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.

So with the fall of Cadia, the galaxy ripped in two and the return of the primarchs it's plain to see that GW is willing to progress the story a little. Add on to that the slow and steady retirement of various models into legends. So more and more named characters are no longer present on the tabletop. I understand that 40K is meant to be a perpetual narrative and no one wants too see their favorite character shuffle off the stage, but one can only take so much plot armor in their setting.

So with that in mind, who would you want to see meet a terrible end on the battlefield? How would you like to see them bite the bullet? Do you think this death would be an interesting change to the setting, a heart wrenching tragedy or you just plain don't like the person?

The death of Marneus Calgar would be a fascinating game changer. It would show that the Ultramarines are not invincible and the ensuing debate on the line procession would be a fun drama. Not to mention that it would make way for new characters as well.

I'm halfway through reading Makari's story and the more I read a bout Grotsnik, the more I would like to see Ghazzghkull finally give him what he deserves.

Plenty should die, of course. But the top of my list would be either the Lion or Guilliman. One of them dying would really be a big deal.

That, or they just get rid of this whole narrative thing and instead focus on 40k as a setting.

Personally I'd like to have more chars than fewer, but if I had to choose any Space Marine would be a good one. Take some of the Space Wolves ones' that wouldn't be more than a foot note in any other faction, like Harald Deathwolf or Krom Dragongaze.

I would keep the loyalist Primarchs to offset the Chaos Primarchs (who now that they are Daemon Princes can't die). But I would start killing/retiring and replacing regularly anyone who can't live for centuries (IG, Tau etc). Also kill off and replace Space Marines every know and then.

Calgar, by all rights, should be dead already. In the space of one supplement book he lost a throat and three hearts. That dude has some of thickest plot armor I've ever seen and I hate him for it.

 Mr Nobody wrote:
I understand that 40K is meant to be a perpetual narrative and no one wants too see their favorite character shuffle off the stage, but one can only take so much plot armor in their setting.

No, 40k is meant to be a "five seconds to Armageddon" (not the planet) setting, not a Saturday morning cartoon/soap opera.

The dipsticks in the studio who listened to the people who whined and moaned because they didn't get that should be ashamed of themselves.

I agree, it's a setting not a story. The story has already happened. Now we play in the resulting setting.

Gabriel Seth. The Flesh Tearers have been doomed since their IA article at least.

Really should be a setting not a narrative

Ive little interest in 40k, the evolving company supplied narrative.

The only time & way I want to see any character killed off is through actual play in our various crusades/escalation leagues/campaigns.

And even then they're only removed from play for the remaing duration of that event.
Other groups might do it differently....

the problem with killing off characters in 40k is that most characters people care about have an associated model and rules, and so to kill off the character would mean also getting rid of the rules (or, if you don't get rid of the rules, you get people complaining that the death means nothing), and so you get people complaining that they can't use their model any more. especially if it's a space marine

it's a lose/lose scenario for GW, so i can see why it's something they would rather just avoid

So just to answer OP:

Rather than death, how about corruption? Like what if the GSC infected Artemis, or a daemon corrupted and possessed Voldus?

There are fates worse than death. And the hit to morale would be so much harder than merely creating a martyr.

But the truth is that I'm sorta with ccs on this one- if it happens on the table, that's the best way for it to happen, no matter how it actually happens.

And also: as a Crusader, named units are dull, because they can't grow, which means no customization over time. Given that, I'm incentivized to convert and create my own characters, whose Battle Honours and wargear become the sort of special rules that you see on named characters.

And Crusade characters can and do die; sometimes they're so overwhelmed with Battlescars, you just want to retire the unit. Heck, in the Sisters army, a Living Saint is a Martyr waiting to happen.

And it isn't a big deal. Because if a Legendary character dies, there's probably two or three others that are Heroic, and even starting over with a green character is just a different kind of fun- it brings potential back to the game... Because you may be proud of the Legendary characters that you've watched grow... But they do become as stagnant as named after a while, because once they hit Legendary, they stop growing..

