Codex Space Marines Amendments

[Robbienw]

So make those options better.  Poor rules is not an excuse for removing options.  Besides the parts are in the kits and are long established in fluff; they aren't going anywhere.

[Captain Idaho]

Yes but there are problems with your position:

 

1) it is hotly disputed as to the competitiveness of Primaris. You think they're hot. Everyone else thinks otherwise. ;)

 

2) The hobby is important. Customisation is important. You might not remember but when GW took away all the options of Chaos Marines from 3.5 to 4th edition Codex it broke the community and saw the start of a decline in the popularity of the hobby.

[Ishagu]

I don't they are hot. I simply don't think they are cold lol

 

They'll certainly get better, Hellblasters and Inceptors are already better than all infantry options in the Marine book except Scouts soo... yeah.

 

As for confusion, a new player in my local equipped all his Tactical Sgts with power fists, only to rip them off after a few games upon learning of better ways to spend the points. We can all agree that's far from ideal.

[chapter master 454]

I am standing with Idaho here however I will content that Primaris are hot, as in they are the best marines really have...but that isn't saying much to be fair (here, lemme just getting my Eldar real quick and show you REAL troop choices).

 

This hobby (HOBBY) is about building your units to be YOURS. You telling me you like seeing all those primaris captains who look exactly the same. I get chaffing in my head just about how cadre fireblades are all the same pose, about how librarians are all the same pose, about any important model that doesn't have options that at the very least vary the model. Not asking for 3 different swords, 5 different arms, 7 different BARE heads and 4 various paraphernalia but I want my captain to be that: MY captain. Even if there is the chance someone else does a similar pose, it won't look the same, feel the same. But with all these "Snap" kits (which they are by all account, static pose gives it away) they have nothing to them.

 

Kit Bashing is actually a part of the marine box strengths and I would content that if marines have anything, it is their INSANE cross kit compatibility with each other. Buy a box of Tacticals, Devastators, Sternguard, Vanguard and even the commander box and EVERY PIECE will work with each other except for a select few special pieces. No other box can really claim such open cross kit availability as even marine tanks can share parts easily with each other across anything based on the rhino chassis which is amazing and allows us to easily magnetise and create our own unique units.

 

I don't mind troops looking similar, that happens you can't have a unit of 10 guys all look unique like a captain but I demand of this hobby the chance to express myself which is its strongest point because as we are discussing here: The gameplay for marines ain't exactly top notch.

 

Options don't weaken the game. It strengthens it. If the option isn't taken, it shouldn't be removed but instead viewed as if there may be an issue with it. Everyone lamented the loss of Mortis dreadnoughts in standard codex play. We need to see options return, not taken away as it just weakens the game down to the very thing we don't like: Mono-tone lists which is what we are complaining about! Seriously, I mean come on just for sake of argument here go look at the craftworld codex for AUTARCHS. If it wasn't for the Index they would be stuck with NO OPTIONS and forced to take nothing but a star glaive. Is that what you want for captains? All of us having to take Plasma Pistols and Power Swords because the only captain model is Cato Sicarius? (like how the only on foot autarch is Yriel)

 

Just for a fun aside, can I just put something out there randomly: I would love it if GW decided to take the commander box and transform it into a 3 model box where the box can build 1 chaplain, 1 captain and 1 librarian with options appropriate for them (talking at least 3 weapon options each for each arm. Librarian would thus have choice of Staff, Axe or sword. Chaplain could be maybe have only a choice of two styles of crozius and so on).

[Captain Idaho]

I don't they are hot. I simply don't think they are cold lol

They'll certainly get better, Hellblasters and Inceptors are already better than all infantry options in the Marine book except Scouts soo... yeah.

Devastators and Sternguard would have something to say about that. Even Vanguard are good in the right circumstances and if GW sort out terrain rules and alpha shooting are they'll be stronger.

[Ishagu]

Sternguard are ok. I'd love the old special ammo rules like what DW have access to.

The -2 AP on the bolters is ok, as is their stratagem, but they aren't auto takes - they lack volume of shots and are too easily dispatched by other generic infantry. If Vanguard could reliably charge from reserves, even by use of Strat, they'd certainly be worthwhile.

 

To go back to the options argent, my biggest problem isn't the amount of options but the disparity between how useful they are. I'm saying that I'd take less options with more balance over a large selection that is mostly not worthwhile. A Power fist has been a poor option on a Sgt for the past 3 editions lol, I'm not expecting this to change.

[Panzer]

I'm seriously against promoting a bunch of different weapons in the same team.

It might be cool from a team kill sized scenario point of view but all it does on a 40k scale is increasing the time required to roll all the weapons since you can't roll all the weapons at the same time without a bunch of different colored dice. And even if you do that you still have the issue of different threat ranges.

[Robbienw]

As for confusion, a new player in my local equipped all his Tactical Sgts with power fists, only to rip them off after a few games upon learning of better ways to spend the points. We can all agree that's far from ideal.

