Supplement Chapter Dexs?

[Squirrelloid]

BA have a different history. Their geneseed is flawed in a way that SM's do not know. Their innate state of being is in the air - they wish to fly as their primarch once did. They are not typical marines, and even if it takes an additional couple of extra years, I would much prefer a separate codex. Supplementing the SM codex would ruin the fluff and fun for my BA's. Any chapter that is as unique as the BA's (i.e.: SW, GK) deserve a separate codex. If they're underpowered for a while, so be it. Codexes come and go, and eventually we will be on top again.

 

I understand the appeal of having everything in one accessible codex, but I don't play SM's. I play BA's. Imo, they are separate armies.

 

What does fluff have to do with the codex being a supplement or not.  That doesn't change the fluff at all, it just means that C:SM is the reference for the statblocks of the units which are shared in common.

 

C:SM need not say anything about BA fluff, and the BA supplement can establish whatever fluff it needs to just fine.

 

Edit: Rules for units should be tied to the units, not the armies.  Everyone's predator destructor should work the same.  Everyone's tactical marines should work the same.  Only if there is a specific and explicit difference between the chapter in question and C:SM should there be any differences.

[Theredknight]

I stand with morticon on this one, I think a supplement is:

a) what gw are going to do regardless of what people think and
get everyone on to a level playing field to bring 6th up to 'compliance'

Never have I seen such a flurry of codex and model releases in such a short space of time.

Some say that gw are trying to get back on their feet after the bashing Hollywood gave them for the hobbit and lotr rights (eesh)

I remember the 3rd ed, and even back in 2nd when everything was in codex imperials. Lol @ parry)

Before we had our current one we were running the print out for how long 2 years? I can't remember now.

So in short I think it'd be a good move, then we won't be left with such expensive units like tacs that we are now, the price has decreased in subsequent Marine releases, but that could be updated via a central FAQ system.

Sure it means flicking between the two now and then, but you could always copy the statline and clip it to your supplement but I believe they'd have them I the back anyway.

And if it means not waiting for 2-3 years hoorah!!

[Xenith]

Infact, many units out of the codex space marines they stole from the blood angels instead, not the other way around. Like pure close combat dreadnoughts (read:furioso) before codex marines suddenly got ironclads. Like assault marine veterans (veteran assault squad) before codex space marines got vanguard veterans. 

 

So...two of them? I'll mention the Stormraven for a third. Don't forget that in previous editions, dreadnoughts could take 2x power fists also. How many units do the BA take from codex SM? 

 

So no. I dont see why all marine chapters should suddenly have their apothecaries run around between their troops. They are part of the command squad (same as with

ours) but we have additional apothecaries because of the well beeing and spiritual tie that their presence provides every blood angel. In other chapters the apothecaries only tend the wounded and collect progenoid glands on the field.

 

C:SM could actually do this before C:BA - with the trait system in the 4th ed marine dex. You could upgrade a squad sergeant to an apothcary for +25pts. C:SM could actually take many more apothcaries than C:BA.

 

 

Mind, alot of things blood angels share with codex marine as well (tactical,devastators assault marines) but thats tied to the basis of a marine chapter. Nothing unique about it (unless you want to tie crusader squads and grey hutner squads into the mix...)

 

Exactly, and SW/BT get a mini dex to themselves. With the prices for the Iyanden update, this is probably what GW will do. £60 if you want to play Iyanden...

 

 

 I think its the same as when we had 3 seperate rulings for stormshields and GW changed them through the FAQ.

 

Something which would't have happened at all if they had produced C:SM + Suppliments.

 

If they said blood angels uses 99% of codex space marine but adds X to unit Y. A to unit B. etc etc I could see how it could be confusing fast for new (and old) players tbh...

 

Now I think you're grasping at straws and massively insulting the intelligence of the player base. I played BA in 3rd at 11 years old and had no trouble reading: "Troops: Space marine tactical squad: See Codex Space Marines:" and understanding exactly what it meant.

