Games Workshop TT Space Marines could never EVER be any where as tough as they are supposed to be, simply for the fact they have to balance them out with every other race type in the 40k universe for a table top game, and thus table top has no bearing on RPG Space Marines, because in a RPG Space Marines can be exactly as tough as they are supposed to be, simply because they are not balanced around making a game viable.

A RPG has a much broader spectrum for characters, and their capabilities, a table top game is no where near the same medium.

As for why SM weaponry does more damage, they have a significantly higher grade of weaponry and Ammunition, Stronger metals used in bolt tips, higher grade propellants, more powerful chemicals for flamers etc etc, this is why they do more damage, this is why there Armour is so superior.

Imp guard and normal humans do not get to use such gear because it costs to much, it is a bad investment giving un-augmented humans such weapons and armour, because they die to easily and it is that simple.

Not once has the economics of the system been brought into this discussion, yet it is the one thing that clearly gives a delineating reason for the differences some of you are struggling to reconcile.

Space Marines have been designed to be self contained armys, with the very very best gear that can be manufactured for them because they are a good investment, they are in comparison to a standard human, basically another species, they are godlike without the gear they have access to.

Imperial guards are dog soldiers and they get gear that reflects it, mass produced with the cheapest materials that will be sufficient to make them work, the exact polar opposite of what Space Marines are and get.

I have zero issues accepting a SM bolter round for round is dealing more damage than an Imperial guard HV Bolter, because although they share the same names, that is the ONLY thing they share, and that is what seems to blinding some of you, just because it has the same name does not mean it is the same, Car means vehicle does that mean all Cars perform the same? no it does not, different materials are used, different price ranges aimed at different users, 40k is no different.

And Space Marines were designed to fight the very things normal humans cannot hope to fight and win, again this means SM should have very little issue dealing with the things that humans can deal with.

Of course this makes them very boring to some people, but it is just a matter of scale, a matter of moving the decimal along one or two spaces.

A Imp guard fights things with 10-20 wounds.

A Space Marine fights something with 30-40 wounds

The exact same thing just bigger, no?

D&D had Dragons and Gods in it, yet it worked just fine, and you never dealt with them things until you actually had a chance of dealing with them and not dying instantly...because it would have been totally boring...and the inverse is true, once you are powerful enough to deal with Dragons and Gods..everything weaker is ....boring. Nothing actually changes except the illusion of scale and progression.

Except you don't start play as a god, fighting goblins which cannot harm you, nor do you have skin armour.
A good weapon deals roughly the same amount of damage at level 1 as at level 20, they can at most go up to +5, maybe with another die of fire damage or so. The enemies will have more HP to deal with it, some even have DR (which could usually be overcome with some effect), but I won't simply be unable to damage them while they're naked. And there's a difference between a rock and a magic sword, in that DR usually works against the rock, but not the sword...

And besides, D&D was not only quite broken in many ways, it has an entirely different premise:
In D&D you play Adventurers going from Zero to (super-)Hero, ending with potential Apotheosis.

In 40k RPGs, you're playing in the Grim Darkness of the Far Future, where even the best and most powerful mortals are not gods.

Games Workshop TT Space Marines could never EVER be any where as tough as they are supposed to be, simply for the fact they have to balance them out with every other race type in the 40k universe for a table top game, and thus table top has no bearing on RPG Space Marines, because in a RPG Space Marines can be exactly as tough as they are supposed to be, simply because they are not balanced around making a game viable.

"Supposed to be"? The vulnerability of TT Space Marines is also reflected in Codex fluff as well as the Inquisitor game.

Consider for a moment that the game came first, and that the fluff was weaved around it.

As for why SM weaponry does more damage, they have a significantly higher grade of weaponry and Ammunition, Stronger metals used in bolt tips, higher grade propellants, more powerful chemicals for flamers etc etc, this is why they do more damage, this is why there Armour is so superior.

Except we have Codex quotes to the contrary.

