for the last several editions, GW has been on a pretty big kick for adding new factions to the game. we've gotten AdMech, Custodes, a real SoB army, plus multiple new chaos armies, and even a new xenos faction. but that makes me think, everything we've gotten so far has been rooted in the lore; however, there's only so much established lore which easily lends will to factions that they can do this with. so what do you think is coming next in the future of 40 factions? any obscure niches you think might get explored? any new concepts you wish would get added? let's ignore all the factions that could use further updates and assume that GW will get to them in due time

for my part, I'd love to see an expansion of rogue traders and their entourages into a more full army, even if it just stays part of the Agents codex. we've got the one box, but it's all monopose, so a generic rogue trader kit with options (even if it's only a few) would be very welcome

Dark Mechanicum, Traitor Guard, Emperor's Children and Exodites come to my mind. Those are the more established factions big enough to make a distinct army out of them.

Exodites are a good shout.we've had a bit of traitor guard in the past from forge world, and EC seem to be coming soon, but Exodites really have not had any representation in the game over the last 30 years

a_typical_hero wrote:Dark Mechanicum, Traitor Guard, Emperor's Children and Exodites come to my mind. Those are the more established factions big enough to make a distinct army out of them.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

StudentOfEtherium wrote:Exodites are a good shout.we've had a bit of traitor guard in the past from forge world, and EC seem to be coming soon, but Exodites really have not had any representation in the game over the last 30 years

Exodites get name dropped not infrequently, and have been part of the lore for a long time. Sure, there have not been minis, but they are hardly forgotten. There is also enough design space with them that you could flesh out a decent sized model range.

There have been Exodite minis, just not in 40k. They had knights in Epic.

Arbites are another option that had an army list back in 2nd and 3rd. I can see them being rolled into an Agents book, but they do have enough units described in the lore to fill out a whole book if GW really wanted to:
Judge (HQ)
Boltgun squad, shotgun squad, shield and baton squad
Cyber mastiffs and handlers
Bikers
Support squads with heavy weapons
I'm pretty sure Arbites sniper units are a thing
Chimera, Rhino, Repressor (this can be a dual kit with Sisters, although GW is moving away from cross-faction kits), Valkyrie
Tarantula sentry guns.
That is without anything new, I'm sure GW would invent a few new characters and probably some vehicle or two if they went this route.

Fully bring back first/real/trueMarines obviously. Split them into their own codex and let the Primaris fumble about on their own.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Fully bring back first/real/trueMarines obviously. Split them into their own codex and let the Primaris fumble about on their own.

New armies.
Not expansions to the biggest army in the game.

I'll echo Dark Mech! There's a lot of cool potential there.

Most of the obvious ones have been said already, but there are a couple more minor ones that could get armies with some expansion to ideas and concepts.

Hrud:
They look like something out of a Lovecraftian nightmare and essentially fight by aging their enemies to dust. It's not their only recourse however as they are constantly scavenging technology to use since they by nature age anything that is not them into obsolesce even when not trying to.
I think that this could mechanically be a very interesting and different army, focusing on debuffs and time. Perhaps they start the game weak, but over time the enemy units are debuffed where the game starts to swing on turn 3. Most would have to be army wide so that it's easier to track, but characters could put out specific ones.
It would play kind of similar to Death Guard, but with more of a Kauyon stile gradient. It's hard to get right as a detachment in an army, but if you built an army around it, it would work well.

The Rangdan:
They were the largest threat to the Imperium during the Great Crusade and while we're told they were wiped out, they thought that two other times, only to find more of them. There could have been a small group that escaped and has been growing in power over the last 10,000 years.
We know very little about them, so mechanically they could work in whatever design space GW wants to put in, but the lore fans would go nuts over seeing them come to the table.

Subsets of the Greater Good:
I absolutely think that there is enough design space for Kroot to become their own faction with an ability to ally with Tau units. Having a Greater Good Supertype like Imperium, Chaos, ect would be a great way to expand armies.

On that topic you could have the Tau coalition Vespid, Nicusar, Demiurg, ect either be part of Tau proper or get their own league style army similar to Imperial Agents but for the Great Good faction.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Fully bring back first/real/trueMarines obviously. Split them into their own codex and let the Primaris fumble about on their own.

New armies.

OP mentioned SOBs. They're not new, rather "newly refurbished".

Release new Mk7 kits with updated scaling, and a new, separated codex for us players traditionale.

I mean, do the other stuff too. Dark Mechanicus, etc. But I bet there are a number of people who would buy updated Mk VIIs and would like to ignore Primaris units.

Rangdan are possibly active in 40k- they may be the same species as the Slaught. They would be a pretty cool addition.

Demiurg have already been fleshed out, they are an aspect of the Leagues of Votann.

I want to see firstborn return as well. even if they have to re-emerge as Blackshields

What else? Ive always wanted to see Slann make a reappearance. Also, I'd like to see some sort of human faction which is not a part of the IoM. Such models would add much kitbash potential to existing factions as well. Call them "Credo" or whatever hehehe!

Blood Pact come to mind

None. The field is too crowded as is.

 Kanluwen wrote:
None. The field is too crowded as is.

if you don't have an answer, you don't need to say anything

 Tawnis wrote:
Most of the obvious ones have been said already, but there are a couple more minor ones that could get armies with some expansion to ideas and concepts.

Hrud:
They look like something out of a Lovecraftian nightmare and essentially fight by aging their enemies to dust. It's not their only recourse however as they are constantly scavenging technology to use since they by nature age anything that is not them into obsolesce even when not trying to.
I think that this could mechanically be a very interesting and different army, focusing on debuffs and time. Perhaps they start the game weak, but over time the enemy units are debuffed where the game starts to swing on turn 3. Most would have to be army wide so that it's easier to track, but characters could put out specific ones.
It would play kind of similar to Death Guard, but with more of a Kauyon stile gradient. It's hard to get right as a detachment in an army, but if you built an army around it, it would work well.

The Rangdan:
They were the largest threat to the Imperium during the Great Crusade and while we're told they were wiped out, they thought that two other times, only to find more of them. There could have been a small group that escaped and has been growing in power over the last 10,000 years.
We know very little about them, so mechanically they could work in whatever design space GW wants to put in, but the lore fans would go nuts over seeing them come to the table.

Subsets of the Greater Good:
I absolutely think that there is enough design space for Kroot to become their own faction with an ability to ally with Tau units. Having a Greater Good Supertype like Imperium, Chaos, ect would be a great way to expand armies.

On that topic you could have the Tau coalition Vespid, Nicusar, Demiurg, ect either be part of Tau proper or get their own league style army similar to Imperial Agents but for the Great Good faction.

all of these would be great. Nicusar in particular is something i hope to see in model form one of these days

Dark Mech and Exodites would probably be my big two, with Traitor Guard/LatD in third spot.

Bonus points if we can trade in the Tau to get those.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
None. The field is too crowded as is.

if you don't have an answer, you don't need to say anything

It is an answer and a fairly valid one, balance and release cycles are a nightmare as-is, so I can see "none please" as a valid response to adding more.

Dudeface wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
None. The field is too crowded as is.

if you don't have an answer, you don't need to say anything

It is an answer and a fairly valid one, balance and release cycles are a nightmare as-is, so I can see "none please" as a valid response to adding more.

I agree that we have too many factions, but would also like to see some new ones.

We do sometimes see consolidation. Black Templar and Harlequins were rolled back into their main books. Special marine chapters are down to supplements instead of full codexes. Skitarri/AdMech merged. There are a few ways they could wrap a few more together to give us some space for more armies.

Exodites could join the harlequins in the craftworld codex.
I think traitor guard has enough different from loyalists to need a seperate book, but they might be able to do it as a supplement. But they have a lot more then “spiky guard” going on.
Dark Mech might be able to be a subset of the main chaos army? There are already a lot of demon engines there? But with Vashtor a big player in the latest lore, and enough things to differentiate them, they probably could use their own book
EC need their own book to join the other 3 god legions. Once established, I could see GW cutting the straight demon codex and switching to a system similar to AoS.

If GW punches the reset button again for codexs they could include all the new armies suggested, and keep the book count the same. But changing horses mid-stream is probably not a good idea.

 Nevelon wrote:

I agree that we have too many factions, but would also like to see some new ones.

We do sometimes see consolidation. Black Templar and Harlequins were rolled back into their main books. Special marine chapters are down to supplements instead of full codexes. Skitarri/AdMech merged. There are a few ways they could wrap a few more together to give us some space for more armies.

Black Templars are getting a codex supplement...and I'm not sure why we're pretending like the "return to supplements" is a good thing? It's given us the nonsense of supplement books that get to pull from the main book and their own book when it comes to detachments.

Skitarii/AdMech got merged at the start of 8th. Not sure why we're treating it like that's some recent development...especially given the headaches it's caused each edition.

Exodites could join the harlequins in the craftworld codex.

Counterpoint:
Harlequins should be removed from the Craftworld book, as should Corsairs. Harlequins and Corsairs are the "bridge the gap" factions of the Aeldari family. Harlequin, Corsairs, and Ynnari would benefit from being done up in "Agents of the Imperium" style.

Exodites are traditionally hostile towards Drukhari. They'd make sense in that Craftworld spot.

I think traitor guard has enough different from loyalists to need a seperate book, but they might be able to do it as a supplement. But they have a lot more then “spiky guard” going on.

They really don't. Traitor Guard are Traitor Guard. You're conflating the concept of "The Lost and the Damned", which was the grouping of all of the non-Astartes stuff, with Traitor Guard.

Traitor Guard stuff is in the CSM book right now. It's not enough to build an entire army certainly, but why do we need to let another "Guard but Not Guard" faction exist?

Dark Mech might be able to be a subset of the main chaos army? There are already a lot of demon engines there? But with Vashtor a big player in the latest lore, and enough things to differentiate them, they probably could use their own book

Again: These elements we have are part of CSM now, and belong to the overall concept of "The Lost and the Damned". The stuff one would expect for Dark Mechanicus wouldn't fit in a single spot. It would have to be split amongst the various books, because you've got all quite a few different concepts going on in that vein.

EC need their own book to join the other 3 god legions. Once established, I could see GW cutting the straight demon codex and switching to a system similar to AoS.

Frankly, you could see the writing on the wall back with Khorne Daemonkin.

Why the rollout is seemingly taking so long is anyone's guess.

If GW punches the reset button again for codexs they could include all the new armies suggested, and keep the book count the same. But changing horses mid-stream is probably not a good idea.

Who cares about the book count? Some things just don't need to be dedicated armies.

We don't get a Codex: Planetary Defence Force or Tempestus Scions, but we're supposed to get a Codex: Arbites? Codex: Traitor Guard? Can't get a C: Skitarii, but we're supposed to have a C: Dark Mechanicus?

