PDA

View Full Version : Splitting chaos



Fredrik
03-07-2008, 17:02
Im kind of mad at GW for splitting chaos up into 3 different armies. Ive been playing whfb for 15 years and to me chaos is the mishmach of loads off different stuff mixed warriors, deamons and beastmen. I like to be able to field Drgaon ogres together with warriors, it just feels and looks right.

Now alot will cry but they get to many options and this makes them to strong. Sure but then id rather see GW drop thing like mauraders and balance up an existing mixlist. Id rather have one cool list that they tone down the three boring powerlists.

As it is now they are taking the feeling of chaos away, bah how fun and interesting is an only mortal list. Give me a mix of warriors and monsters and demons.

Thats my two cents.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
03-07-2008, 17:33
Dude, you could at least wait until the book comes out before labelling it as uninteresting!

When I heard Daemons were getting their own book, I was dubious. But having read it, I'm won over thanks to the brilliant background, and the way they portrayed the Gods as conscious beings once again, rather than the slightly abstract Mass of Specific Emotions they had become..

And as long as your not playing in a Tournament, who says you can't mix and match? One suggestion I've made before for 'Allied' Chaos, is that you choose your main list, and then the other two are your allies. Allied 'Core' units then become Special, Special become Rare, and you can't take the Rare.

Try it out with your opponents.

Cartoon
03-07-2008, 17:33
These boards have been talking about this for a while and based off of all the information I've heard so far I've decided it's best to wait and see how it's going to be handled. It seems like warriors of chaos will have two "paths." One to glory (becoming a champion) and one to oblivion (becoming a spawn). If this is true I think GW put themselves in a position to allow for some unique units and builds, especially when you factor in marks.

So, basically we will have to wait and see.

Baggers
03-07-2008, 17:41
I am a bit disappointed that GW has gone away from the huge horde of chaos that was possible using the Hordes and Beasts books. You can understand a Mortal lord getting his shamans to summon beasts and daemons etc...

However I also happen to like what GW direction did with the daemon book.

Braad
03-07-2008, 18:52
Yes, and I really like it that they split all the stuff.

J.P. Biff
03-07-2008, 20:00
Splitting them up was a great idea. The old chaos lists were exactly that... chaotic! By the time the Beasts book came around you had so many different units that the new units (i.e. Beast herds) were making older units (i.e. Marauders) useless. Now that they're going into separate books each army will have a unique feel and play style which IMO is the best part of the hobby.

Plus on the upside, GW has done an absolutely great job at making almost all the "useless" units in the old books (some examples being Phoenix Guard and Orc Boyz(!) ) useful. So in my hopes the crap units, like Marauders, will all of a sudden be used, possibly even in abundance. (gasp!)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
03-07-2008, 20:03
It's not that Marauders were bad, so much that Beastherds were a better choice. Skirmishing with ranks ftw!

Gazak Blacktoof
03-07-2008, 20:28
I think it was a terrible idea to split the army into threee chunks and not provide even basic rules for allowing players to mix their forces such as those mad doc grotsnik provided above.

The splitting of forces runs counter to the background material about chaos and that's exactly what the army books should strive to avoid.

OldMaster
03-07-2008, 20:36
I do not like this, but I also completely don't care because I'm still using them together.

rodmillard
04-07-2008, 20:05
Once all 3 books are redone (so mid 2009) I'd love to see a campaign book/WD article for combining hosts of one god - so you can mix daemons, beasts and mortals again, but the units must all be unmarked or have the same mark (you could update the DE cult of slaanesh list at the same time). I'm not too bothered if they make it tournament legal or not, but it would be cool to be able to play it (although if Gw don't do it it wuld be a cool start for the Bell Of Lost Souls fantasy section...)

logan054
04-07-2008, 20:39
I think it was a terrible idea to split the army into threee chunks and not provide even basic rules for allowing players to mix their forces such as those mad doc grotsnik provided above.

The splitting of forces runs counter to the background material about chaos and that's exactly what the army books should strive to avoid.

Yeah but sadly GW just wants to make warhammer as simple as possible, perhaps streamlining it to the extent of 40k :cries: I think we all had warning of this however, i guess we have ourselves to blame for using the archoans hordes lists and the Daemonic legion list (or maybe just GW for overpricing warriors and daemons).

WhiteKnight
05-07-2008, 00:25
I don't see why the beasts of chaos army book has to be redone. It doesn't have any daemons or mortals in the army book itself so why? It should stay the same but edit out the parts of mixing units from the books. Oh and the hordes of chaos players that recently bought the book to play the army should get a discount on the new chaos book. It just seems unfair for a new Warriors of Chaos player that spent 22 bucks on a book now has to spend 22 more bucks to get a new book.

Halelel
05-07-2008, 00:42
GW is designing the armies NOT to be used together because if they tried to design the armies to work together, we would end up with just three weak Chaos armies that could only be viable when combined.

