Will HH plastics migrate to 40K?

[conscriptboris]

23 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

I think it's a missed opportunity financially not to do like a primaris pintle sprue for the vehicles and let folks make the vehicles all primaris, but that's my opinion.

That would suit the customer (converting old Tanks), not GW as people wouldnt be dropping £50 plus per new tank.

 

 

[conscriptboris]

I had hoped for a Firstborn/Primaris scism, but it just shows the intention for this was sales driven, not lore. The transition to Primaris has been the only thing accepted without more than grumbles across every space marine chapter, even chaos want in. Shame.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

17 hours ago, sarabando said:

The kratos would be dumb they are supposed to be rare already in 30k having them in every 40k army is just silly

 

Something being rare in 30k shouldn't automatically disqualify it. It may have gained popularity during the scouring or the high lords may have pushed for it after the beast wiped out the fists. They can find an excuse for it to be in 40k just look at the storm raven.

[Karhedron]

Agreed. Fluff is a poor reason to restrict anything and can be written to be whatever you want it to be. Cawl or Guilliman might even have the STC stashed away somewhere and put it back into production. 

[MegaVolt87]

Look at how primaris were implemented. It would not be far fetched to have a helm memory core event like in battletech for firstborn in 40k. 

 

EDIT- GW is so fast and lose with modern 40k lore these days, its no longer the sacred cow older players and GW itself held it as. Such changes are within the realm of possibility now. 

Edited November 29, 2022 by MegaVolt87

[Noserenda]

Spoilers, the fluff was never held as a sacred cow by anyone remotely sensible, especially at GW.

[Doghouse]

I saw Peachy in an interview the other day and he speculated that firstborn would be phased out but replaced with models slightly smaller than Primaris as part of ranges such as the Heroes series. Most of the conversation around this seemed to be what a lot of people have assumed with GW wanting people to move over to Primaris. He said they wanted people to be able to use their old Firstborn models but I got the impression Primaris armies were the goal.

 

I would be genuinely surprised if they did two separate codex for Firstborn and Primaris. It's possible, but I personally think highly unlikely. 

[TheWarmaster]

10 hours ago, Karhedron said:

Agreed. Fluff is a poor reason to restrict anything and can be written to be whatever you want it to be. Cawl or Guilliman might even have the STC stashed away somewhere and put it back into production. 

If they did then surely they would have already.. 

[DesuVult]

18 minutes ago, TheWarmaster said:

If they did then surely they would have already.. 

They could do it in Arks of Omen for the 30k plastic stuff that was resin when the codex came out.

[Bryan Blaire]

I believe the interview that Doghouse is talking about is this one by The Painting Phase group (which Peachy has joined):

 

The Primaris discussion starts at about the 40:30 time mark.

 

I had a different interpretation of that discussion than Doghouse though - it sounds more like to me that GW specifically made the decision not to just do away with the “First Born”/classic Marines (God am I glad to hear that Peachy also hates that term - glad it wasn’t a monolithic “liking” going on in the company) to allow people to continue to use them (trying to please all people tends to please none of them though), and that the scale creep to bring the classic Marines up in size might be covered in Heroes.  He noted something along the lines of (paraphrasing here, not specifically quoting) “things getting resculpted to be just shorter than Primaris in things like Kill Team and Blackstone Fortress”.  The adjusted scale specifically is keeping classic Marines around in this way in 40K, not phasing them out.

 

He also seemed to indicate (in my interpretation) that GW intends you to be able to use Primaris and classic Astartes together in the same army list, so I don’t believe they were looking at separating them out into non-mixing armies (at least not at the time Peachy left/he can’t talk about it yet) - he specifically references armies where you have both types of units in them.

 

What I gathered is that they probably aren’t going to redo 40K classic Marine kits - but the plans at the time he left wasn’t to just not support them from the sounds of things (or he can’t talk about it at this point) - and he thinks that most players will naturally gravitate toward the new scaled and proportioned Primaris as “better.”  That doesn’t mean it was GW’s specific goal - I think conversely GW intentionally made the choice to continue to support the classic Marines in rules from the sounds of Peachy’s comments.

 

Where I think things have gone is that we’ve already seen some of the rescaled classic Marines - they are the Horus Heresy Mk6 kit and bits that come with it, and as Peachy said, the Heroes line, along with Castellan Crowe and the “indeterminate” Black Templar Castellan.  As long as they keep the classic Marine rules in a 40K Codex (whether they split the books or not), then you can use those models to represent the classic Marines, and you could even use older models, the rescaled classic Astartes, and Primaris Astartes all the the same army if you really wanted (as long as you don’t have “allying” restrictions).

 

Personally, I don’t see any reason that GW couldn’t make 40K rules for any of the HH models they want to include and then you could use them for anything from the Heresy forward (i.e. if you wanted to play in the 33rd Millennium or the modern setting with an extreme relic), it just remains to be seen if they will…

Edited November 30, 2022 by Bryan Blaire

[jarms48]

On 11/28/2022 at 4:40 PM, MegaVolt87 said:

Time for firstborn to split from primaris in a seperate dex. The game and the factions will be healthier for the split where they can't combine. 

