PDA

View Full Version : Just ONE Marine codex for all chapters



Pages : [1] 2

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 19:40
Seeing the discussion about the new Space Wolves codex (how is it you always can tell whether the codex designer also plays that army - but I disgress ...) I wondered:

Who would like ALL loyal Space Marines Chapters to be in one FRICKEN HUGE codex?

Be it because you´re one of those sad xenos players, wandering windswept streets with sunken cheeks and eyes bereft of hope of a nex codex anytime soon, or because you´re a jaded gamer who doesn´t like codex creep and rules inconsinstencies.


My vision of a Codex: Adeptus Astartes is of a monster volume that at least doubles the page count of C:SM. I want background for all the first founding Legions/Chapters, special characters for all of them (and some for the more interesting later foundings) and rules for a lot of diverse units (Death Company style ultra-melee unit, veteran Havocs, Sternguard like Veterans with flexible roles).

BUT I want some restrictions to tell you what you won´t be able to take if you take this or that goodie. Like the traits system but actually, you know, thought through and maybe playtested (at least a little.... pretty please?).

Maybe you get a basic Codex army list (like C:SM from 4th edition), and you can choose deviations (super assault squad, flexible veterans, techmarines as generals, ...) for a given cost. And HEAVILY limited.


Edit:
Thanks t-tauri!

marv335
12-09-2009, 19:43
Never going to happen.
Marines make too much money for GW for them to slash their income stream like this.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 19:45
Marv I didn´t ask if it is going to happen :)

Money-wise... let that super-codex cost twice as C:SM - but be worth it!
They won´t lose that much money.

Nym
12-09-2009, 19:48
Of course I'd like it. Unfortunately, it would mean the death of 40k. As much as I hate all these Marines codices, they're what keeps the game alive.

The problem comes from the playerbase : too many kids who think it's cool to play Superman in space.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 19:50
This should be in General.

And the multiple Codices are about making money. And, to be honest, with the amount that some Chapters deviate from the Codex (ie Space Wolves), it just wouldn't work. You would have to include entirely too many rules into one single book for it to be functional.

Having Dark Angels in their own Codex currently makes no sense to me. I don't care about Deathwing, every Chapter can field TDA en masse if they want to. Hell, the UltraSmurfs all died being awesome, what did the DA's do?
The Ravenwing? C:SM does and they do it better. Without the 'Hunt the Fallen' rules, their is no point, they are just another Codex Chapter.

The Blood Angels, they are fine with their own Codex (a full one, please). With their background, Death Company rules, Assault Unit troops, Jump Pack Command Squads and a unique vehicle, they are fine with their own.

The Space Wolves, well, they ride wolves, what else must I say?

Codex Space Marines fits the Codex Chapters that have little to no deviation very well, but not so much the rest and throwing them all into one book just doesn't make sense in a monetary manner or a practical, gaming one in my opinion.

And from a personal stand point, one not based on GW's bottom line or practicality, I still don't think it is a great idea. I like having the multiple Codices. It just makes everything seem...more rich, fuller. And no, I wouldn't whine if Eldar were given three or four Codices if there was a reason behind it like the Space Marines where there are so many differences.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 19:51
I don´t think the codices are what keep the game going, the MARINE armies are. They wouldn´t diminish save for the odd player who won´t suck it up and would quit the game (selling his stuff on ebay and giving another one a shot at playing marines).

The models make the money for GW (I think), and their sale wouldn´t be affected at all.

Edit:

Lothlanathorian yes it should be, but I´m borderline retarded -.-
It was meant to be posted there.

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 19:52
Nope wouldn't be interested the book for a starters going to rival the BRB so at least £30 for a new codex greater cost to GW to print and send out as well. The summary sheets would be pages long. Would lead to complete abuse of the book as everything in the book would be legal in a army as it came from a single Codex.

Have to agree with whats been said as i got ninja'd to it this is in the wrong forum.

marv335
12-09-2009, 19:53
It leads to a drop in potential marketing, which means less sales, which means they can't afford to make all those niche armies that people love so much.
I was told by a regional manager that space marines account for about 60% of total GW sales.
By the same token they could do Codex Xenos, containing 'nids, orks, eldar etc

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 20:01
That´s an unfair comparison. What have Orks with Eldar in common?

But Blood Angels and Ultramarines?
Say each chapter gets the basic codex army list, and 2-3 special characters each. Also, Blood Angels get to take (say) Assault Squads as troops, get to take one super Assault Squad, but only 2 Heavy Support choices and no Heavy Weapons in Tactical Squads (this is just a quick example, off the top of my head! It´s in no way meant to be balanced or well thought-out! It´s just to make a point!)


Sure, all Blood Angels (wich I play, my first army!), Dark Angels, Black Templars and Space Wolves would have to make do with a lot less options that differ from the C:SM than before, but maybe balance would improve?

marv335
12-09-2009, 20:08
It's just as fair as yours.
And what do they have in common?
They're Xenos races.
Eldar/Orks/Tau/Nids etc only exist to give Marines something to fight.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 20:11
But it is those options that make the game, not the balance. It is about having that themes army with lots of background. Codex: Overmen (and their friends, too) wouldn't be that appealing because so much individual flavor would be lost.

The Codex: Xenos is an acceptable comparison as it shows how much could be lost by combining armies that don't have enough in common.

I see your point, but I just think too much flavor would be gone.

And one $70 Codex or 8 $20 Codices? 8 Codices means more money. And Marv also had a good counterpoint. It would lead to less Marine sales as no one wants to drop a c note on a Codex and then buy Codex: All Marines Are Generic Now. (Well, maybe not generic, but less defined and flavored than before) But, that isn't the point of this thread, as you have said.


EDIT: And 9 people have voted and only 5 of us are discussing it? Come on people, the least you could do is quote someone and throw in a '+1' or 'QFT'.

t-tauri
12-09-2009, 20:14
Moved to 40k general.

Seattledv8
12-09-2009, 20:15
All you need to do is compare the wealth of fluff in the new SW codex to the "oh White Scars ride bikes and are white".
The different codices give us more fluff and more Characters.
Blending all the marines into one book would give you Ultramarine ,blue, green, red,etc.
Weak in special characters and background.
It would be a terrible idea.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 20:17
All you need to do is compare the wealth of fluff in the new SW codex to the "oh White Scars ride bikes and are white".
As opposed to: "oh White Scars ride bikes and are white and are always led by the same character?" ;)

njfed
12-09-2009, 20:20
Sm and Chaos should have the same structure for their codex, one main one for the general feel of the army and then another for the varients.

C:SM = C:CSM
SW, Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Black Templars in one book.
A chaos book dedicated to the four gods would be the chaos version.

AFnord
12-09-2009, 20:29
I don't think that they should have one book covering it all. While the same argument can be made for most factions, SM are simply too diverse for a single book.

What they could do is go with the two chapters per book approach, like in 2nd edition. Bunch up two similar chapters in one book, give a basic list of things that both can use, and then give each chapter some unique special rules, and special units.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 20:33
You can still fit all four Chaos Gods into one book, though, and have room for everything you would need. I don't see that happening with a Loyalist Codex. Of course, I also wouldn't complain if they made the Big Four different enough that they got their own Codices. That would be quite awesome, in my opinion.

And I think you made his point for him, Eulenspiegel. Sure, we only know one or two words less about the White Scars, but maybe that means they should have a little more face time. C:SM is already too much of an Ultramarine wankfest (mind you, I am building a DIY Chapter, so I have no issue with the rules :p) and it should have covers the Scattering, Great Crusade and Heresy, then been about Space Marines, period. Many of the other Chapters should have been given a lot more face-time. The 3.5 Chaos Codex did a wonderful job of actually having a lot of fluff and good rules for multiple themed armies. That wouldn't be such a bad thing for Codex Chapters to have. Oh wait, they do, it is called Codex: Space Marines :D.

Space Wolves are too different to be worked into a Codex with all the others. I think the Blood Angels and Dark Angels could be worked into it, but it would take something away from both of them to make it work. It could be done, though.

I do think Codex: Space Marines could have been done better. Very much so. I just don't think that it would have been able to do justice to every Chapter or would have been anything other than tedious if it were the double-sized Uberlexicanum you are suggesting. (Although, it would serve great for beating anyone who disagrees with you)

Urath
12-09-2009, 20:37
Obviously it would clear up the mess of codices floating around, waiting to be updated and such. As a Dark Eldar and former Deamonhunter player, that would be great; as armies such as those would potentially be updated sooner; that's if the Design Team "find the drive" to do other codices aside from Astartes orientated.

But, on that token, I don't think it would work. As had previously stated, the Space Wolves and the Black Templars are both far too different from the Codex chapters to fit into one book, without cramming it full of options and choices that could, not oly be exploited, but it would also penalize other Space Marine players who don't want all of these options from Codex: Space Wolves, they just want to play Imperial Fists. Equally, it'd punish those who can't afford a £30++ book, on top of the rulebook and models and paints and brushes etc.

Besides that, I've always thought that the reason for a Dark Angel and Blood Angel codex, also allowed it to be jam packed full of fluff; for interesting and heavily flawed Chapters to be fleshed out rather than just less than a paragraph mention in Codex: Ultramarines, like what happened to the poor Iron Hands.

I think that, as an alternative, Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Blood Angels could be used as expansion books, such as those we saw around the 3rd Ed. that require the main codex to function, but are packed full of, mainly, fluff as well as all the unique rules, characters and units that the army entail. It would also keep the codex in line with updated rule changes, requiring a Codex: Space Marines in order to work. Or, combine them both into a Codex: Angels of Death; but again, that would penalize players who don't to play Blood Angels, just Dark Angels.

So, they'd work mainly as fluff bibles, but also with extra units and rules as well as characters and wargear. It'd be smaller and require less work, so other races would get some time in the spotlight.

The Codex: Space Marines itself is terrible. Not the unit rules and such, but the backstory. As Lothlanathorian said, other chapters (ESPECIALLY First Founding chapters) need further fleshing out, more development and a deeper insight into the Scouring, Age of Apostasy etc. What did they do during the Heresy? The Scouring? Now? Introduce a trait system, well thought out and playtested mind you, to better represent your DIY chapter or the other Chapters of note. But inventing new units without advancing the timeline is a little silly.

I'd hate to see the codices vanish, just re designed and thoughout.

S_A_T_S
12-09-2009, 20:44
I like the way the Chapter Tactics works with the Codex Chapters in C:SM, but having them and the non-codex in one book would be a bit like taking Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings and mixing them back together - both armies become more generic and dull, and you lose the inherent themes in the army building. It spoils it when you're playing an army that is all Tomb King themed, but has vampires, blood knights and varhgufs just because they are powerful units. GW, especially 40k, is all about the background - without their unique IP GW is nothing. They have to keep it detailed and refreshed to keep interest up.

The REAL problem is that every other Codex is a Space Marine one. Since 3rd edition, we've had at least 10 SM codicies (most updates), 2 Ork and a single, solitary, lonely, MASSIVELY OUT OF DATE Dark Eldar book (I don't play them, but they could be so good if GW put more thought into them and a new range of tougher, better miniatures). The other races need to be updated to give those marines something to fight!

Nezmith
12-09-2009, 20:47
In my honest opinion, if Space Marines were any more generic than they already are, a single big codex would fit.

The only reason I can't agree with a single huge codex, is because one of those Space Marine factions likes to put "Wolf-" in front of everything.

I wish the Imperium of man would just collapse already, so all those Loyalist Marines VS Loyalist Marines games would make a lick of sense.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 20:51
Well, the Dark Eldar are still very good as far as the tabletop game goes. But seriously, I remember buying that Codex when it first came out and being young at the same time. Now I am old and so is the Codex. Time for a new one (now, if only I can convince someone to give me a new body and update it for the current Planet Earth ruleset).

And 14 people have voted for this being a great idea and only two have said anything, counting the guy who started the thread?

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 20:53
I like the way the Chapter Tactics works with the Codex Chapters in C:SM, but having them and the non-codex in one book would be a bit like taking Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings and mixing them back together - both armies become more generic and dull, and you lose the inherent themes in the army building. It spoils it when you're playing an army that is all Tomb King themed, but has vampires, blood knights and varhgufs just because they are powerful units.

Not meaning to rain on your parade, but when I last was interested in Warhammer Fantasy, undead and undead weren´t separated ;)
It takes all of a brainfart on the side of a designer and suddenly we have new "established fluff". Suddenly Space Wolves ride wolves, suddenly Blood Angels use assault squads as troops, suddenly Dark Angels suck when not fielding Deathwing or Ravenwing,
and always have!

How can you easily adapt to that, and not to the new 5th-6th edition of
"Space Wolves differ from other Astartes in the following ways:
- Squads from 5-20 (special and close combat weapons bla bla) but no combat squads
- WS +1 for all characters
- may field Ragnar or Logan
- the end"

Nezmith
12-09-2009, 21:00
And 14 people have voted for this being a great idea and only two have said anything, counting the guy who started the thread?

Because the eleven that also voted would rather not be harassed for their choice. Or apathy.

Space Marine hating is not allowed here. Don't you know Space Marines paid for your groceries, the gas in your car, and the electricity in your house every month? You're only alive because of their hard work. You should be thankful.

starlight
12-09-2009, 21:00
Marines should be in four books (call them what you will, these names are off the top of my head):

Codex: Loyalists - First and Second Foundings
Codex: Loyalists - Everyone else
Codex: Traitor - First Founding
Codex: Traitor - Everyone else

Follow that up with Codex: Inquisition and... :D

All books should be the same size as the current Codex: Ultramarines.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 21:05
Space Marine hating is not allowed here.
This is not about the oh so trendy Marine bashing, and even Ultramarines can be left alone.

Let me state this:

I play Blood Angels, and I FEAR what they will do to them if they continue along the Space Wolves codex. I don´t like auto-win buttons and feel cheap for using such armies.

(This is only to make the point that I play a divergent Marine army! Please don´t discuss this statement here but on another thread... thank you.)

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:08
Because the eleven that also voted would rather not be harassed for their choice. Or apathy.

Space Marine hating is not allowed here. Don't you know Space Marines paid for your groceries, the gas in your car, and the electricity in your house every month? You're only alive because of their hard work. You should be thankful.

Good point. I forgot about all those Space Marine hating commies and how they don't know nuthin':p

I could see this devolving into a flame war if everyone who was voting were to voice their opinion. It is just inevitable that way, but I am actually interested in hearing what people think. I don't have any idea why I find this topic so interesting (maybe it is because of my hangover), but I do.

Ah, I see where you are coming from, Eulenspiegel (off topic, I have come up with a very funny way of saying your name so I remember how to spell it). The 'power creep' is very much the suck. If Blood Angels got a standard Codex and they were all sorts of OP, I can see how that could make games less fun (fear of loss creates excitement, knowing you will win makes for a very, very boring game).

And I don't think Starlight has a bad idea, but I still don't think that it would do justice currently. Even if there were a Codex: Not Codex Marines, it wouldn't be able to do complete justice, methinks, to them all. Then there would be Codex: Loyalists and Codex: Those Non-Conformists Who All Look The Same To Be Different. Space Wolves, Black Templars and any other divergent Chapter would just be 'Those other guys that are just organised differently from these guys'.

Although, two Chaos Space Marine Codices would be nice.

lanrak
12-09-2009, 21:10
Hi all.
It is possible to promote all armies fairly equaly ,( as is done in WH).
But GW decided to make SM thier 'poster boys' for 40k, they promote them more and the out sell other races , unsuprisingly.

GW need an influx of cash, then they trot out codex specific chapter marines .(Just write a bit of fluff ,tweeked list and a re jig of SM sprue and your done.)

Concetrating ONE faction in a game is the easiest way to optimise profit.
NOT the best way or the way that promotes long term growth, but the easiest.(GW PLC seem to adopt the path of least effort every time.:()

One SM 'cover all' dex written well would not let GW perform thier periodical gougeing of SM newbs.


So for game ballance and game play one SM dex makes sense.

But GW PLC are not interested in gameplay.

Dangersaurus
12-09-2009, 21:12
Two codices. One for most marines, and the other so we can still be entertained by DA players every time another codex comes out.

starlight
12-09-2009, 21:13
Good point. I forgot about all those Space Marine hating commies and how they don't know nuthin':p

The Tau?


:p


Although owning at least one of basically every 40K army kind of excludes me from the Marine loving/Marine hating camps. I'm neither and play the different armies because I like them for different reasons. :D I'd like to see *better* books before I see *more* books, but GW is supporting what sells...a fine short term practise, but not very wise in the long term... :(

Corrode
12-09-2009, 21:17
I'm interested in the assertion that 'you can always tell when the designer plays the army'. Phil Kelly must have an absolutely huge collection by that logic, considering that he plays Space Wolves, Orks, Eldar, Tyranids (until 4th edition!) plus whatever Fantasy books he wrote. Sure, for someone with a staff discount and who's been at the company for a number of years 4+ armies for a single system wouldn't be surprising, but to be devoted enough to all of them so as to design the books to be hideously overpowered he must have a lot of time on his hands.

As for the central premise of the thread - Codex: Space Marines and Codex: Chapters of Legend would fix the problem nicely. Base the first one around the Ultramarines and their Successors, as well as the generally Codex-adherent Chapters like the various Fists, the Raven Guard, the White Scars etc. Chapters of Legend focuses on the Angels, Templars, Wolves and maybe a fourth group who represent some other significant divergence.

Couple that with Codex: Chaos Legions and Codex: Chaos Renegades (the latter of which is ideally Codex: The Lost and the Damned). Problems solved, but this is WarSeer so everyone still whines.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:19
Starlight, you sir, have hit the proverbial nail on right on its braincase. Better books would be, well, better. But GW isn't that well thought most times, which is kinda sad.

It seems that the bigger 40K gets (As in more people getting into the hobby, growth and yadda blah), the more diluted everything becomes. More than anything else, I fear things becoming too cookie cutter.

Legions and LatD as two separate Codices equals awesomewinsaucezord.

And, if you had to do something like a Chapters of Legend Codex to include all the Non-Codex, Non-UltraSmurfs, how would you do it and do justice to all of the Chapters contained within? Look at Black Templars, Space Wolves and Blood Angels (I think they are deviant enough to merit inclusion) and tell me how you would make it work? Again, I am interested in this train of thought.

Urath
12-09-2009, 21:19
Do all believe that what I posted on the other page was trash? Or am I just being ignored, as usual?

:(

Bahaha.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 21:27
I didn´t reply to your post directly because it was so different from what I proposed, and so thought it was superfluous to add something.

I think that I speak for a vast majority here that doesn´t want mini-dexes back, or at most as a stop-gap measure like the current Blood Angels pdf.
Nothing more to say :)

A mini-dex can easily be crammed into the main codex, that´s what I was proposing from my first post on. Especially if it´s mainly fluff pages and just a few rules.

Tymell
12-09-2009, 21:29
I'd love it personally. And this is coming from a marine player (a Blood Angels one at that). Of all chapters, only 4 currently have their own codexes, and the actually deviance from the pure codex isn't that much. Nothing that couldn't be dealt with with a few extra sections for the marine codex.

So aye, I think it's a great idea.

And :rolleyes: to those claiming "It would be the death of 40K"

The OP is not suggesting "Let's get rid of space marines". He's saying "Let's have them all in one codex rather than separate ones". So the only players who would really be affected would be space wolf/blood angel/black templar/dark angel players. And with the increased size of the core codex, GW could warrant a small price increase. Small price increase x large number of marine players = £££

I really couldn't see GW losing much out of it. Of course, you could argue that it would cut down on "New space marine" releases, which are big sales boosters. But in turn, bringing it all together would still allow for big waves of marine mini releases.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:30
Do all believe that what I posted on the other page was trash? Or am I just being ignored, as usual?

:(

Bahaha.

You're post was pretty much in agreement with the rest of us 'Pro-Lotsa Codices' guys.

The minidex idea isn't a bad one, and it would allow them to represent many of the deviant chapters like it did in 3rd, but also, in 3rd, everything was very, very minimalist. There wasn't very much background in any of the Codices in 3rd Edition. A full codex allows for more in-depth fluff on the army that Codex is specific to.

With each getting their own (if they are done right), you get more out of it. Specifics about that Chapter's history, paint schemes, organization and special rules. In a minidex, you have to sacrifice some of that stuff to keep it a minidex, which isn't any good, in my opinion. And, with one large Codex, it would be more like a compilation of minidices (really, minidices? Yeah, I used it:D), lots of words, but nothing filling.

stonehorse
12-09-2009, 21:30
It would be a nice idea, but Space Marines are GW's golden cow, so they would never try something like this... to risk for them. I think it would work. The reason that Space Marines sell the most is due to the amount of advertisement that they get, which then promotes more sales, which increases the advertisement... and so on. In essence Space Marines have become victims of their own success.

Orks sold very well when they were released, due to a good advertisement campaign by GW, and along with having s trong Codex it made them a very popular choice.

If GW broke the cycle that has plagued Space Marines I honestly think that they could boost the sales of the non Space Marine armies.

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 21:35
4 DA's
4 BA's
2 BT's
8 SW's
1 IF
1 S
1 WS
1 CF
1 RG
6 Smurf's

Current SM Character totals off the top of my head which would have to be expanded on to make it fair on the Chapters with little or no Characters at all. So if each Chapter gets 6 Characters for the 1st Foundings thats 48 pages going by how they like 1 per page as it is the Sm Codex is only 145 pages, so thats over a third of the book filled.
Before we even get in to the weargear histories and painting guides for the book.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 21:38
(...) risk (...)

Yes, I think that´s all this is to that. Or all GW thinks this is.
It´s a (semi-) radically new idea, and they can´t foresee how it will turn out.

But just imagine the possibilities... they could be dishing out OTHER codices left and right. They´d be so pressed to publish something new that even the Wichhunters and Demonhunters would have their codices incoming. And demiurg players would be scouring the rumours forum for their codex due out in mid-2010.

:cool:

the1stpip
12-09-2009, 21:40
I voted yes, but in reality its not quite.

I feel the Space Wolves and Black Templars are non codex enough to deserve a codex of their own (I don't feel the Black Templars should ever have had a codex, but it would be unfair to Bt players now).

