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.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They are silly, and the people that don't think they're silly, like you, like rules for the sake of rules when said rules don't work and honestly never have.
Mmmpi wrote: Keep in mind there are nearly as many BA players (and DA and SW) players as generic marine players. There might be 100 players who want to play the dragons.
Because the game is currently build so that, at least for marines, you are VERY encouraged to use an already established, first or second founding chapter instead of creating your own. Which I think sucks, big time.
And consolidating would encourage people to make a more personal choice, by taking some of the lesser known chapters or creating their own.
Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Mmmpi wrote: The current SM book is bigger. Add in double the content.
Looking at GW's website, the newest SM book is 192 pages, and is $40. Looking at other codex books, the IG codex is $40, and is 144 pages. No difference in cost despite the SM codex having a third more pages.
You'd hardly need to double the size of the book given that two thirds of it (at least) is shared among all marines (bolters, rhinos, plasma guns, predators, dreadnoughts, land speeders, cyclone missile launchers, and most of the basic fluff loke the creation of space marines, etc), and the size of the book is a relatively minor part of the cost.
Looking at GW's current pricing of books, the page counts they have, that of other games and companies, it's really hard to see where a combined SM codex would come out at any significantly higher price point than any other codex. Maybe at worst it's $50 or 60 instead of 40? Even then I suspect they'd keep it about the same as the others, if for no other reason than to keep the main product line accessible, and it's certainly not going to be anywhere near $200, or even $100.
I don't expect we will ever see a single combined SM book for various other (mainly business cycle) reasons, but price isnt one of them.
Considering just the unique units (not characters) from each run 10-15 pages of datasheets, plus 5 pages of characters, plus a page for special rules, plus two pages for stratagems (instead of four when you include the generics), a page for relics, a page for P.Powers, a page for WL traits, six pages for paintjobs, maybe 10-15 for fluff. The minimum there is 37 pages. Maximum is 47. That's per army, so it would be 37-47 pages each for BA/DA/SW. That's 110-141 pages, and I'm frankly lowballing paint jobs and fluff. That's also not including any pages needed for wargear and weapons.
So I stand by my claim. Just like I did several pages ago when this was first discussed.
There's tons of ways to compact that, both in terms of editing and game design, without squatting anything. Also, lets be real, even if some stuff gets dropped or changed, that happens to some extent with every update, combined book or not.
Even an extra hundred pages or doubling its size is not going to turn a $40 book into a $200 one. If FW can put out a book covering multiple Heresy era Legions over 300 pages with nonstandard sizing and leather binding and foil edging and metal corners and parchment paper pages for $115, I don't see where a main studio Codex book is going to come anywhere close.
You can stand by that assertion, but working in a business that does major printing, looking at GW and FW's offerings, and those of other gaming companies, that assertion does not appear to line up with any other examples or experiences I can see.
Again, you can't compare GW's book prices with what other (saner) companies do. Don't forget too, that those phonebook sized RPG books you can buy for under $60 are also lost liters.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/28 22:51:31
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They are silly, and the people that don't think they're silly, like you, like rules for the sake of rules when said rules don't work and honestly never have.
Mmmpi wrote: Keep in mind there are nearly as many BA players (and DA and SW) players as generic marine players. There might be 100 players who want to play the dragons.
Because the game is currently build so that, at least for marines, you are VERY encouraged to use an already established, first or second founding chapter instead of creating your own. Which I think sucks, big time.
And consolidating would encourage people to make a more personal choice, by taking some of the lesser known chapters or creating their own.
Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Mmmpi wrote: The current SM book is bigger. Add in double the content.
Looking at GW's website, the newest SM book is 192 pages, and is $40. Looking at other codex books, the IG codex is $40, and is 144 pages. No difference in cost despite the SM codex having a third more pages.
You'd hardly need to double the size of the book given that two thirds of it (at least) is shared among all marines (bolters, rhinos, plasma guns, predators, dreadnoughts, land speeders, cyclone missile launchers, and most of the basic fluff loke the creation of space marines, etc), and the size of the book is a relatively minor part of the cost.
Looking at GW's current pricing of books, the page counts they have, that of other games and companies, it's really hard to see where a combined SM codex would come out at any significantly higher price point than any other codex. Maybe at worst it's $50 or 60 instead of 40? Even then I suspect they'd keep it about the same as the others, if for no other reason than to keep the main product line accessible, and it's certainly not going to be anywhere near $200, or even $100.
I don't expect we will ever see a single combined SM book for various other (mainly business cycle) reasons, but price isnt one of them.
Considering just the unique units (not characters) from each run 10-15 pages of datasheets, plus 5 pages of characters, plus a page for special rules, plus two pages for stratagems (instead of four when you include the generics), a page for relics, a page for P.Powers, a page for WL traits, six pages for paintjobs, maybe 10-15 for fluff. The minimum there is 37 pages. Maximum is 47. That's per army, so it would be 37-47 pages each for BA/DA/SW. That's 110-141 pages, and I'm frankly lowballing paint jobs and fluff. That's also not including any pages needed for wargear and weapons.
So I stand by my claim. Just like I did several pages ago when this was first discussed.
There's tons of ways to compact that, both in terms of editing and game design, without squatting anything. Also, lets be real, even if some stuff gets dropped or changed, that happens to some extent with every update, combined book or not.
Even an extra hundred pages or doubling its size is not going to turn a $40 book into a $200 one. If FW can put out a book covering multiple Heresy era Legions over 300 pages with nonstandard sizing and leather binding and foil edging and metal corners and parchment paper pages for $115, I don't see where a main studio Codex book is going to come anywhere close.
You can stand by that assertion, but working in a business that does major printing, looking at GW and FW's offerings, and those of other gaming companies, that assertion does not appear to line up with any other examples or experiences I can see.
Again, you can't compare GW's book prices with what other (saner) companies do. Don't forget too, that those phonebook sized RPG books you can buy for under $60 are also lost liters.
It isn't just opinion those rules haven't worked. It's a fact.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: It's 4 pages of unique units max once you remove the ones that really aren't unique. So that's wrong.
Queue the "DeAtHwInG aRe ToTaLlY uNiQuE" crew to come and chime in.
Agreed. Most so called "unique" units have one or two minor differences to the base unit.......
Because the ability to take wargear other units can't is such a minor thing.
Oh wait...it isn't.
Its called a unit option - so yes its a super minor thing which can be tied (or not) to Keywords.....
Mmmpi wrote: Otherway around. They are a special snowflake chapter.
They don't receive any kind of special, preferential treatment. They are just slightly more deviant from the codex than average. Nothing special snowflake about this.
You just really don't like the idea of people creating their own chapters, do you? You'd rather people play one of the pre-established chapter.
They're not special snowflakes to GW. They're special snowflakes to the people who want special treatment for them. There are already several easy to do ways to build them using existing codexes, but that's apparently not good enough. Keep in mind there are nearly as many BA players (and DA and SW) players as generic marine players. There might be 100 players who want to play the dragons.
I've never seen a BA or SW army(or successors)in my area and I only know 2 DA players. But I've seen tons of non snowflakes, IF, CF, IH, + a ton of custom(before cool rules) & I play Salamanders. Sooo.....?
Yay for anecdotal stories? I've seen a few successor chapters on the table for all three, and in my LGS there are as many DA (and SW) players as there are regular marine players combined. Maybe about 1/2 BA/Regular marines as well.
GW unfortunately have "painted themselves into a corner" with how long they've favored BA/DA/SW. Now that they've shown interest in other chapters/legions, some people fear they'd lose their "special"ness if the Marine component of all chapters were unified(like they should) and any touchyfeely specialness be distilled out of codex into a supplement.
You have yet to prove why they 'should' be unified. It's just you're claim that they should.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They are silly, and the people that don't think they're silly, like you, like rules for the sake of rules when said rules don't work and honestly never have.
Mmmpi wrote: Keep in mind there are nearly as many BA players (and DA and SW) players as generic marine players. There might be 100 players who want to play the dragons.
Because the game is currently build so that, at least for marines, you are VERY encouraged to use an already established, first or second founding chapter instead of creating your own. Which I think sucks, big time.
And consolidating would encourage people to make a more personal choice, by taking some of the lesser known chapters or creating their own.
Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Mmmpi wrote: The current SM book is bigger. Add in double the content.
Looking at GW's website, the newest SM book is 192 pages, and is $40. Looking at other codex books, the IG codex is $40, and is 144 pages. No difference in cost despite the SM codex having a third more pages.
You'd hardly need to double the size of the book given that two thirds of it (at least) is shared among all marines (bolters, rhinos, plasma guns, predators, dreadnoughts, land speeders, cyclone missile launchers, and most of the basic fluff loke the creation of space marines, etc), and the size of the book is a relatively minor part of the cost.
Looking at GW's current pricing of books, the page counts they have, that of other games and companies, it's really hard to see where a combined SM codex would come out at any significantly higher price point than any other codex. Maybe at worst it's $50 or 60 instead of 40? Even then I suspect they'd keep it about the same as the others, if for no other reason than to keep the main product line accessible, and it's certainly not going to be anywhere near $200, or even $100.
