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.

DarthDiggler wrote:
I don't think chaos needs FW anymore than loyalists need the battle brothers rule. Space marines do well because they can easily ally with whatever they need. Chaos has limited allies compared to loyalists.

I think taking units from FW is no different than DA taking Space Wolf allies or a Gladius taking an assassin. It's units from multiple books just like chaos taking units from imperial armor 13.

I have rarely ever seen a top level SM army not take advantage of cherry picking the best units from multiple sources. Chaos just lacks the multiple sources part of the equation.

While thats a part of the problem, the base SM codex outperforms the CSM codex in nearly every way.
Cents are better than oblits/mutalitors
Sm bikers are better than ours
ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics are free and often comparable to most of the marks (with only nurgle being worth it).
SM HQ units are superior to CSM ones in nearly every case.
SM have access to better disciplines.
SM have better elite infantry (Sternguard are better than every elite unit in the CSM dex).
SM infantry is comparable to CSM infantry (fearless, but no extra CCW weapon, but chapter tactics).
Scouts are an effective backline objective holder.
Thunderfire cannons are really solid.
Landspeeders are good for quickly engaging an enemy.
Drop pods. CSM would move up considerably in power with drop pods with launchers.
Better landraiders

For CSM
Termies are better (though all termies are bad, imo)
Plague marines
Nurgle bikers are tougher if no HQ is taken with SM bikers (though nobody does this, IMO).
Heldrake is still solid.
Cultists are cheap backfield objective holders, though they offer little offensively.
I...honestly can't think of another.

 Vaktathi wrote:
More to the point, Chaos taking FW units isn't really even taking units from multiple books in the way DA's taking SW's allies is. The FW units are intended to be additions to the CSM book, not units from another army that were never designed or intended to be part of one army but are allowed to be via the allies rules.

FW really isn't really this super special thing people need to have unique conversations with their communities over, at least not any moreso than anything else else in the game, especially supplements, dataslates, etc that nobody else seems to see a need for special conversations about. Treating it that way is an artificial remnant of many editions past.

Other than the few truly unique Chaos models from those books, what isn't simply a clone of the Imperium version? We have a Typhon, they have a Typhon. We have Sicarans, they have Sicarans. We have Fire Raptors, they have Fire Raptors. We have Thunderhawks, they have Thunderhawks. We have Fellblades, they have Baneblades. We have Chaos Knight, they have Imperial Knight. We share Warhound Titans, Reaver Titans, Warlord Titans, and more. The models deemed necessary for CSM to be competitive are simply the reason SM is already competitive. We may as well be battle brothers with Space Marines.

Yet the things that truly stand out... the Kytan Daemon Engine, the Greater Brass Scorpion, the Daemon Lords, the Blood Slaughterers, rarely used if ever and less effective than some cloned piece of Space Marine technology. The only clone pieces that are unique enough to call Chaos are the Hell Blade, Hell Talon, and Dreadclaw. All still surpassed by the machines of the loyalists. Let's face it... the FW units that make CSM a better list are a slap in the face to the army itself. We can't be competitive without borrowing from a competitive faction.

Akiasura wrote:

DarthDiggler wrote:
I don't think chaos needs FW anymore than loyalists need the battle brothers rule. Space marines do well because they can easily ally with whatever they need. Chaos has limited allies compared to loyalists.

I think taking units from FW is no different than DA taking Space Wolf allies or a Gladius taking an assassin. It's units from multiple books just like chaos taking units from imperial armor 13.

I have rarely ever seen a top level SM army not take advantage of cherry picking the best units from multiple sources. Chaos just lacks the multiple sources part of the equation.

While thats a part of the problem, the base SM codex outperforms the CSM codex in nearly every way.
Cents are better than oblits/mutalitors
Sm bikers are better than ours
ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics are free and often comparable to most of the marks (with only nurgle being worth it).
SM HQ units are superior to CSM ones in nearly every case.
SM have access to better disciplines.
SM have better elite infantry (Sternguard are better than every elite unit in the CSM dex).
SM infantry is comparable to CSM infantry (fearless, but no extra CCW weapon, but chapter tactics).
Scouts are an effective backline objective holder.
Thunderfire cannons are really solid.
Landspeeders are good for quickly engaging an enemy.
Drop pods. CSM would move up considerably in power with drop pods with launchers.
Better landraiders

For CSM
Termies are better (though all termies are bad, imo)
Plague marines
Nurgle bikers are tougher if no HQ is taken with SM bikers (though nobody does this, IMO).
Heldrake is still solid.
Cultists are cheap backfield objective holders, though they offer little offensively.
I...honestly can't think of another.

I would add to the chaos side two very important units. Spawn which absolutely wreck grav weapon toting units, like most Centurions. Spawn also have the speed and toughness to mow through MSU troops and light vehicles all in a 15 wound toughness 6 package.

To keep the spawn alive I would also add to your list Sorcerers who are superior to Librarians. Sorcerers can be level 3 psykers who reroll their dice to cast powers.