There's an argument to be made for more "<Insert Thematic Name Here>" superbooks, akin to the concept of Agents of the Imperium, aimed at Aeldari and Chaos.

There really isn't a valid one to be made for dumping out more codices or doing more cross-faction silliness. GSC+Brood Brothers is a mess and showcases just how horribly bad this current crop of designers are at balance and creativity.

I prefer supplements to standalone codexes because it helps keeps shared units uniform. I’d honestly prefer marines just to be paintjobs, and let army selection show what chapter you have, but decades of flanderization have made that pretty impossible to get back into pandora’s box.

I love the concept of “agents of xx” books. There are a lot of little units out there that don’t need a whole book. Obviously the Imperium has the lion’s share, but as you point out Eldar Could be done. Light/dark/grey. And there are enough random chaos things to fill a tome. Lost and the Damned would be a good umbrella to collect them all under.

In my ideal world the guard codex would have a lengthy appendix for auxiliary human forces fighting for other non-imperial factions. So traitor guard, local PDFs, gu’vessa, brood brothers. Add units/rules to let them hook onto other factions. Probably end up with something like the 30k militia list. That kind of flexability goes against the modern GW NMNR philosophy in 40k, so unlikely to happen.

 Nevelon wrote:
I prefer supplements to standalone codexes because it helps keeps shared units uniform. I’d honestly prefer marines just to be paintjobs, and let army selection show what chapter you have, but decades of flanderization have made that pretty impossible to get back into pandora’s box.

Flanderization gets thrown around a lot, but bluntly that has not been the issue. The issue has been that they chose to emphasize the skew of a few of those Chapters instead of the 'day to day' bits. Dark Angels could easily be in the Codex, as could Blood Angels. Wolves could stand to keep a full, standalone Codex to bring them back to what they were. Black Templars and Imperial Fists+ Successors could easily be broken off into their own setup as well since the Crusader Squads are supposed to be not uncommon in that family tree.

In an ideal world, Marines would be treated like Chaos Marines: A 'primary' book encompassing the basic treatments of the Big Founders, then 4 books tops situated around the idea of different elements. Wolves as the pairing to World Eaters, Dark Angels paired to Thousand Sons, Blood Angels to Emperor's Children, and BT+IF to Death Guard.

I love the concept of “agents of xx” books. There are a lot of little units out there that don’t need a whole book. Obviously the Imperium has the lion’s share, but as you point out Eldar Could be done. Light/dark/grey. And there are enough random chaos things to fill a tome. Lost and the Damned would be a good umbrella to collect them all under.

The ideal thing with this concept of "Agents of <thing here>" is to recognize that they shouldn't be able to be fielded as a full army, or if they're being fielded as so that you KNOW you're going in with a disadvantage.

In my ideal world the guard codex would have a lengthy appendix for auxiliary human forces fighting for other non-imperial factions. So traitor guard, local PDFs, gu’vessa, brood brothers. Add units/rules to let them hook onto other factions.

Counterpoint:
Let Guard be Guard. Brood Brothers should have been a unit in the GSC book, like how Traitor Guard were in CSM.

In my ideal world? CSM, GSC, and Tau would have had their PDF/Guard equivalent units baked in. They don't even have to actually be in the codex! You could just put the datacards into the pack, and give them a datasheet card in there explaining why those items, or what you the player can do to make things look different.

Probably end up with something like the 30k militia list. That kind of flexability goes against the modern GW NMNR philosophy in 40k, so unlikely to happen.

Except the flexibility happened with Brood Brothers, but not Traitor Guard? And they didn't even bother with Gue'vesa?

It's not that it goes against "NMNR". It's that the design team is wildly inconsistent.

Since you mention the 30k militia list, I'd point you towards Liber Imperium as the "best way" to go for Guard. There are certain items in Liber Imperium that are "Loyalist", meaning that they can't be fielded by a Traitor force. Adding a "Loyalist" keyword to certain Guard items would certainly ease my saltiness towards how pants on head messed up the Brood Brothers rules have been for the past two editions.


Additionally, in an ideal world we would see the Guard Codex expanded to include Planetary Defence Forces and stuff tied to them allowing for there to be an actual, meaningful distinction between the "Guard" and "Not-Guard" elements...opening up another avenue for things like Brood Brothers, Traitor Guard, and Gue'vesa to get more 'localized' variants. Things like the AT-70 "Reaver" pattern light tanks of Blood Pact fame and Tauros Venators & Tauros buggies for Traitor Guard & Brood Brothers.

Gue'vesa have had way too much flux in their lore to pin down a 'special' thing to go with them.

 Nevelon wrote:
I prefer supplements to standalone codexes because it helps keeps shared units uniform. I’d honestly prefer marines just to be paintjobs, and let army selection show what chapter you have, but decades of flanderization have made that pretty impossible to get back into pandora’s box.

I love the concept of “agents of xx” books. There are a lot of little units out there that don’t need a whole book. Obviously the Imperium has the lion’s share, but as you point out Eldar Could be done. Light/dark/grey. And there are enough random chaos things to fill a tome. Lost and the Damned would be a good umbrella to collect them all under.

In my ideal world the guard codex would have a lengthy appendix for auxiliary human forces fighting for other non-imperial factions. So traitor guard, local PDFs, gu’vessa, brood brothers. Add units/rules to let them hook onto other factions. Probably end up with something like the 30k militia list. That kind of flexability goes against the modern GW NMNR philosophy in 40k, so unlikely to happen.

I'm a big fan of more agents books. like you say, eldar and chaos both have a lot of great chances for that, but my pie-in-the-sky dream is for an Agents of the T'au book which includes all sorts of random xenos stuff that you can play in any non-Tyranid/GSC xenos army. some squat mercenaries, the kroot stuff, vespids, plus weirder stuff like the psychic bears that exist in T'au lore. maybe even make it out to be like the old Dogs of War books from fantasy, where you have unique mercenary regiments from various xenos species offering their services

A big book of unaligned stuff could be fun. Some of the old blackstone fortress things, kroot mercenaries and the like. The Tau have a bunch in their empire, but there are more out there.

There is a lot of space in the universe for non imperial/chaos stuff to hang out and have fun

Maybe for Kill Team, Newcromunda, or side games.

Not in 40k proper.

Before more armies turn up to push current stuff off the shelves, we could do with more ways to use what we have. Ork Freebooters in other armies. Guard conversion kits for Chaos to use more of them (like Genestealer Cult have). LoV could do with a few more models, currently coming out as Kill Team boxes.

For every new army, an existing one gets its updates pushed back. Look around for how many existing armies are begging for new models. So many kits have been missing from stock, such as Eldar Falcons (now back in, but for how long?)

I'm another who would not mind seeing new 40k armies for a while.

A Lost and the Damned book makes a lot of sense at this point and is low-hanging fruit. They are the most numerous followers of Chaos in real space by a large margin and feature in loads of the lore. They also have more official (GW, not FW) models than ever before, if the various cultists are rolled in (which they should be). Just from existing models, there are:
Cultists
Accursed cultists (mutants)
Chaos beastmen
Traitor guardsmen
The HQ cultist conclave thingy
Gellerpox
The flamer cultist character
The shooty BSF cultists

It is missing some big units, for which existing daemon engines are the only low-hanging fruit (defilers were in the LatD list back in the day). I doubt GW would release Chaos versions of Chimeras and Russes but could release a conversion kit.

Personally I think it would also be good to add the God-specific chaff too (poxwalkers, tzaangors, jakhals) but GW is moving away from that direction and it almost certainly won't happen.

PDF is reasonable from a lore perspective... but is largely just Guard but with less access to toys and the odd local alternative to a Guard unit. Exceptions exist but are uncommon. The only PDF army list GW has published (to my knowledge) was for the Armageddon PDF, and it was basically the standard Guard list with restricted Leman Russ variants, a requirement to take enclosed crew compartments, no abhumans or rough riders, and gained the gang militia unit as a troops choice (which is a local option that is common to hive worlds). Technically we also got the Cadian Defence Force list, but they really are indistinguishable from their Imperial Guard counterparts. I suppose you could have several PDF archetypes featuring different local units (gang militia for hive worlds, repurposed land crawlers on agri worlds etc.) but it is essentially the same list as Imperial Guard with a few extra militia-type units. Things like the AT-70 are very regional (wasn't that an Urdeshi vehicle only produced on that specific forge world?).

R&H/Traitor Guard would work in a similar vein to Brood Brothers IMO.

As has been mentioned there is already a fair whack of mortal Chaos units in the CSM Codex, the difficulty would be making it distinct from Brood Brothers because they are very similar.

 Gert wrote:
R&H/Traitor Guard would work in a similar vein to Brood Brothers IMO.

As has been mentioned there is already a fair whack of mortal Chaos units in the CSM Codex, the difficulty would be making it distinct from Brood Brothers because they are very similar.

Exactly how much difference are you expecting between a Guardsman in service to an overgrown Genestealer and a Guardsman sworn to Chaos?

I'm wondering if GW is slow-rolling out elements for a "Lost and the Damned" army at a future date? There are lots of units they can pull out of Chaos codexes and from Kill Team to form the backbone of the army and add yet another Chaos ally block along with Daemons and Chaos Knights:

Accursed Cultist
Cultist
Fellgor Ravagners (Kill Team)
Gellerpox Infected (Kill Team)
Pox Walkers
Traitor Guardsmen
Tzzangors

I was more meaning the rules-wise. The examples from the WarCom article for the Brood Brothers detachment would all fit a R&H/Traitor Guard force really well and the roles of the Brood Brothers are very similar to that of the Traitor Guard.
Both bring extra firepower and specialised units to a Cult roster such as tanks or artillery and both are more valuable than lowly Cultists.
I don't think it couldn't be done, I just think there would need to be steps to make them different enough for it to not just be a copy/paste job even if that would largely work out well.

Personally I'd welcome something like Eldar Exodites as something that just adds a new visual element to the game.

Yes its another Eldar force, but dinosaurs and such as war engines and replacements for vehicles is a huge change from anything else they do. I feel like it gives them a big new direction to take the design work for the faction in

Various demon or Imperial sub-armies are all very neat ideas and I can agree there are elements of "this could become its own army" setup. I could even see GW doing a Warpsmith themed army and then perhaps using that as an excuse to roll knights back into that instead of being their own army (though functionally they'd likely keep a knight-only option in the sub-armies of the codex; at least for one or two editions)



After that I'd honestly welcome GW doing what they did with the Squats - broaden the game. Something I feel with 40K is that the designers do fantastic work; but you can kind of see that the creative edge isn't quite there as it is with AoS, where the designers are much more free to get creative (at least I'd say until this recent Old World release where it feels like management threw a wrench into things by doubling down on "no duel armies across games" angle).


