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.

They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

Space Marines' Power Armour is industrial spaceship part moving suits that have been adapted to war because they had the STC prints available for em. They're not shielded, they're ablative; and again, comparing space marines to spartans doesn't work because there isn't enough statistical difference to differentiate them, without underplaying spartans or overplaying humans.

liquidjoshi wrote:They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

That was my point, the game mechanic was the only indication anywhere that firewarriors have a shield, and that was just for the purposes of the game. Plus, by same reasoning as "it happened in the videogame" pretty sure space marines shouldn't get cover saves either? And 1 SM should be able to kill armies of orks and his melee kills should heal him? Or are we allowing some mechanics and disregarding others "just because".

Have we considered mobility? I would think of all things a spartan would be far more mobile then a space marine could manage.

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

That was my point, the game mechanic was the only indication anywhere that firewarriors have a shield, and that was just for the purposes of the game. Plus, by same reasoning as "it happened in the videogame" pretty sure space marines shouldn't get cover saves either? And 1 SM should be able to kill armies of orks and his melee kills should heal him? Or are we allowing some mechanics and disregarding others "just because".

I get the feeling we're arguing the same cause but under different pretences. I firmly believe that game =/= fluff (mainly because it doesn't), and that trying to make it fit will make an abomination, not a game. Hence why I think:

A) The first statline was fine.
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

liquidjoshi wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

That was my point, the game mechanic was the only indication anywhere that firewarriors have a shield, and that was just for the purposes of the game. Plus, by same reasoning as "it happened in the videogame" pretty sure space marines shouldn't get cover saves either? And 1 SM should be able to kill armies of orks and his melee kills should heal him? Or are we allowing some mechanics and disregarding others "just because".

I get the feeling we're arguing the same cause but under different pretences. I firmly believe that game =/= fluff (mainly because it doesn't), and that trying to make it fit will make an abomination, not a game. Hence why I think:

A) The first statline was fine.
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

We could be getting mixed up in each others wording >>
Im the first to argue game =/= fluff, least not in all respects, but lets admit some if the 40k fluff as compared to its own game is a little...out there.

The first statline WAS good, and yes, everything needs tweaks but as a base it was fine. Maybe a better idea would be to add all these proposed tweaks in the form of war gear options. The spartan II were never ment to be used as standard soldiers like space marines. Space marines all (to more or less degree) follow their own sets of rules, and thus we have tacticls, devastators etc, and within that (both fluff, movie marine and tabletop) its very much "you 7 get bolters, he gets a chainsword and you two get special weapon X and heavy weapon Y". We in agreement so far? This is what helps to keep some semblance of balance with TT marines, same as their abilities being downplayed. Spartans on the other hand are no legion. Even in the original S2 project, only 33 were left after an initial class of 75, and that was before wartime. Another class came along after, but im going to assume similar numbers. They were encouraged to play to their strengths, and were issued with what suited the individual.

Basicaly what im trying to get at is, downplay the stats a bit, but still better than guardsmen. Give them the rerollable 4+ (great idea by the way) and then, as well as the proposed wargear weapons, give them something alont the line of what stormtroopers get, but by squad member. Their probably going to be Elite unit anyway right? say a selection of little quirks boosting stats or giving a special rule to that one model, priced accordingly and say each "quirk" can only be taken by 1 model each. Sound about fair? Please both parties? It would keep the SM fanboys placated in that each one isnt better than an astartes, and itd keep the halo fanboys down because it would give them slight edges and still be fluffy to halo.

liquidjoshi wrote:
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

>Spartan at representative stats and price
>Why not Space Marine at representative stats and price?
wut.

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

That was my point, the game mechanic was the only indication anywhere that firewarriors have a shield, and that was just for the purposes of the game. Plus, by same reasoning as "it happened in the videogame" pretty sure space marines shouldn't get cover saves either? And 1 SM should be able to kill armies of orks and his melee kills should heal him? Or are we allowing some mechanics and disregarding others "just because".

I get the feeling we're arguing the same cause but under different pretences. I firmly believe that game =/= fluff (mainly because it doesn't), and that trying to make it fit will make an abomination, not a game. Hence why I think:

A) The first statline was fine.
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

We could be getting mixed up in each others wording >>
Im the first to argue game =/= fluff, least not in all respects, but lets admit some if the 40k fluff as compared to its own game is a little...out there.

