Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Recently I've been working on the almost poisoned chalice that is the Chaos Space Marine Codex, trying to flesh it out again and bring it in line to 5th Edition and what many Chaos players seem to want. There was obviously flaws within the current Codex and the one before it, the largest of these being over-simplification and over-complication respectively. I've tried to smooth out both these flaws whilst adding a 5th Edition Competitive edge to it and allowing it to remain suitable and fluffy.
It's taken a fair ol' while and has been hard work at times but I hope you like it and provide some feedback.
Anyways, without further ado, here's my...

Chaos Space Marine Fandex - 5th Edition.

My PDF version of the Codex is attached at the bottom of this post, please give it a look.


This PDF is probably the final version of the Codex.

Please provide any feedback.

Thanks!


-------------------------------------------

I hope you all enjoyed reading it; all comments are more than welcome, in fact, they're encouraged. (Constructive) Criticism is also welcome, as is any input. Also, any further publicity wouldn't go amiss as I know Proposed Rules isn't the most popular of forums.

Thank you to Keatonic also who created his own version of my Fandex, this is available here should people want to use Keatonic's very generous version instead. I cannot guarantee however how up to date the rules are or anything however, but it was good of Keatonic nonetheless. Cheers.

Thanks a lot,
Dave.



Oh. Obviously, all play-testing and player-created army lists are welcome. If players could post their army lists (or experiences) from this then it would massively appreciated.




Please also check out my Eldar Codex.
And my Space Marine Codex.

Looks cool the first thing I saw that I would change is giving plague zombies ws 2 instead of 3. This would make almost all basic troops still hit on a 4 and something feels right about even guards men outclassing zombies in a fight.

I must say, this is a fine Codex you have written. If this was official, I would definitely buy it with little to no complaints, as almost everything I thought should be improved has been touched on.

BUT-

My only concerns are with the army-wide special rules. I like how Warband rules are being thought of again, but I think in some cases, it can be limiting. What about Apocalypse games, where anything and everything you own can be thrown on your side of the table, so long as it matches the points of your opponent? Playing a giant army of just Khorne Berzerkers wasn't exactly what I would have in mind. Or what about a player who is not interested in playing an army based on those in the fluff? What if he wants to make his own Legion of traitors, where maybe multiple Cult Troops of different kinds are appropriate? I think things like Iron Warriors giving you another avialiable HS slot, or something, could work. But if they just basically limiting the guys you can take, besides one or two kinds of units, many players may find themselves frustrated with it. I like the Warband Rules, but I think they should be an option, not a requirement.

This is a giant step in the right direction, though. Really great job! I hope to the Chaos Gods that GW sees this.

I am not gonna read any more unless you change 'all is dust' to either an invulnerable, FNP or an extra wound. That crunk of s*** rule from the 3.0 codex you have revived should be purged from all records and i actually feel personally insulted seeing it again. Apart from that it started really well.

Steve: Good Point, thanks. After thinking about it briefly, I'll likely create a 'to edit' list which it can go on. Thanks man.

Zack: Thank you very much man. Seriously, that is a huge compliment for the intentions of this, thank you.
In regards to your criticism I know what you're saying and I was very consciously trying to limit the effects they could have upon your FoC. My intentions were for the BL to enable a very customisable Codex as the only thing you lose out on is Legion-specific units.
I'm unsure as to what I can do about it. Black Legion has no detrimental effects upon the army composition and ultimately Apoc is friendly games and ultimately if he fields a HQ for each choice he can have as many Legions as he wants. It's a fair point though and I'll give it some thought. Thanks again.

Perkustin: As I said in my comments, TS were tricky. I originally had a 3++ against shooting, however that still makes them as vulnerable against small arms as they all ready are and shouldn't be. FNP would be the simplest solution but risk making them too similar to Plague Marines and an extra wound benefits them in close combat where they should suffer the most problems.
If you could point out the problem with the All is Dust rule, then that'd be great, although politeness would be preferred. Otherwise, I struggle to see viable alternatives...


Cheers All.

Just Dave wrote:Steve: Good Point, thanks. After thinking about it briefly, I'll likely create a 'to edit' list which it can go on. Thanks man.

Zack: Thank you very much man. Seriously, that is a huge compliment for the intentions of this, thank you.
In regards to your criticism I know what you're saying and I was very consciously trying to limit the effects they could have upon your FoC. My intentions were for the BL to enable a very customisable Codex as the only thing you lose out on is Legion-specific units.
I'm unsure as to what I can do about it. Black Legion has no detrimental effects upon the army composition and ultimately Apoc is friendly games and ultimately if he fields a HQ for each choice he can have as many Legions as he wants. It's a fair point though and I'll give it some thought. Thanks again.

Perkustin: As I said in my comments, TS were tricky. I originally had a 3++ against shooting, however that still makes them as vulnerable against small arms as they all ready are and shouldn't be. FNP would be the simplest solution but risk making them too similar to Plague Marines and an extra wound benefits them in close combat where they should suffer the most problems.
If you could point out the problem with the All is Dust rule, then that'd be great, although politeness would be preferred. Otherwise, I struggle to see viable alternatives...


Cheers All.

I must have misread the "0-1 Limit Removed". Alright

And BUMP, I can't believe no one else has commented on this.

From a first fast read:

• Dirge Caster – 10pts – Any enemy unit being tank-shocked by this vehicle suffers a -2 Leadership modifier to any Death or Glory! Attempts.

There is no Death or Glory leadership test. Only regular tank shot leadership and THEN when successful one model can attempt to DoG.

I also think that All is Dust in this state is ridiculously powerful. Especially on troops choice.
This makes the unit incredible immune to shooting. They are completely immune to up to S5 shooting, have 3+ save, 5++ AND fearless? Against shooting armies this just is impossible to kill. Put this on any objective and be safe without any thinking.

Numeration on daemons got little messed up.

Obliterators no longer fearless?

Daemons can ride the LR?

At the first glance everything looks great. Some units didn't need any upgrades from current CSM codex but they did. Almost everything (or even everything) got a buff or at least a 5-10 pts drop. Is current CSM codex really that bad? I'm asking balance / points / stats wise, not if it is bland or not interesting (which is the #1 beef with it I see).
There are some things too powerful here. Special notice to All is Dust as mentioned above. I'll try to read it again tomorrow because I may be wrong on numerous points.

There is just one thing I especially didn't like. There is too much of the stuff in here.
There are 9 warbands. Numerous special rules. 7 Specials, 4 HQs, 7 Elites, 8 Troops, 4FA and 12(!) HS and a rhino. PLUS 10 daemon units. That is almost double the amount what the other codex (plural codex?) have. This is an incredible long wall of text. While having many options is good I think you went a little over the top here.

Well written fandex. Probably the most well written, player created rule set I’ve seen for. It’s good to see someone take a logical approach as well as take into account physical and comparative game play. It’s also good to see someone not take the uber fanboy/Matt Ward approach lol.

Anyway here is my feedback:
1. Any daemon weapons still power weapons as their redux profile doesn’t explicitly state that they ignore armour in CC?

2. Balancing 5th edition CSM Lesser Daemons is a hard one and I’ve personally spent the past few months debating the same thing myself. I’ve reckon best approach out of the 3 options you have provided is to make their profile slightly inferior to their counter parts in the daemons codex ,either through an increased points cost on God Specific Daemons (Bloodletters costing 18pts) or slightly less power on God Specific Daemons (-1WS or -1A). Another idea I’ve though of is for God specific daemons to be treated identically to Cult Marines (0-1 unless army contains a Black Legion Warlord/appropriate Cult Marine HQ). I also reckon lesser daemons and greater daemons should either take up the appropriate FOC slot or contain the Auxiliary rule in their profile.

3. I also think Alpha Legion (assuming I’ve interpreted the Auxiliary rule correctly) lists should not be able to take both Heretics and Operatives for a Single unit choice. I reckon the Auxiliary rule should be written to allow a single auxiliary unit to be taken per single CSM/Cult Marine unit choice (example: Alpha Legion Force with 2 CSM squads, 1 Heretics squad and 1 Operatives squad). In either case, the Auxiliary rule should be written to be a little clearer to understand.

4. Thousand Sons could still use a little more work. A 5+ inv save + all is dust + inferno bolts at 22 pts per model make them extremely good. I reckon a small nerf along the lines of removing relentless from All is Dust (as inferno bolts + 5+ inv save + immunity to Flashlights and Bolt Guns is plenty good already)

5. I like what you did with Fabius Bile. Putting him in the elites slot and reworking him into an evil Sanguinary Priest esque unit was a Golden Idea. Poisoned 3+ on the Needler might be a little powerful so I reckon making the Needler poisoned 4+ instead.