But this is what I was referring to earlier. It's fine to run with a deviating interpretation of the setting - there is no true canon, after all - but please don't claim that this is the way it has to be, because the original material certainly does not support it.

To make the Marines and their equipment that much better was a design decision limited to this RPG, and I submit that considering the issues this has caused, it would be beneficial to scale them back again a bit.

It is to be expected that not everyone agrees with this assessment - as I said, matter of taste and preferences.

In 40k RPGs, you're playing in the Grim Darkness of the Far Future, where even the best and most powerful mortals are not gods.

Indeed, this is a very important factor, at least for me.

More than that, I consider it a delicious and enjoyable trait of the setting that much of the myth and propaganda - if one wants to look at the setting this way - really is just myth and propaganda, and that reality is quite a bit more bleak and dirty than the various glorified legends. It doesn't mean you can't have epic moments, and indeed you should, but they ought to be the result of a struggle, not a walk in the park.

I guess that's why I like the Celestial Lions so much and opted to play one of them in my current Deathwatch campaign; their flaws and losses made them and their sacrifice feel that much more real and thus meaningful to me.

One thing about bolters; don't assume they have a low recoil. Numerous books - both background sections of rulebooks and the text of novels - have bolters generating bruising and even bonebreaking recoil, especially in the case of astartes weaponry wielded by unaugmented humans. The example which jumps to mind is the "Purging Of Kadillus" novel by Gav Thorpe, where a guardsman **** near simultaneously concusses and deafens himself trying to use a marine's bolt pistol.

A bolter has rocket-assisted shells. However, it's not light on recoil, because the shells leave the weapon going at the muzzle velocity you'd expect from a massive calibre smoothbore assault weapon - then the rocket fires and they get faster (or at least, don't get slower).

Yes, well, that seems to depend on the book one is reading. Every author's interpretation is different, hence no-one here can truly be wrong with their opinion.

Technically , just going by what the codices describe, we've been told that bolters fire cal. 75 rounds that leave their barrel at low velocity before a 2nd stage kicks in - and that Stalker silenced shells travel at subsonic speed (so under 340 m/s), which is actually slower than the muzzle velocity of an AA12 assault shotgun of comparable calibre. And thanks to the wonders of modern recoil compensation technology, you can dual-wield the latter without risk of breaking your arm.

Whenever I've read about bolters, it was their heavy weight that was an issue for the wielder, not recoil.

I can only point to Inquisitor and how GW saw fit to give every character the same boltguns (2d10+4) there. It just wasn't a question there. But in this RPG, we have "civilian" bolters whose raw damage is closer to lasguns than the Marines +1 gear.

Honestly, the "more precious/better materials", whilst ridiculous when applied to the Inquisition(!), would be a more realistic approach to justify FFG Astartes gun profiles - simply because those you can at least apply to any weapon there is, rather than limiting it to recoil (plasma pistols? flamers?).

[edit] Don't get me wrong, though. I do like a certain sense of recoil as well, simply for the "rule of cool". Yet I really don't see why it should be more than a comparable Solid Projectile gun. As if bolters would be the only guns rifled for cal .75!

If one desperately wants to set the Space Marine apart from anyone else, this is of course one way to do it. I guess I just don't see or agree about the "why".

Apples and oranges. Are you really comparing a housecat's claw to sci-fi guns?

I'm not sure what they make 41st millennium autogun rounds of, but in GW's version of the setting, they are perfectly capable of injuring, incapacitating or killing even Space Marines. Whether one actually prefers this to FFG's version is, of course, a matter of preferences.

And they're perfectly capable of killing nude space marines in FFGs games too. Standard space marine TB is 8 (BC pg.367) and standard autogun damage is 1d10+3 (BC pg.154). On a roll of 6-10 the space marine will take damage. If you roll 1-5 it doesn't mean that the bullet bounced of the skin. It only mean that the bullet didn't hit anything vital and the wound is minor and nothing that bring the marine closer to death.

