PDA

View Full Version : Books of the Astronomicon/Chapter Approved, Why don't they exist anymore?



Menthak
21-05-2013, 13:48
First things first, I've put this in Warhammer 40k General because it concerns Warhammer 40k more than GW as a whole/

Alrighty then, I was curious as to why Games-workshop don't do anything like the book of the Astronomicon/Chapter approved anymore.

Secondly, as the poll asks, if they did bring out a new line of books, would you buy them or not? And state why (If you would)

A.T.
21-05-2013, 15:07
Alrighty then, I was curious as to why Games-workshop don't do anything like the book of the Astronomicon/Chapter approved anymoreThey do - Death from the skies, crusade of fire...

Most of the old chapter approved stuff was also either
-working to fill in all the gaps the 2nd to 3rd change created (no longer relevant)
-rules for kitbashed stuff (which GW doesn't seem to approve of anymore)
-a collection of chapter approved rules from white dwarf (from back when WD actually had content sometimes)



Secondly, as the poll asks, if they did bring out a new line of books, would you buy them or not? And state why (If you would)Depends on the content. The recent stuff no, because it was light on content and didn't have anything at all I could use personally.

Menthak
21-05-2013, 16:30
They do - Death from the skies, crusade of fire...

Most of the old chapter approved stuff was also either
-working to fill in all the gaps the 2nd to 3rd change created (no longer relevant)
-rules for kitbashed stuff (which GW doesn't seem to approve of anymore)
-a collection of chapter approved rules from white dwarf (from back when WD actually had content sometimes)


Depends on the content. The recent stuff no, because it was light on content and didn't have anything at all I could use personally.

The Books I was thinking of would be those adding diversity to the current codices or providing people who wanted odd armies (such as Feral Orks) to have them, I don't understand why Games-workshop wouldn't like kitbashing

Bobthemime
21-05-2013, 16:42
I would buy them if they were supported 3 months on, 6 months on, 2 years on..

But as it stands the books that have come out in the last 4 years have been pretty much shelved..

When was the last time anyone played storms of magic? or used the crusade of fire?

Menthak
21-05-2013, 16:45
I would buy them if they were supported 3 months on, 6 months on, 2 years on..

But as it stands the books that have come out in the last 4 years have been pretty much shelved..

When was the last time anyone played storms of magic? or used the crusade of fire?

Never, because they both seem so half arsed (Storm of magic not so much) Whereas looking back through the Old books is plenty of care and consideration for the factions in it.

Vaktathi
21-05-2013, 16:50
If the quality of the content was as it were in the original Astronomicon and Chapter Approved releases, yes.

If it were as, say, the Crusade of Fire, Death from the Skies, or Battle Missions...no, not paying a boatload of money of shoddy content and pretty color pictures of studio models.

Chem-Dog
21-05-2013, 17:00
It's hard to say why GW abandoned the concept, could be it was too difficult to track any sales they generated, could be that it was felt games designers could be put to better use or it could be that the company wanted to consolidate it's range of options rather than diversify (Chapter approved books stopped happening about the same time Codexes stopped having Traits/Doctrines). I suspect that it's a composite of these and other factors. Which is a shame.

I agree with Methank, I really can't see why GW wouldn't full endorse kitbashing as it almost always results in buying more kits than you would need normally to make an army.

With the proviso that I have the money spare, I would definitely buy into this kind of thing again, I'm looking eagerly towards the Eldar supplement to see how worthwhile it is, could be the thing that saves 40K for a lot of us veteran players.

Menthak
21-05-2013, 17:04
It's hard to say why GW abandoned the concept, could be it was too difficult to track any sales they generated, could be that it was felt games designers could be put to better use or it could be that the company wanted to consolidate it's range of options rather than diversify (Chapter approved books stopped happening about the same time Codexes stopped having Traits/Doctrines). I suspect that it's a composite of these and other factors. Which is a shame.

I agree with Methank, I really can't see why GW wouldn't full endorse kitbashing as it almost always results in buying more kits than you would need normally to make an army.

With the proviso that I have the money spare, I would definitely buy into this kind of thing again, I'm looking eagerly towards the Eldar supplement to see how worthwhile it is, could be the thing that saves 40K for a lot of us veteran players.

