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.

Mekboy wrote:Woah, 3+ FNP on plague marines would be crazy.

Anyway, I'd like to see decent possessed and spawn, rules for individual legios or even just the ability to upgrade characters to one of the 4 main legions.

QFT

Techboss wrote:
?? I can see neither fluff or rules justification or precedent for this one.See wraithlord for the rules justification for a AV walker becoming a wounds/toughness model. Fluff wise, the Dread is corrupted by a demons .... The wraithlord has been a MC for more editions than it was a vehicle while the dread has always been a vehicle. And if being possessed by daemons turned a vehicle into into a monstrous creature then defilers and soulgrinders would be would have toughness a value.
Not unless you're willing to pay an extra 10 points per model (which is what daemonic mutation used to cost on a non- character) and even then I don't think fluff justifies it (this game has little in common with 2nd ed.). This offsets the cheese shield that currently exists for SM termies. and the extra 10 points would make them cost the same number of points as a SM termy iirc (or are they 35 base)?

You mean like a better BS? I could go for that.Indirect fire, increased BS. The model was originally intended to be ranged and my only guess is that the GW suites thought they weren't selling enough, so it was changed to melee to make people redo their models or buy new ones. Call me a whiner if you want but I don't think that Chaos should have free access to indirect ordnance weapons. And anything powered by a daemon shouldn't sit in a corner pounding away at things it can't see.
A month ago I would have said yes, undoubtedly- but the Wolves' LR is apparently 10 as well. Some have suggested that that's for the keg though... SW have access to the Crusader as well, meaning the transport capacity becomes a negligble point. Chaos will not be getting access to the Crusader. Not being a jerk here just a realist. As a rule SM's have better toys, CSM's have better troops
The SM land raider also has the "machine spirit" option which makes it a bit more useful. Which is why it costs 30 points more

Sorry everybody I was going for the "most painful to read" award.

So for all of those who don't want the book to change, but seem to advocate some sort of rules for the various Chaos Legions:

Wouldn't adding another 1-4 books to the rotation be an absolutely terrible idea? GW already fails to keep the current amount of codexes updated to the current rules platform, and this causes large problems. Looking at the future of the game would adding more books, thus further slowing the already dismal pace at which GW updates books, really be an acceptable solution? If anything it seems like GW needs to figure out how to condense the number of codexes so that they can keep them updated into the current rules quicker and easier.

Caffran9 wrote:So for all of those who don't want the book to change, but seem to advocate some sort of rules for the various Chaos Legions:

Wouldn't adding another 1-4 books to the rotation be an absolutely terrible idea? GW already fails to keep the current amount of codexes updated to the current rules platform, and this causes large problems. Looking at the future of the game would adding more books, thus further slowing the already dismal pace at which GW updates books, really be an acceptable solution? If anything it seems like GW needs to figure out how to condense the number of codexes so that they can keep them updated into the current rules quicker and easier.

In my case I don't advocate it- It's a matter of fact. Either a) GW comes out with legion codexes or b) you have to wait the 2-4 years until they do another.

Caffran9 wrote:Wouldn't adding another 1-4 books to the rotation be an absolutely terrible idea?

If anything it seems like GW needs to figure out how to condense the number of codexes so that they can keep them updated into the current rules quicker and easier.

How so? It's not like Dark Eldar, one of the oldest currently-legal books, aren't still competitive. Adding Chaos Legions (Big 4) and Chaos Renegades (LatD), along with Adeptus Mechanicus and Biel-Tan (that's a total of 4 new Codices, for those who're counting...) doesn't change the competiveness of Dark Eldar, but it does increase the number of Loyalist SM options (+4), and further improves the GEQ (+3) to MEQ (+1) ratio.

If by "condense Codices", you mean "Squat Dark Eldar and Daemonhunters in favor of Chaos Legions", I suppose that'd be OK. But doing this means we officially lose a valid & playable GEQ army, along with some very handy Allies.

Also, why the rush for more new rules? Do we want GW to spend *less* time playtesting Codices simply to squeeze them out faster? Do we want to spend more money on rules and models?

Personally, I'm OK with more Codices and an ever-lengthening release cycle. I see no personal benefit in additional churn for the sake of paying GW more money more often.

Competitive isn't important (it is to me, but to most people it is not). Working completely within the rules by design is important. Clearly, no army will fit perfectly due to inherent flaws in the way GW writes and develops their books/rules. however it does seem very important to make sure that the books are all written with the current rules in mind in order to minimize confusion and loopholes.

