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.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Or alternatively you just make units that will work for SW and other non codex Chapters:

Why exactly does the Wolf Lord not get orbital bombardment and could not be represented by a Chapter Master?
Just give some extra close Combat options for the Dreadnought which would allow the more Specalist /silly variants
Grey Hunters - just give non Codex Tac mariens option for CC weapon
Skyclaws and Blood Calws - just give a option for Jump packs to scouts
Thunderwolf Cavalry and Fenersian Wolves - another example fo GW trying to think up stuff to make the Codex unique - just give a Feral beast / Riding beast option for non Codex marines
Long Fangs - Devestators - option to upgrade to Veterans

Chapter Tactics for the various non Codex Chapters

I'm sorry but that would totally suck. Your suggestions either suck, do not represent the uniqueness of Space Wolves (purely from a rules perspective without even considering fluff) or would have to be much more cumbersome than you are suggesting.

The problem I'm seeing is that people are butthurt that SW get attention. That's not the way I look at it. The way I look at it, if you want to play a Space Marine chapter that is more focused on close assault, has less of the "codex astartes" structure and is more feral in nature, then you use the SW rules. You don't have to call yourself Space Wolves, you don't have to be a furry. The rules exist as another option to the basic C:SM style.

Now, if your opposition is that the uniqueness shouldn't exist at all, ok, I can get down with that.... but it should have been done in 3rd edition, not now.

If your opposition is that GW should spend more time focusing on the Xenos, I agree. I'd be happy to see the same level attention given to all Xenos. But those other Marine codices exist because they are popular and because GW love to push their marines. The SW release was only a 3 week release, the Orks were a 6 week release. If GW are only dedicating 6 weeks worth of releases a year to other Space Marine chapters, I don't really have a big problem with that.

What is the difference between a tac squad with +1 A and a Grey Hunter squad? Or Biker units with the ability to take wolf mounts and TWC?

 fallinq wrote:
Seems to me that YOUR butthurt that people are suggesting your special snowflake chapter isn't really so special. And it's not. SW's have wolves (which they ride on occasionally), Rune Priests instead of Librarians (ooh, such uniqueness!), and more than the usual number of pistols close combat weapons. Other than that, they're marines. They have statlines full of 4's, wear 3+ power armour, have ATSKNF, and use all the same guns. You gush about how totes original they are, but you don't back it up with anything about why the SW's RULES are so unique, special, and completely different from vanilla marines. Come on. Give us some examples. How do his suggestions "purely from rules perspective and without even considering the fluff" (yeah right) not represent the "uniqueness" of the Space Wolves and are "lame" (a well reasoned and objective argument if ever I heard one).

Wow, you really took my criticisms hard, sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Give us SPECIFIC EXAMPLES of why they're so unique, RULES WISE.

That's mostly what I have been doing?

GH - They're Tacticals, but they're not "tacticals", they're close ranged focused. They achieve this by having access to CCW AND having counter attack AND having different weapon options.

BC - They replace scouts... but they're not scouts, they are cheap assault units. They achieve this by differing from scouts by having PA instead of Scout armour AND not having any scout special rules AND having rage AND having weapon options that are assault focused instead of the more shooty options of scouts AND having access to typical PA marine transport options.

The point is, if you try and roll SW in to C:SM, you remove a lot of the rules-wise uniqueness OR you have to add a LOT of content to maintain that uniqueness.

The Space Wolves rules don't just represent the "special snowflake" fluff of the Space Wolves. They represent ANY Space Marine chapter that you want to be close assault focused, more feral, less focused on the codex astartes. That's why I said your suggestions "do not represent the uniqueness of Space Wolves (purely from a rules perspective without even considering fluff)".

What they have unique cannot be summed up in Chapter Tactics and that's a GOOD thing. They let you play Space Marines in a different way regardless of whether you want to paste the SW fluff and SW models on top.

And no, SW, BA, and DA have NOT had their own codices since the dawn of time. Armies of the Imperium used to be one codex. The special snowflake chapters often lapsed out of date for several editions. Space Wolves have had a grand total of 3 codices in 7 editions. Dark Angels have also had 3. Blood Angels have had 4.

I never said they existed since the dawn of time, that must have been someone else. My first SW Codex I believe was 1993, so over 20 years ago. Also, your numbers are wrong, Space Wolves have had a grand total of 4 codices in the 6 editions they have been around, I wasn't collecting in the RT days but I believe they got their unique characters at the end of RT. Orks have actually had the exact same number of codices in that time. I don't collect DA but I believe they have had 4 as well counting Angels of Death from 2nd.