6. I’ve noticed that you forgot to put Fearless in Huron’s profile (I reckon after surviving a melta gun blast and Huron’s shenanigans in general, Huron fears nothing).

7. I reckon you should remove Abaddon’s d6 extra attacks for his weapon. Str 8 attacks are plenty powerful already and removing the D6 also removes any possibility of his weapon rebelling. I also reckon that Guidance of Chaos can also be removed from his profile.

8. I’ve noticed that Abaddon’s profile contains a rule called “Favour of the Gods” which isn’t mentioned anywhere in the rule set

9. I want to point praise your revamped Chaos Dreadnaught rules. I’m already a big fan of the Plasma Cannon + Missile Launcher + Chaos Theory configuration. In regards to the Psyker Dread upgrade, some of the psychic powers, namely Warptime, Power of Chaos and Warp Rift might be too powerful in the hands of the Dread. Perhaps give the Psyker Dread a restricted list of powers to choose from. Also you should clarify if Fire Frenzy affects Psychic shooting attacks.

Overall I dig it. As far as daemons I'd say hit 'em with the instability before doing away with the same turn assault. I think the Thousand Sons are about as good as they're gonna get, there isn't an easy way to set 'em up that is differentiating and representative. Maybe make the sorcerer count as an independent character to make them even more vulnerable to CC? I do think LCs should be an option on the Raptor aspiring champion. I disagree with Candy.man on his 3rd and 7th points - I like that the Alpha Legion can have twice the auxiliaries, that's what they do - and removing the d6 extra attacks from his daemon weapon would be odd; but agree about Fabius, and that the work on the dreds is pretty much spot on.

OK guys, thanks for the responses. It's really appreciated and I'll be sure to take in everything you have said.

I'll post a proper reply with my appropriate intended changes later, but needless to say the following will be attended to:

- Thousand Sons - All is Dust will be removed altogether or replaced my something less powerful.

- Editing on Psychic Powers available to Dreadnought

- Brain Storming on Daemons

- Fixing grammatical issues such as Abbadon, Huron and Daemons/Transports.

- Defending any reasoning so far!

So yeah, watch this space!

Thanks guys, much appreciated.
Dave.

Once again, thanks for the input and compliments everyone, it's really appreciated. I'll address any key points later in this comment but first I'll address what I can now:

Macok wrote:From a first fast read:

• Dirge Caster – 10pts – Any enemy unit being tank-shocked by this vehicle suffers a -2 Leadership modifier to any Death or Glory! Attempts.

There is no Death or Glory leadership test. Only regular tank shot leadership and THEN when successful one model can attempt to DoG.

Will be changed, thank you.

Numeration on daemons got little messed up.

I'm unsure as to what you mean by this? If you mean the squad numbers, then I'll have a look. In regard to points, I said I don't have the Daemons Codex that the Daemons are my biggest hurdle in regards to this Codex.
If anyone would be willing to provide me with the relevant points costs of the Daemons that I have wrong that would be great. This can be cryptic to avoid Copyright if need be.

Obliterators no longer fearless?

Daemons can ride the LR?

Whoops. Both with be sorted.

At the first glance everything looks great. Some units didn't need any upgrades from current CSM codex but they did. Almost everything (or even everything) got a buff or at least a 5-10 pts drop. Is current CSM codex really that bad? I'm asking balance / points / stats wise, not if it is bland or not interesting (which is the #1 beef with it I see).
There are some things too powerful here. Special notice to All is Dust as mentioned above. I'll try to read it again tomorrow because I may be wrong on numerous points.

I agree, but the general trend in 5th Edition is reduced points throughout and one of the problems within the CSM Codex was its lack of competitive choice. I think when it comes to minor points costs, that will be something that can be ironed out within play-testing and further inspection, but I agree. Some of it may be under-costed or over-buffed, however there were several flaws, alongside the main lack of depth/character that I have tried to address, in particular:
- Some units (but few) being under-costed: Daemon Princes, Obliterators.
- Many units being over-costed: Thousand Sons, Noise Marines, Bikers, Raptors, Havoc Weapons.
- Many units having definitive flaws: Possessed, Lord vs. Prince, Dread/Craze, Land Raiders, Spawn, the over-costed.
- Many units simply being not taken: Terminators, CSM's (compared to Zerkers and Plague Marines), over-priced, flawed...

Which, although not to perfection, I fully admit, I would like to believe I largely solved.

Also, consider this:
- 10x CSM - Rhino, 2x Meltagun - 195pts.
- 10x Grey Hunters - Rhino, 2x Meltagun - 185pts.
- 10x Tactical Marines - Rhino, Meltagun and Multimelta - 210pts(?)

There is just one thing I especially didn't like. There is too much of the stuff in here.
There are 9 warbands. Numerous special rules. 7 Specials, 4 HQs, 7 Elites, 8 Troops, 4FA and 12(!) HS and a rhino. PLUS 10 daemon units. That is almost double the amount what the other codex (plural codex?) have. This is an incredible long wall of text. While having many options is good I think you went a little over the top here.

Now this is a criticism I can under-stand, however I will nonetheless defend my position on it. For one thing, many people demand for a Codex for each Legion(!) or one for Undivided and God-specific(!) and whilst I will withhold my opinion on this, I have managed to fit them into a single book and I struggle to see many other Codices with (if I do say myself) this much variety but (overall) relative simplicity. I THINK...
Also, let us compare this to the Space Wolf Codex, recent and which I own, hence the comparison.
- HQ's - CSM: 4 --- Space Wolves: 4
- Special's/Uniques - CSM: 9 --- Space Wolves: 8
- Elites - CSM: 5 --- Space Wolves: 6
- Troops - CSM: 8(!) --- Space Wolves: 2
- Fast Attack - CSM: 4 --- Space Wolves: 5
- Heavy Support - CSM: 8 (+4 Defiler Variants) --- Space Wolves: 7
- Dedicated Transports - CSM: 1 --- Space Wolves: 3

Whilst the Chaos Space Marines obviously have more troops (always their strong point, admittedly) and have the Daemons behind this. They still have an overall equal number of HQ's, Specials/Unique's, Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support.
Personally - while I can understand your doing so, considering they are actually listed as such - I'm reluctant to class each of the cult-defilers as an individual unit considering they are all variants of the same and the difference in minimal.
Finally, many (7) of the units are limited to individual Legions.
(note: I haven't mentioned the Daemons as they may yet be changed into a single choice with marks available).

Obviously there are a wider number of options in the CSM Codex, I'm not going to begin to deny that. However with their nature, I think that's almost inevitable and ultimately what I've just tried to prove is that they're not as widespread as you may think...

candy.man wrote:Well written fandex. Probably the most well written, player created rule set I’ve seen for. It’s good to see someone take a logical approach as well as take into account physical and comparative game play. It’s also good to see someone not take the uber fanboy/Matt Ward approach lol.

Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. I've seen you in proposed rules before, bringing a logical/reasonable/ not Matt Ward approach, so I appreciate it, particularly coming from yourself.

Anyway here is my feedback:
1. Any daemon weapons still power weapons as their redux profile doesn’t explicitly state that they ignore armour in CC?

Dang. I'd swear I had added that in! I'll do it now at least...

2. Balancing 5th edition CSM Lesser Daemons is a hard one and I’ve personally spent the past few months debating the same thing myself. I’ve reckon best approach out of the 3 options you have provided is to make their profile slightly inferior to their counter parts in the daemons codex ,either through an increased points cost on God Specific Daemons (Bloodletters costing 18pts) or slightly less power on God Specific Daemons (-1WS or -1A). Another idea I’ve though of is for God specific daemons to be treated identically to Cult Marines (0-1 unless army contains a Black Legion Warlord/appropriate Cult Marine HQ). I also reckon lesser daemons and greater daemons should either take up the appropriate FOC slot or contain the Auxiliary rule in their profile.

Yes, I've been thinking the same. At the bottom of this comment, I intend to propose changes to Daemons, similar to what you've suggested. I admit, I did strongly toy (and most likely will go for) the idea of giving them the Auxiliary rule, however I did not consider the Cult rule...

3. I also think Alpha Legion (assuming I’ve interpreted the Auxiliary rule correctly) lists should not be able to take both Heretics and Operatives for a Single unit choice. I reckon the Auxiliary rule should be written to allow a single auxiliary unit to be taken per single CSM/Cult Marine unit choice (example: Alpha Legion Force with 2 CSM squads, 1 Heretics squad and 1 Operatives squad). In either case, the Auxiliary rule should be written to be a little clearer to understand.

