Medium of Death wrote:I'd just like an increased level of customisation and restrictions on mixing marks. Khorne and Tzeentch teaming up... *vomits*
While Khorne may believe Tzeentch to be weak due to his reliance on magic, there has never been the animosity that there is between Khorne and Slaanesh.
Yes, I don't understand why people think Khorne should hate Tzeentch as much as he hates Slaanesh. C'mon people, know your Realms of Chaos books. Slaves to the Darkness is Khorne and Slaanesh, not Khorne and Tzeentch.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote:<Snipped cool stuff>
Well gak, if they made the current codex LatD I'd be happier than a dog licking its own butt. Just so you know.
metalboxes wrote:Tastytaste has posted some interesting speculation (wink) (his words) about how legion customization may work in an article over on Blood of kittens. I've quoted the relevant section below.
Perhaps GW could take a page from RPGs or MMOs to design armies that look a lot like skill trees. Envision (wink) say the next CSM codex looking something like this…
Start with a Chaos Lord and depending on how you kit him, he unlocks certain ways you can play your army. Image an Iron Warriors Lord that gives you cheaper Predators and Vindicators or special abilities for your tanks. At the same time that Iron Warrior Lord can only get certain units because of the track he is on. More so the lieutenants (chosen) are customized to lead basic troopers in different ways as well. This is (of course) highly speculative, but it would be new and fun way for players to design armies. It would be a win-win for most players. Fluffy players could make unique armies based on a personal vision and competitive list builders would dive right in, finding the most killy combinations.
I find this a cool concept, as while customization is determined by HQ choice, in such a system you aren't stuck with running the same special character all the time, and it could allow for very fluffy and characterful customizations.
What Tastytaste is mentioning as a tiered system I talked about on Capture and Control on June 24th while wish listing. I hope his rumors are true because what I wish listed on there was similar and I really would like a more complex tiered system to decide just how renegade you are. Not sure it would come to light but a more diverse (complex?) system of making your CSM list would be a breathe of fresh air as opposed to the stale winds of the current dex.
Im curious if it will be legion based on Daemon powers Ie the Big four or if it will have actual Legion rules for say the Alpha Legion.
As an Alpha Legion player Im kind of hanging out.
Will be interesting to see.
GAZ_NZ wrote:Im curious if it will be legion based on Daemon powers Ie the Big four or if it will have actual Legion rules for say the Alpha Legion.
As an Alpha Legion player Im kind of hanging out.
Will be interesting to see.
I'd speculate that any Legion codex would primarily focus on the " Big four" , but also include list for the other Legions as well, with the possible exception of the Black Legion, as they can already be easily represented by the current Codex.
GAZ_NZ wrote:Im curious if it will be legion based on Daemon powers Ie the Big four or if it will have actual Legion rules for say the Alpha Legion.
As an Alpha Legion player Im kind of hanging out.
Will be interesting to see.
I'd speculate that any Legion codex would primarily focus on the " Big four" , but also include list for the other Legions as well, with the possible exception of the Black Legion, as they can already be easily represented by the current Codex.
I hope it doesn't focus just on the big four. If they are going to do that they may as well re-release 3.5 with everything taking a 15% cut on points costs. While many CSM players may not be opposed to such a thing I certainly hope, if GW decides to do a Chaos Legions book they will give ample and equal attention to all the traitor legions. Otherwise it is sort of a misnomer calling it Codex: Chaos Legions. I do agree though that Black Legion probably doesn't need to be in the new book since the current one is basically Codex: Black Legion anyway.
GAZ_NZ wrote:Im curious if it will be legion based on Daemon powers Ie the Big four or if it will have actual Legion rules for say the Alpha Legion.
As an Alpha Legion player Im kind of hanging out.
Will be interesting to see.
I'd speculate that any Legion codex would primarily focus on the " Big four" , but also include list for the other Legions as well, with the possible exception of the Black Legion, as they can already be easily represented by the current Codex.
I hope it doesn't focus just on the big four. If they are going to do that they may as well re-release 3.5 with everything taking a 15% cut on points costs. While many CSM players may not be opposed to such a thing I certainly hope, if GW decides to do a Chaos Legions book they will give ample and equal attention to all the traitor legions. Otherwise it is sort of a misnomer calling it Codex: Chaos Legions. I do agree though that Black Legion probably doesn't need to be in the new book since the current one is basically Codex: Black Legion anyway.
Don't misunderstand, I definitaly hope that the Iron Warriors,Alpha Legion, Word Bearers and Night Lords Legions all get equal time, I just believe that focus may fall mostly upon the " big four"...
Of course at this point everything is speculative...including plans for a "Legions Codex" itself.
I got back into 40k about 6 months ago and after selling nearly everything i had i decided to go back to one of my old loves CSM!
I checked online and people constantly berrated the CSM codex but it didnt put me off as i love the Chaos legions so much more than the loyalist lapdogs.
I play Iron Warriors as many others do but my main troops choices are Khorne Berzerkers and the other CSM players i have seen recently usually play with Plague marines as troops. Id like to take more normal CSM and be a bit more undivided but i just dont see any incentive to do so with the current codex.
I think in the new book there should be perks for taking a certain legion like cheaper vehicles for IW, Cultists for AL, better close combat troops for Khorne etc . I like being able to pick any unit and it works well but i would like some specialisation.
I think that type of setup is counter to the approach GW's been taking lately.
FITZZ wrote:
Don't misunderstand, I definitely hope that the Iron Warriors,Alpha Legion, Word Bearers and Night Lords Legions all get equal time, I just believe that focus may fall mostly upon the " big four"...
Of course at this point everything is speculative...including plans for a "Legions Codex" itself.
I think the "big four" will get more attention just because they're identity is so directly tied to the units of their specific gods, giving them an initially greater volume of focus. I want to see the other five get attention as well, but its hard to believe that even in a Legion centric codex will be able to go far enough to balance all the legions. The big 4 each have a unit characteristic of it and the others 5 would need as much. Add to that the desire of many to see the inclusion of elite forms of those as well as dedicated vehicles... that just makes it a greater uphill fight for balance for the other five. I think it will take the undivided legions gaining access to units like cultists and a diverse selection of daemon engines to balance things.
I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
For example:
• Black Legion: Mark of Chaos Undivided
• World Eaters: Mark of Khorne
• Death Guard: Mark of Nurgle
• Emperors Children: Mark of Slaanesh
• Thousand Sons: Mark of Tzeentch
• Alpha Legion: Infiltrators
• Iron Warriors: Re-roll of some kind
• Word Bearers: Re-roll of some kind
• Night Lords: Acute Senses
What would be interesting is to see how GW differentiates the Legion Codex from the Renegades codex in the final product. I reckon the Legions codex might be a smaller, elite type army like SW and GK whereas the Renegades ruleset would probably have a lot of parallels with the SM codex.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
For example:
• Black Legion: Mark of Chaos Undivided
• World Eaters: Mark of Khorne
• Death Guard: Mark of Nurgle
• Emperors Children: Mark of Slaanesh
• Thousand Sons: Mark of Tzeentch
• Alpha Legion: Infiltrators
• Iron Warriors: Re-roll of some kind
• Word Bearers: Re-roll of some kind
• Night Lords: Acute Senses
What would be interesting is to see how GW differentiates the Legion Codex from the Renegades codex in the final product. I reckon the Legions codex might be a smaller, elite type army like SW and GK whereas the Renegades ruleset would probably have a lot of parallels with the SM codex.
I think it would be a bit more complicated then that... I imagine there would be some sort of Force Org reshuffling involved, special wargear/units, etc.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
For example:
• Black Legion: Mark of Chaos Undivided
• World Eaters: Mark of Khorne
• Death Guard: Mark of Nurgle
• Emperors Children: Mark of Slaanesh
• Thousand Sons: Mark of Tzeentch
• Alpha Legion: Infiltrators
• Iron Warriors: Re-roll of some kind
• Word Bearers: Re-roll of some kind
• Night Lords: Acute Senses
What would be interesting is to see how GW differentiates the Legion Codex from the Renegades codex in the final product. I reckon the Legions codex might be a smaller, elite type army like SW and GK whereas the Renegades ruleset would probably have a lot of parallels with the SM codex.
I think it would be a bit more complicated then that... I imagine there would be some sort of Force Org reshuffling involved, special wargear/units, etc.
yes definitely some sort of bonuses and swapping in the Force Org, but I don't think Night Lords should just have acute senses I think something a long the lines of fear tactics. Like enemies who are forced to take a morale test take it at -1 accumulative of coarse.
Achaylus72 wrote:
I have heard many rumours that are these and the month released
Imperial/Chaos Warhound Titan (September)
Chaos v Dark Eldar Box Set (September)
Summer of Flyers (September)
Sisters of Battle (Full Codex and all Finecast and Plastic range release (September) Rumour version 1
Necron Codex and complete overhaul (September)
Tau Codex and complete overhaul (November)
Sisters of Battle (Full Codex and all Finecast and Plastic range release (January) Rumour version 2
Space Hulk IV (September)
Bloodbowl (September)
Necromunda (October)
Chaos Legions Codex (September)
These are only the tip of the Iceberg. No one exept the top guys at GW knows what is scheduled to be released, the rest of us know jack crap.
That would be a spectacular schedule. However...way too many rumors for Sept...its pretty well settled something is happening in Sept, the question is which 1 of those will come to be. More Space Hulk...nah, Bloodbowl, even bigger nah, Necomunda...never gonna happen, simply because so many people actually want it to.
I think it's going to be very interesting to see what design decisions are made.
I mean, I hear you guys on all 9 Legions in one book, but if you consider what content that requires, I think that just adds up to everything the current CSM book has plus a ton of extra material. Which is fine, but it'd probably eliminate the need for the current book, right? Why have Codex: Legions and Codex: Legions Light? Who'd play the Light version?
Maybe the WD update will be a major overhaul of the current CSM book. *shrug* Still, it's hard to imagine GW making it radically different. At that point the path of least resistance would be to call the new Legions book Codex: CSM, cancel the old one and do a WD army list for whatever it is they want. Which I suppose might happen since these are only rumors. Who knows?
IMO, Black Legion are also a tricky thing. Past treatment has been that they're the Ultramarines of Chaos...but does that really do them justice, especially in the wake of the HH books in which the Luna Wolves were so prominently featured? Seems to me they're more like the GK of Chaos...the best of the best (baddest of the baddest?). I'd really like to see them fleshed out as an entity instead of being treated as Chaos generics. They're Horus's elite...I don't think they should pale beside the WB, DG, EC, etc.
Achaylus72 wrote:
I have heard many rumours that are these and the month released
Imperial/Chaos Warhound Titan (September)
Chaos v Dark Eldar Box Set (September)
Summer of Flyers (September)
Sisters of Battle (Full Codex and all Finecast and Plastic range release (September) Rumour version 1
Necron Codex and complete overhaul (September)
Tau Codex and complete overhaul (November)
Sisters of Battle (Full Codex and all Finecast and Plastic range release (January) Rumour version 2
Space Hulk IV (September)
Bloodbowl (September)
Necromunda (October)
Chaos Legions Codex (September)
These are only the tip of the Iceberg. No one exept the top guys at GW knows what is scheduled to be released, the rest of us know jack crap.
That would be a spectacular schedule. However...way too many rumors for Sept...its pretty well settled something is happening in Sept, the question is which 1 of those will come to be. More Space Hulk...nah, Bloodbowl, even bigger nah, Necomunda...never gonna happen, simply because so many people actually want it to.
Games Day is actually running Specialist Games Intros this year, so perhaps there is some hope for this even if the dates aren't correct.
gorgon wrote:I think it's going to be very interesting to see what design decisions are made.
I mean, I hear you guys on all 9 Legions in one book, but if you consider what content that requires, I think that just adds up to everything the current CSM book has plus a ton of extra material. Which is fine, but it'd probably eliminate the need for the current book, right? Why have Codex: Legions and Codex: Legions Light? Who'd play the Light version?
Agreed. This is why I think if Codex: Legions ever happens, it will be within the context of a more comprehensive chaos revamp, where GW eventually revisits the Renegade book and inserts more to make that book distinctive while allowing the game designers to explore other rogue chapters like the Relicators while bringing in more unique special characters to personify these other renegade ex-loyalists. I think this would be the best place to bring in LatD... such that the book doesn't just represent rogue marines but all renegade ex-loyalist.
gorgon wrote:
IMO, Black Legion are also a tricky thing. Past treatment has been that they're the Ultramarines of Chaos...but does that really do them justice, especially in the wake of the HH books in which the Luna Wolves were so prominently featured? Seems to me they're more like the GK of Chaos...the best of the best (baddest of the baddest?). I'd really like to see them fleshed out as an entity instead of being treated as Chaos generics. They're Horus's elite...I don't think they should pale beside the WB, DG, EC, etc.
I think how Black Legion get done will depend on how structured the codex represents the other legions. For example, if the codex takes the more open approach where every unit is available to every faction and its only a matter of Legions having greater access through FOC or just "counts as scoring type rules"... that doesn't leave much for the Black Legion; in that situation I could imagine Black Legion being able to have Veteran squads as troop choices or something similar to distinguish them (though I'm assuming Veteran chaos marines will improve).
I call BS on Bloodbowl and Necromunda coming back. It's just too good to be true.
And while we're talking Chaos, I never understood why GW don't treat CSM the way they do the SM chapters. If we can have extra books for Black Templars, Blood Angels, Dark Angels und Space Wolves, why not do something similar with Chaos?
And while we're talking Chaos, I never understood why GW don't treat CSM the way they do the SM chapters. If we can have extra books for Black Templars, Blood Angels, Dark Angels und Space Wolves, why not do something similar with Chaos?
It's easy to understand. Economics and resource management.
gorgon wrote:I think it's going to be very interesting to see what design decisions are made.
I mean, I hear you guys on all 9 Legions in one book, but if you consider what content that requires, I think that just adds up to everything the current CSM book has plus a ton of extra material. Which is fine, but it'd probably eliminate the need for the current book, right? Why have Codex: Legions and Codex: Legions Light? Who'd play the Light version?
Maybe the WD update will be a major overhaul of the current CSM book. *shrug* Still, it's hard to imagine GW making it radically different. At that point the path of least resistance would be to call the new Legions book Codex: CSM, cancel the old one and do a WD army list for whatever it is they want. Which I suppose might happen since these are only rumors. Who knows?
