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.

I agree with this. As I've said before, if I wanna build a "fluffy" Speed Freekz list, I don't need a rule telling me I can't field MANz in that army comp. I just don't include the things that I feel don't fit with the fluff. Why you'd need enforced restrictions in order to build a list that fits with the Lore is beyond me.

Zustiur wrote:Given that Dark Angels have a number of units that cannot be taken from the Space Marine Codex, turning Dark Angels into a supplement faction means that every time you release a new Space Marine codex, you must also either;
a) Release the Dark Angels supplement immediately

This would also have to happen for every other supplement. So, not a Dark Angels exclusive problem.
Not to mention that GW already have to do this with the DA Codex (all the new Phobos Primaris units, Impulsors, Angels of Death/Shock Assault ability were added via FAQ, purely because they didn't immediately update the Codex).

b) Include text in the main codex specifying which units cannot be used by Dark Angels.

Why should there be restrictions? Let's go down a list of "normal" units that DA can't take, and why I think they should be an option:
Centurions - no reason given why DA don't use them, and given that there is a separation between Deathwing and non-Deathwing units, it would make sense for DA to have heavily armoured units without needing to rely on their elite Deathwing.
Sternguard and Vanguard - they already have Company Veterans, why can't Sternguard and Vanguard Veterans be used as alternative fillers for the Company Veterans role? Again, I don't think there's any about those units that is intrinsically anti-DA (special issue ammo was used during the Heresy, and hell, they were a unique Legion for having special ammo!)
Stormtalon/Stormhawk - why not? They already have the Stormraven and Thunderhawk, so it's not like DA have an aversion to flyers, or even to generic ones.
Thunderfire Cannon - no reason why not, they had quad mortars in the Heresy, and there isn't really a given reason why not to have them.

Not doing one the above means that Dark Angels players might accidentally buy units that they cannot use in between release of the Codex and release of the Supplement.
By having the Dark Angels in their own separate codex, the above is unnecessary.

Similarly, the DA having restrictions on what units is also unnecessary. Your problem of "what if a DA player accidentally buys a certain unit!" is just as likely to happen as it is with new players.
"I just got this Space Marine unit for my Space Marines!"
"That's lovely, what Chapter?"
"Dark Angels!"
"...oh, you can't use *that* unit."
"But Dark Angels are Space Marines, and these are a Space Marine unit?"
"Yes, but no, can't take them."
"Why not? Is there a lore reason?"
"Not really..."

I can't think of any Space Marine units that Blood Angels can't have (but that's just my lack of knowledge).

Centurions.

With that said, given how supplements have been handled this time around, I'd prefer if Dark Angels HAD been a supplement, albeit a thicker one than the others to accommodate for the number of unique units.

Absolutely, definitely need to be weightier than even the Ultramarines one.

One extra sheaf* of 16 pages aught to do it. We have 21 unique datasheets by my counting, compared to Ultramarines who have the next highest number at... 7?

I count 12 unique Ultramarines units. Similarly, ignoring DA units which realistically don't need unique datasheets (the Ravenwing Biker/Land Speeder units and the three "generic" Deathwing Terminator entries), I count 19. Now, realistically, I think that the Ultramarines Honour Guard, Chapter Champion and Chapter Ancient entries should be generic, but I don't think there's a world of difference. All the same, DA having 19 unique entries is fine by me!

Sgt_Smudge wrote:I want to specifically tackle "are restricted from choosing certain SM units" from a lore front - why?

I can't speak for thunderfire cannons, but Sternguard, and Vanguard have a sound reason for being excluded from Dark Angels. Those are 1st company squads in power armour. Something which Dark Angels patently do not do, because they have enough terminator armour to cover the whole company.

That's why they should be used in the same way Company Veterans are. Not as part of their 1st Company, but as supplements of their Battle Companies.

I don't see reference to it in the current book, but I swear when centurions were introduced it was to 'make up for a lack of terminator armour availability in some chapters'. That was why Dark Angels were excluded. At least in my memory of events.

I've never heard of that being the explicit reason, but even if it was - the Ultramarines Chapter should have more Terminators than most Dark Angels successors - so why shouldn't those DA successor not have them?