As someone else has said, that was largely my intention with the Alpha Legion; to allow for a wider number of auxiliary. However, this isn't without its drawbacks:
- Each auxiliary unit benefits from a infantry-beneficial rule in either Scouts or Infiltrate. Whilst these are obviously benefits, they are kind of contradictory in the typical mechanised environment.
- Heretics cannot take a dedicated transport
- Heretics and Operatives have a (distinctly) sub-par leadership without the addition of an expensive champion or slightly less expensive Icon.
- Chosen, who can be taken as troops under some conditions, do not benefit the auxiliary rule.

So whilst they can take a larger number of auxiliary units, this isn't perfect and IMHO requires they player to properly know the army in order to be truly competitive with it. But yes, either way, I will try to make it clearer.

4. Thousand Sons could still use a little more work. A 5+ inv save + all is dust + inferno bolts at 22 pts per model make them extremely good. I reckon a small nerf along the lines of removing relentless from All is Dust (as inferno bolts + 5+ inv save + immunity to Flashlights and Bolt Guns is plenty good already)

Yes, judging from the reactions, Rubric Marines do need changing. However, despite how much more awkward it may make it for me, I would much prefer they keep the relentless rule over All is Dust as this unrelenting, unstoppable advance is what they're renowned for, not their toughness. Anyways, I will address this further down...

5. I like what you did with Fabius Bile. Putting him in the elites slot and reworking him into an evil Sanguinary Priest esque unit was a Golden Idea. Poisoned 3+ on the Needler might be a little powerful so I reckon making the Needler poisoned 4+ instead.

I may do that. I hoped it would be off-set by the range and lack of armour piercing - it's unlikely to even ID a Space Marine! - however I will look into it...

6. I’ve noticed that you forgot to put Fearless in Huron’s profile (I reckon after surviving a melta gun blast and Huron’s shenanigans in general, Huron fears nothing).

Noted.

7. I reckon you should remove Abaddon’s d6 extra attacks for his weapon. Str 8 attacks are plenty powerful already and removing the D6 also removes any possibility of his weapon rebelling. I also reckon that Guidance of Chaos can also be removed from his profile.

I agree about Guidance, particularly with the benefits of Icons. I'm still intending to keep the extra attacks however; he's known for being a beast in close combat and still is and potential rebellion can hinder this. I can agree with your concern, but I don't recall anyone before criticising him for his level of power. I will consider giving him an extra D3 attacks but without potential rebellion instead...
However, yes I will remove Favour of the Gods.

9. I want to point praise your revamped Chaos Dreadnaught rules. I’m already a big fan of the Plasma Cannon + Missile Launcher + Chaos Theory configuration. In regards to the Psyker Dread upgrade, some of the psychic powers, namely Warptime, Power of Chaos and Warp Rift might be too powerful in the hands of the Dread. Perhaps give the Psyker Dread a restricted list of powers to choose from. Also you should clarify if Fire Frenzy affects Psychic shooting attacks.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it. I will change that, you are very right. I intend to allow him Power of Chaos due to it's short range. However, yes Warptime is too much for a dread, as for the characters that are otherwise the only guys who can access it, they do not have fancy ranged weapons to benefit from it, unlike the dread. So yes, Warptime cannot be accessed (changed).
I will also change Warp Rift. As this was one of the last things added into the Codex, I didn't think about its effect on the dread, who obviously can under this deep-strike as far as he'd like without fearing wounds! I intend to still allow it, however I'll change it to cause penetrating its on a 1 for the dread, due to his size in traversing the warp.

Bromsy wrote:Overall I dig it. As far as daemons I'd say hit 'em with the instability before doing away with the same turn assault. I think the Thousand Sons are about as good as they're gonna get, there isn't an easy way to set 'em up that is differentiating and representative. Maybe make the sorcerer count as an independent character to make them even more vulnerable to CC? I do think LCs should be an option on the Raptor aspiring champion. I disagree with Candy.man on his 3rd and 7th points - I like that the Alpha Legion can have twice the auxiliaries, that's what they do - and removing the d6 extra attacks from his daemon weapon would be odd; but agree about Fabius, and that the work on the dreds is pretty much spot on.

Thank you man. I will consider the Raptor/LC again as tbh I had all ready, although only briefly.
The Daemon-thing I now will address below, after Thousand Sons, for whom I really appreciate your understanding of my predicament!

Anyways, onto the two major 'issues' atm that need to be addressed:

Thousand Sons/ Rubric Marines

As I said in my 'notes' and as others have noted, these guys were always going to be tricky and obviously in my incarnation they aren't particularly balanced. One of the serious problems I face with the Rubric Marines, is making them their own whilst differentiating them from the other choices, particularly Plague Marines.
Either way, All is Dust will be removed all together. However, it MAY be replaced by one of the following effects, depending on what some people think:

Remove All is Dust All-together. I think it's a fine line between 22pts being over-costed without this rule or under-costed with one of the below.

Grant a 4+ invulnerable save. This would be the simplest change and would fit with Tzeentch whilst still allowing them vulnerability to small arms. However, this would still benefit them in close combat.

Provide a 3++ against shooting. This would make them more resilient against shooting, but still vulnerable to small arms and CC. However, this isn't what I intended for the Rubric Marines. Although in this respect it would differentiate them from Plague Marines who are otherwise all but immune to small arms but vulnerable to the big guns.

Allow Rubric Marines to re-roll any armour save (not inv.) roll of 1 against shooting. This would be more complicated than the others (slightly) whilst still providing a noticeable but very subtle buff.

Finally; when the Aspiring Sorcerer (or Sorcerer) casts Warp Rift with a squad of Rubric Marines, they may take an armour save against any rolls of 1. this one's a bit more 'out there' than the other suggestions, but this would provide a definitive bonus and further differentiate them from the other Cult Units.

what are everyone's thoughts for this? Personally, my preference would have to be the re-roll '1's against shooting as it's the least likely to unbalance them, but still benefit resilience to small arms. IMHO.

Secondly:
Daemons

As I said in my notes, these guys were the main problem I encountered. They were always going to be prone to being over-powered if simply shifted from one Codex to another and whilst I was always intending to change it, I wanted other peoples opinions on it. Nonetheless, here's the changes I propose for Daemons.

Firstly, and this is my preferred change, is to simply have Lesser and Greater Daemons and let them take Marks which have a more significant effect than normal. This may seem like an almost cop-out but it's the simplest and acts as a bit of a two-for-one as whilst it still allows variation within the Daemons, it cuts down on choices within the Codex (Macok ) and maintains a bit more consistency with the existing 'dex.
This would work as Lesser Daemons remaining as they are but with access to the following Marks(note: Marks, not Icon):
- MoK - 5pts each - Grants +1 WS and Furious Charge (and +1 attack)
- MoS - 5pts each - Grants Rending (and +1 initiative)
- MoN - 5pts each - Grants Feel No Pain, but minus one initiative. (and +1 toughness)
- MoT - 5pts each - Grants -1 WS and attack, but allows the following ranged profile: Range: 18" - Strength: 4 - AP: 5. Assault 2, fired using the WS as BS. (and 4++ invulnerable).

Whilst for Greater Daemons this would be something along these lines, added to the existing blank profile:
- MoK - 45pts - Grants +1 WS, +1 attack, +1 Strength, Furious Charge and Fleet.
- MoS - 45pts - Grants +1 Attack, +2 (total) Initiative, Fleet and Warptime Psychic Power.
- MoN - 45pts - Grants Feel No Pain, -1 Initiative and Nurgles Rot Psychic Power.
- MoT - 45pts - Grants -1 attack, -1 WS, -1 Initiative, +1 BS and allows casting of up to two Psychic Powers per-turn.

Obviously, these marks aren't perfected or anything yet, but you can see it...

Or, keep current profile and disallow charge on turn of arrival - simplifies in regards to Deep-strike, prevents OP'ness but may be a bit harsh and unthematic.

Daemonic Unstability - Cause D3 (no saves allowed) wounds upon arrival. Fits with the fluff, adds inconsistency but will be very hit or miss and a possibly a bit harsh in regards to Greater Daemons.

Simply add on a 10% or so point increase across the board (rounding down).

-----------------------

Once again, all opinions are welcome (within reason!), particularly in regard to what i've just proposed for the Rubric Marines and Daemons. Army lists, more publicity and other input is also welcome.
Thanks everyone,
Dave.

1)Spiky bits seems really good. Park a rhino in cover, and hose those charging tyranids. I'd make the hits Init1, and I'd base the strength off the speed of the vehicle. I'd hate to lose 5 out of every 6 gaunts when attacking a parked tank.