I'm of the opinion that I'd rather have three strong independent Chaos factions, rather than three haphazard lists.

While it would be "neat" to have the option to combine all 3 armies now, I can already imagine the complete nightmare lists that powergamers would create.

Yes, I know the general concensus on this forum is to bash tournaments, but this would have a huge negative effect even in casual play. Could you imagine playing against some random person who barely knows the game and getting annihilated because he took the most overpowered units of each of the 3 armies? That's a situation I personally want to avoid at all costs.

kroq'gar
05-07-2008, 01:15
I don't see why the beasts of chaos army book has to be redone. It doesn't have any daemons or mortals in the army book itself so why? It should stay the same but edit out the parts of mixing units from the books. Oh and the hordes of chaos players that recently bought the book to play the army should get a discount on the new chaos book. It just seems unfair for a new Warriors of Chaos player that spent 22 bucks on a book now has to spend 22 more bucks to get a new book.

Because the book is a one dimentional list 'power herd with chariots' or 'minotours w/ dragon ogres'.

Ehem, but where are the herds (they need some sort of balance or perhaps a split into ungors and gors- needs to be some decent non besti-gor R&F).

Conotor
05-07-2008, 01:44
I like it. Deamons and chaos warriors don't look right together.

Gazak Blacktoof
05-07-2008, 12:16
Deamons and chaos warriors don't look right together.


I can't begin to tell you how much I disagree with this statement.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
05-07-2008, 12:34
And I shall repeat myself again, and hope I am heard over the hysteria.

The books are only standalone WITHIN TOURNAMENT AND OFFICIAL games.

Playing at home? Or even in a GW? Talk to you opponents. They are reasonable people. Ask if they mind you mixing and matching. Technically nothing to stop them mixing Dwarfs and Empire, Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts, or Orcs and Ogres etc...

It's a hobby, not a game. Games are linear. Hobby's require input and creativity. So get creative, or stick to Console Gaming.

Dominatrix
05-07-2008, 12:40
I can't begin to tell you how much I disagree with this statement.

Yeah well why let every single shred of background ever written about chaos ruin your opinion if they "don't look right together". :rolleyes:


It's a hobby, not a game. Games are linear. Hobby's require input and creativity. So get creative, or stick to Console Gaming.

Little secret: Not everyone sticks to playing games in his home or with a couple of his buddies. Some people don't want to, and some people don't have the luxury. Some of us participate in tournaments and official games, or just games where we can't spend one hour explaining house rules to our opponents and begging them to indulge us.

Gazak Blacktoof
05-07-2008, 12:42
And I shall repeat myself again, and hope I am heard over the hysteria...


Pointed noted, its one I've made repeatedly too. That doesn't mean that a more restrictive product is an improved one or that I should like it.

Condottiere
05-07-2008, 13:06
Since the successor factions do have a common point of origin, it probably wouldn't take a great deal of imagination to figure out some form of combined list. The danger being, that any potential list would be so designed to favour the combined advantages of all three Chaos factions, without compensating with their "supposed" respective weaknesses.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
05-07-2008, 13:25
Is simple enough to transpose units from one list into the other without necessarily mitigating the parent lists inherent weaknesses.

Core go to Special, Special move to Rare, and no Rare allowed. Characters, well, not too sure about that one.

And if you restrict yourself to Tournaments, then tough. Rules are rules after all.

EldarBishop
05-07-2008, 13:47
I don't see why the beasts of chaos army book has to be redone.


Maybe of GW didn't have their heads in their a$$es when they wrote the FAQ (only ranking 4 wide, thus no longer giving skirmishers a rank bonus), then maybe the other minor issues would be tolerable.

There is also a slight lack of magic items, especially god specific ones (Standards for example).

Maybe something like taking allies in a similar fashion to the =][= lists would be useful and not too busted (with a couple of restrictions like ones similar to the recently defunct ones... ie. no Shaggoth general and an allied D.Prince). However, this seems unlikely since they would have put that in the Deamon codex already if they intended on doing that. I guess I'm waiting a year or so before using my Beasts army again...

Shimmergloom
05-07-2008, 15:06
Maybe of GW didn't have their heads in their a$$es when they wrote the FAQ (only ranking 4 wide, thus no longer giving skirmishers a rank bonus), then maybe the other minor issues would be tolerable.



2 years and people still don't know how to read the rule.

They only lose the rank bonus if they face an opponent that's 60mm wide or less.

The rule is always rank at LEAST 4 wide. Not ONLY 4 wide.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
05-07-2008, 15:30
Well said Shimmergloom.

Against other Skirmishers, you get a nice big line of headmashing to use. Against *most* Regiments, you still get your ranks, and lots of attacks.

Against Monsters, Chariots and lone Characters, you don't. But thems the breaks when you have a tasty rule like that.