Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi Guys,

Ive been playing marines since the start of 8th and maybe a couple of months before, So im in no way a seasoned vet, but it is definitely apparent to me that the space marine codex is probably the biggest victim of codex creep in the current edition.

Also, whether there was a slight worry of being too OP or just a lack of understanding of how the rules would develop the army as a whole is lacking a huge amount of character compared to recent codices.

CSM are also in a similar boat here but even so, still have access to much more impressive strats and also the ability to create a very effective themed army built around beserkers for example.

So my question is, is there a precedent in either 40k or sigmar for a codex being revised mid edition or are we basically reliant on minor points updates from chapter approved?

I am certain there will be a new version of the SM Codex within the next... 18 months?

But that's because I also expect an edition reboot within that time too. Either 9e or at least 8.2.

It's possible. They definitely didn't understand how stratagems were supposed to work when they wrote Codex Space Marines. Edit: OR they did, but felt it would have been a terrible idea to make the early codexes SO overpowered compared to the index armies that the backlash would have been huge. However as the saying goes, never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Stormcast Eternals are just about to get their 3rd codex since AOS was released. So GW aren't afraid to rewrite the posterboys if they need an update.

I think the codex will be replaced when the next wave of Primaris are released.

Between now and then, I would like to see a campaign setting or Chapter Approved update that gave them some new stratagems, points tweaks, and updated the chapter tactics to make them more relevant.

Chapter Approved is designed to do exactly this; make meaningful changes to the game. What I would predict for CA 2018:

Open Play vehicle design rules for more than just the Land Raider.
Narrative Play campaign rules.
Matched Play terrain rules supplement.
Points costs and army adjustments.

a new codex before a new edition is unlikely (granted a new edition could be as simple as a 8.5 edition that just re-releases all the FAQ changes etc in a printed format) more likely would be a supplement that gives marines new units etc that happen to be powerful.

Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

 Billagio wrote:
Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

Not asking for it. Just seems likely.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Chapter Approved is designed to do exactly this; make meaningful changes to the game. What I would predict for CA 2018:

Open Play vehicle design rules for more than just the Land Raider.
Narrative Play campaign rules.
Matched Play terrain rules supplement.
Points costs and army adjustments.

This is kind of my issue though; Marines require more than a points adjustment just to feel on par with other codices- they need a full overhaul.

Stratagems are a major issue. Chapter tactics another.

And the fact that everything is centered around running ultramarines kills me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Billagio wrote:
Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

Yes. And new models, we want them too.

 Billagio wrote:
Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

Lol. First of all, Marines have had 3 mediocre codexes (SM, Grey Knights and CSM) and the only "race" that doesn't have a codex yet is Orks.

The fact is that the SM codex was, either though malice or incompetence, intentionally made bad so as to not cause index player backlash. Once all the other codexes are released, it's only fair for Marines to be updated to be on par with the rest of the codexes.

Process wrote:

So my question is, is there a precedent in either 40k or sigmar for a codex being revised mid edition?

To directly answer your direct question: Yes. Stormcast Eternals. 2 Battletomes in AOS 1, a new one next week for AOS 2.

All 3 released when a new "chamber" is opened (i.e. a new model line is released)

If I was a betting man I would say this time next year. New financial year, new primaris line, new marines codex.

Process wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Chapter Approved is designed to do exactly this; make meaningful changes to the game. What I would predict for CA 2018:

Open Play vehicle design rules for more than just the Land Raider.
Narrative Play campaign rules.
Matched Play terrain rules supplement.
Points costs and army adjustments.

This is kind of my issue though; Marines require more than a points adjustment just to feel on par with other codices- they need a full overhaul.

Stratagems are a major issue. Chapter tactics another.

And the fact that everything is centered around running ultramarines kills me.

Stratagems aren't that bad really. Imperial Guard strats are worse than Space Marine ones I would say. There are a few losers (Orbital Strike) but plenty of just-fine stratagems (Hellfire Shells).

Chapter tactics aren't really a problem either. The "worst" are arguably Iron Hands, even though they have a better version of Graia's, and the best are arguably either Ultramarines (one which no other army gets) or Raven Guard (present in many armies and often considered one of the best in the game).

As for everything being centered around Ultramarines... well, welcome to Warhammer 40k, you must be new here.

Process wrote:
So my question is, is there a precedent in either 40k or sigmar for a codex being revised mid edition or are we basically reliant on minor points updates from chapter approved?

