New Space Marine Codex and its affect on its subchapters.

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.

**moosifer**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
moosifer wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:No, a Marine with BP&CCW isn't worth 25 pts. He doesn't have a Jump Pack, for starters, and that's worth 7 points on a standard Assault Marine. Then you've got the extra Ld, which is worth a point. And the extra Attack, with is another 2 points.

Thus, a Veteran Assault Marine with A2 Ld9 BP&CCW is worth 25 pts.

The Death Company get 4 USRs for 10 points. And they're all good USRs for Assault: Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. Under Traits / Veteran Skills, USRs are worth at least 3 pts each. So that bundle of USRs is nominally worth at least 12 points. Only paying 10 pts for them is a bargain.

Suck it up and don't complain.

Death Company gets jump packs for free? Did I create the part in my head where it costs 5 points a model for the entire unit to get jump packs?

So you are justifying 15 extra points for FNP/Rending/FC/Fearless/Ld9. Please dont forget Black Rage which means you NEED a chaplain or you have a squad that you cannot control. And ldr9 on a fearless unit isnt that big a deal because you probably pay 85 points for a Captain with goodies and Combat Tactics to get a Universal Leadership of 10.

One glaring difference between the two codicies is that you have combat tactics which in of itself is awesome, but you have the ability to mix and match diff characters to get the army the way you want it. BA/DA do NOT get this and this in of itself is a huge difference maker.

Oh noes, your stupidly broken Death Company might be overpriced by as much as 5 pts, and an entire unit might be overpriced by as much as 25 pts.

To which, I say "so what?"

Look at Imperial Guard. A *single* Imperial Guard Chimera is overpriced by more than 40 pts. Imperial Guard Advisors are at least 10 points overpriced. Imperial Guard Ogryns are at least 5 pts overpriced. And most importantly, the basic *mandatory* Troops squad of Guardsmen is at least 10 pts overpriced (even moreso if they take a Lascannon) and 2 such squads are *mandatory* in each basic Platoon.

I did a very *generous* cost breakdown. Others can easily conclude that the USRs are actually fairly priced at 15 pts for the lot. And those are very good USRs that all work together - they have synergy such that they amplify each other. Finally, Black Rage is NOT a liability that's worth anything, because you'd take Chaplain Lemartes *anyways*.

The idea that a Blud Angelz player would whine over paying a fair price for their Death Company, and this is in a thread whereby other MEQs are getting new toys, it strikes me as exceptionally childish. I definitely see Yaks' wisdom in "Friends don't let friends start MEQ armies".

Quite frankly, if you don't like Blood Angels, repaint their shoulderpads and call them something else. It's not like you need to buy all-new models to switch the army around...

Man you are a bit bitter about this. As I said before, my army is a generic army with BA units. I started playing BA to get ready for 5th edition and the new dex and lo and behold GW does exactly what I thought. I learned to play with the changes that were coming and am infinitely more comfortable with combat squads and limited choices than the las/plas kiddies.

As for always taking Lemartes, could the reason we *ALWAYS* take lemartes is that DC go wonky without him? I mean you yourself would have to say something about paying 5 points more for an extra wound, and death mask making it always worth the upgrade. DC FORCES you to take a chaplain, which is a very potent HQ, but a mandatory HQ with DC.

What you see as a whine is merely pointing out the fact that the new toys given to C:SM marines far outweigh the "brokeness" of the blud angelz as you so maturely put it. Combat tactics alone is worth its weight in gold, as do the HQ Special Characters changing combat tactics to a USR FOR THE ENTIRE ARMY NOT ONE UNIT

**JohnHwangDD**

Lemartes is underpriced. That's why I don't think BA players have anything to whine about.

Chaplains are good. Very good in a HtH army. So you would take them anyways. There's no "forcing" going on here.

Unlike, say, Guard...

**moosifer**

JohnHwangDD wrote:Lemartes is underpriced. That's why I don't think BA players have anything to whine about.

Chaplains are good. Very good in a HtH army. So you would take them anyways. There's no "forcing" going on here.

Unlike, say, Guard...

