EPK Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I more or less agree. The Dark Angels simply choose to allways equip their Veterans with Terminator armour. It's probably more the tactical doctrine that they are not following in this case - which of course you already stated was optional. In the newest Heresy book Guilliman's Codex was supposed to have solutions for any battle. The Codex is bound to have certain situations that call for Power Armored Vets, perhaps even with jump packs and the specialized weaponry that might come with them. Of course I'm speculating on how specific it gets - in the novel it is more of a big picture scenario. The Deathwing simply do it there own way, perhaps with Ravenwing or other support. Of course the trusty Land Raider can handle a lot of situations on it's own, lol. I suppose the Ravenwing is the true departure from the Codex organization though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 The Deathwing fight in Terminator Armor because they are designed to hunt the Fallen. Most Fallen are power armored, so the Dark Angels bring something better than power armor. If the Fallen evades, they have an entire company dedicated to pursuit tactics to follow them, round them up, and teleport in other TDA armored badasses. Its a really good system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Semper Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 OK that'll be a bit long... Please bear with me. When you say "Dorn rejected the Codex" then that gives the impression that he did have issues with the tactical and organisational doctrines, when the background very specifically points out that he had issue with one of the decrees of the Codex, namely the decree that the Legions should be broken down into smaller Chapters. That would create the notion that Dorn did not like the "ten companies with ten squads each" concept, and only begrudgingly adopted the new Codex organisation. Yes. That's what I'm saying. You cannot be against the break up of the Legions but at the same time thinking the Chapter organization is a brilliant idea. You might think it might work if one absolutely had to break up the Legions but, since breaking up the Legions is not cool then what is there to talk about? A contingency plan if the best idea out there (keeping the Legions in tact) does not play out? Or maybe a smart way to internally organize the Legion? Secondary concerns that nobody would care about if the Legions were to remain intact. A lot of people who only glance over the Black Templars background get the impression that Guilliman forced all the Legions and Chapters to organize into ten Companies of ten squads, just like his own Ultramarines. But then we have the Salamanders and the Space Wolves, who aren't organised that way, or the Iron Hands who do not have any reserve companies. A lot of players do not make a distinction between the combat doctrines part of the Codex, which was mainy guidelines and suggestions, and the legislation part of the Codex, which was mandatory for all Space Marines. As a result of this Guilliman is seen as pompous and arrogant for seemingly requiring all Space Marine forces to organise and fight according to his idears, when it was mainly the legislation, which Guilliman had devised on behest of the High Lords and as a reaction to the events of the Heresy, which was mandated and decreed to all. I'm not expressing a view on Guilliman (where did this come from?) but Dorn was made to adopt the Codex. Having said that the Codex was not presented to the Primarchs article by article so they can then choose (or God forbid vote!) what they liked or not. The content was not a result of a debate with all Primarchs contributing in a round table with Guilliman being the general secretary, keeping notes. It was the result of Guilliman's understanding of politics and war, influenced maybe in some tactical issues by practices of his brothers which he approved. In essence there was nothing in the Codex that Guilliman disapproved of. Nothing. It was Guilliman's work through and through and a good think it was too - it served the Imperium successfully for 10k years and counting... Some Primarchs however did not adopt it. These are the non-Codex Chapters you mention with SW being the more celebrated one. To steer this back to the Dark Angels a bit, a few sources mention that Guilliman had included treatises and articles by some of his brothers in the combat doctrine part of the Codex. Most notably he included Perturabo's siege tactics, which is mentioned in two sources (3rd Ed. C:CSM and IA:IF). However, according to the ancient "Armies of the Imperium" supplement for Space Marine Epic, Jonson had also offered "sagely advice" for the Codex. See my point above. Sure he got influenced, but thinking of the Codex as a collective work is just well, not the case. Therefor I assume that the Dark Angels would not have had any issues with adopting the tactical and organisational doctrines of the Codex Astartes. IIRC in some HH books the Dark Angels Legion had already been described as being organised into "Chapters" of 1,000 warriors, divided into ten companies. (One of the stories included two "Chapters", and one battle barge was said to have three company Captains on board.) I'm 100% in agreement! Jonson himself was highly regarded as a gifted tactician, and if the same can be said about his Sons, then they should welcome the wealth of information and insight the Codex Astartes provides about the various different approaches to warfare. I assume that Jonson, for all his taciturnity, would have been among the Primarchs that would have been open and willing to discuss tactical doctrine with Guilliman (together with Dorn and Fulgrim, who also valued performance), where other Primarchs were outright rejecting the notion that they could learn anything from another Primarch as an insult to their abilities. As I said, being influenced is one thing, the final product is still yours. Compromise on some points then it is collective work. The Codex was not collective work. Sorry Captain Semper, I'm also going to have to agree with the others. If someone has a problem with one particular rule in a larger set of rules which they do accept, that would be as Legatus said, "They were not described as having issues with the Codex Astartes as a whole." No prob! Disagreeing is what we're here for! :). However as I mentioned above the Codex is not a document you can agree on an article by