The New Dark Angels Codex: An Editorial

[Anabis_Xero]

a techmarine also only has one wound and no invul save so even with T5 and a 2+ hes not that brutal compared to a captian.

[PensacolaWarhammer]

The argument for a captian with artificer armor and on bike is thin as Codex marines can take one as well as give him a storm shield and relic blade. I agree that allowing the master on bike would have been a way to allow for personal fluff and narrative. I particularly like the idea of have succsor chapter character, but I mentioned that the codex could have used more named characters.

[Master Avoghai]

Named Characters - While I understand and accept the "scouts kept away from Deathwing goals" feel of the codex, I think this feel could have been kept while also allowing players to explore the lower ranks of the Dark Angels. Basically, I would have allowed players, like me, to create a narrative and more complete Dark Angels character with the inclusion of other named characters. I don't even pretend to know what their rules would be.

I know lots of people who don't like special characters that much. I personnaly would have prefered build my own master of DW or master of RW but it's the occasion for GW to sell more finecast models

Bu they can't push it over limits. 5 special characters for an alternative SM codex is fine. Actually, I would have prefered an AoA chaplain or an GotC Captain. I think I'll use UM's Tellion character as allies to represent Naaman So finally I'm happy with what I have : I prefer creating my character rather expecting GW to do it for me.

Vet sergeants with special wargear - For me, it's a hard sale to pay 10 points to get +1 to leadership and +1 to attack. That's one extra attack that is more than likely going to a model with 1 wound. A regular sergeant is just as effective at killing a 1 wound model and 10 points cheaper. Toss in Grimm Resolve and the +1 leadership is equally a non-issue. Now, if I were able to get an Auspex, Combat Sheild, or Infravisior, for example, when I purchased a vet sergeant, then it might cause me to pause for a moment and really think about it.

To me the role are simple :

tactical squad within 6" from the banner of devastation =>sgt with combi plasma

tactical squad in a transport to grab an objective => vet sgt with PW. I've seen my 3A vet sgt so many times not doing damage that if you don't give me the opportunity to get 3A, I won't even bother giving him a PW.

Moreover the +1Ld could be crucial as this type of squad is not in the 12" radius of a banner hence cannot reroll Ld test. 9 with Stubborn is good to be sure those guys will fullfill their role

The problem with the special issue wargear is that you will give acces as a whole, hence you give your sergent the possibility to grab a power field generator for exemple... And you see the pain it could be to have an entire DA army with 4++ save...

Fliers - There are numorus threads going about how poor fliers are vs how good they are. Personally, I like fliers. I want to use fliers, and I like the Nephilum. It's the Dark Talon that has me stumped. I personally haven't tried the Dark Talon yet, so I can't say much. However, it's weapons payload leads something to be desired. As for all armies having 1 fighter and 1 transport, I just think that makes sense particularly for space marines. All our tanks are a rhino, transport, with guns shoved inside.

The simple thing I don't understand is why the hell the Nephilim has the HB and not the Talon?

I would at least give the rift canon Heavy 2 to be a little useful as well...

Apothicaries - I agree that the Apothicaries replacing their weapon has me scratching my head. I can understand losing the power fist for the Deathwing apothicaries, but losing a weapon for the power armor apothicaries?

And still... You pay +30pts to lose a 20/25pts weapon you've paid for when buying the termi... Why then would I pay 55pts for an apoc that has an effect in the squad when I can pay 85pts for a banner with a same effect in a 12" radius?

Servitors - I've never actually played with servitors or techmarines for that matter. However, how techmarines are presented in this codex I'm actually leaning towards taking them. I cursious as to what loop holes that would open up though as I really can't think of them. Then again, I can honestly say may brain doesn't think in terms of cheese, at least I'd like to think it doesn't.

It wasn't really a problem of cheese it was a problem of rules coherency and endless arguments.

Making them wargear allow you to make a techmarine and his servitor join a unit (as it's a PI with wargear and not a squad).

Now imagine, I shoot at you with my Lord and make 6 (or I use a focal spell with my psyker). I choose to target specifically the servitor with plasma cannon.

