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 don't think CSM need a ton of named characters, since we can build 175 point lords that are absolute butchers.

I'm not furious, BUT Swapping out Huron and Bile with Honsou and, say, Roek Ghulclaw would have been nice... Probably quite interesting too as (fluffwise) Champion of Chaos is not a special rule Honsou would have.

Not disappointed in the lack of new characters so much as I'm disappointed in the lack of new fluff excerpts. In the 4th edition codex we got several short-stories showcasing various Chaos's happenings, from the short-story regarding Kharn to the story regarding Huron's take-over of the Space Wolves' ship.

I mean, for feth's sake, 6E is supposed to be all about how Chaos is the greatest threat to the Imperium. The 13th Black Crusade is the most important event for the Chaos Marines since the Heresy. You'd think that the 6E Chaos Space Marines book would have had gakloads of excerpts about the various traitor legions kicking ass in the Crusade.

Instead we got... like two excerpts about the Crusade, talking about Abaddon's villainous scheme, and that's it.

Extremely disappointing.

 Desubot wrote:
If any codex should complain about a lack of named characters it is tau

Only 3, not counting forge world.

Im not sure about nids though I think generally all xeno except necrons have a giant lack of named ic.

Templars have 2 named characters INCLUDING Forge World. Eldar have a metric crapton of SCs in the Phoenix Lords, while Orks have their fair share as well. It's not just Xenos.

 Daemonhammer wrote:

Abhorash15000 wrote:
besides the fact that this is a codex which is supposed to cover many legions worth, the characters have been the same for too long now-they've been the same since 2nd ed. What do you guys think?

No.

They released 5 new sets alongside it so you chaos players shouldnt complain.

not to mention dark vengance which included chaos models. whooo im on fire i should go work for gw. its cool tell im like i do brit "you want beef, we can take this outside"

their characters are good just for the love of god redo abadon. ugliest model ever.

Despite my prior post, I would have liked to have seen some of the BL heavy hitters (Marduk, Talos, Honsou)... come on, if GW wants to hook people with BL, at least set the hook with the characters in the TTG.

 Lobukia wrote:
Despite my prior post, I would have liked to have seen some of the BL heavy hitters (Marduk, Talos, Honsou)... come on, if GW wants to hook people with BL, at least set the hook with the characters in the TTG.

I'm not really a fan of the, shall we say, extended universe. Personally, I wouldn't like to see these characters coming into the game proper. Perhaps this is why GW hasn't done this much, to appease miserable old grognards like me.

 htj wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Despite my prior post, I would have liked to have seen some of the BL heavy hitters (Marduk, Talos, Honsou)... come on, if GW wants to hook people with BL, at least set the hook with the characters in the TTG.

I'm not really a fan of the, shall we say, extended universe. Personally, I wouldn't like to see these characters coming into the game proper. Perhaps this is why GW hasn't done this much, to appease miserable old grognards like me.

I get that, but forget the extended universe. Can we at least get one CSM for each of the Legions? I'm happy building my own, and truth being told I don't miss named characters at all. But I totally get people wanting them, and as long as they aren't so broken that they are a must get, I welcome them into the game.

 Lobukia wrote:

 htj wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Despite my prior post, I would have liked to have seen some of the BL heavy hitters (Marduk, Talos, Honsou)... come on, if GW wants to hook people with BL, at least set the hook with the characters in the TTG.

I'm not really a fan of the, shall we say, extended universe. Personally, I wouldn't like to see these characters coming into the game proper. Perhaps this is why GW hasn't done this much, to appease miserable old grognards like me.

I get that, but forget the extended universe. Can we at least get one CSM for each of the Legions? I'm happy building my own, and truth being told I don't miss named characters at all. But I totally get people wanting them, and as long as they aren't so broken that they are a must get, I welcome them into the game.

I can see that. I'm not a huge fan of SCs myself, never have been, but I have a certain attachment to the classic ones, ones that have been around since 2nd ed. I'd have no problem with a few more SCs coming into the dex to help represent certain chapters (although I don't like this system either) but if it came at the cost of pre-existing SCs, or some of the new units then, for me, the cost is too high.

Like some others, the lack of new SCs didn't really phase me at all. The HQ slot for Chaos is already WAY over-crowded imo (I feel that both the Warpsmith and the Dark Apostle should have been elites choices), and I wouldn't really want to see any of the current characters dropped to make room for new ones. Would I have liked to see a Honsou or a Talos? Sure, but I don't feel that the codex is left lacking because they are not in it (it IS lacking for multiple other reasons - just not that one ...).

