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.

Still needs a way to deal with all those force weapons the GK bring.

Definitely. In my opinion EW and force weapons should both be very rare, we shouldn't be handing out EW to patch handing out too many force weapons.

I hear you all! Cheers for the responses.

So my thoughts would be to buff The Warrior profile and have the Neurothrope as a support piece that can just buff MC, like grant EW against Force Weapons and maybe FnP to other non-MC units.

I wouldn't do "grant EW against force weapons". If you roll back Warddex force weapons then force weapons are a thing you get on one, maybe two models an army that a lot of Codexes don't even have. A whole "bubble of shut down SM Librarians" special ability seems unnecessarily granular to me.

If you're that worried about the potential effects of force weapons on Tyranid MCs why not make Catalyst grant Eternal Warrior as well as FNP? It gives a counter that isn't just a blanket "this ability no longer does anything to my army ahahahaha!".

I do believe that at the very least the Swarmlord should have inbuilt EW, like all the Marines characters.

Swarmlord sure. Almost nobody had EW in 5th, even among Space Marines (Grimnar, Calgar, the Sanguinor, Draigo, and Lysander, which is under 1/book considering that the DA and BT didn't have any), but giving the biggest named character in the book EW seems fine to me.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I wouldn't do "grant EW against force weapons". If you roll back Warddex force weapons then force weapons are a thing you get on one, maybe two models an army that a lot of Codexes don't even have.

The swarmlord itself was one of the most powerful instant-death inflicting units in the game. Any hit in close combat was instant death regardless of toughness, regardless of psychic protection, no armour saves, no FnP, and re-rolling all invulnerable saves. All this while usually hitting first and wounding on 2+.

Regular models with force weapons were hitting on 5s (or worse), fishing for 6s to wound it, 4++ save and and then had to take an LD test on 3d6.

It was an insane close combat monster. At the same time though it suffered from the dreaded T6 3+ profile that so many nid creatures had - missile launcher bait.

I wouldn't say it was an insane CC monster.

Sure it hit hard, but characters like Abaddon, Calgar, Draigo, etc. hit harder.

Of the examples given Draigo will wipe the floor with the Stormlord (on average rolls the Swarmlord's down to ID in the second round, Draigo's up with 2 wounds remaining), Abbadon's a pretty even fight (ID doesn't come into it either way, he doesn't have Draigo's 3++ so he goes down in 3 turns rather than 4, but the +d6A means he'll take the Swarmlord down in 3 turns as well, so it comes down to the dice), and the Swarmlord eats Calgar easily (he doesn't have the T5 of the other two or the 3++ of Draigo to keep him alive, he doesn't have the volume of attacks or the force weapon to kill the Swarmlord quickly, so he just gets chewed up and spat out).

The only matchup where giving the Stormlord EW makes a difference is vs. Draigo since the other two can't ID him anyway, and that just turns the fight between the 280pt giant beatstick and the 275pts giant beatstick from a stomp into a close fight.

 Tyran wrote:
Sure it hit hard, but characters like Abaddon, Calgar, Draigo, etc. hit harder.

Swarmlord - Four attacks, WS 9, Init 6, Strength 6, Instant Death, Reroll Invulnerables, Reroll to hit
Abaddon - Four attacks, WS 7, Init 6, Strength 8, Reroll Wounds, Daemon weapon (d6 extra attacks, punching self in the face on a 1)
Calgar - Four attacks, WS 6, Init 1, Strength 8, Reroll Wounds
Draigo - Four attacks, WS 6, Init 5, Strength 5, One reroll to hit per turn, Force Weapon, Immense Shenanigans.

Against the Swarmlord both Draigo and Abaddon would give and take wounds fairly evenly - but Draigo wins out on shenanigans while Abaddon does not. Calgar is outmatched.
Of course all three characters have eternal warrior otherwise the swarmlord would have killed them several times over, and against alternate targets - for instance a pack of thunderwolves - you'd want your money on the swarmlord.

