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.

As a fairly recent player in terms of Warhammer I started not long after the 5th Edition rulebook dropped. I began with Necrons and then shifted to the Chaos Space Marines. I like how evil they are, and as a huge fan of 40k from before actually playing the table top game I was hooked immediately. Then I began to meet the naysayers who tried to convince me, basically, not to play them because they claimed were simply 'less fun'. A lot of claims leveled at the Codex is that things are less 'fluffy' and that 'this shouldn't go with that! are you crazy?!', so on so forth.

Personally, I love the book. I don't HAVE to take this with that or only that can go with this. Generic? Maybe, but it's definitely more streamlined. I can understand how it would make older players mad but I can't be swayed. I enjoy my Chaos Space Marines too much.

I'd like to know how Dakka feels about this subject!

silpheedpilot wrote:As a fairly recent player in terms of Warhammer I started not long after the 5th Edition rulebook dropped. I began with Necrons and then shifted to the Chaos Space Marines. I like how evil they are, and as a huge fan of 40k from before actually playing the table top game I was hooked immediately. Then I began to meet the naysayers who tried to convince me, basically, not to play them because they claimed were simply 'less fun'. A lot of claims leveled at the Codex is that things are less 'fluffy' and that 'this shouldn't go with that! are you crazy?!', so on so forth.

Personally, I love the book. I don't HAVE to take this with that or only that can go with this. Generic? Maybe, but it's definitely more streamlined. I can understand how it would make older players mad but I can't be swayed. I enjoy my Chaos Space Marines too much.

I'd like to know how Dakka feels about this subject!

As a former Chaos player, I think the old 3.5 Chaos codex is what GW should aspire towards in every release. It had a vanilla base army and then TONS of options to play established chapters. Additionally, it was full of textual fluff, chapter schemes and photos for most of the chapters, and was just the best codex I think they have ever released. There was just so much you could do with it.

As a newer player you can probably enjoy the new codex without having that comparison in the back of your mind. But if you played Chaos in those days, I think you're probably really sad at what they did to it.

@Brother Gyoken

I can understand that. I would be a little ticked off if the army I played had a really comprehensive codex and then with the new release seemed, let's say, 'nerfed'.

Some Chaos players love it (generally the newer ones), some Chaos players hate it (generally the 'veterans').

Compared to their previous Codices, it took away a lot of the Chaos feel and options, making it seem a lot more similar to loyalist Space Marines than Chaos Space Marines.
I believe this is pretty well characterised by the Daemons available.

Like the Dark Angels codex, it was an almost experiment in simplified Codices. One that did not go down well and from which GW has learnt(!!) from.

You'll soon see a lot of hating on the Codex and GW for what they did to it, then a lot of pleas for the previous Codex and for things to return to how they were before. Don't say I didn't warn you.

As for peoples saying "you shouldn't go with that", as you said, take what you want, not what other people want you to take.


Also, I'm going to take this opportunity to advertise my Chaos Space Marine Fandex in my signature.

@ Just Dave

Consider it read!

Thank you for your reply. I'd like to hope that Games Workshop has learned from their mistakes and with the way things have been going the next Codex upgrade for each army should be fantastic. They have for the Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Dark Eldar, at the very least.

I started playign just as the current 'dex was released and i like it a lot. I think that if you want ot add flavour to your army you are always free to do conversions and stick to the codex rules (using counts as and proxys etc), or just make your own rule sup for Apoc. I like to think my army has characvter as i have made up names and backstories for all my Lords and ICs. and i apply a general ethos to the whole thing rather than put in the marks/grear that "look good"

I have read the old codex and can appreciate where the older players are comign from. there were a LOT more options.

I think that, had i used the old codex when i first started, i woudl have been overwhelmed with the sheer amoutn fo stuff in it. i coudl probably use it now that i have a fair knowledge of the game and the army though.

I am hoping that the next codex does ahve mre options than the current one.

@Praxiss

Agreed. I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more options, units, and maybe some specialized summoned Daemons.

I've yet to actually make up names and a back story for my army other than "They're Chaos and they hate you."

Just Dave wrote:Some Chaos players love it (generally the newer ones), some Chaos players hate it (generally the 'veterans').

Compared to their previous Codices, it took away a lot of the Chaos feel and options, making it seem a lot more similar to loyalist Space Marines than Chaos Space Marines.
I believe this is pretty well characterised by the Daemons available.

Like the Dark Angels codex, it was an almost experiment in simplified Codices. One that did not go down well and from which GW has learnt(!!) from.

You'll soon see a lot of hating on the Codex and GW for what they did to it, then a lot of pleas for the previous Codex and for things to return to how they were before. Don't say I didn't warn you.

As for peoples saying "you shouldn't go with that", as you said, take what you want, not what other people want you to take.


Also, I'm going to take this opportunity to advertise my Chaos Space Marine Fandex in my signature.

I would gladly go back to facing the old Khorne, if it meant not facing the new Tzeentch!

silpheedpilot wrote:@Praxiss

Agreed. I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more options, units, and maybe some specialized summoned Daemons.

I've yet to actually make up names and a back story for my army other than "They're Chaos and they hate you."

Chaos was the second in a new line of streamlined books (along with Dark Angles). Eldar came first, but were always a pretty straight forward army (and still have more flexibility and options compared to Chaos).

What irks a lot of chaos players isn't comparing the 4th edition book to the 3.5 book, as those two books represent deeply different design philosophies and book were extreme examples. No, what's a problem is comparing Chaos to, say, Space Wolves. Somehow all chaos legions have fewer options (in terms of units, war gear, styles of play, special characters, psychic powers, etc) than a single chapter of space marines. Toss in a pretty decent number of builds invalidated or made really, really bad by the 1-2 of the new codex and fifth edition, and a lot of older chaos players went from having a legal and powerful army to having a barely legal pile of poo. Keep in mind that unlike space marines, Chaos can't take bikes, jump troops, terminators, or infiltratrors/scouts/outflankers as troops.

Build the army you like, and if you like chaos than build chaos. Most groups will let you use your army, "counts as", with another codex (iron warriors as space wolves, nightlords as BA, etc). Dont' be put off by what people that got burnt (and sometimes carry their angst too far), but be aware that it's not a top flight codex in terms of options.