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.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:Just to clarify - these rumours are for the Renegades 'dex, yes? Or are we not sure that there are going to be separate books?

Not going to be separate books.

...When was that confirmed? D:

No one reputable has ever promised separate books.

Blood of Kittens Via Facebook wrote:It looks like my server overload wasn't what I thought it was. It turns out that it was a "denial of service attack" which basically means someone or a group of someones was trying to crash my site from out country. For what reasons I have no idea, but anyway will have to make some major fixes to my site for it work properly.

With BoK so desperately seeking attention, it is difficult to tell the truth about this.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:Just to clarify - these rumours are for the Renegades 'dex, yes? Or are we not sure that there are going to be separate books?

Not going to be separate books.

...When was that confirmed? D:

No one reputable has ever promised separate books.

That is not quite right:

straightsilver wrote:Alessio and Jervis have both said that they would like the CSM Codex to stay as Renegades, and to release another Codex which would address the Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, World Eaters, Emperor's Children etc.

I may of course be completely wrong, the next Codex might just be a rehash of the current one and replace it, but that's not what I have heard.

So at least this was the original intention. It seems certain that the book includes lists of at least 4 Legions (including either cultists, some traitor guardists or both), only issue is if it also replaces the old Codex. The dreadnought being replaced, if true, could just be a new unit called daemon engines (this is pure speculation of course).

Generally I am sceptical about the BoK rumours when they differ from current mainstream rumours (which include just one Codex this year), e.g. the dragon. But then again, I still don't accept the WD Sororitas Codex

What is Straightsilver's success record? And even if that story is accurate, how relevant is a second hand plan for a book released 6 years ago?

It never made sense to have the old 4th Chaos Codex stay as 'Renegade' book, as their is nothing uniquely renegade in it except Huron and, depending on your view on him, Ahriman, and about 2 pages in the hobby section on alternative paint schemes.The other 99% of that book are exclusively (ex-)Legion (as they are in the 41st century) fluff and rules. Besides that, there can be no renegades without grounding in the Legions as their origins and history. For the most part, Renegades ARE what has become of the Legions. Word Bearers turning to Khorne become the Sanctified. Night Lords and Word Bearers throwing their stuff together become Warriors of Aggannor.Skulltakes, commanded by a former Storm Lord, are arguably the biggest single organised contingent of World Eaters still around (allied with the former Death Guard known as the Apostles of Contagion). The biggest Word Bearer ship is commanded by Huron, etc... .

Go 40k bro, you won't regret it!

Chaos Space Marines exist in groups of ad hoc alliances to accomplish their goals. A Slaanesh Daemon Prince hiring/dominating a Plague Marine coven to further his goals, and both sides of the alliance are probably planning on pulling one over on the other.

Yet the books themselves say that rarely do they mix up, and usually it's because of a tzeentchian pulling them together.

You can't have "Rarely mixes together, hates each other, rarely makes full out alliances" suddenly becoming "Oh hey they team up all the time, the chaos gods and their followers are all bro's so they'll fight together"

4th edition book was an abomination, most of them aren't even renegades, with the exception of huron, Kharn, Bile, and Ahriman. And even than Kharn is accepted by the Khorne worshipers, and still teams up with his original, unlike the rest. Typhus still stops by the daemon planet with mortrarian, and Lucius hasn't even abandoned the emperors children.

BOK wrote:All Cult Marines are Elites
...
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
...
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)

So this is how Chaos dies: To thunderous stupidity.

Chaos Dreadnaught removed? Madness!

H.B.M.C. wrote:

BOK wrote:All Cult Marines are Elites
...
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
...
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)

So this is how Chaos dies: To thunderous stupidity.

Chaos died years ago when the last "codex" was released. This is just them playing with its corpse like a bunch of necrophiliacs.

I also sense Jervis' touch on this upcoming "codex", with Cult Marines moving back to Elites.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

Zweischneid wrote:

Farmer wrote:

How is that anyless fluffy then a slannesh daemon prince in the same army as a bunch of plague marines? which is all the current codex has to offer.