IMO, Black Legion are also a tricky thing. Past treatment has been that they're the Ultramarines of Chaos...but does that really do them justice, especially in the wake of the HH books in which the Luna Wolves were so prominently featured? Seems to me they're more like the GK of Chaos...the best of the best (baddest of the baddest?). I'd really like to see them fleshed out as an entity instead of being treated as Chaos generics. They're Horus's elite...I don't think they should pale beside the WB, DG, EC, etc.
Whilst I didn't think it possible beforehand, I personally managed to fit the Legions & Renegades quite comfortably into my Chaos Space Marine Fandex. All the information (with only a couple of bits of background) needed to play the game such as rules, stats etc. took less than 60 pages, so with the Space Marine Codex numbering 150+ IIRC, it shouldn't be that hard to include them.
I don't see however how they'd create the Legions Codex and still keep the existing Codex in use.
Personally, I don't think it will be a specifically Legions Codex, but just Codex Chaos Space Marines, but obviously better than it is now...
Regarding BL, they're not really the best of the best and they really are more like the Ultramarines as the poster boys of Chaos. I think GW would be better focussing on their dedication to all gods, how after the HH they almost collapsed as they worshipped all gods with a vast number of Possessed etc. almost destroying themselves. I think GW would do best to focus on their efforts to rebuild their Legion whilst taking the fight to the Imperium that defeated them whilst simultaneously trying to rally the other Chaos Space Marines who might otherwise sit around on their asses.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
Considering the fact that C:SM has 11 special characters, 6 of which have Chapter Tactics, they could very easily use this mechanic to represent the 9 different founding legions that turned to Chaos. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
Considering the fact that C:SM has 11 special characters, 6 of which have Chapter Tactics, they could very easily use this mechanic to represent the 9 different founding legions that turned to Chaos. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
If they followed suit with your suggestion it wouldn't be too bad. I would still hope for specific legion books. For example a Sepreate book for World Eaters, Thousand Sons, Death Guard,a nd emporers children. The rest can be in CSM: Legions and that would be good.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
Considering the fact that C:SM has 11 special characters, 6 of which have Chapter Tactics, they could very easily use this mechanic to represent the 9 different founding legions that turned to Chaos. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Same here, and while it isn't the best way of going about it, it will 'get the job done' and will most likely be the road that they take.
candy.man wrote:I’d make a guess that the legions codex would probably use a HQ Chapter tactics type mechanic (ala SM codex) to represent the 9 different legions. The big 5 would get marks of chaos and the remaining 4 would get either a re-roll or a USR instead.
Considering the fact that C:SM has 11 special characters, 6 of which have Chapter Tactics, they could very easily use this mechanic to represent the 9 different founding legions that turned to Chaos. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Same here, and while it isn't the best way of going about it, it will 'get the job done' and will most likely be the road that they take.
(H.B.M.C incoming!!! )
Seems like the most obvious choice. Not sure I'm big fan though. Now every Death Guard army has to field Typhus? Every Tzeentch army will field Ariman?
It would be interesting though, to see what other characters they come up with. Looking forward to the IW and WB special characters.
Considering that Death Guard are a specific formation, with a specific warleader...that's not really a big deal.
Now, if any Nurgle warband had to take Typhus then yes there would be a problem.
Just like the Nurgle not necessarily needing Typhus example I just gave, not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Kanluwen wrote:Considering that Death Guard are a specific formation, with a specific warleader...that's not really a big deal.
Now, if any Nurgle warband had to take Typhus then yes there would be a problem.
I suppose the problem would be, if only fielding Typhus would make Plague Marines troop choices. But even if only fielding Typhus would give you the ability to use, let's say, Plague Marine Havocs instead, you're choices would be severy limited in smaller games.
This comes, btw., from someone who's been playing Deathguard for over 7 years now.
Kanluwen wrote:Considering that Death Guard are a specific formation, with a specific warleader...that's not really a big deal.
Now, if any Nurgle warband had to take Typhus then yes there would be a problem.
I suppose the problem would be, if only fielding Typhus would make Plague Marines troop choices. But even if only fielding Typhus would give you the ability to use, let's say, Plague Marine Havocs instead, you're choices would be severy limited in smaller games.
This comes, btw., from someone who's been playing Deathguard for over 7 years now.
Better option.
If using Typhus, Plague Marines gain a kind of 'Legion Trait' ability that your "generic" Plague Marines do not have.
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Really, even the TS loyal to Magnus?
Does Magnus even do anything anymore?
I can't think of him doing anything outside of brooding. Ahriman is the only member of the Thousand Sons who is active, and is always reported alongside his automaton styled brethren.
Alpharius wrote:Which is why I hope they go more along the lines of Lord with mark (x) gets you (y).
Taking special characters would then get you that plus something else, at a cost of course!
That would be an excellent system for Chaos. Make those special characters mean something for those 200-250 points, but also allow someone to make a useful or fluffy Nurgle or Khorne army without a named character.
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Really, even the TS loyal to Magnus?
Does Magnus even do anything anymore?
I can't think of him doing anything outside of brooding. Ahriman is the only member of the Thousand Sons who is active, and is always reported alongside his automaton styled brethren.
Just thinking of Battle of the Fang which has Sorcerors and Rubrics working for Magnus rather than the exiled Ahriman so I'm assuming a TS army could be a faction following either of these 2 prime movers.
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Really, even the TS loyal to Magnus?
Does Magnus even do anything anymore?
I can't think of him doing anything outside of brooding. Ahriman is the only member of the Thousand Sons who is active, and is always reported alongside his automaton styled brethren.
Just thinking of Battle of the Fang which has Sorcerors and Rubrics working for Magnus rather than the exiled Ahriman so I'm assuming a TS army could be a faction following either of these 2 prime movers.
Battle of the Fang is supposed to take place not that long after the Heresy, which likely means that Ahriman hasn't been "Exiled" yet.
It, if I remember right(and I might not be because it's been awhile since I read up on Ahriman), wasn't an overnight thing after the Rubric happened. There were several "cure" attempts done by Ahriman before Magnus finally sent him away.
But honestly, when one thinks of the Thousand Sons now--you think of Ahriman and his Cabal leading their empty-armored brothers to war, not Magnus and his lot that just stay on the Planet of Sorcerers for the most part.
I support whatever GW does to move away from the requirement of named SC. It gets pretty boring when every X army is lead by X character...or a "counts as" army that is essentially the same.
I do like the inclusion of named SC as options, but making them essentially a requirement is just dumb.
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Uhh... no. More than no. No x Infinity +1.
Ahriman doesn't lead every 1KSons force, so no, he shouldn't lead 1KSons forces.
Making Legion armies require Special Characters is simply daft. Every Emperor's Children force requiring Lucius would be absurd. Even more absurd would be any World Eater force requiring Kharn.
The World Eaters/Death Guard/Emperor's Children/Thousand Sons/Word Bearers/Iron Warriors/Alpha Legion/Night Lords are more than just a named special character and a special rule. Far, far more than that.
Kanluwen wrote:Considering that Death Guard are a specific formation, with a specific warleader...that's not really a big deal.
This I have to hear:
Tell us Kan, why are the Death Guard a specific formation now and not a Traitor Legion?
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Uhh... no. More than no. No x Infinity +1.
Ahriman doesn't lead every 1KSons force, so no, he shouldn't lead 1KSons forces.
Making Legion armies require Special Characters is simply daft. Every Emperor's Children force requiring Lucius would be absurd. Even more absurd would be any World Eater force requiring Kharn.
The World Eaters/Death Guard/Emperor's Children/Thousand Sons/Word Bearers/Iron Warriors/Alpha Legion/Night Lords are more than just a named special character and a special rule. Far, far more than that.
[
Agreed. Requiring a named SC you may as well make it herohammer 40k...because at that point it would be just a hero and his personal guard. A huge part of the 40k fluff is that the universe is huge. Named SCs cant be everywhere at the same time, and Im sure there is more than one 1k sons battle going at any given time, especially since 40k represents small unit actions not grand battles.
The vast majority of fighting going on wont have a named SC in it, and the rules should allow that to be reflected.
Alpharius wrote:Which is why I hope they go more along the lines of Lord with mark (x) gets you (y).
Taking special characters would then get you that plus something else, at a cost of course!
This is spot on and what should happen in an ideal scenario. Since the 3.5 codex and the current vanilla codex all had FOC altering mechanics based on generic HQs, this will most likely be present in some form the next book. I’m guessing that SCs would probably provide a chapter tactics type bonus to the army if taken. This would essentially create a two tiered scenario where with a generic Nurgle HQ you get a generic Nurgle force and with Typhus you get a Death Guard force.
You can already field a generic Nurgle force with the current 'Chaos' Codex. This new Codex should be about the Legions, not about taking a special character in order to play a Legion.
My post is not a case of “what should happen” only “what will happen” based on current trends. I don’t see GW returning the themed army mechanic of the 3.5 codex any time soon.
H.B.M.C. wrote:You can already field a generic Nurgle force with the current 'Chaos' Codex. This new Codex should be about the Legions, not about taking a special character in order to play a Legion.
I have to agree here. This is supposedly, let's not forget this may not even exist, a Chaos Legions codex; therefore a "generic" Nurgle force would be ridiculous since Deathguard are anything but generic Nurgle Marines. I hope each Legion gets a specific set of builds but the addition of a SC gives you a further bonus. For example World Eaters would be made up of Berzerkers and Khornate Daemons but the inclusion of Kharn would give all Berzerkers an additional +1 attack, or something of that nature. Then again, make the SC awesome enough and you don't need their inclusion to do anything to aid the rest of the corrupt brethren!
OverwatchCNC wrote:For example World Eaters would be made up of Berzerkers and Khornate Daemons but the inclusion of Kharn would give all Berzerkers an additional +1 attack, or something of that nature. Then again, make the SC awesome enough and you don't need their inclusion to do anything to aid the rest of the corrupt brethren!
I don't mind special characters adding something special to the force - there certainly has to be a reason to take them - but I don't want the reason to take them to become the only way to play that army. If we do that we end up with the same sort of crap that Imperial Fist, Crimson Fist, White Scar, Salamander, Raven Guard and Dark Angel players are stuck with.
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Really, even the TS loyal to Magnus?
Does Magnus even do anything anymore?
I can't think of him doing anything outside of brooding. Ahriman is the only member of the Thousand Sons who is active, and is always reported alongside his automaton styled brethren.
Just thinking of Battle of the Fang which has Sorcerors and Rubrics working for Magnus rather than the exiled Ahriman so I'm assuming a TS army could be a faction following either of these 2 prime movers.
Battle of the Fang is supposed to take place not that long after the Heresy, which likely means that Ahriman hasn't been "Exiled" yet.
It, if I remember right(and I might not be because it's been awhile since I read up on Ahriman), wasn't an overnight thing after the Rubric happened. There were several "cure" attempts done by Ahriman before Magnus finally sent him away.
But honestly, when one thinks of the Thousand Sons now--you think of Ahriman and his Cabal leading their empty-armored brothers to war, not Magnus and his lot that just stay on the Planet of Sorcerers for the most part.
Nope Ahriman is exiled by the Battle for the Fang,there were Rubric Marines by then remember.
That means the Rubrik of Ahriman was already cast and he was exiled
Kanluwen wrote:not every Tzeentch army should need to take Ahriman, but any Thousand Sons force should.
Uhh... no. More than no. No x Infinity +1.
Ahriman doesn't lead every 1KSons force, so no, he shouldn't lead 1KSons forces.
To field a 'signature' Thousand Sons force? Maybe he should. Rubric Marines are very specific to Thousand Sons. They're not part of every single Tzeentchian warband. They are, however, part of every Thousand Sons warband.
Seeing the difference here?
There should be no limitation for fielding a 'generic' force of a specific God. But there should be some kind of benefit for fielding a 'Legion' force with a unique, signature character at the head of it.
Making Legion armies require Special Characters is simply daft. Every Emperor's Children force requiring Lucius would be absurd. Even more absurd would be any World Eater force requiring Kharn.
Kharn is a hard one to justify as a special character, period. I think he'd work well as a 'Lone Wolf' kind of unit.
The World Eaters/Death Guard/Emperor's Children/Thousand Sons/Word Bearers/Iron Warriors/Alpha Legion/Night Lords are more than just a named special character and a special rule. Far, far more than that.
Of course they are. But they're also far more than simply a 'mark' on the character. They have specific operational methods, specific organizations, specific formations, specific traits, etc.
A special character with "Visions of Glory Past" giving something akin to Chapter Tactics and giving special rules to otherwise generic units is a good way to represent these Legions without having to go too far overboard on toning down everything to ensure that no real 'broken' builds come out.
Kanluwen wrote:Considering that Death Guard are a specific formation, with a specific warleader...that's not really a big deal.
This I have to hear:
Tell us Kan, why are the Death Guard a specific formation now and not a Traitor Legion?
Probably because the Traitor Legions aren't actually operating as Legions by and large? They're warbands, fragmented and doing what they want for the most part.
The three Legions I can think of that have any semblance of organization are the Black Legion, Iron Warriors(and they're fairly fragmented with a large number of warbands), and the Alpha Legion.
H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't mind special characters adding something special to the force - there certainly has to be a reason to take them - but I don't want the reason to take them to become the only way to play that army. If we do that we end up with the same sort of crap that Imperial Fist, Crimson Fist, White Scar, Salamander, Raven Guard and Dark Angel players are stuck with.
To be 100% fair...
Imperial and Crimson Fists, Salamanders, and Raven Guard don't have too much that really separates them from the Ultramarines in terms of organization. Raven Guard are known for something that isn't tangible(Infiltration tactics and precise planning), the Fists are known for being Stubborn, and Salamanders are known for being a bit slower than average in foot slogging matches.
White Scars are known for being highly mechanized and fielding large amounts of bike troops with Rhino/Razorback mounted troops and Land Speeders to ensure that when they do find the weak point in a line that they can break it down with overwhelming force.
Dark Angels I'm hesitant to say too much about, since some might use my statements here against me next time in one of the "Do the Dark Angels deserve their own Codex?" threads. But basically, my beef with Dark Angels is that they just needed a generic "Deathwing" and "Ravenwing" Captain that could unlock the troop choices/organizations, with Librarians and Chaplains having options to go along accordingly.
Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, and Berzerkers are specific troop types. They should be available to all 'generic' Legion forces, but they shouldn't necessarily be the stupidly powerful versions that specific members of the Legion are known to have in their warbands. They are, essentially, the 'Tacticals' of the Legion. Having a specific character leading the formation should, in my ideal world, unlock the 'Veteran' versions.
"Warband" is a rather fluid and vague term that could mean a Champion and his personal retinue right up to the equivalent of a couple of Codex-sized Companies. They could also be a mixed Warband where various groups from various Legions and Renegade Chapters have come together, or a large Warband of just Emperor's Children or just Night Lords.
H.B.M.C. wrote:"Warband" is a rather fluid and vague term that could mean a Champion and his personal retinue right up to the equivalent of a couple of Codex-sized Companies. They could also be a mixed Warband where various groups from various Legions and Renegade Chapters have come together, or a large Warband of just Emperor's Children or just Night Lords.
Which is why I'd rather not see the 'Super' versions available without a character or with nothing like Chapter Tactics ensuring you're not facing infiltrating Alpha Legion veterans who can 'turn' some of your units against you, alongside of Berzerkers who have FNP and 2 wounds each.
Kanluwen wrote:Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, and Berzerkers are specific troop types.
That's too narrow a view and, frankly, one that doesn't make any logical sense as it doesn't allow for Noise Marine Termiantors or Plague Marine Bikers or Berzerker Chosen.
Having a squad of Plague Marines in your Chaos Space Marine army - no issue there, it makes sense - but if you are playing a Death Guard army then all your Marine units are Plague Marines - the Lord, the Chosen, the Terminators, the Possessed, the Bikers, the regular squads, the Havocs, and so on.
Remember the old phrase that has been said many times before:
Not all Berzerkers are World Eaters. All World Eaters are Berzerkers.
Berzerkers, however, =/= Power Armour + Chain Axe + Fancy Hat.
The only Legion (and not random renegade Warband) that should really have access to cult troops would be the Black Legion, as they're the melting pot for a lot of different things. Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and especially the Word Bearers should stay away from 'cult' troops.
OverwatchCNC wrote: make the SC awesome enough and you don't need their inclusion to do anything to aid the rest of the corrupt brethren!
Thats how it should be, unless the fluff supports the SC adding something to his fellow troops. Kharn for example would not...hes just a crazed combat monster. Ahriman, on the other hand, probably should add something...I imagine his presence could do something liek remove the slow and purposeful rule while he is in play.
Kanluwen wrote:Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, and Berzerkers are specific troop types.
That's too narrow a view and, frankly, one that doesn't make any logical sense as it doesn't allow for Noise Marine Termiantors or Plague Marine Bikers or Berzerker Chosen.
Having a squad of Plague Marines in your Chaos Space Marine army - no issue there, it makes sense - but if you are playing a Death Guard army then all your Marine units are Plague Marines - the Lord, the Chosen, the Terminators, the Possessed, the Bikers, the regular squads, the Havocs, and so on.
If you're playing Death Guard, you shouldn't have Bikers.
Remember the old phrase that has been said many times before:
Not all Berzerkers are World Eaters.
All World Eaters are Berzerkers.
Berzerkers, however, =/= Power Armour + Chain Axe + Fancy Hat.
I'm aware. I've said it many a time in fluff threads, but it's the best way to describe World Eater troops. With some kind of World Eater character(not necessarily Kharn, since the World Eaters are kinda irked at him since you know...he's responsible for the break-up of the World Eater Legion at large) making a 'World Eater warband', I don't see too big of a deal. Maybe they could even use Zhufor, he's supposed to be a World Eater who leads his own warband since the betrayal.
World Eaters, along with Alpha Legion, are the hardest to come up with a 'unique' formation for.
OverwatchCNC wrote:For example World Eaters would be made up of Berzerkers and Khornate Daemons but the inclusion of Kharn would give all Berzerkers an additional +1 attack, or something of that nature. Then again, make the SC awesome enough and you don't need their inclusion to do anything to aid the rest of the corrupt brethren!
I don't mind special characters adding something special to the force - there certainly has to be a reason to take them - but I don't want the reason to take them to become the only way to play that army. If we do that we end up with the same sort of crap that Imperial Fist, Crimson Fist, White Scar, Salamander, Raven Guard and Dark Angel players are stuck with.
Sadly, can we realistically expect more than that from GW?-No.
I think the means by which legions are characterized is going to be dictated by the degree GW chooses to distinguish them from each other. The more complex the rules the less likely they'll be tied to characters; realistically GW will only allow them to be so complex. If GW is willing to give Chaos Legions as big a book as C:SM and as many units as the average codex of this edition, that will be a big first step in the right direction, since anyway GW goes about it they will need more pages and more units than they have now to distinguish all 9.
Whether the special rules are tied to the special characters or not, I think it'll be important and worthwhile to see characters representing each of the legions. At the same time that has to be balanced with the Chaos Renegade book, if that is to remain... for example despite his Legion roots, Fabius Bile acts as a good way of showing how the legions help facilitate the renegades... I also think seeing Cypher returning in the renegade book is worthwhile place for him.
Hopefully for the 4 legions that don't have special characters we can see some daemon princes... one of those things so distinctive of chaos space marines, but GW's never really taken advantage of for 40k.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's too narrow a view and, frankly, one that doesn't make any logical sense as it doesn't allow for Noise Marine Termiantors or Plague Marine Bikers or Berzerker Chosen.
Having a squad of Plague Marines in your Chaos Space Marine army - no issue there, it makes sense - but if you are playing a Death Guard army then all your Marine units are Plague Marines - the Lord, the Chosen, the Terminators, the Possessed, the Bikers, the regular squads, the Havocs, and so on.
Remember the old phrase that has been said many times before:
Not all Berzerkers are World Eaters.
All World Eaters are Berzerkers.
Berzerkers, however, =/= Power Armour + Chain Axe + Fancy Hat.
The only Legion (and not random renegade Warband) that should really have access to cult troops would be the Black Legion, as they're the melting pot for a lot of different things. Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and especially the Word Bearers should stay away from 'cult' troops.
It almost seems like the simplest implementation is if "Chosen," "bikes," "havocs" etc... should just be an upgrade to a selection of core units granting upgrade options and for some special rules... and while that accomplishes the same thing as spelling every unit out it gives the impression that chaos is more chaotic about their force organization and not rigid in imperial doctrine.
I’m hoping that if they do a Daemon Prince SC, they don’t go overboard with his profile as a Daemon Prince more or less has the stat line and abilities of a SC already. Word Bearers would be a good candidate for a Daemon Prince character given their affinity with daemons and their legion rules in the past have always been affiliated with summoning rolls.
Kanluwen wrote:To field a 'signature' Thousand Sons force? Maybe he should. Rubric Marines are very specific to Thousand Sons. They're not part of every single Tzeentchian warband. They are, however, part of every Thousand Sons warband.
Seeing the difference here?
There should be no limitation for fielding a 'generic' force of a specific God. But there should be some kind of benefit for fielding a 'Legion' force with a unique, signature character at the head of it.
There is no difference. A Thousand Sons warband is a Thousand Sons warband, there's more than one of them, and only one Ahriman. If you want to argue from a fluff perspective, no, Ahriman should not lead every Thousand Sons warband.
The problem is when that 'signature' character doesn't define the Legion but a splinter, 'renegade' portion of that Legion. Typhus falls into this as well. They had 'disagreements' with their primarch, turned their backs on their legion, and do their own thing. These people do not represent the Legion, they represent themselves.
Requiring every Thousand Sons force to include Ahriman or every Death Guard force to include Typhus is as bad as making Salamanders overly powerful with Vulkan. It enforces the belief that every Salamanders force should be led by Vulkan, when in fact he leads a separate, highly specialised company that doesn't even operate with the Chapter as a whole, they seek artefacts.
It also limits your ability to bring other units you might want. Vulkan is seen as a neccessity in a Salamanders force (he's not really, he just makes an already powerful list far more powerful), so every Salamanders, and even others using him as 'counts as', uses him. That leaves one HQ slot for doing some more creative stuff with. The same will happen, but far worse, by requiring Legions to take a renegade who doesn't actually represent the Legion as a whole. Vulkan isn't even required and he's ruined the whole concept. Shrike is the same - he doesn't represent the Raven Guard as a whole, but he is used as the Raven Guard commander who makes the force a Raven Guard force, though it's not actually typical Raven Guard force with him.
H.B.M.C. wrote:The only Legion (and not random renegade Warband) that should really have access to cult troops would be the Black Legion, as they're the melting pot for a lot of different things. Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and especially the Word Bearers should stay away from 'cult' troops.
Iron Warriors have vast legions of slaves they use to build their fortresses and wage personal wars between the warsmiths, they are extremely commonplace. Place all 'cultists' under a generic statline and slap on a special rule per legion (black legion cultists become fearless, iron warrior cultists become stubborn etc).
There doesn't need to be an absolute strict adherance to troops access, it could be easily justified that the cultists on the board are fanatical devotees to the chaos gods of whatever legion you are playing and are joining the field to honour the ruinous powers (specific gods or undivided or finders of a daemon relic). Sure Alpha Legion or Night Lord followers wouldn't have any extra rules, beacuse it's just a bunch of members of a nearby chaos cult come to join the battle. This method would promote the taking or not taking of cultists, but no army should be strictly denied access to such things.
H.B.M.C. wrote:The only Legion (and not random renegade Warband) that should really have access to cult troops would be the Black Legion, as they're the melting pot for a lot of different things. Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and especially the Word Bearers should stay away from 'cult' troops.
Iron Warriors have vast legions of slaves they use to build their fortresses and wage personal wars between the warsmiths, they are extremely commonplace. Place all 'cultists' under a generic statline and slap on a special rule per legion (black legion cultists become fearless, iron warrior cultists become stubborn etc).
There doesn't need to be an absolute strict adherance to troops access, it could be easily justified that the cultists on the board are fanatical devotees to the chaos gods of whatever legion you are playing and are joining the field to honour the ruinous powers (specific gods or undivided or finders of a daemon relic). Sure Alpha Legion or Night Lord followers wouldn't have any extra rules, beacuse it's just a bunch of members of a nearby chaos cult come to join the battle. This method would promote the taking or not taking of cultists, but no army should be strictly denied access to such things.
'Cult' units is used to reference Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.
Loki wrote:There is no difference. A Thousand Sons warband is a Thousand Sons warband, there's more than one of them, and only one Ahriman. If you want to argue from a fluff perspective, no, Ahriman should not lead every Thousand Sons warband.
Sure he should. Any Thousand Sons force operating is almost without a doubt going to be Ahriman or one of his Disciples, not Magnus'. Magnus hasn't been going anywhere, by most accounts.
Thousand Sons don't have "warbands" at this point. They're very restricted in what and where they can operate. Without a member of the Sons who is a Sorcerer, they're boned. Ahriman and his Cabal are the ones who usually are operating outside of the Planet of Sorcerers.
The problem is when that 'signature' character doesn't define the Legion but a splinter, 'renegade' portion of that Legion. Typhus falls into this as well. They had 'disagreements' with their primarch, turned their backs on their legion, and do their own thing. These people do not represent the Legion, they represent themselves.
Actually, Typhus according to the fluff has most of the Death Guard following him. Mortarion, on the other hand, is given himself wholly to Daemonhood and usually found with Plaguebearers.
So Typhus is the best representative for Death Guard.
Requiring every Thousand Sons force to include Ahriman or every Death Guard force to include Typhus is as bad as making Salamanders overly powerful with Vulkan. It enforces the belief that every Salamanders force should be led by Vulkan, when in fact he leads a separate, highly specialised company that doesn't even operate with the Chapter as a whole, they seek artefacts.
The point was that they're representative of specialist formations, specifically noted for these specific Chapters.
It also limits your ability to bring other units you might want.
Kind of the point. You shouldn't necessarily be able to mix and match everything powerful and just claim it's "fluffy"--even if it is. If it's broken but fluffy--then there needs to be limitations, even as fluffy as it can be.
Vulkan is seen as a neccessity in a Salamanders force (he's not really, he just makes an already powerful list far more powerful), so every Salamanders, and even others using him as 'counts as', uses him. That leaves one HQ slot for doing some more creative stuff with. The same will happen, but far worse, by requiring Legions to take a renegade who doesn't actually represent the Legion as a whole.
The Legion, as a whole, has no representatives. Black Legion, Alpha Legion, and Iron Warriors are the only ones who have any kind of groupthink going on by all the fluff we've got.
Vulkan isn't even required and he's ruined the whole concept. Shrike is the same - he doesn't represent the Raven Guard as a whole, but he is used as the Raven Guard commander who makes the force a Raven Guard force, though it's not actually typical Raven Guard force with him.
Yeah...I dislike Shrike, but I understand the point of him.
He's there not just to be a "Raven Guard" character, but also an "Assault" character for the generic book. Just like Vulkan is there to provide a template for an "Artificer Lord".
I feel bad for whoever the author is of this codex. Because there is no way in hell that GW has the smarts to make a codex that will cater to all of the varied opinions on this subject.
Sad part is, just tweaking the codex before Gav's mostrously underwhelming version(not really his fault) to be in line with the current editions and making it less of a mess, would make the vast majority of Chaos fans happy. Rebalance a few things for 5th (or upcoming 6th) edition and that would settle it. Maybe add a few new units for good measure and done. Doesn't seem so difficult.
Kanluwen wrote:Sure he should. Any Thousand Sons force operating is almost without a doubt going to be Ahriman or one of his Disciples, not Magnus'. Magnus hasn't been going anywhere, by most accounts.
You don't quite get it yet. We're not saying that the parent force cannot belong to Ahriman or be associated with Ahriman, only that Ahriman need not be present for every engagement, meaning that a 1KSons army should not require him in order to be a 1KSons army.
For example, in our long-running series of games we had a faction of the 1KSons led by a guy called Kaedron. He was an acolyte or Ahriman's, fully supported Ahriman's cause, and fought in his name. It was a 1KSons army, complete with Rhubric Terminators, Marines, Chosen Squads, Possessed and Tzeentch Daemons up the wazoo. It didn't need Ahriman in the list to be a 1Ksons army, and no 1KSons army should.
Kanluwen wrote:Thousand Sons don't have "warbands" at this point. They're very restricted in what and where they can operate. Without a member of the Sons who is a Sorcerer, they're boned. Ahriman and his Cabal are the ones who usually are operating outside of the Planet of Sorcerers.
Nonsense. You're making the 1Ksons out to be this tiny force that needs Ahriman's permisson and direct supervision in order to do anything.
Kanluwen wrote:Actually, Typhus according to the fluff has most of the Death Guard following him. Mortarion, on the other hand, is given himself wholly to Daemonhood and usually found with Plaguebearers. So Typhus is the best representative for Death Guard.
And thus should be required in every Death Guard army?
Kanluwen wrote:The point was that they're representative of specialist formations, specifically noted for these specific Chapters.
And? I've argued before that Salamanders players shouldn't need a special character in order to play their Chapter, and that their change to Chapter Tactics and whatever should be inherent for simply choosing to play a non-Ultramarines/non-Vanilla army. This applies to all the other armies, and applies doubly to the Deathwing/Ravenwing who apparently won't go to battle unless their Company Captain is holding their hand.
Kind of the point. You shouldn't necessarily be able to mix and match everything powerful and just claim it's "fluffy"--even if it is. If it's broken but fluffy--then there needs to be limitations, even as fluffy as it can be.
Kanluwen wrote:He's there not just to be a "Raven Guard" character, but also an "Assault" character for the generic book. Just like Vulkan is there to provide a template for an "Artificer Lord".
Kanluwen wrote:Sure he should. Any Thousand Sons force operating is almost without a doubt going to be Ahriman or one of his Disciples, not Magnus'. Magnus hasn't been going anywhere, by most accounts.
Thousand Sons don't have "warbands" at this point. They're very restricted in what and where they can operate. Without a member of the Sons who is a Sorcerer, they're boned. Ahriman and his Cabal are the ones who usually are operating outside of the Planet of Sorcerers.
That's actually not correct. While Ahriman and the Prodigal Sons are the most well known, there are other warbands of Thousand Sons out there. They definitely also do have warbands. This is in Index Astartes III.
Have to agree with what H.B.M.C has been saying, I think that mandatory inclusion of special characters in order to field certain armies is/was/and will always be a bad idea.
I would hope that any Legions codex to be released would avoid this and allow for various customizable HQs represenitive of their given Legions.
I would much rather be able to create " Lord Tumor Tush" to lead my Death Guard than be forced to take Typhus.
I just did a quick read through of every bit of 1KSons and Death Guard fluff that I could get my hands on (Lexicanium, Index Astartes, current 'Chaos' Codex, 3.5 Codex) and I can't find anything about:
1. Typhus leading the majority of the Death Guard.
2. Ahriman being the main 1KSons guy with Magnus sitting pretty on his world.
What I did find was:
1. Several ship Captains of the Death Guard sided with Typhus who left the Plague Planet with him. The remainder stay there and Mortarion keeps launching attacks from his world (even if he is not physically there to lead them).
2. Ahriman was banished with his group.
3. Although Magnus never leaves the Planet of Sorcerers (he's busy moping after losing everything he ever worked for), the 'Sorcerer Lords' of the Thousand Sons (who are able to maintain their numbers via some very strange methods) do use the Silver Towers of the city as mobile bases to launch attacks into the Imperium...
All of this leads me to believe that:
1. Typhus is simply one of many commanders within the Death Guard, and that Death Guard Warbands that fight for him are less likely to occur than those who don't.
2. The 1KSons are essentially split into two demi-Legions, those that follow Magnus and operate from the Planet of Sorcerers, and those that came with Ahriman when he was exiled.
The conclusion from this is:
1. A 1KSons army needn't require Ahriman in order to be a Thousand Sons army.
2. A Death Guard army needn't require Typhus in order to be a Death Guard army.
Kanluwen wrote:The point was that they're representative of specialist formations, specifically noted for these specific Chapters.
And? I've argued before that Salamanders players shouldn't need a special character in order to play their Chapter, and that their change to Chapter Tactics and whatever should be inherent for simply choosing to play a non-Ultramarines/non-Vanilla army. This applies to all the other armies, and applies doubly to the Deathwing/Ravenwing who apparently won't go to battle unless their Company Captain is holding their hand.
Kind of the point. You shouldn't necessarily be able to mix and match everything powerful and just claim it's "fluffy"--even if it is. If it's broken but fluffy--then there needs to be limitations, even as fluffy as it can be.
Completely agreed. Something like that would be just amazing. Just add a couple of "faction styles" in each codex (not only marines), who free special abilities. That would be great, costumizable, and fun. But it wont happen. Special Characters with special rules sell metal/failcast models, and a lot of people dont like to convert their own Special Characters. Rules like that would be great for the comunity, but bad for the busines...
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:He's there not just to be a "Raven Guard" character, but also an "Assault" character for the generic book. Just like Vulkan is there to provide a template for an "Artificer Lord".
You're the first person I've ever heard say that.
Well, i dont know if i am the only one, but there is people who use those Characters to represent other characters (homemade or not). For example, i think the White Scar comander have a much more "raven guard" tactics than the Raven Guard one, so i use him to field Raven Guard armies, and Vulkan is normallly a overcosted Commander, who i use to field a Salamander Army (who is not lead by Vulkan himself, just a Commander with Storm Shield and Relic Blade...
Moopy wrote:This makes sense to me. Marine should be in the main box (they always are) and if Chaos is the first 6th ed codex out of the gate, it will be a strong contender for the marines to fight.
Yeah, sounds like another boring marines vs marines fight.
Moopy wrote:This makes sense to me. Marine should be in the main box (they always are) and if Chaos is the first 6th ed codex out of the gate, it will be a strong contender for the marines to fight.
Yeah, sounds like another boring marines vs marines fight.
NELS1031 wrote:Sad part is, just tweaking the codex before Gav's mostrously underwhelming version(not really his fault) to be in line with the current editions and making it less of a mess, would make the vast majority of Chaos fans happy. Rebalance a few things for 5th (or upcoming 6th) edition and that would settle it. Maybe add a few new units for good measure and done. Doesn't seem so difficult.
And those of us who had to play against the v3.5 Hainesian monstrosity would much prefer it to remain dead, with a stake through it's cold dead heart - and preferably with all extant copies burned, their ashes spread to the seven winds, and all electronic copies degaussed into free-floating electrons...
Dysartes wrote:And those of us who had to play against the v3.5 Hainesian monstrosity would much prefer it to remain dead, with a stake through it's cold dead heart - and preferably with all extant copies burned, their ashes spread to the seven winds, and all electronic copies degaussed into free-floating electrons...
You say that as if the current 5th edition codexes aren't much worse.
Would it be a satisfactory compromise to have 9 legion-specific, but non-named HQ choices? Like a "Death Guard Lord" that would unlock Death Guard units and "chapter tactics" or whatnot but have some flexibility in his own wargear loadout?
And maybe then the special characters could be upgrades for the generic Legion Lord (upgrade Death Guard Lord to Typhus: must always take a specific weapon combo and gains X special rule as a bonus)
lord_blackfang wrote:Would it be a satisfactory compromise to have 9 legion-specific, but non-named HQ choices? Like a "Death Guard Lord" that would unlock Death Guard units and "chapter tactics" or whatnot but have some flexibility in his own wargear loadout?
And maybe then the special characters could be upgrades for the generic Legion Lord (upgrade Death Guard Lord to Typhus: must always take a specific weapon combo and gains X special rule as a bonus)
That is exactly what most of the community, or anyone who has played with the 3.5 Chaos Codex would be happy with right there. I know I want the ability to play an IW army that has a little more ability than a standard Alpha Legion, or not-Chaos Legion warband. I put Survo arms on a lot of models to make the army a little more fluffy, had a Basilisk, etc, etc, and then v4 comes out and I can no longer use them. Sucks. I would also not want to have to keep fielding my berserker army as nothing but generic bezerkers with no flavor whats so ever. Where are my chainaxes, and Axes of Khorne, can only have 2 plasma pistols, instead of three, etc, etc. No chosen bezerkers. All those cool aspiring champions that I converted are worthless.
But the absolute worst thing as a hobbyist that GW could do to us, and the hobby, is for GW to make it so we have to take a SC to have any flavor to our army. Having to take Vulken, to play Salamanders is the wrong answer, (that and he has no negatives to his free stuff he does to the army) having to take Shrike to play Ravenguard and so on and so on, is so crappy. But as other people have said, from a business standpoint, that is what GW wants. It makes it so more of the SC models are sold, by tenfold probably. I wish they had a sales characteristic for Special Characters.
And to follow along H.B.M.C.'s analogy, I like my strawberry ice cream. I don't just want vanilla. You can keep the chocolate though.
I have been reading everyone's discussion about the 1ksons and ti makes me sad.
The whole idea behind 1ksons is not and should not be limited to who leads what and where. It honestly should encompass everything. This idea should honestly apply to all chaos armies.
Yes there should be armies lead by Ahriman, and YES there should be armies lead by Magnus and YES there should be disparate warbands floating through space disconnected form the rest of the hordes of chaos. That is how the fluff is set up to be.
I want to be able to have Sorcerer Lord that has been trapped in the wrap for 10,000 years where he fled the fall of ....... having taken a small strong core of the legion that had been reduced to a mere shadow of themselves. To him it has only been a few short years since he traded blows with a dastardly Space Wolf who he once called a brother in arms. The only thing the Lord desires is to find the power he needs to enact his revenge upon his feral brethren.
OR
I would like to have an elite force of the Black Legion lead by lowly subordinate to a supreme Lord in Abbaddon's retinue. They have been fighting constantly for 10,000 years and have thousands of battle field experiences and have walked through all 13 black crusades. The only thing keeping them alive is the skill that they have gained from a lifetime of war and the hatred that they all share of their imperial prissy brethren.
ShatteredBlade wrote:I just hope it's not going to be Codex Marines with Spikes.
Considering we're well past the short-lived "boring" era of codices with Codex: Chaos Space Marines, Dark Angels, and Blood Angels (WD dex), I wouldn't expect it to be.
Kanluwen wrote:
The three Legions I can think of that have any semblance of organization are the Black Legion, Iron Warriors(and they're fairly fragmented with a large number of warbands), and the Alpha Legion.
I'd include the Word Bearers there, based on their books they seem to be at least as organized as the Black Legion, and definitely more than the Iron Warriors. Compared to Alpha Legion though (as usual) we can't tell.
H.B.M.C. wrote:The only Legion (and not random renegade Warband) that should really have access to cult troops would be the Black Legion, as they're the melting pot for a lot of different things. Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and especially the Word Bearers should stay away from 'cult' troops.
That ties into where I was going earlier -- that maybe it makes sense to have NL, AL, IW and WB represented in the revised/patched/whatever CSM book (with cult troops removed and a few new toys like SM vehicles, traitors/cultists and new SCs added) while the new book focuses on WE, DG, EC, TS and BL.
Just feels like the most natural break to me. Those first four seem a lot closer to Red Corsairs than the other five. And that gives the new book plenty of room to flesh out the cults -- characters, units and wargear.
I suppose in that scenario the players of "cult 5" armies might end up happier than those of the "noncult 4". But I still feel like it'd be a step forward for everyone, and that GW might end up with an "unhappy 9" if they try to cover them all in one book. Just seems like the detail has to suffer in that case. I think JustDave's version does a good job at incorporating everything in one place. But if I have to make a criticism, I think it's that it doesn't go down-and-dirty enough on the Legions -- especially the cult Legions. Not that there's the room to do that.
The "revised" CSM book is to me an important part of the rumor. If true, I think it's much more likely that it will remain a CSM army list first and foremost -- which is part of the reason my money is still on a split like I outlined above (if I HAD to bet, that is). If JustDave's codex was released as Codex: Legions, there'd be ZERO reason to keep the existing book around.
Regarding the "scattered warband/organization" thing, that's a fluff point that has been emphasized more at some times than at others. It can be changed with a few strokes on a keyboard...it shouldn't be guiding any major design decisions.
And I don't think this thread is in wishlisting territory at all. I think we have a pretty good back-and-forth going about the design dilemmas and decisions involved, which to me is a very different thing than wishlisting. *shrug*
Kanluwen wrote:
The three Legions I can think of that have any semblance of organization are the Black Legion, Iron Warriors(and they're fairly fragmented with a large number of warbands), and the Alpha Legion.
I'd include the Word Bearers there, based on their books they seem to be at least as organized as the Black Legion, and definitely more than the Iron Warriors. Compared to Alpha Legion though (as usual) we can't tell.
Add to that Night Lords - a large number of warbands does not mean they are disorganised - especially when you consider the size of the Legions. If anything the only Legion that could be considered truly 'disorganised' is the World Eaters due to the Skalathrax incident.
Sure he should. Any Thousand Sons force operating is almost without a doubt going to be Ahriman or one of his Disciples, not Magnus'. Magnus hasn't been going anywhere, by most accounts.
Thousand Sons don't have "warbands" at this point. They're very restricted in what and where they can operate. Without a member of the Sons who is a Sorcerer, they're boned. Ahriman and his Cabal are the ones who usually are operating outside of the Planet of Sorcerers.
Wrong actually.
Ahriman has his own group, the Sorcerers still loyal to Magnus operate with their own Thousand Son Rubric Marines and have their own agendas.
For Ahriman to be required for every TS force would make next to no sense, like having Kharn leading every World Eaters force or Lucius leading every Emperors Children. These characters work independently, often with their own specialised group.
The problem as I see it is, depending on the author of this thing, this whole SC required for each army might actually happen. To be honest I prefer the SC's as they are now in the current Codex, helpful boosts to your unit forces but not integral to them at all. All they would require is a bit of tweaking to get them to be worthwhile in taking
DarkStarSabre wrote:Add to that Night Lords - a large number of warbands does not mean they are disorganised - especially when you consider the size of the Legions. If anything the only Legion that could be considered truly 'disorganised' is the World Eaters due to the Skalathrax incident.
And the fact that they're all bloodthirsty maniacs.
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Since we're talking about SCs altering your army, has this actually been done in any other army since Codex: Space Marines?
gorgon wrote:That ties into where I was going earlier -- that maybe it makes sense to have NL, AL, IW and WB represented in the revised/patched/whatever CSM book (with cult troops removed and a few new toys like SM vehicles, traitors/cultists and new SCs added) while the new book focuses on WE, DG, EC, TS and BL.
Just feels like the most natural break to me. Those first four seem a lot closer to Red Corsairs than the other five. And that gives the new book plenty of room to flesh out the cults -- characters, units and wargear.