This is exactly what I mean, imagine if they brought out say, 1 book a year, that gave rules for craftworld eldar or some other obscure army. They don't have to bring out model support, and I doubt the book costs that much to design and print. Then Eldar Vets or people like me who just want diversity would buy both the book and the kits to make Dino Riding Eldar.

skorczeny
21-05-2013, 17:14
The chapter approved from old WDs always seemed temporary and potentially unbalancing.

They made more "special snowflakes" armies, where I always liked the game better with fewer. Keep it simple, I say.

Hypothetical example: If I play crimson fists, and don't use Pedro Cantor, no problem because its just a paint scheme anyway. My army has vanguard vets and crusader land raiders because I like the models.
Then chapter approved on crimson fists dictate their default tactical squads come w/ 'free' heavy bolter and melta gun instead of a 'free' heavy bolter and flamer, and all squad sargs get a power fist at a discounted price. To balance, I lose access to vanguard veterans and crusader pattern land raiders.

Suddenly I'm doing it wrong - I need to buy this new 'mini dex' if I actually want to play crimson fists. Die hard fans start yelling how Crimson Fists are better represented using the Dark Angels codex instead.... and on and on it goes.

I prefer to keep it simple. Let paint schemes and imagination make the theme, not snowflake rules.

Menthak
21-05-2013, 17:17
The chapter approved from old WDs always seemed temporary and potentially unbalancing.

They made more "special snowflakes" armies, where I always liked the game better with fewer. Keep it simple, I say.

Hypothetical example: If I play crimson fists, and don't use Pedro Cantor, no problem because its just a paint scheme anyway. My army has vanguard vets and crusader land raiders because I like the models.
Then chapter approved on crimson fists dictate their default tactical squads come w/ 'free' heavy bolter and melta gun instead of a 'free' heavy bolter and flamer, and all squad sargs get a power fist at a discounted price. To balance, I lose access to vanguard veterans and crusader pattern land raiders.

Suddenly I'm doing it wrong - I need to buy this new 'mini dex' if I actually want to play crimson fists. Die hard fans start yelling how Crimson Fists are better represented using the Dark Angels codex instead.... and on and on it goes.

I prefer to keep it simple. Let paint schemes and imagination make the theme, not snowflake rules.

With respect to Space Marine Chapters and their fans, I wasn't looking at them for this, I was looking for those armies that have almost no support whatsoever, Kroot Mercs, Feral Orks, Harlequins, Genestealer broods, Craftworld Eldar, Mercenaries. Not variations on space marines

A.T.
21-05-2013, 17:20
It's hard to say why GW abandoned the conceptProbably when they stopped putting any actual content into WD - aside from codex:SoB nothing really springs to mind from the last few years to fill out a book.

Menthak
21-05-2013, 18:06
Probably when they stopped putting any actual content into WD - aside from codex:SoB nothing really springs to mind from the last few years to fill out a book.

I don't understand this either, I mean, I can see why there would be no other model companies minis or things like that, but why has there been a decline in content?

skorczeny
21-05-2013, 18:09
With respect to Space Marine Chapters and their fans, I wasn't looking at them for this, I was looking for those armies that have almost no support whatsoever, Kroot Mercs, Feral Orks, Harlequins, Genestealer broods, Craftworld Eldar, Mercenaries. Not variations on space marines

I don't think GW would ever embark upon a new series of products without including Space Marines.

Regardless - the problem I described is not unique to SM Chapters. Its true for Eldar Craftworlds, Ork Clans, Tau Septs, Dark Eldar Kabals, etc.

If this was only used to introduce new content - i.e. an all Kroot army, Eldar Exodites army, a Genestealer Cult army and more with new rules for new units in most FOC slots, then yes, it would be awesome and I would buy it.

Techmarine
21-05-2013, 18:30
With respect to Space Marine Chapters and their fans, I wasn't looking at them for this, I was looking for those armies that have almost no support whatsoever, Kroot Mercs, Feral Orks, Harlequins, Genestealer broods, Craftworld Eldar, Mercenaries. Not variations on space marines

No offense to xeno players intended- but if you expect Games Workshop to embark on a sub-faction financial outing, and not include astartes, you're dreaming.

Dr Morbius
21-05-2013, 18:56
In my believe they have stopped books, because they stopped the articles in WD. These books were, after all, only compilations.

Now the question is why did they stop the articles and especially the army lists?

From my point of view this happenend because of the different expectations GW and the players had on these. For the game designers these were quick exercises with mostly no play testing involved. That was ok as they were thought to be mostly some minor alterations to the main list to provide the fluffy player with ideas on how to construct an army for a specific theme.