Most of the more unique units weren't even in the old codices, they're new editions that were pulled from the same place that GW pulled Kaldor Draigo.

Yes. and I explicitly stated I would be fine with them being bundled in to the C:SM back in 3rd edition before they genuinely became unique. Back then, they could have easily bundled up in C:SM with a few special rules and a Blood Claws being a unique unit.

But they've still gotten more love and care than Necrons or Dark Eldar did for ages, or SoB's get right now, and those are MAIN FREAKING ARMIES that actually have unique and distinct statlines and rules that no other army can replicate.

Necrons have gotten 2 codices in a little over 10 years, about 1 per 5 years. SW have gotten 4 in a little over 20 years, about 1 per 5 years. DE have had 3 in a little over 15 years, about 1 per 5 years.

DE are due for a new codex, it's currently 4 years old. Necrons are also due for a new codex, they are 3 years old. The SW codex was 5 years old when it was recently replaced. SW aren't getting more attention than those other armies, they were the oldest Codex so they got a new one, Blood Angels are now the oldest codex.


Sisters of battle, yes, GW have pretty much relegated them to the halls of "not a real army".

And yes, I HAVE read the DA, SW, and BA codices. I've read the old ones, I've read the chapter approved ones, and I've read SOME of the current bloated ones. Their "uniqueness" is lost on me, because I don't have a mad crush on them.

If their uniqueness is lost on you then I feel you haven't actually read the rules or comprehended how they behave differently on the table top (at least the times when GW didn't totally bugger up the balance and make things like Long Fang armies a viable tactic).

Lastly, saying that combining codices somehow means we're demanding a price hike is horse . When I got into this hobby, codices were $25 each. Now they're pushing $60. It's not because there are more rules to actually play the game; they're just spread out over more pages. It's not material costs; the online versions cost practically as much. GW raises prices because they want to, not because they have to.

I never said that by combining we are demanding a price hike. I just think the reality of it is, if you actually keep as much of the rules as you can and create a fething huge big book of Space Marines it is...

a) Going to cost a feth load, a Space Marine player is going to end up with a higher price of entry.

b) Not actually going to let GW focus on the Xenos any more than they already do. This can be equally as well achieved simply by shortening the release window of satellite chapters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
What is the difference between a tac squad with +1 A and a Grey Hunter squad? Or Biker units with the ability to take wolf mounts and TWC?

Counter Attack, weapon options, having a WGPL instead of a Vet Sarge. Though the bigger difference comes with BC, who are a different stat line, different points cost, have rage, different weapon options and a larger unit size.

Biker units able to take wolf mounts? Close combat focused weapon options. Other than that you could sum up the differences by creating a TWC wargear option with +1S, +1T, +1W, +3A and +1Ld. But as I've said, it's not that you CAN'T shoehorn Space Wolves in to C:SM, it's that it's very convoluted to do it.

Earlier someone suggested "Well Blood Claws are just scouts", but to actually keep BC the way they are, you'd have to say:

Blood Claws: Instead of initiating new members in to the Scouts like other chapters, Space Wolves initiate new members in to a Blood Claws due to the impetuous and headstrong nature of Space Wolf recruits learning to deal with the flaws in their newly implanted geneseed. Because of this, Space Wolves modify the typical Scout squad. They do not have Scout armour or Boltguns, but have Power Armour and Close Combat Weapons instead. They lose the following special rules: Infiltrate, Move Through Cover, Scout. Instead, they gain the special rules Acute Senses, Counter Attack and Rage. Instead of being able to only add 5 additional members, they may add up to 10 additional Blood Claws.

The weapon options are also completely different.

At the end of the day, we could sum up any troop in the game by it's differences to a base profile. Orks are just Space Marines with -2 Bs, -2Ini, +1A, -1Ld and a 6+ save, with different special rules and different weapon options.

Anything CAN be done, I am simply questioning the merit of doing it.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 fallinq wrote:
Seems to me that YOUR butthurt that people are suggesting your special snowflake chapter isn't really so special. And it's not. SW's have wolves (which they ride on occasionally), Rune Priests instead of Librarians (ooh, such uniqueness!), and more than the usual number of pistols close combat weapons. Other than that, they're marines. They have statlines full of 4's, wear 3+ power armour, have ATSKNF, and use all the same guns. You gush about how totes original they are, but you don't back it up with anything about why the SW's RULES are so unique, special, and completely different from vanilla marines. Come on. Give us some examples. How do his suggestions "purely from rules perspective and without even considering the fluff" (yeah right) not represent the "uniqueness" of the Space Wolves and are "lame" (a well reasoned and objective argument if ever I heard one).

