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.

And every squad gets FNP from their apothecary and invulnerable saves from shields...

bhsman wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:But what I'd prefer, if a Marine codex HAS to come out, is Codex Iron Snakes

They're a Codex Chapter, so just use Codex: SM. If you really want to play them, use the Red Scorpion rules from Imperial Armour and upgrade a model to an Apothecary for X points or so. Or, just start a letter-writing campaign to GW and ask them to do stuff like Index Astartes again

They arnt a codex chapter at all- I mean, while I'm not to familiar with the history fo the blood angles, or dark angels, they [The Iron Snakes] rub off as way more unique then either of them [The angel chapters, amongst others who actually dont have codex's', so I don't have a gripe with]. And you get to add in a bit of mystery connected maybe to the two unknown legions, since they have an unknown primarch themselves...

I wouldnt mind having specific rules for creating independent characters who can act independent of a squad entirely like Priad did in the opening section of the Iron Snakes book. For all the stuff people say about space wolf fluff bucking authority and such, its the Iron Snakes strike as the most independent minded chapter (after all, what other chapter has democratic elements in place in the grimdark universe of 40K? )


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Though annoyingly, reading over the the Iron Snakes entry on lexicanum, someone edited out all the primarch stuff, and put them under the Utramarines name. Which is totally unfounded, IMO.

Yeah, every chapter should get their own codex. Every single chapter. Codex: SM is only really for Ultramarines anyway, everyone else says feth the codex and does their own thing, and are so wildly divergent they need their own books.

How about no? We've got enough with SW, SM, BA, DA, and BT. We don't need more Marines.

Aw, stop the cryin' already. If the market can support an Iron Snakes codex, so be it. If the idea bothers you, blame Abnett for writing an interesting book about an oddly divergent chapter.

You're never going to get an equal treatment of all the factions until all the factions have parity in sales and you can't magically create those sales just be releasing stuff for non-marine factions. Affirmative Action for 40k armies won't work because you can't tell people which armies to like, collect and play. If people are happy playing marines against marines, who has the right to tell them they're wrong?

You're never going to get an equal treatment of all the factions until all the factions have parity in sales and you can't magically create those sales just be releasing stuff for non-marine factions.

You'll never get those sales if you keep making more and more Marine gak and leaving said armies in the dust, either.

Marines make up such a large percentage of GW overall sales that they pay for everything else to happen. Without all this marine stuff there would be disproportionally less or no 40k all.

You won't get those sales up either if you don't give non marine options to new players.

I went to a GW store once and said I was looking to start playing. The first thing they did was say "Here's the Space Marines, the most all around army you can play." They didn't even bother to ask about what I was looking for.

Don't bother, those redshirts are often not very smart.

Sidstyler wrote:Yeah, every chapter should get their own codex. Every single chapter. Codex: SM is only really for Ultramarines anyway, everyone else says feth the codex and does their own thing, and are so wildly divergent they need their own books.

How about no? We've got enough with SW, SM, BA, DA, and BT. We don't need more Marines.

You really misunderstood my original post, I think. My opinion is that there should NOT necessarily be more marine codexes. BUT if they are totally unavoidable, I'd much prefer really cool, interesting, and unique chapters like the Iron snakes to get these slots, rather then the Blood Angels who seem much more similar to the Ultras. Though generally speaking, I find many of the original Legion based chapters boring (though, ironically, of them I actually like both the BA, and the Ultramarines alot). That said, I'd be curious about a Raven Guard Codex if that ever came out.

It seems I did.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:Yeah, every chapter should get their own codex. Every single chapter. Codex: SM is only really for Ultramarines anyway, everyone else says feth the codex and does their own thing, and are so wildly divergent they need their own books.

How about no? We've got enough with SW, SM, BA, DA, and BT. We don't need more Marines.

You really misunderstood my original post, I think. My opinion is that there should NOT necessarily be more marine codexes. BUT if they are totally unavoidable, I'd much prefer really cool, interesting, and unique chapters like the Iron snakes to get these slots, rather then the Blood Angels who seem much more similar to the Ultras. Though generally speaking, I find many of the original Legion based chapters boring (though, ironically, of them I actually like both the BA, and the Ultramarines alot). That said, I'd be curious about a Raven Guard Codex if that ever came out.

Well, BA should not be similar to vanilla Marines.
For this, I'd refer to the BA codex in 3rd ed.
The whole army had furious charge.
GW, bring it back!

Having way more JPs and HtH options is good enough to differentiate them for me. But BA do need lower JP costs to get competitive with the newly-cheap (and tough) 5E Rhinos. 4 pts /model is probably about right.

To imagine that a JP used to cost +10 pts on a basic AM...


Army-wide Furious Charge isn't what BA need, as they would mass-DS via JPs. What BA need is the Vanguard rule made army wide (may Assault after DS).

Yeah! 50 or 60 roid raging Space Marines riding rockets of fire straight into the heart of the enemy!! That's a marine army I could spend some money on!

Centurion.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Army-wide Furious Charge isn't what BA need, as they would mass-DS via JPs. What BA need is the Vanguard rule made army wide (may Assault after DS).

I agree that an army-wide furious charge is not very helpful.
It does not improve the game dynamics for BA.
What I could imagine is furious charge for JP Marines and Termies, maybe optional.
Moreover, the possibility to rage (move forward D6'') for some units prior to the game.
Assault after DS (for JP and Termies) would be a very nice option.

Are you guys high?

Furious charge is an amazing ability for BA. The ability to swing BEFORE your enemy (well anything I4 or slower) with an easier change to would is amazingly helpful, especially in the new edition. I would be greatly disappointed if we lost FA in the new Dex, as i cannot count how many times my VAS has eliminated 10 model Space marine squads before they even get a chance to swing.

FC is nice, provided you get to charge, assuming you survive the enemy's massed fire when you DS.

DS&Assault means you get to Assault in the first place - this promotes very aggressive play.

I think DS+Assault in the same turn for an entire army would make them a bit of a no brainer. I can't see GW giving it out.

All of the stuff you mentioned are in the blood angels codex that you can download from the gw site.

Da Boss wrote:I think DS+Assault in the same turn for an entire army would make them a bit of a no brainer. I can't see GW giving it out.

Because it's totally b0rken IMBA OP on Vanguard right now?

BA need an actual, tactical reason to take Assault Termies, along with JPs over Rhinos, and that would do it.

The catch with is that you need to land the Assault Squad within 6+d6" (assuming you can still Run) of an enemy, *after* scatter. Play too "safe", and they're stranded, and can't even shoot. Play too close, and you suffer a DS mishap, probably taking them out of the game.

Not being able to shoot, and the DS mishap table balance things, just fine I think.

I could easily see GW doing this, and I could easily see BA players using it.

BA need an actual, tactical reason to take Assault Termies, along with JPs over Rhinos, and that would do it.

This would be a swing in a direction that is worth to be considered:
Assault Termies and JP with FC and mechanisms to bring them early into assault range.

I don't see that working. It pushes on broken. The whole purpose for not allowing DS+assault is a fairness thing. Ranged units have to actually have some chance of staving off an attack. As it is, things are as balanced as they can be between assault and ranged combat something like that sets a precedent that swings the pendulum further back in favor to assault.

If the issue is JP over rhinos, its simply JP's get to deep strike and rhinos don't its otherwise a direct trade off with little need to be improved. Advantage is that the JP's deepstrike can get a unit to an enemy sooner, regardless of otherwise intervenening terrain.

I think just updating the Assault Terminators rules and points to be "standard" is enough to make them worth while; it makes little sense to make them anything more when it isn't something they're reknowned for.

itys about time they got a face lift since they dont technically have a codex (im sorry but a pdf just isnt a codex to me!)

Technically they DO have a codex. Technically it is a Tijuana back-alley abortion, replete with lighter and coat hanger.

How about deepstriking onto a unit doesn't kill you? I don't understand how squishy things can kill armoured things that have landed on them anyway. "mishap" is fine for teleportation but it makes deepstriking jumpers look weak next to infiltrators. And lets face it, if I was dropping from the sky in the 41st millenia with an powered, armoured suit, I'd be shooting at s*!t all the way down... oh yeah!

Because they want to make deep strike as awful as possible except for vets in valks

gruntboy wrote:How about deepstriking onto a unit doesn't kill you? I don't understand how squishy things can kill armoured things that have landed on them anyway. "mishap" is fine for teleportation but it makes deepstriking jumpers look weak next to infiltrators. And lets face it, if I was dropping from the sky in the 41st millenia with an powered, armoured suit, I'd be shooting at s*!t all the way down... oh yeah!

This happens far more than you'd think was feasable IRL.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Da Boss wrote:I think DS+Assault in the same turn for an entire army would make them a bit of a no brainer. I can't see GW giving it out.

Because it's totally b0rken IMBA OP on Vanguard right now?

Vanguard are limited by being Elites, being way too overpriced and competing with better stuff.
Which means you can't have that many of them, and they can be gunned down after they do their thing. If you had lots of units doing it, and they were cheap to have other toys too, then it gets nastier.

If anyone deserves DS+Assault, it's Daemons. Marines should get tech, not outlandish megaultrasuperhuman abilities. Cuz ya know, converting to Chaos makes you lose all your special powers to gain mediocre ones :p

Arschbombe wrote: Affirmative Action for 40k armies won't work because you can't tell people which armies to like, collect and play. If people are happy playing marines against marines, who has the right to tell them they're wrong?

QFT and quite possibly sigged.

Somnicide wrote:

Arschbombe wrote: Affirmative Action for 40k armies won't work because you can't tell people which armies to like, collect and play. If people are happy playing marines against marines, who has the right to tell them they're wrong?

QFT and quite possibly sigged.

But you can tell people which armies not to like. By not updating its rules or models for a decade, for example. GW should stop telling people to not like DE.