You can reply :"no you can't because it's a piece of wargear and you can't individually target a piece of wargear"...

And I'm sure introducing such rule will create lots of gap like this so... I'ven known that, I don't want it anymore.

You have a model with a WS S T W etc? then it is recruited as a unit.

Have a model without all that that can't be targeted in shoot or CC (like the watcher), then it's a piece of wargear.

The reason a Company Master needs to be able to take a bike is that not everyone using the Codex intends to play Dark Angels. Some intend to play a successor chapter. Those chapters should have options for biking masters that aren't Sammael. In my mind, fluff is the reason that the codeex NEEDS a bike-capable master. Not DA fluff, but successor fluff. That's where the army list falls down in several ways, I think. The list should have had more successor HQ options, like the Blood Angels book does. At least one successor named character. It's not a huge thing, but it's a thing.

Yeah but by doing that you're obliged to make the Master on bike unlocking the RAS as troops. Hence he enters directly in competition with Sammael (the Master with termi armour don't unlock termi). And I don't think GW wants to see people get read of their finecast corvex or their sabreclaw made with a kit of LS + a kit that you find in the RW bikes sprue...

[Brother Landrain]

Servitors - I've never actually played with servitors or techmarines for that matter. However, how techmarines are presented in this codex I'm actually leaning towards taking them. I cursious as to what loop holes that would open up though as I really can't think of them. Then again, I can honestly say may brain doesn't think in terms of cheese, at least I'd like to think it doesn't.

It wasn't really a problem of cheese it was a problem of rules coherency and endless arguments.

Making them wargear allow you to make a techmarine and his servitor join a unit (as it's a PI with wargear and not a squad).

Now imagine, I shoot at you with my Lord and make 6 (or I use a focal spell with my psyker). I choose to target specifically the servitor with plasma cannon.

You can reply :"no you can't because it's a piece of wargear and you can't individually target a piece of wargear"...

And I'm sure introducing such rule will create lots of gap like this so... I'ven known that, I don't want it anymore.

You have a model with a WS S T W etc? then it is recruited as a unit.

Have a model without all that that can't be targeted in shoot or CC (like the watcher), then it's a piece of wargear.

Fenrisian Wolves...

[Brother Immolator]

Servitors - I've never actually played with servitors or techmarines for that matter. However, how techmarines are presented in this codex I'm actually leaning towards taking them. I cursious as to what loop holes that would open up though as I really can't think of them. Then again, I can honestly say may brain doesn't think in terms of cheese, at least I'd like to think it doesn't.

It wasn't really a problem of cheese it was a problem of rules coherency and endless arguments.

Making them wargear allow you to make a techmarine and his servitor join a unit (as it's a PI with wargear and not a squad).

Now imagine, I shoot at you with my Lord and make 6 (or I use a focal spell with my psyker). I choose to target specifically the servitor with plasma cannon.

You can reply :"no you can't because it's a piece of wargear and you can't individually target a piece of wargear"...

And I'm sure introducing such rule will create lots of gap like this so... I'ven known that, I don't want it anymore.

You have a model with a WS S T W etc? then it is recruited as a unit.

Have a model without all that that can't be targeted in shoot or CC (like the watcher), then it's a piece of wargear.

Fenrisian Wolves...

Indeed. Also a vindicare can snipe the watcher :D

[PensacolaWarhammer]

@Brother Immolator

How is that possible since the rules state the watcher takes no part in the game and cannot be targeted. For intents and purposes, you could model Azeral wearing his magic helmet.

[facmanpob]

One extra note:

Complaining about fluff changes in the 40k world is like complaining that the weather changes day by day (for those in California, please note that the rest of the world doesn't have sun every day! ).

e.g. Sammael didn't always ride a jetbike.....he had a bike or a speeder in Codex Angels of Death. At some point his fluff changed..... and once upon a time you had to put a Techmarine in an army in order to field a Dreadnought.

And as if to back up my point its just started snowing in London!

