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.

Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

Almost nothing that wasn't there already - the Company Champion, Apothecaries, Ancients - only change is the new one, the Judiciar.
On those grounds I wouldn't get too excited. Aside from Scouts, pretty much everything else has kept its previous role as well.

Abaddon303 wrote:
Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

This is intentional to force list design choices, otherwise you would just take every buff every game.

Dudeface wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

This is intentional to force list design choices, otherwise you would just take every buff every game.

In fact that's probably one of the reasons they moved Scouts to Elite, to put an end to 3x5 scout troops.

Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

Yes, yes, we wouldn't want any characters with extremely powerful and useful abilities in the elites slot. They need to be in the more limited HQ slot in order to prevent too many strong characters being taken in a single detachment. So tell me, are Apothecaries still elites?

Breton wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

This is intentional to force list design choices, otherwise you would just take every buff every game.

In fact that's probably one of the reasons they moved Scouts to Elite, to put an end to 3x5 scout troops.

Doesnt really change much though. Instead of a Battalion + patrol detachment with 15+ scouts you can just take a Vanguard/Outrider/Spearhead + patrol detachment and only have 1 troop anyway. Just changed a few pts for a CP or two. With Eradicators and Blade Guard veterans being up to 6 per unit with combat squadding enabled the slots arent that important anymore. It is not like scouts being obsec was that important considering how weak they were. Not having scouts as troops just means less troops over all and more specialist units.

 Super Ready wrote:
Almost nothing that wasn't there already - the Company Champion, Apothecaries, Ancients - only change is the new one, the Judiciar.
On those grounds I wouldn't get too excited. Aside from Scouts, pretty much everything else has kept its previous role as well.

repulsors chanegd from dedicated transport to heavy support as well

If we're just talking units changing FOC slots in general, then according to CA2020 Sicarans and Hellforged Predators are moving from elites to heavy support (where they probably belong), and Dreadclaws are moving to dedicated transports. Of course, we should probably wait for the Imperial Armour Compendium to confirm that.

Klickor wrote:


Doesnt really change much though. Instead of a Battalion + patrol detachment with 15+ scouts you can just take a Vanguard/Outrider/Spearhead + patrol detachment and only have 1 troop anyway. Just changed a few pts for a CP or two. With Eradicators and Blade Guard veterans being up to 6 per unit with combat squadding enabled the slots arent that important anymore. It is not like scouts being obsec was that important considering how weak they were. Not having scouts as troops just means less troops over all and more specialist units.

70 points per Smash Captain, or 1.5CP per when you need the CP to fuel those Smash Captains might be more of a change You can't refund the 0 Troop Det costs..

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes, yes, we wouldn't want any characters with extremely powerful and useful abilities in the elites slot. They need to be in the more limited HQ slot in order to prevent too many strong characters being taken in a single detachment. So tell me, are Apothecaries still elites?

Both the traditional and Primaris Apothecary units have remained in Elites, yes.

Breton wrote:

Klickor wrote:


Doesnt really change much though. Instead of a Battalion + patrol detachment with 15+ scouts you can just take a Vanguard/Outrider/Spearhead + patrol detachment and only have 1 troop anyway. Just changed a few pts for a CP or two. With Eradicators and Blade Guard veterans being up to 6 per unit with combat squadding enabled the slots arent that important anymore. It is not like scouts being obsec was that important considering how weak they were. Not having scouts as troops just means less troops over all and more specialist units.

70 points per Smash Captain, or 1.5CP per when you need the CP to fuel those Smash Captains might be more of a change You can't refund the 0 Troop Det costs..

Having 1+ non scout troop unit was seen in almost all lists even before they were elite so 1 or more patrols is probably still going be taken for at least 2cp refunded. Patrol + specialist gives you 4 HQ, 8 slots of your choice and 4 slots for the rest. It only costs 1cp more than battalion + patrol and very few lists would need more slots than that. Quite a few already ran that setup.

Only reason I even used scouts in my BA lists is because I am a slow painter and hadnt gotten to my incursors yet. And that is the only top 4 list I have seen at a GT or bigger with the actual 3x5 scouts in it. And it even had 5 troops despite only needing 4 for the detachments.

Is smash captains even a real thing anymore? Not even all BA lists played with one and now the TH is nerfed in AP, SS lost 3++, the fight twice/thrice strat combos are gone and they cant even get rerolls without paying another 40pts for chapter master. Lots of the good and expensive stratagem combos are also gone and transhuman changed so marines need even less CP now so paying some extras for the slots isnt that much of a deal.

Klickor wrote:


Is smash captains even a real thing anymore? Not even all BA lists played with one and now the TH is nerfed in AP, SS lost 3++, the fight twice/thrice strat combos are gone and they cant even get rerolls without paying another 40pts for chapter master. Lots of the good and expensive stratagem combos are also gone and transhuman changed so marines need even less CP now so paying some extras for the slots isnt that much of a deal.