Do you really think everyone should lose a minimum of one wound from all injuries? If you hit yourself in the hand with nailgun 10 times should that remove all your wounds? The next 10 nails in your foot will kill you and rip your leg from the rest of your body. Is that realistic? Why should a space marine lose a wound from a penetrating hit that doesn't hit anything vital? I know that most video game health bars work that way but reality doesn't.

A realistic damage system doesn't use video game health bar wounds or movie effects like instant death from bullets hitting the body.

If you're going with FFG's numbers, sure. I don't see what this should add to the debate, though, given that these profiles are exactly what's being criticised. Personally, I would also refrain from attempting to shoehorn the weight of real life ammunition and explosives into a sci-fi setting with partially made-up materials, where gun weights and ammo count differ between the sources (even between individual FFG sources), and especially where an abstracted "ammo weight = 10% of gun" formula is supposed to apply to every ranged weapon in the galaxy, of any kind. Because this gets funny if applied to something like IH's three-shot Angelus bolter, or the many different lasguns that all use 60 round clips yet have different rifle weights.

A fairly realistic weight for bolts should be 0.2kg-0.25kg/bolt. That's 6-7.5kg for 30 bolts. Most material from GW is written by people that have never seen a real gun. It's better to use the fluff description of weapons/amour/equipment and ignore all hard "facts"/numbers from FW and most of the numbers from GW/FFG. Even if we have a setting with space elves and magic there's no reason why ballistic weapons should shot magic bullets filled with explosive fairy dust.

Look, we're both right in the sense that there is no wrong answer here. I simply grew up with a different version of 40k, though even aside from my disappointed preference for consistency with the original material, I remain convinced that the current rules are harmful to the game environment.

It was 20+ years since I played the TT game and I've only used the original rogue trader rules. Back then bolters/blasters was a generic weapon described as a gun firing small HE or AP bolts/shells. Everyone used bolters, even orks and space elves. Much have changed since rogue trader.

You may think it's fun and "epic" to just walk through a hail of ineffectual bullets, but personally I'd find this boring after having done it once or twice - and I remain opposed to the Horde rules' magical damage increase on the basis of appreciation for consistency and a certain sense of realism. A gun shouldn't behave differently just because it is wielded in groups.

One 22LR doesn't hurt an elephant but a couple of thousand rounds from a 22LR Gatling probably will.. Look real world magic damage!

Ultimately, it was BI's/FFG's decision to deviate from the original material like this

I totally agree that bolter wielding space elves on hoverboards was much better.. or maybe not.

Technically, just going by what the codices describe, we've been told that bolters fire cal. 75 rounds that leave their barrel at low velocity before a 2nd stage kicks in - and that Stalker silenced shells travel at subsonic speed (so under 340 m/s), which is actually slower than the muzzle velocity of an AA12 assault shotgun of comparable calibre. And thanks to the wonders of modern recoil compensation technology, you can dual-wield the latter without risk of breaking your arm

Bolters "ejaculating" bolts at slow velocity is first mentioned in Ian Watsons Space Marine book. I've not seen any of the newer sources claiming that standard bolts leave the barrel at low speed. On the contrary bolters are described as having high recoil and being very effective in CQB and used for point blank executions.

Btw did you know that Ian Watson calls the bolters used by the space marines in Space Marine "military bolters"? Implying that there exist other kind of bolters.. maybe even civilian?

Muzzle velocity is not a function of the gun but the ammo you use (with a couple of exceptions like internal suppressors slowing down standard ammo to subsonic speeds). Non-lethal bean bag ammo exit the shotgun at sub 100m/s velocity does that make all other shotgun ammo subsonic?

Based on the fluff description of bolters they use a much more powerful round than 12 gauge shotgun shells.

That's easy. None of them .

You never specified if the standard bolt cartridge used by ALL boltguns is the short ones shown in the cutaway illustration or the long bolts in the stormbolter magazine?

