Dark Angels in new C:SM

[AGPO]

Like many here, I like the Dark Angels for the fluff, the atmosphere and the awesome looking schemes and models. Looking over it today however I realised that rules wise, there is very little reason for us to be different to any other codex chapter. Yes we have the inner circle, company veterans and a wierd command structure, but there's nothing to say those can't be represented with Vanguard, Sternguard and regular HQs. The Deathwing and Ravenwing are awesome, but other chapters have companies made up of Terminators and fast attack units. Some armies, such as the Space Wolves and Black Templars are so radically different that they justify a codex of their own, but other varient chapters really don't.

 

My favourite Codex: Space Marines was version 3.5. The doctrines rules really allowed you to tailor your army to fit a given chapter or company. Before that, the Index Astartes rules were brilliant at adding depth to your primary colour marines. Personally, I'd love to see this sort of detail come back, with Dark Angels and other chapters either incorperated in a new Codex: Space Marines or else a new Codex: Chapters of Legend. This could feature the rules for fielding different kinds of chapters and companies, based on famous chapters or units. For example:

 

Templars (Crusading Chapter)

Deathwing (First Company)

White Scars (Biker Company)

Raven Guard (Assault focused)

 

and so on and so forth. Much like the old Index Astartes books you could feature a thouough background section on each chapter, plus a few pages of rules to give them distinctiveness and include their special characters. Even at 100 pages, that's five chapters with twenty full pages of fluff and rules. There's not that much more original material in Codex: Dark Angels as it stands. What would people think of this?

[Isiah]

From memory the current DA Codex is 92 pages including covers. I'd rather see more focus on one Chapter rather than less focus on more. Thus a single combo book of around 100 pages is just not going to cut it. So for me the combo book is out.

 

Cheers

I

[Gillyfish]

Could the DA be rolled in a single Marine Codex? Probably, although they would lose a lot of the background and would probably be all the poorer for it. But then, the same could be said of the Blood Angels - they are a Codex Chapter (arguably more so in structure than the Dark Angels, if the background is to be believed).

 

I think the issue here is that the Dark Angel Codex is very similar to the Marine Codex at present. That doesn't mean it always will be. Indeed, the Blood Angels book had a lot of work to ensure they play differently to other Chapters. I would hope that the next Dark Angel Codex would take the same stance; seeking to highlight the things that make the Dark Angels play differently to a Codex Chapter. I would actually argue that the current iteration of the Codex has fewer differences form the Codex list than the 3rd edition army list.

 

So juts because the DA are similar now doesn't mean that they will be in the future.

[Xyon]

I wonder how many more threads covering this topic we will get to see :P

 

It would work, but has any chapter which was given its own proper codex been folded back into the main dex before? Campaign bookx, such as armageddon, don't count ;)

 

And who's to say they won't make Dark Angels more unique in the next codex? Blood Angels are certainly very easy to represent with the generic marine dex, like Dark Angels, chapter tacctics: assault squads are troops. But then they added in sanguine guard, and some other bits. Space wolfs too used to be fairly easy to represent with the generic dex until they added thunderwolfs and lone wolf squads (give scouts power armor, give tac squads ccw/pistol). Dark angels just suffer from 'old codex' syndrome, having gotten no love since 4th edition, and having 4 marine dex's released since theirs.

[EPK]

I'm pretty sure you will get a resounding "NO" from most in our forum here - maybe a different response from others. Gilly, Xyon and Isiah pretty much sum up my own thoughts.

 

So no, we would not be satisfied and who knows GW might run the risk of loosing players because of it. That's one thing they would never let happen, separate codex and it's following equal more $$$.

 

EDIT: Guess I was wrong, maybe not a resounding no after all.

[Captain Semper]

Very interesting topic - controversial too... Suffice to say I (broadly) agree with the OPs take a single codex issue. Let me explain:

 

There are problems with Space Marine Codices. These, in my view, are:

 

* Some (all actually) SM codices take forever to be updated. In fact if one codex comes out it’s safe to expect it’ll be there for at least 2 editions of the main rulebook. SWs and BA were updated in the 5th from the 3rd previously and DAs that were the 1st codex of the 4th (correct me if I’m wrong here) has yet to be updated and rumors of the 6th are already out there. I just feel lucky I don’t collect BT’s…

* The great span between codices and editions create huge issues of balance, mostly in the form of points values but also in (special) rules as their relative power level gets affected – usually toned down.