I don't expect we will ever see a single combined SM book for various other (mainly business cycle) reasons, but price isnt one of them.
Considering just the unique units (not characters) from each run 10-15 pages of datasheets, plus 5 pages of characters, plus a page for special rules, plus two pages for stratagems (instead of four when you include the generics), a page for relics, a page for P.Powers, a page for WL traits, six pages for paintjobs, maybe 10-15 for fluff. The minimum there is 37 pages. Maximum is 47. That's per army, so it would be 37-47 pages each for BA/DA/SW. That's 110-141 pages, and I'm frankly lowballing paint jobs and fluff. That's also not including any pages needed for wargear and weapons.
So I stand by my claim. Just like I did several pages ago when this was first discussed.
There's tons of ways to compact that, both in terms of editing and game design, without squatting anything. Also, lets be real, even if some stuff gets dropped or changed, that happens to some extent with every update, combined book or not.
Even an extra hundred pages or doubling its size is not going to turn a $40 book into a $200 one. If FW can put out a book covering multiple Heresy era Legions over 300 pages with nonstandard sizing and leather binding and foil edging and metal corners and parchment paper pages for $115, I don't see where a main studio Codex book is going to come anywhere close.
You can stand by that assertion, but working in a business that does major printing, looking at GW and FW's offerings, and those of other gaming companies, that assertion does not appear to line up with any other examples or experiences I can see.
Again, you can't compare GW's book prices with what other (saner) companies do. Don't forget too, that those phonebook sized RPG books you can buy for under $60 are also lost liters.
[/spoiler]
It isn't just opinion those rules haven't worked. It's a fact.
I've seen people use them. Who should I trust? Your words, or my eyes?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/28 22:57:45
If we could harness all the rage people had for others having special toys and them finding it dumb, pointless or wanting it too, we could power the earth with it. Regenerated daily, it would usher in a golden age for all mankind.
I think its pretty clear it isn't the fact GW can't crush all this stuff together, they don't want to. They want there to be enough difference to sell us the same armies multiple times because of the color of our space mans. It isn't the fact they just don't get it as event he primaris are seeing unit bloat with all the different captains, Lts, characters, untis etc, etc that are just minor changes off one another. I think its safe to say, this trend isn't going anywhere GW is the great unclean one, bloated on all its rules.
Arguing forever on it is pointless, the other books give GW a time to release more books, they love releasing more books, sell you the same armies over and over and over again because it keeps marines rotating around in the release cycle.
As well some people do like their unique units and sure I wish everyone had their own unique units and maybe one day they will, I mean we're all marines, a new codex for every month is our destiny !!
Mmmpi wrote: Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Do you somehow disagree that GW have encouraged people to play specific, established chapters rather than create their own, for a very long time?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/31 10:57:04
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Nobody has to play specific chapters...
Its possible to run "homebrew" for 20+ Years so we don't need "SpaceMarine8.5" to start this.
Would agree it was convienient for GW to make multipart-plastic-kits, offer some add ons and sell <insert chapter here> squads. Did they change with Primaris? Or just Lt and Lt and Lt...
Target locked,ready to fire
In dedicatio imperatum ultra articulo mortis.
H.B.M.C :
We were wrong. It's not the 40k End Times. It's the Trademarkening.
BrianDavion wrote: they absolutely have, but thats the case even for vanilla Marines.
Yes, consolidating into a big all-marine book should help with that thouogh, hopefully.
1hadhq wrote: Nobody has to play specific chapters...
Its possible to run "homebrew" for 20+ Years so we don't need "SpaceMarine8.5" to start this.
“It's possible” and “It's encouraged” aren't the same thing, 1hadhq. It's possible to play a Squat army by using count-as, third party models too!
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2019/08/31 14:26:31
Subject: Re:"Unique" Units of the Wolves and Angels
Are you encouraged to play Space Wolves from a Space Wolves ( supplement or codex ) ?
Are you encouraged to play Ultramarines from a Space Marine codex 3.0 ( with supplements DA + BA + SW ) ?
Pick DA and you have the whole "unforgiven" to choose your chapter. Pick BA or any other former Legion with successors at 2nd founding and youre not encouraged to play the chapter that kept the former Legions Insignia. Its your choice.
The only real encouragement I see is based on rules design ( more Power.... ) and flavor of the month / buy the new shiny. So either failure at balancing or pure marketing.....