Sammael wasn't in Codex: Angels of Death - the character was an invention of the 4E codex. In Codex: Angels of Death, "Master of the Ravenwing" was certainly a valid HQ choice, but didn't have a name. In the 3E codex, there's reference to a "Grand Master Gidian of the Ravenwing", but you can play the Master of the Ravenwing under any name you want (still no Sammael).

That's called splitting hairs, and doesn't invalidate the point I was making.

Agreed. For that matter you can still field the Grand Master of the Ravenwing under any name you wish, Sammael is simply the name on the unit entry.

Perhaps I wasn't clear on this, as it seems to me you've both missed my own point entirely. At no point have I said you couldn't play a "counts as Sammael" model in lieu of Sammael (where did that come from?). My point is that Sammael's appearance in 4th Edition is an evolution of the existing fluff that doesn't necessarily contradict what was already written. While you can choose to treat Sammael as a complete retcon of the faceless generic "Master of Ravenwing" from 2nd and 3rd Edition (with full liberties to the chapter armoury), I've always viewed him as an expansion of what was already established: the previous Masters of Ravenwing (from 2nd and 3rd Edition) were slain in battle (to include Gidian, or "Gideon" as it's now spelt) and "Sammael" (or whatever name you wish to give him) has since taken over. This is not a contradiction of what already came before unless you want to read it that way. (While the previous Masters of the Ravenwing didn't ride jetbikes, it's outright stated "Sammael" is remarkably daring even for one of his office. And perhaps the tech wasn't ready for field use before Sammael took over; it certainly hasn't been around long enough to produce whole squads of jetbikers.) Maybe in your own game, "Sammael" has some other name and history, and that's fine - but I still consider the whole jetbike riding thing to be a relatively recent occurrence.

Complaining about fluff changes

Except that they haven't bothered to change the fluff...they've just handed out new toys in violation of the fluff, without bothering to change existing fluff or write additional fluff to explain how "no air power outside the navy" doesn't really mean what we think it means. Big difference! And Sammy getting a jetbike was NOT problematic. It didn't contradict or violate any fluff. There was no fluff along the lines of "and the grand master of the raven wing doesn't own a jetbike."

You go away for a couple of days and the thread moves on!

Anyway, to answer these two posts specifically......please take the time to read the whole post, apologies for its length and lack of emoticons

The point I made, and which I don't think got across, is that GW has been changing and altering the fluff of 40K ever since Rogue Trader was first released. And not only that, it's policy is that fluff/canon is not set in stone and can be changed.

The Master of the Ravenwing has existed for several editions, and the fluff has changed through those editions. First he could be fielded on foot, on a bike or in a speeder, now he has either a speeder or one of the last remaining jetbikes using technology from the time of the heresy (4th Ed Codex - 'venerable Mark 14 jetbike'). Whether or not he is more daring than his predecessors or any other reason for him suddenly appearing on a jetbike isn't relevant to my point. The point is that GW changed the canon, and did not bother to explain the whys and wherefores of how he suddenly has a jetbike when in previous editions the previous bloke in the same job didn't. And this is all fine, as it is consistent with GW's policy.

So, please, don't expect a reason as to why flyers are everywhere (although there were rules for creating your own flyers in Rogue Trader - and there were no limits on who could field them) when they weren't an edition ago; or why a Techmarine is no longer needed in order to field vehicles as he was in 2nd Ed

And if you don't believe me, here's a quote I pulled from A D-B's blog, made by Marc Gascoigne when he was Head of BL, which I think sums it all up very nicely:

“Keep in mind Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 are worlds where half truths, lies, propaganda, politics, legends and myths exist. The absolute truth which is implied when you talk about “canonical background” will never be known because of this. Everything we know about these worlds is from the viewpoints of people in them which are as a result incomplete and even sometimes incorrect. The truth is mutable, debatable and lost as the victors write the history…

Here’s our standard line: Yes it’s all official, but remember that we’re reporting back from a time where stories aren’t always true, or at least 100% accurate. if it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40K universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it.

Let’s put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex… and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths.

I think the real problem for me, and I speak for no other, is that the topic as a “big question” doesn’t matter. It’s all as true as everything else, and all just as false/half-remembered/sort-of-true. The answer you are seeking is “Yes and no” or perhaps “Sometimes”. And for me, that’s the end of it.

