Are World Eaters just unnecessary bloat?

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.

**Wyldhunt**

Selfcontrol wrote:
Out of genuine curiosity: what are the strong bits of identity that you think warrant their own codex? As I said earlier, I support there being a Khorne book, but a big part of that is essentially just the idea of putting a Khorne-y twist on existing units or making room for some Khorne-themed detachment rules. When I think about the differences between a Khorne-themed vanilla CSM list and a Codex: WE list, there isn't really a huge difference in terms of aesthetic or (form an outsider's perspective) playstyle. They can both field a bunch of dudes with chainsaws that stagger waves of melee dudes. The biggest difference seems to just be the blood tithe thing.

Your view of the World Eaters is understandable and helps explain why you feel a Codex : Khorne would be more appropriate.

Personally, what I've always liked about Khorne is that he isn't just the god of mindless close-combat brutality. In the older lore, Khorne was also a Chaos God who had a particular appreciation for technology in many forms : not just daemon engines, but even ranged weaponry (although at shorter range of course). Moreover, he isn't simply the patron of psychopathic killers : he is also a god to whom the weak may turn in the hope of gaining the strength needed to overthrow their oppressors.

I also appreciated that Khorne wasn't merely a one-dimensional brute. He had a theme of corrupted or perverted honor that suited him particularly well. His followers could be psychopathic butchers or freedom fighters who genuinely believe in honor and seek his aid. Khorne would be willing to help either, because he knows that war only leads to more war, honor leads to tyranny, tyranny leads to savagery, and in the end, the only thing that truly matters is that blood flows.

These aspects, combined with the somewhat tragic lore of the World Eaters and their gladiatorial culture, are why they have always been my favorite Legion. They have tremendous potential to embody Khorne's many facets : corrupted gladiators who still cling to notions of honor, psychotic berserkers utterly lost to the nails, dedicated melee warriors supported by firepower, and so on.

The problem is that GW decided that its monotheistic armies needed strong, simple, and easily recognizable identities, with little room for nuance. Hence the flanderization I deeply dislike.

This is, of course, a very personal interpretation of the World Eaters. Even within the limited release we received, however, I think the Codex could have been far more interesting. Instead of giving us two nearly identical variants of corrupted gladiators, we could have had the Teeth of Khorne, for example : a sort of medium/short-range Havoc unit with access to plasma cannons (because Khorne is rage and rage is hot and hot is fire blablabla, there's even a concept art by Jes Goodwin !). Likewise, the army could have included cultists modeled more after militaristic troops (imperial guards style or blood pact style) to represent the "warfare" aspect of Khorne rather than simply weaker Berserkers (with such followers would have to prove themselves through competent warfare before they could hope to become World Eaters, get the "honour" of receiving the butcher nails and gain the strength required to truly excel in close combat, etc).

Don't get me wrong, they would have still be a melee-focused army (the ranged part would have only been support). But adding a bit of nuance (both in gameplay and in visual identity) would have been great.

Thanks! I appreciate the the thorough answer. You may have helped me gain a little more appreciation for all things Khorne.

**ccs**

LunarSol wrote:

I do get why people that play daemons are attached to mixed daemons though. GW has traditionally designed the army in such a way that their unit variety comes from different gods providing a specific type of unit to the army. People do play mono-god but its always felt constrictive without crossover.

Well, my mono Nurgle & mono Khorne also double as AoS forces.
In Sigmar I cant mix them.
So each has its own carry case.

I dont mix them in 40k simply out of laziness.
I dont want to swap things between cases.

My Nurgle works really well here in 40k.
Honestly I have no need to mix it with anything else.
The Khorne? Its really only ever been an excuse to put as many Juggernaughts (one of my favorite models) on the table as the rules allow. Fill remaing pts with other Khorne demons.
This one works better in AoS, but there's still fun to be had with it 40k wise.
It wouldn't be the worst idea in the world (mechanics) to mix in some Tzeentch someday.
But the case is full, so....

