Switch Theme:

Condensing Codicies  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




 Lord Damocles wrote:
 Gert wrote:


If your argument is that the Nemesis Claw shouldn't have rules because they're not different from Legionnaires does the same logic apply to the likes of Berzerkers?
Berserkers are just CCW armed Legionnaires with axes instead of swords. Should Berzerkers be ditched because they're not different enough?

Yes.

Berzerkers should be what happens when you give a Chaos Marine unit the Mark of Khorne. That way you could have Berzerker Havoks, Berzerker Bikers, Berzerkers with bolters, etc. as well. MORE options in fact!


Ahh the glory of the 3.5 dex lives on.

That said, the weird kill team division thing is a weird hill to stand on Gert/Breton, as it's entirely possible for Kill team to exist entirely away from Warhammer 40k. After all I don't see complaints that Cawdor haven't got 40k rules for example.

Further to this, rumours say 11th might be around earlier than expected.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/01/26 19:48:34


 
   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






Can't you just add Killteams to 40k with White Dwarf/digital only publication? It seems overkill to me to print new codex for one or a handful of Killteams.
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





 Lord Damocles wrote:
 Gert wrote:
So in your opinion, should Kill Team not exist?

What does that have to do with rules/faction bloat in 40K?



Kill Team is where those new Factions/units/etc often get their release.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





Somewhere in Canada

 Lord Damocles wrote:
 Gert wrote:


If your argument is that the Nemesis Claw shouldn't have rules because they're not different from Legionnaires does the same logic apply to the likes of Berzerkers?
Berserkers are just CCW armed Legionnaires with axes instead of swords. Should Berzerkers be ditched because they're not different enough?

Yes.

Berzerkers should be what happens when you give a Chaos Marine unit the Mark of Khorne. That way you could have Berzerker Havoks, Berzerker Bikers, Berzerkers with bolters, etc. as well. MORE options in fact!


Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but man am I glad you don't run the company.

I'm only in this game for as long as the range and the possibilities continue to grow, or at least stay stable. The minute the range begins to contract, I'm out, because I know from experience that all the factions I love will be the first on the block, while faction that I wouldn't piss on to save from a fire will continue to be in every box set, get a range refresh/ large release every edition, the protagonists for 80-90% of all licensed content and that they will continue to have meaningful distinctions to their subfactions forever, despite having their own entire separate game where such things are more appropriate.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/01/26 20:28:06


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 PenitentJake wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:
 Gert wrote:


If your argument is that the Nemesis Claw shouldn't have rules because they're not different from Legionnaires does the same logic apply to the likes of Berzerkers?
Berserkers are just CCW armed Legionnaires with axes instead of swords. Should Berzerkers be ditched because they're not different enough?

Yes.

Berzerkers should be what happens when you give a Chaos Marine unit the Mark of Khorne. That way you could have Berzerker Havoks, Berzerker Bikers, Berzerkers with bolters, etc. as well. MORE options in fact!


Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but man am I glad you don't run the company.

I'm only in this game for as long as the range and the possibilities continue to grow, or at least stay stable. The minute the range begins to contract, I'm out, because I know from experience that all the factions I love will be the first on the block, while faction that I wouldn't piss on to save from a fire will continue to be in every box set, get a range refresh/ large release every edition, the protagonists for 80-90% of all licensed content and that they will continue to have meaningful distinctions to their subfactions forever, despite having their own entire separate game where such things are more appropriate.

You seem to be more concerned with having to buy an extra book, than actually having more options.

My example for Berzerkers would give you more options than World Eaters have currently, for example, and would allow for such Berzerker units to exist outside of World Eater specific armies. You don't need more individual factions or more rule[books]s to have more options or more models.


I assume that you object to Marines getting such disproportionate focus given your post, yet my suggested list of consolidations MOSTLY reduces the number of Marine variants, which would BENEFIT your non-Marine factions.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





Somewhere in Canada

 Lord Damocles wrote:

You seem to be more concerned with having to buy an extra book, than actually having more options.

My example for Berzerkers would give you more options than World Eaters have currently, for example, and would allow for such Berzerker units to exist outside of World Eater specific armies. You don't need more individual factions or more rule[books]s to have more options or more models.


In isolation, your suggestion of representing the Berzerkers unit with the rules for Legionnaires + the Mark of Khorne doesn't necessarily reduce the available units to players. But the problem is that your suggestion DOESN'T exist in isolation. How flexible can you make the basic Legionnaire data sheet? Can it be used to represent all of the divergences that are possible with a dex for each God?

Units can diverge on composition, load out, special rules and models. Does your single datasheet idea have the capacity to do all that? The models are a somewhat separate issue - if the datasheet allows you to build a unit looks like acts like Berzerkers (ie. no psyker, geared for close combat with axes, advantages in melee) then MAYBE GW is still incentivized to make models for all four legions. But more likely, they aren't. If it's all represented by the same datasheet, why make five boxes of models to represent it?

So the Plague Marine, Berzerker, Rubrics and EC Legion likely either cease to exist, or in an alternate universe may never have existed. This is the possibility part that I was refering to: if there is a Nurgle dex, that creates more design space to make things that fit Nurgle's aesthetic/ army concept, rather than restricting development to what can be reasonably jury-rigged from existing rules. Now, the Deathguard have a lot of units, but the other legions all need another wave of models and their dexes existing is kind of a prerequisite to that. Since a Khorne dex exists, releasing new Khorne units is a thing that can happen. But believe me, if there was only one CSM dex, the odds of a cool Khorne unit being developed are slimmer. And you're never going to ever get a multi-unit release if you don't have dex.