Edit - ninjaed...

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Of the examples given Draigo will wipe the floor with the Stormlord (on average rolls the Swarmlord's down to ID in the second round, Draigo's up with 2 wounds remaining)

Not being able to use its psychic powers in close combat really limits the Swarmlords options here, along with Draigos strength boost apply to psykers and well as daemons. His odds at his usual strength 5 don't look so great, and at WS1 he'd be hit on 2s and hitting on 5s which is rough (and even worse for the other two).

Against the Thunderwolves giving the Swarmlord EW again wouldn't make any difference given their lack of any weapons that'll ID it.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Against the Thunderwolves giving the Swarmlord EW again wouldn't make any difference given their lack of any weapons that'll ID it.

True, but the swarmlords own instant death means he instantly doubles his damage output when not faced with one of the few models in the game (outside of the entire 4e daemon codex) that has eternal warrior - in a question of who hits hardest the swarmlords problem was never a lack of punch, at least by 5e standards.

S6/ID does the same thing to multi-wound T4/T5 things as having S10 (like, say, a Dreadnaught) would, but makes it better against T6+ multi-wound models and worse against vehicles. I don't think it's that disruptive.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
S6/ID does the same thing to multi-wound T4/T5 things as having S10 (like, say, a Dreadnaught) would, but makes it better against T6+ multi-wound models and worse against vehicles. I don't think it's that disruptive.

I wasn't suggesting it was - just replying to an earlier post.

While the swarmlord one-ups Calgar, Abaddon, and other big names you were always dragging him up the board behind his tyrant guard trying to avoid getting your 500pt unit stuck behind a 35pt rhino.

i think we are missing a few points here
Warriors were a glaring example of why EW was important but it also was important for all other synapse creatures like zoanthropes and hive tyrants.

aside from force weapons there are a number of unique wargear options in 5th across multiple factions that cause instant death especially on popular characters that were a threat to even the big bugs.


As for the compatible 6th and 7th ed editions to the nid line we treat them the same way for import into the 4th ed codex. one of our current nid players noted how trash the haruspex is but if he were using the upgrades from the 4th ed codex it actually makes it worth playing, even if it is quite a bit more expensive.


Similarly the chaos player wanted to use a helldrake from 7th in his 3.5 chaos book. he paid the 7th ed codex points for it and bought parasitic possession out of the 4th ed codex so it could regrow damage and the FW chaff/flare upgrade for all vehicle flyers available previously.

I think a fair few 4th ed biomorphs fall into a similar category of being an obvious enough choice that it would have made more sense to pre-fit and cost the units with some of them, reducing the size of the upgrade and making units more recognizable on the table.

That's not entirely accurate. that may be true in a way as an example if you say option set A is a no-brainer for a CC themed warrior (that can be broken down further into anti-tank and anti-infantry roles)however option set B is better for a fire support warrior. the joy of the 4th ed codex biomorphs is that you had so many options to build is vary different directions depending on what kind of force you wanted to play. you also could mix and match individual models in broods as well. in the battle i posted about i had rending warriors (instead of lash/sword) because i knew i would be facing vehicles. along with a single shooting warrior to provide some ranged fire when needed.

The big thing is that our group uses hybrid rules in the sense of just importing the rules that were better in various editions into the template of 5th instead of creating our own rules from the ground up. since it is already there in the core rulebook or the chosen codex it is easy enough to just look up in print.

 aphyon wrote:
the joy of the 4th ed codex biomorphs is that you had so many options to build is vary different directions depending on what kind of force you wanted to play. you also could mix and match individual models in broods as well. in the battle i posted about i had rending warriors (instead of lash/sword) because i knew i would be facing vehicles. along with a single shooting warrior to provide some ranged fire when needed

The weapon and wargear options were straightforward enough - no different from any other faction.