I've long hoped that a Tau Auxiliaries army, perhaps themed around a Kroot core, would be one way to add a lot of different minor xenos factions and races into the game under the alliance of being within the Tau empire. Whilst making them their own army gives them a lot more tactical room to add options without tripping over core Tau models that already do those roles. Let Tau be the mecha-focused army and Auxiliaries be the everything else for them.


Codex ZOATS - because you can't tease us for 2 Christmases and not give it to us! Then again GW has teased Exodites lore for decades and so far never released a single 40K scale model (perhaps barring one or two in the Rogue Trader days - even the Bright Stallion in Epic is utterly ancient

Heck even the Warhammer+ animation named Exodites was basically focused on the Tau and the only major Eldar element was titans not dinosaurs!

I've been an advocate for Traitor Guard for years. I've previously said CSM should get a rule similar to GSC "Brood Brothers".

Dark Mech and stand-alone Kroot would be nice, but I imagine their factions to be numerically smaller than people realize.

I like the idea of Exodites, but unless they uncharacteristically start colonizing the galaxy at large they should probable be left alone on their planets.

I'd be okay with return of the Rangdan/Slaught; might be a nice threat to everyone.

I'd advocate for none...sort of. At least no addition to the number of books.

I think GW should do an EC Codex to complete the 4 god-specific CSM armies. At the same time I'd take the AoS approach and roll the relevant Daemons into each of those books. So we get an extra god-aligned CSM book, but the Daemons Codex gets split out into all 4 rather than being a standalone Codex. GW never really seemed to figure out Daemons in 40k so this feels like a good way to go about things.

Other than that, I think the game is already too bloated and doesn't need any new armies at all. I'd like to see more encouragement from GW to be more imaginative with current armies, though. For example, Traitor Guard and Dark Mechanicum can easily be represented with the IG and AM Codeices. I don't think the Chaos Gods care enough about a bunch of random human soldiers worshipping them to require a whole different army list, nor do I think there needs to be any fundamental difference between Ad Mech and Dark Mech. It's not like Ad Mech are some paragon of order and logic anyway. Most of their gear is weird, esoteric stuff that fits right in with the concept of Chaos as-is. A single detachment in the relevant book for each of those would probably be enough to represent a slightly more extreme version of them, but the basic Codex should suffice for the most part.

Exodites are another faction that I just don't think justifies a whole Codex. I could see including a handful of Exodite units in the main Craftworld Codex, but I think handling htem like they have the Harlequins in 10th is the way to go.

Slipspace wrote:

Exodites are another faction that I just don't think justifies a whole Codex. I could see including a handful of Exodite units in the main Craftworld Codex, but I think handling htem like they have the Harlequins in 10th is the way to go.

I feel like story wise Harliquins work as an addon because that's basically story wise how they work. They do turn up in small troops lending their aid to larger Eldar forces. The Exodites on the other hand are shown to have worlds, large numbers and extensive forces as well as large war-engines mounted on beasts. I feel like whilst you could do a kill-team of a troop of Exodites, you can't really explore all that makes them unique without giving them a larger number of models that would at least start to add up to half to a full diverse army.

The only thing in lore that needs to advance is to simply have them decide to go on the offensive or do a few narrative stories about Imperials attacking rim-worlds where the Exodites live.

I don't think it is a dramatic departure from the existing, sparse lore of Exodites to have a faction that wishes to recolonise the maiden worlds and is aligned with the Biel Tan worldview.

Slipspace wrote:


Exodites are another faction that I just don't think justifies a whole Codex. I could see including a handful of Exodite units in the main Craftworld Codex, but I think handling htem like they have the Harlequins in 10th is the way to go.

if 1000 marines can get a book all to themselves, and votann with 5 units can get a book all to themselves, then the billions of exodites sure can. The prerelease EPIC models already covered several units 30+ years ago...

They've wasted an entire codex on imperial agents. If you want to say 'nothing will be more popular than another imperial faction' to justify not having an exodite or harlequin codex then fine, but don't use army scope or model count.

I say this as a semi joke.

Titans! So we can get some plastic, big stompy walkers to mess with. They'd probably be terrible but hey, plastic titan!

cody.d. wrote:
I say this as a semi joke.

Titans! So we can get some plastic, big stompy walkers to mess with. They'd probably be terrible but hey, plastic titan!

titans do have an index in 10th edition! i'm not sure if it's any good (probably not!) but hey, it's something

there's also the rumor that GW have a plastic warhound kit in production, but can't figure out how to price it reasonably

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

cody.d. wrote:
I say this as a semi joke.

Titans! So we can get some plastic, big stompy walkers to mess with. They'd probably be terrible but hey, plastic titan!

titans do have an index in 10th edition! i'm not sure if it's any good (probably not!) but hey, it's something

there's also the rumor that GW have a plastic warhound kit in production, but can't figure out how to price it reasonably

About $450, maybe $500 should do it.

 Haighus wrote:
I don't think it is a dramatic departure from the existing, sparse lore of Exodites to have a faction that wishes to recolonise the maiden worlds and is aligned with the Biel Tan worldview.

Exactly, especially with Yinnari kicking up the dust and the general direction of Eldar lore very slowly shifting from "we are a dying race retreating more and more into the shadows" to one that's more on the offensive. Right now the Imperium is faltering; Chaos, Necrons and Tyranids have had huge campaign gains; Tau are steadily ever expanding; Votann have shifted gears and stepped up as well.

Basically everyone in the setting has had a big step forward; barring the elephant in the room which is the Imperium which territory wise has faltered, but lore wise has had a huge step with the Indomitus Crusade.


So yeah the only faction that hasn't really stepped up their game in a big way is Eldar and they feel on the cusp of doing that. If GW has updated Craftworld over the last few years to a modern line (more or less) then why not launch a new Eldar force with Exodites that allows for a brand new creative direction.

 Hellebore wrote:

Slipspace wrote:


Exodites are another faction that I just don't think justifies a whole Codex. I could see including a handful of Exodite units in the main Craftworld Codex, but I think handling htem like they have the Harlequins in 10th is the way to go.

if 1000 marines can get a book all to themselves, and votann with 5 units can get a book all to themselves, then the billions of exodites sure can. The prerelease EPIC models already covered several units 30+ years ago...

They've wasted an entire codex on imperial agents. If you want to say 'nothing will be more popular than another imperial faction' to justify not having an exodite or harlequin codex then fine, but don't use army scope or model count.

The population of the faction in the lore isn't a criteria that should determine whether they get their own Codex. There are likely billions of Kroot too, but they didn't get their own book. Nor should they.

My problem with adding factions is twofold:

1. Do they bring anything new to the game in terms of how they play? The answer to this is probably "no", because of the sheer number of factions in the game right now and because so many of those factions have multiple different styles of play available - or at least could have if GW fleshed out the books a little more or were better at balance. This links to point 2:

2. We already have too many factions. We're running out of niches for armies to occupy. We're also in the position where every three years we get a new edition which usually means a new round of Codices. At the very least we need a whole new set of Codices every 6 years at this point. Constantly adding to them just means more and more armies end up waiting longer and longer, just so some tiny niche faction can get a brand new Codex.

I think we have the tools right now to allow things like Exodites, Dark Mech and similar sub-factions to be included in the main book for their faction via the detachment system. We should utilise that where we can, and encourage an approach that isn't so slaved to officialdom as we have now, with people demanding rules for every little thing instead of using what we already have, combined with some inventive modelling to create the army they want. That's how it used to work, and it was fine.

Current release schedule, 3 year editions, lack of Qualtiy controll?

None, i am sorry. As much as i'd want playable plastic traitorguard / R&H reinvigorated the current system of releases and quality controll makes it honestly impossible to condone a new faction at all. Especially seeing as we got now multiple factions that are basically at best a quarter of a full unit count.

Hrud would probably get my vote on the assumption they could do something fundamentally different.

I think to be interesting an army has to have a different art/model style, a different rules, and, while its a bit subjective (as strategies tend towards archetypes), a notionally unique style of play.

Harlequins for instance certainly exist in the fluff. And I don't think there was (or is) anything wrong with being able to play a whole army of them. But "We are a fast glass cannon army of semi-elite soldiers and grav vehicles" just prompted "oh, so like CWE and DE then."

This sort of leads into Traitor Guard. We have a Traitor Guard kit in Killteam. Do we also need "Traitor Heavy Weapon Squads"? Full unit of Traitor Ogryn? Spiky Leman Russ Variants? I guess you could come up with completely new units and tanks. Borrow stuff from 30k perhaps (that only Traitor Guard have for reasons...) but I suspect that would rub people the wrong way, and feels a bit contrived. I feel if you want to convert up some traitor Guard you can go right ahead. "We need Traitor Chimeras" feels kind of a reach.

Exodites would "visually" fit the bill of being different. (Even if there's a danger it feels like a CWE/Wood Elf/Lizardmen fan mashup). But I think you've got to be careful "a Stegadon with a big gun" doesn't just "feel" like a reskinned Fire Prism.

"Ynnari But Done Right" would also potentially get my vote. But you'd have to take the minis in a new art direction rather than just some CWE/DE mashup. And I think the mechanics would have to focus on Strength from Death being a system where models die, then get resurrected, then die again. A sort of cycle that gives power, rather than "Eldar go fast and hit hard, no not like that, like this."

The 3 year cycle is certainly a problem. More factions means the more chance we end up back like the "old days" where some armies might limp to near the end of an edition before getting a book (or miss it!). Heck we are already at factions missing half of an edition waiting for a book in 1.5 years.

But that's a problem right now and its a symptom of GW's bonkers idea of building a game every 3 years


Heck who knows perhaps adding more factions would finally make GW wake up and lengthen edition lifespans

To be honest, I've stopped caring about the rules aspect. Rules change every 5 minutes and even established units can be deleted on a whim by GW.

I want new armies for the models, which are much more permanent than rules. I can always proxy for rules.

Agreed and for me visual diversity is more important. There are game systems out there where the only difference is the models you choose and the rules for different factions are broadly identical with a few faction tweaks here and there.

Ergo every army has the same model types and they visually differ.


So I'm ok if you end up with two armies that cover the same kind of tactical approach because they will still have little differences and if nothing else they will be visually distinct. I don't mind if another "swarmy" army like Tyranids joins the game so long as they are very visually and lore distinct.

I'm here to make my yearly request for HRUD or Beast race army.

Slipspace wrote:


We already have too many factions.

The only thing we have too much of is Space Marines.

I think that you think GW set out to design a typical wargame when they built 40k, which might be why you want it to look and feel more like other wargames. But since the dawn of Rogue Trader, I'd argue that "a typical wargame" is something that GW never intended 40k to be.

Even in the RT book, it was obvious that the world (galaxy) that they designed as a setting was ALWAYS bigger than the game. T was a big book of ideas that have kept GW busy and active for 40 years while other companies with fewer and more similar factions and more typical wargame rules in their hundreds have appeared on the scene for a brief moment in the sun only to disappear forever.