 

It's nice having a large, BA only dex, but when I'm likely to be buying C:SM anyway, I'd probably rather have C:SM and a suppliment, as long as they are priced accordingly.

 

Like I said, the Iyanden suppliment is the same price as a full codex, which is going a little too far, IMO.

 

To sum up:

 

If C:SM + BA Suppliment = £45 then good

If C:SM + BA Suppliment = £60 then bad.

[Demoulius]

And not sure I agree with your reasoning Mort. Yes BA's are space marines with X and Y added. But we also have all our rules and statlines in 1 place. Are our tactical marines the same as codex ones? No, they have red thirst instead of combat tactics. While thats generally the only difference to speak of in this case it does mean they play differently, even if ever so slightly. Our predators are fast instead of just tanks. Huge difference to how they play in the field. Our assault marines have descent of angels. We can somewhat reliably deep strike them. Our assault marines can also take meltaguns which im pretty sure codex ones cant.

I see what your points are guys, I agree that a devastator should cost the same as a devastator between codexi. If GW decided to have universal statlines (which they kinda already have) and point costs (sadly not) tied to 1 book im all over that. But suplement books are no different to having a seperate book imho. Only thing where id see a benefit behind a suplement is that our devastors would be priced just as much as dark angel or ultramarine devastators.

Thing is DA just have a newer codex. Im sure GW will even out all the devastator/tactical/etc point costs when they get around to redoing our dex. But running a SM dex with some flavour rules added so we can keep playing BA's is to me the same as running a codex chapter and adding a stormraven because "they will get them sooner or later right?" which is some actual reasoning I heard... I think its abit having ones cake and eating it to....

Mind im not a tourney player and while I do think the odd pricing is unfair I just deal with it. Most of the units that are priced more expensivly I dont use so it doesent effect me. I think its a price I pay for running awesome red marines sort of a "cool marine" tax :)

[Chaplain Admetus]

Of the poll responses, I would prefer a stand alone book, and I think that's what we're going to get. Simple reasoning being that the Dark Angels got a new stand alone book. If they'd done a Codex: Space Marines release I'd be more swayed by the theory that the SM chapters get supplements. If anyone's interested, I can (attempt) to dig out my old supplement codex from 3rd edition to see what the actual changes are, but from memory they weren't all that many. I also remember a statement by GW that they were making a conscious effort to move away from the supplement rulebooks as they didn't want people to have to turn up with multiple books to make an army work (a statement which they have reneged on slightly with Death From the Skies, but still).

 

And for what its worth, I don't think we'd need to take SC's to unlock BA army options. My favourite thing to see with the new C:SM would be, hands down, the return of the traits system, but balanced. For example, you could all start with Combat Tactics, and have an X point upgrade that states "your army replaces Combat Tactics with [insert chapter tactics rule here]". Limited to one per army, naturally. Have the named SC's such as Vulkan bring that rule for free (but with their own points cost revised a little to compensate), allowing you to field armies of that nature without having to resort to a special character. By adding a supplement, you could do it such as "Blood Angels armies automatically replace Combat Tactics with The Red Thirst. In addition, Assault Squads become Troops, you gain access to the following units [insert all the BA units/characters]. However, units A, B and C are not available to Blood Angels armies. Any of the following vehicles [insert list of vehicles based on the rhino chassis] may purchase the Lucifer Pattern Engines upgrade, making them into fast vehicles, for X points each".

 

That way, it would work similarly to the SM book, whilst still being divergent and quasi-stand alone. I agree that all marines should have the same costs and wargear (maybe revised slightly dependent on rules, e.g. paying a slight premium on BA assault marines for DoA), and that all wargear should be uniform (avoiding the past era where blue storm shields were vastly superior to red, green, black and grey storm shields) but that's very difficult to make happen.