**Ashiraya**

Wyldhunt wrote:

Ideally, I'd like mixed daemons to always remain an option. That said, I'm always a little surprised when people feel strongly about wanting to specifically play mixed daemons moreso than making monogod lists work. To my mind, monogod lists make way more sense as a coherent, thematic force that can tell stories related to specific gods and their designs. Whereas mixed god armies usually read like you're playing some random warp warp incursion with no particular god behind the wheel.

I am not sure what you mean by this. They're like Drukhari. The Covens, the Wych Cults and the Kabals infight all the time, so much so that Commorragh is justifiably called the most dangerous city in the galaxy. They have truly Skaven levels of infighting going on, held back only by the fact that they're not inherently a comic relief faction, not even in part.

That doesn't change that it's pretty iconic to have all three Drukhari subfactions be fielded together, heavily lore-supported, and absolutely should not be restricted. Daemons aren't really that different.

The idea that people think you can't tell a functional story with a mixed army feels fundamentally tragic to me. We've had decades of mixed Daemon armies appearing in White Dwarf narrative battle reports and the like, to say nothing of the representation undivided gets through various mortals across the various Warhammer settings. It works perfectly fine. When N'kari in WHFB invaded Ulthuan in narratives written like twenty years ago, he had a bunch of Khornate Daemons with him, because of course he did, mortal souls were on the menu which is all the reason they'd need to bury the hatchet for a while.

The idea that a newer generation of Warhammer players seem to think mixed Daemon armies are "lorebreaking" for some reason (?????) is beyond heartbreaking, and yet it's increasingly cropping up on social media. I don't know where this came from (my theory is Age of Sigmar, where crucially Chaos is currently winning and controls the majority of the setting, meaning they infight a LOT more) because mixed Daemons are Chaos in its truest form, a kaleidoscopic carnival of multicoloured creatures come to visit unpredictable horrors on the foe. Strictly segregated, neatly colour-coded cheerleader bands just isn't all that chaotic, you know?

But to each their own. I'd absolutely love to be able to field my slaaneshi daemons with noise marines without having to take a specific detachment or worry about point ratios.

And I'd still like to be able to field my 5 man Bladeguard squad, my 5 man Eradicator squad, my 3 man Ravener and Stealth Suit units, and so on, but we can't always get what we want.

**Tyel**

Skittles demons has had a bad wrap for a long time now. There was a time when that wasn't the case but you are where you are.

Arguably it's much like the issues flagged for DE when GW was trying to build them up as factions not just thematic elements of a wider DE list. It leads to the idea that if we want to expand DE we need shooty Wyches and stabby Kabalites and idk fast Wracks. But this is just duplication of what already exists.

**Wyldhunt**

"Skittles demons" is a fantastic term.

Ashiraya wrote:

I am not sure what you mean by this.

I just mean that when a demonic force is made up of a single god, my brain tends to go to more elaborate and (to me) thematic stories. Like, if you end up with a specifically slaaneshi invasion of a planet, you might be telling the story of how some mortals' greed or hubris snowballed out of hand and lead to a satisfying comeuppance. If you have a purely Nurgle force, you can tell the story of some exotic or even mystical disease that has some cool, symbolic resonance with whatever world it is infecting. Heck, you can even have a pair of gods in a single force, and then my brain starts wondering what symbolism has brought them to the same location. Is it a Fracture of Biel-Tan style wager between Slaanesh and Khorne? Are Nurgle and Tzeentch waging a war of stagnation vs change? Are war and death flooding through a pre-existing battlefield causing Nurgle and Khorne forces to slip free of the warp?

Whereas when it's a mix of 3+ gods, my first thought is. "Oh. So is it just a random patch of the warp being puked into reality, or are we doing yet another four-way god contest?" Obviously there are tons of better stories than that that you can tell with a skittles army, but that's just where my head goes. YMMV.

It's kind of like when people are trying to come up with fluff for their campaign and they end up having this convoluted Armageddon style narrative where everyone and their mother is showing up to fight over this one planet all at once. Vs a story that's just two factions duking it out and leaving space to showcase their individual strengths and weaknesses and how they play off of eachother. The ork vs nids planet (Octarius?) vs Armageddon, basically.

But I'm not here to yuck your yum. If you're forging cool narratives with every flavor of demon, more power to you. You're clearly just better at coming up with quad-god storylines than I am.