However, BA and DA armies are not really non codex. DA have a different Force Organisation, and thats it. Having Belial has a special character in the Marine codex would have fixed this ( and stopped all the moaning from DA players), while Chaplain Lemartes, allowing assault squads as troops, and one assault squad to be upgraded to feel no pain, would allow BA armies using the codex.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:44
Well, not really. In order to do this Codex right, it would be huge, take up a whole lot of time in dev and require many, many waves to get all the models out and done. It would end up eating up just as much time as doing most of them seperate.

Although, having every other Codex released as Space Marines A or B is getting a bit stale. They need to revamp those that need it and do it now, get every other race caught up and then worry about new stuff or variants of other stuff.

A release schedule that alternates Imperium with Non-Imperium would be nice. Or maybe only every 3rd Codex is Imperium based. Of course, once the Space Wolves Codex is out, that only leaves us with a need for a new Blood Angels Codex to really catch everything up. So, really, there shouldn't be much more Space Marine Codex spam in the future.

Okay, I intentionally left Dark Angels out to make people froth. Am I a bad person? Yes, I think they could do with an update, too. Some of their rules and points costs need to be adjusted and brought into 5th Edition. I know this :p

I don't think Lemartes should have been what unlocked Assault Squads as troops. Maybe taking a Captain or Chapter Master with a Jump Pack in the basic list should have. A Blood Angels SC could have given all the Units with Chapter Tactics Furious Charge, though. That would work. But then you are left with how to represent Death Company and do it right.

And yeah, Belial as a SC would have dealt with the DW issue. Sammael could have also been included, but with no need to unlock RW, since that had already been done. His being on a bike already takes care of that. (His LS is awesome, but it isn't needed)

Vaktathi
12-09-2009, 21:46
It really would solve a whole lot of problems.

First off, neither BT, DA nor BA army lists are different enough in terms of an army list from the vanilla list to warrant a different book. All you'd need is to include their characters in the basic book, and then specify "if this character is taken, X may be taken as troops, and the unit and/or army have Y abilities and Options". Done

The Space Wolves could have been fit in until they added a whole bunch of stuff in this upcoming release that wasn't in there before. They still could be if GW simply made a big SM book.


Honestly, if they did a massive $50 book for SM armies, that had all the lists, it really wouldn't be hard at all to fit in all the fluff and army lists for each individual loyalist SM army and still sell like hotcakes, while not taking up release and development time for other armies so we don't end up with DE again where there have been 13 SM books of varous kinds released without a new codex for them.


Honestly, it's pretty ridiculous that so many SM armies have their own books. Most of the variant SM books have less differences than many other army books can contain simply within each book. I can make far more varied and different armies with the IG book (both the current and previous ones) for instance than with the DA/BA/BT/UM books combined.

It's also silly because they represent a fighting force that really is insignificant in terms of the greater 40k universe. A couple thousand Black Templars are not going to be prevalent enough for most foes in the 40k universe to have even *heard* of them, much less see and fight them. Entire campaigns involving hundreds of worlds are fought without ever seeing a single Space Marine.

If the current range of SM books was shrunk to the following
Codex: Space Marines
Codex: Chaos Space Marines

As long as each book was done well and packed full of sublists and fluff, people would buy them and wouldn't hesitate to pay $50 for each book, excepting the little kiddies (which, at least from my experience, are not anywhere near as much of the market as GW thinks they are, it's really 17-30 year olds)

Gazak Blacktoof
12-09-2009, 21:48
I think that it would solve the issues with wargear so I voted yes. I don't particularly like the variant codexes available to marines, even those chapters that follow the Codex as penned by Guilliman seem to "need" a variant army book, I think that's unnecessary.

Space Wolves are the most different of the main chapters, but even so they could be placed in the same army book to avoid rules divergence between editions.

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 21:49
Chaplain Lemartes, allowing assault squads as troops, and one assault squad to be upgraded to feel no pain, would allow BA armies using the codex.

Last time i checked Assualt squads for BA's was a troop choice regardless.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:52
Last time i checked Assualt squads for BA's was a troop choice regardless.

His point was if they were SCs in a single Marine Codex, how to allow it to work.

And since when are BT not different enough from Codex Marines?:confused:

Corrode
12-09-2009, 21:53
Death Company actually isn't that hard.

Chaplain Lemartes - Chaplain cost + appropriate cost for stats + baked in cost for Death Company.

For every full unit of Space Marines (i.e. Tactical Squads, Assault Squads, Bike Squads, Veteran Squads, Terminator Squads, basically anything that's actually a Marine, excluding Scouts, vehicle crews, Dreadnoughts) gain 1 Death Company model, to a maximum of ten. Death Company as they are now, acting as a Retinue for Lemartes. They can purchase jump packs for +10pts per model (including Lemartes, obviously).

If Lemartes is killed at any point, the Death Company suffer from Rage beginning in the subsequent Blood Angel turn.

e: I still prefer the Chapters of Legend idea, which would make it easier to cost for Death Company rather than having to bake in an estimated cost for Lemartes and then having it either be underpowered or overpowered.

Urath
12-09-2009, 21:54
Mm, when you look at the Codex: Dark Angels; the vast majority of it, is telling you about the units in the book, which the regular Codex: Space Marines also does:

pg.1 - 23:
Rites and Initiation of a Space Marine, the Space Marines both don't need to stay. Eighteen out of twenty three pages here that would remain, covering Dark Angel history, organisation, battles and the 'Wings.

p.24 - 47:
is just fluff on Land Speeders, Rhinos, Space Marine units etc - it's already in the main book, so it's not needed. However, the four pages on Deathwing and Ravenwing and the page each on Interrogator Chaplains and the Special Characters would stay as well as the Company Master entry, because they do act differently to Captains. So that's ten pages out of twenty two that would stay. Adding Squad Leader upgrades like Naaman, Bethor and bringing back Asmodai would be another three pages, plus their rules.

So far, that's 28 pages.

p.48 - 52:
Wargear. It's all in the regular codex, so it isn't needed.

p.53:
Armour. It's in the regular codex, maybe so it isn't needed.

p.54 - 55:
Other Equipment. I can see this remaining, not for what it currently is, but for Dark Angel specific wargear, upgrades and relics.

30 pages so far.

p.56 - 71:
Tactics, painting/miniatures showcase. Of thise size, it isn't really needed. Cut off a few pages and cram in extra fluff about the Chapter and successors. I'd say this amount would remain, but out of sixteen pages at least a quarter for extra fluff.

46 pages so far.

p.72 - 75:
Successors. Remain, but largely fluff.

50 pages.

p.76 - 88
Unit stats. Not needed, as it's in codex:space marines. maybe keep a couple of pages for the unique units and a few added unique units, or changed statlines due to rules etc. But only like four pages.

54 pages
excluding front and back cover. Thats shaving off thirty four pages of crap, basically. The book still has it's core of fluff and the extra stuff without penalizing any other race of buyer.

What do you think?

Edit: ninja'd so many times it is unreal.

Surgency
12-09-2009, 21:55
It really would solve a whole lot of problems.

First off, neither BT, DA nor BA army lists are different enough in terms of an army list from the vanilla list to warrant a different book. All you'd need is to include their characters in the basic book, and then specify "if this character is taken, X may be taken as troops, and the unit and/or army have Y abilities and Options". Done

While we're at it, lets roll CSM in also. After all, they're still marines, right? We'll just throw in a couple more characters, give a few "alternative" unit types (we can call them demons, or marine serfs, or something altogether interesting), and a couple more rules. Add 5 more pages for fluff, and voila! we're good.


Hell, lets go a step farther, and throw in Sisters, and Grey Knights! After all, they're still in power armor, right? Not all that much different. 2-3 more special characters each, another half dozen pages...... Done.



While we're at it, lets incorporate Necrons. Since, you know, the statlines are mostly the same... 3+ save, 4/4/4/4, all that... Another character or two, we'll have to add some "unique" names to the unit titles, we'll call it "SM Tactical Squad, or CSM Squad, or Sister Squad, or Grey Knight Squad, or Necron Unit" We'll need smaller font, but overall it'll work for consolidation purposes.





Now that we've done that with SM, lets take a look at other codecies. Eldar/Dark eldar can be combined easily. Adding a few pages, and a few new rules, we can throw Tau in there, probably IG as well.... We can call this one Codex: Xenos 1... As for the others, well, we can get creative, throw Orks, Tyranids, and Daemons into a codex, few extra rules, few extra options, background pages, and we have Codex: Assault Xenos.

Cognitave
12-09-2009, 21:56
I voted no.

The Codex and army limitations should be stricter for the Dark Angels, because if you combine them with the regular Codex:SM, you're risking any SM army getting troop choice Terminators. I admire the people who play Dark Angels for the army, but I don't want to see everyone getting termy troops. It detracts from the terminator fluff and from the Deathwing fluff.




The Space Wolves could have been fit in until they added a whole bunch of stuff in this upcoming release that wasn't in there before. They still could be if GW simply made a big SM book.


Honestly, if they did a massive $50 book for SM armies, that had all the lists, it really wouldn't be hard at all to fit in all the fluff and army lists for each individual loyalist SM army and still sell like hotcakes, while not taking up release and development time for other armies so we don't end up with DE again where there have been 13 SM books of varous kinds released without a new codex for them.

It's also silly because they represent a fighting force that really is insignificant in terms of the greater 40k universe. A couple thousand Black Templars are not going to be prevalent enough for most foes in the 40k universe to have even *heard* of them, much less see and fight them. Entire campaigns involving hundreds of worlds are fought without ever seeing a single Space Marine.

Yes. Let's make a book that encourages power gaming. That's a great idea. When anyone can take a "Dark Angel" army from one book and trow in Terminator troops, have Chronos in their tanks, and Telion in their scouts, and why not have Chaplain Cassius running around with Belial. Even with all the Chaos units united with Plot Armor from GW (although it may be Carapace Armor...), there's no possible way for them to explain the kind of monstrosities you can create from the "Joint Marine" codex. I thought it was bad enough when they didn't put any restrictions on any of the special characters, enough for me not to want to play any vanilla marines. All you can go from there is farther and farther down hill.

stonehorse
12-09-2009, 21:56
I think if GW did a better job of the Traits system that was in the 4th edition Codex, then there wouldn't be a need for as many Space Marine Codexes as we are going to see.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 21:57
Yeah, but then you almost have to use Lemartes. Although, I don't there are Death Company in every battle the Blood Angels show up to and you can pretend he is Generic BA Chaplain B. Give him an option to either have a Jump Pack or not. And allow him the option of purchasing a Rhino if he and his 'escort' opt out on the Jump Packs. See, that is workable. So, we can fit Blood Angels and Dark Angels into the Codex Marines codex, but that still leaves Space Wolves and Black Templars.

@Cognitive: All Marines should be allowed to have Troop Termies. That isn't like some special Dark Angel power. Just about every Chapter can field Terminators. And they can do it en masse, too. And this goes for people who think that Planetstrike is also unfair and hurt your wittle feewings because Space Marines can field a bunch of Terminators and your thunder isn't so loud anymore. So?

But, I also agree with too many Special Characters enables too many powergaming options. Keeping some of the Special Characters separated in different Codices can prevent some forms of abuse.

JHZ
12-09-2009, 21:58
Yes, it would be a good idea. Guess what else was a good idea? Communism.

GW loves their money too much to **** off their biggest demographic. But you know what'll happen when they squeeze 4 codexes into one? A whole lotta internet nerd rage, and maybe someone says they gonna quit for good. No one's gonna walk away from their 10,000pts. Dark Angels they've been collecting since it was possible. They'll bitch and moan, but in the end they'll either get come special characters and tell themselves "it's no biggy, just something to get over the rough spot", or they play their army as they wish, as a fluffy thing that just isn't as good as the one they'd get if they just used the codex as it plays out the best.

But all GW sees is sales and they're afraid of any drop, no matter how temporary.

Corrode
12-09-2009, 21:58
You're aware that codices for Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Black Templars (and Salamanders, since they were in Codex: Armageddon along with the BT) predate the Traits system from 4th edition, right?

e: Lothlanorian, I was approaching that idea as being 'Lemartes is the archetype of a Blood Angels Chaplain and if you want a unique one you use counts-as' much like the current crop of Marine characters have to do, as well as BA Successors.

Surgency
12-09-2009, 22:00
You're aware that codices for Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Black Templars (and Salamanders, since they were in Codex: Armageddon along with the BT) predate the Traits system from 4th edition, right?

Most people have never even seen the Angels of Death book, what was that, RT era, just before second ed? Hell, I can't even remember

Vaktathi
12-09-2009, 22:06
And since when are BT not different enough from Codex Marines?:confused:

Vows, the Emperors Champion, mixed scout/Tac squads, and Righteous Zeal, Fearless in CC, and some Vets skills for Sword brethren.That's pretty much everything right?

That really could all be fit into a basic SM codex. "Take BT Character X for Z points, you army now has Righteous Zeal in exchange for Combat Tactics, is Fearless in CC, has access to Vows, and the following units change in Y ways."

Corrode
12-09-2009, 22:06
Most people have never even seen the Angels of Death book, what was that, RT era, just before second ed? Hell, I can't even remember

Even ignoring Angels of Death (which was 2nd edition), there was Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Space Wolves in minidex format during 3rd edition. This is WarSeer, though, so the 4th edition Traits system was the best thing ever and fully capable of curing both AIDS and cancer if GW had just stuck by it, dammit!

stonehorse
12-09-2009, 22:08
You're aware that codices for Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Black Templars (and Salamanders, since they were in Codex: Armageddon along with the BT) predate the Traits system from 4th edition, right?

Well, since I have been playing 40K since 2nd edition I hope I am. Anyway what is the relevance of knowing this?

The Trait system was a very good idea; just GW didn't plan it out that well, with some of the drawbacks being quite frankly laughable. Or better yet, do what they did with the latest Blood Angels Codex, do them as a White Dwarf and downloadable PDF article. Have a standalone Space Marine Codex, and have the articles work alongside said Codex.

As it is, certain armies in 40K are having a hard time waiting for a update, while various Space Marines are getting all the attention from GW, I know it may sound like heresy, but not all people like Space Marines... and have no interest in collecting them.

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 22:12
p.56 - 71:
Tactics, painting/miniatures showcase. Of thise size, it isn't really needed. Cut off a few pages and cram in extra fluff about the Chapter and successors. I'd say this amount would remain, but out of sixteen pages at least a quarter for extra fluff.


Just that the tactic and painting miniture showcase is on of the key things that helps sell the Codices to kids no pictures = lack of interest for kids.
So how many pages of painted armies will be needed??

Urath
12-09-2009, 22:15
Aye, not delete it completely. But it is a bit excessive.

Lothlanathorian
12-09-2009, 22:15
Even ignoring Angels of Death (which was 2nd edition), there was Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Space Wolves in minidex format during 3rd edition. This is WarSeer, though, so the 4th edition Traits system was the best thing ever and fully capable of curing both AIDS and cancer if GW had just stuck by it, dammit!


Sigging you, my friend. This is pretty much auto-win.

Ditch the BT vows, put in Scouts are purchased as part of Tac Squads, which may now be Bolter or BP/CCW euipped and no heavy weapons. Emperor's Champion is Chapter Champion, already covered by the main list. That would work. And have the SC, as you said, grant them Stubborn or Fearless, one of the two and lose Combat Tactics. That works.

Now, could we make the Space Wolves work?

Vaktathi
12-09-2009, 22:16
I voted no.

The Codex and army limitations should be stricter for the Dark Angels, because if you combine them with the regular Codex:SM, you're risking any SM army getting troop choice Terminators. I admire the people who play Dark Angels for the army, but I don't want to see everyone getting termy troops. It detracts from the terminator fluff and from the Deathwing fluff.


Well, Space Wolves are getting them.



Yes. Let's make a book that encourages power gaming. That's a great idea. When anyone can take a "Dark Angel" army from one book and trow in Terminator troops, have Chronos in their tanks, and Telion in their scouts, and why not have Chaplain Cassius running around with Belial. Even with all the Chaos units united with Plot Armor from GW (although it may be Carapace Armor...), there's no possible way for them to explain the kind of monstrosities you can create from the "Joint Marine" codex. I thought it was bad enough when they didn't put any restrictions on any of the special characters, enough for me not to want to play any vanilla marines. All you can go from there is farther and farther down hill.
Our you know, they could put a modicum of thought into it and restrict what all could be taken with each character. It really wouldn't be that hard.

It's not as though they don't already have the ability to field Lysander and Shrike in the same army. That and Telion/Chronos were designed to be a template for a ubiquitous upgrade unit, not really Chapter Specific characters, just as Bastogne was not really designed just to be taken in Cadian armies, but any IG Army.



While we're at it, lets roll CSM in also. After all, they're still marines, right? We'll just throw in a couple more characters, give a few "alternative" unit types (we can call them demons, or marine serfs, or something altogether interesting), and a couple more rules. Add 5 more pages for fluff, and voila! we're good. Step off it, really. On the other side I could go off an ask for individual books for World Eaters, Night Lords, Word Bearers, Iron Warriors, Thousand Sons, books for Catachan regiments, books for Mordian regiments, books for Death Korps regiments, books for Cadian regiments, etc, Individual Craftworld books, books for Leviathan, Kraken and Behemoth hive fleets, and more.

Most of these would play much differently than many of the individual SM books do from each other.

Really, the vast majority of what makes the loyalist marine books different is simply the extra fluff. Most of the army lists are cut/paste jobs from the basic SM book. It wouldn't be hard at all to combine all the basic loyalist SM armies

Corrode
12-09-2009, 22:18
The last 5 releases organised by date:

Imperial Guard - May 2009
Space Marines - October 2008
Chaos Daemons - May 2008
Orks - January 2008
Chaos Space Marines - September 2007

Hrm, that's 1 Space Marine book, 2 Chaos books, 1 Imperial book, 1 Xenos book. Prior to that, the releases go:

Blood Angels (pdf) - June/July 2007
Dark Angels - March 2007
Eldar - November 2006
Tau - March 2006
Black Templars - November 2005
Tyranids - June 2005

3 Xenos, 3 Marine Chapters (one of which is done as a White Dwarf PDF). At the time, Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters were less than 3 years old (well within the expected lifetime of a Codex) and Necrons were 4 years old, whilst the previous BA/DA codices were 9 and 8 years old respectively, and referenced a different book from the current Codex: Space Marines. Who needed the update more, exactly? The only books older than the BA and DA, at the time, belonged to the Space Wolves (who still haven't been updated, at least until October) and the Dark Eldar (who truly do deserve it, 'second printing' be damned).

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 22:19
So how many pages of painted armies will be needed??
In my opinion:

- a two-page spread of Marines painted up in various chapter colours
- two pages of characters and converted minis of various chapters
- two pages of action shots of chapters they have the nicest painted minis of
- DONE! The rest is what the White Dwarf is (was) for.

Urath
12-09-2009, 22:21
Yeah, that sounds about right to me too.

senorcardgage
12-09-2009, 22:27
I think the book would be tooooooooo big!

JHZ
12-09-2009, 22:28
Vows, the Emperors Champion, mixed scout/Tac squads, and Righteous Zeal, Fearless in CC, and some Vets skills for Sword brethren.That's pretty much everything right?
Oh, please, that's nothing. Shall we look all that the Guard and Eldar have lost with the transition from several lists into one codex? Where's my different craftworld lists? Why is there no difference between a Cadian, Catachan and Armageddon armies anymore? Where's all my special stuff, huh?

Besides, where's Ultramarine Tyranid War Veterans? Where's my sonic tanks and terminators? Where are my Ork Loota armies and Speed Freaks?

Vows? Vow all you like. Emperor's Champion? How about Regimental Champion (if my Tyranid Vets are good enough to be Sternguard, your champion is good enough to be a champion by any other name)? Neophytes? How about Scouts? Just keep them close to your tactical Marines and pretend they're serving them. Vet skills for Sword Brethren? How about vet skills for my CSM? Righteous Zeal? You telling me the BT are the only righteous chapter in the galaxy? Goes with the vows, have all the zeal and make as much vows as you like brother, I won't stop you. I shall vows to destroy you too and have excellent zeal to do it too.

Or maybe make it a Chapter Tactic. High Marchal what's-his-name, who gives your army Fearless in CC and Zeal, and the unit he gets one vow, which he confers to his unit.

PsyberWolf
12-09-2009, 22:30
Now that we've done that with SM, lets take a look at other codecies. Eldar/Dark eldar can be combined easily.

Amen! Dark Eldar could just be a few pages tacked onto the end of the next Eldar codex.

Surgency
12-09-2009, 22:39
I think the book would be tooooooooo big!

Nah, if the SM codex is anything to go by, they'd only add 1 page of fluff for BA/DA/SW/BT, maybe 1-2 pages of special characters, and the rest of the book would be about the Ultras

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 22:40
Just stepping in before this heats up! (Yes I know you internet types! :p)
This thread is purely hypothetical, it almost surely is of no consequence!

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 22:41
In my opinion:

- DONE! The rest is what the White Dwarf is (was) for.

Except Eavy Metal is very much none existant these days.

ROFLMAO@ your above post.

Imperius
12-09-2009, 22:42
Most chapters that follow the Index Astartes could be easily fitted into the codex with their own chapter of an entire book, but those who deviate from it are completely and utterly different in everything from fluff to playstyle and would completely not fit into the book at all.

Its difficult enough to bring new blood into the game, but to confuse them with an infinite list or rules and their own sub-rules would be beyond belief.

Onisuzume
12-09-2009, 22:46
Undecided.

I'd depend a *lot* on how the codex were to be done.

If it'd be done like the current SM codex: then the only reason why I'd buy it would be so I could defecate on it. --- Requiring the use of special characters to make an army play like a specific chapter is, imo, stupid. Not only does it mean that you'll *always* see that special character in a specific chapter's army list, but it'll also mean that those lists will almost always try to take advantage of that special character's chapter-wide benefit.

Advantages/Disadvantages like the previous codex *might* work, provided that it is extended upon a lot. It'd require a lot more different unit choices, but with not all of them being available to a "vanilla chapter". Existing chapters should probably be given a slight advantage over DIY-chapters. Like having a number of unit choices altered/added for for the "big four" chapters (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Puppies, Ultrasmurfs). The BT would be declared excommunicate traitoris and would thus have to use the CMS codex. The downside of this is that there would be a lot to keep track of.

Mini-codices could work as well. Give them a codex that is still about the same size as they are now, but with more pages spend on background, special rules and unique units/wargear. The downside of this would be having to buy two codices (I doubt that GW would see this as a disadvantage though, more money to them).

