The "Codex Compliant" Chapters can, and absolutely should, have access to Unique units.

[jaxom]

Regarding @Orange Knight's original prompt: sure, makes sense. I think the most important part was "Unique unit variations are not what define a chapter's compliance." I think Honor Guards were the best example brought up. UM Honor Guard, Sanguinary Guard, Wolf Guard; they're all honor guards that match a Codex description ("An Honour Guard's wargear is drawn from amongst the most ancient and venerated relics of the Chapter.... In battle, the Honour Guard commonly act as the Chapter Master's retinue") but have different load outs. And those rules are in line with the concept design language and visual design language for their relics. I think that's where things go off the rails, because it's simple to point at Salamanders, Raven Guard, Iron Hands and see the rules (in certain areas) do not match the concept design language and visual design language as well as they could. And that's my transition into...

 

Regarding the topic the thread devolved into:

Spoiler

From their website, here's the GW elevator pitch (i.e. you have one or two floors in an elevator with someone to describe a thing or convince someone of something) for Warhammer 40,000; according to their video it is a thing of:

Quote

Spectacular battles, extraordinary characters, limitless creativity, play together, on the tabletop, and beyond... discover new worlds, full of amazing stories, Warhammer 40,000 is all of this... join the battle for the fate of the galaxy.

and

Quote

In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war.
In the 41st Millennium, warring factions from ancient civilisations and upstart empires fight endless battles across innumerable worlds. Humanity stands alone, beset on all sides by the heretic, the mutant, and the alien. There is no mercy. There is no respite. Prepare yourself for battle.

 

The design language for the concept is not intrinsically tied to the design language for the core rules. Okay, maybe spectacular battle; the core rules are streamlined to the point that any army of 60 +/- 30 models versus another such army will run pretty smoothly and be a nice spectacle. But definitely nothing in the core rules which fosters a sense of grim darkness, ancient civilisations, and endless battles. Describing the rules of 40k does not describe the game of 40k. Contrast that with something like Battletech: "Big robots shoot big guns and missiles at each other, trying to strip off armor or get a lucky hit, blow off limbs, and limp off the battlefield," describes the game and the rules because the design languages for the two are more in line with each other.

 

40k relies on the secondary layer of rules to do all the heavy lifting trying to match the concept design language. The secondary layer includes things like faction rules, faction composition, and unit rules. The concept design language, however, is very broad and the secondary layer of rules is limited - officially - by what GW decides to create and make available. 

 

The implicit promise of the concept design language is the ability to explore extraordinary characters, exercise limitless creativity, and discover new worlds, full of amazing stories is thus immediately broken in the context of official. And that's the crux of the matter: GW's official rules will never match the concept design language of the game, because it is simpler to write using the concept design language and the visual design language than it is to fully process a new thing into the official game. As others have noted, official game pretty much means tournaments abiding by GW published rules; and pick up games in an environment where using only GW published rules is maybe the best way to get a game going smoothly.

 

I think any thread like this one, or like "Iyandan should have more, specialized Wraith units," or "Khorne Berzerkers on Bikes should be a thing!" are more about the broken promise; that Warhammer 40,000 does not officially support a near-limitless galaxy of splendour, terror, and variety which one imagines when thinking about their chosen power fantasy. 

 

  

On 2/13/2025 at 8:48 AM, DemonGSides said:

I think that the shorthand of calling BA/DA/SW/BT 'divergent' when speaking about model lines and rules has brain wormed people when talking about lore.

 

Most people are only calling them divergent because their roster diverges from the SM main roster. That's it.  "Codex Compliant" chapters absolutely could have individual units, but that's what would also instantly make them divergent.

 

The Codex Astartes isn't something that we can read and point to so I don't know how much use it is to talk about what it proscribes and disallows. 

23 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

I'm saying that when people are talking about the divergent chapters, they aren't speaking about the lore in any shape way or form (IE Are they compliant or not?), because they're taking about the game that GW has created where only four chapters of space Marines have a preponderance of bespoke units and rules, and we refer to them differently because is this, NOT because they are actually not codex compliant, because it's easier than having this explanation typed out every time.