GW set out to create a game with so many miniatures they could stock a museum. They set out to design a sandbox big enough to swallow the lions share of the miniature game industry world wide, and the truckloads of cash that go along with it.

I'm sorry you want a game with 6 factions of 6-10 kits each. Games that small die in a decade, and it should have been obvious that 40k was never intended to be that.

 PenitentJake wrote:

I'm sorry you want a game with 6 factions of 6-10 kits each. Games that small die in a decade, and it should have been obvious that 40k was never intended to be that.

And I'm sorry you feel the need to put words in my mouth.

Funnily enough, for quite a long time 40k was a lot closer to that than the position it now finds itself in so it seems a bit rich to say it was never intended to be that.

Still, we're a long way and multiple designers from those times. The 40k galaxy is vast, but there needs to be some restraint on what gets to be a faction or sub-faction. For me that point is when you don't have any more niches to fill from a gameplay perspective, and/or when you have so many factions you can barely get them all released in the course of an entire edition.

There's no requirement for every last faction that's mentioned in the lore to get its own Codex. This is exactly what I was talking about when I mentioned the slavery to officialdom. I've seen people do really cool Exodite armies using the standard Eldar Codex and some imaginative modelling. I've seen it done using the Dark Eldar Codex. I've seen Dark Mech and Traitor Guard done really well using those Codices, because at a certain point the minutiae of specific rules to represent relatively small differences on the tabletop are just not necessary. We have plenty of options available to facilitate all kinds of different armies now. In some cases we have too many. Yes, we should have fewer Space Marine Codices, but that restraint goes along with reining in the production of new armies as well.

I did put words in your mouth- sorry about that; a bit edgy today, and probably posting more aggressively than usual- doing that thing where even though I'm quoting you, I'm responding to past arguments made by folks with similar preferences for smaller ranges.

Anyway, point taken. Sorry man.

I do want to inquire about those Exodite armies you've seen though. I'm wondering how they represented an army that, by its fluff suggests large numbers of mounted units using rules from codices that don't include any mounted units.

Lizard riders count as Shining Spears?

Armies did probably look great, but how you could make them play as they should without houseruling is beyond me. These days, I think both Artel and Wargames Exclusive have created full Exodite ranges (though it might just be one or the other).

But I'm not sure you can field them without beast rider rules, which neither CWE or DE currently have.

Edit: Also, I don't need these things to have their own dexes- I'm fine geting them in combined books like the upcoming Imperial Agents, or in Campaign books, or downloadable PDF's as units are introduced one at a time via KT or a new Warhammer Quest game, or as White Dwarf mini dexes, or even (again) stand alone units. Sorry I wasn't more clear on that.

Bringing back a dedicated Eldar Corsair faction could be neat. There is already a good kit to base things off of - you can already build a lot of the old units and characters with just that one kit actually, so the main thing you'd need is their own bikers following their aesthetic and their jump packs. Then bring one or two of the old Forge World vehicles over to plastic and its basically army done.

As many have mentioned Eldar Exodites and Lost and the Damned/Renegades and Heretics.

Tau Auxiliaries - at this point of its constant expansion over the past...what 20 years? Tau are probably outnumbered in their own empire and finally facing similar logistics problems to the Imperium. Lean into the auxiliary aspect of the Tau to compensate this - an upgrade sprue for guardsmen that has some Tau bits and gribbles and a few guns and helmets to represent Gue'vasa, Tarellians, Vespids, more Kroot (admittedly we just got Kroot but Kroot are great), and so on. Make it so each race has at least 2 units (likely a multi-build kit) and that they aren't pigeon holed into 'the ranged ones', 'the melee ones' etc.

Its also possible to bring out some deep lore, like the Stryxis or Rak'Gol, though they would need a bit more work to bring up to snuff.

You could proxy an Exodite army by just swapping all vehicles for mounted dinosaurs. So a falcon gravtank is just a dinosaur with some large guns on it; an aircraft is a winged creature (possibly with a jet engine strapped too its back). Even a unit like a warwalker or wraithlord could be some form of mounted model - a wraithknight could easily be a T-rex for example

That alone would make the army quite visually distinct from a standard craftworld force.

 PenitentJake wrote:
I did put words in your mouth- sorry about that; a bit edgy today, and probably posting more aggressively than usual- doing that thing where even though I'm quoting you, I'm responding to past arguments made by folks with similar preferences for smaller ranges.

Anyway, point taken. Sorry man.

I do want to inquire about those Exodite armies you've seen though. I'm wondering how they represented an army that, by its fluff suggests large numbers of mounted units using rules from codices that don't include any mounted units.

Lizard riders count as Shining Spears?

Armies did probably look great, but how you could make them play as they should without houseruling is beyond me. These days, I think both Artel and Wargames Exclusive have created full Exodite ranges (though it might just be one or the other).

But I'm not sure you can field them without beast rider rules, which neither CWE or DE currently have.

Edit: Also, I don't need these things to have their own dexes- I'm fine geting them in combined books like the upcoming Imperial Agents, or in Campaign books, or downloadable PDF's as units are introduced one at a time via KT or a new Warhammer Quest game, or as White Dwarf mini dexes, or even (again) stand alone units. Sorry I wasn't more clear on that.

No problem, apology accepted.

The Exodites were basically using the various biker and grav tank vehicles, with beasts in place of the vehicles for the most part. They were also using quite a lot of Rangers and using Warp Spider and Swooping Hawk rules to represent their elite trackers/hunters. As a nice bonues the rules differences between beasts and jetbikes at the time meant the Exodite beasts using the jetbike/grav tank rules were more nimble and flexible than traditional cavalry/beasts, which worked quite well within the Exodite lore.

Your comment about not being able to make them play as they should is exactly what I was getting at with regard to the cult of officialdom. The rules as used did a very good job of representing Exodites without having to do anything more than explain "these are Windriders, these are Swooping Hawks", etc. You don't need the rule to specifically single out a particular Exodite trait in order to have it work in-game. Ultimately it comes down to realising that an Exodite mounted on a lizard with some weird Eldar-tech weapon is represented perfectly fine by a Windrider with a scatter laser, or shuriken cannon. They're fast, have a decent gun, but aren't especially tough. It works fine and has the added benefit of leading to some cool modelling projects.

Slipspace wrote:


Your comment about not being able to make them play as they should is exactly what I was getting at with regard to the cult of officialdom. The rules as used did a very good job of representing Exodites without having to do anything more than explain "these are Windriders, these are Swooping Hawks", etc. You don't need the rule to specifically single out a particular Exodite trait in order to have it work in-game.

Fair enough- I see how it CAN work, I guess.

Given the mechanics of the current edition, I think it would play more like it was supposed to if it did have its own rules- people might feel that Turbo Boost is suitable datacard ability for a dragon rider, but the enhancements, strats and detachment rules might not work as well. And sure, a little bit of tweaking can fix that too, but I still think there's far better rules that could be generated in a book made for the army- especially as a Crusade player; I want the Exodite Planetary/ World Spirit defense storyline and Agendas.

I won't say it can't be done- y'all have proven it can.

Personally, I still don't like it, and I certainly wouldn't invest 100 hours of work converting up an army that's just going to play identically to an existing one. If I'm going to do the work, I want it to matter on the table... But maybe that's a me thing. Obviously, it's fine for a lot of people if armies with radically different fluff and aesthetics behave exactly the same way on the table.

Deathwatch would be cool

Yeah- not sure how good DW Lite is going to be. Too many unknown variables.

We know we're losing the Primaris KTs, but we don't know what the Ordo Xenos detachment looks like.

With the other option they've listed- using DW as Attached Agents- it looks like in a 2k game, you could attach a Watch Master to one Proteus Team, Artemis to another and put each unit into its own Blackstar. and then attach that all to a Space marine army where everyone has DW shoulderpads, and let it use whichever, in your opinion is the Deathwatchiest detachment. There may be a rule that lets you burn the Requisition slot on a Retinue or Character unit if you're not planning on using it for requisitioned troops, so you might be able to squeeze in one more KT if you want.

That doesn't feel terribly satisfying to me, so hopefully the Deathwatch detachment is designed well enough to be a better option.

Either way, I think I preferred DW having a dex. If people think it was problematic, it should have been fixed rather than eliminated. I think it's weird having one Chamber follow such a radically different path than the other two. One of the things I like about the index system is that with the right group of people, the Index cards are still compatible with the edition. So even if the Fortis, Indomitor and Spectrus teams didn't make the Agents dex, I can still use them in friendly games when it suits the Narrative.

9th edition DW Crusade content would be mostly compatible, except many of the underlying mechanics with which that content interacted are no longer in the game (lookin at you Blackshields).

Slipspace wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

Slipspace wrote:


Exodites are another faction that I just don't think justifies a whole Codex. I could see including a handful of Exodite units in the main Craftworld Codex, but I think handling htem like they have the Harlequins in 10th is the way to go.

if 1000 marines can get a book all to themselves, and votann with 5 units can get a book all to themselves, then the billions of exodites sure can. The prerelease EPIC models already covered several units 30+ years ago...

They've wasted an entire codex on imperial agents. If you want to say 'nothing will be more popular than another imperial faction' to justify not having an exodite or harlequin codex then fine, but don't use army scope or model count.

The population of the faction in the lore isn't a criteria that should determine whether they get their own Codex. There are likely billions of Kroot too, but they didn't get their own book. Nor should they.

My problem with adding factions is twofold:

1. Do they bring anything new to the game in terms of how they play? The answer to this is probably "no", because of the sheer number of factions in the game right now and because so many of those factions have multiple different styles of play available - or at least could have if GW fleshed out the books a little more or were better at balance. This links to point 2:

2. We already have too many factions. We're running out of niches for armies to occupy. We're also in the position where every three years we get a new edition which usually means a new round of Codices. At the very least we need a whole new set of Codices every 6 years at this point. Constantly adding to them just means more and more armies end up waiting longer and longer, just so some tiny niche faction can get a brand new Codex.

I think we have the tools right now to allow things like Exodites, Dark Mech and similar sub-factions to be included in the main book for their faction via the detachment system. We should utilise that where we can, and encourage an approach that isn't so slaved to officialdom as we have now, with people demanding rules for every little thing instead of using what we already have, combined with some inventive modelling to create the army they want. That's how it used to work, and it was fine.

GW does not follow your criteria, so why should anyone else when playing the new faction game? You're asking us to use rules the product producers don't use. Every space marine army plays almost identically to the others. And whether an army brings something new or not is entirely on how you write the rules. Choosing to write rules that bring nothing new has nothing to do with the faction, and everything to do with the rules writer.


Your position is built on false premises around what should and should not be used to choose whether a new faction is added or not. the only rules we have to follow is the faction releases of GW themselves and they are clearly fine with releasing codexes that look virtually the same, have very few units in them or aren't even a real army (imperial agents). Whether you think that's how they should do it or not is not really relevant, because we're not trying to justify new factions in your game, but in GW's.


