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.

Most races have a single Codex due mainly to lack of effort on GWs part.

The Imperium has a multitude of Codexes covering various arms of the Military - Marines, Guard, Ad Mech, Knights, Sisters, Custodes etc. Mainly as the primary faction and the huge amount of effort lavished upon it.

Then there is Marines.....

They have their own Codex but also (so far) 3 of their sub factions have their own Codexes.

The reaction to any suggestion that these becomes say a supplement is nigh on hysterical, with immediate idiotic suggestions that all Xenos should be in one codex and historically they have always had a Codex so MUST have one now.

Given that the lore and art is constantly recycled each time and would be the same level of better, that playing these Codex sub-sub factions requires 2 books already - the base Codex and a camapign book

is it just some wierd status symbol over others that makes it imperative for some players absolutely to have a Codex for their army.

Every army has sub-factions within their codex - except marines which get their own codex per subfaction and their own unique models.



On the one side this means that Tyranids can easily change from hive fleet to hive fleet without any change of models required at all. Meanwhile a Bloodanges army is just that, it can't suddenly become an Ultramarines army (unless you only had generic units within the force universal to both sides and no unique insignia on the BA marines).

On the other it means that marines now get 4 5 maybe more times the number of releases than an individual Xenos army does because the marine force is getting releases for Ultramarines, then Bloodangles then etc... Even though within the marine group the two armies are different so its different gamers getting updates; it still counts as a "marine release" to those "on the outside".



Basically its an element of jealousy that marines get so much as a block in comparison to Xenos; even if individual blocks of marines might get less than some others.

Once you're at "oh all xenos should be inthe same codex" you're basically into where people are throwing around frustrations and trolling the thread.







In the end all gamers want is more toys for their army. Both in the form of new models and in updated sculpts. When armies have clear things to update - eg most Eldar Aspect warriors are finecast - then you see Marines getting a dozen new Primaris models each ontop of the fact that their original core army is already pretty finecast free- then the Eldar player is just jealous. It's frustraiting because their army isn't getting the same attention.




Historically it was WORSE. Armies could go years between updates and back then GW was far more in the mode of releasing updates as a big chunk of models in one go then nothing for ages (normally till your next codex). Armies like Necrons went around with perhaps 5 or so models for years; whilst armies like Dark Eldar got missed so many times their codex was 2 editions behind the rules. Sisters of Battle were so far behind they weren't even finecast and were still rocking metal.

GW today is still doing big updates (like the recent Sisters of Battle); but they've also adapted to far more trickle fed updates of models too. So more armies can see updates even if its only one or two models here and there over time.

Ask the Black Templar?

I say this honestly as a question (not being a BT player). They are the only reasonably modern full faction that had a codex and then got wrapped up into another. If I’m forgetting another, sorry, still on my first cup of coffee.

Is it worth having your own full codex, with all the whistle and bells, or part of another? Being separate gave them some nice perks. IIRC they could still give terminator squads 2 heavy weapons in a 5 man squad, while the rest of the marines (who had new codexes for the edition) were down to one. But IIRC it took an errata to give them 3++ storm shields, and updates like that were rare back then.

You trade more regular updates for individuality. Worth it?

For the other big names (DA/BA/SW) they have had years of self-reinforcing flanderization to justify their separate codexes. They have a separate codex, need to justify it, get special stuff. Repeat. Back at the beginning, all they were was separate paintjobs.

The mental perception is that going back to being a supplement as per 3rd ed would been seen as being punished or having things taken away from a psychological angle.

This is the main issue with rolling them back from a stand alone codex, even though for wolves/dark/blood angels it would make sense and is certainly possible.

Another reason for the complaining is the false assumption that any marine release is for all marines. They created new generic units for the codex space marine release. Yes the other codex have access, as they share the same core list (hence why a supplement works better), but of the 3 main chapters not in the main codex, they've received almost no model support directly compared to previous editions.

Xenos players do get a shorter end of the stick generally but at the same time, it's not new and I think the constant marine bashing and moaning at the release schedule actually devalues the argument.

Terms like "marine apologist" or "marine sympathiser" alongside good old white knights and gw fan boys all get banded about, simply because you either like something that is a marine release, or even being ambivalent about it.

PA update to GK, made them in to an army they should have been 2 years ago, when they got their codex. Without it they were if not the worse, then one of the worse books to play.

