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

Ok so I for one was all over the Gav Thorpe web blog last week and I know a lot of forums are popping up like this, but i am jumping on the bandwagon before the train leaves the station. Below I am going to add my fixes, suggestions, additions, etc. which pertain to the contemporary Co: CSM. My Goals is that other dakka readers will then add to my suggestions and by the end maybe someone at GW will have a real nice piece of market research. Its a win-win for all parties. I beg of future posters, please keep all comments and criticisms moving the conversation in a positive direction. It is by all means ok to disagree with someone's ideas but please give a reason why and what change you think would help.

Now, without further ado, my list of Improvements to Co: CSM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the following suggestion will be supplanted with the current (as of 2009) Co: CSM as a foundation. It is assumed that if it is not mentioned here that it exists as is and should not be assumed to have been eliminated. Point Costs may in many circumstances require adjusting and no point costs have been provided herein.

I. Co: CSM may ally with Co: Chaos Deamons
A) I have not worked out the limitations here or how they will enter play to keep it from being

II. Special Characters and HQ choices
A) No changes to Special Character Typhus, Ahriman, Kharn, Lucious, Fabius or Huron as they all have legion specific troop choices at their disposal or have general access to the entire Codex and such additions to their profiles are quite unnecessary given the nature of Co: CSM.
B) Special Character Abaddon the Despoiler
1) Inspiring Presence: All friendly units within 12” of Abaddon receive +1 Attacks whilst he lives. this bonus does not apply to Abaddon nor does it stack with similar bonuses.
C) HQ: Dark Apostle (Word Bearers Special Character)
1) Comparable war gear to Co: SM Chaplain
2) Provides +1 to every summoning roll
3) Concerning Possessed CSM, player may re-roll the results of the Possession Table but must use the second outcome.
4) Entire force is granted the “Fearless” USR
D) HQ: Warsmith (Iron Warriors Special Character)
1) Comparable war gear to Co: SM Master of the Forge
a) No Conversion Beamer
2) Makes Basilisk Tanks available Heavy option
a) (1-3); squadrons not permitted
3) One additional Heavy Slot may replace an Elite Slot on the FOC
4) Entire force is granted “Stubborn” USR
E) HQ: Talon Master (Night Lords Special Character)
1) Entire force is granted the following USRs:
a) “Hit and Run”,
i) I have heard strong arguments in favor of "Stealth" over "Hit and Run" see this needs fleshing out
b) “Night Vision”, and
c) “Move Through Cover”
2) Optional Jet Pack
3) Forces led by NLSC may not take any Marks or Units which are specific to a Ruinous Power. Only Followers of Chaos Undivided are permitted.
F) HQ: Stealth Leader (Alpha Legion Special Character)
1) Gift of Prescience: If your army contains ALSC, you can choose to re-roll any reserve rolls- even successful ones.
2) Any unit ALSC attaches to gains the “Out Flank” USR
3) A roll to “steal the initiative” by controlling player is successful on a D6 roll of 5+.
a) This could be simplified to the Co: SM version whereby the "steal the initiative" roll may be re-rolled once...
G) Lords, Sorcerors, Deamon Princes
1) Full layout of war gear options will be made available to these generic HQ choices
2) Demon weapons, wings/jetpacks, bikes, marks, icons, combi weapons, armor, etc. etc. will be optional for all
3) Demon Princes are (0-1)
H) HQ Retinues
1) Chosen may be taken as HQ retinue. Chosen may be upgraded with terminator armor (Terminator Asp. Champs) if HQ is donning terminator armor.