* The (commendable) attempt by GW to come up with different toys also create an issue as codices that are already out cannot benefit from the likes of LR Redeemers or the latest Storm Raven. That creates enmity between various colors of SM as there is no reason (background wise) why any Chapter would be excluded from the use of such hardware.

*Enter “codex-hopping”. The combination of the above lead inevitably to this practice that some find distasteful (personally I don’t care that much) in an attempt to field competitive armies or just to be able to use the interesting new model additions. And it is not too difficult to do either – SMs are far too similar…

 

My proposed solution: ONE SM CODEX!!!

 

My angle is NOT that SMs do not deserve individual codices, but rather they deserve to be in sync with each other and get regular updates – all of them.

 

But, sme people say, we are so different from each other – it’ll be impossible to do justice to all. My answer would be: Why? Take for example the current Codex: Space Marines. It caters for a number of different play styles and encompasses a number of fundamentally different chapters. And people do play different chapters. There are those who do Ultramarines and those who do Imperial Fists or Salamanders (Vulkan, I know…). Iron Hands and Raven Guard are also pretty popular these days too. Is it the special rules that’s doing it? I don’t think so. It’s the background and the painting scheme… And this can be preserved – in fact it would be better NOT have to fill an entire book with so-so quality fluff just to justify its own existence as it’ll inevitably create issues lessening the credibility of the chapter in question (Bloody blood missiles or blood fists or a wolf on a wolf with wolf claws). Or it’ll shift the focus to new areas not previously associated with the faction (since when Blood Angels were phyker heavy? With phyker dreadnoughts at that?) Or why do you need 4-5 different jump troops? Blood Angels are assaulty – we get it already!!!

 

But, people will say again, the space allocated to fluff will be so small even if this single Codex is bigger than usual – there will be no evolution of the main themes that way – background may stagnate. Well if the Codex was the only source of background then that’ll be an issue – agreed. But nowadays the background is evolved so much through BL – and this can be further expanded. Indes Astarted aritcles / booklets could also make a (very welcome) comeback.

 

The bottom line is that BAs and DAs are virtually codex Chapters so army list wise there is no real need to invent different units just for the sake of it… BAs & DAs have a strong following since the beginning of time and it doesn’t need weird units or completely new background lines to maintain interest. SWs are a slightly different story (them being really non-codex)…

 

A final (if heretical) point: Codex: Chaos Space Marines. Here all chaos marines are in the same boat… When the Codex gets updated all Chaos Marine factions will be brought up to date. No Nurgle left behind for three editions or Khorne got the latest toy and the Word Bearers can’t use it for no other reason than their Codex is already out the previous month…

 

Hey, but the Chaos Codex is crap! some people might argue. Even if this is the case, with fewer codices waiting in the pipeline for updating, an update will be forthcoming faster, thus correcting the damage faster.

 

So one Codex to bind them all? Bring it on…

[brennus]

Personally, I would favor the old approach of a single Space Marine codex supported by mini-codeces for the various chapters who have minor variations on the standard Codex rules. I am tired of hearing how one marine Codex is overpowered or underpowered - if they were all based upon the same core, then they would at least be in the same ballpark (assuming that the mini-codeces were done right). Naturally, chapters who are organized in a completely non-Codex Astartes fashion will still require a codex book of their own.

 

My only concern is that when we used a mini-codex in previous editions, fluff was given a very minor role. It's too important to be reduced to under ten pages of background material.

[Lord_Edgimus]

was thinking that very same thing as i was reading this thread, dunno what the preference for GW would be in terms of making a profit, but why not have 1 space marine codex that is rule book esque in it's scale per edition? all marines are catered for, GW get one large chunk of a sale per edition, and all they would need to do is perhaps release whichever new models were included over time.

[EPK]

But nowadays the background is evolved so much through BL – and this can be further expanded. Indes Astarted aritcles / booklets could also make a (very welcome) comeback.

