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.

As far as I can ascertain, older edition Chaos Havoc squads could include special weapons as well as heavy weaponry but loyalist devastator squads cannot do the same. Has a in-unverse reason ever been given for this?

And second question, were a loyalist Chapter to decide to allow their devastators to run around with special weaponry (ie, 4 flamers, for example), would they get reprimanded? or would that sort of eccentricity be so down the list of concerns that no one would give a damn.

It’s the Codex, which is more a set of recommended guidelines for how to get the most out of a relatively small force.

The role of Devastators is (well, was. They were effing deadly once upon a time!) pinpoint overwhelming fire support, so the other infantry can advance the mission with minimal resistance.

Smaller weapons can do the same, but have a lesser effective range. So if your entire point is to blat something big and nasty as quickly as possible, and ideally before it blats your dudes? You want range, a good vantage points, and hefty man portable firepower.

There would likely be some situations where a heavy weapon is less desirable. For instance, boarding actions where its less likely the entire squad will be able to shoot at the same time, and their bulk can further reduce line of sight. There, perhaps some Chapters would repurpose their Devastators to carry smaller weapons.

The codex be more what ye'd call... guidelines than actual rules.

Devastators are there to provide long range support and firepower (although that can get fuzzy on the "long" part with things like multi-meltas). Special weapons are more there to provide tactical flexibility, allowing a squad to engage targets of opportunity or cover them for situations where their basic equipment isn't ideal - like using a plasma gun to provide anti-heavy armour capability, meltas to engage tanks or flamers for clearing out hordes. They were deployed en masse in dedicated squads up to the Heresy but the Codex redefined their role and such, how they're deployed.

As for codex compliance, the Codex was never designed to be strictly adhered to, and only became that way over time. Almost every chapter will deviate from it in one way or another, and now the original author is back writing the new Primaris DLC for it, it's likely to be even more flexible. Attitudes to diverging from it are going to vary between chapters, so while allowing Devastators to take Special Weapons might gravely offend some chapters, others won't care.

Chaos definitely don't care, they didn't use the Codex to begin with

As MDG says, it’s writ in The Codex on how to organize your fighting force.

Someone might have an issue with a chapter breaking this tenant. It’s a big universe, and a lot of people get bees in their bonnets over the tiniest things. But being non-adherent with the codex is not a death sentence. Plenty of chapters do their own thing all the time. Including 1st founding chapters.

IMHO most of the codex is suggestions and axioms on how to do things the best way generally. But in the flow of combat and campaigns, a fixed book, even one as glorious as The Codex, can’t cover every situation. For that, you need to improvise, even if The Codex does not approve of this action.

From a historical POV we see full squads of special weapons used in the heresy. So it’s not like the concept is new. But in a 40k small force marine army, having a squad of your rare troops dedicated to a hyper-specialized role is generally not a wise use of manpower. Too many eggs in one basket, not enough flexibility.

As a game mechanic aside, Marines could spam special weapons via command squads, and to a different degree sternguard. So there might be lore out there justifying these units doing just that.

And across the rubicon primaris, we see hellblasters, infernus, etc with the heavy support chevron on their shoulder. These are our modern devastator marines, all running around with what classically are special weapons. Take that back to the firstborn, and it gives you some fluff justification.

It’s also worth noting that infractions of the Codex Astartes are really difficult to punish.

Every Chapter is ultimately autonomous. They go where they will, and fight what they will. Other Imperial forces can of course request Astartes support, but even an Inquisitor can’t necessarily demand it.

So what you tend to see is a Chapter given a certain area of the Galaxy to patrol. This is often assigned when the Chapter is first created, and done by the High Lords of Terra. But once there? Exactly how they patrol is up to the Chapter. Even then, some Chapters (Black Templars are a notable one) will just go wherever they want, whenever they want, attacking whatever they want.