Yes I agree Space Marines have more toys than loyalists (my Crimson Fists collection is larger than my Chaos army collection), but chaos still has some very effective unique units.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arkaine wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
More to the point, Chaos taking FW units isn't really even taking units from multiple books in the way DA's taking SW's allies is. The FW units are intended to be additions to the CSM book, not units from another army that were never designed or intended to be part of one army but are allowed to be via the allies rules.

FW really isn't really this super special thing people need to have unique conversations with their communities over, at least not any moreso than anything else else in the game, especially supplements, dataslates, etc that nobody else seems to see a need for special conversations about. Treating it that way is an artificial remnant of many editions past.

Other than the few truly unique Chaos models from those books, what isn't simply a clone of the Imperium version? We have a Typhon, they have a Typhon. We have Sicarans, they have Sicarans. We have Fire Raptors, they have Fire Raptors. We have Thunderhawks, they have Thunderhawks. We have Fellblades, they have Baneblades. We have Chaos Knight, they have Imperial Knight. We share Warhound Titans, Reaver Titans, Warlord Titans, and more. The models deemed necessary for CSM to be competitive are simply the reason SM is already competitive. We may as well be battle brothers with Space Marines.

Yet the things that truly stand out... the Kytan Daemon Engine, the Greater Brass Scorpion, the Daemon Lords, the Blood Slaughterers, rarely used if ever and less effective than some cloned piece of Space Marine technology. The only clone pieces that are unique enough to call Chaos are the Hell Blade, Hell Talon, and Dreadclaw. All still surpassed by the machines of the loyalists. Let's face it... the FW units that make CSM a better list are a slap in the face to the army itself. We can't be competitive without borrowing from a competitive faction.

I like to think, as far as FW units go, that the loyalists are 'borrowing' from the CSM faction, but that just lets me sleep at night.

DarthDiggler wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

DarthDiggler wrote:
I don't think chaos needs FW anymore than loyalists need the battle brothers rule. Space marines do well because they can easily ally with whatever they need. Chaos has limited allies compared to loyalists.

I think taking units from FW is no different than DA taking Space Wolf allies or a Gladius taking an assassin. It's units from multiple books just like chaos taking units from imperial armor 13.

I have rarely ever seen a top level SM army not take advantage of cherry picking the best units from multiple sources. Chaos just lacks the multiple sources part of the equation.

While thats a part of the problem, the base SM codex outperforms the CSM codex in nearly every way.
Cents are better than oblits/mutalitors
Sm bikers are better than ours
ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics are free and often comparable to most of the marks (with only nurgle being worth it).
SM HQ units are superior to CSM ones in nearly every case.
SM have access to better disciplines.
SM have better elite infantry (Sternguard are better than every elite unit in the CSM dex).
SM infantry is comparable to CSM infantry (fearless, but no extra CCW weapon, but chapter tactics).
Scouts are an effective backline objective holder.
Thunderfire cannons are really solid.
Landspeeders are good for quickly engaging an enemy.
Drop pods. CSM would move up considerably in power with drop pods with launchers.
Better landraiders

For CSM
Termies are better (though all termies are bad, imo)
Plague marines
Nurgle bikers are tougher if no HQ is taken with SM bikers (though nobody does this, IMO).
Heldrake is still solid.
Cultists are cheap backfield objective holders, though they offer little offensively.
I...honestly can't think of another.

I would add to the chaos side two very important units. Spawn which absolutely wreck grav weapon toting units, like most Centurions. Spawn also have the speed and toughness to mow through MSU troops and light vehicles all in a 15 wound toughness 6 package.

Spawn, I wouldn't say, wreck Centurions. It's still a T5 unit with 2 wounds and a 2+ save. They need to cause 12 wounds just to kill one, and often cent stars can teleport. Their one melee attack isn't great, but the librarian helps. There are also stern guard and various other units that can remove Spawn.
I did forget spawn. They are pretty good. But nowhere near cents in usefulness.

DarthDiggler wrote:

To keep the spawn alive I would also add to your list Sorcerers who are superior to Librarians. Sorcerers can be level 3 psykers who reroll their dice to cast powers.

I disagree.
Sorcerors are better at casting spells, but librarians have access to the best spells. Diviniation on cents cause devastation to most units in the game. a 4++, or any of the other powers are all good.
The special character caster is also amazing, and is commonly seen. Our special character caster is basically a gun.

DarthDiggler wrote:

Yes I agree Space Marines have more toys than loyalists (my Crimson Fists collection is larger than my Chaos army collection), but chaos still has some very effective unique units.

Chaos has some units that are strong defensively, but not many that put out pain without being fragile.
SM have many units that, with the addition of an HQ, can be very good both defensively and offensively. Way more than CSM.
CSM have MoN Bikers, Spawn, Heldrakes. Helbrutes in formation can be good. Maulerfiends are not terrible. Sorcerors would be better if they had a unit they wanted to be in more.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Only Night Lords is merely the name attributed to his army, not his claim to fame. The point attributed throughout the threads on this forum to his army was that he can successfully field a winning CSM list. With such a claim, a lot of Nurgle was expected.

Hrm, when one talks about "winning with a Night Lords list", that usually carries some fairly strong preconceptions for most people about how the army is built and plays. Producing a min-max'd MSU nurgle army with a bunch of S&P units doesn't really fit that, it's not really what anyone (except Jancoran apparently) would consider "Night Lords" army list.