Now, ask us some specifics, eg can Black Templars spit acid and we can answer that one, and many others. But again note that answer may well be “sometimes” or “it varies” or “depends”.

But is it all true? Yes and no. Even though some of it is plainly contradictory? Yes and no. Do we deliberately contradict, retell with differences? Yes we do. Is the newer the stuff the truer it is? Yes and no. In some cases is it true that the older stuff is the truest? Yes and no. Maybe and sometimes. Depends and it varies.

It’s a decaying universe without GPS and galaxy-wide communication, where precious facts are clung to long after they have been changed out of all recognition. Read A Canticle for Liebowitz by Walter M Miller, about monks toiling to hold onto facts in the aftermath of a nucelar war; that nails it for me.“

[BigGumbo]

 

• Warlord Traits and Dark Angels Special rules - Honestly not much to really complain about here. I would like my special characters to have something other than the Hunt, and I think there could have be a few of the warlord traits dropped for more "fluffy" and useful ones.
• HQ selection - The HQ selection is alright. Again, I would have liked to see at least one of the HQ choices a bit better in close combat, but if GW is moving away from close combat, which I doubt, then it is a pointless issue. I don't understand why Azrael, the Grand Master and leader of the whole Dark Angels chapter, is not an Eternal Warrior, but Sammael, a company master, is. I also don't understand why the three grand masters' swords that were created at the same time from the same piece of rock all have different stats.

I think these two complaints are slightly contradictory: on the one hand, the warlord traits ought to be more varied; on the other, their wargear ought to be more homogenous. I agree that having a bit more variety in Traits would be sensible/desirable but I think the unique wargear is pitched about right.

 

Also, Sammael being an Eternal Warrior is about the wargear rather than the man and hasn't changed since the last Codex. Besides, why shouldn't a company master be a bit tougher than the chapter master?

[Brother Immolator]

@Brother Immolator

How is that possible since the rules state the watcher takes no part in the game and cannot be targeted. For intents and purposes, you could model Azeral wearing his magic helmet.

The helmet is listed in chapter relics section. The model is just a cool way to depict it. The vindicare can snipe any wargear giving inv saves no matter what with his rounds. The watcher cannot be target spefically because you cant target anything of the like (etc a rozarius) a vindicare though can, thats his rule. Same with the watcher in the relic of the unforgiven. For all intentents and purposes the vindicare targets Az and removes his 'wargear'.

[PensacolaWarhammer]

@Brother Mmolator

 

Wow, I can see why people say Grey Knights are broken.

[Corsair]

Meh...thunderhawks are armed transports. They're NOT gunships. And it would be okay for the marines to start acquiring/deploying proper figher/interceptors IFANDONLYIF they wrote fluff to explain away the flouting of various edicts and such...advancing the fluff (along with the timeline!) is one thing...ignoring it to boost sales is...cheap. Show me where they write in anywhere how various chapters either convinced the High Lords of Terra to give them permission to maintain air power, or where they decided "screw terra, we're above the law?" That fluff doesn't exist, therefore the aircraft are unfluffy! They closest thing to that, thus far, is the bit where DA Techmarines fabricate a weapon carried by an illegal aircraft...and deny knowledge of the STC they use to create the weapon...not the aircraft. For the navy not be be up in arms over the fact that the marines have an air force of their own now, when they're unhappy enough that they have the transport capacity to self-deploy their ground forces, is unfluffy. For the inquisition not to be using this breach of "the way things work" (navy does the flying, MI does the dying) as an excuse to launch investigations that are actually looking into completely unrelated suspicions of heresy and such...unfluffy. No, it's as if GW said: "Well, we wrote that fluff a while ago, so it's not that big a deal to just pretend it's not there...look, GamerZ! Shiny, expensive toys!"

I don't see that the Space Marines having air power is unfluffy in the slightest.

 

The post-Heresy separation of power and subsequent restrictions upon the Space Marines was to specifically prevent them from being a NAVAL power, which is why they do not have access to space-faring vessels specialised toward naval warfare, but rather toward conquering planets (and in extremely limited numbers).

