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.
2019/11/15 23:40:11
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
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.
And then we have to start asking why Space Marines deserve special treatment (sub-factions as independent Codexes) and why there aren't unique units for Biel-Tan/Iyanden/Ulthwe/Alaitoc/Saim-Hann, for instance. The entire 'sub-faction' system is there so you don't need to balloon the bloat by writing 8-10 times as many Codexes as we have; adding more content isn't going to help anyone. It isn't going to help players (because if there's a similar ratio of playable models to garbage models as there are now it just balloons the amount of trap options nobody takes, and because it'll take even longer to update everything), it isn't going to help GW (it means they have to work a wider variety of things fewer people are going to buy into their supply chain).
I think there's enough differences for them to exist as sub-Factions within the same Codex, yes. Without losing any options, rules, or uniqueness, I believe they can exist within the same published material the rest of the Marines use. This may not have always been the case, because previous rule sets might have necessitated breaking them up. But under the current rules, I can see no reason to keep them separate other than tradition and "public outrage".
2019/11/16 00:33:26
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Internet Arguing 101! Person A states their opinion, person B states their opinion, person A restates their opinion, person B restates their opinion, repeat until either someone loses their temper or someone gets bored and stops, at which point whoever remains declares themselves victorious and moves on having accomplished nothing other than a feat of stubborn repetition.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Internet Arguing 101! Person A states their opinion, person B states their opinion, person A restates their opinion with reasons why they have this opinion and why person B's opinion is "wrong", person B restates their opinion with reasons why they have this opinion and why person A's opinion is "wrong", repeat until either someone loses their temper, someone is unable to effectively refute the other person's reasons, or someone gets bored and stops, at which point whoever remains declares themselves victorious and moves on having accomplished nothing other than a feat of stubborn repetition, and neither side feels particularly satisfied with the outcome, so they both just wait for the next opportunity to "one up" someone.
Fixed it for you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/16 04:07:55
2019/11/16 04:43:50
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
It would seem that some do not like Space Marines. That is fine, if a little awkward for a 40K player. What is not fine is the desire to fold up Space Marine Codexes such as the DA/BA because you don't like them.
The DA have unique units and are restricted from choosing certain SM units. They are distinct. They have established lore. Having their own Dex reduces so-called "bloat" in the main Codex. At the same time, they do not take the same design/production resources as a whole new faction. Add to that a player base that do indeed play them. I quite enjoy only having to use one book for my army.
Don't like them? Don't play them. Resist the urge to impose your own tastes on others.
All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand
2019/11/16 04:52:54
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
I like Space Marines, but that doesn't mean they get a "pass" just because I like em, and it shouldn't mean you give them a pass either. Like I said (and the OP asked for): I'm looking for practical reasons to keep them separate. "I like them being separate" is certainly a valid reason, but it is far from practical. This is the exact same thing I'd be looking for if GW decided to make Codex: Goff (recycling 85% of the content of the main Codex), which is my own favorite sub-Faction. They are distinct and have established lore, and while I certainly wouldn't mind having a "stand-alone" Goff Codex, I wouldn't make claims that it's efficient, practical, or even good for the game if it happened.
Instead of assuming everyone who thinks these Codexes could be folded into the main book with 0 loss in content "hate Space Marines", it might behoove you to consider whether or not your own view is biased, or whether you're actually looking at the situation from an objective point of view.
2019/11/16 04:56:57
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
TangoTwoBravo wrote: It would seem that some do not like Space Marines. That is fine, if a little awkward for a 40K player. What is not fine is the desire to fold up Space Marine Codexes such as the DA/BA because you don't like them.
The DA have unique units and are restricted from choosing certain SM units. They are distinct. They have established lore. Having their own Dex reduces so-called "bloat" in the main Codex. At the same time, they do not take the same design/production resources as a whole new faction. Add to that a player base that do indeed play them. I quite enjoy only having to use one book for my army.
Don't like them? Don't play them. Resist the urge to impose your own tastes on others.
That doesn't answer the question of why they and none of their successors have Centurions or TFCs, or why not a single successor of any other Chapter is in cahoots with a Forge World that can make Plasma Cannons that fit nicely on a Terminator arm.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/11/16 05:08:57
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
TangoTwoBravo wrote: It would seem that some do not like Space Marines. That is fine, if a little awkward for a 40K player. What is not fine is the desire to fold up Space Marine Codexes such as the DA/BA because you don't like them.