I am not going to feel sorry, that after 2 years of waiting GK codex finaly is fun to play with. Specialy as I don't remember many xeno players whiping themselfs on their back sides for double diping on CWE, DE and Inari rules in the same army.

My only advice is to wait, maybe in 2 years they get updated too.
In the mean time they can do what I was told to do, buy and play a different army.

Dudeface wrote:
The mental perception is that going back to being a supplement as per 3rd ed would been seen as being punished or having things taken away from a psychological angle.

It doesn't help that if a WD minidex is the 'death' of a faction 'indexed with others in a massive Codex' is chatting with others at the Pearly Gates.

BA, DA, SW, DW, and 1k Sons probably could've been supplements, but they were done as their own Codex and have created enough of their own playerbase that changing that now would do more damage than good. Heaven, if GW could reasonably sell it, we'd have Codex: Goffs, Codex: Farsight Enclaves and Codex: Nihilakh.

Me? Wether I'm playing SW, DA, something generic, Salamanders, etc I only want to carry around 1 book.
I want all the units that force can use contained between that 1 books covers.

If that means they print a separate Codex for each Marine faction they make special rules etc for? So be it.
If they were to print 1 giant 300+ page Marine tome the size of the rule book with a core section and {?} chapter specific sections? So be it.

But all of you sniveling about how unfair it is that SW/DA/BA (and I suppose the GK) have their own books when ____ doesn't? You'll just have to learn to live with it.

ccs wrote:
Me? Wether I'm playing SW, DA, something generic, Salamanders, etc I only want to carry around 1 book.
I want all the units that force can use contained between that 1 books covers.

If that means they print a separate Codex for each Marine faction they make special rules etc for? So be it.
If they were to print 1 giant 300+ page Marine tome the size of the rule book with a core section and {?} chapter specific sections? So be it.

But all of you sniveling about how unfair it is that SW/DA/BA (and I suppose the GK) have their own books when ____ doesn't? You'll just have to learn to live with it.

That does not even make basic sense - Salamanders are Codex+Supplement. Keep up.

How many books do WE need now for Angels and Wolves - S - Codex and pretend campaign book - so yeah 2 - just like a codex and supplement - only that would be cheaper right?

So its something else that means you feel you NEED a Codex - what is it?

Saying what he wants to do - i.e., only need to carry one book - makes perfect sense, even if we're not living in his ideal world.

Keep up.

This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

 Galas wrote:
This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

The sad thing is the core of the discussion has some loose legs, in that having the universal core units grouped in one place to reference against is fundamentally a good idea. It stops different marine codex having different entries for the same unit between updates. If they want to release new core units, update 1 book not 4 etc.

 Galas wrote:
This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

Yeah total disconect from the reality of the post or Poster sad really..... And idiotic is as Idiotic does.

Nothing would be lost - just bloated expensive books and loads of reprints

YOU are the one wanting others to be sacrificed for mere duplciation - how many times have the same marine datasheets and strats been reprinted - wrongly. What else could ahev been done instead, including for marines.

But no We had a Codex and we Must always have a codex - Like I said must be a wierd status thing

Dudeface wrote:

 Galas wrote:
This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

The sad thing is the core of the discussion has some loose legs, in that having the universal core units grouped in one place to reference against is fundamentally a good idea. It stops different marine codex having different entries for the same unit between updates. If they want to release new core units, update 1 book not 4 etc.

With the modern GW’s willingness to update points and FAQs, it’s less relevant than before. But in the days where you might not see a new book for whole editions, or 4-6 years, the disparity of units that were ostensibly the same, like Tac and Dev squads, was bad. Especially when you factor codex creep into the mix.

History like that is why some people (myself included) appreciate the supplement system. All marines should be variations on the same core. By keeping the core the same, you get that. You can have you own book to add the things that make you unique, but retain the coherent backbone of the rest of the Astartes.

What's hysterical is your complete focus on this secondary question ...
Just move on man, DA/BA/SW having autonomous codex is not the core problem of 40K by far, it's not even a problem at all.

I'm not sure why people are so fixated on having their own codex, or why having a "all-xenos" codex would be a bad thing.

When indexes released, everyone was happy, even tho no one had a codex.

Imo the "real" problem is that printed rules are terrible when they get constantly amended : there is simply too many different books to bring.
GW needs to create a light, printable, constantly up to date app/website where you can find rules, datasheets, and points values for every unit. They can hide it behind a paywall for 5$ a month subscription.
But this would remove one revenue-source from the GW shops, and that's a bad thing. Probably why they do not do it.

