|
![]() |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Shas'O
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
In the back of the codex, the list of the 1st twenty legions omits
numbers 2 and 11. This topic is for the speculation on who they were, and any evidence regarding who they wer ethat may have existed pre 2nd edition *NOTE* Deathwatch are made up of volutneers from other chapters, GK are a 2nd founding with , IIRC, unique geneseed, and the Legion of the Damned are the fire hawks, who were not one of the legions, but were a 21st foudnign chapter.
__________________
Caves of Narshe - Now has a Chrono Trigger section! Non praestatis Ultramarini, Nobilitis Ultramarini. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Ethereal
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16,024
|
I think that were
deleted due to GW not supporting them (i link that the owns that developed the idea behinds these deletec chapter left GW before 2nd edtion came out, much like if Gav Thorpe left, the Dark Angels might vanish) I think one was entirely tank based (sorta like an that every unit must a Rhino compulsory), but the rhino didn't come out until much later. I vaguely remember a battle when I was about 5 (one of the only battles that I watched at the age and still remember, of sorts that is) and he was using some tank from WW2 to represent his Rhinos and tanks. But I don't know that is reliable or not. |
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
Ethereal
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
2) Adeptus Custodes.
11) Rainbow Warriors.
__________________
Farewell, Kangaroo Joe, you shall not be forgotten. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Ethereal
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16,024
|
I don't think
the Adeptus Custodes were a space marine legion, but the rainbow warriors were in fact a true Legion. The Adeptus Custodes were a organisation of the Imperium like the Adeptus Astartes, Ministorum and the Titan Legion. |
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Shas'La
![]() ![]() |
gold star for tyross
no the custodes are not marines thay are either just less than a marine(pre-CCG) or UBER marines(what the CCG seems to implie) the rainbow warriors if they were a legion not a chapter(i dunno either ive only played 10 years... ) i think the ones in question were owned by the same guy that owned malal so when he left and demanded a huge royalty GW just stoped useing them. |
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Shas'O
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Or possibly the
Rainbow Warriors got sunk by some frenchmen.... :-\
__________________
Caves of Narshe - Now has a Chrono Trigger section! Non praestatis Ultramarini, Nobilitis Ultramarini. |
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Ethereal
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16,024
|
I personally think
they dropped them because the name sucked and that no one could be asked to paint them in the colours (or could afford all that paint). |
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) |
|
Shas'La
![]() ![]() |
i wonder what
they look like... ive never seen them before... has ne one else seen the rainbow warriors?
__________________
blah. |
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Ethereal
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Actually, Rainbow
Warriors were a darkish blue.
__________________
Farewell, Kangaroo Joe, you shall not be forgotten. Quote:
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Speculation - Dark Heresy - finally a 40k R.P.G! | Gamblor | General 40K | 6 | 31 Jul 2007 18:32 |
| speculation on the next Armageddon War, what will GW come up with?? | Gamblor | General 40K | 16 | 27 Jul 2007 12:23 |
| Daemonettes and Eldar speculation. | Autarch_Kalesh | Craftworld Eldar | 14 | 15 Apr 2007 13:19 |
| Another speculation- The Tau, Children of the Old Ones | Grogalmighty | Tau | 42 | 25 Mar 2007 05:48 |
| Korean War 2 speculation | crazedmongoose2003 | Serious Debate and Discussion | 4 | 23 Jan 2006 20:41 |