This is why I love 10th ed Crusade's rule that non-character units freeze at Battle Hardened until you spend the RP to unlock their Heroic/ Legendary potential. It slows down the growth on most units, allowing you to maintain a sense of potential for as long as you want, and if you wait for those units to perform an exceptional feat on the table before you spend the RP, you can really lean into the narrative.

Personally, I'd really like to see this in the setting and have been advocating for it for some time. The old idea of the setting being too big for anyone to truly effect (except perhaps Primarchs now) has been lost a lot with these neigh plot armour invincible beings running around being the movers and shakers of the Galaxy. Axe most of them and just make new characters as needed who can then also die when their time comes.

That being said, on the tabletop, they would have to deal with this in one simple way. Give Legends units proper support. Keep their rules more-less up to date and just say they can't be used in competitive tournaments, but otherwise are perfectly legal. This prevents feel bads from 99% of the community not being able to use the models they paid for anymore.

 Tawnis wrote:
Personally, I'd really like to see this in the setting and have been advocating for it for some time. The old idea of the setting being too big for anyone to truly effect (except perhaps Primarchs now) has been lost a lot with these neigh plot armour invincible beings running around being the movers and shakers of the Galaxy. Axe most of them and just make new characters as needed who can then also die when their time comes.

That being said, on the tabletop, they would have to deal with this in one simple way. Give Legends units proper support. Keep their rules more-less up to date and just say they can't be used in competitive tournaments, but otherwise are perfectly legal. This prevents feel bads from 99% of the community not being able to use the models they paid for anymore.

that's what legends units already are. they get updated with new editions and can be used in any games outside of tournaments. the problem is that most players view "not in tournaments" as "not allowed at all", and so don't see it as an acceptable solution

About 90% of SM Characters.

Then maybe the vast galaxy could finally start to feel vast, because every single conflict won't involve the same handful of dudes.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:


that's what legends units already are. they get updated with new editions and can be used in any games outside of tournaments. the problem is that most players view "not in tournaments" as "not allowed at all", and so don't see it as an acceptable solution

Agree, with one small amendment:

Most people who post in 40k forums don't see at as an acceptable solution.

What actual, real players of the game do and think? None of us have any idea, and GW knows more than we do, but they won't share because it's business intelligence; anything they say to enthusiasts, players or shareholders will also be seen and used by competitors and detractors.

Cookies on the websites tell GW who downloads Legends, then corelates that data with purchases from the store, which has its own cookies. If there's a data match- ie. you downloaded Legends and bought an Enforcer Tauros, and you have a sales history that includes lots of guard, GW has a pretty good guess that you're using it in a Guard army- but they're never going to tell anyone; they're just going to decide whether the data confirms it's profitable to create a sprue that modifies said Tauros for use by guard.

As far as Legends goes, it's a practice that, if I remember correctly, started in 8th. So they put time and effort into writing, formatting and hosting Legends again when they released 9th, and yet again when they released 10th. That likely means there have been enough download (and sales correlations) to justify the effort and expense. what the exact number is, we'll never know... But someone in the company probably does.

Now I don't have any proof of this- again, GW (and in fact any corp) is going to be as opaque as possible about their processes they use and the data they collect. But that's what I'd do if I was in charge.

First?

I didn’t do nuffink so don’t go perishing me! I is innocent!

Second?

Abaddon. I know this wouldn’t be a popular one, but for returning 40K to a setting and not a narrative, Abaddon is the glue that keeps Chaos forces more or less pulling in the same direction. Take him out, and you create an unholy mess of individual warlords and warbands going where they want, doing whatever they think will advance them the most.

In terms of narrative vs setting? I’m genuinely torn. I like that things now stay done, and the background is shaken up. And we can always set our own shenanigans as historical affairs. But? Now they’ve started? They kind of have to continue, and that worries me.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:
Personally, I'd really like to see this in the setting and have been advocating for it for some time. The old idea of the setting being too big for anyone to truly effect (except perhaps Primarchs now) has been lost a lot with these neigh plot armour invincible beings running around being the movers and shakers of the Galaxy. Axe most of them and just make new characters as needed who can then also die when their time comes.