article basis, and the Imperium post Heresy was not reminiscent of say the EU today where delegates know they'll produce a consensus document that everybody agrees on before they even walk in the debate room (sucky parallel I know). You disagree with the break up of the Legions, you disagree with the Codex. How can it be otherwise? Unless your definition of a Legion coincides with the definition of a Chapter... ( I know I'm being silly now). I feel you are looking at it too black and white and coincidentally that is probably how the High Lords saw it as well. I'd say Guilliman used this to his advantage tossing in the "traitor" comment. They saw it as all or nothing and in the end Dorn's hand was forced to accept it as a whole. Yes. And I think Guilliman was correct to push Dorn even by a provocative statement. The politics of peace (such as it was) are not the same as the politics of war. Dorn was clinging to the old ways when the old ways 1) were over 2) have failed 3) did not produce a credible future for the Imperium. Surely the legislative part of the Codex was by far the most important! With that in mind, I do sort of see your point - if Dorn did not split his Legion, no matter if he used the other rules and doctrine of the codex, to at least the High Lords and Guilliman he rejected it, rejected the future of the Imperium and so on. Thx! That is my point. By the way someone please explain to me how a tactical doctrine made specifically for Chapter sized forces could apply wholesale to Legion size forces? And as Legatus touched on, it is not as black and white as "Codex" and "Non-codex". There is even some gray area in Codex Chapters. The Dark Angels along with the Blood Angels both are codex chapters per se, however the Dark Angels obviously organize their first two companies differently and the Blood Angels have an abundance of assault and fast oriented units which other more strict Codex chapters would not utilize in the same manner. Oh it is very much black & white! This is 40k we are talking about (or 30k more likely). No middle ground. You are either Codex or you are not. Blood Angels are Codex through and through. Nothing to add here. Just Codex. DAs on the other hand are not! Not because of the Ravenwing (although this is deviation enough) but because they break the more stringent elements of the Codex which is: the secret Legion theme!!! A general comment: enforcing adherence to the Codex is impossible and ultimately undesirable. Being Codex or not does not carry penalties in itself. Although the High Lords would welcome Universal adherence they have to make do with an 80% compliance. That's life... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EPK Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 The Deathwing fight in Terminator Armor because they are designed to hunt the Fallen. Most Fallen are power armored, so the Dark Angels bring something better than power armor. If the Fallen evades, they have an entire company dedicated to pursuit tactics to follow them, round them up, and teleport in other TDA armored badasses. Its a really good system. Well, I know that's their role of course, but I was speaking in regards to the Codex Astartes and combat doctrine - like in an actual battle. Hunting Fallen is surely not what they are doing 95% of the time. I have to think the majority of the time, the Deathwing are taking part in any other typical Space Marine engagement. Hunts for specific Fallen are few and far between. I also like to think that sometimes there is places where TDA and bikes are just not practical. When the codex says they are always "fielded" in TDA, I like to think it's referring to the field of battle. Though Scout Sergeants like Naaman are members of the Deathwing, so perhaps when more stealthy tracking is needed, they send in someone like him. What if they had to track them through the streets of a Hive World? Does every Fallen have to be in plain sight? Game wise and I suppose in the field of battle, vets in scout armor would be unnecessary and never included (and ripping off SWs), but lore wise I could totally see a group of Deathwing or at the very least Ravenwing donning scout armor when the need arises. The Dark Angels use whatever means possible and they can't just send a green 10th Co. squad. I guess we've gone off on a tangent here. Though I suppose this is all info that Olisredan can use for his writing, though parts of mine is simply speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EPK Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I don't know, if it was so black and white, than the Space Wolves would have also been deemed traitors. Yet if there was going to be exceptions, why not Dorn? By the way someone please explain to me how a tactical doctrine made specifically for Chapter sized forces could apply wholesale to Legion size forces? I don't think it's too hard to imagine. Some of the Legions seemed to be split down into "chapters" more or less already, just under one central commander - their Primarch. That was a main reason to split them up anyway, to decentralize their command so if one turned it wasn't so easy to take the rest with him. But lets be realistic, if Dorn commanded the Crimson Fists and Black Templars to do something, they would do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatus Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Yes. That's what I'm saying. You cannot be against the break up of the Legions but at the same time thinking the Chapter organization is a brilliant idea. You might think it might work if one absolutely had to break up the Legions but, since breaking up the Legions is not cool then what is there to talk about? A contingency plan if the best idea out there (keeping the Legions in tact) does not play out? Or maybe a smart way to internally organize the Legion? Secondary concerns that nobody would care about if the Legions were to remain intact. Some sources describe that the "Chapter" was already a known unit within the Legions, and the Dark Angels Legion was described as being organised in Chapters very similar to those later used for all Marine forces. It would have been quite possible for the Imperial Fists Legion (who were said to have all their battle forces be organised identical and having unimaginative commanders) to reorganise the Legion into a number of Chapters and Companies as well, with the more versatile "battle company" structure for a flexible approach, just as their Index