Because Chaos by and large fight as mix-and-match warbands 99,9999% of the time. That's what makes them "different" to Loyalists. A uniform army that just switches out "red" for "blue" and "for the Blood God" for "for the Emperor" doesn't need a seperate Codex. You can use the marine book for that. What makes Chaos fluffy, distinct and worthy of their own book is the very fact that it's a motley, rowdy, infighting rag-tag warband that will fight each other almost as gladly as they fight the enemy across the board.

This has never been the case until the 4th edition codex, and that codex was an abomination that never should have been written. They removed all semblance of the enmity and divisions between chaos forces in favor of seriously dumbing down the codex, and in doing so, removed 90% of the character of the army.

Yes, most of the legions have been shattered into small warbands, and the World Eaters probably worst of all. But our 40k armies are no bigger than "warband" size. Mixing and matching marked units at the squad level would be uncommon, and the old restrictions represented this well. A chaos warband that resembled the typical builds from the 4th edition codex would be in the vast minority of warbands based on every other bit of chaos fluff that exists.

Edit: to get this post at least slightly back on topic, if these new rumors are correct, it sounds like they're at least bringing this back to some extent with the special character builds. Not totally happy about it though, especially since it leaves all but the big 4 god-dedicated legions out in the cold.

I hope that the one about no new SCs is wrong. Why don't the AL WB IW or NL get any love?

Dreadnought is probably just going to turn into Decimator.

Durza wrote:I hope that the one about no new SCs is wrong. Why don't the AL WB IW or NL get any love?

Personally, I don't think all the Legions should get special characters; it just reduces the emphasis or need on home-made/customised characters IMHO.

Dreadnought is probably just going to turn into Decimator.

Unlikely, they're two different things, game and fluff wise, whilst IIRC someone said GW aren't going to be 'stealing' FW units for their Codices anymore.

Just Dave wrote:

Durza wrote:I hope that the one about no new SCs is wrong. Why don't the AL WB IW or NL get any love?

Personally, I don't think all the Legions should get special characters; it just reduces the emphasis or need on home-made/customised characters IMHO.

Dreadnought is probably just going to turn into Decimator.

Unlikely, they're two different things, game and fluff wise, whilst IIRC someone said GW aren't going to be 'stealing' FW units for their Codices anymore.

While I do agree that some things should be customized, I would love to see an Iron Warriors Dreadnought HQ character. Since I can't exactly make one myself with the rules (Aside from using one as a DP)

Not to mention some of those armies would have rules you can't exactly customize into a mark system.

I agree that not every legion should need a special character, BUT if SCs are the only way to unlock legion-specific rules or builds, everyone else is kind of getting screwed if they don't have one.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

BOK wrote:All Cult Marines are Elites
...
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
...
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)

So this is how Chaos dies: To thunderous stupidity.

I agree with this 100%.

The only way it could be worse is if Matt Ward wrote the codex.

LoneLictor wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

BOK wrote:All Cult Marines are Elites
...
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
...
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)

So this is how Chaos dies: To thunderous stupidity.

I agree with this 100%.

The only way it could be worse is if Matt Ward wrote the codex.

Give it a rest, the only way it could be worse is if Jervis or Crudance wrote it.

LoneLictor wrote:
The only way it could be worse is if Matt Ward wrote the codex.

For non-chaos players, it could be worse if it returned to the same relative power level and feel as the codex that it replaced. That mess of broken and cummulative options led to the most unfun games of 3rd edition my local group ever had. Most of us simply stopped playing 40k on a regular basis after it came out due to the ridiculous combos it allowed in conjunction with the old 3rd edition (and trial assault) rules. Everything is relative depending on your perspective.

warboss wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:
The only way it could be worse is if Matt Ward wrote the codex.

For non-chaos players, it could be worse if it returned to the same relative power level and feel as the codex that it replaced. That mess of broken and cummulative options led to the most unfun games of 3rd edition my local group ever had. Most of us simply stopped playing 40k on a regular basis after it came out due to the ridiculous combos it allowed in conjunction with the old 3rd edition (and trial assault) rules. Everything is relative depending on your perspective.

That Codex was most certainly over powered, but it could've been fixed with some increased point costs and getting rid of one or two esp. bad rules. Instead they made that horrible, horrible, horrible Gav Thorpe Codex that pretty much was Games Workshop flipping all the Chaos players off.

And now we have this. Le sigh.....

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

This has never been the case until the 4th edition codex, and that codex was an abomination that never should have been written. They removed all semblance of the enmity and divisions between chaos forces in favor of seriously dumbing down the codex, and in doing so, removed 90% of the character of the army.

Yes, most of the legions have been shattered into small warbands, and the World Eaters probably worst of all. But our 40k armies are no bigger than "warband" size. Mixing and matching marked units at the squad level would be uncommon, and the old restrictions represented this well. A chaos warband that resembled the typical builds from the 4th edition codex would be in the vast minority of warbands based on every other bit of chaos fluff that exists.

Edit: to get this post at least slightly back on topic, if these new rumors are correct, it sounds like they're at least bringing this back to some extent with the special character builds. Not totally happy about it though, especially since it leaves all but the big 4 god-dedicated legions out in the cold.

That has always been the case. Rogue Trader Slaves of Darkness forced you to roll on a table (with a D10) if you summoned daemons or received chaos gifts. 1 or 2, Khorne, 3-4 Slaneesh, 5-6, Nurgle, 7-8, Tzeentch, 9-10 Undivided. You couldn't possibly avoid a mixed force. 2nd edition + introduced "animostity" precisely to set Chaos apart from the "more diciplined" and uniform chaos forces. Chaos would be infighting, but that was the point. It was what made chaos stand apart conceptually from the loyalist side (unfortunately, WAAC-players without regard for the fluff had a habit of trying to sidestep fluffy armies that used animostity to its fullest).

Mixed warbands have always been the norm. And always will be. Mono-lists are arguably possible. Just like its not unthinkable to have an Ultramarine force deploy entirely in Terminator armour or an Eldar force consiting only of Striking Scorpions. But it sure aint the norm. And it sure ain't the "typical" Ultramarine or Eldar way of fighting. Neither is that the case with Chaos. The proper and fluffy default Chaos army should be a mix of Gods and units, ideally one that highlights the "old" fluffy animosity infighting that made Chaos unique vis-a-vis the loyalists in 2nd Edition +. Mono-forces should be reserved to the few incidents of "historical" play, which are noted in 40K lore and specifically highlighted as unique and rare events.

If GW decided to make fluff that Chaos Legions, like the World Eaters are splintered, it did so with the assumption that this would be visibly represented in the armies on the table. Yes, in theory a rare World Eater force might consist of nothing but World Eaters. And a Space Marine army might consist of a mix-and-match of Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Ravenguards, etc.. all fighting together with a few Marines each. But by default, with the Chaos fluff noting the Legions as broken and the Loyalist Chapters as functionally sound, the expectation is that the "normal" armies will have a smattering of different Chaos Legions/Gods to represent this sundering and "uniform" loyalist armies to represent their organisational and military coherency.

Zweischneid wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

This has never been the case until the 4th edition codex, and that codex was an abomination that never should have been written. They removed all semblance of the enmity and divisions between chaos forces in favor of seriously dumbing down the codex, and in doing so, removed 90% of the character of the army.

Yes, most of the legions have been shattered into small warbands, and the World Eaters probably worst of all. But our 40k armies are no bigger than "warband" size. Mixing and matching marked units at the squad level would be uncommon, and the old restrictions represented this well. A chaos warband that resembled the typical builds from the 4th edition codex would be in the vast minority of warbands based on every other bit of chaos fluff that exists.

Edit: to get this post at least slightly back on topic, if these new rumors are correct, it sounds like they're at least bringing this back to some extent with the special character builds. Not totally happy about it though, especially since it leaves all but the big 4 god-dedicated legions out in the cold.