Nobody would ever look at that army list and think "oh yeah, that's probably a Night Lords army".

Not true, his list isn't far from what I'd expect from Nightlords.

Uses overwhelming force to win combats.

Plenty of Fear causers.

Other 'psychological' effects (dirge casters).

Ability to strike from 'nowhere' (jump, deep strike).

Even mutilators I think can fit the Night Lord theme (deep strike, fear, melee focused, obsessed with personal power, use chaos as a tool to master for their own gain instead of a religion (they eat weapon spirits)). I've never seen any fluff that states "mutilators are known to be used by xx force", but that doesn't imply they can't be justified in any army!

I do well with tzeentch oblits and 2 sorcs for buffs.

2+/4++ and endurance works really well. Sometimes I can get invisibility as well which makes the unit extremely durable.

Spawn are decent but compared to the necron equiv unit of wraiths they really aren't that impressive for their points.

The dirge caster is great but could be better.

The havoc launcher makes Chaos rhinos decent and is an auto include for back field marine units. Throw on the soul blaze upgrade and it can really cripple small weaker units.

 Korinov wrote:
I would never call that a Night Lords list.

Oh well. In the end, how it fights is the issue anyways. So you can CALL it whatever you prefer. 3-0. As good as it gets I guess. Fun weekend. I also won my second tournament this weekend (Adepta Sororitas). So a great weekend.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nareik wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Only Night Lords is merely the name attributed to his army, not his claim to fame. The point attributed throughout the threads on this forum to his army was that he can successfully field a winning CSM list. With such a claim, a lot of Nurgle was expected.

Hrm, when one talks about "winning with a Night Lords list", that usually carries some fairly strong preconceptions for most people about how the army is built and plays. Producing a min-max'd MSU nurgle army with a bunch of S&P units doesn't really fit that, it's not really what anyone (except Jancoran apparently) would consider "Night Lords" army list.

Nobody would ever look at that army list and think "oh yeah, that's probably a Night Lords army".

Not true, his list isn't far from what I'd expect from Nightlords.

Uses overwhelming force to win combats.

Plenty of Fear causers.

Other 'psychological' effects (dirge casters).

Ability to strike from 'nowhere' (jump, deep strike).

Even mutilators I think can fit the Night Lord theme (deep strike, fear, melee focused, obsessed with personal power, use chaos as a tool to master for their own gain instead of a religion (they eat weapon spirits)). I've never seen any fluff that states "mutilators are known to be used by xx force", but that doesn't imply they can't be justified in any army!

He just wants a piece of straw to grasp on to. He thinks that by debunking that an army of 4 Fast attack and three single model heavies is somehow not a "night lord" army somehow magically turns actualized wins into some kind of theoretical loss.

Which is absurd. It is absolutely the definition of a Night Lord list. The only thing about it thats different is that they are tougher. If someone wants to hinge their criticism on the fact that they are TOUGH Night Lords, well... what can ya'do.

A "fluffy" Night Lords army cannot take any mark except for the Mark of Chaos Undivided. (which sadly no longer exists as an actual mark)

The one and only time we had actual Legion rules, during the WD Index Astartes & 3.5 codex days, it was crystal clear. Sure, because there's no longer any hard and fast specific rules anymore, you can claim 'well, these guys are a rare warband of Night Lords', but it doesn't change anything.
Night Lords never worship Chaos and should never be marked.

It's really no different than things like Black Templar players allying in "Black Templar Librarians" or a White Scars player using Dreadnoughts.

That list may be painted up as a Night Lords army, but it's not a true "lore adherent" Night Lords army, and it shouldn't be claimed as one. Accept the fact that it's a non-fluffy Nurgle'fied Night Lords army.

 purplkrush wrote:

Jancoran wrote:

Spoiler:

Night Lords Total Roster Cost: 1996

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

75pts 4 Chaos Space Marines
1 Aspiring Champion
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

75pts 4 Chaos Space Marines
1 Aspiring Champion
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

80pts 4 Chaos Space Marines [Black Legion] (Veterans of the Long War)
1 Aspiring Champion (Veterans of the Long War)
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

130pts 1 Chaos Lord (Nurgle, Jump Pack, Sigil of Corruption, Powerfist+ Combi Melta)

285pts 1 Chaos Lord (HQ) [Black Legion], 160 pts (Mark of Nurgle + Blight Grenades+ Melta Bombs + Sigil of Corruption + Combi-Meltagun+ Veterans of the Long War) + Chaos Bike + 1 The Eye of Night + The Hand of Darkness

330pts 13 Raptors (Mark of Nurgle) + Meltagun x2
1 Raptor Champion (Melta Bombs + Mark of Nurgle + Power Axe x1)

330pts 13 Raptors (Mark of Nurgle) + Meltagun x2
1 Raptor Champion (Melta Bombs + Mark of Nurgle + Power Axe x1)

170pts 1 Heldrake

It's worth noting that this IS NOT a Night Lords list. This is a Nurgle list. Both of your lords are marked as Nurgle as are your Raptors. Which isn't very fluffy.

This partially explains Jancoran's story about his amazing win with just one kill. He's running a durable Nurgle list that's min maxed, not fluffy.

Since 5th edition trying to run a fluffy NL list is impossible. I gave it a try for a few games after they took away the legion rules, tried to keep everything unmarked but it proved to be a terrible idea. CSM have been pretty bad for quite a while now and refusing to use the only thing that tries to give you any advantage over the loyalist is tactical suicide.

That being said in the latest novels it is clear that many Night Lords have fallen to the blessings of the dark gods... so it isn't really that far from the fluff. On the game side I really don't think this is a durable list, sure MoN helps a lot but it is expensive as hell. I used to run my raptors with MoN as well since they were the stellar units on my Night Lords lists, however T5 isn't worth it anymore, many armies have ways to deal with T5 just as well as T4, Tau/Eldar weaponry have high STR which S5+, SM have gravs who doesn't care about T, IG got lots of plates S6-8, DE got poison, GK got medium/high str shots with their psycannons and they got hammerhand which makes T5 irrelevant, pretty much the only armies that care about the upgrade from T4 to T5 are CSM, Orks and Nyds.

The list does have target saturation, however half of it depends on reserve rolls so it will work some times, and won't work some other. With all that DS i'd pay the fortification that allows you to re-roll the reserves. The decked out lord is pretty expensive as well, 285... that is bordering on the nurgle DP cost which is probably as good if not even better.

 Lord Yayula wrote:

 purplkrush wrote:

Jancoran wrote:

Spoiler:

Night Lords Total Roster Cost: 1996

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

76pts 1 Obliterator (Mark of Nurgle)

75pts 4 Chaos Space Marines
1 Aspiring Champion
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

75pts 4 Chaos Space Marines
1 Aspiring Champion
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

80pts 4 Chaos Space Marines [Black Legion] (Veterans of the Long War)
1 Aspiring Champion (Veterans of the Long War)
40pts 1 Chaos Rhino (Dirge Caster)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

61pts 1 Mutilator, (Mark of Nurgle)

130pts 1 Chaos Lord (Nurgle, Jump Pack, Sigil of Corruption, Powerfist+ Combi Melta)

285pts 1 Chaos Lord (HQ) [Black Legion], 160 pts (Mark of Nurgle + Blight Grenades+ Melta Bombs + Sigil of Corruption + Combi-Meltagun+ Veterans of the Long War) + Chaos Bike + 1 The Eye of Night + The Hand of Darkness

330pts 13 Raptors (Mark of Nurgle) + Meltagun x2
1 Raptor Champion (Melta Bombs + Mark of Nurgle + Power Axe x1)

330pts 13 Raptors (Mark of Nurgle) + Meltagun x2
1 Raptor Champion (Melta Bombs + Mark of Nurgle + Power Axe x1)

170pts 1 Heldrake

It's worth noting that this IS NOT a Night Lords list. This is a Nurgle list. Both of your lords are marked as Nurgle as are your Raptors. Which isn't very fluffy.

This partially explains Jancoran's story about his amazing win with just one kill. He's running a durable Nurgle list that's min maxed, not fluffy.

Since 5th edition trying to run a fluffy NL list is impossible. I gave it a try for a few games after they took away the legion rules, tried to keep everything unmarked but it proved to be a terrible idea. CSM have been pretty bad for quite a while now and refusing to use the only thing that tries to give you any advantage over the loyalist is tactical suicide.

That being said in the latest novels it is clear that many Night Lords have fallen to the blessings of the dark gods... so it isn't really that far from the fluff. On the game side I really don't think this is a durable list, sure MoN helps a lot but it is expensive as hell. I used to run my raptors with MoN as well since they were the stellar units on my Night Lords lists, however T5 isn't worth it anymore, many armies have ways to deal with T5 just as well as T4, Tau/Eldar weaponry have high STR which S5+, SM have gravs who doesn't care about T, IG got lots of plates S6-8, DE got poison, GK got medium/high str shots with their psycannons and they got hammerhand which makes T5 irrelevant, pretty much the only armies that care about the upgrade from T4 to T5 are CSM, Orks and Nyds.

The list does have target saturation, however half of it depends on reserve rolls so it will work some times, and won't work some other. With all that DS i'd pay the fortification that allows you to re-roll the reserves. The decked out lord is pretty expensive as well, 285... that is bordering on the nurgle DP cost which is probably as good if not even better.

Honestly, I've always felt and personally accepted that if you're going to play from a "fluff first" perspective, then you're making a willing choice to put winning as a secondary objective.

While not ideal in any way, if I was going to play what one would call a "fluffy Night Lords army", then I'd do it with extreme MSU Marines in Rhinos + MSU Termies and only take the Raptors/Bikes in larger squads. Marks would still be a huge no-no.
It would still be somewhat decent in non-competitive play, but I wouldn't be deluding myself into thinking that I should be excepting a Night Lords theme to being anything close to Tournament capable.

