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.

It shouldn't be a problem for all of them to keep their unique datasheets. Maybe some "basic-marine" datasheets need point adjustments, maybe some weapon options need to be slightly different, but all that could be done within a supplement, couldn't it?

yes, and it would require so many pages of rules, that if the lay out for supplements was suppose to be upheld, by which I mean the number of pictures, history of all 10 companies, chapter history etc you would get a supplement book the size of a codex.

Karol wrote:

It shouldn't be a problem for all of them to keep their unique datasheets. Maybe some "basic-marine" datasheets need point adjustments, maybe some weapon options need to be slightly different, but all that could be done within a supplement, couldn't it?

yes, and it would require so many pages of rules, that if the lay out for supplements was suppose to be upheld, by which I mean the number of pictures, history of all 10 companies, chapter history etc you would get a supplement book the size of a codex.

and that's a problem because...?
So let's make those supplements as thick as a codex, doesn't matter. Nobody says, a supplement is not allowed to have more pages than (fill in a random number).

Just leave the basic units, that all marine armies share out of the supplement, just throw in the fluff, the unique things, the traits... you know where this is going. And if you don't know, well, look at the existing supplements. That's exactly what GW did.
Why paint the horse for the space wolfs in a different color? (again, take whatever chapter you like the most as an example)

edit: grammar

Well, if it's true that 85% of the units are shared with the main Codex, you would, at the very least, have a supplement with approximately 85 fewer pages than a Codex.

Nibbler 781960 10628512 wrote:

and that's a problem because...?
So let's make those supplements as thick as a codex, doesn't matter. Nobody says, a supplement is not allowed to have more pages than (fill in a random number).

edit: grammar

Because being forced to buy 2 books, when in the past you got it in one, and you still could easily get it in one is not good. Well unless maybe if you have a large number of GW stock, then anything that makes them more money is good. bigger sales equal bigger dividend.

Karol wrote:
Because being forced to buy 2 books, when in the past you got it in one, and you still could easily get it in one is not good.

Ultramarines, White Scars, Iron Hands, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Raven Guard, Crimson Fists, and Black Templars, and all of their successors say hi.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Karol wrote:
Because being forced to buy 2 books, when in the past you got it in one, and you still could easily get it in one is not good.

Ultramarines, White Scars, Iron Hands, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Raven Guard, Crimson Fists, and Black Templars, and all of their successors say hi.

Just because they've been wronged, doesn't mean others should be.

I'd rather we saw most of those getting an individual full 'dex (exception being having Imperial Fists and Crimson Fists in one book), with the Ultra's one doubling as the "standard" SM book, with each of the FF Chapters getting more development time and more unique options. One example that's been referenced multiple times here would be IH squad Sergeants (presumably in proper Marine squads, rather than Overly-Inflated Marine squads) having Terminator armour as an option.

The Codex: SM plus supplements approach is a halfway house, and as a result isn't really a good solution either way. Maybe we'll see full Codex releases for some additional FF chapters whenever the next codex cycle occurs, depending on how well they sell this time.

How many times have you been hosed, though, because the SM book came out, and suddenly you were overpaying for Tacs/Rhinos/etc, or some new kit came out that was "SM" so you didn't get it, or your book came out and suddenly you're underpaying for Tacs/Rhinos/etc, or designers were hesitant to properly point your stuff because it's shared across too many books?

The big upside in the parent-child dex/subdexes model is that, with the subdexes expanding upon a primary source for Space Marine rules, Space Marines can be managed in one rulesset and "inherited" by all those that use it. So there's one definition of a Tac Marine squad. This means that, if it needs to change, an FAQ only touches one book. Today, changing Marine rules means changing 7+ books. That seems awfully "WET" ("Write Everything Twice") to me.

An alternate model that'd probably be doable as an FAQ would be if the DA/BA/SW books said "And they can take the following units from the SM book... Their current datasheets are printed here, alongside any additional variance (such as "Tac Squads" are called "Grey Hunters"), but the SM book takes precedence."