Now some of these accidently came out rather strong and were abusedby the WAAC crowd. Especially by those who didn't want to admit that they were WAAC players and hide behind the "fluffy" List.

Please note, I'm not saying that all players of these lists were WAAC players. Just that a WAAC Player had a higher tendency to use those OP lists.

Finally there were those people who really liked the idea behind certain armies and build and painted them lovely with great expense. These players, of course, wanted to continue to use their armies and after a certain time demanded updates for their lists. Preferrably balanced and play tested. But GW did have enough to do keeping their main armies up to date and never intended to update these when they wrote them up in the first place.

So they figured that these lists made quite a number of their gamers in the end not happy and therefore canceled these.

Lord Damocles
21-05-2013, 20:09
All of the 'paint it [colour] get [special rule(s)]' lists were horrible, both in balance and background.

Things like 'Raiders' lists, allies mini-lists, new race-specific fortifications, 'Battlezones' rules, new scenarios (not Battle Missions derpy ones), background etc. would be a plus though.

Of course the old Chapter Approved annuals were re-releases of White Dwarf content, so that's not going to happen again any time soon.

Menthak
21-05-2013, 21:25
In my believe they have stopped books, because they stopped the articles in WD. These books were, after all, only compilations.

Now the question is why did they stop the articles and especially the army lists?

From my point of view this happenend because of the different expectations GW and the players had on these. For the game designers these were quick exercises with mostly no play testing involved. That was ok as they were thought to be mostly some minor alterations to the main list to provide the fluffy player with ideas on how to construct an army for a specific theme.

Now some of these accidently came out rather strong and were abusedby the WAAC crowd. Especially by those who didn't want to admit that they were WAAC players and hide behind the "fluffy" List.

Please note, I'm not saying that all players of these lists were WAAC players. Just that a WAAC Player had a higher tendency to use those OP lists.

Finally there were those people who really liked the idea behind certain armies and build and painted them lovely with great expense. These players, of course, wanted to continue to use their armies and after a certain time demanded updates for their lists. Preferrably balanced and play tested. But GW did have enough to do keeping their main armies up to date and never intended to update these when they wrote them up in the first place.

So they figured that these lists made quite a number of their gamers in the end not happy and therefore canceled these.

The easy way to combat WAAC players would be to make it so that these hypothetical rules were like forgeworld rules, you had to ask your opponents permission.


No offense to xeno players intended- but if you expect Games Workshop to embark on a sub-faction financial outing, and not include astartes, you're dreaming.

I don't see how it could possible cost GW more money than it would make. Plus it's nice to at least do it for the Veteran fans, a futile dream, I know.

Charistoph
21-05-2013, 21:28
Probably when they stopped putting any actual content into WD - aside from codex:SoB nothing really springs to mind from the last few years to fill out a book.

They have been, actually, but they are incorporated later on in to the army book, codex, or expansion book a few months later. Sisters of Battle was the the last time this DIDN'T happen.

For examples, look at Vampire Counts, Daemons, and Death From the Skies. All of which had a "pre-release" in White Dwarf before the books went live the following winter/spring.

duffybear1988
21-05-2013, 21:33
All of the 'paint it [colour] get [special rule(s)]' lists were horrible, both in balance and background.

Sounds like they would be perfect for 6th edition then...

Techmarine
21-05-2013, 22:01
I don't see how it could possible cost GW more money than it would make. Plus it's nice to at least do it for the Veteran fans, a futile dream, I know.

Games Workshop doesn't do anything 'for the fans', veteran status or not. Everything is motivated by money- money that they know would be assured, should some of the releases be marines.

I just cannot possibly see them breaking into sub-faction expansions and not release marine variants. It's just not realistic, given their approach to mainstream codices.

JWhex
21-05-2013, 23:02
There is nothing worth compiling and rereleasing anymore from WD. As others have said they are releasing other types of books, I guess the new Eldar supplement is the latest for 40k and the elf heraldry book for whfb.

Sir Didymus
22-05-2013, 05:48
The easy way to combat WAAC players would be to make it so that these hypothetical rules were like forgeworld rules, you had to ask your opponents permission.
.

Whoever told you this? You need your opponents consent to play, period. He has just as much right to refuse playing your necrons, as he has refusing your DKoK.

