Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

niv-mizzet wrote:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/583414.page#6606741

Have an exalt.

Well I put my 2 cents in with a pinch of humor as this will typically go nowhere. Although, I'm curious now as why people feel so strongly against this. I understand that SW have different rules and units but aren't you guys summarizing all the differences here? Why can't it be done in a space marine codex just like the BT? Personally, I think it makes sense and having a BA, SW, BT, DA codex that is separate than the SM codex doesn't. One could almost say since some chapters are so different let's make a codex for everyone of them and give them special units and gear all. Codex Red Scorpions - sure. Astral Claws - why not? White Scars? Let's give them a new unit that's like a space marine bike stacked onto itself with some Mogul ascetic. I never heard of centurion space marines prior to 6th edition and now its cannon. It can be done so why shouldn't it be done?

Or, how about this - roll SW, DA, BA, BT and maybe GK into a single Codex and keep the codex-compliant chapters in their own book. Solves a lot of the "too much extra space!" arguments and it'd be built for divergence.

Inkubas wrote:
Although, I'm curious now as why people feel so strongly against this. Why can't it be done in a space marine codex just like the BT?

Have you considered that it's because it would be done like BT that SW players/fans feel so strongly against it? We now have a text book (literally) case of what the result looks like when a divergent Chapter gets rolled in. It doesn't look good...

It can be done so why shouldn't it be done?

It could just as easily be asked: "just because it can be done why should it?" We have an answer to that question: because GW would feth it right up. Taking the BT case study as a template, a rolled SW would have half or more of their stuff cut out and the rest hammered and bent into the Codex so that what remains no longer feels like SW, but rather Grey Smurfs.

So, like I said before: can they? Sure, quite easily, in fact. Should they? No, probably not, going on what happened to BT.

I also believe that, as a whole, any game should be GROWING over time. There should always be a new class, a new skill, a new ability, a new unit or new content in general. The game's mechanics and universe should always be growing as long as the company wants to make money off it.

The market experts can guess, but they can never really know if, when they put out the next new thing, if THAT will be the thing that gets the next customer onto the slippery slope where he forks over a grand or more to GW stores.

Culling options, like removing characters or units, eliminates some of those possibilities. If I really liked the idea of elite scouts for SW or the death company for BA, but wasn't invested in the game yet, hearing that the coming codex has omitted them might just send me off to a different wargame.

TL;DR moar content! moar units! not less!

Some of us would like more different options, like something not in power armour, using bolters, rhinos, and having ATSKNF. Maybe an entirely different faction?

Seven different flavours of power armour is hardly variety.

Legit point. Anyone here play BT before they were rolled and enjoy the new change? What changes improved and what didn't? I'm under the stance that it was an improvement so when thinking SW being rolled, it would be for the better. Never considered it like that. Changes things...

Inkubas wrote:
Legit point. Anyone here play BT before they were rolled and enjoy the new change? What changes improved and what didn't? I'm under the stance that it was an improvement so when thinking SW being rolled, it would be for the better. Never considered it like that. Changes things...

Oh I'd be happy to have Thunderfire Cannons and an actual flyer, but losing elite, backfield-outflanking Wolf Scouts would be very sad.

 Blacksails wrote:
Some of us would like more different options, like something not in power armour, using bolters, rhinos, and having ATSKNF. Maybe an entirely different faction?

Seven different flavours of power armour is hardly variety.

there are different ones...

Nids
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Tau
Deamons
IG
Knights
Necrons
Orks
Sisters

that's a lot of options to choose from...

But as we've gone over, round and round... they could, but to the players of the armies who play them, it wouldn't be the same.

I mean in reality, stat wise they could roll all the units int one, their base stat lines (in codex sm) are the same, it's just weapon load out for a chunk of them, that make them diffrnet... of course, people like me, enjoy the many pages of fluff in our codex, while i don'at really care about UM fluff...

I'm aware there are other armies, but if someone is advocating greater diversity in the game, I'd expect them to advocate greater variety, not just more colours of power armoured duded.

I understand the players that play these codices will disagree with me, and I never expected anything different. I just can't help but think the game would be better if they never existed as their own in the first place. Hence why I think they should be rolled in.

Let me ask this... how would it be better?

Serious question... I don't see how it is better or worse...

well generaly speaking... the only thing i see is the time put into the codex, but in the case of the ba, they had a dual codex in second, a mini dex in 3rd, a wd crapdex in 4th and a full one in 5th...

Lets just go back to third edition then. All Space Marines are the same. No chapter tactics as such, but you could get a digital codex (called a White Dwarf magazine for some reason) for 15$ that adds special rules, wargear and a character or two for each unique flavor of BA, DA, SW, WS, RG and so on, but only if your opponent has read that magazine err codex and agrees.