Last there's the option of having the standard codex plus all the mini-codices in a single book. More or less like the old 2nd edition Codex: Angels of Death would mean having a codex consisting of hundreds of pages to accomendate all the background, unique units/wargear and full-colour pages (C:AoD had 60 pages/chapter). The downside would probably be the huge development time required to make everything balanced. Or rather, making sure that all famous chapters are represented enough (finaly a "real" codex: white scars, salamanders, imperial fists, etc.). The actual army list section of each chapter would mostly be an "add-on" to the basic vanilla chapter list (which would probably listed first in the codex). Ofcourse, that would mean we'd probably have to cough up £100 or more for a single codex of over 600 pages (assuming 60 pages/chapter). It'd be at least twice as large as the basic rule book and it'd have to be hardcover to endure regular use.

grissom2006
12-09-2009, 22:47
How very true Imperius.

As i posted earlier the Codex would be more open to abuse and as it is i see enough kids abuse it not understanding it and thinking they have it correct in how it works.

The Guy
12-09-2009, 22:56
Didn't read all of this but here's my take:

I'd like to see it done, or as another good idea was put forward, have one generic and another for the varients. Although IMO the chapters aren't individual enough to even warrant a slightly larger codex:

Dark angels - Ride bikes and wear better armour occasionally. OK just have an option where you can field these as troops.

Blood angels - Go a bit crazy, have those black armoured guys and more jetpacks. Well, you could purchase a special rule for your models that gives them furious charge, but has a chance of making them fall to that thing they do.

Space Wolves - Well, they're just hairier aren't they?

Black templars - I honestly see nothing that separates them other then having different names for stuff.

That's like, 6-7 tweeks you can make and would let you have any chapter you like.

And if GW can put a background for every famous IG producing planet on eight pages then they can do it for space marine chapters! :mad:

Surgency
12-09-2009, 23:00
Black templars - I honestly see nothing that separates them other then having different names for stuff.

So..... Mixed squads is what everyone is doing nowadays? And I don't even play BT!

The Guy
12-09-2009, 23:02
So..... Mixed squads is what everyone is doing nowadays? And I don't even play BT!

Oh yes they have neophytes. Well that's just a simple upgrade you could buy for any tactical squad really.

Surgency
12-09-2009, 23:05
Oh yes they have neophytes. Well that's just a simple upgrade you could buy for any tactical squad really.

So you're fine with something that ONLY BT uses being used in all SM armies? especially something that goes against fluff for every other army but BT? That would make Tac squads pretty nasty, considering the new wound allocation rules...

JHZ
12-09-2009, 23:08
Or, you know, just use Scouts as Neophytes. What do you loose in that, other than having a mixed unit? Does it somehow break the fluff when the Neophytes aren't nose deep in their butts all the time?

The Guy
12-09-2009, 23:14
So you're fine with something that ONLY BT uses being used in all SM armies? especially something that goes against fluff for every other army but BT? That would make Tac squads pretty nasty, considering the new wound allocation rules...

I am just saying that small rules like that are not enough to warrant an entire codex being dedicated to one chapter and that it would be no loss [to me anyway] if such small rules were explained on a page titled "Black Templars special rules" in C:SM.
IG lost their Catachan spinoff
Orks got merged with their speed freaks
Chaos got lumped together and lost LaTD
Why can't Space marines have the same?
Anyone remember the Armageddon 'dex? It had Black templars and Salamanders covering about 10 pages in total. It can be done, it would probably sell more then each one individually and wouldn't harm model sales.

Urath
12-09-2009, 23:17
It would be *********** expensive and I wouldn't be willing to pay.

TheLionReturns
12-09-2009, 23:19
Well I agree with others who think this will never happen for business reasons. However, I would not be opposed to one big codex with one key condition. It could not be a codex ultramarines. I really feel sorry for players of other chapters who don't have their own codex and simply get a page or less of fluff in C:SM next to the excessive and at times rather silly coverage ultramarines get.

The way I could envisage it working is one big army list and only the common fluff included (ie making of a Space Marine, unit profiles etc). Alongside this there would be a series of background books released which each give in depth background of a first founding chapter and their successors, as well as a painting and modeling section.

Eulenspiegel
12-09-2009, 23:32
It could not be a codex ultramarines.
This is the basic premise, yes. Ultramarines would get no more of a coverage than Dark Angels or Space Wolves.


Alongside this there would be a series of background books released which each give in depth background of a first founding chapter and their successors, as well as a painting and modeling section.
Well, maybe. But not as required gaming aid a la the codices. I´d rather see that in the White Dwarves (boosting the sales of that magazine ... hey, I smell a harmonious solution ...).

grissom2006
13-09-2009, 00:04
Alongside this there would be a series of background books released which each give in depth background of a first founding chapter and their successors, as well as a painting and modeling section.

So why would a person by a single Codex and then by yet another book in order to find out about the Chapter they've decided to do. By printing individual books in top of the Codex to get the background, history colour schemes and all the rest means extra expense to the customer. Now yes GW is out to make money, but to cover the 8 1st Founding Chapters. They'll have to go to the expense of writing 8 books 8 sets of army pictures 8 lots of various artwork then all the printing charges for 8 books. GW's target group is mostly KIDS and as such they don't have bottomless pockets with lots of cash to spend. We all know how many already complain about the increased costs we bare for our hobby only got to of looked and the shear numbers of people who moaned about the price of Space Hulk.

The one SM Codex works fine and the Few variation SM Codices make for a far cheaper option over all. The 5 that they have are a far Cheaper option than the 9 that you propose.

Corrode
13-09-2009, 00:11
It's not like 'a series of background books' is a new idea - you may have heard of the Index Astartes books. Another run of that series, but much-expanded, would be interesting to see.

Logarithm Udgaur
13-09-2009, 00:13
I voted one codex to rule them all.

Sure some of the flavor would be sucked out, but that has been steadily happening for years now. So far all that has happened is an increase in whining. The only chapter that seems to be significantly divergent from the Guilliman Codex is Spacewolves. Even they could be easily rolled in, just give them (and only them) access to their special toys, just like the other "special" chapters. Limiting SC to one per army (maybe two), and having them unlock the special stuff for their chapter would presumably keep people from feilding codex:everychapteratonce.

My main reason for voting 1 codex is because I am a vindictive d1ck and would like to see how SM players like it for once.

Zaonite
13-09-2009, 00:15
I voted for having separate codices.

I've seen it suggested here once or twice that we should have a main book that represents all near enough Codex Astartes obedient chapters and then others which build upon it for the divergent ones.

IMO space wolves are just vanilla marines with counter attack and furious charge special rules. Which is all a divergent chapter should be. Just add special rules.

It's like making a pot noodle; just add hot water and change the powder for the different flavours.

Petay1985
13-09-2009, 00:28
In an ideal world i'd like to see all sects, cults, chapters, factions and army varients from every race get their own dedicated book with detailed model range, all equally balanced on a perfect system of rules with equal coverage, devotion and future development...

...until then i'm just going to keep having fun with the tools at my disposal!! :)

EDIT: i voted 'stupid idea'

Bunnahabhain
13-09-2009, 00:40
One marine book, if done well would be a good idea. It's also unlikey to happen.

I actually want, in an ideal world, more marine books. And more everybody else books.

I would like to see all the codexs split into 2 sections- nicely made background book, and black and white pamphlet (available in store, at minimal cost)/ PDF available for free on the GW website, of the actual rules for the army.Makes it much easier, cheaper and quicker to update /errata the rules, doesn't invalidate the background book.

Of course,t his doesn't work with the current GW release schedule model.

Hood
13-09-2009, 00:47
For more fluff, theme, chapter character etc. I'd say every chapter should have their own codex, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

Unfortunatelly since other races and have a general codex allowing them multiple combos of units which ultimately lead to certain powerlists, I'd say there should be one Codex for Spacemarines allowing them to create more competitive and versatile lists.

Personally I prefer style over how competitive a chapter is... Having a universal codex will simply take out much of the fluff and character each chapter has to offer...

I'd prefer that every chapter, craftworld, chaos chapter, ork clans etc... would have their own denstictive codex with special rules, ups and downs and special characters each with a background story. But ofcourse this is only daydreaming! :)

Draquenoire
13-09-2009, 01:07
I voted for putting all Space Marines under one codex. Its hardly impossible to do and I just never seen the point of SMs needing a billion different codices. Just my own opinion though. But I'm all for SM spam if it keeps GW afloat, I have too much fun with GW's games to get that petty.

Condottiere
13-09-2009, 01:09
In an earlier thread, I mentioned a single Codex would be a great idea, but the response was that it's a way for GW to earn money. Personally, I'd rather have them all in a single Codex, in the same sense I like to see all the tanks of WWII in a single book.

DuskRaider
13-09-2009, 01:17
I voted yes for one codex. I find it a bit ridiculous that we need to have around 4 separate codices for Space Marines. What's even worse (and actually quite insulting) is that these same folks in favor of all of these codices are the ones who decry the idea of Chaos Legions having separate codices.

Truthfully, the only difference between Space Wolves and Codex Marines is GW making up a couple different rules and options for them. The same goes for Blood Angels, Black Templar, and so on and so forth. While on the other hand, the Chaos Legions are COMPLETELY different. They have no Codex Astartes to abide by. They worship different Gods or have completely different organization.

Let's put it this way... If Chaos only deserves one Codex, then the same should be said for Space Marines, considering they have less variation then their dark brothers.

Kburn
13-09-2009, 01:24
I play BA, and I think its a great idea. Why does my rhino not have any entry or fire points? Why does a faction of super-space marines(you heard that right!) have a gun that cannot fire as many shots as the one from normal space marines? Why does my land raider fit less people than a normal space marine's?

Multiple codecii create too much contradictions. One codex to rule them all is great, on the condition that it has to be 2-3 times thicker than the current C:SM to fit in all the fluff and additional units.

I can see it being done, list all units and costs (even death company, wolf riders, etc.) for the first half, the second half is the 'armylist' half, what you can take, what you can't take, what army-wide special rules, etc. That way, even if your basic troops, say, grey hunters, have nothing to do with the normal tac. squads, you have some similar units, like rhinos, drop pods, land raiders, weaponary, etc. that are still the same....

That said, I think many non-codex players would rage-quit the game, which would mean bad news for GW, which would mean bad news for us :(

grissom2006
13-09-2009, 01:33
I voted yes for one codex. I find it a bit ridiculous that we need to have around 4 separate codices for Space Marines. What's even worse (and actually quite insulting) is that these same folks in favor of all of these codices are the ones who decry the idea of Chaos Legions having separate codices.

Never once done such a thing in my life and the sooner GW pulls it's finger out and gets on with doing them ones as well the better. My Slaanesh army is crying out for Havocs armed with Slaanesh Weapons not Heavy Bolters Lascannons etc..

TheLionReturns
13-09-2009, 01:33
So why would a person by a single Codex and then by yet another book in order to find out about the Chapter they've decided to do.

I imagine it would appeal to those who are interested in the background. The kind of people who bought Liber Chaotica, or the Empire Uniforms & Heraldry book. Even perhaps those who simply read the odd black library novel. GW seems to have a pretty good track record in selling fluff only products.

I can understand where you are coming from, in that it seems a bit unfair to expect a customer to pay again just to get some background when previously it was included in the price. I just feel that one of the costs of having a single codex is that there isn't enough room to do all chapters justice in terms of the fluff. Its important to consider that we may have to accept that we will have a weaker product in terms of background or have to pay extra to get the background to the detail we wish if we want a combined codex.

I personally would sooner have the option of buying such background sources, than see my chapters background diminished just so we can rush through codex updates in a shorter time period. Also you get the bonus of these being far improved sources of fluff than has previously existed.

I'm a DA player and the fluff was crucial in dragging me back to the hobby to revisit my army after a long break. Its not massively important to me because I have the background I need (although more would of course be welcome) and I can make up the rest myself. Newer players, however, will be denied this immersing aspect of the hobby if the background is neglected and IMO it would be a mistake on GW's part.


It's not like 'a series of background books' is a new idea - you may have heard of the Index Astartes books. Another run of that series, but much-expanded, would be interesting to see.

I do not, of course, claim any originality here and do remember that series. I enjoyed them and am thinking of something more detailed as you say. Also you could have good quality modeling sections with painting guides, and perhaps some scenarios and campaign ideas to recreate famous engagements. There really is quite a bit of potential in the idea to be explored if GW chose to do so.

Hellebore
13-09-2009, 01:41
It isn't hard to do.

Here is a one page document that turns the current SM codex into the 3rd edition Space Wolf codex I created.

However, GW are DETERMINED to make single chapters as important as whole races. 1000 warriors given the same status a billion.

Thus, the new space wolf codex with all sorts of additional units never before in the codex, for no other reason than to try and justify its existence as a seperate book.

I dread to see how much they muck around with the DA and BA to justify newer codicies. Blood Bloodson and Dark Darkson riding Blood and Dark Angels into battle.

Because, if the space wolves, the so called 'most divergent' marine chapter can be summed up in a single page, the DA and BA will barely require a mention.

Hellebore

grissom2006
13-09-2009, 01:41
The Index Astartes books we're good but they also didn't make GW that much money as only hardcore fans ever bought them and not the newbies to the game. We all know full well that GW when it comes to the Experienced gamers and hobbiest well come pretty low. Mainly due to the fact alot of what the redo and less as new to newbies we already have as such why would we buy it again. We don't bin our collections everytime they do something new newbies will buy a bunches of the new SW's coming out us older players with large SW's will either by the odd bit or nothing at all the only part we'll all get is the Codex.

Liking the pdf Hellebore :D

My concern is you place this and lots of these mini list modifications into a single tome you come to write you list. You'll go backwards and forwards to the list then back to the reference of what you can can't have, add this on take away that etc.. Makes it more time consuming to check the lists wargear points etc.. I've been a judge in tournies and it's why we hate allied armies like DH & WH as we have to look in one place then another.

starlight
13-09-2009, 01:48
You describe *some* veterans, but by no means *all* (or even a majority) of them...

DuskRaider
13-09-2009, 01:53
Never once done such a thing in my life and the sooner GW pulls it's finger out and gets on with doing them ones as well the better. My Slaanesh army is crying out for Havocs armed with Slaanesh Weapons not Heavy Bolters Lascannons etc..

I wasn't naming any individuals, Grissom, so nothing was directed at you, friend. It was a generalization and I saw at least one person posted something to that effect in this thread already.

I've been seeing it said for a while on Warseer, and I'm a bit tired of the hypocracy.

ehlijen
13-09-2009, 01:57
I am seriously of the opinion that the space marine chapters are not different enough to warrant seperate codices apart from loyal/chaos.

Making your chapter unique used to be about simply wanting it to be unique and building the army as such. No rules were required. Just look at what the white scars used to be in the 3rd ed codex: just a space marine army with more fast attack than most other players would take.

Not even the wolves are different enough to warrant their own codex, provided the one codex simply has enough freedom of choice (the current one is pretty much there, just add baals and a few more special characters if need be). They are not space wolves because all their army list entries have 'wolf-'. They are space wolves because the owner builds, paints and calls them such. Because at the end of the day, they're really just 4 statlines in power armour with bolters.

"See this chaplain with a wolf pelt? That's my wolf priest!"
"See those sternguard with the wolf claws? Those are my wolf guard!"
It doesn't need more than that to make it wolfy. It's all in how you wish to see your army. The rules are just crutches.

Buuuuut, that's not going to happen. Too many people have by now latched on to specific rules and will never let them go again citing 'background' for doing so...

Lars Porsenna
13-09-2009, 02:00
Yes, I think it can be (should be) done, and it doesn't even need to be a monster book either. One of the things I see about current GW codicies is the amount of wasted space. The current codex has 45 pages of just fluff and special rules on marine units, then duplicates this in another 20 pages at the end. If GW can condense the list portion with the special rules/fluff portion, you can easily get enough units in to cover many of the other chapters, and you can even cover others besides DA/BA/BT; all it requires is something like SM traits that were in the previous codex (a better one IMHO) and you're golden. I also think current codicies are inefficient in their use of white space, as well as the handling of fluff, but that's perhaps a discussion for another time.

Damon.

grissom2006
13-09-2009, 02:07
Lars you saying to go back to the old Codex model that gave us zero fluff/background what so ever and proved to be one of GW's biggest mistakes ever. They got so many complaints over those and it dominated the lectures that they'd do as people would ask wheres the background gone etc..

Hellebore
13-09-2009, 02:17
Liking the pdf Hellebore :D

My concern is you place this and lots of these mini list modifications into a single tome you come to write you list. You'll go backwards and forwards to the list then back to the reference of what you can can't have, add this on take away that etc.. Makes it more time consuming to check the lists wargear points etc.. I've been a judge in tournies and it's why we hate allied armies like DH & WH as we have to look in one place then another.

Well, it was more an example of how even the most divergent chapter is still basically just space marines.

I'm not sure there would be an easier way to do it.

I suppose the actual army list could have 'convert to space wolf for X pts' in each entry, but you'd have 4 or 5 of them in each one, making the army lists pretty unwieldy (although looking at the guard codex they don't seem to care about that...:p).

If you put 4 or 5 of those pages at the end or beginning of the actual army list then it should reduce the amount of flipping required.

Hellebore

TheDarkDuke
13-09-2009, 02:59
Of course I'd like it. Unfortunately, it would mean the death of 40k. As much as I hate all these Marines codices, they're what keeps the game alive.

The problem comes from the playerbase : too many kids who think it's cool to play Superman in space.

Yet based off of looking at dedicated gamers via forums like this, and there project logs... they are dominated by all kinds of power armor armies. With great care in painting and conversions. I think the comment of too many kids just does not ring true. If the majority of project logs (really are dominated my dedicated none brand new gamers (wait there is the other problem with your stance). They release so much SM based off of sales. How many people don't play but paint? How many veterans have thousands of dollars of space marine models versus hundreds of other races, compared to the noob who has at best hundreds in space marines?

Now we are discussing the codex not the gaming, not the models. How many people purchase the codex out of simple want to read fluff? How many purchase it to know the enemy? How many people buy it for the artwork? How many people buy it just to have all the codex? How many people buy it as they have a different SM army and simply want to see this one? My bet is more fall into this category then those who purchase it to actually game with.

I know personally I own a ton of codex and army books that I do not have a single model for. Why? Many combinations of what I listed above. Oh I only don't own Daemons 40k, Empire and Wood Elf for Fantasy. I just like to read them, see the armies, make up ideas for possible long term army ideas, or just for the sake of having them.

With this said at $30 CDN a codex/army book I feel its perhaps a bit pricey for what I am getting but not enough for me to say don't want. Im lucky enough I can afford to do this. If they released something for all SM's in one book think of the cost. Either they ding you the same for each codex in one cover so for SM your looking at $120 not counting BA. How many people now can't afford to get there codex? Lets say they lower the price to that of the main rule book. Again to play one would need to spend too much money, and GW sales drop as instead of selling as an example 100 $30 codex they sell only 25 at $80 codex. They just lost $1000 in sales. Now multiple that by several Marine codex.

Hellebore
13-09-2009, 03:10
Children are hardly likely to come onto gaming forums and starting photo logs about their newest space marines.

And if GW is only surviving on its space marines then that says far more about their incompetence in marketing their other products than anything else.

Hellebore

JHZ
13-09-2009, 03:32
Children are hardly likely to come onto gaming forums and starting photo logs about their newest space marines.

And if GW is only surviving on its space marines then that says far more about their incompetence in marketing their other products than anything else.
Maybe that's why we don't have plastic Thunderhawk yet? GW is trying to spread their market shares around. After all, how many Marine Players field 9 Land Raiders? Not many, but IG has 9 Land Raider priced vehicles that are just itching to be used. And the more people buy them, more GW makes money out of IG stuff. Same with Baneblades. They must have sold well, since they even came out with a second kit. And then there's the battlewagon and stompa kits. Clearly GW is adding support to other armies to dig their way out of the Marine hole they've dug for themselves.

Or that's my tin foil hat theory on GW economics.

Hellebore
13-09-2009, 03:48
Maybe that's why we don't have plastic Thunderhawk yet? GW is trying to spread their market shares around. After all, how many Marine Players field 9 Land Raiders? Not many, but IG has 9 Land Raider priced vehicles that are just itching to be used. And the more people buy them, more GW makes money out of IG stuff. Same with Baneblades. They must have sold well, since they even came out with a second kit. And then there's the battlewagon and stompa kits. Clearly GW is adding support to other armies to dig their way out of the Marine hole they've dug for themselves.

Or that's my tin foil hat theory on GW economics.

I hope so. The other armies of 40k are each interesting in their own right, but are simply drowned in 'mareenz roxxor' propaganda.

When you think about it, playing orks is like having an entire army of the Hulk - big, green, angry, hard to kill, and get bigger the more they fight. :p

GW uses the above kind of marketing to sell space marines - genetically enhanced super soldiers, best at everything, live for ages, spit acid etc.

You can do it for pretty much every army, but GW have so far done it only for marines.

Hell, with the anime soaked generation we have today, eldar would be a sure bet. They are all long haired girly men with a tortured past. They master the 10 million arts of awesomeness and eventually reach a stat of perfection that fuses them to their armour and makes them pretty much immortal.

They are all pretty, skinny, and can do sommersaults while chopping you with their katan...er I mean wierd alien swords.

Hellebore

incarna
13-09-2009, 04:01
I believe the Space Marine faction codex should be united into one comprehensive codex capable of depicting all chapters and providing the ability to make unique chapters.

I believe the doctrines concept from the old codex was an excellent idea poorly executed. However, the legions rules from the old Chaos Space Marine Codex was a decent idea decently executed which could form an excellent foundation for a loyalist rules to represent specific chapters.
There are many advantages to a single mega-codex.

1. When it becomes necessary to update the codex with the release of a new rules edition no space marine player is left waiting around for their codex. There’s no inconsistency between current and out of date chapter-specific codex – everything is taken care of in one fell swoop.

2. Allied forces rules can easily be implemented in future editions of the game. Space Marine players SHOULD be able to add Imperial Guard units as adjuncts to their army. While certain Space Marine units such as prideful Black Templars might never have the ability to take allies, Ultramarines may – and questions like; Can my Blood Angels ally? Can my Space Wolves ally? And the balance issues that accompany those questions are taken to a minimum as a single codex can address them with USRs: Prideful – a prideful unit may not be taken in an allied force.

