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.

Slipstream wrote:The only thing that concerns me about a Chaos legions codex is the amount of information that would need to be included in it to make all the legions different in style of play and army makeup. The only problem is it could be a huge book on a par with the main rulebook! Would GW evencontemplate releasing such a thing?What I will say is that the Chaos Legions at the moment seem 'vanilla', there seems to be no real difference between my Black Legion and my ongoing project(second hand and cheap deals allowing) Nightlords armies. Take the Iron Warriors and then consider the Word Bearers. Now we know that they have very different methods yet the codex does not rise above the vanilla to allow for this. Chaos should allow for probably the most interesting force in 40k yet it is far from it.

They might just focus on the 4 god legions (thousand sons , world eaters ,death guard and emperors children) and the black legion i would personaly dislike this as i think that alpha legion and world eaters could get some interesting rule but doing the "big 5 " would make sense to me.

blackclaw1 wrote:

Slipstream wrote:The only thing that concerns me about a Chaos legions codex is the amount of information that would need to be included in it to make all the legions different in style of play and army makeup. The only problem is it could be a huge book on a par with the main rulebook! Would GW evencontemplate releasing such a thing?What I will say is that the Chaos Legions at the moment seem 'vanilla', there seems to be no real difference between my Black Legion and my ongoing project(second hand and cheap deals allowing) Nightlords armies. Take the Iron Warriors and then consider the Word Bearers. Now we know that they have very different methods yet the codex does not rise above the vanilla to allow for this. Chaos should allow for probably the most interesting force in 40k yet it is far from it.

They might just focus on the 4 god legions (thousand sons , world eaters ,death guard and emperors children) and the black legion i would personaly dislike this as i think that alpha legion and world eaters could get some interesting rule but doing the "big 5 " would make sense to me.

That would nearly defeat the purpose of the book, doing only the four 'god' Legions. As it stands currently, you can make all those Legions, although not as well as would be liked.

IMO following the same basic format as the 3.5 chaos codex, but updated in the style of the most recent books would make the most sense for a Legions book that covered all 9 traitor legions in a reasonable number of pages. The basic unit entries would be for a black legion army and include entries for every unit. However, units more specific to other legions, such as cult marines or cultists, would be absent or limited in this black legion default, either by taking up elites slots or being 0-1 or something to that effect.

I am speculating that taking a specialized HQ choice would then let you build an army for the legions, given that that seems to be the recent trend in making sub-lists. Whether GW makes special characters for all 9 legions, or gives options so that say a normal chaos lord could be upgraded to be an alpha legion lord, a death guard lord, etc. only time will tell. So if you took the death guard HQ choice, you could then take as many plague marines as you want in addition to whatever special units that would come with the death guard, like plague terminators, plague havocs, and what have you. In return for making a death guard army, you would then be unable to take non-death guard/nurgle units, such as other cult units or undivided/unmarked units.

TL,DR: have a default black legion list with every unit, taking a legion specific HQ removes restrictions on appropriate units and gives you any corresponding abilities, but removes access to non-legion associated units.

No thanks. I rather not have to take the same HQ every time to make my preferred army. Take a look at JustDave's fandex for the ideal solution, although I would like more warband specific units.

iproxtaco wrote:No thanks. I rather not have to take the same HQ every time to make my preferred army. Take a look at JustDave's fandex for the ideal solution, although I would like more warband specific units.

I agree with you, I was thinking about it, and no I don't want to run Typhus every time for my death guard, or Ahriman every time with my thousand sons. I'm just spitballing ideas about how such a book could be organized and set up. I haven't read JustDave's fandex, but I'm assuming that the best solution would be to give the basic HQ entries options to become legion specific, which would then lead to all the legion specific stuff.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/340878.page

Basically, you can elect an HQ choice with a Warband rule. Then each unit carries the warband rule. It unlocks units and adds special rules. I'd prefer it if it were a bit more in depth, adding more units for each Legion, but JustDave did a fantastic job with this.

metalboxes wrote:IMO following the same basic format as the 3.5 chaos codex, but updated in the style of the most recent books would make the most sense for a Legions book that covered all 9 traitor legions in a reasonable number of pages. The basic unit entries would be for a black legion army and include entries for every unit. However, units more specific to other legions, such as cult marines or cultists, would be absent or limited in this black legion default, either by taking up elites slots or being 0-1 or something to that effect.

I am speculating that taking a specialized HQ choice would then let you build an army for the legions, given that that seems to be the recent trend in making sub-lists. Whether GW makes special characters for all 9 legions, or gives options so that say a normal chaos lord could be upgraded to be an alpha legion lord, a death guard lord, etc. only time will tell. So if you took the death guard HQ choice, you could then take as many plague marines as you want in addition to whatever special units that would come with the death guard, like plague terminators, plague havocs, and what have you. In return for making a death guard army, you would then be unable to take non-death guard/nurgle units, such as other cult units or undivided/unmarked units.

TL,DR: have a default black legion list with every unit, taking a legion specific HQ removes restrictions on appropriate units and gives you any corresponding abilities, but removes access to non-legion associated units.

If they do this for Chaos I'll just give em up.
I will not be forced into taking a SC to play a specific legion, I don't like it in the current codexes and I sure as hell won't like it if they implement it in Chaos Legions
Its a terrible idea and I hate it in the current codexes we have. It takes away the customisation in your army and forces you to play a unit you may not like at all.
What happens if the HQ we're stuck with ends up crap as well? We end up having to field a liability just to get a chance to use the legion we like

Although your probably correct in assuming thats exactly what they will do.

I'm sure we'll see a return of Kharn, Typhus, Ahriman, Abaddon and Lucius, with the option for the DP, Lord and Sorcerer that we are used to. Perhaps the amount of special characters will rival the SM book, who knows.

I'd just like an increased level of customisation and restrictions on mixing marks. Khorne and Tzeentch teaming up... *vomits*

I'm thinking Nightlords and Alpha Legion may well be put into the Renegade (Irony?) codex to fill it out. Other than the Red Corsairs, I can't think of another chapter that could warrant a prominent place in the book?

iproxtaco wrote:

blackclaw1 wrote:

Slipstream wrote:The only thing that concerns me about a Chaos legions codex is the amount of information that would need to be included in it to make all the legions different in style of play and army makeup. The only problem is it could be a huge book on a par with the main rulebook! Would GW evencontemplate releasing such a thing?What I will say is that the Chaos Legions at the moment seem 'vanilla', there seems to be no real difference between my Black Legion and my ongoing project(second hand and cheap deals allowing) Nightlords armies. Take the Iron Warriors and then consider the Word Bearers. Now we know that they have very different methods yet the codex does not rise above the vanilla to allow for this. Chaos should allow for probably the most interesting force in 40k yet it is far from it.

They might just focus on the 4 god legions (thousand sons , world eaters ,death guard and emperors children) and the black legion i would personaly dislike this as i think that alpha legion and world eaters could get some interesting rule but doing the "big 5 " would make sense to me.

That would nearly defeat the purpose of the book, doing only the four 'god' Legions. As it stands currently, you can make all those Legions, although not as well as would be liked.

so gw are probably going to do that?

Regarding the fear that SCs will be required to unlock a specific Legion (ala Codex Space Marines), I think GW's inability to adopt a consistent approach to Codex writing will work in your favour here

Personally, I think they almost had the right idea with Chapter Tactics, but fluffed it by linking it to Special Characters.

Medium of Death wrote:
I'm thinking Nightlords and Alpha Legion may well be put into the Renegade (Irony?) codex to fill it out. Other than the Red Corsairs, I can't think of another chapter that could warrant a prominent place in the book?

I don't think this will happen, if this is the way forward then they would be a bit stupid to put Legions in the Renegade book. We might see some more characters and a bit more fleshing out of the Pyre, Sons of Malice and the like.

I don't have much gripe with the existing codex, just that it's showing its age a bit and there's not many competitive builds, so a bit of a tweak and the ability to take your unique legion would be great to me. I just hope they don't go rewriting to much of the fluff.

By the by, JustDaves codex is great and strongly recommend a look. I helped him a bit with it and one of the hardest things to do is to get a decent way of combining Renegades and Legions into one book as such. In the end we decided to leave it out entirely.

blackclaw1 wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:

blackclaw1 wrote:

Slipstream wrote:The only thing that concerns me about a Chaos legions codex is the amount of information that would need to be included in it to make all the legions different in style of play and army makeup. The only problem is it could be a huge book on a par with the main rulebook! Would GW evencontemplate releasing such a thing?What I will say is that the Chaos Legions at the moment seem 'vanilla', there seems to be no real difference between my Black Legion and my ongoing project(second hand and cheap deals allowing) Nightlords armies. Take the Iron Warriors and then consider the Word Bearers. Now we know that they have very different methods yet the codex does not rise above the vanilla to allow for this. Chaos should allow for probably the most interesting force in 40k yet it is far from it.

They might just focus on the 4 god legions (thousand sons , world eaters ,death guard and emperors children) and the black legion i would personaly dislike this as i think that alpha legion and world eaters could get some interesting rule but doing the "big 5 " would make sense to me.

That would nearly defeat the purpose of the book, doing only the four 'god' Legions. As it stands currently, you can make all those Legions, although not as well as would be liked.

so gw are probably going to do that?

Why would you think that? The Development team aren't all a bunch of morons. They have a book where you can feasibly make armies that are themed around those four Legions, and you now assume they're going to make an entirely new book just to flesh those out? No, not likely. Legions implies special rules and units for all the Legions, not just the four that have dedicated themselves to a God.

Uhh... can we please not tie everything to HQ characters.

Pfft just release a "Codex : Slaanesh" none of the other gods worshippers matter!

But on a serious note, would be good to see some new characters too - Like the Fallen SoB you can see in the card games (Mariel) I'd also really like to see flavoured HQ's, not neccecarily named but good bases with good customisation to allow people to make there own armies.

To be fair, i have a billion dreams but at the end of the day this is going to be much better than my feeble attempt to have a army of 90% noise marines and be fairly competitive

GW is going to mess it up you know they are.

What are thier options?

Release one book to cover material that would never fit in one book. Kudos to that fandex that tried but does that really do justice for what chaos is? Does it give Alpha legion its flavor and even Black Legions theirs?

or

Do what they have currently done with the loyalist and release 15 new dexes over the next 250 years and never update them?

Again GW has perpetrated its own downfall, they will not be able to do Chaos in any good way. We will either have to ignore Chaos Legions or make do with it like the last one.

Pael wrote:GW is going to mess it up you know they are.

What are thier options?

Release one book to cover material that would never fit in one book. Kudos to that fandex that tried but does that really do justice for what chaos is? Does it give Alpha legion its flavor and even Black Legions theirs?

or

Do what they have currently done with the loyalist and release 15 new dexes over the next 250 years and never update them?

Again GW has perpetrated its own downfall, they will not be able to do Chaos in any good way. We will either have to ignore Chaos Legions or make do with it like the last one.

I find your lack of faith... disturbing.

Also, as somebody who is 'out of the GW hobby', as per your thread, why does this concern you?

Just Dave wrote:I've got mixed feelings about this actually.

Of course I'm happy Chaos will be put back into the face of things and their current Codex updated, but...

Chiefly, for me it would render my fandex (signature) useless, particularly as it's now really starting to pick up; although there's still several months yet...

The Land Raider Marauder will always hold a special place in my heart, for what it's worth.

Medium of Death wrote:I find your lack of faith... disturbing.

Also, as somebody who is 'out of the GW hobby', as per your thread, why does this concern you?

Just my lack of faith? I thought I cited some pretty specific examples of actuality nothing to do with faithfulness.

Does GW have the ability to release more codexs per year? From their past release schedules it is obvious that they can not.

Can GW put all of the material that constitues what is Chaos in one book? They can try, oh how they can, but in actuality, in reality? What do you honestly think they will accomplish?

Other questions, what will GW do about new miniatures/codex entries? Will they bother? Will they ignore older units for the new ones?

To your last question, How doesn't it? It is gaming and if I want to discuss then I will discuss. I don't mean to put anyone off but I am just bringing up points I feel are valid to the current discussion.

Let me add what I have left unsaid. GW does have the potential to do something AWESOME, but I find it near impossible. IF they do I honestly will not start playing again but I will humbly eat my words and applaud GW for accomplishing such a feat.

I too fear GW would screw up Chaos Legions. Their past history indicates this is likely.

Perhaps the answer might be this; remember when they grouped the Dark Angels and Blood Angels into one codex? It may make sense to consider this approach as two armies would get more space for their own specific rules and fluff. Then they could release a codex for the next two Chaos legions. The only downside is the amount of time this may take and more importantly, what legions go in which codex?