All this data is already available for free on the net, the problem is bringing printed rules is frown upon within the community, because people who paid top dollar for their minis/codex can't stand knowing that other found it all for free.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
I'm not sure why people are so fixated on having their own codex, or why having a "all-xenos" codex would be a bad thing.

Why would an "all-Xenos" codex be a bad thing?

Rules: The major Xenos factions, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Tau, Tyranids have no units, stratagems, or rules in common, so there is no streamlining to take advantage of by consolidadting them into a single book.

Cost: The more factions in a single Codex, the larger, and invariably the more costly it is. Unless someone happens to play several of those factions, the whole tome becomes prohibitively expensive.

Perception: There is a feeling amongst many Xenos players that GW sees them as a tiresome afterthought. Dumping all of the Xenos into 'the other guys book' would just reinforce that.

Tyranids/GSC/"Brood Brothers" and Eldar/DE/Harelquins/Ynnari might be possible, though I'd still not be keen on the consolidation idea.

I agree that a Necron/Ork/Tau book would make no sense at all.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
I'm not sure why people are so fixated on having their own codex, or why having a "all-xenos" codex would be a bad thing.

When indexes released, everyone was happy, even tho no one had a codex.

Imo the "real" problem is that printed rules are terrible when they get constantly amended : there is simply too many different books to bring.
GW needs to create a light, printable, constantly up to date app/website where you can find rules, datasheets, and points values for every unit. They can hide it behind a paywall for 5$ a month subscription.
But this would remove one revenue-source from the GW shops, and that's a bad thing. Probably why they do not do it.

All this data is already available for free on the net, the problem is bringing printed rules is frown upon within the community, because people who paid top dollar for their minis/codex can't stand knowing that other found it all for free.

The issue with an all Xenos codex, or even a Codex + Supplement system is that Xenos aren't subfactions of singular faction the way marines are. Necrons, Tau, Tyranids and Orks have no units in common, so supplement + dex doesn't work. With Eldar, they cold support Supplement + Dex, so it would likely be its own thing.

Now if you want to combine the other 4 Xenos faction into a dex, understand that since those 4 factions don't share fluff the way marines do, you're either looking at a 500 page book with a matching price, or you you are going to lose content. There is no other way to do this.

If you created say 3-5 unique units for each hive fleet, and expanded the lists of fleet specific strats, WL traits, relics and psychic powers, then release Nids Dex + Supplement, I don't think many Nid players would complain.

Some Xenos factions are weird because they include inter-species subfactions (Tau and Nids + GSC). That provides a real subdivisional challenge.

The Eldar also pose problems for going Dex + Supplement. DE and CWE, can be seen as supfactions of Eldar, but each has it's own subfactions as well, with DE being even weirder since they have I middle layer of differentiation with the Kabal/ Cult/ Coven divide.

I don't think we want to keep the codexes we have as status symbols- I certainly don't. I think we all fear that any reorganization on a large scale will lead to a loss of options for game play, which is our highest priority. Consolidators argue that they can jam all the books together without doing this. Then we proceed to our second priority- our background and fluff. Fewer of the consolidators suggest that they could combine everything without losing this, but they generally say that the improvements it would make justify the loss since it won't affect game play.

If a BA player was guaranteed not to lose any unique units or rules that they already have, and if they could be FURTHER guaranteed not to lose any of their background or history, many would not object to their codex being remade as a supplement, especially if it consolidated the new material from PA. Those who did object would be those who were doing so for financial reasons, because they may not want to purchase a new version of their dex, especially if they also invested in PA.

As for digital stuff? I support its development, but I just bough 3 E-books, and they aren't optimized for my preferred method of reading them. I'll stick with books- I'm a collector. I think there are a lot of people who would continue to buy them; numbers would drop, sure. But I think GW could still turn a profit if they size their print runs correctly. So go ahead, bring on the subscription service- there's no reason to insist that you can't have what you want, just like there's no reason for you to insist that any of us lose what we already have.

PenitentJake wrote:
If a BA player was guaranteed not to lose any unique units or rules that they already have, and if they could be FURTHER guaranteed not to lose any of their background or history, many would not object to their codex being remade as a supplement, especially if it consolidated the new material from PA. Those who did object would be those who were doing so for financial reasons, because they may not want to purchase a new version of their dex, especially if they also invested in PA.

