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 to me as a da player I like the idea of fielding generic hq's over named one's. Their cheap, consistent, and they are often overlooked as an option when discussing point games over 900pts.

My issue is the viability of them. In a rulebook centered around standing across a field and derping eachother the librarians are the sm's really only viable option.

What I want to know is why bother giving the option for the other two. A chaplain makes any unit he's attached to gain fearless and fear and that's cool I guess and he has 4up invul.

Meanwhile the captain has no value at all. He trades the good things of the chaplain away for improved to hit in melee and 1 more wound.

I guess I'm just wondering why gw has bothered to put units in books as options in a game where they currently will do little more than be damage sponges

Allow me to introduce you to Ironfather Smashfether, aka he who can defeat a heirodule bio-titan in assault.

If someone plays where FW is ok , then mantis warrior librarians are cool , as they have divination .

Captains unlock other options. They can be kitted out however you want, and have better stats than most other models.
But, as you say there are better options, and they're often cheaper, too.

The generic options are there to provide choice, and build a fluffy model.

Yeah, not everything is there to be ideal, but to provide an option for cool painting/modeling opportunities. I run captains pretty regularly, and they do well. Combat characters have kind of been a balancing act in 40k since forever, so support characters like Librarians are typically more viable. Personally, I like captains who can kick some butt, but there are better ways to spend 100 points or whatever.

I prefer the Master of the Forge to a captain due to conversion beamer and boost cover saves. (and fluff)

I prefer the chapter master due to just being much tougher and orbital strike.

I prefer the Chaplain because of the boosts it gives to his squad.

BUT....

But I like the captains because they can be cheap(ish) and can be kitted out to whatever you need them to be.

Chaplains are still kinda goobers compared to libarians, imo. Even the BA super chaplain kinda sucks.

 Kain wrote:
Allow me to introduce you to Ironfather Smashfether, aka he who can defeat a heirodule bio-titan in assault.

Slam into a Slim Jim! OH YEAH!!!!


I pretend that's what he says when he rolls up on his bike and takes that first swing...

The problem I have with space marine captains is that they're only good for assault. It would seem that when a SM gets promoted, he forgets how to shoot any gun that isn't a bolter. I want a devastator captain taking names and kicking ass with a lascannon, dammit.

Captains do have one use for Codex Space Marines - making your bikers troops!

Chaplin doesn't give fear. He gives zealot, which applies fearless and hatred (reroll misses on first round of assault).

I like the captain because the command squad rolling together in a razerback is neat to me. I usually run chapter master in termy army with a full squad a termies stompin up the middle lane. He can shoot his orbital gun while still moving and I like to give him primarch's fury, since he can always shoot the big salvo with that too. I'm tempted to try him on a bike with biker squad troops soon.