Marine Paradox

[TheMav80]

In short they don't. That's one of the rules that are different just to be different. Just like Blood Angels don't need to have a Death Company. You can take out all special rules that make SW different and they are still not the same as codex chapters. You have to also change their non-special rules as well (like weapon options, some stats and normal gear). But after you have changed that you have effectively changed their entire codex.

Because they are. It's like saying why is an assult squad different from a tactical squad. It's the same as why is a Crusader Squad different from a tactical squad. Different kit and battlefield role. It's that simple they are different because they are different. Grey Hunters are a hybrid assult/tact squad and neither one of those can define them. Without major changes to said entry.

Or would you say that every basic MEQ should be rolled into a single FOC slot all the options. Hey a devastator squad is just a tactical squad with extra heavy weapons. Why do they deserve their own entry in the FOC??? And Terminators are just Marines with Terminator armor on. Why don't we just make terminator armor an option for Tactical squads and go back to Terminator armor grants +1 attack.

There is a point when vanillifying becomes complety changing. Iron Hands lost less then 1/2 a page of rules to make them fit into codex SM. It takes more changing but you can still arguably do it with BA and DA. But SW need a complete rewrite of almost every entry with marines in it to make them fit.

If we didn't have FOC restrictions, then yes. You could easily do that. Grey Hunters are only different from Tac Squads because someone, at some point, decided they should be. It was an arbitrary decision that could have been made to any of the other Chapters that existed at the time or have been created since. I understand that Grey Hunters are different because they are different. That has sort of been my whole point!

People look at those Space Wolf rules or Blood Angels rules or Black Templar rules and see them as specifically designed to represent the specific unassailable backround of a Chapter. When we all know that those rules and those backrounds have undergone drastic changes over the course of the game. So I see an arbitrary set of rules designed to create a slightly more unique play style. So I don't see any reason for a Marine player to not take advantage of the options given to them and play with all the different marine books.

[Clarkson]

Actually a while back when there was a "One Marine Dex" thread I actually started writing up a homebrew Codex based on this idea. Bascially you have two entries: Scouts (because they do have a different statline than Marines) and Marine Squad. Basically from there their role is dependent on the gear you give them. It's actually a bit looser than the current dex (for example, everyone could have Meltabombs if you want to pay for them and I allow for two "special" weapons instead of one special and one heavy). I hadn't gotten into Vehicles yet (although that will be very similar, since you have limited chassis). I was actually working on it a bit more earlier, as it is very much a "work in progress" and something I'm doing merely for my own enjoyment. Although intiailly meant for vanilla Marines I also started playing with ideas of how to incorporate the other books into such a structure.

Edit: Actually, gear does shift their FOC placement...Jump Packs or Bikes make them FA, making them Vets makes them Elites, giving them extra heavy weapons makes them Heavy Support. I am also playing with the idea of simply charging a few more points to keep them in the Troops slot, so you could make Bike/Assault/Terminator armies without having to resort to special characters while still paying a price for the flexibility.

so what you are looking for... is infact Inquistor? where you buy the wargear you want and that changes the roles of each character.. or indeed one of the fantasy flight games...

there's a reason they were seperate gaming systems... AS THEY DONT BELONG IN 40K

[Egaeus]

People look at those Space Wolf rules or Blood Angels rules or Black Templar rules and see them as specifically designed to represent the specific unassailable backround of a Chapter. When we all know that those rules and those backrounds have undergone drastic changes over the course of the game. So I see an arbitrary set of rules designed to create a slightly more unique play style. So I don't see any reason for a Marine player to not take advantage of the options given to them and play with all the different marine books.

I suppose I would attempt to make a similar argument for the reverse...as much as it is "arbitrary" (and I don't disagree with this idea at all) each book is meant to provide a different play style that represents a different army. So Ultramarines don't organize and fight like Space Wolves...so if your army is supposed to represent Ultramarines then you don't use the Space Wolves book because that doesn't reflect the "usual" style of the army.

In the end it really seems like it heavily depends on which direction you approach it from...if you do look at it as "just a rules set" then everything should be interchangeable...if one can use Ultramarines as Space Wolves should be no different from using Tyranids as Space Wolves. If you approach it from a "narrative" view then each distinct ruleset is meant to reflect a particular aspect of the background. And in the background Dark Angels are distinctly different from Blood Angels...at least enough that the game designers decided that they warrant their own seperate book.

Edit: This got posted as I was posting...

so what you are looking for... is infact Inquistor? where you buy the wargear you want and that changes the roles of each character.. or indeed one of the fantasy flight games...

there's a reason they were seperate gaming systems... AS THEY DONT BELONG IN 40K

I have Inquistor as well as the 3 40K RPGs and I don't recall "equipment changing role"...Inquisitor had classes, as do the RPGs.

You pick equipment to fulfill a particular role, but that is fundamentally what you do in tabletop 40K as well. My "system" does essentially what Stonerhino was mentioning...Assault Marines are just Marines with Jump Packs and CC weapons, Devastators are Marines with heavy weapons...give them whatever sort of "fluff" background you want this is still essentially how they are represented in the game. My version was intially more of a thought exercise to see if such a system could be constructed...while I'm far from finished with it I think it is turning out quite well, although it does raise some interesting questions about what is really "balanced" in the game (and that's just considering Space Marines).

[hazmiter]

This is basically how I feel.

Except that if any of your squads rolls a 1 for the Red thirst. Then you are no longer playing the Ultramarine's 8th Co. But a BA successer in blue armor.

And fluff is a terrible reason to force fit your army into a codex they don't use. Especially when you can field a near identical list with their own codex.

The solution there is simple, inform your opponent that you the player, will not be making red thirst roles, no, my sanguinary priest has not got a fnp bubble of furious charge. You pay the same in the vanilla codex as what you do in Ba.
So discounting all blood angels special rules before the match, and not using blood angels only items stops confusion. also no death company, furioso, blood angels sanguine guard etc....

[hazmiter]

Omg I'm WAAC I proxy IG sergeants as henchmen with laspistol and close combat weapons, and marines as henchmen w power armour and bolters... Omg not to mention I'm proxying dreadknights as dreadknights and greyknight terminators as greyknight terminators.....
Seriously, what do you expect.
I bought my grey knight models, yes I proxy guard as henchies, yes I proxy marines as henchies....
My codex vanilla..... Omg, they are painted black and red, blood angels successor.
I like playing blood angels, they suit my get in your face playstyle.
Codex vanilla will suit my preheresy iron warriors superbly, as long as I can get the cash up to convert etc.
I have guard, had them since last book.
I have blood angels, because I like them for the ferocity.
I have grey knights because I played with daemon hunters.
I'm doing pre heresy iron warriors because I want a challenge in army building, without daemonic stuff, honestly, I miss my 3.5 chaos dex!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Aluinn]

Part of the enjoyment that I and a lot of people (I'm going to go out on a limb and say most people) get out of the game or hobby is that models are more than just tokens and markers, like Chess or Go pieces. They represent, at least roughly, actual combatants, and as such immensely aid us in imagining that the game we are playing is a battle between forces with history, agendas, traditions, prejudices, etc. of their own: In short, a story and theme behind them. Even if no one breathes a word about fluff during a game, and a player does not describe him or herself as a "fluff gamer/someone into the fluff", we all experience fluff in the sense that, say, my Dark Eldar are not just statlines, but that they represent clearly enough, even to someone who's never read their background, corrupt and sadistic Space Elves who may ride around on sleek grav-skiffs, fire poison ammo with wicked-looking weaponry, etc. This is the entire purpose behind having both well-sculpted and well-designed models (and paying the price for them), as well as rules which are characterful (a very high GW priority): Each model's aesthetic and tabletop function should say something about its character and history in a visual and active way.

Painting and conversions can either enhance or ruin this. An unpainted model is sometimes better than a painted one, if the paint job is bad or egregiously inappropriate enough. Sometimes people are playing with unpainted models because, especially for those of us without oodles of spare time, assembling an army takes a long time in itself, and painting (well) takes even longer--their army may be a work-in-progress and that's fine.

The problem with playing models painted as Ultramarines using Blood Angels rules, amongst other things (e.g. the pure powergamer stigma), is that Ultramarines are not Blood Angels. An unpainted model might be either, but when you take something that, by appearance, is clearly an Ultramarine and either call it a Blood Angel or use the Blood Angels rules for it, you are to some extent spoiling that representationalism I spoke of above, which is a core attraction to the game for a huge portion of players. You're putting rules before it almost to the extent that you might as well be using empty bases, and there is good reason we pay lots of money to buy well-made representative models when we could perfectly well play the game with empty bases with markings painted on to make it clear what they stood in for.

To reiterate: An unpainted model might be a Blood Angel, and clearly represents a Blood Angel if modeled as such. A model painted and modeled as an Ultramarine is plainly not a Blood Angel. It's not a matter of one looking better than another in the ganeral sense (the painted Ultra probably does look better in isolation), but that a core draw of the game is being dismissed by the person who takes the Ultra and uses BA rules for it.

Now if Space Marines were Space Marines, and differences between chapters were played down by GW, this might be different, but the fact remains that GW has made a great deal of effort, lately more than ever, to differentiate loyalist chapters from one another both visually and in rules terms, and at any rate if there was little differentiation there'd probably be no BA codex worth "hopping" to.

EDIT: Before anyone calls me a jerk for upholding this view, I wouldn't refuse to play against someone who had models which were plainly Ultramarines and told me they were using BA rules for them, provided they were a nice enough dude/chick. I would however probably comment, good-naturedly, that they should, although I realize that the BA rules are generally more powerful, "man up" and stick with the codex that matches their models, possibly adding some advice about how the vanilla Marine codex still has many unique advantages to offer which are often overlooked (and I'm not just talking about Vulkan here, which obviously wouldn't match their army very well either; Sicarius on the other hand ...).

[Wishing]

People look at those Space Wolf rules or Blood Angels rules or Black Templar rules and see them as specifically designed to represent the specific unassailable backround of a Chapter. When we all know that those rules and those backrounds have undergone drastic changes over the course of the game. So I see an arbitrary set of rules designed to create a slightly more unique play style. So I don't see any reason for a Marine player to not take advantage of the options given to them and play with all the different marine books.

I totally agree that the chapter rules as written are arbitrary, constantly changing, and not conclusive or authoritative in any way. However, I don't agree with your conclusion that there should be no connection between rules and models in any way for this reason.

Basically we are talking about two different aspects or layers of the game. Layer one is that one distinct model line has its own distinct rule set, which is based on fluff identity. Layer two is the specific content of those rule sets. I don't care whatsoever about layer two - whether Grey Hunters have True Grit or not is entirely random and based on the whims of an author of a temporary rulebook which will be replaced in a few years. However, I have a lot of respect for layer one, which is the concept that there is a set of rules labeled "Space Wolves" and these only apply to Space Wolves (of various types). The content of the rules belongs to layer two, but the concept of "identity=rules" belongs to layer one.

Saying that Ultramarine assault squads might have Furious Charge is a negation of layer two, which I am fine with. I don't care whether they do or not, as long as I think the decision is justified and makes sense. Saying that you can use any set of rules to represent any set of models, because the rules have no identity, is a negation of layer one, which I don't agree with. Because like Egaeus, I feel like at that stage you may as well play with Star Wars models or chess pieces, because then you are playing a game using the rules of 40k, but no longer really playing 40k as it is intended to be played. Personal preference and all.

[AdaptUK0]

I totally agree that the chapter rules as written are arbitrary, constantly changing, and not conclusive or authoritative in any way. However, I don't agree with your conclusion that there should be no connection between rules and models in any way for this reason.

Basically we are talking about two different aspects or layers of the game. Layer one is that one distinct model line has its own distinct rule set, which is based on fluff identity. Layer two is the specific content of those rule sets. I don't care whatsoever about layer two - whether Grey Hunters have True Grit or not is entirely random and based on the whims of an author of a temporary rulebook which will be replaced in a few years. However, I have a lot of respect for layer one, which is the concept that there is a set of rules labeled "Space Wolves" and these only apply to Space Wolves (of various types). The content of the rules belongs to layer two, but the concept of "identity=rules" belongs to layer one.

Saying that Ultramarine assault squads might have Furious Charge is a negation of layer two, which I am fine with. I don't care whether they do or not, as long as I think the decision is justified and makes sense. Saying that you can use any set of rules to represent any set of models, because the rules have no identity, is a negation of layer one, which I don't agree with. Because like Egaeus, I feel like at that stage you may as well play with Star Wars models or chess pieces, because then you are playing a game using the rules of 40k, but no longer really playing 40k as it is intended to be played. Personal preference and all.

well said sir. I've got some Blood Ravens on the go, where I've made an assault squad (with jump packs) and boltguns/plasma guns. The models have been painted as Blood Ravens, and shall be using the standard marine codex. I've decided to add a layer two change to the unit (to fit with the fact that when I've played as Blood Ravens on DOW2, you can outfit your assault squad with ranged weaponary. I enjoyed using them as a mobile fire base, which prompted my choice in modelling them appropriately. Blood Ravens don't have a specific codex, but small changes like that I think add more character to a list - which is why if an opponent has a fluffy reason to make that change, why not let them?

[Clarkson]

well said sir. I've got some Blood Ravens on the go, where I've made an assault squad (with jump packs) and boltguns/plasma guns. The models have been painted as Blood Ravens, and shall be using the standard marine codex. I've decided to add a layer two change to the unit (to fit with the fact that when I've played as Blood Ravens on DOW2, you can outfit your assault squad with ranged weaponary. I enjoyed using them as a mobile fire base, which prompted my choice in modelling them appropriately. Blood Ravens don't have a specific codex, but small changes like that I think add more character to a list - which is why if an opponent has a fluffy reason to make that change, why not let them?

if fluff is concerned with the blood ravens.. they would surely use the chaos codex... as Age of Darkness suggested, they are a splinter of Thousand Sons.. last time i checked.. they are evil.

[dæl]

I think a lot of the issues with using other codex for fluffy reasons could be sorted out with a more flexible C:SM, people wouldn't need to use BA as RG, or SW as IH if they could take assault squads as troops (when taken with a captain with a jump pack? and please next codex can we have command squads with jps.) or termie sgts (iron hands sc allows sgts to take termie armour for x points, no termie squads allowed). Sallies have vulkan but he should make troops -1I, as well as the twin linked stuff. This would then mean less calls for more marine codexes and we might one day get ad mech, exodites, (proper)SoB/ecclesiarchy and squats/demiurg.

[TheMav80]

I totally agree that the chapter rules as written are arbitrary, constantly changing, and not conclusive or authoritative in any way. However, I don't agree with your conclusion that there should be no connection between rules and models in any way for this reason.

Basically we are talking about two different aspects or layers of the game. Layer one is that one distinct model line has its own distinct rule set, which is based on fluff identity. Layer two is the specific content of those rule sets. I don't care whatsoever about layer two - whether Grey Hunters have True Grit or not is entirely random and based on the whims of an author of a temporary rulebook which will be replaced in a few years. However, I have a lot of respect for layer one, which is the concept that there is a set of rules labeled "Space Wolves" and these only apply to Space Wolves (of various types). The content of the rules belongs to layer two, but the concept of "identity=rules" belongs to layer one.

Saying that Ultramarine assault squads might have Furious Charge is a negation of layer two, which I am fine with. I don't care whether they do or not, as long as I think the decision is justified and makes sense. Saying that you can use any set of rules to represent any set of models, because the rules have no identity, is a negation of layer one, which I don't agree with. Because like Egaeus, I feel like at that stage you may as well play with Star Wars models or chess pieces, because then you are playing a game using the rules of 40k, but no longer really playing 40k as it is intended to be played. Personal preference and all.

I think I come at it from a slightly different angle. I care a lot about the fluff, or first layer. It is why I play the game. That being said, I don't really care how that is translated into rules. I care more that your army is painted at all than I do that you are using the right codex for whichever paint scheme you chose.

So if you have a cool looking World Eaters force and want to use the Space Wolf book (for whatever reason), complete with Juggernaut Riders, that is okay with me. I don't associate the rules for Space Wolves with only being for Space Wolves. I don't associate the fluff for Space Wolves with any sort of rules really, because those rules change...a lot.

[Egaeus]

To reiterate: An unpainted model might be a Blood Angel, and clearly represents a Blood Angel if modeled as such. A model painted and modeled as an Ultramarine is plainly not a Blood Angel. It's not a matter of one looking better than another in the ganeral sense (the painted Ultra probably does look better in isolation), but that a core draw of the game is being dismissed by the person who takes the Ultra and uses BA rules for it.

Well said post. This is exactly the idea that some of us have been expressing throughout the thread. It's nice to have one more on "our side".

So if you have a cool looking World Eaters force and want to use the Space Wolf book (for whatever reason), complete with Juggernaut Riders, that is okay with me. I don't associate the rules for Space Wolves with only being for Space Wolves. I don't associate the fluff for Space Wolves with any sort of rules really, because those rules change...a lot.

This again appears to be one of those times when people seem to get what we are saying backwards. If there was a Codex: World Eaters then using the Space Wolf codex to represent them would probably not be considered "fluffy" because the World Eaters should contain such rules. I will give something of a bye to Chaos players as the current codex was intended to represent Renegade Warbands and not actually the Chaos Legions proper. So if you do a "counts as" army you can use whatever ruleset you feel is appropriate to represent them, but if you do a "named" army with a specific rulebook then that is the one I would expect you to use.