2) Plague Zombies. Seem too good for 4 points. WS3 A2, T3(4) and feel no pain? They are going to devour blob squads. (better save, better toughness, more attacks).

3) Daemons. Daemons should be weak and cheap; they should not play a major roll in a Space marine book. I would go with generic daemon stats, and then add:
Khrone: +1 WS
Slaanesh: +1 Init
Nurgle: +1 Toughness
Tzeench: 4++ save
Undivided: ? Prefer Enemy?
I know a lot of people want something better, but having cheap units that score rain down is pretty good. Their is also a serious issue stealing thunder from daemon players.

4) Thousand Sons; how about the 5++ save, and feel no pain (FnP only vs shooting). That will double the survival rate against flak fire, without improving them in close combat.

5) Psychic dreadnoughts. Just don't do it.

6) Warcoven. Neat idea, but a bit expensive and short ranged. I'd make the unit 3, and additional guys are bought in groups of 3. I'd just give them 2 powers, and not have them buy individual powers. It doesn't feel like coven if each guy is doing his own thing.
I'd double the range of the psychic disrupt, and maybe make it a +1 per 3 guys as well. All this should drive the cost of the unit down, allowing for a bigger unit; rather than having 3 baby HQ's that all stand together.


That's all for now.

-Matt

Numeration on daemons got little messed up.

Just Dave wrote:1. Lesser Daemons
1. Bloodletters

Just Dave wrote:1. Greater Daemon
5. Great Unclean One

I missed vehicle upgrades last time, so a few notes.
As HawaiiMatt said - spiky bits is incredibly strong. Init1 won't fix this.
I generally agree with everything Matt said here.
Get rid of FNP (among others) on zombies and/or increase their cost significantly.
Right now you've got 120 T4 FNP units for 480pts. Good luck killing this even with 1500pts army. I'd take this every game no matter what and laugh at objective missions.

I also don't like open-topped rhinos. There is a good reason why no army got this upgrade. Especially in CSM codex, which have better CC troops than their good cousins. Av11 and open topped is not a good solution because it gives many buffs while keeping it unaffected by small str fire.

I really understand the problem with many Legions / Chapters etc. in one codex. I play Eldar and would love having some specific rules for each and every craftworld. This problem in some different ways, for example:
a) Special characters. Like in SM book. You want your army to be more like Salamanders - take this guy. This is very easy solution.
b) Some inner codex specific rules, like taking a Big Mek allows you to take some green dudes as troops. etc. Very similar to a).
c) Do nothing actually. Give units from different Legions and if player wants to play fluffy World Eaters he CAN do this only by selecting appropriate units.
d) You have to choose between one of them - like in this case. Many people will be happy because they can have their own Legion in CSM book, and it is much, much more different than just having one rule thanks to some random special guy. This however enforces fluff on army composition and restricts your army. This is good for fluffy armies, but what about just some casual game when you want to try some other units. Suddenly your whole army must be changed because your original Legion doesn't allow you to take something, or makes something else scoring / cheaper.

I do not own / never played daemons so I can't comment on that. :((

EDIT:
I only nitpick in my posts, but I generally admire the work here. Props to you!

Right, some general edits have been made. These are listed here and at the bottom of the OP:

- All is Dust edited.
- Plague Zombies removed, Spiky Bits (vehicle upgrade) removed.
- Daemons Weapons can ignore armour, Huron is Fearless, Daemons cannot ride in transports, Obliterators are Fearless, Psychic Powers edited slightly, Dreadnought/Psychic clarification, numeration on Daemons changed, Abbadon Special Rules re-worded.
- Daemons in process of being changed.

HawaiiMatt wrote:1)Spiky bits seems really good. Park a rhino in cover, and hose those charging tyranids. I'd make the hits Init1, and I'd base the strength off the speed of the vehicle. I'd hate to lose 5 out of every 6 gaunts when attacking a parked tank.

2) Plague Zombies. Seem too good for 4 points. WS3 A2, T3(4) and feel no pain? They are going to devour blob squads. (better save, better toughness, more attacks)

Both have been removed. Spiky Bits was of limited use as it was and such upgrades are rarely taken by players. Plague Zombies would be difficult to balance, add another unit to the available and are of limited appeal. As such, both have been removed.

3) Daemons. Daemons should be weak and cheap; they should not play a major roll in a Space marine book. I would go with generic daemon stats, and then add:
Khrone: +1 WS
Slaanesh: +1 Init
Nurgle: +1 Toughness
Tzeench: 4++ save
Undivided: ? Prefer Enemy?
I know a lot of people want something better, but having cheap units that score rain down is pretty good. Their is also a serious issue stealing thunder from daemon players.

They shouldn't play a major role, I agree. As such they will also gain the auxiliary rule as-well. I don't believe they should be weak however. If my intended changes go into effect then they should perform as shock-troops in close combat but are slightly too expensive to be taken into widespread use.
But yes, stealing thunder from Daemon Players is an issue I want to avoid. All Greater Daemons at least should be worse, and I'm intending for the Lesser Daemons to be worse too, but this could be more tricky. This issue is also counteracted if they aren't a simple copy and paste from the Daemon Codex and that they cannot use their FA/HQ/Elites/HS choices too.
So yes, to some extent I agree with what you're saying.

4) Thousand Sons; how about the 5++ save, and feel no pain (FnP only vs shooting). That will double the survival rate against flak fire, without improving them in close combat.

Actually, that may be the most simple (beneficial) change I could make, achieving its intended purpose. The only problem is stepping on the toes of the Plague Marines.

6) Warcoven. Neat idea, but a bit expensive and short ranged. I'd make the unit 3, and additional guys are bought in groups of 3. I'd just give them 2 powers, and not have them buy individual powers. It doesn't feel like coven if each guy is doing his own thing.
I'd double the range of the psychic disrupt, and maybe make it a +1 per 3 guys as well. All this should drive the cost of the unit down, allowing for a bigger unit; rather than having 3 baby HQ's that all stand together.

I admit, I think you are under-estimating the amount of firepower these guys could put out. However, I will change it, particularly because, as you said "it doesn't feel like a coven if each guy is doing his own thing". So they will be changed in one way or another.

Macok wrote:Numeration on daemons got little messed up.

Oooh! Simpler change than I realised! Thanks!

I missed vehicle upgrades last time, so a few notes.
As HawaiiMatt said - spiky bits is incredibly strong. Init1 won't fix this.
I generally agree with everything Matt said here.
Get rid of FNP (among others) on zombies and/or increase their cost significantly.
Right now you've got 120 T4 FNP units for 480pts. Good luck killing this even with 1500pts army. I'd take this every game no matter what and laugh at objective missions.

As I said to Matt, both these guys have been removed.

I also don't like open-topped rhinos. There is a good reason why no army got this upgrade. Especially in CSM codex, which have better CC troops than their good cousins. Av11 and open topped is not a good solution because it gives many buffs while keeping it unaffected by small str fire.

Whilst I can under-stand your concern, this ability does still cost points and does make it more vulnerable. I really can under-stand your concern, but manoeuvrability and actually getting into CC was something CSM's often struggled with, particularly 'zerkers. Also, Orks can do this even better and in larger numbers! Hopefully the offset in points and vulnerability adds some compensation. May raise it to 15pts I guess...

I really understand the problem with many Legions / Chapters etc. in one codex. I play Eldar and would love having some specific rules for each and every craftworld. This problem in some different ways, for example:
a) Special characters. Like in SM book. You want your army to be more like Salamanders - take this guy. This is very easy solution.
b) Some inner codex specific rules, like taking a Big Mek allows you to take some green dudes as troops. etc. Very similar to a).
c) Do nothing actually. Give units from different Legions and if player wants to play fluffy World Eaters he CAN do this only by selecting appropriate units.
d) You have to choose between one of them - like in this case. Many people will be happy because they can have their own Legion in CSM book, and it is much, much more different than just having one rule thanks to some random special guy. This however enforces fluff on army composition and restricts your army. This is good for fluffy armies, but what about just some casual game when you want to try some other units. Suddenly your whole army must be changed because your original Legion doesn't allow you to take something, or makes something else scoring / cheaper.

