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

Hi guys,
Another issue I have with the primaris marines, is the following:
How are you going to play historical battles and campaigns such as pre M42 battles (tyrannic wars, Black Crusades, Forge World campaigns and the thousand of others battles fought millennium after millennium) seeing as there were no primaris ?
That's a clear rupture / break in The Hobby, after decades of being able to play in different phases of the history of the universe with a single collection (with only a few new units each 2-3 millennium).
Now your collection is stuck in a very narrow historical time.
What are your feeling about that ?

Primaris are lame.

Run them with the "classic" marine rules and call it a day. This doesn't really feel like much a problem. Most folks have anywhere from a small contingent of classic marines, all the way up to mountains of them (after several decades in the hobby, I alone am just shy of a full chapter's worth) anyway, so again, I don't see this as an issue. And if your group are real sticklers and just won't let you run your Primaris using the classic marine rules, and you're new and don't have as many of the actual classic models, you can get them pretty easily on the second hand market for not a lot of money. They practically grow on trees.

Fortunately for us, this ISN'T Historical Wargaming where you can be refused a game because your British Redcoats are painted with a "historically inaccurate red". I would hope that any group would just let you run your Primaris as "True Scale" marines without issue.

Yeah, I always have the same problem trying to re-create the battle of Gettysburg, but how do I do it with my Sherman Tank models. It's really annoying. And how are you supposed to properly do a good historical of the Battle of Hastings, but people always seem to find my Spitfire models kinda out of place.

Really annoying.

I fully support players converting maxi marines into mini marine variants. GW already so wonky with scale anyway.

I really wish they had used the primaris upgrade as a way to get the scale all right for the future.

I fully support players converting maxi marines into mini marine variants. GW already so wonky with scale anyway.

That's hilarious. For so long we had people painstakingly cutting plastic card to make the old marines bigger ("TrueScaleTM"). How funny would it be to see that go the other direction? "Hey look! I just posted a tutorial on how to cut down your Primaris models to make "Classic Marines!"

Tycho wrote:

I fully support players converting maxi marines into mini marine variants. GW already so wonky with scale anyway.

That's hilarious. For so long we had people painstakingly cutting plastic card to make the old marines bigger ("TrueScaleTM"). How funny would it be to see that go the other direction? "Hey look! I just posted a tutorial on how to cut down your Primaris models to make "Classic Marines!"

The mini marines needed a size upgrade anyway, some weapon upgrades and should be good enough. Would have much prefer they scaled down a few of there other lines with marines just growing a little, but GW is GW and they into there own scale.

Tycho wrote:

Fortunately for us, this ISN'T Historical Wargaming where you can be refused a game because your British Redcoats are painted with a "historically inaccurate red". I would hope that any group would just let you run your Primaris as "True Scale" marines without issue.

Fortunately we aren't playing chess and models and paint schemes have a meaning !

Tycho wrote:
Run them with the "classic" marine rules and call it a day. This doesn't really feel like much a problem. Most folks have anywhere from a small contingent of classic marines, all the way up to mountains of them (after several decades in the hobby, I alone am just shy of a full chapter's worth) anyway, so again, I don't see this as an issue. And if your group are real sticklers and just won't let you run your Primaris using the classic marine rules, and you're new and don't have as many of the actual classic models, you can get them pretty easily on the second hand market for not a lot of money. They practically grow on trees.

Fortunately for us, this ISN'T Historical Wargaming where you can be refused a game because your British Redcoats are painted with a "historically inaccurate red". I would hope that any group would just let you run your Primaris as "True Scale" marines without issue.

What about repulsors, inceptors etc ? Those have no equivalent pre Guilliman !

Then don't use them?

It's not like the old stuff ceased to be sold.

Nothing at all - its not as if GW sells generation 1 full armies of every race. You can't play early Tyranids with Zoats (heck GW is only selling 1 Zoat right now); nor the early smaller forms of most of their units.

You can't play Generation 1 Eldar; nor beaky space marines.


Plus GW is still selling the regular generation marines and their weapons like predators and vindicators.




Also its rather silly to complain about this for Marines when they have a WHOLE GAME set in the 30K era all to themselves with their own unique sculpts and models for multiple chapters. I mean if one army can do old and new battles with unique sculpts its Marines and they can do it for more than most other races could ever do.
GW isn't selling 30K era Orks nor Eldar nor pre-fall Necrons or Tyranids from beyond the Galaxy.

Inceptors are basically more brrt! versions of dual Pistol Vanguard. Repulsors are just Land Raiders but better. Also you're often better off using Primaris stuff so the complaining with the usually better looking Infantry is kinda hilarious. I'll grant the vehicles seem to always be worse looking but overall the Infantry are just better.