That model would give all the benefits of consolidation, with the exception of some extra rule pages in the not-quite-child-dexes. But it'd also have the upside of being able to play (non-competitively) without having the SM book. If GW wanted to be super-awesome, they could even make sure the sub-Marine rules were fully correct just from using the subbooks+FAQ - so that you really don't have to buy two books. Many players still would want to - but those who want to could, those who don't want to wouldn't need to.

This model won't truly happen, but it's not far from where we are. Just a single medium-sized FAQ.

Something I've just realised in this whole debate. You dont need the Iron Hands supplement to play Iron Hands. Chapters traits are still in the core codex. Iron Hands layers dont need to buy 2 books, they get a benefit from it bu it's not mandatory.

DA as a supplement would be a mandatory purchase. Not an optional one. So you do force us to spend more than others to be able to function on a base level.

Or are you now also rewriting the core Codex for a 3rd time to make it capable of running DA without needing to supplement?

Food for thought, I already have a feeling the reaction though

 BroodSpawn wrote:
Something I've just realised in this whole debate. You dont need the Iron Hands supplement to play Iron Hands. Chapters traits are still in the core codex. Iron Hands layers dont need to buy 2 books, they get a benefit from it bu it's not mandatory.

DA as a supplement would be a mandatory purchase. Not an optional one. So you do force us to spend more than others to be able to function on a base level.

Or are you now also rewriting the core Codex for a 3rd time to make it capable of running DA without needing to supplement?

Food for thought, I already have a feeling the reaction though

So you're saying that a Dark Angels list made up solely of the 85% of generic units that exist in the Space Marine Codex too isn't actually a Dark Angels list?

In case I didn't make it clear, I actually did want to rewrite Codex: Space Marines - I thought I made that clear. I wished to rewrite it to the point where mixed Terminator Squads were generic, Terminator plasma cannons were generic, heavy flamers, chainswords, and paired special weapons on Tacticals were generic, Baal Predators and Land Raider Terminus Ultras were generic (much like how the canon Redeemer, Prometheus, and Crusader variants, despite being pioneered by certain Chapters, were distributed amongst the Astartes), Honour Guard were generic, etc etc, and including Chapter Tactics on the Chapter Tactics page for the Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Space Wolves, based off of the core ones that already exist.

I'm not that negligent. You'd still have unique rules, in the same way that Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves were given unique rules in Kill Team and the Vanguard Primaris Marines booklets - Chapter Tactics, like everyone else. If you wanted more, you'd pay for them, like everyone else has to.

I think you inferred something when I said they weren't in the current book. I didn't say a Dark Angel army made of Tactical/Devastator/Primaris marines wasn't a Dark Angel army. I simply stated something I'd realised after 15 pages of this discussion.

You want to rewrite all Space Marines in the way you see fit. You've heard arguments and had questions answered about why the sub-factions are treat differently. You still want to rewrite it all (lore included and retconned to how you see it I might add, because you can't plump units together mechanically and then not expect to make some kind of narrative change to that large group of people that spend money on the narrative side of the hobby).
And you have a valid idea to pseudo return to the 3rd edition setup (which we don't even know if DA are going to stay a separate codex at this point, though gut feeling is they will and just get something different than Combat Doctrines in it's place).

Apart from 'because it's better for you', which I disagree with because I do like the current differences it options across units/wargear/stratagems/etc., I'm not seeing a good reason to remove what makes those codices stand-alone other than 'you're just using the same models*' .

*Well mostly the same models for 'core' units but there's a good number of models in the core codex DA don't get and that's fine with me personally speaking.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
I think you inferred something when I said they weren't in the current book. I didn't say a Dark Angel army made of Tactical/Devastator/Primaris marines wasn't a Dark Angel army.

True, I believed that you were implying that a DA army is only a DA army if it has Deathwing and unique units in it, my mistake and apologies.

You want to rewrite all Space Marines in the way you see fit.

Pretty much, yeah. That doesn't mean that the "way I see fit" isn't governed by my view on Space Marine lore and flavour though.