Yes, Chaos Marines are currently the most massively shafted army;
- We can't viably play our Legions, as GW refuses to give us anything resembling Legion Tactics or similar.
- We can't viably play Renegade Chapters, because GW refuses to give us viable options such as limited access to newer wargear.
- We do individualised Warbands rather terribly, again due to bland rules and a massively restrictive armoury.

We're really just in an awful place right now, both rules AND model wise. Until we get some love from GW instead of the eternal middle finger, we've got two options:
1. Admit that you want to win 50% or more of your games with Chaos Marines, and thus play your Night Lords/IW's/WE's/Red Corsairs as multi-coloured Nurgle Marines with perhaps a sprinkling of Noise Marines, AoBF Jugger Lord or whatever floats your boat.
Just don't claim that your army is full-on "Fluffy", because right now we simply can't be fluffy AND competitive at the same time. (except for Nurgle players!)

2. Admit that fluff is more important than winning, and just accept that our fluffy lists are going to lead to us getting killed, but looking good while being steamrolled by anything even remotely competitive.

There's simply no happy middle ground for us atm.

So the problem, in essence, that chaos has is simply this:

Nurgle works because of toughness but not when used in the manner described in the fluff.

Khorne works just fine but fluff generally prefers larger units which is not the current meta. They also get hurt by ranged armies which generally have more bodies to throw more dakka. This doesn't even touch on the ridiculously small quantity of "terrain" that most 40k throws down.

Seriously, I hate fighting over cornfields and debris. Doesn't anyone fight over something worth fething holding?

Tzeentch is ridiculously overpriced. It's completely ineffective for something that should be the other side of the Necron coin.

Slaneesh, very much like Tzeentch, is also comically underpowered for being the other side of the ELDAR COIN. Of their 2 special weapons only one is paticularly worthwhile.

ALL LEGIONS lack their special rules. Not to harp it but 3.5 made clear how each Legion functioned and had special rules to complement their specialization in warfare.

So, when someone says something like:

[i/]"There are no solid 'rules' on what a Night Lord list must/can't include, and the guidelines are very faint."[i]

or:

[i/]"Odd thing to say. Your opinion of its fluff value is based on...what? Is this not Raptors led by Raptors and Bike commanders, everything mobile in a Rhino or Deep Striking? Bringing death from the skies. So I'm unclear on where it falls short?"[i]

it becomes fairly obvious that either they have no clue what they're talking about (quote a) or are riding technicalities and ignoring obvious facts to shoehorn in their version of things (option b).

Experiment 626 wrote:
A "fluffy" Night Lords army cannot take any mark except for the Mark of Chaos Undivided. (which sadly no longer exists as an actual mark)

The one and only time we had actual Legion rules, during the WD Index Astartes & 3.5 codex days, it was crystal clear. Sure, because there's no longer any hard and fast specific rules anymore, you can claim 'well, these guys are a rare warband of Night Lords', but it doesn't change anything.
Night Lords never worship Chaos and should never be marked.

It's really no different than things like Black Templar players allying in "Black Templar Librarians" or a White Scars player using Dreadnoughts.

That list may be painted up as a Night Lords army, but it's not a true "lore adherent" Night Lords army, and it shouldn't be claimed as one. Accept the fact that it's a non-fluffy Nurgle'fied Night Lords army.

Sure. If you ignroe the way they fight and want to ignore that the Chaos Undivided thing isnt an option, sure. But I don't care what you CALL it. It's a Night Lords list in every important functional way. If you want to call it the "Nurgly Nurgles of Nurgoliciousness" Im cool with that too. Whatevs. The thread is about CSM. So now that I have done it and it has done well, some of you can try it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Yayula wrote:


That being said in the latest novels it is clear that many Night Lords have fallen to the blessings of the dark gods... so it isn't really that far from the fluff. On the game side I really don't think this is a durable list, sure MoN helps a lot but it is expensive as hell. I used to run my raptors with MoN as well since they were the stellar units on my Night Lords lists, however T5 isn't worth it anymore, many armies have ways to deal with T5 just as well as T4, Tau/Eldar weaponry have high STR which S5+, SM have gravs who doesn't care about T, IG got lots of plates S6-8, DE got poison, GK got medium/high str shots with their psycannons and they got hammerhand which makes T5 irrelevant, pretty much the only armies that care about the upgrade from T4 to T5 are CSM, Orks and Nyds.

The list does have target saturation, however half of it depends on reserve rolls so it will work some times, and won't work some other. With all that DS i'd pay the fortification that allows you to re-roll the reserves. The decked out lord is pretty expensive as well, 285... that is bordering on the nurgle DP cost which is probably as good if not even better.

I don't worry much about reserves but the Fortification has always been on my list of maybe-includes for the obvious reason that there are times you want ot be able to keep them off the board. My last game for example I wanted to hold them off another turn because of the mission parameters. Its a valid thought for sure.

As for the T5: gold. Sure there's always "something" that can wound them on a 3, but i mean... then they have to use THOSE weapons on my Raptors! How annoying for the enemy. And they still have to kill enough which isn't so easy to do with Power Armor, cover and so on. They'll kill some, and no one will mourn them.