That being said, on the tabletop, they would have to deal with this in one simple way. Give Legends units proper support. Keep their rules more-less up to date and just say they can't be used in competitive tournaments, but otherwise are perfectly legal. This prevents feel bads from 99% of the community not being able to use the models they paid for anymore.

that's what legends units already are. they get updated with new editions and can be used in any games outside of tournaments. the problem is that most players view "not in tournaments" as "not allowed at all", and so don't see it as an acceptable solution

Kind of, but not entirely.

We'll know if they're getting proper updates when 11th comes out. I think them getting one every edition will be good enough, however, recall that they never got an update in 9th and only in 10th when the rules fundamentally changed. So will we get them every edition, or only when the game gets a full overhaul, that remains to be seen.

That very much seemed like the original intent, it was even explicitly stated in GW's comments on Legends units, but there have been more and more events not allowing them and I think it's based on the perception that they are unbalanced. I'm not sure that entirely something that GW can fix, everyone gets to decide how to run their own events, but it is a problem that needs addressing before people would be okay with more units moving to Legends. Perhaps if once every so often GW held an official event where Legends were allowed... come to think of it, the big narrative events they do, do allow Legends, so IDK, maybe it's a kind of perception that is not so simple to change.

For me, most events in my city allow Legends, so it's never been a big deal on my end, but I hear a lot about it online, so it clearly is an issue for some people in some places.

Fairly happy with a narrative done right. I thought Gathering Storm (just 7 years ago...) was some of the best story telling GW's put out in ages. I liked the idea that 8th would be a 100 year jump into the future, with change for all factions. Rather than just rehashing the 5th/2nd lore (faction depending).

I'd kill off Vect in a heart beat. Perhaps a bit much given DE's lack of named characters and general screen time - but I think he's an albatross round the faction's neck. Ditch the effective stasis of "one step forward, one step back, just according to Vect" and give us half a dozen characters in motion, with ups, downs and a dozen betrayals before breakfast.

But it would require someone on the writing team to really push DE into the current timeline. Maybe if they are the non-Marine faction in the 11th Starter.

(They could obviously do this without killing Vect.)

Tyel wrote:
But it would require someone on the writing team to really push DE into the current timeline.

It would require someone in GW to remember that DE actually exist as a faction.

 Tawnis wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:
Personally, I'd really like to see this in the setting and have been advocating for it for some time. The old idea of the setting being too big for anyone to truly effect (except perhaps Primarchs now) has been lost a lot with these neigh plot armour invincible beings running around being the movers and shakers of the Galaxy. Axe most of them and just make new characters as needed who can then also die when their time comes.

That being said, on the tabletop, they would have to deal with this in one simple way. Give Legends units proper support. Keep their rules more-less up to date and just say they can't be used in competitive tournaments, but otherwise are perfectly legal. This prevents feel bads from 99% of the community not being able to use the models they paid for anymore.

that's what legends units already are. they get updated with new editions and can be used in any games outside of tournaments. the problem is that most players view "not in tournaments" as "not allowed at all", and so don't see it as an acceptable solution

Kind of, but not entirely.

We'll know if they're getting proper updates when 11th comes out. I think them getting one every edition will be good enough, however, recall that they never got an update in 9th and only in 10th when the rules fundamentally changed. So will we get them every edition, or only when the game gets a full overhaul, that remains to be seen.

That very much seemed like the original intent, it was even explicitly stated in GW's comments on Legends units, but there have been more and more events not allowing them and I think it's based on the perception that they are unbalanced. I'm not sure that entirely something that GW can fix, everyone gets to decide how to run their own events, but it is a problem that needs addressing before people would be okay with more units moving to Legends. Perhaps if once every so often GW held an official event where Legends were allowed... come to think of it, the big narrative events they do, do allow Legends, so IDK, maybe it's a kind of perception that is not so simple to change.

For me, most events in my city allow Legends, so it's never been a big deal on my end, but I hear a lot about it online, so it clearly is an issue for some people in some places.