Probably not, but When I hear someone say Smash Captain List I don't think of just smash captains.. any of the Toy/skew lists that min Troops max Toys. Kind of Kleenex becoming the generic name for facial tissue.

They’re not a thing anymore because the rules have been changed to discourage them. They’re just the most egregious example of previous-edition top lists that bore no resemblance to the fluff, and that’s why they’re mentioned. Not because they’re a current strategy.

Smash caps are dead at the moment, for sure. At least for now. The blood angels one especially was completely gutted. Though who knows what their supplement will bring!

Dudeface wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

This is intentional to force list design choices, otherwise you would just take every buff every game.

In fairness that's not really what i was saying. Nor was I intending on taking multiple smash captains.
I'm talking about making more room to take the mid tier characters in the codex.
I've always felt chaos marine armies should have less of a rank and file feel to them (apart from cultists) with more scope for individual champions and blessed individuals. In comparison to the loyalist codex with their various champions, banner bearers, apothecaries, honour guards etc Chaos Marines don't really have a lot of space for creating characters.
Even Imperial Guard, that really are all about the rank and file, can field armies with multiple platoon and company commanders, psykers, masters of ordinance, priests, commissars etc.

Abaddon303 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
Hi have any characters in the new Space Marine codex moved to Elites? I thought the new codex might indicate where things are heading with future codexes on that front since HQ slots are at such a premium.
I play CSM and Death Guard. The DG codex already has a lot of support characters in Elite which seems well set for the new edition, CSM however just have loads of HQs.
I'm really hoping some of the characters like Exalted Champions, Master of Executions, Warpsmith and Dark Apostle get moved to Elite or I just can't see me using them. It's already difficult to decide between Lord, Daemon Prince, two types of sorcerer and the Lord Discordant...

This is intentional to force list design choices, otherwise you would just take every buff every game.

In fairness that's not really what i was saying. Nor was I intending on taking multiple smash captains.
I'm talking about making more room to take the mid tier characters in the codex.
I've always felt chaos marine armies should have less of a rank and file feel to them (apart from cultists) with more scope for individual champions and blessed individuals. In comparison to the loyalist codex with their various champions, banner bearers, apothecaries, honour guards etc Chaos Marines don't really have a lot of space for creating characters.
Even Imperial Guard, that really are all about the rank and file, can field armies with multiple platoon and company commanders, psykers, masters of ordinance, priests, commissars etc.

Oh I understand what you're saying, I was merely giving the reasons for them being as they are. Greater possessed are in elites already, the master of executions should go to elites imo but that's about it.

I'd welcome master of possession and sorcerors being rolled into 1 entry but with different disciplines as well.

Taking 2 detachments is not that prohibitive, you will still probably have more CP than you did in 8th anyway.
A Battalion and patrol unlocks 5 HQs if people want them.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

 bullyboy wrote:
Taking 2 detachments is not that prohibitive, you will still probably have more CP than you did in 8th anyway.
A Battalion and patrol unlocks 5 HQs if people want them.

Sure, but then you're getting into a position where you're paying 2 CP to take what are already non competitive choices just for a little added flavour. It is frustrating that there seems to be several cases where you pay double jeapordy for fluff choices. I'm not really a hyper competitive player but I'm also not particularly inclined to completely gimp myself. A 2000pt list can normally carry one or two sub optimal choices but when it starts costing you CP or other buffs it just makes you think it's not worth the hassle.

I actually just noticed loyalists can actually take two lieutenants in one HQ slot

Umbros wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

Exactly. What a bizarre riposte that was.

Umbros wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

Go ask the DW players what they think about their rules changes in the sm book, and how lore accurate does it make their stuff, by removing gear, ammo options, rule interactions etc. Or how they leave out the updates for csm or loyalist marines that aren't in the new sm codex for the future. Totaly makes you want to play a lore accurate army, specialy with the perspective of an update no sooner then spring 2021.

Karol wrote:

Umbros wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

Go ask the DW players what they think about their rules changes in the sm book, and how lore accurate does it make their stuff, by removing gear, ammo options, rule interactions etc. Or how they leave out the updates for csm or loyalist marines that aren't in the new sm codex for the future. Totaly makes you want to play a lore accurate army, specialy with the perspective of an update no sooner then spring 2021.

I mean, those weren’t the rules changes that were being discussed. Salty DW hot takes bear no relevance to army composition tweaks. We were on about force comp, not a faction’s traits/etc. I’m sorry those rules haven’t wowed you but they aren’t relevant here.

Karol wrote:

Umbros wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

Go ask the DW players what they think about their rules changes in the sm book, and how lore accurate does it make their stuff, by removing gear, ammo options, rule interactions etc. Or how they leave out the updates for csm or loyalist marines that aren't in the new sm codex for the future. Totaly makes you want to play a lore accurate army, specialy with the perspective of an update no sooner then spring 2021.

