Space Marine Chapters, and their lost identity

[FashaTheDog]

As I said in the first post I made here, the one where I laughed off my Blood Ravens as never being tournament legal, it is a shame I lost the special rules for Apothecary sergeants and for my named characters with bespoke models, but I am not losing sleep over it even if I now lack WYSIWYG Tactical Squads.  To quote a Genesis song, "s'always the same, it's just a shame, that's all".  Having played this game since Rogue Trader days change is always the same, not always in your favor, which is a shame, that's all  You move on and try and roll your old Squats into your Guard army.

 

4 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

What codex was he in exactly?

 

When you asked what Chapters lost stuff I did not know you were excluding Forge World.  It is true they were never in a Codex, but there were accepted in most places and formats as additional content.  Now in friendly games it is really easy to just run these guys as plain sergeants with fancy paint jobs and call it a day.  If I know I am playing in a strict WYSIWYG setting I run my Deathwing or Krieg instead. 

 

[Orange Knight]

The codex detachments could be used to cover the Forgeworld chapters pretty well.

 

I agree, just a few characters or units with keywords could have kept them alive.

[Karhedron]

19 hours ago, FashaTheDog said:

Culln the Risen's move to Legends was a shame considering how relatively new his Leviathan was.

 

Just proxy him as a Redemptor Dreadnought as he is on the right sized base. TLAC is just a different pattern HOGC. He has a missile pod on his roof and a melee weapon. I know he isn't a proper character but at least the model is usable.

[FashaTheDog]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

Just proxy him as a Redemptor Dreadnought as he is on the right sized base. TLAC is just a different pattern HOGC. He has a missile pod on his roof and a melee weapon. I know he isn't a proper character but at least the model is usable.

 

I never thought of that.  That is actually a rather good proxy idea.  I have been seeing the Dragon 'mech from Battletech in the Redemptor so it blinded me to anything other than slapping a Draconis Combine insignia on the Redemptor and wondering when my Terminators with cyclone missile launchers will get jump packs.

[Xenith]

On 10/7/2023 at 11:45 AM, Dont-Be-Haten said:

While yes, any chapter can now be anything, something cool for DIY chapters, that does allow more freedom to do things. But apart from that, Raven Guard don't feel any different than Iron Hands or Blood Angels.

 

This is not purely a 10th ed thing, no matter how much it's trumpeted as a problem of 9th ed by GW.

 

You have always been able to use any rules with whatever colour marines you have. There were a lot of blue blood angels around when BA were good in 4th, etc. Plenty of people have said "I'm going to run the 8th company of my chapter using the BA rules, or the 1st company using DW rules." 

 

As usual, it's up to the player to enforce strict rules on army composition and styles to give yourself that flavour. Yes, if you chop and change rules and units every week, you'll feel that they're a bit generic, and that your army doesn't have a specific flavour, but that's on you. If you say, however, "These are Raven Guard and I'm going to choose to only ever use the Stealth-themed detachment" then suddenly you'll start feeling that theme. 

 

Similarly in heresy, a boarding-action-themed army isn't really going to feel like a boarding-action themed army if you have superheavies, knights and loads of jetbikes, however someone taking loads of breachers will feel that theme, and may choose not to use assault drills, despite being able to use them, to carry on with that theme. It's up to the player to choose and stick to that theme.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Xenith

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

14 hours ago, FashaTheDog said:

As I said in the first post I made here, the one where I laughed off my Blood Ravens as never being tournament legal, it is a shame I lost the special rules for Apothecary sergeants and for my named characters with bespoke models, but I am not losing sleep over it even if I now lack WYSIWYG Tactical Squads.  To quote a Genesis song, "s'always the same, it's just a shame, that's all".  Having played this game since Rogue Trader days change is always the same, not always in your favor, which is a shame, that's all  You move on and try and roll your old Squats into your Guard army.