[Phadeout]

I would have said a stand alone book, and I want it right now!! In terms of a supplement it all depends on how quickly they would put it out after C:SM. At the current rate of releases we'd presumably be getting a new codex sometime in mid/late 2014 (C:SM, Orks, Nids, SW, IG, BA? - meaning approx third quarter 2014) and unless they release all supplements very soon after C:SM we wouldn't be expecting a supplement before 1st quarter 2014 at the earliest and it could be later, for example if they wanted to get BT and SOBs into the mix too, waiting three to six months might not seem such a big deal to get a full codex.

On the other hand if they released C:SM this September and then Supplement:BA in October/Nov (seems unlikely) I would be more than happy to get a supplement to potentially spend what could be almost a year playing from a new 6th ed dex even if I needed to basically buy two books for the priviledge.

Yes I'd like some points standardisation too and access to all the cool toys but who doesn't.

As Chaplain Admetus says above though I think we'll get a new book and I think we will have to tough it out until then. Good thing we are Blood Angels and therefore cooler than everyone else....

[Brother Maikel]

Brother Maikel. I could live with that, no problem. Thing is, GW tries to attract new (young) players as well as keep the older players. If they said blood angels uses 99% of codex space marine but adds X to unit Y. A to unit B. etc etc I could see how it could be confusing fast for new (and old) players tbh...

Having all the rules in 1 place is a godsend. For all the nostalgic memories that I have from 3rd edition and indeed the PDF codex beeing references to 1 or 2 other sources (some sources in codex marines in turn revert to the BRB) isent as usefull as it sounds... Specialy when I was faced against someone who dident know blood angels. I was always carrying 2 codex with me to play 1 army. Not to mention FAQ's for both armies and god forbid if one countermanded the other...

It would be totally awesome if GW had some sort of DIGITAL medium that they could use for their codexi. That they could then UPDATE so we wouldnt have to hold our erratas and FAQ's next to them at least then it would be worth the same price as a normal paper codex (imho)

But we already have plenty of armies that need multiple codices to play: by definition, any army with an allied detachment must draw from two books. And that's part of the core rules.

Toss in the BRB rules, any supplements (Death from the Skies, Burning Crusade, WD units), and FAQ's for every book and we're already up to 5-10 documents just from GW alone. I don't see how another one or two will really change much in terms of complexity. Plus, I'm sure many (most?) new players looking to play Power Armour pick up Codex: Space Marines as their first codex anyway (and thus would only need 1 book). I know I did. It wasn't until a couple of months later that I knew BA existed and fit the army I wanted to play so well.

Also, the real benefit as I see it isn't points standardization across PA armies, as nice as that would be. Rather, I want this structure because it would make it a whole lot easier to put out supplements for every first founding chapter. Why do we get our own book but the Salamanders, Raven Guard, and White Scars get stuck with a single SC each, who is also required to lead every battle lest they become Green, Black, or White Ultras? Plus, as I mentioned before, the extra space in each supplement could easily be used to expand on important successor chapters. Which would be cool.

Now, I don't think its likely that this incarnation of C:SM/C:BA will be a Base + Supplement setup. As Chaplain Admetus said, DA already got a standalone book and they're not much more Codex divergent than we are. I'm just wishlisting.

[JAMOB]

JAMOB - Could you expand on your thinking behind wanting something "extremely different" from the SMs? 

I assume its personal reasons rather than history/fluff -since that would indicate the opposite direction, no?

Unit wise: for example the new DA codex has entirely new builds that are quite common and quite good. We have jumpers, Baals, Furiosos and Guard, basically - I would like to see these expanded (maybe improve guard to make that built more viable). For personal reasons more so, because a lot of people by me have said that BA are too similar to SM and should be rolled in the way white scars etc. have been, with a CM that unlocked RAS as troops but otherwise the same. I don't want that, and the thing I fear about a supplement would be us losing our sense of individuality as a chapter. If it were like 3rd edition that wouldn't be horrible, but still I like my codex how it is. I would just be willing to put it aside if its too long a wait.