As I said when you first brought it up, I do understand what you are saying and was also reluctant about implementing such a rule.
In regards to what you have suggested:
a - To me at least, this is a boring and unsuitable mechanic that also seems to be fairly unpopular with many players. This can still be achieved but doesn't force the player to select a certain character.
b - This is something that I have - and still would - consider, such as making cult units elites unless a HQ takes a certain mark. I do fear this would cut down on the character though and benefits to non-cult armies.
c - This is something I would rather avoid doing. Whilst I can see the appeal, I fear this is something that could easily be abused.
d - I really agree with what you're saying here and restricting the player is something I really, really want to avoid and that example you provided would be the kicker for that argument as, as I just said, I really want to avoid restricting the player.
However, IMHO, in its current format, the player isn't restricted unless he goes god-specific (and even then he only misses out on 1 unit) and most of the bonuses provided by Legions is actually very subtle and can allow a player to make it as thematic or unthematic as he likes. For example, Black Legion allows you to do pretty much anything you want...
ZackTheChaosChild brought up a similar issue at first too but seemed appeased with the flexibility allowed, particularly in The Black Legion.

I'm quite happy with the effect of the Legion rule, I'm just reluctant about the application and almost forcing players to take it. However, general fan reaction to the existing CSM 'dex suggests that such a rule would be wanted...

I only nitpick in my posts, but I generally admire the work here. Props to you!

thanks!

OK, a quick edit made tonight regarding Lesser Daemons, in that I have removed the current god-specific profiles and have given the option for Marks and conferred the Auxiliary special rule.
This cuts down on over-crowding the Codex, removes their being over-powered, prevents them stealing from the Daemons Codex and hopefully simply makes them a simpler unit.

Once again, all Feedback is appreciated. Cheers.

Note: Greater Daemons will be similarly changed soon and I am currently brain-storming the changes to be made to the Sorcerers Warcoven.

I like it, although I find the too many special rules/new wargear to be a little confusing, but I guess that's because it's not printed on a book, where you can go back and forth in pages.

I am preparing an email to GW about the next Chaos Codex, would you mind if I "steal" some of your ideas? (it's for the good of all Chaos players!)

I've only had a quick skim but...

No invulnerable save on oblits ? I don't see why they MUST choose a weapon either... ? Too expensive too.

I think the sonic weapon rules, as suggested are pretty terrible I'm afraid. I think existing sonic gun stats are fine and dandy. What i would suggest to provide some balance is to make them a free upgrade but costs the noise marine both his bolt gun and/or bolt pistol. The changes to the blastmaster I find equally odd -- why do noise marines now not have any anti tank options in their squad at all ? I agree the blast rule is, perhaps a bit good. I would lower the points cost of the weapon, give it S7 and a variable ( rolled each time the unit fires) AP value. I would maybe try making this a one per 5 in the squad weapon. Oh, and making it assault 1 R24" or heavy 2 range 36".

I would remove the "pure" Gds and indeed just allow them to be aligned much like the lesser daemons. Maybe with an option to buy them daemonic flights for X points as well.

I think you might as well just change "all is dust" to a flat out "may reroll failed saves".. and leave it as that. Also if the sorcerer MUST be bought for the squad then let's just add him into the basic 5 man squad price from the start. No invulnerable save at all IMO. What do inferno bolts do here anyway ?


I don't see any point to the chaos champion HQ option existing. Combat patrol is over and gone. Deal with it.

I think something to further make your choice of HQ affect the army build would be cool. Maybe selecting a Dp should affect your daemon choices, and something like a sorcerer means possessed count as scoring units -- ala pedro and sternguard.

I think the 4++ on the DP is a bit OTT, and giving a 3++ is.. well.... you want to be able to kill them.

I personally don't think Lucius and Kharn should be HQ, merely upgrade characters for their cults.. but we've argued this before.

I would avoid the inclusion of a Basilisk, I think it just makes it awkward as/when the "parent" book changes, even though the 'lisk stats are pretty solid. i would suggest either making havocs count as scoring units or allowing 1 Vindicator to be taken as a troops choice -- like the ork mek and a deff dread.

Abaddon should make any unit he is with fearless... don't think he does that now/here ?

Chain axe rules are OTT to me, especially given the number of A they can throw out. I don't see why they should be any different than normal cc weapons.


Cypher shouldn't be in the chaos codex. At all.

Don't agree with the land raider variant at all. ..why ?

I think the variant Defilers would be best folded into being merely options for the Defiler.

I would also allow or suggest squadrons for Vindicators and predators -- but only for non possessed ones .

Please don't mistake brevity for rudeness here, it's a fine start IMO.

Tzif wrote:I like it, although I find the too many special rules/new wargear to be a little confusing, but I guess that's because it's not printed on a book, where you can go back and forth in pages.

Thanks, I hope that it's just the format, it wouldn't surprise me if it was otherwise, but I have been - and still am - trying to cut down on the number of 'extra' rules...

I am preparing an email to GW about the next Chaos Codex, would you mind if I "steal" some of your ideas? (it's for the good of all Chaos players!)

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, in all honesty, I'd rather you didn't. Not until it's the finished article at least...
Thanks and Sorry!

reds8n wrote: I've only had a quick skim but...

No invulnerable save on oblits ? I don't see why they MUST choose a weapon either... ? Too expensive too.

Whoops. That's a mistake - will edit that. And I'll cut their points down to 80pts.

I think the sonic weapon rules, as suggested are pretty terrible I'm afraid. I think existing sonic gun stats are fine and dandy. What i would suggest to provide some balance is to make them a free upgrade but costs the nosie amrine both his bolt gun and/or bolt pistol. The changes to the blastmaster I find equally odd -- why do noise mariens now not have any anti tank options in their squad at all ? I agree the blast rule is, perhaps a bit good. I would lower the points cost of the weapon, give it S7 and a variable ( rolled each time the unit fires) AP value. I would maybe try making this a one per 5 in the squad weapon. Oh, and making it assault 1 R24" or heavy 2 range 36".

OK, I appreciate the honesty Red. I wasn't fully happy with my incarnation either, I may go for your idea on the Blast Master though. I had also been toying with the idea of making them 1 in 5, so I'll go with that too.
I'm unsure why you feel the Sonic Blaster should be a free upgrade however?
Also, I was conversely unsure as to why - being sonic weaponry - Noise Marines should have any anti-tank at all?! Obviously it's beneficial for game-terms, but you can always get your anti-tank elsewhere without having to 'waste' the fire of a the rest of the squad? Maybe its just me though?

I would remove the "pure" Gds and indeed just allow them to be aligned much like the lesser daemons. Maybe with an option to buy them daemonic flights for X points as well.

Yeah, don't worry man. I changed the Lesser Daemons to be upgradable rather than 'pure' yesterday and now I intend to do the same with the Greater Daemons. I also intend to give them Fleet instead of wings as IMHO, being able to arrive (summoning) in the enemies face was balanced by the GD's otherwise lack of manoeuvrability, so I would rather not give them wings as well to make them the whole deal. Fleet seems like a suitable compensation to me though.
But yes, they are in the process of being changed.

I think you might as well just change "all is dust" to a flat out "may reroll failed saves".. and leave it as that. Also if the sorceror MUST be bought for the squad then let's just add him into the basic 5 man squad price from the start. No invunlerable save at all IMO. What do inferno bolts do here anyway ?

I guess I could make it re-roll failed saves against ranged attacks, however Tzeentch is all about the invulnerable saves.
As for the 'must' on the Sorcerer, whilst I completely understand your reasoning, it was to provide a benefit to the 'magic numbers' per-se.
Also, Inferno Bolts are AP3 as they were before. If it's not mentioned in the Wargear then its not changed.

I don't see any point to the chaos champion HQ option existing. Combat patorl is over and gone. Deal with it.

Actually, the Chaos Champion was a later addition to provide access to a cheap HQ choice who would be much more viable for one of the Legion-specific special rules, and/or representing smaller Legions and use in smaller games.
Many armies seem to have a more minor HQ and personally I intend to keep him...

I think something to further make your chocie of HQ affect the army build would be cool. Maybe selecting a Dp should affect your daemon choices, and something like a sorceror means posessed count as scoring units -- ala pedro and sternguard.

I was seriously considering allowing possessed to be scoring via a special character, however I decided against it in the end. I may change the rules on Hakanor and make him a Prince from the Beasts of Annihilation(?) and therefore allow possessed as scoring.
Generally however, I've tried to avoid making the HQ's force multipliers to reflect their more greedy nature.

I think the 4++ on the DP is a bit OTT, and giving a 3++ is.. well.... you want to be able to kill them.

Whilst I would normally agree with you, I found the current DP to be a bit... fragile and not befitting of an increased points cost or the favour of Chaos, hence their boost. However, they CANNOT get to 3++ as, like you said, that's a bit much!

I personally don't think Lucius and Kharn should be HQ, merely upgrade characters for their cults.. but we've argued this before.

Whilst I can see your point, yes we have argued this before!