The DA have unique units and are restricted from choosing certain SM units. They are distinct. They have established lore. Having their own Dex reduces so-called "bloat" in the main Codex. At the same time, they do not take the same design/production resources as a whole new faction. Add to that a player base that do indeed play them. I quite enjoy only having to use one book for my army.
Don't like them? Don't play them. Resist the urge to impose your own tastes on others.
That doesn't answer the question of why they and none of their successors have Centurions or TFCs, or why not a single successor of any other Chapter is in cahoots with a Forge World that can make Plasma Cannons that fit nicely on a Terminator arm.
True ... How would the most secretive chapter hide such things. How could they have a land speeder no one else does. How could they have a working jetbike that is very different from the custodes that gets destroyed and yet they always have it. How would they have tech that pisses off the mechanicus and refuses to share. The answer is in the fluff and always has been. Does that mean we need a full Codex... Not really. A supplement is fine in my eyes.
Also as for the Centurions and Thunderfire cannons. The cannons were lost in the warp and everyone else is being salty with centurion armor and not sending us any. (This silly explanation of something that is unexplained was brought to you by the squirrel who runs my brain....he regrets nothing.)
8000 Dark Angels (No primaris)
10000 Lizardmen (Fantasy I miss you)
3000 High Elves 4000 Kel'shan Ta'u "He attacked everything in life with a mix of extraordinary genius and naive incompetence, and it was often difficult to tell which was which." -Douglas Adams
2019/11/16 05:15:17
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Why else would somebody play a list other than liking them? It's a serious question. What we like drives the hobby.
I have offered on this thread and all the others reasons why the DA should have their own Codex. They have unique units. That is not me being biased. They do not have access to several Space Marine units in exchange. Also not me being biased. They have plenty of long-established lore. Not my bias. They've had their own Codex since 2nd Ed and the game has somehow survived.
Where my lack of objectivity comes in is my decision to play them. I'm comfortable with that.
If Codex Goffs came out I wouldn't buy it, but I would be happy for those gamers who chose to buy and play it. Let the market decide. We all get a choice and should refrain from imposing our own choices on others.
BroodSpawn wrote: Nothing I say matters in this discussion. I give up.
Probably because you haven't come up with a good defense for not consolidating than "I don't like it".
Isn't ' I dont like it' the entire argument for consolidation of units here? If my factual answers of what makes things different can be put into such a simple statement then I believe so can your opinion on why it should be changed.
Or is your opinion more valid in this?
2019/11/16 05:34:54
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
It may have been necessary for these Chapters to be separate Codexes in 2nd edition, but unique units, lack of access to some units, and a long lore can be represented in the current ruleset without the need for a separate book. Most Factions operate this way, in fact.
Again, this isn't a question of whether or not they can be fine as their own thing. It's whether or not it's necessary. Ie: are there practical reasons for them to be their own Codex, when it's been proven that a Chapter or sub-Faction can have all the things these ones do without needing a separate Codex?
2019/11/16 05:37:32
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
BroodSpawn wrote: Nothing I say matters in this discussion. I give up.
Probably because you haven't come up with a good defense for not consolidating than "I don't like it".
Isn't ' I dont like it' the entire argument for consolidation of units here? If my factual answers of what makes things different can be put into such a simple statement then I believe so can your opinion on why it should be changed.
Or is your opinion more valid in this?
The argument for consolidation of units is that the game would be better if players a) had to read fewer datasheets, and b) could customize their units more. The argument against consolidation of units is that different datasheets are more characterful and distinctive. Both are true. The entire basis of the disagreement is how much you, personally, are prepared to sacrifice one to support the other. You've chosen to draw the line at "Deathwing must be a different datasheet from normal Terminators, no matter that it makes the game have more datasheets and cuts down on customizability of datasheets". I've chosen to draw the line at "Keeping Deathwing as a unique datasheet doesn't add enough flavour to justify the extra rules necessary to keep them that way and the loss of customizability that results". The entire thing is a subjective line based on personal preference. You're guilty of going "I don't like it", but so am I, so is Slayerfan, so is everyone else.