I suppose in that scenario the players of "cult 5" armies might end up happier than those of the "noncult 4". But I still feel like it'd be a step forward for everyone, and that GW might end up with an "unhappy 9" if they try to cover them all in one book. Just seems like the detail has to suffer in that case. I think JustDave's version does a good job at incorporating everything in one place. But if I have to make a criticism, I think it's that it doesn't go down-and-dirty enough on the Legions -- especially the cult Legions. Not that there's the room to do that.
Well I think an unrealistic ideal is one where GW could devote enough resources to all nine with each getting as fleshed out as the loyalists... we just know that won't happen any time soon.
I think the fact that IW, WB, AL, and NL seem like Red Corsairs just speaks to the failure of GW to properly characterize each and distinguish them accordingly. The fact is Red Corsairs should be more like loyalist marines than they are... aside from their more recent departure they raid the Imperium for supplies more; there is little reason they would have so quickly resorted to using the weapons from their local Chaos-R-US store to purchase milennia old equipment and daemon engines. Admittedly they'd get that stuff from what ever Chaos Legions feel they have something to gain but in general they would look more like the loyalists than the Legions. Next their fluff describes them as engaging primarily in pirate raids against Imperial ships, but there is nothing in their army that actually shows that.
The characterization of IW, WB, AL, and NL are only as fleshed out as alot of the 3rd edition loyalists... where each can be summed up in a single special rule, a unit or two, and a independent character. Just as those loyalists evolved into the current edition so should these 4, even if it isn't to the same degree.
DarkStarSabre wrote:Add to that Night Lords - a large number of warbands does not mean they are disorganised - especially when you consider the size of the Legions. If anything the only Legion that could be considered truly 'disorganised' is the World Eaters due to the Skalathrax incident.
And the fact that they're all bloodthirsty maniacs.
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Since we're talking about SCs altering your army, has this actually been done in any other army since Codex: Space Marines?
Anung Un Rama wrote:[
Automatically Appended Next Post: Since we're talking about SCs altering your army, has this actually been done in any other army since Codex: Space Marines?
Codex Dark Angels (Master of Deathwing, Master of Ravenwing)
Codex Orks (Wazzdakka)
Codex Space Marines (Changes to what counts as scoring)
Codex Blood Angels (Astaroth iirc changes Death Company and Dante with Sanguinary Guard)
Codex Grey Knights (Coteaz and Henchmen and whats-his-name with Purifiers)
I believe Dark Eldar have a few characters that change it as well.
Anung Un Rama wrote:
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
God. I wouldn't know where to start! The current codex isn't dire... it's just dull to the point of making any true urge to use it morribund before you've even played a game! I like that they're finally addressing this hole but just hope they don't over power chaos, more just make them competitive again with their old colour ways and sticking to fluff. Representing that some of these guys are 10,000 years old and have fought against space marines and worst whilst living in hell, literally, is a very big thing to capture with them in my opinion. They're an army unlike any other... they've got the age and experience of the eldar with the military might of the imperium and the sheer brutality of the orks and Tyranids.
Splitting them into 'fake' CSM's and the old school legions seems like a no-brainer to me so long as the renegades are updated properly and there is a healthy level of open unity between the two. It won't happen.. but one can hope.
Here is a list of changes I thought up for the codex a while ago. I'll spoiler it for those who don't want to endure my lengthy post.
Spoiler:
In general bring back the ability for most units to get veteran abilities. It's a serious fluff step for the codex.
Marks:
Should all do more.
Khorne - +1 A, WS, Furious Charge.
Tzeentch - roll psychic test's on 3D6 and pick lowest two, +1 Invul save, ability to use two Psychic Test's a turn.
Nurgle - +1 toughness, feel no pain, true grit.
Slaanesh - +1 initiative, feel no pain, combat stimms.
Special Characters:
Abaddon - get rid of the mastery problem. Give him some psychic resistance and leave him as he is.
Kharn - give him eternal warrior back!
Ahriman - better invulnerable save or eternal warrior. 250pts is too expensive for a 4+ invul and no ID immunity. Otherwise he's gravy. Want to beef him up, give him something to stop enemies hindering his psychic test's.
Fabius - don't bother with an invul save, give him a regen factor and give his needler a bit more flair.
Typhus - he's alright.
Lucius - this guy is an unused canvas. Should definitely add more in about his armour. LD test or WS 1 for assaulting enemies sounds good.....
Huron - hate him. Give me doomrider back! If anything should play into his corrupting ability.
HQ's
DP - make him more customisable beyond marks. Wings, extra toughness, attacks, mutations in general. These guys are superhumans risen up by dark gods to immortality and powers capable of levelling a planet... we should represent this a little more accurately. Bloodthirster has WS 10... lets see the potential for WS 9 at least? Lord of change has a 3+ invul save... again.... lets seen a Tzeentch daemon lord at least on par.
Lords - need to be broken down into captains to represent small warbands (Ws 5, 2 wounds). Lords to lead big forces (as they are now) and something like a 'dread lord' who's a bit stronger. These are the guys that have been around for 10,000 years having a scrap. I'd like to see a stat line better than a wolf lord in the current climate or options to at least make him go toe to toe.
Sorcerers - just add them as a 25/35/40pt upgrade for any of the other options. They get a free power and a force weapon.
Daemon Weapons - i'd rather not have them than have the current lot. Not attacking at all if I roll a one? What the hell? I understand mastery is perhaps a necessary evil but make them powerful enough to be worth the risk. 1/6 chance means potentially one round of CC a game will be foiled which could be really bad!
Greater Daemons - pretty darn good. Give them options or bring back the classics.
Elites:
Veterans? Huh? Arn't most chaos space marines veterans? Let's get the highly customisable Chosen back, ta.
Terminators - if you adjust the benefits of the marks then yeah. Could be way better. More equipment would be nice perhaps and banners should die. In a fire. Slowly.
Possesed - fine just change time of rolling.
Dreds - Considering they can fire at my own units and they've got fairly few upgrades they need more attraction i my opinion. Really I would think all CSM dreds should start on par with a veteran dred from the imperium.
Troops:
CSM's - same goes for them as terminators.
Plague Marines - they're good. Give them more around nurgle maybe.
Noise Marines - make the blastermaster cheaper, perhaps give them a few more 'slaaneshi' options.
KB's - leave them as they are just give them more options. Bring back the chain axes or some form of psychic reistance.
1k sons - they're alright too. It's 2w's vs 4+ invul save issue and i'm easy both ways. Make the sorcerer cheaper!
Daemon Packs - Lets get the originals back.
Fast Attack:
All need their options back. Daemon packs. Perhaps a chaos take on a new vehicle would be nice. Give the raptors their fear inducing aura back and hit and run.
Heavy Support:
Make Obliterators T5 again! They've increased in pts and decreased in durability and flexibility.
Defiler with armour 13 was nice but i'd much prefer indirect fire opposed to the ability for an extra armour pt.
Havocs... well. A few new Heavy Weapons would be nice, otherwise how about something, anything to make these guys worth while beyond just melta or plasma spam.
Predator and Land Raiders... same old... same old.
Anung Un Rama wrote: Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yeah fully with you here.
That was the only benefit I saw with the current Codex, you could take Khorne icon'd units in the unit sections I reckon a Legions book will ignore, as somehow along the line via the many fluff changes Khorne became .. Ug Waaagh in power armour.
Didn't make up for the many other issues I have with the book, but it was a slight positive.
aka_mythos wrote:Well I think an unrealistic ideal is one where GW could devote enough resources to all nine with each getting as fleshed out as the loyalists... we just know that won't happen any time soon.
I think the fact that IW, WB, AL, and NL seem like Red Corsairs just speaks to the failure of GW to properly characterize each and distinguish them accordingly. The fact is Red Corsairs should be more like loyalist marines than they are... aside from their more recent departure they raid the Imperium for supplies more; there is little reason they would have so quickly resorted to using the weapons from their local Chaos-R-US store to purchase milennia old equipment and daemon engines. Admittedly they'd get that stuff from what ever Chaos Legions feel they have something to gain but in general they would look more like the loyalists than the Legions. Next their fluff describes them as engaging primarily in pirate raids against Imperial ships, but there is nothing in their army that actually shows that.
The characterization of IW, WB, AL, and NL are only as fleshed out as alot of the 3rd edition loyalists... where each can be summed up in a single special rule, a unit or two, and a independent character. Just as those loyalists evolved into the current edition so should these 4, even if it isn't to the same degree.
I completely agree that the current book presents a poor treatment of renegades. The Red Corsairs should be far more piratical...and would be *much* more interesting for it. I've always chalked up GW's talk of a "renegade" focus for that book to being mostly marketing spin to justify its radical departure from the previous book.
Ideally, there should be at least three buckets IMO...renegade SMs, CSMs, and cult CSMs. If we're forced to work with two buckets, I personally think the first two groups could work in one codex, although as you point out that's due to the CSMs historically being poorly fleshed out. I also acknowledge that my proposed split creates issues for existing armies, especially those built under the current codex. I'm sure there are plenty of WB players who want to be able to field Plague Marines, for instance. They'd still have the option of fielding CSMs plus MoN, but obviously it's not the same and is a change that would make them unhappy.
Yeah, I think maybe the takeaway at this point is no matter how GW "fixes" CSMs, there are going to be some unhappy players. The resource shortage creates some hard decisions. I suppose the irony is that GW could probably create a SM codex that covers BA and DA and break fewer eggs than what will be required in lumping the very disparate elements of Chaos into a coherent codex or two.
Alpharius wrote:
Anung Un Rama wrote:
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
If the studio wants to make all-monocult armies feasible (which may or may not be a focus of theirs), I think they almost have to move back to that approach.
gorgon wrote:
I completely agree that the current book presents a poor treatment of renegades. The Red Corsairs should be far more piratical...and would be *much* more interesting for it. I've always chalked up GW's talk of a "renegade" focus for that book to being mostly marketing spin to justify its radical departure from the previous book.
Ideally, there should be at least three buckets IMO...renegade SMs, CSMs, and cult CSMs. If we're forced to work with two buckets, I personally think the first two groups could work in one codex, although as you point out that's due to the CSMs historically being poorly fleshed out. I also acknowledge that my proposed split creates issues for existing armies, especially those built under the current codex. I'm sure there are plenty of WB players who want to be able to field Plague Marines, for instance. They'd still have the option of fielding CSMs plus MoN, but obviously it's not the same and is a change that would make them unhappy.
The biggest problem with a Cult CSM codex, is just how little there is in common between them... it almost gets to the point where the book would have 4 separate codices in one book and then a section with the units available to all. GW would really have to be willing to go outside the format to go that route. I do agree there are element of the undivided legions more suited to share with the renegade space marines, but I feel those undivided legions really represent that unifying theme that ties a whole book together in a way that fits the current format.
aka_mythos wrote:The biggest problem with a Cult CSM codex, is just how little there is in common between them... it almost gets to the point where the book would have 4 separate codices in one book and then a section with the units available to all. GW would really have to be willing to go outside the format to go that route. I do agree there are element of the undivided legions more suited to share with the renegade space marines, but I feel those undivided legions really represent that unifying theme that ties a whole book together in a way that fits the current format.
A good point. Though I have to say, you could bring back cult troops without much of a fuzz, if you do it in a similar way it was handled in CSM 3.5. I don't need an entry for Khorne Terminators and Nurgle Terminators. All I want the option to give a unit a real mark (or something similar), essentially making them Terminators/bikers/raptors of whatever Legion I choose with the same benefits and hindrances a regular cult "tactical" squad would have. And not have one ing guy carry a ing banner, so they won't ing forget which deity they worship.
My concern is for my Black Legion force. Will I be defined as Renegade or have a seperate entry? Stuff like that concerns me. I don't trust GW to do it right, but who knows.
I do however feel that Death Guard, TSons, Emp's kids, and World Eaters should really be defined as seperate forces. The current book does them a real injustice and friends of mine had whole forces changed because of it. The changes were not liked.
How come Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Black Templars and Dark Angels can all have seperate codexes while Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Emperors Children, Black Legion, Word Bearers, Alpha Legion, World Eaters, Night Lords, Iron Warriors, and all other renegades are in one freaking codex?
necrongod wrote:How come Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Black Templars and Dark Angels can all have seperate codexes while Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Emperors Children, Black Legion, World Eaters, Night Lords, Iron Warriors, and all other renegades are in one freaking codex?
aka_mythos wrote:The biggest problem with a Cult CSM codex, is just how little there is in common between them... it almost gets to the point where the book would have 4 separate codices in one book and then a section with the units available to all. GW would really have to be willing to go outside the format to go that route. I do agree there are element of the undivided legions more suited to share with the renegade space marines, but I feel those undivided legions really represent that unifying theme that ties a whole book together in a way that fits the current format.
A good point. Though I have to say, you could bring back cult troops without much of a fuzz, if you do it in a similar way it was handled in CSM 3.5. I don't need an entry for Khorne Terminators and Nurgle Terminators. All I want the option to give a unit a real mark (or something similar), essentially making them Terminators/bikers/raptors of whatever Legion I choose with the same benefits and hindrances a regular cult "tactical" squad would have. And not have one ing guy carry a ing banner, so they won't ing forget which deity they worship.
You might still need separate entries for the Cult troops choices, but units like bikers, havocs and raptors should be collapsible. If, for instance, Thousand Son Bikers don't pass the muster conceptually, you just leave out the option for MoT for Bikers. That would have to be done sparingly though, as I wouldn't want to see monogod armies be overly restricted. IMO those restrictions in the v3.5 codex helped lead to the Skittles approach with the v4 codex. The trick would be to swing the pendulum toward 3.5, but not so far that you return to the same old 3.5 problems. To me, this would probably require some new god/unit combos and the accompanying fluff retcons.
mythos' point about the undivided legions being "glue" is a good one, though. I think BL could serve in that role in a Cult CSM codex, though they'd also be the obvious competitive choice if they could pick units and marks however they see fit. So maybe they would have access to the separate Cult troops entries, but not to any marks on bikers, raptors, etc.?
Would really have been interesting to have been in the concepting meetings at the studio for this one.
If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
And they need more vehicles. At least another Land Raider variant.
One unit that Chaos Space Marines needs, is some kind of Fast Attack vehicle. As it stands, Chaos has three coices... Raptors, bikers, or Spawn. Which really makes it two choices... I mean, who uses Spawn anyway?