 

I literally am not speaking about the Lore (where half of the "divergent" chapters being mentioned are actually fully codex compliant (as much as any of it can be since, once again, there is no factual Codex Astartes to point to)), but that people are quick to confound the discussion of models with the lore when it doesn't necessarily apply.

I think I get it; a Chapter isn't divergent until GW has given them a roster that diverges from the roster in the rules of Codex: Space Marines. It's possible I missed it previously (this is a dense thread and I skimmed the more vitriolic posts); do you have an opinion on what distinguishes when such a divergent roster should be created, if at all?

[DemonGSides]

Just now, jaxom said:

Regarding @Orange Knight's original prompt: sure, makes sense. I think the most important part was "Unique unit variations are not what define a chapter's compliance." I think Honor Guards were the best example brought up. UM Honor Guard, Sanguinary Guard, Wolf Guard; they're all honor guards that match a Codex description ("An Honour Guard's wargear is drawn from amongst the most ancient and venerated relics of the Chapter.... In battle, the Honour Guard commonly act as the Chapter Master's retinue") but have different load outs. And those rules are in line with the concept design language and visual design language for their relics. I think that's where things go off the rails, because it's simple to point at Salamanders, Raven Guard, Iron Hands and see the rules (in certain areas) do not match the concept design language and visual design language as well as they could. And that's my transition into...

 

Regarding the topic the thread devolved into:

  Hide contents

From their website, here's the GW elevator pitch (i.e. you have one or two floors in an elevator with someone to describe a thing or convince someone of something) for Warhammer 40,000; according to their video it is a thing of:

and

 

The design language for the concept is not intrinsically tied to the design language for the core rules. Okay, maybe spectacular battle; the core rules are streamlined to the point that any army of 60 +/- 30 models versus another such army will run pretty smoothly and be a nice spectacle. But definitely nothing in the core rules which fosters a sense of grim darkness, ancient civilisations, and endless battles. Describing the rules of 40k does not describe the game of 40k. Contrast that with something like Battletech: "Big robots shoot big guns and missiles at each other, trying to strip off armor or get a lucky hit, blow off limbs, and limp off the battlefield," describes the game and the rules because the design languages for the two are more in line with each other.

 

40k relies on the secondary layer of rules to do all the heavy lifting trying to match the concept design language. The secondary layer includes things like faction rules, faction composition, and unit rules. The concept design language, however, is very broad and the secondary layer of rules is limited - officially - by what GW decides to create and make available. 

 

The implicit promise of the concept design language is the ability to explore extraordinary characters, exercise limitless creativity, and discover new worlds, full of amazing stories is thus immediately broken in the context of official. And that's the crux of the matter: GW's official rules will never match the concept design language of the game, because it is simpler to write using the concept design language and the visual design language than it is to fully process a new thing into the official game. As others have noted, official game pretty much means tournaments abiding by GW published rules; and pick up games in an environment where using only GW published rules is maybe the best way to get a game going smoothly.

 

I think any thread like this one, or like "Iyandan should have more, specialized Wraith units," or "Khorne Berzerkers on Bikes should be a thing!" are more about the broken promise; that Warhammer 40,000 does not officially support a near-limitless galaxy of splendour, terror, and variety which one imagines when thinking about their chosen power fantasy. 

 

  

I think I get it; a Chapter isn't divergent until GW has given them a roster that diverges from the roster in the rules of Codex: Space Marines. It's possible I missed it previously (this is a dense thread and I skimmed the more vitriolic posts); do you have an opinion on what distinguishes when such a divergent roster should be created, if at all?

 

Well that's part of the issue right; I don't even think of BA or DA as divergent (IE: non compliant) in lore but they are absolutely divergent on the tabletop. That was part of what I was trying to get past previously but then I got screamed at that lore and rules are intrinsically linked which I didn't disagree with, just that theres a lot of conflating things that makes the discussion difficult.

 

I already posted my thoughts wrt "tabletop currently non divergent Marine Factions" getting bespoke units; it doesn't make them "Divergent therefore non compliant" because BA and DA have existed for years within the Codex: Astartes framework, so giving Salamanders for example a specialist fire unit isn't a big deal to me and would be great.  It makes them "divergent with regards to the tabletop" once they get a supplement, but I think Codex: Space Marines (the tabletop book for clarity) could easily have those units inside it and not require full supplements, especially with how detatchments work.

[VengefulJan]

1 hour ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Well that's part of the issue right; I don't even think of BA or DA as divergent (IE: non compliant) in lore but they are absolutely divergent on the tabletop. That was part of what I was trying to get past previously but then I got screamed at that lore and rules are intrinsically linked which I didn't disagree with, just that theres a lot of conflating things that makes the discussion difficult.

 

I already posted my thoughts wrt "tabletop currently non divergent Marine Factions" getting bespoke units; it doesn't make them "Divergent therefore non compliant" because BA and DA have existed for years within the Codex: Astartes framework, so giving Salamanders for example a specialist fire unit isn't a big deal to me and would be great.  It makes them "divergent with regards to the tabletop" once they get a supplement, but I think Codex: Space Marines (the tabletop book for clarity) could easily have those units inside it and not require full supplements, especially with how detatchments work.

I feel like everybody who understands this post right here would be in full agreement. I feel we would all agree with Orange Knight that it would be nice to have additional Mechanics to support the aesthetics of the other chapters relegated to the SM book. With the new detachment system, they have a wide breath of options to tweak an alter a ruleset and if they want to throw out a unique unit along side the unique characters to help support it, the more the merrier.

 

My own personal concern to the whole thing would be internal faction health. I already dislike the fact that by the end of the edition, Space Marines will be oversaturated with 24 different detachments vs other struggling factions who are lucky enough to receive 5.  

[Marshal Reinhard]

I've read people state in this thread that even the Black Templars aren't really divergent, so in that case there are no divergent chapters and the topic falls on its head. Everyone is non- divergent so OP's point is everyone should have unique units.

 

I support fully everyone's right to have them. Won't be holding any breaths though...

[LSM]

11 hours ago, Tacitus said:

If you want to talk about Iron Hands getting a bespoke unit you pretty much have to start with the Gorgon Terminators from the Planet Medusae - because of the lore. 

 

Side note: but, interesting. My touchstone (in general) with Space Marine lore was the Index Astartes articles in the early 2000s. (I drifted out of the hobby, and then back in early 9th edition, so have holes in my knowledge as to what's current.)

 

As such, to me, Iron Hands were all about their Iron Fathers and Dreadnoughts. In fact, they were (I think) the only Chapter that didn't have any Terminator squads at all. (Instead, TDA was uniquely available to Veteran Sergeants.)

 

A quick googling brings up the (frustratingly not properly sourced) fan wiki, which states "the majority of this pattern [Gorgon] of Terminator Armour was... lost at the Drop Site Massacre of Istvaan V."

 

//

 

One of the issues with tying everything back to the lore is that GW is so lose with its canon that it often contains contradictory information. 

[DemonGSides]

5 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

I've read people state in this thread that even the Black Templars aren't really divergent, so in that case there are no divergent chapters and the topic falls on its head. Everyone is non- divergent so OP's point is everyone should have unique units.

 

I support fully everyone's right to have them. Won't be holding any breaths though...

 

Point em out. I'm not gonna re-read through every post, but the point being made is that divergent is mealy language compared to just stating outright whether something is compliant or not, and BT are like poster boys alongside SW for "Definitely not compliant" and I don't remember anyone saying opposite.  Divergent being used for two different conversations that often have a lot of overlap can lead to a lot of confusion, which was why I was advocating for different language. 

 

There were some people trying to argue that BA and DA are divergent therefore non compliant, but that's not true. 

Edited February 15 by DemonGSides

[Tacitus]

3 hours ago, LSM said:

 

Side note: but, interesting. My touchstone (in general) with Space Marine lore was the Index Astartes articles in the early 2000s. (I drifted out of the hobby, and then back in early 9th edition, so have holes in my knowledge as to what's current.)

 

As such, to me, Iron Hands were all about their Iron Fathers and Dreadnoughts. In fact, they were (I think) the only Chapter that didn't have any Terminator squads at all. (Instead, TDA was uniquely available to Veteran Sergeants.)