And it is merely from a fluff aspect, as I do understand that because of the way GW releases books that not all Codexes are created equal...so don't think it's because I am requiring you to use a "weaker" book. Although that is still a fundamental aspect of the argument: that if one is switching books for the power then simply admit it rather than try to hide behind an argument that it "better represents" one's army.

[Lord Damocles]

The solution there is simple, inform your opponent that you the player, will not be making red thirst roles, no, my sanguinary priest has not got a fnp bubble of furious charge. You pay the same in the vanilla codex as what you do in Ba.
So discounting all blood angels special rules before the match, and not using blood angels only items stops confusion. also no death company, furioso, blood angels sanguine guard etc....

So, why not just use Codex: Space Marines with Korvydae?

[TheMav80]

So, why not just use Codex: Space Marines with Korvydae?

I think more people would refuse to play against Forge World rules than someone using the "wrong" codex.

[Wishing]

I think I come at it from a slightly different angle. I care a lot about the fluff, or first layer. It is why I play the game. That being said, I don't really care how that is translated into rules. I care more that your army is painted at all than I do that you are using the right codex for whichever paint scheme you chose.

The first layer I was describing above wasn't "fluff" though, it was the concept of "identity=rules" which you are specifically against. "Fluff" in isolation would be a different layer entirely, and one in which I personally am not that interested, since fluff can be used to justify everything and nothing. Painting would be a different layer yet again. I myself mostly care about aesthetics and game philosophy.

[hazmiter]

I don't dislike forgeworld, but as a casual gamer, who takes my time painting, when I'm not fixing my Kawasaki zzr up, I play the army style that suits me, I own codex vanilla, Ba, and Gk.
I use the Gk minis for Gk. My Ba I switch to vanilla if I get bored of assault spam, (which is rare).
I guess every one has a ethos on how the game "should" be played, but my ethos is if your having fun, and not cheating, then so be it.

[wilsongrahams]

Some interesting elaboration that has led me to something else. If one creates their own army, that is not listed as a successor chapter, and then say wants to use Codex blood angels, surely that breaks the identity issue too? Fan created fluff means nothing to me - if looking at your army I see pink, green abd blue marines, then they are not Blood angels and just space marines and so should use the vanilla book. If using ultramarines as blood angels is wrong because they have their own identity, then any marine not listed in codex blood angels, dark angels, space wolves, black templars or grey knights falls under the space marine book, and using any other codex is therefore wrong.

For those that want to keep rules connected to the imagery of a model, they must be consistent, and keep the imagery with the rules. If no rules exist for your imagery, then they are GENERIC marines, and have no traits that make them stand out enough. A player could just as easily say that his own chapter he created, are space wolf successors, with blue armour, gold trim and coincidentally also use an inverted omega as their icon, because screw the codex that states they must have a unique icon blah blah.... you maybe get my point.

Now this isn't my stance, as I see the rules as seperate to the identities, and the rules are just a set of tactics or theme that any army should be able to use - surely all marines can charge just as furiously as each other? The unique units are the only ones I see as belonging to specific chapters, and any FOC changes are merely a theme to represent a force drafted in for a special occassion. If modelled correctly I wouldn't care about the markings or colours as long as I knew what rules were in play. I did however check some other posts and painting logs to see if those opposed to mixing up rules with incorrect models have applied chapter-specific rules to chapters that are not in said codex, and some have...

I see that as being just as guilty - rules are being applied to models in a scheme that has no 'official' basis for using them. Anything made up is no different to an aggressive 8th company ultramarines army on steroids - equally made up and no more 'official'.

Food for thought, please discuss.

ps, This isn't meant as an attack on anyone personally, just a challenge to the stance. As always opinions will differ and there is no right or wrong.

[ogretyrant]

If I had a power armored unit painted silver in my own chapters colour what ruleset would I be able to use? I would like to think any of the marine 'dexs'.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[yabbadabba]

If I had a power armored unit painted silver in my own chapters colour what ruleset would I be able to use? I would like to think any of the marine 'dexs'.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Whatever you want, as long as you fill your opponent in, and you stick to any WYSIWYG rules in your local gaming environment. Have fun

[Lord Damocles]

I think more people would refuse to play against Forge World rules than someone using the "wrong" codex.

It's not just the 'wrong' codex in the example though, it's the wrong codex with some house rules on top (or off the top; whatever).