Ynarri, Corsairs and Harlequins won't grow without dexes. Eldar might still grow, but those three subfactions aren't likely to grow,

Hey Ynarri players: You just got generic Drukhari units added directly to your dex. How many of you would have preferred a basic Ynarri infantry unit all in its own- even added as a Kill Team and ported to 40k with a PDF? Which would make it feel more like a real army?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

I assume that you object to Marines getting such disproportionate focus given your post, yet my suggested list of consolidations MOSTLY reduces the number of Marine variants, which would BENEFIT your non-Marine factions.


You'd think that... But I'm not sure it's so simple. Marines would lose the most, but would feel it less because of where they are starting from. If you're playing Drukhari, you feel the loss of even a single equipment option disappearing.

I'd much rather fix the disproportionate support of marines by beginning to offer mixed Imperial forces in starter sets, or rotating Imperial forces in starter sets. I'd like a return of a Warhammer Quest game for 40k. Blackstone Fortress was a goldmine for 40k in the same way Kill Team is. Allowing Crossover from Necromunda into 40k in some capacity would be a real boon to non-marine factions too- looking at you, Leagues of Votann, and you too Inquisition/ Imperial Agents. Even just moving to a four year edition cycle would make a huge difference by giving the company time to provide more support to neglected factions.

Now look, I'm not going to say that a condensing of printed resources into a handful of Superfaction Books couldn't work. Of course it could.

I'm saying that in the hands of GW, it's far more likely to result in a drastic reductions in options and flavour for everyone than adapting the huge, complex monstrosity that we have in meaningful ways until we move closer to a place where everyone can be happy with the path the game is on.
   
Made in us
Sadistic Inquisitorial Excruciator






 vict0988 wrote:
Can't you just add Killteams to 40k with White Dwarf/digital only publication? It seems overkill to me to print new codex for one or a handful of Killteams.


whenever kill teams get 40k rules, they're published online first, and then added to the codex whenever a new one is released. for example, the new Vespid rules are online, because the kit was released after the codex, and will be staying online until 11th edition

she/her 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





Look at the current options and tell me where the bloat really is, because it's not codex Eldar and codex Dark Eldar.

Half the range is codex imperium broken in sub and sub Sub faction books. Another chunk is take up with codex bad imperium and friends Broken into sub and sub Sub factions...

Everything else is
Tau
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Votann
Tyranids
Genestealer cults (which are more imperium than tyranids)
Necrons
Orks

If you want to talk condensing, then 0% should be coming from the above list...

There are currently EIGHT imperial codexes out including the guard, with 4 more in index form. For a total of 12 books to cover codex imperium.

Chaos has 1 out, with slannesh coming and I assume the other 3 plus knights for a total of 6.

Give that every chaos codex has human imperial edgybois in it, they're all basically from codex imperium as well. Add genestealer cults and votann and that's 20 codexes featuring humans who are pro or ex imperial.

You want to talk bloat? Maybe start with 12 imperial and 6 chaos books before looking at the aliens..


This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2025/01/27 06:58:40


   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Yeah, but hypothetically, if GW did the thing which they're never going to do anyway, they might do it badly, so you shouldn't be in favour of reducing bloat even if that would be good if done well. Or something.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/01/27 07:11:43


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Gert wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:

What does that have to do with rules/faction bloat in 40K?

Kill Team is 40k, the two are intrinsically linked.

They don't have to be, at least not to the extent that GW currently links them. The 1:1 correlation between Killteam loadouts and 40k rules is indicative of a of the biggest problems 40k currently has. GW can't decide what scale they want 40k to be and their No Model No Rules stance is bad enough, but the Has Model Gets Rules and box-restricted loadout options are worse.

It's crazy to me that you have this highly specialised Kill Team, built for a game where tracking the individual loadouts and roles of every model is important and tiny variations in equipment can lead to big changes in how they play, then GW use that same logic when porting the rules over to 40k. There's no reason they can't create a Kill Team where the Nostroman Chainglaive is meaningfully different from the basic chainsword, for example, but there's no need to keep that distinction in 40k. They're more than capable of designing the sprues to allow them to operate in 40k and Kill Team at the appropriate level of detail, but instead they just create units with tons of special rules and bespoke equipment, or weird restrictions. The Krieg equipment restrictions are a hilarious example of this, with some restrictions being in place because the model using a special weapon has an alternate build to carry a piece of special equipment so you can't have both in the same unit, even when the special equipment isn't really necessary in 40k.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




GW views the codexes as a marketing tool. I'm not therefore sure they worry about bloat in this way. If they want to sell a faction they release a codex. If they aren't that bothered consolidate.

Mixed views on the idea that you need unique models/data sheets to grow a faction. I mean are Ynnari likely to grow when they have 3 models? Probably not. But do GW want to grow them? If it's taking players who would have been in the other Eldar subfactions is potentially no gain.

On the other hand I think the chaos factions have undoubtedly added something in a way that "just take mark of Nurgle on stuff" didn't. Admittedly I think the World Eaters and maybe EC are too narrow. Whereas (while undermined by bad rules) Death Guard somehow cover so many styles of play with a limited roster.

Personally I'd prefer more curated lists rather than worrying about consolidating books. Imperial Agents for example had promise - but I don't like how it actually came out. I feel you should be able to make a faction that feels like an Imperial Fleet detachment from the available stuff across the Imperial range. But this would require a bit of imagination and care.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: