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.

I think (pure wishlisting) that they could take a leaf out of the DE codex.

Have Regular Traitor Marines (all flavours, but Strawberry is best..)

And then have an elite choice using the same kit (or better, a kit of their own with Mk 1 or 2 armour..), as an elite slot. : Legion marines.

Much like the DE have Wyches and Kabalites, and also have Trueborn and Bloodbrides.

TyraelVladinhurst wrote:

Xeriapt wrote:I would certainly love to see some new noise marine stuff.

Would be pretty annoyed if they combined the CSM and Daemons though. Pretty sure they wont.

why would you be annoyed? they were only separated so GW could try (and failed miserably) to make more money. sorry if it sounded as an attack, but i'm curious as to your reasoning because in all honesty daemons should be put back in to chaos marines

As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

And in regards to Renegade and Legion books, so... whats going on there? Are we thinking two separate books (oh please yes, I want a purist Legion book and then the Renegades to become LatD) or is the new CSM book going to replace the old CSM book?

Ascalam wrote:I think (pure wishlisting) that they could take a leaf out of the DE codex.

Have Regular Traitor Marines (all flavours, but Strawberry is best..)

And then have an elite choice using the same kit (or better, a kit of their own with Mk 1 or 2 armour..), as an elite slot. : Legion marines.

Much like the DE have Wyches and Kabalites, and also have Trueborn and Bloodbrides.

So Chaos Marines and Chosen.

Kairos wrote:

Marthike wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:

Marthike wrote:black templar will be next. if there is a codex release every 3 month then you might get tau seanking in before black templar.

However, the chances are low so I can say 90% sure black templar is next.

definatly not chaos.

Proof? Where are you getting this info from?

Also, at Brother SRM's post: I like the current Berzerkers...I think they're a fun kit. I've purchased 30 models for them

I have my sources

If you are going to make a bold claim like this, we need more than "I have my sources".

Otherwise, this is just more Ghost21 double talk.

All current\leaked information at this point says Dark Angels are next, followed by 6th Edition, followed by Chaos Space Marines.

What else do i say? #### told me who works in #### that knows #### so its reliable?

I have seen all the rumours and i have my opponion on all of them, not everything is Ghost21's info. Its up to you if you believe what i say anyway so believe what you like but I am backing black templar for next release unless, there is something comming next month, but I don;t think any 40k is getting released soon and chaos will be after the 6th ed i believe (this is my guess). However, before the 6th ed I do think black templar are next.

chaos0xomega wrote:

TyraelVladinhurst wrote:

Xeriapt wrote:I would certainly love to see some new noise marine stuff.

Would be pretty annoyed if they combined the CSM and Daemons though. Pretty sure they wont.

why would you be annoyed? they were only separated so GW could try (and failed miserably) to make more money. sorry if it sounded as an attack, but i'm curious as to your reasoning because in all honesty daemons should be put back in to chaos marines

As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

And in regards to Renegade and Legion books, so... whats going on there? Are we thinking two separate books (oh please yes, I want a purist Legion book and then the Renegades to become LatD) or is the new CSM book going to replace the old CSM book?

As a Chaos space marine player and Chaos daemons player. I believe Fateweaver needs to be changed back to his original incarnation rather than his stupidly idiotic aura bubble. He's a powerful psyker that benefits himself and Tzeentch, Not every tom dick and harry beside him! At least fantasy has his current incarnation right.

As it is however, returning them back to their original form would be a blessing from the stars above. The chaos daemon book was horribly written, with points costs horribly done. (Crushers, Fiends, near everything else). And just not necessary, I'd rather have CSM/CD back together as they properly should.

azreal13 wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I'm hoping what happens with havocs will be part of a more comprehensive rethinking of how Chaos should play and how their concept should translate to the tabletop. All armies are afflicted by rules not living upto fluff, Chaos the rules fail to even hint at the concept. Whether Chaos are 10,000 year old warriors or Rengade ex-loyalists turned pirates... the rules don't show either.

If GW does legionaries, they need to be elite on a level similar to the SW army. If they empahsize Renegade they have to have enough variety to represent the struggles of being without a major support infrastructure and acquiring and maintaining whatever you can.

I could see this working, as you suggest, along the lines of Wolf Guard. Introducing a "Legionnaire" stat line for models that can be taken as elite units or split off to lead units of 'lesser' Marines, representing individuals that had been created post-Heresy and therefore weren't as experienced/tough as those that date from that time. There is fluff precedent for Legions stealing geneseed and using it to replace losses, and could be quite workable on the tabletop.

The beauty of this method is it helps to simplify the volume of rules necessary to distinguish the legions. You have "Legionaries" and much like IG Stormtroopers you must choose one of 4 basic flavors. Then Legionarie status for the God specific cults can just be an upgrade for those respective cult units... ie Berzerkers of Khorne maybe upgraded to World Eater Berzerkers for x-pts or more genericly Berzerkers of Khorne maybe upgraded to Chosen of Khorne where Chosen of Khorne simply represent any legionary who worshipped khorne. It keeps the distinctions but makes them bite-sized enough not to require an appendicies on every Legion. That's important because it was that format of appendicies for each Legion that heavily contributed to what GW attributed as an over-complexity.

chaos0xomega wrote:As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

And in regards to Renegade and Legion books, so... whats going on there? Are we thinking two separate books (oh please yes, I want a purist Legion book and then the Renegades to become LatD) or is the new CSM book going to replace the old CSM book?

I agree. Once the "cat was out of the bag" there's no putting it back in. Pulling daemons out of the Chaos Space Marines books reduced the redundancies; we have 4 cult marines units and 4 daemon units, all similar to each other but slightly different and yet all suppose to be equally capable. Putting daemons in their own codex allowed CSM to get out from under the Daemon's shadow and much the same for Daemons to get out from under CSM's. This will allow them to inevitably distinguish themselves in ways that would never be possible with an all in one codex.

Legions separating from Renegades will help unclutter the concepts that fill the Chaos Space Marines' book. Legions can have more in the way of specialized and elite cult units as well as other distinguishing units and Rengades can easily see the inclusion of lesser mortals and traitors players have wanted since before Eye of Terror. Most Chaos players would end up re-building for one codex and inevitably using other models they have as a starting point for the other.

aka_mythos wrote:Is anything really accomplished by having your elite section look like this?:

ELITE:
Obliterators
Khorne Terminators
Slannesh Terminators
Nurgle Terminators
Tzeentch Terminators
Chosen
Chosen Terminators
Possessed

Not making me angry?

odorofdeath wrote:Havocs will probably be amazing, because presently they suck and are hard to find; this follows GW's business model.

Ditto for Dreadnoughts, Raptors, Land Raiders, Thousand Sons and Emperor's Children.

Thousands Sons will never be amazing. This follows GW's business model.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Is anything really accomplished by having your elite section look like this?:

ELITE:
Obliterators
Khorne Terminators
Slannesh Terminators
Nurgle Terminators
Tzeentch Terminators
Chosen
Chosen Terminators
Possessed

You have an Elite section with 5 or 6 different units that are effectively terminators, and play very similarly. That's a level of redundancy that I can live without especially when it carries the implicit fact that those 4 units are at the expense of something more universally useable. It then begs the question, if terminators get this kind of split representation than how about Havocs and bikes?

Is the way to solve Chaos' lack of worthwhile and distinctive unit choices to simply make duplicates of those same units?-I don't think so, at that point you're just playing the odds that one of them will be a little more worthwhile than the rest.

Not making me angry?

Looks like you left out the important part. Fixed it.

I hate when people bury their heads in the sand and ignore the obvious problems with what they want.

I want to see new units that help to bridge the gap between what Chaos is conceptually and Chaos is in the rules. Chaos will forever be this very narrow mix and match that is flavorless. You will never have something that really represents Chaos when you fill a book with nearly identical units that are used in such similar ways. A codex should be a book that lets you play a number of different ways, which is distinctly different than shoehorning in 5 codices in one. Having unique unit entries for each makes sense if you're printing multiple books to address each. In the context of one or two books centered around particular concepts its clutter that simply adds nothing to the characterization of each of the cults, while taking up resources that could.

Another way to put it, IF GW can only include 5 new units in an updated book, would you really want 4 of them to be terminator units? I'd rather see cult specific daemon engines or elites that aren't so similar... for example slannesh marines on bikes or Tzeentch sorcerer coven. Thats what you lose when you include 4 types of terminators.

It's quite possible to include god specific terminators within one entry, as was explained in posts on the previous page.

Sgt.Roadkill wrote:I don't want plastic oblits....... it would make them to common a choice and they SHOULD NOT BE. except possibly Iron warriors or possibly tzeentch armies.....

Thanks for taking it on yourself to determine what the meta should be.

Medium of Death wrote:It's quite possible to include god specific terminators within one entry, as was explained in posts on the previous page.

Yep.

To be honest one of the oldest ideas bounced about on all forums has been the idea of Greater and Lesser Marks to replace icons, where a Lesser Mark would replicate the Icon's effect (so, for Nurgle +1 Toughness) while the greater Mark replicates the 'cult' effects (i.e. on normal CSMs would make them T5, FNP, Fearless, -1 Initiative).

Sure, this is a step back toward the 3.5 codex. But to be honest the Icons, as have been pointed out are fairly hefty costing upgrades (particularly Nurgle and Tzeentch) that are far, far too vulnerable to the wound allocation and sniper effects and powers that have come about since. Plus they certainly don't allow you to make 'Cult' armies - at least not ones that make any sort of sense (Plague Terminators not being Fearless and suddenly losing the +1 toughness because a guy dropped a stick? Really?).

We wouldn't need a whole slew of seperate unit entries - if anything it would reduce the existing number of entries (Berserkers, Noise Marines, Thousand Sons and Plague Marines ceasing to be seperate) allowing for the Traitors, Mutants and Cultist options that people are hoping for.

The Icon system was by far one of the most idiotic things they've done. There's just never been an existing case where a unit loses an upgrade that has been purchased for it - the previous CSM codexes had 'Marks' and every other army either has their equivalents built in as army wide rules or through purchasing. SMs don't lose ASKNF or Combat Tactics because a Chapter Master gets killed, Tyranids don't lose the scything talon rerolls because a single model dies and yet currently CSMs -can-. Where it's from a specific item of wargear that you pay for for a single model in a squad, fair enough but the CSM mark system has always been treated as a whole squad upgrade.

Another way to put it, IF GW can only include 5 new units in an updated book, would you really want 4 of them to be terminator units? I'd rather see cult specific daemon engines or elites that aren't so similar... for example slannesh marines on bikes or Tzeentch sorcerer coven. Thats what you lose when you include 4 types of terminators.

Yes because It makes SENSE to have different things representing different things, rather than the very simple

Take Chaos Bikers
Add Mark
Gain God rules

Yes because it really makes SENSE to stick chaos with

HQ: Undivided Chaos Lord, Daemon prince of Khorne, Nurgle sorcerer.
Elites: Sorcerer coven
Troops: Khorne Bezerkers
Fast: Slaanesh Bikers
Heavy: Plague marines

Just cut out everything else! No nurgle/slaanesh/tzeentch anywhere else in the troop choice, just move it down to just bezerkers! No more nurgle bikers either, just have Slaanesh only! Cult specific Daemon engines? Pfft, We'll just give them Khorne engines of destruction. More undivided!


It'd be like giving up nearly all the aspects from the Eldar book in return for more wraithbone weaponry/walkers.

You don’t need units for each type of God-specific troop type. Universal Mark rules (rather than that silly Icon shenanigans) are really simple:

Mark of Khorne does W.
Mark of Slaanesh does X.
Mark of Nurgle does Y.
Mark of Tzeentch does Z.

Scale costs depending on unit (IC’s, squads, etc.). Same rules for all.

Honestly I think the legions book is going to be quite simple, one entry for each major unit type (terminators, marines, raptors, havocs, bikers, dreadnoughts etc.) and then you can buy one of 8 "legionary affiliations" for them at +x points (on a per model/per unit basis?). The legionary affiliations come with statline modifications, special rules, and unique wargear options, no doubt it will be a 1-2 page entry each but whatever. In addition to this, I'm sure there will be numerous legion/god specific "special" units incorporated into the book (for example the afore-rumored World Eaters Chrono-Gladiators or what-have-you. Then of course there will be special characters that will no doubt alter force org (for example, night lords character that makes raptors troops?) Simple, avoids tons of extra pages for largely similar/redundant entries. Perhaps the "Big Four" (World Eaters, Thousand Sons, Emperors Children, Death Guard) are JUST different enough to warrant their own separate entries in elites/troops/fast/heavy but certainly the 4 undivided legions will be similar enough to share a common entry with different modifications, etc.

Really, the idea of marks in the legions book kinda doesn't make sense. Its quite clear where the devotions of each of the legions (barring perhaps black legion and the word bearers who are a bit more variable) lies, the idea of someone fielding an army of thousand sons with the mark of khorne because it happens to be the power-build of choice makes me want to punch someone.

Agreed marks are really more a matter of distinction for Renegades. Any Legionaries who follow Khorne would simply be so similar to World Eater rules wise those rules could be used to represent them.

Nerf wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:It better not be a "Take Special Character X to play Legion X" affair. Can you imagine all the Emperor's Children players out there who don't want to bring Lucius the Eternally Useless to every game?

I have to agree. Am I the only one out there that wants to make my own friggin' character? Designed the way I want out of a huge list of options? Bland as it may be, I've defended our most recent codex and still manage to win games with it, and even find a way to make my various legions somewhat fluffy, but the last thing I want to see is a huge list of named characters, that change the way the army plays, and you'd be almost stupid not to use. I mean, I use Vulkan in my marine list, because it seems stupid not to twin-link a bunch of weapons, but I hate doing it.

Anyone else feel this way?

*raises hand* Yeah I miss my daemon prince actually being downright deadly, with the dreadaxe tearing through anything and everything. ^-^ But yeah more options to build a cool unique character would be nice.

As far as SC goes, I'd like to see them outlawed altogether like they once were, or how it used to x SC can only be taken in x army of x amount of points and with your opponents permission. The game had more flavor and was just better back then.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:What I would like is for berserkers to actually be the most unit devastating in CC (like in the fluff), and not take 2nd place to blood angels.

Berserkers should be equal to Death Company, but Berserkers presence should able to channel the summoning of Khorne related daemons....that is all.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Plus they're like fries - they sorta come with everything. Nearly every Chaos box since their inception has come with 8-12 Berzerkers. I've got dozens of them, and not always by choice. As I said, they're just sorta always there.

Well if don't want em' and want to toss them to certain Chaos player's way...

Kairos wrote: Chaos has to be very soon. It is one of the largest selling armies, and a large portion of the current player base is disgruntled with the current book.

Not just disgruntled, but insulted by the bland simplisticness of it, with all flavor taken out, specific daemons and greater daemons getting punted out. It hurt me personally cause my beloved Red Corsairs were the featured forefront, so thier moment of glory got sullied by this book.

The icing on the chaos cake though was one time reading here on dakka that all it was done because people complianed the previous dex i.e. the GOOD and COMPETITIVE one was too complicated. I'd still like to strangle those people for that reason but alas....hopefully the next dex with have the 3.5 dexs fun and options, Oblits moved back to where they were in 3.5 dex and of course cultist hordes. ^-^

why would you be annoyed? they were only separated so GW could try (and failed miserably) to make more money. sorry if it sounded as an attack, but i'm curious as to your reasoning because in all honesty daemons should be put back in to chaos marines

I agree with this. No one should be annoyed they should be grateful.

As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

What if I want a Chaos army that has power armor, daemons, and 2-3 units of 15-20 plus cultists alltogether led by a daemon prince, charging the enemy in howls to the gods, while defilers and a land raider cover thier advance?

As it is however, returning them back to their original form would be a blessing from the stars above. The chaos daemon book was horribly written, with points costs horribly done. (Crushers, Fiends, near everything else). And just not necessary, I'd rather have CSM/CD back together as they properly should.

Amen.

I'm hoping what happens with havocs will be part of a more comprehensive rethinking of how Chaos should play and how their concept should translate to the tabletop. All armies are afflicted by rules not living upto fluff, Chaos the rules fail to even hint at the concept. Whether Chaos are 10,000 year old warriors or Rengade ex-loyalists turned pirates... the rules don't show either.