3. What GW looses in codex sales, it will make up in publishing costs and model production. The simple FREIGHT WEIGHT of shipping books to stores must be staggering. So 10 million 40k players (or however many there are out there) now own one $60 codex instead of 3 $30 codex… how much did it cost to publish those 3 codex? Have the ink plates made? Ship each to the stores in 3 separate releases instead of 1 bulk freight shipment?

4. Games are almost ALWAYS better the simpler they get. There’s this odd need that many gamers have to have complex rules and intricate systems to address their individual needs. That isn’t the case and the sooner gamers realize that the more fun the hobby will be. Some simple if/then rules are all you need and army building and game playing starts to get really smooth and elegant: If you elect to take bike units as troops then you may not take Devistator squads in your force. If you elect to give 1 assault unit the Feel No Pain upgrade for 10 points per model then that unit must be accompanied by a librarian. If you elect to take Terminator units as troops then all other space marine units that would normally count as troops count instead as elites.

I think 1 codex is the way to go and long overdue. I’d like to see a Chaos Space Marine codex follow along a similar veign with the ability to field legion-specific armies again. Similarly, Imperial Guard should be similar along with Eldar and even Tau, Orks, Tyranids, and Dark Eldar.

shabbadoo
13-09-2009, 04:57
I don't think that ONE codex for everything is possible without it being massive or requiring stripping away the unique features that have been developed for many chapters over the years. TWO large codexes could cover things, and in an acceptable way.

Reflex
13-09-2009, 05:06
honestly, it would be nice to see, but honestly, it wont happen.

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 05:29
Space Marines keep this hobby going - without the myriad of chapter dexes' GW would tank, I assure you.

It's become increasingly hard to get people in the hobby as getting a decent list of "small plastic army men" costs more than some high end electronics. So if new players prefer to be a chosen of the Emperor, you can bet GW isn't going to slow down on marine focus; to not would be foolish.

I don't see the hatred towards the marine focus anyways - if you're really under the impression that chapter dexes' for marines is what stunts xeno releases such as Dark Eldar and the like from getting updates, and not lazy staff, I don't know what to tell ya.

coffeecoffee
13-09-2009, 05:35
I'm for it simply because it CAN be done, all in one list. Most of what makes dark angels, blood angels, and black templars special can be done with similar space marine units and special characters.

Now, space wolves is a bit trickier, but it could be done.

GW could still sell all the conversion kits, and the armies would still be played just as much.

If chaos players have to "use their imagination" and not have the rules tell them wat their army can and can't do...then neither should loyalist players.

Zingbaby
13-09-2009, 05:41
The big question to the OP is: WHY? ...because some people are haters of the non smurf chapters or even marines in general?

There is absolutely no real reason this should ever happen except that some people can't handle that 'they got that, while I only got this'.

An unfortunate side affect of this game being so expensive is that a good majority of the players are over-privileged brats who think they are entitled to everything. Get over it and be happy with what you have. All of my armies at one point or another have been so-called 'nerfed' according to wineseer but I still have fun. Kids really need to toughen up these days and stop expecting everything to be just handed to them. If you are losing - play better.

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 06:10
Also...the reason space marines are the main bulk of GW's sales is not bad marketing....it's that THEY ARE FREAKING POPULAR. Not everyone is attracted to xeno's like I am...many people want to play the super soldier and for those people space marines are there. Me...I like the angry horde of barbarians stomping forwards....I also like fire <.<>.> prolly why I play orks....and after winning a battle company I play salamanders *yeah vulkans in there...but I was already in love with using free flamer/melta guns, TH/SS termies and the redeemer before I even read vulkan's rules so suck it :P* and why my next army will likely be space wolves because now I can have a screaming horde of power armor wearing space vikings....SPACE VIKINGS DAMNIT -_-

big squig
13-09-2009, 06:12
Also...the reason space marines are the main bulk of GW's sales is not bad marketing....it's that THEY ARE FREAKING POPULAR. Not everyone is attracted to xeno's like I am...many people want to play the super soldier and for those people space marines are there. Me...I like the angry horde of barbarians stomping forwards....I also like fire <.<>.> prolly why I play orks....and after winning a battle company I play salamanders *yeah vulkans in there...but I was already in love with using free flamer/melta guns, TH/SS termies and the redeemer before I even read vulkan's rules so suck it :P* and why my next army will likely be space wolves because now I can have a screaming horde of power armor wearing space vikings....SPACE VIKINGS DAMNIT -_-
Except you could already do that if space wolves were simply included in the main codex like salamanders were. They didn't need their own rules.

Schmapdi
13-09-2009, 06:14
I think the best solution would be to have Codex: Space Marines and then a single Codex: Marine Variants.

(Ideally, other races like Eldar, Guard, Chaos, etc would get a variant codex as well too).

GirathonB
13-09-2009, 06:22
Except you could already do that if space wolves were simply included in the main codex like salamanders were. They didn't need their own rules.

Yes, because all the stories out there show how they follow codex astartes remotely close at all how? If ANY chapter needs its own book, it's the Sons of Russ

DuskRaider
13-09-2009, 06:24
I really think if you do one, you need to do all. I think Salamanders have great fluff and deserve their own codex, rather then just a SC. Same goes with Iron Hands.

But then again, if you prescribe to this, you need to do all the Ork tribes, Exodite Eldar, Chaos Legions, separate Guard regiments, etc. etc.

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 06:25
Except space wolves by their very freaking fluff nature do no FOLLOW the space marine codex and as such it would be really awkward forcing them in there....let alone how much it would **** off all the Space wolf players. Also you'd be looking at a very large, very awkward book that would have whole sections of army specific models....unless you think wolfguard,death company, ravenwing, blood claws, deathwing and the many other chapter specific units should just be thrown out the window and the army solely responsible for keeping this game going should be gutted to the point that GW will likely collapse within a year or two taking your army of choice with it is a good thing. If that's the case then sure why not.

What it boils down to is Marines get the special treatment because unlike my main army the orks....and all your non space marine armies....they sell...ALOT and therefore they get the multiple shiney codex's cause they bring home the bacon as it were. So if you want to ruin your own army in the process...please...continue to bitch and moan about something as pointless as this. Wow...it's great to finally have a thread where I can dismiss all the complaints in one broad stroke from the unassailable position that if we did it your way the hobby would crash and burn....cool eh!

big squig
13-09-2009, 06:31
Yes, because all the stories out there show how they follow codex astartes remotely close at all how? If ANY chapter needs its own book, it's the Sons of Russ
There are plenty of ways to do wolves with the space marine codex through 'count-as' and special character abilities.

Wolf characters are just normal characters really with a different name. They don't "really" need their own rules.

Wolf Guard are really just veterans and terminators.

wolf scouts don't "need" special rules. There is nothing wrong with scout squads.

Grey Hunters are just marines with different options. This could had been easily handled by giving tac marines a couple more options (like power weapon or power fist instead of a heavy weapon). Players who want to stick to index astartes can simply choose to not take these options.

Blood claws could be done through a special character that gives marines furious charge instead of combat tactics.

Wolves and wolf riders could be done through the new wolf rider special character.

Long fangs don't "need" special rules. There is nothing wrong with dev squads.

You don't need special rules for everything with "wolf" in the name.

big squig
13-09-2009, 06:32
Except space wolves by their very freaking fluff nature do no FOLLOW the space marine codex and as such it would be really awkward forcing them in there....let alone how much it would **** off all the Space wolf players.
Welcome to chaos space marines...

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 06:35
I agree; people seem to be under the impression that if all marines shared a 'dex that suddenly xeno dexes' would come shooting out every other week.

A race / faction becoming outdated has more to it than marine chapters having their own book (which by that same logic, why are some marine chapters horribly outdated?). I think the problem is in how GW goes about their codex production and lack of updates / FAQs, less books really won't alleviate such a problem.

And Orktavius, let Mike win just once. ;)

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 06:38
no....there really isn't a way to capture the SW flavour with 1 or 2 special characters and generic squads. Their squad sizes are different, their FOC slots support 4 special characters, instead of bikers you'd have to have a whole special section in the book about freaking space marines riding wolves with a unit that can only be taken if you take this guy. If GW made another overly complicated codex taht said if you unit A this you can't take unit B or you can only take unit D with space marine commander C do you have any idea how frakked up and silly that codex would be. Do you have any idea how many people would be furiously pissed off to the point they might just stop playing? Lemme give you a hint about 60%. If they utterly pissed off every eldar/ork/chaos and tau player all into quitting at once it STILL wouldn't have the impact on their business that this does. There is no feasible way to do what you want them to do and there is NO logical reason for them to do it other then making a small minority of people feel slightly happier. World don't work that way, world goes where the money is and sadly big squig the money doesn't go the direction you want it to.

edit for ratcatcher: The man just can't win against me...it's not a matter of letting...it's a matter of his dice being cursed and me apparantly having sacrificed 666 virgins to the dice gods at some point without my knowing it. My orks act like they are BS 4 :P

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 06:46
I know what you mean!

We have a guy who visits my gaming club fairly often and I have never seen a player make worse rolls, period. Against him my lasguns are lascannons. :p

JHZ
13-09-2009, 07:34
Their squad sizes are different
Is this like some fluffy thing that they always field larger packs than normal Marines, or is it just something the codex has always give as an options?


their FOC slots support 4 special characters
My IG can have 11 Special Characters in a perfectly legal game. 4 in HQ, 4 in Troops, 1 in Elite, 1 in Fast Attack and 1 in Heavy Support.


instead of bikers you'd have to have a whole special section in the book about freaking space marines riding wolves with a unit that can only be taken if you take this guy.
Did they even have wolf riders before this codex?

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 07:37
sorry...let me fix that...they can have 4 HQ characters and to my knowledge they've had larger squad sizes for a while. The sons of Russ thumbed their noses as Gulliman and his "rules"

Iracundus
13-09-2009, 07:41
Did they even have wolf riders before this codex?

No. Hence it is a fallacious argument to say "They need a separate Codex to reflect how different they are." The difference was created by GW via the Codex. There isn't any inherent difference that exists separate to what GW decide. Before the SW Codex, they were just gray Marines. Before the Angels of Death Codex in 2nd ed., there was nothing special about Death Company or the Dark Angels' Deathwing. They were just different colored Marines and Terminators and nobody had any real issues with that. Before Black Templars appeared in the Armageddon Codex in 3rd ed., they were just black colored Marines with none of those "oh so important" differences that Marine players might stomp their feet and gnash their teeth over "reflecting in the rules."

These "differences" aren't some eternal immutable fact from the distant past. They were created by GW and they can just as easily be ret-conned out of existence by GW. The fundamental problem is the double standard employed by GW: minute differences get created or accentuated for every tiny band of Marines in order to justify a Codex,while much larger and more dramatic differences between planetary forces (for the IG), Craftworlds (for the Eldar), Klans (for Orks), etc... all get brushed aside, downplayed, and ignored.

Lothlanathorian
13-09-2009, 08:07
There are plenty of ways to do wolves with the space marine codex through 'count-as' and special character abilities.

Wolf characters are just normal characters really with a different name. They don't "really" need their own rules.

Wolf Guard are really just veterans and terminators.

Agreed

wolf scouts don't "need" special rules. There is nothing wrong with scout squads.

They are veterans, not new members

Grey Hunters are just marines with different options. This could had been easily handled by giving tac marines a couple more options (like power weapon or power fist instead of a heavy weapon). Players who want to stick to index astartes can simply choose to not take these options.

It could work, but would be odd, since then your Tactical squads would be non-Codex

Blood claws could be done through a special character that gives marines furious charge instead of combat tactics.

Blood Claws are the Space Wolf newbs. They aren't just Marines with Furious Charge, they are Scouts, but in Power Armor with Assault Squad options

Wolves and wolf riders could be done through the new wolf rider special character.

Or just don't have them at all. So stupid.

Long fangs don't "need" special rules. There is nothing wrong with dev squads.

[B]I can live with that. I don't exactly agree, but it's something I could live with[?B]

You don't need special rules for everything with "wolf" in the name.


Bold is mine.

I think I got a bit ninja'd.

And the Orks should have had something to give them more Klan specific rules. And the Eldar should be given more Craftworld diversity. I agree on those points.

Logarithm Udgaur
13-09-2009, 08:08
...which by that same logic, why are some marine chapters horribly outdated?
What marine chapters would those be again?

Hellebore
13-09-2009, 08:12
These "differences" aren't some eternal immutable fact from the distant past. They were created by GW and they can just as easily be ret-conned out of existence by GW. The fundamental problem is the double standard employed by GW: minute differences get created or accentuated for every tiny band of Marines in order to justify a Codex,while much larger and more dramatic differences between planetary forces (for the IG), Craftworlds (for the Eldar), Klans (for Orks), etc... all get brushed aside, downplayed, and ignored.

Yes, and told to use counts as or simply saying that the eldar codex is 'good enough' to represent the fundamental differences between Biel Tann and Ulthwe.

But oh no, that warband of 1000 human soldiers? They get their own codex full of rules created just to justify having their own codex.

It's a very circular argument. Every army is as different as GW wants them to be at any given time.

Let's look at the newest space wolf codex. They added lone wolves, thunderwolf cavalry (:rolleyes::eyebrows:), even changed a fundamental unit type in the army - attack bikes have for the last 15 years been crewed by grey hunters yet now they are used by blood claws, changing how they work. Ignored the other space wolf special characters from history and made up whole new ones.

These are changes for the sake of change, because GW are DETERMINED to have space marine codicies as seperate armies. Thus they invent units to support their stance, rather than consolidate armies to support the original background.

If the anime eldar katana wielding super warriors suddenly started selling out of all proportion (not a strange thing given just how much anime saturates childrens' television these days) you can BET GW would 'justify' Codex Biel Tann Striking Scorpions of the Shadow Shrine who use chainfists as their weapon of choice. Oh and have Scorpion Scorpionson riding a Striking Scorpion into battle as a special character :rolleyes:

Because each aspect shrine is as big or bigger than a marine chapter. And they are all slightly different, being founded on specific teaching methods. Just like the classic Kung Fu schools of antiquity. Each craftworld could have a dozen shrines to a single aspect, with each shrine teaching slightly differently and using slightly different equipment.

So we'd have the light green striking scoprions, the dark green striking scorpions, the brown striking scorpions, the green and yellow striking scorpions etc.

Each just as different (or similar) as GW wishes them to be. Each just like a space marine chapter (but probably having far more warriors than a piddly 1000). If a space marine chapter can get its own wholely unique codex, then it's only down to GW's own perverse fetish for marines that stops other factions from receiving the same.

Hellebore

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 08:27
What marine chapters would those be again?

Dark Angels
Black Templar's
Blood Angels

Zarroc
13-09-2009, 08:30
GW army books already full apart like crazy, a massive army book would be a mess in no time, no to forget trying to find the pagers you need during a battle and that

NOT A GOOD IDEA

JHZ
13-09-2009, 08:31
sorry...let me fix that...they can have 4 HQ characters and to my knowledge they've had larger squad sizes for a while.
But still, those are codex rulings and not fluff. So you get to field smaller squads and less HQ characters. Doesn't really change the army fluff, now does it?


The sons of Russ thumbed their noses as Gulliman and his "rules"
Pretty much like everyone else, eh? Iron Hands aren't split into chapter either, black templars and night watch run larger numbers than allowed and even the Ultramarines themselves run their own little empire.

If we need to talk about chapters that are different from the vanilla codex, then lets.
-Where are my Exorcists who are trained in the use of the 666 verses of the Book of Exorcisms and equipped with the weapons of an Exorcist, who beat daemons like no tomorrow and are protected against them?
-Where are the extra CCWs for my Black Dragons?
-Where are the oaths of the Howling Griffons?
-Where is the bad fortune and Banner of Tears of the Lamenters?
-What about the Mentor Legion with their superior skills and tactics, new experimental gear and the fact that they don't fight as a chapter but "loan" their troops to other Imperial factions, like the Guard?
-Where are the sniper rifle Devastators of the Sons of Medusa?

All those chapters have to get along with the vanilla SM codex.

Egaeus
13-09-2009, 08:32
These "differences" aren't some eternal immutable fact from the distant past. They were created by GW and they can just as easily be ret-conned out of existence by GW. The fundamental problem is the double standard employed by GW: minute differences get created or accentuated for every tiny band of Marines in order to justify a Codex,while much larger and more dramatic differences between planetary forces (for the IG), Craftworlds (for the Eldar), Klans (for Orks), etc... all get brushed aside, downplayed, and ignored.

QFT.

I remember when a friend of mine starting playing Marines and chose Black Templars because their paint scheme was super-simple (spray black then detail with white). This was before the Armageddon Codex came out and when it did he had to change his army all around to make it compatible.

I don't know that the issue is so much a double standard...part of the problem was that back in the day when there was the "flavor of the month" armies coming out all the time some of them were horribly thought out...but once the genie's out of the bottle people come to expect those rules and get upset when they get taken away even though they never should have existed (at least in that form) in the first place.

My current Marine army uses the Black Templar rules, but when I started it I was on the fence as to whether they would be BT or SW. I chose BT at the time because they were slightly more "codex" then the Wolves (although I did use a number or SW sets to build the army) meaning that if I wanted to they could be used as basic SM more easily. When the 4th Ed Marine Codex came out I was tempted to redo my army as "Traited Marines" as you could get a pretty close approximation to the army. But I never really got around to it. Then the 5th Ed Marine Codex came out and I considered it again...except that now I can't really make them similar (fundamentally no option for BP&CCW Tactical squads which is the core of my army). I am eagerly awaiting the new SW Codex and will probably consider "jumping ship" again with these new rules.

Apologies for the rambling anecdote, but it was meant to illustrate my opinion when I say if they wanted to do an "all Marine" codex it wouldn't be that hard...yes, some armies are going to lose a little something to make things fit properly, as if they tried to make everything as unique as it is now then there's no point in doing a single book. The only major advantage at that point would be that Marines would all be in one place so you wouldn't have the oddity of the "rolling changes" in point costs and gear that occur because of GW's design cycle.

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 08:41
Why would a company actively seek to make less money?

I can understand your argument from a position of balance - with marines' sharing a dex no single group gets left behind. While that's good for marine players, I'm curious, do people really think this would cause xeno dexes to be updated more regularly?

If GW can't be bothered to even so much as make a FAQ / crude download update for armies pushing ten years old - would they suddenly get on the ball having four less dexes to do?

big squig
13-09-2009, 08:44
Why would a company actively seek to make less money?

I can understand your argument from a position of balance - with marines' sharing a dex no single group gets left behind. While that's good for marine players, I'm curious, do people really think this would cause xeno dexes to be updated more regularly?

If GW can't be bothered to even so much as make a FAQ / crude download update for armies pushing ten years old - would they suddenly get on the ball having four less dexes to do?
It would mean 4 more dexs than before. Plus, minis are supposed to sell minis, not rules. Have you seen the new space wolf plastic kits?! You don't need rules to be tempted to make an army of those. Let the minis themselves and WD sell the armies, not the uber power rules.

LKHERO
13-09-2009, 08:54
I think they need 1 key Marine codex and then have online codex for Chapter specific material.

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 08:54
It would mean 4 more dexs than before. Plus, minis are supposed to sell minis, not rules. Have you seen the new space wolf plastic kits?! You don't need rules to be tempted to make an army of those. Let the minis themselves and WD sell the armies, not the uber power rules.

We've all seen that isn't how GW operates - they seem to like a safety net of sorts, something to assure themselves there's a reason for the item to be desirable.

While there are a lot of people willing to drop a few hundred dollars adding to their army in the way of new plastics and designs, I'd wager there are just as many or possibly more who aren't. When you're younger and pressed to pick between an iPhone or three boxes of plastic soldiers.. well..

It can be a new codex, or better more flushed out Black Library coverage - but they always want to create a buzz about something to ensure it sells in mass.

It comes down to this, if they can make small changes amongst a popular item and have it and related articles sell like hot-cakes, why would they not?

the1stpip
13-09-2009, 09:11
TBH, ideally we wouldn't have SCs to unlock certain builds, rather a character would have the option of buying a 'trait', such as 2 special weapons, twin linked meltas and flamers, terminator assault, etc.

That way, people would not feel they have to take SCs, and would not get laughed at for taking Cortez in a Salamanders army, for example.

And we all know how codexes do sell more models. What was naff in one codex (and so no-one bought) is uber in the next codex, so everyone rushes pout to buy them.

Logarithm Udgaur
13-09-2009, 09:18
Dark Angels
Black Templar's
Blood Angels

So 2-3 years is hopelessly outdated now? I will have to remember that.

Gazak Blacktoof
13-09-2009, 10:59
It would be *********** expensive and I wouldn't be willing to pay.

Of course you would. If you have an army of marines I don't suppose you'd really worry about spending £20 on a book.

grissom2006
13-09-2009, 11:05
Of course you would. If you have an army of marines I don't suppose you'd really worry about spending £20 on a book.

Sooner or later a person decides thats it enoughs enough i'd pay X amount but not Y amount, and as such bands together with his mates and continues playing the game minus the new Codex and Rules. Net result GW loses customers as such loses money i've lost track of the number of times i've heard a Black shirt moan about how older gamers no longer go in play, which helps bring in the newer gamers.

Putty
13-09-2009, 13:28
nope, don't want a big fat book.

i only want to pay for what i want to play.

Bunnahabhain
13-09-2009, 13:38
Sooner or later a person decides thats it enoughs enough i'd pay X amount but not Y amount, and as such bands together with his mates and continues playing the game minus the new Codex and Rules. Net result GW loses customers as such loses money i've lost track of the number of times i've heard a Black shirt moan about how older gamers no longer go in play, which helps bring in the newer gamers.

I honestly don't think it the price issue there.

It's the sloppy rules writing, and missing or not awefully good FAQs.

Why go into a GW, if you have to use the new rules you don't like, that totally re-write the previous lot of background that you had built your army on? Stay at home, or at the club, and use the house rules that make things work, and know you won't up playing an unpleasent random opponent...

The Guard and Ork books have better rules than their previous versions, and don't break with the established background, so don't suffer too much from this.
The Marines one do appear very prone to overblown background, rewriting background to sell the latest model( when the models will do that anyway), and only having been worked on by hardcore marine fans...

ehlijen
13-09-2009, 14:20
nope, don't want a big fat book.

i only want to pay for what i want to play.

The point is that it would be one slightly extended list, not just all the current subdexes boudn together.

And do you actually use every single option in the current codex? Every single special character?

Marsekay
13-09-2009, 15:27
the thing is the deviant chapters dont really deviate that much. maybe a squad size change or an extra unit here or there.

i vote for 2 loyalist codex's 1 codex marines and 1 diverse marines.

they just dont deviate enough to warrant their own codex's

Marsekay
13-09-2009, 15:39
It isn't hard to do.

Here is a one page document that turns the current SM codex into the 3rd edition Space Wolf codex I created.

However, GW are DETERMINED to make single chapters as important as whole races. 1000 warriors given the same status a billion.

Thus, the new space wolf codex with all sorts of additional units never before in the codex, for no other reason than to try and justify its existence as a seperate book.

I dread to see how much they muck around with the DA and BA to justify newer codicies. Blood Bloodson and Dark Darkson riding Blood and Dark Angels into battle.

Because, if the space wolves, the so called 'most divergent' marine chapter can be summed up in a single page, the DA and BA will barely require a mention.

Hellebore

This is the best take on it possible.

i usually dont agree with hellebore but today hes got it VERY right.

congrats on showing me what i thought was the best possible way.

Bolter Bait
13-09-2009, 17:08
It would be great from my point of view to have "one book to rule them all," especially since this would just outright end the constant "Can I use this from C:SM, my Blood Angels' storm shields aren't as good" or "why are generic Marine bikes more plentiful and more effective than my Ravenwing bikes?"

Spacing all the Marine books out is a great marketing ploy, but it's **** poor for gaming. Chapters than come out might be the bees knees initially, then the power creep catches up and the next Marine codex can do everything the previous ones can do, but better, which is what the "Mary Sue" thread earlier was about. You end up with codexes that are drastically different, printed with different design goals in mind, and fall behind the curve of newer codexes.

Additionally, you end up with the ludicrous situation of Tyranids having one book and one model range, Eldar with one book and one model range, Orks with one book and one model range, Tau with one book and one model range and Marines with 5 books and effectively, one model range where the differences are made up by slight changes to the deely-boppers on their shoulders.

A big hardback "Codex Astartes," the size and cost of the BRB, with full pictures and background fluff for all the loyalist legions would be amazing. I would probably buy one and I don't play even Marines, but anything that has good background and stories, I will read and desire. Have a generic "codex" layout for standard marines (blue boys) with small Chapter specific deviance and restrictions, would work perfectly well to represent any possible Loyalist Chapter. And the best thing is, all the chapters would have the same basic design in mind, meaning that no one chapter will be behind two years of evolving game-play.

========================

Better yet, apply Gav Thorpe's "reasoning" behind making CSM generic and how it's better for our own "good." In his defense of the current bland CSM codex, he claims that by including Legion specific restrictions in the old Chaos codex, it hurt our ability to play CSM the way we wanted to. Hello? Aren't different chapter codexes just entire books of chapter specific restrictions? Doesn't that line of reasoning mean that if I want to play Space Puppies my way, I'm too restricted by their own upcoming codex because it lays out specific ground rules and changes to the basic SM list?

Plastic Parody
13-09-2009, 18:02
I voted no but only because I dont trust them to get all that right in one go.

Cadian144
13-09-2009, 18:13
Although this is one of those things that seems to " make sense" I also agree it is not going to happen.

The currrent system of codex's for Marines, and " Chaos Marines" such as it is, seems to work for GW. And I think with Space marines in General, they dont want to mess around to much with something that for lack of better words "it aint broke". At least in GW's mind.

My 2 cents:D

FraustyTheSnowman
13-09-2009, 18:26
As long as chaos is in one codex, guard is in one codex, craftworld eldar is in one codex, and all the hive fleets are in one codex, marines deserve ONE codex. Sorry for all the spoiled favored children, but your army just isn't that complicated. Blood angels and salamanders don't fight any more different than catachans and death korps.

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 18:31
When xeno races start selling as much as space marines maybe they will make extra codexs for them, but the fact of the matter is you damn whiners is that space marines make all the money for GW in this game and therefore all your little arguements are mute. The almighty dollar speaks louder then your complaints. Xeno races don't have the financial support to justify making multiple codex's for them, space marines do. Until you can argue a point the refutes this none of your comments hold a drop of water as to why all the space marine codex's should be rolled into one codex PERIOD, END OF STORY :-/ I await your ideas as to how it could be done without costing GW tons and tons of money with legitimate points not "in my opinion" bull

Nezmith
13-09-2009, 18:36
When xeno races start selling as much as space marines maybe they will make extra codexs for them, but the fact of the matter is you damn whiners is that space marines make all the money for GW in this game and therefore all your little arguements are mute. The almighty dollar speaks louder then your complaints. Xeno races don't have the financial support to justify making multiple codex's for them, space marines do. Until you can argue a point the refutes this none of your comments hold a drop of water as to why all the space marine codex's should be rolled into one codex PERIOD, END OF STORY :-/ I await your ideas as to how it could be done without costing GW tons and tons of money with legitimate points not "in my opinion" bull

Easy there fella, don't want to blow a blood vessel over SPEES MARHEENS. They aren't worth that.

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 18:39
I play orks :P I only play marines cause I won a battle company at a AoBR release event tourny. What I can't stand is the stupidity being thrown around this thread. FYI, orks don't need clan specific codex's other then maybe the snakebites it's easy to do an army around any clan

Frep
13-09-2009, 18:47
I actually really like this idea but don't see it happening ever. One super marine codex would be very cool, no more complaining that marines A have better weapons than marines B, while marines C keep saying marines D keeps funny faces at them.

Egaeus
13-09-2009, 18:52
When xeno races start selling as much as space marines maybe they will make extra codexs for them, but the fact of the matter is you damn whiners is that space marines make all the money for GW in this game and therefore all your little arguements are mute. The almighty dollar speaks louder then your complaints. Xeno races don't have the financial support to justify making multiple codex's for them, space marines do. Until you can argue a point the refutes this none of your comments hold a drop of water as to why all the space marine codex's should be rolled into one codex PERIOD, END OF STORY :-/ I await your ideas as to how it could be done without costing GW tons and tons of money with legitimate points not "in my opinion" bull

And the simple counter-argument here is that it's a vicious circle as GW pushes Marines, so Marines sell. Unfortuantely Marines do have a number of economic and aesthetic factors that make them more attractive than other armies:
-Mostly plastic range
-Basic troops choice that comes complete in a single box
-The whole "superhuman warrior knights" and the perception of them as the "good guys".

Remember that this is supposed to be a "dark future" and no particular army is really supposed to be "good"...if they were portrayed more as the xenophobic, paranoid, genocidal killing machines that they are (much more like Chaos Marines who could be argued to be the reflection of their true selves) they might be somewhat less attractive. But seriously who doesn't want to portray the "shining defenders of humanity"?

I know that there's develpment and printing costs involved in the Codexes but I don't doubt for a second that if GW thought alternate Codexes for other races would increase the sales of those minis (as we have to keep in mind that GW is NOT a rules company they are in the business of selling miniatures. The only reason the game exists is to sell miniatures) then they would come out with alternate Codexes.

I wonder...how many people have very specific "chapters" that they play with dedication versus players with generic chapters of their own creation that allow them to play with any particular ruleset they desire. My curiousity lies in the fact that if I buy a non-Marine army it's pretty much that army...if I buy a Tyranid army that's what it is. But if I have Marines, they can be Ultramarines or Dark Angels, or Blood Angels or Space Wolves or Black Templars...giving me a lot of potential gaming variety, often with a fairly small pool of minis. Just one more thought on why Marines are popular.

Rat Catcher
13-09-2009, 19:01
Easy there fella, don't want to blow a blood vessel over SPEES MARHEENS. They aren't worth that.

This entire thread is xeno angst, perhaps he's trying to bring about balance. :D

Orktavius
13-09-2009, 19:10
Bring balance to the internets? if I could do that I would be a god....possibly Mork

Shadow Wulfen
13-09-2009, 19:32
I would have to say no to the "One codex to rule them all" idea, having a codex the size of the rule book is a bit much.

On another note I would be more in favour of a streamlining of the books, having the likes of a "Vanilla" Codex for all those Space Marine armies out there without too much divergence (much like the current C:SM), having a Codex dedicated to both DA and BA (C:AoD), and having a Codex for Space Wolves, now I know people will now whine and question me asking why Space Wolves get their own codex, well the reason is, Space Wolves don't follow the same sort of doctrine that all other Space Marine chapters do they have different organisation and should not just be thrown into the grinder with rest of them, that is also why DA and BA do not get thrown in that big book of "Vanilla", DA and BA have a different way of doing things and having those options available to all chapters would make everything boring and the same.

On the note of chapter differences, Black Templar should not get another codex to themselves, the should be put back into the fold with "Vanilla", having a few special characters and that is it, it was good enough for 3rd edition it didn't need to change in 4th.

Israfael
13-09-2009, 19:41
I'd be fine with sharing a 'dex with the Blood Angels, even if they are getting a bit too "Twilight" recently. ;)

Joking aside, I honestly wouldn't mind seeing a dex' that incorporates all of the "big four". If they made it the same size as the vanilla dex it could be done, and done well.

The problem is your average dex feels the need to show fourteen different versions of the same paint job near near the end of it. "Here's them versus Tyranids! Ooooh.. And here is them against Orks in a desert! Oooooh.. And then here -"

If that could be toned down somewhat I think they could fairly easily make a quality dex for us.

Sunyavadin
13-09-2009, 21:09
I'm behind the idea of more catch-all codices.
I'd like to see codex books the size of the old second edition ones.
You could have a chaos codex, covering CSM, CD, and L&D armies, an Eldar one covering Craftworld, Dark, Harlequin and Exodite armies, a Tyranid one covering Tyranids and Genestealers, etc....

This could nicely be followed by an appendix codex, like the third edition Craftworld Eldar codex, with chapters detailing the histories and specific rules of various offshoots of the armies within the main codex. Codex: First Founding, detailing the main SM chapters (Ultramarines, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves etc.) Codex: Craftworld Eldar, detailing Saim-Hann, Iyanden, Ulthwe, etc. I honestly think it's a far better model, which would allow greater ease of balancing, and better ability to keep up to date with each new edition...

Orktavius
14-09-2009, 02:32
last I heard the 3rd ed eldar codex was considered trash....why would you want to turn all the codex's into trash

GimpMaster
14-09-2009, 02:35
I don't want 1 marine codex for the same exact reason why I buy citadel miniatures super glue.....I love handing money to GW by the fistful.....stay alive gw....stay alive

Dranthar
14-09-2009, 04:12
I'm not going to read 9 pages so apoligies if this hasn't already been suggested;

One Vanilla Codex, pretty much exactly like C:SM is today.

One Supplementary Codex. This doesn't have an army per se, but rather a list of special characters that can be taken in a SM army to represent one of any number of Chapters. For balance reasons, they could even allow only characters from one chapter in a given army list, so taking Shrike would prevent you using Lysander, for instance.

So most special characters would open up minor changes to your list, that would be more in theme for the Chapter they represent. So one special character might allow Predators to be taken as squadrons (Aurora Chapter?), while another may replace combat tactics with Preferred Enemy: Eldar.

And they don't need to all be characters either. For instance, the Blood Angels section may contain a "Death Company" unit, while other chapters may have replacements for sternguard etc.

Of course I understand why GW didn't want to do supplementary codecies any more (people needing to refer to >1 book to write an army list, etc), but with the current situation with space marines - 4 books and a PDF list, almost all with different rules for what should otherwise be identical units, using supplementary books is preferrable IMO.

AlmightyNocturnus
14-09-2009, 04:21
As a Blood Angels player. I would like to see ONE codex. I just think it would allow for better game balance and quicker updates.

But as many have suggested, it would be a big leap for GW since they would ultimately lose money on it.

Almighty Nocturnus

Orktavius
14-09-2009, 04:23
Once again.... Space marines make up 30% of GW's TOTAL sales across all 3 systems. As far as 40k goes Space marines *apparantly they lump Chaos ones in with these numbers* make up about 70-80% of sales. So what your suggesting is that GW take what is their biggest money earner and change it so much that it will likely cause a mass exodus of of their players ending Warhammer as a gaming system. Right...bright idea...once again continue with the winning suggestions Xeno players. As an ork player I do not see any legitimate reason as to why GW shove all the Space marine codex's together and no one has yet given a legitimate reason that would offset the decimation of GW's sales.

Hellebore
14-09-2009, 05:16
Once again.... Space marines make up 30% of GW's TOTAL sales across all 3 systems. As far as 40k goes Space marines *apparantly they lump Chaos ones in with these numbers* make up about 70-80% of sales. So what your suggesting is that GW take what is their biggest money earner and change it so much that it will likely cause a mass exodus of of their players ending Warhammer as a gaming system. Right...bright idea...once again continue with the winning suggestions Xeno players. As an ork player I do not see any legitimate reason as to why GW shove all the Space marine codex's together and no one has yet given a legitimate reason that would offset the decimation of GW's sales.

You know, you are one of the rudest posters Warseer has seen in quite a while. Get over yourself.

If GW's entire business strategy is based on selling nothing but space marines they DESERVE to go out of business. That is the stupidest marketing strategy you can have, spending millions producing dozens of different products and only pushing one type and relying on its revenue.

If marines are all that keep GW going then it has FAR FAR more problems than not wanting to put marines in one codex.

Hellebore

Dark_Templar
14-09-2009, 05:18
as a BT player, I would welcome a combined BT/DA/BA codex.

Orktavius
14-09-2009, 07:28
Half of warseer is made up of standard internet trolls so why bother with politeness. You speak hellebore as if GW markets only space marines. They do not...infact GW for the most part doesn't advertise it's products at all. The simple fact is that Space marines have ALWAYS been the most popular and as such every time they've made a starter set marines are part of it as as such many new players start as marines. Add to that fact yet again that most of the marine line is plastic and therefore more affordable and that contributes more to marines general popularity. Since the starter set came out with 3rd ed it's been space marines vs Dark eldar *really...who would want to play dark eldar that much* and then with 4th ed it was Space Marines vs a substandard pile of nids whose constant losing would likely put people off on em and now they are paired with orks. As a result now orks are starting to increase in sales because A) they have a strong codex and B) the orks that came in the starter set could compete with the marines and finally C) much of the Ork line is now in plastic making it relatively cheap.

The fact is though....many new players are attracted to space marines and their variants due to the extensive backstory they have and the fact that people can easily either identify with the marines or like imagining themselves as superpowered soldiers. In fact all the most popular armies are easy for people to identify with in some way, the top 4 selling armies to my knowledge being space marines, chaos marines, imperial guard and orks *come on...we all know someone who's pretty much an ork* and among the lowest selling to be nids and crons *ignoring DE as they've been pulled from shelves for the most part far as I know* as they are the armies people can least identify with. The push over the last few editions is unlikely to have been entirely intentional but the fact remains that space marines have ALWAYS been the most popular army choice. As such they get special treatment such as divergent codex's and other then Chaos space marines are the only army where that is even worth doing. Eldar don't need anything special for the craftworlds all you need to make craftworld specific lists is in their codex far as I can tell, same with Orks and the clans, about the only trouble is the snakebite clan but all you really need to do there is grab a squiggoth and use the battlewagon rules other then that every clan is fully represented front and center.

To reiterate...GW's whole plan isn't just to sell space marines, it's to sell miniatures. If Space marines are selling the most then space marines the people shall have, it would be bad business NOT to capitalize on their most popular product. So again...regale me with the faulty business logic that suggests they should lump all the marines into one bland codex which would have a large portion of their customer base try and burn them at the stake and then leave the hobby for no other reason then the jealous players of the other races don't appreciate having more SM variants to beat the hell out of. Last I checked no Space Marines of any variant were considered that broken or even that hard to beat. If every Space marine codex was broken then maybe I could understand some of the whining. If people just wanted an additonal hardcover special edition book printed that has a copy of all the space marine army lists in one place I could understand. However all I've read is the ranting of bitter and jealous people shooting from the hip with ZERO awareness of the consequences of such an action would bring to the hobby as a whole. If I seem rude perhaps it's because I don't think using anything short of a verbal blunt object to bash these facts into your brain will be in anyway effective, hell, nothing short of the verbal equivalent of a nuke is likely to even budge your thoughts to the contrary in the first place. However I do so enjoy bringing the truth to the ignorant and so I continue.

Nezmith
14-09-2009, 07:59
You're acting like this thread has any bearing on GW's future marketing policies.

Get the **** over yourself. You're not changing anyone's opinions, only making them hate Space Marines more.

And I doubt other Space Marine players want to be thought of as arrogant conceited players who think, "You should thank me because I'm the only reason we still get to play this game."

505
14-09-2009, 08:12
my choice really wasnt there.

I would say yes except for significantly divergent chapters.

(no BT..arguable but no, DA, BA are not significantly divergent neither are white scars, iron hands...depends on what you really give them)

SW are.

Orktavius
14-09-2009, 08:15
They already hate Space marines, who cares if they hate it more and your right, nothing said on warseer means jack to GW nor should it. It's not really reflective of GW's real customer base, just the vocal ones.

AndrewGPaul
14-09-2009, 09:06
Half of warseer is made up of standard internet trolls so why bother with politeness.

Because I'm better than them, and don't feel the need to sink to their level. Because I like this forum despite the trolls, and I don't want things to get even worse. Because my parents raised me properly. :)

My opinion has always been that all the Marine armies could be represented by one Codex. Start with Codex: Space Marines (duh!). Each of the "big 4" Chapters (plus Black Templars and wheover else) only need 1 page with a couple of army-wide special rules (Black Rage for Blood Angels, Vows for Black Templars) and modifications to army list entries or the force organisation chart (jump packs for Command Squads for Blood Angels, Terminator armour for Command Squads for Dark Angels, Scouts as Elites and no heavy weapons in Tactical Squads for Space Wolves, that sort of thing) and 3 or 4 special characters each. Limit it to the ones which have miniatures - Calgar, Tigurius and Cassius for the Ultramarines, Mephiston, Corbulo, Dante and Tycho for the Blood Angels, Grimnar, Ragnar, Ulrik and Njal (and maybe Bjorn) for the Space Wolves, Azrael, Asmodeus librarian Whatshisname for the Dark Angels. Obviously you could expand this in a similar way for other Chapters. Even the current method, of using characters who modify the Force Org charts would work for Chapters such as the White Scars.

As to the marketing angle, most of GW's sales are made up of Space Marine miniatures, rather than the books, no? If most of those sales go to the stereotypical 12-year-old using mummy's credit card, do they really care what Chapter they're playing? Half the time they're not even painted, so the title of the army book probably won't matter.

ntin
14-09-2009, 09:24
The popularity of the various Space Marines lists was due mostly to the fact they were the more solid and power gamey list for the past two editions. The same marketing logic would apply if Eldar suddenly became hugely popular then we would see the Craftworld variant list reintroduced. Economically Space Marines are on the cheap end of the spectrum and in the past did not rely heavily on metal blisters like the majority of armies did. It is not a great conspiracy on Gameworkshop’s part to branch out on the product line that sells the best.

They could probably fold the lesser variant lists into a mini-codex or annual like they have done in the past (Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Iron Hands, Salamanders, White Scars, et cetra). In all truth Space Wolves has been the only codex in the past that diverges enough from Codex: Space Marine to warrant a separate book for itself.

havokas
14-09-2009, 10:55
of course not just one codex.... maby you get all the books in a single book but they are just a seprate as they are now.

e2055261
14-09-2009, 10:58
I reckon they should have one but it will never happen in my lifetime. They should just make one uber marine book and be done with it. Hard cover? The size of the rulebook perhaps...

Mullitron
14-09-2009, 11:10
I think they should do a big expensive one in addition to the existing ones. It has all the rules and info the other space marines books have but with extra history on the other chapters extra, basicly all the stuff you dont need in the army books but are fun ie pictures stories background. Sell it for slightly less than the cost of all the space marine books being bought seperatly.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 11:30
Its not multiple codex's that bother people, its the multiple releases', people seem to get it mixed up, the reasons why people would want one codex is that then there will only be one release of marines a year/few years...

Wrong.

Even if there was one codex they would not update the product line for the various chapters once every year/few years, it would just be the same as it is now, except with one big codex, and if they wanted to release a new unit (like the space wolf thunderwolf cavalry) they would either have to do a suppliment (which they seem to not want to do, hence no wargear update) or re-release the massive codex again.

Nothing (besides a wargear synchronise) would be achieved by doing one codex.

I am sick of the stupid reasons why people want one big marine codex, get over yourselves.

Hypaspist
14-09-2009, 11:56
It's easier to market Marines to Parents/Kids than several of the other 40k factions, and as a gateway product (which is certainly the way I view Marines, your opinion may differ) then one large marine book would (potentially) suffer from being too complicated and/or too unwieldy in the manner that several comments articulated (and Hellebore, I actually liked your document) whilst 'logical' to an experienced/adult player would not necessarily translate to a successful product to the audience that is being targetted. Considering how much of a loss leader certain gateway products are (Assault on Black Reach/Space Hulk), one large marine book would be another loss leading product (if it wasn't marketed at a higher price) that could begin to tip the scales of profitability.
I think the issue between sayers and naysayer's often revolves around the, "Our armies are condensed, so why shouldn't yours be" debate, which *is* a valid point, however there are two outcomes from this.

1) Condense the Marine armies into one, which could be counter-productive, and would certainly need to be heavily researched by GW in order to understand the possibly implications on their new customer base.

2) Expand existing armies into sub factions of themselves (ie Craftworld Eldar, Traitor Marine Legions). This then causes another problem to exist which would be the length of time it would take to update armies (as there are already armies that struggle, see Space Wolves up until now, out of date for a VERY long time)

Now without GW taking on the staffing resource to satisfy possibility 2 (which would require both scultping and creative writing/art expansion) that would leave possibility 1. The issue with this being that having had all these armies now for several editions they have players who have become attached to and invested heavily in these armies. More in terms of fluff necessarily than models, and to have this stripped away may harm the player base in a different way. Of course *most* Variant Marine players would probably make do and 'suck it up' (so to speak) but I'm not certain that everyone would be thrilled.

A possible solution would be (as previously suggested) to have a Codex : Marines, Codex : Divergent Chapters. Using Characters in Codex : Marines to unlock attributes/tactics that typify some of the more Codex adherent chapters, and in the Codex : Divergent Chapters, have separate army lists (and potentially gear, from the Codex Marines) but all under one roof.
of course, it would still take time to then balance and create updates for several 'Armys' at a time, but this would be the sacrifice to have this centralised.

Personally I like it just fine as it is, although if I were to make one slight change, would be to make Marine updates 1 in every 3 (or 2 in 5) perhaps to allow xeno races a bit more spotlight.

/hapennies worth

Dais
14-09-2009, 12:04
as long as it is comprehensive enough to include all the special chapter-defining elements i think it would be a step in the right direction.
the 4E trait system seems to have been a half-hearted attempt at this, it would have been much better if they committed to the chapter variants and gave them unique choices when needed as well.
space wolves may still require a stand-alone book though.

Iracundus
14-09-2009, 12:18
The argument that "GW makes $ off Marines so should spend time on Marines preferentially" is fallacious. Taken to its "logical" conclusion, then GW shouldn't spend any time on making any non-Marine miniatures, forget about spending any time on non-Marine codices, and spend all of its time on what makes $: Marines.

However this would spell death for the business because of excessive over specialization. Nobody wants a game that consists really of just one faction...or only Marines vs. Codex: Non-Marines.

That is where investment of both time and effort in other races and factions comes in. They create new long term opportunities for expansion where none existed before. There wouldn't be Craftworlds or Ork Klans or different IG regiments if GW only spent effort on Marines. Those bits of background came about BECAUSE GW took the time to create them, which they wouldn't have if they just dwelt on just Marines ad nauseum ad infinitum.

AndrewGPaul
14-09-2009, 12:21
I am sick of the stupid reasons why people want one big marine codex, get over yourselves.


Pthbbbbt. :p

Once the proponents of needless Codex-bloat "get over themselves", I'll consider it.

CthulhuDalek
14-09-2009, 12:31
Most people I know who do play have marines and a secondary army -- usually xenos or Imperial Guard(In my gaming group everyone excepy me and my friend Jacob, all have guard armies -- and I'm eventually getting a small one :P)

Thing is, it seems like not everyone are devout marine only players, but at some point have a marine army.

I have marines(used to play blood angels, now I'm vanilla with a vulkan list), nids, some daemonhunters, chaos, used to play Eldar...

I'd prefer ONE marines codex, and one chaos codex.

I'd be willing to compromise on one marine codex if there was one codex about the size of the current one minus ALL special characters, but with one page of fluff per character taken away. This was basically suggested earlier and I'm seconding it -- a second book would be produced with some more fluff, but only special characters and "army specific" rules.

Chaplain Lemartes: basic chaplain stats probably, jump pack, death mask. Special Rule: one assault squad per army gets feel no pain, rage and rending. They lose rending if joined by a Chaplain. BAM simple death company.

Dante: basically the same rules, some changes here and there --extra, special rules: chapter tactics: furious charge. Assault Marines allowed as troops.

BT: Emperor's champion -- upgrade for a chapter champion, altered vows system -- chapter tactics: whatever their thing is for falling forward etc -- scouts may join tactical squads. He could be like + 100 to 150 on top of an honour guard champ...

Mephiston: Just 'cause :) Alter his profile to make him slightly weaker, but then give him the the gate, and the combat abilities free, maybe uses all 3 in a turn.

These are examples of what the secondary codex would do -- it would purely be characters for moulding the chapter.

For chaos I'd just like to see like two important changes -- merging chaos daemons back with the CSM book, and the change that... cult troops are elites unless a marked LORD is taken. Daemons could count as their respective choices but would have their points values changed a bit.

Fanboy
14-09-2009, 12:38
Wow 182 responses to this thread already......

I have no time to read them all. All I can say is that i love my Blood Angels, and I demand my own codex.............call it elitest if you wish, but those are just my thoughts.........

Yours thankfully

Fanboy

Industrial Propaganda
14-09-2009, 12:47
Except you could already do that if space wolves were simply included in the main codex like salamanders were. They didn't need their own rules.

Yes they need their own rules. I hate that every space marines armies looks the same like the Vulkan's ultramarines or Vulkan's imperial fists. More space marines codex means more armies variants, more fluff, more illustrations and more new miniatures.

wilsongrahams
14-09-2009, 12:54
Blood angels have NEVER had a proper themed army and deserve one as the original marines.

Crazed lunatics charging forwards has never fitted with the fluff - not all succumb to the rage. Being efficient in combat may be bloody but doesn't make them madmen. Blood angels are artists - only a unique and well written codex can theme an army properly.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 12:56
One Codex to Rule them All.

And here's why.

It screws Marine players, and leaves a bad taste in non marine player's mouth to have Marines get updated every five seconds.

Instead of one really well designed and competitive codex, SM get Beta Tests (Codex DA) that get released as commercial products, one dimensional Idiotic Dexes that talk about how awesome Blue Is. (SM) While lacking in power compared to contemporaries. Then GW goes "OH ****" and has to release yet another Marine Book in order to bring the SM up to par. This often fails. (BT) because just like the two that came before, typically it has no teeth or is a very poorly thought out book that is "different!" but still One Dimensional and lacking in depth.

So you get three or worse Four Crap Dexes, that really aren't different from each other to have 'Different' Lists.

Did I mention all the while the wargear changes more often than some people change their underwear?

And this is all just what it does to the Marine Player.

Now for the Xenos and not Power Armor user.

1. My army is out of date. Not only is it not one, but two editions behind, but Marines have gotten count them. SIX codexes since mine was brand new. Yes you read that right SIX and it's only been two editions.

2. We get one dex, even if our army has varying factions within it's ranks that are so dramatically different that they have different Model Ranges than the army we were put with. Xenos and IG, any given one has MORE diversity within it's folds than Any Form of Space Marine. Especially with as cookie cutter and lame as the "multiple sm" books are.

3. We have to deal with opponents who seemingly change codexes week to week, and wargear that changes with them. Do you know how hard it is to keep that **** straight? Oh and pt costs change constantly too, so realistically speaking we have no way other than our opponent's word of knowing if they have too much stuff at a given point level or not.

Now for why the General Hobbyist Hates the Crap Dex Method.

1. It has been PROVEN time and time again how radically diverse armies (far more diverse than Marines will EVER be) can all be put into one very well designed codex. Doing so would free up the release schedule SAVE Gw money, and open up the metagame.

2. It rewards Incompetent Game Designers, and Writers such as Matt Ward because "Sorry buddy maybe we'll get it right next time!" rather than an immediate trip to the Homeless shelter and Black Listing for being utterly Incompetent at the Fluff Wheel and the Rules Wheel. The "Fix it with a patch!" method rewards ******. Rewarding ****** in the entertainment industry is a bad bad idea.

What Codex SW has taught us already
That a competent game designer can infact design a Marine Codex, in such a way that there's virtually nothing fluffwise that can't be met. The SW codex is so well designed that frankly I feel that every SM player on Holy Terra, needs to switch to this book and boycott all other Marine dexes (because they'll be lame and cookie cutter in comparison anyway).

With SW you can field Blue Boys, Green Boys, Red Boys, Black Boys and the Gray Boys with ease. That's a very nice thing.
Marines finally have a Dex IMO that is as well designed as the Eldar and IG books are.

Flypaper
14-09-2009, 13:36
Voted Undecided (one of the lucky few! Yay!). I think an all-in-one codex is possible, and if done correctly could even be the best way to proceed.

...However, I don't think GW is capable of doing it right at the moment. Both because I don't have all that much faith in them as rules developers, and because current codex trends would be noxious to the idea (and the 30-special-character approach would be horrible).

(Having said that, they could've integrated C:BA, C: DA, and C:BT into the current book relatively easily. It would've required agressively costed Vanguard to support a lot of counts-as, though)

(...and not gonna happen for financial reasons, blah blah blah)

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 13:42
One Codex to Rule them All.
And so on.

:wtf:

That post is either a joke or you really don't know what you are talking about.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 13:45
:wtf:

That post is either a joke or you really don't know what you are talking about.

Or I know exactly what I'm talking about.

Seriously, look at the SW codex. Tell me what you can't pull off with it. Jump Marines as troops... really is that how you define ALL BA? (and even that one's a pretty shady argument given that you have Bloodclaws to work with as assault troops)

Fact: Marines are Marines.

Fact: There is more differences between GUARD and Eldar armies than there are between Marine armies.

Fact: The Ig and Eldar list was so well designed that there's really no established Ig or Eldar list type that you can't pull off.

Fact: Marines are so **** poor designed usually that it takes multiple books just to even remotely equal ONE Ig or Eldar dex.

Fact: Marines have wargear which changes with every damn codex. Causing Internal Consistency issues, and issues with the ability to suspend disbelief.

Thylacine
14-09-2009, 13:48
Perhaps one large codex for all the minor chapters like Relictors and White Scars. The codex would have a few pages devoted to each chapter listing how divergent they are from codex SM. You can write the stroyline on just one page, the rest is rules.

The problem of upgrading the codex would still be a problem, just look at what SW players have put up with over the last nine years.

x-esiv-4c
14-09-2009, 13:54
1 codex to represent hundreds of chapters?? Well, that wouldn't work would it? Look at C:CSM perfect example of a raging failure in that attempt.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 13:56
The fact is, what marine codex' are released? BT a few years ago, DA was 2 years IIRC BA got the WD treatment, SW no but there last codex was way back when, its the core SM codex that has been released the most, marine armies are not released as much as people like to claim they are.

Nor would one codex solve the 'problem' of multipe marines releases, the only difference is when the next range is released is that no new codex, does not stop a new release happening.

And just claiming the non vanilla codex's are crap is follish, I have played BT for around a decade, I have no problems with them nor does it seem the people who have followed my advice, or other Templar players who play with builds I don't.

The new SW does not have anything that bothers me, I own the new Space Wolf codex (nennerneener) and nothing I have read has made me bat an eye lid, so what if you can take dedicated armies of bikes, jump packs or termies, its not the reason everyone get that army, for most it is the background, it is the look and it is the playstyle.

Its not the marines fault they get so much attention, why don't eldar get a codex for each craftworld? Why should they? From what I have read you can take any craftworld using the Eldar codex, so can you for Orks, IG... and so on.

What would be nice is more books for them regardless, why don't they do more books for them? I can only guess.

What is your guess?

EDIT:woops missed your edit:


Or I know exactly what I'm talking about.

Seriously, look at the SW codex. Tell me what you can't pull off with it. Jump Marines as troops... really is that how you define ALL BA? (and even that one's a pretty shady argument given that you have Bloodclaws to work with as assault troops)..

Answered above.


Fact: Marines are Marines..

Yes and no. A marine is a marine, but one marine varies from another marine.


Fact: There is more differences between GUARD and Eldar armies than there are between Marine armies..

Like what? Playstyle? Background? Poplulation?

Of course there is, though that is not a point in itself why there should be one marine codex, what that means is there should be more guard and Eldar books.

Not connected to this topic.


Fact: The Ig and Eldar list was so well designed that there's really no established Ig or Eldar list type that you can't pull off..

Exactly, though all that has lead to is vanilla guard and vanilla Eldar, they should have more books.


Fact: Marines are so **** poor designed usually that it takes multiple books just to even remotely equal ONE Ig or Eldar dex..

You have lost me, you mean in gameplay or background? Either way I disagree, though as a BT player my opinion is biased.


Fact: Marines have wargear which changes with every damn codex. Causing Internal Consistency issues, and issues with the ability to suspend disbelief.

Besides whiney DA players I see no problem with it.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 13:59
SM 2 times. BT, DA, SW, BA. Six.

Crons? 1.

BT compared to SW, BA, SM are inferior all the way around. You can have a Superior army, and one that's very BT like rules wise with the SW dex and Sagas.

"But fluff!" No. Fluff is not a justification for something to have it's own book if it's the same faction. You are still SM. All it's doing is killing the Release Schedule to continue the Cookie Cutter SM approach. Rather than the Let's make an Incredibly Diverse Single Dex.

Cadia and Catachan are infinitely different than SM are to each other. Yet I can take a Cadia, or Catachan list using one well designed codex.

You can easily make a list of any of the Chapters using the SW dex. Frankly if you folded the backgrounds from the other chapters into the SW you'd have a very diverse characterful and flexible SM codex which can even field "non codex" marines with. "But it can't be done our background is too diverse!" yeah.. right.

Never read the Ig or Eldar book then have you?

I don't think you understand (then again most SM players don't). Xenos and IG players don't want multiple books per faction. We understand how lame and cookie cutter cartoony the lists would be if that happened. We understand how ONE well designed book is a very good thing, and not just for our army but for the hobby.

Most of us, don't play Marines for various reasons. Among them is the fact that frankly each book is entirely too one dimensional. (I will be playing SW btw. I used to play BT. But frankly Bts are too one dimensional, and I can more easily fit my homebrew's fluff with the SW dex)

Industrial Propaganda
14-09-2009, 14:02
I agree. Their should be more books for Eldars too. The Dark, the Craftworlds and the Dinoriders.

It's not the marines players fault to receive more attention than Xenos.

destroyerlord
14-09-2009, 14:03
I haven't read the thread, and don't intend to, but I voted and it says elaborate. I say no, the extra codexs are cool, they add a little variety to all the marine armies out there, get GW lots of money (which invariably good for us, whether you want to admit it or not), and have lots of nice pics and background. Plus there are even some rules in them too if you want your marines to play a little differently.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 14:08
SM 2 times. BT, DA, SW, BA. Six.

Crons? 1.

BT compared to SW, BA, SM are inferior all the way around. You can have a Superior army, and one that's very BT like rules wise with the SW dex and Sagas.

"But fluff!" No. Fluff is not a justification for something to have it's own book if it's the same faction. You are still SM. All it's doing is killing the Release Schedule to continue the Cookie Cutter SM approach. Rather than the Let's make an Incredibly Diverse Single Dex.

Cadia and Catachan are infinitely different than SM are to each other. Yet I can take a Cadia, or Catachan list using one well designed codex.

You can easily make a list of any of the Chapters using the SW dex. Frankly if you folded the backgrounds from the other chapters into the SW you'd have a very diverse characterful and flexible SM codex which can even field "non codex" marines with. "But it can't be done our background is too diverse!" yeah.. right.

Never read the Ig or Eldar book then have you?

As I've already pointed out in this thread, at the time that the Black Templars, Dark Angels and Blood Angels were updated, their codices were variously, 8, 9 and semi-obsolete (Codex: Armageddon featured a BT list) years old. The Necrons were about 5 years old, the Daemon and Witch Hunters were about 3 or 4. The Crons were just about in update range, but to be quite frank the DA and BA were older and a lot more broken since they referred to a Codex that no longer technically existed (C: SM 3rd edition).

Since that point there's actually only been 2 'Space Marine' updates - one at the start of 5th edition, and to be quite frank, if you don't think the Marines are going to get the first new codex for every edition you're an idiot. The second is the Space Wolves, who're not yet released, and they're the second-oldest book currently in the game.

The update schedule largely works. Orks took longer than DE have waited, as did Eldar (from 3rd to 4th edition). The 'glut' of Marine codices has never really existed except in the minds of bitter non-Marine players - in actual fact the thing that stalled the update schedule was Chaos getting 3 codices in the space of 2 editions, Tau being inserted into the game and then getting a second update a very short time later, and the Tyranids getting a codex in about 2002 and then an update a short time later (3 years). The only reason that the Marine books (one of which ISN'T A REAL BOOK) appear to have 'clogged up' the schedule is that they waited an extremely long time between updates before doing them all at once, and half-assing it with the Blood Angels to boot.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 14:09
Exactly.


SM 2 times. BT, DA, SW, BA. Six.

Crons? 1.

BT compared to SW, BA, SM are inferior all the way around. You can have a Superior army, and one that's very BT like rules wise with the SW dex and Sagas.

"But fluff!" No. Fluff is not a justification for something to have it's own book if it's the same faction. You are still SM. All it's doing is killing the Release Schedule to continue the Cookie Cutter SM approach. Rather than the Let's make an Incredibly Diverse Single Dex.

Cadia and Catachan are infinitely different than SM are to each other. Yet I can take a Cadia, or Catachan list using one well designed codex.

You can easily make a list of any of the Chapters using the SW dex. Frankly if you folded the backgrounds from the other chapters into the SW you'd have a very diverse characterful and flexible SM codex which can even field "non codex" marines with. "But it can't be done our background is too diverse!" yeah.. right.

Never read the Ig or Eldar book then have you?

Yes I own and have read both, why do you ask?

You seem to think you can pick and choose, in the reverse, you can use the standard marine codex to play SW...

As I already thought, you are against the marine release schedule, why you think a one codex will fix that is truly beyond me.

By the looks of it you want to dumb down 40k with one book for every faction where they can take any type of army they want... why not just play apocalypse at smaller points with a min HQ and troops :).

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 14:22
Exactly.



Yes I own and have read both, why do you ask?

You seem to think you can pick and choose, in the reverse, you can use the standard marine codex to play SW...

As I already thought, you are against the marine release schedule, why you think a one codex will fix that is truly beyond me.

By the looks of it you want to dumb down 40k with one book for every faction where they can take any type of army they want... why not just play apocalypse at smaller points with a min HQ and troops :).

No the Sw can play Standard Sms better than standard Sms can. Because it's a well designed book. Sw can play pretty much all of the SM 'factions'. Because it's a well designed book.

One Marine book to rule them all would solve the Marine Issue completely. For everyone.

And please, asking for consistent rules isn't asking for a Dumbing Down. I want everyone to have a very flexible codex capable of fielding whatever fluff exists for the faction in question. For example, being able to field SW in the same dex as Blue Boys. Because frankly they are the same army. And it takes care of another issue simultaneously of having -small- engagements that featured multiple chapters.

If you had one well designed book, you could have the Smurfs doing a rescue mission allied with SW without having to resort to a stupid and pointless 3k + point game. Without the need of a second Marine player. With pretty much every army BUT Sm you can already do this. I think it's time SM get with the program already.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 14:53
One Marine book to rule them all would solve the Marine Issue completely. For everyone.



How.

You seem to only want a well designed book, which you seem to think the SW one is.

wilsongrahams
14-09-2009, 14:53
Having reviewed the thread I believe that ONE codex could suffice pretty well, but with options for different force lists, White Scars, Ravenwing, Blood Angels, Deathwing etc.

There is no reason one LARGE codex can't contain all the background and all the lists. In 3rd ed the pathetic BA and DA codexes weren't worth the paper they were written on when there was maybe two new options and a hanful of wargear that could have gone in the SM codex with 'BA only' next to them for example.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 14:55
Having reviewed the thread I believe that ONE codex could suffice pretty well, but with options for different force lists, White Scars, Ravenwing, Blood Angels, Deathwing etc.

There is no reason one LARGE codex can't contain all the background and all the lists. In 3rd ed the pathetic BA and DA codexes weren't worth the paper they were written on when there was maybe two new options and a hanful of wargear that could have gone in the SM codex with 'BA only' next to them for example.

There is no reason why it can't, true.

But if I play 'x' chapter and don't care about the others why should I pay for the info on the other ones?

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 14:59
There is no reason why it can't, true.

But if I play 'x' chapter and don't care about the others why should I pay for the info on the other ones?

The same reason why Cadian players have to "suffer" with Catachan fluff in the same book? If they can get satisfactory info about Vostroyan first born, Catachan, Tanith, Elysia, Cadia. And in the case of the Eldar all of the craftworlds + Exodite info+ harlequins they can do it for SM.

How would it solve the problem?

One Marine book that's well designed (are you missing that part) would supplant the need for 6 forms of Smurf just to equal a truly well rounded army book. It would free up the release schedule so that when **** happens and an army needs an emergency update they can actually get one rather than having to suffer multiple editions without bogging down the release schedule.

It would also subsequently lower the Inventory Costs, of keeping armies in stock that aren't selling because they've not been updated since the Dawn of Time itself *cough* Dark Eldar *cough*.

It would also demonstrate good faith, and customer relations to players of other armies. INCLUDING Sm.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 15:02
The same reason why Cadian players have to "suffer" with Catachan fluff in the same book?

Which would be the case except what? the Catachan fluff amounts to say 4-5 pages alltogether?

Whereas the marine fluff for each chapter with an existing book...

Thing is, you have not given any real valid reason why there should only be one book, all you seem to be doing is moaning about what marines get and xenos don't.

EDIT:woops missed your edit again:


The same reason why Cadian players have to "suffer" with Catachan fluff in the same book? If they can get satisfactory info about Vostroyan first born, Catachan, Tanith, Elysia, Cadia. And in the case of the Eldar all of the craftworlds + Exodite info+ harlequins they can do it for SM.

How would it solve the problem?

One Marine book that's well designed (are you missing that part) would supplant the need for 6 forms of Smurf just to equal a truly well rounded army book. It would free up the release schedule so that when **** happens and an army needs an emergency update they can actually get one rather than having to suffer multiple editions without bogging down the release schedule.

It would also subsequently lower the Inventory Costs, of keeping armies in stock that aren't selling because they've not been updated since the Dawn of Time itself *cough* Dark Eldar *cough*.

It would also demonstrate good faith, and customer relations to players of other armies. INCLUDING Sm.

Guard play the same as they are trained and organised on a galactic level, they don't (generaly) have enough autonomy to create there own fighting style and so and so forth and blah blah blah, that in itself is not enough to validate one marine codex.

Designed well. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies.

The release schedule as pointed out by another member is not dominated by marines as some claim, stop claiming it is.

How is it good faith?

What reason do you have to make it one book besides mini apoc and wargear selections?

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 15:08
Which would be the case except what? the Catachan fluff amounts to say 4-5 pages alltogether?

Whereas the marine fluff for each chapter with an existing book...

Thing is, you have not given any real valid reason why there should only be one book, all you seem to be doing is moaning about what marines get and xenos don't.

I already have given reasons. But you chose to ignore them.

Noooooo they don't. Alot of it's Copy Pasta and rehash on the same theme. Cut the unnecessary rehashes and you get about 4-5 pages. Certainly if you gut all of the "EVERYONE WANTS TO BE BLUE!" from the Sm dex you'd have a very hollow unfufilling dex that fails to even describe one chapter adequately.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 15:11
I already have given reasons. But you chose to ignore them.

Noooooo they don't. Alot of it's Copy Pasta and rehash on the same theme. Cut the unnecessary rehashes and you get about 4-5 pages. Certainly if you gut all of the "EVERYONE WANTS TO BE BLUE!" from the Sm dex you'd have a very hollow unfufilling dex that fails to even describe one chapter adequately.

Yes you gave reasons, none of which where valid.

Lars Porsenna
14-09-2009, 15:12
Lars you saying to go back to the old Codex model that gave us zero fluff/background what so ever and proved to be one of GW's biggest mistakes ever. They got so many complaints over those and it dominated the lectures that they'd do as people would ask wheres the background gone etc..

No this is not what I said. What I did say is that the fluff that is there is often extraneous. What I'm advocating is use the space more efficiently and write the fluff that is more informative.

Damon.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 15:12
Okay, Give me a VALID Reason why they should have multiple books that do nothing but Eat the schedule and Cookie Cutter the marine?

You apparently know nothing of IG if you can say that with a straight face LM.

We're done here.

Lord Malorne
14-09-2009, 15:19
Okay, Give me a VALID Reason why they should have multiple books that do nothing but Eat the schedule and Cookie Cutter the marine?

You apparently know nothing of IG if you can say that with a straight face LM.

We're done here.

You can see my face? As I did say, and I did, they should have more books. I can't say why they don't.

Eat the schedule? what 6 releases, one of which was a WD release in about nine years? (may be more than 6 I would need someone else to clarify).

Cookie Cutter? I am english, what does that mean?

They should have multiple books because they have HAD multiple books for almost a decade now, back then one book may have been and probably was viable, but now, it would be a diservice to lump them in one book.

loveless
14-09-2009, 15:20
A little intense wording on the poll...I don't think it's "stupid" so much as I think it's not monetarily or universally sound.

For instance, Space Marines have long been the top seller. Since Marine boxes litter any GW stand, you want as many opportunities as possible to sell them. The best way to shift them is to keep updating codices and give players several reasons to buy a box of Assault Marines or Devestators, or what-have-you. Since it doesn't make sense to release a brand-new Codex: Space Marines every other year, you have off-shoots that make use of the same models - Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Black Templar, Space Wolves. Five armies that make use of the same family of product - practically 5 birds with one stone, discounting chapter-specific items.

Looking at the story of Warhammer 40K, it leans quite heavily on Marines. As dark as everything is, they're very much the shining knights of the story. They get a lot of focus time - and who in 40K doesn't know the story behind the Blood Angels or Dark Angels or Ultramarines and so on?

While Dark Angels and Blood Angels could likely be absorbed into the main Codex (a few characters with differing Chapter Tactics would be all that's necessary - or the ability to "buy" the appropriate tactics), Space Wolves and Black Templar would make things a bit crammed.

Templar do not make use of Librarians, Devestators, Whirlwinds, or traditional Scout squads. Their organization and methods would be a bit much to handle for a simple Tactics switch.

Space Wolves seem to have taken Guilleman's codex and used it to line the pens of their Fenrisian Wolves. In all honesty, the Wolves are the chapter most-deserving of their own Codex just for their structure.

You could likely do it in 3 books - but the "Codex" book would be so thick it would cost as much as a Land Raider. Not really the sort of thing you want for any army. So, you take the chapters with the greatest deviance and split them off - giving you a book for Blood Angels and a book for Dark Angels (who seem to suffer a bit if you aren't playing a Wing).

It's just the way it goes for the stars of the story. It's the Marines' World - Xenos and Chaos just die in it.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 15:22
Cookie Cutter: the same. Generic. Bland. One Dimensional.

No they shouldn't. For sheer practicality reasons. It eats a schedule which is entirely too lengthy in time scope as it is. Given GW's asinine release schedule of only four books a year, and a five year edition span Six Marine books is too many. Five too many.

There are 1. Eldar, 2 Nids, 3 Tau, 4 Necrons, 5 Dark Eldar, 6 Daemons, 7 Sisters of Battle, 8 Daemonhunters, 9 Imperial Guard, 10 Space Marines 11 Chaos Marines. Hypothetically, in a 3 a year release pattern with no SM clogging up the pipeline it would take Three Years...actually almost Four Years just to get everyone current in a given edition. Out of Five of an Edition's life span. Marines have slowed this down to the point where multiple armies are not only one But TWO editions behind.

Cookie Cutter: applies to Sm because of how many books they have. Each one Niches the army further and further, to the point where each list becomes more and more one dimensional. SW of course is a clear break from that and seems to be hinting at a One Codex to rule them all in a not so far off future. It's better to have -one- flexible Codex in order to do a given faction. Especially in a game with as many factions that 40k has.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 15:28
Okay, Give me a VALID Reason why they should have multiple books that do nothing but Eat the schedule and Cookie Cutter the marine?

You apparently know nothing of IG if you can say that with a straight face LM.

We're done here.

I like how you ignored my post explaining why ZOMG MARINES CLOG SCHEDULE is a totally invalid argument. Classy stuff.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 15:29
See above post.

Marines HAVE clogged the schedule. Just look at the legitimate different factions, and compare Edition Life Span. Five years, 11 factions. Do the math. In a FIVE YEAR SPAN every army should be current. Guess what? They aren't.

Mike3791
14-09-2009, 15:30
While we're at it, lets roll CSM in also. After all, they're still marines, right? We'll just throw in a couple more characters, give a few "alternative" unit types (we can call them demons, or marine serfs, or something altogether interesting), and a couple more rules. Add 5 more pages for fluff, and voila! we're good.

Hell, lets go a step farther, and throw in Sisters, and Grey Knights! After all, they're still in power armor, right? Not all that much different. 2-3 more special characters each, another half dozen pages...... Done.

While we're at it, lets incorporate Necrons. Since, you know, the statlines are mostly the same... 3+ save, 4/4/4/4, all that... Another character or two, we'll have to add some "unique" names to the unit titles, we'll call it "SM Tactical Squad, or CSM Squad, or Sister Squad, or Grey Knight Squad, or Necron Unit" We'll need smaller font, but overall it'll work for consolidation purposes.

Now that we've done that with SM, lets take a look at other codecies. Eldar/Dark eldar can be combined easily. Adding a few pages, and a few new rules, we can throw Tau in there, probably IG as well.... We can call this one Codex: Xenos 1... As for the others, well, we can get creative, throw Orks, Tyranids, and Daemons into a codex, few extra rules, few extra options, background pages, and we have Codex: Assault Xenos.

This is a ridiculous comparison, even when you say combine SM with CSM. All imperial space marine chapters have the same stat line/origin/allegiance as each other. They are at core, the same army.

I voted yes, because the only difference between the loyalist chapters is the special rules/wargear, and as discussed, it is not even that substantial. Remember Codex: CW Eldar that was used with the 3rd ed Eldar book? When the current Eldar where released in '07, it was stated that the craftworlds would be represented by how you built your army(giving you the option to play an existing one or creating a new one.)

I know it won't happen, but I think Space Marines should be similar. If you wanna make a blood angel with wolf claws, then go for it, just make the points appropriate. Also I would allow the options to pay points for special rule upgrades to represent different chapters but also enforce limitations. Only certain units can have certain upgrades, etc.

Ex. Assault squad pays X points for the furious charge rule.
Ex. Assault squad can have furious charge or feel no pain, but not both.

I understand Space Marines keep GW going(they outsell all other GW products combined) and as far as sales are concerned, I would be ok with a new SM codex being released every 18-24 months with lots of model choices...as long as it is a upgrade for the same book. This will also eliminate the rule/point cost inconsistencies that vary with every chapter release. IG can be played a million different ways representing a million different IG homeworlds, SM should be no different.

A flexible, quality codex is better then 5 codexes that are are mostly the same except for minor rule tweaks.

People will play space marines no matter what GW does with them, or how often they are updated

Nezmith
14-09-2009, 15:33
What GW needs to do is squat all the Xeno Codexes.

Space Marines are cool enough not to need Xenos to fight, because they will sell well enough on their own. That way GW can maximize profit, since all they will be selling, is their best seller.

Best business decision ever, am I right?

Corrode
14-09-2009, 16:08
See above post.

Marines HAVE clogged the schedule. Just look at the legitimate different factions, and compare Edition Life Span. Five years, 11 factions. Do the math. In a FIVE YEAR SPAN every army should be current. Guess what? They aren't.

Codex releases since 3rd edition, organised by date (ascending order, '$ EDITION marks an edition change):

Space Wolves - October 2009
Imperial Guard - May 2009
Space Marines - October 2008

5TH EDITION

Chaos Daemons - May 2008
Orks - January 2008
Chaos Space Marines - September 2007
Blood Angels (pdf) - June/July 2007
Dark Angels - March 2007
Eldar - November 2006
Tau - March 2006
Black Templars - November 2005
Tyranids - June 2005
Catachans - wiki doesn't list a release date but sometime in 2005, as a pdf similar to the BA
Space Marines - November 2004

4TH EDITION

Witch Hunters - April 2004
Imperial Guard - November 2003 (supercedes 1999 Codex: Imperial Guard)
Daemonhunters - March 2003
Chaos Space Marines - October 2002 (supercedes 1999 Codex: Chaos)
Necrons - July 2002
Tau - October 2001
Tyranids - February 2001
Craftworld Eldar - June 2000
Space Wolves - April 2000
Catachans - February 2000
Imperial Guard - November 1999
Eldar - August 1999
Orks - July 1999
Dark Angels - May 1999
Chaos - February 1999
Blood Angels - December 1998
Dark Eldar - November 1998
Space Marines - October 1998

3RD EDITION

Let's analyse some data, then.

3rd edition - everything gets updated inside the 6 year span, Tau and Necrons are released in Codex form for the first time (Necrons had previously appeared in Chapter Approved and formerly in Rogue Trader as the Chaos Android concept). Imperial Guard and Chaos get two codices. The edition lasts 6 years, 1998-2004.

4th edition - Marines, Tau, Tyranids, BT, DA, BA, Orks, Chaos, Eldar, Catachans get updates, and 'new' faction Chaos Daemons is introduced. Edition lasts 4 years.

5th edition - Marines, Guard, Space Wolves so far.

Between December 1998 (release of Blood Angels minidex) and June/July 2007 (Blood Angels pdf), a span of 9 years passed. In that time:

The Necrons were released (2002).
The Tau were released (2001) and updated (2006).
'Chaos' of some form had 2 codices - in 1999, 2002 - and shortly were to get two more, in 2007 and 2008.
The Imperial Guard had 3 updates - 1999, 2003, 2009. If you include the Catachans (who, as a faction, have had an equal number of codices since 3rd edition, in equivalent formats to BA - minidex and then pdf) - they've had 5.

You may be reading the release schedule and saying 'A-ha! But there WAS a release glut, in 2005-7 which saw 3 Marine codices followed by the 2008 5th Edition codex!'. You'd be wrong.

At the time of the printing of Codex: Dark Angels 4th edition, the previous codex was 8 years old and balanced around access to the 3rd edition Codex: Space Marines. In 2007 there had been a new base document released. In 2007, the Necron codex was 5 years old - about the average lifespan for a Codex. For reference, the 3rd edition Space Marine Codex was used for 6 years, October 1998 to November 2004.

Whilst comparing Necrons, let's also look at Tau - a new race in 2001, updated in 2006. They were, in fact, done right in the middle of the 4th edition life cycle 2004-2008. They received 2 new codices in 5 years, whereas the Blood and Dark Angels were made to wait 9 and 8 years respectively. Tyranids are even more egregious - 2 codices in 4 years, 2001 and 2005.

Since everyone's new pet hate is the Space Wolves, well, they're 9 years old too, older than every current codex bar Dark Eldar.

For comparison's sake with those 'hunter and Necron players who feel they've had to wait an unfairly long time - the Necron Codex is 7 years old, the Daemonhunters is 6 and the Witch Hunters is 5. Orks waited 9 years (1999 to 2008) and Eldar waited 7 years (1999-2006, excluding the abortion that was C: CE).

The only reason that we're in the current mess with 'broken' codices is the fact that the edition change from 3rd to 5th was too rapid. If we look at the release schedule as a whole, it's actually Chaos and the Guard which have a 'glut' of codices. Orks and Eldar, two of the biggest races in the game, waited longer with worse books than the Necrons have had to, than the Guard have ever had to, and than the Tau could even consider having had to.

tl;dr there's no 'glut' of Marine codices, the various Marine factions have never, at any point, held up the schedule and stopped more 'deserving' races getting their books, and all of you Necron/Tau/Guard players crying about your book is SO AWFUL and SO OLD and OMG SPACE MARINES FANBOYS can go choke. The only race in the game which has any grounds at all for complaint is Dark Eldar, and I'm sure both players will be along shortly to remind all you updated-since-1998 chaps that you really don't know what 'waiting' means. (yes, I excluded the 2003 'update' - that's the same level of 'update' as GW releasing an FAQ tomorrow saying 'sorry, we forgot that Guard should probably be able to use vehicle upgrades, here they are'.

Eulenspiegel
14-09-2009, 16:22
(...) and all of you Necron/Tau/Guard players crying about your book is SO AWFUL and SO OLD and OMG SPACE MARINES FANBOYS can go choke.
This again :rolleyes:
Just for your info: I, the thread starter, play Blood Angels as my first and favouritetest army and intend to start some DIY marines in the future. I also play Orks, Imperial Guard and Thousand Sons, so you can say I see both sides of that argument.
For me I can honestly say that I want each army to receive the same amount of coverage. Call it "GW love". I don´t want my Blood Angels being imbalanced when they get updated.
(Thing is, they´ll notice what they did with the Wolves and will most likely make a face heel turn again resulting in something like the Dark Angels dex -.- ).

I really can´t see why people are getting worked up over the poll question, it´s a simple yes/no one, and you may (this being a forum) freely elaborate your standpoint if you feel so. Trying others to see the one true truth really is so beside the point it´s not funny.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 16:25
And some of that comes back to having ****** working for them (Such as the Authors yes plural of the Tau dex, the IG dex and some other offenders)

Again, 5e is out and we've already had 2 marine releases. Pushing off other armies yet again. There is going to be a third next year as well. So that makes 3. Which means two armies that should have gotten an update -won't- before 6e.

Marine Codexes aren't even armies. Why do they keep getting release Slots. Precious slots which as I pointed out, it takes about 4 years of 3 armies a year before the Non Variant Factions are covered. Codex SW proves that Marine variants aren't armies, as Codex SW can do many of the already released so called Army lists, better than their Wasted Codexes can.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 16:29
My main army is Orks, I have a secondary Codex Marines army, and my girlfriend plays Daemons and wants to start Necrons. I've posted in other places that I feel there should be a better way of designing the Marine codices, either by rolling the various 'non-Codex' factions together into Codex: Totally Not Codex Marines or by rolling the BA/DA into the standard Codex. I too would like to see armies get updated in a timely fashion.

What I am tired of, however, is people ignoring objective fact so that they can complain about things. Micha is a prominent example, but there are others as well. The simple assertion was this:

'Lots of Marine codices are bad because they clog up the release schedule.'

This is false. I presented the incontrovertible truth of this in the above post, according to release dates for various codices since 1998. That is the only point I was making in this instance.

@Micha there is no 'yet again'. Read the damn post. At no point have Marine variants 'taken precious slots' from 'deserving non-Marine factions'. If anything else, it's been the other way around. The fact that you dislike the form the two Tau books and the previous IG book took does not change the fact that they were released, in a timely fashion, ahead of the variants you so intensely dislike - and in fact MULTIPLE iterations of those books were released in that time.

The fact you don't consider them armies doesn't make it so. As I've already stated, I don't believe BA/DA are unique enough to really qualify and should be rolled in. Space Wolves and Black Templars are different enough (and play differently enough) that they merit separate attention, unless you're of the hardcore faction that wants to just eliminate all their differences because you don't think they're valid.

As for 'wasted codexes' (for god's sake, stop capitalising in random places, it's tiring to read your posts. You're not German, you have no excuse) the DA Codex was not a wasted book. At the time it was a worthwhile update to an army which previous to that point had been using an extremely limited pamphlet-sized book from the depths of a previous edition (a situation matched only by BA, SW, and Dark Eldar - at the time, the 'hunters were relatively recent and had large, fluff-fillled books, and the Necrons were slightly old but still good at what they did and also had a relatively high-quality book). The fact that it was very quickly invalidated has everything to do with the fact 4th edition was too short and NOTHING to do with it being 'wasted.'

As for 5th having two Marine codices, yes, it does. As I pointed out - the Space Wolves are exceptionally old, two years older than the Necron codex you so desperately want to see updated. The fact that a base Codex: Space Marines was released first is no surprise to anyone, and it happened almost entirely because of the edition change. The Imperial Guard (an army you play and whose schedule doesn't bother you, strangely enough) had had 3 codices in between the two Space Wolf ones, including a post-5th one.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 16:43
Except of course that SW aren't different enough from SM to warrant a book in the first place.

Your logical flaw (and those on your side of the argument) assumes that Marines are not Marines even though they all share the same model range, and the same unit selections.

Your logical flaw is that you fail utterly at realizing, that this is problem because you are too busy drinking the Marineaid. Multiple Sm books is doing nothing positive for your Green/Red/Black/Grey or even Blue marines. Infact it's only making your army worse because there's less variety you can take within your books, and inevitably you end up with some being left behind because of the fact that there's just so many SM books to update in the first place! Putting you if you happen to play the wrong color of Marines in the same situation that Xenos players are often in!

For reference see SW as you so pointed out not having been updated since before crons were released.

Or See, Deathwing being done, but better by SW now.

Or that DA in general have different wargear entirely even though it's supposed to be the same as what SM have.

or that Bts cost more per mini, and have really none of the perks that even DA have, of the BP and grenades.

This is not even intentional. (And if you think it is, then there's no point in arguing with you) This is all because what it means to be a SM changed, between each codex. Rather than having one well engineered book that should be updated with the start of each edition.

And also, I know I'm right about armies not getting the cut. You just watch, there's going to be at least two Not Marines that don't get updated this time around. What will you say then?

wilsongrahams
14-09-2009, 16:43
A complaint upabove about not wanting to pay for the extra fluff for other chapters than your own seems to be missing the fact that codexes are all the same price anyway, and if you count the pages, are all different lengths too, so in effect you'd be paying for your army list and getting the rest free.

For Templars and Wolves, surely they can just use a different force organisation chart with some notes - eg no devastators in black templar etc, and wolves just need a few similar tweaks or one or two unique units. There is little differnce between a wolf and a dark angel - certainly not enough to need a seperate stat line compared to say a space marine over a guardsman. One characteristic point is supposed to be a BIG differnce in ability, and wolves are no better than other marines, not at the game level in my opinion anyway.

Whilst a seperate codex is nice for the fluff, is it worth buying more than one marine codex if you have two marine armies when they are essentially the same.

Even the Blood Angels should be able to field a pure devastator force - they have a whole company kitted out as such, but this isn't allowed in their force chart. This is the point you all miss. A balanced force chart allows any chapter to play as it COULD be used, not as they WANT you to use it. Sure I do base my Blood Angels as an assault force, but from time to time I fight with two tactical squads and a devastator squad with no assault.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 16:55
Except of course that SW aren't different enough from SM to warrant a book in the first place.

Your logical flaw (and those on your side of the argument) assumes that Marines are not Marines even though they all share the same model range, and the same unit selections.

Your logical flaw is that you fail utterly at realizing, that this is problem because you are too busy drinking the Marineaid. Multiple Sm books is doing nothing positive for your Green/Red/Black/Grey or even Blue marines. Infact it's only making your army worse because there's less variety you can take within your books, and inevitably you end up with some being left behind because of the fact that there's just so many SM books to update in the first place! Putting you if you happen to play the wrong color of Marines in the same situation that Xenos players are often in!

I wasn't arguing that Marines are different or special just for being different colours. If you learned to read rather than simply posting angry replies without doing so, you'd see that I believe just as much as you do that the BA and DA are not in any way or form different enough to merit an extra Codex each, and that I'd prefer they be rolled into C: SM (or ideally that a 'Chapters of Legend' type book be released rolling all 4 into one).

As for whether or not it's positive - it's a moot point. Has it been positive so far? Well, for 3rd edition the Blood Angels and Space Wolves did very well out of it. The Black Templars seem to be doing pretty well with their 4th edition book, and are probably stronger overall than the proper book. Dark Angels have historically done pretty poorly out of the situation, but then they aren't really much of a variant to begin with. Space Wolves might be old, but they've benefited from that - I suspect half the justification for doing a Space Wolf update was to uncouple them from C: SM precisely so that some of the wackier combinations from that were ended. 5pt Storm Shields (4++ assault-only save in 3rd, 3++ all-the-time in 5th) anyone?

Getting 'left behind' on gear is an unfortunate side-effect of the short edition - the Angels are released in 2007, and at the end of 2008 a new base book comes out because of an edition change. Had Matt Ward not been allowed to run rampant, the differences probably wouldn't be too noticeable - much of the problem has emerged from his philosophy of 'give everything better gear cheaper, and **** combat shields!'

Your argument about 'Xenos being years behind' is invalid and has shown to be invalid. There are three Xenos factions which have ever been in this situation, which are Orks, Eldar, and Dark Eldar. Orks had an amazing new book, Eldar had a good new book, Dark Eldar are still waiting. Necrons are starting to fall away but they have in no way, shape or form been left behind. They were a very recent army for much of 4th, and are only in the situation they are in now because the time of the edition change from 4th to 5th is also the time that would have made most sense to update them.

e: missed your edit. With the degree of prescience you apparently have, I'd like to know next week's lottery numbers, whether or not marrying my girlfriend will turn out for the best (there's only about 50 years to cover assuming average lifespans, so you should be able to give me an overall estimate pretty quickly), and whether my first born child will be the girl I want or not.

Whitehorn
14-09-2009, 17:01
No thanks.

I much enjoy all the ignorant rants of those who have to wait for their codex to be updated :)

I would prefer grouping by shared or common units:

Codex: Space Marines (as is, covering the mode codex chapters)
Codex: Cult Legions (covering the 4 powers and Word Bearers, including daemon linked units)
Codex: Traitor Legions (the Anti-codex book, covering IW, NL, BL, AL)
Codex: Wannabes - I guess it would have to be 1 book for each of BA, SW, DA, BT.

Captain Micha
14-09-2009, 17:01
Tau have also been left behind despite or perhaps inspite of their "recent" dex.

Remember I don't consider it a recent Codex unless it exists within the context of the current edition. Tau are a 4e child, well and truly. And thus they are hideously outdated. Not only that, but the dex is a mere pamphlet compared to the likes of Eldar and above.

Dark Eldar are severely outdated and severely left behind.

No it's not been shown to be invalid. Infact your argument is "they got an update within the last two editions! They are fine!". When painting your marines different colors has netted you six codexes to choose from in the mean time. In comparison that IS being left behind.

And yet look at the drawbacks those positives have given you. It's given people the wrong mindset all together. "well I use a different list! I must have my own codex! Because I painted differently! Everyone else just needs more books!"

3e shouldn't count for -anything- in 40k because of just how badly everyone was designed. I'm counting strictly 4e and up. Unfortunately, there are four armies which are stuck firmly in 3e. And designed around a totally ****** different game.

rabblerouser
14-09-2009, 17:08
I think it would be really neat to have one big hardcover tome of a codex for marines, but it would never work. Unfortunately it would never work because the rules continue to get updated so the whole book would need relatively frequent updates.

Hypaspist
14-09-2009, 17:24
Tau have also been left behind despite or perhaps inspite of their "recent" dex.

Remember I don't consider it a recent Codex unless it exists within the context of the current edition.
Thats incredibly arbitraty, under which conditions Daemons and Orks aren't recent?


Tau are a 4e child, well and truly. And thus they are hideously outdated. Not only that, but the dex is a mere pamphlet compared to the likes of Eldar and above.

Don't really see the point of your comment here. Feels like you are just trying to invalidate the fact that they got an update in between being created and several other armies still waiting for an update.


Dark Eldar are severely outdated and severely left behind.

Agreed, but this is not the fault of space marine players or the prevalence of space marine codices.


No it's not been shown to be invalid. Infact your argument is "they got an update within the last two editions! They are fine!". When painting your marines different colors has netted you six codexes to choose from in the mean time. In comparison that IS being left behind.
The point being made was that the plethora of Marine Codices that you claim are clogging the schedule is actually, totally wrong.
Your asinine assertion that every marine player simply flips through all the marine codices and picks the most powerful is also a little insulting. (as is your lack of acknowledgement that fluff matters, whilst it isn't the be all and end all, it does make an army different, different enough to *not* want toplay a different space marine chapter.)


And yet look at the drawbacks those positives have given you. It's given people the wrong mindset all together. "well I use a different list! I must have my own codex! Because I painted differently! Everyone else just needs more books!"

WAH. Wrong answer, It's given people the mindset that they have a list they are proud of and want to be able to represent fully, not just take x character for y slight difference in rules, which actually skirts a lot of the things that make a chapter different. If they could do this in one list, more power to them, however I don't think it will ever happen due to the economic and business considerations that they would have to balance to try and make it work.


3e shouldn't count for -anything- in 40k because of just how badly everyone was designed. I'm counting strictly 4e and up. Unfortunately, there are four armies which are stuck firmly in 3e. And designed around a totally ****** different game.
Trying to invalidate a whole edition of updates because you don't like it is poor form. Two of those 3rd edition armies are still reasonably competetive (Dark Eldar/Sisters) even if they are in genuine need of an update to give them more flexibility. were they badly designed also? (apparently not?)

Durath
14-09-2009, 17:26
GW Rulebooks are hard enough to navigate through (unit special rules are separate from Wargear, which are both separate from the points costs). Add to that, often the unit entries appear out of order in which they are listed in the Army Lists.

Having all the chapters in ONE book would be a nightmare to find stuff in.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 17:33
Tau have also been left behind despite or perhaps inspite of their "recent" dex.

Remember I don't consider it a recent Codex unless it exists within the context of the current edition. Tau are a 4e child, well and truly. And thus they are hideously outdated. Not only that, but the dex is a mere pamphlet compared to the likes of Eldar and above.

Dark Eldar are severely outdated and severely left behind.

No it's not been shown to be invalid. Infact your argument is "they got an update within the last two editions! They are fine!". When painting your marines different colors has netted you six codexes to choose from in the mean time. In comparison that IS being left behind.

And yet look at the drawbacks those positives have given you. It's given people the wrong mindset all together. "well I use a different list! I must have my own codex! Because I painted differently! Everyone else just needs more books!"

3e shouldn't count for -anything- in 40k because of just how badly everyone was designed. I'm counting strictly 4e and up. Unfortunately, there are four armies which are stuck firmly in 3e. And designed around a totally ****** different game.

The fact that you don't 'consider it recent' because it isn't 5th edition is ludicrous, especially given that 5th Edition is what, about a year old? You can't argue with actual facts, so instead you've shifted the goalposts. Were Tau badly designed? No, not really. Do they hold up badly in 5th? Yes, they probably do. Is that the fault of 'omg spess mehreens'? No, not really.

3rd edition IS 5th edition. The sum total of rules changes is very minor and mostly revolves around assault mechanics (which, barring initiative-tests-or-die sweeping advance, mostly benefit Tau), cover mechanics (which don't really benefit the very shooty Tau), and the function of vehicle damage tables and ordnance (both of which help more than harm the rather mechanised Tau). Simply ignoring it so that you can attempt to change the facts does not make it go away. As for Necrons, well, they worked fine in 4th as far as I'm aware - they've only suffered in this edition which is ONE YEAR OLD.

Tau have gotten two codices in five years, one of which is less than 3 years old, and that IS fine. Unless you're expecting GW to release a codex a week, then codices having a lifespan of less than 5-6 years is ridiculous.

Since 2006 (the most recent Tau release) there have been 4 Marine codices - three of which were severely outdated, one of which is related to an edition change. One of them isn't even a real codex - it's a .pdf. Updating old books is never a negative, apparently, unless it's SPESS MEHREENS in which case it's always bad and totally stopped awesome Xenos getting their day in the sun (unlike, say, the gap from Templars to Blood Angels, in between which was a two-year gap of nothin' but xenos, or the year 2007-2008, Blood Angels to 5thMarines, in which there were 3 non-Marine books, or the 2000-2004 gap with zero Marine books).

505
14-09-2009, 17:57
Guard play the same as they are trained and organised on a galactic level, they don't (generaly) have enough autonomy to create there own fighting style and so and so forth and blah blah blah, that in itself is not enough to validate one marine codex.

um in truth they are more diverse the SM.

SM-all train to the codex and add their own flavor
-BT add scouts in their squads but other then that they fight like ultras
-DA mass termies (wich others do to at times) lots of bikes (which others do too) other then that everyone fights like ultras
-BA hide you super assult squads and use a lot of assult squads (others to that too) other then that they fight like ultras
-white scars...iron hands.... they all follow the book with minor tweaks

but guard train to their skills and add the imperial doctrine
-Tellarn are trained on horses and tanks (other then that they fight the same)
-Elyson drop troops no other guard are that well trained in grav shoots and little to no vehicles (I would assume being an old paratrooper we didnt have many vehicles)
-Catchan do real well in jungles (other then that...)
-Armageddon all mounted (other then that...)



Designed well. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies. The list is not the only reason people play those armies.


that can be said for guard or any xenos race. I know a lot of people who would give their right arm for a ellyson codex or tallarn. and there is probibly some sick player who wants a ratling codex (admit it if you are....)

any argument as to why SM should keep 4,5,100, 1000 (might as well :D)codexs can be used for any and all other races. but on the same note the argument that the SM players use as to why other races need only one can be said the same for the SM.

for me its an issue of significantly different. I was excited for the BT codex when I got it I was angry since it was copy and paste of the SM codex (the one at the time) except 7 pages or so (I cant remember I never read it again its in a box some were)

this argument will go on and on and on and no one will change their minds

the big issue of a big codex not haveing all the fluff is if GW would get off their lazy butts and actually put articles in WD that are fluff (been a long time since there was just a story or other) that would solve it....Still dont know why I still have a subscription

(BTW I am a SM player white scar off shoot would it be nice to have a WS codex sure but Im man enough to admit they dont need it...just give me some fluff Ill buy that. and IG and necrons.)

Orktavius
14-09-2009, 18:03
Corrode you sir are an island of logic in a sea of stupidity.

Quite frankly Captain Micha I'm going to show you the same respect you show corrode and ignore everything you have to say. You are stuck in your mindset, I'd have an easier time convincing Westboro Baptist Church's Fred Phelps that homosexuality is not an evil sin to be condemmed then convincing you of why it's fine to have multiple codex's for the different Marine chapters. You have a unique skill for ignoring raw facts provided to you that irrefutably disprove your claims that Marines clog up the release schedule and respond with "well I know I'm right"

Arkley
14-09-2009, 18:16
Corrode you sir are an island of logic in a sea of stupidity.

Quite frankly Captain Micha I'm going to show you the same respect you show corrode and ignore everything you have to say. You are stuck in your mindset, I'd have an easier time convincing Westboro Baptist Church's Fred Phelps that homosexuality is not an evil sin to be condemmed then convincing you of why it's fine to have multiple codex's for the different Marine chapters. You have a unique skill for ignoring raw facts provided to you that irrefutably disprove your claims that Marines clog up the release schedule and respond with "well I know I'm right"


QFT!!!!1!!!!

As a former Codex Marine player going to a Dark Angel player I would hate to see individual chapters like Space Wolves (Spit), Dark Angels and Blood Angels be lost in a 1 book solution...

@Captain Micha - If it bothers you that much why you even involved in the hobby? Do GW care about people like you? I certainly hope not. What it boils down to is damned if you do damned if you dont...

Sunyavadin
14-09-2009, 18:25
In my opinion Micha is 90% correct in what he's stated so far. He's made some comments which can be interpreted as opinion caused by someone who sees themselves as a marginalised player, and this is fine. Hell, I stopped playing shortly after 3rd Edition came out and only returned with 5th because of how I felt GW had left me out in the new edition (Biiiiig fluffmonkey here. I live on it. 3rd always seemed more about rules and balancing then enjoyment and a good story) However if you look at those in context, as opinion, and everyone is ENTITLED to opinions like that, they do not invalidate the good arguments he makes.

However, I would like clarification from him on whether he's actually arguing for the same thing *I* am regarding the large complaint many people have with the idea of catch-all codices, that being the fluff. The "Catachans only get 5 pages in the IG 'dex!" argument.

My solution to that, as I stated beforehand, would be make every codex roughly the size of the 2nd Edition codices. Codex: Chaos springs to mind. With 144 pages you could EASILY do a Space Marine book with EVERY bit of fluff from EVERY SM codex since 3rd Edition, AND list the variants to force organisation charts for each individual army.

This applies equally to IG armies, and also to Eldar or Chaos if you lumped their various factions into compilation books.

Most importantly, if you have good testing and also good editing of the codices, you will highlight glaring imbalances before they make it to print more often, as factions which should be comparable will be getting tested and their books edited at the same time as each other.

The Orange
14-09-2009, 18:49
While I agree with you Corrde on your point about the SM codicies (very well put good sir) I have to say I agree with captain Micha regarding the Tau. Their new codex was little more then a minor update mainly thanks to GW gaining the ability to scan Forgeworld models and make them plastic. Tau did get 2-3 brand spanking new units (vespids, sniper drones, etc) but none of the additions were groundbreaking in changing the way the army plays. Though it is only my opinion, id say GW didn't put much development time into the Tau at all, certainly nothing like the changes seen in Tyranids, Eldar, SMs, CSMs, etc. So in that sense I wouldn't consider it an update in the same sense as the other codices have been.

As to the original topic, I don't really see rolling up everything into one codex as viable as each faction will undoubtedly lose a lot of their character just by losing pg's of text/fluff/etc. On top of that it would just make it more difficult for GW to update SMs as they'd have to work on updating all those armies at one time, all for one book. On the other hand I really am beginning to hate the current system too as prolonged spacing's between codex releases just leads to more whining by (some) players because they feel they are entitled to the new toys of their sibling marines. This sibling rivalry is getting old, especially when you get down to it, nothing really prevents these players from using each others codices. Call me biased but no other model range can make claim to such a cushy advantage.

Corrode
14-09-2009, 18:56
I'm aware the 4th edition update wasn't groundbreaking - I was arguing the fact of its existence, not whether or not it was good. How much development time do you think went into Codex: Make Assault Marines Troops, Update Point Costs, Copy and Paste Wargear from C: SM? At least Tau got an actual book produced.

alphastealer
14-09-2009, 19:01
First off I am a tyranid and space marine player (generic marines).

I am all for the idea of having a core space marine codex that is updated around the same time as the main rulebook.

Thereafter the other specialist marine chapters can get their own codex that spends the bulk of the pages focussing on what makes that chapter unique, be it special characters and universal rules or even lots of fluff and unique ways that they can be fielded.

This however should be done with the core in mind. So for instance a Dark Angels or Blood Angels codex should refer back to the core codex for details on a generic predator or rhino or land raider.

Their own codex should deal with their special units and feautres like baal predators and ravenwing configurations.

This would eliminate the silly inequalities between wargear that has the same name but different stats in each codex...storm shields come to mind but I am sure there are a lot more.

From a money point of view it would ensure that all marine players go and buy the core book and then whatever add-on book they like.

This would enrich the space provided for fluff by removing the need to duplicate generic marine entries.

big squig
14-09-2009, 19:16
One book.

Allow term squads, bike squads, and assault squads to be taken as troops if you have a commander or chapter master is term armor, on a bike, or with a jump pack (blood angles, dark angels, white scars, raven wing). If you want to play strict index astartes, then just don't use this option.

Allow tac squads to give up their bolters for close combat weapons. Add power weapon and power fist to the list of weapon options for the heavy weapon marine (black templars, space wolves). If you want to play strict index astartes, then just don't use this option.

Make Death Company a special character unit. (think like the old ultramarine tyraind war veterans)

Merge vets into one unit. (vanguard are pretty crappy anyways). Make them a very very versatile unit to cover things like sword breathen, or crimson fist sternguard, and wolf guard.

Add special characters for space wolves, black templars (including the emperor's champion), dark angels, and blood angles.

grissom2006
14-09-2009, 19:39
In the 3rd Edition thats what Space Marine players had to do in the first place SW, DA and BA all had sections that referred you back to the SM Codex. It the books had no real background SW Codex 14 pages of rules in a 30 page book and need the SM Codex for 11 units and most of the Armoury. I tossed my SW Codex in a box for the simple reason i got pig sick and tired of going from one book to the other, not only to right up the army list but to ensure that the rules are used correctly. As for the number of times kids on games nights would turn up with one Codex and not the other and expect to play got stupid, my local GW made it a rule no Codices for the army you got no game as the store copies weren't to be used.

Big thing to remember if they go one book Codex that prices will go up as their profit margines drop.

Mike3791
14-09-2009, 19:45
Since 2006 (the most recent Tau release) there have been 4 Marine codices - three of which were severely outdated, one of which is related to an edition change. One of them isn't even a real codex - it's a .pdf. Updating old books is never a negative, apparently, unless it's SPESS MEHREENS in which case it's always bad and totally stopped awesome Xenos getting their day in the sun (unlike, say, the gap from Templars to Blood Angels, in between which was a two-year gap of nothin' but xenos, or the year 2007-2008, Blood Angels to 5thMarines, in which there were 3 non-Marine books, or the 2000-2004 gap with zero Marine books).

They should have phased out the other 4 codices(BT,DA,BA,SW) much like CW Eldar and catachans were phased out and wrapped it into one codex. If the current SM codex was flexible like the current Eldar and IG books(not sure about orks and daemons), then players could make whatever chapter they wanted.

Different chapters are NOT separate armies because they use the except same models and rules(mostly) just with different colors. 4th ed chaos was awesome in the way that you could play 1ksons, worldeaters, etc etc all in one book and that's how imperial marines should be now. You don't have to get rid of the existing unique models or rules, just wrap them up into one book instead of killing trees for no reason.

Lordsaradain
14-09-2009, 21:00
If it means the book will have less pages than all the different chapter codexes combined, I'm against it. If not, I'm all for.

Trogdor
14-09-2009, 21:10
If it were fit for purpose, with concise and well written rules, a detailed hobby section and structured in a manner that facilitates ease of reference mid-game, then yes, I would be in favour of a generic Imperial Space Marines codex. It's all pie in the sky of course - I'm also in favour of flying cars and snooze functions on alarm clocks that freeze time but I doubt I'll see either of them either...:)

The Orange
14-09-2009, 22:52
How much development time do you think went into Codex: Make Assault Marines Troops, Update Point Costs, Copy and Paste Wargear from C: SM? At least Tau got an actual book produced.

I'm assuming your referring to BA? I'm not that familiar with it, but wasn't it a bit more of a departure from the previous BA codex. Even though it did copy/paste aspects of the newer DA and/or SM codices, it was still a lot different from its predecessor, right? so maybe it required less development time, but I'm sure it had much more of an affect on the army play style then did Tau Empire vs. Tau. Tau Empire was pretty much a fine tuning of the Tau codex (most changes being in the camp of points tweaks, and not actual changes to the army/wargear/etc.)with some added goodies so it'd look like more then just a quick update.

And tbh, produced or not BA have a valid codex, so I don't really see what that has to do with anything (if the quality of the codex doesn't matter as you said).

JHZ
15-09-2009, 00:15
Allow term squads, bike squads, and assault squads to be taken as troops if you have a commander or chapter master is term armor, on a bike, or with a jump pack (blood angles, dark angels, white scars, raven wing). If you want to play strict index astartes, then just don't use this option.

Allow tac squads to give up their bolters for close combat weapons. Add power weapon and power fist to the list of weapon options for the heavy weapon marine (black templars, space wolves). If you want to play strict index astartes, then just don't use this option.
Or make assault Marines without jump packs able to count as troops, but you need the jump pack on the commander to get jump packed assault Marines as troops. Also, give command squad the option of jump packs and terminator armour.

And I agree on combining the vets. The whole van and sternguard split is stupid, as its more of a playing style than fluff. I can take normal vets and give them long range weapons, and voila, they're "sternguard".

HunterSkunter
15-09-2009, 00:21
I like the idea, but I also play Vampire Counts in WFB, so I like the bloodlines and stuff, seems like it would be cool to do something similar for space marines, obviously not bloodlines though.

nightgant98c
20-09-2009, 16:05
If all other armies can make it on one book, marines could too. But it wouldn't be too hard to release a codex for non-marine divergent armies too.

Thommy H
20-09-2009, 17:29
I hate to bring this up, and I don't know if someone else has mentioned it already because I haven't read the whole thread, but there is an argument that preserving the character of certain Space Marine Chapters by giving their own books has a purpose besides efficiency and simplicity. Dark Angels have their own Codex because Dark Angels have always had their own Codex (okay, they shared with Blood Angels in 2nd Edition, but the point stands) and have always been one of the "big four" Chapters. Where does that fluff go if you bundle them in with Space Marines? Why should DA players lose Azrael, or Blood Angels players lose Dante? They have some of the most iconic and best-loved models in the Space Marine range and I'd hate to see Mephiston or someone reduced to an option for Librarians - "upgrade to Vampire Librarian - x pts. A Vampire Librarian allows you to take Assault Squads as Troops". How much would that suck? Answer: a lot.

Eulenspiegel
20-09-2009, 17:33
Maybe you should have read at least the first post, Tommy ;)
Even there I was talking about Special Characters in that book.

Thommy H
20-09-2009, 17:44
So the book would contain all the existing special characters, would it? I think someone already did that calculation: 48 pages, I think. Somehow, I don't think that would work.

Background has value. I remember when the DA Codex came out and people were asking why they bothered with Belial - couldn't the Company Master just have had an option for Terminator Armour that unlocked Deathwing as Troops? The reason they included him though was because, instead of a generic page about the Master of the Deathwing or an extra page about the Piscina campaign they could combine the two and give the character a bit of personality. He even shows up in the Ork Codex now - it's about creating a believable, intricate world. Plus long-term DA players who remember the Storm of Vengeance campaign pack would get a bit of a kick out of it.

Lumping everything together would reduce the depth of the setting for no good reason beside "it's mildly inconvenient to have a few extra books for the same basic army".

studderigdave
20-09-2009, 17:49
one space marine codex would kill any hope for legion specific chaos marine codexes.

as much as i dont like seeing marine codex clog up the releases slots for other armies that need new books more, it give me hope that ill be able to run real deathguard again sometime down the road.

TheEndIsHere
20-09-2009, 17:50
I think that upgrade to vampire librarian is EXACLY the way to go...

I magine this, getting rid of 4 codecii in one go!

Thats a year and third of codexes gone every whyat, 4-5 years?

It would make a great positive impact on 40k!

Imagine this:

Codex:
Space Marines
Chaos (CSM deamons and LaTD)
Inquisition
Imperial Guard
Orks
Nids
Tau
Eldar(and Dark)
Necrons

9 codecii. 3 a year, every 3 years every army would have been updated!

I'd love that...

D-End

EDIT: 1 big project every year (SM, Chaos or Inquisition) 1 medium (like nids are gonan get) and 1 small (redux like the Tau had)

Who would not love that?

Thommy H
20-09-2009, 17:56
Yes, it would be totally awesome to get rid of a good character like Mephiston! Heaven forbid our abstract collection of rules have some kind of personality...

The setting is the only thing 40K has going for it and you want to remove that in the pursuit of balance or efficiency? Just play Chess. Two factions, perfectly balanced and none of that pesky fluff getting in the way of the pursuit of pure, unadulterated tactical mastery.

Background: unnecessary filler that distracts you from gloriously crushing the toy soldiers owned by the sweaty guy standing on the other side of the table in a dice rolling contest.

Gen.Steiner
20-09-2009, 17:59
I've actually been thinking along these lines myself for a while now, and I don't think it'd be as hard to do as some are suggesting.

Black Templars, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, White Scars... they can all be accomodated with just a few rules, e.g.:

(BT) Combat Training: This Chapter's Scouts take to the field of battle alongside their fully-fledged Marine brothers. Tactical Squads may include 5-10 Scouts with Bolt Pistol and Close Combat Weapon or Bolter and Bolt Pistol at X points per Scout.

(BA) Visions of Glorious Sacrifice: This Chapter suffers from the Red Thirst. It may include 0-1 Death Company unit at X points with options A, B and C. The unit must be lead by a Chaplain.

And so on and so forth. 'Unique' formations like the Deathwing or Ravenwing can be produced by enabling Captains on Bikes to bring Bike Squads as Troops and Captains in TDA to have Terminator Squads, etc.

As for Special Characters, well, just give each chapter that has its own current 'dex no more than three characters.