 

A quick googling brings up the (frustratingly not properly sourced) fan wiki, which states "the majority of this pattern [Gorgon] of Terminator Armour was... lost at the Drop Site Massacre of Istvaan V."

 

//

 

One of the issues with tying everything back to the lore is that GW is so lose with its canon that it often contains contradictory information. 

They're not mutually exclusive.  In 10,000 years I would assume they would have replaced the lost suits.  The obstacle is economics not logistics.  They can't afford the shelf/sku space for that many boxes and blisters.  They'd have to completely rebuild their production 

[Marshal Reinhard]

13 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Point em out. I'm not gonna re-read through every post, but the point being made is that divergent is mealy language compared to just stating outright whether something is compliant or not, and BT are like poster boys alongside SW for "Definitely not compliant" and I don't remember anyone saying opposite.  Divergent being used for two different conversations that often have a lot of overlap can lead to a lot of confusion, which was why I was advocating for different language. 

 

There were some people trying to argue that BA and DA are divergent therefore non compliant, but that's not true. 

On 2/13/2025 at 4:32 PM, Valkyrion said:

Space Wolves aren't really that divergent.  They ride on wolves, which is a bit weird, but their structure is broadly that of a standard chapter. They have veterans, bikers, jump packs, devastator equivs, tactical equivs and so on. They might be a bit more Legiony than Chaptery as evidenced by lots of consul type leaders, more focused squads, larger than average squads, but really they share identity with the mainstream. Same with the Black Templars.

 

Is like the earliest example in the thread. I was just scoffing at the notion. I suppose a lot depends on what is even meant with "divergent" to begin with. Valkyrion to his credit does make a valid allusion to the Grey Knight's being a truly divergent chapter under any definition. On the tabletop in the game? Divergence has a hard time crystallizing itself as tangible difference between modified super soldiers built the same way, using the same weapons and wearing the same armor. The Grey Knights and to a much lesser degree the deathwatch are the only real chapters that can claim to be divergent. No other chapter really can be divergent if we're this strict. If we bring in lore? The statement misses the mark by quite a wide margin, but then I suppose the definition is too wide to be interesting to some.

[Orange Knight]

On 2/13/2025 at 11:37 AM, Orange Knight said:

 

 

The only chapters that aren't codex compliant would be the Black Templars and the Space Wolves.

 

 

This is in my original post.

 

And to clarify, I'm talking about chapters that use the core Space Marine codex as a base for the army, and are a supported "1st or 2nd founding chapter"

 

The Grey Knights would also apply.

 

There are many chapters that are even more different in the lore, but we can't realistically expect GW to support them all (although I'm very sad about the Badab chapters losing all their Forgeworld units).

 

What we can hope for, and request, is that Games Workshop throws a bone to all 9 of the 1st founding chapters, and of course - the Black Templars and Crimson Fists.

Once GW update the Assault Terminators and release a few more Outrider units and kits, I would prefer to see them focus on fleshing out the Codex chapters with unique units. Yes, the Imperial Fists, the Salamanders, even the Ultramarines. 

Edited February 15 by Orange Knight

[Iron Father Ferrum]

6 hours ago, LSM said:

 

Side note: but, interesting. My touchstone (in general) with Space Marine lore was the Index Astartes articles in the early 2000s. (I drifted out of the hobby, and then back in early 9th edition, so have holes in my knowledge as to what's current.)

 

As such, to me, Iron Hands were all about their Iron Fathers and Dreadnoughts. In fact, they were (I think) the only Chapter that didn't have any Terminator squads at all. (Instead, TDA was uniquely available to Veteran Sergeants.)

 

A quick googling brings up the (frustratingly not properly sourced) fan wiki, which states "the majority of this pattern [Gorgon] of Terminator Armour was... lost at the Drop Site Massacre of Istvaan V."

 

//

 

One of the issues with tying everything back to the lore is that GW is so lose with its canon that it often contains contradictory information. 

 

GW started dragging the Iron Hands' lore more in line with Codex compliance starting in 5th Edition, and really ramped it up in 6th.  The companies are not all independent battle companies with their own scout & veteran squads anymore; they align with Codex standards now.  The 10-man clan council was replaced with one that's like 40-something strong (with a voting rep from the AdMech to boot!  A direct violation of the separation of the Adepta, and the same exact reason -- Mars directly influencing a Chapter's command -- that led to the censure of the Steel Confessors.  Sooo dumb.).  No more Terminator Sergeants leading power armor squads.  No HQ Dreadnoughts.  So much of what made the Chapter unique in the lore, and in the rules of 3rd & 4th, was all stripped away.

[Tacitus]

1 hour ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

 

GW started dragging the Iron Hands' lore more in line with Codex compliance starting in 5th Edition, and really ramped it up in 6th.  The companies are not all independent battle companies with their own scout & veteran squads anymore; they align with Codex standards now.  The 10-man clan council was replaced with one that's like 40-something strong (with a voting rep from the AdMech to boot!  A direct violation of the separation of the Adepta, and the same exact reason -- Mars directly influencing a Chapter's command -- that led to the censure of the Steel Confessors.  Sooo dumb.).  No more Terminator Sergeants leading power armor squads.  No HQ Dreadnoughts.  So much of what made the Chapter unique in the lore, and in the rules of 3rd & 4th, was all stripped away.

Some of that is pretty easy to have forseen though.  HQ Dreads were over done between Libby Dreads, and Bjorn+ - also Terminator (Wolf Guard) Leading Power Armor Squads.  The things that made them unique were the augmetics and council thing more than Space Wolves stuff with Hand Logos instead of wolf pelts.   If you look around there's only a handful of things various chapters have that makes them "distinct" - Jump and Terminator.  Jump and Phobos. Terminator and Bikes. Terminators and Dreads.  Bolters and more bolters.  Flamers and Meltas. Power and Phobos, So a lot of chapters can/will double up on something say Phobos, but their second iconic will be different  Jump vs Intercessor for example.  Or Bikes and Bawkses vs Bikes and Terminators.

[jaxom]

10 hours ago, Tacitus said:

If you look around there's only a handful of things various chapters have that makes them "distinct" - Jump and Terminator.  Jump and Phobos. Terminator and Bikes. Terminators and Dreads.  Bolters and more bolters.  Flamers and Meltas. Power and Phobos, So a lot of chapters can/will double up on something say Phobos, but their second iconic will be different  Jump vs Intercessor for example.  Or Bikes and Bawkses vs Bikes and Terminators.

I don’t think I understand this. 

[Tacitus]

1 hour ago, jaxom said:

I don’t think I understand this. 

OK Let me try a different way.  Space Marines are generalists so they have good/cool things in just about every category.  Each of the Chapters is then given their character by favoring two-ish of those things.  But none of them favor the same two-ish things.  Blood Angels favor Jump Packers and Terminators.  Meanwhile Ravenguard favor Jump Packers and Phobos.  Black Templars also favor Phobos, and I dunno, Land Raiders? DA favor Terminators and Bikes.  White Scars also favor Bikes, and Dedicated Transports.  Of course some times it's not the armor types but the guns - Imperial Fists love Bolters and heavy (siege) weapons, while the Salamanders have a penchant for heat - Flamers and Melta.   Each Chapter usually has some sort of paired preferences which is then used as the basis for their character (or vice versa - their fluff determined what their pairing was).

[Iron Father Ferrum]

2 hours ago, jaxom said:

I don’t think I understand this. 

 

What he's saying is "I don't think Iron Hands should have been that divergent from the codex because other Chapters weren't that divergent."

 

By the lore and rules of pre-6th Edition, the Iron Hands were just as divergent from the codex chapter organization as the Space Wolves or Black Templars.  They had their own unique character (the Iron Father) and their own chapter-specific Tactical Squad box, something that none of the other "common" Chapters (Sallies, Scars, etc) ever had in that era.  But because they were never as popular as the other divergent Chapters, they got roped up in the 5th Edition Matt Ward "everyone is Ultramarines" net.

[LSM]

35 minutes ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

...their own chapter-specific Tactical Squad box...

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: GW are crazy for not having a general "Space Marine bionics" upgrade sprue available. 

 

Beyond being generally cool, it would help the Iron Hands so much - people talk about their colour scheme being boring, but it's perfect for showing off all the exposed metal... that's not actually present on the models. But it looks great in art!