III. Currently Existing Unit Changes
A) Dreadnaughts
1) Eliminate Dreadnought table
2) New War Gear
a) Seismic Hammer
b) Extra Armor
3) Marks specific war gear
a) Slaanesh: Sonic Weaponry (dirge castors, sonic blasters etc)
b) Nurgle: Nurgling distractions (Eliminates charge bonus like defensive grenades)
c) Khorne: Rending Chain Fists (this may not be as helpful since rending was nerfed)
d) Tzeetch: Twin-linked heavy bolters with inferno bolts
B) Possessed CSM
1) Lower points
2) roll on the table PRIOR to deployment.
3) may take marks as well
C) CSM Bikers
1) Chaos Biker Shock Upgrade (representing the affect of all those bike mounted blades)
a) Works similarly to Tank Shock however the maneuver occurs in the assault phase and all normal actions may be taken prior to it. If you turbo boost in the movement phase then you may not Biker Shock.

IV. New/Additional War Gear Options
A) Bionic Limbs/Mutations: +1 WS
B) Chain Axes: +1 S
1) Note: Will be already included in Berserker profile as chain axes are their weapon of choice and so as to avoid over powering them.
C) Collar of Khorn: immunizes wearer from affects of psychic abilities
D) Icon of Chaos = Locator Beacons/teleport homers
E) Power Mace = Thunder Hammer
F) Spiky Bits = Digital weapons
G) Stigmata = Iron Halo
1) Represented by fresh wounds, scars, or other marks usually found on the bearer’s head or chest
H) Trophy Rack
1) Gives “Preferred Enemy” USR to entire unit.
I) Plague Knives and Plague Swords and Blight Grenades to be optional replacements for champs with Mark of Nurgle
J) Asp Champs with Mark of Tzeetch should be allowed to upgrade to sorcerers with access to one psychic power

V. Transport
A) Dread Claw = Drop pod
1) No inertial guidance system
a) May land on difficult or dangerous terrain but Units disembarking must take tests as normal.
b) Impassable terrain will be automatically avoided by reducing the scatter by the unnecessary distance.
c) If a dread claw lands on an opposing unit then the foe must roll a leadership test to either move out of the way are risk breaking.
2) No Deathwind Launcher upgrade
3) No locator beacon upgrade
B) Sonic Weaponry Transport War Gear
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alright there you have it, my thoughts on some of the additions, chances, and over-all suggestions to improve on the current Co: CSM





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Darn it! none of the spacing worked! oh well try to follow the break down. the hierarchy is as follows: I; A); 1); a); i)

Sorry if this is hard to read!

I like most of what you said. I think a couple things more would be

-Cheap Slaneesh Marines (aka Apoc Data sheet ones) and more options to variations with weapons and such (e.g. sonic weapons on preds and such)

-God Specific Daemons (lesser Daemons) or allying with daemons codex.

- Custumizible Daemon Prince like last codex

-Possesed Marines are not random. Lower points and instead give upgrades/mutations. (+5 a model for rending, +10 for wings, so on and so forth)

Hmmm I like this gives chaos a buff but not hugely broken lots of different special rules those guys grant your army.

Hopefully GW might somehow see this and give them something to think about i would love to start a slannesh noise marine army but there just aren't enough models in the army to satisfy my taste.

You forgot something:

CULT TERMINATORS.

e.g. sonic weaponry, FNP, furious charge, and, importantly, fearless.

CajunMan550 wrote:

-God Specific Daemons (lesser Daemons) or allying with daemons codex.

- Custumizible Daemon Prince like last codex

Yeah I covered these but I understand much of the OP may be missed because of the unfortunate format.

Keep it going guys/girls . I want to exhaust our ideas so we can when GW doesn't develop satisfactory CSM Codices in the future.

I like the way you think

Lol @ all of this.
You want your back and GW isn't giving it you .

@ Farmer:

I have not given any point costs to anything above so how can you claim cheese? Youn can't unless it ends up undercost.

All CSM players want is variety and flavor. I suggest you read Gav Thorpe's Blog. You can find a link at BoLS.

With all do respect, I asked for constructive criticism not trolling.

Farmer wrote:Lol @ all of this.
You want your back and GW isn't giving it you .

Please add to the list all the old mutations/gifts of chaos from 3.5!

