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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Needlessly paying for a Mark and having weird Legion restrictions don't seem like "easy enough" to me.

It's just another thing on a long list of bs that this Codex is making us put up with.

I look forward to receiving my copy so that, like so many here, I can put together my letter to GW over all the book's deficiencies and especially it's rampant and flagrant inconsistencies.

Wait, are you complaining about the Cult Units of the Chaos Gods having the MARK of their Chaos Gods? Because i certainly would complain if they did not!
Is it an unneccesarily complicated way of including them in the Codex? Absolutely. Should they just have reprinted them ( and potentially have to change the KB datasheet with the expected World Eaters Tome? Probably.
But quite frankly if i could play Rubic Marines WITHOUT the Mark of Tzeentch ( or not at all, which is what Rumours had us believe), THAT would be bs!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Yea there's absolutely a reason they're not CORE or benefitting from traits. They'd be total monsters.

They are CORE.

Oh gak you're right...it says replace the faction keywords not all...oh boy...

But yes, OBVIOUSLY not benefitting from Legion traits is a real balance mechanic there /s


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CoALabaer wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Needlessly paying for a Mark and having weird Legion restrictions don't seem like "easy enough" to me.

It's just another thing on a long list of bs that this Codex is making us put up with.

I look forward to receiving my copy so that, like so many here, I can put together my letter to GW over all the book's deficiencies and especially it's rampant and flagrant inconsistencies.

Wait, are you complaining about the Cult Units of the Chaos Gods having the MARK of their Chaos Gods? Because i certainly would complain if they did not!
Is it an unneccesarily complicated way of including them in the Codex? Absolutely. Should they just have reprinted them ( and potentially have to change the KB datasheet with the expected World Eaters Tome? Probably.
But quite frankly if i could play Rubic Marines WITHOUT the Mark of Tzeentch ( or not at all, which is what Rumours had us believe), THAT would be bs!

I think the main complaint with the mark is the inconsistency issue. They ALREADY have the Keyword and weird rules after all. So they get some rules in this codex they dont even get in their own respective Legion codex.

What's wrong with Cult Marines being Core? It makes it feel like they are a vital part of the army. Now if only they could take a Legion trait as well.

To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

pgmason wrote:
To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

That's true for some, but not all by a long shot. Look at the Black Legion for example, they have the four divisions based around each of the four gods, and those guys are very much integrated into the Black Legion structure. There's also the case of Khorne Berzerkers being some of the earliest volunteers to the Crimson Slaughter; they were not mercenaries, they joined fully.

From a rules and fluff perspective, it leads to some nonsensical situations. For example, one of the traits for the Red Corsairs is that they can advance and charge in the same turn. As the rules are written, if there are Berzerkers in the army, they can't do that. This is absurd as if anyone should be advancing and charging, it's Berzerkers. For the Iron Warriors trait, why would Rubric Marines not be able to take advantage of the ignore cover from shooting rule? If anything, their nature should allow them to shoot better.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

But yes, OBVIOUSLY not benefitting from Legion traits is a real balance mechanic there /s

Considering it cuts out...

5+++ vs MW
Ignore cover and no reroll wounds
-1 to be hit and fallback and action

And those are all pretty spicy to durable models like that I would say it was an intentional cut. They also won't be default obsec nor will they have a 5++.

As I paw through the craziest thing I can find with them being CORE is being able to shoot into combat, but since they auto-hit they won't hit your own guys. Otherwise I see a 6+++ and the trans hit prayer going on them. The rest is stuff they could do already. If you really want to spend 300 points getting them reroll wounds against one model from Abby then that's a thing, too, but I doubt you'll have that AND the other buffs.

There's probably a bolter version of bolter rubrics with 4+ explodes in Word Bearers. That could be fun.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

pgmason wrote:
To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

That's true for some, but not all by a long shot. Look at the Black Legion for example, they have the four divisions based around each of the four gods, and those guys are very much integrated into the Black Legion structure. There's also the case of Khorne Berzerkers being some of the earliest volunteers to the Crimson Slaughter; they were not mercenaries, they joined fully.