Wow, you really took my criticisms hard, sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Give us SPECIFIC EXAMPLES of why they're so unique, RULES WISE.

That's mostly what I have been doing?

GH - They're Tacticals, but they're not "tacticals", they're close ranged focused. They achieve this by having access to CCW AND having counter attack AND having different weapon options.

Tactical marines can now take CCWs and two SWs. Space Wolf chapter tactics now confer counter attack. Bam, same unit within the Codex. It's an option all Marines should have anyway.

BC - They replace scouts... but they're not scouts, they are cheap assault units. They achieve this by differing from scouts by having PA instead of Scout armour AND not having any scout special rules AND having rage AND having weapon options that are assault focused instead of the more shooty options of scouts AND having access to typical PA marine transport options.

Actually this I agree with. That's why you just have them be Assault Marines. Maybe have a new option that allows you to take WS: 3/BS: 3 AM with a -2 ppm cost to represent chapters that emulate Space Wolf training. Honestly I think that a -1 to their leadership would be more appropriate since new Marines do have a lot of training under their belt.

The point is, if you try and roll SW in to C:SM, you remove a lot of the rules-wise uniqueness OR you have to add a LOT of content to maintain that uniqueness.

The Space Wolves rules don't just represent the "special snowflake" fluff of the Space Wolves. They represent ANY Space Marine chapter that you want to be close assault focused, more feral, less focused on the codex astartes. That's why I said your suggestions "do not represent the uniqueness of Space Wolves (purely from a rules perspective without even considering fluff)".

What they have unique cannot be summed up in Chapter Tactics and that's a GOOD thing. They let you play Space Marines in a different way regardless of whether you want to paste the SW fluff and SW models on top.

Space Wolves differ (Much like the other variant chapters) by having war gear options that should be available in the vanilla codex, a few extra special rules and small stat changes. They are not unique. If you ran an Ultramarine army with Space Wolf rules would it play much differently? Maybe they wouldn't suck as bad in CC but it'd be the same army. Rules don't make an army. The player does.

a) Going to cost a feth load, a Space Marine player is going to end up with a higher price of entry.

b) Not actually going to let GW focus on the Xenos any more than they already do. This can be equally as well achieved simply by shortening the release window of satellite chapters.

A non issue unless they staple all of the current rules into the book. And GW doesn't focus on Xenos at all. They just suck more at balancing them.

Counter Attack, weapon options, having a WGPL instead of a Vet Sarge. Though the bigger difference comes with BC, who are a different stat line, different points cost, have rage, different weapon options and a larger unit size.

Biker units able to take wolf mounts? Close combat focused weapon options. Other than that you could sum up the differences by creating a TWC wargear option with +1S, +1T, +1W, +3A and +1Ld. But as I've said, it's not that you CAN'T shoehorn Space Wolves in to C:SM, it's that it's very convoluted to do it.

Didn't WG lose the ability to mix armor with their unit or is that just for whole squads of them? Either way, just cut the option for TDA or have it be a choice for all Veterans with/without the Space Wolf chapter tactic.

I don't think having an overall "Beast Mount" option would be convoluted. Just add the option to the Special Wargear list. I personally think that all Marine bikers should have access to melee weapons but that's just me. Have the option in the Chapter Tactic? Maybe that'd be too complex.

I am tiring of this discussion, so I'm just going to repeat this:

Anything CAN be done, I am simply questioning the merit of doing it.

I could see the merit of doing it back in 3rd edition, that edition was basically the big ol' edition of simplification. Now that the satellite chapters are more unique, I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique.

 Anpu42 wrote:
Have you ever read any of the Codex: Space Wolves Books?

Actually I have both a Space Wolves army and every Codex ever produced for them including that for RT/ 1st edition where they formed the centrepiece of a campaign. Which ones do you have?

We are not GW and so its not going to happen - I laid out what I would like to see - but that's not going to happen - instead we are going to have increasingly fragmented and poorly put together "codexes" / date slates whatever that have very little that's good and much that's shoddy, rushed and thrown together.

The Chaos Legions and Imperial Guard Regiments in particular deserve better treatment and are far far far more divergent than the various Marine Chpaters that are painted different colours and have a couple of unusual units...............The recent expansions of the Dark and Blood Angels Codexes forced GW to make many "unique" units which many people, including me find awful with blood guns and blood missiles firing blood at enemy to coat them in blood - its like the Simpsons episode where one of the kids is drawing a robot made of guns firing guns that shoot more guns at the enemy I honestly think that this is what GW is now trying to achieve and target.....