That right their is the best way to add some flavor/list difference back into the codex.

jp400 wrote:

Please add to the list all the old mutations/gifts of chaos from 3.5!

That right their is the best way to add some flavor/list difference back into the codex.

Ummm i don't remember what they were. Could you post them?

I had mutations generally/bionics generally as +1 WS

Making Chaos Termies as troops seems way out of character, as the armor is supposed to be even more rarer than the loyalist ones. Besides, Chaos has oblits, which are termies with shifting guns. (2+ armor, 5+ invur).

Allying Daemon codex limitations could be made simple by only being able to take 0-1 HQ, 0-1 Elite, 0-2 Troop, 0-2 Fast, and no heavy same as DH and WH.
But you can only take daemons that match the mark taken by the armies HQ. (so a Lord with Mark of Khorne can only take Khorne related daemons, HQs with no affiliation cant take any daemons, ect)

Just sayin.

Deuce11 wrote:

jp400 wrote:

Please add to the list all the old mutations/gifts of chaos from 3.5!

That right their is the best way to add some flavor/list difference back into the codex.

Ummm i don't remember what they were. Could you post them?

I had mutations generally/bionics generally as +1 WS

I would, but I dont have enough free time today to post all that up. For a refresher you can google a certain "scribd" and have him search for CSM: 3.5 for a preview.

I find this all kinda funny. The CSM codex is still good; you're just limited to 1 uber-competitive build. I would feel bad for you if it weren't for a couple of things:
1) you have arguably the best troops and the variety in your troops choice; every other army must look to their elites choices to get models with a 4++ or ap 3 squad weapons or furious charge and WS5 or toughness 5 etc. etc.... (not to mention that you used to get only 1 cult troop as a troops choice based on your lord's mark)
2) You can have 3 HQ choices one of which is a MC
3) you get obliterators

I can understand you wanting more variety in your list but you won't get any sympathy from me; I play BA. When's the last time you saw a tourney army that didn't include Dante + Corbs?

And now I'll get to each point individually:

Deuce11 wrote:

I. Co: CSM may ally with Co: Chaos Deamons
A) I have not worked out the limitations here or how they will enter play to keep it from being
Not going to happen unless you get legion codexes
II. Special Characters and HQ choices
A) No changes to Special Character Typhus, Ahriman, Kharn, Lucious, Fabius or Huron as they all have legion specific troop choices at their disposal or have general access to the entire Codex and such additions to their profiles are quite unnecessary given the nature of Co: CSM.
B) Special Character Abaddon the Despoiler
1) Inspiring Presence: All friendly units within 12” of Abaddon receive +1 Attacks whilst he lives. this bonus does not apply to Abaddon nor does it stack with similar bonuses.
Really? you want Pedro with a daemon blade? Ummm no.
C) HQ: Dark Apostle (Word Bearers Special Character)
1) Comparable war gear to Co: SM Chaplain
you really want a character w/ I4?
2) Provides +1 to every summoning roll
Sure, why not
3) Concerning Possessed CSM, player may re-roll the results of the Possession Table but must use the second outcome.
Yeah they do need this (see not all my comments are negative)
4) Entire force is granted the “Fearless” USR
Despite the fact that all your cult troops already are I'm going to have to say no.
D) HQ: Warsmith (Iron Warriors Special Character)
1) Comparable war gear to Co: SM Master of the Forge
a) No Conversion Beamer
2) Makes Basilisk Tanks available Heavy option
Not a chance. I'm surprised you guys didn't see this coming when the new 'dex came out.
a) (1-3); squadrons not permitted
3) One additional Heavy Slot may replace an Elite Slot on the FOC
Absolutely not. It was broken before and It's still broken.
4) Entire force is granted “Stubborn” USR
E) HQ: Talon Master (Night Lords Special Character)
1) Entire force is granted the following USRs:
a) “Hit and Run”,
i) I have heard strong arguments in favor of "Stealth" over "Hit and Run" see this needs fleshing out
b) “Night Vision”, and
c) “Move Through Cover”
I wouldn't call this broken but it seems like you ought to just play SM if you want characters that rework your army.
2) Optional Jet Pack
3) Forces led by NLSC may not take any Marks or Units which are specific to a Ruinous Power. Only Followers of Chaos Undivided are permitted.
F) HQ: Stealth Leader (Alpha Legion Special Character)
1) Gift of Prescience: If your army contains ALSC, you can choose to re-roll any reserve rolls- even successful ones.
Why?
2) Any unit ALSC attaches to gains the “Out Flank” USR
Infiltrate makes more sense to me...
3) A roll to “steal the initiative” by controlling player is successful on a D6 roll of 5+.
a) This could be simplified to the Co: SM version whereby the "steal the initiative" roll may be re-rolled once...
G) Lords, Sorcerors, Deamon Princes
1) Full layout of war gear options will be made available to these generic HQ choices
2) Demon weapons, wings/jetpacks, bikes, marks, icons, combi weapons, armor, etc. etc. will be optional for all
Do DP's really need more wargear options to be effective? I just don't know...
3) Demon Princes are (0-1)
H) HQ Retinues
1) Chosen may be taken as HQ retinue. Chosen may be upgraded with terminator armor (Terminator Asp. Champs) if HQ is donning terminator armor.
If by retinue you meant they could be taken without using up a FOC slot then sure. If you meant as a way for your character to lose his IC status then definitely not