TangoTwoBravo wrote:It would seem that some do not like Space Marines. That is fine, if a little awkward for a 40K player. What is not fine is the desire to fold up Space Marine Codexes such as the DA/BA because you don't like them.
On the other hand, I love Space Marines. I like BA over DA, but I'm pretty indifferent to them generally, like I am with White Scars and Iron Hands.
I don't want to fold them in because I don't like them or Space Marines. I want to fold them up because I don't think there's a practical reason at the moment to keep them separate. In 4th and 5th edition? 6th? 7th? I could absolutely see why you'd want to keep them separate, because the way the rules were written didn't lend itself to supplements well.
Nowadays, we literally have supplements being added that give unique units, stratagems, warlord traits, relics, psychic powers, and basic chapter tactics that essentially turn certain basic units into a semi-unique version (White Scars bikers, namely). The structure is there for DA/BA/SW to build on.
The DA have unique units and are restricted from choosing certain SM units. They are distinct. They have established lore.
I want to specifically tackle "are restricted from choosing certain SM units" from a lore front - why? Why don't the Blood Angels, an otherwise Codex Chapter, have Thunderfire Cannons and Centurions? The Dark Angels? Without a lore reason, I can only assume it's there to create an artificial "distinctness": and when we're trying to discuss why the BA/DA/SW are as distinct as they are, this artificial kind of separation goes to show just how shallow it really is.
I'm not saying they're not distinct. I'm saying are they so distinct that they need a new Codex, when they share 85% of the same units (not including the ones that there's no lore reason for them not to have, a la Centurions and TFC), and everyone else also has their own unique established lore?
Or is this a case of "everyone's special, but some are more special than others"?
Having their own Dex reduces so-called "bloat" in the main Codex.
Not really. Do the current supplements increase bloat in the current main Codex? No, because their unique units are only printed in their supplement. Their stratagems, warlord traits, etc etc - only printed in their supplement.
What *is* bloat is the reprinting of what is fundamentally the same book, with functionally the same units, plus some unique elements (that now every Space Marine First Founder has!).
At the same time, they do not take the same design/production resources as a whole new faction.
Yeah, because they already share 85% of their units! If they don't take the same design/production resources (because they're not a whole new faction), why are they being given a Codex as if they were one?
Add to that a player base that do indeed play them.
A player base that, I imagine, would continue to play them if they were put in a supplement.
I quite enjoy only having to use one book for my army.
Good for you - but what about people who play other Space Marine factions? Why do they need two books?
They/them
2019/11/16 13:58:03
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Some people can't understand That chapters exist in books.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/11/16 14:04:22
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
So I've shown you how the DA are distinct. If you then choose to deny that distinction then it's hard to have a dialogue. It's fine that we disagree, but your meaningful response is to not buy the DA Codex instead of trying to deny it to those who actually want it.
GW have given us variety in their artificially constructed universe. Is it so hard to imagine that there would be diversity in the Space Marine Chapters? How is it hurting you as a player? Really. If I really really want TFCs and Centurians I will play a Chapter with access, accepting the consequences of my decision. It's part of the fun of he hobby.
Is your argument "some Chapters need two books so everybody should have two books?" The DA book creates no bloat for those who do not buy it. It's well organized for me as a DA player. Your solution creates complexity where there was functional simplicity - not a hallmark of good design. So I should have two books out of spite?
Cheers,
T2B
All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand
2019/11/16 14:53:46
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
TangoTwoBravo wrote: So I've shown you how the DA are distinct. If you then choose to deny that distinction then it's hard to have a dialogue. It's fine that we disagree, but your meaningful response is to not buy the DA Codex instead of trying to deny it to those who actually want it.
I've told you repeatedly - I'm agreeing they're distinct. But so is every other First Founding Chapter. What I'm asking you is "why are the Dark Angels distinct enough to NEED their own Codex?" Rules? Every other Chapter has unique rules that get reflected just fine in their supplement. Fluff? Every other Chapter has unique fluff that gets reflected just fine in their supplement. What's so special about the DA, who, as I repeat again, share 85% of their material with everyone else?