Back on topic: I remember those compilations, and I believe they stopped, when gamers started takeing the game seriously and demand 'balance', instead of fun whacky experiments. At the same time they stopped introducing new factions and the Universe stopped expanding and turned into endless retcons and drooling fanfic about muscly supermen - ultimately hitting rock bottom with Draigo.

But those were the good 'ol days, when madness ruled and every random piece of plastic could be turned into a tank :)

Menthak
22-05-2013, 13:39
Whoever told you this? You need your opponents consent to play, period. He has just as much right to refuse playing your necrons, as he has refusing your DKoK.

Back on topic: I remember those compilations, and I believe they stopped, when gamers started takeing the game seriously and demand 'balance', instead of fun whacky experiments. At the same time they stopped introducing new factions and the Universe stopped expanding and turned into endless retcons and drooling fanfic about muscly supermen - ultimately hitting rock bottom with Draigo.

But those were the good 'ol days, when madness ruled and every random piece of plastic could be turned into a tank :)

I know it's not like pokémon battles, you can't just lock eyes from across the store and start playing, but you know what I mean, if you ask someone "Hey do you want a game" "Sure what points?" "Uh 1500 okay?" "Sure"
You don't need to follow that up with "Oh, am I okay to use Tyranids?" whereas you would with Death Korps or the Hypothetical chapter approved

A.T.
22-05-2013, 14:29
You don't need to follow that up with "Oh, am I okay to use Tyranids?" whereas you would with Death Korps or the Hypothetical chapter approved"Oh, am I okay to use Sisters of Battle?"

Not so hypothetical.

Bobthemime
22-05-2013, 14:37
I know it's not like pokémon battles, you can't just lock eyes from across the store and start playing, but you know what I mean, if you ask someone "Hey do you want a game" "Sure what points?" "Uh 1500 okay?" "Sure"
You don't need to follow that up with "Oh, am I okay to use Tyranids?" whereas you would with Death Korps or the Hypothetical chapter approved

* A Wild Menthank Appears*

*Sir Didymus Used DKoK*

*Menthank Uses Deny*

*Sir Didymus Fainted*

Menthak
22-05-2013, 20:00
"Oh, am I okay to use Sisters of Battle?"

Not so hypothetical.

Sorry, I don't get this, I'd never deny someone to use the sisters

yabbadabba
22-05-2013, 20:18
They were too much hassle.

A.T.
22-05-2013, 21:02
Sorry, I don't get this, I'd never deny someone to use the sistersThey are the 'hypothetical chapter approved' army. Krieg on the other hand come in a book with 'this is a 40k army' stamp on it.

Chapters Unwritten
22-05-2013, 21:21
The reason is because Games Workshop can make money more easily by taking an existing model's 3-up, changing it slightly, running it through a computer to do some quick sprue recuts, and releasing it is a $115 immersion-ruining talisman.

PrehistoricUFO
23-05-2013, 03:49
An Adeptus Mechanicus CA is needed. Now.

I have the entire Skulz AM set and would absolutely love to build an army around them. Muhahahaha.

Menthak
23-05-2013, 11:33
An Adeptus Mechanicus CA is needed. Now.

I have the entire Skulz AM set and would absolutely love to build an army around them. Muhahahaha.

Agreed, I'm not even a fan of the adeptus mechanicus, but I think they atleast deserve 'ally' rules or something to that effect


They are the 'hypothetical chapter approved' army. Krieg on the other hand come in a book with 'this is a 40k army' stamp on it.

I didn't know this, I thought they were a 'Legitimate' army, I've never seen someone say no to a sisters army, but then again I've never SEEN a sisters army.

Are people negative about this because they know it's not going to happen, or because they actually don't like the idea?

A.T.
23-05-2013, 12:15
I didn't know this, I thought they were a 'Legitimate' armyThey are an old out of print chapter approved article from a previous edition of the game, similar to deathwatch squads, enslavers, and the sons of Antaeus.

What people consider to be legitimate varies considerably, often on a case by case basis.

Brother Loki
23-05-2013, 12:26
The Sisters codex in WD wasn't labelled as chapter approved or opponents permission only or anything like that - it was presented as the new official sisters rules, just like the Blood Angels were before it, until the BA book was finally released. It's no less legitimate than any other 5th edition codex which hasn't been replaced by a 6th ed hardback yet.