... because mixed Daemons are Chaos in its truest form, a kaleidoscopic carnival of multicoloured creatures come to visit unpredictable horrors on the foe. Strictly segregated, neatly colour-coded cheerleader bands just isn't all that chaotic, you know?

Sure. I guess part of it is that I feel like the "chaotic" part of chaos is kind of overstated. I like it when the gods and their servants are engaging in cohesive, thematic plots with coherent goals rather than just... being soup together. Quad god armies make me think that the army is like, the result of a random tear in reality or what have you, making the demons present essentially a sample platter of random encounters that someone ladled up out of the soup of the warp. Whereas monogod armies make me go, "Okay cool. Clearly something about this world or the people on it resonated with this one specific god. What's the story there?"

**LunarSol**

FWIW, I think this edition has decent potential to at least make the design of restricting the daemons to a single detachment in their codex at least something that's a 1 DP design intended to mix with most everything else.

**Ashiraya**

Wyldhunt wrote:
Heck, you can even have a pair of gods in a single force, and then my brain starts wondering what symbolism has brought them to the same location. Is it a Fracture of Biel-Tan style wager between Slaanesh and Khorne? Are Nurgle and Tzeentch waging a war of stagnation vs change? Are war and death flooding through a pre-existing battlefield causing Nurgle and Khorne forces to slip free of the warp?

Whereas when it's a mix of 3+ gods, my first thought is. "Oh. So is it just a random patch of the warp being puked into reality, or are we doing yet another four-way god contest?" Obviously there are tons of better stories than that that you can tell with a skittles army, but that's just where my head goes. YMMV.

You can indeed have 2 gods in a single force (and the Codex shows this off plentifully) so I don't necessarily see why it's any different with 3+. Though the way the codex presents it is different from the way you do. You speak of it as the forces being rivals in the same army, whereas the Codex shows examples where they simply have common cause. When the Sanctuary of Gethsemane's wards collapsed, both Tzeentch and Khorne had evidently plenty of reason to ensure they would not rise again, and when Phaedox XIII was invaded, their "both indolence and unclean practices" ensured both Slaanesh and Nurgle Daemons intermingled in the manifesting assault. (Both are from the 9e Daemons codex.) In both cases, the forces don't really have much reason to have any internal friction, they're there for the same objective and are as cohesive as any other faction (which is how the faction works).

In either of these cases you could very easily see 3 or 4 gods attack together, especially the former.

**Wyldhunt**

Ashiraya wrote:

You can indeed have 2 gods in a single force (and the Codex shows this off plentifully) so I don't necessarily see why it's any different with 3+. Though the way the codex presents it is different from the way you do. You speak of it as the forces being rivals in the same army, whereas the Codex shows examples where they simply have common cause.

Totally! I didn't mean to suggest it was always a rivalry. The point I'm more getting at is that each god you add to a given force makes the nature of the teamup that much more complicated and steers you that much further away from the sort of symbolic "vibes-based" daemon invasion that I tend to like.

**Crimson**

I really dislike the flanderisation of chaos marines. Splitting the monogod legions from the main CSM book has made both worse. Monogod legions have poor unit selection and lack access to a ton of units they should have. On the other hand main CSM are very plain, and they would benefit from being able to mix with the weirder units monolegions have.

Chaos has become boring and non-chaotic. I don't like that.

**BorderCountess**

tauist wrote:
Anything worth a bespoke codex needs substantial amount of unique units and stuff to go with it. Forcing factions into specific lanes is the main reason for eventual Flanderization.

My particular pet peeve are the followers of Tzeentch. I hate almost everything about the Thousand Sons (GTFO with that Egyptian lover aesthetic LMAO), yet, if I am to make a Tzeentch aligned Chaos warband, I have little choice these days. I absolutely hate that *spits*

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/The_Scourged

**Ashiraya**

Wyldhunt wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:

You can indeed have 2 gods in a single force (and the Codex shows this off plentifully) so I don't necessarily see why it's any different with 3+. Though the way the codex presents it is different from the way you do. You speak of it as the forces being rivals in the same army, whereas the Codex shows examples where they simply have common cause.