I would avoid the inclusion of a Basilisk, I think it just makes it awkward as/when the "parent" book changes, even though the 'lisk stats are pretty solid. i would suggest either making havocs count as scoring units or allowing 1 Vindicator to be taken as a troops choice -- like the ork mek and a deff dread.

Well I think the Basilisk suits the Iron Warriors, whilst scoring Havocs doesn't so much and are much more liable to being OP'ed IMHO. I'm willing to risk the Bassie falling behind the parent codex, as, although it's a justified concern, Chaos often has 'older' toys...

Abaddon should make any unit he is with fearless... don't think he does that now/here ?

No he doesn't, I may change that. Although, his usual retinue (Terminators) are stubborn.

Chain axe rules are OTT to me, especially given the number of A they can throw out. I don't see why they should be any different than normal cc weapons.

Yeah, you may be right here. If some others provide feedback on this I will likely change it, particularly given your reasoning behind it...

Cypher shouldn't be in the chaos codex. At all.

Yeah, I was reluctant to include him but fans seem to want him and he has a great model. I also like his role. But yes, he may or may not go...

Don't agree with the land raider variant at all. ..why ?

Well, most Chaos players want an extra Land Raider and complain about Forge World or GW not giving them one. I personally envisage the Marauder as an almost linebreaker, something suited for Chaos, particularly in its transport capacity.

I think the variant Defilers would be best folded into being merely options for the Defiler.

Yeah, this I will do.

I would also allow or suggest squadrons for Vindicators and predators -- but only for non possessed ones .

Personally, I'm not sure why? Normal Space Marines can't do it and CSM's probably shouldn't be any different in that respect. I would on the other hand consider making Defilers squadrons!

Please don't mistake brevity for rudeness here, it's a find start IMO.

It's OK man, I can understand your time constrains (my terms just started too) and I appreciate the feedback. Changes will be made as needed...

The sonic weapon thing I think should be added as I think Slaanesh guys get kind of a raw deal at times, especially if you compare what they get compared to the other cult options -- a point you touch on early on. I thought about maybe giving them fleet but I think given the access to land raiders that might be a bit too abusive -- turn 1 charges are something that should be rare IMO. It's an iconic weapon for them, but if you don't have to give anything up to get the gun they become too much of a no brainer/default choice. The current 5 points is a bit too expensive IMO.

I think they have to have some anti tank, if only for small games. The other cults and troops all do, and whilst I agree that things like powerfists and melta weapons etc etc shouldn't be C & p'ed into every squad option, they need something.

I think the flat out invulnerable saves for the 1K sons is amongst the worst things that GW have done to the faction -- and in 40k they've been shafted good and proper for years. the fluff has them as animated suits of power armour and logically therefore ( insofar as logic has any place in the game/setting anyway ) those suits should be just as vulnerable to high S low AP as normal power armour suits IMO. What wouldn't knock them down is small arms fire punching holes/similar in them. They used to be immune to shooting attacks of less than S5 once upon a time -- which was a bit too much I'll grant you.

I would perhaps even say we should remove the compulsion that says they MUST have a champion, and maybe give them something akin to wraithsight unless they do have a sorceror/IC/psyker within X inches.

I really think that most of the "modern" books are in fact moving away from the "lesser" HQ options, most of the books now have no 2W HQ choice IIRC. I think the "danger" here is that a player in smaller points games can get someone who is 90% as deadly as a fuller HQ... when what should happen is the fuller HQ should be a little less uber than normal.

I've had similar issues with my princes.. but in my experience they tend to gunned down by ( for example) heavy bolter fire/similar, and the option for the 2+ armour goes a long way towards making them a bit more durable. Armour save and an Invulnerable save is pretty tasty on a MC.

As for the squadrons : I think it's a nice way to represent the vast resources the original legions had and also helps bulk out the codex for bigger games. I would suggest it's an obvious step for the regular marines -- don't know if you've seen the Astartes siege list in IA 10 but they can take squadrons of preds, whirlwinds and vindicators.

I would avoid letting any possessed engines go squadron sized -- call it the rule of spite or jealousy/similar -- as given what they ignore that's a bit overpowered IMO.

Right, more changes have been made:

Greater Daemons have become a single Greater Daemon with Marks Available.

As have Defilers.

Obliterators have gained 5++ and a 5pts points decrease.

If anyone is unhappy with any changes then please say so. Personally, I'm much happier with the Greater Daemons, though they may still be a bit rough round the edges.
I'm more apprehensive about the Defilers however; although it cuts down on unit entries, I believe they worked better as individual units rather than upgrades, but we'll see how that goes for now...

As ever, all C+C is welcome. Thanks.

Looking great, I have some suggestions bout Kharn. Him hitting on a +2 was kinda his unique thing being probably the best warrior in the 40k universe(biased some lol ) (also the Betrayer thing) maybe put that back, drop the +2 armor save down to +3 again and the preferred enemy. I like the added Champion of Khrone and Eternal Warrior much needed . Just some suggestions for the character. Also for berserkers why not also add FNP for them? Blood Angel Death Company has it and it would seem fitting for berserkers.

reds8n wrote:The sonic weapon thing I think should be added as I think Slaanesh guys get kind of a raw deal at times, especially if you compare what they get compared to the other cult options -- a point you touch on early on. I thought about maybe giving them fleet but I think given the access to land raiders that might be a bit too abusive -- turn 1 charges are something that should be rare IMO. It's an iconic weapon for them, but if you don't have to give anything up to get the gun they become too much of a no brainer/default choice. The current 5 points is a bit too expensive IMO.

Yeah, I know what you mean Red and I too thought about fleet - albeit only briefly.
I still struggle to understand the point behind Sonic Blasters being optional though; it keeps the points consistency with the other cult troops and a Sonic Blaster is better than a Boltgun and would therefore a real no-brainer...

I think they have to have some anti tank, if only for small games. The other cults and troops all do, and whilst I agree that things like powerfists and melta weapons etc etc shouldn't be C & p'ed into every squad option, they need something.

You have a point, I will see what I can do in regards to simplifying but also beefing up the (1 in 5) Blast Master... I'm thinking Strength 6, Assault 3 or Heavy 5. Light anti-tank I admit, but Strength 7 on a gun that uses sound is a bit... odd to me?

I think the flat out invulnerable saves for the 1K sons is amongst the worst things that GW have done to the faction -- and in 40k they've been shafted good and proper for years. the fluff has them as animated suits of power armour and logically therefore ( insofar as logic has any place in the game/setting anyway ) those suits should be just as vulnerable to high S low AP as normal power armour suits IMO. What wouldn't knock them down is small arms fire punching holes/similar in them. They used to be immune to shooting attacks of less than S5 once upon a time -- which was a bit too much I'll grant you.

The whole immunity to small arms fire is exactly what I was aiming for with this and I completely agree with your point. In regards to this, I now intend to change it to FNP, without Invulnerables. Although, yes, this does step on the PM's toes a little bit, it's simpler and more 'reasonable' than re-roll armour saves IMHO. It balances out well with the points in regards to a lack of invulnerable save too.

I would perhaps even say we should remove the compulsion that says they MUST have a champion, and maybe give them something akin to wraithsight unless they do have a sorceror/IC/psyker within X inches.

This I am also now considering, they have Wraithsight if the Sorc. dies as it is, however I may make a Sorcerer option and only have 'wraithsight' not occur if a sorcerer of some form is in the unit.

I really think that most of the "modern" books are in fact moving away from the "lesser" HQ options, most of the books now have no 2W HQ choice IIRC. I think the "danger" here is that a player in smaller points games can get someone who is 90% as deadly as a fuller HQ... when what should happen is the fuller HQ should be a little less uber than normal.

I know what you're saying, however, the "lesser" HQ here doesn't have base invulnerable save, Daemonic Steeds or - more significantly - Daemonic Weapons; hampering is comparitive deadliness.
Also, as I said before, this is supposed to help represent Warbands of varying sizes and allow easier access to the legion-specific special rules.
Finally, I'd argue otherwise in regards to GW moving away from lesser HQ's. In 5th edition Codices we have the Wych-HQ, WGBL, Tyranid Prime, Commisar Lord who are all (arguably) "lesser" HQs...

I've had similar issues with my princes.. but in my experience they tend to gunned down by ( for example) heavy bolter fire/similar, and the option for the 2+ armour goes a long way towards making them a bit more durable. Armour save and an Invulnerable save is pretty tasty on a MC.

Yes, I know what you mean here actually and I must agree in regards to the mass fire taking them down, however there is still a 2+ available if you pay for it (Chaos Armour) and I find a 4++ suits the Daemonic nature a bit more; stops the powerfists and the like too!
However, a 2+ would certainly help against certain weapons, but then again, so does a 4++...