 

 

When you asked what Chapters lost stuff I did not know you were excluding Forge World.  It is true they were never in a Codex, but there were accepted in most places and formats as additional content.  Now in friendly games it is really easy to just run these guys as plain sergeants with fancy paint jobs and call it a day.  If I know I am playing in a strict WYSIWYG setting I run my Deathwing or Krieg instead. 

 

Claiming that this codex is taking away character from chapters means the we’re talking about things that have been lost from the codex.

 

forgeworld products get spotty support and always have. Forgeworld is also a separate company from GW proper.

[FashaTheDog]

I see where you are coming from and I misread your point.  I was thinking about how rules and units in general have been lost while you are asking how this specific codex removed character.  My apologies, we were talking apples and oranges.

[jaxom]

Looking back at @Dont-Be-Haten's original post and the example of the Carmine Blades, and @FashaTheDog's comments about the Red Scorpions and Forge World lore, I think I've identified what's been bugging me. The codex supplements did an amazing job giving each of the First Founding Chapters a rich narrative and feel for each Company and Captain. They drove home why they're all Codex: Space Marines, but also how they're different. The Forge World books did something similar for their Chapters (usually for one to three Companies per Chapter, but still). That got me thinking about all the writing advice for DIY Index Astartes here at the B&C.

 

Who's the Chapter Master, and how/why were they chosen?

What is the honor name for each Company?

How often do the Reserve Companies function by themselves? As ancillaries to Battle Companies?

Does the Chapter prefer jump troops or bikes for speed?

Does the Chapter prefer long range, short range, or melee combat?

How does the Chapter feel about stealth?

What command staff (Techmarines, Apothecaries, Librarians, Chaplains) are given outsized importance or actual commands? Why?

 

I think those are more important questions for identity than whether or not the Chapter gets a +1 bonus hit in the first round of combat or generates extra bolter hits on a 6 to hit.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 hours ago, FashaTheDog said:

I see where you are coming from and I misread your point.  I was thinking about how rules and units in general have been lost while you are asking how this specific codex removed character.  My apologies, we were talking apples and oranges.

Yeah the OP specifically stated they’re talking about the codex, so definitely wasn’t expecting anything out of left field.

[Tacitus]

On 10/15/2023 at 10:20 AM, Chainsword Cookie said:

I think that for example the Ultramarines are just as flavorful as they can be with the new detachments.

I would say the problem isn't the Ultramarines.  Or the Space Wolves who have their own codex.  The problem is the Imperial Fists, Ravenguard, Salamanders, Crimson Fists, and so on and so on - the ones that will still use Codex Space Marines but are not Ultramarines.  I would assume we'll see codex supplements return for them and Ultramarines before too long.  In the first place: Money, in the second place: fan service.

On 10/17/2023 at 12:42 PM, Blindhamster said:

Rather than chapter rules literally all they needed to do was provide rules for the characters and given them chapter keywords. The actual chapters wouldn't need rules really, though I guess they COULD have provided some more detachments

They've floated back and forth between putting the "flavor rules" on special characters or formations - personally I prefer them on the formation so people don't HAVE to take Belial for a Deathwing Detachment - but either gets most of the job done.  Right now they're nowhere. 

[Blindhamster]

43 minutes ago, Tacitus said:

They've floated back and forth between putting the "flavor rules" on special characters or formations - personally I prefer them on the formation so people don't HAVE to take Belial for a Deathwing Detachment - but either gets most of the job done.  Right now they're nowhere. 

issue with that, is you're asking for a lot more detachments and each detachment needs to feel unique, provide tangible benefits, unique strats and enhancements AND somehow be relatively balanced against the others.

 

It's exactly the issue the divergent chapters now have based on a lot of posts on these very forums.

 

The detachments represent the ways space marines fight, and are meant to be broadly the same across chapters, the army rule of oath of moment is currently always the same across chapters too. Then there are characters for chapters which really exemplify something about that chapter that stands out.

