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.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

This is getting out of hand. First off, not everything needs special rules. If you want a chapter that uses tanks, or bikes, or whatever, include tanks or bikes in your list. Use your imagination and creativity for your narrative; this whole thing where competitive play should be narrative is like terrible for everything.
Second off, units don't need cost free bonus rules packages to flip around. That's what broke 7th. You pay 5 points for a guardsman, it's the same guardsman with the same rules support that anyone else has in their list.

I agree, I dislike that we need special unique rules to make Green Space Marines different to blue ones.
But I made this thread under the reluctant acceptance that this is 40k now.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


None. No more supplements, and I'd like to see the SM ones go away. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'd like to see chapter tactics and regimental doctrines go away.

This is getting out of hand. First off, not everything needs special rules. If you want a chapter that uses tanks, or bikes, or whatever, include tanks or bikes in your list. Use your imagination and creativity for your narrative; this whole thing where competitive play should be narrative is like terrible for everything.
Second off, units don't need cost free bonus rules packages to flip around. That's what broke 7th. You pay 5 points for a guardsman, it's the same guardsman with the same rules support that anyone else has in their list.
Finally, is it not enough that I bought 5 $45 codecies? I feel like I spend more on rules than I do on minis, which isn't true but feels entirely reasonable to assert given both how much I spend on books and the fact that the armies I really want to be buying models for right now haven't seen a new unit since 2014.

The problem is that this is not how it works in w40k. First of all there are decades of different rules and unique units. Telling them that they just should play different coloured ultramarines is not going to find much acceptance. Second thing is how GW write their rules. If marines are always the first book to come out, and would come out stock naked, with few or no special rules, then all the xeno books coming out after them with their special rules would be just rolling over them. Heck even now harlis do that, becuause +4inv ,melta on every dude in a unit and basic model being often a vehicle works really well, in an edition where 5" tall means you are invisible behind stuff.

And third is GW rules writing. If there was one marine codex for all marines, then there would be one way to play it, the way GW writes their rules, specialy if there were no special rules for different units. And then people would be rolling dice to check, if this edition they are allowed to have fun. GW wrote bikes and mounted characters to be good, you can rejoice, but if you like termintors or tanks this 3 years you will not have much enjoyment playing your army. And this gets even worse, if you actualy like specific unit from a specific chapter. Good bikes aren't going to give you much, if what you want to play is termintors and dreadnoughts.

Karol wrote:
The problem is that this is not how it works in w40k. First of all there are decades of different rules and unique units. Telling them that they just should play different coloured ultramarines is not going to find much acceptance. Second thing is how GW write their rules. If marines are always the first book to come out, and would come out stock naked, with few or no special rules, then all the xeno books coming out after them with their special rules would be just rolling over them. Heck even now harlis do that, becuause +4inv ,melta on every dude in a unit and basic model being often a vehicle works really well, in an edition where 5" tall means you are invisible behind stuff.

I disagree. I played Blood Angels back in 5th edition where the biggest differences was that they had some unique units, and all their vehicles had fast.
As far as infantry was concerned, we had a 1/6th chance to gain Furious Charge at the start of the game on each unit (which imo was just a waste of time rolling).
And before that I played Ultramarines, which had no special rules what-so-ever to distinguish them from White Scars or Salamanders or anyone else other than their named characters.

And yet I didn't feel hard done by. If anything, I felt like I was more free and in control because what my Ultramarines were or did wasn't being pigeon-holed by GW's assignment of an arbitrary buff and the consequent winner/loser units.

Karol wrote:
And third is GW rules writing. If there was one marine codex for all marines, then there would be one way to play it, the way GW writes their rules, specialy if there were no special rules for different units. And then people would be rolling dice to check, if this edition they are allowed to have fun. GW wrote bikes and mounted characters to be good, you can rejoice, but if you like termintors or tanks this 3 years you will not have much enjoyment playing your army. And this gets even worse, if you actualy like specific unit from a specific chapter. Good bikes aren't going to give you much, if what you want to play is termintors and dreadnoughts.