For those interested in building Adeptus Mechanicus armies there are various fan-made codexes out there. The most widely accepted is probably the Tempus Fugitives one:
http://www.tempusfugitives.co.uk/downloads

skorczeny
23-05-2013, 12:37
Are people negative about this because they know it's not going to happen, or because they actually don't like the idea?

I'm negative about Chapter Approved articles where they tell you how to play existing armies. To quote Lord Damocles: "All of the 'paint it [colour] get [special rule(s)]' lists were horrible, both in balance and background." I couldn't agree more.

It would be positive if this was used to release small NEW army lists.

GOOD: new content - All vespid army, all kroot army, eldar exodite dragon lords army, etc.

BAD: special rules for playing tau sept ochre, special rules for playing orange space marines, special rules for playing Craftworld BielTan.

A.T.
23-05-2013, 12:49
The Sisters codex in WD wasn't labelled as chapter approvedPage 90, WD380 - big chapter approved stamp.

Does that change your opinion of their legitimacy as an army? Do you consider, say, deathwatch more or less legitimate as a consequence?


(the old BA dex was also labelled chapter approved for what it's worth)

Menthak
23-05-2013, 13:38
They are an old out of print chapter approved article from a previous edition of the game, similar to deathwatch squads, enslavers, and the sons of Antaeus.

What people consider to be legitimate varies considerably, often on a case by case basis.

Does this mean that if I were to bring a Sisters army to a tournament it would be as illegal as bringing a Kroot army, or a Feral orks army?

Also where were the chapter approved rules for playing a deathwatch force?

blackcherry
23-05-2013, 13:57
The old articles in White Dwarf (mini dexs etc) seemed to be more like creative outlets for ideas that members of the design studio tinkered with but knew would never be officially supported by GW in codex form. There don't seem to be as many designers on the White Dwarf team these days. With the increased output, I imagine the design studio are told to keep focused, so less chance to tinker and make up rules that would then appear in White Dwarf.

Theres also the financial possibilities, with many of the minor factions never having official models, which could have lead to people looking around for models and coming across what other companies produce. Which GW is very much not into these days, even if members of the company may have entire armies from other companies in GW HQ.

Yes, its very sad, but it did lead to bad things as well. The current writhing mass of the CSM fanbase that believe they should get exclusive options and rules because they painted their models a different colour was born and encouraged by the development of alternate lists in white dwarf.


Does this mean that if I were to bring a Sisters army to a tournament it would be as illegal as bringing a Kroot army, or a Feral orks army?

Also where were the chapter approved rules for playing a deathwatch force?

One of the chapter approved annuals. 2003 I think.

Brother Loki
23-05-2013, 14:08
Page 90, WD380 - big chapter approved stamp.

Does that change your opinion of their legitimacy as an army? Do you consider, say, deathwatch more or less legitimate as a consequence?


(the old BA dex was also labelled chapter approved for what it's worth)


My mistake. However, no it doesn't change my view on the legitimacy, but then i'm all for using Chapter Approved, Forgeworld or homebrew stuff in normal games anyway. In my view, tournament style rigid adherence to 'official' rules is the exception, not the norm.

Santtu
23-05-2013, 14:16
The Sisters codex in WD wasn't labelled as chapter approved
It was but that makes it official. It's Chapter Approved.

A.T.
23-05-2013, 14:32
Does this mean that if I were to bring a Sisters army to a tournament it would be as illegal as bringing a Kroot army, or a Feral orks army?Depends on the tournament, they tend to list what they consider official at any given time.
If an organiser decides to restrict play to "any in-print codex" then sisters are out.

The deathwatch rules used to be in a pdf on the games workshop site, written by Graham McNeill. You can probably still find them floating around the net with google but it was written for the 4th ed rulebook/wargear list.

Charistoph
23-05-2013, 15:32
Page 90, WD380 - big chapter approved stamp.

Does that change your opinion of their legitimacy as an army? Do you consider, say, deathwatch more or less legitimate as a consequence?


(the old BA dex was also labelled chapter approved for what it's worth)

And right underneath the Chapter Approved label and above the stamp it states that this is an official codex, so it's both.

A.T.
23-05-2013, 15:40
And right underneath the Chapter Approved label and above the stamp it states that this is an official codex, so it's both.All chapter approved is official - that's the point of the tag.

Charistoph
23-05-2013, 16:05
All chapter approved is official - that's the point of the tag.

There's official and official codex. Not all CA are/were codices.