IMO, the easiest way to do a legion book would be to use a 'mark' system similar to the marks of chaos in the current CSM book, however instead of Mark of Tzeentch, Nurgle, Undivided, etc. they should be Legion 'marks' (need a better name) each one coming with its own special rules/USRs and buffs/debuffs. This way you don't necessarily need to have 9+ unique units in each force org slot. Give HQs added abilities related to force org reshuffling and youre good to go.
One thing that nobody seems to have considered is that Legion marines could have a better basic profile than renegade marines. They are 10,000 year veterans after all. This would differentiate the two codexes and mean that all nine legions would find their home in the new codex.
Dysartes wrote:And those of us who had to play against the v3.5 Hainesian monstrosity would much prefer it to remain dead, with a stake through it's cold dead heart - and preferably with all extant copies burned, their ashes spread to the seven winds, and all electronic copies degaussed into free-floating electrons...
Eh, my friend back in 3rd used the 3.5ed Night Lords, and did them well. Everything either had a jump pack, bike or infiltrated, and there were no tanks. It was a really fluffy list that hit hard and fast. He even had the much maligned 4 tank hunter autocannon Havoc squad which succeeded in never killing anything of worth.
Out of all of his armies, they were by far the most fun to fight against. In your face as soon as possible. However, he still only ever managed to win about 1/4 of uour games. True, I never played against the dreaded Iron Warriors mega list, but I always enjoyed fighting his lists from the 3.5ed Chaos book.
Alpharius wrote:I think that's usually handled by the Lord and "Chosen" entries, which allows all sorts of interesting combinations and tactics.
Which allowed, past tense, all sorts of interesting combinations and tactics. Now it’s just 4 special weapons. The Chosen Champion doesn’t even have any options to himself!
Anung Un Rama wrote:If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
And they need more vehicles. At least another Land Raider variant.
*shutter* Imagine the drippage.
I think the restriction was imposed mostly out of balance, but fluff wise both emphasized combat doctrines that couldn't take advantage of it. Death guard preferred all on foot infantry formations of uniformly equipped troops with an emphasis on boarding actions. World Eaters preferred planetary assault by drop pod, rather than jump troops deployed from gunships.
A land raider would be easy... some variant of the reaper autocannon would be a simple way to equip it.
JoeyHeadwounds wrote:One unit that Chaos Space Marines needs, is some kind of Fast Attack vehicle. As it stands, Chaos has three coices... Raptors, bikers, or Spawn. Which really makes it two choices... I mean, who uses Spawn anyway?
I use spawn... but I agree, Chaos needs real fast attack choices and preferably something distinctly chaos. I've always thought demon engines in the vein of the Blood Slaughterer and Blight Drone are exactly what Chaos Marines need for fast attack choices; though it might be better if the units weren't necessarily god specific.
chaos0xomega wrote:IMO, the easiest way to do a legion book would be to use a 'mark' system similar to the marks of chaos in the current CSM book, however instead of Mark of Tzeentch, Nurgle, Undivided, etc. they should be Legion 'marks' (need a better name) each one coming with its own special rules/USRs and buffs/debuffs. This way you don't necessarily need to have 9+ unique units in each force org slot. Give HQs added abilities related to force org reshuffling and youre good to go.
That's a really good idea. At the same time I don't think those two types of marks are mutually exclusive. By utilizing one set of legion marks for some units and the god mark for other units they could allow different degrees of use and throttle the advantages. For example Chaos Bikers, while Death Guard might not necessarily have bikers of their own, they'd obviously be inclined to take nurgle worshiping bike mounted legionaries as allies; in that way GW could allow for more varied army composition while constraining them to a theme.
Alpharius wrote:I think that's usually handled by the Lord and "Chosen" entries, which allows all sorts of interesting combinations and tactics.
Which allowed, past tense, all sorts of interesting combinations and tactics. Now it’s just 4 special weapons. The Chosen Champion doesn’t even have any options to himself!
Well yes, I was speaking in both the past and future hopeful tenses!
So i could only bring myself to read the first page(tired) but i'll throw my thoughts in i guess.
Firstly i'm sad that Tau are getting pushed back but meh. More importantly do you think theres any chance Abaddon will get removed? Thats probably controversial but imho any rules that did him justice wouldn't be playable. I think hes far too powerful to have rules for. I say remove him and condemn him to canon, somewhere in between special characters and The Emperor would please me.
The current rules do him justice just fine. Even in my negative review of the current ‘Chaos’ Codex I still gave credit for creating Abaddon rules that are actually worth a damn and make him out to be the Master of Chaos that he is. He’s no Primarch, he’s Chaos’ Marneus Calgar.
chaos0xomega wrote:IMO, the easiest way to do a legion book would be to use a 'mark' system similar to the marks of chaos in the current CSM book, however instead of Mark of Tzeentch, Nurgle, Undivided, etc. they should be Legion 'marks' (need a better name) each one coming with its own special rules/USRs and buffs/debuffs. This way you don't necessarily need to have 9+ unique units in each force org slot. Give HQs added abilities related to force org reshuffling and youre good to go.
That's a really good idea. At the same time I don't think those two types of marks are mutually exclusive. By utilizing one set of legion marks for some units and the god mark for other units they could allow different degrees of use and throttle the advantages. For example Chaos Bikers, while Death Guard might not necessarily have bikers of their own, they'd obviously be inclined to take nurgle worshiping bike mounted legionaries as allies; in that way GW could allow for more varied army composition while constraining them to a theme.
Then thats not a legion book anymore, thats the renegade book we have now.
Well in that case i think they should raise him up a level. Give him primarchesque status as befits him.
In other news, any chance we will be going back to veteran abilities and the old style marks of chaos? My Slaanesh Havocs and Termy chosen aren't the same without Sonic Blasters.
Temujin wrote:One thing that nobody seems to have considered is that Legion marines could have a better basic profile than renegade marines. They are 10,000 year veterans after all. This would differentiate the two codexes and mean that all nine legions would find their home in the new codex.
Dubious on that one. Not all legionnaires from the original 9 are 10K veterans. Hell, even Honsou is a johnny-come-lately.
What those legions definitely DO need is the ability to field really, really badass veteran squads. Less essential but still very thematic would be having veteran CSM as troops, to represent the warbands that really -do- only have their original Heresy membership and no new recruiting. I guess Vets as troops could be unlocked with a special character, but it seems cheesy to require that (but typically current GW design, so whatever).
I for one am looking forward to Nightlord DOA armies that don't have to be counts-as...
Anung Un Rama wrote:
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yes the marine you are talking about here is Ulric the Slayer and this is how he received the moniker "slayer". It was angron who bestowed the nod.
Temujin wrote:One thing that nobody seems to have considered is that Legion marines could have a better basic profile than renegade marines. They are 10,000 year veterans after all. This would differentiate the two codexes and mean that all nine legions would find their home in the new codex.
Dubious on that one. Not all legionnaires from the original 9 are 10K veterans. Hell, even Honsou is a johnny-come-lately.
What those legions definitely DO need is the ability to field really, really badass veteran squads. Less essential but still very thematic would be having veteran CSM as troops, to represent the warbands that really -do- only have their original Heresy membership and no new recruiting. I guess Vets as troops could be unlocked with a special character, but it seems cheesy to require that (but typically current GW design, so whatever).
I for one am looking forward to Nightlord DOA armies that don't have to be counts-as...
Are we talking about Sternguard/Vanguard Veteran type vets or Chosen vets? Personally I'm not opposed to the idea of 2 wound vets... if they are vets of 10k years (which would be a very small select few I'm sure), I feel like that should count for something...
Temujin wrote:One thing that nobody seems to have considered is that Legion marines could have a better basic profile than renegade marines. They are 10,000 year veterans after all. This would differentiate the two codexes and mean that all nine legions would find their home in the new codex.
Dubious on that one. Not all legionnaires from the original 9 are 10K veterans. Hell, even Honsou is a johnny-come-lately.
What those legions definitely DO need is the ability to field really, really badass veteran squads. Less essential but still very thematic would be having veteran CSM as troops, to represent the warbands that really -do- only have their original Heresy membership and no new recruiting. I guess Vets as troops could be unlocked with a special character, but it seems cheesy to require that (but typically current GW design, so whatever).
I for one am looking forward to Nightlord DOA armies that don't have to be counts-as...
Are we talking about Sternguard/Vanguard Veteran type vets or Chosen vets? Personally I'm not opposed to the idea of 2 wound vets... if they are vets of 10k years (which would be a very small select few I'm sure), I feel like that should count for something...
Wasn't it only about 100 years since the heresy for 10th company in Soul Hunter? I'd imagine the remnants of most of the legions would be in a similar situation.
ZacktheChaosChild wrote:I'm still skeptical whether there will be a Legion 'dex.
It fits with rumors I hold..
I just hope the legions codex does not replace the daemons codex.
I do.
aka_mythos wrote:
Anung Un Rama wrote:If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
I think the restriction was imposed mostly out of balance, but fluff wise both emphasized combat doctrines that couldn't take advantage of it. Death guard preferred all on foot infantry formations of uniformly equipped troops with an emphasis on boarding actions. World Eaters preferred planetary assault by drop pod, rather than jump troops deployed from gunships.
I know they are fluff reasons and I support that. Hell, I field sacred number units, what else can I say on the matter.
But I have this really cool idea for Nurgle Bikes I want to do.
chaos0xomega wrote:IMO, the easiest way to do a legion book would be to use a 'mark' system similar to the marks of chaos in the current CSM book, however instead of Mark of Tzeentch, Nurgle, Undivided, etc. they should be Legion 'marks' (need a better name) each one coming with its own special rules/USRs and buffs/debuffs. This way you don't necessarily need to have 9+ unique units in each force org slot. Give HQs added abilities related to force org reshuffling and youre good to go.
That's a really good idea. At the same time I don't think those two types of marks are mutually exclusive. By utilizing one set of legion marks for some units and the god mark for other units they could allow different degrees of use and throttle the advantages. For example Chaos Bikers, while Death Guard might not necessarily have bikers of their own, they'd obviously be inclined to take nurgle worshiping bike mounted legionaries as allies; in that way GW could allow for more varied army composition while constraining them to a theme.
Then thats not a legion book anymore, thats the renegade book we have now.
No there is a difference... though I think that was a bad example. I was trying to say that you have both types of marks in the book available to different units... the distinctions for certain units aren't necessarily so diverse between legions and compounding legion specific rule with special rules of certain units so certain units like Possessed Marines and cultist/mutants might only have the distinction of god marks, while every other unit has legion marks. Otherwise we might end up with Legion mark rules with lots of "except for..." Its more a matter of categorizing certain units as Legion units and others as chaos units.
Well, from what I understand every legion is pretty set in its ways (regarding gods) so god marks would be redundant I think. You're not going to see a Death Guard Legionnaire or an Iron Warrior with the Mark of Tzeentch for example.
Anung Un Rama wrote: Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yes the marine you are talking about here is Ulric the Slayer and this is how he received the moniker "slayer". It was angron who bestowed the nod.
Pffft. Get this weak gak outta here.
The "really old" Khorne was violent and hated everyone. I'm glad they're heading back in this direction, with the exception of the "headlong charge" part. Khorne doesn't care where the blood flows from, as long as it flows. Hell, the World Eaters used Devastators and they were called the Teeth of Khorne. Khorne gifted his followers (Even ones in warhammer fantasy!) ranged weapons.
So yeah, your Chaos Warriors could be running around with bolters.
I understand why some people want Khorne to go to being more of a Samurai, but it just waters it down for the newbies.
In RoC, under the Khorne section, his "Friends+Enemies" section talks about how a follower of Khorne has no friends-all will be sacrifices to Khorne. Particularly insane World Eaters would commit suicide to offer themselves to the blood god.
I'd just rather that you were able to control your own troops. The only "dynamic" that followers of Khorne require is that they are better than any of the other god's followers at killing, both in close combat AND at ranged. It would be a fun special rule to allow them to shoot into close combat.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Uric the Slayer - Space Wolf Special Character. Back when beating up Berzerkers actually meant something because they knew how to fight. Not the pathetic predictable shell of bloodlust that they are now.
I never understood how your followers killing themselves was supposed to be a good thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote:The current rules do him justice just fine. Even in my negative review of the current ‘Chaos’ Codex I still gave credit for creating Abaddon rules that are actually worth a damn and make him out to be the Master of Chaos that he is. He’s no Primarch, he’s Chaos’ Marneus Calgar.
Nah, if he was Chaos Calgar he'd have some rule that gave friendly units a bonus to morale or extra attacks or something. Abby's more like Calgar lite.
Anung Un Rama wrote: Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yes the marine you are talking about here is Ulric the Slayer and this is how he received the moniker "slayer". It was angron who bestowed the nod.
Pffft. Get this weak Gak outta here.
The "really old" Khorne was violent and hated everyone. I'm glad they're heading back in this direction, with the exception of the "headlong charge" part. Khorne doesn't care where the blood flows from, as long as it flows. Hell, the World Eaters used Devastators and they were called the Teeth of Khorne. Khorne gifted his followers (Even ones in warhammer fantasy!) ranged weapons.
So yeah, your Chaos Warriors could be running around with bolters.
I understand why some people want Khorne to go to being more of a Samurai, but it just waters it down for the newbies.
In RoC, under the Khorne section, his "Friends+Enemies" section talks about how a follower of Khorne has no friends-all will be sacrifices to Khorne. Particularly insane World Eaters would commit suicide to offer themselves to the blood god.
I'd just rather that you were able to control your own troops. The only "dynamic" that followers of Khorne require is that they are better than any of the other god's followers at killing, both in close combat AND at ranged. It would be a fun special rule to allow them to shoot into close combat.
Actually I think you might be misunderstanding folks. The use of heavy weapons thing and tactics where in the Slaves of Darkness version of Khorne, and most or the earlier stuff for him. This is what those of us are complaining about want a return to.
The problem with the Khorne cult army in 3rd (4th? I can't remember) was you couldn't access anything with heavy weapons, and if I'm remembering right, units with Bolters they could take had to shift them down to CC and Bolt pistol, and the only special they could take was a Plasma Pistol.
So aye, In essence you are actually asking for what we are anyway. Khorne has always wanted blood, death and destruction, but in older editions his followers wheren't mindless idiots in doing it.
ph34r wrote:You say that as if the current 5th edition codexes aren't much worse.