Sure, you are likely to draw unwelcome attention if you refuse to support without good reason. For instance, if a good portion of your Chapter happens to be farting around near Armageddon, but doesn’t send any element to join in the fun there? You’re gonna need a bloody good reason why. If you’re not near any particular hot zone, and don’t seem to be duffing anyone up ever? Again there are going to be questions.

But not arming your Devastators as per the Codex is a pretty minor infraction as such things go. Provided that decision doesn’t prevent you doing your job, or repeatedly causes imperial losses where perhaps some timely Lascannons and Krak Missiles would’ve made the difference? Nobody is really gonna care.

 Nevelon wrote:
Someone might have an issue with a chapter breaking this tenant. It’s a big universe, and a lot of people get bees in their bonnets over the tiniest things.

Speaking of which - tenet, not tenant. Breaking your tenants should be illegal.

Even when supporting other armed forces of the Imperium, Astartes are not particularly obliged to join in a given push or contribute to a given plan.

Sure, it’s often wise to do so, and arguably it’s as part of a combined force where the precision and ultra violence of the Astartes really comes into its own. But there’s no obligation to do so. And that goes both ways. If you’re a Chapter of loony turbo nutters like the Flesh Tearers? The other elements are ultimately within their rights to refuse to commit forces alongside you, as you don’t particularly want them butchered by their nominal allies.

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
And second question, were a loyalist Chapter to decide to allow their devastators to run around with special weaponry (ie, 4 flamers, for example), would they get reprimanded?

No, though they probably wouldn't call it a 'devastator' squad. Just an over-equipped assault or tactical squad depending on their battlefield role.

In-game, Havoks are a throwback to the generic chaos marine infantry squads in 2e that could take 3 special or heavy weapons. They were split off into their own unit in 3e due to the more rigid FoC.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Someone might have an issue with a chapter breaking this tenant. It’s a big universe, and a lot of people get bees in their bonnets over the tiniest things.

Speaking of which - tenet, not tenant. Breaking your tenants should be illegal.

I cannot be held responsible for typos and autocorrect errors before I’m done with my first cup of coffee in the morning.

Morning posts over breakfast are going to be chocked full of errors. I’ll just issue a blanket apology for all of them now.

Fun fact: the codex squad size was inspired by the insect world; the ten-ants.

And now I’ll apologize for that horrible joke. Enjoy your days everyone.

Origins of the Devastator Squads come from Legiones Astartes Heavy Support Squads, right? If so, I see no reason why Devastators couldn't be equipped with special weapons if it was required of them.

Way I see it, the only thing that separates a Devastator Marine from a Tactical Marine is that a Devastator Marine is trained to operate/maintain heavy supoprt weapons and traditionally engages the target from a longer range than most tacticals. Also probably utilizing a more passive movement, using cover more, prioritizing vantage points and good sight lines.. They might not be as used to medium/close range combat and constant movement as tacs, but would have no problems acting in that role if it was required from them.

As for flamers, I thought this type of weapon was more used for supression from charges etc. This is why every Devastator squad in my armies has one HF, its the insurace against combatants who get too close for the other weapons to deal with effectively..

and what Codex Astartes say? What about it. Some Marine chapters couldnt care less while others do everytning by it. So its not relevant to consider Codex Astartes as anything holding one's (headcanon) back IMO

Conservation of resources after the introduction of the Codex Astartes.

When your company is only 100 Astartes, and 20 of those have to be Fire Support, you need to make that the best option you can.

Having a Devastator squad all with Flamers isn't a viable tactical option when having Lascannons, Heavy Bolters or Plasma Cannons that can take down hard targets like tanks or crazy monsters.

In-Universe the Devastator Squad is where Scout recruits first go once they're become a full Marine. Units with heavy weapons will likely deploy and act more conservatively than other units, so brings less risk to new Marines. I'm not sure about the timing, but being conservative with your new marines might also help ensure the primogenitor gland to come to it's first maturation to be harvested before they go on more risky assignments like the Assault teams.