III. Currently Existing Unit Changes
A) Dreadnaughts
1) Eliminate Dreadnought table
If you mean the "crazy table" then why? It's been there for three editions and it's what justifies your dread getting an extra attack over the SM one for approximately the same cost.
2) New War Gear
a) Seismic Hammer
No. stop coveting SM toys. besides it's not that great.
b) Extra Armor
3) Marks specific war gear
a) Slaanesh: Sonic Weaponry (dirge castors, sonic blasters etc)
b) Nurgle: Nurgling distractions (Eliminates charge bonus like defensive grenades)
c) Khorne: Rending Chain Fists (this may not be as helpful since rending was nerfed)
d) Tzeetch: Twin-linked heavy bolters with inferno bolts
If this stuff happens at all it will be in the legion codexes (if they ever happen). If you want a characterful dread force you'll just have to play SM's
B) Possessed CSM
1) Lower points
2) roll on the table PRIOR to deployment.
Definatley agree on this point
3) may take marks as well
Not so sure about this though; they already get stat bonus's
C) CSM Bikers
1) Chaos Biker Shock Upgrade (representing the affect of all those bike mounted blades)
a) Works similarly to Tank Shock however the maneuver occurs in the assault phase and all normal actions may be taken prior to it. If you turbo boost in the movement phase then you may not Biker Shock.
Sorry there's just no precedent for this

IV. New/Additional War Gear Options
A) Bionic Limbs/Mutations: +1 WS Unnecessary. No.
B) Chain Axes: +1 S Who would bother putting this on their HQ? But sure, why not?
1) Note: Will be already included in Berserker profile as chain axes are their weapon of choice and so as to avoid over powering them.
C) Collar of Khorn: immunizes wearer from affects of psychic abilities
D) Icon of Chaos = Locator Beacons/teleport homers
E) Power Mace = Thunder Hammer Again, Stop coveting SM toys
F) Spiky Bits = Digital weapons No, see above
G) Stigmata = Iron Halo No. SM's have always had better Inv saves. In the last codex only abby and the dark apostle had a 4+
1) Represented by fresh wounds, scars, or other marks usually found on the bearer’s head or chest
H) Trophy Rack
1) Gives “Preferred Enemy” USR to entire unit. NO
I) Plague Knives and Plague Swords and Blight Grenades to be optional replacements for champs with Mark of Nurgle
J) Asp Champs with Mark of Tzeetch should be allowed to upgrade to sorcerers with access to one psychic power not in a regular joe schmo squad.