Am I encouraged to play chapter X from codex SM: 3.0 ? or 4.0 ? or 5.0 ? 6.0 ? 7.0 ? Maybe if your whole drive is "the best deal" isn't it? But is that really the main motivation of everyone?
Would you choose to play a supplement in 3rd ed? You could just buy codex SM and save money. You could be stuck with very pricey units if you want DA... is more points for the same considered "encouragement" ?
Never heard I have to play X except from fanbois. GW is perfectly happy to sell as many Space Marines and paints and glue and let you decide how your stuff looks. Their encouragement is aimed at your wallet.... not the color of your Space Marines.
Target locked,ready to fire
In dedicatio imperatum ultra articulo mortis.
H.B.M.C :
We were wrong. It's not the 40k End Times. It's the Trademarkening.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Also, I expect the relic side of things to be resolved if/when DA/BA/SW get a v2 book, given I believe things are better with the v2 SM/UM/WS books?
The lack of the Chapter Master strat is an interesting one, though - hadn't noticed that before.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Also, I expect the relic side of things to be resolved if/when DA/BA/SW get a v2 book, given I believe things are better with the v2 SM/UM/WS books?
The lack of the Chapter Master strat is an interesting one, though - hadn't noticed that before.
Yeah, it does suck. It's like they forgot DA successors would have Chapter Masters...
It's not just re-rolls for Azrael though, that 4++ aura is very tasty.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Which is part of the problem of not consolidating, but whatever.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Which is part of the problem of not consolidating, but whatever.
Not really, it's a problem with named characters.
2019/08/31 19:24:19
Subject: Re:"Unique" Units of the Wolves and Angels
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/31 19:24:36
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Firstly I find it bizarre that only one chapter and it’s successor can have melee weapon only Dreadnoughts (I would kill for something like the Furioso for my Black Templar’s just for the theme) and Librarian Dreadnoughts. Terminators should be able to have mixed weapon sets, it might help them remain relevant with the increasing number of primaris units. The Blood Angels and no-one else being able to take heavy flamers in their tac squads is just bizarre.
The Blood Angels mostly make it hard to argue that they deserve a special codex, they only units that should be unique are the sanguinary guard and death company. Dark Angels are a little more complicated but their should be rules allowing Bikers for troops choices. A lot of the “ordinary” chapters should get some customisation choices akin to theirs.
Space wolves are a lot harder to argue though. And the one other chapter in the fluff with mutations doesn’t really give out a strong enough arguement for rolling the Space Puppies into the normal marine codex.
Firstly I find it bizarre that only one chapter and it’s successor can have melee weapon only Dreadnoughts
Dreadnoughts are particularly dumb.
In 2nd any Dreadnought could could have two fists.
In 3rd only Blood Angels could take the two fist Furioso.
In 4th Codex: Black Templars shows a two fist dreadnought which they can't take, and Dawn of War features melee Dreads for Blood Ravens.
In 5th vanilla Marines get the Ironclad.
Also in 5th Blood Angel Furiosos can swap a fist for a gun which defeats the whole point.
In 7th Space Wolves get melee Venerable Dreadnoughts, and a special character which is basically hairy Moriah the Chosen (who Blood Angels can't take since 3rd).
How many different Dreadnought entries are there now? Are we over 20 yet?
Mmmpi wrote: Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Do you somehow disagree that GW have encouraged people to play specific, established chapters rather than create their own, for a very long time?
I do disagree. I think they haven't encouraged making your own chapter on a rules level. On a creation level, they release tons of articles every year about custom building and converting models to make personalized units/chapters/regiments/craftworlds.
Firstly I find it bizarre that only one chapter and it’s successor can have melee weapon only Dreadnoughts (I would kill for something like the Furioso for my Black Templar’s just for the theme) and Librarian Dreadnoughts. Terminators should be able to have mixed weapon sets, it might help them remain relevant with the increasing number of primaris units. The Blood Angels and no-one else being able to take heavy flamers in their tac squads is just bizarre.
The Blood Angels mostly make it hard to argue that they deserve a special codex, they only units that should be unique are the sanguinary guard and death company. Dark Angels are a little more complicated but their should be rules allowing Bikers for troops choices. A lot of the “ordinary” chapters should get some customisation choices akin to theirs.
Space wolves are a lot harder to argue though. And the one other chapter in the fluff with mutations doesn’t really give out a strong enough arguement for rolling the Space Puppies into the normal marine codex.
The 5th edition codex allowed everyone to take Heavy Flamers, which was removed for no good reason.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You aren't even encouraged to play successors with the Blood and Dark Angels based on relic access and lack of the Chapter Master Stratagem!