 Insectum7 wrote:
In-Universe the Devastator Squad is where Scout recruits first go once they're become a full Marine. Units with heavy weapons will likely deploy and act more conservatively than other units, so brings less risk to new Marines. I'm not sure about the timing, but being conservative with your new marines might also help ensure the primogenitor gland to come to it's first maturation to be harvested before they go on more risky assignments like the Assault teams.

Exactly this. It's also a function of the change from Legion to Chapter structure. When you're operating in task forces so small as modern Chapters do, you don't need anything so dedicated and unwieldy as a traditional Tactical Support Squad. Devastators end up being more flexible offensively due to the greater power of their weapons (plasma cannons being better at blasting crowds than plasma guns, for example) while the mobility cost ends up being planned around.

We can also look to the shape of the galaxy when the Codex was formalised.

In terms of major foes? No Tau, Tyranids or Necrons. It was pretty much largely fragmented Chaos Warbands still recovering from the Heresy and Scouring which not only depleted their headcount, but saw them abandon materiel in the retreat and fighting. Eldar and Orks are…Eldar and Orks. With few things a Bolt round isn’t a perfectly acceptable answer to.

Hence, the Tactical Squad. Bolters for general purpose Making Things Go Away, and some extra firepower in case of opportunity or something a bit heftier in need of a kicking.

Devastators? In larger engagements provide precision support to knacker enemy armour.

Assault Squads? General purpose kicking.

The old Tactical Support squad (every brother equipped with the same special weapon) just doesn’t have the same role in a Chapter sized force. Though I guess in a sense Sternguard kinda fulfil that role, with greater flexibility.

A.T. wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
And second question, were a loyalist Chapter to decide to allow their devastators to run around with special weaponry (ie, 4 flamers, for example), would they get reprimanded?

No, though they probably wouldn't call it a 'devastator' squad. Just an over-equipped assault or tactical squad depending on their battlefield role.

That was my thought; it's no longer really a "devastator squad" if they all have flamers, there isn't any tactical overlap with their normal role. Yeah if they were surrounded by ripper swarms they might all grab a flamer and burn their way out but it's no different from any other marines doing the same thing.

The question sort of just amounts to "is there a reason why the long-range fire support squad can't take miscellaneous short-range weapons?"

 Orkeosaurus wrote:

A.T. wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
And second question, were a loyalist Chapter to decide to allow their devastators to run around with special weaponry (ie, 4 flamers, for example), would they get reprimanded?

No, though they probably wouldn't call it a 'devastator' squad. Just an over-equipped assault or tactical squad depending on their battlefield role.

That was my thought; it's no longer really a "devastator squad" if they all have flamers, there isn't any tactical overlap with their normal role. Yeah if they were surrounded by ripper swarms they might all grab a flamer and burn their way out but it's no different from any other marines doing the same thing.

The question sort of just amounts to "is there a reason why the long-range fire support squad can't take miscellaneous short-range weapons?"

So the long and short of it is because the rulebook says so? fair enough.

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
So the long and short of it is because the rulebook says so? fair enough.

If you consider the codex the rulebook.

Lore wise - the codex likely states something along the lines of 'form x number of squads into long range/heavy support squads' with notes like 'do not embed flamethrowers into your anti-tank squads' and 'the codex astartes does not approve of this action'.

Loyalist squad formation is based around practicality and while Guilliman himself would have seen them as guidelines he imposed them as dogma in his absence.
They make sense too - you'd not expect to see a flamethrower in a real-world mortar unit for instance.

Chaos by comparison are/were chaotic and formed of marines that are/were thrown together from whoever was available, with whatever they had on them. Lothar the Spiketaker, warlord of the Painbringers, isn't going to supply his minions with matching guns or demand that Mordred the Twisted swap out the autocannon fused to his arm for something more modern.

I think we can also consider the time when the Codex was written.