V. Transport
A) Dread Claw = Drop pod
1) No inertial guidance system
a) May land on difficult or dangerous terrain but Units disembarking must take tests as normal.
b) Impassable terrain will be automatically avoided by reducing the scatter by the unnecessary distance.
c) If a dread claw lands on an opposing unit then the foe must roll a leadership test to either move out of the way are risk breaking.
2) No Deathwind Launcher upgrade
3) No locator beacon upgrade
B) Sonic Weaponry Transport War Gear
No to the whole concept. Chaos has never had drop pods in their codex. Save that for apocalypse.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alright there you have it, my thoughts on some of the additions, chances, and over-all suggestions to improve on the current Co: CSM

Everything I did not comment on (and a couple of the things I did) seemed okay to me.

I think that CSM players are just going to have to cope with the fact that their codex is comparatively bland. I did.

I like the fluff description of Steel brethren in our own codex. "Extensive use of transports and DROP PODS."

Deuce11 wrote:
B) Possessed CSM
3) may take marks as well

They can look it up possessed can take an Icon.

On topic I would change:
possessed I use them anyway and have had a unit of 5 eventually take down a termi squad,
while I havn't seen the mutations they sound like a very good idea
and give lords eternal warrior and the ability to take a retinue if they so wish.

but thats it you can already take a fluffy force you can take a tournemont winning force (assuming they are not one and the same).

Deuce11 wrote:@ Farmer:

I have not given any point costs to anything above so how can you claim cheese? Youn can't unless it ends up undercost.

All CSM players want is variety and flavor. I suggest you read Gav Thorpe's Blog. You can find a link at BoLS.

With all do respect, I asked for constructive criticism not trolling.

Sorry,if i've got half the chaos fanboy's on my case,seems i have clearly hit a nerve.

But with all respect to you,the rules that where once removed aren't going to suddenly comeback are they ?.

To all nay sayers i think you are missing point. Please go to BoLS and find the link to Gav's Blog. He admits the CSM dex sucks, not because its not powerful (as dual lash and plague marines is quite powerful and near broken) but there is nothing to create inventive fluffy lists. There is no variety, flavor, etc. Please refer to the Blog. I do not wish to rehash the very lengthy argument here.

Also, my "rules" et al are a starting point. There are no point values. This is an exercise of imagination within reality. I honestly will not loose any sleep if old rules come back or not. I just want to see if anyone has thought about this as I have and actually heeded Gav's advice instead of just pouting.

And if you think DPs have enough options you prolly should withstand the urge to post in this forum as you obviously don't get it


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh AND the idea of using characters to "rework" armies is done on purpose to avoid the necessity of legion specific codices and instead use the precedent set by a successful Co: SM... silly goose

BTW all my USR choices for the legion specific characters are based on the fluff i read on librarium.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:1) you have arguably the best troops and the variety in your troops choice; every other army must look to their elites choices to get models with a 4++ or ap 3 squad weapons or furious charge and WS5 or toughness 5 etc. etc.... (not to mention that you used to get only 1 cult troop as a troops choice based on your lord's mark)
2) You can have 3 HQ choices one of which is a MC
3) you get obliterators

Something a lot of us would be willing to trade for if we got an interesting Codex in return.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:I can understand you wanting more variety in your list but you won't get any sympathy from me; I play BA. When's the last time you saw a tourney army that didn't include Dante + Corbs?

Oh I'm sorry, you must have missed the fact that this is a "Proposed Rules" forum, a forum specifically designed to allow people to post rules that they'd like to propose. It's not a 'you shouldn't get these rules' forum, and posting sympathy (or a lack thereof) doesn't really help either.

Sorry, but people coming into proposed rules threads to say things like "You shouldn't get it" is no different to someone posting a list in the Army Lists sub-forum and saying "I'm not changing it!" at the end of his post - it defeats the express purpose of the forum in question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farmer wrote:But with all respect to you,the rules that where once removed aren't going to suddenly comeback are they ?.

Which means what exactly? This isn't a "What is GW going to do?" forum, it's a proposed rules form. Get that through your skull and stop trolling.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:1) you have arguably the best troops and the variety in your troops choice; every other army must look to their elites choices to get models with a 4++ or ap 3 squad weapons or furious charge and WS5 or toughness 5 etc. etc.... (not to mention that you used to get only 1 cult troop as a troops choice based on your lord's mark)
2) You can have 3 HQ choices one of which is a MC
3) you get obliterators

Something a lot of us would be willing to trade for if we got an interesting Codex in return.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:I can understand you wanting more variety in your list but you won't get any sympathy from me; I play BA. When's the last time you saw a tourney army that didn't include Dante + Corbs?

Oh I'm sorry, you must have missed the fact that this is a "Proposed Rules" forum, a forum specifically designed to allow people to post rules that they'd like to propose. It's not a 'you shouldn't get these rules' forum, and posting sympathy (or a lack thereof) doesn't really help either.

Sorry, but people coming into proposed rules threads to say things like "You shouldn't get it" is no different to someone posting a list in the Army Lists sub-forum and saying "I'm not changing it!" at the end of his post - it defeats the express purpose of the forum in question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farmer wrote:But with all respect to you,the rules that where once removed aren't going to suddenly comeback are they ?.

Which means what exactly? This isn't a "What is GW going to do?" forum, it's a proposed rules form. Get that through your skull and stop trolling.

QFT!

There may have been an undercurrent of mockery in my post as to the chaos players missing the old brand of cheese they had but I did take the time to go through the huge wishlist that was posted and point out what I liked (there was some) and what I felt was at best unrealistic.

I find that usually when people make lists of how their codex should be only about half of what is proposed is reasonable. The rest is "wouldn't it be cool if" ideas inspired by something other than precedent. I feel like someone ought to point out those ideas for what they are.

I know how to make everyone feel better: I'll make a BA proposed rules topic and you can shoot it down. Then we'll be even.
Then again I'm sure that's been done before...

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:...as to the chaos players missing the old brand of cheese...

If you're going to persist in making utterly idiotic strawman-based arguments, then perhaps it was better if you stopped posting in this thread.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:...as to the chaos players missing the old brand of cheese...

If you're going to persist in making utterly idiotic strawman-based arguments, then perhaps it was better if you stopped posting in this thread.

that wasn't meant to be literal.

If I were trying to troll this would be too easy. Maybe you should relax a little.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:I think that CSM players are just going to have to cope with the fact that their codex is comparatively bland. I did.

Get Out. Now. I Never Want To See This Kind Of Talk On Here Again. Ever. Have Some Common Decency Please.

Congratulations on realising BA is bland. Now try to imagine playing Chaos, having about 8 different legions all with 10 times the character of the BA, and STILL not getting seperate codexes. At least you actually have a BA codex. I wonder that you dare to come on here and have the gall to complain to US about YOUR codex.

All you random folk preaching to Chaos players about 'getting over it' without having any idea what you are talking about are getting REALLY annoying and I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks so.

I find this all kinda funny. The CSM codex is still good; you're just limited to 1 uber-competitive build. I would feel bad for you if it weren't for a couple of things:
1) you have arguably the best troops and the variety in your troops choice; every other army must look to their elites choices to get models with a 4++ or ap 3 squad weapons or furious charge and WS5 or toughness 5 etc. etc.... (not to mention that you used to get only 1 cult troop as a troops choice based on your lord's mark)
2) You can have 3 HQ choices one of which is a MC
3) you get obliterators

I can understand you wanting more variety in your list but you won't get any sympathy from me; I play BA. When's the last time you saw a tourney army that didn't include Dante + Corbs?

qft

Ugodostres wrote:

I find this all kinda funny. The CSM codex is still good; you're just limited to 1 uber-competitive build. I would feel bad for you if it weren't for a couple of things:
1) you have arguably the best troops and the variety in your troops choice; every other army must look to their elites choices to get models with a 4++ or ap 3 squad weapons or furious charge and WS5 or toughness 5 etc. etc.... (not to mention that you used to get only 1 cult troop as a troops choice based on your lord's mark)
2) You can have 3 HQ choices one of which is a MC
3) you get obliterators

I can understand you wanting more variety in your list but you won't get any sympathy from me; I play BA. When's the last time you saw a tourney army that didn't include Dante + Corbs?

qft

And you can stop perving at my post list too

See above for the answer to that too.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

I think that CSM players are just going to have to cope with the fact that their codex is comparatively bland. I did.

QFT

Madgod wrote:
At least you actually have a BA codex.

Funny you should say that. Case in point, YOU have a codex. I have a White Dwarf article. I guess that serves me right for playing an army with a tenth of the character of your legions (which I find laughable but I'm not going to start an argument over such an obvious exaggeration).


But let me make myself clear. If I had known I would have been attacked for even mentioning the "C" word I would have left it out. And yes chaos does deserve more diversity. But my take on people who played the 3.5 chaos codex was not "which legion fluff do I like most?" but rather "which legion's rules are the most Uber?"For example, I cannot back this up but I believe that most people who played Iron Warriors did not play them because of their siege specializing, bionic loving background but because of the fact that they could take 9 oblits AND 4 heavy support choices. I never had a problem with word bearers or alpha legion armies (of course I never saw any though I saw several IW armies) I actually liked WBs.

I'm all for diversity and representing fluff as long as it doesn't produce a set of rules the pied piper couldn't pull rats away from.

I hope that cleared a few things up. Now can we all relax a bit?

Im with wraithlordmechanic with what he said in his above post (the huge quote one.) However it really does seem that you took space marine gear and tried to make it chaos like by changing it quite dramatically. Why should a chain axe give +1 S when a chain sword doesnt? Why have a rending chainfist when its S10? Why should bionics add +1 WS when the old space marine ones allowed them a chance to ignore a wound?

IMO chaos need to be made unique within the one codex, you (Shouldn't) want or need 3 different ones to make a fluffy list, let alone a competative one.

Ripister wrote:

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

I think that CSM players are just going to have to cope with the fact that their codex is comparatively bland. I did.

QFT

*Madgod rages at ripister and his QFTing*

James you play nids, who are by their very nature fluffless and characterless. Please don't come here for no reason other than to argue with me.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

I hope that cleared a few things up. Now can we all relax a bit?

Ok sorry. I get a little bit annoyed with the rampant Chaos hate around is all. It's all my friends ever talk about as shown by Ugodostres and Ripister above. I was just venting a bit and you got in the way. Sorry. Maybe we should band together in support of the Underdog codexes and lead revolution against those damned Hive Nobles with their Orks, IG, SM and Nids! Viva la Revolution!

Please forgive my rage. You make a good explanation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blackeagle wrote:Im with wraithlordmechanic with what he said in his above post (the huge quote one.) However it really does seem that you took space marine gear and tried to make it chaos like by changing it quite dramatically. Why should a chain axe give +1 S when a chain sword doesnt? Why have a rending chainfist when its S10? Why should bionics add +1 WS when the old space marine ones allowed them a chance to ignore a wound?

IMO chaos need to be made unique within the one codex, you (Shouldn't) want or need 3 different ones to make a fluffy list, let alone a competative one.

My point exactly! You play Dark Angels for heavens sake! Good Lord! And you tell US to make one codex!?!?!? The mind boggles! Where do you people get off with this stuff!?!?

No prob. Sometimes we all get a little passionate about our little gray men. Heck, I'm probably still on H.B.M.C.'s fecal roster for my earlier post.