problem with the Marine books. The fundamental problem of 8e is that GW's desire to "simplify" and "streamline" the core gameplay has left the game really really boring unless they then go back and stack hundreds of stratagems, warlord traits, psychic powers, relics, etc. on top of it to convince us that there's still some element of choice/list-building/gameplay. The game is dull. The endless bloat is a band-aid patch to make it slightly less dull because the alternative would be to admit that the fun has been stripped out of 8e in the name of simplification.

 posermcbogus wrote:
Anyone remember how nice it was when we just had like, 5 indexes and that was everything, for every faction?

That was really nice.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crispy78 wrote:
The guard factions are all one codex aren't they?

By "Guard", I'm referring to potentially offering up something like a Cadian supplement that has Creed, Kell, and Pask in them alongside of rules for Cadian Detachments and unique units.
I'd take it a step further, personally, and remove their access to certain things in exchange for those unique units.
Same goes for the Catachans.

Not sure you could do the same with the eldar. There isn't a single common unit between any of the 3 eldar factions. It's not like the space marine factions where lots of the vehicles and units are the same...

I think you've misunderstood the reference to the Aeldari and Drukhari. It wasn't saying that you could turn Drukhari into a supplement book for them or the like--it was opening up space for stuff like a Wych Cult book with expanded rules for Wych Cults, a Kabalite book, and a Coven book.

With Aeldari, some of the factions have as many unique units and characters(which is to say "they have a single one" ) as a good chunk of the Codex Chapters that got supplements did for Marines.

In that case, yes I did misread you. Sounds like you're actually proposing addressing the problem of rules bloat by bloating everything else to the same level as the space marines. No thanks. Two main reasons:

1) I am not made of money, and spend enough on GW rule books as it is

2) Based on the quality of their output I think GW are already releasing rules/books faster than they can cope with

 Kanluwen wrote:

I think there's no reason to even have all these supplements and extra codecies and everything in the first place. Space Marine codecies and chapters are all more similar to each other than different IG regiments, and is a little blurb and three rules is good enough for the other factions it's good enough for the Space Marines.

Do you even Guard? I mean seriously, you're talking about a faction that is supposed to be issued standardized equipment (with the variations being based upon local manufacture patterns) and that is known for wasting specialist trained personnel in the usage of the 'standard' tactics.

Do you actually believe that a proud, elite regiment like the Vostroyan Firstborns is the same as a penal regiment like the Chem dogs? Or that the Death Korp uses the same tactics as the Catachan?
That makes absolutely 0 sense.
I can't believe you somehow think that the catachan muscle shirts are just "variation based upon local manufacture patterns" compared to Cadian flak armor when anyone having a cursory look at the model can say for certain that they aren't!

 Kanluwen wrote:
So basically, "screw you" to anyone who likes any of the stuff that already exists but "yay" to whatever fanwank nonsense people like to throw out?

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest if there are sub factions with their own codex. Would something like a Black Templars Codex have a bunch of overlap with another chapter's Codex? Sure, but that player would have all of their rules consolidated in one place. I would certainly prefer chapter Codices over supplements.


The real bloat problem is needing so many books for a single arymy: Codex, Vigilus, PA, Supplements,CA,FAQ.

I think a lot of the issues with the consolidators is the presence of existing plastic kits.
You are not going to have Black Knights, Deathwing Knights and Sanguinary Guard, Thunderwolf Cav, Wulfen available for every army.....that's a really dumb suggestion, so cross that one off.

Now let's say you have a "core" marine codex, and add supplements. I feel this could be done as long as you start to caveat what can and can't be used in certain armies. Is it fair to give dark Angels access to every codex SM unit, and then give them all the extras on top? Not really, and many units don't fit existing fluff for some chapters anyway.

So you have a core SM codex added first, with zero special options for unique chapters, including Chapter traits. Hey, if DA and BA have to wait months for a release, so does mary sue Ultras. Or you include all the Chapter traits at the back, including DA, BA and SW. No super doctrines. You will also need to add a keyword line to entries that indicate what chapters can and can't use (sorry, I don't want my lore retconned just to fulfill your bloat anger).

After that, release supplements for the chapters, but not one per chapter...consolidate them.
Angels of Death..Blood Angels, Dark Angels.
Bastions of the Imperium or whatever..Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Crimson Fists, Black Templars (although they don't really fit...but are IF successors)
Swift Hunters or whatever...White Scars, Raven Guard.
Indominatable force (or what the hell ever)...Iron hands, Salamanders.
I guess you could put the bottom four together, they don't have a ton of extra stuff really.

now, this is appeasing the consolidators, as for me personally, I really like the Raven Guard supplement, thought it was great. I'd much rather cut bloat from supplements like Vigilus, and Pyschic Awakening. leave them as campaign books only, not rules updates. It's not like every marine player is going to buy every supplement, but they do take up shelf space and release time on the schedule.

even with the above, you still have at least 4 marine books (Core, Angels, Bastions, others) which still wouldn't appease the consolidators.

bloat is not the problem, it is a symptome for the problem that there is no clear design goal and GW wants to have everything at once

there are not enough play styles and battlefield roles available to have 10 different Marine factions with double the amounts of units (regular and primaris) with everyone being unique and "balanced"

so adding more and more special rules to make units unique, adding more army specific rules to make them unique and "bloat" becomes the solution of the problem

Imagine how much better the game could be if GW only released a new unit if they could justify it in rules, fluff and range diversity rather than purely on can they sell it.

I like the fact that all subfactions are getting their own rules.

You know what would get rid of bloat?

Redoing the main rules properly and establishing USRs so that everything is covered by a rule in the main book. Not having 50 new rules in every unit entry that ever so slightly differs from another unit that does the exact same thing.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

You know what would get rid of bloat?
Redoing the main rules properly and establishing USRs so that everything is covered by a rule in the main book. Not having 50 new rules in every unit entry that ever so slightly differs from another unit that does the exact same thing.

no, this won't work as GW already tried it several times
but because they do not think ahead while writing the core and/or feel that the new Subfaction released need something that make them more different you end up with the same bloat

re-using USR's that are already in the Core Book does no justify a new book release for GW

Bloat it is.

How many times have the same datasheets been reprinted in the PA so called campaign taking up room that could have been used for any of the following:

Actual new lore
Actual new units
Actual scenarios

its such a waste and so sad.

Do we really need a differnt dataslate for every different unit carrying every indivdual weapon option in the Marine arsenal?

How many Marine datassheets are there now?

no, this won't work as GW already tried it several times
but because they do not think ahead while writing the core and/or feel that the new Subfaction released need something that make them more different you end up with the same bloat

re-using USR's that are already in the Core Book does no justify a new book release for GW

But It would work if GW could be consistent for once and stick to a design format.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

But It would work if GW could be consistent for once and stick to a design format.

they believe that they won't sell any new books or units if they do so

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

I feel like folks are arguing past echother and there is actually a lot of middle ground.

All the special rules and datatsheets should be consolidated into as few sources as possible. It's completely stupid that GW ties poorly written, phoned in rules, to the back ground and artwork. This would allow them to patch and update the matched play rules more frequently and cost effectively and would make the rules more accessible to players. I think it's way past due for a living digital document BTW. They can still sell physical copies, but put digital codes into the book and or sell downloadable access for those not interested or with a second hand copy.

I think it is fine and actually really awesome that every sub-faction get their own supplement. There could be 100 of them, get as specific and small as you want and make them really nice with collector editions like they due now, but make them for fluff and background with artwork and timelines only. That way when some poor sucker buys his $150 dollar ultra collectors edition, it isn't worthless in 6 months like tends to occur often now. I have been playing since the mid 90's and I really don't need 6 copies of the same background for my armies. I'd rather buy one really nice supplement that I can hold onto even across new editions.

What has always made folks sour is GW tying rules to the fluff. It was more tolerable a decade ago or longer when you wouldn't see an update for years and the books were cheaper, not only that by the time the books were updated so were most of the models including new entries, but now it's almost comical. Look at the marine stratagems and how much overlap there is. It's a joke, every one of them has over a dozen of the exact same strat reprinted and as others have said, they don't even bother updating them after errata so you need an equal number of patches. Heck even on a smaller scale, how many factions have a 3cp fight again strat? (although some are strangely more restrictive) Why not just make that a generic strat everyone has access to like the interrupt?

Anyway, I imagine a living document and some kind of army builder software is in the future because the game needs some core rules updates pretty badly and I honestly don't think GW can get away with starting from scratch again this soon out after the last indexes. Especially given the future of global economics going ahead.

 posermcbogus wrote:
Anyone remember how nice it was when we just had like, 5 indexes and that was everything, for every faction?

While some of them weren't balanced very well, it was my favorite time to actually PLAY 8th, as it was so much simpler.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
And again in actual rules/datasheets what exactly needs to be added to basic unit to igve Dark Angels the options to run Deathwing/Ravenwing. Why exactly is a Codex needed rather than at most a suppplement?
Which units in the Wolves could not be handled by minor unit options or name changes and again how is this not handable by a most a Supplement.

Why remove a Codex from a chapter that has had one since 1996?

Because its time.

If it's another thread to discuss SW/DA/BA and let the usual suspect ramble in ignorance I'd rather not participate to the discussion (and frankly I'd ask the mod to just smite down the thread if that was the case).

But, about the topic of bloat, the real problem is not the number of unit entry but rather the inconsistency of GW's writing. They need some form of equity between codexes in regard to faction rules, stratagems and relics.
It's because of those that the number of book that you need to play is increasing so much and it is also mainly those that create huge imbalance within the game.

What GW should be doing is :
- increase the number of universal stratagem (not just the 3 strat that are in the rule book, but all factions should have some form of vect imo, and a few others to even out things) and reduce the number of faction specific stratagem to something like 1 page ;
- no faction should have more than X number of relics (nowadays SM have 4 pages of relics to pick while some factions just have 1, like DeathGuard for exemple, it is ABSURD).

The rest of the discussion is just noise.

One man's bloat is another man's chrome. By taking away USRs the Devs have mitigated what some would call bloat. There is a small core rule set and by tying special rules to factions and datasheets the players only have to manage the special rules that are in play.

I think that we just went through a stealthy, evolutionary edition change with the new Marines Codex and Psychic Awakening. The core rules remain, but the way that many armies behave on the tabletop has changed quite a bit. Works for me.

I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

I can't really agree that the various Space Marine Codexes/Supplements are bloat.

Codex Space Marines and it's supplements plus Faith and Fury for Black Templars are a fine way to have both consolidated rules and rules to allow the 8 core "chapters" both share units in an easily updatable way while also creating rules to allow them to play significantly differently on the table.

The "non-compliant" Codexes (Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Wolves) continuing as separate codexes rather than additional supplements seems to be primarily to easily outline what units they don't get out of Codex Space Marines rather than to include additional units (which all the supplements do). There are many differently named units in some of these codexes (Master or Wolf Lord rather than Captain) and a few additional weapons options, but really it is what they don't get that is the important thing.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
And again in actual rules/datasheets what exactly needs to be added to basic unit to igve Dark Angels the options to run Deathwing/Ravenwing. Why exactly is a Codex needed rather than at most a suppplement?
Which units in the Wolves could not be handled by minor unit options or name changes and again how is this not handable by a most a Supplement.

Why remove a Codex from a chapter that has had one since 1996?

Better late than never ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

That sounds like it just removes the special part of special characters.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

Having a "all the space marines chapters" codex and 3 "this one specific space marine chapter" is about as dumb as having an RPG with generic "create your character" rules that work only for fighters, and then one single pre-rolled character for mage, one single pre-rolled character for rogue, and one single pre-rolled character for cleric. It's dumb as a sack of brick. It's an absolutely terrible atrocious idea.
Get 4 different space marines codices if you want, but at least have each codex represent an archetype of space marines chapters, rather than a single stupid chapter...

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

Having a "all the space marines chapters" codex and 3 "this one specific space marine chapter" is about as dumb as having an RPG with generic "create your character" rules that work only for fighters, and then one single pre-rolled character for mage, one single pre-rolled character for rogue, and one single pre-rolled character for cleric. It's dumb as a sack of brick. It's an absolutely terrible atrocious idea.
Get 4 different space marines codices if you want, but at least have each codex represent an archetype of space marines chapters, rather than a single stupid chapter...

Who cares really about this topic really ? There are five thread in the last five month that discussed this. Do you really think the main problem with 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have a specific codex and that those specific factions are at the source of the bloat ? ...