Commanders in a Legion Structure were facing greatly reduced numbers, and could no longer fight in the way the Legions had during the Crusade and Heresy.

Not only were you more limited in the resources at your beck and call? But those resources became ever more precious. Before, with a Legion’s worth of recruitment worlds and Geneseed banks, you could, in a pinch, sacrifice tens if not hundreds of Astartes if that was the right move to secure overall victory. Whilst never ideal, you could still replace those losses pretty swiftly, especially with Inductii.

When you’re a Chapter? Every death is sorely felt. More so if it was the result of a tactical blunder, doubly so if that meant you never got the chance to retrieve the Progenoid Glands from said fallen Brothers.

That is a big chunk of what the Codex was helping to address. How do you best use your now dramatically limited resources in the most efficient manner in defence of the Imperium.

I had to check if this is a necroed ten-year-old tread or something. But no.

There currently in fact are marine squads equipped with special weapons. They are called Hellbalster squad, Infernus squad and Eradicator squad.

You don't need to overthink it. If a military has an "HMG Team" that means they use an HMG, not an LMG, even though they could probably shoot an LMG fine if they had to. A different military might have a "Fire Support Team" which uses either an HMG or an LMG. It doesn't require some sort of dogma, it's just how they define the unit.

IG Heavy Weapon Teams use heavy weapons. Ork Tankbustaz use weapons that can bust tanks. Helllblasters are equipped with plasma guns. All of these units are defined by their armament. Can a squad of Terminators wear power armor instead of terminator armor? Can a Leman Russ Demolisher have a punisher cannon instead? It ceases to be the thing you were talking about.

Not sure anyone is overthinking it.

Astartes are proficient in multiple areas of combat. And the lack (up to Hellblasters and co) of more mobile fire support is something of a strategic anomaly at first.

I mean, for a highly competent surgical strike force, a squad of heavy weapons covering different specialisations, the traditional Devastator squad makes sense. Especially in the olden days when armies were much smaller and you could split fire or combat squad to boot. But for those situations where a great big hefty shooter just isn’t suited? Swapping them out for lighter weapons does make sense. Or indeed how come in certain circumstances Taccies don’t Load For Bear and equip more Brothers with special weapons.

 Orkeosaurus wrote:

A.T. wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
And second question, were a loyalist Chapter to decide to allow their devastators to run around with special weaponry (ie, 4 flamers, for example), would they get reprimanded?

No, though they probably wouldn't call it a 'devastator' squad. Just an over-equipped assault or tactical squad depending on their battlefield role.

That was my thought; it's no longer really a "devastator squad" if they all have flamers, there isn't any tactical overlap with their normal role. Yeah if they were surrounded by ripper swarms they might all grab a flamer and burn their way out but it's no different from any other marines doing the same thing.

The question sort of just amounts to "is there a reason why the long-range fire support squad can't take miscellaneous short-range weapons?"

Yeah, this. A squad equiped with flamers or meltaguns is a specialised close-assault unit, not fire support. Plasma guns and grav guns are more debatable, they have a range equivalent to multimeltas. They are more mobile than plasma and grav cannons at the trade-off of power, but their range probably puts them within more of a fire support role than flamers or meltas.

I think it is worth bearing in mind that the Codex: Space Marines of the era has only ever represented the most common organisation of Space Marine forces under the Codex Astartes, not an exhaustive list. It is the general, multi-purpose Marine task force that will be able to do most tactical roles well and some excellently.

But specialised forces do exist within the Codex, with differently-organised units. The siege assault vanguard list published by FW in 5th edition is one such example- it was still a Codex-approved formation, but had adjustments specifically for the purpose of assaulting fortifications, a task the standard Marine strike force organisation can struggle with. Most Marines rarely have to do this in the 41st millennium, but sometimes they do. In that formation, tactical and assault squads could be specially equipped with shields to better weather the fire of defenders whilst assaulting fortifications.