I will agree with you 100% he is underpriced, no doubt about it. Me personally I would rather have Dante or Mephhy for my HQ but I cannot take them unless it is a 2000+ point game due to limited availability of point value to be given into HQ choices. Right now I am building a 'ard boyz list and even at 2500 points sticking a second HQ in other than a chappy for the DC seems to be rough

As for the guard Analogy, guard take shooty stuff and stick conscripts with commissars in the front to hold off the enemy. Ogyrn are nice (chaos ones are even better) as are rough riders, but again you are not forced into a HQ choice just to make sure they are doing what they are suppose to do (doctrines are choices not compulsary)

**Valhallan42nd**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Oh noes, your stupidly broken Death Company might be overpriced by as much as 5 pts, and an entire unit might be overpriced by as much as 25 pts.

To which, I say "so what?"

Look at Imperial Guard. A *single* Imperial Guard Chimera is overpriced by more than 40 pts. Imperial Guard Advisors are at least 10 points overpriced. Imperial Guard Ogryns are at least 5 pts overpriced. And most importantly, the basic *mandatory* Troops squad of Guardsmen is at least 10 pts overpriced (even moreso if they take a Lascannon) and 2 such squads are *mandatory* in each basic Platoon.

I did a very *generous* cost breakdown. Others can easily conclude that the USRs are actually fairly priced at 15 pts for the lot. And those are very good USRs that all work together - they have synergy such that they amplify each other. Finally, Black Rage is NOT a liability that's worth anything, because you'd take Chaplain Lemartes *anyways*.

The idea that a Blud Angelz player would whine over paying a fair price for their Death Company, and this is in a thread whereby other MEQs are getting new toys, it strikes me as exceptionally childish. I definitely see Yaks' wisdom in "Friends don't let friends start MEQ armies".

Quite frankly, if you don't like Blood Angels, repaint their shoulderpads and call them something else. It's not like you need to buy all-new models to switch the army around...

Death Company are not broken, sorry to say. They're neat, they are a great concept, and unlike prior edition's incarnations, they are fair. Rending and FNP, which made them uber in 4th, are signifigantly reduced in power in 5th. And I'm okay with that. A DC with a jump pack is worth it's cost, however you want to slice it. As for Lemartes, well, can you blame us? I'd rather not have to field him, but them's the breaks.

I hope I get the redeemer, but if I don't, I'll get it for my standard Marine army.

Why are you so angry? Guard are coming up soonish if the rumors are right. Quite frankly, you'll probably be on other side of that arguement at that time. We'll get a ton of cool stuff that probably won't see the table top any time soon due to outrageous cost imbalances. People wil be bitching about those units and they'll want to sell of their marine armies due to the general unfairness of it all. I just want you to remember that when that time hits.

**JohnHwangDD**

OK, "broken" may be a bit too strong as shorthand for "uber 1337".

I've been waiting for nearly a decade for my Dogs of War to get their next Army Book, so you'll excuse me for being a bit cranky about Guard.

If Guard get lots of cool stuff, I'll be very happy. Hopefully, it makes up for lost time.

**Da Boss**

I love it when marine players or marines supporters tell those of us who have to watch release schedules packed to the gills with MEQ releases to wait patiently for our new codex that's "just around the corner".
I'm very tired of marines.
I'd love to see necrons, DE and guard get codices before the Space Marines, for once. Though obviously that would only happen in Loopy Lah Lah Land.

Deadshane1: The reason you think your guys should stay seperate in a codex is the reason I think the codex should disappear. I have a lot of friends who will switch between marine codices every game using the same models. Sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who have one unit with Feel No Pain and Rending, sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who run at me and engage me in close combat, sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who are lead by some dude in a Land Speeder and who like Termies and Bikes. It's all space marines, it's the same statline, the same gear, it should be in the same book. It would free us up release cycle time for those non Marines who need attention, and prevent threads like this with all the bitching and moaning that comes with them.

**Hellfury**

Death By Monkeys wrote:I'm not arguing with you, Hellfury, just pointing out that GW has the leeway to manipulate this statement to do a lot of things.

Agreed. They do seem to change their minds a lot....*shakes head*

**syr8766**

The bottom line is that, as they did with 4th ed., they changed the rules without doing a complete reload of the army lists (as they did in 3rd, and 6th ed. WFHB with 'Ravening Hordes'). I understand the logic behind that: Anyone who bought a 'late' codex for 4th edition would be pissed to find out they had wasted $30 (or whatever they cost now), and their release schedule being what it is, I'm sure they were afraid of having the peasants at the gates screaming for blood.