[Phadeout]

But a supplement doesn't mean we wouldn't have an identity of our own - really the issue becomes one of the quality of the product - there would be plenty of room for fluff and rules in even a 40/50 page book.

 

Also a bad codex could leave people feeling there was little difference between us and vanilla marines but a quality supplement could add in a new unit or two include all the old rules tweaked for 6th ed suitability.

 

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, I would prefer a codex personally...

[Inquisitor Eisenhorn]

While I think there have been some good points both pro and con here, I just wanted to throw out there that the Illanden supplement is rumoured to be entirely fluff and hobby oriented, with the rules for the army being in the Eldar Codex.  That would explain why it's priced equally with the Codex; it's meant to be a different product focusing on different aspects of the hobby.  It also suggests that while GW may release rules supplements in the future, speculating about this based on the imminent Eldar supplement book is a little misaligned, unless we are hoping for fluff/hobby oriented chapter supplements with the core rules for all chapters being in C:SM.  

 

That being said, I think it is entirely reasonable to speculate that even without a current or pending precedent for rules supplements (aside from DFTS) GW may do this for some space marine chapters.  

 

I wholly agree with a lot of what Morticon said, and practically speaking I'd love to have our lists be updated to have more reasonable costs.  I also agree that Blood Angels should basically be a codex-adherent chapter in terms of their flavor so I can see the argument for them not needing their own book.  

 

However:  if they do make chapter rules supplements I really feel that it would be a shame to do this to chapters such as the Blood Angels.  Mainly because I think that it would be such a missed opportunity to develop some other chapters who really deserve to be fleshed out a bit more like the Iron Hands, Raven Guard and Salamanders.  

 

Blood Angels, for better or worse, have been established as a "solo codex" army and demoting them while also ignoring the other chapters I mentioned above would probably succeed in pissing off a majority of BA players while also irritating players who have been waiting literally forever to see their own chapters get a little attention.

 

I hope that was coherent.  

 

TL:DR  Eldar's supplement is rumoured to be fluff/hobby oriented only.  I wouldn't mind a Blood Angels supplement, but other chapters need supplement codexes more than Blood Angels.  

[Demoulius]

@xenith: there were more but I only listed the 2 that came to my mind the earliest. I did say "like veteran assault squad" etc... sorry if that wasent clear.

 

Also no, infact Blood angels did it the earliest (the 3rd edition suplement book, exsanguinator wargear for SHP's) and before that no other chapter had any apothecaries outside of their command squads. With 4th edition other chapter could indeed do it with traits, but it was expensive as all hell.

 

The change to stormshield could have easily been fixed with a FAQ update (and indeed, after what...2 years or so they finaly did) which they dident do for a long time. Wargear changing isent bad per se, but if 3 identical armies have the same thing it isent hard for GW to update all of them. They just CBA'ed to do it in a timely fashion it seems.

 

If space wolves and black templars deserve a codex of their own then why not us? We got a great deal of unique units to us just like they do. Fact that we also got some units in common is a bad basis to say that we dont deserve one, imho....

 

And lastly im not trying to insult anyones intelligence and I fail to see how im grasping at straws. Ive seen people be confused about things I find very much clear and very much obvious. Im dutch and english isent our native language so theres always going to be a language barrier where I play my games. Other then that people that are dislectic do play this game (few at my local club) as are people who dont read rules completly and stop reading when a rule is clear to them (or rather they think its clear to them) to name just a few examples. Asking those players to combine a few codexi if they want to play X army is bound to turn sour sooner or later. Majority probably wont have any trouble but tbh if were going to have a seperate book (and a supplement is just that) then I dont really see the idea behind pointing back to a different book. We already have that with the rulebook mind but thats an issue for ALL codexi.

 

Likewise people who take allies CHOOSE to take allies and combine units from a different book. If blood angels became a supplement anyone who wanted to play BA's would be forced to have 2 books and read/take points from both books when making theirs lists.

