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.

This has been on my mind for a while, just wondering why GW has put some really weird wargear restrictions in their books. This seemed to start back in 5th Ed, and since then there's some examples (see below) which don't really have any reason besides "Just making things awkward".

Examples:

- 5th Edition DE Codex included the entry for Harlequins who could take Shuriken Pistols. In the weapon profiles at the back of the book the entry for Shuriken Pistols simply states "See the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook". No other Codex at that point or since has had this entry.

- 7th/8th Edition DA Chaplains can replace their wargear with the standard options, and then take an additional Power Fist. I know the model had a PF but why make it a weird extra option?

- 6th/7th/8th Edition Blood Angels had weird restrictions on Thunder Hammers. Previously, Scouts or their variants couldn't take a TH but could take a PF, in the current Codex now Sternguard have this restriction as well.

- 7th Ed Skitarii Dunecrawlers could take Smoke Launchers or their self-repair wargear, but not both for some reason?

- 8th Ed SM Assault Sergeants can take Eviscerators, but no other unit in the army can.

- 8th Ed Tau XV8's can take CIBs, XV8 Commanders can take CIBs, but as soon as he gets in a Coldstar suit he loses access?


Now it might seem weird to think of this, but it's something I've wondered about for a while, why GW would make these seemingly arbitrary restrictions? Anyone got any ideas?

I can't say anything about the other examples, but for the 5E DE codex regarding Harlies, it was a weird time when Harlies were just a single unit entry in the Eldar codex, then the 5E DE codex dropped and included them too, copy-paste style.

The 5E BRB also had an appendix with all the profiles for EVERY unit and weapon up to that point. It was a glorious time with there we few enough units for this to be possible and even if you didn't own an opponent's codex, you could easily have a vague idea of what their units were capable of.
That is likely why they referenced the BRB for their wargear, b/c it was an era in which GW was trying to put as many rules in the BRB as possible. Kind of the opposite approach to now

It got even weirder for Harlies in 6E as both Eldar and DE codices' FAQs had different things to say about the same exact unit, then it got removed entirely from the Eldar codex, so until the Harlie codex dropped, you had to take DE to get Harlies.

-

Chapter house --> No models no rules --> wierd design and restrictions.

Oh and also there are a lot of especially newer HQ's (Chaos) that don't get acess to any equipment at all.

Because a faction that is called Chaos is strictly regimented and equipped in the same way overall in all it's leaders which are basically a bunch of sociopathic warmogering warlords.

-For Harlies, Shuriken weaponry (at the time) was CWE weaponry, not DE weaponry. They were trying to avoid versioning issues between books.

-For Chaplains, they might be trying to ensure the Chaplain can still have their signature weapon, even if they take a Power Fist - I don't play DA, so not sure.

-SM Eviscerators were added to Assault squads when the kit was redone. No other unit taking them is in part because, outside ASM squads (where you can see the other Chaiinswords right next to it), it's not as obviously different from the Chainsword option anything else could take. The other part - probably the bigger part - is the "No model, no rules" doctrine means that they're trying to trim down the ability to take wargear that doesn't come in-box. While Marines haven't lost most of their not-in-box options the way most other factions have (being GWs favorite faction), they haven't been adding those options - and ASM only recently got the Eviscerator.

-The Coldstar originally came out with practically no options. It was a "This is the one way this model can be built" datasheet. Part of the "streamlining" that's been paired with the "No model, no rules" doctrine.

Not saying it's right, but that's been my read.

I think the issue is a lot of the restrictions don't really fit with the whole "No model, no rules" idea. Coldstars could only take their BC/MP combo before, but now they can take all the options except CIBs for no reason.

You only get Eviscerators in the Assault Marine kit, but likewise, you only get Gravcannons in the Devastator box, yet Tacticals and Sternguard can also take Gravs despite Eviscerators being limited to Assaults.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Chapter house --> No models no rules --> wierd design and restrictions.

and "all models currently sold must be playable" (why some models had wargear option no other model in the army had)

In part because Eviscerators were added to the ASM squad, but not to the CC weapons list, whereas Grav Cannons were added to the Heavy Weapons list. IIRC, it wasn't Sarge who got the Eviscerator originally.

Note that the Dev box has always been the main way to get Heavies for Tac squads - it's basically the only way to get most of the Heavies. So adding another Heavy to the box, which is selected just like any other Heavy, naturally adds it to the list - it'd take some offputting very specific language in the rules to add it for Devs but not Tacs. The Eviscerator, on the other hand, was an option in an upgrade slot Tacs never had. It would take some offputting very specific language in the rules to add it to ASM *non-sarges* seperate from the CC list choice the Sarge can make, but then allow non-ASM Sarges to take it.

I also think part of it -in this case - was differentiating between Eviscerators and Chainswords. In a squad with mostly Chainswords and a single Eviscerator, it's easy enough to stand out. In a squad that can take one Eviscerator or one Chainsword, it's not immediately obvious which one it is.

Heavy Flamers are in a weird spot of Marines as well.

Vanilla Marines can't put a Heavy Flamer on any regular squad outside of Stern Guard. Sternguard have the super long range special issue boltguns but not Storm Shields so they don't want to get close to the enemy. Blood Angels (who use almost all the same kits mind you) can put Heavy Flamers on Tac and Devestator squads, but they only get basic-marine-portable Heavy Flamers in their special Tac squad box, so you're looking at a lot of kit-bashing to put a Dev Squad with four heavy flamers on the table if you actually wanted to do such a thing.

In the meantime the only regular foot-slogging Marine unit that might want a Heavy Flamer is a Company Veteran squad with all the Storm Shields and a Transport, and they can't take a heavy weapon at all.

I attribute the arbitrary-ness to a combination of a rules design team trying to work around restrictions mandated to them by a legal team, and a game system that is massively sprawling across hundreds of plastic kits.

Some cases, like the assault marine eviscerator, are simple "no model no rules" situations - the eviscerator only comes in the "assault marines" kit, and not in the "vanguard veterans" kit.

Interestingly it has become quasi-canonical for me that in 40k, models have a certain baseline amount of chainsaw that just makes them attack more, but if you add ADDITIONAL chainsaw to an existing weapon, it makes it better at killing tanks. So it follows logically that Chainsaw is a multiplicative quantity rather than additive.

So model+chainsaw = model with more attacks.

Powerfist+chainsaw = slightly more powerfisty powerfist

Chainsaw+chainsaw = powerfist.

Axe+chainsaw = axier axe.

That's how eviscerators work.

the_scotsman wrote:

Some cases, like the assault marine eviscerator, are simple "no model no rules" situations - the eviscerator only comes in the "assault marines" kit, and not in the "vanguard veterans" kit.

Out of curiosity, how does DE HQs getting Troop-kit weapons this edition fit in?

I was expecting that to get more attention than it did. They actually *did* add options for once (not the options they wanted/needed, but options they didn't have), and they *aren't* in the HQ models' kits. There is plastic for them, and you're expected to get the kit with said plastic anyways, but it's still odd.

the_scotsman wrote:
I attribute the arbitrary-ness to a combination of a rules design team trying to work around restrictions mandated to them by a legal team, and a game system that is massively sprawling across hundreds of plastic kits.

Some cases, like the assault marine eviscerator, are simple "no model no rules" situations - the eviscerator only comes in the "assault marines" kit, and not in the "vanguard veterans" kit.

Interestingly it has become quasi-canonical for me that in 40k, models have a certain baseline amount of chainsaw that just makes them attack more, but if you add ADDITIONAL chainsaw to an existing weapon, it makes it better at killing tanks. So it follows logically that Chainsaw is a multiplicative quantity rather than additive.

So model+chainsaw = model with more attacks.

Powerfist+chainsaw = slightly more powerfisty powerfist

Chainsaw+chainsaw = powerfist.

Axe+chainsaw = axier axe.

That's how eviscerators work.

I like it.

On the original topic, it's weird that a Marine army generally will have a Storm Bolter anyplace that it can have a Storm Bolter, but actually modeling that is going to require a whole lot of conversions.

Bharring wrote:
In part because Eviscerators were added to the ASM squad, but not to the CC weapons list, whereas Grav Cannons were added to the Heavy Weapons list. IIRC, it wasn't Sarge who got the Eviscerator originally.

Note that the Dev box has always been the main way to get Heavies for Tac squads - it's basically the only way to get most of the Heavies. So adding another Heavy to the box, which is selected just like any other Heavy, naturally adds it to the list - it'd take some offputting very specific language in the rules to add it for Devs but not Tacs. The Eviscerator, on the other hand, was an option in an upgrade slot Tacs never had. It would take some offputting very specific language in the rules to add it to ASM *non-sarges* seperate from the CC list choice the Sarge can make, but then allow non-ASM Sarges to take it.

I also think part of it -in this case - was differentiating between Eviscerators and Chainswords. In a squad with mostly Chainswords and a single Eviscerator, it's easy enough to stand out. In a squad that can take one Eviscerator or one Chainsword, it's not immediately obvious which one it is.

The one that gets me is that a Sternguard Sergeant can NOT take a Thunder Hammer, despite it being in the Seargent wargear list. A Tactical Sarge can take one, a Devastator sarge can take one, I think a Scout Sarge can take one. . . Sternguard, nope!

Oh, or Combat Shield for AM sergeants. Nothing else can take it, and it's 4 points for a 5++. Wtf.

What can take a Storm Shield is weirdly inconsistent too. Captain with his built-in 4++ can, Libbys and Lieutenants can't. Company Veterans, Vanguard Veterans, and Bike Veterans can, Sterguard Veterans can't.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Chapter house --> No models no rules --> wierd design and restrictions.

Sure, that's a good excuse from that point forward. But it hardly explains all the weird instances previously....

Lets not forget melta bombs. Only tac marines and assult marines sergeants can take them. Would it not make sense for fast recon/sabotage units like scouts or bikes to take them too? "Roll up to enemy bunker/tank, throw the meltabomb, run away and watch the explosions... "

And veteran units like sternguard or vanguard instantly gets denied the wargear as the are promoted... Wtf i say.

Gitdakka wrote:
Lets not forget melta bombs. Only tac marines and assult marines sergeants can take them. Would it not make sense for fast recon/sabotage units like scouts or bikes to take them too? "Roll up to enemy bunker/tank, throw the meltabomb, run away and watch the explosions... "

And veteran units like sternguard or vanguard instantly gets denied the wargear as the are promoted... Wtf i say.

Sometimes I get the impression that GW denies certain weapons to certain troops specifically because that weapon would be good on those troops.

The unit that wants Melta Bombs more than any other by a huge margin is Intercessors. It would basically fix their one real weakness, which is probably exactly why they don't have it.

Almost nothing in the army that could really leverage a heavy flamer can take one. They'd almost be decent on Attack Bikes, Company Veterans, and possibly Inceptors. GW seems to just really not want Marines to use those things.

None of the Primaris troops with Deepstrike or Advanced Deployment can take a real melee weapon. When it was just Reivers it looked like just an ordinary GW misstep, but then the Phobos units came out and made it obvious it's a deliberate design choice. Again, they probably think being able to put a Powerfist on an A3 model that can deploy 9" from the enemy is too strong. (Which is really weird considering some of the things that can pull a top-of-turn-one charge as it is.)

Imperial Guard Sergeant's can't take lasguns or autoguns, but they can take a boltgun. And the box of Cadian infantry has a spare lasgun for him but not the boltgun or shotgun he can take!