As for the squadrons : I think it's a nice way to represent the vast resources the original legions had and also helps bulk out the codex for bigger games. I would suggest it's an obvious step for the regular marines -- don't know if you've seen the Astartes siege list in IA 10 but they can take squadrons of preds, whirlwinds and vindicators.

I would avoid letting any possessed engines go squadron sized -- call it the rule of spite or jealousy/similar -- as given what they ignore that's a bit overpowered IMO.

I can see what you're getting at Red, but I still find it doesn't make that much sense, in that the loyalists can't do it but the traitors can. After-all, the CSM's can reliably produce said units, Vindicators were very late heresy and it's the loyalists that have access to the STC's.
Whilst it certainly would help it in larger games (which are already CSM's strong point to be fair), I'm not sure how necessary it is... There's plenty of emphasis on Heavy Support anyways...
As for the Defilers, these are the things that the traitors can still regularly produce and would - if anything - further display their reliance of Daemonic support/weaponry. Also, the Iron Warriors HAD (Trygons = om nom nom'ed) 600 Defilers on one planet! I've never heard of that many Vindi's or Preds in one place.
Finally, in game terms, it's a lot more beneficial/over-powered to Preds/Vindicators I would've thought, as due to Daemonic Possession Defilers already ignore shaken and stunned results and it would therefore be less 'overpowered' IMHO?

Lord Chiasson wrote:Looking great, I have some suggestions bout Kharn. Him hitting on a +2 was kinda his unique thing being probably the best warrior in the 40k universe(biased some lol ) (also the Betrayer thing) maybe put that back, drop the +2 armor save down to +3 again and the preferred enemy. I like the added Champion of Khrone and Eternal Warrior much needed . Just some suggestions for the character. Also for berserkers why not also add FNP for them? Blood Angel Death Company has it and it would seem fitting for berserkers.

Thanks man, I know what you mean about the 2+ WS thing, however when he hits better than an Avatar it seems a bit dubious, IMHO the preferred enemy has compensated for this anyways...
As for the Bezerkers, they don't really need any more 'boosting' in my opinion and then they'd REALLY be stepping on the toes of other cult units.


Intended Changes to be implemented are:

- Thousand Sons love invulnerable save and re-rolling 1's. Instead they gain FNP.
- Blast Masters are to be changed.
- Warcoven to be changed.
- Special Characters to be reviewed.
- Squadrons in HS (likely Defilers! ) considered, as will be non-mandatory Asp. Sorcerers in Rubric Marine squads.

These will be added in one big group as it were, so the Codex is currently slightly behind what it's intended to be atm.

Cheers, I will update it as soon as I can.
Dave.

I personally feel that Kharn is just about fine the way he is. Maybe up his price if you give him a 2+ Artificer save.

Don't nerf him just because the Avatar sucks. That would be the WORST thing you could do.

Just Dave wrote:Yeah, I know what you mean Red and I too thought about fleet - albeit only briefly.
I still struggle to understand the point behind Sonic Blasters being optional though; it keeps the points consistency with the other cult troops and a Sonic Blaster is better than a Boltgun and would therefore a real no-brainer...

It's the iconic and defining trait/characteristic of the Slaanesh cult in 40k..and they don't come with it ?

Nurgle == bonus T, blight grenades and FnP
Khorne == FC, +1 Ws and A.. chainaxes.
Tzeentch == .. whatever their armour is and inferno bolts, relentless.
Slaanesh == +1 i..and.... ? How is that fair ? This is why I think the upgrade should be free but, in the example I gave, it costs them an A in melee as they also lose the bolt pistol so it becomes an actual choice.

You have a point, I will see what I can do in regards to simplifying but also beefing up the (1 in 5) Blast Master... I'm thinking Strength 6, Assault 3 or Heavy 5. Light anti-tank I admit, but Strength 7 on a gun that uses sound is a bit... odd to me?

It's not just sound remember, it's discordant warp energies. I don't see why, for example, men in sealed terminator armour would be bothered by buzzing flies and a nasty smell from blight grenades but...

The whole immunity to small arms fire is exactly what I was aiming for with this and I completely agree with your point. In regards to this, I now intend to change it to FNP, without Invulnerables. Although, yes, this does step on the PM's toes a little bit, it's simpler and more 'reasonable' than re-roll armour saves IMHO. It balances out well with the points in regards to a lack of invulnerable save too.

fair enough, I do think this makes them like plague marines lite though. maybe keep your reroll 1s and have a psychic power/sorceror benefit that might let a squad reroll all failed saves ?

I know what you're saying, however, the "lesser" HQ here doesn't have base invulnerable save,

and is pretty much worthless in the modern game for this army then no ?

Also, as I said before, this is supposed to help represent Warbands of varying sizes and allow easier access to the legion-specific special rules.
Finally, I'd argue otherwise in regards to GW moving away from lesser HQ's. In 5th edition Codices we have the Wych-HQ, WGBL, Tyranid Prime, Commisar Lord who are all (arguably) "lesser" HQs...

Pretty much all of these have 3w and the full range of options the regular HQ has.

I can see what you're getting at Red, but I still find it doesn't make that much sense, in that the loyalists can't do it but the traitors can. After-all, the CSM's can reliably produce said units, Vindicators were very late heresy and it's the loyalists that have access to the STC's.
Whilst it certainly would help it in larger games (which are already CSM's strong point to be fair), I'm not sure how necessary it is... There's plenty of emphasis on Heavy Support anyways...
As for the Defilers, these are the things that the traitors can still regularly produce and would - if anything - further display their reliance of Daemonic support/weaponry. Also, the Iron Warriors HAD (Trygons = om nom nom'ed) 600 Defilers on one planet! I've never heard of that many Vindi's or Preds in one place.
Finally, in game terms, it's a lot more beneficial/over-powered to Preds/Vindicators I would've thought, as due to Daemonic Possession Defilers already ignore shaken and stunned results and it would therefore be less 'overpowered' IMHO?

Then you need to reread your fluff.

the old Legions had access to numbers of tanks which would make the modern chapters weep with jealousy.

Storm of Iron 1 warband of Iron warriors fields over 100 siege tanks. In the follow up novel in the EoT they pit armoured companies of tanks against the IW fortress. The IW, staying with them, took part in the largest tank battle in the 40K setting on Tallarn.

In my experience chaos armies struggle at higher points games as they generally have already used up all force selections worth taking already. My 1500 list uses all 3 heavy, 2 HQ, 3 troops and 2 elites with the existing list. I'm not exactly overjoyed at the possibility of fielding overpriced and not very good bikes/raptors etc etc at higher points games.

This also, for example, makes it actually possible to field a renegade list that isn't dependent upon daemonic tanks, oblits etc etc... which is one of the goals of the revamp is it not ?

I think what you might see this way in fact is squadrons of cheaper ( ie less heavily armed Predators for example) as a tooled up squadron would be very expensive indeed.
Are you familiar with quite what the squadron rules do for tanks ? They both give and take away, and this is why I think letting daemonically driven tanks "buddy up" ( like Defilers) would be a bit OTT.

Subscribed/Bookmarked. I only just started, and it's looking great. Gotta come back and read it again soon.

P.S., how close are you to finishing? Are you going to release a .PDF?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Some notes as I read along: The whole 'two legions' thing may cause some fairly significant confusion, and I'd recommend for the sake of streamlining and simplicity to make it a one legion limit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd also recommend the Legion Rule to be an option, rather than a requirement just for the sake of argument. Another criticism (hope you don't take it personally, I'm just trying to help out,) is the explanation of the Auxiliaries rules. It could use a better explanation. Does this mean I can only take one cult and multiple different auxiliaries? What's the difference, other than flavor?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Daemonkin may be the only random rules that I like in the entirety of Warhammer. Great job!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In regards to e. Death Guardian, do you mean that it can take a 4+ cover save while in assault? Or something else?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How's playtesting coming?

lol no does not work

Berzerker_spam wrote:lol no does not work

If we could at least try and make our comments actually constructive it would be much appreciated. Thanks.

OK, I have a fairly serious proposal to make here in regards to the Legion Rule:

I am now thinking that instead of its current incarnation (which I fully admit isn't the best), I suggest it should now become a 'mark' of sorts for unit entries.
For example, rather than each unit having to be designated as belonging to a Legion - the same as a HQ choice of course - pretty much all vehicles and units can select (FOR FREE) a Mark of the Chaos Legions.

