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.

ts ok by me as I think they look like crap

That's a little subjective tho.

I see you want to immediately scream and go to extremes

Dude... calm down a little.

Voss wrote:

But realistically, this sort of 'pick from a list' thing doesn't go well. Some are nigh game-breakingly good, and others are damp squibs.

¨
Almost certainly, but the same is true for current faction traits as well, and with a much larger selection there is a chance that there will be several that are viable.

I think until the new CA drops and clears up the mess they are about to unleash its pretty moot trying to argue the pros and cons...

 Crimson wrote:

Voss wrote:

But realistically, this sort of 'pick from a list' thing doesn't go well. Some are nigh game-breakingly good, and others are damp squibs.

¨
Almost certainly, but the same is true for current faction traits as well, and with a much larger selection there is a chance that there will be several that are viable.

also since it's "pick two from a list" chances are you'll be able to do a "pick one that keeps you compeitive, and pick one that's reasonably fluffy"

I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

It's good, and a little annoying, that there'll be a load of new releases so soon. Annoying because I'm going to the London GT in mid September, and these guys will be out just in time for me to need to do a ton of painting for it! Boo to that.

On the other hand though, I do like how my marines keep getting better. Maybe one day they'll actually be a viable army to take to tournaments. You never know.

 ulfhednir86 wrote:
I'm also happy that instead of making marines cheaper they are making them better to retain the small number of elite warriors instead of making them horde.
[/size]

Yeah, I think this is a really good move on their part.

If the 40k rules weren't so transient, that Collector's Edition would be quite attractive.

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

yeah, given what we've been told it looks like each sucessor chapter will be able to take two "traits" that will be chapter tactic rules. so the list might include things like..


1:any weapon that rolls 1 or 2 on wound rolls fails to wound
2: Psykers can re-roll 1s.
3: all units have +1 leadership
4: all units can re-roll charges


etc. so you mix and match, and are like "well my chapter are a buncha tough bastards who never say die, we also are reknowned for our psykers. so I'm gonna take option 1 and option 2. And call my new chapter... eh the blood ravens. yeah tyhats it!"

I like special snowflake stuff, even though it does contribute to rules bloat. They had reasons to focus on Ultras, BA, DA and SW at first, but in my opinion they have gone too far and been neglecting other chapters like White Scars and Iron Hands.

It would be cool if instead of cutting stuff from BA, DA and SW they gave stuff to the others, but I can see how they might see that as being way too much stuff to support.

I think a lot of stuff can be done through stratagems, including "upgrade" stratagems that turn a unit of X into a unit of Y without having to have a separate model.

I'm not as familiar with normal SM, but when it comes to CSM I often see the argument that "Legion X shouldn't get a book because they don't have anything special." The thing I've noticed is that when you dig into the fluff for them they have tons of special stuff, it just never gets rules or models because they don't get as much attention as the more favored Legions. I'm guessing the same is true for many chapters like Salamanders and Raven Guard but I don't know for certain.

I'm not saying that everything needs its own stand-alone codex and model range, I think a lot can be done with supplements and rules rather than models, I just think it would be cool to see some of those factions get a turn in the spotlight.

They literally have said that these supplements include:
-A unique Librarius discipline
-Special characters
-"Bespoke Relics"(the "Relics" part is important I feel! Right now there's just 1 per Chapter if they don't have a Codex)
-Warlord Traits
-Objectives
-Stratagems
-"many other abilities that help to define their character"

We don't know exactly what the last one means but there's a lot of love coming their way.

Not read whole thread but there are 6 listed supplements in the picture.
Chapter Tactics is listed in the following order.
Ultrammarines > White Scars > Imperial Fists > Black Templars > Salamanders > Raven Guard.

RIP Iron Hands.
Not sure if one of above is getting their own codex?
I kinda see the redacted is P obviously the first 6 of the above.. Iron Hands being not as well known/played.

Also wanted to mentioned all successor chapters will be covered by player choice at the back of the new SM Codex 2.0. This reminds me of the rules chaos got for Renegade Chapters in Vigilus Ablaze.

We've already seen the Iron Hands miniature.

Expect Black Templars to be part of a "Sons of Dorn" book, since they're really the odd ones out with Crimson Fists, Black Templars, and the Imperial Fists having their own schticks.

the Librarius disipline could be big given how under whelming the codex one is

 insaniak wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 NivlacSupreme wrote:
Does anybody else find it funny that the enormous transhuman in a suit of power armour still wears a leather glove in order for his bird to sit on his arm?

Assuming no one answered this, it's for the bird's sake, not the Marine.

About 30 people answered this...

Yeah, I answered it when I thought there was one page, because I forgot to refresh before posting.

The other aspect is I wondering if they are going to cut datasheets.

E.g. SM Codex 2.0 will contain only generic <Chapter> datasheets.

Ultramarines Supplement
will include all named characters
-new models (Tyranid War Vets coming back?)
-new strat/relics/warlord traits/etc
-unique psychic discipline.

Other Chapters
the same format.

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

No no, I get that. I just think it would be cool if it were one of the traits, and there was some bonus or something to go along with it. It would just be a fun acknowledgement by GW that some people aren't on all aboard the Primaris train.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

No no, I get that. I just think it would be cool if it were one of the traits, and there was some bonus or something to go along with it. It would just be a fun acknowledgement by GW that some people aren't on all aboard the Primaris train.