 

Fighters and bombers, in addition to transports, compliment this purpose rather nicely. It's not as though a bunch of Storm Talons or specialised land speeders are going to be roaring around in space destroying Grand Cruisers; none of these craft (barring the Thunderhawk) is going to be much danger to a dedicated space fighter anyway, if the Space Marine craft are even capable of fighting out of atmosphere in the first place.

 

The long and short is that the addition of these fliers in no way damages the Imperial Navy's role as the space superiority force of the Imperium.

[Brother Landrain]

 

The post-Heresy separation of power and subsequent restrictions upon the Space Marines was to specifically prevent them from being a NAVAL power, which is why they do not have access to space-faring vessels specialised toward naval warfare, but rather toward conquering planets (and in extremely limited numbers).

 

 

I will take my Rock vs your Battleships any day :)

[Corsair]

 

 

 

The post-Heresy separation of power and subsequent restrictions upon the Space Marines was to specifically prevent them from being a NAVAL power, which is why they do not have access to space-faring vessels specialised toward naval warfare, but rather toward conquering planets (and in extremely limited numbers).

 

I will take my Rock vs your Battleships any day :)

There are, of course, the occasional exceptions :P

[Brother Immolator]

The post-Heresy separation of power and subsequent restrictions upon the Space Marines was to specifically prevent them from being a NAVAL power, which is why they do not have access to space-faring vessels specialised toward naval warfare, but rather toward conquering planets (and in extremely limited numbers).

I will take my Rock vs your Battleships any day

There are, of course, the occasional exceptions

OFC, we like to do things our way.

@Brother Mmolator

Wow, I can see why people say Grey Knights are broken.

Not quite, you pay for a single model that although it can snipe said wargear and has the potential of destroying a LR in a single round but it is a single model and costs akin to a decked out tactical squad. You can see the limitations and problems if you take that into account, not the least of them been that it can fire a single shot per turn.

Now that I think of it, he may not be able to fire on the DWKs watcher. He is a squad upgrade as oposed to a model upgrade. Hm....

He can still snipe Az though.

[facmanpob]

Brother Immolator has hit the nail on the head! Yes the Vindicare is powerful, and can easily knock out a Land Raider with one shot, but he is only shooting at 1 unit per turn, and whilst shooting wargear off models is cool, if he wastes a turn knocking the Iron Halo off my Company Master then I'm happy with that! :)

 

The Vindicare is also likely to be in fortifications with a 2+ cover save. So using weapons that ignore cover is a good idea. Alternatively, take a Telepathy Librarian and cast Puppet Master, Hallucination or Psychic Shriek on the Vindicare every turn! :)

[march10k]

The reason a Company Master needs to be able to take a bike is that not everyone using the Codex intends to play Dark Angels. Some intend to play a successor chapter. Those chapters should have options for biking masters that aren't Sammael. In my mind, fluff is the reason that the codeex NEEDS a bike-capable master. Not DA fluff, but successor fluff. That's where the army list falls down in several ways, I think. The list should have had more successor HQ options, like the Blood Angels book does. At least one successor named character. It's not a huge thing, but it's a thing.

 

Well...it would be reasonable to assume that equipment or tactics  that don't exist in the DA chapter of the First Legion might exist in a "successor chapter."  Except that the legion never really disbanded, and the other chapters of the unforgiven are only separate on paper, and then only on paper that those outside the Legion might one day see.  So, no, if the DA don't do it, that means the Unforgiven don't do it.  Aside from different paint on their armor, the other chapters are identical, at least in terms of weapons and tactics.  For them to have different options would be as logical as two tactical squads from the same company to have different options..."If you paint a '3' on your shoulder pads, you can have a plasma cannon, but if your tactical squad has any other number, your heavy weapon must be a heavy bolter or a lascannon."  golly gee??!?  That would be silly...same thing on the chapter level. 

[ValourousHeart]

 

 

Why does Asmodai not have a ranged attack? Would making the Blades of Reason not a Specialist Weapon unbalance the codex?