 

I've been saying this ever since Primaris dropped. Now people are finally starting to accept it. Lol. 

 

I basically see this:

- Primaris codex: Has all the current primaris datasheets, expands with any new 40k SM models GW releases in future.

- Firstborn codex: Combination of any plastic HH models, and remaining firstborn models. As firstborn models stop being produced they'll be likely sent to legends replaced with any HH counterparts.

[DesuVult]

A split codex doesn't make much sense to me.

[WrathOfTheLion]

It goes against the exact reason they moved the Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc. into the main codex.

 

Do you have two sets of supplements? How do you FAQ this? Where's the chapter tactic for your chapter? How do you take models from both?

 

You can see where that's going, could easily be a logistical nightmare.

Edited November 30, 2022 by WrathOfTheLion

[jarms48]

7 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

It goes against the exact reason they moved the Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc. into the main codex.

 

Do you have two sets of supplements? How do you FAQ this? Where's the chapter tactic for your chapter? How do you take models from both?

 

You can see where that's going, could easily be a logistical nightmare.

 

You just make the 2 codexes cross compatible. With options of pure primaris chapters, pure firstborn chapters, and hybrids of both. 

[DesuVult]

2 hours ago, jarms48 said:

 

You just make the 2 codexes cross compatible. With options of pure primaris chapters, pure firstborn chapters, and hybrids of both. 

That doesn't really solve any problems and would make people complain about needing another book.

[The Unseen]

I hope they move in the opposite direction and stop having arbitrary transport and strat limitations for new models; it was only ever a method of driving sales, and has led to crippling bad gameplay for marines since. If they make marine players buy a second and third codex to run each half of their current armies, I would expect a (justifiable) riot. The marine codex is bloated as hell, but that's mostly because GW decided that the same tank with slightly different guns should be 3 datasheets, and several different captain and lieutenant loadouts, and the fact that we need 2 "sneaky" troop choices who's differences come down to a single special rule and optional wargear, etc. If you actually cleaned up the book with some bloody consistency it wouldn't be nearly so bloated. Well, that and all the units that are so bad they aren't worth the page they're printed on, they definitely contribute to the book feeling both too full but also largely empty. Marines have like twice as many total units than anyone else, but fewer of them in TOTAL are actually viable. On a % basis of course, its even worse.

[Orange Knight]

I don't think so.

 

I think the future of the 40k range is Primaris only.

 

Also, by having two seperate Astartes ranges, dedicated fans will Ultimates end up with two armies. It worked on me lol.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

In response to the fluff changing argument, IIRC I think I've already seen reference to 30k only things being newly reproduced in 40k. I think it's in the aeronautica book for the space marine flyers, (Which are all 'heresy' models in a 40k setting.) I might have a gander for it in a bit if I get chance.

[Emperor Ming]

Is HH separate IP from 40k? 

 

if its a yes then there's a simple answer on kit migration

[Robbienw]

Its not, there is plenty of crossover

[Noserenda]

They consider it a separate IP, but i dont think its that simple, everything in 30k is still in 40k as history and the vast majority of things still exist in 40k to boot thanks to stagnation. Thats a whole legal wormhole im not even remotely qualified to talk about ofc :D 

I certainly wouldnt mind splitting the mammoth marine codex by type because i dont mix the types (It looks godawful) outside of vehicles but keep them compatible.  That said GW apparently dont see the distinction like we do, a marine is a marine, so i doubt itll happen outside of mass legending. 

[Robbienw]

IP in terms of publications and game stuff around it maybe.  Way way too many crossover models to consider the model ranges seperate though.  Heavily intertwined, many shared model in several factions.

Edited November 30, 2022 by Robbienw

[Bryan Blaire]

Folks, seriously, there’s so many legal implications surrounding whether it’s the same IP or not, or the same IP portfolio, or which laws apply to what materials, let’s just drop the IP thing - the “IP designation” is not GW’s deciding line on this likely anyway - they are going to protect all their IPs regardless and it’s whether they internally consider it a separate game or not that makes a difference to them for our purposes.

 

They are separate games for GW.  The rules would have to be ported from the Horus Heresy game and aligned and tested for the 40K set up - I don’t think we can say for certain whether this will happen or not.

Edited November 30, 2022 by Bryan Blaire

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I agree, IP has nothing to do with this debate. (In any event, I'm reasonably sure they're both part of the same "IP" as the ownership is the same even if the topics are slightly different.)

 

It's simply about whether they want to keep them demarcated game wise. Personally, it would be nice to have access to some of the models, even if it's just the better options on the accessory sprues, like rhinos with Multi Meltas!

[DesuVult]

1 hour ago, Bryan Blaire said:

They are separate games for GW.  The rules would have to be ported from the Horus Heresy game and aligned and tested for the 40K set up - I don’t think we can say for certain whether this will happen or not.

They already port the rules for most models.  They stopped for awhile but have restarted with the kratos.