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.

Hollismason wrote:
Games Workshop : Makes a book about Khorne, leaves out the one guy you should have in the book Kharn

Seriously that's just pants on head.

My thoughts as well. He has a model. Why not include him?

I'm personally assuming nothing about if Kharn is in the book or not because GW has other goofs on the webstore. All the models for the Ecclesiarchy Battle Conclave are only under the Inquisition section, but the URL still says "Grey Knights" when you click on their pages.

So yeah, I want to see what the book actually has instead of what I think it has.

JuniorRS13 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Games Workshop : Makes a book about Khorne, leaves out the one guy you should have in the book Kharn

Seriously that's just pants on head.

My thoughts as well. He has a model. Why not include him?

Because the book isn't about providing a khorne themed army, it's about selling new khorne models

 Kirasu wrote:
Because the book isn't about providing a khorne themed army, it's about selling new khorne models

No new models accompany this release, so clearly that isn't the case.

I would imagine a new bloodthirster ties into a Khorne release somehow.

Really unhappy to learn the codex is more formation garbage. I hate the decurion and don't want to see that style being the norm.

 Fafnir13 wrote:
Really unhappy to learn the codex is more formation garbage. I hate the decurion and don't want to see that style being the norm.

You may be out of luck then. In a perverse way, building army lists out of formations can dial down on some of the spam we see at the moment.

For instance I fully expect Hive Tyrants with wings to come with a Gargoyle tax or similar in the future.

Bit of a turnaround from the "use whatever you want" idea in Jervis' pre-7th videos but it's pretty clear that multiple detachments are a bit over the top if there aren't some controls placed on them.

*note that I'm not saying this would fix everything; plenty else needs to be done as well.

Xyptc wrote:

 Fafnir13 wrote:
Really unhappy to learn the codex is more formation garbage. I hate the decurion and don't want to see that style being the norm.

You may be out of luck then. In a perverse way, building army lists out of formations can dial down on some of the spam we see at the moment.

For instance I fully expect Hive Tyrants with wings to come with a Gargoyle tax or similar in the future.

Bit of a turnaround from the "use whatever you want" idea in Jervis' pre-7th videos but it's pretty clear that multiple detachments are a bit over the top if there aren't some controls placed on them.

*note that I'm not saying this would fix everything; plenty else needs to be done as well.

Spot on. Formations are a lot more preferable to CADs in my opinion. They're not only thematical but they're easy to balance. Of course not all formations are created equal and some will undoubtedly be more points efficient while remaining thematical (Destroyer Cult for example has no weak links) but it's still a good thing. I'm not saying CADs should be abandoned but that a combination of the both isn't bad.

So will I still be able to make a normal army list with the models I have or do I have to stick to the formation guidelines?

What new models?

Hollismason wrote:
Games Workshop : Makes a book about Khorne, leaves out the one guy you should have in the book Kharn

Seriously that's just pants on head.

Because he's a renegade fighting with Abaddon's 13th Crusade? He doesn't fight in mono-Khorne armies in the background. If anything, he should be in the Black Legion supplement.

Similar scenario for Skarbrand.

For people who don't care about the fluff, you can ally him in or go unbound.

Everyone's worrying about Kharn and Skarbrand not being in the codex, but no ones mentioned that karanak isn't in the daemonkin army section either. I can understand Kharn or Skarbrand not being in this book, but Karanak not being in it makes no sense whatsoever

Looking at the White Dwarf, it dont specify how to include the BT in an army (EG, if it replace the old thirster, etc)

It also say its "three exclusive datasheets".
Does this mean the WD is the only way to get the rules for the new thirsters?

Or is the exclusive in regards to the plain old Daemon codex?

Wonderwolf wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Games Workshop : Makes a book about Khorne, leaves out the one guy you should have in the book Kharn

Seriously that's just pants on head.

Because he's a renegade fighting with Abaddon's 13th Crusade? He doesn't fight in mono-Khorne armies in the background. If anything, he should be in the Black Legion supplement.

Similar scenario for Skarbrand.

For people who don't care about the fluff, you can ally him in or go unbound.

Let me ask you, how big exactly do you think Abaddon's Black Legion is? Or the forces marshaled for the Black Crusade, for that matter? In your head is it like Abaddon, Kharn, and 30 marines, and every time you field a Black Legion force in 40k you're fielding the exact sum total of that army? Or is it possible that of the thousands of marines fighting for Abaddon, there might be a force of Khorne worshippers big enough to put on the table as a mono-Khorne army, still be part of the Black Crusade, and include Kharn too?