A.T.
23-05-2013, 16:19
There's official and official codex. Not all CA are/were codices.I agree but i'm not sure that I see the distinction - they are both chapter approved rules, both equally 'official'.

Tournaments (including GW tournaments) can be quite picky about it though. Can't remember any tournament offhand that allowed the use of the chapter approved zealots for instance even though they were an official update for an (at the time official) codex.

tiger g
23-05-2013, 16:28
They release this on a regular basis. You have approved scenarios by race as missions as digital releases. Also this domain is covered by Forge World. So they are just using a different avenue for these items.

Chem-Dog
23-05-2013, 17:04
BAD: special rules for playing tau sept ochre, special rules for playing orange space marines, special rules for playing Craftworld BielTan.

GW has long since moved away from this kind of thinking, I don't believe any hypothetical Chapter Approved lists would see a slide back that way, you don't need blue Marines to run Calgar or black spiky marines to use Abaddon. Fine, use one chapter/craftworld/regiment/sept as the exemplar, but no requirement to invest heavily in Warpfiend Grey or Sotek Green just to be able to play the list.

It'd be interesting to see what people are actually imagining the Chapter Approved books to contain, because "just like it was back in the day" clearly doesn't cut it in the current environment.

Allies: Allies lists have been a topic of some considerable interest since 6th landed, the idea of being able to take an otherwise unusable contingent of models that have a place in the setting and put them to use on the table has become something of a holy grail for some of us. They really wouldn't need much in the way of support, the bare bones of what's required for an Allied contingent would be enough - 1 HQ and 1 Troops choice with a few more FOC slots possible if existing models can be used, maybe even a small conversion pack.

Sub-Lists: Those kind of lists that we want to field but, because of the Codex structure or FOC obligations, can't. Dark Eldar Scourge armies, Death Watch Assault Forces, IG Tank Companies, Kroot Mercenaries, Chaos Cult uprisings and so on. These would be along the lines of one or two new units and several See Page XX of the appropriate Codex entries. Trade flexibility for theme, many of us do it anyway and this kind of thing would open the door for more sales of specific kits.
Would be the place for things like Legion lists, which really need not be any more than a reduced selection of units and a couple of unique advantages/disavantages.

New Characters: Or old ones re-imagined. Could tie in with Allies or Sublists or be a new named hero for one of the standard factions. Throw in a "how to make" guide for characters that have no model or utilise it as a way of launching new models aside from the normal release schedule.

Fortifications: I think most of us were expecting Codex Specific Fortifications in the Codexes as the rollover into 6th Ed continued. Denied that, it would be the perfect venue for creating faction specific Fortifications and expanding the scope for more general ones.

Battlezones: we've had these piecemeal over the years, Daemonworlds, Cities and jungles/swamps. New environments and their effects on your battles would be interesting, new or altered Mysterious Objective tables, enhancements and limitations to unit types. Could also change victory conditions, fighting for control of a Star fortress would have different success criteria than a simple land-grab on the surface of a world.
Could also expand into continued support for things like Spearhead and Planetstrike.

New Models: Though I doubt GW will veer away from their tried and tested formula of releases, those releases that do occur outside of that schedule could find a home in these books unitil superseded by their inclusion into the appropriate books.

Sub-Games: Anyone remember the Eldar/Marine "Speeder Chase" game presented in WD some years ago? Things like that that would allow you to do something different with your models for fun (and possibly drive sales of particular kits). A Wych Gladiatorial battle, an Ork Punch-up, an Astartes Honour-Duel/Sparring Match. Combat Patrol and alternate ways of playing 40K could be included here too.

That's all I can think of right now, WD should feel free to plunder this for Content :shifty:

skorczeny
23-05-2013, 18:02
GW has long since moved away from this kind of thinking, I don't believe any hypothetical Chapter Approved lists would see a slide back that way, you don't need blue Marines to run Calgar or black spiky marines to use Abaddon. Fine, use one chapter/craftworld/regiment/sept as the exemplar, but no requirement to invest heavily in Warpfiend Grey or Sotek Green just to be able to play the list.

It'd be interesting to see what people are actually imagining the Chapter Approved books to contain, because "just like it was back in the day" clearly doesn't cut it in the current environment.

