Switch Theme:

Chaos needs a lot of work.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Las wrote:

In your example, you're working backwards: "Some of them need to reflect that they've fallen to chaos, let's use marks for that," rather than forwards from an design objective "We want some units to play like this so that we can reflect this aspect of the lore . In order to encourage this type of play or list construction, what mechanics can we use to facilitate that?"
Ah, well I don't see it as being backwards. I think the "game design is king" philosophy isn't applicable to a game where lore and setting are fundamental to peoples enjoyment in both the game and the hobby as a whole.

In fact, I particularly think that the tabletop experience itself is only half the design space, and I'd say that a player interacting with their codex is potentially the PRIMARY method of interaction with one's own army. The narrative a player builds about the army that they are creating is heavily influenced by what they can do with their codex. So to me, an option "feeling cool" is more important than filling some niche in the tabletop design space.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in ca
Hauptmann




Hogtown

 Insectum7 wrote:
 Las wrote:

In your example, you're working backwards: "Some of them need to reflect that they've fallen to chaos, let's use marks for that," rather than forwards from an design objective "We want some units to play like this so that we can reflect this aspect of the lore . In order to encourage this type of play or list construction, what mechanics can we use to facilitate that?"
Ah, well I don't see it as being backwards. I think the "game design is king" philosophy isn't applicable to a game where lore and setting are fundamental to peoples enjoyment in both the game and the hobby as a whole.

In fact, I particularly think that the tabletop experience itself is only half the design space, and I'd say that a player interacting with their codex is potentially the PRIMARY method of interaction with one's own army. The narrative a player builds about the army that they are creating is heavily influenced by what they can do with their codex. So to me, an option "feeling cool" is more important than filling some niche in the tabletop design space.


I hear ya for sure. However, I'd argue that part of the reason why Chaos doesn't feel as cool as it should is because none of the rules coherently impact the tabletop in a way that reflects a cohesive design vision for the faction. The Marks as they've been these past editions definitely check a box that reflects what we love about the lore (I can make my guy marked by blood god!), but it doesn't feel cool cause it doesn't serve a playstyle incentive, therefore it doesn't have any impact on the table.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/27 20:23:11


Thought for the day
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






Yeah. . . But you know what did feel cool? Chaos 3.5

I'm sure other books have done some interesting things to. We could make a "best of" and worm it into the current paradigm.

I'd shy away from Strats though. Those don't feel the same as modification to the units themselves.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

My idea for Marks was escalating abilities based upon what had the Mark.

1. Regular units (anything that isn't a Daemon basically).
2. Daemonic units (anything that is - possessed, etc.)
3. Exalted units (Greater Daemons, Heralds, Special Characters).

And keep it on a simple scale, for example:

Mark of Khorne
Regular - Gain +1 Attack.
Daemonic - Gain +1 Attack, may Advance & Charge.
Exalted - Gain +1 Attack, may Advance & Charge, gain +2" to Advance/Charge rolls.

Mark of Tzeentch
Regular - Gain +6 Invul (or add +1 to existing Invul save).
Daemonic - Gain 6+ Invul (or add +1 to existing), gain 6+ Psychic Save (or add +1 to existing)
Exalted - Gain 6+ Invul (or add +1 to existing), Gain 6+ Psychic Save (or add +1 to existing), gain +1 to Cast/Deny

And so on. The Cult Troops would be a bit different in that they'd have the basic level, plus their own rules (like All is Dust and whatnot).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Variety of unit leaders (Champion, Junior Warpsmith, Junior Dark Apostle, Junior Sorceror).
Aspiring Apostle is hard to say.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





One thing you guys need to consider is that people may gravitate to the best marks. Like Mark of Nurgle giving +1 to toughness was usually much stronger than the other marks. So most people ended up picking that, unless they wanted to go shooty and then it was slaanash because of that strategem.

It also creates problems with some units. Because Nurgle Bikes with T6 was a thing.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

That's why we had Mark limitations:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/28 03:22:48


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






Eldenfirefly wrote:
One thing you guys need to consider is that people may gravitate to the best marks. Like Mark of Nurgle giving +1 to toughness was usually much stronger than the other marks. So most people ended up picking that, unless they wanted to go shooty and then it was slaanash because of that strategem.

It also creates problems with some units. Because Nurgle Bikes with T6 was a thing.
Nurgle bikes with a T6 would be much less of a thing in the current to-wound paradigm.

Also the double-fire Strat is dumb.

But yeah, as H.B.M.C. points out, a smart codex deals with outlier effects in a pretty reasonable way.

@H.B.M.C At first I thought your suggestion was too complicated, but looking again I think my first impression was wrong. I give it a "could work"!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/28 00:15:40


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My idea for Marks was escalating abilities based upon what had the Mark.

1. Regular units (anything that isn't a Daemon basically).
2. Daemonic units (anything that is - possessed, etc.)
3. Exalted units (Greater Daemons, Heralds, Special Characters).

And keep it on a simple scale, for example:

Mark of Khorne
Regular - Gain +1 Attack.
Daemonic - Gain +1 Attack, may Advance & Charge.
Exalted - Gain +1 Attack, may Advance & Charge, gain +2" to Advance/Charge rolls.

Mark of Tzeentch
Regular - Gain +6 Invul (or add +1 to existing Invul save).
Daemonic - Gain 6+ Invul (or add +1 to existing), gain 6+ Psychic Save (or add +1 to existing)
Exalted - Gain 6+ Invul (or add +1 to existing), Gain 6+ Psychic Save (or add +1 to existing), gain +1 to Cast/Deny

And so on. The Cult Troops would be a bit different in that they'd have the basic level, plus their own rules (like All is Dust and whatnot).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Variety of unit leaders (Champion, Junior Warpsmith, Junior Dark Apostle, Junior Sorceror).
Aspiring Apostle is hard to say.


The problem I raised is still valid. People will cherry pick the best marks for the suitable units and just pick those.

Like from your example, even with the restriction tables, probably nobody will ever pick mark of Tzeentch for regular units because a 6++ does nothing for most of our stuff which are already a 3+ armor save. Yet, the same min max player will absolutely pick mark of Tzeentch for demonic units, because all demonic units are already 5++. If marks are free, then basically, if I run a mostly demonic units CSM army, I suddenly have 4++ save across the board ... for free.

Also remember I posted before on this forum about stacking buffs? A +1 to invul save here already creates a 4++ demonic army, if you add any other way to further increase invul save, then soon you will hit 3++ or even 2++. Like, a simple weaver of fates psychic boosts this to a 3++ invul. A single psychic cursed earth also increases every Tzeentch marked daemon unit within a 6 inch bubble to a 3++. So, now you might be facing a mostly 3++ invul army with just 2 psychic going off. So, yeah ... 9 obliterators surrounding a master of possession rocking a 3++ save, with a unit of 20 possessed in front leading the charge also rocking a 3++ save... all for free too, without even requiring a single CP or strategem, just two psychics.

Now, we are in a very silly meta right now. We already have orc speed freak armies with planes, admech flyer armies, and drukhari. So who knows, maybe by the time the CSM codex comes out, this is perfectly fine. But from my perspective, it just encourages players to gravitate to the most obviously powerful mark because it all free anyway. So, if Tzeetch mark was the best for demonic units, and Nurgle was the best for regular ones, and Khorne or slanaash mark was the best for exalted units, then we will see the Min Max players do this.

And out of 4 marks, there will always be an "ideal" best mark for a certain unit type.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/28 03:22:28


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Like from your example, even with the restriction tables, probably nobody will ever pick mark of Tzeentch for regular units because a 6++ does nothing for most of our stuff which are already a 3+ armor save. Yet, the same min max player will absolutely pick mark of Tzeentch for demonic units, because all demonic units are already 5++. If marks are free, then basically, if I run a mostly demonic units CSM army, I suddenly have 4++ save across the board ... for free.
They wouldn't be free. Nothing I've listed would be free. That would be utterly absurd.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Also remember I posted before on this forum about stacking buffs? A +1 to invul save here already creates a 4++ demonic army, if you add any other way to further increase invul save, then soon you will hit 3++ or even 2++. Like, a simple weaver of fates psychic boosts this to a 3++ invul. A single psychic cursed earth also increases every Tzeentch marked daemon unit within a 6 inch bubble to a 3++. So, now you might be facing a mostly 3++ invul army with just 2 psychic going off. So, yeah ... 9 obliterators surrounding a master of possession rocking a 3++ save, with a unit of 20 possessed in front leading the charge also rocking a 3++ save... all for free too, without even requiring a single CP or strategem, just two psychics.
The issue is you're trying to apply the existing rules to these proposed ones. It'd be like changing Havoc Lascannons to S10 Dam D6+6. You'd say "But with the double shoot strat, that'd be bonkers overpowered!"... but who says the double shoot strat would even exist anymore?

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Now, we are in a very silly meta right now. We already have orc speed freak armies with planes, admech flyer armies, and drukhari. So who knows, maybe by the time the CSM codex comes out, this is perfectly fine. But from my perspective, it just encourages players to gravitate to the most obviously powerful mark because it all free anyway. So, if Tzeetch mark was the best for demonic units, and Nurgle was the best for regular ones, and Khorne or slanaash mark was the best for exalted units, then we will see the Min Max players do this.
Yeah but they're going to do that anyway regardless of what the rules end up being.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And out of 4 marks, there will always be an "ideal" best mark for a certain unit type.
So? Different styles of warfare fit better with different Chaos Gods. Why is that a bad thing?

This message was edited 18 times. Last update was at 2021/11/02 12:42:59


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





While HBMCs ideas for marks are nice, I think they're too far away from the 9th edition mindset. I'd like to present you guys an idea which I think is possible in 9th while recreating many aspects of CSM we would like to see. It takes inspiration from how custom chapters work for SM.

Every "legion trait" could consist of 3 parts.
part 1: actual legion trait
part 2: mark of chaos
part 3: legacy of the warband

So in part 1 you have rules that are special for one legion or warband.
In part 2 you (usually) have our 5 different marks.
Khorne: +1 to Hit when charging/ charged
Nurgle: -1D
Slaanesh: alway strike first
Tzeentch: +1 to cast, 6 to hit = +1D
Undivided: Obsec for all infantry but Cultists (can choose relics and strats from all marks)

In part 3 you can see how long these guys are part of Chaos, it would have 3 variants:
newly turned renegades (+6‘‘ to all shooting weapons because they have new imperial equipment)
famous renegades (advance and charge)
Veterans of the long war (+1LD, -1AP on 6's)

Examples of how these would be used:
Iron Warriors:
1: ignore safe bonus from cover
2: mark of Chaos undivided
3: Veterans of the long war

Night Lords:
1: LD debuff
2: on 4+ enemy can’t fall back
3: Veterans of the Long war
- yes, they don't have a mark but a second special

Fallen:
1: +1 to hit when standing still
2: transhuman for terminators
3: Veterans of the long war

The Purge:
1: +1 to hit after an enemy unit destroyed
2: mark of nurgle
3: famous renegades

Word Bearers:
1: Cultists have obsec, are Core, 5++ for Core
2: mark of chaos undivided
3: Veterans of the long war

Creations of Bile:
1: Creations of Bile Bonus
2: mark of Chaos undivided
3: Famous renegades

The named legions and renegade chapters may get their unique warlord trait, relic and strats, other than that you have relics, traits and strats that are connected to either a mark or a legacy (yes, even special relics for fresh renegades; maybe transhuman strat only for fresh renegades to represent Primaris CSM).
All of these can easily be tied to Custom CSM, where you have a list of abilities for part 1 and can connect these with part 2 and 3 (I'd even allow Veterans of the long war for custom chapters to show warbands that were once part of larger legions like the fractured WE and EC).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/28 06:30:28


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







macluvin wrote:
It annoys me to no end that a chaos space marine squad has always been a loyalist tac squad with no flavor and being even more fragile than their power armor because of the lacking of and they shall know no fear and without the extra punch of combat doctrines and useful chapter traits

"Always" is a strange way of saying "since the 2.0 SM 'dex in 8th edition" - or, at this point, for two years and two months, the majority of which has been during a global pandemic...

 Insectum7 wrote:
But I think it needs to be understood WHY players loved the CSM 3.5 book so much, even when they weren't building the few examples of OP builds that were in there.

Firstly you'd have to find people who can honestly say that - from memory, all the Chaos players around where I was playing at the time seemed to be ignoring the fluff stuff and going for the OP bullgak.

2021-4 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My Pile of Potential - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...

tneva82 wrote:
You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something... 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Dysartes wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
But I think it needs to be understood WHY players loved the CSM 3.5 book so much, even when they weren't building the few examples of OP builds that were in there.

Firstly you'd have to find people who can honestly say that - from memory, all the Chaos players around where I was playing at the time seemed to be ignoring the fluff stuff and going for the OP bullgak.

It would help if you could tell us exactly what you consider the "OP bullgak" to be. Did a Night Lords army with no Marks, lots of jump packs, Veteran Skills, and occasionally a tank or dreadnought count?
   
Made in au
Sword-Wielding Bloodletter of Khorne






My own take would be something of the following: CSM get marks as their codex's mono bonus. In contrast to SM, who get doctrines to represent discipline and working together, CSM get marks to represent their individual blessings from the gods.

Mark of Khorne: +1A and +1" charges
Mark of Nurgle: +1T
Marke of Slaanesh: +1" for move and advance
Mark of Tzeentch: +1AP
Undivided: Access to all marks and strategems*

These don't apply to cult marines (who get their more prolific bonuses/warscrolls), as they represent marines who are now entirely owned, body and soul, by the relevant god. A mark, by contrast, represents a 'choice' (at least, from the perspective of the misguided servants); that first tragic step on the path that leads inevitably towards damnation.

*To explain this one: CSM don't get Core-based auras, but get mark based ones. In addition, they keep the 8th ed restrictions to the strategems: e.g. fight again is for Khorne units, shoot twice for Slaanesh. Except, Undivided has access to all of these (like every other army). Being free of the blessing of any indidivual god means that they won't grant you so much favour of their own, but you do have the tactical flexibility that comes with not restricting yourself to the character of any one god.

Likely some adaptation would need to be made for daemon engines and rhino-chassis, but I see this as appropriate and fun for infantry + hellbrutes.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2021/10/28 11:27:54


World Eaters: 5780pts
Khorne Daemons: 3450pts
Chaos Knights: 2000pts

Sisters of Battle: 5000pts
Imperial Agents: 410pts

Gloomspite Gitz: 7190pts
Blades of Khorne Daemons: 3810pts
Destruction Mercenaries: 470pts
Endless Spells and Incarnates: 1380pts 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






I don’t think CSM being well hard is a bad thing, to be honest. They just need their points to match.

As for people just picking the best combination? At the risk of sounding bellendy, what’s new there? Some folk will embrace the proposed freedoms to make a Chaos army actually Chaotic. Other folk will number crunch it to buggery to see if they can find an ideal mix. Yet more folk will fall somewhere in the middle. Nobody in those examples is doing anything wrong whatsoever.

And that’s what we’ve broadly seen in 9th Ed Codecies. Very few outright stinkers of units, folk able to just pick what they like the look of without suffering in game disadvantage. Some combos are subjectively better, but rather than Good Picks giving a 9/10 and Less Good Picks a 6/10, it seems more 9/10 and 7.5/10. The gap between Best and Themed is narrowing. Still work to be done, of course.

That’s what Chaos needs. All the suggestions so far seem to embrace the ethos that as many decisions as possible should be in the hands of the individual player. There’s absolutely no reason whatsoever, in an ideal world, that their Core Book (as in the central hodgepodge, non-God dedicated book, rather than one every CSM player needs before specialising into a God Dedicated Legion) can’t be expansive.