I would be annoyed if they split out the Tau septs into separate books. I think it's preferable when basically compatible sub-factions are collected together. And that's what ultras/salies/ect. are: sub-factions.
I have a pretty strong opinion that the basics for playing an army should be big rule book and a codex as much as practical. (I don't so much mind expansions/updates in subsequent books, more the idea that to play Ultramarines you have to have a whole extra basic book compared to Ulthwe or Cadians or Farsight)

So I think the codex-compliant chapters should be in a single book. The special rules all follow the same form and unique datasheets for these factions are not that lengthy. Putting these in separate books seems like a cash grab, rather than a useful expansion.

The particularly unique chapters on the other hand, have enough special sauce to have codices - and be fully playable from them.


Now, is it the current state really "bloat'? Eh, kinda getting there for some Imperium folks. But it's not like you've got to buy every book for every army, just the ones that apply to your army. They don't go and stuff basic, whole-game, rules updates in the PA books. Changing how charging works for everyone in Engine War would certainly be bloat.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

Having a "all the space marines chapters" codex and 3 "this one specific space marine chapter" is about as dumb as having an RPG with generic "create your character" rules that work only for fighters, and then one single pre-rolled character for mage, one single pre-rolled character for rogue, and one single pre-rolled character for cleric. It's dumb as a sack of brick. It's an absolutely terrible atrocious idea.
Get 4 different space marines codices if you want, but at least have each codex represent an archetype of space marines chapters, rather than a single stupid chapter...

Who cares really about this topic really ? There are five thread in the last five month that discussed this. Do you really think the main problem with 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have a specific codex and that those specific factions are at the source of the bloat ? ...

Well, judging by that poll quite a few people care about the topic.

And one could argue that the bloat, while not the problem (although space marines are the OP thing to beat now...), it does exasperate several pre-existing problems.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

Having a "all the space marines chapters" codex and 3 "this one specific space marine chapter" is about as dumb as having an RPG with generic "create your character" rules that work only for fighters, and then one single pre-rolled character for mage, one single pre-rolled character for rogue, and one single pre-rolled character for cleric. It's dumb as a sack of brick. It's an absolutely terrible atrocious idea.
Get 4 different space marines codices if you want, but at least have each codex represent an archetype of space marines chapters, rather than a single stupid chapter...

Who cares really about this topic really ? There are five thread in the last five month that discussed this. Do you really think the main problem with 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have a specific codex and that those specific factions are at the source of the bloat ? ...

Well, judging by that poll quite a few people care about the topic.

And one could argue that the bloat, while not the problem (although space marines are the OP thing to beat now...), it does exasperate several pre-existing problems.

Nah, it seems to exasperate a very vocal minority on here - but it might exacerbate a pre-existing problem with the way 8th was put together.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I hope that we can avoid the usual complaining about the DA/BA and SW. Those forces have enough distinctiveness to warrant being their own factions at an acceptable opportunity cost to the game developers/product line managers. This makes the game a more diverse playing environment. I fail to see how the game would be improved by rolling them into the Space Marines Dex. At the end of the day the market will decide.

Having a "all the space marines chapters" codex and 3 "this one specific space marine chapter" is about as dumb as having an RPG with generic "create your character" rules that work only for fighters, and then one single pre-rolled character for mage, one single pre-rolled character for rogue, and one single pre-rolled character for cleric. It's dumb as a sack of brick. It's an absolutely terrible atrocious idea.
Get 4 different space marines codices if you want, but at least have each codex represent an archetype of space marines chapters, rather than a single stupid chapter...

The factions are not character classes in an RPG, so your analogy is hard to follow. I get that you don't like have the Space Marines Codex and then the three distinct Codexes, but I don't see what the character class bit has to do with it. The Big Four are well-established Chapters going back to 2nd Ed in terms of having their own Codexes. Heck, the Space Wolves were the first with a Codex.

What is it that you want? A Codex for a shooty Space Marines army and a different book for an assault-oriented one?

What we have now is plenty of choice for a player, and I think that's a good thing. Those choices have some meaning: if I decide to collect Dark Angels I get access to some unique units and rules but I lose access to others.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Those choices have some meaning: if I decide to collect Dark Angels I get access to some unique units and rules but I lose access to others.

And why can't that be reflected in a supplement?

I'd understand it if the DA had MOST of their units as unique ones and only drew off a small proportion of normal Astartes units, but they really don't, and the units they don't have access to - well, there's no reason for them not to beyond artificial limits. I mean, what units that normal SM can take that DA can't have a good reason behind it?

Right now, DA share the vast majority of their book with normal Space Marines, and have only slightly more truly unique units than the Ultramarines do. Why do the DA get a Codex, but the UM don't? (And no, I don't particularly want the UM to have a Codex either).

In my opinion, it's not an issue with marines, but simply the edition running out of space.

I enjoyed 8th edition for a while when it came out, because the rules were simple and decently elegant. Still a little ho-hum, but this is 40K we're talking about. It's never been a brilliant game. I think, however, the simplicity of 40K in 8th edition meant that there simply wasn't a lot of room to "move" within the game rules. Meaning to make things increasingly powerful or special was harder and harder. In typical GW fashion they leaned heavily (real heavily...) into their two standard rule designs: re-rolling dice, and ignoring key game rules. This has been part of the GW method for a long time now.

Running out of room for "new" rules conflicts directly with the "new models get good rules" mantra which is pretty heavy within GW's releases.

Add in the usual poor GW balance when designing stuff, and you just get a clusterfeth. GW made a pretty solid and simple rule set within 8th edition, but it doesn't work very well with the standards of power creep. So as they step further outside of the 8th edition box looking for ways to make new units powerful, they end up going out on too many limbs and creating some truly awful rules combinations, etc.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
The factions are not character classes in an RPG, so your analogy is hard to follow.

I don't think it is hard to follow. Maybe it's just that you disagree with it.
Custom chapter is like a custom character, pre-made chapter is like a premade character, how hard is that?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
What is it that you want? A Codex for a shooty Space Marines army and a different book for an assault-oriented one?

If we somehow have to have separate SM codex, then yeah, that makes much more sense than the current version. Though I doubt we need.

 kodos wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

You know what would get rid of bloat?
Redoing the main rules properly and establishing USRs so that everything is covered by a rule in the main book. Not having 50 new rules in every unit entry that ever so slightly differs from another unit that does the exact same thing.

no, this won't work as GW already tried it several times
but because they do not think ahead while writing the core and/or feel that the new Subfaction released need something that make them more different you end up with the same bloat

re-using USR's that are already in the Core Book does no justify a new book release for GW

So just throw the baby out with the bathwater as GW did a crap job of it. It works in WMH. It works in Malifaux. It works in numerous other games. What makes 40k so special that they cannot do it?


The only people I ever see saying USRs are bad are the blind GW koolaid drinkers, because GW have implicitly told them they were bad (just like with blast templates) by ditching them in subsequent editions of the game. Try looking at other games and you'll see they work perfectly fine.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

You know what would get rid of bloat?
Redoing the main rules properly and establishing USRs so that everything is covered by a rule in the main book. Not having 50 new rules in every unit entry that ever so slightly differs from another unit that does the exact same thing.

no, this won't work as GW already tried it several times
but because they do not think ahead while writing the core and/or feel that the new Subfaction released need something that make them more different you end up with the same bloat

re-using USR's that are already in the Core Book does no justify a new book release for GW

So just throw the baby out with the bathwater as GW did a crap job of it. It works in WMH. It works in Malifaux. It works in numerous other games. What makes 40k so special that they cannot do it?


The only people I ever see saying USRs are bad are the blind GW koolaid drinkers, because GW have implicitly told them they were bad (just like with blast templates) by ditching them in subsequent editions of the game. Try looking at other games and you'll see they work perfectly fine.

I don't think that's fair to say, It's probably closer to the truth that people saying USRs are bad might only have 6th/7th as a reference, which was USRs at their worst. that said, earlier editions and other games can show that USRs can be done well.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

You know what would get rid of bloat?
Redoing the main rules properly and establishing USRs so that everything is covered by a rule in the main book. Not having 50 new rules in every unit entry that ever so slightly differs from another unit that does the exact same thing.

no, this won't work as GW already tried it several times
but because they do not think ahead while writing the core and/or feel that the new Subfaction released need something that make them more different you end up with the same bloat

re-using USR's that are already in the Core Book does no justify a new book release for GW

So just throw the baby out with the bathwater as GW did a crap job of it. It works in WMH. It works in Malifaux. It works in numerous other games. What makes 40k so special that they cannot do it?

The only people I ever see saying USRs are bad are the blind GW koolaid drinkers, because GW have implicitly told them they were bad (just like with blast templates) by ditching them in subsequent editions of the game. Try looking at other games and you'll see they work perfectly fine.

USR are not bad, GW is just not able to do it right and never will as they don't fit their buisness model and asking to change back won't solve anything as GW will screw it up again

if you want USR, you need to play games from a different company

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
The factions are not character classes in an RPG, so your analogy is hard to follow.

I don't think it is hard to follow. Maybe it's just that you disagree with it.
Custom chapter is like a custom character, pre-made chapter is like a premade character, how hard is that?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
What is it that you want? A Codex for a shooty Space Marines army and a different book for an assault-oriented one?

If we somehow have to have separate SM codex, then yeah, that makes much more sense than the current version. Though I doubt we need.

An analogy should, well, be analogous. A character and a chapter are not even close to the same thing in game terms. A faction from a chapter plays on its own (well, some Soup maybe). Characters are combined to make a party. I play Dark Angels, which I guess is your "pre-made character?" There are many ways to build a force from that Chapter.

Are you sad because you want to make a custom chapter, but somehow feel that you cannot? Is there something you really want from the DA/BA for your custom chapter but you also want things from the Space Marine Codex that those chapters cannot have?

You can't do custom Chapters with the Angels. Hell you're actively punished choosing a successor.

pm713 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

That sounds like it just removes the special part of special characters.

Good. Because in my opinion most 40k characters have become far too special. I'm fed up with the entire universe revolving around a small pool of characters, 90% of which are either Mary Sues protected with Imperium-Grade Plot Armour or else Immortal Incompetents who get killed every time they appear yet never actually die.

I'm also fed up with Special Characters being black holes that suck up all the flavourful rules, weapons and wargear. So most regular HQs have had their options stripped to the bone, yet Special Characters won't even do their trousers up unless the belt buckle is the Anointed Belt Buckle of St. Lucius, Thrice Blessed by the Emperor and used to Discipline 10000 Naughty Children of the Imperium. Or, in the case of Space Wolves, The Wolf-Tooth Belt-Buckle of Fenrir McWolfenson, Grand Hellfrostwolf of the Lupine Pack, which Grants its User the Power and Spirit of the Mightiest and Wolfiest Wolf to ever Wolf.

I've been thinking, since reading this thread, that maybe the codexes should be ring binder folder bound. You buy the intial codex pack, which has pages for everything you would normally find in a codex, and expansions, which have the pages you would normally find in an expansion. But you can combine them in the folder however you like. Want a gaming codex just put in the Datasheets and rules you need. When they release updated rules, lets say in a Psychic Awakening type book (which would also be ring binder bound) you just replace the sheets in your "codex" binder. New unit gets released here's a sheet (available for small change, and will be in the codex package next print) to add to your "codex" binder. This way you can customise your book to have the rules you need without carrying multiple volumes with things you do not need. Not sure what to do with ebook rules though.

Blood Angels (Blood Angels player here) and Dark Angels should also just be supplements to Adeptus Astartes Codex, IMHO. Not Custodes though they are not Astartes.

Just some thoughts.

 vipoid wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

That sounds like it just removes the special part of special characters.

Good. Because in my opinion most 40k characters have become far too special. I'm fed up with the entire universe revolving around a small pool of characters, 90% of which are either Mary Sues protected with Imperium-Grade Plot Armour or else Immortal Incompetents who get killed every time they appear yet never actually die.

I'm also fed up with Special Characters being black holes that suck up all the flavourful rules, weapons and wargear. So most regular HQs have had their options stripped to the bone, yet Special Characters won't even do their trousers up unless the belt buckle is the Anointed Belt Buckle of St. Lucius, Thrice Blessed by the Emperor and used to Discipline 10000 Naughty Children of the Imperium. Or, in the case of Space Wolves, The Wolf-Tooth Belt-Buckle of Fenrir McWolfenson, Grand Hellfrostwolf of the Lupine Pack, which Grants its User the Power and Spirit of the Mightiest and Wolfiest Wolf to ever Wolf.