You've heard arguments and had questions answered about why the sub-factions are treat differently. You still want to rewrite it all (lore included and retconned to how you see it I might add, because you can't plump units together mechanically and then not expect to make some kind of narrative change to that large group of people that spend money on the narrative side of the hobby).

As someone on the narrative side of the hobby, the idea that you need a unique Codex and datasheet to preserve that narrative is simply not ticking for me.

You mention how I want to retcon things: in what way? It's canon that other Chapters have mixed Terminator Squads (Space Hulk), and canon that non-Dark Angels have plasma weaponry on their Terminators (Invictus) - meanwhile, there is no canon that says anything to the effect of "only the Dark Angels and their descendants deploy mixed weapon Terminator Squads".

And you have a valid idea to pseudo return to the 3rd edition setup (which we don't even know if DA are going to stay a separate codex at this point, though gut feeling is they will and just get something different than Combat Doctrines in it's place).

They probably *will* stay as a Codex. The point is that I don't care what GW will do, because this is my imaginary proposal.

Apart from 'because it's better for you', which I disagree with because I do like the current differences it options across units/wargear/stratagems/etc., I'm not seeing a good reason to remove what makes those codices stand-alone other than 'you're just using the same models*' .

*Well mostly the same models for 'core' units but there's a good number of models in the core codex DA don't get and that's fine with me personally speaking.

You mention difference between units/wargear/stratagems. In my proposal, what are those differences that I don't replicate?
Stratagems would be unchanged, I never said anything otherwise.
Units, the only real unit changes (Deathwing Terminators, Cataphractii, Tartaros, Ravenwing Bikers and Land Speeders) would be absolutely identical in every mechanical effect (barring the Deathwing Terminators' lack of Watchers in the Dark), because of my application of keywords and amendments to the existing Chapter Tactics.
Wargear, likewise - you would lose nothing.

The only thing you lose is exclusivity on units that, as I've been demonstrating, have very few reasons to be exclusive (ie, there's canon mixed unit squads, and canon plasma Terminators).

Of course, if there's something I'm missing, I'm more than happy to acknowledge it!

Stratagems would be unchanged, I never said anything otherwise.
Units, the only real unit changes (Deathwing Terminators, Cataphractii, Tartaros, Ravenwing Bikers and Land Speeders) would be absolutely identical in every mechanical effect (barring the Deathwing Terminators' lack of Watchers in the Dark), because of my application of keywords and amendments to the existing Chapter Tactics.
Wargear, likewise - you would lose nothing.

DA have storm shield and caliban mace termintors. And they have plasma cannons on their termintors as arment option. So those are at least two things they would be losing.

The way I understood Sgt_Smudge the plasma cannon would be available to everybody and those mace Terminators will remain unique to DA. So nothing lost for DA players.

Karol wrote:

Stratagems would be unchanged, I never said anything otherwise.
Units, the only real unit changes (Deathwing Terminators, Cataphractii, Tartaros, Ravenwing Bikers and Land Speeders) would be absolutely identical in every mechanical effect (barring the Deathwing Terminators' lack of Watchers in the Dark), because of my application of keywords and amendments to the existing Chapter Tactics.
Wargear, likewise - you would lose nothing.

DA have storm shield and caliban mace termintors. And they have plasma cannons on their termintors as arment option. So those are at least two things they would be losing.

No, they wouldn't.

Deathwing Knights (the ones with the shield and mace/flail) are not the same unit as Deathwing Terminators (the ones with all the other stuff, like storm bolters, power fists, and other standard Terminator weaponry). I've said repeatedly that I wanted to get rid of the Terminator entry, but keep the Knight entry, because that is unique.

Likewise with the plasma cannon, I don't want to get rid of it completely. I want to make it a generic option. Because, as I said, don't want anyone to be "losing" anything. Dark Angels Terminators would have plasma cannons, just like how Ultramarines Terminators would.

I'm pretty sure that this consolidating is never going to happen, but I think it's funny how people come up with "but [insert unit here] is unique to my chapter" when stuff like the hurricane Landraider, Dark Apostles and Spiritseers exist (all of them where unique to a certain craftworld, chapter, legion once, as far as I know).