That has always been the case. Rogue Trader Slaves of Darkness forced you to roll on a table (with a D10) if you summoned daemons or received chaos gifts. 1 or 2, Khorne, 3-4 Slaneesh, 5-6, Nurgle, 7-8, Tzeentch, 9-10 Undivided. You couldn't possibly avoid a mixed force. 2nd edition + introduced "animostity" precisely to set Chaos apart from the "more diciplined" and uniform chaos forces. Chaos would be infighting, but that was the point. It was what made chaos stand apart conceptually from the loyalist side (unfortunately, WAAC-players without regard for the fluff had a habit of trying to sidestep fluffy armies that used animostity to its fullest).

Mixed warbands have always been the norm. And always will be. Mono-lists are arguably possible. Just like its not unthinkable to have an Ultramarine force deploy entirely in Terminator armour or an Eldar force consiting only of Striking Scorpions. But it sure aint the norm. And it sure ain't the "typical" Ultramarine or Eldar way of fighting. Neither is that the case with Chaos. The proper and fluffy default Chaos army should be a mix of Gods and units, ideally one that highlights the "old" fluffy animosity infighting that made Chaos unique vis-a-vis the loyalists in 2nd Edition +. Mono-forces should be reserved to the few incidents of "historical" play, which are noted in 40K lore and specifically highlighted as unique and rare events.

Hahahahahaha
Holy crap dude, are you wrong or what? You totally ignore my post in this thread proving you wrong, and you still come out of the woodwork and post this total bs. It was funny once or twice but now you're just proving to be intentionally obtuse with a best case scenario, or worst case scenario you're a moron.

Here's the post here which you conveniently ignored because you are wrong. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/443328.page#4161692
But let me quote it here so everyone can see it.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:
No. Just no. You keep bringing up this stupid gak into conversations and even after being told you're wrong, you still keep at it, don't you?

Originally when Chaos was introduced, you couldn't do mixed forces. The only force that allowed you to do this was Black Legion in RT era because they switched from god to god so often. Otherwise, there was animosity. You could not have Slaanesh dudes in a Khorne force. Full stop. Or if you could, you were at a disadvantage. Animosity is there for army balance, not to stop WAAC gamers.

What made Chaos unique was the fact that they did not obey the laws of nature. Possessed by daemons, granted Chaos attributes. Could summon Daemons. Were veterans of the Horus Heresy. That's what made Chaos Space Marines unique.

The essential design paradigm was that you chose one specific god and you dedicated your warband to them. That was that. If anything, the WAAC gamers are the ones who abuse the system and mix in the different gods, like using Skarbrand to give your Daemonettes a re-roll to hit.

Um. There was no Black Legion of that name in Slaves of Darkness yet, though they had introduced Horus. Also, there wasn't even animosity yet in slaves of darkness. Indeed, you couldn't even choose which Daemons/Possessions/etc. you got. In RT, you just rolled (D10 still back then) on a table with 1-2 getting you Khorne, 3-4 getting you Slaneesh, 5-6 Nurgle, 7-8 Tzeentch and 9-10 Independent every time you summoned thngs or got possessions. Unless you rolled constantly the same number, it was impossible in RT to have a "mono-God" force. By pure virtue of the fact that the game used dice, you were bound to get a mixture of things(who, in RT-days, weren't even afflicted by animosity).

Thank you for proving that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Go check page 268 of Slaves to Darkness. Whaaat? Could it be? The Black Legion? Say it ain't so!
Only the Black Legion had the possibility having multiple Daemons from different gods, otherwise you were restricted to the god in your chosen army list. Otherwise, unless you took Black Legion, Daemons were subject to hatred of their opposed deity. Also, you have the World Eaters being subject to the hatred of followers of Slaanesh, and Emperor's Children subject to hatred of followers of Khorne.

Also, please direct me to the page number and book where you rolled to summon, because in Slaves to Darkness and Lost and the Damned you paid the points and then you had to roll to see if they were even available.


And to stay on topic, I find the Daemon army to not be appealing at all, since they should be back with the Chaos Space Marines. Grey Knights used to appeal to me but their fluff nowadays just weirds me out.

:edit: I see what you're talking about with the D10, that's the Daemonic Intrusions table. That was totally independent of the army lists and only happened when daemons attempted to use a psyker as a gate to realspace.

Sure makes it easy to argue when you ignore the truth, huh?

Your stupid fething table that you keep blabbing about is where a GM could determine if Daemons used a psyker as a portal to the real world, and I even mentioned that in the post. . Otherwise, the only other faction that could summon daemons of multiple gods was the Black Legion. Even then, they had animosity against Daemons on the opposing side.

Seriously, stop posting your dumb gak. You're wrong. And guess what, you'll ignore this too. But now everyone can see that you are plainly wrong.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:Yaaaaawn.

We need no more

Zweischneid wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

This has never been the case until the 4th edition codex, and that codex was an abomination that never should have been written. They removed all semblance of the enmity and divisions between chaos forces in favor of seriously dumbing down the codex, and in doing so, removed 90% of the character of the army.

Yes, most of the legions have been shattered into small warbands, and the World Eaters probably worst of all. But our 40k armies are no bigger than "warband" size. Mixing and matching marked units at the squad level would be uncommon, and the old restrictions represented this well. A chaos warband that resembled the typical builds from the 4th edition codex would be in the vast minority of warbands based on every other bit of chaos fluff that exists.

Edit: to get this post at least slightly back on topic, if these new rumors are correct, it sounds like they're at least bringing this back to some extent with the special character builds. Not totally happy about it though, especially since it leaves all but the big 4 god-dedicated legions out in the cold.

That has always been the case. Rogue Trader Slaves of Darkness forced you to roll on a table (with a D10) if you summoned daemons or received chaos gifts. 1 or 2, Khorne, 3-4 Slaneesh, 5-6, Nurgle, 7-8, Tzeentch, 9-10 Undivided. You couldn't possibly avoid a mixed force. 2nd edition + introduced "animostity" precisely to set Chaos apart from the "more diciplined" and uniform chaos forces. Chaos would be infighting, but that was the point. It was what made chaos stand apart conceptually from the loyalist side (unfortunately, WAAC-players without regard for the fluff had a habit of trying to sidestep fluffy armies that used animostity to its fullest).

Mixed warbands have always been the norm. And always will be. Mono-lists are arguably possible. Just like its not unthinkable to have an Ultramarine force deploy entirely in Terminator armour or an Eldar force consiting only of Striking Scorpions. But it sure aint the norm. And it sure ain't the "typical" Ultramarine or Eldar way of fighting. Neither is that the case with Chaos. The proper and fluffy default Chaos army should be a mix of Gods and units, ideally one that highlights the "old" fluffy animosity infighting that made Chaos unique vis-a-vis the loyalists in 2nd Edition +. Mono-forces should be reserved to the few incidents of "historical" play, which are noted in 40K lore and specifically highlighted as unique and rare events.

If GW decided to make fluff that Chaos Legions, like the World Eaters are splintered, it did so with the assumption that this would be visibly represented in the armies on the table. Yes, in theory a rare World Eater force might consist of nothing but World Eaters. And a Space Marine army might consist of a mix-and-match of Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Ravenguards, etc.. all fighting together with a few Marines each. But by default, with the Chaos fluff noting the Legions as broken and the Loyalist Chapters as functionally sound, the expectation is that the "normal" armies will have a smattering of different Chaos Legions/Gods to represent this sundering and "uniform" loyalist armies to represent their organisational and military coherency.

Very well spoken!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vladsimpaler, it is show of poor arguing skills when one turns to insulting the opposition with every second word.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

BOK wrote:All Cult Marines are Elites
...
Special Characters will unlock Cult Marines as troops (Kharn for Berserkers and so on)
...
Chaos Dreadnaught is removed and replaced with a new unit (like how pariahs were replaced with Lychguard)

So this is how Chaos dies: To thunderous stupidity.

I agree with this 100%.

The only way it could be worse is if Matt Ward wrote the codex.

Give it a rest, the only way it could be worse is if Jervis or Crudance wrote it.

Or you guys could pay attention to his quote and agree that it could only be worse if George Lucas wrote the codex.
Don't worry HBMC, I followed ya.

