PDA

View Full Version : Combined Chaos army



Schelle
25-10-2008, 20:46
I am planning to start a Chaos army, but was a bit surprised that the new Chaos army apparently does not combine Daemons, Mortals and Beasts in one single army anymore.:cries:

I will still combine my army and basically ignore this rule, depending if my opponent allows this of course.:angel:

I just wanted to know how you guys feel about this change?

Is their any one out there who has been playing chaos for many years and still uses a combined army?

Mr_Rose
25-10-2008, 21:07
well, the thing is that the separation actually makes sense in terms of the Warhammer World - the Beastmen live in the forests of the Empire whilst the Warriors all live hundreds to thousands of miles away in the Wastes and the Daemons occupy an entirely different plane of existence. The only way all three are going to be fighting together under normal circumstances is when an invasion force of mortals gets far south enough to join up with the beasts, possibly boosting the local winds of magic enough to allow daemons to appear.
Which would be a bloody big battle, most likely, and therefore covered by the Legendary Battles rules already, which do allow you to ally all three.

The trouble with rocking up to a 2000pt game and going "I've got 1000pts of Mortals and 1000pts of Daemons, lets go" is that there are no rules for combining forces like that. What are you going to do, have two armies that just happen to be on the same side (mostly acceptable) or have one army with one general and BSB and then just let everyone be affected by everything, despite the fact that this would make for a lot of potentially game-breaking combos?

Schelle
25-10-2008, 21:44
Thanks for sharing that warhammer world bit, to be honest it makes sense that they would not join. However, my idea was to start a Mortal army and slowly build it up to about 3000/4000 pts. Once I reached that army I would start adding some daemon units and treat them as a special choice, just like they did in the previous WoC army book.

It would mainly be daemon core units. Like a unit of 20 bloodletters which were summoned by a twisted sorcerer of chaos to aid to the slaughter. I believe it will create a fun and twisted way to play chaos.

Although I am obviously aware that some people might complain and say that a Mortal army of Chaos is strong enough to deal with any treat on their own.:)

Mr_Rose
25-10-2008, 21:51
Well, since you're basically gonna have to play by special arrangement to get a 4000pt plus game in anyway, go ahead and ask. At that level, most people should be fine with it.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
26-10-2008, 03:36
I wouldn't bother with a chaos army right now. GW seems determined to make the new books as boring as possible.

Schelle
26-10-2008, 14:26
I guess that with your statement you disagree with the fact that Chaos armies can not be combined anymore Slaaneshi?

Do you still use combined armies though or a combined army?

Cherrystone
26-10-2008, 14:40
Also not liking the split in chaos in this edition we allow deamons within a beasts or warrior army (representing a small amount of summoning, gifts etc).

These are the house rules we follow (this is for beasts, the same be true for warriors too).


To allow Daemons of Chaos within a Beasts army the following restrictions must be adhered to

No Daemon character is allowed.

Daemons of a particular god can only be taken if the General has
the same Mark. Unmarked Daemons can be taken by any General.

Daemon Core units count as being a Special choice in a Beasts of
Chaos army.

The number of Daemon units in each category cannot exceed the
number of Beast units.
For example, it is not allowed to have 3 Special Daemon units and
only 1 Special Beast unit.[/I][/I][/I]

Lorcryst
26-10-2008, 15:09
The separation of the three branches of the Chaos Tree doesn't make sense in the Old World ...

Look at the page 17 of the current Beast of Chaos army book, there's a lovely map there showing the biggest concentrations of Beastmen warbands ... the Northern Wastes are crawling with them, even more so than the forests of the Old World ...

The only explanation behind this change is : because GW said so, totally rewritting 25 years of established backstory.

Still, those are the rules we must play with. Nothing prevents you from ignoring those rules or coming up with "house rules" to play with a mixed Chaos army, tough.

And yes, I'm bitter and disagree with the "new" chaos ... I've collected Chaos models for more than 10 years, because of the sheer chaotic factor of a horde a varied followers of Chaos, I had a 5K legit army list and a few units to spare, and now I have three bunches of mostly useless models that cannot form a single legal army list until I buy even more models.

Discord
26-10-2008, 15:13
The only way all three are going to be fighting together under normal circumstances is...

Pretty much all the time.


well, the thing is that the separation actually makes sense in terms of the Warhammer World - the Beastmen live

About everywhere. And they're the perfect servant race, flocking en masse to any chaos army, dedicating themselves to champions or simply joining in for the hell of it. Or at least that's how it's always been in older fluff.


whilst the Warriors all live hundreds to thousands of miles away in the Wastes

And form themselves into roaming warbands, that regularly wander southwards to loot and pillage. Accompanied by the aforementioned beastmen.


and the Daemons occupy an entirely different plane of existence.

From which they are summoned by chaotic sorcerers. Granted, they're somewhat rare in comparison to warriors and beastmen. However, a daemonic army that isn't fighting somewhere on a daemonic battlefield makes far less sense than a bunch of them being summoned by some beastman fire-dancing ritual.

But to answer the original question, here's my take on the issue. Now, I'm peeved that GW split the army books by critter type and doesn't allow them to ally. What's next, separating the greenskins? Anyhow, I've always been a chaos fan and I want a new army. Preferably one that's actually playable by official rules. My solution? Counts-as. Beastmen count as marauders. Centaurs/centigor make fine mounted marauders. Minotaurs can be used as ogres. Daemons can be used as forsaken. Things like that. Just equip them appropriately, make sure you're opponent knows what's what and you're good to go.

nerull1025
26-10-2008, 15:24
The separation doesn't really make sense for beasts but demons is just even more ludicrous, even moreso in 40k due to the much greater distances involved. In the fluff demons need followers to establish belief in them or summon in the first place yet they've chosen to completely go against that.
I'd be more forgiving of the separation, and GWs obvious ploys and disregard for their own fluff, though if they actually did a decent job of filling out each army list. The warriors got a single new unit, the forsaken, which are completely useless since chosen are better in every way, if it was D6 instead of d3 attacks then they'd actually have a point. Plus the magic items are still 95% useless.

The demons just got most of the units they used to have anyway. I have yet to play them to see what all the gamebreaking fuss is all about but didn't much to complain about in the book, to me the new hydra by itself looks more broken.
I'll hope against hope the beasts are done better since I still have a bunch unpainted but I doubt it.
I'd allow for combination of the armies, with some limitations similar to the above, in personal games myself but I only play chaos in both systems atm so I'm prolly more understanding about it then most.
As far as using combos myself, I just got the warrior rules so they'll need a tad of revamping and I don't have many demons to combine anyway. They're too expensive for all that metal and required conversions, which is ridiculous since the bitz ordering is gone.

One last thing, why is the palanquin always soooooo useless?

But ya counts as is your friend, that's the only way chaos remains interesting now, when you take the rules and fluff into your own hands where you can.

Avian
26-10-2008, 15:45
Realistically, it is far easier to update an army if it comes in one book only. Remember all the discussions about Storm of Chaos lists and how they'd work together with the updated army books? The more self-contained a book is, the easier is to balance it.

Gazak Blacktoof
26-10-2008, 15:46
Those sound like a good set of rules cherrystone. I've already cleared some sort of mixing of the books with my group, I'll see what they say about these in particular.

Schelle
26-10-2008, 16:04
Thanks for those houserules Cherrystone, think of using hem myself:D

It's good to see that most of you share my opinion and feel that Chaos armies should still be able to have combined forces, obviously with some restrictions.

Like I said previously I will build up a Mortal army untill I reach 4000 pts, then join in some Daemonic core units and later on (when the new Beastmen Book is released) I will add about 3000pts of beastmen to the fray. By that time I should have a Chaos army of 10.000pts strong. Woepie, let the slaughter begin:skull:

mistformsquirrel
26-10-2008, 16:29
Here's my personal house-rule idea:

Whatever your general is, that army book works as normal.

The other two books you may only take Hero level characters, and only if they total equal or fewer than characters from the General's book.

The other two books have all their units shifted up one slot-type - so Core becomes Special, Special becomes Rare, and Rare is unusuable.

Thus in a list with a Chaos Lord, you would need at least 3 Core units from the Warriors of Chaos book, then you can choose Special from the WoC book or Core from the other two books (counting them as special), then choose Rare from the WoC or Special from the other two books (counting them as rare).

Magic Items and Gifts do not cross between books under any circumstances. (If you have a Daemon Prince from WoC, they can't take DoC gifts or vice-versa)

What do you all think? Sound reasonable? It forces the army the General is from to be the mainstay of your force while opening up some options from the other books.

Schelle
26-10-2008, 16:36
Sounds cool Mistformsquirrel and exactly what I had in mind as well, although I believe I will just use Daemonic core units in my Mortal army and count them as special; I do not feel like using a Daemonic special unit and counting them as rare just yet. Maybe somewhere in the future when my army reaches 15.000 pts (LOL)

Gazak Blacktoof
26-10-2008, 16:40
@mistformsquirrel

Yes I think I posted something similar previously though I'd also let players use rares as a rare and a special. One of the reasons I like cherrystone's idea is that it allows you take take a rare choice from another book.

mistformsquirrel
26-10-2008, 18:22
@Gazak Blacktoof - >.> sorry I didn't see your post!

Gazak Blacktoof
26-10-2008, 18:25
@Gazak Blacktoof - >.> sorry I didn't see your post!

Its not in this thread, so that's understandable :p.

mistformsquirrel
26-10-2008, 18:29
Ahh <@,@> that DOES explain it!

Cherrystone
26-10-2008, 20:34
We did originaly think about not allowing rare choices but we had quite a few models and didnt fancy getting rid of them :)

Valtiel
26-10-2008, 21:19
http://z4.invisionfree.com/cotec/index.php?showtopic=3743

I posted this some time ago on Chamber of the Everchosen. Tell me what you think if you can bother to read through it.

Znail
27-10-2008, 00:37
Hmm, I like the idea of shifting one slot:

Core->Special.

Special->Rare.

Rare->Rare+Special.

Lord->Lord+Hero.

Hero->Herox2.

Limiting diffrent gods is probobly a good idea too as most who wants to use this type of rulesets wants to do so to field an old army that used to have that type of restriction anyway. Greater Daemons and Exalted Daemons used to take up extra hero slots before too.

Else so would the main thing to look out for that the army doesnt get too good that your opponents starts to dislike the suggested rules.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
27-10-2008, 09:21
Schelle,

I've gotten rid of my fantasy chaos army. It's not longer interesting.