Asmodai is an issue since v3 : they kept the old model's wargear though it was useless (since crozius and Psword had both the same effect), and now it could have a use (choosing between S6AP4 or S4AP3), they removed the model and create this ugly thing.... Actually, more than the profile of the blades of reason. It's more the reasonning of model creation I would like to understand..

This is the first Asmodai ever made. The other model that everyone confuses as Asmodai is actually Saphon. It even says so on his base.

[Brother Immolator]

 

 

 

Why does Asmodai not have a ranged attack? Would making the Blades of Reason not a Specialist Weapon unbalance the codex?

Asmodai is an issue since v3 : they kept the old model's wargear though it was useless (since crozius and Psword had both the same effect), and now it could have a use (choosing between S6AP4 or S4AP3), they removed the model and create this ugly thing.... Actually, more than the profile of the blades of reason. It's more the reasonning of model creation I would like to understand..

This is the first Asmodai ever made. The other model that everyone confuses as Asmodai is actually Saphon. It even says so on his base.

 

Mine says asmodai. But I agree with you. Though the new model is the same as the old, exsept some details

[Master Avoghai]

 

 

 

Why does Asmodai not have a ranged attack? Would making the Blades of Reason not a Specialist Weapon unbalance the codex?

Asmodai is an issue since v3 : they kept the old model's wargear though it was useless (since crozius and Psword had both the same effect), and now it could have a use (choosing between S6AP4 or S4AP3), they removed the model and create this ugly thing.... Actually, more than the profile of the blades of reason. It's more the reasonning of model creation I would like to understand..

This is the first Asmodai ever made. The other model that everyone confuses as Asmodai is actually Saphon. It even says so on his base.

Mine too.

 

It was presented as Asmodai in the v3 codex and IIRC, in the angels of death as well.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Pardon my little rant but...

 

No ability to make Veterans as troops? I know we get Termis and bikes as troops but come on, not every successor may have that ability. Or how about fan-successors (IE...MINE!) that have more than just a squad or two of "Company Veterans". I don't mean to sound selfish...but I am sure I wouldn't be the only one to enjoy Vets as troops.

 

rant over

[Brother Immolator]

All of us would, but it doesn't cut it to the theme of the unforgiven. According to the new fluff those are hap hazard squads not a formation to hold ground. They are mostly comprised of hard as nails marines to be send into the thick of it and erase some serious threats.

[Master Avoghai]

I second to Brother immolator.

 

Don't forget our particular organization : all our1st company members go to combat with a termi armour => possibility to field termi as troops.

 

Other chapters don't have this luck and some of their members of their 1st company are in power armour => characters that allow to count them as troops.

 

Like says the paragraph along the veteran entry the vets squads are just built for a battle with the most trained brethren of the company => too anecdotic to count them as troops.

[Brother Immolator]

I second to Brother immolator.

 

Like says the paragraph along the veteran entry the vets squads are just built for a battle with the most trained brethren of the company => too anecdotic to count them as troops.

 

I would call it ad-hoc to be more precise,  something that comes out of necessity and violates (in my mind at least) the strict operational rites of the unforgiven.

Think their deployment as a bend of the mondus operandi.

[Brother Landrain]

 

I second to Brother immolator.

 

Like says the paragraph along the veteran entry the vets squads are just built for a battle with the most trained brethren of the company => too anecdotic to count them as troops.

 

I would call it ad-hoc to be more precise,  something that comes out of necessity and violates (in my mind at least) the strict operational rites of the unforgiven.

Think their deployment as a bend of the mondus operandi.

 

I think this is instead more in line with the Lion's Superior senes of Strategy and tactics.

The DA Masters are able to realize when something special is needed, and are flexible enough to create special kill units for special missions, rather than being so strict and stuck to following the codex that they cannot see the advantage of that added flexibility.

 

I see veteran squads as special mission oriented Kill teams, that give the DA ways of dealing with specific threats that standard codex units may not be best suited engaging.

 

While DA are considered to be 'stubborn' beyond belief, I dont think that means they cannot be superior tactical/strategically flexible planners.

[Cpt_Reaper]

I guess my displeasure stems from the fact that once again Unforgiven successors have been left out in the cold.