PDA

View Full Version : Single god Chaos armies?



Phunting
11-08-2008, 11:55
I've always despised mixed God armies as being against everything in the background. The Chaos Gods to me are fractious and quarrelsome, and their followers rarely can stand each others' presence, let alone ally with them in an army. So like many others, I've viewed GW's butchering of their natures with dismay.

Thankfully, others in the small group I play with agree, so we've decided to ignore their rulings and carry on with the old rules for mixed armies allowing us to field a rounded army as long as it is dedicated to the same god.

Using the DoC and BoC books and the WoC WD list, whatever list the general is from is played as normal, but with units allowed from the other lists with Core choices counting as special. In order to allow this we've said:

All units that can have a mark, must have a mark.
All marks must be the same.
All Daemons must be from the appropriate God.
Units that can't have a mark are fine, except furies and the hellcannon.

I've built my Slaanesh army this way, and another in the group plays with a Tzeentch army. Which is fine amongst ourselves, but my question is to see if people would be generally be happy about this outside our incestuous circle? I'm not talking about tournament play, but would people object to facing these mixed (or unmixed, depending on your point of view) in a friendly game?

Rodman49
11-08-2008, 12:57
Yeah man, if you're only taking core choices from allied lists its all groovy.

Phunting
11-08-2008, 13:55
Well, no actually not just Core as that would preclude things like using a Greater Daemon. Which I don't think is too much to ask for in a Chaos army of any type.

Gekiganger
11-08-2008, 14:23
Wouldn't particularly approve of it unless they'd but some work into a themed background for it, but I wouldn't openly object to playing it. I certainly wouldn't play them again IF it was done for the purpose of strengthening their army to the point of beared-ness.

Reinnon
11-08-2008, 14:41
i don't understand the poll you have posted, as none of your points actually breaks any of the rules of the daemon/WoC/BoC books, all you are doing is theming your list.

Reading your poll, i thought you were talking about renaming the daemons to make them all fit with one god, maybe i'm missing something.

I personally have no problem with mixed armies, the new book doesn't force you to take mixed gods and i really never understood peoples insistance on taking armies of pure gods. It strikes me as very silly that people constantly moan about the new daemons with "the chaos gods are suddenly all friendly bah, bah, bah".

Its annoying because thats not what the background says, the background states that the chaos gods still hate each other, but in terms of mortal incursions they are willing to put aside their differences and combine. That was always the background back in the old days.

GW has always made it possible to mix marks (through the use of mark of undivided), they are now simply suggesting that a mixed army might work better. The pure god armies were always imbalanced, GW have simply made it easiler to mix teh gods together to create a balanced force.

On a background level i have zero problem with it. It actually makes more sense to me for the chaos gods to work together on a short term basis, multiple gods in the same armies don't always have to suggest a friendly relationship - but more of a merc idealogy.

The book still allows for themed list, in fact the themed lists work in a simular way to before. All GW have done is remove the restrictions.

Thats all.

Phunting
11-08-2008, 15:27
Perhaps I wasn't clear, I'm talking about an army that draws on units from the WoC, BoC and DoC lists, something that you could do under the last edition but not in this one.

In terms of balance, it may be better. But it does destroy the ideology behind them IMHO. Opposing chaos powers hate each other. Hate, detest and despise. This is what makes chaos chaos, the in-fighting. It's the only thing that stops it overwhelming the world. And it's apparantly just been scrapped...

It may make more 'sense', but these are not the gods of sense. They are the gods of chaos, depravity and madness. And no matter how much GW and others try to convince that they're all quite happy to ally but it doesn't really mean they like each other, I just don't like or buy it. In my mind you don't ally with someone you hate just because it is convenient. They may want to destroy the Empire, but they hate each other. In fact I'd say that they would rather the Empire stand than see it fall under the sway of one of the other gods, so they'd be very reluctant to help each other.

I admit there's been a slow trend away from this over the years, but this is the first time you're all but forced to mix gods in an army without breaking the rules.

Muad'Dib
11-08-2008, 15:41
I've always despised mixed God armies as being against everything in the background. The Chaos Gods to me are fractious and quarrelsome, and their followers rarely can stand each others' presence, let alone ally with them in an army. So like many others, I've viewed GW's butchering of their natures with dismay.