In context with other books at their time of release? No, they're not.
gorgon wrote:Yeah, I think maybe the takeaway at this point is no matter how GW "fixes" CSMs, there are going to be some unhappy players. The resource shortage creates some hard decisions. I suppose the irony is that GW could probably create a SM codex that covers BA and DA and break fewer eggs than what will be required in lumping the very disparate elements of Chaos into a coherent codex or two.
Given that BA/DA have had their own books in every edition with the Codex system, I really doubt this statement - especially given the last BA book. It even makes me look forwards to a 5th ed-style DA book, as long as it isn't Wardian. In contrast, CSM have historically always had one book, and only the v3.5 monstrosity tried to give alternative lists to the Legions - which, given the author, was a huge mistake.
LostSoulCasey'sLaw wrote:Firstly i'm sad that Tau are getting pushed back but meh. More importantly do you think theres any chance Abaddon will get removed? Thats probably controversial but imho any rules that did him justice wouldn't be playable. I think hes far too powerful to have rules for. I say remove him and condemn him to canon, somewhere in between special characters and The Emperor would please me.
The only set of rules that will do him justice are the set where the Chaos Gods finally Spawnify him for his 10,000 years of failure...
Anung Un Rama wrote:If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
I don't know...Lots of room for 'Lord of the flies' imagery with nurgle-inspired Raptors. Maybe note that they're more focused on spreading nasty plague around and give them an option to take a 'poisoned' flamer or an aura of plague.
gorgon wrote:Yeah, I think maybe the takeaway at this point is no matter how GW "fixes" CSMs, there are going to be some unhappy players. The resource shortage creates some hard decisions. I suppose the irony is that GW could probably create a SM codex that covers BA and DA and break fewer eggs than what will be required in lumping the very disparate elements of Chaos into a coherent codex or two.
Given that BA/DA have had their own books in every edition with the Codex system, I really doubt this statement - especially given the last BA book. It even makes me look forwards to a 5th ed-style DA book, as long as it isn't Wardian. In contrast, CSM have historically always had one book, and only the v3.5 monstrosity tried to give alternative lists to the Legions - which, given the author, was a huge mistake.
Point isn't about history or what deserves their own codicies (ironically BA and DA did share a codex but not an army list), but that 9 Legion armies in one book requires more consolidation than BA, DA and generics probably would. Even trying to do limited treatments for each Legion can result in a monstrosity very quickly, as you pointed out. BA and DA wouldn't get satisfactory treatments if included a SM codex, but the end result would be a little less monstrous. That's all I'm saying.
Noisy_Marine wrote:I never understood how your followers killing themselves was supposed to be a good thing.
Khorne is fed by acts of violence. Worship is unnecessary, really.
I like the idea that Khorne's portfolio encompasses all sorts of 'super warrior' types from berserkers to master generals. The idea that Khorne might try to corrupt a General by offering even more successes is a neat idea. You want the strength to defeat the next big army? Well you'll need to help your new buddy out a bit... Have the troops wipe this town of civilians off the map. Winning that fight would be for the good of your Emperor, after all...
Anung Un Rama wrote:If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
I don't know...Lots of room for 'Lord of the flies' imagery with nurgle-inspired Raptors. Maybe note that they're more focused on spreading nasty plague around and give them an option to take a 'poisoned' flamer or an aura of plague.
I actually liked that not all units could take all marks. It really helped make the legions different. It helped show what they focused on and what sort of things each felt was unnecessary. If it did anything, it just helped with diversity. I knew I wouldn't see my exact same EC army across the table only with Marks of Nurgle instead of Slannesh.
It also showed that certain groups within the various forces of Chaos were specific unto themselves - Raptors and Obliterators being the two most obvious ones, with them being described as 'Cults' of their own, which is why there aren't any 'Emperor's Children Raptors' or 'World Eater Obliterators'. It also showed combat doctrine, as has been mentioned above.
That said, some freedom could be opened up for Chosen units (such as a World Eater Chosen unit having access to Jump Packs).
Anung Un Rama wrote: Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yes the marine you are talking about here is Ulric the Slayer and this is how he received the moniker "slayer". It was angron who bestowed the nod.
Pffft. Get this weak Gak outta here.
The "really old" Khorne was violent and hated everyone. I'm glad they're heading back in this direction, with the exception of the "headlong charge" part. Khorne doesn't care where the blood flows from, as long as it flows. Hell, the World Eaters used Devastators and they were called the Teeth of Khorne. Khorne gifted his followers (Even ones in warhammer fantasy!) ranged weapons.
So yeah, your Chaos Warriors could be running around with bolters.
I understand why some people want Khorne to go to being more of a Samurai, but it just waters it down for the newbies.
In RoC, under the Khorne section, his "Friends+Enemies" section talks about how a follower of Khorne has no friends-all will be sacrifices to Khorne. Particularly insane World Eaters would commit suicide to offer themselves to the blood god.
I'd just rather that you were able to control your own troops. The only "dynamic" that followers of Khorne require is that they are better than any of the other god's followers at killing, both in close combat AND at ranged. It would be a fun special rule to allow them to shoot into close combat.
Actually I think you might be misunderstanding folks. The use of heavy weapons thing and tactics where in the Slaves of Darkness version of Khorne, and most or the earlier stuff for him. This is what those of us are complaining about want a return to.
The problem with the Khorne cult army in 3rd (4th? I can't remember) was you couldn't access anything with heavy weapons, and if I'm remembering right, units with Bolters they could take had to shift them down to CC and Bolt pistol, and the only special they could take was a Plasma Pistol.
So aye, In essence you are actually asking for what we are anyway. Khorne has always wanted blood, death and destruction, but in older editions his followers wheren't mindless idiots in doing it.
I understand where they're coming from and for the most part I agree with them, I'm just not a fan of the whole "honor and saluting" stuff that 2nd edition Khorne seemed to be all about. It sounds interesting but really takes away from the whole "kill everyone, even your friends and family" stuff that I like about Khorne. He's not censored at all, unlike Slaanesh who keeps on getting watered down through the editions.
Otherwise, like i said, I agree with you. Khorne should have heavy weapons (and get bonuses for them) and probably some special Khorne ranged weapons too. Hell, the Cannon of Khorne would be a cool artillery piece for World Eaters/Khorne forces.
Not even so much using tactics as it is "kill them, kill them all". Fairly mindless but not completely.
But hey, everyone has their own thing they like. If Khorne ends up being the honorable samurai again, it's fine. I'll just keep reading Realms of Chaos and keep on enduring through my champions becoming Chaos Spawn.
H.B.M.C. wrote:It also showed that certain groups within the various forces of Chaos were specific unto themselves - Raptors and Obliterators being the two most obvious ones, with them being described as 'Cults' of their own, which is why there aren't any 'Emperor's Children Raptors' or 'World Eater Obliterators'. It also showed combat doctrine, as has been mentioned above.
That said, some freedom could be opened up for Chosen units (such as a World Eater Chosen unit having access to Jump Packs).
Yup. Despite some overpowering elements in Chaos 3.5 (overpowering at the time, not so much anymore), I really feel the codex did it right on organization and personalization of your force. You really could build any type of army you wanted out of the book. Chosen were great stop gap unit that could take most any type of wargear to give you what ever type of unit you wanted. Granted you paid through the nose for it, but you could have it.
There were limitations for the individual factions. There were FOC rearrangements as was fitting for the factions. Yes, IW should have access to 4 HS selections. Its just a shame that how 3rd and 4th ed core mission rules worked, this turned out somewhat abusive. I loved that giving Nurgle a transport made them FA choices. For a force that is supposed to win by attrition and hard to kill bodies, this was wonderfully fluffy and helped focus what each faction army was about.
I think that is what most of us Chaos players truly miss. The ability to field a force that we want, how we want, and one that will be unique to other chaos forces. It bugs me to no end to see Berzerkers fighting hand in hand with other cult marines in every single Chaos army I see currently fielded.
H.B.M.C. wrote:That said, some freedom could be opened up for Chosen units (such as a World Eater Chosen unit having access to Jump Packs).
It think that's the most sensible solution.
I think its some weird alignment of the stars for us to all agree like this. I think it really simplifies it when you take this approach, with each legions pulling different units in different directions to just right the rules where the legions primary unit of choice can be elevated to "Chosen" opening up all the appropriate upgrade options.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jayden63 wrote:
Yup. Despite some overpowering elements in Chaos 3.5 (overpowering at the time, not so much anymore), I really feel the codex did it right on organization and personalization of your force. You really could build any type of army you wanted out of the book. Chosen were great stop gap unit that could take most any type of wargear to give you what ever type of unit you wanted. Granted you paid through the nose for it, but you could have it.
It wasn't just overpowering elements that was a problem. I loved that book don't get me wrong, its just the cited reason for moving away from that was the overwhelming number of variations any number of units could take. You had legions, marks, and skills producing an excessive variation of just the chaos marines, let alone other units. It was unfair by virtue of the difficulty for other players to grasp what army they were fighting.
I think a fair amount of the problem with the 3.5 Codex, could have been fixed by simply giving your opponents a simple yet detailed army list. I personally feel that providing such a list is just good sportsmanship, no matter which army you're playing.
I’ll have to agree that the complexity issues with the 3.5 codex could be overcome with providing your opponent with a well written army list as well as the codex on hand for them to read. That being said, as complex as the 3.5 book was, there was no ambiguous rules, quality issues or general weirdness that’s prevalent in every Matt Ward codex.
Think you guys should be tapped to write the new 'dex. I have been loving the ideas in the past two pages, especially the Veterans with 2 wounds each. A whole elite force of essentially captain level warriors in units would be fantastic, even if you could only afford to field 20 models at 2000 points. Options like that would just make for an awesome book.
The veterans would be like the paladins in a sense. Or you could style them like Wolf Guard but with two wounds. On the raptors being a cult, it is pointed out in Chaos Codex 3.5 and in the fluff, like in Blood Reaver. Icons could stay if marks came back. They could turn into squad enhancing items, like sacred chaos artifacts.
Yea that would be pretty sweet. Super customizable armies and units, for a price.
I came REALLY close to making a true scale, counts-as all Wolf Guard Word Bearers army. I demurred, getting sucked into WHFB, but having the option would be sweet.
Vladsimpaler wrote:I understand where they're coming from and for the most part I agree with them, I'm just not a fan of the whole "honor and saluting" stuff that 2nd edition Khorne seemed to be all about. It sounds interesting but really takes away from the whole "kill everyone, even your friends and family" stuff that I like about Khorne. He's not censored at all, unlike Slaanesh who keeps on getting watered down through the editions.
Well, there's a reason Kharne is called The Betrayer. Because he did that. he went mindless and slaughtered friends and foe alike. The rest of them weren't like that. He was disliked and mistrusted because of it. And this is still in his fluff. But it doesn't make sense now that Berzerkers are all like this. Why bother tagging him as The Betrayer when all Berzerkers are as mindless and bloodthirsty as him?
Now he's Kharne The Guy-Who-Does-What-Everyone-Else-Does.
Just to quote myself for a second, from my review:
Commissar Calgar wrote:‘Khorne embodies mindless and absolute violence, destroying everything and everyone within reach, slaying both friend or foe alike.’ – Codex: When Loyalists Go Bad, Page 9.
I really do long for the days when Khorne not only embodied mindless slaughter, but martial pride and prowess – skill and ability within combat in all its forms. I want Khorne to go back to being the bloodthirsty God of War, where power could be gained both through hacking off someone’s head with an axe and through blasting them with a massive gun.
Some of us must remember the old Khornate Daemon Engines of Space Marine, specifically the Great Cannon of Khorne. Sure, it was possibly one of the more silly models GW has made, ranking up their with their first attempts at making Thunderhawk Gunships models, but it was a representation of Khorne as a master of combat, no matter the type of combat.
All fiction is based around conflict, and internal conflicts are often the most interesting types. The dichotomy of Khorne – one part bloodthirsty killer, the other part proud and honourable warrior – has, to me at least, made him the most interesting God, even more interesting than the relationship between Nurgle and Tzeentch. To see the Blood God distilled over time to a maniac who just wants to kill everything is quite saddening. Anyway, moving on.
Boiling down the Chaos Gods to a single personality trait makes them little more than the Star Trek alien races that each have one defining feature (Klingons - fighting, Ferengi - greedy, Romulans - sneaky, etc.) and that is really dull!
-Loki- wrote: Well, there's a reason Kharne is called The Betrayer. Because he did that. he went mindless and slaughtered friends and foe alike. The rest of them weren't like that. He was disliked and mistrusted because of it. And this is still in his fluff. But it doesn't make sense now that Berzerkers are all like this. Why bother tagging him as The Betrayer when all Berzerkers are as mindless and bloodthirsty as him? Now he's Kharne The Guy-Who-Does-What-Everyone-Else-Does.
The thing to note here is that Kharn the Betrayer came out in 2nd edition, where Khorne was turned into (some would say) something more dynamic, where he wanted death and destruction but he was also "honorable" about it. In the context of Khorne and the Berzerkers in 2nd edition, Kharn's moniker fits very well.
In the context of Realms of Chaos Khorne, like you said it makes no sense and is really just redundant.
H.B.M.C. wrote:Just to quote myself for a second, from my review:
Commissar Calgar wrote:‘Khorne embodies mindless and absolute violence, destroying everything and everyone within reach, slaying both friend or foe alike.’ – Codex: When Loyalists Go Bad, Page 9.
I really do long for the days when Khorne not only embodied mindless slaughter, but martial pride and prowess – skill and ability within combat in all its forms. I want Khorne to go back to being the bloodthirsty God of War, where power could be gained both through hacking off someone’s head with an axe and through blasting them with a massive gun.
Some of us must remember the old Khornate Daemon Engines of Space Marine, specifically the Great Cannon of Khorne. Sure, it was possibly one of the more silly models GW has made, ranking up their with their first attempts at making Thunderhawk Gunships models, but it was a representation of Khorne as a master of combat, no matter the type of combat.
All fiction is based around conflict, and internal conflicts are often the most interesting types. The dichotomy of Khorne – one part bloodthirsty killer, the other part proud and honourable warrior – has, to me at least, made him the most interesting God, even more interesting than the relationship between Nurgle and Tzeentch. To see the Blood God distilled over time to a maniac who just wants to kill everything is quite saddening. Anyway, moving on.
Boiling down the Chaos Gods to a single personality trait makes them little more than the Star Trek alien races that each have one defining feature (Klingons - fighting, Ferengi - greedy, Romulans - sneaky, etc.) and that is really dull!
The italicized text is what Khorne was in Realms of Chaos. No need to stop at 2nd edition.