 BroodSpawn wrote:
25yrs+ of Dark Angels (the ones I follow story, models and have dipped in regularly for so I have a decent grasp on them) being separate, being shown as separate

Yeah but what about all those other chapters that you haven't followed that are different too? Shouldn't those get enough customization in Codex SM to be properly represented on the table? Why shouldn't the C:SM be flexible enough to allow for chapters very different from Ultramarines, including the dark angels?

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
The only difference from marines are the options available, and a reduced stat line for less points. That's it.

And special rules. Oh, and keywords.
The only difference between guards and marines are different statlines, different wargear, different options, different special rules, different faction keyword, different unit keywords.
I am not sure how they could be made more different, because I don't see what other difference the system allow for.

Those special rules and keywords are part of the mentioned options. You pick one set, and that detachment doesn't get to use others.

I don't understand what you are saying.

In the scope of the game, the difference in biology, skill and wargear between an imperial guard and an eldar (or a marine), is definitely relevant enough to warrant different special rules, different keywords, different profiles, etc., i.e. a different datasheet. However, the difference between a dark angel tactical and a crimson fist tactical, or between a deathwing terminator and a rainbow warrior terminator doesn't warrant more than a different chapter tactic and possibly access to different stratagems. Not a different datasheet.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Karol wrote:

Stratagems would be unchanged, I never said anything otherwise.
Units, the only real unit changes (Deathwing Terminators, Cataphractii, Tartaros, Ravenwing Bikers and Land Speeders) would be absolutely identical in every mechanical effect (barring the Deathwing Terminators' lack of Watchers in the Dark), because of my application of keywords and amendments to the existing Chapter Tactics.
Wargear, likewise - you would lose nothing.

DA have storm shield and caliban mace termintors. And they have plasma cannons on their termintors as arment option. So those are at least two things they would be losing.

No, they wouldn't.

Deathwing Knights (the ones with the shield and mace/flail) are not the same unit as Deathwing Terminators (the ones with all the other stuff, like storm bolters, power fists, and other standard Terminator weaponry). I've said repeatedly that I wanted to get rid of the Terminator entry, but keep the Knight entry, because that is unique.

Likewise with the plasma cannon, I don't want to get rid of it completely. I want to make it a generic option. Because, as I said, don't want anyone to be "losing" anything. Dark Angels Terminators would have plasma cannons, just like how Ultramarines Terminators would.

I think we have slight disagreement here in the intended goal.

As far as I can see you want all Space Marines Terminators to have mixed versatile loadouts. Which I don't mind.

Giving them our plasma Cannon.... I'd rather not because it does feel like our little thing I would prefer we just have a unique entry for the plasma Cannon in our combined Deathwing entry in a supplement

Honest question: Would you really want to keep the plasma cannon unique to yourself if it means you get to use literally everything else from all the other Space Marine factions?

I've been for us being moved to a supplement off Ultras like the other first founding chapters with our uniqueness included. You could do the same thing with Blood Angels.

Only Space wolves are that unique imo.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Honest question: Would you really want to keep the plasma cannon unique to yourself if it means you get to use literally everything else from all the other Space Marine factions?

Honestly yes.

Otherwise what's the difference between one faction of marines and another? If the goal is that every Marine chapter is exactly the same then you remove options that make them different, which is part of what the suggestion is. DA not having Centurions is a difference because Ultramarines don't have plasma cannons on Terminators. It gives an interesting option for all kinds of players and collectors when sub-factions have tangible differences (no, not everyone goes by the 'but people only play the most powerful units' style of playing/collecting so don't even bother with that please). Which means choices matter. Removing these distinctions makes those choices irrelevant for not only older players but new ones too.

As for the 'why can't other Chapters get cool things, why does DA (etc.) deserve to have things like that?' question - I've said before I'd love to see Raven Guard, etc expanded with there own divergent units (and army restrictions on what they have access to) to make them different or to exemplify those differences. Concatenating DA (etc.) down doesn't make those factions any more unique, it just removes the uniqueness from others.