The first statline WAS good, and yes, everything needs tweaks but as a base it was fine. Maybe a better idea would be to add all these proposed tweaks in the form of war gear options. The spartan II were never ment to be used as standard soldiers like space marines. Space marines all (to more or less degree) follow their own sets of rules, and thus we have tacticls, devastators etc, and within that (both fluff, movie marine and tabletop) its very much "you 7 get bolters, he gets a chainsword and you two get special weapon X and heavy weapon Y". We in agreement so far? This is what helps to keep some semblance of balance with TT marines, same as their abilities being downplayed. Spartans on the other hand are no legion. Even in the original S2 project, only 33 were left after an initial class of 75, and that was before wartime. Another class came along after, but im going to assume similar numbers. They were encouraged to play to their strengths, and were issued with what suited the individual.

Basicaly what im trying to get at is, downplay the stats a bit, but still better than guardsmen. Give them the rerollable 4+ (great idea by the way) and then, as well as the proposed wargear weapons, give them something alont the line of what stormtroopers get, but by squad member. Their probably going to be Elite unit anyway right? say a selection of little quirks boosting stats or giving a special rule to that one model, priced accordingly and say each "quirk" can only be taken by 1 model each. Sound about fair? Please both parties? It would keep the SM fanboys placated in that each one isnt better than an astartes, and itd keep the halo fanboys down because it would give them slight edges and still be fluffy to halo.

That 4+ re roll still irks me somewhat. But it's a point I'll concede for now. I think Spartan squads could work as 5 man units (slightly unfluffy, but we all know fluff =/= rules) with possibly more special weapons than other units (thinking 2/ 5 guys - able to buff them to 10 - Combat squads would definitely be an option.)
Another point is that while they are far more fragile than Space Marines, they are more manoeuvrable and naturally more quiet, so I don't see why they couldn't have MTC and Stealth. This means they get better cover saves than astartes, becoming more durable in a fluffy way, while they can't fulfil the role of frontline warriors that the SM can. I feel this is balanced (and also mitigates the re-rollable 4+ armour save - you don't need it with a 3+ cover in ruins, 4+ in most other pieces of terrain)

Obviously some people won't be happy with it, but I feel that this is balanced and somewhat fluffy. Making them fit to the game, not their fluff, is what is important, and what I think a lot of people here are missing.

chrisrawr wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

>Spartan at representative stats and price
>Why not Space Marine at representative stats and price?
wut.

Wow... that's... interesting... And very unclear. Translation anyone?

doc1234 wrote:

chrisrawr wrote:

Spoiler:

Righto, if you're going to use Space Marines as a comparison, we have to acknowledge that no mere human, no matter how well-trained, deserves a 4 in any stat, and indeed, S4 is mighty.

S4 is representative of Servos capable of lifting many-tonne spaceship parts. It's representative of a 2-tonne suit of armour with a 200 pound fist smashing you at over 100 miles an hour. It's representative of the awesome might of mechanical systems and stresses, which would tear normal human tissue to pieces.

T4 is representative of the multiple redundancies that go into a Space Marine's physiology. It's representative of the steroids and god-seed present in their systems. T4 represents the ability to be shot by a modern-day tank and keep trucking, with or without power armour.

WS4 represents decades, if not centuries, of training in the arts martial, the arts combative, and the firearm arts. It represents dozens, if not hundreds, of campaigns and victories. It also represents the power of the black carapace to aid and assist, and indeed enhance, their very minds and senses far beyond any mere mortals.

BS4 represents, again, the enhanced senses and abilities brought by the carapace, their geneseed, and their power armour's ability to negate all recoil from any weapon smaller than a battle cannon. Servos are awesome.

Ld8 represents a space marine's unshakable will in the face of decades of atrocity.

I4 and A1 represents a space marine's incredible machine-enhanced speed and lethality - able to kill a man simply by walking over him, able to plant precision blows without stopping in his advance, the space marine is a terror.

Sv3+ represents the tank-like armour of the space marine. Able to easily survive a fullisade of laserbeams, shrapnel, plasma, and worse, the space marine is at home in his role as a storm-trooper and walking war machine.

With this in mind, my new proposed statline for humans and spartans.

Guardsman: WS1.5 BS1.5 S1.1 T1.1 W0.2 I1.5 A0.2 Ld4 Sv9+

Spartans: WS2 BS3 S3 T2 W0.5 I2.5 A0.6 Ld7 Sv4.5+

And some weapons

Lasgun: S1 AP10 range 24" rapidfire
Bolter: S3 AP6 range 24" rapidfire
Heavy Bolter: S4 AP5 range 36" assault 5 for space marines, heavy 3 for everyone else.
Battle Rifle: S2 AP7 range24 assault 3
SMG: S1.5 AP8 Range18 assault 3, 2 = assault 5

And now everyone can be happy.

He has a point, the tabletop vs fluff really doesn't balance well >> Though to be fair the fluff doesn't balance either, but hey thats sci-fi (as is halo). Now, baring in mind that they're 2 sci-fi worlds ruled by cool (with the exception of a few nice little psuedo-science bits), SOME of the proposed changes make sense, In terms of the invuln save, how about something along the lines of 5+/3++ FNP, with a special rule, after he fails the 3++, but before FNP, for the next turn he loses the 3++ (as in the shield going down). Turn after that, if still alive gets it back. Seem fair?

Im not gonna touch the rest of it yet before thinking thruogh a bit more. Hope this helped

Quite a well known and old fact that SM's dont fit the fluff, and instead of downgrading every other model you simply have to upgrade space marines and things like GD's and avatars and SC's. I remember from a long time ago GW supposdly saying that if marines fit the fluff in the TT game then they would be stat line on most and prob 5 wounds. If that was the case then a SM army would be 5 models and then how would GW make any money

liquidjoshi wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:

Spoiler:

They do. Ever played the Firewarrior Video game? You're armour very definitely has a shield IIRC. You don't see anything apart from the armour bar, but still counts.

That was my point, the game mechanic was the only indication anywhere that firewarriors have a shield, and that was just for the purposes of the game. Plus, by same reasoning as "it happened in the videogame" pretty sure space marines shouldn't get cover saves either? And 1 SM should be able to kill armies of orks and his melee kills should heal him? Or are we allowing some mechanics and disregarding others "just because".

I get the feeling we're arguing the same cause but under different pretences. I firmly believe that game =/= fluff (mainly because it doesn't), and that trying to make it fit will make an abomination, not a game. Hence why I think:

A) The first statline was fine.
B) If people want to do Spartans representing what they can do in game, that's fine. But expect me to turn up with movie marines at regular marine prices in our game.

We could be getting mixed up in each others wording >>
Im the first to argue game =/= fluff, least not in all respects, but lets admit some if the 40k fluff as compared to its own game is a little...out there.

The first statline WAS good, and yes, everything needs tweaks but as a base it was fine. Maybe a better idea would be to add all these proposed tweaks in the form of war gear options. The spartan II were never ment to be used as standard soldiers like space marines. Space marines all (to more or less degree) follow their own sets of rules, and thus we have tacticls, devastators etc, and within that (both fluff, movie marine and tabletop) its very much "you 7 get bolters, he gets a chainsword and you two get special weapon X and heavy weapon Y". We in agreement so far? This is what helps to keep some semblance of balance with TT marines, same as their abilities being downplayed. Spartans on the other hand are no legion. Even in the original S2 project, only 33 were left after an initial class of 75, and that was before wartime. Another class came along after, but im going to assume similar numbers. They were encouraged to play to their strengths, and were issued with what suited the individual.

Basicaly what im trying to get at is, downplay the stats a bit, but still better than guardsmen. Give them the rerollable 4+ (great idea by the way) and then, as well as the proposed wargear weapons, give them something alont the line of what stormtroopers get, but by squad member. Their probably going to be Elite unit anyway right? say a selection of little quirks boosting stats or giving a special rule to that one model, priced accordingly and say each "quirk" can only be taken by 1 model each. Sound about fair? Please both parties? It would keep the SM fanboys placated in that each one isnt better than an astartes, and itd keep the halo fanboys down because it would give them slight edges and still be fluffy to halo.