From a rules and fluff perspective, it leads to some nonsensical situations. For example, one of the traits for the Red Corsairs is that they can advance and charge in the same turn. As the rules are written, if there are Berzerkers in the army, they can't do that. This is absurd as if anyone should be advancing and charging, it's Berzerkers. For the Iron Warriors trait, why would Rubric Marines not be able to take advantage of the ignore cover from shooting rule? If anything, their nature should allow them to shoot better.

That's part of the 'fun' of this. Rubrics are rented out (for favors) by the TS. They aren't really part of any other legion. On the other hand, home grown IW or RC berserkers can and do exist.
So this is wildly inconsistent in as many ways as possible, because its a one-size-fits all patch that's trying to bridge multiple books, different design directions and even future books.

Voss wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

pgmason wrote:
To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

That's true for some, but not all by a long shot. Look at the Black Legion for example, they have the four divisions based around each of the four gods, and those guys are very much integrated into the Black Legion structure. There's also the case of Khorne Berzerkers being some of the earliest volunteers to the Crimson Slaughter; they were not mercenaries, they joined fully.

From a rules and fluff perspective, it leads to some nonsensical situations. For example, one of the traits for the Red Corsairs is that they can advance and charge in the same turn. As the rules are written, if there are Berzerkers in the army, they can't do that. This is absurd as if anyone should be advancing and charging, it's Berzerkers. For the Iron Warriors trait, why would Rubric Marines not be able to take advantage of the ignore cover from shooting rule? If anything, their nature should allow them to shoot better.

That's part of the 'fun' of this. Rubrics are rented out (for favors) by the TS. They aren't really part of any other legion. On the other hand, home grown IW or RC berserkers can and do exist.
So this is wildly inconsistent in as many ways as possible, because its a one-size-fits all patch that's trying to bridge multiple books, different design directions and even future books.

I've actually read that there are examples of non-Thousand Sons Marines becoming Rubric Marines for one reason or another, possibly to achieve some form of immortality or to be totally and utterly soldiers, with no humanity to distract them.

About Plague Marines, I know that they aren't Bubonic Astartes anymore, but I wonder if they still keep Nurgle's Gift ability to reduce enemy toughness within a certain area? I would think not, but I'm curious.

They shouldn't get the -1T Nurgle's Gift contagion, since that's the "only have Death Guard in the entire army" benefit, and if you're taking them in CSM detachments that's most certainly not the case.

 Thariinye wrote:
They shouldn't get the -1T Nurgle's Gift contagion, since that's the "only have Death Guard in the entire army" benefit, and if you're taking them in CSM detachments that's most certainly not the case.

Likewise, Rubric Marines in a CSM army won't have their invulnerable save.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

pgmason wrote:
To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

That's true for some, but not all by a long shot. Look at the Black Legion for example, they have the four divisions based around each of the four gods, and those guys are very much integrated into the Black Legion structure. There's also the case of Khorne Berzerkers being some of the earliest volunteers to the Crimson Slaughter; they were not mercenaries, they joined fully.

From a rules and fluff perspective, it leads to some nonsensical situations. For example, one of the traits for the Red Corsairs is that they can advance and charge in the same turn. As the rules are written, if there are Berzerkers in the army, they can't do that. This is absurd as if anyone should be advancing and charging, it's Berzerkers. For the Iron Warriors trait, why would Rubric Marines not be able to take advantage of the ignore cover from shooting rule? If anything, their nature should allow them to shoot better.

That's part of the 'fun' of this. Rubrics are rented out (for favors) by the TS. They aren't really part of any other legion. On the other hand, home grown IW or RC berserkers can and do exist.
So this is wildly inconsistent in as many ways as possible, because its a one-size-fits all patch that's trying to bridge multiple books, different design directions and even future books.

I've actually read that there are examples of non-Thousand Sons Marines becoming Rubric Marines for one reason or another, possibly to achieve some form of immortality or to be totally and utterly soldiers, with no humanity to distract them.

I do remember some hints around the idea, but they always read as 'we don't want to restrict creative people's army building' rather than 'this is a real thing that happened'
Where'd those writers go?

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Thariinye wrote:
They shouldn't get the -1T Nurgle's Gift contagion, since that's the "only have Death Guard in the entire army" benefit, and if you're taking them in CSM detachments that's most certainly not the case.

Likewise, Rubric Marines in a CSM army won't have their invulnerable save.

Which matters less when AoC AND All is Dust is a thing.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, true. Though we all get around that easy enough.

Cool, love resorting to piracy when GW could have just not taken the units out of the book...

 Gert wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, true. Though we all get around that easy enough.

Cool, love resorting to piracy when GW could have just not taken the units out of the book...

*shrug* it is what it is.

As I was working on building a Spartan I was mulling over this book and I really feel like if they just put Accursed Weapons on the melee list (and maybe even gave the weapon +1 attack if a model has two) a lot of the frustration would be gone because we'd have the freedom to do a lot with melee weapons on a number of models without any major issue to the rules.

Do that and let the Chosen Champion take a Power Fist and I feel like a good chunk of my frustration with this book would be sorted.

Still wouldn't be thrilled about not having jump packs, but I'd be happier about modelling. As it stands I'm starting to look at taking lighting claws on my Legionnaire Champs and running them as Daemon Blades. Sure, they won't get shred, but they'll basically have rending and will shank people at -2AP, 2 Damage which is good enough for me.

That said, I have to say the thing I'm starting to dislike the most about the NL rule is that the bonus to wound only works on melee weapons, which is a real shame honestly because that's such a flavorful thing from HH that shows how they'll fight dirty rather than just try and get into a straight up fight.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Yes, I do think a chaos space marine army should like a chaos space marine army. It’s codex: chaos space marines right? Not just codex: chaos.

Codex: Adeptus Custodes lets you do a Sisters of Silence army. The Eldar Codex lets you do a Harlequin army. This "It's Codex: CSM guys!!!" excuse doesn't hold water.

haven't seen any sister silence armies anywhere. And as a harlequin player too, we didn't want to be plugged into the Aeldari Codex (notice it's not called Craftworlds so you're kinda reinforcing my point), but that's GWs decision.

Boosykes wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Yes, I do think a chaos space marine army should like a chaos space marine army. It’s codex: chaos space marines right? Not just codex: chaos. Cultists and support was all 8th and early 9th, let’s hope they go all in an actual cultist army, and have people actually use chaos space marines in a chaos space marines army. They could have pushed cultists to elites like they did marine scouts, but chaos would need way moa. re troop options than what they have now, unlike marines with their grocery superstore options.

. Naa chaos space marines simply means they should be the focus as in the strongest the leadership. Chaos should be strong chaos leaders backed by tuns of chaff aka cultists and supernatural support demons all bound to a core of superpower full chaos space marines. That's how I want my chaos space marines they should have the strongest heros and extremely powerful exulted, possesed, chosen, then a few up and comers that are around the same strength as space marines. That's the army I want to play.

I agree, but i saw way too many chaos space marine armies that didn't have any space marines in them. Cultists were taken as Troop tax and then everything but marines (although with the stats as they were, understandable). There should still be a core of chaos marines to an army, but I wish they'd add more options such as minotaurs, beasts, etc...purely chaotic stuff. Just keep the core of the force chaos marines unless you change the name to Codex; Chaos and just lump it all together.

 bullyboy wrote:
haven't seen any sister silence armies anywhere. And as a harlequin player too, we didn't want to be plugged into the Aeldari Codex (notice it's not called Craftworlds so you're kinda reinforcing my point), but that's GWs decision.

Neither of these points rebut anything I just said.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As I was working on building a Spartan I was mulling over this book and I really feel like if they just put Accursed Weapons on the melee list (and maybe even gave the weapon +1 attack if a model has two) a lot of the frustration would be gone because we'd have the freedom to do a lot with melee weapons on a number of models without any major issue to the rules

Don't accursed weapons already have +1 attack?

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Don't accursed weapons already have +1 attack?

Yeah.
I tend to agree not having accursed weapons in the melee list - but instead having power swords, power mauls etc is weird and stupid.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
When people are saying 'cult troops are gone' do they not see the rules to bring in cult troops or do they just find those rules too restrictive?

GW has made pretty darn worthless to bring in allies anymore except for some specific like knights and even THOSE are hurting bad from being allies.

Sure you can in theory play. You can in theory play open play as well. Don't see that often around.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As I was working on building a Spartan I was mulling over this book and I really feel like if they just put Accursed Weapons on the melee list (and maybe even gave the weapon +1 attack if a model has two) a lot of the frustration would be gone because we'd have the freedom to do a lot with melee weapons on a number of models without any major issue to the rules

Don't accursed weapons already have +1 attack?

Yeah they do, I'd forgotten about that while thinking how they could be used to represent lighting claws.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Though, I am considering adding a bit of comparison between this mess, and another product from the same company. Or, it says that it's from the same company. It's really hard to believe actually........

I don't have the HH rules, but that's probably a good idea to do that.

You don't? Well, if you have a friend who does, ask them to give you a look at them. Or find some of the leaked pages from the Liber Hereticus (pretty sure all of the Night Lords stuff was leaked). It puts this to shame, IMO. I can't speak for the other Legions but, IMO, the 30k Night Lords rules are the best rules we've ever had. They really nailed the 8th. The Night Lords rules in this codex are pretty sad in comparison.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As I was working on building a Spartan I was mulling over this book and I really feel like if they just put Accursed Weapons on the melee list (and maybe even gave the weapon +1 attack if a model has two) a lot of the frustration would be gone because we'd have the freedom to do a lot with melee weapons on a number of models without any major issue to the rules.

But what would those Accursed Weapons represent? For example Chosen can't take Power Fists so any Power Fist you see on a Chosen must be an Accursed Weapon. But a Power Fist on a Terminator really is a Power Fist because Terminators can take both, so you can't use a Power Fist to represent an Accursed Weapon on a Terminator and still be WYSIWG. If you put Accursed Weapon on the melee weapons list then you couldn't represent it with any of the other options that appears on the list. Basically it would be a Lightning Claw (or some exotic weapon option that you converted, possibly with 3rd party bits, which is a BIG NO-NO!!! so let's ignore that possibility), at which point you might as well just put the Lightning Claw on the list.

I'm really confused by the almost overwhelmingly positive reviews for this. A lot of the reviewers seem really bowled over by the legion traits, warlord traits, stratagems and relics. I could understand this if these were new things but they aren't. They are mostly just carried over from Psychic Awakening. I've seen reviews that gush about the fact that these are now included in the codex but ignore the inconveniance of having cult troops in different codexes. Having all the rules in one book is either important or it isn't - pick one!

 Samus666 wrote:
I'm really confused by the almost overwhelmingly positive reviews for this.

Negative reviews from influencers means influencers dont get early products or discounts. Never trust them except for the actual overview of said rules.

Also love how the main praise is "look two wounds!" when thats something that could've been fixed with a quick PDF saying "add a wound to these models for X points".

Also WOWEE, TWO PART LEGION TRAIT! LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IS GETTING!

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Samus666 wrote:
I'm really confused by the almost overwhelmingly positive reviews for this.

Negative reviews from influencers means influencers dont get early products or discounts. Never trust them except for the actual overview of said rules.

Also love how the main praise is "look two wounds!" when thats something that could've been fixed with a quick PDF saying "add a wound to these models for X points".

Also WOWEE, TWO PART LEGION TRAIT! LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IS GETTING!

I'm gonna need a citation of anyone who lost early access by not giving positive reviews all the time.

There's evidence to the contrary as well, tabletop tactics utterly tore the nachmund pack apart and told people not to buy it.

You'll also note that the problems with the codex aren't, to the people reviewing it, a big deal necessarily. There's a lot of long time gorgnards on here who have old units invalidated and love to get angry.

I'm taking jump packs off my hqs before I use then next, it super happy about it, not going to call it a bad codex for that reason either. The no double special/heavy bothers me more than anything else, but that's workable.

I think the stereotype of the tournament grinder not being interested in the modeling side of the hobby is overblown, but meta-chasers probably aren't that attached to their individual builds to be bothered by needing to tear off arms and rearrange infantry units.

So...do we know what Abaddon gets in a Supreme command detachment? Is it just his warlord traits/datasheet rules, or does he get his legion traits too?

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

pgmason wrote:
To me the idea that cult marines don't get legion traits actually seems reasonable. They're generally depicted in the background as either being mercenaries from outside the legion (such as a squad of World Eaters berzerkers tagging along with another warband for the chance of a good scrap) or as being legion members who are so far gone down their respective god-path that they're no longer really capable of rational thought, or who put their god before their legion.

That's true for some, but not all by a long shot. Look at the Black Legion for example, they have the four divisions based around each of the four gods, and those guys are very much integrated into the Black Legion structure. There's also the case of Khorne Berzerkers being some of the earliest volunteers to the Crimson Slaughter; they were not mercenaries, they joined fully.

From a rules and fluff perspective, it leads to some nonsensical situations. For example, one of the traits for the Red Corsairs is that they can advance and charge in the same turn. As the rules are written, if there are Berzerkers in the army, they can't do that. This is absurd as if anyone should be advancing and charging, it's Berzerkers. For the Iron Warriors trait, why would Rubric Marines not be able to take advantage of the ignore cover from shooting rule? If anything, their nature should allow them to shoot better.

That's part of the 'fun' of this. Rubrics are rented out (for favors) by the TS. They aren't really part of any other legion. On the other hand, home grown IW or RC berserkers can and do exist.
So this is wildly inconsistent in as many ways as possible, because its a one-size-fits all patch that's trying to bridge multiple books, different design directions and even future books.

I've actually read that there are examples of non-Thousand Sons Marines becoming Rubric Marines for one reason or another, possibly to achieve some form of immortality or to be totally and utterly soldiers, with no humanity to distract them.

About Plague Marines, I know that they aren't Bubonic Astartes anymore, but I wonder if they still keep Nurgle's Gift ability to reduce enemy toughness within a certain area? I would think not, but I'm curious.

where did you read it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Yes, I do think a chaos space marine army should like a chaos space marine army. It’s codex: chaos space marines right? Not just codex: chaos.

Codex: Adeptus Custodes lets you do a Sisters of Silence army. The Eldar Codex lets you do a Harlequin army. This "It's Codex: CSM guys!!!" excuse doesn't hold water.

I agree with you, but I think the way to fix that is limitations on types and also increasing the power of chaos marines, these guys should be badasses, almost no one in the imperium should even be close, I mean these dudes are juicin on chaos.

haven't seen any sister silence armies anywhere. And as a harlequin player too, we didn't want to be plugged into the Aeldari Codex (notice it's not called Craftworlds so you're kinda reinforcing my point), but that's GWs decision.

Boosykes wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Yes, I do think a chaos space marine army should like a chaos space marine army. It’s codex: chaos space marines right? Not just codex: chaos. Cultists and support was all 8th and early 9th, let’s hope they go all in an actual cultist army, and have people actually use chaos space marines in a chaos space marines army. They could have pushed cultists to elites like they did marine scouts, but chaos would need way moa. re troop options than what they have now, unlike marines with their grocery superstore options.

. Naa chaos space marines simply means they should be the focus as in the strongest the leadership. Chaos should be strong chaos leaders backed by tuns of chaff aka cultists and supernatural support demons all bound to a core of superpower full chaos space marines. That's how I want my chaos space marines they should have the strongest heros and extremely powerful exulted, possesed, chosen, then a few up and comers that are around the same strength as space marines. That's the army I want to play.

I agree, but i saw way too many chaos space marine armies that didn't have any space marines in them. Cultists were taken as Troop tax and then everything but marines (although with the stats as they were, understandable). There should still be a core of chaos marines to an army, but I wish they'd add more options such as minotaurs, beasts, etc...purely chaotic stuff. Just keep the core of the force chaos marines unless you change the name to Codex; Chaos and just lump it all together.

Dudeface wrote:
There's a lot of long time gorgnards on here who have old units invalidated and love to get angry.

When a person has miniatures they have poured hours on hours of time and effort into and have been using for years suddenly invalidated, and invalidated in a completely nonsensical way at that, yes; they will get angry. That is a reasonable emotional response, so it does not provide evidence for a tendency or 'love' towards anger.