I don't like the idea that "GW can't do it properly so there's no point doing it".
The only reason GW doesn't do it properly is because they don't need to. This attitude and others like it allow GW to pass off just about anything and it's accepted by the playerbase. Other games like Star Wars Legion are far better balanced because, unlike GW, they have to be to attract and retain players. I've never heard anyone say "come play 40k, the balance is so great!".

If internal balance of the codex was better I could choose what I want and make the army my own.
If I wanted to play a Salamanders army I could just run more Land Raider Redeemers or whatever. If I wanted to run White Scars I could just run more bikes. If I wanted to run the Salamanders 1st Company I could do so without being constantly reminded I've hobbled myself for not playing Dark Angels rules or whatever.
*I'm talking about internal balance amongst Space Marines here, but the same arguments apply to any factions just the same.

In short, I want players to be able to make their own uniqueness rather than have it dictated by GW.

What I would like from supplements is to add special units but do away completely with these sorts of small snow flake rules, and focus on introducing new stuff which doesn't fit into the main codex, but isn't enough to justify a new codex.
For example with my initial Gue'vesa supplement to Astra Militarum. It could introduce loads of fluff about the Gue'Vesa. It could perhaps add infantry squads with some Tau gear, to represent Gue'Vesa regiments more closely integrated into the Tau military, leaving players to use the standard AM units to represent Gue'Vesa regiments who aren't so closely integrated.

Only ex GW employes already said that the books and rules are not writen with balance in mind. So asking for a balance book, is like asking for an army to be nerfed, because you can bet that within a codex or two, some GW designer is going to write and unbalanced one.

I don't like the idea of xeno armies getting imperial rules set of imperial costed chaff. It would make them too good. If tau got fixed suits, and could buy IG troopers with tau guns, for 5-6pts it would be crazy. And while I would enjoy looking IG players go full banans over it, I don't want to play tau which are good. Good tau and eldar armies, mean bad times for elite marine lists. The game is already hard enough for me, I don't need it to go back to how it was in 8th ed.

Again, GW don't make balanced rules because they don't need to.
GW is not fundamentally incapable of writing balanced rules and playtesting to confirm, they just choose not to because they don't need to and doing so takes effort/money they can therefore skimp on.
Plus they're very good at cultivating discontent. "my army rules are so bad, we *need* a codex to rebalance it" is perfect as people are begging GW to sell them something new with more fancy stuff, instead of wanting OP stuff toned down.

I personally don't like the idea of having supplements bloating the game but if they wanted to keep it then I would say there should be a supplement for major subfashions. For example the non-marked traitor legions, one for renegades, Ork klans, craftworlds and so on. The subgroups where there is a marked difference in how those armies should play.

 Hellebore wrote:
Depends what you consider a supplement to cover.
The marine supplements are basically 'the same army but slightly different'.

A coven or cabal supplement is effectively a different army altogether, rather than 'the same' with uniqueness.
More likely it would by supplements around specific alliances (generally around an archon and their cabal), that has unique units and skills.
...
Hardly a stretch for those to be supplements, iyanden and ulthwe have already had their own in the past (ulthwe strike forces from the eye of terror codex and the iyanden supplement form 6th was it?).

I trimmed your post down a bit to reply, but something I've given thought to with regards to Craftworlds is not 1:1 supplements for the named Craftworlds(aside from Ulthwe and Alaitoc, I could not think of many unique units off the top of my head for the others) but rather archetypal setups:

-A book for those closely associated with the Aspect Warriors; basically a Biel-Tan book and rules for a Make Your Own Craftworld that follows a similar setup.
-A book closely associated with the Seers. This would be where we could see Ulthwe and Iyanden style hosts.
-A book closely associated with 'The Outcasts'. Alaitoc style.

The third one could 100% be pared down and rolled into the Aspect Warriors book.

It's a similar approach to what I'd do for Guard, Orks, AdMech, and Drukhari.

Speaking of the last one, I've always felt like it was a misstep that they did not do a Wych Cult and Kabal book when they dropped the Haemonculi Covens book.

Controversial opinion:
With the way GW currently works, I would like Chaos Space Marines to be a supplement for Space Marines.

At least then their wouldn't be a huge power gulf for no reason between the armies. Would represent legions worse than renegades but eh, sacrifices.