Allies: Allies lists have been a topic of some considerable interest since 6th landed, the idea of being able to take an otherwise unusable contingent of models that have a place in the setting and put them to use on the table has become something of a holy grail for some of us. They really wouldn't need much in the way of support, the bare bones of what's required for an Allied contingent would be enough - 1 HQ and 1 Troops choice with a few more FOC slots possible if existing models can be used, maybe even a small conversion pack.

Sub-Lists: Those kind of lists that we want to field but, because of the Codex structure or FOC obligations, can't. Dark Eldar Scourge armies, Death Watch Assault Forces, IG Tank Companies, Kroot Mercenaries, Chaos Cult uprisings and so on. These would be along the lines of one or two new units and several See Page XX of the appropriate Codex entries. Trade flexibility for theme, many of us do it anyway and this kind of thing would open the door for more sales of specific kits.
Would be the place for things like Legion lists, which really need not be any more than a reduced selection of units and a couple of unique advantages/disavantages.

New Characters: Or old ones re-imagined. Could tie in with Allies or Sublists or be a new named hero for one of the standard factions. Throw in a "how to make" guide for characters that have no model or utilise it as a way of launching new models aside from the normal release schedule.

Fortifications: I think most of us were expecting Codex Specific Fortifications in the Codexes as the rollover into 6th Ed continued. Denied that, it would be the perfect venue for creating faction specific Fortifications and expanding the scope for more general ones.

Battlezones: we've had these piecemeal over the years, Daemonworlds, Cities and jungles/swamps. New environments and their effects on your battles would be interesting, new or altered Mysterious Objective tables, enhancements and limitations to unit types. Could also change victory conditions, fighting for control of a Star fortress would have different success criteria than a simple land-grab on the surface of a world.
Could also expand into continued support for things like Spearhead and Planetstrike.

New Models: Though I doubt GW will veer away from their tried and tested formula of releases, those releases that do occur outside of that schedule could find a home in these books unitil superseded by their inclusion into the appropriate books.

Sub-Games: Anyone remember the Eldar/Marine "Speeder Chase" game presented in WD some years ago? Things like that that would allow you to do something different with your models for fun (and possibly drive sales of particular kits). A Wych Gladiatorial battle, an Ork Punch-up, an Astartes Honour-Duel/Sparring Match. Combat Patrol and alternate ways of playing 40K could be included here too.

That's all I can think of right now, WD should feel free to plunder this for Content :shifty:


Many good points. But your Sub-Lists section makes me pause.

Sub-Lists are good. Dark Eldar Scourge armies, Death Watch Assault Forces, IG Tank Companies, Kroot Mercenaries - sounds great. You can't make these armies in-codex.

But when you say this is also the place for Legion lists - a reduced selection of units and a couple of unique advantages/disavantages - I have to disagree. Isn't this the same as special rules for playing Biel-Tan, Night Lords, Death Guard, Imperial Fists, Tau Sept Ochre, Hive Fleet Grubface, etc? These things are all provided for IN-CODEX already, and should not get anything like the old chapter approved rules of 'free special rule in exchange for restricted FoC.

yabbadabba
23-05-2013, 18:03
Umm there is no such thing as legal or illegal in GW games. There are no laws for a start.

There is the way you want to play and the way GW want you to play. Sometimes these crossover.

Baaltor
23-05-2013, 21:04
Umm there is no such thing as legal or illegal in GW games. There are no laws for a start.

There is the way you want to play and the way GW want you to play. Sometimes these crossover.

Indeed, most if not all the rulebooks have said something to the effect of "these are suggested rules; do what you want with them, and add/remove at your leisure". It's a little disconcerting to hear issues that everyone seems to hate, yet go unchanged in a TT game.

What if Codexes as they are now were abolished, and in their place Articles were issued in WD detailing a model's rules, whilst also being included inkit? A yearly (Or Bi/tri/watevs/yearly) "Codex" Compilation for each of the factions? A full publishing of all the rules of the year for those who want them all, or if the content doesn't amount to enough for a full codex.

Many of us would be more happy paying the full price a fraction of the codex costs for a shorter version of a rulebook with exclusively new stories, art, and a handful of new rules.

tiger g
23-05-2013, 21:26
Umm there is no such thing as legal or illegal in GW games. There are no laws for a start.

There is the way you want to play and the way GW want you to play. Sometimes these crossover.

But then you would eliminate all of the players who are rule book lawyers.

Baaltor
24-05-2013, 00:05
But then you would eliminate all of the players who are rule book lawyers.

I don't think he mentioned serial murder.