Oh look, its that troll thread again!

On Topic:
I dont care at all. They keep the codices separate -> im fine with it. They roll them together -> im fine with it.

In the end every one here knows its not going to happen anyway. And even if ... who cares?

I could see the merit of doing it back in 3rd edition, that edition was basically the big ol' edition of simplification Now that the satellite chapters are more unique, I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique

Because you would spend less time making slightly different marines with slightly different rules with silly names and more time revamping or creating new armies.

Yes we all know Space Marines sell - but its somewhat of a catch 22 - they sell partly because they are so dominant so they make more and increase their dominance etc etc. Only the spiky versions get a bit of a shafting for...reasons

Dark Eldar relaunch was a triumph and sold really well? but now we just get Dark Angels and Blood Angels in particular who really did not need a separate codex and had the really silly stuff crowbarred in.

 Mr Morden wrote:

I could see the merit of doing it back in 3rd edition, that edition was basically the big ol' edition of simplification Now that the satellite chapters are more unique, I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique

Because you would spend less time making slightly different marines with slightly different rules with silly names and more time revamping or creating new armies.

With the way GW currently release books, I don't think it really matters. I mentioned it previously, but SW had a 3 week launch vs 6 weeks for Orks. GK appear to only be having a 1 week release.

If there's no need to have a big long release then it seems GW are fine giving them shorter releases.

They're just pumping out codices like mad anyway, the oldest Codex is just over 4 years old (BA), the next is a bit under 4 years (DE) and then the next is not even 3 years old (necrons). Only 3 more codices before the oldest codex in 40k's lineup is only a mere 2 and a half years old (assuming it takes them about 6 months to release the remaining 3 codices).

Yes we all know Space Marines sell - but its somewhat of a catch 22 - they sell partly because they are so dominant so they make more and increase their dominance etc etc. Only the spiky versions get a bit of a shafting for...reasons

Yes, I know, I'm just being realistic in thinking that it's not going to change. Even if they wrap SM in to 1 codex, it's going to be a fething huge codex and they are still going to spend a couple of months each year promoting it over the Xenos.

Dark Eldar relaunch was a triumph and sold really well? but now we just get Dark Angels and Blood Angels in particular who really did not need a separate codex and had the really silly stuff crowbarred in.

It was? I wasn't aware it was that awesome. I do remember the numbers for the 5th ed Space Wolf codex coming up in the legal issues with Chapterhouse and noticing that they were quite large compared to other releases in the same time frame.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique.

Provides a single source for all marine players to draw resources from, is much better for DIY chapters, offers more codex slots/time devoted to other codices, is easier to balance, lessens the potential impact of one flavour of marine being better than any others, is cheaper for codex collectors, and generally opens up more total options for all marine chapters.

Instead of only Blood Angels getting access to a fast attack predator tank, all chapters can now bring a predator in their fast attack slot. This doesn't make Blood Angels any less Blood Angel-y, it just gives all chapters more options for killing the enemies of the Emperor. Instead of only Space Wolves getting access to the baby Caestus Ram, all chapters have the option for a middle of the road gunship or troop transport. It doesn't make the Space Wolves any less Space Wolfy, it just gives more options to all the other marine chapters.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

I could see the merit of doing it back in 3rd edition, that edition was basically the big ol' edition of simplification Now that the satellite chapters are more unique, I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique

Because you would spend less time making slightly different marines with slightly different rules with silly names and more time revamping or creating new armies.

With the way GW currently release books, I don't think it really matters. I mentioned it previously, but SW had a 3 week launch vs 6 weeks for Orks. GK appear to only be having a 1 week release.

If there's no need to have a big long release then it seems GW are fine giving them shorter releases.

They're just pumping out codices like mad anyway, the oldest Codex is just over 4 years old (BA), the next is a bit under 4 years (DE) and then the next is not even 3 years old (necrons). Only 3 more codices before the oldest codex in 40k's lineup is only a mere 2 and a half years old (assuming it takes them about 6 months to release the remaining 3 codices).

Yes we all know Space Marines sell - but its somewhat of a catch 22 - they sell partly because they are so dominant so they make more and increase their dominance etc etc. Only the spiky versions get a bit of a shafting for...reasons

Yes, I know, I'm just being realistic in thinking that it's not going to change. Even if they wrap SM in to 1 codex, it's going to be a fething huge codex and they are still going to spend a couple of months each year promoting it over the Xenos.

Dark Eldar relaunch was a triumph and sold really well? but now we just get Dark Angels and Blood Angels in particular who really did not need a separate codex and had the really silly stuff crowbarred in.

It was? I wasn't aware it was that awesome. I do remember the numbers for the 5th ed Space Wolf codex coming up in the legal issues with Chapterhouse and noticing that they were quite large compared to other releases in the same time frame.

Well Dark Eldar were languishing forgotten and the new release made sure that they had lovely new models and for what I understand sold extremely well.

I was never proposing one codex for Marines but two - one for the "Codex" chapters and one for everyone else. So the current one as is and then have a second one with all the odds and sods.............

Yeah its just wish listing but isn't that what forums are for ? GW are just going to keep making smaller and smaller Codexs covering smaller and smaller aspects - FFS they did one for a single company of two Chapters and data slates etc to give back the content already in previous Codexes. Sad really.....................

 Colpicklejar wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
Maybe this is just because I have lot of armies, but I'd like to see the following

Codex: Astartes. Contains the rules and information for all Space Marine Chapters and making your own. DA, BA, SW and BT have all their unique units included like the BT stuff in the current codex, unlocked by Chapter Tactics

Codex: Imperium. IG, Inquisition, GK, Sisters and Assassins

Codex: Chaos. CSM, Demons, and full traitor guard rules. Includes Legion and Warband rules.

Codex: Ancient Enemies. Necrons, Eldar and DE

Codex: Rising Threat. Nids, Tau and Orks

Each of these would be about double the size of a current book, but there would also be softback 'just the rules' versions available.

I'd love to have a Codex Astartes. I wonder, has GW ever experimented with releasing any kind of book or supplement that allowed players to make their own factions/rules? It's something that roleplaying franchises sometimes do.

There are two ways that could turn out - either there is genuine flexibility in the system and it opens up lots of new cheese/op bs, or they tone it down to prevent this and the end result is pretty "meh".

Personally I think they should go for it anyway still


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I am tiring of this discussion, so I'm just going to repeat this:

Anything CAN be done, I am simply questioning the merit of doing it.

I could see the merit of doing it back in 3rd edition, that edition was basically the big ol' edition of simplification. Now that the satellite chapters are more unique, I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique.

This. I think a lot of people are annoyed that other people get goodies they don't. Which is fine I guess, but I don't think it's nessesarily very healthy to advocate making other peoples' hobbies less enjoyable simply "because". You could roll every single codex into one if you really wanted to, and it wouldn't even be that big. But there's an entire hobby behind the rules, you can't ignore that just because you don't like red/grey/wolfy space marines.

Oh come on guys... The marine codecies need to be left alone. I think dark eldar and eldar need to be rolled in together. Millitarum tempestus and Astra militarium need to be rolled togrther, inquisition and assassins need to go back to Grey knights, daemons need to join csm, and we need to just drop necrons all together. That's all. Not jking

This. I think a lot of people are annoyed that other people get goodies they don't. Which is fine I guess, but I don't think it's nessesarily very healthy to advocate making other peoples' hobbies less enjoyable simply "because

Not really and even then it would work both ways - lots of people get goodies - others don't which is fine because some do?

I honestly believe you could make 2 nice fat Marine Codex - one Codex and one "others" and have plenty of fluff and fun units - what we are getting now is supplements covering a single company, unit or even person - fragmentation and exploitation of the fluff.

Lets look at the Orks - there was no reason not to have the Gaz and Ork Codexes as one except price gouging.

A decent non codex Chapters would be great - it would likely even work fir renegade Chapters:

You just need the rules for the oddities - rampaging Assaulty Dreadnoughts - that's good for Wolves and Blood Angels, even Khorne touched renegades
Riding Beasts - good for not just Wolves but other unusual mounts
Snipers and Scouts that are not just aspirants but veterans - cool for Raven Guard and similar
Assault options for Tac units - again cool for Wolves, Blood Angels and Renegades

Not really and even then it would work both ways - lots of people get goodies - others don't which is fine because some do?

If someone gets something special that you like, you simply ask for it yourself.
Demanding that they take his special thing away because you don't have it too is just.. childish.

So what do we need to hear in this thread:
1) A good reason as to why they should do such a thing.
2) A good explanation as to how you will include FOUR full codices into one book without removing fluff, without removing rules and still have it be a maximum of 150 pages.

I'd avoid calling people's opinions and reasons as childish.

Further, there have been plenty of good reasons. You just happen to not like it.