I agree with most of this. SC's can have a place, but when they crowd out so much in terms of game design space, and all basically have the same copy-pasta 1-dimensional cardboard cutout background (particularly among the Imperial factions), it gets old, and makes for substantially less varied and interesting armies in the long run when they become the cornerstones of so many lists.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
An analogy should, well, be analogous.

Obviously. Not "exactly the same". Just "similar in the way that matter for this specific comparison".

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
A faction from a chapter plays on its own

lolwhat?
A faction from a chapter? What do you mean? Like a company? Companies have never been a thing you build your army around, except for Dark Angels for some reason, and even for them, the default is "soup". Even for the DA it's only two of the 10 companies that are somehow special, for the 8 others it's never been a relevant thing.
What's next? Each space marine squad should be considered a different faction maybe? "I'm playing soup, I am using 5 different units, from across 3 different companies!!"

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I play Dark Angels, which I guess is your "pre-made character?" There are many ways to build a force from that Chapter.

Yeah, and you can play a pre-generated characters in different way. Prepare different spells. Make different decisions during roleplay. Make different decisions upon leveling. It's still someone else who decided what your character and his backstory was, and the basics of your gameplay. Just like it's someone else who decided the lore and color scheme of the Dark Angels, and what their Chapter Tactics were.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

That sounds like it just removes the special part of special characters.

Good. Because in my opinion most 40k characters have become far too special. I'm fed up with the entire universe revolving around a small pool of characters, 90% of which are either Mary Sues protected with Imperium-Grade Plot Armour or else Immortal Incompetents who get killed every time they appear yet never actually die.

I'm also fed up with Special Characters being black holes that suck up all the flavourful rules, weapons and wargear. So most regular HQs have had their options stripped to the bone, yet Special Characters won't even do their trousers up unless the belt buckle is the Anointed Belt Buckle of St. Lucius, Thrice Blessed by the Emperor and used to Discipline 10000 Naughty Children of the Imperium. Or, in the case of Space Wolves, The Wolf-Tooth Belt-Buckle of Fenrir McWolfenson, Grand Hellfrostwolf of the Lupine Pack, which Grants its User the Power and Spirit of the Mightiest and Wolfiest Wolf to ever Wolf.

I agree with most of this. SC's can have a place, but when they crowd out so much in terms of game design space, and all basically have the same copy-pasta 1-dimensional cardboard cutout background (particularly among the Imperial factions), it gets old, and makes for substantially less varied and interesting armies in the long run when they become the cornerstones of so many lists.

Yes! again

Hybrid,

I will not keep quote-boxing to keep the thread manageable. I am still trying to understand your position. The Dark Angels are a faction. They are tool box and you can make a range of armies out of that tool box. As a faction they stand on their own (unless they want to soup I suppose). A faction/chapter is completely different from a character in an RPG because a faction stands on its own. A character is part of a party and not intended to stand on its own (well, in most RPGs anyway).

What is it about the Dark Angels having a Codex that bothers you? Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems and characters without losing access to other things?

Cheers,

T2B

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Hybrid,

I will not keep quote-boxing to keep the thread manageable. I am still trying to understand your position. The Dark Angels are a faction. They are tool box and you can make a range of armies out of that tool box. As a faction they stand on their own (unless they want to soup I suppose). A faction/chapter is completely different from a character in an RPG because a faction stands on its own. A character is part of a party and not intended to stand on its own (well, in most RPGs anyway).

What is it about the Dark Angels having a Codex that bothers you? Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems and characters without losing access to other things?

Cheers,

T2B

Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems, and characters without losing access to other things? Because you got pretty much the entire Space Marine kit and caboodle with your PA book.

And to me, it seems there's really only two tenable positions.

1) Consolidate. All Marines in one book. All Guard in one book. All [FACTION] in one book.

2) Give everyone the Space Marine treatment. Orks get new books for Deathskulls, Freebootas, Evil Suns, all that. Same for Guard. Same for Eldar, and Dark Eldar, and Harlequins. Same for Tau.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably hold the position that Space Marines and Space Marines alone deserve all that.

TangoTwoBravo,

I don't understand why the "stand on one's own" is relevant to my comparison. For me the part that matters is "You can make your own, or use one that was made for you".

I don't play marines, but if I have to give one concrete example: why should having bikers veterans be linked to being a dark angels? Having "biker veterans" as a trait you can select would allow white scars, and customs chapters, to have access to them. And if you want to say "Why don't you just play the custom chapter as a dark angel then?", well, if you do it means the custom chapter lose access to having for instance "bestial" marines (mutated marines in a similar vein to the wulfen, the death company or the dragon's claw. Lots of chapters have similar units).

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

What is it about the Dark Angels having a Codex that bothers you? Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems and characters without losing access to other things?

I'll toss my worthless $0.02 on this. My issue is that they're ostensibly a codex adherent chapter, always were, and originally largely were simply differentiated by how they deployed their Bike and Terminator en-masse routinely (as opposed to only rarely doing so with other Chapters) with a slight preference for plasma weaponry, instead of actually being anything particularly unique, and over time that's somehow became defined by superbiker plasma-fetishists with Knighty-Big-Terminators to justify their existence as a separate faction.

Simultaneously, it's also made making a more typical or representative Codex-adherent force for the Dark Angels typically rather pointless, the book might as well be "Codex: Ravenwing/Deathwing" instead of "Codex: Dark Angels", as (for the past several editions) the DA book wasn't really set up to support such lists as well as the basic SM codex, or needed some gimmick like the Standard of Devastation to make people even look at playing anything that wasn't Dark/Raven wing.

It's essentially an entire "faction" centered around a couple of internal small sub-organizations of a niche sub-group of an actual fully fledged faction (Space Marines), like making a codex specifically for the Cadian 4037th's Fire Support Company (but still called "Codex: Cadian 4037th Regiment"). This is to say nothing of original root faction already being one of the smallest fighting forces in the setting, and, again, the Dark Angels still ostensibly being codex-adherent.

At the scale 40k plays at as a game, and with the breadth of other factions around, it's really hard to see a DA specific book as anything but a pet project or a perpetual beneficiary of game design inertia.

EDIT: quote format issues.

 JNAProductions wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Hybrid,

I will not keep quote-boxing to keep the thread manageable. I am still trying to understand your position. The Dark Angels are a faction. They are tool box and you can make a range of armies out of that tool box. As a faction they stand on their own (unless they want to soup I suppose). A faction/chapter is completely different from a character in an RPG because a faction stands on its own. A character is part of a party and not intended to stand on its own (well, in most RPGs anyway).

What is it about the Dark Angels having a Codex that bothers you? Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems and characters without losing access to other things?

Cheers,

T2B

Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems, and characters without losing access to other things? Because you got pretty much the entire Space Marine kit and caboodle with your PA book.

And to me, it seems there's really only two tenable positions.

1) Consolidate. All Marines in one book. All Guard in one book. All [FACTION] in one book.

2) Give everyone the Space Marine treatment. Orks get new books for Deathskulls, Freebootas, Evil Suns, all that. Same for Guard. Same for Eldar, and Dark Eldar, and Harlequins. Same for Tau.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably hold the position that Space Marines and Space Marines alone deserve all that.

JNA,

By playing Dark Angels I gain access to unique units but lose access to others (Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Vanguard Vets etc). I get something but I lose something. The game gains some diversity with an additional faction but with low opportunity cost.

The Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves have a long history in the game of having their own books. Others have come and gone. They have a popularity that makes it worthwhile for GW to invest in them. I don't know if that could be said for a Deathskulls book. The marketplace will ultimately decide - and its been doing so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
TangoTwoBravo,

I don't understand why the "stand on one's own" is relevant to my comparison. For me the part that matters is "You can make your own, or use one that was made for you".

I don't play marines, but if I have to give one concrete example: why should having bikers veterans be linked to being a dark angels? Having "biker veterans" as a trait you can select would allow white scars, and customs chapters, to have access to them. And if you want to say "Why don't you just play the custom chapter as a dark angel then?", well, if you do it means the custom chapter lose access to having for instance "bestial" marines (mutated marines in a similar vein to the wulfen, the death company or the dragon's claw. Lots of chapters have similar units).

We do not have a unit called biker veterans. We do have Ravenwing Black Knights which are one of our distinctive units. We have Ravenwing Bike Squads who get Jink and access to some Stratagems. The Ravenwing are kind of a big part of the Dark Angels thing and have been so since the game took shape. I don't see a problem with this: the Ravenwing are well established lore. The White Scars do bikes well, and anybody can take bikes.

My whole point is that its good to have to make meaningful choices. You want Ravenwing Black Knights? Great! You don't get Thunderfire Cannons. Its a choice, leading to greater diversity on the tabletop based on something other than points.

You can make a custom chapter from the mainline Space Marines book. Its true that you lose out of some of the distinct units of the non-Codex compliant Chapters. It's the point. The Dark Angels are their own faction. You don't have to like it and you don't have to buy them. If you really want their units then you are absolutely able to pick up their Codex and play with them. As a Dark Angel. Or a Space Wolf etc.

 vipoid wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Precisely. In pen & paper RPG, you can decide you want to play the pre-rolled characters from the book. But that shouldn't be the default mode, and there should never, ever be any rules that are specific to them, that player-made characters cannot match. Same for 40k, really.
The subfaction system, if there is one, should be all about letting you create your own chapter, and named chapters should just be pre-rolled chapters.
"If you want to play Ultramarine, then use subtrait X and subtrait Y"

IMO special characters should also work this way.

Yes!

That sounds like it just removes the special part of special characters.

Good. Because in my opinion most 40k characters have become far too special. I'm fed up with the entire universe revolving around a small pool of characters, 90% of which are either Mary Sues protected with Imperium-Grade Plot Armour or else Immortal Incompetents who get killed every time they appear yet never actually die.

I'm also fed up with Special Characters being black holes that suck up all the flavourful rules, weapons and wargear. So most regular HQs have had their options stripped to the bone, yet Special Characters won't even do their trousers up unless the belt buckle is the Anointed Belt Buckle of St. Lucius, Thrice Blessed by the Emperor and used to Discipline 10000 Naughty Children of the Imperium. Or, in the case of Space Wolves, The Wolf-Tooth Belt-Buckle of Fenrir McWolfenson, Grand Hellfrostwolf of the Lupine Pack, which Grants its User the Power and Spirit of the Mightiest and Wolfiest Wolf to ever Wolf.

Which is why Relics should be paid pieces of wargear and characters can take as many as they're allowed to take.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Hybrid,

I will not keep quote-boxing to keep the thread manageable. I am still trying to understand your position. The Dark Angels are a faction. They are tool box and you can make a range of armies out of that tool box. As a faction they stand on their own (unless they want to soup I suppose). A faction/chapter is completely different from a character in an RPG because a faction stands on its own. A character is part of a party and not intended to stand on its own (well, in most RPGs anyway).

What is it about the Dark Angels having a Codex that bothers you? Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems and characters without losing access to other things?

Cheers,

T2B

Do you want access to their unique units, stratagems, and characters without losing access to other things? Because you got pretty much the entire Space Marine kit and caboodle with your PA book.

And to me, it seems there's really only two tenable positions.

1) Consolidate. All Marines in one book. All Guard in one book. All [FACTION] in one book.

2) Give everyone the Space Marine treatment. Orks get new books for Deathskulls, Freebootas, Evil Suns, all that. Same for Guard. Same for Eldar, and Dark Eldar, and Harlequins. Same for Tau.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably hold the position that Space Marines and Space Marines alone deserve all that.

JNA,

By playing Dark Angels I gain access to unique units but lose access to others (Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Vanguard Vets etc). I get something but I lose something. The game gains some diversity with an additional faction but with low opportunity cost.

The Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves have a long history in the game of having their own books. Others have come and gone. They have a popularity that makes it worthwhile for GW to invest in them. I don't know if that could be said for a Deathskulls book. The marketplace will ultimately decide - and its been doing so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
TangoTwoBravo,

I don't understand why the "stand on one's own" is relevant to my comparison. For me the part that matters is "You can make your own, or use one that was made for you".

I don't play marines, but if I have to give one concrete example: why should having bikers veterans be linked to being a dark angels? Having "biker veterans" as a trait you can select would allow white scars, and customs chapters, to have access to them. And if you want to say "Why don't you just play the custom chapter as a dark angel then?", well, if you do it means the custom chapter lose access to having for instance "bestial" marines (mutated marines in a similar vein to the wulfen, the death company or the dragon's claw. Lots of chapters have similar units).

