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.

Tyranids

Naramyth: Lost Spine rifles and Stranglewebs? I guess they were gaunt guns? Huh.

https://www.goonhammer.com/warhammer-legends-the-goonhammer-hot-take-round-table/

 Lance845 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

dakkadakka is hardly the entire 40k community dude.

Correct. By all means, find me some rage about the strangleweb. I would love to see it.

someone already did.

https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/51770/new-stuff-coming-gw?page=273

The thing is, nothing of ours that we remotely care about went to Legends, but there are still Index only options with points in CA i.e. AG on gargs, shrikes and skyslashers. They're not Legends and have pts in latest CA, so...?

Thats from the forum dedicated entirely to tyranids.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
The game is an entire mess now.

Balancing the game for every little change would be exactly like balancing the game for every little datasheet now. Nobody changes point costs for chapter tactics now. So on and so forth.

100% not true. when PA came out,,, new point costs... when the marine dex came out ,,, new point cost,,, new eddition,,, new point cost.... they might not have done a good job of it,,, but there is a reason the point costs changed and that was because the balance of the units changed with introduction new stratagems, abilties and etc...

They are having enough trouble keeping up whilst some restrictions ARE in place, you think they ll be able to keep balance sans restrictions and with total customization ? you got to be kidding me.

The workload is either equal (less datasheets more options) or less (with less datasheets and more options you likely are consolidating duplicate options so there are actually less lines of data to adjust.)

you are fundamentally flawed with this logic.

The more you restrict your variables the less possible variances you have to account for. Even though you are reducing objects in your equations you are increasing dynamic variables. Given that you are running these objects through loops that try the different variables against other objects running similar loops. You now inherently have both more potential outcomes and therefore less predictable outcomes. Increasing the objects but making their variables largely static gives you an increased level predictability and therefor the time it will take to balance will be less.

Do you follow ?
This is literally an example of P vs. NP an unsolved problem in math.
If we already have NP complete (the static variables) we do not need to calculate all of NP which takes exponential time .

 insaniak wrote:
Whether you have 6 standalone books, or 1 core book and 5 supplements that refer back to the core book, you still have 6 books. If 6 books is too many in scenario 1, it's still too many in scenario 2.

Too many by whose standard?

Again, this comes back to the "should" thing. People are saying that things "should" be consolidated, but haven't presented a cogent reason as to why outside of their own personal preference, which isn't reason enough to do anything.

 insaniak wrote:
Instead, you have a single Marine codex, which has a cavalry option, and traits that can be taken to make your army more Space Wolfy. So people can make Space Wolf Thunderwolf cavalry, or they can make Space Gheckos Lizard Rider Cavalry, or they can make White Scar Bikers... all by taking the same generic unit with optional modifications via the traits. The end result is more choice, not less.

Maybe GW wants the Wolves to have TWC because it fits them, rather than "Generic Cavalry" that gets flavoured for different lists. Maybe there aren't any "Gheckos Lizard Rider Cavalry" because GW wants that element of the game - Marines riding living creatures - to be unique to the Space Wolves. Same for "Golden Winged Swordsmen" and "Robe-Covered Super Terminators" and anything else that's unique to different Chapters.

Maybe they don't have generic options for specific Chapters because they don't want Marines to just be a paint job.

 Lance845 wrote:
https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/51770/new-stuff-coming-gw?page=273

The thing is, nothing of ours that we remotely care about went to Legends, but there are still Index only options with points in CA i.e. AG on gargs, shrikes and skyslashers. They're not Legends and have pts in latest CA, so...?

Thats from the forum dedicated entirely to tyranids.

congrats,

This still doesnt change that I KNOW PEOPLE WHO COMPLAINED because they cared about the fluff of its existence and didn't care it literally did nothing.

I'd rather my harlequin blades stayed and did something then just got squated in the rules... even though they currently do nothing... the idea is ,,, some players would like the unique stuff referenced on their datasheet to do something over getting rid of it.. admittedly we probobly wouldn't care if it wasn't on the sheet in the first place... but it was,,, so we are invested.

Yeah, My degree is game design. You are just wrong.

The consolidated "cavalry" data sheet that was proposed earlier can easily be costed to create all the data sheets that currently exist at the same point costs they are now. Balancing them in the future would be easier with a single sheet to adjust individual variables on.