Exactly ! But if BA and others were not to lose any units, it wouldn't change anything to the bloat : what would happen is that their supplement would be three time the weight of other chapters.

That being said, when you look at the arguments of the anti-DA/BA/SW hysterical posters of dakkadakka, it seems that simply putting everything in one codex is not what they actually want : they want to streamline the marine line, by giving all available units to all codex compliant chapter and making most variant units accessible through strata and not datasheets.
i.e. : they actually want to reduce diversity and go backward, and that's just an absurd demand that comes from a willingly ignorant standpoint - they don't want to acknowledge differencies between marine chapters (The idea that everything thar differentiate a chapter is "new lore" or the question "why is it that this chapter doesn't get this unit ?" Illustrate that pretty well ; Smudge posts are also a perfect exemple of that).

WhiteDog wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
If a BA player was guaranteed not to lose any unique units or rules that they already have, and if they could be FURTHER guaranteed not to lose any of their background or history, many would not object to their codex being remade as a supplement, especially if it consolidated the new material from PA. Those who did object would be those who were doing so for financial reasons, because they may not want to purchase a new version of their dex, especially if they also invested in PA.

Exactly ! But if BA and others were not to lose any units, it wouldn't change anything to the bloat : what would happen is that their supplement would be three time the weight of other chapters.

That being said, when you look at the arguments of the anti-DA/BA/SW hysterical posters of dakkadakka, it seems that simply putting everything in one codex is not what they actually want : they want to streamline the marine line, by giving all available units to all codex compliant chapter and making most variant units accessible through strata and not datasheets.
i.e. : they actually want to reduce diversity, and that's just an absurd demand that comes from a willingly ignorant standpoint - they don't want to acknowledge differencies between marine chapters (Smudge posts are a perfect exemple of that).

As a guy who doesn't actually play marines and doesn't have the current marine dex or any of the supplements, it's hard to know exactly what it would look like. My understanding was that if the BA dex became a supplement, the stuff that would get removed is the stuff that already exists in the SM dex, which would reduce page count, though not "rules bloat". Semantically, these two terms are connected, but they aren't identical, and many posters use one phrase when they mean to use the other.

Not having either of the books in question, I can't compare the page counts, and I can't actually see how much duplication there is. Interestingly enough, I am considering putting together a few SM detachments for the fist time since 1994 or so. I have the BA termies from Spacehulk and the Space Wolves from Tooth and Claw, and I have the BA PA. Unfortunately, the factions I like the most are the Inquisition related GK and DW.

This is why I like the allies/ detachment system.

PenitentJake wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
If a BA player was guaranteed not to lose any unique units or rules that they already have, and if they could be FURTHER guaranteed not to lose any of their background or history, many would not object to their codex being remade as a supplement, especially if it consolidated the new material from PA. Those who did object would be those who were doing so for financial reasons, because they may not want to purchase a new version of their dex, especially if they also invested in PA.

Exactly ! But if BA and others were not to lose any units, it wouldn't change anything to the bloat : what would happen is that their supplement would be three time the weight of other chapters.

That being said, when you look at the arguments of the anti-DA/BA/SW hysterical posters of dakkadakka, it seems that simply putting everything in one codex is not what they actually want : they want to streamline the marine line, by giving all available units to all codex compliant chapter and making most variant units accessible through strata and not datasheets.
i.e. : they actually want to reduce diversity, and that's just an absurd demand that comes from a willingly ignorant standpoint - they don't want to acknowledge differencies between marine chapters (Smudge posts are a perfect exemple of that).

As a guy who doesn't actually play marines and doesn't have the current marine dex or any of the supplements, it's hard to know exactly what it would look like. My understanding was that if the BA dex became a supplement, the stuff that would get removed is the stuff that already exists in the SM dex, which would reduce page count, though not "rules bloat". Semantically, these two terms are connected, but they aren't identical, and many posters use one phrase when they mean to use the other.

Not having either of the books in question, I can't compare the page counts, and I can't actually see how much duplication there is. Interestingly enough, I am considering putting together a few SM detachments for the fist time since 1994 or so. I have the BA termies from Spacehulk and the Space Wolves from Tooth and Claw, and I have the BA PA. Unfortunately, the factions I like the most are the Inquisition related GK and DW.

This is why I like the allies/ detachment system.