I also feel like among the older codexes, Dark Eldar are a bit of an exception when it comes to being competitive. The IQ books are not good at all in the tournament scene and Necrons are also not very strong these days. They basically have Deceiver and Monoliths going for them. you can run a gimmick list or two and hope to catch people off guard, but that is hardly gorunds for really being considered a competitive list.

Why would Beil-Tan get a whole Codex?

It's just one of those things that doesn't make sense and is pure "John Logic". He doesn't like the old Chaos Codex, yet is fine with the idea of a Beil-Tan Codex... I mean WTF'ingF?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Caffran9 wrote:Wouldn't adding another 1-4 books to the rotation be an absolutely terrible idea?

Adding one more book to cover Legions armies, no. Adding four more books to cover World Eaters, Death Guard, Emperor's Children and Thousand Sons though, that would be an absolutley terrible idea.

I've explained this in other threads, but can do so again here.

If GW is doing 2 Codex releases a year, which seems to be their current rate, to get four Codices out would require 2 years. However, they're not going to do nothing but Chaos releases for two years running, so say they split them up and make them every other release, that makes it 4 years to get all four books out. Now GW loves Marines - loves them to pieces - so if we've for four Chaos releases and four 'other' slots in those 4 years, that means that at least half of those 'other' slots will be a Marine Codex. So that's 6 out of 8 releases being Marine Codices, so in the space of 4 years we get a whopping 2 non-Marine releases. It also means that Thousand Sons (as they would be the last) will be waiting 4 years to get a book that:

A). Won't get a further update for 8+ years.
B). May not ever get an update, and simply be removed from the game in favour of an even more generic Chaos Codex (assuming that's even possible).

I just can't see that working.

H.B.M.C is right concerning multiple Legion codices,it would be a awful idea .
However,concerning a single Legions codex,what goes in?,what stays out?
Now,of course the "big four" will be represented,but what about Night Lords,Iron Warriors,Word Bearers,obviously they can't be represented by Codex:Boring Spikey Feths,so would they not merit a place in the Legions codex?
And what of LaTD?could we perhaps squeeze them in as well,or are we looking at codex bloat?

FITZZ wrote: However,concerning a single Legions codex,what goes in?,what stays out?
Now,of course the "big four" will be represented,

but what about Night Lords,Iron Warriors,Word Bearers,obviously they can't be represented by Codex:Boring Spikey Feths,so would they not merit a place in the Legions codex?

And what of LaTD?could we perhaps squeeze them in as well,or are we looking at codex bloat?

Easy:
- Chaos Legions = Big 4
- Chaos Marines = the rest
- Chaos Traitors = LatD

The current CSM Codex cannot and does not represent Alpha Legion, Night Lords, Word Bearers or Iron Warriors so unless you're talking about a whole new suite of Chaos Codices (ie. re-doing the current one to fit the four Undivided Legions in), then it wouldn't work.

And 'Traitors' is a lot more than just LatD, in much the same way as 'Daemons' is more than just Daemons.

A 'Traitor' Codex should include both Traitor Guard and Lost & The Damned (they are not the same, no matter how much 'Counts As' John or anyone else might want to spin it). How you'd do Traitor Guard without it just being Spiky Guard is a different story - and not one I'm saying I have the answer or solution to - but it's something worth remembering.

A 'Legions' Codex, as in World Eaters, Death Guard, Emperor's Children and Thousand Sons would work fine, as would an Undivided Codex that has a basic list (Black Legion), and then the other four.

Then Daemons needs to be redone as well to include full Daemon World armies - the enslaved warriors and other horrible creatures that infest Daemon Worlds, and not just Daemons.

I'd like to see a Legions book covering all the Legions,as I honestly don't see that the current CSM can properly represent any of the original Legions,in fact I honestly belive the only thing that Codex CSM can properly represent is kindling for a fire.
Now,perhaps a Chaos traitors book would be nice,somthing representing the non MEQ aspects of chaos..including LaTD.
And apparently H.B.M.C. types much faster than I do.

@Fitzz: Obviously, if we pull the Big 4 from the CSM book, we have space to add 4 brand new Special Characters, each of which grants a USR or modifies the FOC according to their Legion...

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Fitzz: Obviously, if we pull the Big 4 from the CSM book, we have space to add 4 brand new Special Characters, each of which grants a USR or modifies the FOC according to their Legion...