I think I'd be Ok with a "Compromise" damage rating that brought all bolter damage together (Legion/Astartes and civilian). Perhaps 1d10+7 pen 5? The reason I mention this is I tend to agree with Lynata. FFG's 40k is still based on the TT 40k and I (Personally) prefer it maintain the same feel. In TT Boltguns are Boltguns. They are used by the Astartes, the Legions of chaos, the Sisters of battle and even the IG to a limited extent. They are all Exactly the same. They are intended to be the Imperium's last word in personal small arms without getting into specialist weapons like Plasma guns and such (Which usually also have some sort of drawback). As to an Autogun or Lasgun being able to Injure a Space Marine I think it should at least be able to. In TT an Autogun S3 fired at a Space marine T4 Save 3+ has VERY small chance of actually damage him but at least it can! Bearing in mind that just because a unit is removed as a casualty does not necessarily mean they are actually dead! They are just unable to continue the current combat. In the current ffg RPG this could loosely be interpreted as said unit suffering any critical effect from minor to fatal. As to toughness soak I am pretty well documented as feeling it should just go away! Yes, IMHO any damage not absorbed by armor should at least do something! Getting slashed by a knife is NOT the same thing as a cat scratch even if it's not fatal! Oh, And btw, Housecats HAVE been known to cause fatalities! It is extremely rare but it has happened!

Fine, let's continue our exchange of overlapping yet incompatible interpretations of the 41st millennium, then.

And they're perfectly capable of killing nude space marines in FFGs games too. Standard space marine TB is 8 (BC pg.367) and standard autogun damage is 1d10+3 (BC pg.154). On a roll of 6-10 the space marine will take damage. If you roll 1-5 it doesn't mean that the bullet bounced of the skin. It only mean that the bullet didn't hit anything vital and the wound is minor and nothing that bring the marine closer to death.

Do you really think everyone should lose a minimum of one wound from all injuries? If you hit yourself in the hand with nailgun 10 times should that remove all your wounds? The next 10 nails in your foot will kill you and rip your leg from the rest of your body. Is that realistic? Why should a space marine lose a wound from a penetrating hit that doesn't hit anything vital? I know that most video game health bars work that way but reality doesn't.

A realistic damage system doesn't use video game health bar wounds or movie effects like instant death from bullets hitting the body.

Do we have nude Space Marines in FFGs games? Did I talk about nude Space Marines?

As for a "realistic damage system", your example with the nailgun is exactly how it currently works in FFG's RPGs - with the exception that some few types of characters are exempt from it. But maybe you are argueing that everyone here should get Unnatural Toughness now?

You argue with realism, yet you apparently have no issue with TB allowing people to stare plasma guns in the face and getting nothing but a nice tan. That's exactly what I meant with the current rules trivialising guns that are meant to be really, really frightening!

Most material from GW is written by people that have never seen a real gun. It's better to use the fluff description of weapons/amour/equipment and ignore all hard "facts"/numbers from FW and most of the numbers from GW/FFG. Even if we have a setting with space elves and magic there's no reason why ballistic weapons should shot magic bullets filled with explosive fairy dust.

Then there's also no reason why we need to have magic flamers that do more damage than other flamers. The argument works both ways. The real question is what would actually make for a better game?

It's not me who started argueing with specific weight numbers (which are fairly abstract anyways; the truth is we have no clue what kind of material is used for building these guns or ammunitions, nor how much they weigh), I'm merely pointing at what GW's fluff said and that I don't see a need for FFG to deviate from this. Not when it leads to artificially inflated gaps between character archetypes prone to working side by side. That's just, like, bad design.

It was 20+ years since I played the TT game and I've only used the original rogue trader rules. Back then bolters/blasters was a generic weapon described as a gun firing small HE or AP bolts/shells. Everyone used bolters, even orks and space elves. Much have changed since rogue trader.

Then your interpretation of Astartes is largely influenced by their novels and computer games, I take it? That probably explains our differences.

I got into 40k at around 3rd Edition, so that's what I "grew up" with.

I totally agree that bolter wielding space elves on hoverboards was much better.. or maybe not.

Oh, with "original material" I meant The 40k starting with 2nd Edition. I think everyone here is aware that GW reworked at least half their universe during the transition from Rogue Trader to Warhammer 40.000, and I believe it is this setting that most people are referring to when they talk about the IP.

