Abadabadoobaddon wrote:And the Iron Hands' Chapter Approved had them not having chapter masters and not holding Marneus Calgar as their spiritual liege.

theQuanz wrote:Just have 1 chaos book, that includes it all....ALLLLLLLLLLLL
Not this division gak.

Samus_aran115 wrote:

theQuanz wrote:Just have 1 chaos book, that includes it all....ALLLLLLLLLLLL
Not this division gak.

Yeah, no. Are you brain dead? That's the whole reason the current book is tasteless and pathetic.

tarnish wrote:Seeing as the new trend is putting out sprues that can be 2 or even 3 different things, i think its likely that there will be a thousand sons/noise marine set out eventually. they look enough like each other to fit such a set wouldn't you agree?

Kanluwen wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:

theQuanz wrote:Just have 1 chaos book, that includes it all....ALLLLLLLLLLLL
Not this division gak.

Yeah, no. Are you brain dead? That's the whole reason the current book is tasteless and pathetic.

Um no. The "whole reason the current book is tasteless"(personal opinion on your part. It's fine if you want to do a Renegade Chapter like the Red Corsairs or a generic warband. Bad for everything else) and "pathetic" has to do with the fact that it was supposed to be the first of two books. The second was, in fact, to be "Legions".

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:

theQuanz wrote:Just have 1 chaos book, that includes it all....ALLLLLLLLLLLL
Not this division gak.

Yeah, no. Are you brain dead? That's the whole reason the current book is tasteless and pathetic.

Um no. The "whole reason the current book is tasteless"(personal opinion on your part. It's fine if you want to do a Renegade Chapter like the Red Corsairs or a generic warband. Bad for everything else) and "pathetic" has to do with the fact that it was supposed to be the first of two books. The second was, in fact, to be "Legions".

The current book was never intended to be a one of two parter, it was done with leaving the door open to invididual books later as a possibility, but never intended to be one part of a never-finished duo.

Kanluwen wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:

theQuanz wrote:Just have 1 chaos book, that includes it all....ALLLLLLLLLLLL
Not this division gak.

Yeah, no. Are you brain dead? That's the whole reason the current book is tasteless and pathetic.

Um no. The "whole reason the current book is tasteless"(personal opinion on your part. It's fine if you want to do a Renegade Chapter like the Red Corsairs or a generic warband. Bad for everything else) and "pathetic" has to do with the fact that it was supposed to be the first of two books. The second was, in fact, to be "Legions".

The current book was never intended to be a one of two parter, it was done with leaving the door open to invididual books later as a possibility, but never intended to be one part of a never-finished duo.

Not what the author said.

I'm pretty sure the author knows better than you do.

Vaktathi wrote:4th Why the removal of veteran skills and Legion rules? Is it just being done across the board or was it felt that they were just too powerful? will they make a future comeback possibly?

GavT wrote:The removal of Legion-specific rules seems to be causing the most contention, which we expected. However, I think in the longer term giving ourselves the option of producing proper, full Codexes for the most interesting and different Legions is very exciting. For example, imagine a full 20+ page background section and unique army list for the World Eaters, with specific troop types and war engines, for which we actually produce models?

Vaktathi wrote:
Gav used to post on Warseer frequently, still is around sometimes. Back when the book came out, I PM'd him about the book, I'll repost some of the conversation here.

Vaktathi wrote:4th Why the removal of veteran skills and Legion rules? Is it just being done across the board or was it felt that they were just too powerful? will they make a future comeback possibly?

GavT wrote:The removal of Legion-specific rules seems to be causing the most contention, which we expected. However, I think in the longer term giving ourselves the option of producing proper, full Codexes for the most interesting and different Legions is very exciting. For example, imagine a full 20+ page background section and unique army list for the World Eaters, with specific troop types and war engines, for which we actually produce models?

FabricatorGeneralMike wrote:
Why not just get ADB to write the Fluff for the new Chaos dex? He's kicked butt with the NL's and Word Bearers so far. One of his future HH book's is going to be World Eaters...the man does know how to write good fiction.

Kanluwen wrote:Of COURSE he said there was no second part as "part of the plan".

At that point in time, it probably was just an idea on a blackboard.

You have to remember that Gav Thorpe was responsible for Warhammer Armies: Hordes of Chaos where he actually promised "at least two companion volumes". The only one we saw materialize was "Beasts of Chaos", and then a halfcocked attempt to tie Storm of Chaos in.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Of COURSE he said there was no second part as "part of the plan".

At that point in time, it probably was just an idea on a blackboard.

In which case, how was the CSM book supposed to be "the first of two books" if any other ideas were, ideas on a blackboard meaning 3-4 years out, if even that (as we've got nothing but speculation on that)?

You have to remember that Gav Thorpe was responsible for Warhammer Armies: Hordes of Chaos where he actually promised "at least two companion volumes". The only one we saw materialize was "Beasts of Chaos", and then a halfcocked attempt to tie Storm of Chaos in.

Right, that's all fine and dandy, but from my conversation with him, no second part was ever intended or planned, only considered a future possibility as you can see.

Manchu wrote:This could be settled with Kanluwen giving us a source for the two-parter story.

Vaktathi wrote:
Right, that's all fine and dandy, but from my conversation with him, no second part was ever intended or planned, only considered a future possibility as you can see.

Gee, probably because Gav had Alessio and Jervis on board with said book.

He learned his lesson, presumably, and did not make any firm allusions to the book being definitive because of that.

Manchu wrote: It's hard to take Vaktathi's "Gav Thorpe PMed me once" line seriously (no offense but anyone could say something like that in any argument)

Vaktathi wrote:

Manchu wrote: It's hard to take Vaktathi's "Gav Thorpe PMed me once" line seriously (no offense but anyone could say something like that in any argument)

Understandable, though if anyone really wants I can post the entire log if they want more.

Kanluwen wrote:At that point in time, it probably was just an idea on a blackboard.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing the whole log.

GavT wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Hi again, I had a few questions for you about upcoming chaos changes with the new codex if that's cool?.

As it's now confirmed, I can't see there being any problems with answering some questions.

I'd like to say first off that there are alot of things I like about the new codex so far alot (I love the new affordable Raptors and Terminators, as well as BP/CCW/Bolter/Frags on basic marines, cult troop changes are great), and a couple that I dont like so much (Predators, removal of legion rules, dreadnaught fire frenzy), but that is the way of things I guess.

Well, I think people will always like some changes and not others with a new Codex or Army book, so no surprises there!

First question is why did the basic marine squad get changed to need to be a minimum of 10 strong to take a heavy weapon? I understand wanting to cut down on min-maxing, but with the current box holding only 8 marines, and when most chaos armies used 6-9 marines, often with a heavy bolter instead of a lascannon, I was just curious as to what spurred this change?

The Chaos Sace Marines frames have been re-tooled along similar lines to the Space Marines and so the updated box comes with ten-man squads. The principle is for players to make choices about their army on a much more unit-by-unit level rather than individual models. By limiting heavy weapons in the basic squads, players have more incentive to look at Predators, Havocs, Obliterators and such. Multiple small units having access to heavier weapons undercuts the role of other parts of the army.

2nd, I can understand Oblits being moved to heavy support, but why reduce them to S4, T4 and Ld9 and remove their autocannons and heavy bolters in conjunction with a price increase while only giving them weapons that are offer slight advantages to weapons they already have? (e.g. multi-melta when they already have lascannons and TL meltaguns) I ask this not to complain, but just to understand the changes better for myself.

Again, this is about giving the Obliterators a more defined role, and also to address a more system-wide problem with the escalation of profiles. The Obliterators main strength is their versatility, and while they remained outrageously tough this meant that Plague Marines would have to be even tougher to show their strength. This could have developed into an internal 'arms race' with units all competing for the same ground in people's armies rather than having a place and role to fulfil. All of the changes, to the squads in particular, should be taken as a whole. We've removed lots of the special rules that 'cluttered' the army list and added much more definition to each unit with simple but significant differences between them.

Secondly, since the re-write of the Codexes back in 3rd edition, we 'flattened' all of the profiles so that Toughness 5 was remarkable and limited to very few troop types. This is because the system used Imperial Guardsmen (the average human) as a benchmark, but over the years the prevalence of WS, BS4, S4, T4, 3+ armour save Space Marines seems to have shifted that middle ground in people's perceptions. If an Obliterator is T5, then surely a Daemon Prince should be T6, a Great Unclean One
T7? So, the escalation continues to pull the system away from its founding principles. T4 is meant to be better-than-average, but at the moment that's not very obvious.

3rd, Predators and Dreadnaughts, why the huge increase in lascannon costs coupled with increase in costs for vehicle upgrades or reduced functionality (BS3 possession for example, although I can understand removal of Mutated hull)? Is that just part of a general trend of toning things down accross the board?

The Predator is in line with changes made in the Dark Angels Codex. Again, here we want people to make significant decisions. The investment in points for a supreme anti-tank vehicle means that players must think before they upgrade. The humble autocannon Predator really hasn't had a chance in either CSM or SM armies for many year now, and no surprise when it was so cheap (relatively speaking) to upgun?

And with dreads, why make Fire Frenzy even more dangerous when people are loathe to take dreads already (both because the Chaos dread model is very old and outdated and the that a CC dread is now greatly overshadowed in ability by the new 5A fleeting defiler)

It's only more dangerous if you're too close! :eek: Firing twice is more dangerous to the opponent in the right circumstances. This was simply a step back towards the Dreadmoughts of the original 2nd edition Codex, making them unpredictable but potentially deadly. Regarding the Defiler, I'm glad players see it more as an assault walker than an indirect-firing tank, as that's more fitting with what it's supposed to be. With the Dreadnoughts and Defilers now occupying different force organisation chart slots, players will have to look at their overall army composition. Sure, they can take Defilers over Dreadnoughts, but that restricts access to other heavy support choices, so Dreadnoughts might be ther better option if you also want Havocs, Obliterators, tanks and so on; the wider shape of their army becomes more of a consideration.

4th Why the removal of veteran skills and Legion rules? Is it just being done across the board or was it felt that they were just too powerful? will they make a future comeback possibly?

The removal of Legion-specific rules seems to be causing the most contention, which we expected. However, I think in the longer term giving ourselves the option of producing proper, full Codexes for the most interesting and different Legions is very exciting. For example, imagine a full 20+ page background section and unique army list for the World Eaters, with specific troop types and war engines, for which we actually produce models?

5th. Kharne. Does his "always hits on a 2+" apply to skimmers as well? Or was this supposed to be when measuring against an enemies WS?

At first glance, I cannot see any reason why vehicles would not be hit on a 2+, regardless of speed or type. Further investigation may prove otherwise!

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

No probs, I hope you understand some of our reasons a little better. I know that some players won't agree with our reasoning or decisions, but I find that if we can explain some of the principles behind our thinking players are less likely to fill in the gaps and make the wrong assumptions.

Cheers,

GAV

GavT wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:also, one last nagging question, why "chaos glory" over "chaos undivided"? It just doesnt sound quite as...menacing I think.

-thanks!

We've found that the concept of Chaos Undivided within the rules was affecting people's perception of the background. 'Chaos in all its Glory' better reflects what's going on - followers worshipping all of the Chaos gods, as opposed to some non-existent 'fifth power' represented by Chaos Undivided. It was also as much for ourselves, as a reminder that the majority of Chaos followers don't choose a single god over any other but worship them all equally. I kinda like Chaos in all its Glory, it's more of a statement than Chaos Undivided, which is seems technical and pragmatic. Ideally, we'd just keep it as Chaos and nothing else, but that got a little confusing when writing about Marks of Chaos in general, and Marks of other gods...

Cheers,

GAV

Lint wrote:...They pretty much nerfed demons in CSM 4.0, and then followed it up by giving them their own codex...

Manchu wrote:Thanks for posting that, V. Nice bit of history. I especially like the quip about "some non-existent 'fifth power' represented by Chaos Undivided." Losing Malal was definitely not a mistake and giving that tripe any way back in would be. Although, I have to admit, I do like "Chaos Undivided" a lot better than "Chaos Glory." I don't see "Chaos Undivided" as too confusing, as far as an idea like Malal goes.

Vaktathi wrote:*Gav Thorpe Log*

Just Dave wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:*Gav Thorpe Log*

The design ethos may have been flawed, but from a designers and balance perspective, A LOT of what Gav says there is very reasonable IMHO.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Manchu wrote:Thanks for posting that, V. Nice bit of history. I especially like the quip about "some non-existent 'fifth power' represented by Chaos Undivided." Losing Malal was definitely not a mistake and giving that tripe any way back in would be. Although, I have to admit, I do like "Chaos Undivided" a lot better than "Chaos Glory." I don't see "Chaos Undivided" as too confusing, as far as an idea like Malal goes.

Chaos Undivided, as a concept, no longer exists. Just look at Black Crusade. You've got things dedicated to the four Gods, and then you have 'unaligned'. It's not even done as a proper noun any more.

Vaktathi wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:*Gav Thorpe Log*

The design ethos may have been flawed, but from a designers and balance perspective, A LOT of what Gav says there is very reasonable IMHO.

Right, and I get where they were going with it, they just happened to pull it on the book such a change would be more noticeable on than any other by a long shot, and then of course everything 180*'d not much later, leaving what *was* the most varied and detailed army out there as one of the least detailed and varied in the game.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:*Gav Thorpe Log*

The design ethos may have been flawed, but from a designers and balance perspective, A LOT of what Gav says there is very reasonable IMHO.

Right, and I get where they were going with it, they just happened to pull it on the book such a change would be more noticeable on than any other by a long shot, and then of course everything 180*'d not much later, leaving what *was* the most varied and detailed army out there as one of the least detailed and varied in the game.

You didn't play tau, necrons, orks, eldar, or tyranids did you?

The chaos inferiority complex is strange.

Vaktathi wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:*Gav Thorpe Log*

The design ethos may have been flawed, but from a designers and balance perspective, A LOT of what Gav says there is very reasonable IMHO.

Right, and I get where they were going with it, they just happened to pull it on the book such a change would be more noticeable on than any other by a long shot, and then of course everything 180*'d not much later, leaving what *was* the most varied and detailed army out there as one of the least detailed and varied in the game.

You didn't play tau, necrons, orks, eldar, or tyranids did you?

The chaos inferiority complex is strange.

Actually, I have Tau, Eldar, and Tyranids, just not Necrons or Orks.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Then what you consider to be the 'least detailed and varied' codex is a strangely broad field.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Actually, I have Tau, Eldar, and Tyranids, just not Necrons or Orks.

Then what you consider to be the 'least detailed and varied' codex is a strangely broad field.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Then what you consider to be the 'least detailed and varied' codex is a strangely broad field.

GentlemanGuy wrote:I cant see GW releasing god specific upgrade sprues like they did with DA and BT. I reckon plastic boxsets will come out for them but what i would like are legion specific boxsets you can spread through your army like they've done with SW and BA. Imagine an Iron Warrior boxset with bionic arms and legs or a word bearers boxset ith scrolls and parchment covered shoulder pads. What about an Alpha legion one with scaly shoulder pads and reptilian helmets and small multi headed serpents to use as familiars XD thats what i'd like to see

also about cultists an traitors in a legion army. I reckon all but 3 legions use them. Iron warriors who fight siege and trench warfare would need expendable troops to grind there adversaries before sending the legionarres as shock troops. Word bearers would requirecultists wherever they go. Alot of sacrifices and cannon fodder. The same with the black legion who would need meat shields to grind an opponent down. Even death guard would use cultists which would be just as pox ridden as their overlords

ghost21 wrote:Okay, time to end the what-ifs:

There will be 3 Chaos dexes as far as I'm aware: Legions, Renegades and Daemons

Now Daemons will appear in the Legion Codex but not those awful lesser things they are now. I'm not sure about greater daemons. However, if you are doing a Legion list, it's based on "Black legion(or the generic list)" or one of the others.

Legions:
Whats there ? Lots!
World Eaters with bolt guns you say? Yeah, they're there.
Expect very powerful characters here (they are 10 Milena old). My favorite is the overpowered red angel: Now he IS angry!

I'll do the others, if people wish.

Kroothawk wrote:

ghost21 wrote:I'll do the others, if people wish.

Kroothawk wrote:

ghost21 wrote:Okay, time to end the what-ifs:

There will be 3 Chaos dexes as far as I'm aware: Legions, Renegades and Daemons

Now Daemons will appear in the Legion Codex but not those awful lesser things they are now. I'm not sure about greater daemons. However, if you are doing a Legion list, it's based on "Black legion(or the generic list)" or one of the others.

Legions:
Whats there ? Lots!
World Eaters with bolt guns you say? Yeah, they're there.
Expect very powerful characters here (they are 10 Milena old). My favorite is the overpowered red angel: Now he IS angry!

I'll do the others, if people wish.

NELS1031 wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:

ghost21 wrote:I'll do the others, if people wish.

Why does he say things like that? Just out with it man!

I'm sure no one wants to know any more details, whatsoever. /sarcasm

Kroothawk wrote:

ghost21 wrote:Okay, time to end the what-ifs:

Expect very powerful characters here (they are 10 Milena old). My favorite is the overpowered red angel: Now he IS angry!

NELS1031 wrote:

ghost21 wrote:I'll do the others, if people wish.

Why does he say things like that? Just out with it man!

Samus_aran115 wrote:Angron


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A couple primarchs are still alive, although I think it would be ridiculous to make them playable. No more ridiculous than Draigo, lol

Deathly Angel wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Angron


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A couple primarchs are still alive, although I think it would be ridiculous to make them playable. No more ridiculous than Draigo, lol

He does have a datasheet in Apocalypse. I cringe the thought of Draigo fighting a Primarch in an actual game.

Samus_aran115 wrote:Angron


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A couple primarchs are still alive, although I think it would be ridiculous to make them playable. No more ridiculous than Draigo, lol

Harriticus wrote:

-Alpha Legion: No idea. Arkos the Faithless is the only Alpha Legion character I know of, and he's in Imperial Armour and was captured by the Dark Angels.

Deathly Angel wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Angron


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A couple primarchs are still alive, although I think it would be ridiculous to make them playable. No more ridiculous than Draigo, lol

He does have a datasheet in Apocalypse. I cringe the thought of Draigo fighting a Primarch in an actual game.

Harriticus wrote:The best option is probably a special character for each Legion:

-Black Legion: Abaddon
-World Eaters: Kharn
-Death Guard: Typhus
-Emperors Children: Lucius
-Thousand Sons: Ahriman
-Word Bearers: Some infamous Dark Apostle. Erebus, Marduk, or even Kor Phaeron. Something like that
-Iron Warriors: Honsou
-Night Lords: Tarraq Darkblood, stated in Codex Eye of Terror to be the most bloodthirsty and vicious in the legion or Talos or something.
-Alpha Legion: No idea. Arkos the Faithless is the only Alpha Legion character I know of, and he's in Imperial Armour and was captured by the Dark Angels.

Plus Fabius Bile and Huron Blackheart.

aka_mythos wrote:You guys have it wrong the "red angel" isn't Angron. The "red angel" is a different specific character... he's shown in Horus Heresy art books as a really scary possessed looking blood angel

ghost21 wrote:Urm, yes. Everything to be taken with salt.

But it's been said for a while there would be 3 dexes, even if they decided to split the legions, well I've been told... for a while I heard there would be cult, and non cult dexes. However I was told that IF this happens the chaos dex would be delayed another 6 months at least.

My position within the company really? Do people want me to lose that? Honestly, I think there's 2 people who know who I am and where I work on this board.

And if you search my posts I do explain my hit and misses.

Lastly, I try not to post stats, some hints of rules certainly, but not everything... I do get into some hot water occasionally.

However, there are some people who object to the tight lipness of GW. And as long as they stay this way I'll continue to post what I have, even if I get a bent ear.

ghost out

Chaos legions will be out in January or February dependant on necron sales, however it will probably be January.

ghost21 wrote:

I assume the Red Corsairs will figure prominently in the Renegade book? Will they try and give Renegade chapters more "codex/loyalist" gear?

Not exactly. As I understand, it's a LATD list first and foremost.
Traitor generals, guard, SOME marines, mutants, cults etc.
(...)
I shouldn't but....

Okay, true they have stagnated, but do you think they sit about drinking beer and catching rays?
No, they constantly fight, so I think they are sharp if not sharper than most Marines

Knowing what I know.. and I don't like angry marines because they are angry... but they've expanded beyond that khorne wants skulls true, he wants blood equally true, but the path of devotion doesnt make them all frothing loonies. Khan is an enigma, a one off, if they were all like him, well he'd be the last.

I have to say I'm excited for chaos, there is allot allot of inspiration from the 3.5 dex, with warsmiths, dark apostles and the alpha legion rules. Well, lets say they have a dual command structure

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Got this horrible feeling that this is all part of a GW mis-information campaign and that the next codex out will be a Gretchin codex or something. I've been in the hobby for 25+ years and I've seen a lot of false dawns.

lord_blackfang wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Got this horrible feeling that this is all part of a GW mis-information campaign and that the next codex out will be a Gretchin codex or something. I've been in the hobby for 25+ years and I've seen a lot of false dawns.

I would totally buy a Gretchin codex.

tarnish wrote:dont really get it that warsmiths makes so many people drool... are they that amazing? i mean, wouldent it be more interesting if there where simply more options for the hq in general or is a servo harness that essential? to me, it lacks creativity to simply want "dark tech marines" and calling it chaos-y.

lord_blackfang wrote:

tarnish wrote:dont really get it that warsmiths makes so many people drool... are they that amazing? i mean, wouldent it be more interesting if there where simply more options for the hq in general or is a servo harness that essential? to me, it lacks creativity to simply want "dark tech marines" and calling it chaos-y.

That's a good point. For all the complaints that the current CSM are just loyalists with spikes, there sure is a lot of calls for Spiky Techmarines and Spiky Chaplains (Dark Apostles)

lord_blackfang wrote:

tarnish wrote:dont really get it that warsmiths makes so many people drool... are they that amazing? i mean, wouldent it be more interesting if there where simply more options for the hq in general or is a servo harness that essential? to me, it lacks creativity to simply want "dark tech marines" and calling it chaos-y.

That's a good point. For all the complaints that the current CSM are just loyalists with spikes, there sure is a lot of calls for Spiky Techmarines and Spiky Chaplains (Dark Apostles)

CpatTom wrote:I want Fabio Stomach Acid to make some really interesting things happen. The switch places with another model on trazyn(iirc, its one of those necrons) could be interesting as to his use of clones. Supeing up those around him is neat too, but this is a mad doctor, they could do alot with him more than, hey these guys hit a little bit harder. That said, I wouldn't want them to just start piling on abilities that will cause his price to skyrocket.
Anyways, Bile has always been one of my favorite 40k characters, and I hope he doesn't get forgotten by the wayside.

timetowaste85 wrote:Iron Warriors don't really seem chaos-y to me anyway, more like " the Emperor, we'll do what we want!" (In Cartman's voice)

ghost21 wrote:I know a lot of you have questions about individual units and legions. I'll try to address them all, however there are limits on how much I can get away with.

I'll say this: there are havoc's for marked legions.

Though each legion will get something unique to them, from force organization to individual units to HQs, for example Night Lords and World Eaters can only have 1 heavy support but get other boni.

Remember Huron has quite decent kit, so expect something like a 2nd ed list for him. Also, in some ways picking a legion will restrict you, there are a lot of chaos characters already in fluff so expect most to return ... plus a few new faces.
Who's the star of the show, huh? Now, that is something, I'll hold onto for a while.

His Master's Voice wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:Iron Warriors don't really seem chaos-y to me anyway, more like " the Emperor, we'll do what we want!" (In Cartman's voice)

But that's pretty much what IW were about all along, Warsmiths or not. Very much like Night Lords and Alpha Legion; not worshipers but dissenters.

Agent_Tremolo wrote:OMG... The Horus Heresy artbook was pure deranged fun. I'm glad they're taking design cues from it.

sennacherib wrote:i really hope that they dont use the same planned obselesnce tactic that they used with nids. If they do, all the good old standby units will suck and they will be replaced by something that is way cooler. Rush out and buy the new COOL stuff kiddies. Its got new rules and it works twice as well as all that other stuff you bought from us way back when.

Red Corsair wrote:

Agent_Tremolo wrote:OMG... The Horus Heresy artbook was pure deranged fun. I'm glad they're taking design cues from it.

Can you post a link or drop some titles for some of this literature/graphic novels so I can look into picking them up?

-RC

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

lord_blackfang wrote:

tarnish wrote:dont really get it that warsmiths makes so many people drool... are they that amazing? i mean, wouldent it be more interesting if there where simply more options for the hq in general or is a servo harness that essential? to me, it lacks creativity to simply want "dark tech marines" and calling it chaos-y.

That's a good point. For all the complaints that the current CSM are just loyalists with spikes, there sure is a lot of calls for Spiky Techmarines and Spiky Chaplains (Dark Apostles)

H.B.M.C. wrote:

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

It better fething not be.

ghost21 wrote:Though each legion will get something unique to them, from force organization to individual units to HQs, for example Night Lords and World Eaters can only have 1 heavy support but get other boni.

Deathly Angel wrote:

ghost21 wrote:Though each legion will get something unique to them, from force organization to individual units to HQs, for example Night Lords and World Eaters can only have 1 heavy support but get other boni.

This was one of the factors that led to the balance issues in the 3.5 codex that GW wanted to avoid with the 4th ed codex; I just can't see them bringing it back.

-Loki- wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

It better fething not be.

Agreed. If they halfass it by making it the followers of Typhus, Kharn, Ahriman and Lucius, they might as well not bother. It's stupid and doesn't represent a legion, it represents that particular characters warband.

However, considering ghost21's rumour said there would be addition special characters as well as the current characters in the fluff, I'd say single, individual characters won't be the basis for legion selection.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

It better fething not be.

Anung Un Rama wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

It better fething not be.

Wouldn't surprise me at all. They did so with Space Marines and Eldar.
Then again, Orks and Marines could field different units as troops by selecting a regular HQ. Honestly, I could see both happening.

There's nothing stopping GW from just rewriting the Fluff for Ahriman and Typhus though.

Anung Un Rama wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

candy.man wrote:I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character...

It better fething not be.

Wouldn't surprise me at all. They did so with Space Marines and Eldar.
Then again, Orks and Marines could field different units as troops by selecting a regular HQ. Honestly, I could see both happening.

There's nothing stopping GW from just rewriting the Fluff for Ahriman and Typhus though.

warboss wrote:
I'm not familiar with the Necron codex but does it have characters that change army list force org slots for units? Supposedly, its designed with the next edition in mind.

Bonde wrote:I am really thrilled for a Chaos legion release. Do you think that GW will keep the slightly outdated plastic models of the current range, or will the entire range of infantry get revamped with a whole new feel to it? They probably won't touch the vehicles as much, and perhaps just add a couple of new ones, but it is mostly the infantry I am worried for.
I am thinking of getting a single squad of finecast PM's and perhaps a squad of regular CSM and the Death Guard Forge World conversion kit for them, but I don't know if they still would be viable with thoose weapon options and all in the new codex and even in the next edition of 40K. It might be quite a risk buying (perhaps) outdated models to start an army that first will be relased in a year or so, but it would be nice to get a head start before the codex hits.

candy.man wrote:I wonder how the Legion mechanics are going to work as mention in Kroothawk’s recent post.

I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character however there’s always the possibility that it might be more complicated than that (given that World Eaters and Night Lords are restricted to 1 HS slot).

Deathly Angel wrote:

Harriticus wrote:

-Alpha Legion: No idea. Arkos the Faithless is the only Alpha Legion character I know of, and he's in Imperial Armour and was captured by the Dark Angels.

Alpha Legion: No Special Character

Any Chaos Lord or Chaos Sorceror may take an Icon of the Alpha Legion for +??pts

Icon of the Alpha Legion: Confers the I am Alpharius special rule.

I am Alpharius: In the assualt phase, the Independant Character cannot be singled out in combat from any squad he is attached to.

aka_mythos wrote:I think as it is there are enough kits that need plastic versions, GW would see it as more worthwhile to produce plastic kits for those units, before replacing existing plastic kits.

ghost21 wrote:Though each legion will get something unique to them, from force organization to individual units to HQs, for example Night Lords and World Eaters can only have 1 heavy support but get other boni.

ghost21 wrote:basically as i understand if we want more than 1 havoc squad they have to trade something for it(so not limits on heavy support per say)

as i understand they can take khornate engines without restriction

sorry to cause confusiuon

Commander Cain wrote:I doubt that the current plastics will be changed, only the oldest and most outdated kits usually get replaced (think old DE) Chances are that you will just be able to spruce up the infantry kits with all the new stuff.

Durza wrote:

candy.man wrote:I wonder how the Legion mechanics are going to work as mention in Kroothawk’s recent post.

I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character however there’s always the possibility that it might be more complicated than that (given that World Eaters and Night Lords are restricted to 1 HS slot).

It can't be. Warbands are often amalgams of different legions, so unless they alter their fluff, there has to be the option for at least two legions.

Brother SRM wrote: The only plastic kit it makes sense to replace are Chaos bikers.

poipo32 wrote:With the mention that many characters will make a comeback I can't help to wish for the return of Doomrider.
You don't make more batgak insane than Doomrider.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:What I want in terms of a replacement for the plastic CSMs is a kit that looks less like spiky mk7 power armour, and more like self-modified armour of earlier patterns. It'd be slightly more "realistic".

Alpharius wrote:All sounds good to me!

I'm trying to not get too excited though, as this whole thread seems a little... less than substantial?

DarkStarSabre wrote:
And Cypher.

iproxtaco wrote:

Durza wrote:

candy.man wrote:I wonder how the Legion mechanics are going to work as mention in Kroothawk’s recent post.

I’m going to assume that “picking a legion” is achieved via selecting a special character however there’s always the possibility that it might be more complicated than that (given that World Eaters and Night Lords are restricted to 1 HS slot).

It can't be. Warbands are often amalgams of different legions, so unless they alter their fluff, there has to be the option for at least two legions.

Simple, Legion Rules. Every HQ choice must pick one Legion Rule, this gives access to special upgrades and units. Taking two HQ's unlocks further bonuses, or taking two different ones will restrict access to the better bonuses. The Special Characters come with a Legion Rule built-in, so Kharn would have the World Eaters one, Lucius would have the Emperor's Children one etc.

aka_mythos wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:
And Cypher.

Despite coming from the Heresy era like the Chaos Legionaires... based on his background, he strikes me as more appropriately from a fluff perspective in the "Renegade" codex with Traitor guard and ex-loyalist chapters.

DarkStarSabre wrote:
True. But Cypher was always the sort of character most likely to appear in both sides of things. And besides, a squad of Fallen always makes things fun.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:"And Chaos players, do we have a treat for you! It's a dreadnought!"
"SQUEEEEEEE!"
"...Redone in Finecast!"
"SSSSSSSSSSS"

Kroothawk wrote:

ghost21 wrote:I know a lot of you have questions about individual units and legions. I'll try to address them all, however there are limits on how much I can get away with.

I'll say this: there are havoc's for marked legions.

Though each legion will get something unique to them, from force organization to individual units to HQs, for example Night Lords and World Eaters can only have 1 heavy support but get other boni.

Remember Huron has quite decent kit, so expect something like a 2nd ed list for him. Also, in some ways picking a legion will restrict you, there are a lot of chaos characters already in fluff so expect most to return ... plus a few new faces.
Who's the star of the show, huh? Now, that is something, I'll hold onto for a while.

aka_mythos wrote:I don't know... squeee seems aweful nurgle... as in "awww gross he squeed all over me"... or is that slaanesh?

warpcrafter wrote:I am hoping the Chaos Renegades codex happens, because I have 62 Mutants, 15 Big Mutants, 60 Beastmen, 57 Plague Zombies and 106 traitor Guard that I would really like to have a reason to dust off.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:What I want in terms of a replacement for the plastic CSMs is a kit that looks less like spiky mk7 power armour, and more like self-modified armour of earlier patterns. It'd be slightly more "realistic".

Brother SRM wrote:As cool as that would be, the Giger-influenced stuff would be a huge departure from the entire range as is. They'd probably need to start the line over to go in that direction, and there's so many portrayals of Chaos Marines out there in games, books, and 40k proper that I don't see it changing. I could definitely see some Giger elements becoming incorporated in new kits or characters though.

Just Dave wrote:"their true form. This is namely a misshapen morass of decomposing filth"

Make models for that will ya Games Workshop?*

lord_blackfang wrote:For example, someone asked him around May if Hrud would be getting a codex and he said no.

ghost21 wrote:Re: hrud ive not heard a single thing this doesnt mean there are not coming

it was probably just spam.. however ill keep a look out as id love them to apear

aka_mythos wrote:
I always thought the Space Crusade Chaos marines were a good balance of those visual elements and the more modern marine:

Kazwulf wrote:Kroothawk:
Does it sound like the design approach to the new CSM codex follows the same path laid by the latest work -- i.e. more variety, additional options for customizing your own personalized armies, army-wide selections?

ghost21 wrote:Basically, as I understand, if we want more than 1 havoc squad, they have to trade sth for it (so not limits on HS per sé)
As I understand, they can take khornate engines without restriction.
Sorry to cause confusiuon.
(...)
There are downsides to chaos units: Nurgle can't do sweeping advances (I think that's what they are called, and are stoic), Khorne has to engage in some kind of combat every turn or suffer a d6 result, Tzeentch (sp, ooooh I hate that word) are mindless automatons, who need a command figure or suffer a d6 result to guide their actions, and Slaanesh ... well let's say they have very harsh results.
(...)
As I've said, it will probably be the first or second 6th ed book, 6th ed is slated for july I think (but also I have bb then... so I dunno), so anything up to 4 months after that (and this is the Legions book, not the renegades).

theDarkGeneral wrote:I'm glad ghost21 was able to confirm my early reply about Warsmiths and Dark Apostles, and World Eaters w/Bolters...

Here's more tidbits over a few shots of bourbon and some cigars...

*Chaos Dreads: No longer crazed or deranged, and new plastic (FINALLY) sprue to incorporate some new/old dreadnought close combat weapons types (chainfist, thunderhammer, power scourge, etc.)...but i'm more excited about being able to have Marked Dreads!!!

*Assault Berzerkers! Finally, Berzerkers with jump packs counting as Fast Attack!

*Slaughterfiends from Apoc will make their way into the Codex, along with versions for "Marked" type ones for other Legions.

*HQs making a return (lil' salt): Droomrider, Doombreed, Cypher , along with 5 newish guys.

*Unit size changes: Oblitz can come in up to 4, while most Daemon Engines can be 3 for 1...

*New Landraider: So we no longer have to suffer with just the old crumby one, has a higher capacity (15?) but is more of "warped" version of one of the Imperial versions.

*Force Org Chart: As ghost21 has alluded to, it won't change according to your Legion (HQs) as in swapping more Heavies for less Fast, but your access to units in those categories opens up, becomes limited, or closes off accordingly. Easy example I was given, is taking Khorne Daemon Prince means no Scouts...

(...)
I mean there is to be a "scout unit", but no associated with the World Eaters.

And as Brother Dimetrius has already mentioned, Cypher indeed was a Chaos model, and appeared in at least one of our previous Codexes. Could that mean a hint at Dark Angels around the bend? I think that'd be very cool, especially considering they are the FIRST Legion...

*Nightlords: I don't ask much about them, though a lil' i have for my buddy Paul has around 25,000+ points of them...Hit & Run and Stealth for universal special rules, but possible counter attack (for elite unit) as well as jump pack troops.

*Possessed: FINALLY getting some love, and according to Legion, they will have upgrades either already included or that you can pay for.

*Word Bearers: Apparently getting a lil' extra attention, and besides Dark Apostles, new models for "daemonancers", which just might be unit champs/sgt upgrades. I'm not sure. BUT, their summoning of Daemons from the Warp apparently allows re-rolls on the scatter dice, as well as new mishap chart!

*Deathguard: Feel no pain and blight grenades for their Cult Terminators, new nasty flamers upgrades.

*Thousand Sons: AP3 bolters will be MUCH more useful under 6th Edition, and a couple new Psychic abilities, one of which (supposedly) can remove an entire enemy squad from the table on a failed stat test!

*Iron Warriors: Access to Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield termies, thunderfire cannon off-shoot, Havocs w/Tank Hunters and relentless for some squad...

*Emperor's Children: Lash is finally changed to be more in line with Daemon version. More heavy weapons upgrade count for larger units. Better Bikes? Not sure what that means...

*Alpha Legion: Lots of infiltrating abilities, outflanking, and even temporary control of enemy squads/vehicles...basically sneaky bastards!

*Black Legion: HQs allow broader access to all unit types, but lack of better universal special rules.

(...)
To think their won't be drawbacks...wait, what are the drawbacks to playing Space Wolves or Grey Knights????....

I don't recall either ghost21 or myself mentioning any such thing...thus far just the wanted positives have been posted.

Rage? Modified by LD tests...which are/can be modified by characters and or enemy models within "X" vicinity.

Arrogance...newish rule (with a different name), which is almost like looking down upon a foe and not wishing to fight...or tactically fall back.

Target Armor Priority...how hard will it be for certain Havoc squads to NOT shoot the Devilfish behind the Crisis Battlesuites?

There WON'T be Force Org Chart slots exchanged for another...but access to units from Force Org Chart will be modified according to HQs...

TheDarkGeneral wrote:...*Chaos Dreads: No longer crazed or deranged, and new plastic (FINALLY) sprue to incorporate some new/old dreadnought close combat weapons types (chainfist, thunderhammer, power scourge, etc.)...but i'm more excited about being able to have Marked Dreads!!!
...
*Unit size changes: Oblitz can come in up to 4, while most Daemon Engines can be 3 for 1...

*New Landraider: So we no longer have to suffer with just the old crumby one, has a higher capacity (15?) but is more of "warped" version of one of the Imperial versions.
...
*Emperor's Children: Lash is finally changed to be more in line with Daemon version. More heavy weapons upgrade count for larger units. Better Bikes? Not sure what that means...

Durza wrote:I'd be somewhat sceptical about them getting rid of the Dread rules.

*Iron Warriors: Access to Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield termies, thunderfire cannon off-shoot, Havocs w/Tank Hunters and relentless for some squad...

htj wrote:I think he's being fed false information. I remember reading a while back that someone had been abusing a GW employees trust, and to catch him out they had given them false information and watched the anonymous poster on Warseer they thought was him. Sure enough, the false information came up. I suspect that poster was ghost21.

BOLS's Little Bird wrote:Alright, story time.

My "source" (let's call him Mr. Black because it sounds cool) has been leaking small tidbits to his friends for years, with the understanding that we keep things under wraps and not say anything until it becomes public knowledge on the internet. He's a cool guy and we want him to keep his job. One of the guys in my group is a poster on Warseer and he leaks like a soggy teabag, though. Mr. Black suspected this, but it wasn't that big of a deal because most of the information he shares with us is either confirmations of rumors that are already out there, it's small stuff that most people wouldn't care that much about (fluff, internal workings, etc). Well, Mr. Black has a laptop, and on that laptop are the next 2-3 unreleased codices plus plenty of other work-related stuff. When Mr. Black went to the restroom one day without locking his laptop, our leaky friend snuck a peak at the unreleased GK codex and leaked a ton of rumors onto Warseer. He didn't get caught at first, but suspicions were running high. Later as a test, Mr. Black told Leaky about some new information he'd heard from on high (all of it completely BS), and sure enough the next day it's all over Warseer under the same account name as the guy who leaked the GK rumors.

Now that we have confirmation that Leaky is a ****, he is being fed a lot of utter BS to see how gullible he is and/or how long it takes him to realize that he's been caught red-handed. I don't know Leaky's screenname but people who frequent Warseer might be able to take a stab at it.

That said, I haven't talked to Mr. Black in a few weeks and have no idea if this Hrud information is legitimate or not. Basically I'm just giving the rumor mill a bit of a warning.

aka_mythos wrote:This is a very juicy set of rumors.

ghost21 wrote:...*Chaos Dreads: No longer [SNIP!]

aka_mythos wrote:

Durza wrote:I'd be somewhat sceptical about them getting rid of the Dread rules.

Its a poor and very antiquated rule that doesn't even fit the current edition... its rules made it either limitedly usable or required the player to neuter their dreadnought just to get it into the army. You are paying a premium in points for a rule that either doesn't work or works against you the vast majority of the time... and its treated like a good thing, when it isn't.

In an average 6 turn game, you're likely to have it do nothing 4/6th of the time... 1/6th it can shoot well and 1/6th it assaults well... so right off you're paying points for something you will not benefit from the majority of the time. Next the two "beneficial" outcome conditionally mutually exclusive... meaning they are only truely positive some of the time... Since only the last 1/4th to 1/3rd of the game tends to occur in assault range for a dreadnought meaning on average out of 1/6th of the time you get the assault bonus, it only helps only 1/3rd of the time... meaning 1/18rd of the time do you get it when you can use it. With the shooting ability its much the same, because despite being more inclined to shooting by being in shooting range 2/3rd of the time the first 1/3rd of the game is spent with your own units being the closest and thus in danger of being targets. Thus the shooting rule is only of benefit 1/18th of the time and we're paying points for a rule that helps us about as often as it hurts us, but otherwise has no impact beyond making you worry it might cause your army to self destruct.

To make the unit viable these rules actually push you towards spending more points to make it a dedicated close combat unit or to march it alongside something its shooting can't hurt. In other words its just poor rules writing.

Slayer le boucher wrote:
...Its the 4th Ed rules that maked the Crazed rule lame and counter product if for Chaos players...

Slayer le boucher wrote:
Getting rid of the Crazed rule of the Chaos Dread is stupid...,that was one of the things that made a Chaos Dread superior to any Loyalist Dreads, the guy could Shoot twice with his weapons or double his attacks on assault!!!, do you know many Dreads with more then 9 attacks?...(exception made of the DC Dread and Blood Talons...).

Slayer le boucher wrote:
All they need to do is to put back the Crazed rule as it was back in 3rd and 3.5Ed.

aka_mythos wrote:

Durza wrote:I'd be somewhat sceptical about them getting rid of the Dread rules.

Its a poor and very antiquated rule that doesn't even fit the current edition... its rules made it either limitedly usable or required the player to neuter their dreadnought just to get it into the army. You are paying a premium in points for a rule that either doesn't work or works against you the vast majority of the time... and its treated like a good thing, when it isn't.

In an average 6 turn game, you're likely to have it do nothing 4/6th of the time... 1/6th it can shoot well and 1/6th it assaults well... so right off you're paying points for something you will not benefit from the majority of the time. Next the two "beneficial" outcome conditionally mutually exclusive... meaning they are only truely positive some of the time... Since only the last 1/4th to 1/3rd of the game tends to occur in assault range for a dreadnought meaning on average out of 1/6th of the time you get the assault bonus, it only helps only 1/3rd of the time... meaning 1/18rd of the time do you get it when you can use it. With the shooting ability its much the same, because despite being more inclined to shooting by being in shooting range 2/3rd of the time the first 1/3rd of the game is spent with your own units being the closest and thus in danger of being targets. Thus the shooting rule is only of benefit 1/18th of the time and we're paying points for a rule that helps us about as often as it hurts us, but otherwise has no impact beyond making you worry it might cause your army to self destruct.

To make the unit viable these rules actually push you towards spending more points to make it a dedicated close combat unit or to march it alongside something its shooting can't hurt. In other words its just poor rules writing.

Kanluwen wrote:Wow. I just realized I put this in the entirely wrong thread...

My bad.

How about those awesome new Chaos rumors?

Samus_aran115 wrote:>DOOMRIDER

shdgfygskufb Everything else is irrelevant.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:

Durza wrote:I'd be somewhat sceptical about them getting rid of the Dread rules.

Its a poor and very antiquated rule that doesn't even fit the current edition... its rules made it either limitedly usable or required the player to neuter their dreadnought just to get it into the army. You are paying a premium in points for a rule that either doesn't work or works against you the vast majority of the time... and its treated like a good thing, when it isn't.

In an average 6 turn game, you're likely to have it do nothing 4/6th of the time... 1/6th it can shoot well and 1/6th it assaults well... so right off you're paying points for something you will not benefit from the majority of the time. Next the two "beneficial" outcome conditionally mutually exclusive... meaning they are only truely positive some of the time... Since only the last 1/4th to 1/3rd of the game tends to occur in assault range for a dreadnought meaning on average out of 1/6th of the time you get the assault bonus, it only helps only 1/3rd of the time... meaning 1/18rd of the time do you get it when you can use it. With the shooting ability its much the same, because despite being more inclined to shooting by being in shooting range 2/3rd of the time the first 1/3rd of the game is spent with your own units being the closest and thus in danger of being targets. Thus the shooting rule is only of benefit 1/18th of the time and we're paying points for a rule that helps us about as often as it hurts us, but otherwise has no impact beyond making you worry it might cause your army to self destruct.

To make the unit viable these rules actually push you towards spending more points to make it a dedicated close combat unit or to march it alongside something its shooting can't hurt. In other words its just poor rules writing.

Agreed. I hated having to take missiles and HBs just to even get them on the table. GW were shooting themselves in the foot the second they put 'crazed' on it. I wonder how many Chaos Dreads are locked away in old boxes ready to wreak havoc upon the empire once more?

Samus_aran115 wrote:>DOOMRIDER

shdgfygskufb Everything else is irrelevant.

Durza wrote:I'm just interested in the bit about the Alpha Legion now... controlling enemy units sounds fun.

Durza wrote:I'm just interested in the bit about the Alpha Legion now... controlling enemy units sounds fun.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:>DOOMRIDER
shdgfygskufb Everything else is irrelevant.

I hear he does cocaine.

His Master's Voice wrote:

Durza wrote:I'm just interested in the bit about the Alpha Legion now... controlling enemy units sounds fun.

Didn't fzorgle prove beyond any doubt that controlling your opponent's units is a bad mechanic?

Harriticus wrote:Of all things Chaos (and I operate a very large Chaos army of not only CSM but also Daemons and Forgeworld Renegade models) I found the Fiend of Slaanesh the biggest bitch to put together. Got so frustrating I just fused it together with a soldering iron. Take that metal.

Brother-Captain Scotti wrote:Being an iron warriors fan, if the rumors were true, I'd be over the moon but rumors are rumors for a reason

Still no mention of a basilisk though, guess they are saving that for the traitor guard..... *sigh*

geordie09 wrote:I'm worried... I have a horrible feeling that all my favourite chaos units will be raped

General information:

Ghost21 reports that the plan is for 3 Chaos books. Legions, Renegades and Daemons

Daemons are already covered, so the next book will cover the Chaos Legions, with a future Renegades codex incorporating all manner of traitor humans, mutants and Marines-gone-bad.

ghist21 thinks this Legions book will be 1st or 2nd book after 6th edition, which is being released July 2012, putting the release around October-November 2012

Harry supports this, saying:

I do think CSM are the first sixth edition book but not sure if they come just before or just after 6th edition.

theDarkGeneral contradicts this, saying he has heard of 3 separate Legions books with an even split of Legions in each. He claims 2 are planned for release in 2012 and the third for early 2013. He further claims a “Lost and the Damned” style book and a “largely Daemon-based” campaign book are in the works for after that.

theDarkGeneral was supposedly given the Legion split breakdown as:
*World Eaters, Word Bearers and Nightlords
*Deathguard, Iron Warriors and Emperor's Children
*Thousand Sons, Alpha Legion and Black Legion

Mat Ward is rumoured to be writing the codex.

Minor Gods will make an appearance and all Legions will be included

The minor Gods are named, and will act in a similar way to marks, but have no Daemons.



Background:
Ghost21 tells us the background has been expanded and improved so that Legions and their worship of the Gods is far less one-dimensional.



Rules:
Each Legion will have something unique to them, but will have unit restrictions to offset their inherent bonuses.

Ghost21 further clarifies by saying World Eaters may be restricted to 1 Havoc squad, but could potentially take more by “trading in” something else.

theDarkGeneral tells us:

it won't change according to your Legion (HQs) as in swapping more Heavies for less Fast, but your access to units in those categories opens up, becomes limited, or closes off accordingly. Easy example I was given, is taking Khorne Daemon Prince means no Scouts...

And goes on to say the following about the different Legions:

*Nightlords: I don't ask much about them, though a lil' i have for my buddy Paul has around 25,000+ points of them...Hit & Run and Stealth for universal special rules, but possible counter attack (for elite unit) as well as jump pack troops.

*Word Bearers: Apparently getting a lil' extra attention, and besides Dark Apostles, new models for "daemonancers", which just might be unit champs/sgt upgrades. I'm not sure. BUT, their summoning of Daemons from the Warp apparently allows re-rolls on the scatter dice, as well as new mishap chart!

*Deathguard: Feel no pain and blight grenades for their Cult Terminators, new nasty flamers upgrades.

*Thousand Sons: AP3 bolters will be MUCH more useful under 6th Edition, and a couple new Psychic abilities, one of which (supposedly) can remove an entire enemy squad from the table on a failed stat test!

*Iron Warriors: Access to Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield termies, thunderfire cannon off-shoot, Havocs w/Tank Hunters and relentless for some squad...

*Emperor's Children: Lash is finally changed to be more in line with Daemon version. More heavy weapons upgrade count for larger units. Better Bikes? Not sure what that means...

*Alpha Legion: Lots of infiltrating abilities, outflanking, and even temporary control of enemy squads/vehicles...basically sneaky bastards!

*Black Legion: HQs allow broader access to all unit types, but lack of better universal special rules.

Ghost21 tells us Chaos units have built in negatives depending on the God. It is unclear if these are just Cult Troops, or all Marked units.

Nurgle units can’t perform Sweeping Advances and are what he refers to as “stoic” (possibly meaning slow and purposeful)

Khorne has to “engage in some kind of combat every turn” (not sure what this means ie does shooting count?) or roll on a D6 table and suffer some random penalty

Tzeentch require a “command figure” (likely Sorcerer) or will act based on a random D6 roll

Slaanesh are described only as having “very harsh results”

theDarkGeneral says Nurgle Flamers can be made poisoned 3+ or even 2+ (possibly through a special character).


HQ

Special Characters:
ghost21 tells us characters will supposedly be very powerful, including the “Red Angel” from this artwork

Although ghost21 goes on to say he hasn’t seen a named Warsmith character, only a Dark Mechanicus one.

theDarkGeneral claims we will see the return of Droomrider, Doombreed, and Cypher as well as another 5 new characters. This does not preclude any or all existing special characters being included.

theDarkGeneral also tells us there will be a Slaaneshi Dreadnaught special character.

theDarkGeneral reports that Ahriman will be better due to new Chaos Psychic powers as well as "some kind of guaranteed psychic ability that can't be stopped via Psychic Hoods, etc"


Elites

theDarkGeneral tells us Chaos Dreadnaughts will no longer act randomly, and are able to take marks, but will not be able to be Venerable.

theDarkGeneral claims Possessed will be improved and supposedly have upgrades either already included or that you can pay for.

ghost21 tells us there will be a "gladiator themed" World Eater unit

ghost21 also says Emperor's Children will have access to a unit described as "soul shieldsman" which is possibly an upgrade for Veterans.


Troops

theDarkGeneral implies there will be some kind of “Scout unit” which will not be available to World Eaters.

God-specific Daemons will likely be included, but ghost21 is only sure of the lesser varieties (Plaguebearers, Bloodletters, Daemonettes & Horrors) and not the greater ones
theDarkGeneral claims Daemons will remain as they are in the Daemons Codex, but with slight points adjustments to reflect the ability to summon them and certain 6th edition changes.


Fast Attack

theDarkGeneral claims “Assault Berzerkers” with jump packs will be available as Fast Attack choices.

ghost21 tells us Doomrider will be a unit upgrade (presumably for Bike squads)

theDarkGeneral mentions a new unit called Brazen Knights consiting of "Skull Champions" (possibly super Khornate CSM Champions) riding Juggernauts


Heavy Support

theDarkGeneral tells us Slaughterfiends from Apoc will be available, as well as versions for other Legions and Marks.

theDarkGeneral reports Obliterators maximum unit size is increased to 4

theDarkGeneral says most types of Daemon Engines can be taken as 3 per FOC slot

theDarkGeneral claims Legions will get a new Landraider pattern with a higher transport capacity (possibly 15) and is described as a "warped version of one of the Imperial versions”

Marked Legions are rumoured to get Havocs

theDarkGeneral has also hinted at the possibility of a new Monstrous Creature that is not a Greater Daemon. No further info is available as yet.


Dedicated Transports

No news as yet



Miniatures:

Plastic Dreadnaught rumoured by both ghost21 and theDarkGeneral. TheDarkGeneral claims it will include multiple Dreadnought close combat weapons types, such as the Chainfist, Thunder Hammer, Power Scourge, etc.

Plastic Plague Bearers rumoured to appear in the 6th edition started

Plastic Raptors have been confirmed by the ever-reliable 75hastings69 who said:

I can add to this that the new plastic Raptors are very nice

Abaddon – ghost21 claims this miniature is almost identical to the existing one, but “bulkier and taller”

Little Horus - ghost21 reports seeing a miniature for this guy, and implies it is very good

ghost21 also claims to have spotted a miniature for a Dark Mechanicus character, but is unsure if he will make it to release. He described it as:

a very creepy sculpt based on a john Blanche piece

theDarkGeneral wrote:I should probably start probing my buddies for more info on other Legion stuff.

Something interesting that i've forgotten to mention, is that Apocalypse has really helped changed 40K in general, and much of it's popularity is spilling over into the upcoming 6th Edition Rule Book as well as upcoming Codexes. This of course included many newish rules and models...couple years back I was told of plastic kits made for both the Warhound Titan and the Thunderhawk assault ship...but apparently either the world wide economy slipping stopped their production, or the problematic 6 sprue count for boxed sets.


What does this spell for Chaos? Thus far many of the staff/play testers are liking the idea of Hell Blades for the Chaos Legions, mostly to help counter act much of the new "fliers" coming out. Supersonic is a cool rule.

I find it very interesting that both ghost21 and I have heard about 3 Chaos Codexes to be released within the next year or so. My info says 3 Chaos Legions per Codex (with a possible 2 later Chaos type Codexes), and his is that of a Legions, a Lost and the Damned, then Daemons. Either way, looks like us Chaos folk are in for some good times and models i'm sure!


Onto other items i've forgotten...(again peeps, salt with 'em)...

*No Venerables: Even if we do get the Slaaneshi Dread special character, we'll still be denied access to venerable dreads.

*Nurgle Flamers: Yeah, I guess they can be poisoned 3+ or even 2+ (special character?).

*Ahriman: I believe someone on the original thread asked about him. Yeah, he gets better, partially because of the new Psychic powers that Chaos gains. He also supposedly has some kind of guaranteed psychic ability that can't be stopped via Psychic Hoods, etc.

*Monstrous Beast: Now, this is intriguing, because my one buddy says to expect a large, monstrous creature type for Chaos besides the Greater Daemons...??? Now what Legion uses anything like that? Maybe a hint towards ghost21's info of The Lost and the Damned???

*Brazen Knights: Skull Champions riding a top Juggernauts.

h75hastings69 wrote:I can add to this that the new plastic Raptors are very nice

ghost21 wrote:Dude, I mentioned like a gladiator themed world eater unit.
And doomrider is a unit upgrade (personally I hate doomrider).
And Emperor's Children get something like soul shieldsman (an upgrade for veterans I think).

Ghost any other special units for specific cults besides the gladiator ones? Sorry for asking more than once, but any new plastic cult troops on the horizon?

I really wish I could say yes, only plague marines I believe.
Believe me: I want plastic noise marines but I haven't seen any.
Nurgle gets kinda bikes, but really with their stoic rule I have no idea why you'd want to.

geordie09 wrote:I'm worried... I have a horrible feeling that all my favourite chaos units will be raped and a load of new ones that have expensive finecost minis will be introduced to replace them.

GW, if you're going to play with berserkers, please just give them some better pistol options. I don't want to see them weaker, or stronger, just a bit of flexibility and no randomness... and if chaos dreads are brought into line with the SM options for wargear that'd be good too whether they keep the rage roll or not...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh, and bring back 2's to hit vehicles with Gorechild... too many Land Raiders have escaped the mica dragon teeth since that little piece of errata...

What does this spell for Chaos? Thus far many of the staff/play testers are liking the idea of Hell Blades for the Chaos Legions, mostly to help counter act much of the new "fliers" coming out. Supersonic is a cool rule.

*Monstrous Beast: Now, this is intriguing, because my one buddy says to expect a large, monstrous creature type for Chaos besides the Greater Daemons...??? Now what Legion uses anything like that? Maybe a hint towards ghost21's info of The Lost and the Damned???

*World Eaters, Word Bearers and Nightlords
*Deathguard, Iron Warriors and Emperor's Children
*Thousand Sons, Alpha Legion and Black Legion

candy.man wrote:That is an interesting analysis Samus and something that I missed. The only issue is that gameplay wise, those 3 legions fit together however thematically they’re apples and oranges. However this is only an issue when it comes to the name of the book.

I honestly don’t see how they will name the three books. I’m guessing the naming constraints for the book will be something like Chaos Legions: Volume 1.

As Ph34r has pointed out, if this rumour is true it means CSM player will have to wait 1.5 years before all of the books are released. More books also means a greater opportunity for external balance issues (as recent codices tend to be internally balanced but not externally). Personally I think rather than write 3 full blown codices, they should write 1 legion codex with perhaps the two being codex supplements for the specialised legions.

iproxtaco wrote:I can see GW doing Noise-Marines and Thousand Sons in finecast, with Plague Marines and Beserkers in plastic. Raptors too, but I doubt anything else will get an update if it's not new.

Nurgle units can’t perform Sweeping Advances and are what he refers to as “stoic” (possibly meaning slow and purposeful)

bhsman wrote:It's when you can (potentially) wipe out an enemy unit when they fail their Leadership test after losing combat.

Durza wrote:Can't see the point of those three codices myself.

DarkStarSabre wrote:I'm going to wager a standard Legions codex, a White Dwarf 'Renegades' list and maybe a Renegades codex in the following year.

Durza wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:I'm going to wager a standard Legions codex, a White Dwarf 'Renegades' list and maybe a Renegades codex in the following year.

Something just occurred to me. What if we get nothing but a WD update? What if we get Sistered?

Brother-Captain Scotti wrote:^

The thing is though, as long as the codex is good, I don't mind being sistered, it's cheaper than buying a £20+ codex that aint worth half the price

aka_mythos wrote:That'd be a very minimalist approach and one that continues to ignore the distinctive details GW has added to the artwork depiction of the cult marines. I liken that approach to the minimal differences in 2nd edition between blood angel minis and generic marine minis... but as the depiction of blood angels has evolved so has the cult marines. To ignore those distinctions in sculpting new minis is to continue the trend of selling short the effort to really update the chaos miniature line. The Chaos marine's minis have been stuck largely in 3rd edition, so the last thing we need is something less than a 3rd edition approach. I'm not saying it won't happen your way... just that'd I be disappointed and see it as another lost opportunity for GW.

aka_mythos wrote:The rumor of it being an actual codex has been pretty consistent. The only mention of a WD 'dex has been for the "Renegades" as something distinct from the Legions.


I agree. Even IF, and that's a big if, GW were to do 3 legion books... talk about a waste of resources. I love playing chaos, but 3 codices with what is effectively a single facet of Chaos, when they already have two other concepts that are just as interesting... its a waste. If GW seriously tried to do 3 legion codices, it would end up like they did the Inquisition codices... where they get through 2/3rd and then decide it wasn't the best idea and the resources could be better used elsewhere. I've seen enough proposed Chaos Legion codices to know it can be done in a single book and be worthwhile.

aka_mythos wrote:That'd be a very minimalist approach and one that continues to ignore the distinctive details GW has added to the artwork depiction of the cult marines. I liken that approach to the minimal differences in 2nd edition between blood angel minis and generic marine minis... but as the depiction of blood angels has evolved so has the cult marines. To ignore those distinctions in sculpting new minis is to continue the trend of selling short the effort to really update the chaos miniature line. The Chaos marine's minis have been stuck largely in 3rd edition, so the last thing we need is something less than a 3rd edition approach. I'm not saying it won't happen your way... just that'd I be disappointed and see it as another lost opportunity for GW.

ph34r wrote:I dread the concept of a 5 book release. That would mean large portions of chaos players not getting their rules for years from now yet.

On the other hand it would be balanced against the half dozen loyalist books we have

DarkStarSabre wrote:Kelly - I like him. He writes decent fluff. He puts his effort into the armies he enjoys. He does Xenos proud.

Kelly has Wolves and DE - lo and behold his shining examples.

Does the Studio actually have any Chaos players...?

Castiel wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:If Phil's writing the book, expect it to be nowhere near as good as Wolves or Dark Eldar.

Kelly has no vested interest in Chaos. He only does well on the armies he plays/collects, and if he's working on Chaos he'd likely halfarse it so he can get to working on Sisters faster.

NO!

I can't let this comment pass. You do realise that Kelly is a member of the crew that wrote the 3.5 Chaos codex, which is regarded by almost everyone as the best Chaos codex ever.

Bonde wrote:I actually find all this talk about codex writers rather interesting, as I don't know anything about them besides Matt Ward. So far it seems like you guys to prefer having Kelly to write the Chaos Legions codex?

DarkStarSabre wrote:You quoted yourself.

Well done. I was querying whether or not Kelly actually was a Chaos player - taking part in the 3.5 codex is one thing...until you realise that Andy Chambers AND Pete Haines were also involved and they were known Chaos players.

Kelly is however the best bet around at the moment from the pool of what they seem to be producing - the SW and DE do shine compared to Cruddace's attempts to tack every army into the same structure and Ward's attempts to ramp Space Marines even higher.

Durza wrote:I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

Castiel wrote:And yes I do realise that, henece I said he was a member of the team. I do however find it objectionable that people suggest that he would do a worse job on CSM than on SW or DE just because they don't think he collects them. It is insulting to his professional manner, and from the examples of his other works quite an unfair accusation.

Also, I think he is probably the best writer out there atm. He writes good fluff, and his rules are good, but not ott. Definately the man I hope to see on the job, and I hope the rumors I shared from the B&C prove to be correct.

Kanluwen wrote:

Durza wrote:I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

No.

When it comes to rules?
That is a good thing.

Haines wasn't even really that good for background material. Chambers, however, was.

Kanluwen wrote:Let me put it like this.

Haines didn't care about Chaos. He cared about Iron Warriors.

The "best bet" right now for Chaos really is Mat Ward. There may be some questionable fluff, but he can sort out writing a book for armies he's not entirely fond of(Grey Knights and Blood Angels) while feigning interest in them. He can also sort out writing a book for armies he IS fond of without going absolutely crazy (Necrons and C: SM).

Durza wrote:I do believe he may have been replying to my 'Have someone who cares about Chaos' comment.

Kanluwen wrote:

Durza wrote:I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

No.

When it comes to rules?
That is a good thing.

Haines wasn't even really that good for background material. Chambers, however, was.

His Master's Voice wrote:I don't see Ward doing CSM justice. He's good with structured SM variants but Chaos needs a touch of wackiness and flair he doesn't really show in his rules.

I still think Kelly is the one who should write it. If you can't have a Chaos follower doing it, at least put someone who's competent both in terms of rules and fiction on the job.

Edit: Fixed unintentional megalomania.

Kanluwen wrote:Let me put it like this.

Haines didn't care about Chaos. He cared about Iron Warriors.

The "best bet" right now for Chaos really is Mat Ward. There may be some questionable fluff, but he can sort out writing a book for armies he's not entirely fond of(Grey Knights and Blood Angels) while feigning interest in them. He can also sort out writing a book for armies he IS fond of without going absolutely crazy (Necrons and C: SM).

H.B.M.C. wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:That'd be a very minimalist approach and one that continues to ignore the distinctive details GW has added to the artwork depiction of the cult marines. I liken that approach to the minimal differences in 2nd edition between blood angel minis and generic marine minis... but as the depiction of blood angels has evolved so has the cult marines. To ignore those distinctions in sculpting new minis is to continue the trend of selling short the effort to really update the chaos miniature line. The Chaos marine's minis have been stuck largely in 3rd edition, so the last thing we need is something less than a 3rd edition approach. I'm not saying it won't happen your way... just that'd I be disappointed and see it as another lost opportunity for GW.

How? The level of detail they can put into plastic minis these days makes this kind've thing entirely possible. Look over the new Necron plastics. There are two plastic boxes that contain two completely different units, and to start with we weren't sure if some of them were the same kit or separate boxes (I was certain Deathmarks were single-pose Failcost models). I think they could do a Thousand Son/Noise Marine box very easily.

Alpharius wrote:

C: CSM 3.5 was awesome.

Tone down some of the over the top parts, clarify some of the confusing parts and Shazam - awesome!

H.B.M.C. wrote:How? The level of detail they can put into plastic minis these days makes this kind've thing entirely possible. Look over the new Necron plastics. There are two plastic boxes that contain two completely different units, and to start with we weren't sure if some of them were the same kit or separate boxes (I was certain Deathmarks were single-pose Finecast models). I think they could do a Thousand Son/Noise Marine box very easily.

Kepora wrote:Fixed your spelling.

Kanluwen wrote:

Castiel wrote:And yes I do realise that, henece I said he was a member of the team. I do however find it objectionable that people suggest that he would do a worse job on CSM than on SW or DE just because they don't think he collects them. It is insulting to his professional manner, and from the examples of his other works quite an unfair accusation.

I say it because it's known he doesn't collect them. It's also a perfectly fair accusation, considering. Four armies he's known to be quite fond of(and his armies of which have been displayed before in White Dwarf or even the army books proper over the years) become powerhouses with very strange, particular builds. It's also worth noting that he was a big fan of Wolf Guard and Haemonculi Covens...two of the most "broken" potential lists.

DarkStarSabre wrote:

Ward is a SM player through and through.
Kelly has Wolves and DE - lo and behold his shining examples.
Cruddace is an IG player (doesn't forgive him though) abd clearly didn't give a hoot about 'nids.

Does the Studio actually have any Chaos players...?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Unless we get a Noise Marine/Thousand Sons combined kit (box of 5 with enough parts to make either). The torsos, legs and arms would be the same. It really comes down to the heads, weapons, shoulder pads and a few extra details (tabards, speaker backpacks, etc.).

candy.man wrote:

I honestly don’t see how they will name the three books. I’m guessing the naming constraints for the book will be something like Chaos Legions: Volume 1.

Kanluwen wrote:

The "best bet" right now for Chaos really is Mat Ward. There may be some questionable fluff, but he can sort out writing a book for armies he's not entirely fond of(Grey Knights and Blood Angels) while feigning interest in them. He can also sort out writing a book for armies he IS fond of without going absolutely crazy (Necrons and C: SM).

candy.man wrote:I don’t know why the 4HS thing gets quoted so much. It’s was not crash hot considering the current GK book having Stormravens as a FA choice and the current BA book has LRs as a basic dedicated transport as well as dreads as a troop choice (allowing for some pretty mech-tastic armies that the IW could only dream of). Even still, running an IW list meant that one could not include daemons or take marks other than Chaos undivided anyway (and before someone says something, both were very good in the 3.5 book).

The only balance issues in that book IMO were the Daemonic Upgrades and to a lesser extent, the veteran skills as abusing them allowed one to build very powerful HQs (str8+furious charge+EW DPs anyone? ). This issue was not limited to the CSM codex alone as global wargear lists in general had balance issues.

Despite the balance issues the 3.5 book had, it was no where near bad as 7E Fantasy Daemons and 5E GK (as both invalidated armies).

H.B.M.C. wrote:Oblits weren't T5. They FAQ’d that. It was a ‘misprint’ (apparently...).

And how come everyone who whines about the 3.5 Codex always retreats straight to the Iron Warriors example, as if that was the only thing people used? Moreover, how come people always cite Prince/2LasPlas/9Oblits/4HS as the reason why 3.5 was so broken, as if it were the only broken Chaos army to have ever existed, both past and present? There were plenty of other armies in that Codex (not all of them balanced, some quite balanced, some terrible) and there are plenty of unbalanced things in the Codex Bland-Nation that we have now (or any other Codex for that matter).

Durza wrote:I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Oblits weren't T5. They FAQ’d that. It was a ‘misprint’ (apparently...).

And how come everyone who whines about the 3.5 Codex always retreats straight to the Iron Warriors example, as if that was the only thing people used? Moreover, how come people always cite Prince/2LasPlas/9Oblits/4HS as the reason why 3.5 was so broken, as if it were the only broken Chaos army to have ever existed, both past and present? There were plenty of other armies in that Codex (not all of them balanced, some quite balanced, some terrible) and there are plenty of unbalanced things in the Codex Bland-Nation that we have now (or any other Codex for that matter).