Ever was it thus. Options become usable or unusable as editions change and rules clarifications change things.

 

This is not a valid excuse for arbitrarily taking away long established options from squads.

[Ishagu]

No doubt, in terms of tabletop usability you shouldn't mix and match. It's why I'm not overly fond of Vanguard - their cost spirals if you equip them with useful weapons (Relic Blades) but not doing so means you lack the volume of quality attacks to really damage an elite units. No point hunting hordes with them because boltguns do that job just as easily, and they don't have the volume of attacks or resilience to get stuck into a big melee for a few turns... It's really disappointing in all honesty.

 

As for confusion, a new player in my local equipped all his Tactical Sgts with power fists, only to rip them off after a few games upon learning of better ways to spend the points. We can all agree that's far from ideal.

Ever was it thus. Options become usable or unusable as editions change and rules clarifications change things.

 

This is not a valid excuse for arbitrarily taking away long established options from squads.

I'm not saying these units will lose access to wargear. What I am saying is that new Astartes units in the future will be a lot more themed to a specific purpose and will have less wargear variety.

[Captain Idaho]

I'm enjoying my Vanguard. They do well and are mobile.

[Robbienw]

 

 

As for confusion, a new player in my local equipped all his Tactical Sgts with power fists, only to rip them off after a few games upon learning of better ways to spend the points. We can all agree that's far from ideal.

Ever was it thus. Options become usable or unusable as editions change and rules clarifications change things.

This is not a valid excuse for arbitrarily taking away long established options from squads.

I'm not saying these units will lose access to wargear. What I am saying is that new Astartes units in the future will be a lot more themed to a specific purpose and will have less wargear variety.

Well that does seem to be the current trend I can see that. But like with all GW studio trends, don’t except it to last more than a few years before they change ways again.

[Closet Skeleton]

Are you guys seriously advocating dropping options in the game? I think that's awful for the hobby. Since AoS came out and Primaris after it, we've seen a drop in conversions and kit bashing, less creativity and generally boring armies.

 

 

Depends on the option.

 

If its a biker hero anyone could work out how to kit bash then no. If its a left field but competative options that have never been in any kit like dreadnought autocannons then yes (I have a converted pseudo Mortis dread and I'm still confused).

 

I find Captain Smash more cookie cutter and non-creative than anything in the Primaris range and you have to kitbash him.

 

For more controversial opinions like "twin assault cannon razorbacks should never have been a thing" you can follow me on no social media platforms.

[Captain Idaho]

I hate Blood Angels armies that use that character too...

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There will always be some equivalent of Captain Smash... now don’t trigger me about Bobby G. :D

[Ishagu]

Things repeat across all armies. It does't matter if it's a model or a chosen faction trait. All Eldar have -1 to hit, All dark Eldar have an element of Cabal of the Black Heart, all Blood Angels have a Captain Smash, All Nids have a Hive Tyrant or 3, etc etc

[chapter master 454]

 

I find Captain Smash more cookie cutter and non-creative than anything in the Primaris range and you have to kitbash him.

 

 

At least each one has some degree of individuality to it unlike the primaris captains. Yes, the load-out can be the same but the the models can look drastically different (and if they aren't then sad to say but your area may be a bit bland) as each player makes their own vision of smashmaster.

 

Also. I love how it appears everyone has their own more friendly version of saying Smash which I find funny. I personally went with Smash-Master but you have Captain Smash (which makes me think of my hero academia XD) and I have seen a couple more here and there.

[Terrified Templar]

It suits the Ultramarines but it's a flexibility that most Marines could have as part of ATSKNF. So I'm torn and on the fence.

 

What would the Ultramarines Chapter Tactic be in that case?

Maybe something like the old 7th edition chapter tactics? A tactical, assault and devastator doctrine that you pick from to use each turn? Not like to hit rolls but maybe -1AP to close combat attacks for the assault doctrine for example? Not sure what the others would be but something besides To Hit bonuses I think are needed since we can get those easily from other sources. Just spit balling here.

 

And since I am balling spit I was wondering if giving combat blades to marines as part of their standard kit would help? In that same vein to make sure that units like the assault marines don't lose out give chainswords -1AP? Granted this would be space marine wide (Blood angels, Dark angels, those traitors squatting in the Eye of Terror and the like) but I think it'd help a bit at least in the image that marines can do it all be it fighting at range or in melee although it might make the Blood Angels too dangerous but it might be worth it.

 

Also two heavy weapon options for 5 man terminator squads. Sternguard can have two heavy weapons for a five man squad so I feel it should be available to other veteran units like terminators.

 

Also I agree on the loss of customization on models especially the new Primaris is sad. I enjoyed looking at a wealth of options for my models, especially characters, and wondering not only what would be the optimal configuration but also how I could make an awesome model out of it. Bionics, terminator honors and the like were enjoyable for me. Kit bashing and conversions are really enjoyable for me, currently trying to make a glaive out of a an old banner pole and a power sword which is frustrating but fun to try. Sorry for the ramble first time back in a while so everything 40k related kinda comes out in a rush these days.

