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.

tneva82 wrote:
That goes against gw's goal of getting impulse buys from players. If they release all at once there are people who can"t afford to buy all at once. If you spread it people have time to recharge wallet and gets hit by hype at full strength and buy more than intended. Majority of sales come　in first few months. They don't want to weaken that

No, most people wouldn't buy all the supplements at once. They'd buy the one for their primary chapter, then the one for their other chapter a month or so later. So, same results. Flawed logic.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That goes against gw's goal of getting impulse buys from players. If they release all at once there are people who can"t afford to buy all at once. If you spread it people have time to recharge wallet and gets hit by hype at full strength and buy more than intended. Majority of sales come　in first few months. They don't want to weaken that

No, most people wouldn't buy all the supplements at once. They'd buy the one for their primary chapter, then the one for their other chapter a month or so later. So, same results. Flawed logic.

sure except if they release supplement space wolves, supplement blood angels, blade guard veterns, invader ATVs, the chaplain etc all at once, a guy who might otherwise have picked up a supplement for an army he doesn't play "for the lore" might not.
that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That goes against gw's goal of getting impulse buys from players. If they release all at once there are people who can"t afford to buy all at once. If you spread it people have time to recharge wallet and gets hit by hype at full strength and buy more than intended. Majority of sales come　in first few months. They don't want to weaken that

No, most people wouldn't buy all the supplements at once. They'd buy the one for their primary chapter, then the one for their other chapter a month or so later. So, same results. Flawed logic.

sure except if they release supplement space wolves, supplement blood angels, blade guard veterns, invader ATVs, the chaplain etc all at once, a guy who might otherwise have picked up a supplement for an army he doesn't play "for the lore" might not.
that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

As I said, I can understand spreading out the model releases, but not rules. Four straight months of almost nothing but loyalist marines, with only a single chaos codex (which is, after all, just more marines, just with spikes and some Nurgeling up) and one Xenos codex is going to cause more complaints of marine bias, which I think we've all heard enough of by now, while also forcing loyalist players of some chapters to wait for their rules. Other factions need updating, stretching out the release of the loyalist rules just pushes those updates further back.

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

 Geifer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

the writings fine, but... there feels like there's less lore. for example, in previous codices we'd get a page or so of lore for each unit, but that's gone now :(

Thanks. That's not great.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

the writings fine, but... there feels like there's less lore. for example, in previous codices we'd get a page or so of lore for each unit, but that's gone now :(

Yeah I was very sad not to see the lore page for units. I hope its a complaint that filters back to GW because over the years I've loved seeing the quantity and depth of the lore of the codex increase through the Tyranids and I'd hate to think of it going backwards.

 Overread wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

the writings fine, but... there feels like there's less lore. for example, in previous codices we'd get a page or so of lore for each unit, but that's gone now :(

Yeah I was very sad not to see the lore page for units. I hope its a complaint that filters back to GW because over the years I've loved seeing the quantity and depth of the lore of the codex increase through the Tyranids and I'd hate to think of it going backwards.

agreed. I'm a little concerned that this is the result of "feedback" from the tourny players they have working with their playtest team now. :(

BrianDavion wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

the writings fine, but... there feels like there's less lore. for example, in previous codices we'd get a page or so of lore for each unit, but that's gone now :(

Its varied quite a bit over the decades- and alot was copy paste edition after edition or repeated info. I think there is more lore in total than in most editions, its def quite wide ranging.

Alot of it seems to be still present but in the main lore pages on the different Chapter elements which I actually like better - it also means the data slates are less cluttered - again which I like.

Just been putting the Monolith together, one thing I found a bit annoying was the way the guns were fitted, clamped between the two halves of the exterior. Obviously you really need to paint the guns before fitting them (this is even suggested in the instructions), especially if you want to leave them to move, but then that means that you're either having to paint the exterior before putting the two sides together which will leave a nasty join line, or messing about with a load of tricky masking around the guns.

Seems like it would have been really easy to have the guns push through from the back and then have a piece glued over the back of them to keep them in place. I ended up hacking the gun sockets up with a knife so I could just glue the guns in from behind later.

The old Monolith had to be painted before putting it together completely thanks to the green plastic.