'Why doesn't the core codex allow you to make divergent chapters?' - Isn't it because the design point of that is to represent all the Chapters that don't diverge from each other that much? Excluding the Black Templars, the other named Chapters in that book operate to a greater degree in the same way, though some favour certain approaches over others. The design of that book is to cover the 90% of Space Marines that that exist., especially since it's canon that the most common Founding Legion was the Ultramarines. Why do extra work to show divergence from that in the same book that is supposed to be showing that level of commonality. Or have I missed the what makes this core codex different from the DA/Space Wolves/BA factions and successors.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
...Otherwise what's the difference between one faction of marines and another?...

Relics, Warlord Traits, Stratagems, psychic disciplines, unique characters.

Or are you saying the Salamanders, Iron Hands, Imperial Fists, Ultramarines, Raven Guard, and White Scars are all identical?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 BroodSpawn wrote:
...Otherwise what's the difference between one faction of marines and another?...

Relics, Warlord Traits, Stratagems, psychic disciplines, unique characters.

Or are you saying the Salamanders, Iron Hands, Imperial Fists, Ultramarines, Raven Guard, and White Scars are all identical?

Y'know there's no good answer to this. Either I say 'yes' in which case I'll be accused of being ignorant or dismissive, or I have to say 'no' at which the next step is 'so DA should be brought inline with them and have stuff taken away/given to everyone so that they're only as different as the IH are to the RG'.

You do seem to have missed my point though, especially by pulling half a sentence out of context. So let me reiterate: the best thing would be to expand the Codex Compliant chapters to show more differences. Removing what makes a Codex Divergent chapter different does not make those that are Compliant any more different or unique than they already are.

My question is: is having unique load-outs really necessary for them to be different or unique? Should GW, for example, add 10-15 unique units and load-outs to every sub-Faction in the game (Chaos, Nids, Orkz, etc.) and make them all their own Codex? Or are they different and unique enough without them? And, if so, why should the Codex Divergent Chapters have their own Codex? Not to he condescending, but just wondering why their own Codex with their own special load-outs and such is NECESSARY for them to be unique? If the answer is "because I like it that way" then I ain't gonna argue you down. You're entitled to like things the way you like them. But the OP's topic was "what practical reasons are there for these Chapters have their own Codex?" and answers such as "because GW says so", "because they've been that way for a long time", and "because players like it that way" aren't practical reasons.

Tough one. Not because it's difficult to justify different sub-factions for Marines existing, but because asking why something is NECESSARY for a game like 40k is impossible to really answer in a dispassionate manner. For example of what I mean by this here's a few extensions to that base question:

Are any of the Xenos factions really needed when the game is Imperium vs Chaos?
Do Chaos Marines need to exist independently when you could just swap a singular keyword on a generic Marine datasheet?
Can someone justify Sisters of Battle existing as a playable faction?

Those stem from the same place 'give me a practical reason for 'x' to exist in this game'. Just change the 'x' as you see fit and see how difficult it is to answer without falling back on 'that's what was released to purchase and what people have bought and supported over time (in most cases)'.

In the most literal sense - they is no practical reason for any of them to exist, or for there to be any form of divergence (Chapter Tactics) in Space Marines.

However we can all agree that without even something as simple as Chapter Tactics (which practically doesn't need to exist for a Marine to be a Marine) allowing for people to have different options it allows for more ways to interact with both the hobby and the game. People like White Scars focus on rapid, mobile units (bikes) which is a difference to Iron Hands more armoured company (infantry + tanks) approach. Expanding that so certain units in certain sub-factions only having access to certain equipment others doesn't is a further expansion of those options. It's not needed in the most practical of terms, but it makes things more interesting and gives us more options in what we want to collect or how we go about that.

Why do DA (etc) have there own codex? Because there were enough differences in units they were allowed access to or had that were divergent from the 'core' in editions past to warrant it. Do they need it to just be a Space Marine army - no. Is it a good thing that they do have one since it gives players a choice and some specific models that are different from the generics? In my opinion yes.