Again, you say "people want the DA Codex" - that poses the question I'm trying to get to: is it the "Dark Angels" part that's important (ie, having the rules in the first place), or the "Codex" part? If it was just the "Dark Angels" part, then it shouldn't matter if it's a Codex, supplement, FAQ, or whatever - they've got that unique flavour. If it was the "Codex" part, then that kinda speaks a lot to the sense of priority.
GW have given us variety in their artificially constructed universe. Is it so hard to imagine that there would be diversity in the Space Marine Chapters?
So every Chapter everywhere should have it's own Codex?
Yes, of COURSE there is diversity in Chapters, but it doesn't mean they all need full Codexes!
How is it hurting you as a player? Really.
Increased amounts of tie-over FAQs, waste of paper in the DA Codex (85% of it's datasheets), less encouragement to buy into multiple Chapters (something I actually really liked about the Indexes was the fact that every Chapter was present in them! For the first time, it actually presented a chance for me to buy into other Chapters without needed to shell into another full Codex only to have the same units replicated), increased uniformity amongst otherwise identical units, ease of adding new units.
If I really really want TFCs and Centurians I will play a Chapter with access, accepting the consequences of my decision. It's part of the fun of he hobby.
But you haven't answered why Dark Angels don't have them in the first place. You've just accepted that "I shouldn't want TFC in my Dark Angels" without questioning "why should I settle without them?"
If I want Iron Hands abilities, I would play Iron Hands, but at least I know WHY Ultramarines don't have Iron Hands rules, because Iron Hands fluff supports their heavy focus on the mechanical and durable elements of their Chapter. Dark Angels have unique and specific units, as they absolutely should, but there is no correlation as to whyDA don't have certain generic units other than "seeeee they're TOTALLY different!!" If Dark Angels had always had some fluff along the lines of "they see the idea of artillery as dishonourable and refuse to use indirect firing weapons, which is why they don't use Thunderfire Cannons and Whirlwinds*", or "Dark Angels and their descendants specifically do not trust the use of Centurion suits because during the Battle of No-Centuria, their suits malfunctioned at a critical moment in the battle, leading to the forced retreat of the Dark Angels forces and subsequent loss of the subsector - little to they know it was actually Alpha Legion trickery and sabotage!", then that would be fine! There you go, some easy fluff to explain why they might not have them! Only, they don't have that. But then, even if they did, that's not really a cause to be a separate Codex: just look at the Black Templars. Unique units, restriction on others, soon to have unique stratagems and warlord traits and abilities - and they're basically another Space Marine supplement.
So, I say again - why the special treatment for Dark Angels?
*assuming in this hypothetical argument that DA also lost Whirlwinds, for the sake of the argument
Is your argument "some Chapters need two books so everybody should have two books?"
Obviously, yes? Now that all First Founding Chapters are distinct, with their own unique units, rules and abilities, I see no reason why some Space Marine Chapters should be more special than another. Also, I'd like to clarify, it's not just "some" Chapters, it's ALL First Founding Chapters (don't forget, even DA/BA/SW need multiple sources at the moment - where else do you get your Phobos and Repulsor/Impulsor rules from?)
The DA book creates no bloat for those who do not buy it.
And having a Codex and supplement create no bloat for people who do not buy it. In the same vein, "people who don't buy XYZ book don't have to deal with XYZ problem that book has".
It's well organized for me as a DA player.
And the supplements are well organised for me. Your point?
Your solution creates complexity where there was functional simplicity - not a hallmark of good design. So I should have two books out of spite?
You realise your argument there just reeks of "It's fine for me, sod everyone else. Why should I have to do the same as everyone else?"
The DA book isn't bloated in itself, it's bloated because 85% of it's units are just lazy copypaste jobs. Strip those out, and would you still say you have a full Codex?
I suppose my main question is, if a Dark Angels army had access to generic units that made up 85% of it's available units, it's own unique units, stratagems, Relics, lore, warlord traits, psychic powers, etc etc, would that be sufficient enough to show their "unique-ness"? Now, assuming that DA advocates are fine with the above, my second point: I didn't specify if I was talking about a Codex or supplement in that above example. So, if they both lead to the same resulting flavour and unit access, what's the problem with supplements?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/16 15:02:45
They/them
2019/11/16 15:26:25
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Having separate Marine Codexes DOES make it more complicated for at least one group of people: the new player. The person who is interested in 40k, and likes the Marine aesthetic, but isn't sure which Chapter they wanna settle down with. Instead of all the information being in one book, allowing the player to "test drive" each Chapter and see which one they like best, if the player wants to try out Ultramarines, then give DA a go, they have to buy a separate Codex.
2019/11/16 15:36:33
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
flandarz wrote: Having separate Marine Codexes DOES make it more complicated for at least one group of people: the new player. The person who is interested in 40k, and likes the Marine aesthetic, but isn't sure which Chapter they wanna settle down with. Instead of all the information being in one book, allowing the player to "test drive" each Chapter and see which one they like best, if the player wants to try out Ultramarines, then give DA a go, they have to buy a separate Codex.
Also true. Being confronted with "Space Marines" and "Space Marines with hoods and green armour" and "Space Marines with wolves" and "Space Marines with wings and red armour"* is more than likely pretty daunting, and if you buy one, only to find you prefer "Space Marines with red armour", currently, that's a whole new Codex you need to buy.
With supplements, all you need to know if you like Space Marines in general, and then you can specify later on. It's far more flexible, and rewards collecting multiple Chapters.
*yes, this is absolutely a reductionist argument, but to a new player, this may well be their initial impression
They/them
2019/11/17 04:50:03
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
The Dark Angels are a secretive Chapter that might also be a Legion. They have a terrible secret and a hidden agenda. They have unique organizations. The have a large collection of ancient technology and weapons and also do not fully trust their Techmarines. They have lots of Plasma. They don't have Thunderfire Cannons or Centurions. Why have Centurions when you have lots of Terminator suits. We could talk lore all day. From a game balance perspective it makes sense that the Dark Angels pay for having unique units by losing access to others. You win/ you lose - player's choice. I chose to play them. And yes, I do think that they are special. You don't have to agree.
You have being dodging my point about it being a step backwards turning a stand-alone Codex into a list that requires the main Space Marine Codex and a Supplement along with your interesting ideas of how to combine datasheets. You're really worried about paper? Yes I need the Phobos FAQ if I want to run them - not a big deal as I have a computer and a printer. I am fairly certain that the Dark Angels 2.0 Dex will roll all that into the one book. Based on your earlier responses it seems that you want to have two books for the Dark Angels more out of spite than anything else.
All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand
2019/11/17 05:17:25
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
You can turn DA into a supplement, but then you are looking at:
- Fluff section
- Showcase section
- Army composition section (where you also have to state "You cannot have x, y and z")
- 18 Unique datasheets (that you cannot consolidate for reasons stated multiple times in this thread)
- WT - Relics
- Stratagems
- Interromancy
At that point, it is a supplement only in name. There are full fledged codici with less stuff inside.
I would still do it, just for coherency toward new players that see green marines on the table and grab the marine codex without knowing that there is a special codex for green marines.
2019/11/17 05:35:50
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
My view on "my sub-Faction doesn't/shouldn't have these options" is that, if you feel that way, just don't use them. For example, Snakebite Orkz are more primitive than the others, so they wouldn't use as many vehicles (in my opinion), instead favoring Squiggoths and maybe the odd Trukk/Battlewagon. So, when I list-build for Snakebitez, I don't include the things I don't feel "fit the lore", even if, technically, I COULD use them.
Tldr; you shouldn't need a rule or restriction to force you into a fluffy list, it should be a choice.
2019/11/17 07:09:09
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Spoletta wrote: You can turn DA into a supplement, but then you are looking at:
- Fluff section
- Showcase section
- Army composition section (where you also have to state "You cannot have x, y and z")
- 18 Unique datasheets (that you cannot consolidate for reasons stated multiple times in this thread)
- WT - Relics
- Stratagems
- Interromancy
At that point, it is a supplement only in name. There are full fledged codici with less stuff inside.
I would still do it, just for coherency toward new players that see green marines on the table and grab the marine codex without knowing that there is a special codex for green marines.
1. Fluff sections being too big is a reason to make a codex as expensive as they are. You can easily chop out 1/2 of the Marine codex, so Dark Angels and Blood Angels would be no different than another Chapter entry.
2. Showcase Section isn't that big. Not a good argument.
3. Why are we limiting what we can't have? No reason Dark Angels shouldn't have Centurions, which honestly fit their Tactics well for a gunline. The only Chapter that has an excuse not to include something is Black Templars with Librarians, and that's literally covered in their Chapter Tactic section.
4. We've already discussed your "unique" datasheets aren't all that unique for the most part. You lose literally nothing by replacing "Deathwing" with the regular Terminator section anymore than you lost anything with the other Mk Terminators. Not that there should entries for those, for the record.
5. Nobody NEEDS 6 separate Warlord Traits, Relics, Psyker Powers, and that many Stratagems. 3 Warlord Traits and Powers, 4 Relics, and 5 Stratagems covers a lot more than you want to believe as you have this inane idea that if nothing is separate nothing can be unique. This mindset is what led to the Supplements being a thing, and they should NOT be a thing.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/11/17 08:25:32
Subject: Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: That doesn't tackle why not a single other Chapter doesn't have a single Plasma Cannon on their Terminators.
Standard plasma cannon ports are compatible with specially-designed backpacks for Devastators, but not with the Terminator Armour ports, and Terminator suits are far too valuable for techmarines to dare experiment. The Dark Angels, with their known vault of ancient tech, have the adaptors, but thanks to their distrust of the rest of the imperium, they haven't shared the tech with anyone other than the other Unforgiven.
Not official lore (actually, saying that, it wouldn't surprise me if it were), but 100% consistent with existing lore and the reasoning behind other differences.
1. Fluff sections being too big is a reason to make a codex as expensive as they are. You can easily chop out 1/2 of the Marine codex, so Dark Angels and Blood Angels would be no different than another Chapter entry.
2. Showcase Section isn't that big. Not a good argument.
3. Why are we limiting what we can't have? No reason Dark Angels shouldn't have Centurions, which honestly fit their Tactics well for a gunline. The only Chapter that has an excuse not to include something is Black Templars with Librarians, and that's literally covered in their Chapter Tactic section.
4. We've already discussed your "unique" datasheets aren't all that unique for the most part. You lose literally nothing by replacing "Deathwing" with the regular Terminator section anymore than you lost anything with the other Mk Terminators. Not that there should entries for those, for the record.
5. Nobody NEEDS 6 separate Warlord Traits, Relics, Psyker Powers, and that many Stratagems. 3 Warlord Traits and Powers, 4 Relics, and 5 Stratagems covers a lot more than you want to believe as you have this inane idea that if nothing is separate nothing can be unique. This mindset is what led to the Supplements being a thing, and they should NOT be a thing.
1. Lots of people like the fluff sections. If your argument is "you can cut out the fluff", you're killing half the appeal of codices.
2. It's big enough, and interesting enough for people who like fluff, that it would be missed if it was cut or even pared down. Glad to see you acknowledge your point wasn't a good argument, though.
3. Because in their lore, Dark Angels are extremely distrustful of new developments and anything that goes outside their way of doing things, and will avoid taking them on as far as possible.
4. Yes, if you take out all the things that make Deathwing unique and give them to everyone else, then Deathwing have nothing unique. 5. That's pure opinion - it's impossible to refute because you've drawn a totally arbitrary line and said "this is acceptable but that is not." Some people like having more variety and more options, others think these can be pared back without it affecting the game too much. Neither side is wrong, neither side is right.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/17 10:53:29
2019/11/17 13:12:27
Subject: Re:Why are DA, BA and SW not treated as supplements of SM? (Even GK)
TangoTwoBravo wrote:The Dark Angels are a secretive Chapter that might also be a Legion.
That may once have been unique, but there are now both plenty of secretive Chapters (Relictors, Mortifactors, Minotaurs, Exorcists etc etc) and they're not even the only original Legion to maintain the ability to call upon their successors to increase their numbers and operate as a single army (Imperial Fists and the Last Wall protocol, Blood Angels at Baal, and even the Ultramarines maintain close contact with lots of their many descendants, forming things like the Honour Companies, or Aegida Company, which was initially a secret Ultramarines 11th Company.)
But, more to the point, what mechanical effect would this have in game that justifies them being a solo Codex?
They have a terrible secret and a hidden agenda.
As above, why does this mean they get a unique Codex? It's represented mechanically via their Inner Circle rules, yes, but as I've shown, they can be applied in a supplement too.