This kind of logic seriously annoys me, and I think it's this kind of thinking that leads us to never, ever have good Chaos codexes. The fluff armies and the battles they fight are simply enormous, but in spite of GW's best efforts at making the game unplayably large, 40k is still a glorified skirmish game - you're hard pressed to even field a decent sized warband in a normal 40k battle. Yet somehow, because the legions aren't all unified and 100,000 strong anymore, we are simply forbidden from ever having rules that could decently represent a mono-god legion force (or heaven forbid an undivided legion force). This in spite of the fact that I think it's the number one thing most chaos players want to field.

And this is how we may end up with a mono-Khorne codex that fails to include the poster child of Khorne.

Hahahaha WOW, you have to buy a box of Possessed if you want to use the Blood Host.

GW got us again

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
This kind of logic seriously annoys me, and I think it's this kind of thinking that leads us to never, ever have good Chaos codexes. The fluff armies and the battles they fight are simply enormous, but in spite of GW's best efforts at making the game unplayably large, 40k is still a glorified skirmish game - you're hard pressed to even field a decent sized warband in a normal 40k battle. Yet somehow, because the legions aren't all unified and 100,000 strong anymore, we are simply forbidden from ever having rules that could decently represent a mono-god legion force (or heaven forbid an undivided legion force). This in spite of the fact that I think it's the number one thing most chaos players want to field.

And this is how we may end up with a mono-Khorne codex that fails to include the poster child of Khorne.

*standing ovation*

Couldn't've said it better.

Not necessarily a bad thing. My brother uses possessed all the time and they're quite effective! Heck, if you don't like those models, you could always try the Gal Vorbak from Forge World. Excellent models.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Or is it possible that of the thousands of marines fighting for Abaddon, there might be a force of Khorne worshippers big enough to put on the table as a mono-Khorne army, still be part of the Black Crusade, and include Kharn too?
+

Possibly. But its rare enough to be covered by unbound. Because 40K is smaller in scale, you should make an effort to include a non-Khorne unit in any army involving Kharn, precisely because it helps bring the theme and background of the larger battles that cannot be portrayed in 40K into the game at its reduced scale.

If you abuse the fact that 40K armies are smaller in scale than the larger battle "going on around it" to draw a skewed, rather than a representative smaller "sample" from the larger force, you're still not playing it fluffy. You're simply abusing the scale differences to justify your unfluffy army to yourself.

The overarching theme of the Legions are the fact that they are broken. To bring that theme to the battlefield, you don't bring a mono-list. Doing so moves you into the theme of the loyalist forces.

If Chaos would be played as uniform legions, basically "evil" mirror-versions of the unified, uniform loyalist Chapters, they'd serve no purpose in the game.

Of course, they could be large. A Black Legion crusade or some other renegade warband might well include thousands of Khorne worshipers and thousands of Tzeentch worshipers. But to bring that to the table, you'd pick one unit of Khorne worshipers AND one unit of Tzeentch worshipers. If you field an "army" solely from one corner of the black crusade and think it is fluffy, you've failed to grasp the basic ideas and themes that define the CSMs as a faction in the 40K-universe.

If you don't care about fluff and want Abaddon (he also is a champion of Khorne!! Probably more so than Kharn) or Kharn in a mono-Khorne army, unbound has you covered.

Also, isn't this all based on the fact that the Kharn model isn't in the deamonkin segment of the webshop? What if this is just an error?
Has anyone seen the contents page yet?
I'll wait til next Saturday.

 bubber wrote:
Also, isn't this all based on the fact that the Kharn model isn't in the deamonkin segment of the webshop? What if this is just an error?
Has anyone seen the contents page yet?
I'll wait til next Saturday.

Some guy over on warseer posted a pic holding the codex and leaked what units were included. kharn, mutilators, preds, and some others were not.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Or is it possible that of the thousands of marines fighting for Abaddon, there might be a force of Khorne worshippers big enough to put on the table as a mono-Khorne army, still be part of the Black Crusade, and include Kharn too?
+

Possibly. But its rare enough to be covered by unbound. Because 40K is smaller in scale, you should make an effort to include a non-Khorne unit in any army involving Kharn, precisely because it helps bring the theme and background of the larger battles that cannot be portrayed in 40K into the game at its reduced scale.

If you abuse the fact that 40K armies are smaller in scale than the larger battle "going on around it" to draw a skewed, rather than a representative smaller "sample" from the larger force, you're still not playing it fluffy. You're simply abusing the scale differences to justify your unfluffy army to yourself.

The overarching theme of the Legions are the fact that they are broken. To bring that theme to the battlefield, you don't bring a mono-list. Doing so moves you into the theme of the loyalist forces.

If Chaos would be played as uniform legions, basically "evil" mirror-versions of the unified, uniform loyalist Chapters, they'd serve no purpose in the game.

Of course, they could be large. A Black Legion crusade or some other renegade warband might well include thousands of Khorne worshipers and thousands of Tzeentch worshipers. But to bring that to the table, you'd pick one unit of Khorne worshipers AND one unit of Tzeentch worshipers. If you field an "army" solely from one corner of the black crusade and think it is fluffy, you've failed to grasp the basic ideas and themes that define the CSMs as a faction in the 40K-universe.