During 3rd ed. Chaos Space Marines, Imperial Guard, DEldar and Dark Angels all got revised books mid-edition, but that was quite a while ago. Hopefully going forward GW will just update a codex if necessary without waiting for an edition change, like they seem to be doing with Stormcast in AOS.

Age of Sigmar has seen THREE versions of the Stormcast battletome in 2 years, so I'll bet that yeah, a Space Marines Codex 2.0 is very very probable.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

Lol. First of all, Marines have had 3 mediocre codexes (SM, Grey Knights and CSM) and the only "race" that doesn't have a codex yet is Orks.

The fact is that the SM codex was, either though malice or incompetence, intentionally made bad so as to not cause index player backlash. Once all the other codexes are released, it's only fair for Marines to be updated to be on par with the rest of the codexes.

mmmmm. I love the smell of completely unsupported assertions in the morning.

The answer is of course yes, it’s possible.

IMO they need to find a better format than new hard copies and/or chapter approved for rules changes within an edition of the game.

Do the digital codices get updated with points/text changes?

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
The answer is of course yes, it’s possible.

IMO they need to find a better format than new hard copies and/or chapter approved for rules changes within an edition of the game.

Do the digital codices get updated with points/text changes?

The digital codexes got points change updates for Chapter Approved, but not the Chapter Approved Errata. They also did not get any rules changes edited in. TBH the digital codexes (as GW make them) are shamefully amateur in their production.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Process wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Chapter Approved is designed to do exactly this; make meaningful changes to the game. What I would predict for CA 2018:

Open Play vehicle design rules for more than just the Land Raider.
Narrative Play campaign rules.
Matched Play terrain rules supplement.
Points costs and army adjustments.

This is kind of my issue though; Marines require more than a points adjustment just to feel on par with other codices- they need a full overhaul.

Stratagems are a major issue. Chapter tactics another.

And the fact that everything is centered around running ultramarines kills me.

Stratagems aren't that bad really. Imperial Guard strats are worse than Space Marine ones I would say. There are a few losers (Orbital Strike) but plenty of just-fine stratagems (Hellfire Shells).

Chapter tactics aren't really a problem either. The "worst" are arguably Iron Hands, even though they have a better version of Graia's, and the best are arguably either Ultramarines (one which no other army gets) or Raven Guard (present in many armies and often considered one of the best in the game).

As for everything being centered around Ultramarines... well, welcome to Warhammer 40k, you must be new here.

The fact that one of the winning stratagems is something you have to hit with for an average of 2 Mortal Wounds should actually speak volumes of how bad the Strategems are as a whole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Graia is better on single wound models and has the little morale clause.

Just wait till space wolves comes out. Per usual they will be the creme of the crop.

SW will hard counter all of 8th ed.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Jesus, Marine players can be spoiled sometimes. Not all the races even have a codex and you have 1 mediocre/crappy codex for 1 edition and are asking for a second one in the same edition...

Lol. First of all, Marines have had 3 mediocre codexes (SM, Grey Knights and CSM) and the only "race" that doesn't have a codex yet is Orks.

The fact is that the SM codex was, either though malice or incompetence, intentionally made bad so as to not cause index player backlash. Once all the other codexes are released, it's only fair for Marines to be updated to be on par with the rest of the codexes.

Right, so what youre saying is that all the races (or armies, whatever) havnt gotten a codex yet and SM players are already clamoring for a new one. Plenty of other races (im thinking orks here) have had terrible codexes (6th edition anyone when we were first??) and we wernt begging GW to give us a new codex before the new edition. Id argue the current SM codex is miles better than many other races codexs have been over the years

GW wants to print as sell as many books as possible. Look how lucrative the index scam was!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The fact that one of the winning stratagems is something you have to hit with for an average of 2 Mortal Wounds should actually speak volumes of how bad the Strategems are as a whole.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Graia is better on single wound models and has the little morale clause.

Why does on-demand mortal wounds speak volumes about how bad the stratagems are on the whole? You want me to look at my Slaanesh Daemons stratagems or my Imperial Guard stratagems and tell me how likely any given one is to do two mortal wounds? I feel like your vision is skewed. Space Marine stratagems are fine.
Graia is the same on single wound models and far, far worse on multi-wound models. Dramatically so. And the "little morale clause" means nothing; look at most Admech lists that still exist and tell me how many are anticipating losses to morale.