If GW does legionaries, they need to be elite on a level similar to the SW army. If they empahsize Renegade they have to have enough variety to represent the struggles of being without a major support infrastructure and acquiring and maintaining whatever you can.

Don't shoot me but I'd like to see Havocs as troops with a catch. Like you have to take 2+ units of CSMs to take a unit of Havocs....or maybe make that an Iron Warriors thing, but meh, it's my idea to make them unique, and so they don't compete for the Raider (unless they make it dedicated to get it out of the HS slot), defiler, Vindi, etc.

chaos0xomega wrote: I agree. Once the "cat was out of the bag" there's no putting it back in. Pulling daemons out of the Chaos Space Marines books reduced the redundancies; we have 4 cult marines units and 4 daemon units, all similar to each other but slightly different and yet all suppose to be equally capable. Putting daemons in their own codex allowed CSM to get out from under the Daemon's shadow and much the same for Daemons to get out from under CSM's. This will allow them to inevitably distinguish themselves in ways that would never be possible with an all in one codex.

Legions separating from Renegades will help unclutter the concepts that fill the Chaos Space Marines' book. Legions can have more in the way of specialized and elite cult units as well as other distinguishing units and Rengades can easily see the inclusion of lesser mortals and traitors players have wanted since before Eye of Terror. Most Chaos players would end up re-building for one codex and inevitably using other models they have as a starting point for the other.

Unclutter? Have you READ the 4th ed dex? It's as uncluttered and sterile as a hospital...a good hospital that is....anyway...There wasn't redundancies to begin with when you had daemons and csm together. Need specific daemon, give unit specific mark to summon them...done. There was no 'getting out from under a shadow' they are MEANT to be together. Daemons can't exist without mortal assitance to get INTO the world, they NEED cultists and CSM to hold them together. The next book literally needs to be 3.5 dex/daemons/LaTD all together in the glory they deserve.

DarkStarSabre wrote:

Yep.

To be honest one of the oldest ideas bounced about on all forums has been the idea of Greater and Lesser Marks to replace icons, where a Lesser Mark would replicate the Icon's effect (so, for Nurgle +1 Toughness) while the greater Mark replicates the 'cult' effects (i.e. on normal CSMs would make them T5, FNP, Fearless, -1 Initiative).

Sure, this is a step back toward the 3.5 codex. But to be honest the Icons, as have been pointed out are fairly hefty costing upgrades (particularly Nurgle and Tzeentch) that are far, far too vulnerable to the wound allocation and sniper effects and powers that have come about since. Plus they certainly don't allow you to make 'Cult' armies - at least not ones that make any sort of sense (Plague Terminators not being Fearless and suddenly losing the +1 toughness because a guy dropped a stick? Really?).

We wouldn't need a whole slew of seperate unit entries - if anything it would reduce the existing number of entries (Berserkers, Noise Marines, Thousand Sons and Plague Marines ceasing to be seperate) allowing for the Traitors, Mutants and Cultist options that people are hoping for.

Hmmm I'd like to see that playtested as it does sound intriguing. Maybe instead of being cliche and calling it 'greater mark' call it like Marked for the Plague (nurgle) Marked for the Berzerker (Khorne) Marked for the Rubric (Tzeentch) Marked for the Noise (Slannesh)

Fluff wise it'd at least explain how legions recoup thier losses. They pick the best out of the renegades and 'bring them into the fold' so to speak.

I'd like to see non generic lesser daemons in a CSM army again! I'd also like to see the old animosity and summoning rules in some form too, that might be nice.

aka_mythos wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

And in regards to Renegade and Legion books, so... whats going on there? Are we thinking two separate books (oh please yes, I want a purist Legion book and then the Renegades to become LatD) or is the new CSM book going to replace the old CSM book?

I agree. Once the "cat was out of the bag" there's no putting it back in. Pulling daemons out of the Chaos Space Marines books reduced the redundancies; we have 4 cult marines units and 4 daemon units, all similar to each other but slightly different and yet all suppose to be equally capable. Putting daemons in their own codex allowed CSM to get out from under the Daemon's shadow and much the same for Daemons to get out from under CSM's. This will allow them to inevitably distinguish themselves in ways that would never be possible with an all in one codex.