We do not have a unit called biker veterans. We do have Ravenwing Black Knights which are one of our distinctive units. We have Ravenwing Bike Squads who get Jink and access to some Stratagems. The Ravenwing are kind of a big part of the Dark Angels thing and have been so since the game took shape. I don't see a problem with this: the Ravenwing are well established lore. The White Scars do bikes well, and anybody can take bikes.

My whole point is that its good to have to make meaningful choices. You want Ravenwing Black Knights? Great! You don't get Thunderfire Cannons. Its a choice, leading to greater diversity on the tabletop based on something other than points.

You can make a custom chapter from the mainline Space Marines book. Its true that you lose out of some of the distinct units of the non-Codex compliant Chapters. It's the point. The Dark Angels are their own faction. You don't have to like it and you don't have to buy them. If you really want their units then you are absolutely able to pick up their Codex and play with them. As a Dark Angel. Or a Space Wolf etc.

It's all arbitrary though. Why don't Dark Angels or ANY of their Successors get TFCs? Why can they not use the Chapter Master Stratagem if Azrael isn't in their army?

It's forced differences to try and convince you that they're a different faction when in reality they aren't and they're just trying to convince you that everyone needs a bunch of codices.

gods i hate trying to quote something from my phone....

I think this question and poll is worded unfairly and addresses two issues, but condenses them down to one question.

I'm a big fan of factions getting their own shine, and unique codexes for subfactions and expansion of the game. I love the codex supplements, and that DA/BA/SW/GK/DW have their own books. I do think they should invest a little bit more time into the writing of some of them however.

However, the bottom line question, "is the marine codex bloated"? I hate saying we should have "less" stuff, but at this point... absolutely. There is so many units within that dex and so much redundant gak. For the most part, the old Marines need an overhaul, or GW just needs go ahead and push out Primarified versions of all the units they want to keep, and put the rest on the chopping block already if that's the plan - and that's from someone who much prefers the old Marines to Primaris. They just aren't being supported model or rules wise. anymore, and the dex and SM store page is an ugly mess because of it.

Well, if GW feels that no more books are sold or they get out of ideas, a new edition will loom.

I don't think anything in the truly vast Marine range needs to be gone - never been in favour of that, but so many datasheets are just very slight variations on each other and could be uincluded on one or at most two datsheets with no loss of options or models being unable to be used.

This includes many of the minor Chapter specific variations leaving room for supplements to cover actual unqiue units.

Other factions have had much less of this so far as they have had to be crammed into single books for entire races rather than single Chapters of a single Imperial subfaction.

I'd like to see the bigger army lists trimmed and streamlined, not necessarily removing options ( but I'd be ok with that) but definitely consolidating datasheets and entries where possible.

As mentioned above, the number of terminator entries for SM is a good example of this, and characters with or without specific wargear/armour/jump-pack/bike would be another.

I'm not familiar enough with most armies to know if there are similar datasheet duplication.

As for putting all the various types of SM into one book, I'd be all for that, including DA, SW BA et al. Whether you want to call it a codex or not doesn't bother me, but it worked for the
Indices.

I'd like to see a return to something much closer to the Indices than to the current ( and historic) Codices method of faction lists/rules.

Form reading this thread it seems a lot of people are in favour of adding more rules and ever increasing complexity. Personally I'd prefer to go the other way are reduce, streamline and simplify. Have comprehensive core rules that all the factions follow. Codices and army specific features shouldn't actually add any rules. but should dictate the units a specific faction can take and how they interact with the rules. New rules for their own sake are bad for the game as are rules purely for the sake of "flavour".

That's not to say that flavour and faction identity don't matter, they really do, but the GW approach to them isn't the right way to go as far as I'm concerned. From a business/profitability perspective maybe it is the better approach as is, but it isn't how I would choose to have it as an end-user.

 Kanluwen wrote:


If you got:
-Characters+special units/errata to grant keywords(ie: Intercessors or Tactical Squads could be given the 'Grey Hunters' keywords for SW for a pointed upgrade)
-Stratagems
-Relics
-Special Rules for a pure faction army.
Would you consider it a fair trade for being updated whenever the generic Marine book got updated?

Would other factions be interested in a similar treatment, if it's possible(the ones that immediately spring to mind are Aeldari, Drukhari, Chaos Marines[vanilla] and some of the Guard subfactions)?

I've added a poll to the top that will run for 5 days. Feel free to explain your vote choice.

So what you're proposing here is that eldar and drukhari get a shared base codex that includes all the units the two factions share, then a supplement with all the unique drukhari and craftworld stuff?

So the base book would have...no units in it? not a single one?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
By playing Dark Angels I gain access to unique units but lose access to others (Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Vanguard Vets etc). I get something but I lose something. The game gains some diversity with an additional faction but with low opportunity cost.

You keep saying this like if having a separate Dark Angel codex was the only way for this to happen. If you get real "Make your own codex" rules that says "If you want veteran bikers, you lose access to centurions", "If you want bestial marines, you lose access to centurions", etc, then you do 100% fit with the "special chapters are just pre-generated custom chapters" mantra, AND you get to make a choice, that gains you access to specific units and the expense of other units.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Others have come and gone.

Like who, Black Templars?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
The marketplace will ultimately decide - and its been doing so.

We can see how bad that works for actual important real-life things and shudder at this lol.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
We do not have a unit called biker veterans. We do have Ravenwing Black Knights which are one of our distinctive units.

Which are
- a pretty recent introduction to the lore and models
- really just bike veterans.
Other chapters should have access to bike veterans.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I don't see a problem with this: the Ravenwing are well established lore.

So are the Dragon's Claws. Yet only one of those can be represented on the tabletop.
You don't want for Dark Angels to be properly represented on the table. You want them to have access to things that others don't have. That"s really it. That's the core of what you are saying. You just want to prevent other chapters from getting stuff that would represent them better on the tabletop, because you believe it would make the dark angels less special. That's not very nice...

the_scotsman wrote:

So what you're proposing here is that eldar and drukhari get a shared base codex that includes all the units the two factions share, then a supplement with all the unique drukhari and craftworld stuff?

So the base book would have...no units in it? not a single one?

No. It would be that Aeldari and Drukhari got base codices of their own, then supplement books of their own.

I'm not necessarily sure how I'd do the Craftworlds side of things. Not sure how well received a book expanding the Aspect Warriors significantly would be, with the Phoenix Lords, the skills bits like what PA had in there while adding Exarchs as HQ options in the core book.

Drukhari feels like an easy one. Kabalite, Wych Cults, Covens each get a book with expanded rules & named characters(including adding/reintroducing characters) in there

So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented? The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point. You might think I'm not very nice for being OK with that and I guess I'm going to have to get over your censure. Do you think its not very nice that your custom chapter (that you don't even play) can't get units from other factions?

I don't pretend to have sales figures, but there are plenty of dedicated Dark Angels players out there who buy the product and keep the faction viable for GW. Will that always be the case? Who knows. The iron hand of business practice (SKU control etc) can hurt. Like I said earlier, other Chapters had Codexes and then lost them (and were sometimes reborn in a Supplement). If you think its bad that GW or any business have to follow the invisible hand of the marketplace you must find life very frustrating. I would certainly be sad if the Dark Angels got rolled into the Space Marines in the future, but I would need to get over it.

I will give you the last shot and wish you good gaming.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented? The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The issue is that it's not really all that "unique", it's a basic standard unit with a special rule swap or an extra plasma weapon option.

As far as DA being their own faction, sure, but the same could be said of tons of factions that don't have their own book or models or rules, and lots that have significantly more justification for it too, again, particularly with the Dark Angels ostensibly still being a "Codex Adherent" chapter. If the Dark Angels need their own book because their bikers get winged doodads and their Terminators have cool Company name, and they somehow figured how to stick a shield generator to a Land Speeder and have an extra stockpile of plasma weapons, there's a whole lot of other factions that have significantly more divergence to play with than that if they had their own book.

 Vaktathi wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented? The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The issue is that it's not really all that "unique", it's a basic standard unit with a special rule swap or an extra plasma weapon option.

As far as DA being their own faction, sure, but the same could be said of tons of factions that don't have their own book or models or rules, and lots that have significantly more justification for it too, again, particularly with the Dark Angels ostensibly still being a "Codex Adherent" chapter. If the Dark Angels need their own book because their bikers get winged doodads and their Terminators have cool Company name, and they somehow figured how to stick a shield generator to a Land Speeder and have an extra stockpile of plasma weapons, there's a whole lot of other factions that have significantly more divergence to play with than that if they had their own book.

The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !
In reality, they effectively still function as a legion, and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes, but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.) and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity. They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest, but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

All in all, who cares ? Do you really think the core problem of 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have their own codexes ? Who for real believe that ?

It's A problem, because I think the game has way too much emphasis on power armor. As I've said, I think GW should have killed off BA with the Nid invasion. I guess that's less models for them to sell, though. Taking out GK, BA, and DW would help clean up the codices quite a bit.

Martel732 wrote:
It's A problem, because I think the game has way too much emphasis on power armor.

And you think having DA/BA/SW in codex supplement and not in full fledged codex would change that ? Who are we mocking for real ? Can we discuss something meaningful to the game and not some drenched out topic that has no relevance whatsoever ?

Probably not, but removing some power armor factions entirely might.

No it would not. That's the game you play : the SM are the main focus of 40K, that's how it is.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

So what you're proposing here is that eldar and drukhari get a shared base codex that includes all the units the two factions share, then a supplement with all the unique drukhari and craftworld stuff?

So the base book would have...no units in it? not a single one?

No. It would be that Aeldari and Drukhari got base codices of their own, then supplement books of their own.

I'm not necessarily sure how I'd do the Craftworlds side of things. Not sure how well received a book expanding the Aspect Warriors significantly would be, with the Phoenix Lords, the skills bits like what PA had in there while adding Exarchs as HQ options in the core book.

Drukhari feels like an easy one. Kabalite, Wych Cults, Covens each get a book with expanded rules & named characters(including adding/reintroducing characters) in there

This still doesn't really explain what would be in the base codex, then. Kabalites, Wych Cults and Covens share like...2 models between all three of them. I think it's ltierallly just venoms and raiders.

I'd much, much, MUCH rather have my whole army back together than have them fragmented into three microfactions. All combined Drukhari have fewer unit entries than a lot of factions do.

WhiteDog wrote:
No it would not. That's the game you play : the SM are the main focus of 40K, that's how it is.

Unfortunate because I've gotten very sick of power armor. On both sides of the table.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

So what you're proposing here is that eldar and drukhari get a shared base codex that includes all the units the two factions share, then a supplement with all the unique drukhari and craftworld stuff?

So the base book would have...no units in it? not a single one?

No. It would be that Aeldari and Drukhari got base codices of their own, then supplement books of their own.

I'm not necessarily sure how I'd do the Craftworlds side of things. Not sure how well received a book expanding the Aspect Warriors significantly would be, with the Phoenix Lords, the skills bits like what PA had in there while adding Exarchs as HQ options in the core book.

Drukhari feels like an easy one. Kabalite, Wych Cults, Covens each get a book with expanded rules & named characters(including adding/reintroducing characters) in there

This still doesn't really explain what would be in the base codex, then. Kabalites, Wych Cults and Covens share like...2 models between all three of them. I think it's ltierallly just venoms and raiders.

I'd much, much, MUCH rather have my whole army back together than have them fragmented into three microfactions. All combined Drukhari have fewer unit entries than a lot of factions do.

Again:

each get a book with expanded rules & named characters.

There'd be no stripping out of the units from the army. Just things like Lelith Hesperax and Urien Rakarth.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

So what you're proposing here is that eldar and drukhari get a shared base codex that includes all the units the two factions share, then a supplement with all the unique drukhari and craftworld stuff?

So the base book would have...no units in it? not a single one?

No. It would be that Aeldari and Drukhari got base codices of their own, then supplement books of their own.

I'm not necessarily sure how I'd do the Craftworlds side of things. Not sure how well received a book expanding the Aspect Warriors significantly would be, with the Phoenix Lords, the skills bits like what PA had in there while adding Exarchs as HQ options in the core book.

Drukhari feels like an easy one. Kabalite, Wych Cults, Covens each get a book with expanded rules & named characters(including adding/reintroducing characters) in there

This still doesn't really explain what would be in the base codex, then. Kabalites, Wych Cults and Covens share like...2 models between all three of them. I think it's ltierallly just venoms and raiders.