I would love to see a codex supplement for something not wearing power armor. Its grating at this point the constant deluge of space marine releases...

Karol wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


None. No more supplements, and I'd like to see the SM ones go away. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'd like to see chapter tactics and regimental doctrines go away.

This is getting out of hand. First off, not everything needs special rules. If you want a chapter that uses tanks, or bikes, or whatever, include tanks or bikes in your list. Use your imagination and creativity for your narrative; this whole thing where competitive play should be narrative is like terrible for everything.
Second off, units don't need cost free bonus rules packages to flip around. That's what broke 7th. You pay 5 points for a guardsman, it's the same guardsman with the same rules support that anyone else has in their list.
Finally, is it not enough that I bought 5 $45 codecies? I feel like I spend more on rules than I do on minis, which isn't true but feels entirely reasonable to assert given both how much I spend on books and the fact that the armies I really want to be buying models for right now haven't seen a new unit since 2014.

The problem is that this is not how it works in w40k. First of all there are decades of different rules and unique units. Telling them that they just should play different coloured ultramarines is not going to find much acceptance. Second thing is how GW write their rules. If marines are always the first book to come out, and would come out stock naked, with few or no special rules, then all the xeno books coming out after them with their special rules would be just rolling over them. Heck even now harlis do that, becuause +4inv ,melta on every dude in a unit and basic model being often a vehicle works really well, in an edition where 5" tall means you are invisible behind stuff.

And third is GW rules writing. If there was one marine codex for all marines, then there would be one way to play it, the way GW writes their rules, specialy if there were no special rules for different units. And then people would be rolling dice to check, if this edition they are allowed to have fun. GW wrote bikes and mounted characters to be good, you can rejoice, but if you like termintors or tanks this 3 years you will not have much enjoyment playing your army. And this gets even worse, if you actualy like specific unit from a specific chapter. Good bikes aren't going to give you much, if what you want to play is termintors and dreadnoughts.

What?

First off, until recently there weren't supplements. There were DA, BA, and SW, and codex Space Marines.
Second, Black Templars had a codex at one time with unique units and then were rolled into the Space Marines codex, so like that can be done too. There aren't actually that many noncharacter special units.
BA have what, 4 [Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, Furioso Dreadnought, Baal Predator]?
DA have Deathwing Knights, Nephilim Jetfighter, and the big Land Speeder
SW have "more", but really most of our unique units are just the regular unit with a different name and the ability to add a unique squad sergeant.
Now, this might be enough to maintain these three codecies as supplements or separate codecies, but whole thing with free special rules needs to stop. That's what gave us 7th.



Then, I'm not sure what the second paragraph is saying. Like, A: everybody else has one codex and is just fine. B: most of what unit type is good is based on the way the core rules and meta interact with that unit, C: if you like bikes, put bikes in your list. You don't need any extra special rules or anything to make your bikes faster while mine are stabbier or whatever.

Necrons could really use a Destroyer Cult supplement. They really didn't give enough design space in the WLT/Relics and Mechanics for lots of destroyer cults IMO.

Has anyone made a supplement of a supplement joke yet?

I'll take a Void tridents supplement, see its a supplement of the Ultramarines supplement

 fraser1191 wrote:
Has anyone made a supplement of a supplement joke yet?

I'll take a Void tridents supplement, see its a supplement of the Ultramarines supplement

You mean Emperor's Spears that just came out? Funny though I actually really like it and will be playing them lol.

I’d like to see an agents of bile supplement. The full CSM codex doesn’t suit him totally plus in the recent stories there are some great characters that can make the army noticeably different from other CSM whilst still being similar enough

His demon daughter
Fabius clones
Gland hounds
The new men

His conclave of apothecaries from other legions. I know these were disbanded largely but they could be brought back in the fluff easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I’d like to see a fallen supplement but I don’t know if that would need to be based on the DA codex

mrFickle wrote:
I’d like to see an agents of bile supplement. The full CSM codex doesn’t suit him totally plus in the recent stories there are some great characters that can make the army noticeably different from other CSM whilst still being similar enough

His demon daughter
Fabius clones
Gland hounds
The new men

His conclave of apothecaries from other legions. I know these were disbanded largely but they could be brought back in the fluff easily.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I’d like to see a fallen supplement but I don’t know if that would need to be based on the DA codex