 Mr Morden wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
... that said as a Lore Monkey who was inclined to get all the supplements, I gotta say if the supplements take the same approuch to lore the new marines codex does, forget buying extras I'll just buy what I need

Can you elaborate? Did the writing get worse? Did they drop background to fit in more rules?

the writings fine, but... there feels like there's less lore. for example, in previous codices we'd get a page or so of lore for each unit, but that's gone now :(

Its varied quite a bit over the decades- and alot was copy paste edition after edition or repeated info. I think there is more lore in total than in most editions, its def quite wide ranging.

Alot of it seems to be still present but in the main lore pages on the different Chapter elements which I actually like better - it also means the data slates are less cluttered - again which I like.

keep in mind you say "copypasta" because you've been around for awhile, but remember new players don't have 4 editions of space marine codices to go back. so repeats of stuff is honestly not a bad thing. If, for example, I was coming into 40k fresh with this codex I'd not be able to tell you what the organs in a marine all where, etc. which I felt was a pretty signficigent "missing" bit of lore.

Honestly, for new players a fluff page to the store or a dedicated GW page for this purpose and maybe a beginner's guide leaflet would do the job just as well.

I really like reading the fluff of units, but the plague marines entry in the DG codex is exactly the same one as in 4th edition's CSM codex. Printing it over and over again is just a waste of money for everyone.

 Jidmah wrote:
Honestly, for new players a fluff page to the store or a dedicated GW page for this purpose and maybe a beginner's guide leaflet would do the job just as well.

I really like reading the fluff of units, but the plague marines entry in the DG codex is exactly the same one as in 4th edition's CSM codex. Printing it over and over again is just a waste of money for everyone.

In my experience if you make fluff optional fewer people engage with it. Ask yourself how many friends and even if you yourself read Black Library books. Because I'd wager many don't, or might have read the odd one or two.

Warmachine hit the same issues, separation of fluff from rules resulted in a fast dwindling uptake of the fluff.



Essentially we each have a budget and we budget around the game. So components essential to the game - models, tools, paints, rules - become necessary purchases. When we are really into the game our purchasing goes up (as our budget allows); but at the same time because we are playing we are more likely to want to invest into rules to use the models and into models to use on the tabletop. So fluff gets pushed to the side. Meanwhile if we start to slow down and focus on other things, we are focusing on other things so we aren't likely to pick up fluff then either.

At the same time fluff sells an army and it also helps reinforce that sale and enthusiasm. There are many who "come back" to 40K because of the fluff; many who enjoy the game and the little bits of fun it helps instil in us. We do like fluff; its often something people complain about smaller games and other brands is that the fluff isn't that well developed or isnt' that accessible or just isn't really there beyond a few mentions on a store page.



My view is fluff and rules should not be separated. Codex should remain a fountain of lore as much as they are for rules. It helps reinforce the connection. Sure pros dont' want all the fluff that they've read for years; they might want the few pages of new stuff, but the rest is repeated. Thing is the codex isn't just for them, its for those brand new to an army who have been gaming for years; its for those who are brand new to the entire game itself. It's a multi-purpose document and should remain so. Weakening/reducing/cutting out the lore would be a very very bad idea. It would appease the few who just want rules, but is it.

 Jidmah wrote:
Honestly, for new players a fluff page to the store or a dedicated GW page for this purpose and maybe a beginner's guide leaflet would do the job just as well.

I really like reading the fluff of units, but the plague marines entry in the DG codex is exactly the same one as in 4th edition's CSM codex. Printing it over and over again is just a waste of money for everyone.

What changed? 4th ed market target was new players, 2020 market target is new players. Old players are insignificant side bonus for　gw. Main target is timmy 12yo buying army. Once that army is sold focus goes to next timmy 12yo

Anybody from 4th ed is whatever for gw. So far from their focus not even　same　country

Not sure I have ever seen a 12 year old playing 40k, let alone with anything approaching an army.

The vast of majority of players that joined our group during 8th and 9th have not read the fluff in their codices either. They read things on their phones, tablets and pcs. They read wikis, blogs or listen to youtube videos and podcasts. Most of the veteran player haven't read their codices' fluff because it has been the same for decades.
They literally use their books for rules only, some even don't use their codices at all outside of rules arguments or for checking if battlescribe is correct.
Some of the marine players are even wondering whether they should buy books at all, considering how fast their hardbacks are invalidated and that there is no more digital version they can put on their tablet.