Space marine stratgems are awful compared to recent publications.

Martel732 wrote:
Space marine stratgems are awful compared to recent publications.

Depends on the recent publications. I'm fairly certain they have better stratagems than Renegade Knights.

I wouldn't be surprised to - at some point - see a "Primaris Space Marines" codex, featuring only Primaris models as that line expands. Space Marines will need something for sure...and while occasional units are easy to add to a Codex when they're released, I think you'll get to the point where there are a dozen or more Primaris kits which are not in the main codex, so something more official will come out.

SM/CSM need a few updates that are no-brainers, that I hope we can all agree on.

1. Chapter tactics only affect infantry and walkers. Everyone else gets the full benefit of their tactics. Why are these two specifically limited?

2. I would also revise chapter tactics / army buffs, and this isn't specific to SM. -1 to hit is too strong. Army wide rerolls is too strong. It just so happens that some of the SM tactics are really, really bad.

3. Something flavorful in regards to stratagems. Right now they have fairly weak stratagems. The best ones are flak missile and hellfire shells, which are good, but the rest leave a lot to be desired. Especially with the rule of 3 impacting predators and vindicators, making those stratagems very difficult to use.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The fact that one of the winning stratagems is something you have to hit with for an average of 2 Mortal Wounds should actually speak volumes of how bad the Strategems are as a whole.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Graia is better on single wound models and has the little morale clause.

Why does on-demand mortal wounds speak volumes about how bad the stratagems are on the whole? You want me to look at my Slaanesh Daemons stratagems or my Imperial Guard stratagems and tell me how likely any given one is to do two mortal wounds? I feel like your vision is skewed. Space Marine stratagems are fine.
Graia is the same on single wound models and far, far worse on multi-wound models. Dramatically so. And the "little morale clause" means nothing; look at most Admech lists that still exist and tell me how many are anticipating losses to morale.

On Demand? Unless you're in a Devastator squad you have to actually hit. It's basically an average of 1 mortal wound because of that.

Also Graia is working on slain models. That means multi-damage does nothing to them. And there ARE people talking up bigger Skitarii groups in the AdMech thread so...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The fact that one of the winning stratagems is something you have to hit with for an average of 2 Mortal Wounds should actually speak volumes of how bad the Strategems are as a whole.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Graia is better on single wound models and has the little morale clause.

Why does on-demand mortal wounds speak volumes about how bad the stratagems are on the whole? You want me to look at my Slaanesh Daemons stratagems or my Imperial Guard stratagems and tell me how likely any given one is to do two mortal wounds? I feel like your vision is skewed. Space Marine stratagems are fine.
Graia is the same on single wound models and far, far worse on multi-wound models. Dramatically so. And the "little morale clause" means nothing; look at most Admech lists that still exist and tell me how many are anticipating losses to morale.

Look at orbital bombardment and tell me that space marine strats are fine. How about all the ones giving you access to reroll 1's when you have captains and other characters giving you reroll ALL hits or hits and wounds. How about the one that lets you split a full 10 man unit into 5 man units....when it already has the ability to do that at the start of the game...for free...even though it is useless.

The book has more useless stratagems than any other book. It's "good" stratagems are just direct mortal wounds or damage buffs to units of 3 - which don't in the slightest make up for the armies lack of damage in other places.

Considering they just reprinted the Stormcast Eternal Battletome for AoS just to add in a new 'chamber' of Stormcast, I'm positive that they'll happily do the same thing for Space Marines when new things come out for them.

When that is? Not any time soon. We've got at least the next 6 months to get through, and probably another 6 months after that too.

 Marmatag wrote:
SM/CSM need a few updates that are no-brainers, that I hope we can all agree on.

1. Chapter tactics only affect infantry and walkers. Everyone else gets the full benefit of their tactics. Why are these two specifically limited?

2. I would also revise chapter tactics / army buffs, and this isn't specific to SM. -1 to hit is too strong. Army wide rerolls is too strong. It just so happens that some of the SM tactics are really, really bad.

3. Something flavorful in regards to stratagems. Right now they have fairly weak stratagems. The best ones are flak missile and hellfire shells, which are good, but the rest leave a lot to be desired. Especially with the rule of 3 impacting predators and vindicators, making those stratagems very difficult to use.

Yeah -1 to hit army wide buff needs to be straight removed.