For example, it would be changed to something like this (spoiler for ease):



Whilst this may seem complicated when explained like this, it will make it simpler overall I expect. Although it would increase the number of options available to each unit, this means that units don't HAVE to be aligned with a HQ choice and helps clarify things through representation of Wargear.
In regards to cross-cultural (Legionary) CSM forces, it could simply be worded so that a unit with the Mark of [insert Legion] can only enter transport vehicles that also have the Mark of [insert Legion] etc.

As I said, it may seem complicated when explained like this, but I think overall it will make things a lot simpler in regards to confusion between the Legion rules.
Obviously, to save confusion the reference of 'Marks' may be changed to something such as 'brand', 'emblem', 'symbol' etc.

Thoughts?

jp400 wrote:I personally feel that Kharn is just about fine the way he is. Maybe up his price if you give him a 2+ Artificer save.

Don't nerf him just because the Avatar sucks. That would be the WORST thing you could do.

It's not so much that the Avatar sucks, but that Kharn shouldn't be able to so reliably hit a God of War. With a WS7 and Preferred Enemy he's still considerably capable of doing so however.
On the other hand, atm Kharn is seriously under-priced and will therefore go back to 3+ and probably lose PE too.

reds8n wrote:

Just Dave wrote:Yeah, I know what you mean Red and I too thought about fleet - albeit only briefly.
I still struggle to understand the point behind Sonic Blasters being optional though; it keeps the points consistency with the other cult troops and a Sonic Blaster is better than a Boltgun and would therefore a real no-brainer...

It's the iconic and defining trait/characteristic of the Slaanesh cult in 40k..and they don't come with it ?

Nurgle == bonus T, blight grenades and FnP
Khorne == FC, +1 Ws and A.. chainaxes.
Tzeentch == .. whatever their armour is and inferno bolts, relentless.
Slaanesh == +1 i..and.... ? How is that fair ? This is why I think the upgrade should be free but, in the example I gave, it costs them an A in melee as they also lose the bolt pistol so it becomes an actual choice.

Sorry Red, but what was the point you were trying to make again? That they should have Sonic Blasters as optional?
If so, then as it is it rounds out their points to equal the others, is superior to the Boltgun and therefore would be taken instead if optional and - as you said - is there defining characteristic? As you also said, in the current Codex they are over-priced; hence they're much less so here...

It's not just sound remember, it's discordant warp energies. I don't see why, for example, men in sealed terminator armour would be bothered by buzzing flies and a nasty smell from blight grenades but...

That's a fair point as well actually, I'll see what I can do...
(had forgotten the Warp Energy bit)

fair enough, I do think this makes them like plague marines lite though. maybe keep your reroll 1s and have a psychic power/sorceror benefit that might let a squad reroll all failed saves ?

I agree, it does seem a bit like Plague Marines lite, but I feel there is enough difference in the rest of their stats to help differentiate, but yes, it's still stepping on their toes a little bit and I acknowledge this.
Then again, I may stick with the re-roll ones as the Sorcerer Lord special rule combined with FNP would be too much IMHO.

(Sorcerer Lord = 1 for a HQ in the army, 45pts (optional) - Each turn, a single friendly unit within 12” of a Sorcerer Lord can re-roll either unsuccessful to-hit rolls or unsuccessful armour saves for both shooting phases of that turn.)

and is pretty much worthless in the modern game for this army then no ?

No. He can still get an Invulnerable save and he can perform as a relatively cheap way to add force-multiplication rules such as Sorcerer Lord (above).

Then you need to reread your fluff.

the old Legions had access to numbers of tanks which would make the modern chapters weep with jealousy.

Storm of Iron 1 warband of Iron warriors fields over 100 siege tanks. In the follow up novel in the EoT they pit armoured companies of tanks against the IW fortress. The IW, staying with them, took part in the largest tank battle in the 40K setting on Tallarn.

In my experience chaos armies struggle at higher points games as they generally have already used up all force selections worth taking already. My 1500 list uses all 3 heavy, 2 HQ, 3 troops and 2 elites with the existing list. I'm not exactly overjoyed at the possibility of fielding overpriced and not very good bikes/raptors etc etc at higher points games.

This also, for example, makes it actually possible to field a renegade list that isn't dependent upon daemonic tanks, oblits etc etc... which is one of the goals of the revamp is it not ?

I think what you might see this way in fact is squadrons of cheaper ( ie less heavily armed Predators for example) as a tooled up squadron would be very expensive indeed.
Are you familiar with quite what the squadron rules do for tanks ? They both give and take away, and this is why I think letting daemonically driven tanks "buddy up" ( like Defilers) would be a bit OTT.

I wouldn't doubt I do need to catch up on some of my fluff...

... However, it still remains that - unlike with defilers - the CSM's do not have the resources to build more pred's and vindi's (do they?! STC?) although Storm of Iron is a good example. However, a Single Warband of Iron Warriors still had 600+ Defilers - significantly more.

Also, whilst yes, it would help renegades step away from daemonic engines, it also suggests that renegades have even more tanks then their loyalist counterparts who don't field in squadrons.

Finally, whilst I fully admit my strongest point most certainly is not the rules of the game. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Defilers already ignore Shaken and Stunned Results and therefore do not gain this from Squadrons, whilst they can still be destroyed as the result of immobilisation. Unlike Pred's/Vindi's which would now be able to ignore shaken and stunned and therefore gain a benefit Defilers miss out on?
I dunno, I'm sorry but I'm still unconvinced as to why Preds or Vindi's should be squadrons, particularly in comparison to defilers...

crazypsyko666 wrote:Subscribed/Bookmarked. I only just started, and it's looking great. Gotta come back and read it again soon.

P.S., how close are you to finishing? Are you going to release a .PDF?

Thank you man, I appreciate this. Well the army rules per-se are largely finished. If it's popular enough - and I have enough time - I do intend to create a PDF, yes.
ATM it's largely fixing any flaws within the army list options, fluff etc. would be added into the PDF on the other hand.

Some notes as I read along: The whole 'two legions' thing may cause some fairly significant confusion, and I'd recommend for the sake of streamlining and simplicity to make it a one legion limit.

For simplicity sakes, you are completely right, yes. However, forcing players to only have one Legion wouldn't be fair or popular IMHO.

I'd also recommend the Legion Rule to be an option, rather than a requirement just for the sake of argument. Another criticism (hope you don't take it personally, I'm just trying to help out,) is the explanation of the Auxiliaries rules. It could use a better explanation. Does this mean I can only take one cult and multiple different auxiliaries? What's the difference, other than flavor?

Don't worry man, I won't take it personally, I appreciate the help. But yes, I shall re-write Auxiliaries, that seems to be a problem someone else commented on too, so yes, that will be changed.
As for the Legion rule, someone else also raised the idea of making it optional, but to me this just adds confusion as to what happens to non-Legion units and that Black Legion is effectively the default choice and doesn't hinder what you can take...

However, you could check out the Legion rule at the top of this post to see if you prefer that proposal.

The Daemonkin may be the only random rules that I like in the entirety of Warhammer. Great job!

Why thank you!

In regards to e. Death Guardian, do you mean that it can take a 4+ cover save while in assault? Or something else?

Well as far as I know, you cannot get Cover Saves in assault, so no. I'll have another look at it however and see if I need to change the wording...

How's playtesting coming?

Actually, atm play-testing is non-existent! I don't really PLAY WH40K much atm and nor do I have the time or resources available to me atm...

Hmm, I wish Kharn did away with that silly rule that makes him hit his own men. In his current incarnation he's so easy to kill that it doesn't matter if he's a combat beast.

I'm not really sure I like the rewrite of the Legion rule. The whole point is to define the army and its composition, and allocating these rules to individual units means two things: That it could easily be abused by selecting the best possible options for each army, and two, that it still makes things pretty confusing. I'd take the two legions thing over that any day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@reds8n: I'd argue that the Iron Warriors have such powerful siege capabilities is BECAUSE they maintain their vehicles with such high regard. They and the Imperial Fists were the two masters of siege and defense, why wouldn't they have the best available?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Chiasson wrote:Looking great, I have some suggestions bout Kharn. Him hitting on a +2 was kinda his unique thing being probably the best warrior in the 40k universe(biased some lol ) (also the Betrayer thing) maybe put that back, drop the +2 armor save down to +3 again and the preferred enemy. I like the added Champion of Khrone and Eternal Warrior much needed . Just some suggestions for the character. Also for berserkers why not also add FNP for them? Blood Angel Death Company has it and it would seem fitting for berserkers.

Because FNP/high T is a big thing for Nurgle. Lethality and ferociousness in CC is Khorne's. For a perfect example of these differences, look up the troop choices in the Daemon's codex if you haven't.