Problem solved. I'm sure perfect game balance will ensue and you only need to own one codex.

Durandal wrote:
Lets just go back to third edition then. All Space Marines are the same. No chapter tactics as such, but you could get a digital codex (called a White Dwarf magazine for some reason) for 15$ that adds special rules, wargear and a character or two for each unique flavor of BA, DA, SW, WS, RG and so on, but only if your opponent has read that magazine err codex and agrees.

Problem solved. I'm sure perfect game balance will ensue and you only need to own one codex.

BA, DA, SW all had their own 3rd edition mini dex

heck, 3rd was the forst time they had a codex space marines, 2nd was SW, angels of death and UM...

Brother Weasel wrote:
Let me ask this... how would it be better?

Serious question... I don't see how it is better or worse...

well generaly speaking... the only thing i see is the time put into the codex, but in the case of the ba, they had a dual codex in second, a mini dex in 3rd, a wd crapdex in 4th and a full one in 5th...

It would give every marine player more options without being forced into picking one book for a handful of units. It would allow for other, more diverse army books in the same codex cycle (assuming GW would still behave mostly the same), or allowing just quicker updates for every other book. It would stop the marine power creep, where each one has generally been better than the one before it, and BA and SW have generally just been vanilla +1 in 5th.

The biggest drawbacks would be the loss of some of the fluff printed in the new book, and cutting some of the lesser used characters that likely wouldn't be missed too much. In return, each generic HQ character would have more options to re-create most of those characters anyways. The fluff aspect would certainly get some people riled up, but I don't have a horse in this race so I'm largely indifferent. As a Salamander fan, I was fine with the amount of fluff for them, so opinions vary.

Now, I admit BT were a bit of a hack job, but that's because of implementation, not the concept. If GW were any good at game design and rules writing, rolling all the marines in would work out just fine. That and I don't think a new codex would have really fixed a whole lot, or made them play like they're represented in the fluff. Its not like 5th ed Wolves were known for being an assault oriented army on the table top.

I also don't think you need a dozen special characters and other minor differences in wargear to make a unique force. Clearly I'm in a minority in this thread, though I imagine this thread draws a lot more fans of Wolves than people who are indifferent.

Brother Weasel wrote:

Durandal wrote:
Lets just go back to third edition then. All Space Marines are the same. No chapter tactics as such, but you could get a digital codex (called a White Dwarf magazine for some reason) for 15$ that adds special rules, wargear and a character or two for each unique flavor of BA, DA, SW, WS, RG and so on, but only if your opponent has read that magazine err codex and agrees.

Problem solved. I'm sure perfect game balance will ensue and you only need to own one codex.

BA, DA, SW all had their own 3rd edition mini dex

heck, 3rd was the forst time they had a codex space marines, 2nd was SW, angels of death and UM...

And this goes all the way back to 2nd, I still have my 2nd and 3rd Edition Codex: Space Wolves along with the 5th.
They never had to much in common with Codex: Space Marines in any edition, but 1st.

 Blacksails wrote:

Brother Weasel wrote:
Let me ask this... how would it be better?

Serious question... I don't see how it is better or worse...

well generaly speaking... the only thing i see is the time put into the codex, but in the case of the ba, they had a dual codex in second, a mini dex in 3rd, a wd crapdex in 4th and a full one in 5th...

It would give every marine player more options without being forced into picking one book for a handful of units. It would allow for other, more diverse army books in the same codex cycle (assuming GW would still behave mostly the same), or allowing just quicker updates for every other book. It would stop the marine power creep, where each one has generally been better than the one before it, and BA and SW have generally just been vanilla +1 in 5th.

The biggest drawbacks would be the loss of some of the fluff printed in the new book, and cutting some of the lesser used characters that likely wouldn't be missed too much. In return, each generic HQ character would have more options to re-create most of those characters anyways. The fluff aspect would certainly get some people riled up, but I don't have a horse in this race so I'm largely indifferent. As a Salamander fan, I was fine with the amount of fluff for them, so opinions vary.

Now, I admit BT were a bit of a hack job, but that's because of implementation, not the concept. If GW were any good at game design and rules writing, rolling all the marines in would work out just fine. That and I don't think a new codex would have really fixed a whole lot, or made them play like they're represented in the fluff. Its not like 5th ed Wolves were known for being an assault oriented army on the table top.

I also don't think you need a dozen special characters and other minor differences in wargear to make a unique force. Clearly I'm in a minority in this thread, though I imagine this thread draws a lot more fans of Wolves than people who are indifferent.