Personally I'm kind of hoping it isn't Chaos Marines at all but Lost & the Damned instead......

Slipstream wrote:Perhaps the answer might be this; remember when they grouped the Dark Angels and Blood Angels into one codex? It may make sense to consider this approach as two armies would get more space for their own specific rules and fluff. Then they could release a codex for the next two Chaos legions. The only downside is the amount of time this may take and more importantly, what legions go in which codex?

I don't see most of the Legions being that different to tell you the truth. They were all easily covered in the 3.5 Chaos codex, they can be covered in the next one.

I was mulling over why there seems to be more worry with GW/Matt Ward screwing up this codex over other codices and I wrote an article about it on Capture and Control, follow the link in my sig if you're interested.

I have to disagree with one thing said here though. I see the Legions as being quite different from one another (a point I discuss in my article) just from reading the HH books you can see that EVERY legion not just the traitor ones had very distinct characteristics prior to the heresy and the blaspehmy that was Guillimans codex. I hope the book does each Legions distinct nature justice but I have serious doubts. It will more than likely be based upon HQ choice whether you are playing World Eaters or Word Bearers etc. With this dex using HQs as the catalyst for build types seems ungainly and implausible but I doubt we are going to get a codex that breaks away from that mechanic. It has just worked too well for GW in the past 3+ years.

I think I'm gonna pick up a copy of the old 3.5 Chaos Codex... just in case the next new one is a load of crap.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Conclusion: Not restrictions.

Claiming that these are 'restrictions' would be like a Blood Angel player complaining because he can't field Deathwing.

Sigh. I'm not here to debate you on the merits of the individual restrictions in the old chaos codex. I was trying to explain some of the reasoning behind the changes made in the current book, not defend them. Just in case you think I am making this up here's a link to Gav Thorpe's comments on the codex. Take it up with him.

Arschbombe wrote:
Sigh. I'm not here to debate you on the merits of the individual restrictions in the old chaos codex. I was trying to explain some of the reasoning behind the changes made in the current book, not defend them. Just in case you think I am making this up here's a link to Gav Thorpe's comments on the codex. Take it up with him.

That's highly ironic. H.B.M.C. did take it up with Gav Thorpe on the blog.

filbert wrote:

Arschbombe wrote:
Sigh. I'm not here to debate you on the merits of the individual restrictions in the old chaos codex. I was trying to explain some of the reasoning behind the changes made in the current book, not defend them. Just in case you think I am making this up here's a link to Gav Thorpe's comments on the codex. Take it up with him.

That's highly ironic. H.B.M.C. did take it up with Gav Thorpe on the blog.

Yes, I believe ice cream was involved

filbert wrote:

Arschbombe wrote:
Sigh. I'm not here to debate you on the merits of the individual restrictions in the old chaos codex. I was trying to explain some of the reasoning behind the changes made in the current book, not defend them. Just in case you think I am making this up here's a link to Gav Thorpe's comments on the codex. Take it up with him.

That's highly ironic. H.B.M.C. did take it up with Gav Thorpe on the blog.

Made him cry too is what I heard.

Flashman wrote:

filbert wrote:

Arschbombe wrote:
Sigh. I'm not here to debate you on the merits of the individual restrictions in the old chaos codex. I was trying to explain some of the reasoning behind the changes made in the current book, not defend them. Just in case you think I am making this up here's a link to Gav Thorpe's comments on the codex. Take it up with him.

That's highly ironic. H.B.M.C. did take it up with Gav Thorpe on the blog.

Yes, I believe ice cream was involved

That's the one - I couldn't be bothered scrolling through Gav's blog to find the exact quotes; there's 300+ odd comments, but I remember reading it at the time. Not only that, if you can wrangle the Dakka search engine you may well find the Dakka thread referencing it.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Nah, he'll write it that Aby and his crew get together for a 14th Black Crusade, a Black Crusade that's specific target is Draigo himself - he's just that destructive! Think about it, he puts togther a Chaos 'Dream Team', of Aby, Kharn, Lucius, Ahriman, Typhus, the Planet Killer and a fully activated Blackstone Fortress. I'd still put money on Draigo though. The guy is armageddon incarnate!

no.... this guy is the Chuck Norris of the 41St millennium