I highlighted the bold because I found it funny- you want things to return to the way they were, but not the entire way. You want a return to 2nd edition, but why not Realms of Chaos? Realms of Chaos, in my (most likely not) humble opinion was the purest Chaos has ever been. Once you get into 2nd edition, the spikes start to show up and the "evil" that Chaos represents starts to become more cartoony. Granted it was much easier to actually play a game as the Treacher Legions but that's about it.
Khorne in was a bit one-dimensional in RoC, but he was still a master of all types of combat. There was no way you could beat a Bloodthirster unless you focused your entire army on it. If you saw Khornate Warriors coming up on your lines (WS6, S5, I6 with 2 attacks each), it was game over man, game over.
Finally, I'm curious as to why any of the Chaos gods need to be "dynamic". Each of the Chaos gods is just one part of the whole equation.
Vladsimpaler wrote:I highlighted the bold because I found it funny- you want things to return to the way they were, but not the entire way.
Much of the Rogue Trader/Realms of Chaos era stuff no longer applies. Of course we don't want to go all the way back, because going all the way back gives us things like Leman Russ being a man rather than a Primarch, the Ultramarines being the replacements for a corrupt Ultramarines (and a half-human/half-Eldar Chief Librarian), Beastmen units in the Guard, and all sorts of other stuff.
40K wasn't internally consistent (or as internally consistent as something so vague and scattered can be) until 2nd Ed came around and GW started codifying and rationalising their universe. Sure they've mined the old ROC days for material as the years have gone on, but they've tried to take it and reapply it to the more structured and uniform 40K universe of 2nd/3rd/4th Ed.
Vladsimpaler wrote:I highlighted the bold because I found it funny- you want things to return to the way they were, but not the entire way.
Much of the Rogue Trader/Realms of Chaos era stuff no longer applies. Of course we don't want to go all the way back, because going all the way back gives us things like Leman Russ being a man rather than a Primarch, the Ultramarines being the replacements for a corrupt Ultramarines (and a half-human/half-Eldar Chief Librarian), Beastmen units in the Guard, and all sorts of other stuff.
Most of this is doesn't really add to our conversation (I would call it a red herring but I'm looking for discussion rather than argument) other than the fact that RT had some very cool but very odd stuff. And Leman Russ was ret-conned to being a primarch later in Rogue Trader
Yet at the same time, some stuff from Rogue Trader has come back into the spotlight. The new Bloodletters mimic the old ones, and of course the Jokaero. A perfect opportunity for the "I kill everyone at range and in close combat" Khorne.
40K wasn't internally consistent (or as internally consistent as something so vague and scattered can be) until 2nd Ed came around and GW started codifying and rationalising their universe. Sure they've mined the old ROC days for material as the years have gone on, but they've tried to take it and reapply it to the more structured and uniform 40K universe of 2nd/3rd/4th Ed.
I'm still not seeing why we can't see a return to the Khorne who doesn't care where the blood flows from as long as it flows. And I'd argue that it's a more likely step for the grimdark 40k universe than an "honorable" Chaos god would.
Then again, it all depends on who writes the codex.
Anung Un Rama wrote:
Here's a thought: Do you think GW would ever go back to the "old" Khorne, which was more about achiving glory in battle or something like that? Never read any fluff about it myself, only heard stories from older gamers.
I wish they would do this - bring back that aspect of Khorne, the "martial pride" theme.
There was a story about a Loyalist Space Marine beating 2 or 3 Berzerkers in HTH and the leader/champion saluted him for his efforts.
Things like that are nice to see, rather than All Who Worship Khorne are maniacs and their only tactic is the headlong charge...
Yes the marine you are talking about here is Ulric the Slayer and this is how he received the moniker "slayer". It was angron who bestowed the nod.
Pffft. Get this weak Gak outta here.
The "really old" Khorne was violent and hated everyone. I'm glad they're heading back in this direction, with the exception of the "headlong charge" part. Khorne doesn't care where the blood flows from, as long as it flows. Hell, the World Eaters used Devastators and they were called the Teeth of Khorne. Khorne gifted his followers (Even ones in warhammer fantasy!) ranged weapons.
So yeah, your Chaos Warriors could be running around with bolters.
I understand why some people want Khorne to go to being more of a Samurai, but it just waters it down for the newbies.
In RoC, under the Khorne section, his "Friends+Enemies" section talks about how a follower of Khorne has no friends-all will be sacrifices to Khorne. Particularly insane World Eaters would commit suicide to offer themselves to the blood god.
I'd just rather that you were able to control your own troops. The only "dynamic" that followers of Khorne require is that they are better than any of the other god's followers at killing, both in close combat AND at ranged. It would be a fun special rule to allow them to shoot into close combat.
Actually I think you might be misunderstanding folks. The use of heavy weapons thing and tactics where in the Slaves of Darkness version of Khorne, and most or the earlier stuff for him. This is what those of us are complaining about want a return to.
The problem with the Khorne cult army in 3rd (4th? I can't remember) was you couldn't access anything with heavy weapons, and if I'm remembering right, units with Bolters they could take had to shift them down to CC and Bolt pistol, and the only special they could take was a Plasma Pistol.
So aye, In essence you are actually asking for what we are anyway. Khorne has always wanted blood, death and destruction, but in older editions his followers wheren't mindless idiots in doing it.
Actually, you are wrong...
Just grabbed my Realms of Chaos Slaves to Darkness book and the first page for Khorne clearly states he is the "aspect of mindless and absolute violence" that is straight from the book...and it continues on to talk of his "gore-maddened" followers who charge head long into battle...nothing of honor
And the person who said that the Ulrik story of him besting 3 Berzerkers was when it mattered because they weren't mindless is also mistaken, that story is not from an old codex...it is from the newest Wolves Codex...Idk about older ones
So this honor of Khorne stuff people are talking about is actually new, and not the original idea at all...if it even can be said to exist...
EDIT: Didn't see this was touched on...oh well, still excited for a new Codex and I could care less how Khorne turns out truly...Slaanesh for me
Mourningstar wrote:
Just grabbed my Realms of Chaos Slaves to Darkness book and the first page for Khorne clearly states he is the "aspect of mindless and absolute violence" that is straight from the book...and it continues on to talk of his "gore-maddened" followers who charge head long into battle...nothing of honor
So this honor of Khorne stuff people are talking about is actually new, and not the original intent at all...if it even can be said to exist...
Figured I'd Clear that up since it was bothering me
+1 to that, brotha
Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness, Page 17 wrote:
He (Khorne) looks with particular favour upon those who take the lives of their friends and allies...
I wish that Khorne would have an ability that gave you bonuses based on how many of your own troops you kill! Haha
From a fluff standpoint, World Eaters Khorne Berserkers, and almost the whole Legion in fact, underwent a surgery for implant that boosted aggressionand strength. That comes from Index Astartes III. In the current Codex, it states that the practice of this surgey continues, with only the Black Legions Berserkers equalling those of the World Eaters. Based on this, we could say that the ones in a Chaos Legions Codex, should be better than those in a Chaos Renegades Codex. At least, that's the way I see it...
Except the current codex is perfectly able to represent Black Legion, which basically has everything. There's no reason for Berzzerkers in the Legions codex to be better aside from, well, making that codex more powerful.
Which means it will happen, but not for that fluff reason.
-Loki- wrote:Except the current codex is perfectly able to represent Black Legion, which basically has everything. There's no reason for Berzzerkers in the Legions codex to be better aside from, well, making that codex more powerful.
Which means it will happen, but not for that fluff reason.
You seem to have missed how I was mostly talking about the World Eaters. Basically, I was referencing the fluff in both cases to say that the World Eaters should be close combat monsters to tie into the previously stated fluff. That, and that non World Eaters Berserkers should not be as good, again based on the fluff.
Mourningstar wrote:And the person who said that the Ulrik story of him besting 3 Berzerkers was when it mattered because they weren't mindless is also mistaken, that story is not from an old codex...it is from the newest Wolves Codex...Idk about older ones
It's not original source. Lexicanum lists White Dwarf 266 as the source.
Just grabbed my Realms of Chaos Slaves to Darkness book and the first page for Khorne clearly states he is the "aspect of mindless and absolute violence" that is straight from the book...and it continues on to talk of his "gore-maddened" followers who charge head long into battle...nothing of honor
And the person who said that the Ulrik story of him besting 3 Berzerkers was when it mattered because they weren't mindless is also mistaken, that story is not from an old codex...it is from the newest Wolves Codex...Idk about older ones
So this honor of Khorne stuff people are talking about is actually new, and not the original idea at all...if it even can be said to exist...
EDIT: Didn't see this was touched on...oh well, still excited for a new Codex and I could care less how Khorne turns out truly...Slaanesh for me
Yeah, I realised where it was coming from Space Marine, Adepticus Titanicus and later Epic is where Khorne was more martial, as they had to justify heavier vehicles and weapons.
My mind thought it was SoD, but the epic systems are almost as old as the Realm of Chaos books, and they actually helped focus much of the direction 40K went in.
Also I wasn't advocating the honour thing, that got caught up in the post Vlad was responding to. I just the ability to use some kind of tactical know how in battles, there was a period Khorne followers represented the best on the battlefield, and they where a sod to out fight both physically and tactically.
Mourningstar wrote:And the person who said that the Ulrik story of him besting 3 Berzerkers was when it mattered because they weren't mindless is also mistaken, that story is not from an old codex...it is from the newest Wolves Codex...Idk about older ones
It's not original source. Lexicanum lists White Dwarf 266 as the source.
So, fairly 'old' then.
And really, I don't think anyone wants to go ALL the way back to RT, for many of the reasons H.B.M.C. already mentioned.
Though I would like Beastmen Guard units - those were some pretty cool miniatures that stand the test of time fairly well!
Mourningstar wrote:And the person who said that the Ulrik story of him besting 3 Berzerkers was when it mattered because they weren't mindless is also mistaken, that story is not from an old codex...it is from the newest Wolves Codex...Idk about older ones
It's not original source. Lexicanum lists White Dwarf 266 as the source.
So, fairly 'old' then.
And really, I don't think anyone wants to go ALL the way back to RT, for many of the reasons H.B.M.C. already mentioned.
Though I would like Beastmen Guard units - those were some pretty cool miniatures that stand the test of time fairly well!
It is from the second ed codex not the current one thank you they trickle down you see.
Anung Un Rama wrote:If there's one thing I didn't like about 3.5 it was how some units couldn't get any marks. I can see why Nurgle Raptors would seem weird (though they would probably look awesome with the old chaos jetpacks) but why shouldn't there be Khorne dedicated jump troops?
I don't know...Lots of room for 'Lord of the flies' imagery with nurgle-inspired Raptors. Maybe note that they're more focused on spreading nasty plague around and give them an option to take a 'poisoned' flamer or an aura of plague.
I actually liked that not all units could take all marks. It really helped make the legions different. It helped show what they focused on and what sort of things each felt was unnecessary. If it did anything, it just helped with diversity. I knew I wouldn't see my exact same EC army across the table only with Marks of Nurgle instead of Slannesh.
I woul think the best way would be to plan that each unit would have a full page that has the 'base' unit and 3-5 'variants' for both Marked and Cult armies.
So a basic Space Marine squad (this one might need two pages) would have the basic statline then a bunch of boxed sections with changed units for 5 marks, Thousand Sons (makes it a Sorcerer + Rubric troops), etc.
Others would be a bit simpler. No Khorne-marked sorcerer, for example. Units that are ultra-specialized would probably be best described independently, but in general for a lot of setups (the aforementioned Nurgle Raptors) it's easier to say "Nurgle Raptors pay an extra 5 points/model but get 1 extra point of toguhness and their special weapons are limited to disease flamers" or similar.
how about this for an idea: a khorne codex(includng world eaters etc), a Nurgle codex (w/ death gaurd), a Tzeentch codex (including Thousand sons), and a slaanesh codex (w/ emperoros children) and then a Chaos Renegades book
necrongod wrote:how about this for an idea: a khorne codex(includng world eaters etc), a Nurgle codex (w/ death gaurd), a Tzeentch codex (including Thousand sons), and a slaanesh codex (w/ emperoros children) and then a Chaos Renegades book
This is entirely unnecessary. It all fit in a codex once, it will do so again. These suggestions are increasingly ludicrous.
necrongod wrote:how about this for an idea: a khorne codex(includng world eaters etc), a Nurgle codex (w/ death gaurd), a Tzeentch codex (including Thousand sons), and a slaanesh codex (w/ emperoros children) and then a Chaos Renegades book
This is entirely unnecessary. It all fit in a codex once, it will do so again.
I have to second this actually, they're capable of all fitting in the same Codex IMHO.
necrongod wrote:how about this for an idea: a khorne codex(includng world eaters etc), a Nurgle codex (w/ death gaurd), a Tzeentch codex (including Thousand sons), and a slaanesh codex (w/ emperoros children) and then a Chaos Renegades book
This is entirely unnecessary. It all fit in a codex once, it will do so again. These suggestions are increasingly ludicrous.
now that i look on it thats an extra 3 codexes and with GW the way it is now ere lucky to get one.
And that's really saying something in a thread based on a copied and pasted rumor for which there are no other indicators providing any evidence of verification at all for something that is supposedly happening nearly a year from now. When I see a thread like this go for a long time with absolutely nothing to go on, I like to pop in once in a while just to see how ludicrous it's gotten. 17 pages based on only one post that actually provides any rumor at all and that sketchy at best, yeah, ludicrous is a good adjective for this one.
We need someone to bring back variation within a codex to 40k.
They got rid of space marine traits which means that now there is only a slight difference, and only if you take a special character.
IG lost their traits/points system. I think that was the best way to diversify within a codex, you could end up with 2 completely different armies using different tactics that were just as effective as the other all from the same codex.
So, the main thing with chaos legions is actually diversify the different legions rather than we're all black legion + a couple of special characters.
tantan628 wrote:We need someone to bring back variation within a codex to 40k.
They got rid of space marine traits which means that now there is only a slight difference, and only if you take a special character.
IG lost their traits/points system. I think that was the best way to diversify within a codex, you could end up with 2 completely different armies using different tactics that were just as effective as the other all from the same codex.
So, the main thing with chaos legions is actually diversify the different legions rather than we're all black legion + a couple of special characters.
It would be nice, but hopefully there will be traits that are not just junk.
)
ing guy carry a 