The lore for the siege assault vanguard also mentioned tunnel fighting as another area where the standard Codex tactics struggle. Whilst no list has ever been published for this, to my knowledge, this is the area I think squads equipped with an over-abundance of special weapons would make most sense. Heavy weapons have no range advantage in this environment, and special weapons have the advantage of mobility. Such forces would also be ideal for boarding actions. Again though, in practice it is probably tactical or assault squads that would get the extra special weapons, rather than devastator squads in the first instance.

Why is a marine with a flamer a specialised close assault unit, whereas a unit with a heavy flamer is fire support?
Or is the defining trait of a devastator their mobility?

In Heresy you have "tactical support squads" and "heavy support squads", I think both of those would translate in 40k to Devastators within the Codex. Both are specialised fire support squads just one empthasising a bit more mobility whilst the other being a bit more static.

GW seems to agree as Hellblasters/Pyreblasters are Fire Support squads.

I don't think those distinctions have ever been terribly logical.

Well no, I can't say the Codex actually does make much sense as a genuine military organisational structure.
It is, however, a decent guide on how a player could layout an army for the Warhammer 40,000 Miniatures Battle Game. Which is the actual purpose of the Codex.

But if we take the codex as it is, special weapons squads like Hellblasters fit the Firesupport role way better than they do the Battleline role.

Probably the closest real-world example between Intercessors and Hellblasters would be the WW2 German Assault Platoon, built around the new MP44 assault rifle. Here, you saw two squads armed entirely with the assault rifle supported by one squad armed with LMGs and rifle grenades. The firesupport section would hang back and suppress the enemy whilst the assault sections closed in to finish the job. I imagine that's how the Primaris would operate.
Except the Codex doesn't include platoons, just you're 6 Battleline 2 Firesupport and 2 Assault to a company.

kirotheavenger wrote:Why is a marine with a flamer a specialised close assault unit, whereas a unit with a heavy flamer is fire support?
Or is the defining trait of a devastator their mobility?

In Heresy you have "tactical support squads" and "heavy support squads", I think both of those would translate in 40k to Devastators within the Codex. Both are specialised fire support squads just one empthasising a bit more mobility whilst the other being a bit more static.

GW seems to agree as Hellblasters/Pyreblasters are Fire Support squads.

Well, as Crimson says:

Crimson wrote:I don't think those distinctions have ever been terribly logical.

But some thoughts.

Devastators are not routinely armed with heavy flamers. In fact, I can't think of a time that has been supported in 40k. The shortest-ranged heavy weapon they have is multimeltas, and those are still equivalent in range to infantry rifles. Mobility is not the defining trait, but clearly using heavy weapons that affect mobility is because no devastator weapon has ever been one that didn't affect mobility. Heavy support squads directly map onto devastators (except the loss of some weapon options including heavy flamers), tactical support squads do not and have no modern equivalent in Codex Chapters until the Primaris options below. Notably, the Legions typically considered tactical support marines as tactical marines doctrinally (as seen by the unit markings, images spoilered):

In both cases, the tactical support squads are line tactical units sharing markings with standard tactical squads, and not heavy support units sharing markings with the heavy support squads.

A squad armed with flamers or meltaguns necessarily has to get close to the enemy and can expect to get stuck into melee regularly. Prior to Primaris, the standard unit that could take most flamers is assault squads with two, or Salamanders tactical squads (in one iteration of their rules). It is entirely logical that assault or tactical squads would be the ones armed with extra of the weapons intended for shooting in close assaults.

I discussed plasma above, I think this applies to Hellblasters. Pyreblasters are the anomaly really. It all gets skewy after Primaris anyway though, because the Codex no longer applies in the same way and Primaris units initially all filled specific niches rather than being multirole units like Devastators.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Well no, I can't say the Codex actually does make much sense as a genuine military organisational structure.
It is, however, a decent guide on how a player could layout an army for the Warhammer 40,000 Miniatures Battle Game. Which is the actual purpose of the Codex.