 

The bottom line is that BAs and DAs are virtually codex Chapters so army list wise there is no real need to invent different units just for the sake of it…

 

These two statements are nearly contradictory- I know they aren't per se, as one is in reference to lore and one to gameplay - but why should the two not be related? The Horus Heresy is doing wonders in expanding our knightly background and there is no reason that things can't be invented to show that at least to some point it may have survived over 10k years.. I like to think that we only operate as a Codex chapter on the outside anyway for the sake of the Imperium and that's one theme I'd like explored. As new fluff is written in the BL novels, there is no reason the Codices can't expand on it in my opinion. And to be honest, wouldn't people that have been playing DA for all those years enjoy something fresh? Not a complete departure of course, but something new to toy with.

 

The codex lag issues can at least be stymied for a time with FAQs and such, if only GW would be more consistent with them. There is no reason that GW can't add to a codex after it's release to allow wargear or even units to be updated.

[Brother Kovash]

Sure, they can comine all the SM chapters into one codex, if that codex happens to be 600+ pages in length.

 

I enjoy being able to play a Space Marine army that has it's own identity and it's own background. Yes, I can create my own story using the C:SM, but I feel it's more powerful to have something already established.

 

Besides, combining books would give Ultramarines terminators as troops, and that's the last thing I want to see running around on the field.

[Bartali]

Looking over it today however I realised that rules wise, there is very little reason for us to be different to any other codex chapter.

 

It's because DA have a rubbish codex, gawd bless Jervis.

[RayJ]

As much of a bad rap Jervis gets for the latest version of the DA Codex, it is important to remember that he has written ALL of the Dark Angels codices. From a hands-on perspective, he has had the most to do with DAs of all the game designers.

 

While I can agree that his execution was somewhat poor and that I disagree with the extreme simplification he wanted to do with 4th Edition (Eldar and Chaos Space marines felt it too), he advanced the idea of the army focusing on both the Deathwing and Ravenwing working in unison. Even without special rules, DAs are really the first place we saw unlocking of extra troop types through characters. He opened up opportunities for both expansion of the DA fluff and for better codex design in the future with that one act.

 

I will be the first to admit that the DA Codex and its limitations have been felt ever more strongly as 5th Edition has progressed, but it's not entirely fair to blame it all on Jervis, or to point to everything in it being rubbish. When the book released it was perfectly on par with the power level of 4th Edition Codex: Space Marines (even if it was received poorly). The huge design shift away from Jervis's ideas and into 5th Edition is what makes the codex bad. If all the books got the same treatment as DAs you wouldn't be having quite the same reaction this long after the fact.

[Brother Immolator]

Anyone considered that the its not the DA who look alike the C:SM rules wise but the opposite.It was out dex that was the template for laying out the space marine dex.So yes i want a different codex than them.

 

First they take our plasmas,then our dual autocannon dreads,then our terminator and bike armies...Anything else?

 

We need a new different codex one that is different from the rest of the marines.Better still it is made after 6th editon and 6th edition marine codex came out.

[Droma]

The DA codex was written at the end of 4th when the design goal was simplified codexes so that's one strike against it. It was also used as a test bed for codex: SM (combat squads, sc's unlocking units as troops, free pistols, plasma cannons, vets) so right there they took a lot of stuff that made us unique. At the time we came out we were a good deal different compared to the 4th ed C:SM. Since then more things have been taken from the chapter(logan wing/GK termies).

 

So are we similar now? Yes we are but we're a long standing separate codex with a good amount of divergence in the fluff already and more could very easily be added. Not to mention how much money marine codex releases mean for GW. Just look at all the bandwagon hoppers that have started up BA/SW/GK, there is no reason to suspect that we won't see the same thing happen with a new DA release.(unless jervis writes our dex again, I swear for being a DA fan he sure doesn't show it)

[wheelballer]

Personally, I agree with the first couple posters. I don't like the idea of losing a lot of fluff and cool stuff in order to combine all the codexes. Even if the fluff is slightly mediocre i much prefer to have a lot of it. It gives more background for people to work with when creating custom second/third/so-on chapters based around whatever book they use. And I believe that they will release a new codex that will give more individuality. That is the trend of all the recent SM books. As people have said, the SW now have lots of wolf/viking themed stuff. The BA now have sanguinary guard and the sanguinor, and new weapons and things. So if that trend continues, they will give us new cool stuff to help separate us.