 

//

 

I do think GW sold a Salamanders Tactical Squad c. Codex: Armageddon. Google turns up the below image, which just looks like the regular plastic Tactical Squad with the metal Multimelta (unique to Salamanders' Tactical Squads at the time), Plasma Gun, and Shoulder Pads.

 

(But the Iron Hands squad was cooler, and more in line with what the Night Lords and Iron Warrior got with their kits. Some heads, torsos, legs, Bolter arms, and Thunder Hammer, to go with the pads.)

 

Spoiler

 

 

Edited February 16 by LSM

[Dr. Clock]

Fun Discussion. I would tend to agree with the title that something 'could be done' to give all First Founding Chapters at least one distinctive non-Epic unit.

 

More broadly, it seems like we're searching for a term to agree on that's like 'diverse' without being 'Divergent'. Like... Salamanders have the wrong number of squads in the wrong number of companies, but it's still within the 1000 marine tolerance and they're the flippin' Sons of Vulkan so they will get a pass where The Rout would not.

 

It seems like true 'Divergence' crops up first at an organizational or even existential level. The Canis Helix and the Red Thirst/Black Rage are the most obvious or prominent 'existential' divergences to me... 'Space marines but Werewolves' and 'Space Marines but Vampires' is an order of magnitude more significant a change than 'Space Marines but on Bikes' or even 'Space Marines Ninja-style'.

 

Dark Angels and Black Templars are more the 'organizational deviants', whether surreptitiously or directly just ignoring the Codex. It's interesting the extent to which Dark Deathwing and Ravenwing make DA seem somehow more divergent to us than they likely would seem to any naive observer... given that the secret knowledge and purpose of DWing and Ravenwing aren't apparent unless you already know that there's 'not usually a company of bikers'. It's also of course somewhat perverse that the single company of Ravenwing has received more studio attention than an entire lineage of 'Space Marines Mostly on Bikes!'.

 

At the end of the day, I think it's still important that 'the divergents' remain more... diverse than the 'conforming'. I prefer my Salamanders as Space Marines first, with just an inkling of Promethean Cult and scaly adornments. I don't really need White Scars to have a whole separate speeder or bike design. Raven Guard need not have Were-Ravens. Space Marines are already cool enough - most of the time the 'chapter identity' or themes can be added perfectly well as a 'filter' on the shared identities of units and characters that become data-sheets.

 

So yeah - 'Firedrakes' would be a cool thing to add as a Salamanders unit, but I already feel okay with the idea that Sternguard, Bladeguard, and Terminator squads would all be Firedrakes, and even other squads might be Firedrake Hellblasters or Infernus squads if the same guys just... chose a different gun the next time they left the ship. I do want another marine biker unit for my Scars successors, but I don't particularly care if it's limited to White Scars as their extra special thing... I just want to be able to have 'veteran bikers' of some type because 1st Co. squads generally just get to do whatever they like still, right?

 

So I guess my point is that if we're adding units we need to be careful that they don't needlessly differentiate everyone to the point that nobody just plays marines anymore as the chapter identities get pigeonholed into a too-narrow array of 'special units' over the traditional workhorses or customary choices.

 

In general at present I feel like I have good ability to reflect Chapter differences through the unit choices I make (more Infernus, less JPI; more Outriders/Speeders, less dreadnoughts), because that's always how I've approached army themes in the first place - just take more of some things and less or none of others. I guess at the end of the day I'm more interested in adding units to the roster of Marines overall than to only some limited segments of it. That way theming without spamming gets a little easier, and thus more people can enjoy those new things if they're only maybe a secondary theme of their chosen Chapter.

 

Seems to me the easiest way to add some cool theme options is through adding more 'command unit' options, or essentially 'Company Champions but Terminators, Bikes, Jump-packs, Phobos'. Lock them to having a Captain so they don't just flat out-compete their mainstream brethren, but give me a way to make, say, the third unit of Phobos marines a bit more specialer as the Honor Guard of a Captain. Technically there'd likely be nothing to stop ad hoc Honour Guard units from being armed in any way, but it creates some great narrative to help us really play into some of those niches of diversity.