That 4+ re roll still irks me somewhat. But it's a point I'll concede for now. I think Spartan squads could work as 5 man units (slightly unfluffy, but we all know fluff =/= rules) with possibly more special weapons than other units (thinking 2/ 5 guys - able to buff them to 10 - Combat squads would definitely be an option.)
Another point is that while they are far more fragile than Space Marines, they are more manoeuvrable and naturally more quiet, so I don't see why they couldn't have MTC and Stealth. This means they get better cover saves than astartes, becoming more durable in a fluffy way, while they can't fulfil the role of frontline warriors that the SM can. I feel this is balanced (and also mitigates the re-rollable 4+ armour save - you don't need it with a 3+ cover in ruins, 4+ in most other pieces of terrain)

Obviously some people won't be happy with it, but I feel that this is balanced and somewhat fluffy. Making them fit to the game, not their fluff, is what is important, and what I think a lot of people here are missing.

No, you are right, we can't and won't make everyone happy. I'll also be the first to admit I don't know a great amount about the Halo universe. However, I do like making balance for these kinds of things.

And I like watching Halo fanobys rage because they think Spartans are better than SM for some reason.

liquidjoshi wrote:No, you are right, we can't and won't make everyone happy. I'll also be the first to admit I don't know a great amount about the Halo universe. However, I do like making balance for these kinds of things.

And I like watching Halo fanobys rage because they think Spartans are better than SM for some reason.

Its not even a case of "better" though, its like comparing the navy SEALs to SAS. Happens alot, national pride blagh blagh blagh. Their a bad comparison, they were created for entirely different purposes. Its like arguing that your cars better than a bus because it goes faster. Yes, true, but lets see it fit 40 people. See my point?

@liquid no one in this entire thread has ever insinuated that spartans are better than space marines. Please point me to a post by someone raging over this?

I never said about this thread specifically. I've seen the Spartan VS SM thread about 100 times.

Having said that, bit defensive there aren't we chris? I might well infer that you would think that.

But whatever. Not the topic of discussion.

daedalus-templarius wrote:
Spartan
WS4 BS6 S5 T4 I5 A2 W2 Ld9 Sv 3+/4++*
Battle Rifle: S4 AP5 Assault 3 24"/36" 24" moving, 36" heavy profile
SMG: S4 AP6 Assault 5 12"
Sniper Rifle (purchasable option) follows rules for Vindicare rifle using Turbo-Penetrator

Special rules: Regenerating shield, hijack, weapon-grab, move through cover, stealth

Regenerating shield: 4++ to start, once a save is made, it changes to 5++, once another save is made 6++, if a save is made at 6++ the shield is exhausted. The shield regenerates at the beginning of the next player turn

hijack: When in B2B contact with an enemy vehicle, the Spartan can attempt to wrest control of the vehicle. On a 4+ the Spartan steals the vehicle and is removed from play temporarily, as he is in control of the enemy vehicle. The controlling player can choose to relinquish control of the vehicle and come back onto the board using disembarkation rules, and the vehicle is wrecked. If the vehicle is wrecked while the Spartan is inside, he must disembark.

weapon-grab: When a Spartan is in play, place a token where an enemy squad with a special weapon has been killed. On the Spartan controlling player's turn, he may choose to pick up a dropped special weapon and use it for that shooting phase. After the shooting phase is over, the Spartan discards the special weapon due to it being out of ammunition, low on power, etc.

I fully agree that this is what Spartans would be. They are not meant to be balanced. However, why is the BR heavy if at 36". I would not think that it would be unless you are saying he is standing still trying to line up a shot. Note that 36" is the range for 40k snipers

Spartans also have armor abilities, should be another special rule.