Let it contain CSM, Lost and the Damned and Daemon Units across most if not all slots. Get them all in there. Let us pick the bones out of it.

Bob might want to lean into Lost and The Damned, but with some CSM elements. Perhaps just a unit of Chosen amongst a sea of absolute spods.

Barry might want to go a bit Word Bearer Daemon Bomb, with relatively few initial units, relying on summoning in his daemonic support.

Kevin might want to do a recently turned Chapter, and forgo much of the gribbly Chaos stuff, fielding only cheapo basic CSM as a kind of semi-horde army.

Give all those options and more variations thereupon within the book. It’s the only way to unify the various incarnations of Chaos we’ve seen, and ensure nobody feels left out because the Chaos they first encountered has fallen by the wayside.

   
Made in ca
Hauptmann




Hogtown

Here's my pitch:

To my mind, we want Marks of Chaos to represent Astartes or mortals who have taken the first explicit step toward the service of one of the Gods. They should feel like aspirants vying for attention to climb a ladder, while filling roles on the table that make up for the heretic astartes' lack of specialization. They should encourage the type of play we associate with the lore. But they should also discourage lore-breaking play with the unit/army selection. I think we also want to restrict them to core unit types. I think we can assume fluff-wise that daemon princes, etc are already marked and favoured by their chosen god. Maybe there's an HQ specific alternate set of marks for extra utility and flavour, but for core:

Khorne: +1 Attack, +1 strength and re-roll hits on the charge.
Nurgle: +1 wound. -1 to hit in the open.
Slaanesh: -1 to enemy leadership within 3", +1 save in the first round of combat.
Tzeentch: 5+ invuln. May deny the witch on 1d6.

Thought for the day
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Las wrote:
Here's my pitch:

To my mind, we want Marks of Chaos to represent Astartes or mortals who have taken the first explicit step toward the service of one of the Gods. They should feel like aspirants vying for attention to climb a ladder, while filling roles on the table that make up for the heretic astartes' lack of specialization. They should encourage the type of play we associate with the lore. But they should also discourage lore-breaking play with the unit/army selection. I think we also want to restrict them to core unit types. I think we can assume fluff-wise that daemon princes, etc are already marked and favoured by their chosen god. Maybe there's an HQ specific alternate set of marks for extra utility and flavour, but for core:

Khorne: +1 Attack, +1 strength and re-roll hits on the charge.
Nurgle: +1 wound. -1 to hit in the open.
Slaanesh: -1 to enemy leadership within 3", +1 save in the first round of combat.
Tzeentch: 5+ invuln. May deny the witch on 1d6.


The Khorne one is amazing!
The Nurgle one is pretty good.
The Tzeench one is basically just 1k sons.

Why is the Slaanesh one so utterly useless?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/28 15:41:46


 
   
Made in ca
Hauptmann




Hogtown

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Las wrote:
Here's my pitch:

To my mind, we want Marks of Chaos to represent Astartes or mortals who have taken the first explicit step toward the service of one of the Gods. They should feel like aspirants vying for attention to climb a ladder, while filling roles on the table that make up for the heretic astartes' lack of specialization. They should encourage the type of play we associate with the lore. But they should also discourage lore-breaking play with the unit/army selection. I think we also want to restrict them to core unit types. I think we can assume fluff-wise that daemon princes, etc are already marked and favoured by their chosen god. Maybe there's an HQ specific alternate set of marks for extra utility and flavour, but for core:

Khorne: +1 Attack, +1 strength and re-roll hits on the charge.
Nurgle: +1 wound. -1 to hit in the open.
Slaanesh: -1 to enemy leadership within 3", +1 save in the first round of combat.
Tzeentch: 5+ invuln. May deny the witch on 1d6.


The Khorne one is amazing!
The Nurgle one is pretty good.
The Tzeench one is basically just 1k sons.

Why is the Slaanesh one so utterly useless?


Haha, I suppose I should take my own advice and recenter on intent and build mechanics from there.

