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.

mostly just bored of this now.

Just likely to be a huge disappointment. The CSM datasheet isn't going to let you build 10 with bolters and 10 with CCW weapon because you cant build that out of a box of CSM. the tease has gone on for too long that unless this book is amazing (and I dont expect it will be) its going to be a dissapointment.

BRING ON THE GLORIOUS 10ed CHAOS CODEX

Aesyn wrote:
Turning Hydra's wail into a 1CP cost relic version of a 0 CP Stratagem for other factions... Woof.

If you play using the new tournament pack.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

So it doesn't. Fair enough then.

Even without the tourney pack your first pick relic probably won't be hydra's wail, it could even be a special free extra relic and by just being a relic instead of a strat in your back pocket it'd be slightly worse and vulnerable to being taken out before use. Also raises the question if the relics effect still functions after the user is killed.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

So it doesn't. Fair enough then.

It's literally one of the current EC Warlord Traits.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So...a word bearers warlord gets a 4+ invul and more strength, movement, wounds and attacks.
For free. With no downsides.

The only way that could make sense balance wise is if the Word Bearer's trait is absolute gak and the only strong point they have is the warlord, or if the daemon trait has a huge weakness.
Or maybe both.

Starting next week it'll cost them 1CP.

The Iron warriors secondary objective sounds interesting though

Im curious if the secondaries in the book will even be legal for use, considering that (again, starting next week) the new Chapter Approved is overwriting all the codex secondaries with new chapter approved ones.

Dudeface wrote:

Aesyn wrote:
Turning Hydra's wail into a 1CP cost relic version of a 0 CP Stratagem for other factions... Woof.

If you play using the new tournament pack.

The vast majority of us will, even if we don't really want to, because playing with the latest tournament pack is the default behavior of the dominant player group within the community from which all gameplay related social norms follow.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Im curious if the secondaries in the book will even be legal for use, considering that (again, starting next week) the new Chapter Approved is overwriting all the codex secondaries with new chapter approved ones.

Given that the CA leak shows secondaries for each legion I would bet they will have simply been reprinted there.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

So it doesn't. Fair enough then.

Those aren't "Pink Marines" but Noise Marines. The poster boys of EC and the cult units of Slanesh.

I can't help but think I already saw this WLT somewhere though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

So it doesn't. Fair enough then.

It's literally one of the current EC Warlord Traits.

That was it ! Shows how much it was used !

In regards to the pick-a-number trait, IMO the biggest problem is simply that a flat +d3 attacks wouldn't even be that good as a trait, let alone one with the additional chance of failure. Close second is slowing the game down without a good reason.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

The Black Legion Legion Trait differs from the one in the rumors.

The one in the rumors was exploding 5s for rapid fire and assault.

The one on Warcom are +1 to hit the closest unit and +1 to hit on the charge.

This may mean other rules are different from the ones circulated in the rumors.

 techsoldaten wrote:
The Black Legion Legion Trait differs from the one in the rumors.

The one in the rumors was exploding 5s for rapid fire and assault.

The one on Warcom are +1 to hit the closest unit and +1 to hit on the charge.

This may mean other rules are different from the ones circulated in the rumors.

That was for their Doctrine equivalent, not the Legion rules.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
The Black Legion Legion Trait differs from the one in the rumors.

The one in the rumors was exploding 5s for rapid fire and assault.

The one on Warcom are +1 to hit the closest unit and +1 to hit on the charge.

This may mean other rules are different from the ones circulated in the rumors.

That was for their Doctrine equivalent, not the Legion rules.

+1 Also means they are keeping the "spiky doctrine" under cape for now.

 techsoldaten wrote:
The Black Legion Legion Trait differs from the one in the rumors.

The one in the rumors was exploding 5s for rapid fire and assault.

The one on Warcom are +1 to hit the closest unit and +1 to hit on the charge.

This may mean other rules are different from the ones circulated in the rumors.

You're confusing the leaked Legion trait with the leaked "super doctrine". The trait in the article is almost exactly the same as the leaked one (the only difference that I can see is that you no longer need to charge the closest unit to get the bonus). The exploding 5s was the leaked super doctrine. It's beginning to look like the playtesting changed very little.