There were a few times in 9th where (some) Legends got updates.
One that comes to mind? The Chaos Lord. Remember when people lost their when he lost his Jump Pack in the new Codex? Well, a few days later, guess what was added to the Legends version of his sheet? That's right, a jumppack.
There's a few more examples, but I'd have to check my notes & I'm too busy atm.

ccs wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:
Personally, I'd really like to see this in the setting and have been advocating for it for some time. The old idea of the setting being too big for anyone to truly effect (except perhaps Primarchs now) has been lost a lot with these neigh plot armour invincible beings running around being the movers and shakers of the Galaxy. Axe most of them and just make new characters as needed who can then also die when their time comes.

That being said, on the tabletop, they would have to deal with this in one simple way. Give Legends units proper support. Keep their rules more-less up to date and just say they can't be used in competitive tournaments, but otherwise are perfectly legal. This prevents feel bads from 99% of the community not being able to use the models they paid for anymore.

that's what legends units already are. they get updated with new editions and can be used in any games outside of tournaments. the problem is that most players view "not in tournaments" as "not allowed at all", and so don't see it as an acceptable solution

Kind of, but not entirely.

We'll know if they're getting proper updates when 11th comes out. I think them getting one every edition will be good enough, however, recall that they never got an update in 9th and only in 10th when the rules fundamentally changed. So will we get them every edition, or only when the game gets a full overhaul, that remains to be seen.

That very much seemed like the original intent, it was even explicitly stated in GW's comments on Legends units, but there have been more and more events not allowing them and I think it's based on the perception that they are unbalanced. I'm not sure that entirely something that GW can fix, everyone gets to decide how to run their own events, but it is a problem that needs addressing before people would be okay with more units moving to Legends. Perhaps if once every so often GW held an official event where Legends were allowed... come to think of it, the big narrative events they do, do allow Legends, so IDK, maybe it's a kind of perception that is not so simple to change.

For me, most events in my city allow Legends, so it's never been a big deal on my end, but I hear a lot about it online, so it clearly is an issue for some people in some places.

There were a few times in 9th where (some) Legends got updates.
One that comes to mind? The Chaos Lord. Remember when people lost their when he lost his Jump Pack in the new Codex? Well, a few days later, guess what was added to the Legends version of his sheet? That's right, a jumppack.
There's a few more examples, but I'd have to check my notes & I'm too busy atm.

The flipside, though, is that a LOT of named characters didn't even get Legends rules for 10th. There's a whole document of named characters and what generic datasheet you should use them as. (A personal favorite is using Gabriel Angelos as a Terminator Captain, even though Terminator Captains can't use Thunder Hammers anymore)

I'm not a fan of anyone in 40k being the master of their fate, so you can imagine Asdrubael Vect winds me up, and I'll be delighted when the threads in Queen of Knives take what I presume to be their intended course and he winds up face down in a gutter with a shiv in his spine. I wouldn't even consider it 'moving the narrative forward', just correcting a lacklustre idea in the Dark Eldar's first codex in 3rd that until now they've kept trying to prop up with contrivance rather than just admit their mistake and toss him in the bin.

But as I say I much prefer everyone in 40k to be inescapably damned by the poor choices of their predecessors, so I wouldn't make a habit of shaking things up.

ccs wrote:

There were a few times in 9th where (some) Legends got updates.
One that comes to mind? The Chaos Lord. Remember when people lost their when he lost his Jump Pack in the new Codex? Well, a few days later, guess what was added to the Legends version of his sheet? That's right, a jumppack.
There's a few more examples, but I'd have to check my notes & I'm too busy atm.

Wasn't that just when they were taken out of the codex? Kinda like what just happened to the FW Necron Canoptek stuff?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:


The flipside, though, is that a LOT of named characters didn't even get Legends rules for 10th. There's a whole document of named characters and what generic datasheet you should use them as. (A personal favorite is using Gabriel Angelos as a Terminator Captain, even though Terminator Captains can't use Thunder Hammers anymore)

True, that can be added to the pile of "they would have to do Legends properly" point I made.

 Tawnis wrote:

ccs wrote:

There were a few times in 9th where (some) Legends got updates.
One that comes to mind? The Chaos Lord. Remember when people lost their when he lost his Jump Pack in the new Codex? Well, a few days later, guess what was added to the Legends version of his sheet? That's right, a jumppack.
There's a few more examples, but I'd have to check my notes & I'm too busy atm.

Wasn't that just when they were taken out of the codex? Kinda like what just happened to the FW Necron Canoptek stuff?

My point was that despite GW (and players) saying that Legends won't be updated, GW does occasionally update them within an edition.
The how/what/why/quantity is a different subject.

I think people/poor writers can caught up in narrative being something like a skywalker family drama. You can have a narrative setting. Indeed with the size of 40k it is easy - here you have characters like Abaddon drive a united chaos force into this part of the galaxy, but x thousand light years and months/years warp travel away its business as usual. So you narrative opens up new areas of the galaxy setting. Not, Abaddon does this, now every part of galaxy changes. Like dare I say the real world. Trump might come to power in the next election, but the war in Burma will continue to rage. Not everything affects everything else and this is just one planet.

If it were up to me, I'd exterminate every named character in the setting at regular intervals. "The Galaxy is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed" and all that. Black Library stories could all be posthumous tales of martyrdom, why not. Its not about how you survive, its how you die that counts!

Much preferred the old editions system where you only had generic characters (Minor hero/Hero/Major Hero), and everybody designed their own. Made the setting seem that much bigger IMO

But of course, cant have that now can we, cuz NMNR and all that flocking BS

ccs wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:

ccs wrote:

There were a few times in 9th where (some) Legends got updates.
One that comes to mind? The Chaos Lord. Remember when people lost their when he lost his Jump Pack in the new Codex? Well, a few days later, guess what was added to the Legends version of his sheet? That's right, a jumppack.
There's a few more examples, but I'd have to check my notes & I'm too busy atm.

Wasn't that just when they were taken out of the codex? Kinda like what just happened to the FW Necron Canoptek stuff?

My point was that despite GW (and players) saying that Legends won't be updated, GW does occasionally update them within an edition.
The how/what/why/quantity is a different subject.

I mean, I think there is a notable distinction between adding to and updating, but I get what you mean.

 tauist wrote:
If it were up to me, I'd exterminate every named character in the setting at regular intervals. "The Galaxy is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed" and all that. Black Library stories could all be posthumous tales of martyrdom, why not. Its not about how you survive, its how you die that counts!

Much preferred the old editions system where you only had generic characters (Minor hero/Hero/Major Hero), and everybody designed their own. Made the setting seem that much bigger IMO

But of course, cant have that now can we, cuz NMNR and all that flocking BS

Totally agree!
I missed the customization as well… Been playing since '92

 tauist wrote:


Much preferred the old editions system where you only had generic characters (Minor hero/Hero/Major Hero), and everybody designed their own. Made the setting seem that much bigger IMO

But of course, cant have that now can we, cuz NMNR and all that flocking BS

I think the only edition without named characters was Rogue Trader. And I think even it had one or two. I don't disagree with your larger point though- I too think build-your-own beats named hands down for player engagement, and that it was easier to do in the list-building stage in previous editions with more customizable unit sizes, options and equipment.

But customizability is why I play Crusade- I don't get to buy my customization up front, but I can earn it over time based on what happens on the battlefield. Weapon upgrades and Crusade Relics do provide modeling potential, and even certain skills and abilities also suggest possibilities like cammo cloaks to show that a unit has a stealth-conferring battle honour, or grizzly trophies of the appropriate type, gunsights, searchlights, etc.

I know it's not the same as list-based flexibility... And I do miss that too. It's one of the reasons why 9th ed Crusade is still better than 10th; the core customization that was still available in 9th made Crusade even better, because in that edition it served as an extra layer of customization, rather than being the sole source of options for some units or carrying a disproportionate share of that responsibility for others.