With the current codex, there's really no point playing Dark Angels if you aren't taking Azrael in all honesty. Which is sad, but it's the same boat Ultras were in for 2 years.
Which is part of the problem of not consolidating, but whatever.
Not really, it's a problem with named characters.
Untrue. See, the 5th-7th edition Vanilla codices allowed you to take Chapter Masters as an option, whereas the Angels didn't, which makes no sense for a codex meant to represent those Chapters AND their Successors. Blood Angels getting a different named Character for one doesn't count and you know that.
Mmmpi wrote: Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Do you somehow disagree that GW have encouraged people to play specific, established chapters rather than create their own, for a very long time?
I do disagree. I think they haven't encouraged making your own chapter on a rules level. On a creation level, they release tons of articles every year about custom building and converting models to make personalized units/chapters/regiments/craftworlds.
IOW, they haven't encouraged it. Thanks for playing.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/09/02 23:02:22
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Mmmpi wrote: Or it's that people like the armies (for rules as well as fluff), and so play what they like.
Do you somehow disagree that GW have encouraged people to play specific, established chapters rather than create their own, for a very long time?
I do disagree. I think they haven't encouraged making your own chapter on a rules level. On a creation level, they release tons of articles every year about custom building and converting models to make personalized units/chapters/regiments/craftworlds.
IOW, they haven't encouraged it. Thanks for playing.
"AKA GW didn't do something the exact way I want them to, so I'm going to cry about it."
Firstly I find it bizarre that only one chapter and it’s successor can have melee weapon only Dreadnoughts
Dreadnoughts are particularly dumb.
In 2nd any Dreadnought could could have two fists.
In 3rd only Blood Angels could take the two fist Furioso.
In 4th Codex: Black Templars shows a two fist dreadnought which they can't take, and Dawn of War features melee Dreads for Blood Ravens.
In 5th vanilla Marines get the Ironclad.
Also in 5th Blood Angel Furiosos can swap a fist for a gun which defeats the whole point.
In 7th Space Wolves get melee Venerable Dreadnoughts, and a special character which is basically hairy Moriah the Chosen (who Blood Angels can't take since 3rd).
How many different Dreadnought entries are there now? Are we over 20 yet?
Perfect illustration of what I meant by “It's a rule artifact”. The specific details of which dread loadouts are available for which chapters are a rule artifact.
Mmmpi wrote: I do disagree. I think they haven't encouraged making your own chapter on a rules level. On a creation level, they release tons of articles every year about custom building and converting models to make personalized units/chapters/regiments/craftworlds.
But way less than they do on established, first founding chapters, and the two big second founding chapters.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Firstly I find it bizarre that only one chapter and it’s successor can have melee weapon only Dreadnoughts
Dreadnoughts are particularly dumb.
In 2nd any Dreadnought could could have two fists.
In 3rd only Blood Angels could take the two fist Furioso.
In 4th Codex: Black Templars shows a two fist dreadnought which they can't take, and Dawn of War features melee Dreads for Blood Ravens.
In 5th vanilla Marines get the Ironclad.
Also in 5th Blood Angel Furiosos can swap a fist for a gun which defeats the whole point.
In 7th Space Wolves get melee Venerable Dreadnoughts, and a special character which is basically hairy Moriah the Chosen (who Blood Angels can't take since 3rd).
How many different Dreadnought entries are there now? Are we over 20 yet?
Perfect illustration of what I meant by “It's a rule artifact”. The specific details of which dread loadouts are available for which chapters are a rule artifact.
Mmmpi wrote: I do disagree. I think they haven't encouraged making your own chapter on a rules level. On a creation level, they release tons of articles every year about custom building and converting models to make personalized units/chapters/regiments/craftworlds.
But way less than they do on established, first founding chapters, and the two big second founding chapters.
Exactly. We only need three:
1. Basic Dread with option for Ven upgrade
2. Ironclad with option for Ven upgrade
3. Contemptors
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
I don't believe every chapter should have access to every unit, or else your chapter selection is just a paint job. Yes Blood Angels have Sanguinary Guard and Death company, but we don't get Centurions or Thunderfire cannons and I'm fine with that. Those units don't fit the rapid assault theme of a Blood Angels army but would be perfectly suited for the Imperial Fists.
Also considering the dreadnoughts, the Furiosos are our Venerable dreads. We don't get ordinary venerables or ironclads.
Definitely other dreads should have the dual ccw option though, that's just wierd.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/02 04:48:41
For the Emperor! Kill Maim Burn!... I mean purge the unclean!
