Brother-Sergeant Bohemond Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I do not think we need a new Chaplain, we have Asmodai who fits your requirements to the T. I would like to see a whole new successor special character. Not sure on which chapter, what role, or rules, just I want one. Or maybe two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Chaplain Ginn Posted April 4, 2012 Author Share Posted April 4, 2012 Asmodi is not in the book. He's just a chaplain ATM. I don't want just a chaplain with lots of beads on his Rosarius, if they redo Asmodi then make him do something. Don't have him be another boring CC guy with access to a fearless bubble. Asmodi is an idea they could expand on, but why not take the opportunity to Retcon/make a new character with some kind of unique weapon or armor. Like a flaming Crozius or relic weapon of some kind. He and or Azreal could have some sort or "Luthers whisper in the Dark" special rule where in a moment if clarity Luther gives a clue about the fallen in on of his premonitions of the Lion/future. This could allow a redeployment, or +1 to reserves, or forcing of the opponent to place an unit in reserves, or scout move before the game starts...if my Valten idea was too over powered. Not just another CC guy with something uncreative like universal preferred enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother-Sergeant Bohemond Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Yes, but he once was. And I agree, Asmodai needs to be different to just a CC guy (leave that, and the inspirational, role to Sapphon.) Asmodai needs to be scary, powerful, stubborn as heck, never gives up in the pursuit of the Fallen, terrifying and decent in CC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Immolator Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Maddoc, in third edition we had both Intractable and Stubborn,it was on squad disposition and character selection,check the codex if you have it. I dont view it from a position of functionality rather as a mondus operandi.Both of those rules are useless in CC they are meant for units that keep their distance.Also how fearless was a fix exactly?Fearless means pile up wounds...Especially to small squads such as deathwing. As to the unflufiness of things:Fluff is not always depicted,you read and find fluff in the clues and orientation of the chapter.And the clues are there if you look carefully. As for plasma,well if we have to throw it down to complexity and tech specs,i have to say that a plasma gun is a more complex and demanding thing to build than an imperial aircraft.Ionizing plasma and having magnetic containers and heat resistant magnetic accelerator coils,is something that even puzzles the mechanicus who build titans of all things.So yeah not a weak example at all. I agree that the DA should be all rounders to epitomize their strategic superiority over the rest of them,but as i said our CC options are getting useless and useless. That claimed focus was non-existant in 2E, only existed in 3E due to some peoples interpretation of Jervis' lame attempted fix of adding plasma cannons to DA Tactical squads (which everybody gets now anyway, does that make them shooty now too? ermm.gif), and its non-existant in the 4E Codex. So where is this supposed reinforcing of these non-existant themes? Lame/no lame,it happened.When you release a chapter specific tactical squad,that has a plasma cannon with DA specific Iconography on it,it has a knack to imprint on your mind.I myself hunted this specific set on e-bay.I dont advocate that the plasma cannon makes them shooty.Their whole disposition makes them and rules such as those i spoke of earlier.If you read the deathwatch RPG rules (i know not cannon but i bet well see a surprising good number of fluff entries from it into our next codex) they are pretty much tailored for ranged combat. As to the ripoff discussion.See now the GKs pioneered the 2w system for terminators(which IMHO must spread all around) and when i said it should spread the answer was: We will be Gk look alikes.So yup in minds of most it is a rip off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGumbo Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I hope we keep Company Vets in the PA Companies too, personal choice because in my mind Vet is not a rank or position(although it can be) it is a measure of skill(stats), if the PA wearer has extra skill and has not been inducted into the DW or they are at full complement he can stay in a unit in the 3-9th Coys. To me it makes perfect sense, to others I'm sure it makes less sense. I agree entirely with this line of reasoning - not all veteran marines will be suitable for the DW, but they would presumably gain skills and experience to mark them apart within their own company. Similarly: venerable dreadnoughts. According to the current codex, these are members of the Deathwing but that's always seemed odd to me: why would a long-service dread in one of the other companies not be venerable, whilst a newly created DW dread would, on a literal reading of the fluff, immediately take on venerable status? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Immolator Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I hope we keep Company Vets in the PA Companies too, personal choice because in my mind Vet is not a rank or position(although it can be) it is a measure of skill(stats), if the PA wearer has extra skill and has not been inducted into the DW or they are at full complement he can stay in a unit in the 3-9th Coys. To me it makes perfect sense, to others I'm sure it makes less sense. I agree entirely with this line of reasoning - not all veteran marines will be suitable for the DW, but they would presumably gain skills and experience to mark them apart within their own company. Similarly: venerable dreadnoughts. According to the current codex, these are members of the Deathwing but that's always seemed odd to me: why would a long-service dread in one of the other companies not be venerable, whilst a newly created DW dread would, on a literal reading of the fluff, immediately take on venerable status? Because the dread of the deathwing quite probably is 'in the know' and the other is not could be a reasonable explanation. As for the PA vets,the DA player base must agree to this:The crux terminatus (veteran badge) and the deathwing are not the same.One can have the one but not the other and vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGumbo Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Because the dread of the deathwing quite probably is 'in the know' and the other is not could be a reasonable explanation. It's the apparent/implied exclusivity that seems odd, though - surely you'd have venerable and non-venerable dreads in all companies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 You'd think so wouldn't you? The term Venerable implies age and experience, not just being inducted to the DW because you can keep a secret without losing your mind. That's a different sort of criteria altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cactus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Meh, venerable dreadnoughts = Deathwing is just one of those bits of 4th/5th ed nonsense that I ignore. But I'm one of those old-fashioned people who thinks only terminators should have white armour, not dreadnoughts or vehicles. Back on topic, here's my prosaic list of things I want to see in our next codex: The return of Azrael's rule that lets you play for another turn after the dice say the game ends. A special character Interrogator-Chaplain. Asmodai, Sapphon, or someone new. Sergeant Namaan. Deathwing to remain fearless and able to mix all terminator weapons in their squads (these have been constants since Codex: Angels of Death). All the generic space marine kit like thudd guns thunderfire cannons, land raider redeemers, camo cloaks for scouts etc. Ravenwing to have the hit and run rule and/or skilled riders. They've always been presented as an elite formation but fearless, although cool, doesn't really benefit them the way it does terminators and they need something more. Scout bikers. How else do we know which brothers to promote to the 2nd company? Successor chapter special characters like the Blood Angels got, because it adds some variety and fleshes out their chapters. Land raider dedicated transports for the Deathwing. I love using Deathwing assault but it would be nice to have the choice. A teleport homer in each suit of terminator armour, like in the good old days. There needs to be a way to get a lock on the squad to teleport them back to the ship! No thunderlions! :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 No thunderlions! :( How about, Stormlions, Angels Lions or my favorite: Lion's Lions :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoc Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Similarly: venerable dreadnoughts. According to the current codex, these are members of the Deathwing but that's always seemed odd to me: why would a long-service dread in one of the other companies not be venerable, whilst a newly created DW dread would, on a literal reading of the fluff, immediately take on venerable status? If you misread whats written in the Codex you'd get that. While the Codex might suggest that all Venerable Dreadnoughts are Deathwing it does not say that all Deathwing Dreadnoughts are Venerable, reread the relevant text if you don't believe me. Venerable: Dreadnoughts may be upgraded to Venerable status, indicating that they are serving with the Deathwing. - Codex: Dark Angels 4E, p30. That says that Venerable equates to Deathwing, but contrary to what your post above suggests it does not say that Deathwing equals Venerable. The two things are quite different. As for the PA vets,the DA player base must agree to this:The crux terminatus (veteran badge) and the deathwing are not the same.One can have the one but not the other and vice versa. The Crux Terminatus is reserved for members of the First Company (or those who have served in it), Company Veterans are not First Company (since Company Veterans aren't even Fearless so clearly they're not Deathwing, former or otherwise, and even if some of them had served in the First Company, only those individuals who had actually done so would be permitted to openly display the Crux anyway). ------------------------------------- Maddoc, in third edition we had both Intractable and Stubborn,it was on squad disposition and character selection,check the codex if you have it. Deathwing (and HQs) had Stubborn everybody else had Intractable. Since we're talking about the army overall then the rule dejour for 3E was the armywide Intractable rule, not the limited spread Stubborn rule. I dont view it from a position of functionality rather as a mondus operandi.Both of those rules are useless in CC they are meant for units that keep their distance.Also how fearless was a fix exactly?Fearless means pile up wounds...Especially to small squads such as deathwing. Neither of those makes the DA more shooty, Intractable was a terrible rule that was useless in any situation, and DW having Stubborn is irrelevant to the Chapter as a whole, as since the first Codex featuring DA the DW have been Immune to Psychology (later translated to Stubborn/Fearless), setting them apart from the line Brothers and actually