Note that 1 spartan can easily take down many times his own number, not just Chief. They can also survive falls from space and hordes of enemies. They top SMs by a long shot

Da_Boss wrote:

daedalus-templarius wrote:
Spartan
WS4 BS6 S5 T4 I5 A2 W2 Ld9 Sv 3+/4++*
Battle Rifle: S4 AP5 Assault 3 24"/36" 24" moving, 36" heavy profile
SMG: S4 AP6 Assault 5 12"
Sniper Rifle (purchasable option) follows rules for Vindicare rifle using Turbo-Penetrator

Special rules: Regenerating shield, hijack, weapon-grab, move through cover, stealth

Regenerating shield: 4++ to start, once a save is made, it changes to 5++, once another save is made 6++, if a save is made at 6++ the shield is exhausted. The shield regenerates at the beginning of the next player turn

hijack: When in B2B contact with an enemy vehicle, the Spartan can attempt to wrest control of the vehicle. On a 4+ the Spartan steals the vehicle and is removed from play temporarily, as he is in control of the enemy vehicle. The controlling player can choose to relinquish control of the vehicle and come back onto the board using disembarkation rules, and the vehicle is wrecked. If the vehicle is wrecked while the Spartan is inside, he must disembark.

weapon-grab: When a Spartan is in play, place a token where an enemy squad with a special weapon has been killed. On the Spartan controlling player's turn, he may choose to pick up a dropped special weapon and use it for that shooting phase. After the shooting phase is over, the Spartan discards the special weapon due to it being out of ammunition, low on power, etc.

I fully agree that this is what Spartans would be. They are not meant to be balanced. However, why is the BR heavy if at 36". I would not think that it would be unless you are saying he is standing still trying to line up a shot. Note that 36" is the range for 40k snipers

Spartans also have armor abilities, should be another special rule.

Note that 1 spartan can easily take down many times his own number, not just Chief. They can also survive falls from space and hordes of enemies. They top SMs by a long shot

And I dont agree. In WH40k fluff, guardsmen and marines hijack tanks, and pick up weapons. However its not part of their USR's, So I find my stats and price perfectly fair. Its just not a fanboy friendly stat line.

Yeah, I'd take OBC's statline over Daedalus's any day. It's a significantly better representation TT wise

This thread is still garbage, sad I came and checked on it.

For the record, I'm a bigger 40k fanboy than Halo fanboy(just look at my art ffs); I just think the stats presented in here are crap.

daedalus-templarius wrote:This thread is still garbage, sad I came and checked on it.

For the record, I'm a bigger 40k fanboy than Halo fanboy(just look at my art ffs); I just think the stats presented in here are crap.

They really aren't. Nowhere are Spartans portrayed as superior to marines, and their stats are very similar. The only problem is that the stat scale of 40K is crap. A guardsman might be strength 3.4, a Spartan might be strength 4.2, and a marine might be strength 4.4, but since the system only uses a scale of 1-10 the guardsman is lowered down to strength 3, the Spartan is rounded down to strength 4, and the marine is rounded down to strength 4. As I said earlier, if you give Spartans stats like WS:4 BS:5 S:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:4+/5++ than you should give marines stats like WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:5 W:2 I:4 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:3+, which no one wants. Now, if you made a Spartan special character with stats like WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:4 W:3 I:5 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:3+/5++, and gave them eternal warrior I wouldn't mind because special and independent characters have plot armour. It is why a Lord Commissar or Creed gets more wounds than an Ork Nob, or why anyone except gargantuan creatures have eternal warrior. No one wants to buy a fancy special character that costs 250 points just to see them die on turn 3 from a demolisher cannon without having done anything.

daedalus-templarius wrote:This thread is still garbage, sad I came and checked on it.

For the record, I'm a bigger 40k fanboy than Halo fanboy(just look at my art ffs); I just think the stats presented in here are crap.

considering this thread hadnt had a post for what, nearly a week or something? if your not happy why did you feel the need to a) post and get the thread going again, and b) complain and then offer no discussion, alternative anything. congrats my good sir, you whined on the internet and got some attention!

Buttons wrote:
They really aren't. Nowhere are Spartans portrayed as superior to marines, and their stats are very similar. The only problem is that the stat scale of 40K is crap. A guardsman might be strength 3.4, a Spartan might be strength 4.2, and a marine might be strength 4.4, but since the system only uses a scale of 1-10 the guardsman is lowered down to strength 3, the Spartan is rounded down to strength 4, and the marine is rounded down to strength 4. As I said earlier, if you give Spartans stats like WS:4 BS:5 S:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:4+/5++ than you should give marines stats like WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:5 W:2 I:4 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:3+, which no one wants. Now, if you made a Spartan special character with stats like WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:4 W:3 I:5 A:2 Ld:10 Sv:3+/5++, and gave them eternal warrior I wouldn't mind because special and independent characters have plot armour. It is why a Lord Commissar or Creed gets more wounds than an Ork Nob, or why anyone except gargantuan creatures have eternal warrior. No one wants to buy a fancy special character that costs 250 points just to see them die on turn 3 from a demolisher cannon without having done anything.

this is always a problem not just with 40k, but scaling any other fandom into it. always too gonna have two sides frothing at the mouth. Even the originaly posted stats were pretty damn good compared to some (as in, topics that go along the lines of "hur dur spartans should be S9 just because". Yes il admit, we went a little silly with the tinkering, but i think it was more.... people tinkering towards different directions up there rather than a pool, so its probably not as bad as it seems.

"this is always a problem not just with 40k, but scaling any other fandom into it. always too gonna have two sides frothing at the mouth."

Eh, I fervently disagree with this. Any fiction with content worth porting will have some basic consistency to it from which data can be extrapolated. Data extrapolated from two sources can always be compared when the system comparing them is representative; Warhammer 40K the Tabletop is not representative, so you can't compare data with it.

chrisrawr wrote:"this is always a problem not just with 40k, but scaling any other fandom into it. always too gonna have two sides frothing at the mouth."

Eh, I fervently disagree with this. Any fiction with content worth porting will have some basic consistency to it from which data can be extrapolated. Data extrapolated from two sources can always be compared when the system comparing them is representative; Warhammer 40K the Tabletop is not representative, so you can't compare data with it.

Right, but you can compare the data of WH40k fluff to Halo Fluff, then translate the 40k fluff back into tabletop fluff. Which is what I did. Its not 100% perfect, but it stays with the spirit of the game.

Also like Buttons said about Plot armor, this is a generic spartan. Not an named character. Its not going to have the plot armor that the Chief would have.

daedalus-templarius wrote:This thread is still garbage, sad I came and checked on it.

For the record, I'm a bigger 40k fanboy than Halo fanboy(just look at my art ffs); I just think the stats presented in here are crap.

Oh I'm sorry, here I made you a special Supa 1337 SPARTAN stat line.
WS: 10
BS: 10
S: 10
T: 10
I: 10
W: *
A: 100
LD: 10
Save 2+/2++ re-rollable.
Fleahbane
Armor Bane
Shrouded,
Stealth,
Rage
Stubborn
Fearless
ATSKNF

SPARTANS R DA BESTEST: You win automatically for playing a spartan!

Happy?

* Wounds? SPARTANS CANT DIE THEY 2 COOL!!!!!1!1!!1

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:

chrisrawr wrote:"this is always a problem not just with 40k, but scaling any other fandom into it. always too gonna have two sides frothing at the mouth."

Eh, I fervently disagree with this. Any fiction with content worth porting will have some basic consistency to it from which data can be extrapolated. Data extrapolated from two sources can always be compared when the system comparing them is representative; Warhammer 40K the Tabletop is not representative, so you can't compare data with it.

Right, but you can compare the data of WH40k fluff to Halo Fluff, then translate the 40k fluff back into tabletop fluff. Which is what I did. Its not 100% perfect, but it stays with the spirit of the game.

Except that FOURTYKAY FLUFF DOES NOT TRANSLATE INTO TABLETOP FLUFF (I think you meant crunch here).

There is no consistency at all to tabletop statistics, let alone when you bring fluff into it. Implying that you can stick something so much more than human in every way, in a slot that's so close to human, or worse in some cases, while we have things like vindicares, deathcult assassins, commissars, etc, all with established fluff being weaker than space marines (yet having better statlines, weapons, and points-cost-to-killy ratios) is a clear example of this.

So yes, you can compare Halo fluff to 40K fluff. But no, you cannot translate 40K fluff back into tabletop fluff without addressing the inconsistencies in the characteristics currently there, as they provide NO MEANINGFUL DATA that can be USED in a CONSISTENT WAY!

Meaningful Data: How much stronger is a Space Marine in Power Armour than a Human? A Space Marine is "Furious Charge" stronger - that is, when a human gets angry and runs at his enemies, he is as strong as a Space Marine in Power Armour,
Dual Comparison to WHAT WE KNOW for Consistency: How strong are Humans, and how strong are Humans when angry and running? Humans are human-strength, and a Humans are about the same strength when angry and running.
Meaningful Data Interpretation: Space Marines in Power Armour are Marginally stronger than Humans; S4 is marginally stronger than S3. We see this in the continued trend of S3-S4 via Furious Charge; in Orks, Harlequins, Tau, etc.
Dual Extrapolation: Either S4 is representative of Space Marine Strength, and marginally better than S3, or S4 is not representative of Marine Strength, and marginally better than S3.

The same basically applies to everything else where comparisons were made between humans and space marines.

If you want to compare this properly, from fluff to tabletop, then a Spartan would be more or less the equivalent to a SM Scout, but with T3.

I would allow the S4 because let's face it, Spartans don't have any standard issue hand to hand combat weaponry other than the armour itself AFAIK, so if they came up against a SM with anything from their armoury with the exception of perhaps a combat blade the spartan would be dead pretty fast.

Also a Bolter would be best compared to a full automatic RPG, rather than a machinegun.

Just saying, there are too many people on dakka that do not understand how to make playable rules as aposed to "fluffy rules". i think you'll find if you play a scenario using the movie marine rules you'll find it increadibly boring and not fun at all (that is unless you are completely obsessed with winning which is not the point of the game). I will admit i used to be like that but you'll find the game is far more fun when everyone plays for fun. For realistic and playable spartan rules i would say the following:

Spartan Team 100pts

Ws Bs S T W I A Ld Sv
Spartan team leader: 4 4 4 4 1 4 2 10 4+
Spartan: 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 9 4+

Unit Composition:

1 Spartan Sergeant
4 Spartans

Unit Type:

Infantry
Infantry Character (Sergeant only)

Special Rules:

Iron Will: A Spartan unit may always attempt to regroup at its normal leadership, regardless of any modifiers

Wargear:

Assault Rifle
Frag and Krak Grenades
Spartan Armour (4+ armour save)
Sheilding (6+ invurnerable save)
Magnum
Combat Knife

Options:

Any Spartan in the unit may exchange his magnum for one of the following:
Battle Rifle......................4pts
Shotgun..........................5pts
DMR................................4pts
Any Spartan in the unit may replace his assault rifle with one of the following:
Battle Rifle.....................1pts
Shotgun.........................2pts
DMR................................1pts
One Spartan in unit unit may replace both his assault rifle and Combat Knife with one of the following
Rocket Launcher..........5pts
FlameThrower...............5pts

Weapon Profiles:

Range S AP Type
Magnum 12" 3 6 Pistol
Assault Rifle 24" 3 6 Rapid Fire
Battle Rifle 36" 3 - Rapid Fire
DMR 36" 3 5 Single Shot
Shotgun 12" 3 6 Assault 2
Rocket Lchr. 36" 4 6 Heavy 1, Blast
Flamethrower template 4 - Heavy 1

Combat Knife - user - Melee

Writers notes:
My reasons for the rules are as follows: a marine from halo's armour is equivelant to that of a standard imperial guardsman, spartan armour is not much better so only a 4+ save was given. the 6+ invurnerable save is because again, the sheild can't take that much punishment. In melee combat a spartan does far more damage bashing than the weapon does at range, therefore the guns are all strength 3 apart from the shotgun as it is very powerful at short range, and the heavy weapons, both of which are the mounted versions from halo 3 as the rocket launcher that is more mobile would run out of ammo to quickly in a game of 40k. In the rules for the DMR the reason it is single shot is because you cannot assault after firing it. the rest is pretty self explanitory, but obviously these rules will need playtested before they can be finalised.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just to confirm, this message was not directed at the creator of this post, it was directed at all the halo fanboys preaching OP rules. The rules i have suggested should play well and sort of fit fluff wise. Plus it allows you to field them in a game without breaking it and it'd be really cool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lol, i didn't read your rules before i wrote mine, we had very similar ideas! I will repost this and ask for suggestions.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll just go post it in the thread you just made for them hahaha