Where 4e got messy was that half the statline of any given unit was up for change, and then each model had primary attacks and sometimes secondary attacks which were derived from the model statline as much as the weapon itself.

The attack profile of a single 4e carnifex could look like this (with the model using all indicated attack profiles each phase) :
Close combat:
- X, S?, AP2, Reroll to wound on first turn, two wounds per wound, +2X on charge
- D3, S/2, AP2, I1, Only when engaged by 4+ models
- 1, S?+1 (<=10), AP-, I*2, Always hits on 4+
Ranged:
- 12", S?(<=6), 5, X, Reroll to hit
- 18", S?-1(<=6), -, 2X, Reroll to hit and wound
- 36", S?+2(<=10), 4, X, Glancing only

 aphyon wrote:
aside from force weapons there are a number of unique wargear options in 5th across multiple factions that cause instant death especially on popular characters that were a threat to even the big bugs.

Daemon soul devourer, chaos blissgiver, tyranid bonesabres, DE huskblade. And a few instant death on 6s. By no means a complete list, though no ranged instant death effect springs to mind unless you look at the ET-ignoring jaws of the world wolf and orks curse power.

I think the trouble with giving everything eternal warrior is that you are screwing the players who bought those expensive items out of their use, much in the same way that the Ward-knights blanket force weapon access screwed nids out of their multi-wound models.

The rules for 4th-ed Tyranids were that Synapse prevented Instant Death from double-strength. Not Instant Death period.

I imagine that hybridizing 4th and 5th/7th Nids would be an interesting experiment. There are several decisions to consider in the process. Some of my initial thoughts are:

1) Venom Cannons use 4th-ed/style rules, instead of being small blasts, making them an Autocannon-like support tool, and not turning that into "take Hive Guard, or else."
2) Warriors are Troops unless given wings. Remove Warriors as an HQ, replace with the Tyranid Prime.
3) The Broodlord is his 4th ed profile, but has Fleet so he doesn't slow down his army.
4) Most other guns use 5e-profiles, save Deathspitters being single-shot small-blast, and Brainleech Devourers perhaps firing 4 instead of 6 shots. 2shot "Reroll wound" was...wonky. Bioplasma is a template instead of a small-blast.
5) Units with the ability to create Spore-Mines (e.x. Biovore/Harpy/Sporocyst) can choose the type they lay down for extra utility.
6) "Without Number" units can respawn from Trygon Tunnels; however, Trygon Tunnels are treated as a structure/building that can be attacked to collapse said tunnels.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

1) Venom Cannons use 4th-ed/style rules, instead of being small blasts, making them an Autocannon-like support tool, and not turning that into "take Hive Guard, or else."

Also drop that "can only make glancing hits" or "-1 to vehicle damage table" (depending on edition). For some reason GW was obsessed with making venom cannons specifically bad against vehicles.
There is also the issue with strength depending on if toxin sacs give +1 strength like in 4th or give poison instead like in 5th.

 Tyran wrote:
For some reason GW was obsessed with making venom cannons specifically bad against vehicles

Looks like the rule was introduced in the 3e codex when the cannon went from being a fixed two shots at S8 AP4 to a variable profile, perhaps to discourage railfexes.

Cheers for the responses folks!

Looking at the 4th ed bug book and there seems to be a few things to take away from said book, but I agree with another poster in that it gets very convoluted, very quickly with the customization.

So what I'm seeing for the Tyranid Codex is to bring in the 4th edition buffs that allowed bugs to be synergistic but that also upheld variety while bringing in the conformity and streamlined simplicity that the 5th ed. Codex brought.

MAJAOR UPDATE:

So I'm excited and delighted to announce the first project that is completed:

Chaos Space Marines have now been updated with the current range and new custom units and characters in this supplement!

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sUYjf8QFtdp1wHLy4-9Kyu7AmMedYwne?usp=sharing

Right now it's just a PDF. I will make the attempt to give it the good looking codex PDF treatment once all codex projects are completed. I feel this should be the correct course of action so that folks can play with their toys sooner rather than later.