Khorne's rules should feel like a rush to the shortest possible route to hand-to-hand combat, which then hits hard.
Nurgle's should feel like a methodical force that corrupts things around it. (maybe it gives soft debuffs to enemy movement, enemy cant fall back?)
Slaanesh should feel like a graceful, prideful expert, perhaps with an element of temptation (what I was going for with the leadership debuff)
Tzeentch, i have to admit, is difficult from an objective setting point of view. How do you convey the feeling of planning and foresight in a meaningful way on the tabletop?)

Thought for the day
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

What impact would the traits "graceful" and "prideful" have on the tabletop?

For that matter, what would "temptation" do?

The only think I can think of is 'expert' which implies he should have +1 WS or something because he's an 'expert' but that's .... kinda way worse than Khorne AND more in Khorne's arena.

Slaanesh is hard to capture on the tabletop unless you either go with "speed" (which in your case is apparently Khorne) or you write some really fantastical rules (like AOS Slaanesh).
   
Made in ca
Hauptmann




Hogtown

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What impact would the traits "graceful" and "prideful" have on the tabletop?

For that matter, what would "temptation" do?


Mechanics that would force the enemy to act in a way that makes them vulnerable (abstractly on the table). What I'd be trying to replicate is an enemy being struck or spellbound by the physical or expert beauty of the way a slaaneshi devotee looks or moves. Maybe they can't be interrupted, or gain the "always hit first" mechanic that orks use? Or if selected for a shooting/melee attack, roll X and the enemy has to target another unit if able.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/28 17:31:36


Thought for the day
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Las wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What impact would the traits "graceful" and "prideful" have on the tabletop?

For that matter, what would "temptation" do?


Mechanics that would force the enemy to act in a way that makes them vulnerable (abstractly on the table). What I'd be trying to replicate is an enemy being struck or spellbound by the physical or expert beauty of the way a slaaneshi devotee looks or moves. Maybe they can't be interrupted, or gain the "always hit first" mechanic that orks use? Or if selected for a shooting/melee attack, roll X and the enemy has to target another unit if able.


Those make more sense, and are along the lines of both the Slaanesh Daemons rules (always strike first) and the AOS rules (reducing enemy attacks nearby/preventing pile in/etc)
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Dysartes wrote:
macluvin wrote:
It annoys me to no end that a chaos space marine squad has always been a loyalist tac squad with no flavor and being even more fragile than their power armor because of the lacking of and they shall know no fear and without the extra punch of combat doctrines and useful chapter traits

"Always" is a strange way of saying "since the 2.0 SM 'dex in 8th edition" - or, at this point, for two years and two months, the majority of which has been during a global pandemic...

 Insectum7 wrote:
But I think it needs to be understood WHY players loved the CSM 3.5 book so much, even when they weren't building the few examples of OP builds that were in there.

Firstly you'd have to find people who can honestly say that - from memory, all the Chaos players around where I was playing at the time seemed to be ignoring the fluff stuff and going for the OP bullgak.

I built the fluff stuff
My brother built the fluff stuff
My friends built the fluff stuff
Sometimes at local FLGSs I'd get the inevitable Iron Warriors lists. . . sure. Also, while irritating, I didn't find them so difficult to beat in play, so maybe your notion of OP is a little off?

Our proposal is to rebuild the fluff stuff and make it useable, and nerf egregious auto-takes. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought




San Jose, CA

Slannesh should get a -1 to hit at range and a +1 WS in melee. Or some other combination of them dancing their way thru the battlefield vs the steamroller of berserker-ness of Khorne.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/10/28 19:27:23


 
   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





Yeah anything other then leadership mechanics. Unless your mechanics involving such are so mechanically overpowered they are just so lackluster.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/28 20:17:30


 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Yeah anything other then leadership mechanics. Unless your mechanics involving such are so mechanically overpowered they are just so lackluster.

Yes, they are. Take it from a Night Lords player. And yet, most people (including gw) seem to think we should be saddled with that for a Legion trait. Though our Faith and Fury rules seem to show they're moving away from that. At least I hope so.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/29 20:22:37


 
   
Made in ca
Rampaging Carnifex





Toronto, Ontario

 TonyH122 wrote:
My own take would be something of the following: CSM get marks as their codex's mono bonus. In contrast to SM, who get doctrines to represent discipline and working together, CSM get marks to represent their individual blessings from the gods.

