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.

Yes, but you can band together nearly anthing for a short peroid of time. I'm talking about an actual warband who stays together for years at the least.

I wrote that as fast as I could type it with no pre-planning. If I felt the urge I could flesh the story out into an unlikely alliance that develops into a larger plot arc (terrible fanfic story ) where the princes are the protagonists and the various other chaos elements provide tension aswell as meatshields.

If an imperial inquisitor can make alliances with daemons and heretics to achieve his aim's while not breaking fluff (eisenhorn books) then a pair of lash princes can sure as hell create an ad-hoc chaos warband that goes forth to glory. Especially slaaneshi princes who would be the most charasmatic (pavane of slaanesh), beautifull (aura of slaanesh) and inspirational (former officers of the great crusade) of them all with the added arogance and disregard for people they consider beneath them carrying over from there days in the emperors children.

"No sweeter glory than one that invloves the death of anothers minions for my own aims, a win-win situation, the perfection of command where even my losses are victorys".

So a question about what is acceptable for a Chaos Army;

What would you guys think about a Warband made up of Renegade Marines( from a DIY Chapter), World Eaters and Fallen?

Despite not being able to Field 3 HQ units normally they'd each have one that could be swapped out depending on what the Battle required.

The Fallen being made up of a biker squad, a Chosen Squad and probably a Sorcerer w/o a Mark at this time.

The DIY Guys being basic CSM, Chosen, a Raptor squad or two and a winged Commander w/ MoT who eventually may become a DP.

and the World Eaters being made up of KB, Termies and a Termie Lord.

Conflict too much with your ideas of cannon or what? Of course a good reason would be come up with for them working together and why the DIY guy is marked by Tzeentch (Maybe he's cunning, and likes to make battle plans that are some times overly elaborate and he pleased Tzeentch).

In fact I liked that last quote I posted, I might start a new CSM warband based around a former emperors children commander who sees the use of other gods troops as perfection in battle planning. You can achieve what would be to another legion commander a phyyric victory (victory at the cost of extreme losses) into a truely glorious victory where you achieve your own aims and also weaken your rivals.

Oh and another thought is Fabious Bile, there right in the heart of the cannon is a slaanesh follower who will happily work with anyone if it allows him to progress further towards perfection in what he does.

BrotherStynier: I see no problem with it.

For me I think the best case you can make for ad-hoc warbands is the Eisenhorn Arguement. He worships the god-emperor and is devout, yet he uses demonic allies and makes pacts with heretics to achieve his aims. Why is it ok for him to do that but not ok for a Chaos lord to do it? Because Eisenhorn woships space jesus and that somehow makes it ok?

Why can't chaos have "radicals" who use any means to achieve there aims aswel as "puritans" who will work soley within the confines of there own god. I think chaos have an even greater case for radical thinking since there sole aim is more power at any cost, anything to become a prince of chaos.

Okay cool.

You would think that the whole, Achieve power by any means necessary would be something that Chaos Lords and Sorcerers would do, after all isn't the whole by any means necessary thing what drove a lot of them over the edge in the first place? As you can see Leotilt I more or less agree with your findings on the matter.

While the story is a cute as it is contrived, typically, when players talk about a "Fluffy" army, I believe that they mean it conforms to some version of previously-written, GW-created Fluff.

If you have to create a backstory, my Plague Marines happened to corrupt the Moderati while he went to the restroom, which is why I'm bring a Titan to my next game of regular 40k.

JohnHwangDD wrote:While the story is a cute as it is contrived, typically, when players talk about a "Fluffy" army, I believe that they mean it conforms to some version of previously-written, GW-created Fluff.

If you have to create a backstory, my Plague Marines happened to corrupt the Moderati while he went to the restroom, which is why I'm bring a Titan to my next game of regular 40k.

There's a difference between creating backstory to fit your concept in the 40k universe, and creating backstory to break the rules.

JohnHwangDD wrote:While the story is a cute as it is contrived, typically, when players talk about a "Fluffy" army, I believe that they mean it conforms to some version of previously-written, GW-created Fluff.

If you have to create a backstory, my Plague Marines happened to corrupt the Moderati while he went to the restroom, which is why I'm bring a Titan to my next game of regular 40k.

Then would Lash Princes leading Plague Marines be "Fluffy" beings that current Ed fluff states that groups will often form into warbands regardless of who they follow out of the necessity to survive?

Well, most of them do not.
But I don't blame them, I'd blame GW.

I still play Emperor's Children able to win RTTs with them (proved one month ago).

Thanks darkhound for the advise, but to answer the topic question, I still care about this fluff, in fact I intended to use it. In the book Storm of Iron, the Iron warriors used a modified version of the tecno virus to take control of a hive fleet Node Queen (the Tyrinid flag ship), and eliminate its army! My character (who is a lutenant to my overall force comander) is a little infectied with the virus alowing him to survive and come back from the dead, (after the battle is over of corse!) and there is more. If you want to start an army read a Black Library book that stars them, it showss their motivatons, methods and history. I read the book the Storm of Iron befor I stared my army. This way you know what that army likes to field and what they don't. The iron warriors don't like deamons, save the princes, because they put their faith in the hope of victory in their wargear and heavy artilery.