I myself use strictly the older Mk Power Armor variants and my Intercessors are represented by Mk3 with Boarding Shields. The moment they make them more decently proportioned like with Primaris though it's over.

Yeah... if you want to make a campaign like that, simply don't use Primaris. And if there are players who want to join that have nothing but Primaris, well, either give them a different army, play Primaris as true scale Marines or simply base your Story in the current timeline. Overall 40K hasn't changed that much, despite Cadia and half of the galaxy going up in flames. I can hardly imagine a story that can't be workable before and after the Fall, we aren't Age of Sigmar here.

Fortunately we aren't playing chess and models and paint schemes have a meaning !

Rigggghhhhhtttt ... and no one in your group has EVER played for example, an army that was clearly painted as (for example) Ultramarines, but used them as, say, Iron Hands? This happens all the time. It's generally meaningless. We're not talking about the sarcastic answer someone above gave of trying to use Sherman tanks in the battle of Gettysburg. We're talking about using a slightly larger, differently proportioned version of the same model.

If your group is so anal that they won't allow that, you might want to find a different group. Like I said earlier, people have been making and using true-scale marines for years without issue, so I really don't see the problem of using Primaris in that role (ie. using the classic marine rules with the Primaris models).

What about repulsors, inceptors etc ? Those have no equivalent pre Guilliman !

OMG! You're right! ... so don't use them. What's the problem here? There weren't Repulsors in that time period so you don't need to worry about it. Why would the existence of said models in the current timeline somehow prevent you from playing a game in an older timeline? If you don't like the Primaris, that's absolutely your perogative, and there's nothing wrong with that (I like them but dislike how they were introduced in the fluff. Thought it was a bit lazy). But this thread kind of feels like a troll-job, or someone just looking for reasons to complain ...


@Slayer-Fan123 and @Sgt. Cortez - Exalted

If I had to use my Primaris army of a pre-Gathering Storm narrative game here is how I would use them.

Phobos/Tactius Captain/Lieutenent = Firstborn equivalent
Gravis Captain = Terminator Armor
Chaplain = Firstborn equivalent
Apothcary = Firstborn equivalent
Librarian = Firstborn equivalent

Intercessors = Tactical Marines with Hellblasters for Plasmagun, Auto Bolt Rifle In for Heavy Bolter, Grenade Launcher as Missile Launcher
Scouts = Scouts

Reivers = Assault Marines (mine already have chainswords instead of combat knives)

Aggressors with Firestrom Gauntlets = Assault Terminators
Aggressors with Auto Boltstrom Gauntlets = Terminators
Redemptor Dreadnought = Dreadnought

Inpulsor = Rhino
Repulsor = Land Raider
Repulsor Excution = Specialized Land Raider

That's enough to put together a full army even going back a few editions for this hypothetical historical 40k game. They are even in Raptor Green if you want to do the Babab War. There is going to be some count-as modeling to pull it off. That is to be expected as the Firstborn Space Marine model line is let's say deep. I am going to be kinda limited as Primaris don't have anywhere near the number of options that Firstborn do. I can still cover a lot the basic stuff well enough I feel though. I am not that concerned about it as I don't expect I will be playing any 'historical' 40k anytime soon. Even if I was, I would somewhat expect either leeway or the person setting up the historical game to setup both armies (which isn't uncommon in historical play). Conversely, I can ask if the Black Legion would work better and just play my CSM instead.

I like my Primaris marines and I am pretty fine they can't go back further than a couple centuries in the 40k timeline except maybe in a weird 30k thing where they were being field tested or something. I don't look over at my cases of WWII miniatures and pine to use them in anything more than WWII games. It is the same with my Primaris. I want to see the story of the Avenging Eagles (my custom chapter) evolve since 40k is a fictious setting, and as far as I am concerned; my marines are just as real and part of the universe as the Ultramarines or any other 'cannon' chapter.

This rests solely in the hands of the gamer. If you want to play a historical styled game, simply use units from that period - or ones you consider period correct (mostly). Models will likely never be a problem, particularly for marine players - as eBay is swamped with cheap "old marines". Even the old marine vehicles will likely exist in a Forgeworld resin (ugh) form after the plastics are long gone from shelves.

If you're concerned with it you can go the horrendously expensive Horus Heresy route, etc.

Primaris are replacing old marines, and yes it is a business decision on GW's part; but they're a business...that's their imperative.

40K, regardless of your desires, has a slowly evolving timeline. While GW doesn't apply hard and fast rules to this outside of Horus Heresy vs. 40K...things move on, and you should not expect a miniature to be stagnant in design forever. There is nothing stopping you and your opponent from collecting and building "old marine" armies and playing older "historical" games of 40K to your heart's content.

