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.

BDJV wrote:Well he posted. http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2012/04/26/network-news-new-csm-codex-rumors

With that said let us get started.

Troops choices will be Chaos Space Marines and Cultists
All Cult Marines are Elites
No new Special Characters
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
Typhus makes Cultists into Zombies
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)
CSM now get a Flyer a Mechanical Chaos Dragon (model is done will be part of initial release)
Lesser and Greater Demons are gone
Spawn replaced by “Fell Beast”

I feel like I am missing something…

Oh yeah…
Almost Forgot...
Rules for Traitor Guard are in!

I don't get it. Does Typhus make plague-ies troops AND cultists zombies? Because there aren't any other nurgle special characters. That would be epic if you could have plague marines and zombies (hopefully at a slightly cheaper price?). Kind of silly to make Typhus, Kharn, Ahriman and Fabius unlock cult troops, considering they have almost nothing to do with their original legions, and usually run off on their own campaigns. Ahriman is far too expensive to make taking thousand sons worth it.

No new characters? Sounds like Iron Warriors, Word Bearers, Night Lords and Alpha Legion will be oddly left out of such a great opportunity...

Mechanical chaos dragon? Oh god I loled. GW, you're running out of ideas. OR the poster just has no creativity making up bunk rumours.

Interested to see what they do with dreadnoughts, although I may or may not like it at all. Dreadnoughts are a familiar sight, and a familiar name that's gone hand in hand with 40k for a very long time.... It makes no sense to arbitrarily ret-con them.

Lesser and greater daemons are gone? What's the purpose of the Legion codex then? Plenty of existing legions use daemons or have the capability to use them.

Calling foul on these rumours. None of this makes any sense, and if they are indeed true, GW is wasting a valuable opportunity to right the wrongs they've done to the chaos community. I may very well just drop the game entirely if this codex doesn't put anything new on the table, so to speak. I'd be more than happy to sell this ugly blob of plastic that's sitting on my shelf.

I hope there is a mechanical chaos dragon! So maybe all these awful monsters in WFB can have a home in my apoc games for 40k

If he got the army wrong, I could see a flying daemon engine fitting into Chaos Daemons rather nicely. It'd fill their "flyer" slot that every codex seems to be getting now.

I really didn't think we'd see Traitors, Cultists and Plague Zombies in a CSM codex given GW's stance on LatD. But the rumor was that one of the designers made a good proposal for Traitor Guard a while back that was ultimately rejected. So maybe some of those concepts made it into the CSM book, I dunno.

Samus_aran115 wrote:
I don't get it. Does Typhus make plague-ies troops AND cultists zombies? Because there aren't any other nurgle special characters. That would be epic if you could have plague marines and zombies (hopefully at a slightly cheaper price?). Kind of silly to make Typhus, Kharn, Ahriman and Fabius unlock cult troops, considering they have almost nothing to do with their original legions, and usually run off on their own campaigns. Ahriman is far too expensive to make taking thousand sons worth it.

The simple fact is even if they aren't strictly speaking Legion anymore they characterize the chaos legions as they make themselves apparent to the Imperium. GW would create redundancy in creating characters that effectively represent the same thing.

Of course the flying dragon definately won't be a void dragon Phoenix bomber, no siree!

Why do GW have this mad insistence of inflicting special characters on people just so they can play themed lists?

I sincerely hope that a standard HQ choice with the appropriate mark will also unlock cult choices as troops.

As for these fresh rumour most of them are simply rehashes of old rumours and the dragon sounds so astonishingly bad that I wouldn't be in the least surprised if it is true.

Palindrome wrote:Why do GW have this mad insistence of inflicting special characters on people just so they can play themed lists?

Because they make more money by forcing you to buy a Finecast special character to play the army you want to than allowing you to play that army with a generic plastic HQ kit.

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Palindrome wrote:Why do GW have this mad insistence of inflicting special characters on people just so they can play themed lists?

Because they make more money by forcing you to buy a Finecast special character to play the army you want to than allowing you to play that army with a generic plastic HQ kit.

Or you can make it out a plastic kit.

Every SC can be kitbashed, and if they can't, 5 bucks of plasticard and a bit of GS will do it.

I don't own a single GW SC (Besides Arjac), but somehow own them all.

people just convert counts-as characters from plastic. They shouldn't have to, though. Typhus doesn't lead every single Death Guard skirmish, Ahriman doesn't personally command every single Thousand Sons force, it makes no sense to make them a requirement.

I was hoping these rumours (true or false) would get me excited for a new chaos book, but it's just making me worried more than anything.

I dont know how anyone would thing 40K chaos robo-dragon is what Chaos fans would rather have instead of just taking them back to their roots and simply making a varied and viable codex.

Charax wrote:people just convert counts-as characters from plastic. They shouldn't have to, though. Typhus doesn't lead every single Death Guard skirmish, Ahriman doesn't personally command every single Thousand Sons force, it makes no sense to make them a requirement.

Keep in mind that SC are just unique versions of normal characters with unique abilities. It is clearly stated that just because you take Typhus in your army doesn't mean that it is actually Typhus. By choosing a specific SC to do the unlock, you create a known quantity for you, the rules and your opponent. Not saying they can't do it with generics, but it may be 'easier' to do it this way.

Gorechild wrote:I was hoping these rumours (true or false) would get me excited for a new chaos book, but it's just making me worried more than anything.

Agreed.

My Fandex is looking mighty tempting right now!

I dont know how anyone would thing 40K chaos robo-dragon is what Chaos fans would rather have instead of just taking them back to their roots and simply making a varied and viable codex.

That's one of the things I dislike about all these big ol' new kits and rules etc; they sell.
Same with Mat Ward's rules; they sell.

Most Dakkanauts and/or veterans seem to usually dislike them, but they sell.

I certainly hope troops are also unlocked by marked generic lords/sorcerers/princes. It would really be a slap in the face that because a certain special character turns out terrible (we can't be naive enough to think they'll all be good here) that you'll never get to play with certain cults as troops.

morgendonner wrote:I certainly hope troops are also unlocked by marked generic lords/sorcerers/princes. It would really be a slap in the face that because a certain special character turns out terrible (we can't be naive enough to think they'll all be good here) that you'll never get to play with certain cults as troops.

It might be unfortunate, but it certainly won't be a SITF.


We have many codexes with unlocks based on Special Characters and the world hasn't ended yet. I will not be at all surprised if C: CSM does it as well.

pretre wrote:Keep in mind that SC are just unique versions of normal characters with unique abilities. It is clearly stated that just because you take Typhus in your army doesn't mean that it is actually Typhus. By choosing a specific SC to do the unlock, you create a known quantity for you, the rules and your opponent. Not saying they can't do it with generics, but it may be 'easier' to do it this way.

you say "Create a known quantity", I say "Paying 200+ points to have a character I don't want in my army, just to get back an option which isn't unbalanced (because if it were unbalanced, it wouldn't be an option even for typhus) and which has been the core of my army for more than half the editions of 40K that have ever been released"

Sasori wrote:BoK was pretty accurate with his Necron Rumors, and he did come out with them before Yakface gave us the first big sneak peak.

So, he has a bit of reliability. I know he was the first to talk about Writhing Worldscape.

I think you are specifically talking about BadTaste who posted on BOK...vs Tastytaste who is a differnet poster on BOK (site founder I believe too) and is the one who first leaked the rumor about Sister's WD article and also stated that the 6th ED starter set would not include IG, Xenos, or UltraMarine early on.

Badtaste's initial post did predate Yak, but was edited shortly after Yak's big release and was largely a rant against the reliability of most of the current rumors concerning Necrons at the time. Badtaste's more detailed reviewsconcerning specific units, which is what I think you are refering to, came after Yak's first two rumor posts. Badtaste's rumors still introduced new information though.

Anyways, BOK has had several rumors posted on its site that indeed came true and thus shouldn't be discounted.

BoK is down for me.

Looks like no "rumors" today.

I dislike the idea of Chaos Characters/HQ's in general being force multipliers or being required to unlock troops.

To me, it kind of goes against the selfish, vanity of the Chaos Lords if they act as force multipliers. I like that differentiation between them and their loyalist counterparts; that the loyalists contribute to the force more as a whole, whereas the Chaos characters are much more dangerous, but contribute less overall.
Particularly, as some don't even really associate themselves with their Legion any more, such as Kharn or Ahriman.

I do believe Huron and Abaddon should be exceptions to this however.

Charax wrote:you say "Create a known quantity", I say "Paying 200+ points to have a character I don't want in my army, just to get back an option which isn't unbalanced (because if it were unbalanced, it wouldn't be an option even for typhus) and which has been the core of my army for more than half the editions of 40K that have ever been released"

You can say this about a lot of things that existed in 'half the editions of 40k that have ever been released'. Just because something is a holy cow, doesn't mean that we should worship it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Just Dave wrote:I dislike the idea of Chaos Characters/HQ's in general being force multipliers or being required to unlock troops.

To me, it kind of goes against the selfish, vanity of the Chaos Lords if they act as force multipliers. I like that differentiation between them and their loyalist counterparts; that the loyalists contribute to the force more as a whole, whereas the Chaos characters are much more dangerous, but contribute less overall.
Particularly, as some don't even really associate themselves with their Legion any more, such as Kharn or Ahriman.

I do believe Huron and Abaddon should be exceptions to this however.

Chances are they probably will be. I kind of like this argument though. Chaos Lords shouldn't make their force more effective except in rare circumstance, since most folks are just looking for a chance to supplant the big guy.

I disagree that unlocking cult troops is a force multiplier though.

Just Dave wrote:I dislike the idea of Chaos Characters/HQ's in general being force multipliers or being required to unlock troops.

To me, it kind of goes against the selfish, vanity of the Chaos Lords if they act as force multipliers. I like that differentiation between them and their loyalist counterparts; that the loyalists contribute to the force more as a whole, whereas the Chaos characters are much more dangerous, but contribute less overall.
Particularly, as some don't even really associate themselves with their Legion any more, such as Kharn or Ahriman.

I do believe Huron and Abaddon should be exceptions to this however.

The way I would do it is with a retinue system. It's not so much that Chaos characters are trying to aid their minions but, for example, Chosen of Khorne will refuse to follow any leader who does not bear the Mark of Khorne.

AlexHolker wrote:The way I would do it is with a retinue system. It's not so much that Chaos characters are trying to aid their minions but, for example, Chosen of Khorne will refuse to follow any leader who does not bear the Mark of Khorne.

Not a bad idea. It fits the fluff as well.

You can similarly say that even the cult troops of a specific god would be rare in the retinues of unmarked Lords. They might show up, but would be fewer in number. Whereas a marked Lord would obviously have a lot of cult troops hanging around.

pretre wrote:

Charax wrote:people just convert counts-as characters from plastic. They shouldn't have to, though. Typhus doesn't lead every single Death Guard skirmish, Ahriman doesn't personally command every single Thousand Sons force, it makes no sense to make them a requirement.

Keep in mind that SC are just unique versions of normal characters with unique abilities. It is clearly stated that just because you take Typhus in your army doesn't mean that it is actually Typhus. By choosing a specific SC to do the unlock, you create a known quantity for you, the rules and your opponent. Not saying they can't do it with generics, but it may be 'easier' to do it this way.

That still doesn't really make any sense. So what you are saying is that you have to take a character in terminator armor in order to unlock death guard troops? Not buying these rumors.

Let's pretend we're talking about the SW codex for a second and replace the word Death with Wolf.

brettz123 wrote:That still doesn't really make any sense. So what you are saying is that you have to take a character in terminator armor in order to unlock Wolf guard troops? Not buying these rumors.

Yes, you have to take Logan to unlock Wolf Guard as troops.