Well the thing is that Chaos background consists of more then champions killing each other on sight. There are many instances when you see followers of Gods allying. The chaos incrusions, the various norse tribes (Hound, Raven, Crow, Snake) or the siege of Pragg in Gotrek & Felix book "Beastslayer". Same goes with Daemons - do you really think millenia old beings are incapable of forming short or long-term alliances? Especially as manipulation is in both Tzeentch and Slaanesh spheres of influence.

That said, I'm not too fond of how GW seperated the Chaos books, and would have no problems of joint mono-god forces of beasts, warriors and Daemons.

Gazak Blacktoof
11-08-2008, 16:04
I think its perfectly acceptable and would in fact encourage anybody in my group to do this in preference to fielding an army of allied gods. I see a mixed warrior/ beast/ daemon under the banner of a single patron deity as a more natural state of affairs.

I'm certain that people could abuse the situation but then that's possible in all lists.

logan054
11-08-2008, 16:22
Personally thats how i would like to play my list, the way i have dont for since i started playing chaos in warhammer, problem is many people would object because it isnt raw..

Just remember, you can play that way if you choose to legendary battles! :rolleyes:

Personally i always saw the mixed god armies as something for the larger games but i guess my perception of chaos army will have to change to fit with GW new design..

Phunting
11-08-2008, 16:37
Well the thing is that Chaos background consists of more then champions killing each other on sight. There are many instances when you see followers of Gods allying. The chaos incrusions, the various norse tribes (Hound, Raven, Crow, Snake) or the siege of Pragg in Gotrek & Felix book "Beastslayer". Same goes with Daemons - do you really think millenia old beings are incapable of forming short or long-term alliances? Especially as manipulation is in both Tzeentch and Slaanesh spheres of influence.I do understand that on occasion they could and would ally. But IMHO this would be the stuff of 'legendary battles', not vice versa.

I think I'm slightly swayed to by seeing too many armies that are just a joke. Things like armies full of Khorne daemons but with a couple of Tzeentch sorcerers thrown in randomly. Things like that have made me hate the concept of a mixed god army as a whole, unless under very well explained circumstances...

Helbracht
11-08-2008, 17:08
As much as I wish we could still use DoC/WoC/BoC all in the same army...they decided to change it this edition. Rules change, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. You just have to live with it.

So, if you want to mix it up and try something with your friends, that's fine...but when I play people I want them to follow the current edition rules. Mixed 7th edition Chaos armies can become seriously unbalanced.

Gazak Blacktoof
11-08-2008, 17:20
I do understand that on occasion they could and would ally. But IMHO this would be the stuff of 'legendary battles', not vice versa.

That's exactly the way I think it should be too.


Rules change, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. You just have to live with it.


Only if you have no imagination.

Muad'Dib
11-08-2008, 17:41
I do understand that on occasion they could and would ally. But IMHO this would be the stuff of 'legendary battles', not vice versa.
I think I'm slightly swayed to by seeing too many armies that are just a joke. Things like armies full of Khorne daemons but with a couple of Tzeentch sorcerers thrown in randomly. Things like that have made me hate the concept of a mixed god army as a whole, unless under very well explained circumstances...

Well yes, there is the rather unfluffy Khorne army with few Sorceror's/Tzeentch champions tossed in...but for example if you take Beastmen, then such situation is perfectly in line with fluff - Beastmen shamans are described as being sacred to all Beastmen, and are never killed, even during battle between rival tribes. So a Khorne tribe could as well have a Tzeentch/Nurgle shaman responsible for communication with the Gods (Slaaneshi would be harder considering the Khorne vs Slaanesh opposition...but still possible). It is also easy to imagine two warriors - one following Nurgle, the other Khorne, fightning as a joint force. And that's the beauty of Chaos - there is infinite number of options. There can be alliances that are part of huge Chaos invasions, but at the same time tiny warbands and tribes of different Gods might fight together.
Though the recent Daemon codex takes it slightly too far - removing any limitations makes armies look like a random group of Daemons that just appeared, rather then a proper force. The system from old HoC book that took your general into account was, IMO, the best one.

theunwantedbeing
11-08-2008, 17:52
The minions of the chaos gods dislike each other, they will not fight for a common cause...more try to take it for themselves while appearing to be fighting alongside the enemy. Similarly, sometimes you'll find a rival faction seemingly supporting another, but would infact be doing quite the opposite in the grad scheme of things.
However, you don't see the grand scheme....just the individual happeneings of a group of what you see as rival daemons, for some reason co-operating.

Chaos doesnt have to make sense to you.

As for mono-god multi-race armies.
If that's what works for you then fine, especially if your opponents are okay with it.

A tzeentch beastmen chariot army with a bunch of horror units and some chosen knights of tzeentch accompanying them could perhaps be percieved to be soemwhat abusive of the rules. But so long as you steer clear of such things then there's no real problem.

==Me==
11-08-2008, 18:13
It depends on how you do it. Mixing and matching between books all willy nilly is asking for trouble. I'll just take Thorek and 2 Stanks and call it fluffy and we'll be good to go.

If you want to do it, work something like this in:
Your general determines how your army is composed. A mortal Lord means WoC stuff stays as-is. BoC and DoC Core is now special, Special is now Rare, and any characters taken eat up a Hero and Rare slot. Same goes for any other mix.

That way, you have your fluffy army that is balanced. If you just wanted to cherry pick the best units from each book and then complain about mix and match armies, it would seem a bit hypocritical.

Ubermensch Commander
11-08-2008, 19:11
I would be very much against mixing units from different army books, simply because of game balance. I also fear it would set a bad precedent.
"Oh well my Brettonia forces are right next door to the Wood Elves and they both hate (fill in name of evil enemy army) so they work together...and then the Empire does the same because they are all against and Chaos and the fluff often has them allied."
so while i have no problem with the OP idea, it is creative and kinda cool, and i see where you are coming from, I feel that army book entries shouldnt be mixed.

On a side note:
Could you take a Khornate themed Mortals list and in a larger point game ally it with an Khornate themed Beastman list?

logan054
11-08-2008, 19:16
the bad precedent being that people want to use the army as it was originally sold to them? ah yes, i see what you mean now :rolleyes: these kind of comments make me laugh when i think back to the hordes of people who said it would be ok in friendly games.

Its not not really the same as brets and wood elves because i dont believe brets and wood elves have been in the same army since before i started playing.

Gekiganger
11-08-2008, 19:30
As logan said, there's a difference between claiming an alliance between 2 races for (what appears to be in the example) a simply 'I want this unit in my army' argument. Considering the vast majority of chaos players will have units stretching across the 3 books that have suddenly became unusable is a tad different.

Ubermensch Commander
11-08-2008, 19:45
and when GW allows the Choas books to mix units again, i will have no problem with that. Frankly i dont much care. But the rules are what they are and i would like the rules not be broken by mixing different army lists simply due to some unhappy players. That was the only point.
As for the precendent it sets, let me put it thusly.
"Chaos players get to mix and match units....well why can't the "good" races, who are inherently less fractious in the fluff?" and other such arguments that wonder why one player could IGNORE THE RULES and they could not.
Or if we are ignoring this rule, why not just let Orcs ignore rules they dont like(Just go to the "Why do people want Orcs to suck" thread here on Warseer for examples)? I am well aware the OP was not suggesting these things at all. I am simply worried that ignoring rules because the players are not happy with them sets a VERY bad precedent.

lord mekri
11-08-2008, 20:09
my thoughts on this is that while i intially disliked the split, i now think its ok. as long as each book gets done well i am happy.
as for the arguement for mixed gods not making sence, but mixed races under one god making sence, i have to say i think they make equal amounts of sence.
by that i mean demons and beast and chaos warriors dont like each other just cause they worship the same god. the mortals think they are better than the beasts, the beasts think they are btter than the mortals, and the demons think they are all meat to be slaughtered.
if you want to go back to the beginning, chaos is and has always been about the champion (or in this case the general). the strenght of the champion is what forms the army and holds it together. the army fights who the champion wants to fight, and allies with who the champion chooses to ally with.
in 5th edition, you chose a champion. you picked his retinue based on both race and god. then you picked another character (in th esame army) and built his retine (same god/race as character), and so on till the army points were spent.
so, you could have a Khorne warrior and retinue, and a nurgle demon and retinue, and a tzeentch beastman and retinue, in th esame army (i believe one of the gods would always be excluded based on who the general is.)
in 6th, they switched this a bit by introducing Undivided (as well as the dual book idea).
basically, your genral decided what was core, and what gods you could take. if he was undivided, he could take any mixture of gods. if he was god speciific, he coudl take that god, and undivided. his specials would be taken from the other two races. so you could have a undivided mortal general with any mortal (any god) as core, with demons and beasts of any god as specials. you could mix (or not) to your hearts content.
now is 7th they are trying something different. you can mix gos to your hearts content, but they must all come from the same race. in essence, this is the same kind if idea as making us able to mix races, but have only one god. basically, instead of three books (beasts, demons, mortal) you would have 4 (all khorne, all slanesh, all nurgle, all tzeentch). with no mixing of the gods. at this point you would **** of some other people (basically, not every one is going to be happy no matter what they do).