 

Its a hassle during army list creation and its a pain in the backside when rule issues arise. Specialy if your flipping through the pages at a tournament or whatever....

 

Would it create an equal footing and point costs for all chapters? Yes, yes it would. Not changing the point costs to begin with would solve that as well though. Im not sure if its worth all the hassle for the meagre gains it gives. Likewise if they needed to add a seperate entry for each unit "add meltagun for 10 pts per model to the assault squad." "Add furioso upgrade to dreadnoughts" etc etc would take so many pages and so many unnecesary lines that unless we want to sacrifice our unique units were just as good off as having our own book... Kinda like the one we have now <_<

[Chaplain Admetus]

I reckon Dem's right; it is a hassle having to use multiple books. As recently as the PDF nonsense I was having trouble because my codex came in two halves, and that was frankly a nuisance as it was (I used the white dwarf version). I think (personally, at least) its clear that we'll be getting a stand alone one in time as if they planned to revert to supplements we'd have seen a Space Marines codex instead of the Dark Angels one, as it makes no sense to give the DA a stand-alone book and then make everyone else play to the tune of the ultramarines. Its also likely that the Iyanden book will be a fluff supplement, as they've been doing those for a while with WFB (the High Elves got one with their release).

[Morticon]

I think the benefits of having a rules system that is not only representative of the SM nature, but in line with the most up to date SM dex and a factor of it - that being more in line with BA-SM fluff than not- is a far bigger plus than needing to carry around one more book.  I mean, honestly though guys, we're not 11, yeh?  

Do we need our mommies to remind us to pack our lunch bags, toothbrush and extra codex book to go game? Or is the added weight of that one extra book too much to deal witht? Also, how many of you guys actually ever use the rule book after the first two months?

[Demoulius]

I always pack both my rulebook and my codex with me Mort. If someone doesent know a rule or unit stat I can show them. Thats completly besides the point though. Its not so much that its to much of an hassle (although it was a pain to find things sometimes) but the fact that its unnecessary... Sure GW changing prices or rulings on wargear is a pain in the backside. So....why cant they stop bloody doing that? Or IF they change a wargear item that other codexi also have (say a storm shield) then change those for the other books as well! If a pricing is changed, change that as well. How hard can it be to streamline a few pieces of wargear and their pricing?

Heck the FAQ's on their website generally dont anwser the REAL issues that arise in games anyway (well, so far for me anyway...) so they might as well use that space on their website to update pricing and rule changes. If nothing else that would actually make the FAQ worth more then the paper that they are printed on..... I find it hard to believe that its to much of a hassle for them. How long would it take to add a few lines to a PDF document?

Like I said a few times. If they can manage to do it in such a manner that the supplements make sense and we dont lose to much (or anything at all) of our unique units AND have nice fluff and backstory to boot im all for it. I generally buy the codex to read through the fluff, unit options and such to know what opponents might bring. Heck I can even see other chapters having a jump capable honor guard (or command squad...) for their HQs as well. Doesent really make sense why the blood angels have sole acces to that. Likewise its kinda unclear to me why we dont use the speeder transport for our scouts or that arty cannon for our techmarines. What we had in 3rd edition worked well even if it was a pain to work with back then. (then again I was 12 at the time so that might be a big reason behind it... )

So long as the cons don't outweigh the pros im all for the supplement system.

[Morticon]

Well, as it turns out the Iyanden book is just fluff?  Odd that its so much money.  Who knows.  I figure this would have been GWs opp to sort out the BT and potentially the BA to a lesser degree.  

 

I wonder if the BT boys would feel the same way we do?

[TheHarrower]

I was actually thinking they might do this with the Black Templars when the Space Marines are released next. I'd be okay with it. Honestly, I think it would make a lot more sense to go this route. Not looking forward to when the Space Marines Codex comes out and they get cool toys like Rhinos with Assault Ramps and whatever else and we are stuck with the same old until we come around again. I just think if they were going to go this though, they would have did it already with the Dark Angels. We'll see what happens, but one can hope.