Also, to set the record straight, Primaris Space Marines are awesome and definitely not lame despite any potential opinions, comments and/or rumors to the contrary.

godardc wrote:Hi guys,
Another issue I have with the primaris marines, is the following:
How are you going to play historical battles and campaigns such as pre M42 battles (tyrannic wars, Black Crusades, Forge World campaigns and the thousand of others battles fought millennium after millennium) seeing as there were no primaris ?

Easy. Without Primaris.

That's like saying "how are you going to play a Badab War campaign when all I have is *insert Chapter/faction that never took part in the Badab War*" - it's simple, you either suspend disbelief, say you're playing a scenario that's "incredibly similar but totally not that particular named battle no sir", or just don't play those units.

That's a clear rupture / break in The Hobby, after decades of being able to play in different phases of the history of the universe with a single collection (with only a few new units each 2-3 millennium).

The same can be said of any army, or even how you've painted your models.

Now your collection is stuck in a very narrow historical time.

No it's not, no more so than having a named character in your army is, or, as I've said above, not having a Chapter specific to that name battle.

If I collected the Dark Angels, I can't play them in the First Tyrannic War, I can't play them during the Badab War, or Damocles Gulf. If I collected Tau, I can't have them fighting in an Eye of Terror or Armageddon campaign. If I collect Blood Angels, I can't put Tycho in any army after the mid-3rd War for Armageddon. By that same token, "my collection is stuck in a very narrow historical time and place".

Basically, you either have to not care about the "historical inaccuracies" (just like you'd already have to already), or just play with the "correct" units. Primaris add nothing new to the complication that didn't already exist.

Tycho wrote:If you don't like the Primaris, that's absolutely your perogative, and there's nothing wrong with that (I like them but dislike how they were introduced in the fluff. Thought it was a bit lazy). But this thread kind of feels like a troll-job, or someone just looking for reasons to complain ...

It does seem that way, doesn't it.

I think there is something to be said about how 40k covered a huge period of time and allowed for head canon to fill in the massive gaps between known events. The only factions that created time constraints are the Tau (due to their relatively short time on the scene) along with the Nids and Crons becoming more active/encroaching more the closer to 999.M41 you get.

Primaris comes online and you have the incredibly tiny window (200 years at most?) for these battles to take place which really disrupts the feeling of playing the game in your own narrative and instead your trying to squeeze this battle into GW's plot line. Hell even in GW's plot line the bloody Ultras are fething everywhere which is very jarring.

 godardc wrote:
Hi guys,
Another issue I have with the primaris marines, is the following:
How are you going to play historical battles and campaigns such as pre M42 battles (tyrannic wars, Black Crusades, Forge World campaigns and the thousand of others battles fought millennium after millennium) seeing as there were no primaris ?
That's a clear rupture / break in The Hobby, after decades of being able to play in different phases of the history of the universe with a single collection (with only a few new units each 2-3 millennium).
Now your collection is stuck in a very narrow historical time.
What are your feeling about that ?

That sounds like a you problem.

Me? (shrugs) I'm good. I've got between 3k-5k+ pts of SW, DA (3rd Co.), UM (9th Co. The whole thing.), Mentor Legion, Doom Eagles, & "1st Co.". And not a single Primaris anything in any of them.
Though I'm not opposed to adding some Primaris to either the DA or Mentors....

 Vankraken wrote:
Primaris comes online and you have the incredibly tiny window (200 years at most?) for these battles to take place which really disrupts the feeling of playing the game in your own narrative and instead your trying to squeeze this battle into GW's plot line. Hell even in GW's plot line the bloody Ultras are fething everywhere which is very jarring.

Well, 200 years and until the last star burns out the galaxy or the nids eat everything. Unless you are that concerned Games Workshop some how greatly upends the meta-plot and/or somehow changes there only being war. Even in just 200 years that something like a thousand of battles for a space marine chapter to participate in fairly believably. Remembers marines often go battle to battle and they have a few companies or even smaller forces to fight in them at the same time.

If you doubt me, does it sound all that off that for a space marine company to be prepping, deploying, participating, extracting about every 9-10 months on average? Because spread out over 200 years among 4 battle companies, that is average duration for a chapter has to reach a 1000 battles in 200 years. Which granted, seems a bit brief, but not outside the realm of possibility given in the setting and the role for Spaces Marines serve. Makes as much sense as the low number of marines in general to me. And is more games that I am ever likely to ever play.

I think we could amicably boil this thread down to "do what suits you and your opponent in the moment." In my experience most FLG leagues are pretty competitive and then all belief suspension is off - if two Iron Hands list with Fierros are facing against each other, at that point it's just a game. But if you've got friends who want to do narrative or historical play, that's an option too. However you feel about particular models, you have complete control about what goes into your own army. I love 40k lore and my renegades have a very long backstory, but when I play a game it's just a game - otherwise I'd have to get a new name for my HQs every time they die! If that doesn't work for you, that is also okay.

Let's have some fun with it, friends. Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of thy law.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

Well, 200 years and until the last star burns out the galaxy or the nids eat everything. .

Indeed. There is nothing constraining you to playing your battles only within the timescale laid out in the book. Unless the universe ends sometime shortly after the 'current' time, you're free to explore as far up the timeline as you wish.

Hell, thanks to the vagaries of the warp, and travel through it doing weird things to time, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from having a strike force of Primaris Marines wind up in some system somewhere thousands of years before they were actually created.


The fact that the 40K setting allows you to set up narrative battles between literally everyone involved anywhere in the setting with a bare minimum of cerebral effort is one of the best things about it.

Well, I wasn't speaking for me personally.
It's not a me problem, I own 3 intercessors, and several thousands points of classic marines. And no, I'm not whinning or trolling, I'm genuinely curious about NEW PLAYERS mainly (yeah I should have written it first) because indeed most of the veterans do have LOTS of classical.
For example, if I had only tau and idk, sisters, I wouldn't be able to play Age of apostasy or the beast era (let's say I read the novels and now wanted to play against my friends: orks, sisters don't exist).

The idea of count as isn't bad at all, indeed. But it's true that there is definitely a change when your army has been around for 2 centuries in a timeline of 10,000 years.
Tbf most of my games / campaigns are "present days" but it doesn't mean all of them !

It's not a thread against primaris just to whine but a sudden realization that collecting only them close the gates of the 10,000 years war.

It's not a significantly different problem to if you play Tau/Tyranids/Necrons

Or to a lesser extent Sisters of Battle/Witch Hunters, Wraith-heavy Iyanden, Valhallans etc.

There is no difference between playing "age of apostasy" and "age of current day" in terms of gameplay, so unless both players specifically decide to roleplay lists from that period (of which I don't think any specific TO&E exist anyway), it doesn't matter. I'll be honest, I've never had that problem, it's usually "want to meet for a quick game?" over "want to replay this specific barely-mentioned scenario?".

 Vankraken wrote:
I think there is something to be said about how 40k covered a huge period of time and allowed for head canon to fill in the massive gaps between known events. The only factions that created time constraints are the Tau (due to their relatively short time on the scene) along with the Nids and Crons becoming more active/encroaching more the closer to 999.M41 you get.

Primaris comes online and you have the incredibly tiny window (200 years at most?) for these battles to take place which really disrupts the feeling of playing the game in your own narrative and instead your trying to squeeze this battle into GW's plot line. Hell even in GW's plot line the bloody Ultras are fething everywhere which is very jarring.

200 years is tiny?

That's the equivalent of being able to play everything from the American War for Independence over the Civil War to WWI, WWII and Vietnam all with the very same range of miniatures, for those (pseudo-)historical gamers.

There're entire GW competitors with a more historical slant out there, that settle live on barely 5-6 years of WWII or so, and even there you get people freaking out if you're late-war tank rolls into a 1939 campaign.

Not to mention that plenty of the more fictional miniature games have less than that in their entire fictional universe. Infinity as a whole is just 175 years in the future. Etc..

I got the impression that GW released the Primaris line because the classic SM line was really widespread.

godardc wrote:It's not a thread against primaris just to whine but a sudden realization that collecting only them close the gates of the 10,000 years war.

Well, as you say, it's no different to collecting Tau, Necrons, or Tyranids, who only appear to the Imperium in M39, 897.M41, and 741.M41 respectively (although the latter two have enough fluff contrivances to appear earlier on, but the Tau and Tyranids are geographically locked to the Eastern Fringe for most of their history).

If making sure that factions in the narrative campaign are "accurate", then there's more than enough solutions to resolve it. The simplest ones being either "we're going to do a different campaign set in a different time" or "we're not letting you play your army". Obviously, the former is preferable.

 godardc wrote:
Fortunately we aren't playing chess and models and paint schemes have a meaning !

Okay, what do the blue cloth and silver metal on my sisters of battle mean?

If I painted my Space Marines purple, what would that mean?

If I collected Orks and had the audacity to give them plaid skin, what would that mean?

The idea of when things happen is utterly irrelevant to me. There are several reasons I don't like Primaris but this isn't one of them.