In my opinion, I think they should either be covered under one big CSM Dex. I'd be cool with supplements too, but even with CSM being big ol' bads of the setting, they don't deserve to be subfocused down as much as something more expansive and varied like Guard or Ad Mech; and certainly don't need supplements when Dark Mech and R&H don't even have real Codecs.
I think supplements would be the best of both worlds- it would allow smooth updating, unit sharing and gave enough space that the CSM dex could provide flavour for other subfactions.
Whenever they try and combine too much in one book, something is always lost. Splitting them into their own dexes did allow for more development, and over time even more development will come. But any updates now have to be made to multiple dexes.
(My Drake's better than your Drake, my Drake's better than yours, my Drake's cuz he's in the Ksons book, my Drake's better than yours).
honestly Chaos needs 3 books:
Chaos Legions (the HH legions turned chaos, should have more emphasis on marks, demons, etc. this is also where the all-demon armies should be rolled into)
Chaos Renegades (later SM chapters that turned agaisnt the Imperium, should have chaos elements as an option, but should mostly feel like just evil regular marines as a base)
Chaos Cults (focus on non-space marine stuff, like corrupted Imperial Guard, cult armies, and so on)
I selected "other", because I'm cool with the God-Marked Legions getting their own codexes, I'm not cool with all of the "Undivided" Legions being played off as "the same".
Yes, the four Marked Legions should've been spun out - but they should've done a better job of it.
By which I mean that the insistence that CSM kits can't be used for TS/DG/WE units (at least in the short-term) is silly. DG Havocs, for example, or WE bikers.
Equally, both TS and WE need a wider array of Legion-specific unit entries (Berserker-Surgeons and Red Butchers for WE at a minimum, maybe WE Bloodcrusher Cavalry too).
I will say I'm less clear for TS on what makes sense to keep from the CSM book or add as new options - aside from maybe a Silver Tower LOW - but I'll let others that know the faction/lore suggest things there.
Roll them in to a combined book. Have Marks turn units into cult troops; add new generic unit entries which can be customised to cover multiple specific units (eg a Light Daemon Engine entry for Bight Haulers, Bloat Drones, Venom Crawlers, Blood Slaughterers etc); give Legionaries more options so that they can better represent true veterans; and turn Chosen into units of champion equivalents, who can take Daemon weapons and/or mounts.
Roll them in to a combined book. Have Marks turn units into cult troops; add new generic unit entries which can be customised to cover multiple specific units (eg a Light Daemon Engine entry for Bight Haulers, Bloat Drones, Venom Crawlers, Blood Slaughterers etc); give Legionaries more options so that they can better represent true veterans; and turn Chosen into units of champion equivalents, who can take Daemon weapons and/or mounts.
I don't think the way GW has done them is in any way expansive enough, and often they have done nothing but contract their forces... but I'd rather have them than not have them.
I play Emperor's Children (I am Emperor's Children), and honestly as much as I gripe about not getting a codex in 9th, playing a Codex CSM list with the EC legion rules never felt generic or half-hearted to me. What I'd actually like to see would be a distinction between the legions and the marine cults that emerged from them - I don't feel like every World Eater has to be a Berzerker, every Death Guard a Plague Marine (I mean, they'd have plagues obviously, but not 'Plague Marine' as a specific type, if you follow me), every Emperor's Child a Noise Marine... Thousands Sons are an exception, the lore kind of does dictate that their rank and file all be Rubik's Marines, but let's set them aside - I know a lot of the legions fell hard to their chosen deity and became cult troops, but the Eye of Terror's a crazy place, consistency doesn't sit well with me. You can be True Khorne and devoted to martial prowess and valour, not just smashing folks' heads in, True Slaanesh without an electric guitar, and so on.
What I'd like to see would be a single Codex Chaos Marines, with the basic cult marines included, as Noise Marines were in 9th - any warband could have a squad of Berzerkers or Plague Marines (or, why not, Roblox Marines) in it, because why not, it used to happen all the time. The Legions get their specific requirements and bonuses - EC for example (just because I'm passingly familiar with them), you pay your points for the Marks and don't have a bunch of Plague Marines stinking up the place, and you get to take more Noise Marines (I've already forgotten how the preview of 10th army list building works, whatever) and you get your EC special rules and wargear/relics and stuff. Then you have not Codex: Emperor's Children, but Codex: Noise Marines (and equivalent codices for the other marine cults), where a pure Noise Marine army can also have Super Noisy Marines and Sonic Obliterators and whatever other special troops they come up with, like they did with the existing Legion codices in 9th - and in those codices, they also have a secondary points list so you can take those super-troops in a regular CSM army, so long as it fulfils fluffy criteria (Codex Noise Marine-specific units only in CSM armies with marks of Slaanesh and Undivided only, for instance), and if you do that the points costs are higher than they are for a pure Codex Noise Marines force. So if you want to run an EC army (or just Slaanesh-specific army using the EC rules, like the Flawless Hos or whatever) and take Super Noisy Marines, but still have access to non-Noise Marine stuff like regular human cultists and, you can - you just have to pay a reasonable premium in points for it. I feel like that's a good balance between making the widest spectrum of troops available to all CSM players, rather than locked away in specific Legion codices, while also having the marine cults have their own identity as an army and structure worth having a codex, not just 'CSM list with a bunch of Noise Marines in it'.
Dysartes wrote: Yes, the four Marked Legions should've been spun out - but they should've done a better job of it.
By which I mean that the insistence that CSM kits can't be used for TS/DG/WE units (at least in the short-term) is silly. DG Havocs, for example, or WE bikers.
Equally, both TS and WE need a wider array of Legion-specific unit entries (Berserker-Surgeons and Red Butchers for WE at a minimum, maybe WE Bloodcrusher Cavalry too).
I will say I'm less clear for TS on what makes sense to keep from the CSM book or add as new options - aside from maybe a Silver Tower LOW - but I'll let others that know the faction/lore suggest things there.
I think the generic CSM troop choice for each chaos god being available for the generic codex is a good balance as it can represent generic war and members leaning in one direction or another, or getting a small allied contingent to the war and, without stepping on the toes of the specific god related codexes. So noise marines, plague marines, rubric marines and bezerkers being in the generic csm codex….
Yes, if for no other reason than to give Abby a summer vacation every so often. The more of these subfactions that get a supplement+, the more variety the game has.
Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got and so far it's been a poor initial wave and then AoS tack-ons. I like AoS, it's cool but porting a solid chunk of the Arcanites list onto Thousand Sons was lazy. I know there needs to be some difference between the HH and 40k army lists but if GW was going to expand the Tsons army list with mortal units to represent the smaller size of the Legion then those mortal units needed to fill more gaps than chaff and wizard.
Gert wrote: Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got...
That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
Lord Damocles wrote: That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
18 units (more kits but those are optional doubles or add-ons) compared to Tsons 6 and World Eaters 8.
I'm not getting into a discussion about which army should get what because it had it in Edition X or Codex Y.
Dysartes wrote:Yes, the four Marked Legions should've been spun out - but they should've done a better job of it.
By which I mean that the insistence that CSM kits can't be used for TS/DG/WE units (at least in the short-term) is silly. DG Havocs, for example, or WE bikers.
Equally, both TS and WE need a wider array of Legion-specific unit entries (Berserker-Surgeons and Red Butchers for WE at a minimum, maybe WE Bloodcrusher Cavalry too).
I will say I'm less clear for TS on what makes sense to keep from the CSM book or add as new options - aside from maybe a Silver Tower LOW - but I'll let others that know the faction/lore suggest things there.
Dysartes gave the answer for my Other response. Good idea that was badly executed.
Thousand Sons needs more units badly. There must be space in that lore for more TS Marines besides Exalted Sorcerers, Sorcerers, and Aspiring Sorcerers leading Rubrics (in Power Armor or Terminator Armor). More units like the Infernal Master need to be added.
Death Guard and World Eaters didn't need every non-vehicle unit in Codex Chaos Space Marines removed from their roster. If they feel they need to go that route, they need to greatly expand the number of units available to both Codex. DG have 17 kits that are not shared with CCSM. World Eaters have 8. That's 1 more combined than the 24 Kits Adepta Sororitas received in the two waves. They need to give the Legions more kit love.
Edit: When back to check and Thousand Sons have 6 unique kits. That's 31 kits for 3 legions, with half of those being Death Guard. No wonder they feel so one dimensional. Even Harlequins have 6 kits.
Personally I am happy with God-Marked Legions having separate codices.
The reason is I just don't want generic marked units and I don't want a codex that has 100 datasheet entries. I find that the Codex: Space Marines to be an abomination that needs a good culling.
I do though admit that Thousand Sons have been shafted and I hope that WE get a second wave in 10th to fill out their roster. Death Guard sits in my opinion at the best spot with their selection of units.
Gert wrote: Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got...
That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
Well, apparently Havocs are not lore appropriate for Death Guard. My guess is Obliterators would fall into that category as well. Mortarion is really not a fan of putting heavy weaponry on infantry.
Personally I don't feel like bikes are a Death guard thing, same with raptors. Chosen are around 50/50 but they need their bespoke kit. The current Chosen feel more Emperor's Children than Death Guard.
I agree that it's weird that Vindicators are not available to DG, but Dinobots are about 50/50 as they really don't have the plague look going for them.
Regarding terminators I am actually quite happy with what we have. I find terminators with power fist to be a very superfluous choice that doesn't give me anything except "I can now play alternative Space Marines". I'd rather have the scythes and flails. They give Death Guard character while Fists would just be another knock-off.
Dysartes wrote: Yes, the four Marked Legions should've been spun out - but they should've done a better job of it.
By which I mean that the insistence that CSM kits can't be used for TS/DG/WE units (at least in the short-term) is silly. DG Havocs, for example, or WE bikers.
Equally, both TS and WE need a wider array of Legion-specific unit entries (Berserker-Surgeons and Red Butchers for WE at a minimum, maybe WE Bloodcrusher Cavalry too).
I will say I'm less clear for TS on what makes sense to keep from the CSM book or add as new options - aside from maybe a Silver Tower LOW - but I'll let others that know the faction/lore suggest things there.
This. Getting spun out was useful. Getting absolutely gutted in the process was a (very bad) choice GW made.
I'm also not happy with where they decided to go for the non-god legions (and the recent converts), either in the past or now.
I'm very happy for general design decision to abandon colors-as-rules for 10th edition. But they really put on the dunce cap for the CSM faction ability. It isn't the only one (tau also puts me off, some of the others i need to think about more), but for me personally, gambling for 6s via self-damage is just bad. Its not a playstyle I enjoy. And lore-wise doesn't fit a good half of the non-god legions or renegades.
I won't ever pick up CSM in this edition as a main faction. Maybe as allies for one of the chaos armies that actually got interesting and thematic faction rules, but not marines.
Gert wrote: Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got...
That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
Well, apparently Havocs are not lore appropriate for Death Guard.
Gert wrote: Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got...
That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
Well, apparently Havocs are not lore appropriate for Death Guard. My guess is Obliterators would fall into that category as well. Mortarion is really not a fan of putting heavy weaponry on infantry.
I'm sick of this garbage justification.
Mortarion hasn't done jack gak to lead the Death Guard until just recent. There's no reason Death Guard wouldn't adapt to use other ways of warfare. On top of that, the units still existed in 30k anyway.
Chaos 3.5 is still the gold standard. One book is all that's needed, and is made more ideal by the way units can freely mix within an army, if desired.
Death Guard and World Eaters didn't need every non-vehicle unit in Codex Chaos Space Marines removed from their roster. If they feel they need to go that route, they need to greatly expand the number of units available to both Codex. DG have 17 kits that are not shared with CCSM. World Eaters have 8. That's 1 more combined than the 24 Kits Adepta Sororitas received in the two waves. They need to give the Legions more kit love.
This depends on a shared kit = shared unit. I'd argue a Chaosified Apothecary should be a unit choice to begin with, so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Death Guard and World Eaters didn't need every non-vehicle unit in Codex Chaos Space Marines removed from their roster. If they feel they need to go that route, they need to greatly expand the number of units available to both Codex. DG have 17 kits that are not shared with CCSM. World Eaters have 8. That's 1 more combined than the 24 Kits Adepta Sororitas received in the two waves. They need to give the Legions more kit love.
This depends on a shared kit = shared unit. I'd argue a Chaosified Apothecary should be a unit choice to begin with, so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
It's because corporate wills it so. That's the gist of it - nowadays the 'GW Hobby' is a product you consume, not something you do. Things they offer need to be legally protectable, and they need a name and label you can find in the store with minimal effort. 'Just convert it' or 'Kitbash your own' or 'Use a Chaos Apothecary with appropriate wargear' are all pre-2010s solutions; 2020s GW does not recognize these as viable anymore. Their Universe increasingly consists of the contents of the Online Store, and not much else, and the hobby and creativity dimensions get tuned out more and more. A sad, but probably ultimately unavoidable result of their change from hobbyist-led garage firm to corporate Behemoth that started in the late 90s and has been picking up speed since then. They realized that their chief capital was their hold on their IPs, and protecting that (for them) meant to tighten everything down and curtail all possibilities for creativity, because creativity was seen as a vector of intrusion for outside material and third-party contenders.
Death Guard and World Eaters didn't need every non-vehicle unit in Codex Chaos Space Marines removed from their roster. If they feel they need to go that route, they need to greatly expand the number of units available to both Codex. DG have 17 kits that are not shared with CCSM. World Eaters have 8. That's 1 more combined than the 24 Kits Adepta Sororitas received in the two waves. They need to give the Legions more kit love.
This depends on a shared kit = shared unit. I'd argue a Chaosified Apothecary should be a unit choice to begin with, so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
It's because corporate wills it so. That's the gist of it - nowadays the 'GW Hobby' is a product you consume, not something you do. Things they offer need to be legally protectable, and they need a name and label you can find in the store with minimal effort. 'Just convert it' or 'Kitbash your own' or 'Use a Chaos Apothecary with appropriate wargear' are all pre-2010s solutions; 2020s GW does not recognize these as viable anymore. Their Universe increasingly consists of the contents of the Online Store, and not much else, and the hobby and creativity dimensions get tuned out more and more. A sad, but probably ultimately unavoidable result of their change from hobbyist-led garage firm to corporate Behemoth that started in the late 90s and has been picking up speed since then. They realized that their chief capital was their hold on their IPs, and protecting that (for them) meant to tighten everything down and curtail all possibilities for creativity, because creativity was seen as a vector of intrusion for outside material and third-party contenders.
Well that is all very true and depressing!
Particularly as they are doing so well by it, little chance of a rethink.
Thousand Sons specifically need to be their own book because that army has to scratch out half the CSM codex to be Thousand Sons. The other three cult legions don't have the same issue and trying to pretend they do has lead to some very arbitrary restrictions in their army lists.
I think one of the issues is that, unlike AoS, the 40k God books are named after specific Legions rather than with more generic terms.
For example, take the Death Guard and Hedonites of Slaanesh.
With the Death Guard there is a specific history associated with the name. You can go onto a Wiki or watch a YouTube video specifically about the Death Guard where they are very different from say the Purge or Grey Death. Even if you have your own custom Warband, the army name is still Death Guard.
For the Hedonites of Slaanesh, there is no baseline. The two big mortal characters are complete opposites with one being obsessed with personal beauty and the other being obsessed with tasting the most delicious meals in the Realms. You're not playing the Decadent Host, you're playing Hedonites with the option to theme your army after the Decadent Host.
Change the names to be less specific and throw in some characters that exist for the more dedicated Warbands that aren't explicitly part of the Legions and I think it would help a bit. That and make the CSM Codex good enough for people who want to do a God-aligned army but aren't too into it yet.
Gert wrote: Good plan, but poorly executed.
Each army needed to have even a fraction of the support Death Guard got...
That's Death Guard with their lack of Havoks, Raptors, bikes, Vindicators, dinobots, Terminators with power fists, Chosen, Obliterators, Palanquins, Traitor Guard, etc...
Well, apparently Havocs are not lore appropriate for Death Guard. My guess is Obliterators would fall into that category as well. Mortarion is really not a fan of putting heavy weaponry on infantry.
I'm sick of this garbage justification.
Mortarion hasn't done jack gak to lead the Death Guard until just recent. There's no reason Death Guard wouldn't adapt to use other ways of warfare. On top of that, the units still existed in 30k anyway.