[Taranis]

If asked right now I'd prefer waiting for a new stand-alone codex. It all depends on quality. If It's a great codex I'd be willing to wait for it, if It's a great supplement I'd surely be happy with it, naturally.

To me this discussion is like choosing between apples and pears without getting to read/taste/feel.

What we contributes to this tread is our opinions and not a fixed answer to ne verified in a rulebook.

 

Currently I'm a codex guy. And a happy one.:)

[SamaNagol]

The main issue with standalone books is the way that things are dragged out of line. A piece of wargear should cost the same for each same unit in each different codex and more importantly should WORK the same. Let's not forget the 4th edition debacle of Storm Shields.

 

I am all for regular updates to Marines working across the board, where applicable.

 

Whether the answer is supplements is a different matter though

[JamesI]

Personally, I think its easiest to use supplement codexes.  Avoids the insanity of tactical squads, scouts, assault squads, captains being very different. 

 

A supplement dex could include fluff, rules for our special units (Baals, Furiosos, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard and the special characters), any special equipment we have and then add ons for the basic stuff (such as replace combat tactics with furious charge and descent of angels).

[Demoulius]

Either have basic units in the marine codex and have specialist gear in the supplmenet or keep the wargear up to date with FAQ's. Since we know GW is pretty poor at doing the latter perhaps a supplement is the better idea at this time...

 

At the very least it would mean that all marine chapters get the same "basic" goodies to play with at the same costs :)

[Darklighter]

For me to buy a supliment it would have to be along side a BA dex like a successor chapter not a replacment book. Or maybe even units of valour with extra upgrade characters and glorious units from fiction/history. Auxilleries would be a popular book featurning things like chapter serfs and chapter specific fortifications.

 

I've just wishlisted my self into a nerd frenzy.... Damn it!

[The Yncarne]

The electronic codexes offer a way for GW to go either way; supplements or stand alone codexes that can be updated as needed. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. There's too many people still using the print version and GW apparently has little interest in using the Internet to keep things updated for the print medium.

 

I'd much rather have a supplement approach. As Mort and others have said the supplement approach allows a faster update for people using the print codexes. It also would allow more consistent points costs. Historically, I don't see GW valuing either advantage. Let's be honest, a game in which units are consistently pointed doesn't encourage buying new models. I think it is the unbalanced rules that drive a lot of purchases and I suspect GW believes this as well.

 

Look where GW's been going since the last Codex: Blood Angels. They appear to be trying to make each chapter even more different by creating new distinct units that weren't in the game prior. For example, Baals, Sanguinary Guard, and priest for Blood Angels. Dark Angels get new speeders, terminators flyers and bikers. In this context I see it less likely to go the supplement route.

 

I'd like to have 40K be a fairly balanced game that encourages people to take units by making them synergistic as opposed to min-maxxing the "good" units. But that kind of game model doesn't encourage impulse buys nor buying a large army. 

 

All those reasons make me believe that GW will not change their game business model no matter how many of their players cry out for change.

[appiah4]

I'm OK with a supplement if the supplement costs SIGNIFICANTLY less than a full codex.

 

But who am I kidding, I'll probably have to pay almost double and got both codices..  So in effect, no, I want stand alone.  At least I'll get forked once.

[Leksington]

I saw the White Dwarf treatment SoBs got.  If that's the sort of effort they'd put into a BA supplement, then no thanks.  

 

They'd err so hard on the side of caution with a BA supplement that I have to believe that I'd feel BAs were made weaker and more one-dimensional

[Jolemai]

Personally, having had our own Codex since 40k began I don't want to see us (or any of the current stand alone Codices) merged into a generic Space Marine Codex. Especially as these supplements are only for a fluff point of view and contain no rules.

 

However I do think it's a good idea for Eldar, Imperial Guard and the other first founding Space Marine chapters to have this sort of supplement.