Pouring through and updating 100+ data sheets is more work then 50. I know. I have made games. I speak from experience when placing basically repeat data in different places in a document you are likely to miss things if you are bad at editing. Oh look. GW keeps doing that and then releasing FAQs/Errata a week later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/51770/new-stuff-coming-gw?page=273

The thing is, nothing of ours that we remotely care about went to Legends, but there are still Index only options with points in CA i.e. AG on gargs, shrikes and skyslashers. They're not Legends and have pts in latest CA, so...?

Thats from the forum dedicated entirely to tyranids.

congrats,

This still doesnt change that I KNOW PEOPLE WHO COMPLAINED because they cared about the fluff of its existence and didn't care it literally did nothing.

I'd rather my harlequin blades stayed and did something then just got squated in the rules... even though they currently do nothing... the idea is ,,, some players would like the unique stuff referenced on their datasheet to do something over getting rid of it.. admittedly we probobly wouldn't care if it wasn't on the sheet in the first place... but it was,,, so we are invested.

I take your anecdotal evidence with all the salt it deserves.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Too many by whose standard?

The... people complaining it's too many?

Again, this comes back to the "should" thing. People are saying that things "should" be consolidated, but haven't presented a cogent reason as to why outside of their own personal preference, which isn't reason enough to do anything.

Personal preference is absolutely a valid reason to think that something should be done a certain way. That's pretty much exactly what personal preference is about.

 insaniak wrote:
Maybe GW wants the Wolves to have TWC because it fits them, rather than "Generic Cavalry" that gets flavoured for different lists. Maybe there aren't any "Gheckos Lizard Rider Cavalry" because GW wants that element of the game - Marines riding living creatures - to be unique to the Space Wolves. Same for "Golden Winged Swordsmen" and "Robe-Covered Super Terminators" and anything else that's unique to different Chapters.

Maybe they don't have generic options for specific Chapters because they don't want Marines to just be a paint job.

But Marines are already just a paint job. That was my point. I can, right now, build an army of Space Gheckos Marines, using Space Wolf rules and riding giant lizards. The only difference between what exists now and what exists under my proposed system is that right now, my Space Gheckos are identical to Space Wolves in every way except appearance, whereas with all of the Marine options in one book, I could actually make a Chapter that wasn't just Space Wolves painted orange, because I wouldn't be restricted to the options currently available to Space Wolves.

 insaniak wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
8th Edition - All the Marines have different books, or supplements.

"There are too many Marine books!"

9th Edition - Consolidates Marines into a single book, with supplements for anything that's unique to various Chapters.

"There are too many Marine books!"

So which is it?

Whether you have 6 standalone books, or 1 core book and 5 supplements that refer back to the core book, you still have 6 books. If 6 books is too many in scenario 1, it's still too many in scenario 2.

I don't want to look at 6 stand alone book or 1 core book and 5 sups.... as I said,,, I only wanted one book

To be clear, I'm not saying that choices should be taken away. I'm saying that they should be consolidated, but that, if combined with a robust Trait system, doesn't have to mean losing options. If anything, it opens up options, because it means that the things that currently make a particular Chapter 'unique' (just like all of the other Chapters that use the same rules because they're using the same codex!) can't only be taken in specific combinations. When the system allows for you to make 'The Totes Not Space Wolves' Chapter using the Space Wolf codex, the idea that rolling the Space Wolf-only goodies into the basic Marine book removes their uniqueness goes straight out the window. When you only have Thunderwolves in the Space Wolf Codex, they're not actually unique to Space Wolves... they're just unique to Space Wolves and any other chapter that is unique in the exact same way as Space Wolves.

Instead, you have a single Marine codex, which has a cavalry option, and traits that can be taken to make your army more Space Wolfy. So people can make Space Wolf Thunderwolf cavalry, or they can make Space Gheckos Lizard Rider Cavalry, or they can make White Scar Bikers... all by taking the same generic unit with optional modifications via the traits. The end result is more choice, not less.

The problem is that this level of customization might still provide customization, we would be sacrificing unique fluff (as everyone has access to the flavor we chose), the level of customization becomes a mess from a game design perspective and finally the User Interface becomes crowded and bloated. This proposal would be worse not better. Requires MORE effort for the designers for every little balance change ever with anything (it would be like dominos with every change), MORE time just to overhaul the entire faction as is AND unique factions would not feel like they had special flavour for taking the restrictions they want... If I choose firewariors, I want to get their weapons, I chose them because I am ok with not being able to get warpspider movement shenagins... I chose a restriction for my self for access to a flavour of rule.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
Yeah, My degree is game design. You are just wrong.

The consolidated "cavalry" data sheet that was proposed earlier can easily be costed to create all the data sheets that currently exist at the same point costs they are now. Balancing them in the future would be easier with a single sheet to adjust individual variables on.