Could be a really interesting book and model range but likely not enough Marines for a supplement :(

 Mr Morden wrote:

mrFickle wrote:
I’d like to see an agents of bile supplement. The full CSM codex doesn’t suit him totally plus in the recent stories there are some great characters that can make the army noticeably different from other CSM whilst still being similar enough

His demon daughter
Fabius clones
Gland hounds
The new men

His conclave of apothecaries from other legions. I know these were disbanded largely but they could be brought back in the fluff easily.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I’d like to see a fallen supplement but I don’t know if that would need to be based on the DA codex

Could be a really interesting book and model range but likely not enough Marines for a supplement :(

How do you mean? Fabius still works with warbands of CSM etc when he’s not screwing them over. So all you could still have plenty of marines. There are some codexes/supplements that have a very small number of units in anyway (aren’t there)

One for anybody else showing it isn't just excessive Loyalist favouritism.

ould be a really interesting book and model range but likely not enough Marines for a supplement :(

Apologies if my sarcasmometer is broken here, but it's more than the handful of named characters the Ultramarines got. Mind you I actually like the Ultras 8th ed supplement but yeah, it's pretty flimsy in terms of justification for it actually being its own thing.

I think Agents of Bile has a lot more going for it. I could see a new run of the Dark Vengeance Marines for example as they would fit the role well (assuming they're as big as I remember - scratch that if they're silly small next to new marines), and man the things you could do with cultists and chaos spawn in that army would be so cool!

Im still waiting for Emperor's Children and World Eaters. How you going to ignore half the cult legions GW?

DudleyGrim wrote:
Im still waiting for Emperor's Children and World Eaters. How you going to ignore half the cult legions GW?

You are looking for a codex, not a supplement.

At this point....take anything we can get

Well, if it's a supplement akin to salamanders or imperial fists, you wouldn't really gain a lot compared to codex CSM+PA. It would be a few more relics and stratagems, maybe a psychic discipline for ES and some prayers for WE, but that's about it. Not a great trade-off for having to buy a second book.

WE and EC should get the DG/TS treatment (new minis, plastic primarch, separate codex), not just a supplement.

As for supplements:
Tau - 1) Farsight Enclaves; 2) Auxiliaries (Kroot, Vespid, Gue'vesa, ...)
Eldar - 1) Ynnari
Imperium - 1) Agents of the Imperium (Assassins, Inquisitors, ...) -> able to supplement all imperium codices, collecting the rules in one place without the need for campaign books

 Aenar wrote:
WE and EC should get the DG/TS treatment (new minis, plastic primarch, separate codex), not just a supplement.

This.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
WE and EC should get the DG/TS treatment (new minis, plastic primarch, separate codex), not just a supplement.

This.

Double this.

Aenar wrote:Eldar - 1) Ynnari

Realistically, it should be the other way around with Codex: Ynnari with Supplements: Craftworlds, Drukhari, and Exodites.

mrFickle wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
WE and EC should get the DG/TS treatment (new minis, plastic primarch, separate codex), not just a supplement.

This.

Double this.

Very much so. If Thousand Sons and Death Guard have their own codex, then World Eaters and Emperor's Children should have one.

Honestly, I think they are too wrapped up in the main names and should have been more genericly named on the codex level, ala Age of Sigmar, that way one could then supplement the Death Guard and Thousand Sons and add other warbands to them that have been mentioned in previous codices, but that's just me. If anything, it would have provided a larger opportunity for that supplement income.

As I want to start a Word Bearers army as my second force, I'd like to see the Word Bearers get their own codex complete with rules/model for Lorgar.

I demand a Thunder Warriors Supplement.

Awww thats cute. Some people actually seem think plebian faction that are not SM will get extra rules. <3

Only the chosen ones shall know no unfavorable rules..

That is an interesting claim considering most marines don't even make it in to the top 5 best armies in the game, and a lot don't even reach the 50% win rate.

Seems to me like the sub faction of chaos marines and CWE eldar are doing just fine and have great rules this editiion. Why shouldn't people playing other factions want or expect something similar?