Bolters "ejaculating" bolts at slow velocity is first mentioned in Ian Watsons Space Marine book. I've not seen any of the newer sources claiming that standard bolts leave the barrel at low speed. On the contrary bolters are described as having high recoil and being very effective in CQB and used for point blank executions.

Btw did you know that Ian Watson calls the bolters used by the space marines in Space Marine "military bolters"? Implying that there exist other kind of bolters.. maybe even civilian?

Maybe. Are we playing civilians, though?

I do not hold much stock in the personal interpretations of individual freelancing novelists, though. Too many contradictions between the novels and towards the studio material. Mr. Goto's backflipping Terminators or Dan Abnett's Emo-Servitors do not exist in my interpretation of the setting.

That's not to mean that I would condemn any and all novels, of course. A lot of them have cool ideas I feel inspired by, not to mention the stories they tell. For consistency, however, my own choice remains the material of the GW core studio, which has remained surprisingly consistent over the past 20 years.

But we all have our own favourites, of course. That's why there is so much argueing in the fandom!

Muzzle velocity is not a function of the gun but the ammo you use (with a couple of exceptions like internal suppressors slowing down standard ammo to subsonic speeds). Non-lethal bean bag ammo exit the shotgun at sub 100m/s velocity does that make all other shotgun ammo subsonic?

You misunderstood - I was referring to Stalker silenced shells and their subsonic speed ( if we are going by GW's fluff description), yet they are just as lethal as ordinary bolts. Apparently, the damage profile thus has little to do with high projectile velocity.

Based on the fluff description of bolters they use a much more powerful round than 12 gauge shotgun shells.

Based on the fluff description of bolters, a 12 gauge shotgun shell's kinetic energy is perfectly sufficient to catapult the projectile out of the barrel, where its internal rocket motor - the primary propellant - would kick in.

You never specified if the standard bolt cartridge used by ALL boltguns is the short ones shown in the cutaway illustration or the long bolts in the stormbolter magazine?

FFG seems to have opted for the short ones, if you'd care to look it up in the Deathwatch rulebook.

That being said, I now find myself questioning if these rounds may not have been resized / squeezed a bit. One should probably assume that the round is roughly as long as the magazine it's contained in? The ejection ports might also be a good hint here, as would be the various models .

Regardless, it seems evident that there is no room for such extreme projectile length differences as you hinted at with your image of real world munitions, else it should show on the aforementioned features (which FFG has replicated in their own books' pictures). And GW's fluff. And their rules.

Do we have nude Space Marines in FFGs games? Did I talk about nude Space Marines?

As for a "realistic damage system", your example with the nailgun is exactly how it currently works in FFG's RPGs - with the exception that some few types of characters are exempt from it. But maybe you are argueing that everyone here should get Unnatural Toughness now?

I’m not saying that FFGs abstract damage system is perfect but it works ok with a couple of changes to make it more realistic. I like realistic damage systems but it’s nothing wrong with using a damage system based on video games / movies if you like that better. The later is probably what most 40RPG players expect.

Head injuries should be more lethal. Double penetrating damage and/or use half TB but with +1-2 natural armour. The head is the only hit location that should have instant death critical effects.

Blood loss should be the real danger from hits to limbs or body. Remove all movie instant death effects from crit limb/body tables and replace them with more severe blood loss. Space Marines don’t bleed much so it’ll be possible to have a quad amputee SM still shouting insults at you and trying to bite your leg off if you get too close.

A crazy chaos cultist high on drugs and adrenaline will continue to attack you for a couple of rounds even if you shot him in the heart. He probably won’t notice his injury and it’ll take a couple of rounds until he passes out due to lack of oxygen in the brain. Death from blood loss can sometimes be very fast but not usually not instant.

Track damage/crit for each hit location and set wound limits for location crippled/destroyed. That way you still have instant death from extreme damage like plasma cannons evaporating your whole body.