See how that works?

If steel dragon is true, that could mean lots of Draon Univers toys being sold. The eggs for Tyranids for Myceotic Spore Pod, wich I use and now the dragon inside can be used for Chaos. All for $15 if I am not mistaken.

http://dragons.megabloks.com/#/toys/predavor/7

brettz123 wrote:

pretre wrote:

Charax wrote:people just convert counts-as characters from plastic. They shouldn't have to, though. Typhus doesn't lead every single Death Guard skirmish, Ahriman doesn't personally command every single Thousand Sons force, it makes no sense to make them a requirement.

Keep in mind that SC are just unique versions of normal characters with unique abilities. It is clearly stated that just because you take Typhus in your army doesn't mean that it is actually Typhus. By choosing a specific SC to do the unlock, you create a known quantity for you, the rules and your opponent. Not saying they can't do it with generics, but it may be 'easier' to do it this way.

That still doesn't really make any sense. So what you are saying is that you have to take a character in terminator armor in order to unlock death guard troops? Not buying these rumors.

No. That's not what he's saying, at all.


What he is saying is that special characters can be used as a sort of "archetype" with which one can build upon to represent a particular character of their own creation(a Mary Sue if you will!).

For example:
Imagine you have a special lord who you have written fluff for.
You're not going to want to simply use the "generic" profile, it's just not heroic enough for him.

You're going to want to use a "heroic" profile for him--so you use Typhus, as it is the closest representative for him and the troops under his command.

Kanluwen wrote:For example:
Imagine you have a special lord who you have written fluff for.
You're not going to want to simply use the "generic" profile, it's just not heroic enough for him.

You're going to want to use a "heroic" profile for him--so you use Typhus, as it is the closest representative for him and the troops under his command.

My army's led by a Daemon Prince. Kinda hard to shoehorn him into the Typhus archetype

These rumors sound completely off, and not what I have been hearing otherwise. If they are true then my army will be made completely redundant because my whole army is plague marines.

Yes, you have to take Logan to unlock Wolf Guard as troops.

See how that works?

No one owned wolf guard armies prior to this. See the difference?

I have no issue with SCs unlocking special FOC builds or a few neat tricks. But this is a bit heavy handed. I can still run Salamanders without Vulkan, its not as cool but I am not entirely screwed should I choose not to. That doesn't appear to be the case here and its going to really tick people off if it comes to pass. Belial was bad enough but workable (cause DA had such terrible HQ options anyways) but this just takes the cake.

Arm.chair.general wrote:These rumors sound completely off, and not what I have been hearing otherwise. If they are true then my army will be made completely redundant because my whole army is plague marines.

Or you can take the character that gets you plagues as troops. Poof, not redundant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

winterman wrote:The only problem with that is what if I want my deathguard to be led by a non-terminator? Or my world eaters to be led by a bad ass terminator like the FW one. etc etc.

You can still run World Eaters without all Khorne Berserkers or Death Guard without all Plague Marines. I see it happen all the time.

Kanluwen wrote:What he is saying is that special characters can be used as a sort of "archetype" with which one can build upon to represent a particular character of their own creation(a Mary Sue if you will!).

For example:
Imagine you have a special lord who you have written fluff for.
You're not going to want to simply use the "generic" profile, it's just not heroic enough for him.

You're going to want to use a "heroic" profile for him--so you use Typhus, as it is the closest representative for him and the troops under his command.

To me - and many others - that should work the other way round:
Imagine you have a special lord you have written fluff for.
You're not going to want to simply use some "universal" profile (read: a special character), it's not the character you've created, but rather some named character with set rules, set fluff and included in several armies.

I can understand why GW use the Special-character-unlock method, but to me it's not entirely 'fair' and is pretty 'heavy-handed'. Why can't another or standard HQ choice do the same? Why can't I use my own character if I want to run a fluffy army?

I'm not saying one way is right or wrong, but I know I'm not the only one who doesn't like being forced to use a generic character.