Totally! I didn't mean to suggest it was always a rivalry. The point I'm more getting at is that each god you add to a given force makes the nature of the teamup that much more complicated and steers you that much further away from the sort of symbolic "vibes-based" daemon invasion that I tend to like.

Don't you think it's overly simplistic if it's just monogod though? Like, okay, it's Nurgle again, time for more Nurgle stuff just doing Nurgle things. If you've played Vermintide you know what I mean. It's like if no Ork invasion ever had mixed subcultures. Goffs, Beast Snaggas, Speed Freekz etc all in one Waaagh is just more fun for the whole family. The increased variety is a perk, not a detractor. Much like said varied Ork clans, the Daemons have the same ultimate purpose and therefore plenty of unifying motive (kill 'em all, as it were).

Now, of course, if Tzeentch wants to spend a century plotting the downfall of a governor through increasingly overcomplicated Machiavellian scheme after scheme in a Rube Goldberg machine of gambits and trickery, that can make for a nice story too, and Khorne's presence probably wouldn't be much help. But that sort of scheme isn't really what we're depicting on the tabletop anyway. We're depicting the apex of violence, a meeting engagement of some kind between two prepared forces, something all Gods engage in a lot. I don't think we need to overcomplicate it beyond that.

It's sort of like how the Orders Hospitaller are actually an extremely large and diverse organisation, but much of its work is civilian in nature and irrelevant to gameplay, so we only really see them represented by the Sister Hospitaller. Even more extreme, the Orders Famulous are a significant non-militant wing of the Sororitas, but again, their work isn't immediately pertinent in game play, so we tend to set them aside when discussing codex design.

**kabaakaba**

Idk, for me this nano codices are just money making. We have all sm in sm codex and some irregulars in supplements but they could take from sm codex.

And it's strange khornates couldn't. And Abaddon couldn't take slaughterbounds. Why? He is warmaster of chaos and chosen of the four.
It's just don't fit gw's own logic.

**Hellebore**

In all cases I desire equal representation.

So, if marines and chaos get all these sub codexes, everyone else should too. If not, then they should be streamlined.

Any army can be as expansive or limited as you choose to invest in.

I'm not a fan of the chaos daemons being wrapped into the cult legions. Daemons invade realspace by themselves and alongside cultists, traitor guard et al far in excess of the times they are hanging with cult marines.

It sets a skewed image, just as the amount of marine codexes make it look like they're the main fighting force of the imperium.

**kaotkbliss**

kabaakaba wrote:
Idk, for me this nano codices are just money making. We have all sm in sm codex and some irregulars in supplements but they could take from sm codex.

And it's strange khornates couldn't. And Abaddon couldn't take slaughterbounds. Why? He is warmaster of chaos and chosen of the four.
It's just don't fit gw's own logic.

Everything GW does is just to rake in more cash, even if it means destroying their own lore.
Take SW for example. In one edition all initiates go through trials, any that failed are mind-wiped and become thralls. Those that succeed become blood claws, who then either become scouts or grey hunters. From their they become Long fangs. When a unit of long fangs is all but wiped out, those left become wolf guard.

Servitors/thralls and long fangs no longer exist in SW

Another edition it was blood claws to grey hunters to wolf guard to long fangs

Haven't gone through the other editions yet to see what else has suddenly changed lore-wise except that now blood claws seem to have forgotten how to ride bikes or use jump packs.

Anyways, I agree. Chaos should be set up just like SM I think. A main chaos book with common troops across all 4 types, then a suppliment for each god to add unique and additional troops for that god.

**Daba**

Hellebore wrote:
In all cases I desire equal representation.

So, if marines and chaos get all these sub codexes, everyone else should too. If not, then they should be streamlined.

Any army can be as expansive or limited as you choose to invest in.

I'm not a fan of the chaos daemons being wrapped into the cult legions. Daemons invade realspace by themselves and alongside cultists, traitor guard et al far in excess of the times they are hanging with cult marines.

It sets a skewed image, just as the amount of marine codexes make it look like they're the main fighting force of the imperium.

Although it kind of reads them as wrapping them into cult legions, it might be a way of getting out a Codex: Khorne, and should have list options where you can eschew the Marine element altogether..