Besides, who says each chapter needs to keep every single special rule, character, and other little details? I'm fairly certain Salamander players, or any other chapter are getting along just fine with completely unique, flavourful armies without needing a book replete with redundant special rules and units.

Its not about removing anything, its about sharing it with all the other chapters in a reasonable manner. Hardly childish.

To lend some context to my earlier remark about all SM sharing a codex, I would point out that I would remove absolutely nothing from the other marine books. Everything from Thunderwolf Cavalry to Death Company to Black Knights would still have unit entries in full. The only parts 'removed' would be the superfluous three Tactical/Assault/Devastator ect entries that are copied across three different books, which makes the value worse for anyone who has more than one SM army. One of the reasons I probably won't buy the new BA/DA book is that I feel no need to pay for copies of rules I already own.

Putting it all in one large book with every type of marine fully represented would be better value for a lot of players, which is why GW will never do it.

 Blacksails wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


I just don't see where the advantage is in cramming them all in to one big book and/or removing a lot of what makes them unique.

Provides a single source for all marine players to draw resources from, I'd argue that's not much of a benefit.

is much better for DIY chapters,Are we talking about specific chapter creation rules or simply using the rules of an existing chapter to create your own? If it's the latter, I don't see how it makes much difference. There's nothing stopping you using any of the additional codices for your homebrew chapter

offers more codex slots/time devoted to other codices,I mentioned this earlier, GW are happy to reduce release windows for armies like SW vs armies like Orks, they can easily keep all the individual codices and just reduce the release windows for them so that it doesn't take more time away from other armies. You also have the fact we are nearing the point where all codices will be less than 2.5 years old anyway. GW are already thrashing 40k so much that I don't think it's of benefit, I'm wondering where GW will go once they re-release the last 3 remaining 5th ed codices.

is easier to balance, lessens the potential impact of one flavour of marine being better than any others,Possibly true, but GW balance is roulette, even within a big SM book there's going to be chapters that are obviously better than others. It does reduce the chance that one chapter has been updated for the new edition and others haven't (which was the case with SW up until a couple of weeks ago and is still the case with BA). But given the balance roulette we play at the moment I'm not really sure I see it as a big benefit to balance to roll them all in to one

is cheaper for codex collectors,These people still exist with GW's current prices? I used to collect army books (not so much codices), but since the more recent price hikes I think the number of codex collectors would be near insignificant. I think it's of far greater benefit to keep a low price of entry vs lower price for the insane people who insist on codex collecting when regular codices are $50 a pop anyway and collectors codices are massively more expensive.

and generally opens up more total options for all marine chapters.

Instead of only Blood Angels getting access to a fast attack predator tank, all chapters can now bring a predator in their fast attack slot. This doesn't make Blood Angels any less Blood Angel-y, it just gives all chapters more options for killing the enemies of the Emperor. Instead of only Space Wolves getting access to the baby Caestus Ram, all chapters have the option for a middle of the road gunship or troop transport. It doesn't make the Space Wolves any less Space Wolfy, it just gives more options to all the other marine chapters.

So you want any chapter to just be able to select from whatever lists of units from whatever chapter they like? That's an interesting prospect, allowing vanilla marines to take Blood Claws and the like, but I do think this would open up the possibility of even less balance because you could just pick the best things from each chapter to make your "homebrew" chapter.

Kangodo wrote:

Not really and even then it would work both ways - lots of people get goodies - others don't which is fine because some do?

If someone gets something special that you like, you simply ask for it yourself.
Demanding that they take his special thing away because you don't have it too is just.. childish.

So what do we need to hear in this thread:
1) A good reason as to why they should do such a thing.
2) A good explanation as to how you will include FOUR full codices into one book without removing fluff, without removing rules and still have it be a maximum of 150 pages.

As I have said several times - two books for Marines and no problem at all. You might simplify rules here and there but it will give more options for more players........

Is the Current Blood Missile firing blood guns and wolves riding wolves riding Wolf ships really fluff that's worth keeping /expanding upon?

I agree Skink. At least on some points. Given GW's current inability to price things appropriately and at anything resembling balance what we would end up with in a "Roll-in" would be a horribly expensive book with most of the options gone/useless penalizing the variant chapter/vanilla players in equal measure as they have to take crap that wouldn't fit into their chapter thematic wise to stay competitive or pay obscene prices to get their units back from the data slate fairy.