The hilarious thing is, not only can Death Guard use Heavy Support Squads (the obvious precursors of Havocs) in HH, they even have a Right of War that lets you take them as Troops.
So, I guess Morty changed his mind on the whole heavy weapons thing at some point after the Heresy?
I understand DG lacking in fast attack options such as bikes or jump packs for the factions gameplay id as much as fluff but yeah, cant see why no havocs makes sense.
I'd rather have 4 god specific Codizes +1 undivided with everything in each from traitor guardsmen to beastmen, cultists, daemons, CSM, Dark Mech and Knights.
Someone may count if you'd need more pages/ datasheets for that than for the Space Marines codex.
I guess the overall point is that the Legion Codices were an opportunity to flesh these forces out, to expand them with a host of new units that fit with that Legions doctrine. But, rather these Codices coming with an expansion, they are mostly a contraction (DG got away with more actualy new units than the other two, to be fair), and thus by playing your chosen army you end up with less than you had when you were part of the Chaos Codex proper.
(Reminds me about a week or two ago someone was adamant that World Eaters hadn't really lost anything... where do these people come from?)
Dysartes wrote: Even if you didn't want DG to have HW Havoc unit, there'd be nothing preventing a special (or plague?) weapon version of the unit, surely?
That's the way 3.5 did it. You could have Havocs, but special weapons only. I had three - two with 4x Melta and one with 4x Plasma. Threw 'em in my plagued Rhinos and ran up the table hoping for the best.
EviscerationPlague wrote: ... so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Because it's fun? Ever consider that? There should be a Plague Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct entities with their own minis because it's fun. But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
Marshal Loss wrote: As others have said: good idea to break them out, poor execution. I'm still keen for EC getting (hopefully...) broken out in 10th.
I doubt EC breaks out until Fulgrim is due - so I'd be surprised to see it in 10th. But I wouldn't be surprised to see some Kharn/Typhus/etc level characters come out along with a resurgence for Fabius Bile.
H.B.M.C. wrote: But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
Why would someone discuss a specific topic about which a question is posed, inviting discussion, on a forum for discussing topics, if they don't agree with you..? C'mon...
Lord Damocles wrote: Why would someone discuss a specific topic about which a question is posed, inviting discussion, on a forum for discussing topics, if they don't agree with you..? C'mon...
There's "They should all be in one Codex" and then there's "There shouldn't even be different factions/all Marines should be the same".
Previously I would have thought two books sufficient but I think three would be best. One for the God Marked Traitor Legions, one for the Legions who disdain the Chaos Gods, and lastly Renegades and Heretics for everyone else who falls between the cracks.
That said, we got separate codexes for certain premiere traitor legions and I don't foresee that cat going back into the bag. As H.B.M.C. noted these should have been used to flesh them out (and I'd say they did a great job with DG) but its been very underwhelming with 1k Sons and World Eaters. I'm sure overtime they will start to become bloated with models just like Loyalists though
EviscerationPlague wrote: ... so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Because it's fun? Ever consider that? There should be a Plague Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct entities with their own minis because it's fun. But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
And it's reasoning like yours we have 10 entries for Marine Captains. It's not necessary.
Lord Damocles wrote: Why would someone discuss a specific topic about which a question is posed, inviting discussion, on a forum for discussing topics, if they don't agree with you..? C'mon...
There's "They should all be in one Codex" and then there's "There shouldn't even be different factions/all Marines should be the same".
And Marines should mostly be the same. Blood Angels don't need a separate codex because Death Company exist on top of other Chapters having Crazy Marines in their fluff (which is really just what Death Company ARE). That's worthy of a new unit entry, not a whole codex.
For someone so "concerned" about stripping options, you really don't get it.
EviscerationPlague wrote: ... so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Because it's fun? Ever consider that? There should be a Plague Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct entities with their own minis because it's fun. But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
And it's reasoning like yours we have 10 entries for Marine Captains. It's not necessary.
Most of the different Captain datasheets around at present are there to cover different types of armour or different significant equipment (such as bikes or jump packs), to allow GW to be as clear as possible when it comes to keywords and statistics. It also stops the options list for the Captain getting to ridiculous lengths for each unit - though I'd certainly prefer a general Armory, possibly with flags as for what can be taken by a proper Space Marine, what can be taken by a Steroid Boi, and what can be taken by both.
The outlier here is the "Captain with Master-Crafted Heavy Bolt Rifle", who really should just be an equipment option for the standard Primaris Captain (note that I don't have my copy of the 'dex to hand, but I think that's what he's a variant from). That's a datasheet that could be merged and I don't think anyone would bat an eyelid.
The current options are the Primaris Captain, Power Armour Captain, Terminator Captain, Gravis Captain, and Gravis Captain with MC Heavy Boltrife. The latter two were where the issue of excess datasheets is often highlighted as the only difference between the two units was the Bolstorm Gauntlet and Boltrifle.
Hmm. When it comes to subfaction rules for CSM, I'm not all that interested in new units per se so much as I'm interested in adding a splash of flavor to existing units and some sort of army-wide (detachment level?) mechanic to change up how the army plays.
So my Thousand Sons, for instance. I don't really need special thousand sons havocs and thousand sons raptors, etc. I just want psyker sergeants, a (mandatory?) way to represent my non-sergeants being rubricae, and maybe something like the cabal points system.
With my Alpha Legion (which, tbf are using RG/DW rules these days), I want a detachment rule and maybe some stratagems to represent the idea that we're springing a trap. Maybe a custom cultist unit (or the ability to ally in IG) to represent the idea that we took the time to train some of our cultists to be more effective.
For my Slaaneshi marines, I just want the ability to stick noise marines and daemonettes in the same army, and a detachment or wargear rule for combat drugs would be nice. (Dark Pacts can be refluffed as combat drugs pretty easily, actually.)
I don't think I really *need* dedicated splats for the aspects of my chaos armies that I want represented. I feel like the asks I have for each of the factions above could each fit onto a single page of rules. Basically just a detachment rule and a few lines saying, "You can take these additional options on these units, and you must spend X extra points on such and such units to represent that they're rubricae," or whatever.
EDIT: And the same applies to loyalists too. DW and GK are a bit more complicated, but SW and BA could probably have their meaningful rules options put on a single page each, and then include the handful of datasheets for units that absolutely, positively need to be unique units instead of just being rolled into generic datasheets.
Fundamental problem with splitting off the Marked Legions to their own books: "Can I have Tzeentch Havocs? No, because GW hasn't made a Thousand Sons-specific Havoc kit? Um...okay?"
I’m not against variety, but I am dubious of variety for variety’s sake.
The big four, each being utterly dedicated to a Specific God end up with flavour of their own. But, and I’m not just saying this to wind folk up, the other 5 just aren’t quite as divergent.
By the same coin, the common or garden variety Loyalist Marines really didn’t need sub-Codecies of their own. Space Wolves and Black Templars? No argument there. Both significantly divergent from Norm. But….Blood and Dark Angels? Outside of three or four units each? The divergence just isn’t pronounced.
Of course, I’ve long argued that Chaos is so….chaotic in terms of military organisation, just make it a Proper Fat Old Codex. Single Codex covering Daemons, CSM, Traitor Guard, Traitor Knights, Lost and the Damned.
To hell with “but someone will just cheese their list”. All in one. One massive tome of potential with as few restraints as possible.
EviscerationPlague wrote: ... so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Because it's fun? Ever consider that? There should be a Plague Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct entities with their own minis because it's fun. But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
I think the "no, there should be a complete separate range of unique sculpts of every model for every different Marine Legion!" would be a more defensible position if, say, Warp Spiders weren't still resin dumped into metal molds originally made in the late '90s.
AnomanderRake wrote: Fundamental problem with splitting off the Marked Legions to their own books: "Can I have Tzeentch Havocs? No, because GW hasn't made a Thousand Sons-specific Havoc kit? Um...okay?"
You can play The Scourged instead if you want Tzeentch havocs. I personally feel that Thousand Sons infantry heavy weapons solution should be sorcerers turning tanks into rust but we aren't really getting that either so what the hell do I know.
Dysartes wrote: Even if you didn't want DG to have HW Havoc unit, there'd be nothing preventing a special (or plague?) weapon version of the unit, surely?
What would be difference between special weapon havocs and plague marines?
AnomanderRake wrote: I think the "no, there should be a complete separate range of unique sculpts of every model for every different Marine Legion!" would be a more defensible position if, say, Warp Spiders weren't still resin dumped into metal molds originally made in the late '90s.
That's almost a non-sequitur. I really fail to see what one has to do with the other.
Jidmah wrote: What would be difference between special weapon havocs and plague marines?
Plaguespewers and their special unique weapons that regular CSMs can't get.
Ah, I guess I wasn't being very clear, I'll rephrase it.
If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
Jidmah wrote: If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
Greater concentration of firepower. Naturally a Havoc unit would have access to more special weapons than the standard Plague Marine squad (putting aside the current ghastly PM dataslate). Thinking back to when there were such a thing as "Plague Marine Havocs", they could get 4 special weapon, whereas regular Plague Marine squads could get 2. I'd argue that they should've been allowed heavy bolters as well (and there's two pieces of art in the 3.5 'Dex that show this), but that's a different conversation.
EviscerationPlague wrote: And it's reasoning like yours we have 10 entries for Marine Captains. It's not necessary.
Dysartes already covered why there are so many entries, and the benefits and drawbacks of such a system. Honestly though I think they could put, for example, Captain, Captain w/Jump Pack, Captain w/Bike and Captain w/Terminator Armour onto the same sheet.
Moreover I've made fun of the ludicrous unnecessary dataslates in the past (again, the Captain w/Heavy Bolt Rifle being among the most unnecessary entries in the book, as Dysartes pointed out above). But at the same time, I'd never just say "This is Generic X, but you can pretend its actually a Blood Angel Whatsitdoodah or a Space Wolf Wolfenwolfwolf if you just paint it differently, turn your head to the side and squint!". I think there should be both aesthetic and mechanical differences between types of Marines.
It's one thing to have 10 different Captain entries because each one has a slightly different hat. It's another to differentiate between Chapter- or Legion-specific unique units.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Blood Angels don't need a separate codex because Death Company exist on top of other Chapters having Crazy Marines in their fluff (which is really just what Death Company ARE). That's worthy of a new unit entry, not a whole codex.
At what point does something become different enough for you to accept it as not just being 'counts as'. And at what point do you acknowledge that people like to have differences with their armies, and don't always want everything to be squashed towards the middle? Do we go to the full extreme and just have one Marine book and special rules to show Chapters/Legions?
H.B.M.C. wrote: For someone so "concerned" about stripping options, you really don't get it.
The only thing I don't get is why you're so anti-fun. When you have more options, you can just ignore the ones you like. When everything is consolidated, you're stuck with just what's there. As someone who went through the 3.5 to 4th Edition Chaos transition, I can tell you it sure as feth ain't fun.
AnomanderRake wrote: I think the "no, there should be a complete separate range of unique sculpts of every model for every different Marine Legion!" would be a more defensible position if, say, Warp Spiders weren't still resin dumped into metal molds originally made in the late '90s.
That's almost a non-sequitur. I really fail to see what one has to do with the other.
Pretty sure Rake is pointing out that GW only puts out so many models/books within a given timeframe. The more units GW puts out, the longer it presumably takes for a given kit to be refreshed. Thus you end up with warp spiders that are still in finecast using a pose from the days of pewter.
We could give every chapter and legion their own unique devastator kit with unique cute little special rules to show how they're ever so slightly different from the other devastators. But for many of us, that would be seen as a frustrating move because it would mean that each of those special devastator kits took up a release slot that could have been filled by updated warp spiders or noise marines or what have you. I'm sure you'd be having fun with your Black Templars-specific devastator model, but I'd still be wondering where my plastic spiders are at.
On the other hand, if you just provide a variety of rules that can all be used by the same datasheet (similar to how exarchs and harlequins can choose one of several special rules), then you can give anyone with a given model something shiny to enjoy regardless of subfaction.
Yes, we should have new Warp Spider models by now because Warp Spiders have only ever had one kit and it's frustrating that they simply ignore them. But that's true of the Eldar range in general - they have the literal oldest model part GW still makes (Baharroth's wings! ) - and should be updated.
That doesn't really take away from the fact that there are differences between types of Marines that should be represented both physically with models and in-game with rules. You don't have to sacrifice one to get the other.
GW's unwillingness to finish the Eldar revamp (hopefully when the next book hits we can get the missing things - remaining Phoenix Hawks, Fire Dragons, Scorpions, Warp Spiders and something else I'm sure I'm forgetting... a new Vyper?), but as it stands I don't think that having a Plague-Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct units with different miniatures prevents that from happening.
Or GW could do the unthinkable and make a kit that could become either a Plague-Surgeon or a Bezerker-Surgeon or even a Noise-Surgeon. All they have to do is have maybe 3 sets of arms and 3 heads in a kit with a torso and legs and one appropriately sized base. Then they would be satisfying all the people who want individual Surgeons and all the people who would like to see fewer skus.
I think part of the issue is that the God Marked Legions (or at the very least the TS, DG and WE) are pretty much Legions of Hats.
Pretty much all DG are Plague Marines, all WE are Berzerkers, all TS are Rubricae led by Sorcerers. Although it seems the Emperor Children kinda avoided that fate with only "many" of them becoming Noise Marines.
Tyran wrote: Pretty much all DG are Plague Marines, all WE are Berzerkers, all TS are Rubricae led by Sorcerers. Although it seems the Emperor Children kinda avoided that fate with only "many" of them becoming Noise Marines.
You're right. And that's why these Legion-specific books needed to expand upon the concepts of original Legion. Death Guard got this, for the most part. 1KSons didn't (they just ported over all the Tzeentch AoS Beastmen) and World Eaters were even more poorly underserved.
They had the chance - dare I say it, the opportunity - to split these Legions out and make them into something substantive, something creative, something vibrant and, well, we all know what GW does with opportunities.
I mean we ended up with a unit called Eightbound that come in boxes of 3 and units of 6. How did that pass muster???
Arachnofiend wrote: No, it... really does. Having more marines on the release schedule means less non-marines on the release schedule. That is how time works.
Yeah... I'm not so sure about that. I think they're going to make the Marines they're going to make, and I don't think they stop making other things to make more Marines.
Their production limitations is certainly impacted by that - why things go out of stock more quickly - but not the design process.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: Or GW could do the unthinkable and make a kit that could become either a Plague-Surgeon or a Bezerker-Surgeon or even a Noise-Surgeon. All they have to do is have maybe 3 sets of arms and 3 heads in a kit with a torso and legs and one appropriately sized base. Then they would be satisfying all the people who want individual Surgeons and all the people who would like to see fewer skus.
Given the aesthetic differences between the three, I doubt that would work, especially with Nurgle-related units.
Jidmah wrote: If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
Greater concentration of firepower. Naturally a Havoc unit would have access to more special weapons than the standard Plague Marine squad (putting aside the current ghastly PM dataslate). Thinking back to when there were such a thing as "Plague Marine Havocs", they could get 4 special weapon, whereas regular Plague Marine squads could get 2. I'd argue that they should've been allowed heavy bolters as well (and there's two pieces of art in the 3.5 'Dex that show this), but that's a different conversation.
Errrrr....yeah? But I've always found the "no heavy weapons for Nurgle" restriction silly (made even more so by the current 30k Death Guard rules that I mentioned up thread). So why not just give Death Guard proper Havocs (and allow Havocs to take special weapons again )?
Gadzilla666 wrote: Errrrr....yeah? But I've always found the "no heavy weapons for Nurgle" restriction silly (made even more so by the current 30k Death Guard rules that I mentioned up thread). So why not just give Death Guard proper Havocs (and allow Havocs to take special weapons again )?
Like I said: What they could/should be armed with is a different conversation, and I don't necessarily disagree with you (and neither does GW, apparently, given the weapons they added to Plague Marines at the start of 8th). However, I was just answering Jid's question about what a Death Guard Havoc Squad would look like with those parameters (access to special weapons).