Yeah i'm still trying to understand what you mean by that line...

Getting CSM out of Deamons Shadows?..., yeah like there was so many people who had more then 3 units of Deamons besides those playing Word Bearers...

Deamons back in 3.5 was just like GK's in 3rd, a Elite and powerfull choice, but who was limited(and thank god they where...)

Now i don't say that IF,( and thats a big IF), GW decide to redo the Deamons dex, and do it right, it should'n stay an army of his own.

But i'm 90% sure thats not gonna happen, well not soon anyway.

And for those who says that if Deamons are put back into CSM, units will dissapear?, c'mon!, 60% of the Book is just useless...

Only an handfull of units(just like in CSM...coincidence?) are doing something then just Dsing and die horribly while doing nothing, or getting turned in shreads, because their rules sucks...

What Deamons lack to be able to stand as a Codex, is the same thing CSM lacks, something that make them play as a whole, some internal mecanics or Magic.

Now i do, and i really do, hope that with upcoming Codexes this will change, and that be it CSM or Deamons, they become more interessting as a whole, and not only for a selection of units.

Yep.

To be honest one of the oldest ideas bounced about on all forums has been the idea of Greater and Lesser Marks to replace icons, where a Lesser Mark would replicate the Icon's effect (so, for Nurgle +1 Toughness) while the greater Mark replicates the 'cult' effects (i.e. on normal CSMs would make them T5, FNP, Fearless, -1 Initiative).

Sure, this is a step back toward the 3.5 codex. But to be honest the Icons, as have been pointed out are fairly hefty costing upgrades (particularly Nurgle and Tzeentch) that are far, far too vulnerable to the wound allocation and sniper effects and powers that have come about since. Plus they certainly don't allow you to make 'Cult' armies - at least not ones that make any sort of sense (Plague Terminators not being Fearless and suddenly losing the +1 toughness because a guy dropped a stick? Really?).

We wouldn't need a whole slew of seperate unit entries - if anything it would reduce the existing number of entries (Berserkers, Noise Marines, Thousand Sons and Plague Marines ceasing to be seperate) allowing for the Traitors, Mutants and Cultist options that people are hoping for.

Hmmm I'd like to see that playtested as it does sound intriguing. Maybe instead of being cliche and calling it 'greater mark' call it like Marked for the Plague (nurgle) Marked for the Berzerker (Khorne) Marked for the Rubric (Tzeentch) Marked for the Noise (Slannesh)

Fluff wise it'd at least explain how legions recoup thier losses. They pick the best out of the renegades and 'bring them into the fold' so to speak.

Well the names you suggest are dumb^^, but i think if this how things turn out, they will find cooler/stupider names for it ^^.

But yeah High Marks and Marks, are something i can life with.

The simple fact that GW would have said that the Icon can be carried by the Champ would have resolved the matter of the Worship Alzheimer..., but hey, that would require of them too much neurones to make them work...

Slayer le boucher wrote:

Well the names you suggest are dumb^^, but i think if this how things turn out, they will find cooler/stupider names for it ^^.

But yeah High Marks and Marks, are something i can life with.

The simple fact that GW would have said that the Icon can be carried by the Champ would have resolved the matter of the Worship Alzheimer..., but hey, that would require of them too much neurones to make them work...

Hehe well it's just a suggestion. I'm not paid to write this stuff.

I'm really, REALLY hoping for cultists, even if it's basically like the IG Penal Legions. That and improvements to Greater and Lesser Daemons, they just seem... lack luster at the moment, but that won't prevent me from using them as my army grows

Slayer le boucher wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:As a chaos daemons player: No, they shouldn't. I like being able to play a chaos army that doesn't involve power armor thank you very much. Besides that, combining the two together as they are now would lead to one of the most stupidly overpowered armies in the game (hurr I'll take fateweaver, a bunch of bloodcrushers and obliterators, and back them up with plague marines).

And in regards to Renegade and Legion books, so... whats going on there? Are we thinking two separate books (oh please yes, I want a purist Legion book and then the Renegades to become LatD) or is the new CSM book going to replace the old CSM book?