I'd much, much, MUCH rather have my whole army back together than have them fragmented into three microfactions. All combined Drukhari have fewer unit entries than a lot of factions do.

Again:

each get a book with expanded rules & named characters.

There'd be no stripping out of the units from the army. Just things like Lelith Hesperax and Urien Rakarth.

Right, I'm just not understanding what you would have in the base codex. Would you have, as you have in the marine supplements, all the units, subfaction tactics for all the kabals and cults and covens, and strats, and then in the subfaction books , say the wych cult book, you'd have Lelith and...just like, relics, warlord traits, strats specific to wych cults?

If so, then...yeah, seems like unnecessary bloat to me. from a practical perspective GW would never do it because Drukhari have pretty much never been a top seller, but from a theoretical perspective I would resent the situation as much as anyone who plays one of the factions that now requires 3-4 books and supplements seems to resent it.

Plus, Dark Elder (among many other factions) should have more units.

For reference, at least according to Battlescribe, Marines have 7 unique Captain Entries and a total of 20 HQ entries, including FW but not Legends or unique characters.

Dark Eldar have 3 HQs total, and 29 total units (again, including FW, but not Legends or named characters).

An entire faction doesn't even have half again the numbers of HQs Marines have. Marines have more unique Captain entries than Dark Eldar have literally any force org slot, other than Elites, of which they have 8.

I get it, Marines are the sellers, they're the big boys on top, they're popular. But good lord, other factions need support too!

Marines should be the army with very few options. There just aren't that many of them.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented? The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The issue is that it's not really all that "unique", it's a basic standard unit with a special rule swap or an extra plasma weapon option.

As far as DA being their own faction, sure, but the same could be said of tons of factions that don't have their own book or models or rules, and lots that have significantly more justification for it too, again, particularly with the Dark Angels ostensibly still being a "Codex Adherent" chapter. If the Dark Angels need their own book because their bikers get winged doodads and their Terminators have cool Company name, and they somehow figured how to stick a shield generator to a Land Speeder and have an extra stockpile of plasma weapons, there's a whole lot of other factions that have significantly more divergence to play with than that if they had their own book.

The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !
In reality, they effectively still function as a legion, and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes, but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.) and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity. They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest, but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

All in all, who cares ? Do you really think the core problem of 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have their own codexes ? Who for real believe that ?

Its also the Lore as GW write it - their orgnaisation is built around the Codex with some minor naming conventions, a few fancy weapons and artefacts - just like ANY other major Astartes chapter

It just adds bloat - you know the whole point of this thread

Again how many times have the same datasheets been reprinted in Psychic Awakening taking up how many pages? Thats space thats been taken away from any other true faction.

Is its some kind of wierd status thing that some Angels and Wolves players have to have a Codex?

love these bits:

it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore.

unlike what the codex suggest,

so which is your primary source - the Codex or your own head cannon?

WhiteDog wrote:


The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !

In reality, they effectively still function as a legion, and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes, but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.) and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity. They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest, but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

So there's two parts here, the first is that they still function as a Legion, and the second is that they're not really Codex Adherent.

Lets start with the latter, that they aren't really Codex Adherent. Well, just as you described, and and just as I stated earlier, this pretty much mostly boils down to a doctrinal difference in the way they deploy 2 companies of their chapter. That's it. They're still Space Marines on Bikes or in Terminator armor, they just deploy them as entire companies instead of breaking them up to support other companies. That's not a whole lot of deviation (does it matter who pilots their flyers? that doesn't make any difference on the table, and it's not like they *don't* have Techmarines), and far less deviation than many SM chapters that don't have their own book (to say nothing of say, Chaos Space Marines).

Outside of that, looking at the Chapter Organization descriptions and images in each DA codex over the various editions from 2E onward, they're bog-standard Codex Adherent. They're not the only ones to ever deploy their first company en-masse (the Ultramarines at the Battle of Macragge for example), nor the only ones to have elite bikers (white scars say hello) or other such things.

As for functioning as a full Legion, that's a relatively new fluff suggestion/intimation that came around loooong after they already had their own books for many editions (it's not in the first 3 or 4 DA codex codex books that I can see). Yeah they have their successor chapters that they work with, but so do lots of others (like the Ultramarines), and even then we're probably talking a combined personnel count lower than a typical IG regiment (of which there are literal billions, each composed of thousands or tens of thousands of troops, from a million+ different worlds), but more importantly, that doesn't really have any reflection on the table as we're not playing Apocalypse sized games with multiple companies of Deathwing on the table.

Most of this just isn't stuff that is relevant to tabletop gameplay needing its own rules source, particularly in 8E where army construction rules and FoC charts don't need special rules to allow for entire armies of Terminators or Bikes to be played.

I'll also reiterate another earlier point, in that we don't even really get Codex: Dark Angels, we get Codex:Raven/Deathwing, because practically nobody plays a "Greenwing" tactical company and anyone doing so has pretty much always better off just running the basic SM codex through the game's history.

All in all, who cares ? Do you really think the core problem of 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have their own codexes ? Who for real believe that ?

I think the fact that we have a big group of trivially differentiated factions that share 80-90%+ of their background, units, weapons, profiles, units, etc take up a huge amount of the development space, marketing & release pipeline time, constantly cannibalize each other in multiple different ways, and drive tons of power and rules issues bloat, does contribute significantly to many issues 40k has and has had.

the_scotsman wrote:

Right, I'm just not understanding what you would have in the base codex. Would you have, as you have in the marine supplements, all the units, subfaction tactics for all the kabals and cults and covens, and strats, and then in the subfaction books , say the wych cult book, you'd have Lelith and...just like, relics, warlord traits, strats specific to wych cults?

If so, then...yeah, seems like unnecessary bloat to me. from a practical perspective GW would never do it because Drukhari have pretty much never been a top seller, but from a theoretical perspective I would resent the situation as much as anyone who plays one of the factions that now requires 3-4 books and supplements seems to resent it.

You'd have Lelith Hesperax, additional Relics, additional Warlord Traits, and additional stratagems specific to Wych Cults with perks added if you have an army being taken as a purely Wych Cult army.

The biggest problem that I keep seeing with regards to "the number of books and supplements", currently, is that people continually throw out misinformation about what is or isn't required. Telling people they need to carry Chapter Approved with them at all times, a Psychic Awakening book, and Vigilus with them at all times, alongside of all the possible supplements is just nonsense.

 Mr Morden wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented? The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The issue is that it's not really all that "unique", it's a basic standard unit with a special rule swap or an extra plasma weapon option.

As far as DA being their own faction, sure, but the same could be said of tons of factions that don't have their own book or models or rules, and lots that have significantly more justification for it too, again, particularly with the Dark Angels ostensibly still being a "Codex Adherent" chapter. If the Dark Angels need their own book because their bikers get winged doodads and their Terminators have cool Company name, and they somehow figured how to stick a shield generator to a Land Speeder and have an extra stockpile of plasma weapons, there's a whole lot of other factions that have significantly more divergence to play with than that if they had their own book.

The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !
In reality, they effectively still function as a legion, and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes, but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.) and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity. They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest, but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

All in all, who cares ? Do you really think the core problem of 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have their own codexes ? Who for real believe that ?

Its also the Lore as GW write it - their orgnaisation is built around the Codex with some minor naming conventions, a few fancy weapons and artefacts - just like ANY other major Astartes chapter

It just adds bloat - you know the whole point of this thread

Again how many times have the same datasheets been reprinted in Psychic Awakening taking up how many pages? Thats space thats been taken away from any other true faction.

Is its some kind of wierd status thing that some Angels and Wolves players have to have a Codex?

love these bits:

it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore.

unlike what the codex suggest,

so which is your primary source - the Codex or your own head cannon?

I'd willingly answer to your question if you could understand the answer.

And no, DA/BA/SW do not create the bloat, unless you actually believe 30 page of reprint is the core of problem of v8 ????
That's just a dumb assertion, that's not the topic at all : a bit of objectivity could make you understand that easily. For exemple, I also play CSM : to play I effectively need the normal codex, the faith and fury PA, the last chapter approved and the vigilus ablaze book. So I need more book than when I play DA (only the codex and the ritual of the damned, not even need the chapter approved because all new point values are in the PA).

 Vaktathi wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:


The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !

In reality, they effectively still function as a legion, and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes, but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.) and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity. They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest, but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

So there's two parts here, the first is that they still function as a Legion, and the second is that they're not really Codex Adherent.

Lets start with the latter, that they aren't really Codex Adherent. Well, just as you described, and and just as I stated earlier, this pretty much mostly boils down to a doctrinal difference in the way they deploy 2 companies of their chapter. That's it. They're still Space Marines on Bikes or in Terminator armor, they just deploy them as entire companies instead of breaking them up to support other companies. That's not a whole lot of deviation (does it matter who pilots their flyers? that doesn't make any difference on the table, and it's not like they *don't* have Techmarines), and far less deviation than many SM chapters that don't have their own book (to say nothing of say, Chaos Space Marines).

Outside of that, looking at the Chapter Organization descriptions and images in each DA codex over the various editions from 2E onward, they're bog-standard Codex Adherent. They're not the only ones to ever deploy their first company en-masse (the Ultramarines at the Battle of Macragge for example), nor the only ones to have elite bikers (white scars say hello) or other such things.

As for functioning as a full Legion, that's a relatively new fluff suggestion/intimation that came around loooong after they already had their own books for many editions (it's not in the first 3 or 4 DA codex codex books that I can see). Yeah they have their successor chapters that they work with, but so do lots of others (like the Ultramarines), and even then we're probably talking a combined personnel count lower than a typical IG regiment (of which there are literal billions, each composed of thousands or tens of thousands of troops, from a million+ different worlds), but more importantly, that doesn't really have any reflection on the table as we're not playing Apocalypse sized games with multiple companies of Deathwing on the table.

Most of this just isn't stuff that is relevant to tabletop gameplay needing its own rules source, particularly in 8E where army construction rules and FoC charts don't need special rules to allow for entire armies of Terminators or Bikes to be played.

I'll also reiterate another earlier point, in that we don't even really get Codex: Dark Angels, we get Codex:Raven/Deathwing, because practically nobody plays a "Greenwing" tactical company and anyone doing so has pretty much always better off just running the basic SM codex through the game's history.

All in all, who cares ? Do you really think the core problem of 40K rules is that DA/SW/BA have their own codexes ? Who for real believe that ?

I think the fact that we have a big group of trivially differentiated factions that share 80-90%+ of their background, units, weapons, profiles, units, etc take up a huge amount of the development space, marketing & release pipeline time, constantly cannibalize each other in multiple different ways, and drive tons of power and rules issues bloat, does contribute significantly to many issues 40k has and has had.

How can you say that "functionning as a legion" and "being codex adherent" are two different questions ? The codex was created to split up legion, that's the whole point.

And new lore, old lore, this is not an argument, you cannot just handpick what you want.

As for your last sentence, it is contradicting itself : if SM sub-factions are "trivially differentiated factions that share 80-90%+ of their background, units, weapons, profiles, units, etc" then that means that it is very easy for GW to produce content for those factions without having to utilize "development space, marketing and release pipeline time". In fact, look at what DA/BA/SW got for this ed. : one lieutenant, one special character each ? That's not a "ton of development space". And the benefit made out of those relatively easy to develop characters can be used to invest into whatever GW wants to afterwards - yes, even xenos factions.
And again, that's not the topic of the discussion : the discussion is about rule bloat, and the SM codex bloat. Now you're talking about GW marketing strategy.

I'd willingly answer to your question if you could understand the answer.

And no, DA/BA/SW do not create the bloat, unless you actually believe 30 page of reprint is the core of problem of v8 ????
That's just a dumb assertion, that's not the topic at all : a bit of objectivity could make you understand that easily. For exemple, I also play CSM : to play I effectively need the normal codex, the faith and fury PA, the last chapter approved and the vigilus ablaze book : I need more book than when I play DA (only the codex and the ritual of the damned, not even need the chapter approved).

I own and can play all Armies Mate - for objectiveity's sake. Including Dark Angels

Given that only one of us is arguing for super special treament for a sub-sub-faction - what does that say about you?

So reprinting those data sheets over and over again helped the bloat how exactly?

On the subject of not understanding answer were there too many hard words for you in the excellent and thoughtful response in Vaktathi as you donlt sem to have understood it at all?

And new lore, old lore, this is not an argument, you cannot just handpick what you want.

Yiour previous post

unlike what the codex suggest,

So again which is it?

As for your last sentence, it is contradicting itself : if there are "trivially differentiated factions that share 80-90%+ of their background, units, weapons, profiles, units, etc" then that means that for GW it is very easy to produce content for those factions without having to utilize "development space, marketing and release pipeline time". In fact, look at what DA/BA/SW got for this ed. : une lieutenant, one special character each ? That's not a "ton of development space".

Good so its agreed a Supplement at most would cover them.
They got as much or more than most actual Factions. They also clogged up the so called campaign books with all those reprinted datsheets. All those wasted pages.....sad really

And new lore, old lore, this is not an argument, you cannot just handpick what you want.

Yiour previous post

unlike what the codex suggest,

So again which is it?

You have a hard time understanding : I'm not talking about the codex Dark Angels, but the codex astartes, written by Guilliman. The idea that the DA effectively function as a legion is implied in the codex DA (the idea that they name themselves the "Unforgiven" and that they oftentime function together is actually old, as it was already the case in the 3rd edition). On the other side, the codex astartes is written to split legion and limit the growth of SM chapters.
But you should know that if you play all armies (and by the way you say that everytime you criticize DA/SW/BA, that doesn't make you more legitimate).

Good so its agreed a Supplement at most would cover them.
They got as much or more than most actual Factions. They also clogged up the so called campaign books with all those reprinted datsheets. All those wasted pages.....sad really

If DA were in a supplement what would happen :
- I would need SM codex + supplement + PA + CA to play ;
- the DA supplement would effectively be twice the size of any other supplement (except SW and maybe BA).
That's not intelligent, that's just stupid : you're adding to the bloat.

Stop referencing Psychic Awakening as mandatory. There is every indication that we will be seeing a new edition or codices within the next year or so.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Stop referencing Psychic Awakening as mandatory. There is every indication that we will be seeing a new edition or codices within the next year or so.

Stop talking out of your ass, you don't know anything about that. And to effectively play a game nowadays you need PA.

I say it everytime because apparently people like you forgot or ignore it and start claiming about objectivity or hating a speciic Chapter. maybe don;t make that argument and i wont need to counter eh?

So how do you play DA now: Oh yeah you need a so called Campaign book and a Codex. So totally different to having to have a Codex and supplement. How exactly?

No the supplement would need very little space to add the actual rules changes to make the DA function exactly as they do now. How can you play an army and not know how little rules difference there actually are.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I say it everytime because apparently people like you forgot or ignore it and start claiming about objectivity or hating a speciic Chapter. maybe don;t make that argument and i wont need to counter eh?

So how do you play DA now: Oh yeah you need a so called Campaign book and a Codex. So totally different to having to have a Codex and supplement. How exactly?

No the supplement would need very little space to add the actual rules changes to make the DA function exactly as they do now. How can you play an army and not know how little rules difference there actually are.

Tell me : do you really think it would change anything for 40K (as in less rule bloat, more sunlight for xenos armies, etc.) if DA/BA/SW were in a supplement ?

Vaktathi wrote:I'll toss my worthless $0.02 on this. My issue is that they're ostensibly a codex adherent chapter, always were, and originally largely were simply differentiated by how they deployed their Bike and Terminator en-masse routinely (as opposed to only rarely doing so with other Chapters) with a slight preference for plasma weaponry, instead of actually being anything particularly unique, and over time that's somehow became defined by superbiker plasma-fetishists with Knighty-Big-Terminators to justify their existence as a separate faction.

Absolutely. The unique aspects of the DA that would make any different on tabletop are two companies, nothing more.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:By playing Dark Angels I gain access to unique units but lose access to others (Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Vanguard Vets etc). I get something but I lose something. The game gains some diversity with an additional faction but with low opportunity cost.

But why don't the DA have those units? If I made my own custom Chapter that simply couldn't take Scouts, but then added something like a melee Primaris unit, by your logic, that's enough for a while new Codex?

There is no lore reason the DA can't have all those units beyond arbitrary limitations.

The Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves have a long history in the game of having their own books. Others have come and gone.

So why should the DA/BA/SW remain independent? You can't just appeal to the status quo - there must be a solid reason why they should stay as they are.

We do not have a unit called biker veterans. We do have Ravenwing Black Knights which are one of our distinctive units.

Which are basically just Veteran bikers. If I added a unit to the Raven Guard called "Raven's Talons" and were literally just Vanguard Veterans with lightning claws, would you say that the RG should have their own unique Codex? No, they're just a generic unit with a fancy new name!

We have Ravenwing Bike Squads who get Jink and access to some Stratagems.

All stuff that could be added in via Chapter Tactics and supplements. White Scars bikers all get the ability to advance without penalty - should they get their own unique datasheets?

The Ravenwing are kind of a big part of the Dark Angels thing and have been so since the game took shape.

They're one Company. Not even the majority of the Chapter.

I don't see a problem with this: the Ravenwing are well established lore. The White Scars do bikes well, and anybody can take bikes.

Ravenwing are established lore, yes. But giving them generic units wouldn't change that lore.

If I were to take a Dark Angels bike, and simply change the unit name to "Bike Squad", that wouldn't change the fact they're Ravenwing. It's like if I had a custom Chapter who call their Tactical Squads "Impulsor Squads". I don't need a unique datasheet for them, I just call them "Impulsors" in my backstory and stuff. It's like the Emperor's Spears, who call their Veterans "Paragons". They don't need a "Paragons" datasheet, because as players, we're smart enough to know that, despite their fancy name, they're just Veterans.

My whole point is that its good to have to make meaningful choices. You want Ravenwing Black Knights? Great! You don't get Thunderfire Cannons. Its a choice, leading to greater diversity on the tabletop based on something other than points.

But WHY don't they have Thunderfire Cannons? It's not like not having Thunderfire Cannons is a big part of the DA lore? It's not like Guardsmen, who play drastically differently depending on if they're run as Scions or not.

WhiteDog wrote:The argument that the DA are an "ostensibly codex adherent chapter" is so stupid : it's entirely missing the point of the DA and their lore. They are "ostensibly", as in it is what they show, but they are not in reality ... it's the entire point of the chapter !

No, they DO function internally as a normal Chapter. Their whole "Legion" stuff doesn't factor into their rules at all. And why would it?
"Ah yes, we function as a Legion, so we get our own unique Codex!"
"But sir, we're only fielding units from our own Chapter, why would it matter if we were a Legion when this battle is only at the company scale?"
"...but we're a-"
"-A Legion, yes, but what does that change? Why are we any different from the other Chapters who are deploying at company strength with the same units as we are?"

DA being a Legion is background fluff, not anything relevant to the game itself.

In reality, they effectively still function as a legion

Which is irrelevant, seeing as the DA still follow Codex organisation doctrines.

and have various number of units (ravenwing, deathwing yes

Wow. Completely generic units with a new coat of paint. Who have a fancy name for two of their companies.

Why is this important? If the White Scars called all their Terminators "White Lightnings", would they get to have a full Codex?

but also all their flyers that are not pilotted by techmarines, because they would be affiliated to mars, etc.)

Okay - but what does that change? It's not like there's some kind of in game effect that makes a difference if they're piloted by Techmarines, Ravenwing, or even little children recently rescued from slavery who think spinning in a good trick. Functionally, a DA flyer is identical to a UM one - look at the two Stormraven profiles, and tell me what the difference is.

and two full compagnies that are tailored to pursue a specific goal, a goal that partially define their identity.

That's a strange way of saying that 80% of the Chapter is completely basic and normal then.

Why are we giving a Codex to a faction that's 80% normal? There's more differences between Scions and Salvar, and yet they share a book!

They also rarely deploy at the compagny level, unlike what the codex suggest

Hang on, why are you ignoring what your own lore says? You wouldn't be arguing from your headcanon, would you?

but in various strike forces that usually have half a compagny and semi-autonomous elements of DW and RW.

Why would the DW and RW deploy if the Fallen weren't present? I thought you just said they were "tailored to pursue a specific goal"?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

WhiteDog wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Stop referencing Psychic Awakening as mandatory. There is every indication that we will be seeing a new edition or codices within the next year or so.

Stop talking out of your ass, you don't know anything about that. And to effectively play a game nowadays you need PA.

I don't own a single PA book, and I play fine.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Right, I'm just not understanding what you would have in the base codex. Would you have, as you have in the marine supplements, all the units, subfaction tactics for all the kabals and cults and covens, and strats, and then in the subfaction books , say the wych cult book, you'd have Lelith and...just like, relics, warlord traits, strats specific to wych cults?

If so, then...yeah, seems like unnecessary bloat to me. from a practical perspective GW would never do it because Drukhari have pretty much never been a top seller, but from a theoretical perspective I would resent the situation as much as anyone who plays one of the factions that now requires 3-4 books and supplements seems to resent it.

You'd have Lelith Hesperax, additional Relics, additional Warlord Traits, and additional stratagems specific to Wych Cults with perks added if you have an army being taken as a purely Wych Cult army.

The biggest problem that I keep seeing with regards to "the number of books and supplements", currently, is that people continually throw out misinformation about what is or isn't required. Telling people they need to carry Chapter Approved with them at all times, a Psychic Awakening book, and Vigilus with them at all times, alongside of all the possible supplements is just nonsense.

Well sure, but my tolerance level toward buying 50$ books with a 2-year life expectancy to be allowed to play my armies is also pretty fething low. no other modern miniatures game that I've played has required me to buy even two books anywhere near that price to play exactly 1 faction. Most just give you the rules for free nowadays, in the hopes that you'd, I dunno, buy miniatures from the miniatures company.

No, I would not consider getting some 20-30% more rules for my wych cult units to be worth paying 2x as much and carrying a supplement with me. If you gave me a button I could push and rewind the game back to Indexes Only I'd push that button.

WhiteDog wrote:

How can you say that "functionning as a legion" and "being codex adherent" are two different questions ? The codex was create to split up legion, that's the whole point.

No, because those other Chapters aren't part of the DA chapter, they will operate in conjunction with them, but they maintain their own worlds, command structures, recruitment, run their own campaigns, etc, and they operate as Codex adherent chapters in organization (10 companies, 100 marines to a company, etc).

They act cooperatively...sometimes, and some within the setting see that as rebuilding a Legion, but that's about as far as that goes. We can either go with the hinted perception, or the long established, repeated, and unchanging chapter organization we've seen displayed through their entire existence over 7 editions and (IIRC) 6 books over almost a quarter century of time.

Even if we throw that all out the window though, none of that really means much in terms of the DA requiring their own rules source to be properly represented on the table.

And new lore, old lore, this is not an argument, you cannot just handpick what you want.

When we're talking about bloat over time, and how relevant a piece of background is to the tabletop experience, and particularly with a bit of fluff that's as soft and shadowed as this, trying to lean on it as a central pillar of the factions core identity and a requirement for them to have their own rules source doesn't really work.

As for your last sentence, it is contradicting itself : if there are "trivially differentiated factions that share 80-90%+ of their background, units, weapons, profiles, units, etc" then that means that for GW it is very easy to produce content for those factions without having to utilize "development space, marketing and release pipeline time".

This is not true at all. Marketing and release pipeline are exclusive, they are blocks of time, if GW is releasing Dark Angels stuff, they're not releasing anything else for set amount of time, each release gets its own window. The entire logistical back end of laying out, editing, creating art for, printing, packing, storing, and shipping those books takes significant effort and resources even if the gameplay material is rather thin.

And again, that's not the topic of the discussion : the discussion is about rule bloat, and the SM codex bloat. Now you're talking about GW marketing strategy.

Having to update these various books, keep them balanced with each other, is a nightmare the way GW handles 40k, and increasingly GW's design decision to differentiate these factions ends up in significant rules and power bloat to try and generate interest. We end up with all sorts of balance issues, unit availability weirdness, and increasingly bloated abilities, trying to make and keep a ton of different SM factions around as distinct armies.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I say it everytime because apparently people like you forgot or ignore it and start claiming about objectivity or hating a speciic Chapter. maybe don;t make that argument and i wont need to counter eh?

So how do you play DA now: Oh yeah you need a so called Campaign book and a Codex. So totally different to having to have a Codex and supplement. How exactly?

No the supplement would need very little space to add the actual rules changes to make the DA function exactly as they do now. How can you play an army and not know how little rules difference there actually are.