Zweischneid wrote:
. The proper and fluffy default Chaos army should be a mix of Gods and units, ideally one that highlights the "old" fluffy animosity infighting that made Chaos unique vis-a-vis the loyalists in 2nd Edition +. Mono-forces should be reserved to the few incidents of "historical" play, which are noted in 40K lore and specifically highlighted as unique and rare events.

So...for the Legions that are largely whole, or at least splintered into factions that are larger than Chapters, or whose members don't tread down the path of any one god?

Remember, the Death Guard didn't split into hundreds of tiny warbands the way the World Eaters and Emperor's Children did, nor did the Thousand Sons, or Iron Warriors. The Death Guard are still largely cohesive, with one real primary break, and that's Typhus and his group which are more than large enough to portray in a force as a single unified Nurgle tabletop force, and those that didn't join him are still thousands strong, likewise the Thousand Sons and Ahriman's coven and the bulk of the Tsons forces. Other Legions like the Iron Warriors won't really have units dedicated to any god and thus likely wouldn't have anything but undivided units.

These forces are still plenty large enough on their own to fully justify mono-god lists, especially at the level a 40k game is played at with a few dozen troops at best.

I have a fluffy, mono God list of bolter carrying Plague Marines led by a Sorcerer. Even if the Death Guard were splintered into thousands of infighting warbands (which they aren't) it'd still be possible to have a force of maybe three dozen Plague Marines working together without assistance from other Traitor Legions.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

Durza wrote:I hope that the one about no new SCs is wrong. Why don't the AL WB IW or NL get any love?

Personally, I don't think all the Legions should get special characters; it just reduces the emphasis or need on home-made/customised characters IMHO.

Dreadnought is probably just going to turn into Decimator.

Unlikely, they're two different things, game and fluff wise, whilst IIRC someone said GW aren't going to be 'stealing' FW units for their Codices anymore.

While I do agree that some things should be customized, I would love to see an Iron Warriors Dreadnought HQ character. Since I can't exactly make one myself with the rules (Aside from using one as a DP)

Not to mention some of those armies would have rules you can't exactly customize into a mark system.

I think your avatar of My Little Pony as Horus is just adorable.

Even World Eaters can have armies that are larger than loyalist chapters. Like in the 38th millennium when Angron and his army of 50000 (yes, fifty thousand) khorne berserkers (the vast majority are most likely World Eaters) launched an attack at the Imperium.

pg 36 in the current Codex: Chaos Space Marines

Vladsimpaler wrote:Chaos died years ago when the last "codex" was released. This is just them playing with its corpse like a bunch of necrophiliacs.

And with these magic words, this thread deteriorates into the same old stupid whinery about the old Codex as every Chaos thread before. So predictable

Kroothawk wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:Chaos died years ago when the last "codex" was released. This is just them playing with its corpse like a bunch of necrophiliacs.

And with these magic words, this thread deteriorates into the same old stupid whinery about the old Codex as every Chaos thread before. So predictable

Hey, someone had to do it, I took one for the team.
Also, strong whining about my post haha

:edit: Just so the thread isn't locked, what do I think about the rumors?
It would be cool of Chaos Dreads were Daemon vehicles. I'm excited if cultists/traitors are indeed in.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

Totalwar1402 wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

While I do agree that some things should be customized, I would love to see an Iron Warriors Dreadnought HQ character. Since I can't exactly make one myself with the rules (Aside from using one as a DP)

Not to mention some of those armies would have rules you can't exactly customize into a mark system.

I think your avatar of My Little Pony as Horus is just adorable.

That Pony's name is Luna. It is only fitting that she were the Primarch of the Luna Wolves.

For the rumours, I can't see Dreadnoughts being taken out and replaced with a catch all "Daemon Engine" category. It's more likely that Dreads will stay in and the other types of daemon engine get their own slots, even if they all come in the same plastic kit. I think that an entry covering multiple different units with different stats would be unnecessarily complicated when you can do it with several different entries. Some of the new daemon engines could be monstrous creatures as opposed to a walker vehicle so it would lead to needing several very different stat lines in the same section.

After all, would you group a Dreadknight and Dreadnought together and call them Marine Engines?