From a uniqueness perspective, we get the unique Deathwing Terminators datasheet with its plasma cannon, weapon variability and watcher in exchange for the loss of vanguard and sternguard. And yes, being able to put cyclone missile launchers on a model with a storm shield is a distinct advantage. It's not all about taking a random assortment of equipment in a 5 man unit. Equally, thanks to combat squads, Deathwing can essentially create 2 different units in one elite slot, one of tactical terminators with 2 heavy weapons, and one of assault terminators out of a single datasheet. Regular marines cannot do that. Is there a fluff reason? No, not really. As pointed out up thread, Space Hulk shows that mixed weaponry is fine in other chapters, but as a trade off for sternguard and vanguard? It seems only fair we should get something that regular marines don't. What we get is a more flexible terminator unit.

But why? Why shouldn't all Chapters have mixed squads, other than to artificially create a reason for DA to have a unique unit? Why shouldn't DA have access to Sternguard and Vanguard, as part of the same role as Company Veterans?

As you've said, there's no fluff reason why they shouldn't all mix options.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Zustiur wrote:
It seems only fair we should get something that regular marines don't.

what???

You do realise you've cut that sentence away from its context, right? Dark Angels give up units that regular marines have and get their unique units instead. Fair's fair.

Ultramarines don't.

I don't see why DA shouldn't have certain units.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flandarz wrote:
I agree with this. As I've said before, if I wanna build a "fluffy" Speed Freekz list, I don't need a rule telling me I can't field MANz in that army comp. I just don't include the things that I feel don't fit with the fluff. Why you'd need enforced restrictions in order to build a list that fits with the Lore is beyond me.

Exactly - I have a mono-Primaris army, because they're an Ultima Founding Chapter, and all comprised of Marines who either crossed the Rubicon Primaris, or part of Cawl's "blasphemous hordes". I don't need something telling me not to take certain units because they don't fit my army's lore.

Similarly, if I were playing a fluffy Imperial Guard artillery company, I would take lots of artillery.

Is the argument now that DA (and the other non Codex compliant chapters) should be reworked as Codex compliant chapters because a few people dont like the idea of a Space Marine army having restrictions on what the army should be allowed to include?

And the reason why they should be exactly the same (which I believe is how this has been consistently presented by those pushing it) is because they think all Marines should be exactly the same?

Which then begs the question again of why have supplements or chapter traits? Neither are functionally or practically needed.

Sharing a Codex doesn't make sub-Factions "exactly the same". Any argument that relies on pushing this fallacy is doomed to fail, as we have multiple Factions that present unique and flavorful sub-Factions within a single book.

I don't really care if DA, or whatever, can't take certain options via the Lore. My question is: "Why do you need a book to tell you what you are and are not allowed to take (thereby stripping you, the player, of agency in how you build your army)?" I don't, for example, need GW to restrict my unit choices if I choose to build a Spees Freekz army. I can do that on my own, thanks. And if I decide to add a little personal flavour by including a "non-standard" choice in my army, then that's a GOOD thing.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
Is the argument now that DA (and the other non Codex compliant chapters) should be reworked as Codex compliant chapters because a few people dont like the idea of a Space Marine army having restrictions on what the army should be allowed to include?

There's no need to rework them, because they *are* Codex Compliant. Dark Angels are a Codex compliant Chapter, which happens to have a secret they wish to keep, don't trust their Techmarines (but do trust them well enough to field them in their army), deploy their Terminators en mass, and have very well trained Bikers and Land Speeder pilots who also deploy en mass for specific mission roles.

Nothing about why they can't take Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, normal aircraft. Sternguard and Vanguard Veterans could, and would, easily slot into the same battlefield roles as their Company Veterans. I mean, in Kill Team: Elites, they use the same "Veterans" datasheet as normal Marines (albeit with restricting factors).

And the reason why they should be exactly the same (which I believe is how this has been consistently presented by those pushing it) is because they think all Marines should be exactly the same?

They're not "exactly the same" just because they share the same units - are Cadians and Catachans the same regiments? Are World Eaters and Emperor's Children the same warbands?

Which then begs the question again of why have supplements or chapter traits? Neither are functionally or practically needed.

Could you play separate Chapters without needing them? Yeah, absolutely - people did so just fine in 5th edition and prior. Do *I* want that? No, that's not my argument at all.