Ironically, the Legions system is a problem for the 'mixed marine' list because unlike in Fantasy, they aren't small warbands/renegades united under one chaos lord, but have their superstructure, at least in spirit. The renegade chapters function more like Fantasy chaos warriors in this regard, and work better for that concept. For it to work for the main legions, you basically need to have an Everchosen level leader, because a regular aspiring Chaos Lord being un-ascended won't have the gravitas of the legion primarchs, so spiritually separate allied detachments works better for that model.

**Gert**

I think people are getting a bit hung up on the names of things.

Having all Khorne Daemons in the World Eaters Codex would be fine, it makes them 40k Blades of Khorne. Given that Daemons aren't even getting Codexes anymore, it's clear the plan is to ape AoS with the way Chaos is implemented.

All GW would need to do is change the name from World Eaters to Khorne Bloodbound or whatever and shazam the problem is gone.

Then it's just a case of yknow, actually giving the armies that aren't Nurgle some units.

**Slipspace**

I agree with those saying the solution is to put the Daemons into the respective god-dedicated Codices and change them to be Khorne/Slaanesh, etc rather than World Eaters or EC. While they're at it, they could also remove the stupid restriction that prevents you using Daemons in those Codices unless you take a specific detachment.

WE and EC definitely need more stuff, and arguably TS too. I'd prefer to see those armies get more divergent, as has happened with DG. Give them their own Terminators, their own vehicles (and possibly remove Predators and Helbrutes at the same time) and really flesh them out. That could also allow GW to explore more of the background of these armies because it's definitely true that WE in particular are too heavily Flanderized right now.

Khorne isn't just about bloodlust and insane butchery. Where are the honourable duellists? Where's the weird and wonderful technology of war Khorne used to be known for? EC seemed to move a bit more towards different types of excess/obsession in their Codex with Noise Marines being the sensationalists and Flawless Blades being all about the perfection of their swordsmanship and I think all the god-dedicated legions could do with that.

**tauist**

Crimson wrote:
I really dislike the flanderisation of chaos marines. Splitting the monogod legions from the main CSM book has made both worse. Monogod legions have poor unit selection and lack access to a ton of units they should have. On the other hand main CSM are very plain, and they would benefit from being able to mix with the weirder units monolegions have.

Chaos has become boring and non-chaotic. I don't like that.

I wholeheartedly agree. Chaos should be random and all over the place

**Wyldhunt**

Ashiraya wrote:

Don't you think it's overly simplistic if it's just monogod though? Like, okay, it's Nurgle again, time for more Nurgle stuff just doing Nurgle things. If you've played Vermintide you know what I mean. It's like if no Ork invasion ever had mixed subcultures. Goffs, Beast Snaggas, Speed Freekz etc all in one Waaagh is just more fun for the whole family. The increased variety is a perk, not a detractor. Much like said varied Ork clans, the Daemons have the same ultimate purpose and therefore plenty of unifying motive (kill 'em all, as it were).

I see your point, but my personal preference still skews monogod. For me, adding more gods into the mix and giving them a "unifying motive" kind of implies that their goals have to be something more generic. "Kill 'em all" instead of "bring about a poetic demise that resonates with the themes that caused this specific flavor of incursion to happen in the first place. But YMMV.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hellebore wrote:
I'm not a fan of the chaos daemons being wrapped into the cult legions. Daemons invade realspace by themselves and alongside cultists, traitor guard et al far in excess of the times they are hanging with cult marines.

Gert wrote:I think people are getting a bit hung up on the names of things.

Having all Khorne Daemons in the World Eaters Codex would be fine, it makes them 40k Blades of Khorne. Given that Daemons aren't even getting Codexes anymore, it's clear the plan is to ape AoS with the way Chaos is implemented.

All GW would need to do is change the name from World Eaters to Khorne Bloodbound or whatever and shazam the problem is gone.

Then it's just a case of yknow, actually giving the armies that aren't Nurgle some units.

Gert gets it. I'm basically advocating for making Codex: Khorne which would support the option to field daemons by themselves or as part of a mixed force of daemons and non-daemons (with fewer hoops to jump through than what we have now.)

Slipspace wrote:
WE and EC definitely need more stuff, and arguably TS too. I'd prefer to see those armies get more divergent, as has happened with DG. Give them their own Terminators, their own vehicles (and possibly remove Predators and Helbrutes at the same time) and really flesh them out. That could also allow GW to explore more of the background of these armies because it's definitely true that WE in particular are too heavily Flanderized right now.

Khorne isn't just about bloodlust and insane butchery. Where are the honourable duellists? Where's the weird and wonderful technology of war Khorne used to be known for? EC seemed to move a bit more towards different types of excess/obsession in their Codex with Noise Marines being the sensationalists and Flawless Blades being all about the perfection of their swordsmanship and I think all the god-dedicated legions could do with that.

Idk. I feel like part of the appeal of rolling WE, Khorne daemons, vanilla CSM options, and maybe even some guard together into a single book is that you get so much variety you don't necessarily need new kits. You instantly give the faction a pile of new units to choose from with the option to do a Khorne-specific version of their datasheets (something like giving havocs a different special rule to better represent the ranged fire support unit someone mentioned earlier), and you can use detachments to flesh out some of those other concepts. Your honorable duelists might be represented by a "Worthy Warriors" detachment that is geared for sending characters to fight characters and monsters/vehicles, for instance.

If you've got all that, I'm not sure you necessarily need bespoke Khorne terminators that are just melee terminators with a slightly different weapon, you know? (Of course, shiny new kits do always hold a certain appeal...)

**Ashiraya**

Wyldhunt wrote:
I see your point, but my personal preference still skews monogod. For me, adding more gods into the mix and giving them a "unifying motive" kind of implies that their goals have to be something more generic. "Kill 'em all" instead of "bring about a poetic demise that resonates with the themes that caused this specific flavor of incursion to happen in the first place. But YMMV.

Why do Daemons have to have this? No other faction is held to that standard. This seems a bit unfair. Every other faction does "generic" things all the time.

**Wyldhunt**

Ashiraya wrote:
Wyldhunt wrote:
I see your point, but my personal preference still skews monogod. For me, adding more gods into the mix and giving them a "unifying motive" kind of implies that their goals have to be something more generic. "Kill 'em all" instead of "bring about a poetic demise that resonates with the themes that caused this specific flavor of incursion to happen in the first place. But YMMV.

Why do Daemons have to have this? No other faction is held to that standard. This seems a bit unfair. Every other faction does "generic" things all the time.

They don't have to go monogod (if it wasn't clear, my ideal scenario would still support multi-god armies), and they're welcome to do the more generic missions. To my personal sensibilities, daemons of various gods working together just saps away some of the extra flavor you get with a monogod army in a way that you don't necessarily get with most other armies.

If Slaanesh alone is invading a planet, that means there's something very Slaanesh-specific going on, and exploring those narratives can be evocative. Once you've got all four gods involved, you're probably switching away from something like, "The planet that prizes its famed artists has suddenly found all its paintings shift to scenes of perverse excess, and rumors say that some of the creatures within the paintings have begun to step out of them," and replacing that with, "The chaos gods felt like eating some souls today" or "the chaos gods decided to have a bet on who could eat the shiniest soul today."

If I play my drukhari, I do get some bonus flavor if I zoom in and focus purely on my wych cult's specific culture. However, if I field my wych cult alongside my kabal and coven, whichever faction is the most powerful can still essentially be leading the action, have the driving, quirky motivation, and basically be treating the others as pawns.

If I play my marines, having, idk, terminators and phobos units working together doesn't really water things down at all because they're just marines doing marine things. My 'nids are all part of the same swarm. My 'crons are all part of the same dynasty with any destroyer cult units still generally being controlled/directed by the non-destroyers.

A multi-god chaos army is made up of guys who each ultimately work for their respective gods. So they don't have the overall unity the way 'nids or marines do, and the daemons of one god don't generally "work under" the daemons of another god just because the lead daemon is more powerful.

But again, if you're enjoying quad god armies, more power to you.