My biggest downside comes against dread/high AP spam. big units of those are a challenge for sure. I faced an ork who used a crazy number of robots in his list and had to play the reserve game and sucker him in so that I could defeat him. The Eye of Night was exceptinally helpful. =) One false move....and...FIRE! Lol. Killakan parts everywhere. That helped. A lot.

 purplkrush wrote:
Khorne works just fine but fluff generally prefers larger units which is not the current meta. They also get hurt by ranged armies which generally have more bodies to throw more dakka. This doesn't even touch on the ridiculously small quantity of "terrain" that most 40k throws down.

Khorne has been nerfed since 3rd because it used to be a strong close combat army. Chaos isn't allowed to be strong. Heldrake neck breaks and all. What Khorne used to be is +1 attack regardless, +1 Strength and +1 Initiative on the charge, the ability to have Feel No Pain on all your guys, and insane charge distances. That's no longer Khorne. They split Khorne into himself and Slaanesh.

I think the main contention here is what defines "fluffy" to both sides. Personally when I think night lords I think straight raptors, even so far as to go Unbound to have just raptors and raptor lords in crimsom slaughter for buffs to fear effects. Is that objectively correct? Or powerful? No to either, but its still valuable as an opinion. The Nurgle focus is sorta icky to me, but in the wake of no undivided mark nor legion rules its all you can get without playing with legion rules or using C:SM

 Jancoran wrote:

Sure. If you ignroe the way they fight and want to ignore that the Chaos Undivided thing isnt an option, sure. But I don't care what you CALL it. It's a Night Lords list in every important functional way. If you want to call it the "Nurgly Nurgles of Nurgoliciousness" Im cool with that too. Whatevs. The thread is about CSM. So now that I have done it and it has done well, some of you can try it

Some people want their army more representative than this. Most longterm CSM players lament the loss of rules that represented the legions because they aren't a fan of the sort of jumbled together army that performs well enough. They want form and function and they don't want to have to assert models that aren't modeled with nurgly marks have nurgle marks.

I don't think we can use 3rd edition list composition rules to dictate what is a fluffy force. For starters there would be no such thing as knights nor allies and many unbound lists would be considered unfluffy by that metric.

Second to that, I don't think it is necessary for every person's list to represent a prototypical force... If for no other reason that the only armies people would be able to play are imperial guard / orks as any other army (like space marines, let alone night lords, or even, Emperor forbid, nurgle night lords) is too rare.

I also feel it is rather arbitrary to say 3rd ed is fair game for defining what is possible in Chaos (of which all things are possible ), whereas 2nd ed is defunct and doesn't count.

Experiment 626 wrote:
While not ideal in any way, if I was going to play what one would call a "fluffy Night Lords army", then I'd do it with extreme MSU Marines in Rhinos + MSU Termies and only take the Raptors/Bikes in larger squads. Marks would still be a huge no-no.
It would still be somewhat decent in non-competitive play, but I wouldn't be deluding myself into thinking that I should be excepting a Night Lords theme to being anything close to Tournament capable.

Interestingly we also disagree here on what makes a fluffy Night Lord list.

To me Night Lords are about striking with overwhelming force and brutality, so basing the army around MSU would be wrong (I'd see that as a more Alpha Legion thing). I'd probably also throw icons into the foot sloggers as they effectively lower the leadership of enemies they've beaten in combat, which plays to the Night Lord terror warfare aspect.

I suppose this brings us onto an on topic point; Chaos forces are loosely, or even conflictingly, defined. This gives lots of room for interpretation/imagination/innovation as well as for discussion on 'what is fluffy' for the traitor forces.

Except the Night Lords don like chaos, don't worship chaos, and don't even live in the Eye of Terror. Their gene seed is also surprisingly pure.

PS Yes, there were 3.5 era rules for Night Lords, but those rules have contradictions with both previous and later fluff.

So I maintain, fluffwise, there are no solid rules on what Night Lord warbands can look like, the closest we have is generalisations (most look down on the fervent. They live for murder and the accumulation of material wealth. In combat they use shock tactics. Basically they tend to be space pirate mutilators).

PPS It is very rude to state people don't know what they are talking about, purplkrush. On an unrelated note, the first square brackets aren't meant to have the slash, that goes in front of the 'i' in the second set. That will make your italics work properly (if that was what you were hoping to achieve).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 welshhoppo wrote:
Except the Night Lords don like chaos, don't worship chaos, and don't even live in the Eye of Terror. Their gene seed is also surprisingly pure.

You are turning generalisations into a rule.

Some Night Lords embrace chaos, it is a common theme of conflict between themselves in any story they feature in (some think chaos should be viewed with suspicion, others embrace it fully).

Plus plenty of Night Lords do hide out in the Eye of Terror.

I'm not sure why so many people try to put across the idea that Night Lords aren't chaos space marines, when they were murderous, evil butchers that fed chaos (even if they did not worship) before the HH even started.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Except the Night Lords don like chaos, don't worship chaos, and don't even live in the Eye of Terror. Their gene seed is also surprisingly pure.

They do mutate however (the exalted) or ascend to daemonhood (Acerbus) or even if they don't worship them they do get consumed by the dark gods (Uzas being blessed by khorne)

nareik wrote:
I don't think we can use 3rd edition list composition rules to dictate what is a fluffy force. For starters there would be no such thing as knights nor allies and many unbound lists would be considered unfluffy by that metric.