If you don't care about fluff and want Abaddon (he also is a champion of Khorne!! Probably more so than Kharn) or Kharn in a mono-Khorne army, unbound has you covered.

You can play the game however you like, but I feel you couldn't be more wrong. Just literally every sentence in your reply is wrong. Kharn surrounded by 1500 or so points of fellow Khorne worshippers is the opposite of rare, I would say it was the rule rather than the exception. There's nothing, nothing unfluffy about a mono-Khorne force centered around Kharn, or about highlighting a small part of a large force in general when making a 40k army.

40k is inherently going to be about small forces in the grand scheme of things, either a small part of a larger battle, or a small raiding/skirmishing force separated from the main element of an army. There's no getting around that, and likewise there's nothing that says you have to "pick one of everything" to represent units from a broader army around them. That is an insulting idea; it craps on virtually anyone who has ever tried to build a properly themed list, and wholly embraces the Games Workshop "you'll buy one of everything and like it no matter how little sense it makes or how poorly it performs on the battlefield" mentality.

The overarching theme of the Legions are the fact that they are broken. To bring that theme to the battlefield, you don't bring a mono-list. Doing so moves you into the theme of the loyalist forces.

This is such a ridiculous statement that I don't even know what to say. It's indefensible.

Like I was trying to explain, it's that kind of thinking that literally has ruined the chaos codex for several iterations now. "The legions are dead, and clearly it's impossible to get even 40 or 50 of them in one place at one time on a battlefield, so we're going to deny you the option of representing them." This is why we have a rudderless, characterless, toothless arch-enemy, and why 30k sells so well. The fact that you think there's no purpose in representing the remnants of the legions, or even proper mono-god forces, is just sad and misguided as a player, to say nothing of being blatantly and embarrassingly wrong in terms of fluff.

Khorne codex without Kharn?
GARBAGE!
Thanks GW for making me spare the money for this useless release and for the Khorne demons models too!

And accidentally quoted myself instead of editing. I swear I've used this website before.

Could Kharn's absence be connected to the rumors that Finecast is soon to be gone?

Not trying to be tin-foil crazy or anything, but if Finecast is being removed then that's going to knock out a lot of characters, Kharn included. And we all know GW can't just let us have the rules now, no-siree. Now, maybe Kharn will be back in a future CSM book, but it will only be because he got a plastic model.

master sheol wrote:
Khorne codex without Kharn?
GARBAGE!
Thanks GW for making me spare the money for this useless release and for the Khorne demons models too!

Well since he's already in the main Codex, it'd be silly to print his rules twice don't you think? I suspect there will be an allowance for Kharn in there anyways given that HE'S ON THE COVER.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

master sheol wrote:
Khorne codex without Kharn?
GARBAGE!
Thanks GW for making me spare the money for this useless release and for the Khorne demons models too!

Well since he's already in the main Codex, it'd be silly to print his rules twice don't you think? I suspect there will be an allowance for Kharn in there anyways given that HE'S ON THE COVER.

Khorne Daemonkin is a standalone codex. Without being in the codex you would need to take him as an ally.

But why not just put the rules in there? You're already paying $50 for the book, why not add the rules for one of Khorne's most well-know we champions in. It's all of one page. But I guess I'm not thinking in the mindset of the multiple army book armies...$100+ for just army rules seems to sour with me.

Wonderwolf wrote:
The overarching theme of the Legions are the fact that they are broken.

When a billionaire goes broke he's still a millionaire. Same thing applies to the Legions. Rather than thousands upon thousands of Marines those warbands could be five or six hundred strong, easily enough for a monobuild, and easily enough for Kharn to lead them.

If Chapters only 1000 strong get entire Codices then it is simply baffling how multiple warbands that could be hundreds if not thousands in size, spread across the galaxy, somehow can't get their own rules.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

master sheol wrote:
Khorne codex without Kharn?
GARBAGE!
Thanks GW for making me spare the money for this useless release and for the Khorne demons models too!

Well since he's already in the main Codex, it'd be silly to print his rules twice don't you think? I suspect there will be an allowance for Kharn in there anyways given that HE'S ON THE COVER.

That's not him. It is just a generic Champion of Khorne.

Kharn has at least one bare arm, the Khornate bunny ears on his helmet, and Gorechild is a chainaxe whereas the cover shows a warped power axe, with distinctive power cabling.

It doesn't make any sense to me at all that the most famous Chaos Space Marine of Khorne and of the Berserkers would not be in the codex dedicated to the God he's Fighting for, that and SKull Taker etc.. not being in seems just dumb.

There's just no reason : Like what? Why is he not in the Codex?