 

I;m not trying to say that combining books can't/shouldn't be done, but rather I think people like having different books. It helps people feel more special I'm sure. And also, having separate books is what prompts the different model ranges. If all the books were combined, then all GW would really need is the basic squad box sets to cover all the armies. And for the individual stuff just release the HQ models and chapter upgrade kits. Along those lines, having separate books is a great way for GW to bring in more money, more model ranges, and more product choice brings in money.

 

So, overall I'd say that GW could combine everything and it would probably work out fine. But I definitely hope that they don't. I like my army to have its own book and background. Of course, I don't play competitively, just for fun among friends, so I honestly don't care about having a competitive list. I just like having something a little different from all my friends I play against.

[Varizel]

I would say no to combining codex with C:SM. First off, i think it wasn't us who is like SM. It's the other way around. SM is getting DAer w/ every iterations. Look at Relic Blade... Plasma Cannons on Tacts... LS Tornado (i think)... Dreadnought w/ dual TLAC. Heck... the next codex for SM prob will have termies on Troops slot or something along those line. Those SM guys are actually DA wannabes.. they just don't know it or admit it :P.

 

I know a lot of peeps dun like JJ for what he did to DA on 4th, but he really did set the template for the current SM. Special Characters, Bolt Pistols, Grenades, cheaper rhinos, etc etc. The simplification of codex back then was for the grand scheme of things... which turned 180 after C:DAWannab err C:SM was released. I dun really blame JJ for it, as a matter of fact, i think his codex is actually pretty well written if not a bit flat. The only :cussTY part about our codex besides pts costs are our librarians (god they sucked.... and Ezekiel... Master crafted BOLT PISTOL? U FOR REALZ MAN?). Pt cost wise kinda questionable on some equipments that has rending... but it was maybe because back then rending was ruling, thus all rending equipped units/weapons have increased cost or reduced quantity. Our Drop pod too has higher cost, but maybe because back then DP was too cheap (30pts i think).

 

As a matter of fact, some of the costing on C:SM is the one that's weird. The cheaper cost on C:SM has no reasons whatsoever.

 

Cheaper tanks? why?

Cheaper Tacts? Why?

Cheaper ASM? Why?

Cheaper ML on Devs? Why?

Cheaper SC (Hestan... srsly?) Why?

etc etc

 

If the coming DA codex is written by JJ again... i wouldn't be too fussed about it. He is after all the overlord of DA codex <_<. What he really need to do however, is start saying NO to every codex writer that copies our equipment or units. HECK as a matter of fact, i would really like it if JJ writes our next codex rather than MW. I'm prob alone on this though :D.

 

Peace out.

[Droma]

From everything I've heard someone else will be co-writing fluff and such things on ward codexes because of all the negatives that has received. From a pure rules point of view though ward writes some really good codexes, probably the best in 5th. C:SM, BA, and GK are all ward dexes and they are all solid and fun but way over the top from a fluff view. Most of the bad codex's(tyranids) or very overpowered codex's(SW/IG) were written by someone other than ward. Dark Eldar is probably the only well balanced dex not written by ward.

 

So assuming someone watches his fluff writing I'd be very happy having him write our codex. I want JJ touching our codex about as much as I want Thorpe to write another DA book, which is to say not at all.

[Interrogator Stobz]

I have two different takes on this idea.

 

The first is based around the simplifying the rules;

You can, I have, fit ALL the C:SM rules onto 6 pages of stats, 2 pages of special rules 2 pages of wargear and 2 more for Special characters rules.

C:DA would add maybe 2 more for their special rules and characters, BA similar maybe 3, SW similar to BA, BT etc......

 

Most of the rules in the rules sections are actually fluff, eg. the lascannon is a big shooty gun that can destroy the mightiest tank blah blah blah, it is R48", S9, AP2, H1. Which part is actually rules :tu:

GW could easily fit ALL the SM variants rules into one book.

 

My second point is why don't they?

 

Firstly I look at the layout in each dex using ours as an example;

Intro/contents 5pages,

SM stuff 3pages,

Origins of DA 4 pages,

The Unforgiven 4 pages,

Chapter Organisation 4 pages,

Rites and Battles 5 pages

Forces section 17 pages although meant to be rules is actually 90% fluff and descriptions

Wargear 8 pages, same as Forces,

More cool pics for 15 pages,

More Secessor fluff 4 pages,

Lists 10 pages can be heavily streamlined and has massive overlap between dexes(like I did when I summarised my rules) but reads nicely as is,

Summary 2 pages.

 

My thoughts about the second point is that players need rules to play, hobby enthusiasts like fluff and pictures and what is the most important thing for GW? Creating a keenness in both types of 40k freaks :rolleyes:

I think the rules are so annoyingly spread throughout the dexes is to make them seem harder and more complex than they really are.

 

That of course doesn't help with the updating issue, and the different wargear we had so much issue with over the last little while :D

 

I would personally hate to see the dexes merged, the fluff to me is what makes us different from the other 'types' of SM and as it takes the bulk of all the dexes.

The rules are what needs updating, these could be done in a minidex that covered ALL SM variants easily but I am still against that because it would create a situation for GW where most people only buy the mini rule books. A bit like those who only got the AoBR mini rule book. That would over time degrade the differences and make the game boring.

 

Man, sorry about the wall of text.

 

stobz

[Candleshoes]

Having the DA codex folded into the regular space marine codex would likely be the best thing for the army, in my opinion, not overly shared by others though.

 

At the end of the day, we don't salivate and look forward to the 3 sentances of newly introduced design team fluff that was placed in our book. The fluff, stand alone dex or not, is already well established, and whether it was a single page in a C:SM, or a set of pages in a C:DA, the "new direction" or established flavour of the army could be solidified (or better yet, left open for people to approach how they want).The foccus in the last decade for the majority of space marine players have been models, good and flexible rules, gameplay options, and the ability to identify your potential army choice with what you choose to field. All of these would be better and more quickly delivered of the DA were turned over to the generic codex.

 

We all know that in 6th, C:SM will likely include rules for all terminator armies, all bike armies, balanced armies, or any of the other options, mech, pod or what have you, so long as they lie within the blueprint of a basic Chapter. The Dark Angels will no longer need to be represented as anything other than a codex chapter, we have never possessed anything that went outside of what R.G. wrote down, save a small amount of technology, ALL of which is now commonly used and accepted as C:SM, used and applied in lists easier than if we were to do it. Trying to make a Battle/Reserve Company army, to which the Chapter is 80% made up of, is (and was when it first came out) an excercise in futility. What are the Deathwing/Ravenwing really at the end of the day? A color, a name, and an existing codex unit.

 

I for one would like to hope for a merge (just DA into C:SM), for then you would also be able to take advantage of all the other rules/units/special counts as characters that come along with it, updated every edition on the dime, with a handful of new releases you can bet on every year, without fail. Does this destroy the fluff we have? Certainly not. What of our potential? It was released that Gav Thorpe will not only be doing a primarch novella about the Lion, but also a coresponding series about the Dark Angels in 40k. Like the author or not, those seem like great opportunities for the community to get an influx of new fluff, far above many of the other first founding chapters.

[Brother Immolator]

From everything I've heard someone else will be co-writing fluff and such things on ward codexes because of all the negatives that has received. From a pure rules point of view though ward writes some really good codexes, probably the best in 5th. C:SM, BA, and GK are all ward dexes and they are all solid and fun but way over the top from a fluff view. Most of the bad codex's(tyranids) or very overpowered codex's(SW/IG) were written by someone other than ward. Dark Eldar is probably the only well balanced dex not written by ward.

 

So assuming someone watches his fluff writing I'd be very happy having him write our codex. I want JJ touching our codex about as much as I want Thorpe to write another DA book, which is to say not at all.

 

And then we will have equipment like the dreadknight only it would be a watchers piloted mech suit,missiles of redemption,the ultimate sword of absolution and grenades that will make the enemy feel guilty and sit and cry(well we actually have that as a psichik power call me mind worm) and i forgot the badass robes of chuck noris stare.Oh and the ability to overcharge our predetors at our enemies face causing a deathstrike missile pieplate of destruction...No scratch that give deathstrike amunition to the wirlwind...

Seriously now keep ward away or give me a bolter to empty the magazine on his head.If you need more convincing imagine bels new miniature entry(will we ever see one?)in the GW site:

 

Matt Ward says:Why take bel?Because he can make your enemies crap their pants thats why!Not only he is the master of the deathwing increasing all stats in any terminator unit he is attached to by two points by virtue of how awesome he is,he is capable of ditching 5d3 attacks on melee!Call that a haircut!!!He has an invulnerable save of 2+ he can chop to pieces entire enemy hordes and elites units on his own.His stormbolter has the melta rule and his CC attacks count as force weapon attacks without the need to take the test.Just watch them drop and laugh!Never the empirium has seen a better warrior(except calgar who kills them all).

 

Clearly i dont want to see such things in a DA codex.Let the chapter master take a beating now and then(siege of vraks)if its nessecery to keep fluff nice and acceptable.We dont want to have any calgars or crowes or mephistons(a great character who was rapped by wards fanboyism,i have seen him take out a warhound single handidely!!!!)in our chapter.

 

Rant out!

[Captain Semper]

Personally, I agree with the first couple posters. I don't like the idea of losing a lot of fluff and cool stuff in order to combine all the codexes. Even if the fluff is slightly mediocre i much prefer to have a lot of it. It gives more background for people to work with when creating custom second/third/so-on chapters based around whatever book they use. And I believe that they will release a new codex that will give more individuality. That is the trend of all the recent SM books. As people have said, the SW now have lots of wolf/viking themed stuff. The BA now have sanguinary guard and the sanguinor, and new weapons and things. So if that trend continues, they will give us new cool stuff to help separate us.

 

Yes. You are right in assuming that when DAs get their Codex updated some coool stuff should be expected. That is until the next SM codex comes out where other cool stuff will emerge - to which DA will have no access. Whether the list will remain competitive or not does not come into play here. People just want the cool stuff (and rightly so!). Now regarding the differentiation from other chapters by having a separate codex I think many players that share the current Codex: SM do not feel "homogenised" - but bear their own "codex" chapter with pride. A Raven Guard player chose to play Raven Guard - and not Sons of Orar for a reason! The army list is also flexible enough to mirror both chapters - and a large number on top these.

 

I;m not trying to say that combining books can't/shouldn't be done, but rather I think people like having different books. It helps people feel more special I'm sure. And also, having separate books is what prompts the different model ranges. If all the books were combined, then all GW would really need is the basic squad box sets to cover all the armies. And for the individual stuff just release the HQ models and chapter upgrade kits. Along those lines, having separate books is a great way for GW to bring in more money, more model ranges, and more product choice brings in money.

 

You are spot on! People like having different books. It makes them feel their choice of army is more "special" than a vanilla chapter... But regarding models I guess this has to do with the established release sequence by GW. We release the new Codex, and support the release with chapter specific spues and a couple of unique items (tanks, flyers, giant wolves...). What if the sequence of models' release was de-coupled from the codex? Then you could have a similar support for other chapters too. So one month dedicated to say Salamanders the other Imperial Fists (and successors) and so on... Furthermore since the releases are not going to be related to a time consuming Codex production they might become more frequent... But then again this niche might be covered by FW...

 

So, overall I'd say that GW could combine everything and it would probably work out fine. But I definitely hope that they don't. I like my army to have its own book and background. Of course, I don't play competitively, just for fun among friends, so I honestly don't care about having a competitive list. I just like having something a little different from all my friends I play against.

 

I think you are expressing the views of the majority... Quite accurately too. For the record I think DAs will be getting their Codex as they did in the past. Some say UM are the poster boys. I disagree. I think UM, DAs, BAs and SW are the poster boys as they define themselves vs. each other. UM are the benchmark but compared to what? Enter DAs, BAs and SW!!! And for some reason Imperial Fists do not deserve their own Codex as the other 4 loyal legions/chapters and successors. But hey! they are not complaining! Codex SM worked fine for them! DAs do complain though as BAs did before they got their new codex... And SWs too! So among the loyalists there are those who are more equal than others... But unfortunately that can backfire as in the effort to differ GW toys with the borderline ridiculus...

 

Having the DA codex folded into the regular space marine codex would likely be the best thing for the army, in my opinion, not overly shared by others though.

 

I share it ^_^

 

At the end of the day, we don't salivate and look forward to the 3 sentances of newly introduced design team fluff that was placed in our book. The fluff, stand alone dex or not, is already well established, and whether it was a single page in a C:SM, or a set of pages in a C:DA, the "new direction" or established flavour of the army could be solidified (or better yet, left open for people to approach how they want).The foccus in the last decade for the majority of space marine players have been models, good and flexible rules, gameplay options, and the ability to identify your potential army choice with what you choose to field. All of these would be better and more quickly delivered of the DA were turned over to the generic codex.

 

True. Agreed. Couldn't put it better myself!

 

We all know that in 6th, C:SM will likely include rules for all terminator armies, all bike armies, balanced armies, or any of the other options, mech, pod or what have you, so long as they lie within the blueprint of a basic Chapter. The Dark Angels will no longer need to be represented as anything other than a codex chapter, we have never possessed anything that went outside of what R.G. wrote down, save a small amount of technology, ALL of which is now commonly used and accepted as C:SM, used and applied in lists easier than if we were to do it. Trying to make a Battle/Reserve Company army, to which the Chapter is 80% made up of, is (and was when it first came out) an excercise in futility. What are the Deathwing/Ravenwing really at the end of the day? A color, a name, and an existing codex unit.

 

Exactly! the thing is that although the "all Terminator army" for example is a signature build for DAs it is no more- and rightly so. The option should be given to DAs payers to do so if they so desire but other options should be equally viable. In the end of the day who is to say that other Chapters won't field all Terminator armies in certain situations? (Space Hulk anyone?) or that DAs wont go assault heavy in a particular engagement? They would background wise... So why not gaming wise? Just to make them different? This is like shooting yourself in the leg... Ultimatetly it should be left to the individual player to play "in character" or not - (and who's to say what "in character" is anyway - gaming wise... Was Cadillus "in character"? Throughout the book you could substitute the Green boys with any other color and it would have been just the same.)

 

I for one would like to hope for a merge (just DA into C:SM), for then you would also be able to take advantage of all the other rules/units/special counts as characters that come along with it, updated every edition on the dime, with a handful of new releases you can bet on every year, without fail. Does this destroy the fluff we have? Certainly not. What of our potential? It was released that Gav Thorpe will not only be doing a primarch novella about the Lion, but also a coresponding series about the Dark Angels in 40k. Like the author or not, those seem like great opportunities for the community to get an influx of new fluff, far above many of the other first founding chapters.

 

This.

 

I just think that all SMs should be in one book... For the same reasons stated above!

[Brother Immolator]

Most people tend to forget the times when the ravenwing and death wing were relevant and not simply troop choices.Granted ravenwing have a small tweek but in the past those were reinforced.Now days every marine dex can field bike and terminator armies.Sudenly every marine chapter has a full company of terminators...And instead of saying that they must become different and leave that toys to those who realy make use and invented them we advocate to become the same as them by using a unified codex.That means we will become UM with robes gentlemen.We will resive less and less fluff since the space marine has always been an UM codex(how many codex chapters had fluff in the new dex?I dont see that many)and eventually we will face out with only a couple of players here and there trying to make a few convertions to make their green UM look more like dark angels.

 

And for those of you that wonder,i played the DA with the SM codex at first because i thought rules wise ours sucked(well its not the best we have to admit).It felt a bit empty.My oponet had salamanders and it was like competing who was greener(like orcs).

 

If you wish Dark angels to become green Ultramarines i dont have to say i am on the same boat.As i said i prefer a fluffy and ruleswise crappy codex than losing our personality.If we can have good rules and good fluff all the better.If we have good rules bad fluff then no no no no and did i say no?

[exsulis81]

As much of a bad rap Jervis gets for the latest version of the DA Codex, it is important to remember that he has written ALL of the Dark Angels codices. From a hands-on perspective, he has had the most to do with DAs of all the game designers.

 

Technically that is incorrect. Jervis, and Rick Wrote the Angels of Death Codex(2nd). JJ wrote the unplayable 3.0 codex that was only in print for 2 years before it was replaced by the 3.5 codex written by Gav(2001-2007). Interesting note but the whole have to have the Master of the DW, and RW was in JJ's 3.0 codex. Then we have the 4.0 JJ codex. Which is anything goes to show that the man can't write a codex to save his life. Notably the BA list in AoD was way better as was the BA PDF compared to it's 4e DA codex. That doesn't cover all of the WD fluff that existed before hand.

 

While I can agree that his execution was somewhat poor and that I disagree with the extreme simplification he wanted to do with 4th Edition (Eldar and Chaos Space marines felt it too), he advanced the idea of the army focusing on both the Deathwing and Ravenwing working in unison. Even without special rules, DAs are really the first place we saw unlocking of extra troop types through characters. He opened up opportunities for both expansion of the DA fluff and for better codex design in the future with that one act.

 

JJ really didn't do even a marginal job on DW, and RW working together. Great, one turn we've got synergy. Okay, you are done. Now we've got two forces that don't work at all together on the field.

 

Again, we had the unlocking system with the Trait system, in addtion Fantasy already had Heroes that did this. So not a big whoop.

 

I will be the first to admit that the DA Codex and its limitations have been felt ever more strongly as 5th Edition has progressed, but it's not entirely fair to blame it all on Jervis, or to point to everything in it being rubbish. When the book released it was perfectly on par with the power level of 4th Edition Codex: Space Marines (even if it was received poorly). The huge design shift away from Jervis's ideas and into 5th Edition is what makes the codex bad. If all the books got the same treatment as DAs you wouldn't be having quite the same reaction this long after the fact.

 

Wow, what are you on? The 4e SM codex was by far more powerful than the 4e DA codex, even the BA pdf was better..... The only things cheaper were the Dakka preds, and some transports. Everything else became more expensive, less useful, and more restricted. Coupled with the TERRIBLE rules writing it literally was on the bottom of the barrel as there was no weaker, less thought out, and not play tested codex.

 

If the DA codex was a 1/4 as good as the Eldar, or CSM we wouldn't have had anywhere near this reaction to this codex.

 

Dates:

 

Armies of the Imperial 1991 Epic

AoD 1996

Dark Angels Codex 3.0 1999

Dark Angels Codex 3.5 2001

Dark Angels Codex 4.0 2007

[Droma]

Wow, what are you on? The 4e SM codex was by far more powerful than the 4e DA codex, even the BA pdf was better..... The only things cheaper were the Dakka preds, and some transports. Everything else became more expensive, less useful, and more restricted. Coupled with the TERRIBLE rules writing it literally was on the bottom of the barrel as there was no weaker, less thought out, and not play tested codex.

 

That's not entirely true and you know it. If you were around back then most of the discussion was around DA squads costing more because they had pistols and grenades rolled into their profile while old C:SM had to pay for them. Looking back and comparing it to current we see it's a pile of dung but there were more than enough complaints back then about why DA were getting "free pistols/grenades" plus combat squads.

[Grey Mage]

Personally, I would favor the old approach of a single Space Marine codex supported by mini-codeces for the various chapters who have minor variations on the standard Codex rules. I am tired of hearing how one marine Codex is overpowered or underpowered - if they were all based upon the same core, then they would at least be in the same ballpark (assuming that the mini-codeces were done right). Naturally, chapters who are organized in a completely non-Codex Astartes fashion will still require a codex book of their own.

 

My only concern is that when we used a mini-codex in previous editions, fluff was given a very minor role. It's too important to be reduced to under ten pages of background material.

Agreed, the mini-dex system was awesome. The fact that C:SW made it 10 years is a testament to this.