BrotherStynier wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:typically, when players talk about a "Fluffy" army, I believe that they mean it conforms to some version of previously-written, GW-created Fluff.

Then would Lash Princes leading Plague Marines be "Fluffy"

current Ed fluff states that groups will often form into warbands regardless of who they follow out of the necessity to survive?

Of course not, don't be silly.

If led by MoN and MoS characters, it'd be somewhat believeable. But MoS-only Psykers leadong only MoN Cult Marine Troops is laughable from a Fluff perspective, as any explanation is highly-contrived. That said, if there's a GW Fluff piece that matches, please do share it.

I gotta say, the obliterator/plague marine/daemon prince story kind of sucks.

Ork, you mean the brainstorm/sketch of a story idea? If you're gonna insult someone's writings, at least insult a real story, not something that someone made up on the spot as an example.

To JohnHwangDD, taking Fzorgle and Plague Marines in an army is comparable to taking a titan with Plague Marines how? One of those is entirely legal, one of those isn't. Have you read the current Chaos Space Marine codex? Where does it say that Chaos warbands won't have different god's forces in them? Where does the current Chaos Space Marine codex state that Slaaneshy Daemon Princes will NEVER work with Death Guard? In the current codex, it never once even hints that mixing god's is a bad idea. Hell, look at the Daemon codex. The only god restriction in it is that the Heralds can't join other god's squads. In fact, doesn't the Daemon codex contain a short story where forces of all four god's go to war under the command of a Bloodthirster and a Lord of Change?

@Rusty: First off, you're neither clever nor amusing in misspelling my name that way as an insult.

Second, the "real" writings for Lash/PM/Obits aren't any better than the "on the spot" example.

Third, it's just pseudo-Fluff to justify a non-Fluffy force. Pretending that Lash/PM/Oblits are Fluffy is just silly. It's better to simply admit to your opponent (and yourself) that you're fielding the most optimized list that you can. At least you'll be honest, and people can respect you for that.

The list is:
2 Deamon princes/sorcerer lords with MoS and Lash
3 squads of plague marines
3 squads of Obliteraters

This is the uber list/most powerful army list that can be made from Codex: Chaos Space Marines. We all know this already. Fact: this list is not fluffy. Some call it Win at all Costs (I don't know what the costs are, 9 obliteraters$$?). Not all chaos player use this list, so let us not make generalizations about all chaos players or all chaos lists.

Mixed warbands are ok, fluff wise, all the way back to 2nd edition. The real point of contention here is a HQ with no troops having the same mark. This is consideed un-fluffy by many, and I believe is the point of the OP.

@John, I misspelled your name on accident. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Second, that's a matter of outdated fluff-nazi mindset versus openmindedness.

Third, there is nothing saying it can't BE fluffy. The warbands of chaos are made up of fragmented remnants of old legions and other traitors.

Fourth, I don't field that list. If you want to see what I'm going to be fielding at tournaments, look at my sig. I'm just tired of fluff nazis that are stuck in the past and feel the need to inflate their epeens.

And to Sugna, my fellow Iron Warrior Brethren. We don't need daemons, we don't need bikes, or jump packs, or any of that silly fast attack stuff. Heck, we don't even need basic troops. All we need is slaves to find the enemy mines, and big guns with enough ammo to keep them firing till the end of time.

My old platoon Sargeant used to say "Every night you should pray for war, so that you can go to work."

@JohnHwangDD:Fully agree with your third point,if people choose to run a Lash/PM/Oblit list then they by all means have the rights to,after all it's their army,codex says it's legal..however,fluffwise..nope I just don't buy it.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Rusty: First off, you're neither clever nor amusing in misspelling my name that way as an insult.

Funny, I remember that you criticized me for complaining that you spelled my name wrong (and there is no way you can honestly misread a 3 and 4 as e and a) Now, you complain that someone else spelled your name wrong.
I would likely have to correct myself spelling your name, as I know more people with the last name Whang than Hwang. I can't say that there is the same precedence for an honest mistake when misspelling my name, however...

But I still agree with you that Lash sorcs, PM, and oblits being thought of as fluffy is ridiculous.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Of course not, don't be silly.

If led by MoN and MoS characters, it'd be somewhat believeable. But MoS-only Psykers leadong only MoN Cult Marine Troops is laughable from a Fluff perspective, as any explanation is highly-contrived. That said, if there's a GW Fluff piece that matches, please do share it.

I don't think there is anywhere where there is fluff on Dual Lash Princes, PM, Oblits, but on the same note I can't think of there not being any. Its a tournament list, no argument here, that has nothing in the fluff for it or against it other than vague references Gods not working together and the Gods working together.

On another note would it be "fluffy" for a Lord with MoT to have Khorne Berserkers in the army, even if the Khornate lord isn't there? Would it be to far gone to assume that he convinced or some how deceived them into following him, look at the God who marked him after all.

Well, how I look at it is that if the main body of your force is dedicated (or not) to a God, squads of other Gods may join up out of necessity (they are cut off from their warband, or are simply guns for hire). Which is to say, a Nurgle Sorcerer, leading a couple squads Plague Marines with a squad of Khorne Berserkers along for the ride. That is entirely different from a Nurgle Lord leading a body of Khorne Berserkers and Noise Marines (without the count-as speech I gave earlier) with no other Nurgle units in sight.

DarkHound wrote:Well, how I look at it is that if the main body of your force is dedicated (or not) to a God, squads of other Gods may join up out of necessity (they are cut off from their warband, or are simply guns for hire). Which is to say, a Nurgle Sorcerer, leading a couple squads Plague Marines with a squad of Khorne Berserkers along for the ride. That is entirely different from a Nurgle Lord leading a body of Khorne Berserkers and Noise Marines (without the count-as speech I gave earlier) with no other Nurgle units in sight.

That's funny, because that's exactly what my Black Legion army consists of:

Nurgle DP
1 squad noise marines
1 squad berzerkers
1 squad icon of khorne
1 squad icon chaos glory

I do have a slaaneshi sorcerer that I don't use much, and a khorne DP who I don't use much either, but the codex simply doesn't have any of the artificial list constrictions that the last two codices had. Note that I generally don't use any Tzeentch-marked units in my warband, but that's more of a self-imposed restriction than anything else, and I wouldn't begrudge a player who wanted to do so. The last time that someone accused my army of being "unfluffy" was back when I actually chose to run only Khorne-and-undivided marked units with the 3.5 codex.

The way I see it, the units are led by aspiring champions who are well on their way on the path to daemonhood in their own right, and they probably don't listen to the boss as much as the boss would like them to (which is why they run away all the time ). When you are a servant of chaos, you don't get any "points" for conformity, and the best way to gain attention from your patron god is through bold acts.

whitedragon wrote:

Cruentus wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:But in this case, don't blame the players. If they even want to win one game out of 100, they need to take a combo of units.

Gee, I don't know. I still use almost the same exact CSM list I did back in 3rd, and I still win more than 50% of my games. And that includes GTs. It might actually be the player in some cases, unless you're talking about Cult armies attempting to replicate the legions. My Word Bearers work just fine, although at this point, I might as well use the Marine Codex

Let's see:

Dark Apostle - Chaplain
Veteran CSM - sternguard
CSM Marines - tacticals
CSM Devs - Devs
Raptors - Assault Marines
Chaos Dread - Dread (plus venerable, etc.)
Vindi/Pred/LR all the same, or better.

I'd miss out on the generic daemons, but what does that matter

*edit* - oh yeah, I'd never do the above btw, but is an example of cheese elementals "counts as" era, which I also find sad.

Booyah, Codex Marines works better than codex Chaos for the original traitor legions. Night Lords led by Counts as "Shrike" for instance...

I wouldn't blame anyone for using Codex:Marines for a Chaos army since as you point out it sorta syncs up and its not even a major stretch for "count as" since everything is wearing power armor and armed with essentially the same weapons.

On the original topic, I play Black Legion so having Khorne Bersekers running along side Rhinos packed with Thousand Sons is not beyond the realms of possibility. Though my god specific troops are painted in Black Legion colours with just one shoulder pad or in the case of the TS the base armor painted in the original colours of their legion.

Blighter, I missed that. Black Legion is the exception the this. They are our Ultrasmurfs that can take anything without breaking any fluff.

I think Polonius, and later whitedragon, are really seeing the problem for what it is. The loss of mark specific units in each FOC slot really does necessitate the use of multiple marks in a single army to be a ferocious competitor.

I am a fan of stuffing an army full of fluff because you get to breath life in your hobby with personal touches and considerations which in turn make the victories even sweeter. However I don't knock anyone for using counts as to accomplish that goal because often it is the most creative way to getting at the desired end.

DarkHound wrote:Blighter, I missed that. Black Legion is the exception the this. They are our Ultrasmurfs that can take anything without breaking any fluff.

But should the paintjob really matter that much? I play Black Legion because I love their iconic place in the story of 40k... but if someone plays a homebrew warband or renegade chapter rather than a Legion should they have more restrictions than I do?

But should the paintjob really matter that much? I play Black Legion because I love their iconic place in the story of 40k... but if someone plays a homebrew warband or renegade chapter rather than a Legion should they have more restrictions than I do?

great arg. willydstyle

H.B.M.C. wrote:Don't blame the players for that. Blame Gav, Jervis and Alessio. They're the reason why Lucius can lead a unit of Berzerkers and why Fateweaver can lead an army of Plague Bearers.

I think it is GW marketing...why limit what people can take in and army instead of letting them buy EVERYTHING.

willydstyle wrote:But should the paintjob really matter that much? I play Black Legion because I love their iconic place in the story of 40k... but if someone plays a homebrew warband or renegade chapter rather than a Legion should they have more restrictions than I do?

Why have different rules and restrictions for anything? Because it makes those armies more interesting when they are different.