if they had to make the split, i prefer it based on race, not god.

you can still easily theme an army around one god (you know, self imposed restrictions?).
and you can "mix" by using allied contigents (which makes more sence anyway).
for instance, play 3000pts, with 1 2000pnt mortal army(withs its won general) teamed up with 1000 pts of beasts (again, with its own general).

the only place this wont work is in tournaments, but tourneys are not the be all and end all of our hobby.

Rodman49
11-08-2008, 20:16
Well, no actually not just Core as that would preclude things like using a Greater Daemon. Which I don't think is too much to ask for in a Chaos army of any type.

You could still use a Greater Daemon (Lord and General) - your list could then include Bloodletters as Core and marked Warriors/Knights as Special; I guess you could also use Marauders too.

Lordsaradain
11-08-2008, 20:23
I'd rather have seen god specofic books than the division of "races". That way each army could become pure incantaions of their god; tzeentch, magicky , slaanesh, fast and deadly, khorne, brutal and hardhitting and nurgle, a slow and tough force which withers down its opponents with disease while slowly advancing.

Zoolander
11-08-2008, 20:29
I'm not fond of how GW split the books. My human chaos miniatures are going to collect a lot of dust now... sigh. That being said, they designed each army with the idea in mind that you could NOT combine them. You may think it's no big deal to do so, but you may be inadverently throwing the list out of balance. Remember, the lists are being designed with inherent flaws and weaknesses. By combining armies you may be wrecking that careful design. For instance, VC have no missile troops to speak of. It was done that way on purpose. If I started taking TK archers or an SSC, how would that disturb that balance? I would suggest dumping the idea and embracing each army on it's own merits.

P.S. - This poll is horrible worded. I, too, thought you were talking about combing gods, something you can do now. I would suggest doing another poll, as many of your votes may be invalid as some may be confused by your question.

snyggejygge
11-08-2008, 21:04
If properly themed & you have more fun doing it like this then I wouldnīt have a problem w. it, after all, itīs about having fun & GW themselves have said that the most important rule is to have fun, the rest are just guidelines...

Phunting
12-08-2008, 16:54
If properly themed & you have more fun doing it like this then I wouldnīt have a problem w. it, after all, itīs about having fun & GW themselves have said that the most important rule is to have fun, the rest are just guidelines...Well that's what I've always thought. Personally I couldn't care less if I win or loose, as long as I enjoy the game. Still people seem to hooked on the idea if they don't have a carefully crafted 50% chance of winning from the very start it's impossible to enjoy one's self. I don't understand why at all.

Still, I respect that they don't have top play against what they don't want to. I'm encouraged the majority of people at least wouldn't mind the idea.

Schelle
12-08-2008, 17:22
[QUOTE=Phunting;2859090]Well that's what I've always thought. Personally I couldn't care less if I win or loose, as long as I enjoy the game. Still people seem to hooked on the idea if they don't have a carefully crafted 50% chance of winning from the very start it's impossible to enjoy one's self. I don't understand why at all.

So Frikkin' true. I played a 5000 pts game the other day, VC against O&G, and one of my Vampire Lords completely destroyed Grimgor Ironhide with a smashing killing blow. That fact just made my day. I lost the game over all, but I couldn't care less. :D

Icarus
12-08-2008, 20:07
I'd have no problem with this, its a good idea and its the way I wish things worked. If I had known Daemons weren't going to be compatible with other Chaos units when I preordered my army, well, i wouldn't have bothered.

Your house rules seem well made too. I see no problem with taking core choices as allies etc, sounds like it would make for a fun army.