I think it might be a bit extreme to go from "is it necessary for DA to have their own book, instead of sharing one with the other Chapters, to be unique and different?" to "is it necessary for Orkz to even exist?" But maybe that's just me.

Should also mention that many, MANY other Factions have unique units, Relics, Stratagems, Traits, and load-outs for certain sub-Factions while still being in the same book. These Codexes have also given players "a choice and specific models that are different from the generics".

 flandarz wrote:
I think it might be a bit extreme to go from "is it necessary for DA to have their own book, instead of sharing one with the other Chapters, to be unique and different?" to "is it necessary for Orkz to even exist?" But maybe that's just me.

In the most practical sense though where does the line get drawn on what is and isn't 'needed'. After we concatenate Space Marines into 1 list, how do we justify 3 factions of Eldar? How do we justify certain Xenos races when they add nothing of value to the primary setting/story.
I'm just pushing that argument to it's more extreme ends at this stage, but I'm trying to prove the point - you can't justify anything is actually needed or practical in 40k. It's not really a good justiification (in my eyes) to start removing units or re-writing multiple codices just because the trying to justify why something exists in this game is so difficult (as can be attested to in just how difficult it is to prove the differences in these units since someone will always use the 'I don't think that's a good enough reason' argument).



And here's the question back at you that I'm being made to answer: justify why those units should not be generic versions available to all? Why should they be different, what value does it bring, are they truly NEEDED to be able to represent that sub-faction?

 BroodSpawn wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I think it might be a bit extreme to go from "is it necessary for DA to have their own book, instead of sharing one with the other Chapters, to be unique and different?" to "is it necessary for Orkz to even exist?" But maybe that's just me.

In the most practical sense though where does the line get drawn on what is and isn't 'needed'. After we concatenate Space Marines into 1 list, how do we justify 3 factions of Eldar? How do we justify certain Xenos races when they add nothing of value to the primary setting/story.
I'm just pushing that argument to it's more extreme ends at this stage, but I'm trying to prove the point - you can't justify anything is actually needed or practical in 40k. It's not really a good justiification (in my eyes) to start removing units or re-writing multiple codices just because the trying to justify why something exists in this game is so difficult (as can be attested to in just how difficult it is to prove the differences in these units since someone will always use the 'I don't think that's a good enough reason' argument).

Spoiler:

Should also mention that many, MANY other Factions have unique units, Relics, Stratagems, Traits, and load-outs for certain sub-Factions while still being in the same book. These Codexes have also given players "a choice and specific models that are different from the generics".

And here's the question back at you that I'm being made to answer: justify why those units should not be generic versions available to all? Why should they be different, what value does it bring, are they truly NEEDED to be able to represent that sub-faction?

Well seeing as Eldar vs Dark Eldar are actually functionally different compared to Marines and other Marines, that might be how.
For eliminating armies, Harlequins don't need their own codex for example.

Just my 2 cents:

I personally feel that a space marine is a space marine. DA, BA and SW are all just space marines at the end of the day. That is to say, they play the same way. You have your tacs, assaults, devs, predator, rhino land raider etc. and Primaris are all identical. The minor differences between them are so minute as to matter too little for the overall playstyle (except probably SW, due to wulfen). At this point even Deathwatch (with all the primaris) are slowly becoming just another chapter.

The way I see it, if the majority of your units are equivalent/same then you should be merged into one book so that everyone gets updated simultaneously. There are already plenty of BA/DA players who would like to get doctrines and such. If they shared a book, they would have gotten them by already.

As for why other factions should not be merged:
- Chaos Marines aren't even Imperium so that would be wonky, plus only 1/3 of their codex are equivalent to imperial marines anyway. That said, DG and TS could be merged into the main chaos marine book. I would make 4 subsections dedicated to WE, EC, DG, TS with their own gear but still sharing the same codex.
- Eldar. D eldar and harlequins share 0 units between them afaik, so merging is pointless. Though harlies are small enough that they could be printed into both craftworlds and d eldar with their own subsection.