What I'd like to ask everyone is if they can take a look at the PDF update, see if I'm missing anything (Wargear, units, etc) and I like to know peoples thoughts on what they think of the additions and changes?

If anyone does try out this supplement for a game, please give us a report here (with pics ).

Next project will be the Tyranids!

It's taken a considerable amount of time to get this made so I would appreciate any feedback and constructive criticism.

Cheers to all responses!

Ah the 4e book, it has been a while.
If you are making the rules a supplement to another book you may wish to include the errata in some form?

It's late so just a few initial thoughts:

Venomcrawler - lasher tendrils included in profile?
-stat wise the AP3 blast weapons stand out as they would be an uncommon profile in 5th edition (several armies actually lacked any AP3 weaponry)

Maulerfiend - the assault and heavy types are interchangable for vehicles in 5th. You may want to consider making the magma cutters a single heavy 2 weapon unless the extra durability of having two distinct weapons is intentional.
-the lasher tendril option is unclear on whether you replace one or both

Forgefiend - first impression was the return of the notorious psybolt autocannon dread from the grey knight codex - at about the right price if the GK codex is your balance target.
-upgrade option for third cannon unclear - do you need to take two cannons to get the option for a third
-in practical terms the ectoplasm cannons are plasma cannons with the instant death rule against 95% of the infantry and characters in the game (a lot of T5 stuff is T4(5) in 5th)

Greater possessed - are weaker than the unit they lead? (possessed are strength 5 base)
-no reference to the possessed table (page 29) - rending automatic?
-they don't have the independent character rule, or a comparable rule locking them to a possessed unit
-60 points is what the DE players pay for a T3 archon with a splinter pistol

Master of the daemonforge - seems reasonable, though i'm seeing a bit of a theme on 12" movements and AP3 weapons
-pairs of close combat weapons - on units like the servitors and greater possessed with no wargear options why not make this a single weapon and add +1 to the attack profile?
-self destruct timing unclear (and very important)

Dark Apostle - free flamer?

Dark Disciples - wouldn't you just take the regular cultists?

Master of Executions - ...

Master of Possession - you'd be surprised how dangerous the dangerous terrain in 5th was (it ignored armour, so one in every six models that get anywhere near this model are dead - and area effect psychic powers like this are measured from a vehicles hull for added effect).
-cursed earth doesn't affect the actual daemons in the book

Cultists - oddly high priced flamer

Warpsmith - ...

Mutilators - no attack characteristic

Warp Talons - a 5e vanguard veteran with a jump pack and single lightning claw costs 45 points per model with no invulnerable or access to init 5. A mundane assault marine with a chainsword costs 18 points - these are drastically undercosted by the standards of the edition.
-unit is paying a 25 point unexplained surchange for its starting models
-warpflame strike interaction with attached characters unclear

Heldrake - baleflamer does not specify number of shots

------------

Zao Sahaal - captain shrike that trades in infiltrate for d3 extra attacks, rerolls on everything, and a better than 50% psychic negation. In practice i'd guess he would be put forward early-ish to force a bunch of Ld6 pinning and break tests from small arms on things.
-not clear if the two Ld reducing effects stack

Erebus - seems straightforward enough... hahaha no. Seriously, killing three cultists to boost the strength, toughness, and weaponskill of a unit by 3? Go go squad of possessed wraithlords.

Honsou - no limit given on which friendly units can use his rule - part of his unit, radius, trait, or entire army?

Harrowmaster - a note on army wide infiltrate. In 5th edition this essentially allows you to deploy nothing onto the board, wait for your opponent to set up, and then place everything exactly where you want it within the range limitations. If you rolled to go first you totally screw your opponent over, if you rolled to go second then you essentially deploy within first turn charge range with cover and LoS blocking to everything that matters. Chosen with this rule combination can inflitrate, scout, disembark and walk up to within melta/flamer range before their opponent has moved an inch.
And all this has cost you what? 40 points, give or take on a model that keeps coming back from the dead and grants the entire army re-roll sweeping advances and +1 attacks (because lets face it - you are all but deploying into your opponents deployment zone here).

------------

Veterans of the Long War - just the usual warning of enemy-specific rules. If you make everything better against one set of factions then they are either going to be balanced against them and weak against everyone else, or else balanced against everyone else and unbalanced against their favoured opponents.

Allies - 5e allies didn't include heavy support, but that was a legacy 3e thing that you can ignore
-the original allies were also limits, not extra slots. If you took an allied HQ that left you with only one HQ slot for your own faction (and all compulsory slots had to be filled from the main dex)

Legion traits - general - have no mark of chaos restrictions. Lucius can bestow the blessings of slaanesh upon berzerkers and plague marines alike (for instance)
Legion trait - Abaddon - preferred enemy already rerolls all misses in combat
Lucius - a +1 initiative boost is significant in 5th edition, but applies to almost nothing in this instance (off the top of my head)
Kharn/Fabius bile - it is hard to understate how powerful rending is in this context, even the weaker rending of 5th edition compared to previous editions. Similarly furious charge - these kinds of abilities are far and away more powerful than the few comparable abilities that exist elsewhere in the edition and in larger games outweigh the value of the character itself.
Huron - relentless is similarly a high impact rule, albeit more specific in its use. Infantry heavy weapons in 5e were particularly immobile for the most part but once you get relentless you'll see a lot of change to first turn deploments and perhaps more significantly 'gun trucks' - squads shooting heavy weapons out of speeding rhinos, leaping out with multimeltas, etc.

----------

Thunder hammer - sorcerers do not have a power weapon or close combat weapon to replace

the dark apostle is a fallen chaplain. they existed in the 3.5 chaos codex as a special word bearers only HQ choice.

It was also the way to build an all demon army without the need for a separate demon codex as word bearers special thing was the ability to replace every singe unit selection in the FOC with the demonic counterpart.

 aphyon wrote:
It was also the way to build an all demon army without the need for a separate demon codex as word bearers special thing was the ability to replace every singe unit selection in the FOC with the demonic counterpart.

The rule was that World Bearers could trade up an elite, fast attack, and heavy support slot for three extra troop slots but they didn't need to fill them with daemons (or in fact take any daemons at all).
The 4e daemons are already slotless troops so the rule doesn't help them.

Looking at the CSM now, but I can't find the main rulebook. I checked in the Core and FAQ, but nothing.

Why would a Helstalker be only T4? Seems odd to me.

Ok, cheers to all responses folks! I have made a few amendments, the new file is in the folder.

A.T. wrote:
Ah the 4e book, it has been a while.
If you are making the rules a supplement to another book you may wish to include the errata in some form?

It's late so just a few initial thoughts:

Venomcrawler - lasher tendrils included in profile?
-stat wise the AP3 blast weapons stand out as they would be an uncommon profile in 5th edition (several armies actually lacked any AP3 weaponry)

They may stand out but I don't see the issue here. As far as I'm aware there's no downside, nor anything to frown upon by making them AP: 3.

Maulerfiend - the assault and heavy types are interchangable for vehicles in 5th. You may want to consider making the magma cutters a single heavy 2 weapon unless the extra durability of having two distinct weapons is intentional.
-the lasher tendril option is unclear on whether you replace one or both

The two distinct weapons were intentional for the use of durability. I've swapped Assault to Heavy type for this weapon.

Forgefiend - first impression was the return of the notorious psybolt autocannon dread from the grey knight codex - at about the right price if the GK codex is your balance target.
-upgrade option for third cannon unclear - do you need to take two cannons to get the option for a third
-in practical terms the ectoplasm cannons are plasma cannons with the instant death rule against 95% of the infantry and characters in the game (a lot of T5 stuff is T4(5) in 5th)

Yeah I get you, I've given the Cannon gets hot! so it has the chance to not fire at all being its drawback.

Greater possessed - are weaker than the unit they lead? (possessed are strength 5 base)
-no reference to the possessed table (page 29) - rending automatic?
-they don't have the independent character rule, or a comparable rule locking them to a possessed unit
-60 points is what the DE players pay for a T3 archon with a splinter pistol

Ammended. Took away rending from them, made them Strength 6 and gave them the Daemonkin rule. Bumped points to 95pts. My only concern is accidently making them just as powerful, or more, than a DP.

Master of the daemonforge - seems reasonable, though i'm seeing a bit of a theme on 12" movements and AP3 weapons
-pairs of close combat weapons - on units like the servitors and greater possessed with no wargear options why not make this a single weapon and add +1 to the attack profile?
-self destruct timing unclear (and very important)

Amended the Maulerfiend to auto-passing dangerous terrain tests and not to be slowed by difficult terrain. It no longer moves 12".

Amended the Servitors by granting an extra attack by the pairs of CCW (included in profile)

Dark Apostle - free flamer?

Dark Disciples - wouldn't you just take the regular cultists?

Ammended. Apostle is now 5pt flamer and Dark Discpiles now have a rule called Dark Ritual.

Master of Executions - ...

Master of Possession - you'd be surprised how dangerous the dangerous terrain in 5th was (it ignored armour, so one in every six models that get anywhere near this model are dead - and area effect psychic powers like this are measured from a vehicles hull for added effect).
-cursed earth doesn't affect the actual daemons in the book

I'd like to see this play tested. see what happens. DT is quite powerful but it's only a 6" bubble.

Cultists - oddly high priced flamer

Warpsmith - ...

Mutilators - no attack characteristic

Amended. Cultist flamers are 5pts and Mutilators have A: 3

Warp Talons - a 5e vanguard veteran with a jump pack and single lightning claw costs 45 points per model with no invulnerable or access to init 5. A mundane assault marine with a chainsword costs 18 points - these are drastically undercosted by the standards of the edition.
-unit is paying a 25 point unexplained surchange for its starting models
-warpflame strike interaction with attached characters unclear

Ammended. WT are now 50pts a piece and the Warpflame Strike rule has no effect if an Independent character has joined them in reserve.

Heldrake - baleflamer does not specify number of shots

Amended to Assault 1

------------

Zao Sahaal - captain shrike that trades in infiltrate for d3 extra attacks, rerolls on everything, and a better than 50% psychic negation. In practice i'd guess he would be put forward early-ish to force a bunch of Ld6 pinning and break tests from small arms on things.
-not clear if the two Ld reducing effects stack

Ammended. The results are not cumulative.

Erebus - seems straightforward enough... hahaha no. Seriously, killing three cultists to boost the strength, toughness, and weaponskill of a unit by 3? Go go squad of possessed wraithlords.

Amended. Now the 'chosen' unit must choose the characteristic rather than having all the characteristic buffs.

Honsou - no limit given on which friendly units can use his rule - part of his unit, radius, trait, or entire army?

Amended for clarification. If his Legion trait is chosen then it's his whole army.

Harrowmaster - a note on army wide infiltrate. In 5th edition this essentially allows you to deploy nothing onto the board, wait for your opponent to set up, and then place everything exactly where you want it within the range limitations. If you rolled to go first you totally screw your opponent over, if you rolled to go second then you essentially deploy within first turn charge range with cover and LoS blocking to everything that matters. Chosen with this rule combination can inflitrate, scout, disembark and walk up to within melta/flamer range before their opponent has moved an inch.
And all this has cost you what? 40 points, give or take on a model that keeps coming back from the dead and grants the entire army re-roll sweeping advances and +1 attacks (because lets face it - you are all but deploying into your opponents deployment zone here).

Amended. Units just gain Scout with the exception of Chosen. Chosen may increase or decrease the value by 1 when choosing deployment/outflanking sides. Harrowmaster also just regains 1 wound rather than D3.

------------

Veterans of the Long War - just the usual warning of enemy-specific rules. If you make everything better against one set of factions then they are either going to be balanced against them and weak against everyone else, or else balanced against everyone else and unbalanced against their favoured opponents.

Yes, but also to note that most of these existing codex's can hold up their own in their own regard and the ones that can't will be getting the retool/overhaul

Allies - 5e allies didn't include heavy support, but that was a legacy 3e thing that you can ignore
-the original allies were also limits, not extra slots. If you took an allied HQ that left you with only one HQ slot for your own faction (and all compulsory slots had to be filled from the main dex)

Now this is interesting as I've never known allies in 5th ed. 40k.Might have happened in 4th ed, but never known it in 5th ed. I chose to make this a separate force org. chart so it clarifies any convulsion about 'sharing' or overlapping rules for unseen combos and I've further clarified this in the allies entry. I find this ok as your still paying points for this and it's still a heavily restricted chart to minimise exploits.

Legion traits - general - have no mark of chaos restrictions. Lucius can bestow the blessings of slaanesh upon berzerkers and plague marines alike (for instance)
Legion trait - Abaddon - preferred enemy already rerolls all misses in combat
Lucius - a +1 initiative boost is significant in 5th edition, but applies to almost nothing in this instance (off the top of my head)
Kharn/Fabius bile - it is hard to understate how powerful rending is in this context, even the weaker rending of 5th edition compared to previous editions. Similarly furious charge - these kinds of abilities are far and away more powerful than the few comparable abilities that exist elsewhere in the edition and in larger games outweigh the value of the character itself.
Huron - relentless is similarly a high impact rule, albeit more specific in its use. Infantry heavy weapons in 5e were particularly immobile for the most part but once you get relentless you'll see a lot of change to first turn deploments and perhaps more significantly 'gun trucks' - squads shooting heavy weapons out of speeding rhinos, leaping out with multimeltas, etc.

Amended Lucius and Kharn to be only Icons and Marks of Khorne/Slannesh. Amended Khorne to be just +1 Strength.
Hurons trait has been amended so that the Relentless rule has no effect when a unit is embarked in a transport.
Bile has been amended as all non-vehicle units may roll on his enhanced warriors chart.

----------

Thunder hammer - sorcerers do not have a power weapon or close combat weapon to replace

Amended. Took away the option for Sorcerers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Looking at the CSM now, but I can't find the main rulebook. I checked in the Core and FAQ, but nothing.

Why would a Helstalker be only T4? Seems odd to me.

Amended. Granted the Hellstalker +1 Toughness.

The 4th ed. CSM Codex is in the folder as shown here.

I meant the MAIN main rulebook. Like, your version of the 5th Edition rules. I can see the CSM dex.

Ah, yeah, I haven't uploaded them yet, gimmie a few hours. That's a huge file to fit there.

 The Warp Forge wrote:
Ah, yeah, I haven't uploaded them yet, gimmie a few hours. That's a huge file to fit there.

Garch.

Also, T5 Helstalker? Really? That thing is bigger than a Daemon Prince-it's more on par with a Maulerfiend or Forgefiend. A little spindlier, but not that much.

I'd make it T6, and just charge an appropriate price for that durability.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 The Warp Forge wrote:
Ah, yeah, I haven't uploaded them yet, gimmie a few hours. That's a huge file to fit there.

Garch.

Also, T5 Helstalker? Really? That thing is bigger than a Daemon Prince-it's more on par with a Maulerfiend or Forgefiend. A little spindlier, but not that much.

I'd make it T6, and just charge an appropriate price for that durability.

I made it T:5 because it can be upgraded to T:6 with the Mark of Nurgle. With that in mind having a T:7 unit was incredibly uncommon and T: 8 were only seen very occasionally.

Also core book is now uploaded.