For reference, the Harlequins had a full army list before every current space marine army had one, in some cases by decades. They had an army list before sisters, ad mech and the eldar themselves.

Out of Left Field, but how about the Rak Gol? They are in the background, and are visually different to everything in 40k at the moment.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or, what about a compliation of all those "non-aligned" units out there that can be taken in any army> The Zoat guy, the Ambull, fortifications, etc.

When it comes to being alien, rak'gol have bilateral symmetry and other features that are mostly comprehensible if you're used to earth creatures or tyranids. So for existing minor species, why are the Saruthi not better as alien-looking aliens?

On another axis, the rak'gol don't wear clothes, so they present like centaurs, beasts with weapons but not clothes. That's pretty common for centaur aliens like Zoats or slug aliens like Jabba the Hutt from a sci-fi film called star wars. They have weapons, star ships, a complex society, but not clothes.

So what I would want from an alien species are saruthi with clothes, because that way they don't have an earth-style body plan but they do look like a multi-system starfaring society. Miniature wargames are a top format for alien-aliens than film or books, because they don't need visual fx like a film but it's a better visual format than a novel or even illustration.

But for the same reasons as other people I'm pretty cold to new factions. The Kin Leagues and the Shissellian League do actually resemble factions from other, smaller games. Drop zone, Infinity, Maelstrom's Edge, Mutant Chronicles, and Deadzone all have these random factions - this is the cyborg human faction, this is the euroamerican megacorp human faction, this is the East Asian human faction. If there were a space warmahordes or space MtG they'd have this problem too.

The Shisselian league has been around for 23 year in warhammer and they still don't have the historic links with other factions, like the way all the Eldar factions and most of the human factions were created by the birth of Slaanesh. At least the Shissells have a pretty distinct gameplay style with their jetpack crisis suits and ashigaru infantry.

Men of Iron as a stand alone Xeno's Faction?

 pelicaniforce wrote:
The Shisselian league has been around for 23 year in warhammer and they still don't have the historic links with other factions, like the way all the Eldar factions and most of the human factions were created by the birth of Slaanesh. At least the Shissells have a pretty distinct gameplay style with their jetpack crisis suits and ashigaru infantry.

...the who now?

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
for the last several editions, GW has been on a pretty big kick for adding new factions to the game. we've gotten AdMech, Custodes, a real SoB army, plus multiple new chaos armies, and even a new xenos faction. but that makes me think, everything we've gotten so far has been rooted in the lore; however, there's only so much established lore which easily lends will to factions that they can do this with. so what do you think is coming next in the future of 40 factions? any obscure niches you think might get explored? any new concepts you wish would get added? let's ignore all the factions that could use further updates and assume that GW will get to them in due time

for my part, I'd love to see an expansion of rogue traders and their entourages into a more full army, even if it just stays part of the Agents codex. we've got the one box, but it's all monopose, so a generic rogue trader kit with options (even if it's only a few) would be very welcome

None of the above. Expand what they have. They went to the new formations which really enables theme armies - and theoretically multiple builds per faction - but then they contracted the Leader/Characters in a two steps forward one step back. Fill out the leaders. Even before that some of the factions need to be filled out. Some of them are pretty lean. Leagues of Voltran need more units, Sisters of Battle need some more access to man portable heavies with the new S/T Bands, Knights need some sort of a chaff infantry action monkey unit to balance against the knights and provide for the new-ish mission based gameplay, The Deity Marines (1000 Sons, DG to a lesser extent, World Eaters to a greater extent, as well as GK and Custodes need more units.

I think there's a place for Codex Imperial Agents But For Everyone - 40k's answer to Regiments of Renown, basically. Pick a bunch of fun units from across every army - a few characters with new minis for attention-grabbing on launch day, but mostly just existing kits - come up with lore for why this squad of Guard went rogue or this squad or Eldar are chasing some mysterious prophecy and don't care who they fight alongside if it furthers their quest or there's this Carnifex that Emperor-knows-why has struck off on its own and will just blunder into battles of its own accord and target one side specifically, and tweak their datasheets to remove anything that'd be awfully unbalanced outside of their native army and give a whitelist/blacklist of which armies each unit will fight alongside or not... Seems like (assuming the rules are competent) no downsides to me, GW doesn't really have to lift a finger production-wise and suddenly a bunch of existing players have half a dozen new kits they could incorporate into their armies if they want to. Heck, you could even make a half-credible excuse for the real edge cases to go shopping for mercs - those Thousand Sons aren't part of your Tyranid hive, they're just using the mayhem of it devouring a world as cover for their own inscrutable mission, those Exodites aren't allied with your Necrons, they just dug up some ancient artifact that means Necrons read them as non-targets, whatever, it's a crazy galaxy. Or just field all the weirdos as a single chaotic (different to Chaotic) force of Wyches and Ratlings and Corrupt Arbiters and Thudd Guns and the Mad Knight.

 Dysartes wrote:

 pelicaniforce wrote:
The Shisselian league has been around for 23 year in warhammer and they still don't have the historic links with other factions, like the way all the Eldar factions and most of the human factions were created by the birth of Slaanesh. At least the Shissells have a pretty distinct gameplay style with their jetpack crisis suits and ashigaru infantry.

...the who now?

nothing comes up in a search of any of the wikis or on the reddit lore groups. why do i get the feeling that they're someone's homebrew faction that pelicaniforce mistook for official? either that or the spelling is way off.

https://gavthorpe.co.uk/2017/06/26/the-origins-of-the-tau/

Early name for the Tau concept.

Saying Tau have no historical links is wrong though. Ethereals are almost certainly an engineered subspecies created by a different species, and the clues point to an Eldar faction being responsible.

 Daia T'Nara wrote:
I think there's a place for Codex Imperial Agents But For Everyone - 40k's answer to Regiments of Renown, basically. Pick a bunch of fun units from across every army - a few characters with new minis for attention-grabbing on launch day, but mostly just existing kits - come up with lore for why this squad of Guard went rogue or this squad or Eldar are chasing some mysterious prophecy and don't care who they fight alongside if it furthers their quest or there's this Carnifex that Emperor-knows-why has struck off on its own and will just blunder into battles of its own accord and target one side specifically, and tweak their datasheets to remove anything that'd be awfully unbalanced outside of their native army and give a whitelist/blacklist of which armies each unit will fight alongside or not... Seems like (assuming the rules are competent) no downsides to me, GW doesn't really have to lift a finger production-wise and suddenly a bunch of existing players have half a dozen new kits they could incorporate into their armies if they want to. Heck, you could even make a half-credible excuse for the real edge cases to go shopping for mercs - those Thousand Sons aren't part of your Tyranid hive, they're just using the mayhem of it devouring a world as cover for their own inscrutable mission, those Exodites aren't allied with your Necrons, they just dug up some ancient artifact that means Necrons read them as non-targets, whatever, it's a crazy galaxy. Or just field all the weirdos as a single chaotic (different to Chaotic) force of Wyches and Ratlings and Corrupt Arbiters and Thudd Guns and the Mad Knight.

the 40k team could take some notes from the AOS team and do what they did. put out small value boxes and say that they're a group of mercenaries you can use in any army. GW gets to sell more old models, we get more choices for army. you don't even need bespoke armies. would add a lot of flavor to the game, all without overwhelming the allies rules, which GW is clearly touchy with anymore


Automatically Appended Next Post:
by the way, i think anyone answering with "let's not add any factions" is dreadfully boring. the point of this was to start a conversation, and saying "we shouldn't add anything" is just shutting that down. you don't need to comment, right?

So you can only participate in the discussion if you agree with the OP?

I don't think it's unreasonable to look at the number of factions and argue that those that have smaller model ranges that can definitely be expanded should be over adding another army.

Drukhari haven't gained anything in ages beyond two characters, Incubi, Mandrakes and an upgrade sprue while the Archons court, beasties, Grotesques and the only other characters that had models were removed.

 Gert wrote:
So you can only participate in the discussion if you agree with the OP?

I don't think it's unreasonable to look at the number of factions and argue that those that have smaller model ranges that can definitely be expanded should be over adding another army.

Drukhari haven't gained anything in ages beyond two characters, Incubi, Mandrakes and an upgrade sprue while the Archons court, beasties, Grotesques and the only other characters that had models were removed.

think of it like this. we're not talking about what GW is going to add, we're talking about what they could add. it's trying to start a discussion, and saying "add nothing" just shuts down that discussion. my problem is that it's a boring answer

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Gert wrote:
So you can only participate in the discussion if you agree with the OP?

I don't think it's unreasonable to look at the number of factions and argue that those that have smaller model ranges that can definitely be expanded should be over adding another army.

Drukhari haven't gained anything in ages beyond two characters, Incubi, Mandrakes and an upgrade sprue while the Archons court, beasties, Grotesques and the only other characters that had models were removed.

think of it like this. we're not talking about what GW is going to add, we're talking about what they could add. it's trying to start a discussion, and saying "add nothing" just shuts down that discussion. my problem is that it's a boring answer

OK? That's just, like, your opinion man. You're welcome to it, but I think you're missing some of the nuance.

Yes, just saying "nothing" is not an interesting response. Just responding with "Hrud" is also not a particularly interesting response. If it were, you might as well just go an read a list of Xenos races on the 40k wiki. Many of the people advocating for no new additions have explained not only why they think this, but how they would handle many of the proposed additions within the framework we currently have. Seeing the mix of opinions on how to handle that is actually quite an interesting area of discussion for me.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

think of it like this. we're not talking about what GW is going to add, we're talking about what they could add. it's trying to start a discussion, and saying "add nothing" just shuts down that discussion. my problem is that it's a boring answer

And the majority of those who have said "not a new army" have expanded on their post to say "fill out what we already have instead".

What's so problematic with that point in a discussion about what people think GW should add? It's a perfectly valid stance to take that their are enough armies and that many of those that do don't have nearly enough support.

 Gert wrote:

Drukhari haven't gained anything in ages beyond two characters, Incubi, Mandrakes and an upgrade sprue while the Archons court, beasties, Grotesques and the only other characters that had models were removed.

"Gained"

Those were all finecast to plastic updates. Drukhari hasnt gotten anything truly new since 2014 with the voidraven bomber

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Drukhari haven't gained anything in ages beyond two characters, Incubi, Mandrakes and an upgrade sprue while the Archons court, beasties, Grotesques and the only other characters that had models were removed.

"Gained"

Those were all finecast to plastic updates. Drukhari hasnt gotten anything truly new since 2014 with the voidraven bomber

Yep.

And even if we do get a big release this ed? It's all going to be resculpt:

- Grotesques
- Court of the Archon
- Beast Master + Beasts
- probably Urien

If they get all of that out of the way in 10th, it sets up at least one truly new model for 11th.