 

Also chapter master 454 thanks to you I don't think I'll ever be able to roll a To Hit roll for a powerfist  again without yelling Imperium Smash.

[chapter master 454]

 

 

Also chapter master 454 thanks to you I don't think I'll ever be able to roll a To Hit roll for a powerfist  again without yelling Imperium Smash.

 

 

Hehe...enjoy that. Now we gotta get ourselves a Salamander with a power fist who looks up to vulkan as an All might figure! He did go Plus Ultra on a primal ork I'm sure! XD

 

On topic:

Some things I have stood by are a few things: Marines should all be base wounds and attack of 2. I mean, you want proof why? -Opens up Craftworld codex- Oh look, all the exarchs of the aspect warriors have 2 wounds and +1 attack to their stat line. How in the ever loving, imperium forming, eye of terror opening, slannesh orgy birthing, Khorne breathing exercises do AELDARI SERGEANTS (which is what they are) have two wounds...TWO...that goes for ALL of their units. Dark Reapers to Avengers, Fire Dragons to Scorpions. Yet somehow, our bio-engineered marines can only have 1 wound, with access to having two being limited to having to put on terminator armour while Aeldari just lose themselves on a path and suddenly BOOM, they can take a bolt round to the face but a MARINE can't. Something here is dissonant with the design of the game here.

 

Another point would be that tacticals need to very much just be an option select between special weapons, heavy weapons and close combat weapons. While they may need some trimming round the sides relating to options for the sake of balance (if it even is a concern) they should be without question the MOST FLEXIBLE unit in the game in terms of position, be it melee or shooting. Possibly even add the idea of the doctrines.

"Assault Doctrine: This unit re-rolls all hit rolls of 1 in the fight phase"

"Devastator Doctrine: This unit re-rolls all hit rolls of 1 in the shooting phase when firing weapons with the heavy type"

"Marauder Doctrine: This unit re-rolls all hit rolls of 1 in the shooting phase when firing plasma guns, Melta guns and Grav Guns. They may re-roll 1s when determining how many shots they get when firing a flamer"

 

These doctrines would apply to the appropriate units, with Marauder applying to a new unit called the Marauder Squad, an elite choice that can have up to 4 special weapons in the squad.

 

"Tactical Acumen: At the start of the 1st Battle Round but before the first turn chose from among the three doctrines as noted at the beginning of the rules section. This squad has that doctrine for the rest of the battle"

 

New stratagem:

"Tactical flexibility, 1CP: Use this stratagem at the beginning of any of your turns, targeting one Tactical Squad. You may chose a new doctrine to apply to the unit, replacing their previous doctrine"

 

Now we can even add the unique idea of Faction Unique Doctrines that apply to certain units, possibly ether enhancing certain options or giving new ones. For example, in addition to the ultramarines traits, they have

 

"Tactical Masters: All Tactical squads that have the Ultramarine in a detachment that is battle-forged replace their Tactical Acumen special rule with this one. At the start of the 1st Battle Round but before the first turn chose up to two from among the three doctrines as noted at the beginning of the rules section. This squad has those doctrines for the rest of the battle. (Note: if you use the Tactical Flexibility stratagem, you may replace ether one of the chosen doctrines in the squad)"

 

While Imperial Fists could have something like:

 

"Boltgun Doctrine: All units with the Imperial Fist keyword in a battle-forged detachment gain this Doctrine. Re-roll all hit rolls of 1 when a unit uses a bolt weapon to make an attack. If the unit has the Devastator Doctrine, they re-roll all failed hit rolls with bolt weapons instead that have the heavy type"

 

 

Radical and quite extravagant but certainly reflects the idea that each chapter would have their own doctrines and teaching they adhere to. I suppose however I will get targeted for "bloating the game" but I personally want something to call our own since right now a lot of these army traits are starting to look very similar to one another!

[Deafbok]

Just a random musing - what about mixed Primaris/Oldmarine units being a possible thing a la Deathwatch?

 

Basically, this would allow Tactical Squads with the special & heavy weapons having more bubble wrap & more effective support from the bolters, would be "Fluffy" in that it shows a slow "bleeding in" of Primaris marines under their more experienced forebears and would help mitigate some of the major problems with resilience - though would probably need a transport that could carry Primaris at around the cost of a Rhino.

 

Or is that a bit off the hook?

 

Far more wrong with marines than just that, obviously, but just throwing out a single idea

[Panzer]

That makes not much sense. Primaris are all about being focussed for one specific task design-wise and regular Marines, especially Tacticals, are all about being able to take on different tasks by adding few different special or heavy weapons to the regular Bolter guys.

Plus aside from it not making sense from a design point of view I don't see how that would make any of them stronger. If we go with the Deathwatch example you'd still need the 5 regular Marines or 5 Primaris Marines as base unit before adding some of the other and you don't really want more than the minimum size of models in a unit unless you have good buffs that target a single whole unit. (like the CSM double shooting or +1 to-wound).