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

[jaxom]

45 minutes ago, Dr. Clock said:

So I guess my point is that if we're adding units we need to be careful that they don't needlessly differentiate everyone to the point that nobody just plays marines anymore as the chapter identities get pigeonholed into a too-narrow array of 'special units' over the traditional workhorses or customary choices.

 

In general at present I feel like I have good ability to reflect Chapter differences through the unit choices I make (more Infernus, less JPI; more Outriders/Speeders, less dreadnoughts), because that's always how I've approached army themes in the first place - just take more of some things and less or none of others. I guess at the end of the day I'm more interested in adding units to the roster of Marines overall than to only some limited segments of it. That way theming without spamming gets a little easier, and thus more people can enjoy those new things if they're only maybe a secondary theme of their chosen Chapter.

 

I think you've provided an excellent summary of Codex: Space Marines' design philosophy. I think it didn't play out like GW thought it would, hence the recent improvement they gave to chapter-specific characters to further reward taking a particular unit (like Lysander now gives improved OC to both types of Terminator units).

[Tacitus]

4 hours ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

 

What he's saying is "I don't think Iron Hands should have been that divergent from the codex because other Chapters weren't that divergent."

 

By the lore and rules of pre-6th Edition, the Iron Hands were just as divergent from the codex chapter organization as the Space Wolves or Black Templars.  They had their own unique character (the Iron Father) and their own chapter-specific Tactical Squad box, something that none of the other "common" Chapters (Sallies, Scars, etc) ever had in that era.  But because they were never as popular as the other divergent Chapters, they got roped up in the 5th Edition Matt Ward "everyone is Ultramarines" net.

No, that's not what I'm saying.  Nowhere close.  In fact at no point did I ever say what should or shouldn't be for Iron Hands.  All I said was that it was fairly obvious IH were going to get a retcon so they were more "unique" rather than a different color copy of someone else. 

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

20 hours ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

 

 The 10-man clan council was replaced with one that's like 40-something strong (with a voting rep from the AdMech to boot!  A direct violation of the separation of the Adepta, and the same exact reason -- Mars directly influencing a Chapter's command -- that led to the censure of the Steel Confessors.  Sooo dumb.).  

 

Is the Voice of Mars still a thing in M42? I figured that was being set up to be done away with in the concluding Guymer novel that was never published (and which was set a few hundred years earlier). But I'm by no means an expert on "present day" Iron Council politics... aside from the fact that Kardan Stronos apparently has compromising information on everyone else involved.

 

Otherwise, I'm in complete agreement with your sentiments - pure laziness/apathy on GW's part to toss the Iron Hands into the "codex compliant" stew.

[Tacitus]

46 minutes ago, Lord Nord in Gravis Armour said:

 

Is the Voice of Mars still a thing in M42? I figured that was being set up to be done away with in the concluding Guymer novel that was never published (and which was set a few hundred years earlier). But I'm by no means an expert on "present day" Iron Council politics... aside from the fact that Kardan Stronos apparently has compromising information on everyone else involved.

 

Otherwise, I'm in complete agreement with your sentiments - pure laziness/apathy on GW's part to toss the Iron Hands into the "codex compliant" stew.

Economics.  I've mentioned it before in passing, but every box and every blister has a shelf space cost in the stores and in the warehouse.  The faction has grown faster than their logistics - plus the trainwreck of Chapterhouse.  I don't know if they're riding out "the way they've been doing it" (meaning model/kit creation) out of laziness or economics.  Maybe they don't want to throw away that much mold money, or maybe they haven't spent enough time to find a solution they like - I don't know.  But in order to do all the things we want for all the factions and subfactions they would need a new system.  All (or almost all) the "bespoke" characters would become a generic body kit + part of a Chapter Upgrade Sprue.  Feiros would be Iron Hands Character Sprue + HQ Gravis Body.  The only ones that might stay the same might be Calgar and Grimaldus types - the ones that come with a Retinue.  that's a lot of molds to toss, and a lot of new molds to make.  Don't get me wrong I'm dying for them to do it since it also solves the missing HQ problem, but I'm not holding my breath. 