People don't suddenly start reading the fluff because it happens to be stuck to the same outdated release mechanism as their rules, especially not when it's mostly low-effort reprints.

I don't think it helps that there have been so many Marine Codexes with the exact same info - so much was new in the Sisters Dex because its been so rare they get anything.

I enjoyed the new dex and presentation style of the lore info.

I am also pleased there was a lot of lore pages - pgs 3-89 even with the huge amount of rules and datasheets (sooo many datasheets) from 90-201 (!)

What changed? 4th ed market target was new players, 2020 market target is new players. Old players are insignificant side bonus for　gw. Main target is timmy 12yo buying army. Once that army is sold focus goes to next timmy 12yo

Anybody from 4th ed is whatever for gw. So far from their focus not even　same　country

Not sure? There are lot of us older players with lots of money to spend on product - even if its also for kids...

It's one thing to not read something that is there; its much harder to read something that isn't there.


People keep saying books are out-dated and yet GW seems to have no problem selling them. Yes apps and such exist, but not every gamer uses them; plus they have their own hurdles and pitfalls. I'd also say that besides the Big Rule Books, the Battletomes and Codex are not that big even when fully loaded with fluff.

The real issue we had before was not the fluff, it was that GW had setup the rules in a very confusing and messy way for several generations of codex. There was a LOT of breakup of information which meant a single unit required a lot of flipping back and forth on pages to find the information you needed. It wasn't that the fluff got in the way, it was that GW's layout of information was flawed.

The new Necron codex is FAR simpler than before and reminds me of the more classic codex where all information for each model was basically on the same page.

I do enjoy the fluff sections in the books, but I had found myself skim-reading a lot of the last couple of Marine books. On the other hand, because the new book had a lot of different stuff in there instead, I found myself reading the entire thing, front to back.

The reduction in fluff is likely a simple result of how much the rest of the marine book has expanded. 178? Datasheets take up a lot of space (even if some could have been easily merged like the predators, gladiators, gravis captains and storm speeders). The Marine book is already near twice the size of the necron codex. Trimming some of the fluff means no need for an extra 16 or 32 page block making the book even bigger, heavier, and more expensive to produce and ship.

Aye but the Necron Codex is smaller and is also missing the fluff pages for units as well.

 Overread wrote:
Aye but the Necron Codex is smaller and is also missing the fluff pages for units as well.

How does it compare to previous editions - they do vary quite a lot - the early one was quite lite on lore and some of that was setting up mysteries but it was very evocative with the images.

Unit fluff was the best part about any kind of book. Have they removed it?

 Galas wrote:
Unit fluff was the best part about any kind of book. Have they removed it?

No, just , for chaos atleast, really not inovated since 4th.

 Galas wrote:
Unit fluff was the best part about any kind of book. Have they removed it?

Its more in the general organisation section of the lore.

The Necron lord has vanished entirely from GWs website. And in the codex there is also no picture (except for the unit profiles) of any unit with the green rods. I wonder if there will be a second wave of necrons in this edition to replace at least the old destroyers, their lord and the normal lord.

Shas O Ores wrote:
The Necron lord has vanished entirely from GWs website. And in the codex there is also no picture (except for the unit profiles) of any unit with the green rods. I wonder if there will be a second wave of necrons in this edition to replace at least the old destroyers, their lord and the normal lord.

The Lokhust Destroyer kit (as the old Destroyers are now known) has been reworked with blank plastic rods on the sprue. They're not going away anytime soon.

Yes I know of the new heavy destroyer kit.
But has GW ever removed a unit completly from it's website (the past 2 weeks it was only market as permanently sold out) and did not replace it with a new kit, especially since the "lord" is still in the new codex?

Shas O Ores wrote:
Yes I know of the new heavy destroyer kit.
But has GW ever removed a unit completly from it's website (the past 2 weeks it was only market as permanently sold out) and did not replace it with a new kit, especially since the "lord" is still in the new codex?

Yeah, this is a good catch. The Old lord is what is in the datasheet in the dex too.

I suspect there will be replacements eventually, but I'd be suprised if it's anytime soon.