Pouring through and updating 100+ data sheets is more work then 50. I know. I have made games. I speak from experience when placing basically repeat data in different places in a document you are likely to miss things if you are bad at editing. Oh look. GW keeps doing that and then releasing FAQs/Errata a week later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/51770/new-stuff-coming-gw?page=273

The thing is, nothing of ours that we remotely care about went to Legends, but there are still Index only options with points in CA i.e. AG on gargs, shrikes and skyslashers. They're not Legends and have pts in latest CA, so...?

Thats from the forum dedicated entirely to tyranids.

congrats,

This still doesnt change that I KNOW PEOPLE WHO COMPLAINED because they cared about the fluff of its existence and didn't care it literally did nothing.

I'd rather my harlequin blades stayed and did something then just got squated in the rules... even though they currently do nothing... the idea is ,,, some players would like the unique stuff referenced on their datasheet to do something over getting rid of it.. admittedly we probobly wouldn't care if it wasn't on the sheet in the first place... but it was,,, so we are invested.

I take your anecdotal evidence with all the salt it deserves.

If your degree is in game design... I would have failed you for not understanding what I just described LOL ... now you are out right lying to me to try and prove yourself right,,, this conversation is 100 % done... I was ok with arguing with your circular logic and silly assumptions... but I am not going to argue with you if you are going to stoop to faking credentials in order to "prove" a point over me XD... your officially trying too hard and you officially outed yourself as not being genuine.

 Type40 wrote:

The problem is that this level of customization might still provide customization, we would be sacrificing unique fluff (as everyone has access to the flavor we chose),...

Again, that 'unique fluff' is an illusion. Everyone already has access to it, because Codexes don't restrict you to only building the actual Chapter that's on the cover. You're restricted to those rules, but can call the Chapter whatever you want, and paint it however you want... but it will be identical to the Chapter on the cover.


Space Wolves can still have their unique fluff if other Chapters have access to their gear. We know this, because it's how things already work.

Think what you like. Your opinion means very little to me. I thought you were done a couple pages ago. Hopefully this time you mean it.

 insaniak wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

The problem is that this level of customization might still provide customization, we would be sacrificing unique fluff (as everyone has access to the flavor we chose),...

Again, that 'unique fluff' is an illusion. Everyone already has access to it, because Codexes don't restrict you to only building the actual Chapter that's on the cover. You're restricted to those rules, but can call the Chapter whatever you want, and paint it however you want... but it will be identical to the Chapter on the cover.


Space Wolves can still have their unique fluff if other Chapters have access to their gear. We know this, because it's how things already work.

Yes but the ruleset IS the flavour I am after... I don't care what you call it.. as long as I am rewarded for choosing restrictions in exchange for unique options... call them "Silly walking monkey marines" for all I care, as long as my choice to restrict myself to those rules equals certain unique options I am getting flavour and my choices feel like and in fact do mater.

 Type40 wrote:

Yes but the ruleset IS the flavour I am after... I don't care what you call it.. as long as I am rewarded for choosing restrictions in exchange for unique options... call them "Silly walking monkey marines" for all I care, as long as my choice to restrict myself to those rules equals certain unique options I am getting flavour and my choices feel like and in fact do mater.

If that's what you want, then a single book with a Chapter Trait system would give you exactly what you want. You don't need to have each available unit on a separate piece of paper to everyone else's for that to work.

Wants restrictions. Doesn't want to loose any data sheets or wargear from the army with more data sheets and wargear then any 2-3 others armies put together.

Yup. Checks out.

 insaniak wrote:
Personal preference is absolutely a valid reason to think that something should be done a certain way. That's pretty much exactly what personal preference is about.

Then my personal preference is not to.

Am I more or less wrong than you?

 insaniak wrote:
But Marines are already just a paint job.

I reject this notion in every perceivable manner. GW has created a situation where you can paint things in any way you want, make up any fluff you want, but at the end of the day a Blood Angel is different to a Dark Angel. They have different aesthetics, different narrative, and different mechanics. They are not just paint jobs. They are unique.

But I could take DA models, paint them yellow, and use BA rules. So whats the difference?

 Lance845 wrote:
But I could take DA models, paint them yellow, and use BA rules. So whats the difference?

Well, for one thing, you'd confuse your opponent quite a bit.

But more seriously, I just said what the difference is: Blood Angels are unique. Dark Angels are unique. They are not just a paint job.