 

Honestly I'm still kind of expecting the divergent chapters to either straight up stop using the core marine codex when it comes out (I think this is the only way they can do it where it will feel "balanced" vs codex space marine chapters). Or, if that doesn't happen potentially for them to have some other change like they replace the army rule (oaths) with their own thing, then the detachments are the main codex ones, but that comes with the awkward thing of enhancements working differently or divergent chapters simply not having unique ones.

The forgeworld ones likely should fall into the same general approach as the codex chapters and just be characters that can be used in any of the detachments. But ultimately, it's not GW maine studios job to maintain the forgeworld chapters, the problem lies with forgeworld on that having not been done.

 

[Blindhamster]

50 minutes ago, Tacitus said:

I would say the problem isn't the Ultramarines.  Or the Space Wolves who have their own codex.  The problem is the Imperial Fists, Ravenguard, Salamanders, Crimson Fists, and so on and so on - the ones that will still use Codex Space Marines but are not Ultramarines.  I would assume we'll see codex supplements return for them and Ultramarines before too long.  In the first place: Money, in the second place: fan service.

But the codex isn't codex ultramarines. Fact is, most of the chapters you listed literally do fight following the codex, which means they should use the detachments and rules as they are. Iron hands arguably deserve to be distinct as they don't follow the codex or its battle plans or structure (arguably almost to the same level as templars and wolves). Dark Angels are a middle ground between codex and divergence whilst Blood Angels arguably are pretty codex compliant, they have a few other units but outside of the things their flaw forces on them (death company) they broadly work like any other codex chapter.

[Karhedron]

As far as I can tell, the people who are unhappy don't seem to like the idea of a Chapter's flavour being linked to the Detachment rules. Would Raven Guard or Iron Hands really play that much differently if their "Chapter traits" replaced OOM? The complaint seems to be that there is no difference between playing a Raven Guard Vanguard Spearhead and an Iron Hands Vanguard Spearhead.

 

But the question is whether Chapters are so different that Raven Guard are actually so much better at stealth and infiltration that the difference needs to be represented on the tabletop or does the difference simply manifest in their preferred manner of fighting?

 

The problem with baking Chapter Traits into the rules is that straight away, some detachments will become outright better for some Chapters than others and it will start to pigeon-hole those factions. The situation we have right now strikes a balance between flavour and keeping Marines as a "broad church". Stealthy Vanguard Spearheads may be particularly favoured by the Raven Guard but you don't have run RG to make use of it, The current arrangement could allow you to play just as well with Imperial Fists which is a good thing. Possibly they are a taskforce of Sappers sent in ahead of the main force to undermine enemy fortifications.

 

The flavour and identity is still there, it is just applied in a non-exclusive way. I think the 8th and 9th edition codices did Marines a disservice in the way they implemented their rules. It gave players the impression that certain Chapters only fought in certain ways rather than simply having a preference for it.

[jaxom]

4 hours ago, Karhedron said:

But the question is whether Chapters are so different that Raven Guard are actually so much better at stealth and infiltration that the difference needs to be represented on the tabletop or does the difference simply manifest in their preferred manner of fighting?

Funnily enough, I've been reading through the Raven Guard supplement a lot recently as part of working on my homebrew material. The Raven Guard's stealth is described to such Mary Stu levels that the only time it would make sense to actually play out a battle on the table top is when they're not being stealthy. The book makes a lot of references to using stealth to set up battles to the point where they're winnable; for example, a 2000 point battle is now taking place because the Raven Guard have spent 8 months setting up accidents for a massive Ork horde and now it's down to a manage size for direct confrontation. 

 

EDIT: Anecdote from Deathwatch RPG (which I consider to be the best representation of lore Marines in an interactive tabletop game). The most brutally efficient character I have ever played or seen played was a Raven Guard Tactical Marine with a Stalker-pattern Bolter. No one ever saw him, he made heads explode regardless of how well armored they were, and if any blast weapons went off near by, he had power armour.

Edited October 19, 2023 by jaxom