Nevertheless, by making that accommodation, we're stuck with a bunch of army lists that are imbalanced one from another and subject to the vagaries of the author at the time and his/her orders from the top on how to deal with the game. Thus: Dark Angels and C:CSM were a direct response to the 'uber' issues of the previous codicies, while C: SM is going back to uber because that's what sells models/marine codicies.

*shrug* Say what you will about the release of 3rd ed. and the blandness of the codicies at the time, but the BBB was tight and got you by until your codex came out, and while they were doing the thin books, they were churning out 'dexes at a pretty fast rate and putting out supplemental rules in WD/compilations equally quickly.

You knew that at the reboot, your list was balanced with everyone else's list. That's not going to happen when some armies are dealing with 3rd/early 4th codicies, some were written while the design team were trying to figure out what they were doing, and some are coming out with the release of 5th. Retrofitting just doesn't work.

**Alpharius**

You're probably right.

At some point (like they did in the transition from 2nd to 3rd, I think?) GW needs to 'level' the playing field, re-balance everything (for real this time! Using (gasp!) statistics!) and go from there.

Sure, it would get a lot of people angry to have to use a "Ravening Hordes" type of list for a while, but in the long run, the game would probably be better off for it. Though they'd have to resist the temptation to 'churn' out a Codex 'just because', as we're then back on the same slippery slope as before, most likely.

But, that would take a lot of planning, hard work and intelligence to pull off correctly, so...

**JohnHwangDD**

Let me get this straight:

There are a few "problem" Codices under the new Edition. Some Codices have a few "problem" units.

So the solution is to throw away *ALL* of the Codices and start from scratch?

GW is stupid, but not that stupid.

**Alpharius**

Er, no, not really, so I guess you didn't get it straight...

**Grot 6**

Hellfury wrote:....or "Does GW have any idea of what it is doing?"

For awhile I laughed at how I knew that the DA/BA codices wouldn't get any retcon. But I was just being cruel because of how the fanboys defended and lauded Jervis' handling of those books.

I have been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the realization that if Jervis doesn't retcon some of this stuff into the DA/BA codices via FAQ, he is a real tool.

By that I mean is that he strung everyone along with this 'grand plan' of reorganizing the structure of the game.
Some severe toning down of abilities.
To the point where people really snigger when they hear the names of the DA and BA codex mentioned.

And now we see all of these pretty much confirmed rumours (in all aspects except seeing the codex in hand) putting a waffle stomp on on this 'grand plan' he himself initiated.

I disliked how Jervis handled the DA codex, and I especially disliked how he pontificated to other designers about how it should be done when it was obviously not the way to go to make the customers happy.
However, I am glad to see a bit more flavor returning, but..... find a fething plan and stick to it for chrissakes!

I don't even play these codices, and I feel really bad for the armies. These armies are rather recent and they wont see a 5th ed codex for many years to come. Does GW expect DA/BA players to just sit idly by trying to enjoy their rules waiting for a new codex when they KNOW in their hearts the rules that they use are a crock of poo-doo? Give 'em a FAQ with a few minor upgrades so that they know they aren't forgotten.

However, BT can forget about it. They still get tons of cool crap such as two heavies in a 5 man termie squad, an actual wargear list, etc. Giving them any of the new stuff is just asking for the revisit of 3rd ed BT cheese fests. if anything BT lists need to be toned down to match.

I honestly think ol' Jervy-poo needs to make a huge apology to the consumers he reeled in with his spiel.
Jervis has made himself into the George Bush Jr. of the wargaming world.
Like GWB he lacks any credibility in my eyes because it seems rather apparent that he doesnt have the slightest idea what he or the rest of his designers are doing.

Again, I say this to GW (and to the pontificating Jervis especially):

FAQ now, or STFU!

QFT!!

**ihockert**

I definitely agree that the Dark Angels and the Blood Angels should be FAQed to be brought in line with some of the new Marine changes.

DA/BA should have all their wargear brought in line with the new stats. Another debacle like the DH assault cannon would just be stupid. At bare minimum this is what must be done. As far as the new units are concerned, other than possibly vehicles, DA should not have access to them. Sternguard/Vanguard/Honor Guard seem to represent first company elements and as such would not be used by DA. For BA, I don't know if they should have such units as I'm not as up on their background.

I also would like to see a small alteration of some of the special characters for these armies. I think Azrael should have a WS of 6 for example and the BA specials who have a 6 WS should probably have a 7. Now I don't think this will happen and by and large it won't make a huge difference most of the time anyhow but it would make sense.

**Valhallan42nd**

JohnHwangDD wrote:Let me get this straight:

There are a few "problem" Codices under the new Edition. Some Codices have a few "problem" units.

So the solution is to throw away *ALL* of the Codices and start from scratch?

GW is stupid, but not that stupid.

I think the point was that if GW ever does another "about face" like from second to third (which was drastic), then they'll need to do a ravening hordes list.

**Voodoo_Chile**

Here's hoping for a Space Wolves codex soon to be released either via White Dwarf or a quick fix online pdf.

Though I suspect GW will take the long route and go for the new models and new codex coincidation

**Cruentus**

Red_Lives wrote:

Its not that we are not space marines... after all BA, DA, and SW are in fact space marines. However BA and SW have unique geneseeds that alter the combat "doctrines" of the chapter organization, and still use standard issue imperial space marine equipment. I think that is what the issue is, why should the new Death wind launcher be heavy 2 and mine still heavy 1? Why should my tech marines not have access to the big cannon? Why should my landraiders only carry 10 (5) when the new ones are 12 (6)? Now keep in mind this can be easily fixed if they just had 1 extra line in that codex: All loyalist space marine chapters may use the new landraider/drop pod/landspeeder/wargear profiles that parallels (shares a name) with their current version.

As a Flesh Tearer (Blood Angel) player, I'd argue that the above statement is more than enough reason to just have one marine codex. I've been playing since 2nd ed, when my Word Bearers were the same as every other chaos marine army, except painted red. It wasn't that terrible, really. And if its just a matter of "altering the doctrines and organization", that can easily be done within the same codex as every one else.

As Syr mentioned, though, GW continues to strap itself by trying to make everything backwards compatible, which straightjackets itself by continuing to include bad game/army design.

And, to respond to Alpharius, yes, they should throw out all the codexes and start again. Reason being is they can NEVER get every codex updated before they switch editions. So we're NEVER playing on an even field (except with 'ravening hordes' types of lists - which by the way, 3rd ed right out of the box was the best 40k I ever played). So we'll always have codexes from old editions that are wonky, wargear that doesn't match up (hell, we still have DH with sub-par assault cannons, and that's been known for how long?), and skewed power levels as the designers wander from brilliant idea to brilliant idea.

And the main reason we'll never see one consolidated marine dex? It doesn't sell models. They can push the shiny new rules and models they make up for all of those MEQ sub-dexes to fuel sales. Take those away, and its a harder pull for GW. So it'll never happen.

Oh, and I've been planning to run my Flesh Tearers as "vanilla" since the 3rd ed BA codex where they (BA) were stupid-broken. It was a point and click army. So when the new dex hits, I'll paint them black, give them a yellow saw emblem, and use them as they were written in Rogue Trader, as a 'codex' chapter.

**Ratbarf**

"It would free us up release cycle time for those non Marines who need attention"

Wait, what? There are non Marines??? Who the hell are they and why are they trying to steal some of our limited release schedule time!!! I mean who even knows what a non marine is??? Like some kind of evil space elf or something? Maybe killer robots? Why would anyone even want to play one of those anyways!

**Abadabadoobaddon**

Ratbarf wrote:Great, then we can scrap the entire chaos space marine book as well and just call the new Codex Space Marines?

Might as well. I'm pretty sure you can make a better (read: fluffier) Night Lords army with the new Codex: SM than with Codex: CSM. Same with Alpha Legion. Same with Iron Warriors if you don't want Obliterators. Etc.

**Alpharius**

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
Ratbarf wrote:Great, then we can scrap the entire chaos space marine book as well and just call the new Codex Space Marines?

Might as well. I'm pretty sure you can make a better (read: fluffier) Night Lords army with the new Codex: SM than with Codex: CSM. Same with Alpha Legion. Same with Iron Warriors if you don't want Obliterators. Etc.

Amen brother!

I know that's what I will be doing!