What did they lose? Plasma on the Dread? What else?

Breton wrote:

Karol wrote:

Umbros wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Absolutely. They want armies that look like the fluff, not like minmax triple Smash Captain nonsense.

If GW wants people to play with lore accurate armies, then they should give lore accurate armies and unit combinations rules that make them worth taking.
People are not writing their own rules, they are playing within a meta created by GW with armies that have rules also writen by GW.

Yes and that's why they are changing the rules to do that...

Go ask the DW players what they think about their rules changes in the sm book, and how lore accurate does it make their stuff, by removing gear, ammo options, rule interactions etc. Or how they leave out the updates for csm or loyalist marines that aren't in the new sm codex for the future. Totaly makes you want to play a lore accurate army, specialy with the perspective of an update no sooner then spring 2021.

What did they lose? Plasma on the Dread? What else?

To nitpick deathwatch lost a little character in their index rules set, special issue ammo etc. However given their supplement is maybe a month out tops, seems premature to complain.

I have DW, and I'm not salty (yet). They took away SIA from all primaris and pretty much everything that isn't a standard basic bolter.

But, DW gained like 50 more unit options and two more types of kill teams (that admittedly have some broken keyword interractions), so. . .

Anyway, back to the topic--no it doesn't seem that much has changed for Space Marine characters. They are more at a premium, but they are (aside from the Chapter Master) also more powerful than they were before due to the chapter command upgrades you can now take for points instead of CP.

I agree with others in that I think this is by design. They want you to limit your characters and make choices to bring other stuff that's more reflective of a "fluffy" army. Multiple captains in a supreme command detachment that grants you MORE CP was something I think most people (and especially GW) disliked.

 JohnnyHell wrote:


I mean, those weren’t the rules changes that were being discussed. Salty DW hot takes bear no relevance to army composition tweaks. We were on about force comp, not a faction’s traits/etc. I’m sorry those rules haven’t wowed you but they aren’t relevant here.

But they are important. If GW writes the rules for a normal apothecary in a such a way that he is not worth taking, and at the same time makes a warlord version of the apothecary that rises attack bikes from the dead and is generaly awesome, the rules have impact on the list building and the army composition, because with 3 HQ slots and more specific an apothecary warlord the army starts looking a lot different.

And GW does stuff like that all the time, excusing the rules changes as them just wanting to represent The Lore better is a weak argument, when there is a ton of examples when they do the opposit, or strickt make stuff better to sell specific models in favour of other models. Or even worse, when they forget their own rules or list building paradigmas from 2-3 editions ago, and suddenly the army feels as if it wasn't writen for the edition people play in.

You ain't going to tell me that gsc or knight rules in 9th feel good. Or the cutting the main load out of units for DW, which were vets with shields and storm bolters, in favour of primaris is anything, but trying to push primaris in favour of classic marine models. I mean storm bolters losing the DW ammo, impacts the list building and how the armies work. And lore wise, both stormbolters and regular bolters, which happen to still have the old DW rules, use the same kind of ammo. So where is The Lore there?

Karol wrote:

But they are important. If GW writes the rules for a normal apothecary in a such a way that he is not worth taking, and at the same time makes a warlord version of the apothecary that rises attack bikes from the dead and is generaly awesome,

IF they do, but I don't think they did. 1 CP for the new resurrection strat isn't that expensive, AND a damn sight better than a 50/50 shot of a res/heal or standing around with your reductor in your hands. Even a normal apothecary is better enough it's worth taking now.

he rules have impact on the list building and the army composition, because with 3 HQ slots and more specific an apothecary warlord the army starts looking a lot different.

We always had 3HQ slots, and the Apothecary is an Elite Slot. Which we've had 6 of for a while.

And GW does stuff like that all the time, excusing the rules changes as them just wanting to represent The Lore better is a weak argument, when there is a ton of examples when they do the opposit, or strickt make stuff better to sell specific models in favour of other models. Or even worse, when they forget their own rules or list building paradigmas from 2-3 editions ago, and suddenly the army feels as if it wasn't writen for the edition people play in.

You ain't going to tell me that gsc or knight rules in 9th feel good. Or the cutting the main load out of units for DW, which were vets with shields and storm bolters, in favour of primaris is anything, but trying to push primaris in favour of classic marine models. I mean storm bolters losing the DW ammo, impacts the list building and how the armies work. And lore wise, both stormbolters and regular bolters, which happen to still have the old DW rules, use the same kind of ammo. So where is The Lore there?

My only complaint is that, if anything, Scouts should be a Fast Attack choice like Tau Pathfiners are. But I guess they didn't want to prevent all the new FA choices being bought.