4th edition SM codex was objectively the best one. Is there any

>>46053041
Is there any conceivable reason why you can't houserule it in?

>>46053041
I actually enjoyed the 5th one far more.

GW needs to keep changing small details about the game between editions to sell new books while doing the least amount of actual work.

>>46053041
> Is there any conceivable reason why GW couldn't include the trait system in future books?
They replaced them with formations. Now you have to buy and field specific models to get its benefits.

File: CSM.jpg (91KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 250x250px

>>46056949
>specific models

This.

You know that one anon who keeps posting ye olde Chaos Armoury pic? It's like that: The difference between the old GW writers encouraging you to use the models YOU like in 40k and the new writers mandating the models THEY want you to buy.

File: ZogMeItsBootiful.png (2MB, 1271x1725px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1271x1725px

>>46059373

>>46056949
>>46059373
Yes, despite how obscenely abusable the trait system was, and how some traits never saw use.

>>46053041
interesting a quote from Horus appears along with courageous...plus the rules do match his fighting style.

>>46053084

5E is best in terms of game design and organization.

7E is best in terms of power.

The older ones are best in terms of flavor.

The 4E book might be nostalgic and flavorful but it's a fucking mess. You do not want to play 7E games with rules written in the same obtuse, scrawling manner as 4E.