Honestly, it's not the world's sexiest squad - it was just two meltas, two plasmas, and a cool looking Champion - and it doesn't have the same allure as, say, giant plague Terminators with huge scythes, but in removing it I feel it was another area where the faction shrunk, and something they could redo. Now, if GW were more flexible, and didn't have to have a specific kit for the unit, and we could do it with regular Plague Marines, then wonderful, but they don't work like that these days. I mean, remember when Death Guard Terminator Lords/Sorcerer Lords didn't get some of the DG rules because they weren't actually DG miniatures, just transplanted regular CSM minis? That's the mentality we're facing now.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Errrrr....yeah? But I've always found the "no heavy weapons for Nurgle" restriction silly (made even more so by the current 30k Death Guard rules that I mentioned up thread). So why not just give Death Guard proper Havocs (and allow Havocs to take special weapons again )?
Like I said: What they could/should be armed with is a different conversation, and I don't necessarily disagree with you (and neither does GW, apparently, given the weapons they added to Plague Marines at the start of 8th). However, I was just answering Jid's question about what a Death Guard Havoc Squad would look like with those parameters (access to special weapons).
Honestly, it's not the world's sexiest squad - it was just two meltas, two plasmas, and a cool looking Champion - and it doesn't have the same allure as, say, giant plague Terminators with huge scythes, but in removing it I feel it was another area where the faction shrunk, and something they could redo. Now, if GW were more flexible, and didn't have to have a specific kit for the unit, and we could do it with regular Plague Marines, then wonderful, but they don't work like that these days. I mean, remember when Death Guard Terminator Lords/Sorcerer Lords didn't get some of the DG rules because they weren't actually DG miniatures, just transplanted regular CSM minis? That's the mentality we're facing now.
Ehhhh...it's less that "gw" isn't flexible like that anymore, and more like the 40k rules writers aren't. Tons of conversion opportunities in 30k. Just sayin. Please don't yell at me for the lack of Xenos in 30k.
Arachnofiend wrote: I could not possibly care less about playing a version of Thousand Sons from before the Rubric of Ahriman.
That isn't the point. The point is: GW is perfectly capable of writing rules that don't incorporate the aggravating "NMNR" paradigm into them. No reason that 1ksons can't have psychic dreadnoughts, for example.
EviscerationPlague wrote: ... so why does "Plague Surgeon" need to be a specific entry? Because it has a name?
Because it's fun? Ever consider that? There should be a Plague Surgeon and a Berzerker-Surgeon as two distinct entities with their own minis because it's fun. But you're the guy who thinks that there should only be 1 Marine Codex, and sub-factions shouldn't be a thing, so why are you even discussing this?
And it's reasoning like yours we have 10 entries for Marine Captains. It's not necessary.
No its reasoning like Terminator Captains Riding Bikes. The multiple Captain Entries are - generally - based around statline/keyword modifying wargear. They could have done one entry, but there'd still be That Guy trying to put a Phobos Scouting Infiltrating Captain in Terminator Armor on a Bike.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote: No, it... really does. Having more marines on the release schedule means less non-marines on the release schedule. That is how time works.
You're playing Zero Sum. Fewer Marine releases could also mean fewer sculptors employed. Aside from only having X people to design Y models over a year, they're also going to factor in B - the cost of making and marketing the model kit - recouped over C - the time its going to take to make it profitable. If it wouldn't pay to make new Warpspiders, they're not going to do it just to keep some sculptor employed.
Arachnofiend wrote: I could not possibly care less about playing a version of Thousand Sons from before the Rubric of Ahriman.
That isn't the point. The point is: GW is perfectly capable of writing rules that don't incorporate the aggravating "NMNR" paradigm into them. No reason that 1ksons can't have psychic dreadnoughts, for example.
To be honest, they should. BA have it and BA/1K are mirrors (psychic strength, fatal flaw, etc etc) while BA/SW are Preferred Enemies. Most of the Loyalist/Heretic Marines have those two paradigms. UM are mirrors of Black Legion, Preferred with Word Bearers - Imperial Fists are both to Iron Legion etc. When they built the BA Libby Dread they should have built a 1KSons alternate sprue.
I think 'should' is a tricky question to answer, different people want such wildy different things from Chaos as an overall faction. No solution that GW ever came up with would satisfy everyone.
Personally I'd rather be able to mix and match more with Chaos as a whole. As Mad Doc said:
It would be nice if that could be better reflected on the tabletop.
But regardless since GW has made the decision to spin some 'legions' out as their own factions I think the more pertinent question is whether they are unique and functional enough on the tabletop, and if not what do they need to get there.
Arachnofiend wrote: I could not possibly care less about playing a version of Thousand Sons from before the Rubric of Ahriman.
That isn't the point. The point is: GW is perfectly capable of writing rules that don't incorporate the aggravating "NMNR" paradigm into them. No reason that 1ksons can't have psychic dreadnoughts, for example.
They very well could have ported the existing Osiron Contemptor to 40k the same as they did to the general Contemptor. Your guess is as good as mine why they didn't.
Breton wrote:I doubt EC breaks out until Fulgrim is due - so I'd be surprised to see it in 10th. But I wouldn't be surprised to see some Kharn/Typhus/etc level characters come out along with a resurgence for Fabius Bile.
Late 10th, or early-to-mid-11th at a guess. In the meantime, how about redone CSM Bikers - and the return of Doomrider for the EC? I guess some might prefer a Lucius resculpt, though.
Gert wrote:The current options are the Primaris Captain, Power Armour Captain, Terminator Captain, Gravis Captain, and Gravis Captain with MC Heavy Boltrife. The latter two were where the issue of excess datasheets is often highlighted as the only difference between the two units was the Bolstorm Gauntlet and Boltrifle.
Thanks Gert - I was working of memory, and thought the Proper SM Captain on Bike and With Jump Pack were their own datasheets.
AnomanderRake wrote:Fundamental problem with splitting off the Marked Legions to their own books: "Can I have Tzeentch Havocs? No, because GW hasn't made a Thousand Sons-specific Havoc kit? Um...okay?"
As I said on the previous page, NMNR really messed things up here - some of these units should still exist, but as a kitbash opportunity until GW gets around to making a specific kit in a future wave.
Question for 1K Sons players - what other CSM units do we see mentioned as being part of the 1K Sons in the lore, aside from Rubrics and Scarabs?
AnomanderRake wrote:I think the "no, there should be a complete separate range of unique sculpts of every model for every different Marine Legion!" would be a more defensible position if, say, Warp Spiders weren't still resin dumped into metal molds originally made in the late '90s.
Honestly, I think Warp Spiders should have gotten the Dark Reaper slot in the last big Eldar Release - Reapers are now on their fourth kit over the years, while Spiders are still on the original sculpts, which is weird to me.
Jidmah wrote:Ah, I guess I wasn't being very clear, I'll rephrase it.
If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
If we assume that, for whatever reason, GW have decreed that 40k lore states that the DG don't have heavy weapon infantry, there's still a spot for an infantry unit with greater firepower than the current Plague Marine datasheet. Havocs give us the structure for such a unit - everyone bar the Champion has to take a special (or ranged plague?) weapon, with the Champion getting combi-weapon access.
In an edition where we're seeing the return of fire points to transports, and disembarking after transport movement (I think that's been confirmed as a thing), that gives the DG an opportunity to make a mess of a target by surgical application of firepower (or plaguepower). It also gives you a unit that has a different flavour to the CSM equivalent, which I know I would find somewhat interesting.
Arachnofiend wrote:No, it... really does. Having more marines on the release schedule means less non-marines on the release schedule. That is how time works.
More marine kits on the release schedule also help to finance more non-marine kits on the release schedule - 9th feels like a reasonable example of that process at work, with significant waves for a number of non-loyal SM factions going on during it.
Here's hoping this is a pattern that continues during 10th.
H.B.M.C. wrote:I mean we ended up with a unit called Eightbound that come in boxes of 3 and units of 6. How did that pass muster???
Aye, that should probably have been 4 & 8, but you know what you say about GW and opportunities...
Gadzilla666 wrote:Errrrr....yeah? But I've always found the "no heavy weapons for Nurgle" restriction silly (made even more so by the current 30k Death Guard rules that I mentioned up thread). So why not just give Death Guard proper Havocs (and allow Havocs to take special weapons again )?
It's certainly an odd change between the two time periods, but it's also one that seems to have stuck now.
Wyldhunt wrote:EDIT: And the same applies to loyalists too. DW and GK are a bit more complicated, but SW and BA could probably have their meaningful rules options put on a single page each, and then include the handful of datasheets for units that absolutely, positively need to be unique units instead of just being rolled into generic datasheets.
Please get your mind out of the gutter regarding this, Wyldhunt - I'm hoping we'll see that Codex: Dark Angels for 10th sees a return to a proper book for BA/BT/DA/DW/SW, with all their units in the book - and units like the Wolf Priest (which should be a Chaplain/Apothecary hybrid, not just a Chaplain in a Wolf Skull) getting their true role restored.
Arachnofiend wrote: I could not possibly care less about playing a version of Thousand Sons from before the Rubric of Ahriman.
That isn't the point. The point is: GW is perfectly capable of writing rules that don't incorporate the aggravating "NMNR" paradigm into them. No reason that 1ksons can't have psychic dreadnoughts, for example.
Psychic dreadnought (or Sorcerer Hellbrute, at least) is a good shout for a 1k Sons unit that seems like an obvious open goal for GW at the minute.
What is the point of printing the Intercessors datasheet 5 times? It's a waste of paper which is bad for the environment. It's a waste of time as more things need to be checked and fixed. It creates the possibility of DW having 1W Intercessors while UM get 2W Intercessors which is silly. Similar books should be updated as close to each other as possible to minimize visible design philosophy changes throughout time.
Let's say GW wants to reduce the durability of vehicles ASAP once 10th launches because it turns out the new vehicle stats are unfun. Leaving Necrons for last would work, yeah they'd keep their very durable vehicles for longer than most but you cannot really compare Necron Ghost Arks and SM Rhinos because they're different civilisations, but comparing CSM and SM or worse DW and UM there should not be a difference in durability between their Rhinos as it would feel gamey and wrong.
I am in favour of consolidation of CSM books back together because of one simple issue:
RN, no CSM force is served decently enough. It is easily arguable that the only moderatly successfull codex CSM got in regards to represent what csm should be is one that is nowadays decades old. The cutting out of mono-god legions has actually been immensly contraproductive aswell.
I am talking of course about the 4th edition codex.
Ok now that i got the silly urge out of my system:
I will sound like a broken record but part of the reason R&H in 6 and 7th were one of the core favourites of CSM or Chaos players, had not to do with the ammount of unique entries. Contrary it was a list with less entries than guard. But rather how those entries were designed and how they interacted with the army rules.
A militia platoon squad could represent: Dark mech cheap servitors, cultists, paramilitary forces, traitor guardsmen, PDF in any cult variation or unaligned. Mutants: were separated out. Grenadiers, was a melee and depending upon demagogue devotion, shooty veteran unit, capable of representing evil skitarii, fallen tempestus scions, Cult elite, etc.
Only the really unique, like plague zombies, bloatdrones, bloodslaughterers, etc. were separated out, from generic options that you could run according to your representation needs.
There is nothing that couldn't be done just aswell with CSM. F.e. Apothecaries should be something generically available to most legions and even fallen chapters. The specialisation and access should come from the choice of what force you run. Preferentially you could make a multi tiered army system: Chose alignment: Khorne, yadda yada. Chose precursor: Legion, order, (pirates and rabble).
After that you unlock specific things alignements unlock free marks f.e. but disallow others, unaligned pays for them. If you got Mark x, units get acess to y. f.e. Khorne aligned, legion leftovers, get havocs that have access to plasmacannons and autocannons and a rule representing their trigger happines. (yes, khornes teeth havocs). Combat drugs for apothecaries. Unlocks Khorne berzerkers as troops, can exchange chainswords for chainaxes, etc.
Slaanesh? Noise weapon access. Slaansh psy. etc. etc. You get what i mean.
Legion vs order: Access to things that are found in HH, like Shrappnell boltguns, phosphex, landspeeders, volkite, special terminator upgrades. Order? more modern stuff, hell even potentially primaris.
You'd minimise the ammount of paper, maximise the way one can build forces. If you want to avoid Nurgle bikers with an FNP that hard you can limit forces to being more stringent with how they in 30k operated.
The less crossover between HH and 40k the better IMO. If 40kCSM could just be a HH army then they're no longer CSM because the whole point of the Crusade/Heresy Legions was that they were superior to their later counterparts.
I have the same opinion regarding the Relic Terminators and Contemptor in the Marine Codex because rather than these having these supposedly ancient and rare technologies, every Chapter and their mums can use them.
Technological devolution as a theme is long since dead gert, for Space marines in general.
Atleast hh weaponry and units don't look like primaris. .. exception to the kratos which is also extremely overloaded.
Also where if not csm legions should you find contemptors and relic terminators? Just because sm get far too liberal access to these things doesn't mean that csm shouldn't have them.
vict0988 wrote: What is the point of printing the Intercessors datasheet 5 times? It's a waste of paper which is bad for the environment. It's a waste of time as more things need to be checked and fixed. It creates the possibility of DW having 1W Intercessors while UM get 2W Intercessors which is silly. Similar books should be updated as close to each other as possible to minimize visible design philosophy changes throughout time.
Counter-point - people only needing to buy one book instead of two to play one of the Big Chapters is better for the environment.
As to your other point in this - good information management should be able to handle such a thing. There should be a database/spreadsheet somewhere which holds the details of which books certain datasheets are printed in, which can be referred to if you need to amend all instances of a certain thing. Without such a document, an amend to the Rhino or Land Raider will be an even bigger PITA than updating Intercessors or Assault Marines.
In theory, the other upside should be that these Chapters could see different prices for units if deemed appropriate - I don't know that we'll see that, but it is easier if they're their own books than if they're smushed into one plus supplements.
It's why I'm interested into the variant Chapter Faction Focus this week - let's see what they're proposing to do, and hope that they do things properly.
Not Online!!! wrote: Technological devolution as a theme is long since dead gert, for Space marines in general.
Atleast hh weaponry and units don't look like primaris. .. exception to the kratos which is also extremely overloaded.
Also where if not csm legions should you find contemptors and relic terminators? Just because sm get far too liberal access to these things doesn't mean that csm shouldn't have them.
There's a difference between Primaris stuff and just straight-up getting access to equipment that was difficult to produce even during the Crusade.
Cawl can make all of this new stuff because he made them. He doesn't have to worry about other patterns of the equipment being less resource intensive or more advanced than he can manage because there are no other patterns.
The Mechanicus struggles to make Indomitus pattern armour and Castra Ferrum Dreadnoughts, it literally can't produce Contemptors or Cataphractii at levels anywhere near enough that they should be distinct options in the Marine Codex.
And as for CSM, they're not exactly sitting on their behinds doing nothing. Every living moment is a fight for them and being cut off from the massive resources of the Imperium means they can't replace losses as readily. In the same way that a First Founding Chapter will have fewer pieces of Heresy-era equipment in their armouries than during their Crusade days, so too will the Legions of the Long War. A Chapter can replace a Deimos pattern Predator with a Mars pattern with relative ease because there will be a Forge World making equipment for them. A Warband doesn't necessarily have even a planet to their name, let alone a Daemon Forge, which is why they turn to Daemonology or raising Chaos Cults to bolster their forces. The Forges they do have access to also aren't ruled by particularly sane individuals in the way Imperial Forge Worlds are. The Dark Mechanicum could produce a Predator for a Warband or they could build a murder robot inhabited by a Daemon because that is more interesting to them.
I also didn't say these armies shouldn't have access, they just shouldn't be able to essentially run a Crusade Legion army.
Jidmah wrote: If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
Greater concentration of firepower. Naturally a Havoc unit would have access to more special weapons than the standard Plague Marine squad (putting aside the current ghastly PM dataslate). Thinking back to when there were such a thing as "Plague Marine Havocs", they could get 4 special weapon, whereas regular Plague Marine squads could get 2. I'd argue that they should've been allowed heavy bolters as well (and there's two pieces of art in the 3.5 'Dex that show this), but that's a different conversation.
Barring the whole topic of how the plague marine sprue dictates their rules (I think we both have spent more than enough time on making our opinions about that clear), it seems to me that plague marines and DG havocs of old can both be represented by one unit as PM can have 4 ranged special weapon in a unit of 5 and 7 in a unit of 10. I think bringing back havocs would add very little little to the army, I'd prefer a different type of unit instead, like those DG mortar crews from HH.
Not Online!!! wrote: Technological devolution as a theme is long since dead gert, for Space marines in general.
Atleast hh weaponry and units don't look like primaris. .. exception to the kratos which is also extremely overloaded.