But if we take the codex as it is, special weapons squads like Hellblasters fit the Firesupport role way better than they do the Battleline role.

Probably the closest real-world example between Intercessors and Hellblasters would be the WW2 German Assault Platoon, built around the new MP44 assault rifle. Here, you saw two squads armed entirely with the assault rifle supported by one squad armed with LMGs and rifle grenades. The firesupport section would hang back and suppress the enemy whilst the assault sections closed in to finish the job. I imagine that's how the Primaris would operate.
Except the Codex doesn't include platoons, just you're 6 Battleline 2 Firesupport and 2 Assault to a company.

Those platoons were still line units though, Germany was just forced to use squads as the smallest tactical unit by that point in the war instead of fireteams. Essentially, they had to regress to WWI era tactics due to their massive losses of trained soldiers (especially NCOs) and poor quality replacements. The devastator equivalent was the HMG teams with tripod-mounted MG-34s/MG-42s supporting the assault platoons, not the rifle squad with LMGs.

I agree that the HH paradigm and the initial Primaris paradigm matched those tactics though.

I think you're setting up a false baseline - that being firesupport is inherently a long range role and that whether it's 'fire support' or 'tactical' is dependent on the range of the weapon.

Firesupport is really about the volume of the firepower.
A squad entirely equipped with plasma is providing an inordinate amount of firepower. Equivalent to probably several platoons of HH Tactical Marines. They're absolutely a firesupport squad.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think you're setting up a false baseline - that being firesupport is inherently a long range role and that whether it's 'fire support' or 'tactical' is dependent on the range of the weapon.

Firesupport is really about the volume of the firepower.
A squad entirely equipped with plasma is providing an inordinate amount of firepower. Equivalent to probably several platoons of HH Tactical Marines. They're absolutely a firesupport squad.

No, I think the inherent feature is role, and that fire support is... not very well defined. Devastators obviously don't do anything else unless they can't avoid it, they sacrifice mobility for firepower and there has never been any indication that they compromise on this with lighter weapons. HH era tactical support squads were expected to be part of the line of battle alongside the tactical squads. Hellblasters are marked as fire support by modern GW, but that doesn't mean they fight the same way as devastators.

Thinking on this, I think a better analogue to support your argument for units like hellblasters is not the third squad in German assault platoons (which is analogous to HH era tactical support squads rather than hellblasters), it would be support units heavily armed with light role weapons like the Carrier platoons in British rifle battalions. These operated as a heavily-armed reserve that carried as much firepower as an entire rifle platoon per section and were mechanised for rapid responses. They could be used to block enemy break-ins or to exploit break-ins against the enemy, and were generally a support section instead of part of the line infantry. There isn't too much difference in terms of armament compared to the LMG squad in German assault platoons, the big difference is doctrinal (plus the mobility afforded by being mechanised), which could explain the difference between how hellblasters are expected to operate in 40k vs how tactical support squads were expected to operate in 30k. German schutzen/panzergrenadiers had similar units to carrier platoons IIRC.

To quote the wiki: Devastator Squads are specialised Firstborn Space Marine Fire Support Squads tasked with long-range fire support, entrusted with the Chapter’s rarest heavy weaponry.

So they are specifically tasked with long-range fire support using heavy weapons. They don't use plasma guns because they aren't heavy. They don't use heavy flamers because they aren't long range. Hellblaster (plasma gun) and Infernus (flamer) squads are a very different type of fire support and there probably isn't much overlap in their skillset.

But I guess Chaos "Havoc" squads can be considered a general fire support unit, since they can take a bunch of any type of weapon; they aren't defined as strictly as loyalist "Devastators" are. This is probably more a difference in convention than anything, Chaos is less standardized and has less of a reason to subdivide their unit names.

Devastators have a specific function; long range/heavy firepower for tough, important targets. Fire support. Special weapons don't fit that bill. Taking special weapons would degrade their function in their assigned role.