True,however that opens up the whole "special characters unlocking rules" issue that I am also very much against .

Ditto.

I shouldn't have to bring a named character to play my army. Whatever happened to having your own fluff for your army or, dare I say it, picking the flavour of ice cream you want, not just a different coloured tub for your vanilla.

Somewhere in England, Robin Crudace is cackling maniacally...

Bring back the old gear choices for Aspiring Champs so I can use mine again... LOL

JohnHwangDD wrote:Somewhere in England, Robin Crudace is cackling arbitrarily...

Fixed it for you.

I want Lash of Submission to go away... It is ridiculuous that whole armies are formed around one spammy little power. Re-balance Chaos and pull the attention back to units like noise marines, thousand sons, and other cool stuff that really makes chaos, chaos!

Warboss Gutrip wrote:I want Lash of Submission to go away...

Of that, I doubt you have to worry.

You simply need the patience for the next CSM book to come out.

Yeah, like Siren before it, Lash ain't gonna survive to the next book.

I'd like to see:

Cheaper sonic weapons, and a sonic weapon for every noise marine.
Possibly some other kind of Tzeentch marine. Though I do like Thousand Sons.
More chaos specific vehicles
Special characters that affect force org
Legion lists
Demons
LatD

I think that's asking a lot so I won't add any more of want I want to see.

Here's what we don't need:

Anything with a FNP that isn't 4+. Messing around with universal special rules is bad for the game. It's like having two different kinds of cyclone missile launchers.

Zerkers with rending - nope. Rending sucks, we don't need it.
Newer LR variants - nope. Chaos is supposed to use old equipment plus it's own inventions. We don't need to copy the SM codex. Or do you want Land Speeders and attack bikes, too? Chaos scouts with sniper rifles? Play loyalists if you want to use their toys. That's the point of having different armies.

More expensive oblits with less options. Nuf said.
Oh, and no more god damn spider tanks that are impossible to hide from LOS because they are so fething huge. Yeah they look cool. But they're too easy too pop because their fething huge.

Noisy_Marine wrote:Special characters that affect force org

Really? That's what you want to see?

You play Emperor's Children right? Do you want to bring Lucius to every game you play?

Think about it...

I think the most likely legion rules will involve special characters affecting force org. But if GW switches design philosophies again, we won't need em. I hope.

I think that the most significant improvements would be to get chaos some new special characters. I mean, c'mon, Abbadon isn't looking as young as he used to be, and thats not a good look for a warmaster of chaos. But seriously, a lot of the chaos models are outdated now and need a makeover.

Rules that i think need to be added/improved: (just a few)...
+Zerkers need higher str to differentiate them from marines with IoK.
+Havocs should be cheaper.
+Get rid of daemons totally and put more emphasise and special rules on things like chosen marines, possesed, termies, etc.
+Better psychic powers.
+Crazier vehicles, i mean, chaos space marines shouldn't mean space marine vehicles but with spikes!! We want more things like defilers...

i could rant all day...

Noisy_Marine wrote:I think the most likely legion rules...

Ok, gonna stop you there. When did this thread go from "What do you want in Codex: CSM 5th edition" to "What do you think GW will do in Codex: CSM 5th Edition"?

Lash should really have been a Tzeentch power.

And I don't think it would be too broken if they changed it to match the Pavane of Slaanesh.

Pavane exists because they saw how broken Lash was.

This is ridiculous if the berzerkers have all those upgrade theyll be like the freaken greater deamons lets be realistic and not make everyone invincible

I agree with you Vampire.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I think the most likely legion rules...

Ok, gonna stop you there. When did this thread go from "What do you want in Codex: CSM 5th edition" to "What do you think GW will do in Codex: CSM 5th Edition"?

Good point. If Legions comes out, I expect it to have SC all over the place. But I remember when my Chaos Lord had so many options we DIDN'T NEED SC's! And I believe those days can come again!!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

...- .- -- .--. .. .-. . wrote:This is ridiculous if the berzerkers have all those upgrade theyll be like the freaken greater deamons lets be realistic and not make everyone invincible

Nope. They'll still be 1 wound marines with Toughness 4. And with lots of options they'll be expensive. This is a *good* thing. People will be able to build the elite legion armies they want. Unless you want a horde. In that case, uh, play Alpha Legion? *shrug* Course it'd be really cool if we could take cultists in legion lists.