Astartes suggests they later did when accepting the Codex structure. Look, you can say that Dorn had a problem with one of the main decrees in the Codex and therefor was fundamentally against the implementation of the Codex, but if you simply say he was "against the Codex" without any further clarification, then that does facilitate the notion which is held by a lot of players that Rogal Dorn was against all the tenets of the Codex Astartes and did not like any part of it. But that was simply not the case. I'm not expressing a view on Guilliman (where did this come from?) but Dorn was made to adopt the Codex. It is a widely held belief that since Guilliman wrote the Codex, and since Dorn had to comply with the decree of splitting his Legion, that therefor Guilliman was forcing all of the others to "do things his way". This ignores the fact that the mandatory legislation elements of the Codex were developed after the Heresy on behest of the High Lords and that the doctrine part of the Codex was a guide rather than decree. This is evident by the fact that Dorn's and Russ' issues were specifically about the decree to divide the Legions, not about any organisational matters, and by the fact that a lot of the First and Second Founding Chapters do deviate from the strict Codex organisation. If Dorn was forced on gunpoint to conform to the decree to split his Legion, then why were the Salamanders, the Iron Hands and the Space Wolves allowed to keep certain distinct organisational elements? Because that part was not forced on the new Chapters, like the decree limiting the allowed force strength and fleet assets was. Essentially: Guilliman works throughout the Great Crusade to compile a massive treatise on warfare, in which he includes a lot of contributions by his brothers. After the Heresy, Guilliman becomes one of the High Lords of Terra, and is tasked with reforming the Imperial military and codifying the future legislation for Space Marines. He combines both of these elements into the "Codex Astartes", which deals with all aspects concerning Space Marines, and presents this to his brothers as the future of the Space Marines. This Codex includes the mandates for Space Marines, and the reforms which the Legions (as well as all the other Imperial armed forces) all have to abide by. And it also includes the massive guidebook on warfare which Guilliman had been working on all his life. The legislation part is mandatory for all Space Marines, and is decreed by the High Lords. The guide is not mandatory, and would be impossible to police and to enforce, and not all First and Second Founding Chapters fully adhere to it. Rogal Dorn had a problem with the mandate to limit the number of Space Marines one single individual was allowed to command. This had been one of the decrees by the High Lords which had been a result of the Heresy, and therefor Dorn was not permitted to disregard it. Having said that the Codex was not presented to the Primarchs article by article so they can then choose (or God forbid vote!) what they liked or not. The content was not a result of a debate with all Primarchs contributing in a round table with Guilliman being the general secretary, keeping notes. It was the result of Guilliman's understanding of politics and war, influenced maybe in some tactical issues by practices of his brothers which he approved. In essence there was nothing in the Codex that Guilliman disapproved of. Nothing. Of course, Guilliman only included the elements he deemed worthy. The Codex is still mainly seen as his work. But he was not above considering his brothers' idears. If he had simply collected articles from all the other Primarchs then he would have simply acted as a scribe, not as an editor or researcher in that field. He did not dismiss idears just because they weren't his own. But he also didn't just include everything that was submitted to him. I think it goes without saying that all idears he came across were sorely tested and carefully considered. But while it was ultimately up to Guilliman what made it into the Codex and what didn't, it can none-the less be said that the Codex was based on the knowledge and insight of several Primarchs, and not just on Guilliman's methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olis Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 Of course, Guilliman only included the elements he deemed worthy. The Codex is still mainly seen as his work. But he was not above considering his brothers' idears. If he had simply collected articles from all the other Primarchs then he would have simply acted as a scribe, not as an editor or researcher in that field. He did not dismiss idears just because they weren't his own. But he also didn't just include everything that was submitted to him. I think it goes without saying that all idears he came across were sorely tested and carefully considered. But while it was ultimately up to Guilliman what made it into the Codex and what didn't, it can none-the less be said that the Codex was based on the knowledge and insight of several Primarchs, and not just on Guilliman's methods. I agree. Also, it was Perturabo that penned/influenced the section on tank tactics, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatus Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Not sure who wrote about tanks. The 3rd Edition Codex Chaos Space Marines and the Index startes Imperial Fists state that Perturabo had written about fortifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olis Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 Hmm, I think I might have heard it on one of the audio dramas, but I can't be certain of that without listening to them until I find a reference (or not). ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaplain Lucifer Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 1) Could an Inquisitor be aware Fallen Angels exist (and if so, to what extent)?2) Is it in keeping with the Unforgivens character to 'erase' those that know/find out/come in contact with the Fallen? If so, with extreme prejudice, yes? these are the original questions by OP. You gents are waaaay off topic... keep it in topic please... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olis Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 My apologies Lucifer. I thank those of you who've taken time to answer my questions. That's it - I have the information that I basically need. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.