However, on principle I think it should be done. If this were a more competent company a "Build your own Chapter" codex would be great for everyone. Maybe have supplements for the popular marine books that add formations/new options/scenarios etc. But right now given GW's insanity I think the current way of doing things is best.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I agree Skink. At least on some points. Given GW's current inability to price things appropriately and at anything resembling balance what we would end up with in a "Roll-in" would be a horribly expensive book with most of the options gone/useless penalizing the variant chapter/vanilla players in equal measure as they have to take crap that wouldn't fit into their chapter thematic wise to stay competitive or pay obscene prices to get their units back from the data slate fairy.

However, on principle I think it should be done. If this were a more competent company a "Build your own Chapter" codex would be great for everyone. Maybe have supplements for the popular marine books that add formations/new options/scenarios etc. But right now given GW's insanity I think the current way of doing things is best.

On principle, I think 40k as a whole needs to be rewritten completely and I'd be more than happy to see them roll codices together to make that happen. Of course I don't think it will happen and I don't want them rolled in to one purely so I have to buy yet another book that's even more expensive

"Build your own Chapter" is a nice thought, I'm not really sure how it'd work in practice. Didn't we have this several editions ago? I think it was during one of my hiatuses from 40k. I remember the "build your own hive fleet" from one of the old Tyranid codices was cool, but in practice there were some options that were just flat out better than others, leading to a lot of biomorphs that were auto-takes and a lot that you'd never touch.

I feel those sorts of "build your own army" things are actually quite hard to balance, though I'm definitely open to the idea if it can be balanced.

The whole point is very quickly becoming moot though. We are so close to having all armies with 6th/7th codices printed within the past 2 and a half years, so it hardly seems necessary for GW to roll SM in to one to focus on the other armies... they are almost all done anyway. Space Wolves were the last army that was left out of the flier game and the remaining codices are just ones that need small tweaks to bring them in line with 6th/7th rules.

I'm really interested and concerned to see what GW do once these last 3 forces are done.

Is slightly off topic, but 'build your own chapter tactics' would be easy to implement. Take a bunch of USRs and maybe some other options (like +1 Ccw or the like) and put in two lists, major and minor. A Cheaper can have two minor or one major trait.

This is kind of like the 4th ed one worked, but without the 'drawbacks' choice, as a) it was unbalanced in many ways and b) none of the current one have them

 Blacksails wrote:
I'd avoid calling people's opinions and reasons as childish.

Why not?
Let's say I see that DCM-tag in your name and I want it too.
I can either make sure I get it or I can demand that they remove your tag.
Which one would you call the mature thing to do?

Further, there have been plenty of good reasons. You just happen to not like it.

Well, maybe I need new glasses but all I see are people trying to bend reality in order to fit those rules in one single Codex.
So again: Make a list of good reasons/benefits to merging the Codices.

Besides, who says each chapter needs to keep every single special rule, character, and other little details? I'm fairly certain Salamander players, or any other chapter are getting along just fine with completely unique, flavourful armies without needing a book replete with redundant special rules and units.

Who says that? How about nearly everyone that plays those Chapters?
You keep missing the point! Whether you think they deserve to have their own Codex or not: They now have it.
So if you wish to remove everything they have, you better have a good reason.

Its not about removing anything, its about sharing it with all the other chapters in a reasonable manner. Hardly childish.

So you want BA to share Death Company, Furioso Dreads, Troop-ASM, Sanguinary Guard, Sanguinary Priests, Fast Tanks, Infernus Pistols and Hand Flamers with everyone?
How envious..

 Mr Morden wrote:
Is the Current Blood Missile firing blood guns and wolves riding wolves riding Wolf ships really fluff that's worth keeping /expanding upon?

Yes, I am not willing to trade in an entire Codex because it might make a few people happy if that means every BA-player is told to feth off.

Combining Codices might have been a good idea 16 years ago.
But you cannot support an entire Faction for 16 years with their own Codex and then suddenly remove all the lore and rules for those ten players that like even more customisation with their home-brew Chapters.

As a BT player, anyone who argues that the current state of the BT in C:SM is fine is going to have to argue rather well in order to convice me that they're not deluded. I'm not saying it'd be impossible to fold Chapters into the Vanilla book, but the way it's been done so far has been a giant scrotum kick to an army that was already down for the count.

es, I am not willing to trade in an entire Codex because it might make a few people happy if that means every BA-player is told to feth off.

Combining Codices might have been a good idea 16 years ago.
But you cannot support an entire Faction for 16 years with their own Codex and then suddenly remove all the lore and rules for those ten players that like even more customisation with their home-brew Chapters.

Right so in your world its either a massively indulgent and badly written full length Codex or nothing. As we have dicussed at length you can make plenty of generic rules for non Codex chapters in their own book to give lots of options FFS but I guess thats not enough............you want to keep all your blood guns firing blood missiles that are pretty much the same as normal missile but just called blood missiles. and this impreves the game and background how exactly............