@Dreadfully-Hopeful- I knew who they were but I like the EC purple pattern better than that fucia. I've been playing EC since 3rd ed.

I also forgot that that WLT already existed. I just never even considered it so I forgot all about it.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
The last thing is both really bloody weird and not particularly flavourful

How do you figure? He's basically Possessed: The HQ.

I meant the Warlord Trait. I don't see how a game of picking a number plays into Emperor's Children or Arrogance.

Oh, good they confirmed that they kept in the trash WL trait no one ever takes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Maybe if the trait was doing D6 instead of D3 for attacks, it'd be a lot better. For THAT small a benefit though? Pass.

Eh, it's probably a balance thing. 1/3 chance of it not working feels a lot fairer than 1/6 chance. Especially when in the case of the D6 you can get 6 attacks. Then again, your opponent is probably always going to for 6 anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter.

Come to think of it, why is it a Slaanesh trait? With the amount of mind games at play here it should really be a Tzeentch thing.

It doesn't say it's an EC warlord trait. It just has a picture over it of some pink marines so people are assuming that the rule is related to the picture. People should know by now that GW doesn't always match pictures to text.

It definitely is an EC WL trait; it one of the ones from Faith & Fury. It wasn't taken before and no one will pay to take now either.

There has never been a better example of "GW has no idea what the feth it is doing" than "The Word Bearer becomes a mini-Daemon Prince for free, the Emperor's Children lord *maybe* gets 3 additional attacks."

 blood reaper wrote:
There has never been a better example of "GW has no idea what the feth it is doing" than "The Word Bearer becomes a mini-Daemon Prince for free, the Emperor's Children lord *maybe* gets 3 additional attacks."

I don't mind the Word Bearers trait, especially if the 'first warlord/relic costs a CP and you only start with 6' becomes the norm.

The EC one is lame, underpowered, and slows the game down dramatically. Just take the slaanesh daemon weapon and you get +2d3 without a stupid mini-game in the middle of the game.

We just need this book to come out already so we can get over it, get the rest of the 9th ed codexes, and then have it all squatted back into indexes in 10th and THEN maybe we'll be able to enjoy a game of 40k again.

The WB warlord trait.

It gives a 4++ vs shooting, but you would hope that you are giving it to something with a 4++ already. Like most half decent HQs get in most decent codexes. E.g. I hope DPs/Disco Lords have a 4++ already.

The best characters are likely to be DPs and Disco Lords, so they get DAEMONKIN from the sounds of it, but may not be able to pick up too many of the buffs related to DAEMONKIN as they are a MONSTER/VEHICLE. If you put it on a lesser character, then you get less out of the rest of the trait.

That being +1S/+1A/+1W/+2Mv. Which isn't bad.

It is no PRECISION OF THE HUNTER, BRUTAL BUT KUNNIN’, COMPETITIVE EDGE, HEIGHTENED SENSES or CHAMPION OF THE IMPERIUM but it maybe gets in the same conversation as those (which seems good and fair for the personal power is key faction).

If there is some significant keyword synergy to be found it can maybe compete with those warlord traits mentioned above.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Now that's salesmanship! "Hey, look Night Lords players! It's the same thing you've had for the past 5 years! See how hard we've been working on the new codex?".

3 hour lunch ain't gonna take itself!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Starting next week it'll cost them 1CP.

If you're using that tournament pack. And I, for one, am getting sick of this "Tournament Edition 40k" bull gak. I'm tired of a few people in the US tournament circuit causing changes for everyone else.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Now that's salesmanship! "Hey, look Night Lords players! It's the same thing you've had for the past 5 years! See how hard we've been working on the new codex?".

3 hour lunch ain't gonna take itself!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Starting next week it'll cost them 1CP.

If you're using that tournament pack. And I, for one, am getting sick of this "Tournament Edition 40k" bull gak. I'm tired of a few people in the US tournament circuit causing changes for everyone else.

So just use the Crusade rules or Tempest of War?

We are. Last weekend I had three tables set up. Two were Open War, and one was Tempest of War.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
In regards to the pick-a-number trait, IMO the biggest problem is simply that a flat +d3 attacks wouldn't even be that good as a trait, let alone one with the additional chance of failure. Close second is slowing the game down without a good reason.

I do wish it was something like numbers different = effect A, numbers the same = effect B. Though that might change the game theory a bit.

It says a lot about just how much Unbridled Arrogance sucked, given most of the people in this thread aren't even aware it existed

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
In regards to the pick-a-number trait, IMO the biggest problem is simply that a flat +d3 attacks wouldn't even be that good as a trait, let alone one with the additional chance of failure. Close second is slowing the game down without a good reason.

I do wish it was something like numbers different = effect A, numbers the same = effect B. Though that might change the game theory a bit.

While not the best rule I've ever seen, it definitely has the read of Unbound Arrogance. You know you want 3 additional attacks. Your opponent knows you want 3 additional attacks. Are you arrogant enough to pick 3 when all they have to do is pick 3 to deny you 3? Or will you pick 2, hoping they haven't decided you aren't arrogant enough to pick 3 and picked 2 themself? Buy why would you pick 2 when you can pick 3? Are you one of the most perfect astartes to live or not?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
We are. Last weekend I had three tables set up. Two were Open War, and one was Tempest of War.

Cool. So why does it matter that other people are playing the format they like?

 Laughing Man wrote:
Cool. So why does it matter that other people are playing the format they like?

That wasn't what I was getting at at all.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
The Black Legion Legion Trait differs from the one in the rumors.

The one in the rumors was exploding 5s for rapid fire and assault.

The one on Warcom are +1 to hit the closest unit and +1 to hit on the charge.

This may mean other rules are different from the ones circulated in the rumors.

You're confusing the leaked Legion trait with the leaked "super doctrine". The trait in the article is almost exactly the same as the leaked one (the only difference that I can see is that you no longer need to charge the closest unit to get the bonus). The exploding 5s was the leaked super doctrine. It's beginning to look like the playtesting changed very little.

I didn't look so closely into the leaks because at that time, no one knew how "valid" those leaks are, and these are subject to change upon the actual codex release anyway. But exploding 5s sound really tasty!

I think a lot will depend on whether armor of contempt is still a thing for the chaos space marines after their new codex release. If armor of contempt is still a thing, I think CSM will be a decent codex. Not OP like nids or the other top tier codices right now, but a balanced and fun one like knights.

Yes, some of the rules are similar to the ones we have already gotten over the years in faith and fury. But those were all pretty fluffy anyway. CSM's problem was in its datasheets. We didn't have enough power in our datasheets to do anything. Everything just melted once any decent unit so much as looked at it. But now, with armor of contempt, and 2W, we will at least have some durability to do stuff.

Calling it now, we won't be mad crazy like how Nids or Harlequins, or Tau were, but that's fine. I prefer a balanced, A tier codex that we can play without feat of being nerfed as opposed to a S tier codex that everyone is crying out for nerfs on at codex launch.

The only thing that might swing the codex over to crazy levels would be if some datasheet of a CSM specific unit is crazy OP. There aren't many of those actually. We already seen all the demon engines stats, and the new possessed stats. There is basically only the Lord of skulls and Obliterators. Based on the leaks (if they were true), the oliterators are not going to anything too OP. I bet they totally forgot about the Lord of skulls and don't change anything about it at all.

Oh, there is Abaddon too. I heard rumors some crazy changes to Abbadon. Which is fine. I mean, one character is not going to break a whole codex. And he is a guy who moves 6 inches per turn. No matter how OP he is, he is not going to break the CSM codex.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So...a word bearers warlord gets a 4+ invul and more strength, movement, wounds and attacks.
For free. With no downsides.

The only way that could make sense balance wise is if the Word Bearer's trait is absolute gak and the only strong point they have is the warlord, or if the daemon trait has a huge weakness.
Or maybe both.

The Iron warriors secondary objective sounds interesting though.

Umh. That's warlord trait so for one costs cp. And of course no other warlord trait. It's not extra rule all word bearers have.

That's like "damn that marine captain hands out obsec for free"

Since when did warlord traits cost CP? Is that a Chapter Approved change? I do not recall seeing that in the 9th ed rulebook.

Yes it's in the new CA preorder tomorrow.