Once upon a time they were all the same - back in 2nd Ed when all we had was the Codex Army Lists book and Marines were just Marines, but with different coloured paint. When I chose my army back then I chose it not based on differing aesthetic quirks (robes, wings, wolfy bits, etc.) or the strength of their unique units over one another. I chose them because I liked blue more than red.

Nower days, the choice isn't so black and white (or red and blue, as it were! ). There's a difference between Ultramarines and Blood Angels. There's a difference between Dark Angels and Imperial Fists. Sure, I can paint my Imperial Fists green and my Dark Angels yellow, but there is a mechanical difference to the way the two armies perform, even if they share a core of units. Stripping it down to just generic entries and making Marine Chapters just a paint job again robs the game of what makes it unique.

And, again, we have done this in the past. The various Chaos Legions stopped having their own rules and became just another paint job. Even Daemons lost their flavour. It was awful. How could anyone wish that upon any other type of army?

 insaniak wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

Yes but the ruleset IS the flavour I am after... I don't care what you call it.. as long as I am rewarded for choosing restrictions in exchange for unique options... call them "Silly walking monkey marines" for all I care, as long as my choice to restrict myself to those rules equals certain unique options I am getting flavour and my choices feel like and in fact do mater.

If that's what you want, then a single book with a Chapter Trait system would give you exactly what you want. You don't need to have each available unit on a separate piece of paper to everyone else's for that to work.

I do if those units are particularly unique and I bought into that ruleset specifically for those specifically unique units. It does, if those units should be restricted from other factions as a result of the choice of me picking my particular faction and what comes with that.
Now, saying all of this...

I will concede. Given an infinite amount of design time and resources... a completely customizable, balanced, choose your own heroes, units, wargear, abilities on a single convenient variable data sheet is a wonderful utopia for a game like warhammer... The problem is,,, this would take so much more work, time and effort on the parts of the designers just to make a working system that inlcudes everything in a way that doesnt lose anything. Then the task of constantly keeping it balanced and runing like clockwork in a good way all the time would be inconceivable ....

Otherwise leaving in the current restrictions and affordances just changes how they format and present data, it doesnt actually change design effort (maybe a bit harder because a balanced single datasheet with more variables takes more work then static ones) (p.s. this kinda seems to be there current method)

This total customizable limited set of datasheets proposal is just not this amazing balancing/time freeing thing everyone seems to think it would be ... in fact it is far far worse for resources, balance and time and then on top of it, my faction loses it's uniqueness.. its lose/lose/lose (not just lose/lose but a triple lose. )

I can't really explain this in any more ways then I have ...

So I was watching a sports match the other day, and I couldnt tell why people were cheering one second and booing the other.

I mean, the only difference between the players was the Jersey they were wearing so why couldnt they all just have been on the same side?

Or maybe, just maybe, those colors are a surface indicator of something else that actually stands for a lot of differences, even though they look similar.

If someone tried to claim that Biel-Tan is the same as Saim-han I would say the same thing as if they said "All marines are the same with a different coat of paint". Each chapter, craftworld, regiment, hell even each hive fleet represent completely different cultures, preferences, sometimes abilities. Things that appeal to different people for different reasons.

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

A lot of customization potential, a lot of fun wargear builds available to legions even without using the unique stuff

You mean what they did with the new marine books? How they have all the core shared units in one book and then all the chapter specific ones in another?

 Leth wrote:
You mean what they did with the new marine books? How they have all the core shared units in one book and then all the chapter specific ones in another?

No, because it's not 2 books. Stretching out individual books over months is a contributor to marine fatigue

FlubDugger wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

Ya... that's a different game,,, with different unit access, and different wargear access, rules access , and less uniquely flavored units... again,,, sure everything will be the same if you remove what makes things different.

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

Ya... that's a different game,,, with different unit access, and different wargear access, rules access , and less uniquely flavored units... again,,, sure everything will be the same if you remove what makes things different.

Nope, you have unique units available to each legion. It's just all consolidated to 2 books. Just because it's a different system doesn't mean that the idea couldn't work in 9th edition

FlubDugger wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

Ya... that's a different game,,, with different unit access, and different wargear access, rules access , and less uniquely flavored units... again,,, sure everything will be the same if you remove what makes things different.

Nope, you have unique units available

I don't want my TWC to have to be a 'counts as' unit when they have perfectly unique rules as is , thanks. Also, my faction is also in 2 books, it used to only be 1 book... but now it's in two because GW decided that's how SWs work now.