As far as i'm concerned, a codex is just a collection of rules, and the more rules you can fit in there without overloading it the better.
I would be very dissappointed if GW split other factions like they did marines: e.g catachans/cadians getting a codex/supplement would bum me out since it's unnecessary and a waste of money, paper, time and space. The codexes should be designed so that it can represent and respect significant subfactions. GW resorting to supplements is an indication that their codex design is insufficient/poor and should be revised.

The indexes despite their balance flaws were better laid out imo. With just one book I could play an Inquisition led guard army with knight support. Now, I need 2 codexes AND the index. I would love it if things like the inquisition/knights/assassins were just rolled into every imperial codex under its own subsection. Or at least the guard/admech ones.
I actually liked sharing my index between tau, orks and nids because it felt like I was getting more bang for my buck. I had an old ork army I was even able to use even though I never really planned on using them at all.

Dandelion wrote:
Just my 2 cents:

I personally feel that a space marine is a space marine. DA, BA and SW are all just space marines at the end of the day. That is to say, they play the same way. You have your tacs, assaults, devs, predator, rhino land raider etc. and Primaris are all identical. The minor differences between them are so minute as to matter too little for the overall playstyle (except probably SW, due to wulfen). At this point even Deathwatch (with all the primaris) are slowly becoming just another chapter.

The way I see it, if the majority of your units are equivalent/same then you should be merged into one book so that everyone gets updated simultaneously. There are already plenty of BA/DA players who would like to get doctrines and such. If they shared a book, they would have gotten them by already.

As for why other factions should not be merged:
- Chaos Marines aren't even Imperium so that would be wonky, plus only 1/3 of their codex are equivalent to imperial marines anyway. That said, DG and TS could be merged into the main chaos marine book. I would make 4 subsections dedicated to WE, EC, DG, TS with their own gear but still sharing the same codex.
- Eldar. D eldar and harlequins share 0 units between them afaik, so merging is pointless. Though harlies are small enough that they could be printed into both craftworlds and d eldar with their own subsection.

As far as i'm concerned, a codex is just a collection of rules, and the more rules you can fit in there without overloading it the better.
I would be very dissappointed if GW split other factions like they did marines: e.g catachans/cadians getting a codex/supplement would bum me out since it's unnecessary and a waste of money, paper, time and space. The codexes should be designed so that it can represent and respect significant subfactions. GW resorting to supplements is an indication that their codex design is insufficient/poor and should be revised.

The indexes despite their balance flaws were better laid out imo. With just one book I could play an Inquisition led guard army with knight support. Now, I need 2 codexes AND the index. I would love it if things like the inquisition/knights/assassins were just rolled into every imperial codex under its own subsection. Or at least the guard/admech ones.
I actually liked sharing my index between tau, orks and nids because it felt like I was getting more bang for my buck. I had an old ork army I was even able to use even though I never really planned on using them at all.

Absolutely agreed. Shove all the marines into one codex, separate the options based on the different flavours of mehreens.
We do NOT need a new book every two months rehashing the same damn content. It's literally just a book that contains 10-20 excel spreadsheet statlines. We can do better than that, we deserve better than that.

Or at the very least market this gak better so anyone who plays Xenos or CSM DOESNT feel like it's a damn NPC race. This is an egregious disaster.
Hell, to make matters worse there's rumors that the design team had Space Marines a LOT weaker in the beta, with Super Doctrines not stacking with normal doctrines but GW told them "Yea naw fam push that gak 4 sales" and so we have what we've got now.

It's the same gakking company shoveling gakware for gakkers but with a semi-decent (until recent) PR company running the community.

I never said that DA (and other non-Compliant Chapters) should have "generic" options. I'm asking, if you share 85% of the same options, why do you need a separate book? Why is it necessary to have your own Codex, if the little differences that you DO have can be easily included in the same book the rest of the Marines are using? Differences are great, but do these Codexes have ENOUGH differences to justify a separate book? Eldar and Orkz are different enough from each other (they share literally 0 data sheets, rules, lore, etc.) to justify being separate books. Can you say the same for DA and the other Codexes?