And any complaints at my doing so will be met with, "Ah, but this is my DIY Chapter, Brothers of the Hydra!"

**Stu-Rat**

Hellfury wrote:I have been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the realization that if Jervis doesn't retcon some of this stuff into the DA/BA codices via FAQ, he is a real tool.

By that I mean is that he strung everyone along with this 'grand plan' of reorganizing the structure of the game.
Some severe toning down of abilities.
To the point where people really snigger when they hear the names of the DA and BA codex mentioned.

And now we see all of these pretty much confirmed rumours (in all aspects except seeing the codex in hand) putting a waffle stomp on on this 'grand plan' he himself initiated.

Yet another reason I'm glad I quit 40k right before 40k5e was released.

I agree but it's not just 40k that's getting the crappy Jervis/non-Jervis treatment. Look at Blood Bowl. 3rd edition makes it Warhammer Fantasy Football, which is a really bad move (despite all the other improvements in that edition), one that even JJ has admitted to. So over the latter part of 4th and all of 5th, the intention has been to move it away from WFB (for example, see JJ's comments in BB Mag #8, the new minis at the time - Elfs, Ogres, Vamps, etc. - and so on), yet now the current rumours are for Bretonnians to be the new team for 2009. Sigh.

Here's an idea. Have a game plan (which GW do seem to do, to be fair) and damn well stick to it (which GW do not).

**derek**

Voodoo_Chile wrote:Here's hoping for a Space Wolves codex soon to be released either via White Dwarf or a quick fix online pdf.

Though I suspect GW will take the long route and go for the new models and new codex coincidation

This could turn out to be a double edged sword. On the one hand I'd love to see an updated Space Wolves Codex, as mine is falling apart being that it was bought when it was first released for 3rd Ed(it's my oldest 40k book that I still have), and it would motivate me to actually play them again. OTOH, I would hate to see one of the most flavorful, and interesting 40k armies get the DA/BA treatment. I don't want a gutted codex. I like that currently there are a lot of options from C: SM for the Space Wolves, and I'm sure Space Wolves will like it even more when they get to use the new stuff come October. All of that could go away when they get a new standalone book.

To be honest I liked the 3rd Ed codex supplements(mostly because it allowed me to have copies of all the chapter rules for cheap), and while I wish they'd do an all-in-one book for Space Marines, which they could easily do by giving rules for all first founding chapters and a few variants such as Black Templar, Crimson Fists, Relictors, and the like, they never will because it's much more profitable to sell 4 different books, than to give everyone all they want as one. Doing away with the flavors of Marines was one thing I hated about the 4th Ed book, Traits didn't cut it. The IA articles were awesome.

**JohnHwangDD**

They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

**derek**

JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

I was thinking more along the lines of $50, about the same size as the rulebook, with lots of background. 10-12 different Chapters included. Would be a great book.

**Hellfury**

I was thinking more along the lines of $25 if not much more cheaper.
AT-43 can make the same type of army book for half the price with twice the quality in EVERY way. Full color glossy pages on all pages, better rules..

The consumers continual acceptance of the sort of suggested price gouging is astounding.

**Abadabadoobaddon**

JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

The problem with an all-in-one book is not the size or price. It's that they wouldn't be able to release it 5 times.

**Alpharius**

derek wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

I was thinking more along the lines of $50, about the same size as the rulebook, with lots of background. 10-12 different Chapters included. Would be a great book.

I think Derek's prediction is closer to what reality would be.

If they'd ever do it.

Which they won't. (see: Abadabadoobaddon for why)

**Hellfury**

Its easy to see why GW would never do it.

Its not so easy to see why people will continue to reinforce GW's behavior regarding that though.

**George Spiggott**

What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

**derek**

George Spiggott wrote:What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

I believe the reason that they stopped doing IA(and for that matter Chapter Approved) was because they were trying to streamline everything into Codexes, with the previous Codex: Chaos Space Marines being the first, and then the trait system in Codex: Space Marines really being the death knell of unique Space Marine chapters that didn't already have their own Codex list. Of course Salamanders had Codex: Armageddon, but since then Salamanders players have been forced into being just another Codex chapter.

**Alpharius**

George Spiggott wrote:What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

There was nothing wrong with it at all!

The current 're-emphasis on the hobby and making WD readable' again currently going on has me hoping...