Also where if not csm legions should you find contemptors and relic terminators? Just because sm get far too liberal access to these things doesn't mean that csm shouldn't have them.
There's a difference between Primaris stuff and just straight-up getting access to equipment that was difficult to produce even during the Crusade. Cawl can make all of this new stuff because he made them. He doesn't have to worry about other patterns of the equipment being less resource intensive or more advanced than he can manage because there are no other patterns. The Mechanicus struggles to make Indomitus pattern armour and Castra Ferrum Dreadnoughts, it literally can't produce Contemptors or Cataphractii at levels anywhere near enough that they should be distinct options in the Marine Codex.
And as for CSM, they're not exactly sitting on their behinds doing nothing. Every living moment is a fight for them and being cut off from the massive resources of the Imperium means they can't replace losses as readily. In the same way that a First Founding Chapter will have fewer pieces of Heresy-era equipment in their armouries than during their Crusade days, so too will the Legions of the Long War. A Chapter can replace a Deimos pattern Predator with a Mars pattern with relative ease because there will be a Forge World making equipment for them. A Warband doesn't necessarily have even a planet to their name, let alone a Daemon Forge, which is why they turn to Daemonology or raising Chaos Cults to bolster their forces. The Forges they do have access to also aren't ruled by particularly sane individuals in the way Imperial Forge Worlds are. The Dark Mechanicum could produce a Predator for a Warband or they could build a murder robot inhabited by a Daemon because that is more interesting to them. I also didn't say these armies shouldn't have access, they just shouldn't be able to essentially run a Crusade Legion army.
Except that might be true for small warbands. But the legions that didn't shatter or successfull warbands like the Red Corsairs, actually have cut themselves vast petty empires out, that are now expanding evermore, indeed have stolen like with the spartan stc plans, etc. So no, that argument may work for the "brass beasts" or the Purge but not for IW. And as with all leaders of chaos, just as much as the insane rule, the sane may very well are the most successfull as seen with Huron. Further the ammount of standardisation visible within daemonengines is palpable, and so is dedicated specialisation like we could see with the XANA lineage of helltalons and Hellblades. So no, once again there should be the whole picture not 4th edition nonsensery csm.
Else CSM as a credible threat wouldn't even work anymore and would need to be replaced completly in favour of singular CSM leading cultist armies and paramilitaries.
Barring the whole topic of how the plague marine sprue dictates their rules (I think we both have spent more than enough time on making our opinions about that clear), it seems to me that plague marines and DG havocs of old can both be represented by one unit as PM can have 4 ranged special weapon in a unit of 5 and 7 in a unit of 10. I think bringing back havocs would add very little little to the army, I'd prefer a different type of unit instead, like those DG mortar crews from HH.
It'd be nice if the chemical and biological warfare aspect of DG would've gotten amped up more and for that artillery would play a massive role. Phosphex etc. Basically the C instead of just B type of warfare.
Jidmah wrote:Ah, I guess I wasn't being very clear, I'll rephrase it.
If there was a unit of havocs in Codex: DG for 9th edition with access to nothing but the special weapons of old, how would it be different from a unit of plague marines?
If we assume that, for whatever reason, GW have decreed that 40k lore states that the DG don't have heavy weapon infantry, there's still a spot for an infantry unit with greater firepower than the current Plague Marine datasheet. Havocs give us the structure for such a unit - everyone bar the Champion has to take a special (or ranged plague?) weapon, with the Champion getting combi-weapon access.
In an edition where we're seeing the return of fire points to transports, and disembarking after transport movement (I think that's been confirmed as a thing), that gives the DG an opportunity to make a mess of a target by surgical application of firepower (or plaguepower). It also gives you a unit that has a different flavour to the CSM equivalent, which I know I would find somewhat interesting.
I actually like the idea that DG don't do man portable heavies. The 30/40K difference you can chalk up to Morty asserting himself more now that he's on his own or something. But its additional flavor. Of course, that means they should get more/better specials. "Tac Squads" should get at least two specials etc. Some sort of Firestrike Turret niche is something else that should probably get looked into.
Not Online!!! wrote: Except that might be true for small warbands. But the legions that didn't shatter or successfull warbands like the Red Corsairs, actually have cut themselves vast petty empires out, that are now expanding evermore, indeed have stolen like with the spartan stc plans, etc. So no, that argument may work for the "brass beasts" or the Purge but not for IW. And as with all leaders of chaos, just as much as the insane rule, the sane may very well are the most successfull as seen with Huron.
Further the ammount of standardisation visible within daemonengines is palpable, and so is dedicated specialisation like we could see with the XANA lineage of helltalons and Hellblades. So no, once again there should be the whole picture not 4th edition nonsensery csm.
Else CSM as a credible threat wouldn't even work anymore and would need to be replaced completly in favour of singular CSM leading cultist armies and paramilitaries.
Right, and those Legions went from being supplied by masses of foundries and Forge Worlds to scratching what they could in the Eye and that was before the Legion Wars decimated them even further and the Long War started. They should not have access to massive amounts of Heresy-era equipment because nobody is producing it anymore, not even the Hell Forges of Xana II.
There are Warbands that will have a core of Heresy veterans in their ranks with the vehicles to accompany them but they should be in exactly the same boat as Chapters who are from earlier Foundings. They might have a Contemptor or two and Spartan if they are lucky but most of their equipment should be newer patterns taken from raids or it should be Daemon Engines.
Even the more put-together Legions like the Iron Warriors or Word Bearers are not "unified" enough to maintain massive stores of Heresy-era equipment. Perturabo starts wars on Mendregard all the time to ensure only the strongest Warbands remain and the Word Bearers have entire wars over the shade of red that should be used to paint their armour. Ten thousand years of constant warfare in Realspace and the Warp means that even if there is a Warband with a particularly strong armoury of Heresy-era equipment just after the Legion Wars, it isn't going to stay that way forever and replacements or alternatives have to be found. Hell, there's a chance that this five thousand-year-old tank will one day just start eating its crew because it's been possessed by a Daemon and has to be destroyed.
This idea that because some CSM fought in the Heresy that the Codex should include things like Contemptors and Spartans is just ludicrous.
Not Online!!! wrote: Except that might be true for small warbands. But the legions that didn't shatter or successfull warbands like the Red Corsairs, actually have cut themselves vast petty empires out, that are now expanding evermore, indeed have stolen like with the spartan stc plans, etc. So no, that argument may work for the "brass beasts" or the Purge but not for IW. And as with all leaders of chaos, just as much as the insane rule, the sane may very well are the most successfull as seen with Huron.
Further the ammount of standardisation visible within daemonengines is palpable, and so is dedicated specialisation like we could see with the XANA lineage of helltalons and Hellblades. So no, once again there should be the whole picture not 4th edition nonsensery csm.
Else CSM as a credible threat wouldn't even work anymore and would need to be replaced completly in favour of singular CSM leading cultist armies and paramilitaries.
Right, and those Legions went from being supplied by masses of foundries and Forge Worlds to scratching what they could in the Eye and that was before the Legion Wars decimated them even further and the Long War started. They should not have access to massive amounts of Heresy-era equipment because nobody is producing it anymore, not even the Hell Forges of Xana II.
There are Warbands that will have a core of Heresy veterans in their ranks with the vehicles to accompany them but they should be in exactly the same boat as Chapters who are from earlier Foundings. They might have a Contemptor or two and Spartan if they are lucky but most of their equipment should be newer patterns taken from raids or it should be Daemon Engines.
Even the more put-together Legions like the Iron Warriors or Word Bearers are not "unified" enough to maintain massive stores of Heresy-era equipment. Perturabo starts wars on Mendregard all the time to ensure only the strongest Warbands remain and the Word Bearers have entire wars over the shade of red that should be used to paint their armour. Ten thousand years of constant warfare in Realspace and the Warp means that even if there is a Warband with a particularly strong armoury of Heresy-era equipment just after the Legion Wars, it isn't going to stay that way forever and replacements or alternatives have to be found. Hell, there's a chance that this five thousand-year-old tank will one day just start eating its crew because it's been possessed by a Daemon and has to be destroyed.
This idea that because some CSM fought in the Heresy that the Codex should include things like Contemptors and Spartans is just ludicrous.
Or like their First Founding counterparts (who would have had armories filled with this stuff before losing much of it to their successors during the Second Founding) - they may still have some but they are generally too precious to risk willy nilly.
Not Online!!! wrote: Except that might be true for small warbands. But the legions that didn't shatter or successfull warbands like the Red Corsairs, actually have cut themselves vast petty empires out, that are now expanding evermore, indeed have stolen like with the spartan stc plans, etc. So no, that argument may work for the "brass beasts" or the Purge but not for IW. And as with all leaders of chaos, just as much as the insane rule, the sane may very well are the most successfull as seen with Huron.
Further the ammount of standardisation visible within daemonengines is palpable, and so is dedicated specialisation like we could see with the XANA lineage of helltalons and Hellblades. So no, once again there should be the whole picture not 4th edition nonsensery csm.
Else CSM as a credible threat wouldn't even work anymore and would need to be replaced completly in favour of singular CSM leading cultist armies and paramilitaries.
Right, and those Legions went from being supplied by masses of foundries and Forge Worlds to scratching what they could in the Eye and that was before the Legion Wars decimated them even further and the Long War started. They should not have access to massive amounts of Heresy-era equipment because nobody is producing it anymore, not even the Hell Forges of Xana II.
There are Warbands that will have a core of Heresy veterans in their ranks with the vehicles to accompany them but they should be in exactly the same boat as Chapters who are from earlier Foundings. They might have a Contemptor or two and Spartan if they are lucky but most of their equipment should be newer patterns taken from raids or it should be Daemon Engines.
Even the more put-together Legions like the Iron Warriors or Word Bearers are not "unified" enough to maintain massive stores of Heresy-era equipment. Perturabo starts wars on Mendregard all the time to ensure only the strongest Warbands remain and the Word Bearers have entire wars over the shade of red that should be used to paint their armour. Ten thousand years of constant warfare in Realspace and the Warp means that even if there is a Warband with a particularly strong armoury of Heresy-era equipment just after the Legion Wars, it isn't going to stay that way forever and replacements or alternatives have to be found. Hell, there's a chance that this five thousand-year-old tank will one day just start eating its crew because it's been possessed by a Daemon and has to be destroyed.
This idea that because some CSM fought in the Heresy that the Codex should include things like Contemptors and Spartans is just ludicrous.
Just yet more proof they need to bring back 0-1 options, and heck, they could even restrict them to 1st/2nd founding chapters, and the most cohesive and powerful warbands.
Just yet more proof they need to bring back 0-1 options, and heck, they could even restrict them to 1st/2nd founding chapters, and the most cohesive and powerful warbands.
I'm more OK with 0-1 than First/Second/etc Foundings/Legions -
Someone buys super cool big centerpiece Forgeworld (or Not) model, builds their own little warband around it -> The Astral Bazooka's warband stole a Whatchamacallit from their parent chapter and then absconded with the relic to carve their own destiny out among the stars as they're sick of defending a Mankind that doesn't deserve it yadda yadda.
The whole "The equipment is so rare that we can't put it on the battlefield" excuse is beyond pathetic. If that were the case then you'd never see Chapter Masters, let alone Patriarchs, on the field of anything less than a do or die battle.
This is a game and depending on whether you want to look at your particular battle as a skirmish or just a snap shot of what's going on over a planet as a whole you should be able to play with your toys. If the Imperial side has access to a pre-heresy weapon then chaos should be able to field the same thing with the same point cost. I'll say that weapon options could easily be different between the 2 sides due to later developements (so daemonic things for chaos and newly developed sciences for SM). But there is no reason that SM should have the ability to play Spartans or grav vehicles while a Chaos player doesn't.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: The whole "The equipment is so rare that we can't put it on the battlefield" excuse is beyond pathetic. If that were the case then you'd never see Chapter Masters, let alone Patriarchs, on the field of anything less than a do or die battle.
Sure you would. They make new Chapter Masters pretty easy.
Right, and those Legions went from being supplied by masses of foundries and Forge Worlds to scratching what they could in the Eye and that was before the Legion Wars decimated them even further and the Long War started. They should not have access to massive amounts of Heresy-era equipment because nobody is producing it anymore, not even the Hell Forges of Xana II.
Pray tell what the reaper autocannon is? Or how about we go to the source: "Imperial Armour Volume Thirteen - Warmachines of the Lost and the damned" P. 16: The tools of damnation:
So right after raiding as a source we get a nice little snippet about the Dark Mechanicum
...]From their blasphemous foundries pour forth all manner of constructs, from recognisable patterns of vehicles such as the Rhino and Land Raider to terryfing engines of destruction entirely unknown to the machine canon of the cult Mechanicus[...
Then it goes on how those "deals" are maintained, mostly: Slaves + material = supply. Or security duty. Etc. Etc. et all. That is the LITERAL introduction of the book on these warmachines.
Or P 17: Describing that some warbands manage to be entirely mechanised. Or even more ironic the preference and prevalence of Kharybdis, thunderhawks, stormeagles etc.
Do you seriously think that is an "underequipped force" without access to such tools?
P26: Has a nice bit about why the predator is so liked, because, surprise, the predator and even the rare varieties can be produced plentyfully by the dark mechanicum aswell as being potential spoils from other marines.
Etc.
There are Warbands that will have a core of Heresy veterans in their ranks with the vehicles to accompany them but they should be in exactly the same boat as Chapters who are from earlier Foundings. They might have a Contemptor or two and Spartan if they are lucky but most of their equipment should be newer patterns taken from raids or it should be Daemon Engines.
Even the more put-together Legions like the Iron Warriors or Word Bearers are not "unified" enough to maintain massive stores of Heresy-era equipment.
And yet somehow this quote is also found in above book in regards to the Storm Eagle assault Gunship:
]While the storm eagle dropped out of use amongst the Adeptus Astrtes when the two Forge Worlds that produced it in the greatest numbers fell during the Horus Heresy, many Chaos Space Marine warbands retained their vessels and, so it appears, the secretes of maintaining them. P71.
Then The thunderhawk is flat out producable by many Dark mech forge worlds, P. 78. Seems to be a big seller for the dark mech.
Perturabo starts wars on Mendregard all the time to ensure only the strongest Warbands remain and the Word Bearers have entire wars over the shade of red that should be used to paint their armour. Ten thousand years of constant warfare in Realspace and the Warp means that even if there is a Warband with a particularly strong armoury of Heresy-era equipment just after the Legion Wars, it isn't going to stay that way forever and replacements or alternatives have to be found. Hell, there's a chance that this five thousand-year-old tank will one day just start eating its crew because it's been possessed by a Daemon and has to be destroyed.
This idea that because some CSM fought in the Heresy that the Codex should include things like Contemptors and Spartans is just ludicrous.
And you think that is something you do when your logistics are supposedly as bad?
I am not against limits, like 0-1 or the old machina malefica which required after the first vehicle with this rule a warpsmith / abby / lord to take another one, but let's not pretend that the supply issue is as dire as you claim, it isn't else once again, chaos marines wouldn't be a threat at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: Nobody has said that Imperial Chapters should get greater access to Heresy-era wargear than Chaos Warbands.
Then as it stands, why do Marines get better access to it?
Wyldhunt wrote:EDIT: And the same applies to loyalists too. DW and GK are a bit more complicated, but SW and BA could probably have their meaningful rules options put on a single page each, and then include the handful of datasheets for units that absolutely, positively need to be unique units instead of just being rolled into generic datasheets.
Please get your mind out of the gutter regarding this, Wyldhunt - I'm hoping we'll see that Codex: Dark Angels for 10th sees a return to a proper book for BA/BT/DA/DW/SW, with all their units in the book - and units like the Wolf Priest (which should be a Chaplain/Apothecary hybrid, not just a Chaplain in a Wolf Skull) getting their true role restored.
Wolf Priests are definitely a canon example that would be awkward to roll into generic datasheets. They're fully the SW chaplains and the SW apothecaries, so forcing them to choose between the two is a bit awkward. Then again, they don't seem to carry nartheciums, so it's probably fair to say that their ability to heal on the battlefield is somewhat reduced compared to those with full apothecary equipment. Alternatively, you could just have a (detachment?) rule that says SW chaplains have the option to spend X points to grant their squad FNP.