They have unique organizations.
Okay, but even in your Codex right now, those organisations are represented in two ways - everything that would otherwise be a Bike or Land Speeder get the <Ravenwing> keyword and Jink, and everything that would be a Terminator gains <Deathwing> and Inner Circle. And that's absolutely fine! But in two sentences, I've just given them all their mechanical difference. Why do they need to be a full Codex, when a supplement would do the same?
Also, I'd like to point out that even the current Codex doesn't accurately reflect the "unique organisation" of the Deathwing/Ravenwing - there should be some form of ability wherein mono-Deathwing/Ravenwing lists gain more CP.
The have a large collection of ancient technology and weapons and also do not fully trust their Techmarines.
But, nearly all First Founding Chapters have large collections of ancient technology and weaponry - however, yes, the Dark Angels are blessed with one of the last jetbikes and suchlike. However, as I've said, I'm fine with that being a unique datasheet - how would having a Codex instead of a supplement change that? It's not like every Tactical Marine has jetbikes! It's one guy, and he can be represented by a single datasheet.
Also, regarding their lack of Techmarine trust - they still have them. They just don't deploy them on certain Fallen-related missions - and instead have specialist not!Techmarines to operate the Chapter's vehicles when that happens, as I'm sure you know, which have fundamentally the same in-game effect. Just look at Deathwing Land Raiders - they don't have a whole unique entry! Do Dark Angel Thunderhawks have a wholly unique entry? No, because I believe GW have assumed that if a DA player wants a certain vehicle to accompany an Inner Circle army, they'd just repaint the model to not be a Techmarine!
Again, with no mechanical difference, *why* do they need to be a Codex?
They have lots of Plasma.
Yes, true, but in my proposal, this is well reflected - any unit that carries plasma talons get to keep them, meaning that you get quite a lot of plasma there.
Aside from that, if you want to represent more plasma, I dunno, just equip it?? No need for a wholly unique Codex! But if one datasheet of Terminators having to share their singular plasma cannon with everyone else is the crux of this argument, I have to say that's pretty narrow.
They don't have Thunderfire Cannons or Centurions.
Why? Yes, it's all well and good that they currently don't, but what's the reasoning for that? Because at the moment, it just looks that way because GW decided to artificially restrict DA without any reason.
Why have Centurions when you have lots of Terminator suits.
Centurion suits can mount heavier weaponry, and are entrusted to non-Veterans in Codex Chapters. In fact, by that logic, we should actually see *more* Centurions in Dark Angels armies than in other Chapters, because they allow for non-Deathwing to fulfil some roles that less isolationist Terminators would also fill in other Chapters. Essentially, they would act as Terminators-lite while the actual Deathwing can go off hunting more Fallen.
We could talk lore all day.
You can quote lore all day, but without justifying why that should make them a unique Codex (not Chapter, I agree they're a unique Chapter, like every other First Founding Chapter), you're just quoting lore.
I can do exactly the same as you, quoting why XYZ Chapter is special, but being special and unique in lore doesn't necessarily mean they need a whole new Codex for it!
Ultramarines are unique because they were the largest Legion, and have the most successors, they are devoted to the Codex and the teachings of Guilliman, they have unique organisations (in the form of the Tyrannic War Veterans, Honour Companies, the Vigil Opertii and the Victrix Guard), they have lots of relics and nearly a whole sub-empire they can call upon, they have lots of hellfire rounds and gladii and Primaris Marines, they don't have any extreme geneseed mutations or deviancies, and they have a Living Primarch!
Those are all unique or notable features of the Ultramarines, but they don't mean they need a full Codex.
From a game balance perspective it makes sense that the Dark Angels pay for having unique units by losing access to others.
But none of the supplement Chapters do.
Not to mention that when their roster is made up of 85% of the same units, from a game balance perspective, they make more sense being a subfaction of the generic book.
You have being dodging my point about it being a step backwards turning a stand-alone Codex into a list that requires the main Space Marine Codex and a Supplement along with your interesting ideas of how to combine datasheets.
I'm not dodging your point at all - I'm waiting for your point to land. In what way is it a step backwards?
For it to be a step backwards, it would need to lack something that the Codex currently does, and at the moment, the only thing the supplement would lack is it's independence. Is that such a problem for you? Why?
