"Fixing" the Space Marine Codex

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

It’s not even like SM should be top tier every edition. They were not in 3rd or 5th edition.

 

I can tell you GW is not going to let the fans write the rules either and they made that mistake before when they released a codex for Black Templars - would you believe that codex was panned hard ? It was indeed. So GW has learned their lesson and won’t make it again.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Land Raiders need fixing. They are way too expensive base cost, and the dedicated assault vehicles need something which reflects that. Crusaders should be able to move then disgorge, Machine Spirit could also pull back from combat and shoot.

 

Also, Techmarines, they should be more widely used, but are largely forgotten. Considering their role in the chapter, it actually makes more sense for them to have an aura which affects only ranged attacks in some way than it does for Captains and Lieutenants!

[Ishagu]

The problem with drop pods is that the game gives out the same ability out to multiple armies for a CP exchange.

 

It means the pod will NEVER be good because the cost for the ability to deepstrike has been set to 0 in competitive armies. Pods are useless.

 

If a drop pod costs 1 CP then we've got something. Oh yes, allow Centurions to ride in them again. Currently there's nothing worth transporting in them.

[Race Bannon]

Currently there's nothing worth transporting in them.

Deathstorm hardware, lol.

[robofish7591]

Dreadnoughts and centurions definitely need to be able to ride in drop pods again.  Maybe even allow drop pods to deep strike outside of the deployment zone first turn... they just might be worth their price... ok, who am I kidding, they would still be a bit over costed

[BitsHammer]

It’s not even like SM should be top tier every edition. They were not in 3rd or 5th edition.

 

I can tell you GW is not going to let the fans write the rules either and they made that mistake before when they released a codex for Black Templars - would you believe that codex was panned hard ? It was indeed. So GW has learned their lesson and won’t make it again.

I think you misunderstand exactly how I'm planning on communicating all of this, but let me try and make an example for you to try and clear things up. Firstly the rules I (and others) have been writing aren't being written with the intent of doing GW's job for them, or even with an amount of certaintity that they'll adopt what we propose, but rather to provide an example of one way to fix the problem we outline.

 

For example, let's take Tactical Marines, and assume I'm starting here as the very first thing in the feedback:

 

 

Tactical Marines

As the backbone of most player's Marine collections the Tactical Marine has been sitting on a shelf for sometime now. Broadly speaking this has come down to a few things, most of which are tied to how 8th edition's mechanics have shaped the way players see the game. Without getting into some of the hyperbole I've collected, the feeback can be summarized thusly:

1. The unit suffers heavily from AP values as they basically don't get the full mileage out of the points they pay for having a good save2

2. Due to the unit's higher points cost the model count is lower but the volume of fire capable for the unit isn't higher to compensate for the lower number of models

3. The loss of morale protection and the introduction of CP have pushed the army into what is called "MSU" builds: minimum sized units in order to protect from morale losses (because the unit is generally destroyed before the first Astartes retreats) and ensure they can get as many command points as possible

4. Scouts are generally seen as being able to do the same job of Tactical Marines (namely holding objectives and picking off a few enemy models through bolter fire) at a decreased cost which allows for easier access to higher amounts of CP even without the use of allied detachments.

 

This had lead to a lot of discussion how these problems could be addressed, and while making the base price of the unit members could allow for more Astartes to be taken (some people claiming that they should cost less than 8 points each with basic wargear putting 100 Marines at less than 800 points) it must be noted that it doesn't fix the last problem: there is another unit who can basically do the same job as a Tactical Marine squad, but even cheaper. As such I dug a little deeper to try and get a feel for the sort of things people feel the unit needs to be worth taking instead as a troop choice in more lists:

1. While being a change that basically fits all the Astartes in the army, people want to feel the extra points they pay for armour are worth something, leading to one example of a rule that could be added being presented as an example of the sort of mechanic they hope to see in lieu of something like a significant points cut: "Transhuman Physiology: Astartes are capable of weathering the most deadly firepower seen and fight on through the most grevious of wounds that would fell even the stoutest of humans. Against attacks with a Strength characteristic of 8 or less treat all AP values as being 1 worse than they are to a minimum of 0, and all Damage characteristics as being 1 worse to a minimum of 1. If these values are determined randomly first determine their value then decrease the result by 1."

 

A mechanic that works in a manner similar to this basically creates a feeling to most players that the armour save is actually worth the points paid for it while also allowing for some difference between units like Sisters of Battle or Inquisition in power armour from needing to pay as many points for the same benefit since they could effectively be cheaper in terms of points. And while it could stuff benefit units like Scouts, the real benefit is for models with 3+ or 2+ Save characteristics as they'd be able to use their full save more often.