Tell me : do you really think it would change anything for 40K (as in less rule bloat, more sunlight for xenos armies, etc.) if DA/BA/SW were in a supplement ?

Obviously yes.

They would have come out with the other first Founding Chapters.
Lets look at PA alone - we could have more lore, an actual storyline rather than dozens of pages of the same old datasheets.
Less need for whole new round of the same FAQs every time the same stuff is reprinted wrongly in PA.
Less chance for discrepencies between Chapters equipment, rules and pts cost cos they are working on the same base thing
All that means time and effort can be spent on something, anything else without taking a single thing away from the Wolves and the Angels excpet the apparent status symbol of having a Codex.

Bloat is a problem with the entire 8th edition system.
Not just SPESH MAUREENS.
You can devote all your attention on MAUREENS... That won't fix 8th edition.

You guys are just not understanding the topic you wish to discuss.
The idea that marketing and pipeline are exclusive for exemple is such a silly idea ... What matter is the risk and profit that GW might make when they release a product.
It's GW that decide to create half assed product, reprint rules and add quick lore because it is easy and it plays the role of a filler between actual consistent release. If you think PA 3 "Blood of Baal" or PA 4 "Ritual of the damned" actually delayed the return of Ghaz for exemple, or the arrival of the v9, you're just deluding yourself.

Copy pasting the rules of a mini that is already released, like the infiltrator, into a 35€ book is NOT delaying anything : it is a way to make easy money for a compagny, like publishing a new call of duty in gaming for exemple, while not leaving down time and risk losing the contact with the consumers. It's actually those type of product that makes more risky product possible.

But again you're mixing two very different things : the problem of bloat and rules, and GW's marketing strategy.

 ValentineGames wrote:
Bloat is a problem with the entire 8th edition system.
Not just SPESH MAUREENS.
You can devote all your attention on MAUREENS... That won't fix 8th edition.

Yes, exactly. Thank you for pointing out the obvious.

the_scotsman wrote:

Well sure, but my tolerance level toward buying 50$ books with a 2-year life expectancy to be allowed to play my armies is also pretty fething low. no other modern miniatures game that I've played has required me to buy even two books anywhere near that price to play exactly 1 faction. Most just give you the rules for free nowadays, in the hopes that you'd, I dunno, buy miniatures from the miniatures company.

Blame the people who whined about AoS for that one. We got full damn rules for units and everything, people complained about having to carry printouts.

No, I would not consider getting some 20-30% more rules for my wych cult units to be worth paying 2x as much and carrying a supplement with me. If you gave me a button I could push and rewind the game back to Indexes Only I'd push that button.

It would help if you posted the right prices.
Physical:
Codices are $40.
Supplements are $30

Enhanced Edition Digital:
Codices are $37.99 to $39.99
Supplements are $25.99

There's also another argument that has been brought up in the support of the variant marine codex: That they exist because they make money over the other codexs. But there's some major problems there:
*For the first thing, this really is conjecture. GW has never confirmed if that's the case, nor how much any of the products have made other than a throwaway line years ago. I'm not denying that space marines are popular, but whether SW/DA/BA (or even Custrodes/GK/DW) make so much money that they justify themselves has always been a guess.
*Secondly, it assumes that sale begets supports. But as we've seen multiple times, it's the opposite: Support begets sales. When Dark Eldar were lagging on for 11 years, people through they were pointless. But when they got a huge model reveal in 5th they became much bigger in terms of players and now are supported as much as their Craftworld equivalence. Sisters of Battle was through to be squat and their lack of support was a punchline for parts of the community and by GW themselves. Then GW actually went "...wait, do you guys actually want SoB?" and when they came out the SoB box it was sold out for months! Ad mech and Genestealer cults were both legends from the old rogue trader days, and when GW gave them a chance they found out there's a market for it. When something is supported, people will buy it!
*Thirdly, GW can only know what's profitable if there's something to buy. They wouldn't have any data of if variant IG codexes would make money, because they've never done that. A consumer can only buy what exists. The closet thing non marine armies have had in that vain is campaign boxes, which still tend to be generic for most armies.

Copy pasting the same info when it s not needed is the exact defination of Bloat?

Again is this a staus thing that your chosen faction has to have a Codex or its somehow lesser or at the same level as others?

As we noted - having mutiple sources for the same rules simply adds to the chances of errors and balance issues especially when GW can;t be bothered to update the same stuff with the approriate faq.

Again do you think dozens of pages of reprinted data sheets was a good use of finiate resources for the big campaign of the year and there was nothing better that could have been put there.

The awesome part is, that the whole problem only exists because GW insist on publishing rules as books.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I say it everytime because apparently people like you forgot or ignore it and start claiming about objectivity or hating a speciic Chapter. maybe don;t make that argument and i wont need to counter eh?

So how do you play DA now: Oh yeah you need a so called Campaign book and a Codex. So totally different to having to have a Codex and supplement. How exactly?

No the supplement would need very little space to add the actual rules changes to make the DA function exactly as they do now. How can you play an army and not know how little rules difference there actually are.

Tell me : do you really think it would change anything for 40K (as in less rule bloat, more sunlight for xenos armies, etc.) if DA/BA/SW were in a supplement ?

Not only would those things change, but ease of updates as well. You can pretend that Deathwing are SUPER DIFFERENT but the truth is they aren't. Outside mixed wargear they have the useless Morale rule nobody pays attention to. Lose the separate Terminator entries (no we don't need different entries for the different armor Mks) and bam you're done.

 ValentineGames wrote:
Bloat is a problem with the entire 8th edition system.
Not just SPESH MAUREENS.
You can devote all your attention on MAUREENS... That won't fix 8th edition.

It won't fix the entire edition no, but at the same time, it can't be denied that Space Marine bloat is a significant contributor to those issues, and the dizzying array of sub-faction releases plays a major part in that.

 Jidmah wrote:
The awesome part is, that the whole problem only exists because GW insist on publishing rules as books.

No, the problem exists because they continue to release items for factions rather than just reach a stopping point.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented?

... you have no idea what you are talking about, right? Do you know what Dragon's claws are?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The point is, lorewise they are the same as every chapter, each with it's own peculiarities, gamewise they should be the same as every chapter, a selection of custom traits that fit their lore.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
the invisible hand of the marketplace

Woah we found a true believer .

WhiteDog wrote:
Can we discuss something meaningful to the game and not some drenched out topic that has no relevance whatsoever ?

Yeah, you can. Just click on any other thread in the forum mate, just not on this one if you hate it.

Let me put it this way: you could take all the actual rules pages from Codex: Space Marines, all six Codex Suppliments, Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels, Codex: Space Wolves, Codex: Death Watch, and all of the related PA pages, put them into a single book the size of Codex: Space Marines and still have half the pages left for fluff.

Whether that constitutes 'bloat' depends on how valuable you personally find the fluff. I like the character-focused blurbs that give a sense of each chapter's overall personality, but there's a lot of "significant battles of [insert chapter name here]" timeline stuff that I mostly gloss over.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
There's also another argument that has been brought up in the support of the variant marine codex: That they exist because they make money over the other codexs. But there's some major problems there:
*For the first thing, this really is conjecture. GW has never confirmed if that's the case, nor how much any of the products have made other than a throwaway line years ago. I'm not denying that space marines are popular, but whether SW/DA/BA (or even Custrodes/GK/DW) make so much money that they justify themselves has always been a guess.
*Secondly, it assumes that sale begets supports. But as we've seen multiple times, it's the opposite: Support begets sales. When Dark Eldar were lagging on for 11 years, people through they were pointless. But when they got a huge model reveal in 5th they became much bigger in terms of players and now are supported as much as their Craftworld equivalence. Sisters of Battle was through to be squat and their lack of support was a punchline for parts of the community and by GW themselves. Then GW actually went "...wait, do you guys actually want SoB?" and when they came out the SoB box it was sold out for months! Ad mech and Genestealer cults were both legends from the old rogue trader days, and when GW gave them a chance they found out there's a market for it. When something is supported, people will buy it!
*Thirdly, GW can only know what's profitable if there's something to buy. They wouldn't have any data of if variant IG codexes would make money, because they've never done that. A consumer can only buy what exists. The closet thing non marine armies have had in that vain is campaign boxes, which still tend to be generic for most armies.

You didn't understand the argument, you can read again. I wasn't talking about SM overall, but specifically about DA/BA/SW. What you didn't take into consideration is that developing product for DA/BA/SW as they did lately does not cost much - it's not only about sells, it's about profit (benefit - costs). To produce a DA or a SW lieutenant, and a PA book (i.e. mostly just reprinting rules that already exist) it doesn't cost much.
Your exemple with the SoB is perfect : just think about the cost that this release had for GW, who had to redo the entire line, recreate rules and playtest them, then market this entire line up and release the army in a way that does not create too much frustration (no long waiting time between release) but that also maximize selling. Sure they certainly made some profit, but more than that they invested for future release. Do you have the same problem for DA/SW/BA ? No, none of that. Everything you invest to develop the SM line can be easily used to develop the SW/DA/BA and thus SW/BA/DA (as they have been thought out in this edition) are not delaying any product or hijacking any ressources.

That being said, I totally agree with most of your points.

Yeah, you can. Just click on any other thread in the forum mate, just not on this one if you hate it.

The subject of rule bloat is a real question ; but people in this sub are just so jealous of SW/DA/Ba that they cannot even understand the complexity of the subject and what to do to prevent it.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
There's also another argument that has been brought up in the support of the variant marine codex: That they exist because they make money over the other codexs. But there's some major problems there:
*For the first thing, this really is conjecture. GW has never confirmed if that's the case, nor how much any of the products have made other than a throwaway line years ago. I'm not denying that space marines are popular, but whether SW/DA/BA (or even Custrodes/GK/DW) make so much money that they justify themselves has always been a guess.
*Secondly, it assumes that sale begets supports. But as we've seen multiple times, it's the opposite: Support begets sales. When Dark Eldar were lagging on for 11 years, people through they were pointless. But when they got a huge model reveal in 5th they became much bigger in terms of players and now are supported as much as their Craftworld equivalence. Sisters of Battle was through to be squat and their lack of support was a punchline for parts of the community and by GW themselves. Then GW actually went "...wait, do you guys actually want SoB?" and when they came out the SoB box it was sold out for months! Ad mech and Genestealer cults were both legends from the old rogue trader days, and when GW gave them a chance they found out there's a market for it. When something is supported, people will buy it!
*Thirdly, GW can only know what's profitable if there's something to buy. They wouldn't have any data of if variant IG codexes would make money, because they've never done that. A consumer can only buy what exists. The closet thing non marine armies have had in that vain is campaign boxes, which still tend to be generic for most armies.

You didn't understood the argument, you can read again. I wasn't talking about SM overall, but specifically about DA/BA/DW.

No it would not. That's the game you play : the SM are the main focus of 40K, that's how it is.

So you didn't say this - which this argument directly addresses?

I wouldn't say there's a rules bloat per se. I'd say the problem is that none of its consolidated in one place. The rules out of faith and Fury for loyalists is 20 pages that's with the BT pages which should have been in the If supplement, otherwise it's only 7 pages! Those 7 pages could have easily been added to the codex

The problem is that GW needs to separate the rules and the fluff. Buy the codex you get 2 books. The fluff and the "field manual" like with chapter approved

 Mr Morden wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
There's also another argument that has been brought up in the support of the variant marine codex: That they exist because they make money over the other codexs. But there's some major problems there:
*For the first thing, this really is conjecture. GW has never confirmed if that's the case, nor how much any of the products have made other than a throwaway line years ago. I'm not denying that space marines are popular, but whether SW/DA/BA (or even Custrodes/GK/DW) make so much money that they justify themselves has always been a guess.
*Secondly, it assumes that sale begets supports. But as we've seen multiple times, it's the opposite: Support begets sales. When Dark Eldar were lagging on for 11 years, people through they were pointless. But when they got a huge model reveal in 5th they became much bigger in terms of players and now are supported as much as their Craftworld equivalence. Sisters of Battle was through to be squat and their lack of support was a punchline for parts of the community and by GW themselves. Then GW actually went "...wait, do you guys actually want SoB?" and when they came out the SoB box it was sold out for months! Ad mech and Genestealer cults were both legends from the old rogue trader days, and when GW gave them a chance they found out there's a market for it. When something is supported, people will buy it!
*Thirdly, GW can only know what's profitable if there's something to buy. They wouldn't have any data of if variant IG codexes would make money, because they've never done that. A consumer can only buy what exists. The closet thing non marine armies have had in that vain is campaign boxes, which still tend to be generic for most armies.