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

Ya... that's a different game,,, with different unit access, and different wargear access, rules access , and less uniquely flavored units... again,,, sure everything will be the same if you remove what makes things different.

Nope, you have unique units available

I don't want my TWC to have to be a 'counts as' unit when they have perfectly unique rules as is , thanks.

What part of "unique units available" do you not understand?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
But I could take DA models, paint them yellow, and use BA rules. So whats the difference?

Well, for one thing, you'd confuse your opponent quite a bit.

But more seriously, I just said what the difference is: Blood Angels are unique. Dark Angels are unique. They are not just a paint job.

Once upon a time they were all the same - back in 2nd Ed when all we had was the Codex Army Lists book and Marines were just Marines, but with different coloured paint. When I chose my army back then I chose it not based on differing aesthetic quirks (robes, wings, wolfy bits, etc.) or the strength of their unique units over one another. I chose them because I liked blue more than red.

Nower days, the choice isn't so black and white (or red and blue, as it were! ). There's a difference between Ultramarines and Blood Angels. There's a difference between Dark Angels and Imperial Fists. Sure, I can paint my Imperial Fists green and my Dark Angels yellow, but there is a mechanical difference to the way the two armies perform, even if they share a core of units. Stripping it down to just generic entries and making Marine Chapters just a paint job again robs the game of what makes it unique.

And, again, we have done this in the past. The various Chaos Legions stopped having their own rules and became just another paint job. Even Daemons lost their flavour. It was awful. How could anyone wish that upon any other type of army?

Do you really think anyone here has suggested to get rid of chapter tactics, warlord traits, strats, and relics?

Nobody is saying get rid of the things that make a space wolf intercessor different from a DA intercessor. They are saying that you only need one intercessor data sheet to represent them both.

 Lance845 wrote:
Nobody is saying get rid of the things that make a space wolf intercessor different from a DA intercessor. They are saying that you only need one intercessor data sheet to represent them both.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there only was one Intercessor sheet? I mean, that was the whole point of consolidating all the Marine Codices into a single book, so that the core units would only ever be represented by a single sheet.

This meant that the supplements could be used for things that were unique to that Chapter, whereas the base-line units would have One Entry to Rule Them All and avoid repetition.

If there's been some report that the Wolf Supplement is going to reprint the Intercessor (or any) datasheet verbatim, but with different keywords down the bottom, then I might actually agree with you.

FlubDugger wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

FlubDugger wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-heresy-legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Army-List

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/The-Horus-Heresy-Legiones-Astartes-Age-of-Darkness-Legions

I'd just to point out that we have a working example of a generic marine list with added flavour layered on top, done in 2 books (missing Dark Angels as of right now)

Ya... that's a different game,,, with different unit access, and different wargear access, rules access , and less uniquely flavored units... again,,, sure everything will be the same if you remove what makes things different.

Nope, you have unique units available

I don't want my TWC to have to be a 'counts as' unit when they have perfectly unique rules as is , thanks.

What part of "unique units available" do you not understand?

The unique unit rules part ? where did you find the rules for TWC ? XD ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Nobody is saying get rid of the things that make a space wolf intercessor different from a DA intercessor. They are saying that you only need one intercessor data sheet to represent them both.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there only was one Intercessor sheet? I mean, that was the whole point of consolidating all the Marine Codices into a single book, so that the core units would only ever be represented by a single sheet.

This meant that the supplements could be used for things that were unique to that Chapter, whereas the base-line units would have One Entry to Rule Them All and avoid repetition.

If there's been some report that the Wolf Supplement is going to reprint the Intercessor (or any) datasheet verbatim, but with different keywords down the bottom, then I might actually agree with you.

Ya,,, at that point, why even bother with a supplement XD.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Then my personal preference is not to.

Am I more or less wrong than you?

No. That's the fun thing about opinions.

I reject this notion in every perceivable manner. GW has created a situation where you can paint things in any way you want, make up any fluff you want, but at the end of the day a Blood Angel is different to a Dark Angel. They have different aesthetics, different narrative, and different mechanics. They are not just paint jobs. They are unique.

And they still would be if they were in the same book, with Chapter Traits.


Imagine if instead of your Blood Angel successor being identical in every way to a Blood Angel despite the fluff in many cases telling us that they are different, you could build Build a Blood Angels army, or you could build a Blood Angel Successor Chapter who has cavalry instead of Sanguinary Guard, but otherwise follows Blood Angel rules?

Your Blood Angels are still different to Dark Angels... but every other Chapter doesn't have to just be a cookie cutter copy of the parent codex.