Mark of Khorne: +1A and +1" charges
Mark of Nurgle: +1T
Marke of Slaanesh: +1" for move and advance
Mark of Tzeentch: +1AP
Undivided: Access to all marks and strategems*

These don't apply to cult marines (who get their more prolific bonuses/warscrolls), as they represent marines who are now entirely owned, body and soul, by the relevant god. A mark, by contrast, represents a 'choice' (at least, from the perspective of the misguided servants); that first tragic step on the path that leads inevitably towards damnation.

*To explain this one: CSM don't get Core-based auras, but get mark based ones. In addition, they keep the 8th ed restrictions to the strategems: e.g. fight again is for Khorne units, shoot twice for Slaanesh. Except, Undivided has access to all of these (like every other army). Being free of the blessing of any indidivual god means that they won't grant you so much favour of their own, but you do have the tactical flexibility that comes with not restricting yourself to the character of any one god.

Likely some adaptation would need to be made for daemon engines and rhino-chassis, but I see this as appropriate and fun for infantry + hellbrutes.


I really, really like this.
   
Made in us
Warp-Screaming Noise Marine




At this point I would rather they blow this edition up launch another index edition and then start thinking about how to give everyone unique toys to play with on the tabletop...

Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





Anyone think we could really do with a recon unit? I know in the fluff the normal Astartes do jobs like that but would be very cool to see a marine unit equipped with some recce style stuff
With a chaos twist. Possibly some kind of daemonic optic thing akin to a Daemon host, a floating little eye out whatnot.

Total spitballing here but it makes sense to have something like that to me.
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Eldenfirefly wrote:
Like from your example, even with the restriction tables, probably nobody will ever pick mark of Tzeentch for regular units because a 6++ does nothing for most of our stuff which are already a 3+ armor save. Yet, the same min max player will absolutely pick mark of Tzeentch for demonic units, because all demonic units are already 5++. If marks are free, then basically, if I run a mostly demonic units CSM army, I suddenly have 4++ save across the board ... for free.
They wouldn't be free. Nothing I've listed would be free. That would be utterly absurd.


Well that's what is GW design paradim. Whatever chaos does for marks you can be sure it's free.

You don't pay points based on are you ultramarine or white scar do you?

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator




Southampton, UK

Rogerio134134 wrote:
Anyone think we could really do with a recon unit? I know in the fluff the normal Astartes do jobs like that but would be very cool to see a marine unit equipped with some recce style stuff
With a chaos twist. Possibly some kind of daemonic optic thing akin to a Daemon host, a floating little eye out whatnot.

Total spitballing here but it makes sense to have something like that to me.


It sounds like a cool idea for a model, but what benefits would it bring to the army on the tabletop? CSM don't really do long range non-LOS shooting. In past editions it might serve as a deep-strike marker but that's not really applicable any more.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

tneva82 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Eldenfirefly wrote:
Like from your example, even with the restriction tables, probably nobody will ever pick mark of Tzeentch for regular units because a 6++ does nothing for most of our stuff which are already a 3+ armor save. Yet, the same min max player will absolutely pick mark of Tzeentch for demonic units, because all demonic units are already 5++. If marks are free, then basically, if I run a mostly demonic units CSM army, I suddenly have 4++ save across the board ... for free.
They wouldn't be free. Nothing I've listed would be free. That would be utterly absurd.


Well that's what is GW design paradim. Whatever chaos does for marks you can be sure it's free.

You don't pay points based on are you ultramarine or white scar do you?

Marks aren't factions/subfactions for CSM, at least not in the way H.B.M.C is talking about. They're optional buffs, like equipment, that would cost points, like equipment. Just like in older editions. The factions/subfactions are Black Legion, Iron Warriors, Night Lords, etc. Don't bring Loyalist Scum design paradigms into Chaos Space Marines.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: