Talk:Codex Astartes
Now that I think about it, perhaps this would be better placed under Roboute Guilliman's article? Not LongPoster 15:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Go for it. - Shock Mox 16:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- The page now redirects to Roboute Guilliman. Not LongPoster 23:01, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Planning to add a section on the actual reason for it, ie that it's a fluffy FAQ / guideline set for making your own chapter, with the tiny chapter size providing a pre-made in-universe explanation for yours not appearing in the fluff. And that the Ultramarines' rather dull history seems to have originally been created for the express purpose of telling kids that not every chapter has to have won the Horus Heresy. Tim 02:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Non-Codex chapters[edit]
Should we create a section detailing how different chapters deviate from codex norms? Mostly short bullet points, like how the Exorcists have two extra scout companies, or how the Star Phantoms have three Devastator squads per company? --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Agreed here. Going from those that deviate marginally from the codex, to those who throw it out the window/don't use it due to the things they have to deal with. - Ben (talk) 15:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- I've made a start, I have organised it alphabetically rather than by extremity, as in some cases it becomes difficult to judge what counts as a greater infringement. After starting, I get the feeling that it's one of those things that could grow arms and legs and bloat the page. If it gets unwieldy then we could put the list in its own collapsible section rather than taking over most of the page and detracting from the page being about the actual codex, rather than those who deviate from it.--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 17:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Added some from me. - Ben (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- That's cool, though I think we need to be careful about how we categorise "non-codex chapters". Because strictly speaking just because different chapters have different resources available to them shouldn't make them non-compliant. The Aurora Chapter for instance might have a shedload of tanks, but that's probably down to good luck rather than any disagreement with the codex. The two categories I made, one was for those chapters which simply aren't organised the same way (like the Wolves, Templars, Salamanders etc) and for those chapters which are organised the same way, but spurn certain elements of the Codex. Sound like a good way to go?--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah. It's kinda painful to see differences here, so I did with those chapters that had something significant. Wanted to add Aurora Chapter to the first category (very heavily mechanized for a Codex Chapter), but dunno if add them there or to the latter category. This is tricky here. - Ben (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- My thoughts exactly, I probably wouldn't add them at all. I'd probably remove Raven Guard and White Scars from the list too, (I know I added the Scars) because strictly speaking, they are codex chapters, and can do everything the codex says, they just have a preferred methodology and access to different resources, which is hardly a deviation from the rules. I would put myself in the Ultramarines shoes here and try to imagine what they would consider breaking the rules, since they even put their captains on trial for disobeying the codex. I wouldn't think they'd be upset about some chapters having access to lots of bikes and then using them, any more than they would if they had lots of tanks or any other kind of weapon like meltas or plasma. If we go down that route we might as we just list every single chapter that has a fortunate excess of Wargear, or those chapters that just so happen to be good at something and not so good at other things.--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- I do think that the Raven Guard should certainly stay. Their methodology that they share with their successors is so radically different from that of other chapters, that it's a pretty noteworthy difference. They are the "Sneeki Beekiez" for good reason. Evilexecutive (talk) 05:22, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe we need a third category for those chapters that adhere to the codex, but use unique methodologies that don't "breach" codex guidelines? Strictly speaking --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 05:34, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- I do think that the Raven Guard should certainly stay. Their methodology that they share with their successors is so radically different from that of other chapters, that it's a pretty noteworthy difference. They are the "Sneeki Beekiez" for good reason. Evilexecutive (talk) 05:22, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- My thoughts exactly, I probably wouldn't add them at all. I'd probably remove Raven Guard and White Scars from the list too, (I know I added the Scars) because strictly speaking, they are codex chapters, and can do everything the codex says, they just have a preferred methodology and access to different resources, which is hardly a deviation from the rules. I would put myself in the Ultramarines shoes here and try to imagine what they would consider breaking the rules, since they even put their captains on trial for disobeying the codex. I wouldn't think they'd be upset about some chapters having access to lots of bikes and then using them, any more than they would if they had lots of tanks or any other kind of weapon like meltas or plasma. If we go down that route we might as we just list every single chapter that has a fortunate excess of Wargear, or those chapters that just so happen to be good at something and not so good at other things.