I'll agree with you.. it could be done, it could be done very well... Slight increase in pages....

BUT

I think the part the SW and my fellow BA players are stuck on.. is that we don't think GW could do it well... so we'd rather them not hack up our armies. (we've seen BT, we know how the Knight Dex is, we've seen the Suppliments...)

i also agree about SC... we never used em in 3rd and 4th... tired of them in 5th and 6th

 Blacksails wrote:

I understand the players that play these codices will disagree with me, and I never expected anything different. I just can't help but think the game would be better if they never existed as their own in the first place. Hence why I think they should be rolled in.

The thing is, it's a bit late for that now. The genie's out of the bottle, and punching it in the face is going to make the fans of the genie upset.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

I understand the players that play these codices will disagree with me, and I never expected anything different. I just can't help but think the game would be better if they never existed as their own in the first place. Hence why I think they should be rolled in.

The thing is, it's a bit late for that now. The genie's out of the bottle, and punching it in the face is going to make the fans of the genie upset.

Which I'm well aware of.

I thought it was understood we were talking in hypotheticals.

 Blacksails wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

I understand the players that play these codices will disagree with me, and I never expected anything different. I just can't help but think the game would be better if they never existed as their own in the first place. Hence why I think they should be rolled in.

The thing is, it's a bit late for that now. The genie's out of the bottle, and punching it in the face is going to make the fans of the genie upset.

Which I'm well aware of.

I thought it was understood we were talking in hypotheticals.

Well, yes, hypothetically it'd potentially be better for the game if the variant Space Marine Codices didn't get released, but that's four editions back now. It'd be a lot more useful to debate hypotheticals that have something to do with the current state of the game, and not "what if this hadn't happened two decades ago?!"...

NO.

 Blacksails wrote:
Some of us would like more different options, like something not in power armour, using bolters, rhinos, and having ATSKNF. Maybe an entirely different faction?

Seven different flavours of power armour is hardly variety.

That just comes down to GW's focus. GW could release all SM in a single month or maybe two and just copy/paste codices with a couple of updates for the new edition and I'd be fine with that. Still don't want them rolled in to one epic codex.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Once people stop insisting that 20+ units can be axed and dozens of uniaue wargear options too wuthout losing the feel and style of the army, I'll stop pointung out how obviously wrong that is.

Sigh... Okay, how many times would you like us to tell you that:

1) wolves do not have 20+ unique units.
2) no-one was removing those units. If you lost Swiftclaws and gained SM Bikes I hardly believe any of you would cry out.
3) having +1S PW is hardly a unique weapon.

Just keep Grey Hunters, keep Blood Claws, keep Wolf Scouts and keep some of your special characters.
Paint them blue, add the word "Wolf" everywhere and call them Space Wolves. Losing a couple of wargear options doesn't mean they are instantly Ultrasmurfs.

 soomemafia wrote:


Just keep Grey Hunters, keep Blood Claws, keep Wolf Scouts and keep some of your special characters.
Paint them blue, add the word "Wolf" everywhere and call them Space Wolves. Losing a couple of wargear options doesn't mean they are instantly Ultrasmurfs.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Oxayotl: Yes, hyperbole and intentionally wrong comparisons are the best way convey accurate information and opinions.

Yeah, but that is not their objective. They just try to be funny and witty, you know. They try very hard, even though not always with success.

Waaaghpower wrote:
We've got a historical example of a codex being folded in, (One which was ancient, had fairly little unique gear, and was hurting for an update.) That Codex was completely shat upon, lost most its best and unique things, and the general consensus is that it was worse than not being updated at all.

Because being updated while not folded does prevent from being “shat upon” ?
I think we have plenty of evidence contrary to that.

Brother Weasel wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Some of us would like more different options, like something not in power armour, using bolters, rhinos, and having ATSKNF. Maybe an entirely different faction?

Seven different flavours of power armour is hardly variety.

there are different ones... […]
Sisters

Well, Sisters qualify as they do not have ATSKNF, but they have all the rest ! Still, they have way more room for huge variation from C:SM because of their fluff.

Fandarel wrote:
Really?

If i would lose my Choser of the Slain, i would be pissed!
If i would lose my Thunderwolves, i would be pissed!
If i would lose my unique Psiweapons, i would be pissed!
If i would lose my Wolveclaws, i would be pissed!
If i would lose my Saga of the ..., i would be pissed!

Any Questions?

Yes, I do have one. Why on earth do you believe you would keep all that in the next edition of you codex ? I mean, apart from Thunderwolves that are not going away because models, I am sure any of it can just go poof anyway.
Oh, and another question, also. Why do you think SW should get power weapons+1 that are not available to any other force of the Imperium ?

Rather than roll up everything into a newer, bigger codex, at the very least release Codex: Space Marines FIRST next edition, so players of the other chapters won't feel totally boned.

I am not saying I want the Codex Marines units Dark Angels can't use, but I do want my units that are the exact same between the two to function the same. I really hate how bad my scouts are compared to Codex Marines scouts. Not being able to take a teleport homer really hurts their viability. I also really hate that I'm forced to bring teleport homers on my bikes for what's essentially +6 points a model over Codex Marine bikers.

If they made The Big Book of Space Marines and released every power armor army into one $100 giant volume, I wouldn't have an issue with it. The thing that needs to be addressed, though, is the stuff that's the same between the codices, not the things that are different.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Oh, and another question, also. Why do you think SW should get power weapons+1 that are not available to any other force of the Imperium ?

Yes Power Weapons +1, that cost as much as a Relic Blade or Power Fist.

 soomemafia wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Once people stop insisting that 20+ units can be axed and dozens of uniaue wargear options too wuthout losing the feel and style of the army, I'll stop pointung out how obviously wrong that is.

Sigh... Okay, how many times would you like us to tell you that:

1) wolves do not have 20+ unique units.
2) no-one was removing those units. If you lost Swiftclaws and gained SM Bikes I hardly believe any of you would cry out.
3) having +1S PW is hardly a unique weapon.

Just keep Grey Hunters, keep Blood Claws, keep Wolf Scouts and keep some of your special characters.
Paint them blue, add the word "Wolf" everywhere and call them Space Wolves. Losing a couple of wargear options doesn't mean they are instantly Ultrasmurfs.

1.) Yes they do? There are over 20 units who cannot be replicated inthe SM codex by simply adjusting the available wargear.In Niz-Mivvets review he found 19, but the Wolf Priest still has a different function than a Chaplain (PE over Hatred) and Wolf Lords are different from Chapter Masters, if only by 1 Wound and the lack of Orbital Bombardment.
So no, not 20+ units who are more varied than the colors of the rainbow, but yes, 20+ Unique units.

2.) If we lost any -Claw unit, I'd be annoyed. The fluff, function, rules, and stats all have a pretty high variance compared to the nearest codex equivalent.

3.) Of course not. That's why we have dozens of other unique options. But thank you for pointing out that one thing we have available to us isn't totally unique.


Seriously though, by the logic in this thread, Tactical Marines, Scouts, Bikes, Assault Marines, Veterans, Cebturions, Terminators.... Almost every unit in the Space Marine codex could just be one unit, because it's just the wargear and a couple of stats that are different.

Waaaghpower wrote:
the Wolf Priest still has a different function than a Chaplain (PE over Hatred) and Wolf Lords are different from Chapter Masters, if only by 1 Wound and the lack of Orbital Bombardment.

That is nitpicking at its best. How does giving PE rather Hatred here makes the Wolf Priest rules more faithful to its stuff ? Yeah, I know, for absolutely no reason. The Wolf Priest did not specifically study all the weakness and perks of everything he ever fights, and he is not giving that knowledge over to his unit. He is just telling his pal how the enemies are very very bad guys and so his pups start being really angry at them.
How then is PE better to represent his fluff ?
As for Wolf Lord having one less wound, how the hell is that supposed to be meaningful of anything ?
Seriously, I assume you are either quite new to 40k, or the Space Wolves are an exception, because there are quite often much much more drastic change on two different iterations of the very same unit when a new codex edition comes up.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Seriously though, by the logic in this thread, Tactical Marines, Scouts, Bikes, Assault Marines, Veterans, Cebturions, Terminators.... Almost every unit in the Space Marine codex could just be one unit, because it's just the wargear and a couple of stats that are different.

Now you are being silly.

I'M NOT SAYING THEY'RE major differences. But they are just that: Differences. All I was pointing out was that they did have something unique, at least a little bit, because soneone else said that there weren't 20+ unique units.

I would still love to see a mock-up of the hypothetical super-codex that incorporates all the marine armies.

I'm having trouble imagining what some of the pages look like, such as the simple assault marine page, which would need to explain what can be taken and point BA and SW players to their respective armories, and also give SW players a chance to remove their sarge, and lower their WS and BS by 1, while adding berserk charge and headstrong.

In addition to the scary complexity of also making Death company an upgrade offshoot of them as has been previously mentioned a couple times.

I can't imagine it as anything less than an incomprehensible ugly mess, but if someone threw up a mockup, I might be surprised by the result.