I'd like a Mandrake Leader (Kheradruahk AKA the Decapitator) and a leader for Scourges.

Obviously, Vect and the Dias would be nice too. Making the Tantalus Plastic would also be cool- with a transport capacity of 15 it feels like it was made for Archon + Court + Kabalites.

I could see them making the plastic tantalus a dual-kit for the Dais. Throw in a little plastic Vect sitting on a throne.

(Kind of hoping that a hypothetical Vect kit wouldn't *just* be a Vect kit as I play Poisoned Tongue and wouldn't want to field Vect for lore reasons.)

 Wyldhunt wrote:
I could see them making the plastic tantalus a dual-kit for the Dais. Throw in a little plastic Vect sitting on a throne.

(Kind of hoping that a hypothetical Vect kit wouldn't *just* be a Vect kit as I play Poisoned Tongue and wouldn't want to field Vect for lore reasons.)

Yeah, that would be excellent- if they used the Tantalus as the base vehicle for Vect, essentially they get two kits out of on plastic mold, and one of them is already well established in the game.

If I have answered this already my apologies:


GW should add an army that completely rips off the Covenant from Halo. (Which is ironically something I think the Tau were originally conceived to be before they became Gundam Hype)

Why? Because it will make them money.

Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

2.) Is literally impossible.

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

2.) Is literally impossible.

In which made-up fantasy world is anything impossible ?

Siegfriedfr wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

2.) Is literally impossible.

In which made-up fantasy world is anything impossible ?

Chaos does not exist without the Warp.

Siegfriedfr wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

2.) Is literally impossible.

In which made-up fantasy world is anything impossible ?

just because the writers could do something doesn't mean they could or would have any reason to. i know people think that introducing new kinds of armor has literally ruined 40k, but the lore is still a consistent thing. at this point, all the ideas you have here would make for a completely different story than 40k already is

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Lore-wise:

1) Kill the Emperor, breakup the Imperium, each space marine "chapter" becomes a faction hostile to any others
2) Close access to the Warp, and make Chaos factions opposed to each other instead of de facto allies
3) Eldar stop being tied to Craftworlds (ships), and settle on Exodite planets

Model-wise:
1) Reintroduce the slann as a good/good faction, coming back to the galaxy to save it etc
2) Introduce a new monsters/alien factions to counterbalance the Tyranids monopoly in this area

2.) Is literally impossible.

In which made-up fantasy world is anything impossible ?

Chaos does not exist without the Warp.

well, until the day that GW says "Now it does"....

GW could also decide the Emperor was actually bees in trenchcoat but that's also unlikely.

 Gert wrote:
GW could also decide the Emperor was actually bees in trenchcoat but that's also unlikely.

Anything is possible in a multiverse. Like female Custodes who have "always been there". Never say never.

It's not a multiverse though.

women existing is also far less serious than changing basic rules of the universe. all that change meant is, oh those female custodians were offscreen the entire time. the changes suggested here are significantly more drastic than even the changes around the time of 8th edition

Siegfriedfr wrote:

 Gert wrote:
GW could also decide the Emperor was actually bees in trenchcoat but that's also unlikely.

Anything is possible in a multiverse. Like female Custodes who have "always been there". Never say never.

Let's not have that 'discussion' again. People got... ugly... the last time.

in regards to Exodites.. Psychic awakening says that a lot of Exodites have been joining Biel-Tan and the Ynnari, suggesting that you could easily include them alongside the Corsairs, aspect Warriors, and Biel-Tan guardians and Wraith constructs in a Ynnari Codex.

If they did come around to Ynnari again I think that would be the perfect place for Exodite models. You'd only need 1-2 different units, and perhaps a character. If it's one of those "character option in the unit box" things, all the better.

i'd give them three units, an HQ, and a character. unit wise i'd go with some sort of infantry, some dino riding cavalry, and a 'large beast' type support unit.

the infantry would need to do something different from the Corsairs and Guardians, but i'm sure you could find a niche for them.

 cuda1179 wrote:
If they did come around to Ynnari again I think that would be the perfect place for Exodite models. You'd only need 1-2 different units, and perhaps a character. If it's one of those "character option in the unit box" things, all the better.

I feel like Yinnari has wound up with no energy behind it.
I think it comes from a period when GW made some odd choices. IT was the same period that GW went for Primaris as a "second" marine army within regular marine armies instead of just releasing a new version of Marine armour and a model update. Yinnari was basically "how to make a new faction by only making 1 boxed set of 3 models".

Since then its basically floundered as a lore concept and not much else.



I could get behind Yinnari being expanded to have Exodites and Corsairs; but I think that if it went down that pathway it would end up a bit like Imperial collected armies - so many armies included that it ends up overpowered because you can pick and choose from such a wide variety of rosters.
Also I feel like just putting other Eldar armies into Yinnari is a lazy approach that lacks creativity and frustrates fans. Those who like Exodites as a concept don't want 3 models in a "collective" army; they want a full army. The lore behind the game supports the view that Exodites can operate at the mass army level; they do have a unique visual appearance compared to both other Eldar and other forces; and they have potential to be a full faction.



Honestly if GW wanted to expand Yinnari now as its own army I'd rather see them make it its own thing (yes even if that meant no exodites investment). Unique models, unique army, unique everything.

 Overread wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
If they did come around to Ynnari again I think that would be the perfect place for Exodite models. You'd only need 1-2 different units, and perhaps a character. If it's one of those "character option in the unit box" things, all the better.

I feel like Yinnari has wound up with no energy behind it.
I think it comes from a period when GW made some odd choices. IT was the same period that GW went for Primaris as a "second" marine army within regular marine armies instead of just releasing a new version of Marine armour and a model update. Yinnari was basically "how to make a new faction by only making 1 boxed set of 3 models".

Since then its basically floundered as a lore concept and not much else.



I could get behind Yinnari being expanded to have Exodites and Corsairs; but I think that if it went down that pathway it would end up a bit like Imperial collected armies - so many armies included that it ends up overpowered because you can pick and choose from such a wide variety of rosters.
Also I feel like just putting other Eldar armies into Yinnari is a lazy approach that lacks creativity and frustrates fans. Those who like Exodites as a concept don't want 3 models in a "collective" army; they want a full army. The lore behind the game supports the view that Exodites can operate at the mass army level; they do have a unique visual appearance compared to both other Eldar and other forces; and they have potential to be a full faction.



Honestly if GW wanted to expand Yinnari now as its own army I'd rather see them make it its own thing (yes even if that meant no exodites investment). Unique models, unique army, unique everything.

with the lore continuing forward, too, i think you could easily make unique ynnari models. blend craftworld and drukhari aesthetics for something distinctly both and neither, rather than just letting you use the models from both armies. say that enough time has passed within the ynnari for these distinct groups to begin sharing the tools of war amongst themselves, or something like that

Exactly, that lets you keep the GrimDark Emo Drukari; the "my race is dying" depressed Craftworlders hiding on Craftworlds and doing stuff in the background - and then a force of unique looking Yinnari attacking and striking and trying to rebuild their empire of old.

Considering many of the Eldar joining are younger there would indeed be more scope for them either mixing up armours and parts or even making their own unique creations. They might even dip into "forbidden technologies". Eg one way to do it would be to have them start using robots instead of wraiths.

We need Chaos Mortals.

Daemons, Knights and Astartes are all fine and well and rock hard. But it’s the Cultists and mortal turn coats that keep the Imperium chasing its tail. They’re the core threat. The rot that festers and grows under The Imperium’s self inflicted brutality toward its citizens.

And we know they exist at all levels of Imperial society, from Planetary Governors right down to the mankiest, most barely still human scavvies and mutants of a Hive World’s sump.


Yet they’re entirely absent from the game. The now near legendary Imperial Armour 13 did them proud of course, but as with the Black Crusade “Lost and the Damned” it didn’t receive the full bodied support such a force requires.

Now we have Imperial Agents? It’s high time the Ordos Hereticus and Malleus had someone to go chasing.

The unwashed, unkempt, insane masses that make up those with genuinely the best chance of overthrowing Imperial rule through number and ubiquity.

Oh, and throw in Dark Mechanicum. Just with a better name.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
We need Chaos Mortals.

Yet they’re entirely absent from the game.
.

They aren't their own faction, that's true.

I don't have the Chaos dex, but the indexes I thought had units for:

Cult Leaders
Cursed Cultists
Regular Cultists
Traitor Guard
Beastmen

What's more, I thought that some of 9th's limitations on what cultists could do had been lifted as well.

That's not to say that I don't want a renegades and Heretics or mortal faction- I like sandboxes, so of course I do.

Just pointing out that "They're entirely absent from the game" is hyperbole.

I had forgotten about those guys.

Definitely need their own Codex though.

They would definitely be cooler if they had one, that's for sure. I'd buy a dew like that in a heartbeat, because as a small scale narrative guy, these units are awesome.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I had forgotten about those guys.

Definitely need their own Codex though.

I agree. Because they don't belong in a book titled Codex CSM.

 PenitentJake wrote:
They would definitely be cooler if they had one, that's for sure. I'd buy a dew like that in a heartbeat, because as a small scale narrative guy, these units are awesome.

And as a Guard/AdMech player, I don't want to see more codices that are effectively "knockoffs" until they actually get a good handle on the identity of those two factions.

The current setup of those mortal elements in CSM works fine.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 PenitentJake wrote:
They would definitely be cooler if they had one, that's for sure. I'd buy a dew like that in a heartbeat, because as a small scale narrative guy, these units are awesome.

And as a Guard/AdMech player, I don't want to see more codices that are effectively "knockoffs" until they actually get a good handle on the identity of those two factions.

The current setup of those mortal elements in CSM works fine.

And yes, I agree- certainly the Guard dex should come out first, and hopefully it will address some of those issues. Fixing Admech is harder since their dex is already out, but yeah, it sounds like they need work too.

I think it's important to acknowledge though that most people in this thread probably want to see some things fixed before we get new stuff- the argument applies elsewhere too; lots of advocates for Exodites, but even most of them probably still want all Aspects and Phoenix Lords in Plastic first.

Nowhere in the thread does it suggest that GW should create new armies and ignore everything else; it's just that the question was about which new factions COULD exist, rather than what does or does not need to be done before those new armies drop.

 PenitentJake wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
We need Chaos Mortals.

Yet they’re entirely absent from the game.
.

They aren't their own faction, that's true.

I don't have the Chaos dex, but the indexes I thought had units for:

Cult Leaders
Cursed Cultists
Regular Cultists
Traitor Guard
Beastmen

What's more, I thought that some of 9th's limitations on what cultists could do had been lifted as well.

That's not to say that I don't want a renegades and Heretics or mortal faction- I like sandboxes, so of course I do.

Just pointing out that "They're entirely absent from the game" is hyperbole.

FWIW, I've been working on an alpha legion mortals army using the GSC rules, and it lines up pretty well. I'm just refluffing/modeling all the xenos stuff as mutations, magic, and daemons. Cultist = cultists. Daemonettes/blood letters = purestrains. Witches = magus/the new guy. Etc. The only hurdle I've run into is that I'm not sure what unit (if any) should use the patriarch rules. It's tempting to use a daemon prince for that, but an argument could be made for just using a chaos marine and explain his stats as basically the law of conservation of ninjutsu in action.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
If they did come around to Ynnari again I think that would be the perfect place for Exodite models. You'd only need 1-2 different units, and perhaps a character. If it's one of those "character option in the unit box" things, all the better.

I feel like Yinnari has wound up with no energy behind it.
I think it comes from a period when GW made some odd choices. IT was the same period that GW went for Primaris as a "second" marine army within regular marine armies instead of just releasing a new version of Marine armour and a model update. Yinnari was basically "how to make a new faction by only making 1 boxed set of 3 models".

Since then its basically floundered as a lore concept and not much else.



I could get behind Yinnari being expanded to have Exodites and Corsairs; but I think that if it went down that pathway it would end up a bit like Imperial collected armies - so many armies included that it ends up overpowered because you can pick and choose from such a wide variety of rosters.
Also I feel like just putting other Eldar armies into Yinnari is a lazy approach that lacks creativity and frustrates fans. Those who like Exodites as a concept don't want 3 models in a "collective" army; they want a full army. The lore behind the game supports the view that Exodites can operate at the mass army level; they do have a unique visual appearance compared to both other Eldar and other forces; and they have potential to be a full faction.



Honestly if GW wanted to expand Yinnari now as its own army I'd rather see them make it its own thing (yes even if that meant no exodites investment). Unique models, unique army, unique everything.

with the lore continuing forward, too, i think you could easily make unique ynnari models. blend craftworld and drukhari aesthetics for something distinctly both and neither, rather than just letting you use the models from both armies. say that enough time has passed within the ynnari for these distinct groups to begin sharing the tools of war amongst themselves, or something like that

My mind goes to the visarch:



He's supposed to be wearing pre-fall armor, so maybe leaning into a "reclaim the empire' angle with "antique" armor designs might be a good idea.

On my passion for Chaos Mortals?

Background wise? What’s more 40K than Mere Humans, sufficiently swollen with gifted, stolen or borrowed power, in their multitude thrown against Astartes and winning.

Even if it’s just “and you thought a hangover or come down was bad” psykers that can turn entire regiments of Guard insides out on a whim. Usually shortly before they turn inside out.

In fact, if GW decided to sideline Slaanesh and let Vashtorr take its place, I would have no problem with it.

GW simply doesn't dare to put out miniatures in the style we WANT and DESIRED, for obvious reasons. It doesn't have many units that people think are cool, except for the Emperor's children. I don't know how many people think that fat eater and his car are cool, or those daemons that don't really have much aesthetic appeal and are not cool.

If Vashtorr took its place, we would undoubtedly get a lot of cool stuff————half-mechanical half-demon units. There would be a lot of new badass daemon engines, cyberdaemons, and even Warhammer 40K versions of Icon of Sin, and chaos lords in a giant red power armor————That is exclusive equipment that only Chaos Lords who serve Vashtorr can possess.
.

WWW-STL wrote:
In fact, if GW decided to sideline Slaanesh and let Vashtorr take its place, I would have no problem with it.

GW simply doesn't dare to put out miniatures in the style we WANT and DESIRED, for obvious reasons. It doesn't have many units that people think are cool, except for the Emperor's children. I don't know how many people think that fat eater and his car are cool, or those daemons that don't really have much aesthetic appeal and are not cool.

If Vashtorr took its place, we would undoubtedly get a lot of cool stuff————half-mechanical half-demon units. There would be a lot of new badass daemon engines, cyberdaemons, and even Warhammer 40K versions of Icon of Sin, and chaos lords in a giant red power armor————That is exclusive equipment that only Chaos Lords who serve Vashtorr can possess.
.

I really like seeing the alternate takes on Slaaneshi excess other than just being horny. The glutton is a great example, actually Noise Marine murderers is another.

Clearly ugly Chaos figures sell, because the entire Nurgle line exists and is the biggest of the God-specific ranges. Seductive daemonettes have a place within Slaanesh, obviously, but they certainly are not the entirety of Slaanesh and I don't think the appetite for sexy models is as high as you are suggesting. I do think GW should keep daemonettes in the model range though, the current ones are appropriately disconcerting.

WWW-STL wrote:
In fact, if GW decided to sideline Slaanesh and let Vashtorr take its place, I would have no problem with it.

GW simply doesn't dare to put out miniatures in the style we WANT and DESIRED, for obvious reasons. It doesn't have many units that people think are cool, except for the Emperor's children. I don't know how many people think that fat eater and his car are cool, or those daemons that don't really have much aesthetic appeal and are not cool.

If Vashtorr took its place, we would undoubtedly get a lot of cool stuff————half-mechanical half-demon units. There would be a lot of new badass daemon engines, cyberdaemons, and even Warhammer 40K versions of Icon of Sin, and chaos lords in a giant red power armor————That is exclusive equipment that only Chaos Lords who serve Vashtorr can possess.
.

Since we need not eliminate one to have the other, why not just hope we get a faction for Vashtor without losing Slaanesh?

Whether you like Slaanesh or not, they are a pivotal antagonist for Aeldari, they complete the classic chaos pantheon and an they ARE a favourite chaos god for many.

 Haighus wrote:

I really like seeing the alternate takes on Slaaneshi excess other than just being horny. The glutton is a great example, actually Noise Marine murderers is another.

While I agree, and think it is cool to have other forms of excess in the army, if you look at violent mental disorders, many are connected with sexual dysfunction, neurosis and other disorders. Obsessing over being good at music or gluttony doesn't have the same presence among violent offenders as sexual dysfunction. And cults using sexuality as a means of recruitment and control is well documented, whereas feeding people to excess, or having them obsess over music is far less common.

 Haighus wrote:

Clearly ugly Chaos figures sell, because the entire Nurgle line exists and is the biggest of the God-specific ranges. Seductive daemonettes have a place within Slaanesh, obviously, but they certainly are not the entirety of Slaanesh and I don't think the appetite for sexy models is as high as you are suggesting. I do think GW should keep daemonettes in the model range though, the current ones are appropriately disconcerting.

I think there are some people who may stay away from hypersexualized models for political reasons; there may be some people whose sense of attraction is more piqued by well dressed and accessorized people than by naked or scantily clad ones- it's amazing the role style can play in attracting a partner.

But if you ask any Slaanesh player their favourite Daemonettes, they're likely going to say the Diaz sculpts, and every time they are re-released "for a limited time only" GW make FAT bank. If you look at Wargames Exclusive, Artel, or Raging Heroes, it's quite obvious that sexy minis sell at least as well as the ugly ones.

And if you want to bring it back to 40k, I'm sure I can dig up a 60 page thread on fat Lelith or Beefy Escher.

 PenitentJake wrote:

WWW-STL wrote:
In fact, if GW decided to sideline Slaanesh and let Vashtorr take its place, I would have no problem with it.

GW simply doesn't dare to put out miniatures in the style we WANT and DESIRED, for obvious reasons. It doesn't have many units that people think are cool, except for the Emperor's children. I don't know how many people think that fat eater and his car are cool, or those daemons that don't really have much aesthetic appeal and are not cool.

If Vashtorr took its place, we would undoubtedly get a lot of cool stuff————half-mechanical half-demon units. There would be a lot of new badass daemon engines, cyberdaemons, and even Warhammer 40K versions of Icon of Sin, and chaos lords in a giant red power armor————That is exclusive equipment that only Chaos Lords who serve Vashtorr can possess.
.

Since we need not eliminate one to have the other, why not just hope we get a faction for Vashtor without losing Slaanesh?

 Haighus wrote:

I really like seeing the alternate takes on Slaaneshi excess other than just being horny. The glutton is a great example, actually Noise Marine murderers is another.

While I agree, and think it is cool to have other forms of excess in the army, if you look at violent mental disorders, many are connected with sexual dysfunction, neurosis and other disorders. Obsessing over being good at music or gluttony doesn't have the same presence among violent offenders as sexual dysfunction. And cults using sexuality as a means of recruitment and control is well documented, whereas feeding people to excess, or having them obsess over music is far less common.

Not sure what the relevance is of mental disorders? Chaos isn't a mental illness, and "violent mental disorders" are the tiny minority of serious mental illness in real life. Chaos doesn't follow any pattern related to real mental illness. This isn't a good angle to go down.

I think Slaaneshi sexual excess being commonly depicted in BL materialis because GW writers find it easy or convenient to use for whatever reason. But it only seems to be a common method in some areas of society. Gluttony and excessive consumption is the way Slaaneshi nobles are often portrayed, such as the Glaw family. Excessive perfection of violent arts is the common method for warriors (like Chaos Marines in particular). I'd argue that for much of the existence of 40k, the violent perfectionism and noise Marine depictions were the most common depictions, really until Chaos daemons splintered off as their own faction. GW seems to be highlighting that aspect more again in AoS, and I'd expect the same when they do Emperor's Children.

 Haighus wrote:

Clearly ugly Chaos figures sell, because the entire Nurgle line exists and is the biggest of the God-specific ranges. Seductive daemonettes have a place within Slaanesh, obviously, but they certainly are not the entirety of Slaanesh and I don't think the appetite for sexy models is as high as you are suggesting. I do think GW should keep daemonettes in the model range though, the current ones are appropriately disconcerting.

I think there are some people who may stay away from hypersexualized models for political reasons; there may be some people whose sense of attraction is more piqued by well dressed and accessorized people than by naked or scantily clad ones- it's amazing the role style can play in attracting a partner.

But if you ask any Slaanesh player their favourite Daemonettes, they're likely going to say the Diaz sculpts, and every time they are re-released "for a limited time only" GW make FAT bank. If you look at Wargames Exclusive, Artel, or Raging Heroes, it's quite obvious that sexy minis sell at least as well as the ugly ones.

And if you want to bring it back to 40k, I'm sure I can dig up a 60 page thread on fat Lelith or Beefy Escher.

Not going to argue such models are unpopular, I'm pushing back on the assertion that they are the only form of models in general or Slaanesh in particular that are popular. Those threads are 60 pages long because there are large numbers with the opposite viewpoint too that generate discussion.

Thing is?

Daemonettes, background wise, aren’t sexy. They use a glamour to beguile opponents. But they remain horrific to look upon, and drop the glamour when it’s time to take a life.

The other reason sexualised depictions of Slaanesh worshippers are most often used is because it's easier to sculpt. It's a convenient shorthand that doesn't require any further explanation. If you look at a Noise Marine, like the classic guitar-bolter one, it's not immediately obvious to the non-initiated that this guy is dedicated to the God of Excess. Even once you've painted it all the garish colours you still have to explain the whole thing about being so excessively indulgent that only the wildest sensations have any meaning. That's a much more nuanced and interesting take on Slaanesh, IMO, but it makes for a much less clearly defined model aesthetic, so it's a problem for GW since they're fundamentally about selling models.

Slipspace wrote:
The other reason sexualised depictions of Slaanesh worshippers are most often used is because it's easier to sculpt. It's a convenient shorthand that doesn't require any further explanation. If you look at a Noise Marine, like the classic guitar-bolter one, it's not immediately obvious to the non-initiated that this guy is dedicated to the God of Excess. Even once you've painted it all the garish colours you still have to explain the whole thing about being so excessively indulgent that only the wildest sensations have any meaning. That's a much more nuanced and interesting take on Slaanesh, IMO, but it makes for a much less clearly defined model aesthetic, so it's a problem for GW since they're fundamentally about selling models.

That was true 16 years ago (when the current daemonettes were released). If you take a look at the AoS slaanesh range, they did a wonderful job representing excess without going for "they like sex lul".

I fully expect that when GW goes to update the daemonettes (and seekers and chariots) we'll get something that matches better with the AoS range.

in the meantime, i'll stick to CreatureCaster's Demons of Ecstasy

Apart from how they go together (I really hate the arms) I don't get the beef with current Daemonettes.

They're vaguely lithe humanoids that from afar could be confused as beautiful but then you get closer and you see the sharp teeth, hooved feet and claws which I think encapsulates Slaanesh pretty well.

From afar it's all ecstasy and sensation then when you get in among it the real horror sets in.

Also, this idea that only sex can make a Slaanesh cult is utterly absurd. Starving Imperial citizens given the chance to eat all they want and experience culinary delights unheard of. The drudgery and monotony of labouring in a Manufactorum broken up by hidden music clubs and artistic displays. A chance to let one's passions run wild no matter what they are.
Those are all things that have happened in our past already.
GW just hasn't expanded Slaanesh because it wasn't as easy as the other three Gods and writers never really made the effort either.

The deamonette kit is actually rather neat in how it swaps with the others. Charios, seeker riders and deamonettes all use interchangeable connection points so you can swap parts around effortlessly.

Having read the Liber Chaotica there ARE some really neat deamonette style creatures in there that have other features like whip arms and other elements that I think would be neat to see.

I do think some people just want the Diaz style of sexy deamonettes back and won't accept anything else.


I think excess has always been a part of Slaanesh, but in the past it was always presented in a very "excess brings pleasure". I think also because GW likely wanted to keep fatter models to Nurgle; smarter to Tzeentch and more fighty to Khorne. Which I think made a lot of sense when all 4 were in one army originally.

With them separated fully in AoS and kind of heading that way in 40K, I think it opens up for allowing gluttons and other excesses to appear with slaanesh styles and themes because now you're not stepping on Nurgle's design toes. It also creates loads of gaps in the model lineup for tactical slots and functions that previously were handled by another god's unit.

 Gert wrote:
Apart from how they go together (I really hate the arms) I don't get the beef with current Daemonettes.

They're vaguely lithe humanoids that from afar could be confused as beautiful but then you get closer and you see the sharp teeth, hooved feet and claws which I think encapsulates Slaanesh pretty well.

From afar it's all ecstasy and sensation then when you get in among it the real horror sets in.

my issue with them is that theyre too static and their proportions are too cartoony

My issue is mostly with the seeker riders. The mounts are just too small. You REALLY see it with the mortal seeker riders.

The new Exalted Seekers are sized properly for the riders and I'd love to see them roll out for the deamonettes oneday even if it meant they'd all be upscaled.



Chariots are a cool kit but always always feel out of place in 40K. In Old World/AOS perfect; in 40K they feel like they should have a bunch of bolt-on gun emplacements or something
(oh and freaking heck give them rolled up whips not elongated ones!)

 Overread wrote:
My issue is mostly with the seeker riders. The mounts are just too small. You REALLY see it with the mortal seeker riders.

The new Exalted Seekers are sized properly for the riders and I'd love to see them roll out for the deamonettes oneday even if it meant they'd all be upscaled.



Chariots are a cool kit but always always feel out of place in 40K. In Old World/AOS perfect; in 40K they feel like they should have a bunch of bolt-on gun emplacements or something
(oh and freaking heck give them rolled up whips not elongated ones!)

the new ones are EXALTED seekers, so it kinda makes sense for the old ones to be smaller. Still doesn't excuse the crazy difference in dynamism between the two. Slaanesh should be the one with lithe and agile demons

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Overread wrote:
My issue is mostly with the seeker riders. The mounts are just too small. You REALLY see it with the mortal seeker riders.

The new Exalted Seekers are sized properly for the riders and I'd love to see them roll out for the deamonettes oneday even if it meant they'd all be upscaled.



Chariots are a cool kit but always always feel out of place in 40K. In Old World/AOS perfect; in 40K they feel like they should have a bunch of bolt-on gun emplacements or something
(oh and freaking heck give them rolled up whips not elongated ones!)

the new ones are EXALTED seekers, so it kinda makes sense for the old ones to be smaller. Still doesn't excuse the crazy difference in dynamism between the two. Slaanesh should be the one with lithe and agile demons

Yeah but if you look at the old Diaz deamonettes and at the artwork of seeker riders you can see that seekers are big compared to their riders. The riders perch atop; the current plastic models the riders are heavily straddled over them. The mortal ones are almost comical.

Meanwhile the Exalted have a much better set of proportions. With a larger mount body you've also room to have the rider dancing/perched on the back rather than straddling.

Part of it is indeed that the older kit is more simple in pose (likely a result of them wanting easy swapping of arms between all the kits); but another is just the relative sizes of mount and rider. New kits from GW I think will be a very long way off, but they'd be very welcome with much more dynamic (if likely fixed) poses and hopefully exalted mounts for all (or at least bigger mounts)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gert wrote:
I don't get the beef with current Daemonettes.

my issue with them is that theyre too static and their proportions are too cartoony

Too cartoony is a feature of many chaos kits and models from a few other armies. I think this is partly a hazard of plastic updates to metal sculpts.

 Gert wrote:
Apart from how they go together (I really hate the arms) I don't get the beef with current Daemonettes.

For myself, it isn't that I have a beef with the current kit at all- I don't, it's fine.

I just like the Diaz models better.

I actually like having both in my army- it provides greater variety.

 Overread wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Overread wrote:
My issue is mostly with the seeker riders. The mounts are just too small. You REALLY see it with the mortal seeker riders.

The new Exalted Seekers are sized properly for the riders and I'd love to see them roll out for the deamonettes oneday even if it meant they'd all be upscaled.



Chariots are a cool kit but always always feel out of place in 40K. In Old World/AOS perfect; in 40K they feel like they should have a bunch of bolt-on gun emplacements or something
(oh and freaking heck give them rolled up whips not elongated ones!)

the new ones are EXALTED seekers, so it kinda makes sense for the old ones to be smaller. Still doesn't excuse the crazy difference in dynamism between the two. Slaanesh should be the one with lithe and agile demons

Yeah but if you look at the old Diaz deamonettes and at the artwork of seeker riders you can see that seekers are big compared to their riders. The riders perch atop; the current plastic models the riders are heavily straddled over them. The mortal ones are almost comical.

Meanwhile the Exalted have a much better set of proportions. With a larger mount body you've also room to have the rider dancing/perched on the back rather than straddling.

Part of it is indeed that the older kit is more simple in pose (likely a result of them wanting easy swapping of arms between all the kits); but another is just the relative sizes of mount and rider. New kits from GW I think will be a very long way off, but they'd be very welcome with much more dynamic (if likely fixed) poses and hopefully exalted mounts for all (or at least bigger mounts)

I suspect the issue is that the riders had to scale with the foot daemonettes but the mounts had to fit on a 25x50mm base.

The AoS ‘Exalted’ seekers didn’t have the latter limitation so could be bigger.

That and GW can make bigger moulds now and bigger plastic models. Without having to rely on thousands of parts to get there. Granted Exalted Seekers aren't as big as dragons, but its certainly a display of the evolution of GW's capacity to invest and so forth between the two ranges of models.

 Overread wrote:
.


I think excess has always been a part of Slaanesh, but in the past it was always presented in a very "excess brings pleasure". I think also because GW likely wanted to keep fatter models to Nurgle; smarter to Tzeentch and more fighty to Khorne. Which I think made a lot of sense when all 4 were in one army originally.

With them separated fully in AoS and kind of heading that way in 40K, I think it opens up for allowing gluttons and other excesses to appear with slaanesh styles and themes because now you're not stepping on Nurgle's design toes. It also creates loads of gaps in the model lineup for tactical slots and functions that previously were handled by another god's unit.

I don't personally agree with this- if you go back to 2nd and 3rd edition Slaaneshi units, they were primarily violent, military expressions of excess and perfection. This makes sense, for a wargame. But Slaaneshi lords and Marines being focussed on martial prowess and and the ectasy of murder didn't lead to stepping on the toes of Khorne and the model ranges were distinct. For a start, Khornate aesthetics have tended towards brutality and Slaaneshi aesthetics towards elegance.

Ultimately, it was a choice to take Slaaneshi daemons and many of their fiction depictions along the route of being succubi over other forms of excess. I don't think it was a wrong choice per se, but certainly not the only choice as demonstrated by GW themselves in their other Slaaneshi model lines.

The only true Daemonettes have giant crab hands.

Anyone? No?

I think Noise Marines kind of struggle in the modern day because "Heavy Metal" just doesn't seem that subversive. Not entirely sure it was in the 1980s either, but there were potentially more connotations in a way that there isn't so much today. But maybe that's a reflection of my own (or societies) hedonism.

I think noise marines just suffer from not actually having a model. There's an upgrade kit but no actual models and the only one they've had is the kind of promo-model that GW did which is a fairly regular marine glammed up .

It depends on the Metal.

Metallica mainstreamed with the Black album, but Cannibal Corpse and Rotting Christ are still out there.

But admittedly, we're a long way from Dee Snyder vs. Tipper Gore and the PMRC, Ozzy with his bat-head and the Suicide Solution or Judas Priest and their episode with youth suicide.

Tyel wrote:
The only true Daemonettes have giant crab hands.

Anyone? No?

I think Noise Marines kind of struggle in the modern day because "Heavy Metal" just doesn't seem that subversive. Not entirely sure it was in the 1980s either, but there were potentially more connotations in a way that there isn't so much today. But maybe that's a reflection of my own (or societies) hedonism.

They may have been a little goofy, but the lobsters did leave an impression.

I like the steeds from the lobster claw era, but that might be the nostalgia talking. The new ones are not bad, but the ones in the middle were not good.