I agree. Once the "cat was out of the bag" there's no putting it back in. Pulling daemons out of the Chaos Space Marines books reduced the redundancies; we have 4 cult marines units and 4 daemon units, all similar to each other but slightly different and yet all suppose to be equally capable. Putting daemons in their own codex allowed CSM to get out from under the Daemon's shadow and much the same for Daemons to get out from under CSM's. This will allow them to inevitably distinguish themselves in ways that would never be possible with an all in one codex.

Yeah i'm still trying to understand what you mean by that line...

Getting CSM out of Deamons Shadows?..., yeah like there was so many people who had more then 3 units of Deamons besides those playing Word Bearers...

Clearly you have never faced a slaaneshi daemon bomb army then...

IF we do get lesser daemons again i just hope blood letters get their +1 strength power weapons back

Sorry, the DE refuse to hand them back

chaos0xomega wrote:Really, the idea of marks in the legions book kinda doesn't make sense. Its quite clear where the devotions of each of the legions (barring perhaps black legion and the word bearers who are a bit more variable) lies, the idea of someone fielding an army of thousand sons with the mark of khorne because it happens to be the power-build of choice makes me want to punch someone.

Marks aren't just visible indicators that you're BFFs with Khorne - they are a physical manifestation of the dedication of one group to a specific Chaos God. The World Eaters don't slap on a 'Mark of Khorne' to show their devotion to Khorne, the Mark is gained because of their devotion.

So Marks make perfect sense, because that's precisely how dedication works. The icons were the things that didn’t make sense, especially as everyone in the squad would forget who they worshipped the moment the guy holding the banner died.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:Really, the idea of marks in the legions book kinda doesn't make sense. Its quite clear where the devotions of each of the legions (barring perhaps black legion and the word bearers who are a bit more variable) lies, the idea of someone fielding an army of thousand sons with the mark of khorne because it happens to be the power-build of choice makes me want to punch someone.

The icons were the things that didn’t make sense, especially as everyone in the squad would forget who they worshipped the moment the guy holding the banner died.

I think the idea behind the icon is that its more of a locus for warp energies, thus allowing the squad to channel the gods energies but I see your point

Corsair Princess wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:As nice as it would be, it doesn't make practical sense. Would you have a single new Terminator kit that has all the Legion (or, for sake of argument, the main four) in the same box? That's a lot of left-over bits. I really don't think GW would waste their time on a single sprue like that.

And I don't think they'd make four more sets of Chaos Terminators to go with the one they've already got.

Well with their current trend of 2 units in a box I could see it happening, I mean I had a ton of bits leftover from the grey knight boxes and such.

I was going to point out the GKT as well. Ive built 2 boxes and had tons of parts left over each time. It would actually be great to have a CSMT box done like the GKT.

And what’s a Paladin folks? A GKT with a slightly different head and an easily breakable thing sticking out of his back. What’s a Deathmark? A different gun and a different head.

Neither of these things is really comparable to putting the icons, weapons and various other aesthetic details for four separate Legions (discounting the unaligned Legions) in the one box.

Not to just be a contrarian (Ok, maybe a little)--but while I certainly appreciate the amount of bits they throw in a box now--I sometimes also wonder how much that drives cost. While the extra plastic is minimal, design time, etc. is likely a factor. I ask, as when I finish assembling my guys from new boxes, I end up just like the previous poster stated--a box full of bits left.

H.B.M.C. wrote:And what’s a Paladin folks? A GKT with a slightly different head and an easily breakable thing sticking out of his back. What’s a Deathmark? A different gun and a different head.

Neither of these things is really comparable to putting the icons, weapons and various other aesthetic details for four separate Legions (discounting the unaligned Legions) in the one box.

There is actually a bit more difference than a Gun and Head, between a Deathmark and a Immortal. The Shoulders are different, there is a different part of the spine, in addition to the Head and weapons It ends up making both of them look pretty distinct.

The Lychguard box is a really good example.of a ton of extra bits It has 4 different weapon options, in addition to all the extra bits that differentiate Praetorians and Lychguard. I could see Legion boxes on that scale.

I’m going to agree with H.B.M.C. on this one. It would be nice but it won’t happen (this is GW we’re talking about remember).

At best I seem them selling terminator shoulder pad/head conversion kits for direct order on their website.