When you describe damage treat rolled damage as the actual amount of soft tissue destroyed/penetrated. A lasgun hitting a creature for 5 damage before TB will destroy a certain amount of tissue but the effect will be different depending on what you hit. A TB3 human will get a small wound cavity only penetrating a couple of inches (2 wounds lost). The exact same wound size will blow away half the body of a small TB0 rat (all wounds lost) but only count as a superficial wound on a massive space marine TB8 (no "skin armour" reflecting laser beams).

Use WP rolls when people get injured.

Use hidden wounds if you have players that can’t roleplay. During combat only describe to the players how their character perceives their injuries. A scrawny scribe getting shot for the first time may think he’s mortally wounded if a lasgun shot penetrates his armour even if he doesn’t lose a wound after TB reduction. “The chaos cultist raises his lasgun and fire a shot at you. You feel an intense burning pain in your abdomen. Looking down you see a large smoking hole in your flak vest. You’ve been shot and you’ll die soon if you don’t get immediate medical attention.” The groups medic risking his life running to save the mortally wounded scribe will only find some blistered skin.

You argue with realism, yet you apparently have no issue with TB allowing people to stare plasma guns in the face and getting nothing but a nice tan. That's exactly what I meant with the current rules trivialising guns that are meant to be really, really frightening!

Average damage is 5,5 or 11 wounds if both shots hit. 11 or 22 wounds if fired on high setting. Using the legion plasma rifle on high setting average damage is 15 or 30 wounds.

Your definition of “nice tan” is a bit strange…

Then your interpretation of Astartes is largely influenced by their novels and computer games, I take it? That probably explains our differences.

I got into 40k at around 3rd Edition, so that's what I "grew up" with.

Oh, with "original material" I meant The 40k starting with 2nd Edition. I think everyone here is aware that GW reworked at least half their universe during the transition from Rogue Trader to Warhammer 40.000, and I believe it is this setting that most people are referring to when they talk about the IP.

For consistency, however, my own choice remains the material of the GW core studio, which has remained surprisingly consistent over the past 20 years.

Oh noes, support for different caliber bolt shells. Heresy!!!

Oh, And btw, Housecats HAVE been known to cause fatalities! It is extremely rare but it has happened!

I noticed people mentioning Space Marine (the novel, that is) up there. Considering Black Library themselves have pretty much outright implied it's not canon in the modern 40k setting, I'm pretty sure it can be totally ignored. Unless you like you Psycannon bolts being made of the Emperor's defecation, Space Marines hijacking titans, and other fun Ian Watson creations.

You talked about “skin armour” Are you upset that standard ball ammo fired from a small caliber autogun can’t penetrate 1+inch of power armour? And yes I know that a stone thrown by a small child/autogun/autocannon/macro-cannon have a 33% chance of penetrating power armour and 17% chance of penetrating terminator armour in the TT game. Armour made of compressed fairy dust magically letting a certain % of all attacks through is not realistic/fun in a RPG.

Actually naked Space Marines make for even more silly effects, of course. I'll get to that in a little while.

Not that this is in any way authoritative. Just saying what's printed in the original material, so you see where I am coming from.

No. A nailgun would have low damage. Most hits wouldn't cause a wound to a normal human

The game has rules for Improvised Weapons, and the nailgun would qualify as such. Or are you argueing it's less lethal than a fist punch? I guess we'd have to agree to disagree then.

I’m not saying that FFGs abstract damage system is perfect but it works ok with a couple of changes to make it more realistic. I like realistic damage systems but it’s nothing wrong with using a damage system based on video games / movies if you like that better. The later is probably what most 40RPG players expect.

That's kind of strange, now, considering that it is me who is argueing for a more lethal injury system, and you to keep the movie-like super toughness that makes people way more resilient against the guns of the far future.

What I really was expecting was a damage system that replicates the deadliness of the 41st millennium! Not Hollywood action heroes shrugging off hits from armour piercing missiles without even a flesh wound.