Experiment 626 wrote:

Abhorash15000 wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
I find this whole threat halarious simply because if Chaos Marines got any more 'new' SC's, they would probably end up dropping one or two of the current ones to make room.

Then you'd have hate-threads about how evil GW are for removing Special Character 'X' who's been around for ever and ever and replaced him with super broken/underpowered new Special Character 'Y'.

Sorry but if you've played/played against chaos space marines since 2nd ed you may feel differently. dropping and adding characters has been the norm for pretty much all the armies over the editions and is a good way of keeping things fresh. Apparently however this does not apply to chaos marines.

I've been playing CSM's on and off since 3rd edition.

In the 3rd ed codex we had; Abaddon, Ahriman, Kharn, Fabius, Cypher & Doomrider.
In the 3.5 codex we lost Cypher & Doomrider, (and people whined and moaned!), and we ended up with; Abaddon, Fabius, Kharn & Ahriman plus the NEW additions of Typhus & Lucius.
In the the 4th ed codex we kept Abaddon, Kharn, Ahriman, Fabius, Lucius & Typhus and gained Huron Blackheart.

Chaos doesn't get new SC's? Please try telling us another one since over the past 4 books, (including the new 6th ed codex), this is the first codex that hasn't added any new/returning SC's.

Though it's a terrible shame we didn't get Doom Rider back. ALL THE SPACE COKE!

Grey Templar wrote:Nah, I'd complain that some of the ones they do have still arn't worth taking.

Like Fabulous Bile. I mean, shouldn't he be a little more Fabulous

Fabulous Fabius and his Merry Men are Fantastic.
My army is based around him. He'll pretty much always be my Warlord and a solid constant within my army (Also, allied with Dark Eldar from time to time, one way or the other.)

I was sooo angry I rage pitched my codex dramatically into the fire...

/sarcasm

Look, the characters are fine. If you don't like them, there are two options to build your own. And even if they came out with new characters, there would be complaints about them...

I would not say I was furious, disappointed was more of my feeling. I wanted to start a Night Lords army, and I mean a real night lords army where a special character could unlock raptors and Warp Talons as troops. Sadly, that was not an option. I might as well just pick up the Blood Angels codex and use it for such an application.

On a side note, WOOO my 1000th post!

Having quickly gone through them all (assuming I didn't miss any), the current standard 40k codexes have the following numbers of Special Characters each:
Black Templars: 2
Blood Angels: 8
Chaos Daemons: 9
Chaos Space Marines: 7
Dark Angels: 4
Dark Eldar: 8
Eldar: 9
Grey Knights: 8 (+4 Assassins)
Imperial Guard: 12
Necrons: 7
Orks: 7
Sisters of Battle: 3
Space Marines: 11
Space Wolves: 8
Tau Empire: 3
Tyranids: 4

At the end of the day, it would have been nice to get either a Lord option, or Special Character to unlock certain specific armies, and/or got things like the Doomrider back, and some silly flavour characters, but at the end of the day - we didn't come off too badly, and you can always head over to Proposed Rules and make your own. (Do try and balance them though!)

I'm just glad there as no mephiston/sanquinor or dragio character that everyone spams as they have no skill.

does the apostol and warpsmith even count as updates , they are terribad .

Although new special characters are nice and shiny, I would personally just see a return of the sorely missed 'oldies' like Cypher and Doomrider. Failing that some new re-sculpts are desperately needed... looking at you Abaddon... or failing that a suggested Chaos Lord build for each of the other SCs...

No. It doesn't bother me too much because I don't take named characters. I much prefer using my own fluff. Only time I ever took a named character was back when C'tan were named and I always asked my opponent if it was ok first. That being said, I think it would be nice if they had a character for all the major factions.

 tuiman wrote:
Just a re-sculpt of the current ones and I would be happy. Abby, kharn in particular could do with new models

Oh yes do i agree with this post.

I would also like to see new CSM models but thats a lesser one.

In the the 4th ed codex we kept Abaddon, Kharn, Ahriman, Fabius, Lucius & Typhus and gained Huron Blackheart.

2nd edition contained Huron surprisingly enough.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Abhorash15000 wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
I find this whole threat halarious simply because if Chaos Marines got any more 'new' SC's, they would probably end up dropping one or two of the current ones to make room.