acted to improve their utility in close combat, but did nothing to enhance their shootiness (the later Fearless now having the detrimental No Retreat! rule aside). As to the unflufiness of things:Fluff is not always depicted,you read and find fluff in the clues and orientation of the chapter.And the clues are there if you look carefully. Then, being so readily found, you shouldn't have any trouble pointing out at least some of those hints. Bare in mind those hints you're claiming need to make it clear that the DA are more shooty than other Marines, so any example you give which has analogous examples featuring other Chapters just proves that DA are as shooty as other Space Marines not more so. As for plasma,well if we have to throw it down to complexity and tech specs,i have to say that a plasma gun is a more complex and demanding thing to build than an imperial aircraft.Ionizing plasma and having magnetic containers and heat resistant magnetic accelerator coils,is something that even puzzles the mechanicus who build titans of all things.So yeah not a weak example at all. Your underestimation of the tech involved in Imperial aircraft construction aside, plasma is incredibly weak when compared to the vastly more complex mechanisms of conversion beamers or graviton guns... I agree that the DA should be all rounders to epitomize their strategic superiority over the rest of them,but as i said our CC options are getting useless and useless. No more so than other Marines. Our Assault Squads are no worse in combat than C:SM Assault Squads (differing option costs and the C:SM Assault Sergeant having more options is a product of Jervis' weak, and therefore abandoned, design paradigm not some conscious attempt to make the DA more shooty). Lame/no lame,it happened.When you release a chapter specific tactical squad,that has a plasma cannon with DA specific Iconography on it,it has a knack to imprint on your mind.I myself hunted this specific set on e-bay.I dont advocate that the plasma cannon makes them shooty.Their whole disposition makes them and rules such as those i spoke of earlier. Nothing about the DA makes them more shooty, not their disposition, not their rules, and certainly not their fluff. Some people believe they're shooty but I have yet to see a single shred of actual evidence that so much as supports that theory let alone proves it. If you read the deathwatch RPG rules (i know not cannon but i bet well see a surprising good number of fluff entries from it into our next codex) they are pretty much tailored for ranged combat. I have the DW RPG and I'm not seeing your claimed tailoring of DA to ranged combat (more than any of the other DW Marines), moreover, where a Chapter displays some divergence from a balanced/allround approach to combat its mentioned by the DW books under the Combat Doctrine for that Chapter and there is no such mention made for DA, quite the opposite in fact. I think your projecting things onto the text that isn't there. As to the ripoff discussion.See now the GKs pioneered the 2w system for terminators(which IMHO must spread all around) and when i said it should spread the answer was: We will be Gk look alikes.So yup in minds of most it is a rip off. C:GK has 1W Terminators and 2W Paladins, so your assertion that Paladins somehow mean all Terminators in subsequent Marine Codexes will be gaining 2W hits a big snag as even the C:GK Terminators are only 1W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Don't do it BL.... I know you want to :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoc Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Don't do it BL.... I know you want to ;) If he wants to try misrepresenting what I've written, yet again, or to just plain fail to prove me wrong, yet again, why shouldn't he? :) Nothing I wrote has any valid counters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Immolator Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Arguments and counterarguments and all i see a solid wall of denial and stubbornness in front of me.I had my share of wall banging in the past i will not elaborate any further.After all everyone is entitled to his opinions. As an aside,yes i was wrong about that but since when Paladins are not Terminators? BL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Landrain Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 BL? That may be me :) I have my own design theory on how DW should play, and I have no problem waiting for the new book. At which point someone whill either eat their words or slink away... I know I am prepared to be hungry :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoc Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Arguments and counterarguments and all i see a solid wall of denial and stubbornness in front of me.I had my share of wall banging in the past i will not elaborate any further.After all everyone is entitled to his opinions. So I can take it from all that, that the evidence you claimed was so evident in the fluff isn't going to be forthcoming? Can't say I'm too surprised... As an aside,yes i was wrong about that but since when Paladins are not Terminators? They're not a basic Terminator unit, they're a specialist unit that happens to be in Terminator armour. Are you going to claim that Nemesis Dreadknights, GK Grand Masters and GK Librarians are the equivalent of C:SM/C:BA/C: DA Terminator units too? After all, the pilot in a Dreadknight is in Terminator armour, as are both the GKGM and GK Librarian. I hope not. BL? Unless I'm mistaken Stobz is referring to Brother Landrain. Edit- I have my own design theory on how DW should play, and I have no problem waiting for the new book. At which point someone whill either eat their words or slink away... I know I am prepared to be hungry :) Bwhahahaha... that was a good one. :) Oh, you're serious... how sad. Though in all honesty, I don't expect you to eat crow or slink away when you're shown to be wrong (you haven't the many times its happen so far), I expect you to be all bull & bluster and carry on in denial (so business as usual). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HJL Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Can we stop with the passive aggresive sad face? GW decide what Dark Angels are. If they decide they are plasma loving, thats what they become. Ive been playing DA since 2nd and i embrased it. Personaly i am sure that DA are going to move more heavily in that direction with the next codex. Edit So as not to offend delicate butterflies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vazzy Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Can we stop with the passive aggresive This. We all need to chill for a bit. Personally, I've always run meltas over plasma, as it seemed more cost effective, but hey, if they make plasma worth taking I will take it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoc Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Can we stop with the passive aggresive douchbaggery? I think stopping calling/implying people are douchebags is a far more pressing concern. Since, as an offensive label targeted toward specific members, its quite a serious violations of the forum rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HJL Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 I would say the larger concern is you trying to cause tension and arguements. It called being a troll. Ive looked at a bunch of your threads, its recuring theme. Do you have nothing better to do with your life than get pissy over toy soldiers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemisor Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 delicate butterflys :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 ROFL...Intractable, stubborn mules more like it :devil: Disagrements are good, nit picking is boring and no fun for anyone (I think :unsure: ) EDIT: We had such a great and supportive team during the LPC, I suppose now we have no common goal we can revert to the old ways again :) :D stobz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Droma Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 @MadDoc Deathwatch RPG, DA get +5 BS for being DA, no one else currently has that in any supplement as far as I'm aware. So yes there is a precedent for DA to be shooty in deathwatch. As for DA from book and codex fluff I agree completely with you. I've read every DA codex and nothing in them makes them any more shooty than other chapters. Ancient tech is definitely their thing though primarily because of the Jetbike in the current book but being the only ones with plasma way back when doesn't hurt that aspect either. If we take HH fluff into account DA are very skilled melee combatants with a specific focus on sword work. It's currently not reflected in the codex but I would guess it will be when we get updated. Seriously though lighten up over wishlist discussions. No reason to pick apart someone's wishlist even when you know it doesn't make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemisor Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 i would like to see cheap SS/PW combos on vets and termys. just coz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoc Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 @MadDoc Deathwatch RPG, DA get +5 BS for being DA, no one else currently has that in any supplement as far as I'm aware. So yes there is a precedent for DA to be shooty in deathwatch. With a cursory look, Iron Hands also get +5 Ballistic Skill (Deathwatch- First Founding, p 9), as can any Ultramarine (+5 to any two stats) and its part of the first and third of the Chapter Characteristic Modifiers in Rites of Battle (p22). +5 Ballistic Skill also doesn't actually equate to being more shooty, just being better at it. All beside the point though. As for DA from book and codex fluff I agree completely with you. I've read every DA codex and nothing in them makes them any more shooty than other chapters. Ancient tech is definitely their thing though primarily because of the Jetbike in the current book but being the only ones with plasma way back when doesn't hurt that aspect either. If we take HH fluff into account DA are very skilled melee combatants with a specific focus on sword work. It's currently not reflected in the codex but I would guess it will be when we get updated. Thats all I've been trying to point out, that theres no fluff that supports the DA being shooty. Seriously though lighten up over wishlist discussions. No reason to pick apart someone's wishlist even when you know it doesn't make any sense. Good thing I wasn't doing that then, isn't it? It was Landrain and Immolator that leapt on my list and had a go at me for it, I was merely defending myself. ----------------------------------- I would say the larger concern is you trying to cause tension and arguements. It called being a troll. Ive looked at a bunch of your threads, its recuring theme. Do you have nothing better to do with your life than get pissy over toy soldiers? I'm a troll for giving my opinion and then defending myself when I was taken to task over it by Landrain and Immolator? Not quite. Also, I think you'll find unprovoked personal attacks on members trumps self-defence in the wrongness stakes. Keep making personal attacks though, see where it gets you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.