You're really worried about paper? Yes I need the Phobos FAQ if I want to run them - not a big deal as I have a computer and a printer. I am fairly certain that the Dark Angels 2.0 Dex will roll all that into the one book.
Unfortunately, yes, it will, but if I haven't made it clear enough already, I don't care what GW are going to do. This isn't based on what they're most likely to do right now.
Based on your earlier responses it seems that you want to have two books for the Dark Angels more out of spite than anything else.
Not out of spite - out of equality. Because right now, there is no reason for Dark Angels to have a unique Codex, save for "I don't want to have to share a book with those filthy Codex Marine peasants!" Based on your current responses, it seems you want to have one book because you find the idea of doing the same as "regular" Marines abhorrent, and why should Dark Angels be like them?
There were reasons to keep them separate before - but that was before everyone got supplements, unique rules and units and abilities. Now that everyone is special, why are the Dark Angels special enough to need a full Codex? That's the point you've simply not addressed. You've said how they're special, you've said why they're special, but not why they're more special than everyone else.
Spoiler:
Spoletta wrote:You can turn DA into a supplement, but then you are looking at:
- Fluff section
- Showcase section
- Army composition section (where you also have to state "You cannot have x, y and z")
- 18 Unique datasheets (that you cannot consolidate for reasons stated multiple times in this thread)
- WT - Relics
- Stratagems
- Interromancy
At that point, it is a supplement only in name.
I honestly don't have a problem with that - I mean, at the moment, the DA book is a Codex in name only, sharing 85% of it's units with every other Space Marine Chapter.
Also, while I agree that there's definitely some unique units out there that cannot be consolidated (Black Knights, Deathwing Knights, the special flyers and Land Speeders and characters), things like Deathwing Terminators and many Ravenwing units don't need to be unique.
By my count, there's 14 unique units - more than any other supplement, but only two more than Ultramarines have.
Similarly, I don't think DA need a "here's what you can't take" - I don't see why they can't have all the normal flyers and TFC and Centurions as well as their unique stuff. I mean, after all, they don't have *that* much that's truly unique, only having two more datasheets than what the Ultramarines currently have.
There are full fledged codici with less stuff inside.
Absolutely true, but then those same Codexes have even fewer units than some of the existing supplements (the Chaos Knights Codex has 8 units, Harlequins with 9, Custodes and Imperial Knight Codexes have 12 units - the Ultramarines supplement also has 12 units).
I would still do it, just for coherency toward new players that see green marines on the table and grab the marine codex without knowing that there is a special codex for green marines.
Yeah, this is the main thing for me - with supplements being widely available to everyone, and them demonstrating perfectly well that Chapters can have unique rules operating around the Codex: Space Marines core, I don't see why DA/BA/SW shouldn't have that too.
I mean, imagine trying to explain why if they want their Space Marines to have hoods and green armour they can't use the Space Marines book, but if they want their Space Marines to be part machine and have black armour they can.
Spoiler:
Aelyn wrote:1. Lots of people like the fluff sections. If your argument is "you can cut out the fluff", you're killing half the appeal of codices.
Yeah, the fluff sections should be kept.
3. Because in their lore, Dark Angels are extremely distrustful of new developments and anything that goes outside their way of doing things, and will avoid taking them on as far as possible.
While true, they still have access to otherwise "new" things - Razorbacks, grav-weapons, and notably, Primaris. There isn't really a reason not to have Thunderfire Cannons at least, as direct descendants of Legion quad mortars. Similarly, Centurions would actually make a tonne of sense as non-Deathwing super-heavy infantry.
4. Yes, if you take out all the things that make Deathwing unique and give them to everyone else, then Deathwing have nothing unique.
The only things about Deathwing that I'd want making generic are their ability to have mixed weapon units (which honestly shouldn't be unique, we see it happen in several places in non-Dark Angels Terminators), and plasma cannons. The truly unique features of the Deathwing (their obsession with the Fallen, and unique en mass deployment) are things I'd want to keep, and arguably improve upon in my proposal. Even if I were to have DA remain as a Codex, I'd still insist on giving them some kind of "<Deathwing> detachments gain 4 extra Command Points" rule.
(Fantasy I miss you)