Dark Angels are a unique Chapter. Ultramarines are a unique Chapter. Why shouldn't they both have supplements?
I repeat, the Dark Angels have no fluff reason why not to have Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Stormtalons/Stormhawks, Sternguard/Vanguard Veterans (again, there would need to be a fluff entry on the Dark Angels Codex saying "Dark Angels Veteran Squads, unlike most standard Chapters, do not deploy as part of the Chapter's 1st Company, the Deathwing. Instead, each Company boasts a small compliment of Veterans, deploying as Sternguard, Vanguard or Company Veteran Squads.") Why don't they have them?

And, as many people have pointed out - if you want to take a "fluffy" army, do you really need rules banning you from taking those units? I'm all for Black Templars not needing a rule saying "no Librarians", because if I were obsessed with played Black Templars for their lore, I would know not to take Librarians. If I wanted a "fluffy" 1st Company, I'd only take 1st Company units. If I wanted a Night Lord Raptor Host, I'd take lots of Raptors.

But the problem there is you didn't have a Codex Speed Freakz as a separate and independent entity. In fact mechanically there's been no difference between Ork factions for years.
I'm not saying that's a good thing, just how it was.

DA and others have been separated for some time and do have restrictions printed in independent books. That's a fact. They are a separate faction from Codex compliant marines, they may share part of a model range but is that a good enough justification to say 'you dont deserve to be anything more than a sub-faction'? Though I already know the answer to that is 'they're just space marines'.

Putting DA (and the rest) into the same book as Codex marines means you now have to either restrict there options in that book, which the people pushing for this supplementisation approach dont want, or you have to remove those restrictions. That last point is what is being proposed as the solution and as a functional reason.

Functionally and practically if your stance is that because the factions that didn't and havent had that kind of separation into multiple factions dont need it, you're arguing to remove options that exist for others because you dont want those options to exist. At which point I'm going to take that logic and push it to its conclusion: no faction should have rules that differentiates one sub-faction from another. Which, prior to 8th, was the standard approach for everyone except Marines.

But that's too far for the people that want to condense, but they're not giving a reason why it's too far. Only that the non compliant Chapters must have options condensed and rolled into the generic list (which forces a rewrite of the core codex) because they stubbornly refuse to accept anything else.


Smudge, lore reasons have been given for why DA dont have certain units. You're just not accepting those reasons as it's not inline with your 'all marines are functionally identical and should play and use exactly the same options' approach. If you cant see the answers have been provided this just turns into you telling us we have to accept your proposed rewrite of every Marine codex to be how you want it to be, and that if we cant accept your proposal were... wrong?

I respectfully disagree. Why would I give up a bunch of options unless it's to gain some different options instead?

Anyway, I await flandarz's response since that's who's criteria I was responding to. Not yours.

Zustiur wrote:
I respectfully disagree. Why would I give up a bunch of options unless it's to gain some different options instead?

Anyway, I await flandarz's response since that's who's criteria I was responding to. Not yours.

Because that's what you are choosing to build your army as.

My Tau army still features no Riptides, Missilesides, Stormsurge, Breachers, Coldstar/XV85 commander etc. because I started it (back in 4th edition) with the intention of it representing Farsight on his crusade against the Orks, at which point in time none of those things existed.

I certainly could hear the complaints now if DA got access to the full SM dex. So in addition to adding Centurions, TF cannons etc, DA will also have access to many additional units that other marines don't get. People will be complaining to the end of time why they can't have terminator champions or apothecaries, or bike ancients, apothecaries, etc
Just to be clear, DA would have the following in addition to everything that other codex marines have..

A whole slew of characters plus a unique Lt (Talonmaster)
Apothecary in terminator armour
Champion in terminator armour
Mixed Terminator squad (although this could be parceled out into assault and regular, but you do have to add the plasma cannon somehow, so an FAQ necessary)
Deathwing Knights
Bike apothecary
Bike ancient
Bike Champion
darkshroud
Vengeance speeder
Black Knights
Dark Talon
Nephilim Jetfighter

basically, more entries than either Custodes or Harlequins

You can't say that they don't get these unique kits anymore...because models exist.

Zustiur wrote:
I respectfully disagree. Why would I give up a bunch of options unless it's to gain some different options instead?

Anyway, I await flandarz's response since that's who's criteria I was responding to. Not yours.

Sorry, I got called into work. That said, my personal opinion is that you don't need GW to tell you want units you "shouldn't" take. As I mentioned earlier, I believe that should be YOUR choice. If someone wants to, say, run BA with Centurions (or whatever unit they aren't allowed to have), why should GW tell them "no"? Shouldn't it be their choice whether or not to stick to canon?

BroodSpawn wrote:But the problem there is you didn't have a Codex Speed Freakz as a separate and independent entity. In fact mechanically there's been no difference between Ork factions for years.
I'm not saying that's a good thing, just how it was.

And this is now.

DA and others have been separated for some time and do have restrictions printed in independent books. That's a fact. They are a separate faction from Codex compliant marines, they may share part of a model range but is that a good enough justification to say 'you dont deserve to be anything more than a sub-faction'? Though I already know the answer to that is 'they're just space marines'.

DA and other were separated for some time because there was no way of easily putting their unique abilities into the standard Space Marine book - things like stratagems, keywords, sub-factions, Chapter Tactics and suchlike didn't exist until relatively recently. So yes, it's a fact that they used to be separate, and for good reason. But the implementation of supplements *currently* demonstrates that they no longer need to be Codexes. They have no mechanical need to be a Codex any more so than every Space Marine supplement should be a full Codex.

You say they're a separate faction from Codex compliant Marines, but in what way? Ignore the fact they have a Codex, why are they a separate faction? They have unique units? Every named Chapter does. They don't get access to some generic units? Black Templars don't. They have their own unique organisations and lore? So does every other Chapter. They used to need to have a full Codex? So did Black Templars.
So, why *do* Dark Angels deserve to be a full Codex now?

Putting DA (and the rest) into the same book as Codex marines means you now have to either restrict there options in that book, which the people pushing for this supplementisation approach dont want, or you have to remove those restrictions. That last point is what is being proposed as the solution and as a functional reason.

You don't need to restrict DA, BA, or SW as to what units they can take, and I've never claimed that they should be limited. I don't see any reason why DA/BA/SW shouldn't have access to Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, and all the other generic stuff.

Functionally and practically if your stance is that because the factions that didn't and havent had that kind of separation into multiple factions dont need it, you're arguing to remove options that exist for others because you dont want those options to exist. At which point I'm going to take that logic and push it to its conclusion: no faction should have rules that differentiates one sub-faction from another. Which, prior to 8th, was the standard approach for everyone except Marines.

Or, alternatively, everyone gets their unique options, but all work from the same core compliment of units - which they already do in all but name.

Saying "you just want Space Marines to all be generic and have no unique attributes" is blatant misrepresentation of my argument. That's exactly the opposite of what I want. I want DA to have all the same mechanical functions as they've always had, but under the name of "supplement", not "Codex".

But that's too far for the people that want to condense, but they're not giving a reason why it's too far.

Because every faction in the game has unique faction rules, and the implementation of those rules allows for unique Chapters to be differentiated mechanically without the need for full Codexes. Because different factions *should* play differently from one another, even if they all have access to the same baseline equipment, but that doesn't mean they all need Codexes.

Smudge, lore reasons have been given for why DA dont have certain units.

No, there haven't. Or did I miss where you explained the lore reason they don't have Thunderfire Cannons, and Centurions, and Stormtalons, and Stormhawks?

You're just not accepting those reasons as it's not inline with your 'all marines are functionally identical and should play and use exactly the same options' approach.

That's not what I said at all. I said that all Marines draw from the same core units. It is how they apply their own special rules and playstyles to those core units that make them unique, as well as their few unique units and options that supplement that core contingent.

85
85% of the current Dark Angels Codex, roughly, is comprised of generic, core Space Marine units, and all absentees bar two (Sternguard and Vanguard) are unexplained as to why that is the case. And even in the Sternguard/Vanguard case, there's more than enough workarounds. But sure, I'd accept a line in their supplement saying "Sternguard Veteran Squads and Vanguard Veteran Squads may not be taken in a <Dark Angels> army.

If you cant see the answers have been provided this just turns into you telling us we have to accept your proposed rewrite of every Marine codex to be how you want it to be, and that if we cant accept your proposal were... wrong?

I can't see your answers, because they've not been provided.

Please, answer my above question: what is the lore reason for DA/BA/SW not having Centurions, Thunderfire Cannons, Stormtalons and Stormhawks?

bullyboy wrote:I certainly could hear the complaints now if DA got access to the full SM dex. So in addition to adding Centurions, TF cannons etc, DA will also have access to many additional units that other marines don't get. People will be complaining to the end of time why they can't have terminator champions or apothecaries, or bike ancients, apothecaries, etc
Just to be clear, DA would have the following in addition to everything that other codex marines have..

Spoiler:

A whole slew of characters plus a unique Lt (Talonmaster)
Apothecary in terminator armour
Champion in terminator armour
Mixed Terminator squad (although this could be parceled out into assault and regular, but you do have to add the plasma cannon somehow, so an FAQ necessary)
Deathwing Knights
Bike apothecary
Bike ancient
Bike Champion
darkshroud
Vengeance speeder
Black Knights
Dark Talon
Nephilim Jetfighter

basically, more entries than either Custodes or Harlequins

You can't say that they don't get these unique kits anymore...because models exist.

Ultramarines have a similar size of unique units in their supplement. They have:

By that count, they have 12 unique datasheets. By my count (so, not including the generic Deathwing datasheet, because the generic Terminator datasheet should also be mixed weaponry and have plasma cannons, and their Terminator Apothecary, who should likewise be generic - they already have a generic Terminator Ancient, why not the Apothecary?), the Dark Angels would have 19 unique datasheets (17, if you were to make the Interrogator-Chaplain options into stratagem upgrade for normal Chaplain units) - that's only 7 more than Ultramarines.

I'm absolutely fine with that. After all, the Ultramarines have more than Harlequins and just as many as Custodes.

in the PA news thread it's rumored BA are getting Combat Doctrines and will have a bonus during Assault. Followed by 9th edition coming after PA. it's a step closer toward Supplement status if true.

They managed to put everything for Space Marines into one book with the Imperial Index 1, I think they should have done the Codexes similarly.

Book 1 - Space Marine Common Codex
Book 2-X - Chapter specific lore, datasheet wonkiness/limitations, list special units.

Though, personally, I don't understand why only Deathwatch gets the Corvus Blackstar. I bought and intend to use one for my Dark Angel successor force, GW be damned.

Boy this thread is frustrating. There's at least three different conversations going on at cross purposes.
Conversation 1) Why can't Dark Angels/Blood Angels/Space Wolves as they currently exist be run as supplements instead of separate codexes. To which I answer, they can since the very recent introduction of the new supplement style, but I understand GW's position of not doing this because writing a book that says 'ignore 10 pages of the other book you already paid for'. It also introduces issues around timing of book releases, as per my original question to flandarz, which has been repeated at the bottom of this post because it appears to have been missed by the very person I was addressing.
Conversation 2) Why can't Dark Angels/Blood Angels/Space Wolves take all of the 'codex units'? To which I answer, it's a game, and there has to be some degree of give and take. If you want extra unique units, you have to give up some of the shared units. Otherwise you're just better for no cost.
Conversation 3) Why not put all the units in one book and let the players self-restrict as they see fit? To which I answer below, people suck and given that much freedom, will abuse it.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Zustiur wrote:Given that Dark Angels have a number of units that cannot be taken from the Space Marine Codex, turning Dark Angels into a supplement faction means that every time you release a new Space Marine codex, you must also either;
a) Release the Dark Angels supplement immediately

This would also have to happen for every other supplement. So, not a Dark Angels exclusive problem.

But 5 out of 8 chapters DON'T have that problem. That's WHY they are in the same book already.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Zustiur wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Zustiur wrote:
It seems only fair we should get something that regular marines don't.

what???

You do realise you've cut that sentence away from its context, right? Dark Angels give up units that regular marines have and get their unique units instead. Fair's fair.

Ultramarines don't.

I don't see why DA shouldn't have certain units.

Because if DA have everything SM have, while also having a bunch of unique units, DA simply become SM +1.
I'm not saying the current list of restrictions and unique units is the only way it could be. But some sort of trade off is required to prevent one faction from simply being better than the other supposedly equal factions.

 flandarz wrote:
My question is: "Why do you need a book to tell you what you are and are not allowed to take (thereby stripping you, the player, of agency in how you build your army)?" I don't, for example, need GW to restrict my unit choices if I choose to build a Speed Freekz army. I can do that on my own, thanks. And if I decide to add a little personal flavour by including a "non-standard" choice in my army, then that's a GOOD thing.

In that case, why not simply put all the units in one giant book and let players choose for themselves? Why restrict space marines from taking hive tyrants? Let the player decide. Obviously that's an extreme example, but it's the same underlying principal. Your position seems to boil down to, 'why have rule restrictions to enforce the fluff?' To which my response is, too many players would abuse the fluff in order to build the most powerful winning combination, resulting in no armies actually looking like the fluff. In short, people suck, so you have to have rules. You could just have easily suggested 'why not let all models in the codex pick from the same weapon list, and let the player decide how to restrict themselves?' To which I say, cool, my terminators can now carry twin lascannons. Maybe you think I'm being ridiculous here with these examples, but consider the beginning of 8th edition, where you could soup within a detachment for no detriment. That's where this reliance upon self imposed restriction leads.

 flandarz wrote:
Sorry, I got called into work. That said, my personal opinion is that you don't need GW to tell you want units you "shouldn't" take. As I mentioned earlier, I believe that should be YOUR choice. If someone wants to, say, run BA with Centurions (or whatever unit they aren't allowed to have), why should GW tell them "no"? Shouldn't it be their choice whether or not to stick to canon?

As I feared, the flow of questions from others has caused you to respond to something that missed the primary point of my post. Let's try again;

Zustiur wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
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?

How's this for practical?
Given that Dark Angels have a number of units that cannot be taken from the Space Marine Codex, turning Dark Angels into a supplement faction means that every time you release a new Space Marine codex, you must also either;
a) Release the Dark Angels supplement immediately
b) Include text in the main codex specifying which units cannot be used by Dark Angels.
Not doing one the above means that Dark Angels players might accidentally buy units that they cannot use in between release of the Codex and release of the Supplement.
By having the Dark Angels in their own separate codex, the above is unnecessary.

Does this meet your criterion of 'practical reasons'?

Zustiur wrote:Conversation 1) Why can't Dark Angels/Blood Angels/Space Wolves as they currently exist be run as supplements instead of separate codexes. To which I answer, they can since the very recent introduction of the new supplement style, but I understand GW's position of not doing this because writing a book that says 'ignore 10 pages of the other book you already paid for'. It also introduces issues around timing of book releases, as per my original question to flandarz, which has been repeated at the bottom of this post because it appears to have been missed by the very person I was addressing.

Ten pages is a vast exaggeration, and ignores that most people are advocating for DA/BA/SW to *gain* units they didn't have before for no good reason.
Therefore, no need to have to panic about ensuring everything is released together (even though this would be a good thing, and a similar thing is ALREADY happening with DA/BA/SW Codexes right now, with emergency FAQs being put out to give them the Angels of Death abilities and their new Phobos units - even *if* DA couldn't take certain units for bizarre reasons, an emergency FAQ could be released as part of the Codex or what have you, saying "XYZ units cannot be taken in a Dark Angels army".)

Conversation 2) Why can't Dark Angels/Blood Angels/Space Wolves take all of the 'codex units'? To which I answer, it's a game, and there has to be some degree of give and take. If you want extra unique units, you have to give up some of the shared units. Otherwise you're just better for no cost.

So what about people who play an unnamed Chapter? What do they gain if they don't want to attach a specific keyword to their Chapter? There absolutely doesn't need to be give and take - if you play Dark Angels, you don't get things exclusive to any other Chapter. That's your "give and take". Otherwise, where's the give and take for the other Chapters? What do Ultramarines not get to take because they got unique stuff?

Ultramarines don't give up anything, and still have plenty of unique units. Ultramarines have 12 unique datasheets. Dark Angels have 17/19 (depending on how you treat Interrogator Chaplains), but lose access to both Centurion types, Stormtalons/Stormhawk, Sternguard and Vanguard and Thunderfire Cannons. Oh, they have even fewer datasheets! So, if they have less stuff, why do they need a Codex?

Conversation 3) Why not put all the units in one book and let the players self-restrict as they see fit? To which I answer below, people suck and given that much freedom, will abuse it.

So should Salamanders armies not have any plasma or heavy bolters at all, because fluffy Salamanders lists would have lots of flamers and meltas?
People can abuse anything in the game, but if you don't like them "abusing" it, you just don't play them if that's not okay with you.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Zustiur wrote:Given that Dark Angels have a number of units that cannot be taken from the Space Marine Codex, turning Dark Angels into a supplement faction means that every time you release a new Space Marine codex, you must also either;
a) Release the Dark Angels supplement immediately

This would also have to happen for every other supplement. So, not a Dark Angels exclusive problem.

But 5 out of 8 chapters DON'T have that problem. That's WHY they are in the same book already.

The whole "but DA/BA/SW can't take certain units!" is the problem, because there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to! Don't repeat the whole "but they have their own unique stuff, so they should lose stuff too!" thing, because as the Ultramarines demonstrate, that's unnecessary.

If it were truly about that, then why do the Ultramarines have access to everything, despite having several times more units than other supplement Chapters?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Zustiur wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Zustiur wrote:
It seems only fair we should get something that regular marines don't.

what???

You do realise you've cut that sentence away from its context, right? Dark Angels give up units that regular marines have and get their unique units instead. Fair's fair.

Ultramarines don't.

I don't see why DA shouldn't have certain units.

Because if DA have everything SM have, while also having a bunch of unique units, DA simply become SM +1.

But EVERY SUPPLEMENT has "everything SM have, while also having a bunch of unique units" - by your logic, EVERY named Chapter is SM+1!

Are Ultramarines SM+1 because they have their unique stuff? Are Iron Hands SM+1 because they have more things than <Unnamed Chapter>, or are they SM-1 because they have less than the Ultramarines?

I'm not saying the current list of restrictions and unique units is the only way it could be. But some sort of trade off is required to prevent one faction from simply being better than the other supposedly equal factions.

Give non-DA/DA/SW Chapters better rules or more unique units then. I mean, do you honestly think that DA would suddenly become the top tier Marine army if they could take Centurions? Would Blood Angels be super broken with Thunderfire Cannons? Would Space Wolves dominate if they had Stormtalons?

Or, look at it this way - let's say Iron Hands are dominating the meta right now (they might be IRL, but I'm not sure right now): but how can this be true? They have less units than the Ultramarines, who have everything from the core Codex and more! It's almost like Iron Hands being good isn't because they have access to more units, but because they have unique rules that just happen to be very powerful. Similarly, just adding more units won't make Dark Angels brokenly powerful. It just gives them more units, and honestly, I don't see a problem with that. They're Space Marines - they should have all Space Marine units, as well as their own unique ones.

DA shares 85% of its datasheets with the SM Codex, Zustiur. So an argument about consolidation into a book that is 85% similar is a fair one to make. An argument that two (or more) Codexes that have 0% in common should be consolidated is, obviously, not an argument in good faith. From information in this thread, the unique units of DA number somewhere between 17 and 20. That means you have about 86 units that are direct copies from the SM Codex. Even assuming that each of those copies only takes half a page in the DA Dex (unlikely, but I'm favoring your argument on this one), the book would be a whole 43 pages smaller without them. That's a significant amount of crossover that could be easily eliminated.

As for your original query, it is only a practical concern if GW did the first option. The second option would literally take a quarter page to explain, IF that. Better option, however, would be to just allow DA to take those other models. Because, why not?

Jimbobbyish wrote:
in the PA news thread it's rumored BA are getting Combat Doctrines and will have a bonus during Assault. Followed by 9th edition coming after PA. it's a step closer toward Supplement status if true.

Which Blood Angels shouldn't get. If some of these people are insisting they're so different to Codex Marines, they clearly shouldn't benefit like they're fighting Codex style.

So it seems the real underlying debate is centred on why have the Dark Angels etc exist as a separate faction. We can put aside the suggestion about Supplements as they would be a step backwards if we retain the DA as a distinct faction.

I believe that the reason we should have the Dark Angels etc as separate faction is variety. They give a different option for the player who collects/runs them and they offer a different threat for the opposing player. I think that variety is a good thing. The DA/BA etc are at a design sweet spot. GW is able to design/produce/distribute additional factions without having to start from scratch.

I do not see the negative impact this has on players who do not collect them. GW has still produced/redesigned other factions and has still been able to produce the Supplements fleshing out other Chapters.

Cheers

But does it actually provide variety, or just the illusion of variety? Or, rather, would being in the main Codex reduce the amount of variety it adds? Does Goffz and Blood Moonz sharing a Codex mean there's little variety in how they play? As an Ork player, I can assure you that if I try to play Blood Moonz the same way I play Goffz (and if my opponent expects them to play the same), I'd be in for nasty surprise.

This is obviously just my opinion, but DA, BA and SW don’t offer any meaningful variety. They are space marines through and through. A special apothecary is still just an apothecary. If I wanted variety, I would look towards literally any other faction. Besides, the game has like 30 factions already, we don’t need to splinter one of them into 5 more to have variety. You can keep all your kits, but pretending DA, BA and SW are not just space marines is just too much imo.

As for the negative impact, I would say that clogging the release schedule is one. If all marines were in one book, they would all be updated at the same time. No waiting months to get the same boosts. There’s really no reason why the main codex can’t be designed in a way to handle every marine chapter codex compliant or not. It’s just a rule book after all.

Another negative impact (IMO) is the sidelining of other chapters. It is my belief that generic options are vastly superior to exclusive options. Locking certain load outs and units to these 3 chapters prevents homebrew chapters from accessing them, only for the sake of exclusivity, and thus impedes player freedom and creativity. It’s not like those three chapters are the only ones with unique histories and organization anyway.
The only thing you’d lose is the illusion of being unique.

That said i also think the supplements were a bad idea. They’re literal pay to win ( because the new rules have no cost other than real money) and serve only to show that GWs codex design is poor. They also rely far too much on special rules bloat.

As something of an analogy, I play tau and the Farsight enclaves not having their own codex (or even unique units)has not stopped people from playing them and enjoying it. I even dabbled in Farsight for a bit but then switched to Vior’La, and because the codex was the same I was good to go. So, flavor does not require a unique codex.

Of course, if I had my way, space marines wouldn’t be the only ones to get lumped together: knights and inquisition for example would be tossed into the guard book ( though as a separate mini section, kinda like how the index handled it). Sisters of silence would be lumped with custodes. And I might also toss all the Eldar into one book, mostly for convenience. (Again each with their own subsections just like the index) etc...

If you disagree that’s cool, but that’s how I see it.

So BA are getting combat doctrines and a super assault doctrine. Even primaris can be now death company.

In my view, all loyalist SM have now been fully integrated into the main SM book.

Curious to see if the Primaris Death Company are a unique datasheet, or if it's something along the lines of a stratagem, something like "Death Company (1CP): Select one <Blood Angels> Intercessor Squad in your army. They gain the <Death Company> keyword, and the Black Rage rule, outlined on page X".

I kinda hope they go with the latter, and that framework becomes more popular for a variety of once-"unique" units. If we're seeing that happening, maybe we'll also see that with Aggressor Squads becoming members of the Deathwing, and so on!

That sounds horrible to me. Presumably GW are on it then.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Curious to see if the Primaris Death Company are a unique datasheet, or if it's something along the lines of a stratagem, something like "Death Company (1CP): Select one <Blood Angels> Intercessor Squad in your army. They gain the <Death Company> keyword, and the Black Rage rule, outlined on page X".

I kinda hope they go with the latter, and that framework becomes more popular for a variety of once-"unique" units. If we're seeing that happening, maybe we'll also see that with Aggressor Squads becoming members of the Deathwing, and so on!

I´m not aiming to bud in on the whole codex yay/nay discussion but as for this: I hope they actually don't do this. I know 8E has been made with stratagems and CP in mind but I vastly prefer the old way of upgrading units to for example 'Ard Boys, which is to say pay +1 point (or w/e is appropriate) per model and do it that way. The whole pay x CP for upgrade just irks me. Both because more often than not it limits it to 1 unit per army, and because I'd much rather just factor it into my list building with a fixed cost rather than "magically" upgrade them at game start. Personal opinion of course.

I prefer the use of stratagems to upgrade units, mostly because it prevents competition between similar units in the codex. For example, a point increase for a better save is either worth it or it isn’t. With CP, the increased save is always better, but you can only upgrade a couple units if you want to use other stratagems. So it’s less all or nothing.

Dandelion wrote:
I prefer the use of stratagems to upgrade units, mostly because it prevents competition between similar units in the codex. For example, a point increase for a better save is either worth it or it isn’t. With CP, the increased save is always better, but you can only upgrade a couple units if you want to use other stratagems. So it’s less all or nothing.

Disagree, considering the red butcher stratagem.

Which one’s that?

Dandelion wrote:
Which one’s that?

You pay 2CP to give a unit of Chaos Terminators (Lord too, I think) to give them S5 and the same fight twice ability.

Dandelion wrote:
Which one’s that?

2 CP, give a squad of World Eaters Terminators +1 S and Attack twice in melee.

As usual, delivering them is and has always been the problem with World Eaters.

So is that bad or too good?