You didn't understood the argument, you can read again. I wasn't talking about SM overall, but specifically about DA/BA/DW.

No it would not. That's the game you play : the SM are the main focus of 40K, that's how it is.

So you didn't say this - which this argument directly addresses?

You have a hard time reading, those are two entirely different things. The quote you took here was arguing that even if DA/SW/BA were in a supplement, it wouldn't change much because GW just focus so much on SM. What I was discussing about cost is that DA/BA/SW do not hijack ressources and delay non-SM faction units because GW do not actually use much ressources just to copy paste rules and release half assed fluff.

If your problem with 40K is that it is too centered on SM, DA/BA/SW are not the cause of it : your problem is with SM.

WhiteDog, I wasn't even quoting you specificly, I was making a general statement and was more arguing against TangoTwoBravo's "Invisible Hand of the Market" Comment than anything.

WhiteDog wrote:
The subject of rule bloat is a real question ; but people in this sub are just so jealous of SW/DA/Ba that they cannot even understand the complexity of the subject and what to do to prevent it.

Sure. Go create your own topic that don't have "Marine" right in the title and maybe there people will not speak about the obvious rule bloat that is having so many Space Marines codex.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:
The subject of rule bloat is a real question ; but people in this sub are just so jealous of SW/DA/Ba that they cannot even understand the complexity of the subject and what to do to prevent it.

Sure. Go create your own topic that don't have "Marine" right in the title and maybe there people will not speak about the obvious rule bloat that is having so many Space Marines codex.

You're not even talking about that ??? You're just talking about the usual SW/DA/BA out of frustration.
Nobody here even mention that SM have twice the number of relics, strata and psychic powers than most factions : that's the rule bloat right there. But nonono, the real problem is that some space marine have a codex and others just a supplement ... lal
Did anyone even realized that, for exemple, a Ravenguard librarian has access to twice the number of psychic power than a DA/BA/SW librarian ? And it's the DA/BA/SW that are the source of the bloat ? Really ? ...

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
WhiteDog, I wasn't even quoting you specificly, I was making a general statement and was more arguing against TangoTwoBravo's "Invisible Hand of the Market" Comment than anything.

Ok my bad.

 fraser1191 wrote:
I wouldn't say there's a rules bloat per se. I'd say the problem is that none of its consolidated in one place. The rules out of faith and Fury for loyalists is 20 pages that's with the BT pages which should have been in the If supplement, otherwise it's only 7 pages! Those 7 pages could have easily been added to the codex

I was legitimately surprised that Black Templars were not in the IF book. Agreed on the Chaplain bits.

The problem is that GW needs to separate the rules and the fluff. Buy the codex you get 2 books. The fluff and the "field manual" like with chapter approved

I was wondering if someone else would bring this idea up! I'm totally down for it.

WhiteDog wrote:
Did anyone even realized that, for exemple, a Ravenguard librarian has access to twice the number of psychic power than a DA/BA/SW librarian ? And it's the DA/BA/SW that are the source of the bloat ? Really ? ...

Each having access to different psychic powers is definitely a pretty big source of bloat, really.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:
Did anyone even realized that, for exemple, a Ravenguard librarian has access to twice the number of psychic power than a DA/BA/SW librarian ? And it's the DA/BA/SW that are the source of the bloat ? Really ? ...

Each having access to different psychic powers is definitely a pretty big source of bloat, really.

The increasing number of psychic power is definitly a symptom of bloat : throughout psychic awakening, a few factions gained psychic powers for exemple.

Mostly sm and some Clan specific new powers .

Space Marines got whole new disciplines.

Other factions get one power per sub faction.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Space Marines got whole new disciplines.

Other factions get one power per sub faction.

Yes, same for strata / relics : SM overall got more than all other factions. That's a real problem imo.

I agree. The sheer number of books needed is silly, but the deeper issue for me is that marines are seemingly choking and dominating the game's design space; sneaky marines are better than GSC, shooty ones are better than Tau, fighty ones better than Nids and so on.

WhiteDog wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Stop referencing Psychic Awakening as mandatory. There is every indication that we will be seeing a new edition or codices within the next year or so.

Stop talking out of your ass, you don't know anything about that. And to effectively play a game nowadays you need PA.

Oh. I didn't get that memo.

And in our last game I still kicked the Death Guard all over the table - using only Codex: Dark Angels (& CA'19 for pts).

Game played just fine, so I'm still not wasting $ on Vigilous, &/or PA.

ccs wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Stop referencing Psychic Awakening as mandatory. There is every indication that we will be seeing a new edition or codices within the next year or so.

Stop talking out of your ass, you don't know anything about that. And to effectively play a game nowadays you need PA.

Oh. I didn't get that memo.

And in our last game I still kicked the Death Guard all over the table - using only Codex: Dark Angels (& CA'19 for pts).

Game played just fine, so I'm still not wasting $ on Vigilous, &/or PA.

You NEED to have everything to play "competitively", which is the stupidest thing ever(guess which part of that has the most emphasis). But that seems to be a bed of their own making, not GW.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
So you think that the Dragon's Claws really need Ravenwing Black Knights to be properly represented?

... you have no idea what you are talking about, right? Do you know what Dragon's claws are?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
The Dark Angels are their own faction. They have stuff in common with the Codex Adeptus Astartes but they have their own stuff. It's kinda the point.

The point is, lorewise they are the same as every chapter, each with it's own peculiarities, gamewise they should be the same as every chapter, a selection of custom traits that fit their lore.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
the invisible hand of the marketplace

Woah we found a true believer .

Spoiler:

WhiteDog wrote:
Can we discuss something meaningful to the game and not some drenched out topic that has no relevance whatsoever ?

Yeah, you can. Just click on any other thread in the forum mate, just not on this one if you hate it

.

I was indeed going to stay out, but you really don't know what Ravenwing Black Knights are, do you? They have only ever been available to Dark Angels in the rules and lore. Nobody else has had them in the lore. They are unique models with plasma weapons in accordance with DA lore and not just "veteran bikers." Saying that the Dark Angels are the same lorewise as every other chapter tells me that we have a different operating definition of what lore is.

You can make a custom chapter within the existing rules. You could even make an a Dark Angels Successor Chapter (not that there is an advantage to that besides modeling/lore) with all the Ravenwing Black Knights you could ever want.

Cheers

T2B

So what about Iron Hands terminator sergeants? Why can’t I field them?

Why do DA get special treatment, even above and beyond what other marines get?

 JNAProductions wrote:
So what about Iron Hands terminator sergeants? Why can’t I field them?

For the same reason Raven Guard didn't get special scouts or Vanguard or anything like that. The supplements took existing units over, not adding new ones.

If I had been writing those supplements? You would have seen some more unique stuff added in. Not necessarily Terminator Sergeants in Tactical Squads styled of things--but definitely 'signature units'.

Why do DA get special treatment, even above and beyond what other marines get?

Because they do. Just like how Ultramarines got Tyrannic War Veterans and Black Templars got Crusader Squads.

If you want to argue that Dark Angels should have some of their special units made into generic ones? I won't argue against you on that:


There's 13 unique datasheets that are not named characters. Of those 13? 6(RW and DW Ancient, Champion, and Apothecaries) of them should reasonably be added into the generic list for Marines, with a stratagem/pointed upgrade that could be in a Dark Angels supplement book for Ravenwing or Deathwing.

The argument that Dark Angels/Death Watch/ etc etc should be rolled into the Marine Codex because other subfactions are more unique and deserve their own dexes more, is one of the dumbest goddamn things I've yet read.

By rolling other subfactions into their parent book, you're progressing backwards. You're literally regressing the progress towards other subfactions getting their own dexes - something GW has said they want to do.

Who cares what GW said they want to do? What they want to do right now is what they did in 6th and 7th. That's not progress.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Who cares what GW said they want to do? What they want to do right now is what they did in 6th and 7th. That's not progress.

It's worse. They overly simplified the game and then they piled on layer after layer of bloat from so many sources. I will also say that 6th and to a lesser extent 7th didn't have nearly as many rules sources per army. Discounting forge world stuff, most armies only had their codex which may or may not of had a 6th edition release.

I for one, am of the indifferent opinion. A person will buy the books to his army(s) as he feels are needed. So you only need the Codex/ and BRB to play.

Some folks might feel they are missing out if they do not buy the latest CA, or WD, or what have you publication. I call that hogwash. A person buys the books that interest them, for whatever reason they choose.

The long and short of it is real simple. Folks will make up any number of reasons to buy or not purchase any said book. It is up to the individual to make that decision for themselves.

Because of psychic awakening there is no way to reduce bloat immediately. Looking at marines, taking SW/BA/DA and cutting them to supplements is sensible to reducing errata and reprinting units.

What this doesn't solve is the number of releases or units, those new supplements still take up a release slot the same as a codex would. Those release slots will still want/need accompanying models as well, so if your objective is to make the game less marine centric, it changes nothing.

Psychic awakening imo is less productive than just re-printing a codex, since it just fragments rules, makes people buy unwanted content etc.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
The awesome part is, that the whole problem only exists because GW insist on publishing rules as books.

No, the problem exists because they continue to release items for factions rather than just reach a stopping point.

The whole issue is that all the adeptus astartes factions share a large chunk of their models, but still have unique parts.
Either you have separate books for everyone, then if you update the shared part in any way, you need to re-print all the books.
Or you have the shared part in one book and the unique part in another - which means you need two books to play.
Now you want to give everyone 5-10 pages of updates and suddenly you are running around with three books.
And now we are bloated.

If the rules were digital, an updated or added datasheet or new rules would just directly find their way into your digital rules library and update the entire marine rainbow at once.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I was indeed going to stay out, but you really don't know what Ravenwing Black Knights are, do you?

I know full well what black knights are. You, on the other hand have absolutely no clue what Dragon's Claw are, and you are making a fool of yourself as a result.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
They are unique models with plasma weapons in accordance with DA lore

lol "in accordance to DA lore".

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
and not just "veteran bikers."

So, are they not veterans? Or are they not bikers?
Pretty sure they are both. So they are veteran bikers.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
You can make a custom chapter within the existing rules.

There are tons of things I can't make with the existing rules. There are no official rules to use for Dragon's Claws, for instance.
But you don't know what Dragon's claws are, and cannot even be bothered to google it, lol. Or to read my messages, either.
I mean, it's just ridiculous at this point. This is what I wrote :
"it means the custom chapter lose access to having for instance "bestial" marines (mutated marines in a similar vein to the wulfen, the death company or the dragon's claw. Lots of chapters have similar units)"
Adding emphasis to help you understand.
Nobody ever compared Dragon's claw to your precious black knights. I compared them to other "bestial marines" units like the wulfen or the death company. Now none of those units are dark angels, but if they were, you would totally be clutching pearls about how unique your brand of bestial marines are, and how it should totally not be available as a generic option, so only the GW-established chapters (and actually, a subset of them) have access to those options, because feth creativity and feth making your own army, that's why. And that's petty and ridiculous.

But yeah, the "invisible hand of the free market" seems to be coming for you, have you seen how there are no chapter-specific primaris units? Prepare to be rolled into CSM, because those are the future.

DA/SW/BA/BT are the because they are historical grown in the lore

They are unique to a point that a vanilla Marine list could do the same but better
They were "Meta" only if GW was lacy with rules updates, like let them have 2 heavy weapons per 5 Terminators while vanilla had changed to 1 (or new weapon profiles per FAQ while points remaind the same)

there were some unique options to units which were expanded over time as 1-2 different units did not justify a Codex on its own (otherwise we would need one for each Eldar ship and Ork Clan too)

DA are not more different than any other Chapter of the first founding and there was the time people used the SW Codex to play Deathwing as it represented the fuffy list better and stronger than the DA book.


Having one Codex SM with generic options that fit all Chapters, as Eldar or Orks have, would not change the possibilities to field a fluffy list of that Chapter but solve a lot of problems we had over several Editions now

I mean it would be 1 page of rules/units options/upgrades per Chapter to get the unique stuff done

I'd argue that in the case of TS and DG it actually hurt the faction overall (CSM).
TS especially has an uniquely small roster for no reason at all. Because half the stuff that TS had is basically gone poof. You could've easily handled their unique stuff via access on a page.
Same with DG, which have it even worse in some regards. I mean the infantry legion doesn't have dedicated heavy firesuport infantry?