Then you'd have hate-threads about how evil GW are for removing Special Character 'X' who's been around for ever and ever and replaced him with super broken/underpowered new Special Character 'Y'.

Sorry but if you've played/played against chaos space marines since 2nd ed you may feel differently. dropping and adding characters has been the norm for pretty much all the armies over the editions and is a good way of keeping things fresh. Apparently however this does not apply to chaos marines.

I've been playing CSM's on and off since 3rd edition.

In the 3rd ed codex we had; Abaddon, Ahriman, Kharn, Fabius, Cypher & Doomrider.
In the 3.5 codex we lost Cypher & Doomrider, (and people whined and moaned!), and we ended up with; Abaddon, Fabius, Kharn & Ahriman plus the NEW additions of Typhus & Lucius.
In the the 4th ed codex we kept Abaddon, Kharn, Ahriman, Fabius, Lucius & Typhus and gained Huron Blackheart.

Chaos doesn't get new SC's? Please try telling us another one since over the past 4 books, (including the new 6th ed codex), this is the first codex that hasn't added any new/returning SC's.

You don't seem to understand what i'm saying. FYI Huron was in 2nd ed and was not a new character in 4th for a start. So since 1996 they have received a total of 2 new characters and even they are now over a decade old. If you are happy with that then fine i'm not knocking you for it but to me thats just laziness on their part. I'd like something new.

 Kaldor wrote:
I'm just pissed they didn't re-sculpt the basic Chaos Marines. Those bad boys are in dire need of an update.

Certainly.

Though, be careful what you wish for, lol. The new models could be even more ridiculous than the existing ones.

But, if they get rid of the belt fed bolters, I might actually buy a box or two.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:


But, if they get rid of the belt fed bolters, I might actually buy a box or two.

If they did this, I'd buy up all the belt feeders I could find. I like the look...

 Phaeron wrote:

I was suggesting different characters should have been included not necessarily more if you read the initial text i wrote under the subject line

I must have misunderstood then. Was your point that they should have replaced older characters, that people already own, with new ones? Was there a particular character from the fluff you had in mind to be introduced?

Cypher and Doomrider were both banished from the Codex back in the 2nd 3E C:CSM, and Cypher couldn't even accurately be recreated as a chaos lord until this edition gave everyone the gunslinger rule, never mind Doomrider.

Here's a more detailed response from my perspective: I'm against the proliferation of special characters. You can represent any number of characters using the generic HQ units without having to resort to yet another named Special Character with game altering rules.

I'm glad the new C:CSM continues to allow alterations to the army list based on your generic HQ choice and his chosen mark, not only on named characters, which unfortunately is what GW seems to have drifted towards in many cases.

I totally agree with your last sentence. I'm still bored with essentially the same stock of characters they've been using since 1996. Ultimately this game boils down to a battle of mathematics, luck, and a bit of pre-emption. I know when me and my friends play we like to augment that with our imaginations which are inevitably led by the fluff. True that this can be done with generic HQs but it is alot better imo to pick up a codex and read background to a character who is part of your force. In the case of Chaos SM I am now a bit tired of reading the same stories for the same characters. It does not inspire me. Obviously each to their own though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
I was sooo angry I rage pitched my codex dramatically into the fire...

/sarcasm

Look, the characters are fine. If you don't like them, there are two options to build your own. And even if they came out with new characters, there would be complaints about them...

Well that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. You say there would be complaints about it if they brought out new characters, well....so what? I don't know how representative this discussion is of the 40k gaming community overall but in the circles I play in there is not one person who is happy with codex:csm. We are bored of the same old crap being rehashed ssince 1996 and the lack of options for marines(eg nurgle=+1T, Slaneesh=+1I). Its been that way forever and its boring. What if I want to field an army of marines with just one mark?(not an unreasonable request considering the span of legions this one book is supposed to cover)- it will be a very boring army to play as there will be such little variance between units. I appreciate that may not be what everyone else wants to do with a csm army but it seems like it should be a viable option and it never has been imo.

Me personally, I was hoping for some kind of word bearer SC that let you take demons as troops and so I could start my word bearers legion (Crossed fingers for eliphas!) but all I got was a measily little apostle... Not even worth the money to buy a new army...

6th book has no Doomrider. Book is fail./troll

Honestly, I'm not bothered by it, at least Dark Apostles are back, and we got some new toys. Then again, after the last book, it's hard to take it further away from chaos-y goodness. Huron is worth taking now just for his Infiltrate spam ability.