[Subtleknife]

Logistics etc aside, the method I come at this from is fairness.

 

Personally, GW should have made sure all first founding had 1 chapter master, 1 special character that fits that first founding and one special unit. 8th would have been a good point to slowly roll this out from and the lore can be very easily changed as GMan isn't to certain if the codex was a good idea now etc.

 

Whether that makes business sense, who knows and if Im honest I dont really care, that is GWs job not mine, I just think it's madness some chapters have oodles of characters and others like Scars don't even have a named character on a bike.

 

So I would be in favour of attention being split equally amongst the first founding. I liked when we all got supplements, but I wouldn't mind if they took the HH approach and stuck us in one book either. I just want cool looking minis at the end of the day 

Edited February 17 by Subtleknife

[Iron Father Ferrum]

18 hours ago, Lord Nord in Gravis Armour said:

 

Is the Voice of Mars still a thing in M42? I figured that was being set up to be done away with in the concluding Guymer novel that was never published (and which was set a few hundred years earlier). But I'm by no means an expert on "present day" Iron Council politics... aside from the fact that Kardan Stronos apparently has compromising information on everyone else involved.

 

Otherwise, I'm in complete agreement with your sentiments - pure laziness/apathy on GW's part to toss the Iron Hands into the "codex compliant" stew.

 

The third book was never completed and probably won't ever arrive (thank the Machine God!  I barely got through Eye of Medusa it was so eye-wateringly boring; I've never actually picked up a copy of Voice of Mars).  The BL's focus has been almost entirely on Heresy- and Indomitus-era stories, and Kardan Stronos' "coming to power" story is a pre-Primaris one on the timeline. 

[jaxom]

4 hours ago, Subtleknife said:

Personally, GW should have made sure all first founding had 1 chapter master, 1 special character that fits that first founding and one special unit. 8th would have been a good point to slowly roll this out from and the lore can be very easily changed as GMan isn't to certain if the codex was a good idea now etc.

Indeed. The 8th edition supplements were packed with so much lore and included info on each Chapter Master, Captain, and a few other notables in the chapter. Considering the game is now more "modern setting" and less "historical sandbox" it doesn't make sense to hand-wave the issue as, "we want people to make up their own characters for their Captains, etc," when it comes to the First Founding Chapters.

[Tacitus]

8 hours ago, Subtleknife said:

Logistics etc aside, the method I come at this from is fairness.

 

Personally, GW should have made sure all first founding had 1 chapter master, 1 special character that fits that first founding and one special unit. 8th would have been a good point to slowly roll this out from and the lore can be very easily changed as GMan isn't to certain if the codex was a good idea now etc.

 

Whether that makes business sense, who knows and if Im honest I dont really care, that is GWs job not mine, I just think it's madness some chapters have oodles of characters and others like Scars don't even have a named character on a bike.

 

So I would be in favour of attention being split equally amongst the first founding. I liked when we all got supplements, but I wouldn't mind if they took the HH approach and stuck us in one book either. I just want cool looking minis at the end of the day 

So would I - I'm just pointing out the obstacle.  In order to do that, my guess is roughly 80-90% of current special characters lose their own blister and instead of a $40 blister for one special character you're buying a $50 upgrade sprue (that probably makes 4-5 Special characters you may or may not need/want, plus a $30-40 base body blister per each charater.  Long run that would absolutely be better for the subfactions, but its a major redesign - and without something like that GW can't justify the shelf space in the warehouses and stores.

 

And I'd say each supported chapter (First Founding, Black Templar, Crimson Fists, any I have forgotten) should have

Chapter Master

Textbook Captain (Sicarius/Ventris)

Blacksheep Captain (Belial/Sammael)

Master of Sanctity

Chief Librarian

Potentially one or two more minor personae.

 

Then adjust that based on each chapter i.e. Black Templars won't have a Chief Librarian but they do have an Emperor's Champion

Edited February 17 by Tacitus

[jaxom]

A $60 kit including a Chapter Master, a Master of Sanctity, and a Chief Librarian.

 

A second $60 kit including a Captain, Lieutenant, and Apothecary.

 

A third $60 kit including a Chaplain, Judiciar, and something.