The new Blood Angels Codex will almost certainly be gutted anyway ........

How is it indulgent and badly written? Because you say so?
I do need 100 pages to contain all the fluff and the unique entries, we've needed that for the last 16 years.
And it's not going to change because some people are butthurt that they don't have their own Codex.

Yes, it's completely possible to merge them by taking four books, ruining them and having only one book left.
I am sure that all the Grey Knight, Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Blood Angel-players would happily have their Codex ruined just so you can be happy that GW screwed them.

About Blood Missiles: They are actually AP1 compared to Stormstrike Missiles and lack the Concussive-rule.
And what Blood Guns are you talking about? Because I am talking about the other 17 unique-entries we have.
Seems quite clear you don't even know what is in the Codex.
But even if you were right: Why not?
Why should I have to buy the Codex: Space Marines when I didn't have to do such a thing in the last 16 years?

Dante, Gabriel Seth, Astorath, Sanguinor, Mephiston, Tycho, Sanguinary Guard, Corbulo, Lemartes, Furioso, Death Company-Dread.
And then we have the elite-Chaplains, Reclusiarchs, Sanguinary Priests and Assault squads.
The Codex then continues with loads of special rules and wargear.
And it starts with dozens and dozens of pages with stories and fluff.
You cannot merge four of those things in a single Codex without giving them gigantic cuts and there is no sensible reason to do such a thing.

Kangodo wrote:
How is it indulgent and badly written? Because you say so?
I do need 100 pages to contain all the fluff and the unique entries, we've needed that for the last 16 years.
And it's not going to change because some people are butthurt that they don't have their own Codex.

Yes, it's completely possible to merge them by taking four books, ruining them and having only one book left.
I am sure that all the Grey Knight, Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Blood Angel-players would happily have their Codex ruined just so you can be happy that GW screwed them.

About Blood Missiles: They are actually AP1 compared to Stormstrike Missiles and lack the Concussive-rule.
And what Blood Guns are you talking about? Because I am talking about the other 17 unique-entries we have.
Seems quite clear you don't even know what is in the Codex.
But even if you were right: Why not?
Why should I have to buy the Codex: Space Marines when I didn't have to do such a thing in the last 16 years?

Dante, Gabriel Seth, Astorath, Sanguinor, Mephiston, Tycho, Sanguinary Guard, Corbulo, Lemartes, Furioso, Death Company-Dread.
And then we have the elite-Chaplains, Reclusiarchs, Sanguinary Priests and Assault squads.
The Codex then continues with loads of special rules and wargear.
And it starts with dozens and dozens of pages with stories and fluff.
You cannot merge four of those things in a single Codex without giving them gigantic cuts and there is no sensible reason to do such a thing.

Hey - you know what forgot it - if you think the Blood Angels revised fluff s good fine - enjoy your life

Yes I have the bloody codex and yes I know whats in it - but I did not realise it was so damn perfect that it can never be improved - my mistake

I do need 100 pages to contain all the fluff and the unique entries, we've needed that for the last 16 years.

Lies and misinformation - I have the pevious Codexes and there is not that much fluff - check your facts.

And what the F Am I "butthurt" about mate??

Couldn't you look at Lexicanum or... crack open your old copy of the codex to get the lore? And isn't a lot of it common with the other Marine books?

I've seen these kind of threads over and over and I always wonder: Why do we need to combine the codices?

I think there's way too much bad blood between people who want it rolled in to one and people who don't.

To the people who are throwing around terms like "special snowflake". YES, we do want something unique. I don't crap on people who want their army to be unique, be it an Ork clan or a CSM legion or an Eldar craftworld.

There's an argument to be made for simplification, I totally agree, but there's no need to get huffy about people who do want to keep the unique rules that go along with their army. The satellite chapters are NOT just "SM with a few small changes", they are "SM with a lot of small changes and some considerable ones". Even just the special characters, there's 22 special characters between BA, DA and SW. I don't want to see any of them cut even if I don't like them all because I dislike arbitrary cutting of things.

But yes, way too much animosity surrounding this topic.

Especially since at this point it means very little, given that GW are very close to having all codices updated and we are only 3 months in to 7th edition. The only way I can see GW going from here is adding more and more expansions to more armies rather than consolidating.

I don't really see a reason to have a super mega space marine codex. It's not very practical, GW has no incentive and it would probably piss off a lot of marine players.

It would be nice to see more non-imperial supplements/codices.