Ok let’s use the standard space marine (BC pg.367) again with TB 8 and 20 wounds.This time he’ll have his power armor (8 All, 10 Body) and we shot him in the face with a standard plasma gun (BC pg.155) on low setting damage 1d10+8 and pen 10 . +8 damage exactly cancel the default SM TB and the pen 10 defeat standard SM power amour. It almost look like the designers intentionally used damage/pen values that always will wound a standard space marine.

Average damage is 5,5 or 11 wounds if both shots hit. 11 or 22 wounds if fired on high setting. Using the legion plasma rifle on high setting average damage is 15 or 30 wounds.

Your definition of “nice tan” is a bit strange…

Dark Heresy and Only War plasma pistols have a damage profile of 1d10+6 Pen 6 E.

For added lulz, let's assume the character doesn't have a helmet and takes the shot straight to his naked face.

Using average damage (let's round up and say a roll of 6, for a total of 12 damage), this means the Marine gets his hairs burned off and is blinded a bit. Awesome.

Then consider that TB 8 is the low end for Astartes, and it's probably safe to say that most PCs buy a couple Toughness advances, so we're quickly getting to TB10 when you actually play them in a game. Even an Astartes plasma pistol with an average damage of 16 would result in a mere Crit 6.

Oh, and of course this is all assuming we do not factor in the many Wounds and instead go straight to the Crit table ...

Ok so "orginal material" is not the original material but the 2nd/3rd edition TT game. That explains a lot. Maybe you should try to read some of the books your “original material” originates from?

Please, let's not be childish. As I said, we are talking about "Warhammer 40.000". I thought it was pretty much accepted that this means 2nd Edition up until now (6th)? Did I give off the impression I would talk about the Rogue Trader Marines, which are quite a bit different from their 2E version?

I do have the 1st edition Rogue Trader book, too, though, just because I'm a collector of fluff, it has some cool ideas, and not everything got retconned.

Have you read the new horus heresy books from Forgeworld Games Workshop Ltd? They have .60/.70 cal bolters and .50 cal bolt pistols. (Horus Heresy Betrayal pg.19)

Oh noes, support for different caliber bolt shells. Heresy!!!

As I said, I generally don't have much interest in what anyone but GW's core studio is putting out, as I value consistency too much and have made the experience that other writers just have a lot of different ideas.

I'm sure there's also a bunch of "Black Library Games Workshop Ltd." novels that have all sorts of funny ideas, but that's just not the background I'm working with. If you like it, run with it, but don't complain when someone is sticking to the core material.

To be fair, given that apparently there is no canon , I don't have much of a problem with those older books. I've certainly seen a lot of weird things in current novels, too.

It's just that ... well, there's not much of a point argueing about stuff like this. As I said earlier, technically, neither of us can be "wrong", since everything is a matter of interpretation and preferences.

Now, I've never read Space Marine, but I did enjoy his Inquisitor novel about Jaq Draco and his team. It was one of my first 40k books ever! Picked it up in a magazine store at the train station many, many years ago. /nostalgia

Well yeah, I'm very much on board with the 'there is no canon' thing, but the synopsis of the book on the website really implies it's not exactly canon anymore.

Believe us when we tell you that Space Marine is quite unlike any other Warhammer 40,000 novel you’ve ever read.

First published in 1993 – though completed some years earlier – at a time when the background to the Warhammer 40,000 universe was still in a state of flux and not yet fully coalesced, the book follows three young Imperial Fist recruits from their formative years in the underhive gangs of Necromunda through to fighting as part of the First Company within the bowels (literally!) of a Tyranid bioship.

Not only will you find squats in this novel –Tzeentch-worshiping squats at that – but also Space Marines controlling Titans, Space Marines with lasguns, the Pain Glove and more than a small amount of toilet humour. Oh, and a Zoat. How could we forget the Zoat?

Although the temptation was great to rewrite significant portions of this book to make it conform to current background, as a curiosity piece, an historical snapshot of the Warhammer 40,000 universe circa the early 1990s, this book is invaluable. It also serves as a shining example of what can happen when a respected genre author at the height of his powers is let loose on an established shared universe.