--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah. It's kinda painful to see differences here, so I did with those chapters that had something significant. Wanted to add Aurora Chapter to the first category (very heavily mechanized for a Codex Chapter), but dunno if add them there or to the latter category. This is tricky here. - Ben (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- While I appreciate this has taken off and a lot of good contributions have been made, I just wanted to issue a warning against letting it get out of hand. It could just turn into a list of any and all chapters, since concievably every Chapter is different from Guilliman's vision in some shape or form, all it takes is one person to say "my special snowflake chapter is different because..." And add them to the list, while that's good and all, we come back to this point of; is it really a codex divergence? Or just something that makes them unique? Again, in my opinion only, just because a chapter has a preferred mode of warfare, or something they are particularly good at, shouldn't necessitate adding them to the list. Otherwise we might as well list every chapter from the fluff and describe them in summary.--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 21:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- That's cool, though I think we need to be careful about how we categorise "non-codex chapters". Because strictly speaking just because different chapters have different resources available to them shouldn't make them non-compliant. The Aurora Chapter for instance might have a shedload of tanks, but that's probably down to good luck rather than any disagreement with the codex. The two categories I made, one was for those chapters which simply aren't organised the same way (like the Wolves, Templars, Salamanders etc) and for those chapters which are organised the same way, but spurn certain elements of the Codex. Sound like a good way to go?--Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Added some from me. - Ben (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Legion-sized deployments in 40k[edit]
On the page, this sentence is used: "Legion sized forces were present at those conflicts albeit from various Chapters but with an unified theater-exclusive command structure". Maybe that was true back in the days that the legions numbered around ten thousand each, but by this point in canon, almost all space marine legions numbered over a hundred thousand marines each. There were some smaller legions, yes, but these were atypical (emperor's children/space wolves and genetic issues, thousand sons and psykers). Is it really accurate to call Armageddon's space marine forces legion-sized anymore? --85.144.202.27 13:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it's fair to say that most of the legions were 100k+. A LOT of the legions stayed smaller. It's not just the EC, the Rout, and the 1kSons, the Alpha Legion, Raven Guard, Salamanders, and the World Eaters all kept below the 100k point for the most part, as I remember. It was mostly the big workhorse legions like the Sons of Horus, Ultramarines, Iron Warriors, and Imperial fists who really got the big hundreds of thousands strong legions. Josman (talk) 20:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
- Are you sure about that? The fluff has shifted a lot when it comes to the size of the Legions, and even the Forgeworld HH books aren't always consistent with one another. But, unless I'm mistaken (I don't have the books on hand right now)m I remember from the Forgeworld books that the World Eaters were actually one of the bigger Legions (if with the caveat that they also had much bigger rates of attrition). And even for the smaller Legions, I haven't really seen anything in the recent fluff that might indicate that any of them were closer to 10K than to 100K. Except maybe the Thousand Sons - but Inferno isn't out yet, so they haven't had a proper fluff update yet. But, to get to the point: most of the fluff tidbits (like the fluff on the Armageddon Wars and the Badab War, or even the old Black Templar fluff) that refer to "Legion-sized Astartes forces" are actually pretty old, and date back to the time that the Heresy-era Ultramarines were stated to be 25K strong. --84.87.63.38 22:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- I have the books on hand, the only small legions were the TS, the Wolves, the DG (70 000 after Istvaan III), and the EC (60 000 after Istvaan). HH6 says that the assumption of traitor marine numbers only going down since Istvaan V is a common misconception, so there's that as well. It appears "standard" legion size was of 100 000+. -- Zerghalo2 (talk) 23:28, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Are you sure about that? The fluff has shifted a lot when it comes to the size of the Legions, and even the Forgeworld HH books aren't always consistent with one another. But, unless I'm mistaken (I don't have the books on hand right now)m I remember from the Forgeworld books that the World Eaters were actually one of the bigger Legions (if with the caveat that they also had much bigger rates of attrition). And even for the smaller Legions, I haven't really seen anything in the recent fluff that might indicate that any of them were closer to 10K than to 100K. Except maybe the Thousand Sons - but Inferno isn't out yet, so they haven't had a proper fluff update yet. But, to get to the point: most of the fluff tidbits (like the fluff on the Armageddon Wars and the Badab War, or even the old Black Templar fluff) that refer to "Legion-sized Astartes forces" are actually pretty old, and date back to the time that the Heresy-era Ultramarines were stated to be 25K strong. --84.87.63.38 22:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Codex as an organization guide[edit]
So, where I can read more about Codex talking about stuff not related to Astartes? McNeil' books don't help much, as well as codices, so I'd love to get some directions, or, even better, quotes on the subject.
