New rumours on Chaos Legions (latest on pages 30, 32 and 34; compilation in first post)

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.

**ph34r**

English Assassin wrote:Significantly to this discussion, both of the aforementioned books are more entertaining reads than the forthcoming Chaos codex is likely to be.

I wish I had your superpowers of judging things based on zero information!

**Alpharius**

Durza wrote:Draigo's Law: As a thread increases in length, the probability that someone will hate Draigo and/or Matt Ward approaches 1.

Blatantly stolen from someone who I can't remember at the moment.

Goodwin!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

And, I love this variation!

ph34r wrote:
English Assassin wrote:Significantly to this discussion, both of the aforementioned books are more entertaining reads than the forthcoming Chaos codex is likely to be.
I wish I had your superpowers of judging things based on zero information!

Good point!

Away from the ledge everyone - it is WAY too early!

**Medium of Death**

I wonder if the rumours for a LatD like list would allow you to have daemons enter play through units of cultists to negate the need for deepstrike.

Replace Cultist unit x with Daemon unit y if unit x fails a leadership test? Daemon unit cannot exceed Cultist unit, excess daemons/cultists are destroyed. Totally impractical, but fluffy. GW could even make a mutant/cultist kit and use it for multiple forces... /wishlisting

**English Assassin**

ph34r wrote:
English Assassin wrote:Significantly to this discussion, both of the aforementioned books are more entertaining reads than the forthcoming Chaos codex is likely to be.
I wish I had your superpowers of judging things based on zero information!

It's called 'inference', look it up.

You may wish to check 'sarcasm' while you're there.

**Kroothawk**

wyomingfox wrote: It's like playing Telephone with those guys over at warseer

I'd rather copy this to Dakka for readability ... and because Warseer often deletes things without further ado, as they did in this case again.

Another response:

Aaron Dembski-Bowden wrote:There's an old politics axiom: "If you're explaining, you're losing." But seriously, I have to explain this.

I think you're coming at this from the wrong angle. I'm not bouncing in to claim HH material as soveriegn territory. I just thought this was a topic about rumours. I explained why that rumour wasn't a likely future event in the Chaos Codex. That's literally the entirety of the situation. I said it was unlikely, and explained why.

I didn't even give my feelings on the matter (which, incidentally, are largely ambivalent). I didn't attack ghost21 or try to kill his kids. I pointed out three unlikely rumours, and only got defensive when he kept lying about being in meetings where I categorically knew he wasn't there (it's creepy when someone says they met you several times and were in a room with you, when they weren't); corrected him on his misunderstanding of how 40K lore development worked in regards to what novelists are told and not told; and when he directly insulted me, which is all clearly still in the thread a few pages back. I even PM'd him to bury the hatchet - which given how he'd directly lied, been exceedingly creepy, and insulted me, wasn't exactly something that needed doing from my end. I also listed the people in those meetings, and said why I knew he wasn't one of them. (And if he was there - then as someone else has said: why would he admit that - it'd blow his anonymity, since I know those people well, and any GW employee would be able to work out who the rumourmonger was.) Either way, no reply yet.

I appreciate his value as a rumourmonger and that he's a familiar face, but he's not exactly an innocent martyr unjustly attacked out of nowhere. He reacted badly to a couple of rumours being offered likelier counterpoints, and I reacted badly by rising to the bait of someone able to lie and hide behind anonymity. It was a silly conversation online, not a holy war. He's probably just doing something else for a few days, not lamenting how he can never spread another rumour ever again.

tl;dr -- Chillax.

**Kroothawk**

Update:

StraightSilver wrote:Well I wasn't going to post in this as I have decided to stay pretty much out of the rumours forum to be honest.

I just wanted to back up what some of the others have been saying, rumours are just that and should be treated as such.

I have a couple of very good contacts at GW HQ and they often mention things to me regarding future releases, but as Aaron said more often than not they heard it from X, who heard it from Y etc.

It's also the fact that GW work years in advance and things do change, so what may be true early on in development will not be true by time of release.

There's also the fact that people are only human and things do get misinterpreted once they hit the web, and also people just sometimes don't want to agree with you.

The problem I have found is that people do take it all a bit personally, and that's the reason I stopped posting in the rumours threads, as I had a bad experience on "another forum".

However I would say to Ghost keep posting, not everything will be right but that's why they're called rumours, and everybody will have an opinion.

And I would also like to say that I have met Aaron a couple of times at BL events, Games Day etc and he really is a top bloke. It is way too easy on the internet to misinterpret what somebody is saying because you aren't face to face, and I don't for one minute think he was being confrontational.

And as far as I know since GW set up Black Library (after Boxtree published for them) they have stayed away from including original author creations in Codexes.

I think the exception may be Gaunt in one of the previous IG Codexes, but generally you won't see Ciaphas Cain, Eisenhorn etc in a Codex.

Back on topic I don't have a huge amount to offer, as I say I tend not to disclose anything these days but I do recall something that Jervis Johnson said a while ago.

Apparently when Gav Thorpe wrote the last CSM Dex he was given very strict instructions on what he could and couldn't do. He was pretty much forced to streamline the Codex as the dev team thought the previous one was too complicated.

Gav really didn't have much say in the Dex, and wasn't happy with just how stripped down it was, but those were the wishes of the design department.

However Jervis said that as soon as the Dex was released they realised they had made a mistake, and started planning the new Dex almost immediately.

Suffice it to say this new Dex has been in planning for quite some time, and the idea was to reintegrate some of the elements from the Codex before last.

Jervis also said that the plan was to release the Legions book, but keep the current CSM Codex as a Renegades Codex.

This may be where the confusion of 2 books arises from, as far as I know the new Legions Dex will be in addition to the CSM one, not a replacement.

However that info is well over a year old now so once again, don't shoot the messenger.

The other forum is Dakka

(see this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/401797.page )

StraightSilver wrote:
Born Again wrote:That's been the rumour for some time now, though I don't recall it having come from Jervis, or any member of the Dev team, I thought a rumour monger on a forum started it. I could be wrong though.

I believe Jervis touched upon the point in one of his Standard Bearer articles, I will see if I can dig out which one, but it was ages ago. He then expanded on the article to somebody that I know, but as I say this was over a year ago now if memory serves.

In terms of the differences, the new Chaos Legions Codex is supposed to represent the Traitor Marines who fled to the Eye of Terror after the Heresy.

They are therfore Chaos Legionnaires rather than Chaos Marines, and are therefore different to the Marines who have since turned their backs on the Emperor and have gone renegade.

They are much older, and closer to their original Legions (World Eaters, Thousand Sons etc) and will have distinct rules to represent this.

In terms of Traitor Guard apparently the idea for a full Traitor Guard Codex was put forward but was rejected.

Rumours say that Traitor Guard will be available as a unit choice in the new Legions Codex (by taking Alpha Legion) but won't be available as a full army.

AFAIK the only current plans are for the Legions Codex, nothing else. The current CSM Codex will remain to represent Traitor Marines rather than Legionnaires.

Summary:
CSM Codex stays viable for Renegade Marines.
Legions Codex will come to cover the older Legions like Death Guard and Thousand Sons INA DDITION to the old CSM Codex.
Traitor Guard idea considered but abandonned, now only a unit for Alpha Guard in Legions Codex.

**Kid_Kyoto**

DarkStarSabre wrote:
GentlemanGuy wrote:Gotrej and felix were in the 4th edition dwarf book and mentioened way before trollslayer was released

Ragnar Blackmane was in the 2nd edition codex as mentioned above

Thanquol and boneripper were in the skaven armybook since 4th edition

I feel the need to correct this. People seem to think that Trollslayer is a product of the late 90s...

It's actually a reprinted collection of short stories - some of which date back to the 1980s predating 4th edition.

And while we're correcting, Ragnar first showed up in the sunset days of Rogue Trader when the Space Wolves for a new WD army list which was sort of the test bed for 2nd edition.

Yarrick and Ghaz became special characters around the same time.

**AgeOfEgos**

Kroothawk wrote:
AFAIK the only current plans are for the Legions Codex, nothing else. The current CSM Codex will remain to represent Traitor Marines rather than Legionnaires.
Summary:
CSM Codex stays viable for Renegade Marines.
Legions Codex will come to cover the older Legions like Death Guard and Thousand Sons INA DDITION to the old CSM Codex.
Traitor Guard idea considered but abandonned, now only a unit for Alpha Guard in Legions Codex.

Well, if this is true--Chaos will have essentially two codices. One, which is composed of Lash Sorcerors, Ababababadddon, Plague Marines, Zerks and Oblits---and then the new Legion book.

I guess, sarcasm aside, this depends on if they have viable choices in the legion book for the misses in the current CSM book. One would hope they would revisit the current CSM book and attempt to balance out the sub-par choices.

**Samus_aran115**

Seems like we can basically tear down half of ghost's rumors then.

Much LESS excited about the whole thing now. I don't think there's a decent way to fit all the legions into one book, especially if there are new units that can only be used in ONE legion (all of the khorne stuff mentioned). The book would be too unwieldy, and have massive sections that you would just have to skip over. I liked what Ghost was saying about splitting up the nine legions into three books. That would be a decent way to give the legions their space, and enough room for codex fluff that actually applies to the army you like...

I also don't think that anyone would play the 'CSM' codex if they released a Legions book. There are fundamental problems with the current book that more or less narrow your choices down to a few units. Almost every player who has a legion collection would abandon the CSM book, right? It doesn't make sense for them to keep such a crappy book, that almost everyone who uses it hates.

**warboss**

Kroothawk wrote:The other forum is Dakka (see this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/401797.page )

LOL, he posted in and was the OP source for an incredibly biased Chapterhouse lawsuit rumor thread (a double whammy!) and didn't realize that it would cause so much debate?? He must be new to the wider internet forum world outside Warseer's overly pruned forests.

**Bonde**

Holy feth, if the rumor about the option to include traitor guard in an Alfa Legion army, I will start said army on release! I hope that Alfa Legion will get some really sneaky unit selections, and will make for a unique army to play.

**Noisy_Marine**

The thread confuses me. I just hope there is a new CSM codex and it doesn't suck. Because if it does, I quit GW games darn it! I mean it!

**tarnish**

Noisy_Marine wrote:The thread confuses me. I just hope there is a new CSM codex and it doesn't suck. Because if it does, I quit GW games darn it! I mean it!

NOOO! dont leave us! we know you so well ....

no seriously, i think quite a few are thinking the same thing.

**ph34r**

English Assassin wrote:
ph34r wrote:
English Assassin wrote:Significantly to this discussion, both of the aforementioned books are more entertaining reads than the forthcoming Chaos codex is likely to be.
I wish I had your superpowers of judging things based on zero information!

It's called 'inference', look it up.

You may wish to check 'sarcasm' while you're there.

Inference! OOh, that is a big scary word that I have never heard of before. Thanks, now I know it is safe to doom-say about things that I have literally no concrete information about, because of "inference".

**Ehsteve**

Kroothawk wrote:Summary:
CSM Codex stays viable for Renegade Marines.
Legions Codex will come to cover the older Legions like Death Guard and Thousand Sons INA DDITION to the old CSM Codex.
Traitor Guard idea considered but abandonned, now only a unit for Alpha Guard in Legions Codex.

I do like this idea better than a full redo of the CSM book. It means that current models/lists won't be invalidated overnight and gives all CSM players more options. Only thing I don't want is a rebranded loyalist Land Raider, perhaps something different rules-wise apart from renaming the special abilities.

**Samus_aran115**

Ehsteve wrote:
Kroothawk wrote:Summary:
CSM Codex stays viable for Renegade Marines.
Legions Codex will come to cover the older Legions like Death Guard and Thousand Sons INA DDITION to the old CSM Codex.
Traitor Guard idea considered but abandonned, now only a unit for Alpha Guard in Legions Codex.

I do like this idea better than a full redo of the CSM book. It means that current models/lists won't be invalidated overnight and gives all CSM players more options. Only thing I don't want is a rebranded loyalist Land Raider, perhaps something different rules-wise apart from renaming the special abilities.

Yeah, but more than likely, the legions book will blow away the old CSM book, and those lists you've become so attached to will seem antiquated and obsolete. That happens with every codex release. Keeping the old CSM book is just going to encourage people to run no brainer Obliterator/Lash Prince/ Plague marine lists with the old book, and we'll still be seeing those same

builds years after the CSM book should have hit the dust. More than likely, they'll change all three of those units, but such is the natural progression of the game, I suppose.

I just don't feel like leaving the current book in the game is a good idea in any way, except to keep certain armies viable for those hobbyists who run genuinely non-legion forces (Like red corsairs and fallen DA armies, which are pretty cool). But even then, I can imagine it wouldn't be too hard to find a legion to fit the general idea of your army. Or maybe I'm over-thinking it, and the CSM book will just fall into obscurity and never be used. I dunno.

I think as long as we can move 12 and fire a single weapon, most CSM players will be happy enough

Automatically Appended Next Post:

English Assassin wrote:Significantly to this discussion, both of the aforementioned books are more entertaining reads than the forthcoming Chaos codex is likely to be.

How do you figure that? My guess is that they'll have to cram a lot of different fluff into the legions book, but that doesn't really mean it'll be worse than the current one.

**aka_mythos**

Those reasons are exactly why a legion codex only in the context of the renegades codex being redone sooner rather than later. Without a redo, there is too much overlap and redundancy... and the fact is there is a concept that makes the renegade book supplement and justify having both exist in parallel.

**Red Corsair**

aka_mythos wrote:Those reasons are exactly why a legion codex only in the context of the renegades codex being redone sooner rather than later. Without a redo, there is too much overlap and redundancy... and the fact is there is a concept that makes the renegade book supplement and justify having both exist in parallel.

Holy run on sentence! I have no idea what your point is?

**sennacherib**

Dont worry about trying to figure out what the point is. Its all part of chaos theory.

**Ehsteve**

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Ehsteve wrote:
Kroothawk wrote:Summary:
CSM Codex stays viable for Renegade Marines.
Legions Codex will come to cover the older Legions like Death Guard and Thousand Sons INA DDITION to the old CSM Codex.
Traitor Guard idea considered but abandonned, now only a unit for Alpha Guard in Legions Codex.

I do like this idea better than a full redo of the CSM book. It means that current models/lists won't be invalidated overnight and gives all CSM players more options. Only thing I don't want is a rebranded loyalist Land Raider, perhaps something different rules-wise apart from renaming the special abilities.

Yeah, but more than likely, the legions book will blow away the old CSM book, and those lists you've become so attached to will seem antiquated and obsolete. That happens with every codex release. Keeping the old CSM book is just going to encourage people to run no brainer Obliterator/Lash Prince/ Plague marine lists with the old book, and we'll still be seeing those same builds years after the CSM book should have hit the dust. More than likely, they'll change all three of those units, but such is the natural progression of the game, I suppose.

I just don't feel like leaving the current book in the game is a good idea in any way, except to keep certain armies viable for those hobbyists who run genuinely non-legion forces (Like red corsairs and fallen DA armies, which are pretty cool). But even then, I can imagine it wouldn't be too hard to find a legion to fit the general idea of your army. Or maybe I'm over-thinking it, and the CSM book will just fall into obscurity and never be used. I dunno.

I think as long as we can move 12 and fire a single weapon, most CSM players will be happy enough

It all depends on the meltaspam. If the legions codex can still outfit chosen/havocs with all meltas and rhinos with combi-meltas then it might catch my attention. It would be interesting to see if I could run the chaos legions as both pre-heresy and post-heresy with the same book.

**Defeatmyarmy**

I would like to see chaos thrive and become popular again, so long as it doesnt turn into another BA tournament crowding. I went to a tournament yesterday with my necrons and I was the only one. I was actually very happy to not go up against 3 of the same army, only the ringer had necrons. I get the distinct impression they are mainly a tier 2 and 3 army besides the scarab swarm list after finding out how delicate doom scythes are.

With chaos, there is so much diversity, most players hopefully will not spam the dual lash or all nurgle lists with obis since that is the main competitor until this update. For GW to fully cash in, Im expecting at least 3 units never seen before in addition to the rezurrection of the old 3rd edition codex with upgrades only available through new kits

**Durza**

sennacherib wrote:Dont worry about trying to figure out what the point is. Its all part of chaos theory.

I've never understood why that's never been mentioned in a Chaos book, even in passing.

**Medium of Death**

ADB calls out a liar and is made out to be the bad guy?

What?

This 'ghost21' sounds like an ass. Have his rumours ever been accurate? (Genuine Question)

**DarkStarSabre**

Medium of Death wrote:ADB calls out a liar and is made out to be the bad guy?

What?

This 'ghost21' sounds like an ass. Have his rumours ever been accurate? (Genuine Question)

They've been hit and miss accurate - as has been pointed out in just about every thread he gets mentioned in ever. He claims it's due to his source being involved in the very early part of the design process (i.e. when everything can change afterwards).

Personally? I reckon this Ghost person is in fact Jervis Johnson.

(The last bit was a joke.

)

**aka_mythos**

Red Corsair wrote:
aka_mythos wrote:Those reasons are exactly why a legion codex only in the context of the renegades codex being redone sooner rather than later. Without a redo, there is too much overlap and redundancy... and the fact is there is a concept that makes the renegade book supplement and justify having both exist in parallel.

Holy run on sentence! I have no idea what your point is?

It made more sense before Samus_aran115 edited the preceeding post. This is what I was responding too:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Yeah, but more than likely, the legions book will blow away the old CSM book, and those lists you've become so attached to will seem antiquated and obsolete. That happens with every codex release. Keeping the old CSM book is just going to encourage people to run no brainer Obliterator/Lash Prince/ Plague marine lists with the old book, and we'll still be seeing those same builds years after the CSM book should have hit the dust. More than likely, they'll change all three of those units, but such is the natural progression of the game, I suppose.

To reiterate:
Point 1- The previous renegade codex, doesn't really stand on its own too well, because of obsolecence and redundancies.
Point 2- Having two Chaos codices, where one is the current Renegade codex, only make sense if they plan on reworking the Renegade codex at a later date, but that they'd likely have worked on both jointly.
Point 3- The overlaping themes and the need to work both a Legion codex with atleast forthought to an updated Renegade codex to me says that update would come sooner rather than later.
Point 4-There exists a concept that works for Renegades that justifies two parallel Chaos codices.

**Brother SRM**

Medium of Death wrote:ADB calls out a liar and is made out to be the bad guy?

What?

This 'ghost21' sounds like an ass. Have his rumours ever been accurate? (Genuine Question)

That's Warseer/B&C for you. ADB didn't do anything so confrontational either - he said some of those rumors were probably untrue, and then ghost21 started doing this creepy cyberstalker thing where he was saying he's met ADB and stuff, when ADB says he knows everyone he's met in meetings, and ghost21 isn't one of them.

As for rumor quality, ghost21 refuted rumors from BoK and Yakface that ended up being completely true (Necrons) and said that if Sisters didn't get a proper codex with plastic models et al. before the end of 2011 he'd run naked through London. The only thing close to an accurate rumor he's had is "Something with boats that isn't ManO'War" and that's it. Everything else has been off by a mile.

**Bonde**

I myself believe that either Ghost21 is just a kid making up random rumours in his room, and we therefore shoulden't believe a word of what he is saying, or his dad works for GW and he occationaly oveerhears something in early development, and he makes the rest of the stuff up. At least that explains his horrendus spelling.

**Brother SRM**

Bonde wrote:I myself believe that either Ghost21 is just a kid making up random rumours in his room, and we therefore shoulden't believe a word of what he is saying, or his dad works for GW and he occationaly oveerhears something in early development, and he makes the rest of the stuff up. At least that explains his horrendus spelling.

So the "My uncle works for Nintendo and they're already playing Pokemon PURPLE VERSION on their N65!!!!" explanation. I'll accept that.

**aka_mythos**

Bonde wrote:I myself believe that either Ghost21 is just a kid making up random rumours in his room, and we therefore shoulden't believe a word of what he is saying, or his dad works for GW and he occationaly oveerhears something in early development, and he makes the rest of the stuff up. At least that explains his horrendus spelling.

Personally I doubt what you're saying... but IF he was, he should be writing the codex, because simply these ideas are some of the best ideas for a chaos codex.

**wyomingfox**

Medium of Death wrote:This 'ghost21' ... Have his rumours ever been accurate? (Genuine Question)

Off the top of my head...Some of his rumors have been accurate, though these relate largely to DreadFleet:

First guy to state a special box set game would be released for September

First guy to state it was Fantasy and not Warhamer Quest or Mordheim

First guy to state that it involved miniature ships

For Necrons:

First guy to state C'tan would not appear in the codex

First to state Necrons would get a flying chariot