Look it's easy : actually, aside from Ultramarine, most supplement have 2 or 3 chapter specific datasheets and they are all characters. The BA have a huge number of characters (almost on par with UM), plus a bunch of non character chapter specific units - death compagny, Bhaal predator, furioso, librarian dread, etc.
So yes it would reduce page count but it would be three (or more) times the page count of the ravenguard supplement or the IF supplement.

You cannot just erase histort of unit development on a whim...

WhiteDog wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
If a BA player was guaranteed not to lose any unique units or rules that they already have, and if they could be FURTHER guaranteed not to lose any of their background or history, many would not object to their codex being remade as a supplement, especially if it consolidated the new material from PA. Those who did object would be those who were doing so for financial reasons, because they may not want to purchase a new version of their dex, especially if they also invested in PA.

Exactly ! But if BA and others were not to lose any units, it wouldn't change anything to the bloat : what would happen is that their supplement would be three time the weight of other chapters.

That being said, when you look at the arguments of the anti-DA/BA/SW hysterical posters of dakkadakka, it seems that simply putting everything in one codex is not what they actually want : they want to streamline the marine line, by giving all available units to all codex compliant chapter and making most variant units accessible through strata and not datasheets.
i.e. : they actually want to reduce diversity, and that's just an absurd demand that comes from a willingly ignorant standpoint - they don't want to acknowledge differencies between marine chapters (Smudge posts are a perfect exemple of that).

As a guy who doesn't actually play marines and doesn't have the current marine dex or any of the supplements, it's hard to know exactly what it would look like. My understanding was that if the BA dex became a supplement, the stuff that would get removed is the stuff that already exists in the SM dex, which would reduce page count, though not "rules bloat". Semantically, these two terms are connected, but they aren't identical, and many posters use one phrase when they mean to use the other.

Not having either of the books in question, I can't compare the page counts, and I can't actually see how much duplication there is. Interestingly enough, I am considering putting together a few SM detachments for the fist time since 1994 or so. I have the BA termies from Spacehulk and the Space Wolves from Tooth and Claw, and I have the BA PA. Unfortunately, the factions I like the most are the Inquisition related GK and DW.

This is why I like the allies/ detachment system.

Look it's easy : actually, aside from Ultramarine, most supplement have 2 or 3 chapter specific datasheets and they are all characters. The BA have a huge number of characters (almost on par with UM), plus a bunch of non character chapter specific units - death compagny, Bhaal predator, furioso, librarian dread, etc.
So yes it would reduce page count but it would three (or more) times the page count of the ravenguard supplement or the IF supplement.

You cannot just erase histort of unit development on a whim...

Its not being suggested they should, simply that the entries shared with codex space marines are taken out and replaced with a "please see codex space marines" so all their strats, characters, units, relics etc that are unique to them stay in the blood angels supplement, the page count is irrelevant mostly.

Dudeface wrote:

Its not being suggested they should, simply that the entries shared with codex space marines are taken out and replaced with a "please see codex space marines" so all their strats, characters, units, relics etc that are unique to them stay in the blood angels supplement, the page count is irrelevant mostly.

They did this in 3rd. Everyone hated it. There is a reason they do not do it anymore outside of Ynnari.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Its not being suggested they should, simply that the entries shared with codex space marines are taken out and replaced with a "please see codex space marines" so all their strats, characters, units, relics etc that are unique to them stay in the blood angels supplement, the page count is irrelevant mostly.

They did this in 3rd. Everyone hated it. There is a reason they do not do it anymore outside of Ynnari.

They also hate it when codex dark angels or w/e comes out with a new tank that the other chapters only gain access to when their books are updated over 4 years. Can't win either way, but at least a central point is consistent.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Most races have a single Codex due mainly to lack of effort on GWs part.

The Imperium has a multitude of Codexes covering various arms of the Military - Marines, Guard, Ad Mech, Knights, Sisters, Custodes etc. Mainly as the primary faction and the huge amount of effort lavished upon it.

Then there is Marines.....

They have their own Codex but also (so far) 3 of their sub factions have their own Codexes.

The reaction to any suggestion that these becomes say a supplement is nigh on hysterical, with immediate idiotic suggestions that all Xenos should be in one codex and historically they have always had a Codex so MUST have one now.

Given that the lore and art is constantly recycled each time and would be the same level of better, that playing these Codex sub-sub factions requires 2 books already - the base Codex and a camapign book

is it just some wierd status symbol over others that makes it imperative for some players absolutely to have a Codex for their army.