 

2. A lot of ways of "fixing" the potential damage output of a Tactical Squad have been bandied about ranging from Rapid Fire 2 bolters being standard to more detailed ones, but there were two that really stood out: giving bolters -1AP and giving the Tactical Marines a mechanic that allows them to have a greater amount of firepower.

 

The first portion is undoubtedly one of the stronger changes for the army, and could even present the need for a small point increase on bolt weapons that lack an AP value other than 0 (likely about a point each) depending on, but essentially is presented as a way to add "quality" to offset enemy army "quantity". Naturally this would mean the bolt gun and bolt rifle would have very similar roles, and one proposed method of handling this was to give the bolt rife an additional point of strength so that it is better against T4 and T5 models than the regular bolter is.

 

The second change that stood out was a way for increasing the unit's firepower, akin to the Horus Heresy legion's Fury of the Legion rule. The general idea for such a mechanic is that the unit has to trade something for the ability to shoot twice and could work something like: "Fury of the Chapter: If this unit has not moved in its preceding movement phase or ends its movement within 3" of an objective marker it may make a second shooting attack immediately following resolution of the first during the shooting phase. This shooting attack may be made against different targets than the first shooting attack."

 

The first possible change of course benefits units like Scouts just as much as it does other Astartes, but the second possible change ensures that the roles of Scouts and Marines become a lot more varied on the table. Tactical Marines become supporting fire units who specialize in holding objectives whole Scouts can remain cheaper and focused on harassing back line units or protecting other units by forming defensive lines against assaulting units or units that specialize in attacking after coming from reserve.

 

3. Generally speaking in this edition the game has had a large increase of allies used in armies less for the purposes of thematic combination or to provide much needed support in an area the army is normally weak in (such as providing a melee focused ally for T'au), but almost entirely for providing enough Command Points to fund the use of stratagems. Without a change in how those work the only real way to change this for smaller model count armies would be to include a bonus for only taking <Chapter> detachments, much like how the Dark Eldar gain a bonus for running armies of only Patrol detachments but instead tied to a keyword like Astartes.

 

Morale, of course, is a different aspect that is shrinking units down to their smallest size and assuming the goal isn't to limit these for armies that have smaller model counts (by, say, limiting them to a single model lost to morale per turn) the possibility of something like ignoring the first model lost each turn for the purposes of morale might work.

 

In short the changes people have said to be looking for aren't many but are focused on making the durability and damage output of a squad that costs around as much as three Imperial Guard Infantry Squads feel like it's a true threat to most things instead of a speed bump that it better replaced with the cheaper Scout unit.

 

 

And generally speaking this is why I'm collecting rules ideas as well as information: to make detailed write ups with examples of the kind of mechanicals people are looking for, even if they don't 1:1 take the stuff right off the page for use in a proper codex.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Just tell them which units need help and why. Don't tell them how to fix it even if you say it is only examples. Really I am trying to help you and make your task easier. What you have presented for tactical Marines IMO is too much information.

[BitsHammer]

Just tell them which units need help and why. Don't tell them how to fix it even if you say it is only examples. Really I am trying to help you and make your task easier. What you have presented for tactical Marines IMO is too much information.

It's too much info because I rolled the changes regarding bolters and durability into this to show the full scope of what I've been trying to talk about.

 

The reason for the example rules is to basically show "this is what we mean when we talk about doing X to fix Y" to cut down any possible confusion.

[Triszin]

The problem with drop pods is that the game gives out the same ability out to multiple armies for a CP exchange.

 

It means the pod will NEVER be good because the cost for the ability to deepstrike has been set to 0 in competitive armies. Pods are useless.

 

If a drop pod costs 1 CP then we've got something. Oh yes, allow Centurions to ride in them again. Currently there's nothing worth transporting in them.

I'd support this.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

 

Just tell them which units need help and why. Don't tell them how to fix it even if you say it is only examples. Really I am trying to help you and make your task easier. What you have presented for tactical Marines IMO is too much information.

 

It's too much info because I rolled the changes regarding bolters and durability into this to show the full scope of what I've been trying to talk about.

 

The reason for the example rules is to basically show "this is what we mean when we talk about doing X to fix Y" to cut down any possible confusion.

Like I said just identify the problems. They can fix it. They are the most knowledgeable as well.

[Kallas]

The problem with drop pods is that the game gives out the same ability out to multiple armies for a CP exchange.

 

It means the pod will NEVER be good because the cost for the ability to deepstrike has been set to 0 in competitive armies. Pods are useless.

 

If a drop pod costs 1 CP then we've got something. Oh yes, allow Centurions to ride in them again. Currently there's nothing worth transporting in them.

 

I kind of agree, there's definitely a proliferation of deep strike stratagems, but at their core Drop Pods are a good idea, but their implementation/cost is off. A Drop Pod for 5pts, even with the beta rules, would be useful (this has been gone over before: anything can be made viable if it's cheap enough!) but realistically they're never going to be that cheap.

 

A better way to make them useful is to give them something that other deep strike options (particularly the stratagems) don't/can't get, such as access to non-deployment zone first turn deep striking, or a reduced minimum distance. A Drop Pod at, say, 60pts that can ignore the first turn restriction would be a reasonable unit (assuming, of course, that their cargo options were worth taking); or a Drop Pod that can deep strike outwith 6" instead of the usual 9" would also be a more interesting and worthwhile option; or a Drop Pod that functioned in a similar manner to the Mawloc, where it can deep strike very close to enemy units and doing so causes damage (it's fired from orbit at several kilometers per second!) or inflicts some kind of other penalty when it does.

 

A Drop Pod simply becoming a 1CP stratagem doesn't necessarily fix the issue, it would alter it. Astartes generally don't produce many CP alone, with maybe 13 from a double Battalion (and no additional CP being spent on pre-game things like Relics) being about the maximum, so it basically swaps a points issue with a CP issue. Astartes (at least Codex: Space Marines) don't really have particularly good stratagems, so that would at least give them something to spend their CP on, but one of the hopes of the balance passes is that the lacklustre stratagems available would become useful which would make CP Drop Pods niche again, albeit less than currently.

 

The core issues of the Drop Pod boils down to:

• being too expensive/not having any redeeming feature beyond basic deep strike (ie, it doesn't do anything beyond just deep striking a unit)
• not having a good cargo option (ie, Astartes units are generally crap, making the already high cost too large of a pill to swallow when we have superior transport options such as the Rhino)

Fixing at least on of those problems would go a long way to making the Drop Pod see some table time. Doing both would make Drop Pods much more common, which would be a good thing considering how iconic they are.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Space Marines should just get a deep strike strategem like other factions nuff said

[chapter master 454]

I also want to bring our attention to the issue of Assault Marines and Vanguard Marines. These two units need some serious attention as one is just a raw upgrade of the other. Assault marines strike me as an odd unit for anyone to take these days, why take them when you can take vanguard (you hard up those 10-20 points that bad?)? The only thing assaults can take is flamers over the vanguard but...only 2 of them and oh wow, flamers...going to set the world on fire with those while the vanguard can run around with so many different weapon combos you can have hordes of different selections. The other issue is how would one go about making the units different? I mean, any buff to melee must be applied to vanguard (because in design vanguard are literally just more experienced assault marines) so how would one make assaults worth it?

 

The problem is that both units occupy non-troop slots which makes them both effectively the same thing: specialists. and in 40k we have no shortage of specialist slots (need extra elites, take a vanguard detachment. Even a standard battalion gives 6 elite slots I believe) and I tend to find that in regards to marines, one section that is the only thing worse than tacticals is our fast attacks (with only bikes proving any worth barely). Seriously, Land Speeders are a joke through and through, storms just feel...well out of place really (should just be transports, might of made them semi-ok but...not worth taking in the first place I believe), assault marines are outright pathetic and...what else is in there I think there is something but I forget.

[BitsHammer]

 

 

Just tell them which units need help and why. Don't tell them how to fix it even if you say it is only examples. Really I am trying to help you and make your task easier. What you have presented for tactical Marines IMO is too much information.

It's too much info because I rolled the changes regarding bolters and durability into this to show the full scope of what I've been trying to talk about.

 

The reason for the example rules is to basically show "this is what we mean when we talk about doing X to fix Y" to cut down any possible confusion.

Like I said just identify the problems. They can fix it. They are the most knowledgeable as well.

 

You say that, but the fact they created the problems and that you're not sitting in the same in the room as the people you're trying to communicate the issue to means that you need to be as specific as possible.

[chapter master 454]

The issue really comes from the fact the game is nigh impossible to playtest within a controlled environment. How many unit permutations, positioning, usage, match-ups, variance of rolls and an innumerable amount of other factors come into play with the game that a studio can never playtest.

 

GW need to adopt more transparent methods of moving forward with game balance and actually make a deal of it. Actually have the game balance team be an active community member as they play the game as much as us so why not have dialogue with us more regularly and openly. Make a blog of it, maybe a monthly stream where they talk to the community while they play a "beers and pretzels" game of 40k, sigmar or some upcoming game but while doing so talk about what is happening, using the game they are playing as a vehicle as a means to convey it. Never having a serious game but something that people could watch, have fun with and maybe share in the solidarity of the dice gods forsaking/blessing players. Have the team actively even talk to communities about key sore points in the game currently and let people know what they are planning.

If not that at least let us know more clearly how long the pipeline is and is that possibly an issue that needs to be addressed in some fashion?

 

Marines are only one point in 8th edition and while we must have "winners and losers" in every game, what we can have is the difference between top and bottom tier not being a canyon and more of a steep hill that can be overcome by ones self and not having serious support and gear to overcome clear issues. I mean, we could have this discussion in reverse about Eldar: How do we fix the eldar codex to NOT be so overwhelming but yet retain their key identity and competitive nature?

 

This game is a vast and complicated issue and to be honest I think the game design team would benefit from having more open dialogue with the community, actively making their presence known in forums like these and use them help them balance the game. Not everyone is right, not everyone is wrong, thus they could actually skim through these threads and notice trends. We already see key issues we have with marines (simply put, lacking in all regards so possibly a symptom of being timid codex writers for that book?), it would aid in getting things fixed.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

If guard get a nerf that will be a positive bump for Marines. Don’t get your hopes up for much else.

[Medjugorje]

Alright, so previously I'd posted this but the formatting was non existant and basically it was too much to ask people to read it.

 

So here it is again, but with some additional tweaks and proper formatting. Also spoiler tags:

 

Alright, so I started this thing so I might as well go through everything then to get some discussion going about the codex in whole. I'm going to avoid anything that essentially could just get cheaper (from my viewpoint at least) as a fix. The ultimate goal of this will always remain a submission to GW on why the community is neglecting so much of the book's options, what could change about them to make them a viable option for most players, and generally the point is to get away from just making the army cheaper and cheaper until we start looking like a Guard army with better wargear.

 

There are two main goals I have for this whole submission:

1. Present a method in which an elite army like Space Marines may be reasonably balanced against other armies, particularly horde armies, while keeping in mind that many changes made here will apply to other armies here when taking into considering wargear or the base mechanics of Marines. Many buffs could end up buffing other armies and it could easilly defeat the purpose of the buff if it leaves the army unable to reach a balanced state within the game.

2. Give each chapter in the codex a faction bonus that provides benefits that every unit can enjoy without imbalancing the game while also giving each a specialization bonus that rewards the choosing of certain wargear or unit types creating distinct types of armies within the framework of the greater codex. 

 

To kick things off, let's go back over those Chapter Tactics again, shall we? Don't worry, this isn't a rehash but rather an update.

 

Now I've gotten some feedback about these already which has helped me refine the rules a bit more. Each will be a two part bonus to the faction, the first something any unit can enjoy, the second a more focused bonus for specific models or weapons to create an army specialization that will allow each chapter to have a disctinct playstyle from each other if a player builds towards it. I want to start with these first because it creates a picture in your mind on how each change might affect one chapter more than another.

 

Chapter Tactics: If your army is Battle-forged models with the <Chapter> keyword in a Space Marines detachement gain a Chapter Tactic as long as every unit in that detachment is drawn from the same Chapter.

 

It's a small change to the way the chapter tactics work, but it's a change every Space Marine player can say should apply. It opens the army up to a lot more flexibility and makes vehicles worth taking knowing that you can kit them to work like the rest of your army. 

 

Ultramarines: Codex Discipline: Ultramarines units never lose more than a single model due to a failed morale test. Models with the Character, Dreadnought, or Vehicle keywords instead gain +1 Leadership. Ultramarines units may shoot in the same turn in which they Fall Back.

 

The change here is to encourage Ultramarine units to form larger units due to a lower fear of morale as well as giving single model units greater protection against effects that target leadership. The penalty for falling back and shooting was removed to coinicide with the previous change to encourage Ultramarine armies to be aggressive in their approach as they can get stuck in with less fear of morale and then step back and open fire with all barrels.

 

White Scars: Lightning Assault: Whenever a White Scars unit Advances, Charges or Turbo-boosts it moves an additional 2" in addition to the distance rolled (turbo-boosting models move the full 6" plus the additional 2" for a full 8" instead of rolling). Models with the Biker, Infantry or Dreadnought rule may charge on a turn they Fall Back at no penalty. Models with the Vehicle keyword (to include Vehicle models with the Dreadnought keyword) treat their weapons as assault weapons during a turn in which they advanced (ex. Rapid Fire 1 becomes Assault 1, Heavy 3 becomes Heavy 3).

 

The biggest change here is making the army faster overall. The White Scars are known for modifying even their tanks to go faster and it didn't make any sense that they should be going slower. Additionally, as a chapter that basically hits the enemy as they drive through them the chapter isn't known for slowing down, making the bonus to their charges something that just fits naturally. Generally speaking this is the army that moves the fastest, and can slam into the enemy multiple times to kill it making it so they can keep something tied up on your opponent's turn before breaking free, shooting with your army's suport elements and then hitting that unit again.

 

Imperial Fists: Siege Masters: Enemy units do not recieve benefit to their saving throws for being in cover against attacks made by Imperial Fists models, furthermore Imperial Fists re-roll all to-wound and damage rolls against enemy models with the Building keyword. In addition models making a shooting attack with a bolt weapon (any weapon with "bolt" in it's name and Dorn's Arrow are all bolt weapons as is the boltgun half of a combi-weapon) may make an additional to-hit roll for every roll of a 6. These to-hit rolls do not generate additional shots. The non-bolt weapon portion of a combi-weapon additionally does not benefit from this rule.

 

While I feel the rule towards buildings to be incredibly fluffy, it's not enough to build an army around as it's more situational than something you can build an army around. As such I didn't take it away but rolled it into the first effect as it fits well with their removal of an enemy's army protection mechanic. Making them the army that benefits the most from taking bolter weapons was more to make a nod to their special rule in their previous supplement material. This creates an army with a focus on shooting, but with a key focus on using bolt weapons as the basis of that shooting.

 

Black Templars: Righteous Zeal: You can re-roll either or both dice when a Black Templar unit fails a charge roll. On a turn a model with this rule charges, was charged or makes a Heroic Intervention add 1 to its Attacks characteristic until the end of the Fight Phase .

 

The Black Templars are quite clearly the melee focused army in the codex and it needs to show. Making their charges more reliable through rerolls ensures these zealots will make it to combat more often while the extra attack seperates them from their fellow Astartes as being the army that throws the most dice in combat. Basically the intent is to make them feel like an army that benefits from being stuck in, and gets stuck in more often. 

 

Salamanders: Master Artisans: Salamander units with this rule may re-roll a single to-hit and to-wound roll each time they shoot or fight. Additionally when using a weapon that rolls to determine the number of shots or attacks you may roll two dice and take the highest result.

 

The biggest benefit for this rule is undoubtably to vehicle with lower numbers of shots such as lascannon predators, but also helps weapons that swing the other way by making weapons that roll random number of shots more reliable for the army. Ultimately this makes Salamanders a strong contender for certain heavy weapon options as well as weapons such as the flamer which are less than reliable at times. 

 

Raven Guard: Shadow Masters: Raven Guard units that have not advanced or charged this turn gain the benefits for cover. Models that are already in cover and have not moved instead gain an additional +1 to their cover save bonus. Additionally, when targeting Infantry models with this special rule, your opponent must subtract 1 from their to-hit rolls if they are more than 12" away.

 

There were two changes here: the first was to make it so the army still has a benefit for their ability to hide themselves and their use of camoflauge, allowing them to feel like the ambush masters they should be, while giving Infantry models the existing bonus as a means of encouraging lists that aren't just a mass of tanks that get a cover bonus in the open.

 

Iron Hands: The Flesh is Weak: Roll a die each time an Iron Hands model loses a wound. On a unmodified roll of a 6 the damage is ignored and the model does not lose a wound. Models with the Character, Terminator or Dreadnought keywords instead ignore the lost wound on an unmodified roll of 5 or 6. Additionally Iron Hand models with the Vehicle keyword ignore penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons.

 

Not only are the more heavilly augmented of the chapter more likely to ignore wounds like they do in the lore, though with future proofing so that the mechanic can't be boosted or reduced by any other rules. Of course, the augmented nature of the Iron Hands become the army that benefits from bringing the most heavy weapons, though due to the way the rules work, they'll be different than the ones seen in a Salamanders army due to the benefits being different. This allows two different kind of armies to come out of the codex that both favor heavier weapons, but favor different ones due to the nature of how the rules interact with the weapons.

 

With how each chapter operates laid out and given a bonus that makes them feel more in line with their lore now it's time to look at the Warlord Traits. Not all of these need to be looked at as most are pretty solid as is and frankly work as viable options for the army that can take them. So in the interest of not making this longer than it already is going to be, let's keep to the ones that actually need addressing:

 

Angel of Death: Subtract 1 from the Leadership characteristic of enemy units that are within 6" of your Warlord. If your Warlord has slain an enemy Character during the game instead Subtract 2 from the Leadership characterisitic of enemy units within 12" of your Warlord.

 

Not a big change here, but it encourages you to use your warlord more aggressively to take out enemy characters during the game. 

 

The Imperium's Sword: Re-roll failed charge rolls for your Warlord. Models with the Black Templars keyword instead roll 3 dice and pick the two highest when making charge rolls. In addition in a turn that your Warlord has charged or makes an Heroic Intervention add 1 to their Attacks characteristic until the end of the fight phase.

 

Biggest changes here were to make it less redundant to Black Templars while also giving a bonus for Heroic Interventions to make it more likely to see the table for armies who need a defensive melee character escorting their deathball on the table.

 

Iron Resolve: Add 1 to the Wounds characteristic of your warlord. In addition, roll a dice each time your Warlord loses a wound. On an unmodified roll of a 5 or 6, your Warlord shrugs off the damage and does not lose the wound. Models with the Iron Hands keyword instead ignore a lost wound on an unmodified roll of a 4, 5, or 6. 

 

Due to the proposed changes in the Iron Hands tactic it was basically a necessity to make this work on a 4+ for an Iron Hands warlord. That said, if you want a tank of a character, they're the ones who'll most likely allow you to be one. That's the perks of replacing most of your body with robotic parts I suppose.

 

Rites of War: Friendly <Chapter> units within 6" of your Warlord automatically pass Morale tests. Additionally units within 6" of your Warlord count as hitting on a 5 or 6 when firing Overwatch.

 

Biggest change here is to give player better benefit out of the trait for huddling models up on the board. A bonus to overwatch makes this a viable choice for gunline or deathball style armies even when paired with units that don't tend to run full sized squads (Primaris or Devastators for example who don't worry about morale as much).

 

Champion of Humanity: You can add 1 to all hit and wound rolls made for your Warlord in the Fight phase when targeting an enemy Character or Monster.

 

Change here is that some of the things you want to throw a beatstick warlord at aren't characters and really any hero of the Imperium should be able to fight either of these things on equal measure.

 

Adept of the Codex (Ultramarines): While your Warlord is alive and on the table once per phase you may reuse a previously used Stratagem. Stratagems that target friendly units this way may not target the same unit twice, and can not be used to exceed any limitations within the stratagem that limit when they can be used or how many times a game they can be used. Additionally, once per game you may attempt to regain Command Points spent on a stratagem. If you choose to do this, roll a die for each Command Point, on a 2+ that CP is immediately refunded.

 

Obviously I'm not a fan of the current Adepts of the Codex as unlimited CP regeneration is a broken mechanic in the game when given for free so the change was to make the Ultramarines the more tactically flexible army instead by allowing them to use stratagems more often. This also allows them to partially negate the effects of Agents of Vect by allowing them to reuse a critical statagem that they were denied in that phase.

 

Oathkeeper (Black Templars): At the beginning of the first Battle Round, but before the first turn begins, your Warlord swears a Vow against the enemy forces. Choose a Vow from the following list and apply it's effects immediately:

Abhor the Witch: Your Warlord can attempt to deny one psychic power per turn as if they were a psyker. If they have the Armour of Contempt special rule they may instead attempt to deny one additional psychic power per turn.

Purge the Heretic: Your Warlord may perform a Heroic Interventions if the enemy are within 6" (instead of 3") and move up to 6" while doing so. Additionally all friendly Black Templar units within 6" of your Warlord may roll an extra die and choose the highest when making charge rolls.

Suffer not the Unclean to Live: Your Warlord gains +1 to hit and wound rolls made against models with the Character keywords. Additionally all friendly Black Templar units within 6" of your Warlord roll an extra die and choose the highest while Advancing.

 

This is a long one but generally the idea is to give the Black Templars their vows back. Each has an obvious bonus against a specific enemy in combat, but comes with an additional use that may cause the vows to be taken against other opponents instead. Honestly these likely need work and have been through several versions before I posted these. Ideas and suggestions especialyl welcome here.

 

With Warlord traits covered, let's talk Wargear. As before I'm only talking about changes here, but the point of these changes is as always going to be with the mind that other armies may see the changes just as well. As such there won't be as much changed her because any bonus to bolters (for example) would equally apply to an army like Sisters of Battle who typically greatly outnumber Space Marines and would negate any bonus that weapon would have against the cheaper bodies. Ideally I'd love to say that every bolter is Rapid Fire 2 and -1 AP to make Marines have the shooting output of a horde army on a smaller body count (and making every casualty take more out of the army in return) but realistically it doesn't work when you consider that the bolter is spread across a number of other armies and a higher body count army with bolters like Sisters or Scouts would become a broken mess in terms of balance.

 

Ranged Weapons

Bolt pistol (on Primaris models): Replace with Heavy Bolt Pistol. The Primaris are a more elite form of the regular Space Marine army and as such require more quality damage output to make up for their smaller numbers. The additional AP doesn't break balance for the army while giving the units a bit more punch when locked in combat, which is important for a group that lacks a number of melee options.

 

Demolisher Cannon: When targetting a unit of 5 or more models change this weapon's Type to Heavy 2D3. Generally speaking feedback I've seen time and time again is players prefer to have 2D3 shots over D6 as the average number of shots is higher for the 2D3 (4 versus 3) and it means firing at least 2 shots instead of 1. Basically it just does so much more to make the gun more likely to see the table with this change even without a points change.

 

Flamestorm gauntlets (shooting): 12" range Generally speaking no one takes these guys due to the range of their weapon being so short and with the loss of templates the fixation of 8" being the range for flame weapons can go away now. The weapon was left unchanged as the Auto Boltstorm Gauntlet pattern comes with the Fragstorm Launchers standard and fires 6+D6 shots meaning the minimum number of shots for the boltstorm variant is higher, but the Flamestorm varient trades that for automatically hitting.

 

Grav (all varients): If the target has a Save characterisitc of 3+ or better, this weapon's Strength caracteristic is doubled and the Damage characteristic is increased to D3.

 

Grav-Cannon and grav-amp: Heavy 2

 

The heavier something is the harder this is supposed to hit, so the way it hits should reflect that. As such increasing it to S10 makes it more likely to hurt those bigger models. However, keeping the Grav-cannon at Heavy 4 wasn't a balanced choice as that would give a Devastator Squad 16 S10 shots against anything with a 3+ or better which would be outright mad.

 

Heavy Flamer: 12" range, Heavy 2D3. Honestly I don't get the original change from Assault to Heavy, but regardless, we've given up the flamer template and as such it's a good way to make the Heavy Flamer a different weapon from the regular Flamer. An increased range makes it possible for it to reach out and touch the things easier while the 2D3 shots gives it a better average on it's number of hits over a standard flamer. Basically it's moving the weapon beyond just being a slight S and AP boost over the base flamer and makes it feel like a proper heavy weapon on the table.

 

Heavy Plasma Incinerator: Heavy 2. A slight points increase on the gun might be needed but honestly the reason this version of the Hellblaster's gun is left off the table beyond proxy is because the increased strength isn't enough to counterbalance the loss of mobility from making it a Heavy weapon as well as decreasing the number of shots. Giving it extra shots makes it more into the Primaris answer for more heavilly armoured models (such as vehicles, Custodes and Monsters) while still retaining the same limitations the current gun has: slower movement with decreased efficiency when you need to move.

 

Master-crafted Stalker bolt rifle/Stalker bolt rifle: Heavy 2 OR the ability to target characters. Either of these options would fix the Stalker bolt rifle so that it would see the table more often. As it currently is the Stalker has the same basic problems the Heavy Plasma Incinerator does: the loss of mobility AND number of shots with no bonus to targetting isn't enough to justify taking this weapon for just about anyone. Being able to target Characters like a Sniper Rifle or giving it Heavy 2 to allow it to offset it's lowered movement would put these into people's lists, even if it brought a slight points increase.

 

Melta (all types): Double weapon strength at half range instead of the bonus to damage rolls. Additionally change the damage characteristic to D3+3. These are weapons meant to slag even the heaviest of armour at close range and even from further away it could still do a severe amount of damage if it punches through the armour. For obvious reasons this means the Melta bomb should always be S16 as well.

 

Plasma weapons (all types): Change the bearer being slain to the bearer taking a mortal wound. While having your guys have their faces melt off is a long standing featur of the lore, the introduction of Mortal Wounds really fits this mechanic better and would allow for better synergy with armies that have mechanics to allow them to ignore Mortal Wounds, such as Iron Hands or Death Guard. This would also cut down how much the mechanic punishes multi-wound models such as Primaris or HQ choices for using plasma.

 

Melee Weapons

Chainsword/Combat Knife: -1 AP. This may require a small (1-2 point) bump as it'd still give an extra attack, but considering the lower number of attacks that can be put out by a Marine army compared to larger armies like Orks or even Guard there needs to be a quality bump to offset the lowered quantity of attacks.

 

Power Sword: Abilities: Parry: Increase the bearer's save by 1 during the Fight Phase. Generally the Power Sword is seen as a lot less of a choice. It doesn't make wounding models easier like the other options, and while it's better at ignoring armour there is a diminishing return on this against most targets. Increasing the defensive ability of the bearer at least gives it a utility beyond strictly trying to more effectively stab the other guy.

 

Vehicle Wargear

Dozer Blades: Double the bearer's Attacks characteristic until the end of the Fight Phase on a turn it has completed a successful charge. Basically let's bring these back and then let players use them to ram people.

 

Siege Shield: The bearer's Save characteristic is increased by 1 against shooting attacks. Giving a Vindicator tank an increased save against shooting for a points cost doesn't break the army as much as it gives a tank with rather limited firepower more staying power so it might actually weather more than a unit's shooting before it's reduced to a smoking puddle of slag on the table.

 

Misc Equipment

Terminator Armour: Models with the Terminator keyword reduce all weapon damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. Additionally increase their save to 1+. Since a 1 always fails this means that the save only negates the first AP of a weapon and reduces how effective multidamage weapons are. Essentially it means they won't go down quite as fast to anything less than dedicated heavy weapon fire or weight of dice.

 

Power Armour: Has +1 to it's save Characteristic against weapons with an AP profile of -1 or greater (-2,-3,ect). This was a hard one to puzzle over as Power Armour is on so many different armies. Increasing the save like All is Dust could just lead to us having Sisters running around with effective 2+ saves all the time, and a FnP effect wasn't really going to work either. In the end negating 1 of the weapon's AP seemed like the cleanest solution, though it does mean that you need to hit Thousand Sons Rubric models with -2 AP just to get them to a 3+. Magnus would be proud I guess?

 

Centurion Armour: Models with the Centurion keyword reduce all weapon damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. Increase their save by 1 against weapons with a Damage characteristic of 1. Yes, even the waddlebots are getting a look here, because honestly all that extra armour should be doing something more than it is.

 

Gravis Armour: Models with the Gravis keyword reduce all weapon damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. Increase their save by +1 against weapons with a Damage characteristic of 1. With how durable Gravis is supposed to be it needed something to feel like it was going to stay on the table longer. As lazy as it is to just reuse All Is Dust, here and on the Centurion armour, the extra armour being stronger against weaker weapons makes sense in terms of the lore. Reducing the weapon damage fits equally well and gives them more staying power. With these additions the need to push points down on the models becomes rather moot as they become the durable weapon platfoms they're shown as in the lore.

 

VERY VERY good work. Absolute fantastic.

 

 

[Medjugorje]

If you’re unhappy with your army prolly the best thing to do is just let GW know. I doubt that will use fan made rules tbh.

 

why not... we are the costumers and we are the guys who pays for it.

Each other company makes what the costumer want to have.

[Claws and Effect]

Let Company Veterans take jump packs.

 

It would fix an issue I personally have.

 

Namely that Shrike is in a weird place right now. He's a Chapter Master that really wants to be in melee, but is the most fragile of all the CMs.

 

If he had a unit that could soak wounds for him and keep up with his movement it would improve him by proxy and would require no other changes.

 

No reason why it should be Raven Guard exclusive either. Let everyone do it.

[Lion's Crown]

Well I don't know much about other chapters but Dark Angels should have more CP for their Outrider and Vanguard detachement since we can built pure bikes or terminator armies. And they are already not that good it would simply allow us to play them because right now it's near impossible if your opponent bring anything even remotely competitive.

'Dark Angels Outrider and Vanguard detachment CP value is 2." And even 4 if it's your sole detachment.

[Medjugorje]

Let Company Veterans take jump packs.

 

It would fix an issue I personally have.

 

Namely that Shrike is in a weird place right now. He's a Chapter Master that really wants to be in melee, but is the most fragile of all the CMs.

 

If he had a unit that could soak wounds for him and keep up with his movement it would improve him by proxy and would require no other changes.

 

No reason why it should be Raven Guard exclusive either. Let everyone do it.

 

there are a few things ... minor changes that could help very well. Like BT have a own troop choice, RG could get a own Company Veteran Squad with Jump Pack and WS with Bikes....

 

[Morticon]

question, is there an email address and/or physical address that we could write to for game dev? 

[BitsHammer]

question, is there an email address and/or physical address that we could write to for game dev? 

I've written the studio in the past and basically you just need to address the package to the Nottingham address and make it C/O The Rules Team or something similar and the mail room will make sure it gets there.

[Ishagu]

I've emailed the rules team in the past on multiple occasions.

 

I've also had conversations with existing high profile play testers for GW.

 

GW aren't going to write new rules based on our request or feedback, but they might adjust costs and introduce new limitations if certain combinations are too common and domineering.

 

I think a new SM codex is the best bet for sweeping changes and we won't be getting that yet. I'll just be happy with a notable point reduction so we can take larger forces - that will certainly have a positive impact on Marines.

[Medjugorje]

It’s not even like SM should be top tier every edition. They were not in 3rd or 5th edition.

 

I can tell you GW is not going to let the fans write the rules either and they made that mistake before when they released a codex for Black Templars - would you believe that codex was panned hard ? It was indeed. So GW has learned their lesson and won’t make it again.

 

Black Templar Codex never was a top tier codex