Putting feelings about them aside, that makes for terrible rule design and balance.
'Get bonuses for not having X' is pure gravy, especially if its something people would design an army around not having in the first place.
Its exactly the kind of thing that went wrong with the DYI chapters and guard companies way back when, and the design problems they caused largely why they vanished into the ether.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

No no, I get that. I just think it would be cool if it were one of the traits, and there was some bonus or something to go along with it. It would just be a fun acknowledgement by GW that some people aren't on all aboard the Primaris train.

GW wont acknowledge that though, because theyve been going around in all the books giving them to everyone, even the chapters that dont want them. They make those that dont want them take them at gunpoint essentially.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

No no, I get that. I just think it would be cool if it were one of the traits, and there was some bonus or something to go along with it. It would just be a fun acknowledgement by GW that some people aren't on all aboard the Primaris train.

Putting feelings about them aside, that makes for terrible rule design and balance.
'Get bonuses for not having X' is pure gravy, especially if its something people would design an army around not having in the first place.
Its exactly the kind of thing that went wrong with the DYI chapters and guard companies way back when, and the design problems they caused largely why they vanished into the ether.

People already design their armies around not having things, so making that their draw back is fine. Kinda the whole point.

the problem is, if you design your army around not having X. and you can abuse the traits system (maybe getting a third trait in return for you army not having X) it could be pretty imbalanced because many killer lists could be designed without said unit. "I can't take primaris" realisticly isn't much of a disadvantage.

GW wont acknowledge that though, because theyve been going around in all the books giving them to everyone, even the chapters that dont want them. They make those that dont want them take them at gunpoint essentially.

indeed, basicly the custodes show up and say "this is a gift from the emperor.. only heretics would refuse a gift from the emperor"

BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, if you design your army around not having X. and you can abuse the traits system (maybe getting a third trait in return for you army not having X) it could be pretty imbalanced because many killer lists could be designed without said unit. "I can't take primaris" realisticly isn't much of a disadvantage.

Kind of like the old "You can have an extra Heavy Support but you can only take one Fast Attack" restriction that wasn't a restriction at all for gunline players?

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, if you design your army around not having X. and you can abuse the traits system (maybe getting a third trait in return for you army not having X) it could be pretty imbalanced because many killer lists could be designed without said unit. "I can't take primaris" realisticly isn't much of a disadvantage.

Kind of like the old "You can have an extra Heavy Support but you can only take one Fast Attack" restriction that wasn't a restriction at all for gunline players?

exactly. I mean restrictions like that is fun to use to design chapters in house sometimes, but... in a compeitive enviroment it breaks down fast

Bonuses based around giving things up never work. CSM 3.5, Guard Doctrines and 4th Ed Marine Chapter Traits are all wonderful examples of that. It almost worked with the Marine Chapter Traits, because some of the disadvantages were pretty harsh, but then they went and added the "Cannot take allies!" downside, and if you weren't going to take Inquisition/GKs/SoBs, then it wasn't a disadvantage.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
People already design their armies around not having things, so making that their draw back is fine. Kinda the whole point.

Not what he's saying. He's specifically saying that giving bonuses to an army for not taking something is a bad way to write rules, because the people who never intended to take the thing they're "giving up" lose nothing as a result, and only gain something.

The simplest example is CSM 3.5 Iron Warriors. To get a 4th Heavy they had to give up 2 Fast Attack slots. Most people didn't take Fast Attack slots in CSM armies anyway (Raptors and Bikers... yay?), so 'giving up' those units to get another Defiler was not a disadvantage in any way.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
... theyve been going around in all the books giving them to everyone, even the chapters that dont want them. They make those that dont want them take them at gunpoint essentially.

Art imitates life.

Voss wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I hope one Chapter trait is "Does not trust/have Primaris"

I don't think you need a trait for that. Just don't include them in your army.

No no, I get that. I just think it would be cool if it were one of the traits, and there was some bonus or something to go along with it. It would just be a fun acknowledgement by GW that some people aren't on all aboard the Primaris train.

Putting feelings about them aside, that makes for terrible rule design and balance.
'Get bonuses for not having X' is pure gravy, especially if its something people would design an army around not having in the first place.
Its exactly the kind of thing that went wrong with the DYI chapters and guard companies way back when, and the design problems they caused largely why they vanished into the ether.

:shrug: I understand that, too. But I loved the DIY stuff, and think that's more important to the overall game then strict competetive balancing. People already swap factions for competition anyways (playing Deathwatch units instead of Space Marine ones) so, whatevs, imo.

Come on Iron Hands supplement!

I'd be shocked if there was't one, especially given the IW character coming out. I imagine a squad upgrade pack would be part of the same release.

Sallies, Raven Guard, Iron hands and Imp Fists (incl. Crimson Fists and Tempalrs) would make sense to me.

I don't understand why the "Space Wolf Tactical Squad" thing is such a big deal. Black Templars can already take Tactical Squads despite such things explicitly not existing in the fluff. Just like a Tactical Squad is worse than a Crusader Squad, so a Tactical Squad is worse than a Grey Hunter squad anyway, so you wouldn't take them.

Because Space Wolves are a non-Codex Chapter, and therefore should (and do) have a completely unique organisation.

I tend to view the "first founders can all take this" as being with a major cavet.