I think most people would not consider IG, Marines, SoB, Ad Mech, etc. to be the same faction. Combining them would be like combining all the Eldar factions into one army. Just because they're nominally lore-allies, does not make them the same army. In many WWII games, for example, Commonwealth, American, and Soviet forces are three factions, even though they're on the same side of the war.

The Marine factions [Space Marines, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels] are often spoken of together as one group, and could be combined. This is like having separate factions in a WWII games for the US Marines and the US Army. It works, but consolidation also could work, there's not that much difference between an M4A2 and M4A3 as a tactical level game sees it, so there'd be two factions that play the same and look the same, but lore differences that separate them.

You consolidate stuff when it makes sense. In this case it doesn't.

If you look at DA and ignore the "Let's give everything to everyone!" comments, they don't actually have many datasheets in common with the core SM book. You would need a supplement with almost thirty additional datasheets to cover them plus a lot of "You can't use this". At this point, compiling them all into a single book makes more sense.

Spoletta wrote:
You consolidate stuff when it makes sense. In this case it doesn't.

If you look at DA and ignore the "Let's give everything to everyone!" comments, they don't actually have many datasheets in common with the core SM book. You would need a supplement with almost thirty additional datasheets to cover them plus a lot of "You can't use this". At this point, compiling them all into a single book makes more sense.

Elites
Please see codex space marines for the relevant options:
1
2
3
Etc

Seems easy enough really, you don't need to list units they can't take, just the ones they can.

A quick glance at the codex shows 27ish of 76ish unique entries (the add on the executioner and vanguard stuff that's shared for about 25% unique), but a lot of them I don't know how different they are, for example is a ravenwing landspeeder different to a landspeeder apart from the name and keyword?

GK/DW are weird and different enough to stand alone, BA/DA/SW could easily be supplements and if they were we wouldn't end up with mad gak like reprinting the same special rules, stratagems and datasheets 5 times to bring them up to speed.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Galas wrote:
This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

Yeah total disconect from the reality of the post or Poster sad really..... And idiotic is as Idiotic does.

Nothing would be lost - just bloated expensive books and loads of reprints

YOU are the one wanting others to be sacrificed for mere duplciation - how many times have the same marine datasheets and strats been reprinted - wrongly. What else could ahev been done instead, including for marines.

But no We had a Codex and we Must always have a codex - Like I said must be a wierd status thing

Morden,

Its academic, but what about the DA/SW/BA Codexes makes you so upset that you have to post about it so much? Why do you have to ascribe negative connotations to those who like having a dedicated Codex? What gives you the right to demand that things be taken away that others enjoy? If you don't want the DA Codex then don't buy it - its really simple.

I only buy Codexes that I need, and I don't concern myself with how other people enjoy the hobby. Clearly there is a good demand for the DA/BA/SW Codexes or GW would not produce them. It's not like those Chapters having their Codexes is a new thing.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Galas wrote:
This "consolidation" crusade that some posters have, specially the ones that call others idiotic for not following their reasoning is some of the most pathetic things I have seen in dakkadakka.

In general, kids that want the toys of other kids removed so they can have the possibility to receive more are just so sad. And I don't care a feth if you are a marine player, Mr Morden. Your reasoning is bad, unrelated with what armies you play.

Yeah total disconect from the reality of the post or Poster sad really..... And idiotic is as Idiotic does.

Nothing would be lost - just bloated expensive books and loads of reprints

YOU are the one wanting others to be sacrificed for mere duplciation - how many times have the same marine datasheets and strats been reprinted - wrongly. What else could ahev been done instead, including for marines.

But no We had a Codex and we Must always have a codex - Like I said must be a wierd status thing

Morden,

Its academic, but what about the DA/SW/BA Codexes makes you so upset that you have to post about it so much? Why do you have to ascribe negative connotations to those who like having a dedicated Codex? What gives you the right to demand that things be taken away that others enjoy? If you don't want the DA Codex then don't buy it - its really simple.

I only buy Codexes that I need, and I don't concern myself with how other people enjoy the hobby. Clearly there is a good demand for the DA/BA/SW Codexes or GW would not produce them. It's not like those Chapters having their Codexes is a new thing.

I've stated my thoughts that they could easily condense and it would have benefits, but ultimately you're right, it simply isn't important enough to be anything other than a weird personal issue really. 100% agree with you.