**Ashiraya**

Wyldhunt wrote:
If I play my drukhari, I do get some bonus flavor if I zoom in and focus purely on my wych cult's specific culture. However, if I field my wych cult alongside my kabal and coven, whichever faction is the most powerful can still essentially be leading the action, have the driving, quirky motivation, and basically be treating the others as pawns.

This applies to Chaos too, yes? Like, N'kari's invasion of Ulthuan in WHFB was clearly a personal vendetta, and him bringing all manner of Daemons with him (including notable onscreen examples of Bloodletters and Bloodcrushers) didn't mean he was making any kind of compromises for them.

Or, to use a 40k example, this. This seems good to me: https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Murderval

Murderval is an especially good example imo, because you can see how the army retains cohesion even after its initial objective is abandoned and its initial commander is overthrown by another, and the army continues to wreak havoc elsewhere. The pre-war bargains are very reminiscent of how the Drukhari work, too.

But yeah, I don't think this is getting anywhere. If you don't see the appeal in multi-god Daemons, then I don't imagine I can convince you further at this point. I just hope the army will retain support.

**Hellebore**

Wyldhunt wrote:

Gert wrote:I think people are getting a bit hung up on the names of things.

Having all Khorne Daemons in the World Eaters Codex would be fine, it makes them 40k Blades of Khorne. Given that Daemons aren't even getting Codexes anymore, it's clear the plan is to ape AoS with the way Chaos is implemented.

All GW would need to do is change the name from World Eaters to Khorne Bloodbound or whatever and shazam the problem is gone.

Then it's just a case of yknow, actually giving the armies that aren't Nurgle some units.

Gert gets it. I'm basically advocating for making Codex: Khorne which would support the option to field daemons by themselves or as part of a mixed force of daemons and non-daemons (with fewer hoops to jump through than what we have now.)

That's fine conceptually if that's actually what gw had done. But it's clear these are cult legions, not codex.xhaos gods.

My problem is with what gw has actually done. Which is make a chaos legion codex

**Gert**

Considering Tsons came from the age of mini-codexes and Death Guard were an edition starter, we're now actually at the point where all four Gods have a Codex in 40k.

Daemons also don't have a generic Codex anymore.

Now unless there's a 180 and the Daemon Codex comes back, it doesn't take a genius to see the 40k Chaos roundup is going the same way AoS did.

**Hellebore**

And all I said was I don't like it and listed why.

Repeating what they have done doesn't change that.

**Breton**

How does AOS handle an Undivided All-Four army?

In other words, if they do copy it, How does a Black Legion with a little of everything "mortal" and daemonic work?

**the Signless**

Breton wrote:
How does AOS handle an Undivided All-Four army?

In other words, if they do copy it, How does a Black Legion with a little of everything "mortal" and daemonic work?

AoS has Slaves to Darkness to represent generic mortal followers of Chaos in both the heavily armoured chaos warrior and barbarian flavours. If they copied that into 40k, it would work pretty well as the black legion, though I would prefer them keep some of the god specific marines like berserkers or plague marines.

The way AoS currently represents armies working together is through regiments of renown, where fixed sets of units can be taken by armies that would be appropriate. For example, any chaos army can choose to ally in Skarbrand.

**Breton**

the Signless wrote:
Breton wrote:
How does AOS handle an Undivided All-Four army?

In other words, if they do copy it, How does a Black Legion with a little of everything "mortal" and daemonic work?
AoS has Slaves to Darkness to represent generic mortal followers of Chaos in both the heavily armoured chaos warrior and barbarian flavours. If they copied that into 40k, it would work pretty well as the black legion, though I would prefer them keep some of the god specific marines like berserkers or plague marines.

The way AoS currently represents armies working together is through regiments of renown, where fixed sets of units can be taken by armies that would be appropriate. For example, any chaos army can choose to ally in Skarbrand.

That doesn't sound like a good end result for Black Legion. I mean Black Legion should be able to take Skarbrand, but in a more freeform manner than that.

**BorderCountess**

Slaves to Darkness also has an Army of Renown themed for Be'lakor that allows for a curated selection of daemons from the four gods.

**Ashiraya**

It's really not very fun. The selection is very restrictive, it doesn't compare very well to the pre-2022 version.