# Ravenguard Possibly Getting a Codex Supplement



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

From: Faeit 212: Warhammer 40k News and Rumors: Ravenguard Possibly Getting a Codex Supplement


There are a lot of questions regarding who is going to be getting a codex supplement for Space Marines. While its rather solid right now that White Scars are first, well sourced rumors are giving us a second Space Marine codex supplement before the end of the year.


The usual candidate being thrown around is the Ultramarines. I do think they will get a well deserved supplement, but are they next after the White Scars? It may be possible that Ravenguard is coming.

Check this report out, which might very well point us in the direction of the Ravenguard being next.

Please remember that just because cases are empty, does mean its happening. I consider this to be a small piece of the puzzle only.

​ 
​ 
​ 
​ 
*via Calistarius from the Faeit 212 inbox*
_It's Calistarius. I visited GW Nottingham today and thought I'd send_
_you photos of the armies on display, or notably those that weren't on_
_display. As always, absence may be for reasons other than upcoming_
_releases but it's fun to speculate._
_First up is that the lizardmen forces have disappeared. All that's_
_left in the case are a saurus champion, a couple of skinks and_
_terradons which lend support to the new plastics rumours._
_Secondly, Tau forces are also absent but notably kroot remain. This_
_doesn't come as much of a surprise due to the upcoming farsight_
_supplement but the kroot remaining may hint that they're not in the_
_supplement._
_Finally, there were two minor absences in the display cases, both_
_coming in from the left field. These could be as a result of putting_
_together a battle scene for the rumoured upcoming C:SM or may be_
_potential supplements. First up the Word Bearers have disappeared from_
_their case and along with lizardmen and tau has a nice little sign_
_saying they've been taken for photographing. The other absent force is_
_Ravenguard. They don't have a sign explaining their disappearance but_
_I've noticed a few Ravenguard fans frequenting the forums so fingers_
_crossed for a supplement._


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

A RG supp would be cool. Much prefer them over UM. Hopefully some more info about them in the HH will be present.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

Can't see any reason why the smurfs would get a supplement when they are the epitome of a codex chapter. There wouldn't be anything new we hadn't already seen. The WS,RG or even Sallys would be more deserving. Then again, they could do them all in one supplement if they really wanted.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Anything is better then the smurfs getting yet another codex... Honestly in all my years of being with the hobby, I've yet to meet a single person who plays as Space Marines who uses an Ultramarine force. 

I'd rather see the Imperial Fists become the poster boys as the codex chapter.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

I think its safe to say that the 9 loyalists will get a supplement with footnotes on successor chapters.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

As I said in the IG supplement thread, I really can't see GW making tons of supplements. Marines may prove me wrong but I'm thinking a max of 1 per army, though not everyone needs or will get one. (Looking at the non-codex Marines here. Though a separate Flesh Tearers book could be cool.) Anyway, the more supplements produced means the more time it will take for future editions to update and that's not a good thing for GW. So, one for the armies potentially diverse(or popular) enough towarrant a supplement; such as SM, Eldar, Tau, IG, Orks, Tyranids and CSM.

Anyway, it needs to be an aspect so different that the inclusion of a character or unit isn't enough to make the change. What one chapter is different enough to warrant their own rules and unit changes? Salamanders are currently changed by one character, as are White Scars. Would adding a supplement add more to those armies, like it did Iyanden? Because, you can run "Iyanden" with codex Eldar by taking Prince Yriel and a bunch of Wraith units. But by playing Iyanden, you get more Spiritseers to lead those Wrait units. So, what Space Marine army is unique enough?

Furthermore, those cases could be empty because Marines are slated for launch in about 3 months. Maybe WD just wanted to use the Ravenguard models for that.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I'm curious to know what Ravenguard would get that cannot be proxied from codex BA.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Orochi said:


> I'm curious to know what Ravenguard would get that cannot be proxied from the current codex BA.


Who knows what's coming?


----------



## Loli (Mar 26, 2009)

Archon Dan said:


> As I said in the IG supplement thread, I really can't see GW making tons of supplements. Marines may prove me wrong but I'm thinking a max of 1 per army, though not everyone needs or will get one. (Looking at the non-codex Marines here. Though a separate Flesh Tearers book could be cool.) Anyway, the more supplements produced means the more time it will take for future editions to update and that's not a good thing for GW. So, one for the armies potentially diverse(or popular) enough towarrant a supplement; such as SM, Eldar, Tau, IG, Orks, Tyranids and CSM.
> 
> Anyway, it needs to be an aspect so different that the inclusion of a character or unit isn't enough to make the change. What one chapter is different enough to warrant their own rules and unit changes? Salamanders are currently changed by one character, as are White Scars. Would adding a supplement add more to those armies, like it did Iyanden? Because, you can run "Iyanden" with codex Eldar by taking Prince Yriel and a bunch of Wraith units. But by playing Iyanden, you get more Spiritseers to lead those Wrait units. So, what Space Marine army is unique enough?
> 
> Furthermore, those cases could be empty because Marines are slated for launch in about 3 months. Maybe WD just wanted to use the Ravenguard models for that.


If Flesh Tearers get a book before Iron Hands I'll hang an assorted number of chickens. 

Regarding your point about marines being different enough to warrant a book/supplement. You are right Sallies have a character in the Vanilla, WS can either use the character/captain bike route or proxy Ravenwing, RG proxy BA etc. So this leaves you with Iron Hands, they don't have a character, none of the books are that good for proxy, you can expand Techmarines, Iron Father's, have an excuse to finally make Mechanicum pieces etc. 

Yes I'm an Iron Hands and Mechanicum fan boy, I love them more than I do sisters, but every issue you raised just screamed Iron Hands to me.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Archon Dan said:


> As I said in the IG supplement thread, I really can't see GW making tons of supplements. Marines may prove me wrong but I'm thinking a max of 1 per army, though not everyone needs or will get one. (Looking at the non-codex Marines here. Though a separate Flesh Tearers book could be cool.) Anyway, the more supplements produced means the more time it will take for future editions to update and that's not a good thing for GW. So, one for the armies potentially diverse(or popular) enough towarrant a supplement; such as SM, Eldar, Tau, IG, Orks, Tyranids and CSM.
> 
> Anyway, it needs to be an aspect so different that the inclusion of a character or unit isn't enough to make the change. What one chapter is different enough to warrant their own rules and unit changes? Salamanders are currently changed by one character, as are White Scars. Would adding a supplement add more to those armies, like it did Iyanden? Because, you can run "Iyanden" with codex Eldar by taking Prince Yriel and a bunch of Wraith units. But by playing Iyanden, you get more Spiritseers to lead those Wrait units. So, what Space Marine army is unique enough?
> 
> Furthermore, those cases could be empty because Marines are slated for launch in about 3 months. Maybe WD just wanted to use the Ravenguard models for that.


I, on the other hand, believe GW will milk this cow as long as they can this edition as it's a way to monetize armies for longer and promote sales on models (like Spiritseers for Iyanden since they can take up to 20 of them in a Double FOC). We won't likely see a lot of these books at one time and I doubt that if we get a White Scar book (like the Marine rumors have claimed) that we'll be seeing a Ravenguard book at the same time.

Now will you NEED the supplements? Not really, but given time you could probably get them anyways as they'll let you do more inside of whatever army you're playing while sticking to your theme. This gives you more variety when things get boring, and it gives GW more $$$$ when you buy the book, and possibly more models to support it.

That said, time will tell which way this goes. If the books don't sell particularly well over the next year the project may be dropped.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

Loli said:


> If Flesh Tearers get a book before Iron Hands I'll hang an assorted number of chickens.
> 
> Regarding your point about marines being different enough to warrant a book/supplement. You are right Sallies have a character in the Vanilla, WS can either use the character/captain bike route or proxy Ravenwing, RG proxy BA etc. So this leaves you with Iron Hands, they don't have a character, none of the books are that good for proxy, you can expand Techmarines, Iron Father's, have an excuse to finally make Mechanicum pieces etc.
> 
> Yes I'm an Iron Hands and Mechanicum fan boy, I love them more than I do sisters, but every issue you raised just screamed Iron Hands to me.


Hanging chickens? Is that a euphemism? But I don't think Flesh Tearers deserve a supplement. Of course, Gabriel Seth needs an overhaul so that using him makes the army feel more Flesh Tearer.

I wouldn't mind seeing Iron Hands or a more defined Death Watch. Both seem like good supplements to a Marine book. Then again, I'd love some special rules for a Crusade Fleet Chapter too. But all I can think for them is cheaper Drop Pods. Either way, I hate the Ultra-centric feel of the current codex. Let's drop about half their named characters.



Zion said:


> I, on the other hand, believe GW will milk this cow as long as they can this edition as it's a way to monetize armies for longer and promote sales on models (like Spiritseers for Iyanden since they can take up to 20 of them in a Double FOC). We won't likely see a lot of these books at one time and I doubt that if we get a White Scar book (like the Marine rumors have claimed) that we'll be seeing a Ravenguard book at the same time.
> 
> Now will you NEED the supplements? Not really, but given time you could probably get them anyways as they'll let you do more inside of whatever army you're playing while sticking to your theme. This gives you more variety when things get boring, and it gives GW more $$$$ when you buy the book, and possibly more models to support it.
> 
> That said, time will tell which way this goes. If the books don't sell particularly well over the next year the project may be dropped.



Let's keep this to one thread. LOL Of course, I like your suggestions for supplements for the non-codex Marine books, especially SW. Wulfen rock!

And of course, the supplements are optional. Even if I wanted to make my Eldar Iyanden(hate the color scheme), I'm not sure I would use the supplement. Sure, having a ton of Spiritseers would be great. They are much better than Warlocks for casting the awesome Runes of Battle powers. But an all Wraith army is point heavy, with fewer units and shorter firing ranges.

But, yes. The supplements feel like a fad. GW will ride the fad as long as it makes them money. And Iyanden was a good choice. Near as I can tell, they were a popular Craftworld for veteran Eldar players. So it kind of forced them to buy 2 books and potentially more models to get the feel of the army right. Sadly, that puts Ultras in the right spot for a supplement(so fricking popular).


----------



## refractory (Sep 15, 2008)

Orochi said:


> I'm curious to know what Ravenguard would get that cannot be proxied from codex BA.



if I were to speculate on a RG supplement I would guess something like this...

*army has stealth and/or infiltration : Scouts, Assault, Tactical, and Veterans

*more Scout type options or variations on existing platforms ( jump pack scouts??? anyone?)

*a warlord trait that makes the whole game night fight, or maybe the first two turns, RG being immune to the effects of night fight

*when RG units deep strike and/or assault you don't get snap fire?

*maybe a troop assault marine choice, makeing either the veterans or the FA choice to be different in maybe they have these: Wings of the Raven - Lexicanum 
-with this maybe, a longer movement range, or the ability to "fly for a turn at a time(ground/fly/ground/fly etc.), or once per game?


*you could also through some good armour options in there, just due to their planets putting out the equivilent of what a forgeworld does.

EDIT: *Lightning claws are free for sergeants and up... ( don't know why I didn't think of this earlier)

*fleet.

*and just because i have models for this and no use anymore SHRIKE"S WING! (damn you GW for taking them away!)


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

refractory said:


> if I were to speculate on a RG supplement I would guess something like this...
> 
> *army has stealth and/or infiltration : Scouts, Assault, Tactical, and Veterans
> 
> ...


I'd add to that the fact that RG are not BA successors and shouldn't be suffering the Red Thirst or using fast vehicles (plus they're ambush/hit-and-run specialists) so using BA for a proxy doesn't get the feel 100% right.


----------



## refractory (Sep 15, 2008)

Zion said:


> I'd add to that the fact that RG are not BA successors and shouldn't be suffering the Red Thirst or using fast vehicles (plus they're ambush/hit-and-run specialists) so using BA for a proxy doesn't get the feel 100% right.


couldn't have said it better myself, so I didn't. 

RG to me, are the true "spec-ops" type army of the SM chapters. they adorn coloring to their environment, they use the cover of darkness/shadows, they like to hit fast and hard, doing lots of damage in a very short amount of time, catching the enemy at it's most vulnerable and weakened state. They even use small unit tactics and they seam to stay planet bound more than not (meaning they stay at a given war zone for extremely long periods of time, much like USASF).


----------



## DeathJester921 (Feb 15, 2009)

A RG codex supplement would be useful for my chapter, the Dark Reavers (not named after the mod. Called them that when I was at Bolter and Chainsword, before I came here), who are a successor chapter of the Raven Guard. Gonna hold off buying a BA codex now to play them properly.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

refractory said:


> if I were to speculate on a RG supplement I would guess something like this...
> 
> *army has stealth and/or infiltration : Scouts, Assault, Tactical, and Veterans
> 
> ...


Have a look at the Eldar supplement,
the sort of thing you see in that will be what you get in any near future supplements, 
you aren't going to get lots of new rules unless it's an actual codex


----------



## Karyudo-DS (Nov 7, 2009)

Archon Dan said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing Iron Hands or a more defined Death Watch. Both seem like good supplements to a Marine book...


Yes, Iron Warriors would be nice, yesss... er wait, Hands, right. :grin:



Archon Dan said:


> But, yes. The supplements feel like a fad. GW will ride the fad as long as it makes them money. And Iyanden was a good choice. Near as I can tell, they were a popular Craftworld for veteran Eldar players. So it kind of forced them to buy 2 books and potentially more models to get the feel of the army right. Sadly, that puts Ultras in the right spot for a supplement(so fricking popular).


Fad indeed, I've been informed my first Dark Angel codex was indeed just a supplement as well (3rd ed) though those had more meat, granted you couldn't get that meat elsewhere. Personally I would like to see a couple Chaos Legions get books. Something about "masters of siege warfare" using the exact same FOC is just silly. I'd even be happy with something stupid like being able to take 1-3 Defilers per Heavy slot or something. I somehow don't see Ultra's though unless they do indeed remove characters from the next C:SM. The current book seems to center on them already so I would hope for something different like RG.


----------



## nestor73 (Jul 9, 2013)

To make RG more "unique" and Codex supplement worthy they could give their Scout Snipers BS4 and camo cloaks as part of their wargear instead of an upgrade and have Land Speeder Storms as a Dedicated Transport plus have assault troops as a Troop choice. Shrike and Korvydae as characters as well as creating chaplain IC and a scout IC.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I've been playing Raven Guard using the BA codex since it was released in 5th.

What does it give us? Speed, a plethora of Jump and Vehicle options, and a focus on close work. All of which are suitable for Raven Guard.

What doesn't it give us? Stealth of any kind, relevant special characters, fluff, or a bias towards hit and run.

It is however, better by far than the Vanilla codex which does nothing but add a reroll to your assault distance and allow you to infiltrate one unit, assuming you want to sacrifice a HQ slot to possibly the least impressive combat character in the book.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Sethis said:


> Stealth of any kind, relevant special characters, fluff, or a bias towards hit and run.


I think Dante is the only one with hit and run...but does he even remotely fit the bill?


----------