Second to that, I don't think it is necessary for every person's list to represent a prototypical force... If for no other reason that the only armies people would be able to play are imperial guard / orks as any other army (like space marines, let alone night lords, or even, Emperor forbid, nurgle night lords) is too rare.

I also feel it is rather arbitrary to say 3rd ed is fair game for defining what is possible in Chaos (of which all things are possible ), whereas 2nd ed is defunct and doesn't count.

Chaos players only use the 3.5 edition reference, simply because that was the one and only time GW actually gave us a measure of really characterful rules to help define the Legions and allow for much more customisation. It wasn't perfect by any means, as a number of the choices made no real sense. (ie: why couldn't World Eaters for example have Havocs limited to say special weapons only?)

But in essence, Chaos Marines were the real pioneers of Legion/Chapter Tactics/Doctrines/etc... Unfortunately, we're the only army alongside Guard now that have had all their flavour ripped away from them.

 Arkaine wrote:

 purplkrush wrote:
Khorne works just fine but fluff generally prefers larger units which is not the current meta. They also get hurt by ranged armies which generally have more bodies to throw more dakka. This doesn't even touch on the ridiculously small quantity of "terrain" that most 40k throws down.

Khorne has been nerfed since 3rd because it used to be a strong close combat army. Chaos isn't allowed to be strong. Heldrake neck breaks and all. What Khorne used to be is +1 attack regardless, +1 Strength and +1 Initiative on the charge, the ability to have Feel No Pain on all your guys, and insane charge distances. That's no longer Khorne. They split Khorne into himself and Slaanesh.

He had a blood thirster with a D Weapons, a Castigator, Khorne dogs, a Juggy Lord and a Heldrake. So basically the best units they have. Couple cultist units because he had to. A soulgrinder for Anti-air and because: Soul Grinders. Pretty good. Strange combination but the Castigator is so ridiculously good that I'd certainly take it if i could stomach forge world.

I agree 3.5 wasn't perfect. There were lots of arbitrary limits that pushed legions to be caricatures of themselves.

It was a great codex for generic chaos armies though. The legion stuff felt like a bolted on afterthought to me.

What were the 3.5 rules for Night Lords? I can't remember them so well, were they a chapter approved thing, not 3.5 proper?

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

Sure. If you ignroe the way they fight and want to ignore that the Chaos Undivided thing isnt an option, sure. But I don't care what you CALL it. It's a Night Lords list in every important functional way. If you want to call it the "Nurgly Nurgles of Nurgoliciousness" Im cool with that too. Whatevs. The thread is about CSM. So now that I have done it and it has done well, some of you can try it

Some people want their army more representative than this. Most longterm CSM players lament the loss of rules that represented the legions because they aren't a fan of the sort of jumbled together army that performs well enough. They want form and function and they don't want to have to assert models that aren't modeled with nurgly marks have nurgle marks.

I get it. I dont think it speaks to the actual codex strength. that just speaks to more fluffy players playing Chaos and i'm all for it.

nareik wrote:
I agree 3.5 wasn't perfect. There were lots of arbitrary limits that pushed legions to be caricatures of themselves.

It was a great codex for generic chaos armies though. The legion stuff felt like a bolted on afterthought to me.

What were the 3.5 rules for Night Lords? I can't remember them so well, were they a chapter approved thing, not 3.5 proper?

They traded 2 heavy slots for 1 extra fast and they all had night vision. And removed the 0-1 on raptors iirc.

 Jancoran wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

Sure. If you ignroe the way they fight and want to ignore that the Chaos Undivided thing isnt an option, sure. But I don't care what you CALL it. It's a Night Lords list in every important functional way. If you want to call it the "Nurgly Nurgles of Nurgoliciousness" Im cool with that too. Whatevs. The thread is about CSM. So now that I have done it and it has done well, some of you can try it

Some people want their army more representative than this. Most longterm CSM players lament the loss of rules that represented the legions because they aren't a fan of the sort of jumbled together army that performs well enough. They want form and function and they don't want to have to assert models that aren't modeled with nurgly marks have nurgle marks.

I get it. I dont think it speaks to the actual codex strength. that just speaks to more fluffy players playing Chaos and i'm all for it.

The people who want something fluffy and representative they want a codex that allow these pre-established sub-factions to shine, even if its in a niche sort of way. Personally I think it'll be moot as GW will inevitably say "feel free to use 30k legions in games of 40k"... and when someone says they want to play Night Lords, GW will simply point to those 30k rules.

GW has been trying to move away from Chaos Marines as Legionaries and thats fine IF they give us a more cohesive version of what Chaos Marines should be. Crimson Slaughter is the perfect example of GW's failure; their fiction makes them out as pirates that are boarding action and drop pod specialists... There is nothing in their rules that represents that. No drop pods, no boarding shields... nothing that suggests they do anything differently to actually make them specialists at those things. The same is true of the main Codex too. GW doesn't seem to want us to think of CSM as legionaries but that means they are still using legionary weapons and seem to have forgotten all the different loyalist toys. They want it both ways and give us neither. So we're left in the weird ambiguous place where we should be able to do things with the Codex but can't.

 Lord Yayula wrote:

nareik wrote:
I agree 3.5 wasn't perfect. There were lots of arbitrary limits that pushed legions to be caricatures of themselves.

It was a great codex for generic chaos armies though. The legion stuff felt like a bolted on afterthought to me.

What were the 3.5 rules for Night Lords? I can't remember them so well, were they a chapter approved thing, not 3.5 proper?

They traded 2 heavy slots for 1 extra fast and they all had night vision. And removed the 0-1 on raptors iirc.

Their rules were:
- Only 'Daemonic' units allowed were Chaos Furies, Possessed and Daemon Prince(s)

- Only allowed was Chaos Undivided. Vehicles likewise could not be dedicated to any Chaos God.

- All Night Lords had Night Vision vet skill, plus access to their own unique Stealth Adept skill. (which also didn't 'use up' a vet skill slot)

- Could trade 2 Heavy Support for +1 Fast Attack choice.

- 0-1 limit on Raptors removed.

Stealth Adept skill was simply +1 to their cover save *if* the unit was in cover already. Bike, Steed, Daemonic Stature or Termie armoured models couldn't make use of the skill however.

You are turning generalisations into a rule.

Some Night Lords embrace chaos, it is a common theme of conflict between themselves in any story they feature in (some think chaos should be viewed with suspicion, others embrace it fully).

Plus plenty of Night Lords do hide out in the Eye of Terror.

I'm not sure why so many people try to put across the idea that Night Lords aren't chaos space marines, when they were murderous, evil butchers that fed chaos (even if they did not worship) before the HH even started.

Because you don't have to worship someone to supply it. The Night Lords hate chaos as much as they hate themselves.

And we can only go on what we have to go on. The most recent piece of crunch we have on the night lords is the 3.5. And no, whilst generalisations do not count for everyone. You look at the space marine book to get ideas on ultramarines, so you look at the most recent one to get ideas on the night lords.

 Jancoran wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

Sure. If you ignroe the way they fight and want to ignore that the Chaos Undivided thing isnt an option, sure. But I don't care what you CALL it. It's a Night Lords list in every important functional way. If you want to call it the "Nurgly Nurgles of Nurgoliciousness" Im cool with that too. Whatevs. The thread is about CSM. So now that I have done it and it has done well, some of you can try it

Some people want their army more representative than this. Most longterm CSM players lament the loss of rules that represented the legions because they aren't a fan of the sort of jumbled together army that performs well enough. They want form and function and they don't want to have to assert models that aren't modeled with nurgly marks have nurgle marks.

I get it. I dont think it speaks to the actual codex strength. that just speaks to more fluffy players playing Chaos and i'm all for it.

I don't know about that. I think it speaks to chaos players realizing that their builds are ultimately limited against the meta right now and so look for silver linings. Some go to Forgeworld. Some play fluff, not looking for competition. Some resort to non fluff justification for their armies. Some quit playing and instead just model. That's where I'm at at the moment. Chaos is the best army in terms of a modelers dream. We can do somewhat straight up loyalists with few modifications, we can do the spikes and nurgle stuff straight out of the box, we can do most of the cool stuff of daemons if we want, or we can do whatever the hell we want and call it a result of a he warp. What is chaos good at? Modeling opportunity. We have the ability to create the most glorious looking armies or the most decrepit. We can use most of the fantasy line and it works just fine. We can paint them pink or paint it black. We are artists. We do what we want.

So to sum up, chaos is where you want to be if playing a game of dice and winning is not your end all and be all. It's the hobbyists darkest dreams come true.

 Lord Yayula wrote:

nareik wrote:
I agree 3.5 wasn't perfect. There were lots of arbitrary limits that pushed legions to be caricatures of themselves.

It was a great codex for generic chaos armies though. The legion stuff felt like a bolted on afterthought to me.

What were the 3.5 rules for Night Lords? I can't remember them so well, were they a chapter approved thing, not 3.5 proper?

They traded 2 heavy slots for 1 extra fast and they all had night vision. And removed the 0-1 on raptors iirc.

Not quite. The Night Lords were allowed 4 Fast Attack but only 2 Heavy Support.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Lord Yayula wrote:

nareik wrote:
I agree 3.5 wasn't perfect. There were lots of arbitrary limits that pushed legions to be caricatures of themselves.

It was a great codex for generic chaos armies though. The legion stuff felt like a bolted on afterthought to me.

What were the 3.5 rules for Night Lords? I can't remember them so well, were they a chapter approved thing, not 3.5 proper?

They traded 2 heavy slots for 1 extra fast and they all had night vision. And removed the 0-1 on raptors iirc.

Not quite. The Night Lords were allowed 4 Fast Attack but only 2 Heavy Support.

Experiment626 already posted the complete rules, you were allowed only 1 Heavy, which was ok since Oblies were pretty tough back then and you were restricted to 0-1 so, no need for more slots. Also they had the special stealth but it came with a cost, can't remember if it was 2 pts/model or something like that. The night vision was free thou