While cool models are cool, GW does have to allocate resources to decide what models get sculpted/made/released within a given timeframe. Using those resources to pump out a dozen slightly different apothecaries is not how I personally would want them to use those resources. If you really want faction X's version of a unit to be ever so slightly different from faction Y's, you can probably use the same model, embrace conversions, and toss in an optional rule that costs X points and tweaks how the unit performs.
Arachnofiend wrote: I could not possibly care less about playing a version of Thousand Sons from before the Rubric of Ahriman.
That isn't the point. The point is: GW is perfectly capable of writing rules that don't incorporate the aggravating "NMNR" paradigm into them. No reason that 1ksons can't have psychic dreadnoughts, for example.
Psychic dreadnought (or Sorcerer Hellbrute, at least) is a good shout for a 1k Sons unit that seems like an obvious open goal for GW at the minute.
Psychic dreads are a great example of a unit that should just be a generic option rather than needing unique data slates. There's no reason for them to be a BA-specific thing. Pretty sure the SIlver Skulls canonically have them? I think we all agree that the Thousand Sons ought to have them, but also what's to stop DG from having a dreadnaught with a psychic guy's head floating around in the puss-drenched coffin? Or EC? Or AL? You could easily just add an upgrade to make a dread psychic and let him choose from a list of powers that cost X points.
Any player who thinks it would make a cool addition to his army would have access to the option. Players who don't want psychic dreads can take other options instead. And you do it in a single datasheet instead of making people buy faction-specific splats to get their bespoke dread/brute rules.
Not Online!!! wrote: Pray tell what the reaper autocannon is? Or how about we go to the source: "Imperial Armour Volume Thirteen - Warmachines of the Lost and the damned" P. 16: The tools of damnation:
So right after raiding as a source we get a nice little snippet about the Dark Mechanicum
...]From their blasphemous foundries pour forth all manner of constructs, from recognisable patterns of vehicles such as the Rhino and Land Raider to terryfing engines of destruction entirely unknown to the machine canon of the cult Mechanicus[...
Firstly, we were talking about things like Contemptors, Volkite weaponry, and Spartans, not two Autocannons strapped together which is exactly what a Reaper is. Any mook with a welder can make a Reaper.
Secondly, that quote doesn't prove your point because it is extremely vague. It mentions Rhinos and Land Raiders, which while all patterns are technically Heresy patterns, it doesn't explicitly mean the Deimos stuff, and the majority of example images show Mars pattern vehicles for all the Rhino chassis tanks in the book. In fact, IA13 makes references constantly to the Dark Mechanicum having to make unusual or esoteric modifications to these vehicles to keep them running because they can't reproduce the originals.
Spoiler:
Or P 17: Describing that some warbands manage to be entirely mechanised. Or even more ironic the preference and prevalence of Kharybdis, thunderhawks, stormeagles etc.
Do you seriously think that is an "underequipped force" without access to such tools?
P26: Has a nice bit about why the predator is so liked, because, surprise, the predator and even the rare varieties can be produced plentyfully by the dark mechanicum aswell as being potential spoils from other marines.
And yet somehow this quote is also found in above book in regards to the Storm Eagle assault Gunship:
]While the storm eagle dropped out of use amongst the Adeptus Astrtes when the two Forge Worlds that produced it in the greatest numbers fell during the Horus Heresy, many Chaos Space Marine warbands retained their vessels and, so it appears, the secretes of maintaining them. P71.
You keep ignoring the other portions of those entries where it makes clear that vehicles like Infernal Relic Predators are extremely rare, with entire wars being fought over them. For example, the Stormeagle entry you've quoted has this as the very next line:
Though rarely deployed in great numbers
Seems to me that CSM don't actually have huge stores of Stormeagles to call upon if they're rarely deployed en-masse unlike the gunships of the Imperial Chapters.
But you're also forgetting the Infernal Relic rule. This rule prevented armies from taking more than one Infernal Relic vehicle in a list unless the player also took Abaddon, a Warpsmith, or a Malefic Sorcerer, emphasising that these vehicles were too rare and important to be present without a "technomancer" present to oversee their deployment. A similar rule was in place for Imperial Marines BTW.
Spoiler:
Then The thunderhawk is flat out producable by many Dark mech forge worlds, P. 78. Seems to be a big seller for the dark mech.
Yeah, the Thunderhawk was originally a cheaper stop-gap because Stormbirds were extremely difficult to construct and maintain. It's the Mars pattern Rhino of the Astartes aircraft roster.
Spoiler:
And you think that is something you do when your logistics are supposedly as bad?
You're implying that beings ascended beyond the concerns of mortal life care about that. Perturabo wanted efficiency over all else and if an inefficient Warband was operating a relic vehicle, then the loss of that vehicle was an acceptable one if greater weakness had been purged. And the Word Bearers are hardly the most logical or sane lot, again referring to the fact they have entire wars over the shade of red to be used for armour paint.
Spoiler:
I am not against limits, like 0-1 or the old machina malefica which required after the first vehicle with this rule a warpsmith / abby / lord to take another one, but let's not pretend that the supply issue is as dire as you claim, it isn't else once again, chaos marines wouldn't be a threat at all.
Not having access to masses of Heresy-era equipment doesn't make CSM not a threat. Cults, Daemons, esoteric technology, sorcery, and boons granted by the Gods, all of these make the CSM dangerous in ways that they weren't during the Heresy. There was a reason Horus wanted to make sure that the Loyalist Legions adhered to the Edict of Nikea so as to prevent any real hope of those Legions being able to combat the Warmaster's allies from beyond the veil.
Then as it stands, why do Marines get better access to it?
Why not then go with my proposal?
Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
Chaos Legions have the potential to be far more divergent than the various flavors of loyalists. If Blood Angels, Space Wolves etc get their own codexs then the God Four definitely should.
Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
Oh really now, so basically the formeless goop pile of utter paper waste we got now?
Iow what feels like a force more stringent to the codex astartes than UM? Just with more tentacles and Spikes.
Except for those things that gw fails to make look interesting aka dino and spiderbots?
Or has tentacles growing out Off? Which btw still suck compared to their 3.5 iteration and are basically an HH unit par excellence considering gal vorbak?
The whole tentacle thingy is not fitting by the by for a whole slew of Chaos forces as it stands. AL never got pushed into the eye f.e.
Instead of what they were supposed to be , cue Gads quote?
The potentially warped ancient relics of a bygone era running on spite alone? Or the uncanny valley daemonengines like the decimator or the recently removed xana lineage?
And were excactly is cultist representation in the current paradigm ? In the fething legends PDF it is. Or as afterthoughts poorly implemented. Or completly replacing Chaos marines when gw inevitably fails again to make csm tacs worth the ink.
I never stated by the way that malefic machine limitations shouldn't apply either. I stated that legions should get access and nothing more.
But then there's your perturabo point formulated as an exemple. Yet logistics and efficency are his aims you argue. If the logistics as already pointed out to you would really be this bad for the cohesive legions then that would be squandering ressources and instead of culling weakness by "Training excercise" you'd merely lower Overall strength.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Key there is understanding what the tech levels tell us about their time.
The Great Crusade wasn’t something The Emperor could afford to hang around and hold fire on. Once the Warp Storms blew out, it was Go Time. We must also keep in mind The Imperium’s growth was rapid.
As with any military, standardised equipment is desirable, as it keeps your logistics as simple as possible. Hence the humble Lasgun’s storied place. And indeed why the more destructive, arguably better suited terror weapon but more complicated Volkite range was eventually traded out for the still quite nasty Bolt range when it came to arming and equipping the Legions.
The same is true of tanks and other support stuff. Sure, you could make every tank anti-Grav with big guns and a decent transport capacity, because that tech absolutely exists. But you need tank and support stuff in such increasingly vast numbers, there’s a lot to be said for mass produced, middle of the road equipment.
Cawl? Cawl had something The Emperor didn’t. No. Seriously he did. Wanna know what that was?
10,000 years. Give or take. 10,000 years of research, development, production, stockpiling and mothballing. Even if the approx 1,000 Chapter of Marines were to have 10 Repulsors? You just need to average one produced every year.
Another thing Cawl had was No Other Pressing Concerns. Just his pet project, and his multiple mind-copies all beavering away. Requisitioning components, researching and testing STCs, perhaps even (heresy!) adapting stuff, relatively safe in the knowledge folk would only find out if/when his benefactor - a son of The Emperor and therefore Omnissiah - returned to the fold. An authority near as second to none bar The Emperor himself.
Time. Time and not having to constantly repair and replenish losses does wonderful things.
Yeah, the time to improve on things. Biggest thing that they could float with anti-grav in the Crusade/Heresy era? Javelin land speeder. Biggest thing that Cawl can float with anti-grav? A super heavy tank. And he's using plenty of Heresy era tech while he's at it, and quite often improving on that. "Neo" volkite? Laser destroyers? Accelerator Cannons? Yeah, he's got it covered. And he's improved on bolters, plasma, meltas, etc, etc. And again even the Marines themselves.
Yeah, I don't see how giving the Traitor Legions access to Heresy-era tech breaks the "current Imperial tech is better" paradigm.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Yes the new Primaris stuff is 'more advanced' than the Heresy tech, but it's also more advanced than what CSM already have, so I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. But that's not really what I was getting at.
All of the Heresy stuff wasn't part of the origins of 40k. It was invented to serve the novels, and eventually being made into kits by Forge World, before finally reaching plastic. It has crept into 40k in a limited way with some rules support, but the only ones in the Space Marine codex are relic terminators and Contemptor Dreadnoughts. They don't even market those kits in the 40k section of the website anymore, you have to go to the Horus Heresy section to find them.
The Heresy 'stuff' isn't really part of the identity of 40k let alone the CSM identity and it certainly doesn't seem like GW are likely to change that.
I appreciate that people that got to 40kCSM from Horus Heresy lore might feel like they're not getting what was advertised, but at the end of the day it seems pretty clear that GW's current vision for CSM =/= 30K traitor legions.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Yes the new Primaris stuff is 'more advanced' than the Heresy tech, but it's also more advanced than what CSM already have, so I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. But that's not really what I was getting at.
All of the Heresy stuff wasn't part of the origins of 40k. It was invented to serve the novels, and eventually being made into kits by Forge World, before finally reaching plastic. It has crept into 40k in a limited way with some rules support, but the only ones in the Space Marine codex are relic terminators and Contemptor Dreadnoughts. They don't even market those kits in the 40k section of the website anymore, you have to go to the Horus Heresy section to find them.
The Heresy 'stuff' isn't really part of the identity of 40k let alone the CSM identity and it certainly doesn't seem like GW are likely to change that.
I appreciate that people that got to 40kCSM from Horus Heresy lore might feel like they're not getting what was advertised, but at the end of the day it seems pretty clear that GW's current vision for CSM =/= 30K traitor legions.
Sooooo....you're just one of those "Forge World models/rules/lore 'don't count'" individuals? Despite Forge World being around since 3rd edition (did the Dreadclaw that I repeatedly used back then "not count"?)? Okayyyyy. Moving on......
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Yes the new Primaris stuff is 'more advanced' than the Heresy tech, but it's also more advanced than what CSM already have, so I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. But that's not really what I was getting at.
All of the Heresy stuff wasn't part of the origins of 40k. It was invented to serve the novels, and eventually being made into kits by Forge World, before finally reaching plastic. It has crept into 40k in a limited way with some rules support, but the only ones in the Space Marine codex are relic terminators and Contemptor Dreadnoughts. They don't even market those kits in the 40k section of the website anymore, you have to go to the Horus Heresy section to find them.
The Heresy 'stuff' isn't really part of the identity of 40k let alone the CSM identity and it certainly doesn't seem like GW are likely to change that.
I appreciate that people that got to 40kCSM from Horus Heresy lore might feel like they're not getting what was advertised, but at the end of the day it seems pretty clear that GW's current vision for CSM =/= 30K traitor legions.
Sooooo....you're just one of those "Forge World models/rules/lore 'don't count'" individuals? Despite Forge World being around since 3rd edition (did the Dreadclaw that I repeatedly used back then "not count"?)? Okayyyyy. Moving on......
That's a pretty snarky label to apply and not at all what I wrote.
I'm just saying that the GW's actions indicate that it doesn't agree with that vision for CSM in 40K.
I'm not saying that it's a bad idea for them to bring 30K stuff in, just that currently it seems like an unreasonable expectation given the direction that GW is currently heading.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Yes the new Primaris stuff is 'more advanced' than the Heresy tech, but it's also more advanced than what CSM already have, so I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. But that's not really what I was getting at.
All of the Heresy stuff wasn't part of the origins of 40k. It was invented to serve the novels, and eventually being made into kits by Forge World, before finally reaching plastic. It has crept into 40k in a limited way with some rules support, but the only ones in the Space Marine codex are relic terminators and Contemptor Dreadnoughts. They don't even market those kits in the 40k section of the website anymore, you have to go to the Horus Heresy section to find them.
The Heresy 'stuff' isn't really part of the identity of 40k let alone the CSM identity and it certainly doesn't seem like GW are likely to change that.
I appreciate that people that got to 40kCSM from Horus Heresy lore might feel like they're not getting what was advertised, but at the end of the day it seems pretty clear that GW's current vision for CSM =/= 30K traitor legions.
Sooooo....you're just one of those "Forge World models/rules/lore 'don't count'" individuals? Despite Forge World being around since 3rd edition (did the Dreadclaw that I repeatedly used back then "not count"?)? Okayyyyy. Moving on......
That's a pretty snarky label to apply and not at all what I wrote.
I'm just saying that the GW's actions indicate that it doesn't agree with that vision for CSM in 40K.
I'm not saying that it's a bad idea for them to bring 30K stuff in, just that currently it seems like an unreasonable expectation given the direction that GW is currently heading.
Ok, fine, I was being "snarky". But it was definitely the feel that I was getting from your comments. I apologize if I was misunderstanding you.
But we're not talking about what gwis doing, but what they should be doing. IE: supporting the many ways that CSM can be represented on the table.
Gert wrote: Again for the third time, I don't think Chapters should get better access. I don't think your proposal is better because it removes the point of CSM being CSM. They're not the twisted and corrupted remains of the once proud Legiones Astartes dabbling in dark magic and tech heresy, they're just the Legions but a bit spikier.
But is that really "the point" of CSM, or just one of many, and the one that you prefer? Let's see what someone who had considerable input into what CSM were designed to be after the ancient days of RT:
To me the Chaos Space Marines needed to be characterized as a threat reaching back to the Imperium's past, a threat that had refused to lie down and become a part of history. This is why the Gods of Chaos are less pivotal in Codex Chaos; we felt that the motivations of Chaos Space Marines should remain their own, no matter how debased and vile. Though the corrupted marines of the Traitor Legions make excellent champions for the Gods of Chaos, they are not pawns and have their own agendas of vengeance, empire-building, and vindication or arcane study that gives them purpose
Andy Chambers, from the Designer's Note to Codex Chaos: 2nd edition, page 112
And also from that same Designer's Note:
Another interesting spin we came up with was to make Chaos Space Marines forces feel as if they'd been exiled to the Eye of Terror ten millennia before the Imperium's "present" day. Though the technological advancement of the Imperium moves at the speed of an aged tortoise ten thousand years was bound to bring some changes. This suggested limiting the Traitor Legion's weaponry to some of the "older" types and making others dangerous, experimental precursors of the guns used by Imperial Space Marines. This, combined with the older patterns of power armour the designers have used, gives the Chaos Space Marines miniatures a dark, archaic feel, that contrasts well with the clean, upright loyalist Space Marines.
So, "Old Warriors, fighting an Old War, with old equipment" was one of the original "points" of CSM, at least according to one of their most important designers. Of course, there are many other themes covered by the forces of the Chaos Space Marines, and those should be there for those interested to explore and represent in their own armies. But so should that one, for those of us that want to represent it.
It's worth remembering though that when Andy wrote that there were no Contemptors, Spartans, Tartaros, Cataphractii, Volkite etc. That stuff wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of Forge World yet. They had combi-botlers instead of stormbolters and reaper autocannons instead of assault cannons, the old 'low tech' heresy versions, rather than the more advanced Imperial kit. The identity of the army was set well before the Heresy stuff crept in to 40k.
I see your point. Originally, the "Heresy" equipment was more "low tech" than the current Imperial tech. And, obviously the current Heresy era tech is more "high tech" than current Imperial tech, isn't it? Right? Let me ask you some questions:
Which is more "high tech"? A tracked Sicaran/Kratos/Land Raider? Or any of the various Primaris Grav Tanks?
Which is more "high tech"? The tracked Fellblade chassis tanks (basically more advanced Baneblade chassis tanks), or the bigger, and flying (grav tech, again) Astreus?
A Contemptor or a Redemtor? Admittedly, that one is harder. Contemptors have a force field giving them an invulnerable save (probably, we haven't seen the 10th edition Contemptor rules yet), but the Redemptor has more wounds (again, probably, we still need to see those 10th edition Contemptor rules ).
How about a Heresy era CSM or a Primaris marine?
Seems to me, that Cawl has pushed the current Imperial tech beyond most Heresy era tech. And that maybe, letting CSM use Heresy era tech will continue the aforementioned "CSM use older, inferior tech, compared to modern Imperial tech" paradigm.
Yes the new Primaris stuff is 'more advanced' than the Heresy tech, but it's also more advanced than what CSM already have, so I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. But that's not really what I was getting at.
All of the Heresy stuff wasn't part of the origins of 40k. It was invented to serve the novels, and eventually being made into kits by Forge World, before finally reaching plastic. It has crept into 40k in a limited way with some rules support, but the only ones in the Space Marine codex are relic terminators and Contemptor Dreadnoughts. They don't even market those kits in the 40k section of the website anymore, you have to go to the Horus Heresy section to find them.
The Heresy 'stuff' isn't really part of the identity of 40k let alone the CSM identity and it certainly doesn't seem like GW are likely to change that.
I appreciate that people that got to 40kCSM from Horus Heresy lore might feel like they're not getting what was advertised, but at the end of the day it seems pretty clear that GW's current vision for CSM =/= 30K traitor legions.
Sooooo....you're just one of those "Forge World models/rules/lore 'don't count'" individuals? Despite Forge World being around since 3rd edition (did the Dreadclaw that I repeatedly used back then "not count"?)? Okayyyyy. Moving on......
That's a pretty snarky label to apply and not at all what I wrote.
I'm just saying that the GW's actions indicate that it doesn't agree with that vision for CSM in 40K.
I'm not saying that it's a bad idea for them to bring 30K stuff in, just that currently it seems like an unreasonable expectation given the direction that GW is currently heading.
Ok, fine, I was being "snarky". But it was definitely the feel that I was getting from your comments. I apologize if I was misunderstanding you.
But we're not talking about what gwis doing, but what they should be doing. IE: supporting the many ways that CSM can be represented on the table.
Again, my apologies if I've misunderstood you.
No worries, getting things across in text it always tricky.
That's a fair statement about this being about what GW should do. It's always going to be difficult question because different people want different things. Personally I'd prefer a more soup approach to Chaos with less focus on CSM in particular, but franky it's been Codex: CSM rather than Codex: Chaos since 3rd edition so I have to live with that.
Going more directly to the point of the marked legions, separating them out let's GW give them each a more unique identity from a table top perspective, which is probably a good thing in principle.
If only the Arquitor Plagueburst Crawler wasn't arbitrarily limited to Death Guard only...
You could have a customisable generic 'artillery tank' unit entry to also cover Basilisks for Iron Warriors, Cannons of Khorne for World Eaters, maybe Vindicators too.
Lord Damocles wrote: If only the Arquitor Plagueburst Crawler wasn't arbitrarily limited to Death Guard only...
You could have a customisable generic 'artillery tank' unit entry to also cover Basilisks for Iron Warriors, Cannons of Khorne for World Eaters, maybe Vindicators too.
Can't have that, see that is HH tech and that mustn't be in the faction that literally refers back to these golden days of technology as a reason for existing. Because HH tech is a Big nono, faaaar to advanced
But care for some antigrav primaris? Technology so fidely a far better mechanicus couldn't manage to mass produce? Yet somehow a singular techpriest not only managed to do so en mass but Beat all other antigrav from supposedly far more advanced civilisations beyond necrons which float a whole pyramid?
I memeber a time were the ravenwing masters jetbike was an absurd rarity.
And yet technological stagnation and devolution a hall mark characterisation of the iom and forces based upon humans should still be a thing? But only for non-primaris of course.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Yeah, the time to improve on things. Biggest thing that they could float with anti-grav in the Crusade/Heresy era? Javelin land speeder. Biggest thing that Cawl can float with anti-grav? A super heavy tank. And he's using plenty of Heresy era tech while he's at it, and quite often improving on that. "Neo" volkite? Laser destroyers? Accelerator Cannons? Yeah, he's got it covered. And he's improved on bolters, plasma, meltas, etc, etc. And again even the Marines themselves.
Yeah, I don't see how giving the Traitor Legions access to Heresy-era tech breaks the "current Imperial tech is better" paradigm.
Either all-in-one, or supplements. Some of the arbitrary restrictions placed on the God legions when they got their own books are baffling.
Some combination of the 2nd edition codex, the 3.5 dex & the Traitor Legions codex would be great, they've all given you several ways to represent both battle-hardened veterans of the long war and newly-turned renegades.
The messaging about CSM and what they get access to has always been contradictor and stupid:
"Why don't we have Centurions?" "Too new, CSM have older gear"
"Why can't we have Volkite and HH vehicles then? they're old" "Hard to maintain"
"But half the mechanicus fell during the heresy, we're always being told about the soul forge and the various Dark mechanicus facilities supplying the legions"
It's like half the imperial armoury is equipped with bombs that go off as soon as someone questions the Emperor. all the Speeders, all the grav tech, everything Primaris just explodes the moment the chapter starts to go Renegade.
Death Guard were ruined for me when they got their own book. They went from a slow, silent, implacable wall of power armour to giggling Captain Planet villains sprouting tentacles and bells from every available surface, it's like they got into a teleporter accident with some Skaven. Relying or hordes of poxwalkers and Daemon engines (!?)
Here are some quotes from Index Astartes: Death Guard:
Their weapons and armour were rarely the most expertly artificed, certainly not the most beatutifully-ornamented, but functioned without flaw.. Mortarion preferred to utilise huge waves of infantry, well-equipped and highly trained on an individual level...all his Space Marines were expected by Mortarion to be equally adept at Bolter, Bolt pistol and close combat weapon, to fight with whatever weapon circumstances dictated...the combat doctrine that served the Death Guard so well in life now suits the damned character of the Plague Marines to perfection...the manner in which the Plague Marines carry themselves to war still reflects the hand of the Primarch which forged them, shaped them and led them to their damnation
That sound like "Huge amounts of chaff poxwalkers" to you?
Does "huge waves of infantry" sound like something well-represented by reducing max squad sizes from 20 to 10?
Does "squads equipped with melee weapons lose their bolters" sound like fighting with "whatever weapon circumstances dictated"
Does "complete lack of heavy weapons because lol old" sound like they "functioned without flaw"?
Where the hell did all the Daemon Engines come from?
When did mr "Massed infantry are the way to go" decide "Hey, I'm gonna design an artillery tank by adding some wrought iron fencing and pus to some old Arquitors"
Before they got their own codex, these aspects were all represented.
Plague Marines with Bolter, Bolt Pistol & CCW, able to be taken in huge squads
Plague Marine Havocs meant they could rely on their troops rather than armoured vehicles where AT was required
Every Death Guard is trained in the use of bolt pistols...but none of them can take one! they're limited to characters only
Hell, the Traitor Legion codex even gave them heavy weapons back! and that's without hyping death guard getting so many "new units" and giving us several flavours of Death Guard Middle Management
I've never played thousand sons or world eaters so I can't comment if a similar desecration of their lore and playstyle happened with them, but today's Death Guard are completely unrecognisable from the army I chose.
All the cult legions should use the CSM codex as a base, and only omit units if there's a damn good reason to (Death Guard explicitly don't use jump packs or bikes, for example)
It's like half the imperial armoury is equipped with bombs that go off as soon as someone questions the Emperor. all the Speeders, all the grav tech, everything Primaris just explodes the moment the chapter starts to go Renegade.
I assume it is a religious basis. The post heresy gear and the Empire as a whole is ordered. Specific types of weapons, produced in specific ways. No mixing, build to specification, even if we could make it better, we don't because of uniformisation. Chaos runs on pre heresy stuff, where technicaly there were paterns and variants, but everything was being mixed and matched. A squad could have 5 dudes with 5 technicaly identical archeotech wrist mounted plasma weapons, but only in how their functioned. The range, fuel cells, cabling etc could all be unique. Very chaotic.
So I can imagine that chaos space marines in their insanity, can't just deal with the fact that some stuff is not spiky and chaotic. And new fallen chapters probably have to destroy their stock pile of auto canons, storm bolters etc in some sort of religious ritual. Before they get replacments of combi bolters and reaper canons etc
Chaos Marines are not necessarily insane - in fact I'd say that most of them aren't, with the badly flanderised World Eaters as the most obvious exception. The religion thing does not necessarily apply either - there are traitor legions that are not especially devout like the Iron Warriors, or that actively reject the chaos gods like the Night Lords.
Crispy78 wrote: Chaos Marines are not necessarily insane - in fact I'd say that most of them aren't, with the badly flanderised World Eaters as the most obvious exception. The religion thing does not necessarily apply either - there are traitor legions that are not especially devout like the Iron Warriors, or that actively reject the chaos gods like the Night Lords.
World Eaters would be much more interesting if they were perfectly sane (to begin with) as long as the Nails were in the 'off' position... Like that one Angron book were slaughter starts and the pages are literally just covered in red for a few paragraphs, and then sanity of the POV character somewhat returns and you just see the aftermath. A couple thousand years of constant murder-amnesia and dealing with the consequences makes for much more interesting character arc than all blood, all angry, all eight all the time.
Have you read the First Law trilogy by Joe Abercrombie? There's a character rather like that, a grizzled veteran warrior trying to escape his past and be a better person, but who on occasion goes into berzerk furies (which were what made his name in the first place). He loses sense of where he is, what he's doing, and just kills - anyone, anything, whatever is in front of him; with sometimes tragic results.
It's a lot more nuanced than just "Rah! Axe! Kill! Maim! Burn!" all the time.
There is no nuance in lobotomisation or brain damage inducted aggresion. Anyone who did or does contact sports, can tell you that. Dude goes maniac mode at a moment notice and suddenly there is their family around them all dead.
It is like DG or 1ksons. There is nothing subtle about those either. One is a walking septic tank and the other is an automaton.
One of my favourite ever rules was in the 2nd edition chaos codex:
You can take equipment, wargear cards, vehicle cards, vehicles and support options from Codex:Ultramarines (the generic "LSM" codex) for an extra 50% points to represent their rarity, and take post-heresy terminators (complete with stormbolters/Powerfists) at +5 ppm
Imagine if that applied now. Want Chaos Centurions/land speeders/Razorbacks/Primaris/Whatever? Go for it! you can make whatever fluffy army you want, but you pay for it through the nose.
Want a renagade chapter with a few Chaos elements? absolutely doable. Want a veteran CSM warband which has captured some newer equipment? That's fine. Cult legion that retains some of its HH equipment? All yours!
Is it competitive? Maybe, maybe not. you're never going to win if you try a mirror-match against LSM when you're paying 50% more, but you also have access to combos they don't.
Is it fluffy? Hell yes it is
Would it make a lot of CSM players happier? Yes, yes it would.
Maybe you give CSM a discount on the extra cost, so the Cult Legions would pay a premium, while unmarked CSM have wider access to them, that seems fair
From the 3.5 CSM codex you take the Veteran Skills mechanic, where Cult units can optionally take a skill/upgrade to represent their ten thousand years of warfare, and unmarked units can take up to 2
In one fell swoop you've made a book that can represent both newly-turned renegade marines and hard-bitten warbands of elite veterans, and pretty much everything in between.
Then from the 7e Traitor Legions codex, the book so good GW ripped the galaxy in half to stop CSM getting decent rules, you take Detachment abilities, things like Word bearers being able to pick a character and give them a boon at the start of each turn, or Night Lords being able to declare a battle is taking place at night, boosting their cover saves, or Iron Warriors getting a form of Battleshock mitigation when inside a fortification
Those three changes - all of which have been tried successfully in the past, would not make for a perfect CSM/Cult legion dex, but would make it a damn sight better. Perfection would require GW to get off their "Wargear options must match what's available in the kit" kick, which isn't going to happen for the forseeable future
All the cult legions should use the CSM codex as a base, and only omit units if there's a damn good reason to (Death Guard explicitly don't use jump packs or bikes, for example)
Incorrect, and frankly Mortarion hasn't done anything for thousands of years so his "preference" doesn't matter whatsoever.
ERJAK wrote: No. And the different space marine chapters didn't need their own books either.
You get one page of rules and 2 pages of fluff like everybody else.
But noooooo, I can't have Black Templars unless I'm specifically given Crusader squads and nobody else because no other Chapters go on Crusades!
I really, honestly do wish Marine and CSM players would stop pretending that just being 'the ones who spend the most money on GW products' makes their subfactions special.
Factionally, there's a MUCH smaller difference between Ultramarines, Black Templar, and Space Wolves than there is between Behemouth, Leviathan, and Kraken; but we still have to cater to 'but mah wherewolfves!' and give each little clubhouse it's own book.
If that's the bar, why not give the local boyscout troupe it's own book? We could give each individual Arbite it's own book! How about Mark the fishmonger? He's not THAT much less active than the Space Wolves these days.
I literally quoted the part that says they still follow his preferences.
And fine, they don't explicitly have no jump packs, but they "gave little emphasis on specialised units using jump packs or bikes" and "The Death Guard had no dedicated Assault or Tactical squads"
ERJAK wrote: No. And the different space marine chapters didn't need their own books either.
You get one page of rules and 2 pages of fluff like everybody else.
But noooooo, I can't have Black Templars unless I'm specifically given Crusader squads and nobody else because no other Chapters go on Crusades!
I really, honestly do wish Marine and CSM players would stop pretending that just being 'the ones who spend the most money on GW products' makes their subfactions special.
Factionally, there's a MUCH smaller difference between Ultramarines, Black Templar, and Space Wolves than there is between Behemouth, Leviathan, and Kraken; but we still have to cater to 'but mah wherewolfves!' and give each little clubhouse it's own book.
So much this. It's all about sellable product, and much less about the supposedly "expansive" universe.
Charax wrote: I literally quoted the part that says they still follow his preferences.
And fine, they don't explicitly have no jump packs, but they "gave little emphasis on specialised units using jump packs or bikes" and "The Death Guard had no dedicated Assault or Tactical squads"
Therefore, there should be decent access to Jump Packs. Thanks for proving my point.
ERJAK wrote: No. And the different space marine chapters didn't need their own books either.
You get one page of rules and 2 pages of fluff like everybody else.
But noooooo, I can't have Black Templars unless I'm specifically given Crusader squads and nobody else because no other Chapters go on Crusades!
I really, honestly do wish Marine and CSM players would stop pretending that just being 'the ones who spend the most money on GW products' makes their subfactions special.
Factionally, there's a MUCH smaller difference between Ultramarines, Black Templar, and Space Wolves than there is between Behemouth, Leviathan, and Kraken; but we still have to cater to 'but mah wherewolfves!' and give each little clubhouse it's own book.
So much this. It's all about sellable product, and much less about the supposedly "expansive" universe.
GW managed to sell the idea of tradition to release multiple Marine codices so they could sell the codices themselves. Queue HMBC to say "you're saying no fun allowed!!!1!"
Charax wrote: I literally quoted the part that says they still follow his preferences.
And fine, they don't explicitly have no jump packs, but they "gave little emphasis on specialised units using jump packs or bikes" and "The Death Guard had no dedicated Assault or Tactical squads"
Therefore, there should be decent access to Jump Packs. Thanks for proving my point.
How do you manage to misfire those neurons hard enough to join "little emphasis on using jump packs" to "yeah loads of them then"? I don't think the point you think you're proving is the one you're actually proving there.
IMHO most Loyalist Marines should be consolidated because they share like 90% of the same units.
A BA tactical is pretty much the same thing as an Ultramarine tactical. Even the Wolves are usually the same exact units but with names replaced with Wolfy McWolf.
Chaos actually has a much better argument for individual codexes.
Tyran wrote: IMHO most Loyalist Marines should be consolidated because they share like 90% of the same units.
A BA tactical is pretty much the same thing as an Ultramarine tactical. Even the Wolves are usually the same exact units but with names replaced with Wolfy McWolf.
Chaos actually has a much better argument for individual codexes.
I would agree with that sentiment entirely, but it only works if they put legwork into defining them further.
They need, in my eyes, to be mono god books with daemons in and then to have more unique units dropped in to better emphasise the gap. Having a smattering of standard marine tanks, a couple of shared daemon engines and 3-5 units doesn't cut it.
It's like half the imperial armoury is equipped with bombs that go off as soon as someone questions the Emperor. all the Speeders, all the grav tech, everything Primaris just explodes the moment the chapter starts to go Renegade.
I assume it is a religious basis. The post heresy gear and the Empire as a whole is ordered. Specific types of weapons, produced in specific ways. No mixing, build to specification, even if we could make it better, we don't because of uniformisation. Chaos runs on pre heresy stuff, where technicaly there were paterns and variants, but everything was being mixed and matched. A squad could have 5 dudes with 5 technicaly identical archeotech wrist mounted plasma weapons, but only in how their functioned. The range, fuel cells, cabling etc could all be unique. Very chaotic.
So I can imagine that chaos space marines in their insanity, can't just deal with the fact that some stuff is not spiky and chaotic. And new fallen chapters probably have to destroy their stock pile of auto canons, storm bolters etc in some sort of religious ritual. Before they get replacments of combi bolters and reaper canons etc
I'd think that the easier and more consistent explanation would be that, much as loyalist Space Marines rely on the Adeptus Mechanicus for their gear, the Chaos Space Marines rely on the Dark Mechanicum for theirs. That's been cited as the reason why renegades who don't go chaos don't last very long; maybe you don't care about worshiping the dark gods and making the meat become machine and the machine become meat, but the guy who repairs and replaces your tanks does.
I think my biggest issue with splitting up the chaos books is that it compartmentalizes their units, even though the faction has a strong element of mixing anything together.
Cult troops were previously always easily available to any chaos warband, now they are locked into separate books, making it harder to just mix them in.
Not only that, separating each book out forces GW to make drastic restrictions on units those cult legions can take, otherwise why even have a separate book? For example, if world eaters could take basic legionnaires, havoks, bikes, and raptors etc… wouldn’t that be very similar to the normal chaos book?
Fundamentally, when it come to chaos there’s always an easy justification for why wildly different legions and renegades are working together. Why wouldn’t Ahriman recruit basic legionnaire mooks as meat shields? Plague company #312 apparently doesn’t care about Mortarion’s opinion on heavy weapons and has Havoks working for them. A black legion warband will certainly use both berserkers and noise marines if it could.
It wouldn’t be chaos if it was orderly, right?
In any case, I doubt merging all the cult legions back into the main book would be any worse than what exists in the marine book.
Dysartes wrote: Yes, the four Marked Legions should've been spun out - but they should've done a better job of it.
By which I mean that the insistence that CSM kits can't be used for TS/DG/WE units (at least in the short-term) is silly. DG Havocs, for example, or WE bikers.
Equally, both TS and WE need a wider array of Legion-specific unit entries (Berserker-Surgeons and Red Butchers for WE at a minimum, maybe WE Bloodcrusher Cavalry too).
I will say I'm less clear for TS on what makes sense to keep from the CSM book or add as new options - aside from maybe a Silver Tower LOW - but I'll let others that know the faction/lore suggest things there.
This is pretty much the thread here. They should be spun out, but they need the model support to do so. being given 5 unique kits is not enough.
Tsons was able to be played and felt like Tsons in 9th due the fact it had it's own bespoke army rules and datasheets balanced against it. Their playstyle and rules are unique enough that it would be much harder to have them rolled into CSM and feel right.
H.B.M.C. wrote: You want to consolidate everything. You are anti-fun.
Don't get annoyed because I'm right about you.
Sorry I don't think we need separate entries for garbage like Hounds of Morkai or Eightbound or three different Terminators because boxes for them exist. There's literally nothing wrong with eliminating redundant unit entries.
For someone that hated on Bespoke rules you're sure doing a lot to help defend that creating entirely new unit entries for the sake of them existing.
Tyran wrote: IMHO most Loyalist Marines should be consolidated because they share like 90% of the same units.
A BA tactical is pretty much the same thing as an Ultramarine tactical. Even the Wolves are usually the same exact units but with names replaced with Wolfy McWolf.
Chaos actually has a much better argument for individual codexes.
I would agree with that sentiment entirely, but it only works if they put legwork into defining them further.
They need, in my eyes, to be mono god books with daemons in and then to have more unique units dropped in to better emphasise the gap. Having a smattering of standard marine tanks, a couple of shared daemon engines and 3-5 units doesn't cut it.
Monogod books would work, but the more I think about that approach, the less I think it's the best way to go.
When I think about what I want from most of the legions/warbands, it's not stuff that really calls for its own book. Breaking it down a bit:
World Eaters - Just not very special. The standard CSM unit entries fit them pretty well. All I really want for them is a detachment ability that gives them their blood tithe points and maybe an option to let their units hit harder in melee in exchange for taking more damage in return (reckless offense). We don't really need unique data entries for red butchers or whatever for the same reasons we don't need a separate datasheet for space wolf long fangs and devastators. So that's like, 1 page of special rules tops. Two if we count datasheets for Kharn and Angron.
Thousand Sons - Mostly just want a detachment rule that turns my power/terminator armor guys into rubrics. So -1" Movement, maybe a defensive All is Dust rule, and the option to upgrade sergeants to psykers with force weapons for X points and give the squad inferno bolts for y points. Then slap on the Rituals as a detachment ability. Special termies can just be normal termies. Exalted Sorcerers can just be sorcerers. Toss mutalith vortex beasts and tzaangor in as units available to all CSM. So roughly 2 pages of special rules, a page for Ahriman and Magnus, and a couple more pages for the now-univerally-available tzaangors, vortex beasts, etc.
Death Guard - Are actually a pretty good counterpoint to my argument because they have so many decidedly plague-y units of their own. But if we wind back the clock to before they go their own codex, they could have basically been an upgrade to Plague Marines (+1 T, maybe FNP, and you gain a plague knife) for X points and a detachment rule for spreading disease around. So 1 page of special rules plus the entries for Typhus and Morty.
Emperor's Children - Unlock a noise marine dataslate, and give them a detachment rule for either combat drugs or having sonic weapons interact. So 1 page of rules for the detachment ability, and 1 page for Fabius and Noise Marines. Maybe expand on that to let vehicles have sonic weapons. Fabius and his boys would basically be their own faction that gets its own detachment rules.
I could go on, but you get the idea. There really isn't *that much* difference in the roster of units available to most warbands. It's more about slight tweaks to a basic profile (letting Thousand Sons treat their troop marines as rubrics) and changing up how existing units behave (letting WE attack more recklessly, letting AL be sneaky, etc.) I don't need an entire book to let Thousand Sons take rubricae and do magic. I don't need to buy a full splat to let WE chop things up more angrily than other marines. I just want a gimmicky mechanic and a couple pieces of detachment-locked wargear/unit upgrades.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Sorry I don't think we need separate entries for garbage like Hounds of Morkai or Eightbound or three different Terminators because boxes for them exist. There's literally nothing wrong with eliminating redundant unit entries.
That implies that they are redundant, something you haven't shown.
So go on then. Let's pick one at random: Eightbound.
Why shouldn't this unit exist? What should it be consolidated with? Wulfen? Death Company? Rough Riders? Land Raiders?
EviscerationPlague wrote: For someone that hated on Bespoke rules you're sure doing a lot to help defend that creating entirely new unit entries for the sake of them existing.
You show a staggering level of misunderstanding to think that wanting unique units and disliking bespoke rules is somehow contradictory.
The rules are a base from which units are created. You use your codified, scalable and broad range of universal rules to make the unique units rather than trying to make everything "bespoke". How is this not obvious?
EviscerationPlague wrote: Sorry I don't think we need separate entries for garbage like Hounds of Morkai or Eightbound or three different Terminators because boxes for them exist. There's literally nothing wrong with eliminating redundant unit entries.
That implies that they are redundant, something you haven't shown.
So go on then. Let's pick one at random: Eightbound.
Why shouldn't this unit exist? What should it be consolidated with? Wulfen? Death Company? Rough Riders? Land Raiders?
EviscerationPlague wrote: For someone that hated on Bespoke rules you're sure doing a lot to help defend that creating entirely new unit entries for the sake of them existing.
You show a staggering level of misunderstanding to think that wanting unique units and disliking bespoke rules is somehow contradictory.
Rules are base from which units are created. You use your codified, scalable and broad range of universal rules to make the unique units rather than trying to make everything "bespoke". How is this not obvious?
Eightbound could've just been an alternative Possessed model since it's literally what they are.
Also the Guard codex did Rough Riders perfectly because they're not locked to a particular army whereas Marine calvary only exists if you're Space Wolves or a successor.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Eightbound could've just been an alternative Possessed model since it's literally what they are.
My preferred method of Chaos would be to do it the way the 3.5 'Dex did it: Rules are based on Chaos Marks. So a Mark of Khorne gives Y and Z USRs for +X Points per model, and you could turn Possessed into Eightbound that way. That way Eightbound still exist, but they're using existing rules rather than bespoke rules to achieve the same result.
Having said that, my thoughts on the current Legion books are framed from the perspective that GW aren't ever going to be that clever again, and will always separate things out, in which case, as I said right from the beginning: I'd rather have them than not have them. I know what it's like to live in a world where they don't exist. It's not fun.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Also the Guard codex did Rough Riders perfectly because they're not locked to a particular army whereas Marine calvary only exists if you're Space Wolves or a successor.
Perfectly? They're world-locked to Attlia. It's annoying. But that bit of nonsense aside (the current Guard Codex is a travesty with all its worlds-as-Aspect Warrior nonsense), what's wrong with the Woofs having access to Thunder Wolf Cavalry but no one else? It's a uniquely Space Wolf thing, so... what's the problem here?
EviscerationPlague wrote: Eightbound could've just been an alternative Possessed model since it's literally what they are.
My preferred method of Chaos would be to do it the way the 3.5 'Dex did it: Rules are based on Chaos Marks. So a Mark of Khorne gives Y and Z USRs for +X Points per model, and you could turn Possessed into Eightbound that way. That way Eightbound still exist, but they're using existing rules rather than bespoke rules to achieve the same result.
I like the idea of paying X points to upgrade an existing unit rather than having a custom bespoke datasheet.The thing about bespoke rules vs USRs is that you might want a benefit that isn't really widespread enough to warrant being a "USR". For instance, if we want to let people turn their CSM and havoks and terminators into rubric versions of those units, we'd probably want to give them options for psyker sergeants, some kind of All is Dust rule, and the option for inferno bolts (+x points to improve the AP of all "Bolt" weapons by 1.) A USR for "is a psyker who (insert All is Dust rule here) and can improve his AP for X points" is probably a little too niche to be considered a USR.
Simpler example: maybe you want to give Night Lords a bonus against Battle Shocked targets. That's cool and fluffy and easy to turn into an upgrade that costs points, but it isn't necessarily a rule that's going to be seen on a bunch of units throughout the game.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Also the Guard codex did Rough Riders perfectly because they're not locked to a particular army whereas Marine calvary only exists if you're Space Wolves or a successor.
Perfectly? They're world-locked to Attlia. It's annoying. But that bit of nonsense aside (the current Guard Codex is a travesty with all its worlds-as-Aspect Warrior nonsense), what's wrong with the Woofs having access to Thunder Wolf Cavalry but no one else? It's a uniquely Space Wolf thing, so... what's the problem here?
The issues with T-wolf cavalary as I see them are:
* They take up a release slot despite only being useful to players of a specific subfaction of marines.
* The concept of riding beasts probably doesn't need to be subfaction-locked. If your Raven Guard successors want to ride giant bird monsters, that seems valid.
* They could *probably* just be an upgrade for a bike unit. Take a biker squad. Pay x points to upgrade their bikes to T-wolves which basically just means you gain the "Fangs and Claws" melee weapon (Extra Attacks) and the <GOOD BOY> keyword.
That said, T-cav are distinctive enough that I have less isue with them than I do with, say, longfangs or skyclaws. Who are basically just devastators and assault marines respectively.
I think Thunderwolf Cavalry are one of the dumbest concepts in 40k.
To contradict the above statement, I think that GW's execution of that idea is excellent. I actually really like the models, even if the idea is pants-on-head stupid and just another step in the long-winding road of total Flanderisation of the Wolves.
And to contradict that statement, Canis Wolfborn aka. Wolfy "The Wolf" McWolfenwolf (who rides a wolf, wields wolf-claws, and has a wolf-belt), might be the worst Space Wolf model they've ever made.
All the cult legions should use the CSM codex as a base, and only omit units if there's a damn good reason to (Death Guard explicitly don't use jump packs or bikes, for example)
Incorrect, and frankly Mortarion hasn't done anything for thousands of years so his "preference" doesn't matter whatsoever.
Nature vs Nurture - They're built with his genetics.
I always find the 'Death Guard don't use bikes!' hilarious. Everyone just memory holed 6th edition.
The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Lord Damocles wrote: The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Lord Damocles wrote: The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Bikes couldn't take the Mark of Nurgle.
They could take the Mark; they just couldn't benefit from Daemonic Resilience.
Lord Damocles wrote: The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Bikes couldn't take the Mark of Nurgle.
They could take the Mark; they just couldn't benefit from Daemonic Resilience.
How about we stop just saying things at each other and just consult the actual book?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I think Thunderwolf Cavalry are one of the dumbest concepts in 40k.
To contradict the above statement, I think that GW's execution of that idea is excellent. I actually really like the models, even if the idea is pants-on-head stupid and just another step in the long-winding road of total Flanderisation of the Wolves.
And to contradict that statement, Canis Wolfborn aka. Wolfy "The Wolf" McWolfenwolf (who rides a wolf, wields wolf-claws, and has a wolf-belt), might be the worst Space Wolf model they've ever made.
Fenris fauna includes woolrhinos the size of rhinos, even bigger mamoths , gigantic elk and gene moded humans that reverted to being animals, wolves to be specific, after some genius forgot to tell the Emperor that Fenris population gene moded themselfs after a comet struck the planet.
Lord Damocles wrote: I always find the 'Death Guard don't use bikes!' hilarious. Everyone just memory holed 6th edition.
The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Death guard players in 6th, were largely just the power game chasing meta people. T6 bikes were the hotness at the time and people abused them. That doesn't mean it makes sense fluff wise or has an in-setting explanation. It doesn't even mean it was the right choice from the rules team.
Lord Damocles wrote: I always find the 'Death Guard don't use bikes!' hilarious. Everyone just memory holed 6th edition.
The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Death guard players in 6th, were largely just the power game chasing meta people. T6 bikes were the hotness at the time and people abused them. That doesn't mean it makes sense fluff wise or has an in-setting explanation. It doesn't even mean it was the right choice from the rules team.
Exactly this. GW forgetting their fluff doesn't mean the rest of us have to
Lord Damocles wrote: The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Bikes couldn't take the Mark of Nurgle.
They could take the Mark; they just couldn't benefit from Daemonic Resilience.
How about we stop just saying things at each other and just consult the actual book?
Based on GW's track record, optional bolt-on special rules for units are a bad idea. They simply never get them balanced at a power to points level and they allow for too much optimization. We've seen what happens when they tried to do it at a detachment level and allowed multiple detachments. Players put units benefiting from Rule A into Detachment A while those benefiting from Rule B went into Detachment B. The result was unbalanced units. Let's not pretending doing that at a unit level will go any better. As untasteful as it is, better to do it at the Codex level so that units are properly balanced at that level.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Their execution does not make them a bad idea.
"They got it wrong so let's give up!" is also a massively defeatist attitude.
it's also rather untrue, considering that codex balance has been even more shoddy in the past as has detachment balance. Cue 6/7th edition R&H to codex nonsense in that time period.
Lord Damocles wrote: The 3.5 codex put no restrictions on Death Guard bikes - despite putting restrictions on Rhinos. They couldn't take Raptors; although that was because they could only take the Mark of Chaos Undivided.
Bikes couldn't take the Mark of Nurgle.
They could take the Mark; they just couldn't benefit from Daemonic Resilience.
How about we stop just saying things at each other and just consult the actual book?
Hmm. Even after 20 years the abominable layout of the 3.5 codex is still catching me out!
EviscerationPlague wrote: Eightbound could've just been an alternative Possessed model since it's literally what they are.
My preferred method of Chaos would be to do it the way the 3.5 'Dex did it: Rules are based on Chaos Marks. So a Mark of Khorne gives Y and Z USRs for +X Points per model, and you could turn Possessed into Eightbound that way. That way Eightbound still exist, but they're using existing rules rather than bespoke rules to achieve the same result.
Having said that, my thoughts on the current Legion books are framed from the perspective that GW aren't ever going to be that clever again, and will always separate things out, in which case, as I said right from the beginning: I'd rather have them than not have them. I know what it's like to live in a world where they don't exist. It's not fun.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Also the Guard codex did Rough Riders perfectly because they're not locked to a particular army whereas Marine calvary only exists if you're Space Wolves or a successor.
Perfectly? They're world-locked to Attlia. It's annoying. But that bit of nonsense aside (the current Guard Codex is a travesty with all its worlds-as-Aspect Warrior nonsense), what's wrong with the Woofs having access to Thunder Wolf Cavalry but no one else? It's a uniquely Space Wolf thing, so... what's the problem here?
Y'all need to stop looking at CSM 3.5 like it was some holy grail. It was a hot mess of arbitrary restrictions, options that didn't make sense, and even more unbalanced than the Legion supplement that came out less than a year before 7th ended.
And you'd still have 8 Bound, you just use the Possessed rules because that's what they are. Simple as.
You can also sat "noooooo Rough Riders are only on World XYZ" but they're not army locked, are they? Maybe because, big brain time, World XYZ isn't the only guard army that uses calvary.
So yes, Aspect Guard is silly, and you can certainly blame the way GW makes all kits their own unit (oh wait you defended it for 8 Bound), but I'd NEVER defend only a Catachan army getting 2 Flamers in their Infantry squad and nobody else because that restriction is dumb.
The 3.5 Chaos Codex was the single best Codex that Chaos have ever received. It was the most flexible, covered all the Legions, allowed for a massive variety of different army types, character customisation, unit customisation and allowed for everything from daemon-infused Veterans of the Long War to renegade Chapters who have never even heard of a Daemon. Moreover, it included Daemons, meaning you could create mixed forces that were full of fun, flavour and even power. The only thing it was really missing was the Lost & The Damned aspect, but the Eye of Terror Codex brought that into the game, basically making it 99% complete (just didn't do much with Renegade Chapters, TBF).
No, it wasn't balanced, but "It wasn't balanced!" is hardly much of a criticism given everything else that was in 40k at the time (and since). No, it wasn't perfect - no Codex is. I'm not sure what I'd describe as arbitrary about the restrictions, given how few there were. It was utterly fantastic, and what followed it... the 4th Ed book... might be the single greatest example of how to completely feth over an army: Stripping out every option, all the Legions, daemonic abilities, Veteran skills, army flexibility and construction options... and all the fething Daemons!
So when I say I'd rather have it than not have it, I'm talking about a time when Chaos players went from having it to not having it. Those were bad times, and the more people like you who pine for a return to such drudgery, the more indignant I'll become on the topic.
EviscerationPlague wrote: You can also sat "noooooo Rough Riders are only on World XYZ" but they're not army locked, are they? Maybe because, big brain time, World XYZ isn't the only guard army that uses calvary.
My point was that they didn't introduced Rough Riders, they introduced Atillan Rough Riders, which was a damned shame and (yet another patented GW) missed opportunity. I lament the current Guard Codex because of the 'Aspect Warrior' nature.
And of course I know that other Guard armies use cavalry. How could you possible think that I or anyone wouldn't already know that? Hell, I wrote all the cavalry rules/mount options for the Only War RPG, FFS.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Their execution does not make them a bad idea.
"They got it wrong so let's give up!" is also a massively defeatist attitude.
"They got it wrong the last six times, maybe GW will get it right the seventh time!" might not be an objective stance to take either.
the irony being that GW got it's rulessystem wrong now 9 times aswell overall.
10th isn't out yet.
The consensus among the old-timers seems to be that CSM 3.5 was the all-time peak of chaos. So GW at least got in wrong in 4th, 5th, 6th,7th, 8th and 9th.
It's amazing how people hate GW for running into the same damn wall over and over again for more than 20 years, but completely flip their gak when someone suggests taking a path that doesn't lead to the very same wall again.
3.5 was great, it just had a few overpowered combos relative to other books at the time that people are still maligning it for decades later. I mean, nobody would bat an eyelid if IWs got 4 HS slots in 6th or 7th,but because it happened in 3rd the sky is falling!
The problem is GW radically overcompensated and made 4th the blandest codex you could possibly imagine, and they've been on a "can't repeat 3.5, gotta keep Chaos weak" kick ever since, whereas actually 3.5 was just slightly ahead of its time and a lot of the concepts would have worked brilliantly in later editions
Is it perfect? No, but it's the best ruleset (in terms of flexibility and lore representation) Chaos have had before or since, which is why people keep referring back to it.
The consensus among the old-timers seems to be that CSM 3.5 was the all-time peak of chaos. So GW at least got in wrong in 4th, 5th, 6th,7th, 8th and 9th.
It's amazing how people hate GW for running into the same damn wall over and over again for more than 20 years, but completely flip their gak when someone suggests taking a path that doesn't lead to the very same wall again.
Actually 7th had a supplement that was another highpoint for CSM.
And the actual deviation happened in 4th with the utter removal of unit specific upgradeability tied to the faction of the army. Which got reimplemented in said supplement. 8th then just added faction sub rules that ... didn't work out very well especially with detachment freedom, 9th did the same and... that didn't work out very well either just with mono focus on detachments. Now we are at a Faction + detachment system, which, surprise surprise, doesn't work out well because not every CSM legion / renegade is a closet word bearer in their identity and following out of that shouldn't just play like that.
Also the "new paradigm" of cutting some of the legions out to sell separetly is just the Cut-Content-DLCification of the rules sides of things and should be understood as that. Same happened with tempestus and as we can see it has often barely enough effort behind for the cut out factions... 2/3 currently are just lackluster and DG, the one with the most support, has been as another poster brought up expanded mostly in "middle management".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Charax wrote: 3.5 was great, it just had a few overpowered combos relative to other books at the time that people are still maligning it for decades later. I mean, nobody would bat an eyelid if IWs got 4 HS slots in 6th or 7th,but because it happened in 3rd the sky is falling!
The problem is GW radically overcompensated and made 4th the blandest codex you could possibly imagine, and they've been on a "can't repeat 3.5, gotta keep Chaos weak" kick ever since, whereas actually 3.5 was just slightly ahead of its time and a lot of the concepts would have worked brilliantly in later editions
Is it perfect? No, but it's the best ruleset (in terms of flexibility and lore representation) Chaos have had before or since, which is why people keep referring back to it.
ironically 4th was worse with slaanesh lash princes and obliterators from a balance perspective. And the overcompensation aspect is true, i still have the WD that introduced dinobots and talked about the 6th(?) ed codex and the inspiration was basically only 4th edition in that article. I further miss 4th edition doctrine guard...
The main problem with 3.5 was the attrocious internal balance.
Go on; tell me you ever even considered Daemonic Venom or an Ether Lance...
It was well designed in terms of flexibility (not layout) but half of the options might as well not have existed.
Lord Damocles wrote: The main problem with 3.5 was the attrocious internal balance.
Go on; tell me you ever even considered Daemonic Venom or an Ether Lance...
It was well designed in terms of flexibility (not layout) but half of the options might as well not have existed.
50% usable things still puts it above 4th or any later CSM codex for that matter though...
Oh right. Weren't nurgle bikers a thing in 4th edition? Because you got +1T from the bike and +1T from the Nurgle mark making them T6 in total? So bolters would have been wounding them on a 6+ if memory serves?
Wyldhunt wrote: Oh right. Weren't nurgle bikers a thing in 4th edition? Because you got +1T from the bike and +1T from the Nurgle mark making them T6 in total? So bolters would have been wounding them on a 6+ if memory serves?
If it was 4th it'd have been T4 (6), no?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Charax wrote: 3.5 was great, it just had a few overpowered combos relative to other books at the time that people are still maligning it for decades later. I mean, nobody would bat an eyelid if IWs got 4 HS slots in 6th or 7th,but because it happened in 3rd the sky is falling!
There's a lot more wrong with that codex you're purposely missing, but sure.
The 3.5 Chaos Codex was the single best Codex that Chaos have ever received.
Which is objectively incorrect when 7th + Supplement existed, even if for less than a year. THAT actually provided a way to build basically any Legion with any list. But yeah sure, random restrictions that were either too harsh to consider or non-restrictions were soooooo cool. OH and super pointless and redundant upgrades too.
Hell, if 7th allowed you to pick your Warlord Traits, that'd have tackled the main issues with customization I'm sure you'll complain about.
The only thing it didn't handle was Renegade Chapters, but with the silly Allies chart just take the Loyalist Huron and whatever Chaos formations you want.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: My point was that they didn't introduced Rough Riders, they introduced Atillan Rough Riders, which was a damned shame and (yet another patented GW) missed opportunity. I lament the current Guard Codex because of the 'Aspect Warrior' nature.
And of course I know that other Guard armies use cavalry. How could you possible think that I or anyone wouldn't already know that? Hell, I wrote all the cavalry rules/mount options for the Only War RPG, FFS.
And if that were true, you'd not care about the arbitrary naming of the Rough Riders.
You're SO focused on the names and needing bespoke rules for it that you forget what you supposedly stand for.
To be honest, that's just another reason to split them all out:
Everything should be in there, but the options and synergies should be different from book to book.
Sure all the Deathguard are ostensibly a child of Mortarion and have his nature - but the rare one here and there would be rebellious and successful at something different.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Which is objectively incorrect when 7th + Supplement existed, even if for less than a year.
7th was the worst edition of the game. Nothing that came out in that edition deserves any sort of recognition.
EviscerationPlague wrote: HAT actually provided a way to build basically any Legion with any list...
3.5 already did that.
EviscerationPlague wrote: But yeah sure, random restrictions that were either too harsh to consider or non-restrictions were soooooo cool. OH and super pointless and redundant upgrades too.
A Codex with restrictions? A Codex with pointless and redundant upgrades? My goodness. I didn't know that these things were unique to the 3.5 book and have never ever been in any other Codex in any other edition ever. Wow. I'm shocked. This is relevatory!
H.B.M.C. wrote: And if that were true, you'd not care about the arbitrary naming of the Rough Riders.
I don't think it's arbitrary. It certainly wasn't for Cadian, Krieg and Catachan units. I would have really liked:
1. There to have been a non-Atillan Rough Rider entry. 2. For the Atillan RRs to maybe somewhat better, reflected in points/stats (and not "bespoke" rules, before you misuse that word again). 3. For the kit to reflect that these options.
One way or another I'm putting Cadian heads on my RRs, but some of us think about the fluff and our armies quite a bit and don't think that 'counts as' is a sufficient answer to such situations.
I've already explained how you're misusing this word. Stop it.
But to answer the point...
H.B.M.C. wrote: You're SO focused on the names and needing bespoke rules for it that you forget what you supposedly stand for.
And you're so focused on crushing down and removing options, choice and even unique units from armies (and even whole armies!) that you forget what this game is meant to be: FUN!
I disagree with your 7th statement. I liked corsairs and r&h and the traitor supplement was also really well done.
Further to consider it started the trend of cutting out factions and reselling them with books to you, a Trend still with us which has only delivered 2 unmigitated desasters (WE and TS) and one medicore but arguably untrue to the way DG.
Not only that but the general quality of the csm dex has also collapsed, if we don't ignore god divisions of the BL or cult renegades like the purge,etc.
Not Online!!! wrote: Further to consider it started the trend of cutting out factions and reselling them with books to you, a Trend still with us which has only delivered 2 unmigitated desasters (WE and TS) and one medicore but arguably untrue to the way DG.
To which I go back to my original statement: Having lived in times where these things existed, and times where they have not, I would rather have them than not have them.
Not Online!!! wrote: Further to consider it started the trend of cutting out factions and reselling them with books to you, a Trend still with us which has only delivered 2 unmigitated desasters (WE and TS) and one medicore but arguably untrue to the way DG.
To which I go back to my original statement: Having lived in times where these things existed, and times where they have not, I would rather have them than not have them.
And i rather have them in a singular book and be done via customisation system based upon choices of alignment AND original force which unlocks and prohibits certain units and or marks.
Also it flanderised these factions and mainline csm which nowadays seem to only be closet WB.
Not Online!!! wrote: And i rather have them in a singular book and be done via customisation system based upon choices of alignment AND original force which unlocks and prohibits certain units and or marks.
I'm presuming the options are separate books or none at all.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also it flanderised these factions and mainline csm which nowadays seem to only be closet WB.
Putting something in a separate book does not Flanderise a faction. What happened to the Wolves didn't happen because they got their own book.
Is that true though? Because the only effect i see is that separation and iteration seemed to have forced the writers in their effort to distinguish these forces from their mainline variant to flanderise them.
Granted the Split out csm legions got the short end of the stick and so did Space Wolves.
And i am not saying decent separate books aren't possible but for either scenario (Split or customizable) the writers at gw don't have the skill.
Atleast with a consilidated book the custommer doesn't get robbed as much.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also it flanderised these factions and mainline csm which nowadays seem to only be closet WB.
Putting something in a separate book does not Flanderise a faction. What happened to the Wolves didn't happen because they got their own book.
Wolves needed more unique units to justify having their own book. You see a repeating pattern with Marine flavours where a variant will get something special, then vanilla will get that thing too, then the variant will get something new which makes them more variant again, etc etc...
That didn't *have* to result in wolf wolf wolf, but it's clear that there's a pattern of the variants getting more wolf wolf wolf, blood blood blood, plasma plasma fallen, as time goes on.
Not Online!!! wrote: Is that true though? Because the only effect i see is that separation and iteration seemed to have forced the writers in their effort to distinguish these forces from their mainline variant to flanderise them.
Granted the Split out csm legions got the short end of the stick and so did Space Wolves. And i am not saying decent separate books aren't possible but for either scenario (Split or customizable) the writers at gw don't have the skill. Atleast with a consilidated book the custommer doesn't get robbed as much.
Space Wolves were the first Codex.
I think you're confusing giving something an identity vs what happens when you let that identity dominate their entire being.
Blood Angels were given an identity that was distinct from regular Space Marines, and that came with it unique rules and a few units that separated them from, say, Ultramarines and the like. Then Matt Ward came along and we started getting Bloodfists and Blood Talons and Bloodshard Rounds and the fething Sanguinor. He began to Flanderise them, but they were pulled back from the brink before they went over the edge of no return.
Space Wolves, on the other hand, were given units and abilities that were distinct to them and showed how far they had tread from the idea of a "normal" Space Marine. This existed for quite some time, but then they did go over that cliff, and we got Wolfy McWolfenwolf riding a giant wolf, Space Marines riding wolves, ice so hard they make claws out of it, Santa Grimnar, whatever the hell those God-awful Wulfen minis ended up being and... *sigh* Murderfang.
I'd argue that this hasn't happened to Dark Angels, or Templars, or Deathwatch (Deathwatch are a bit all over the place because their big expansion came in the form of First Born Marines and, like with GKs, they're stuck with that problem until GW just replaces them with Primaris minis), or Death Guard or Thousand Sons. World Eaters? 100%. They've got Berzerkers, Berzerker Berzerkers and Berzerker Berzerker Berzerkers and lost so much of their army that they might as well not exist (and including all the things GW could have included - Berzerker Bikerz, Houndstooth Havocs (or whatever they were called), the mother fething Slaughterbrute, and so on).
Having a distinct identity does not mean you are Flanderised.
Lord Damocles wrote: Wolves needed more unique units to justify having their own book.
As I said above, Wolves were literally the first Codex GW printed. They did not need more units to justify them as a separate Codex.
Not Online!!! wrote: Is that true though? Because the only effect i see is that separation and iteration seemed to have forced the writers in their effort to distinguish these forces from their mainline variant to flanderise them.
Granted the Split out csm legions got the short end of the stick and so did Space Wolves.
And i am not saying decent separate books aren't possible but for either scenario (Split or customizable) the writers at gw don't have the skill.
Atleast with a consilidated book the custommer doesn't get robbed as much.
)?
super heavy tank. And he's using plenty of Heresy era tech while he's at it, and quite often improving on that. "Neo" volkite? Laser destroyers? 
