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.

Sageheart wrote:I like the new SM codexs, i think they are really interesting and add new things to the game. i would like there to be some way to do the saem thing with orks, eldar, IG, etc.

Of course, everyone likes the fluff. The more fluff and story the better. Rules-wise, though, that's Codex Creep happening why everyone likes them. Name one thing the Vanillas can do that the BA can't? Now name all the things the BA can do that the SM can't. No units specific to SM... no penalty of any sort for the BA... but plenty of bonuses, special units, more options. The only thing they don't have is the Vanillas special characters, but that's just fine because they get their own. Take SW as another example. Superior AND cheaper basic units (grey hunter is 1 point less than a 'nilla, has a ccw, and has all the SW special abilities), better psykers, better everything but wah wah we can't combat squad.

Maybe if that could be the defining issues for an all encompassing Marine chapter codex is that different chapters have different psyker powers and different special characters combinations to set apart different chapters (I am so sick of seeing Shrike/Calgar together in the same army for competative fluff-defying cheese). I see no reason why Grey Hunters should be better and cheaper than SM tactical marines, or why devastators from a precise and well organized army are incapable of co-ordinating their fire like the Long Fangs from a savage and charge-happy army can. Because it sells models and sells books when everyone wants the shiney new better-for-cheaper easy win Codex.

You can use a vanilla codex to make a viable SW or BA or DA or BT army if you could just get over needing all those little leg-up special rules and bonuses from having a 'special' codex. If you want white scars, take more bikes, if you want dark angels, paint your guys dark green, BA take more jump packs, etc. They don't all need their own rulebook. If everyone is on the same page ruleswise, with the only differences being between special characters and psykic powers, it would make for a much more even game.

Even better to have some special charater archetypes like 'master psyker', 'hit and run captain' and so on that are available to whichever chapter, but not in conjunction with each other (like Marneus+Shrike leading some army together as I mentioned before). The BA 'Death Company' doesn't need a fullon codex overhaul, it could just be an assualt squad with some special rules possibilities for add-on options you pay for. Some other home-made chapter could call them the 'kamikazi' or the 'bound-for-doom' or whatever depending on what you want to invent.

There is just NO reason other than fluff, for the BA to have so many advantages over smurfs, yet no drawback. A balanced codex for all chapters with options for customizing would do far more good for all marine players.

There's this idea that the game is better when there's more and more special rules. It's a terrible idea. You will not have more interesting games because you can say your yellow marines have a special rule for being yellow.

When we've had these options in the past it didn't lead to gamers discovering a wealth of diverse options, it led to them picking the handful of best options, and the result was no greater diversity.

What we need is a solid core game and solid core books. As an ork player I love the variety and range of armies I can build in one book. I really don't think there's any value at all in giving me a special rule if I say 'my boyz are goffs'.

No special rules for being yellow (or red marines, or periwinkle blue - ahem - space wolf 'grey')? are you mad?!

Well Orks have a special rule for being red... but oh YEAH! they pay POINTS for that, and aren't given leg-ups just for having a shiney new book, they still follow the same rules as all orks do. Works for them.

What you don't want to see a 'Bad Moons' codex? Who doesn't want a separate ruleset for all the major Ork tribes? Then maybe the Marines can wait 5 years between updates while each Tau sept gets its own separate army list. On top of that I really want to see a Tallarn codex that makes it different from a Mordian codex.

How far do you want to take it, Marines? The IG is supposedly the most diverse and biggest fighting force in the galaxy, but they can do it with 1 codex. Superhuman my arse.

I'm still waiting on my Alaitoc codex... I hate being lumped in with all those generic 'nameless farseers and guardians' Eldar armies.

I want an Il-Kaith codex (Bonesingers) or an Yme-Loc codex (constructs edit: tanks, vypers, walkers and titans).

Mahtamori wrote:I want an Il-Kaith codex (Bonesingers) or an Yme-Loc codex (constructs).

I want space marine players to grow some balls, Warhammer is a game. Why do people play games? To have fun. If you want to WAAC then you have to accept that cant use everything exactly as you want, If i wanted to win at all costs I wouldn't field Chaos Spawns even if I do really like them.
If you like white scar's you dont need Jervis Johnson to write you a 100 page book, you just buy bikes and play with them, atleast your codex gives you the facility to make a legal list like that.

[/rant]