PDA

View Full Version : Does anyone think chaos marines have fallen off?



rabblerouser
22-01-2011, 14:01
The other thread got me thinking. I really dislike how the plastic chaos marines are just mostly chaosified mk6/7 marines. According to the fluff chaos marines have remained in the warp since M31 where time has no meaning, so they should really be wearing older marks of power armour with newer bits scavenged from dead loyalists. The old 2nd edition models did not accurately represent the older suits, but they looked more archaic than the current range with the heavy cables running on the outside of the chest and slimmer, more basic looking helmets. I think the plague marines lost out the most - the current models are basically just conversions cast in metal. Anyone with moderate GS skills could make similar figures out of the undivided box.

Anyone else miss the old 2nd edition range?

Hicks
22-01-2011, 14:49
As far as Plague Marines go, I totaly agree. The new ones are mostly crapy convertions of the plastic CSMs. That's why I use the old ones, plus you gatta love the cute spike on their helmets.

Chaos marines aren't all 10,000 years old though. They do get new recruits and the dark mechanicus helps keeping the stocks of weapons and armors high. This means that their appearance can vary a lot. It would be nice though if they had at least some really older marks of armor on the sprues.

AlphariusOmegon20
22-01-2011, 15:45
Personally I liked the Spiked helmet PM version. I liked it far better than I do the current Plague Marines, which look to me like little lumps of metal someone forgot to finish sculpting.

As for the rest, I do have to say that the current Noise Marines are a vast improvement over the 2E ones, and I love the current Berzerkers, The TS could use a bit of updating away from the current hybrids.

The current regular Chaos Marines are good compared to the old metal ones, though some of the old metal ones do mesh well with the current ones (The tasseled helmet from back then blends almost seamlessly into a unit of current ones.)

Overall, I'd say we have it mostly better now.

impala
22-01-2011, 16:19
I think the Rogue Trader-era Chaos Marines were the best. They had lots of personality and for the most part conveyed malevolence...

Still Standing
22-01-2011, 16:27
Fluffwise, they had all (except perhaps the new Mk7) armour during the Heresy. So the only thing you will rarely see in a Chaos army is the armour with the high collar (sold as Sgts in tac boxes).

insectum7
22-01-2011, 16:53
I think the Rogue Trader-era Chaos Marines were the best. They had lots of personality and for the most part conveyed malevolence...

Totally agree, those guys were crazy.

NixonAsADaemonPrince
22-01-2011, 17:06
I've got some of the old metal models and I don't mind them, though I don't think they are better than the current ones. I do agree however that Chaos Marines need a remake to make them less like Loyalists with spikes, something like the Space Wolf box would be good. Seeing what they did with Dark Eldar as well I have high hopes for the spikier races.

Seth the Dark
22-01-2011, 18:48
Chaos can always use more spikes!

Damien 1427
22-01-2011, 19:05
To be honest with you all, I look forward to the day when Chaos gets more than Loyalists With Spikes And Tentacles. Or, maybe if we're lucky, a few more skulls.

Mannimarco
22-01-2011, 19:45
Agreed there should be more to Chaos than "Loyalist + spikes - most of the options"

DuskRaider
22-01-2011, 22:14
Forge World conversion kits are the best option, truthfully. At least for Death Guard & World Eaters right now. They have distinct armor marks, all of which are Mk. II - Mk. VI. I've been converting my FW Death Guard army over using the Pre-Heresy armor and weapon kits from FW as well to make their armor sets look complete, works wonders.

Born Again
23-01-2011, 08:03
It's best to just pretend the Citadel Plague Marines don't exist. Not a hard thing to do when the Forge World ones are so lovely.

But as already said, by the time of Heresy they were already up to MkVI armour, possibly MkVII I think? So they would have the full range, except for MkVIII. In the time since then, their armour would have been repaired, reworked, and had parts scavenged from defeated foes. However, it's true we only see a very limited array on the sprues. If there were actual MkII parts on there, it would be cool.

Having said that, I think the current models of the basic CSMs are perfectly fine and there's no rush at all to get them replaced.

BeatTheBeat
23-01-2011, 08:10
I'm one of the guys who think that a big part in "de-spikefying" CSM and giving them an image of their own would be achieved by giving them lots of MKII-MKV. In general, CSM should be very much as portrayed in the Heresy artbooks, I think.

Cheers,
BTB

Goatboy
23-01-2011, 08:24
Put me in the camp that wishes CSM were more that Imperial+spikes. And not just on the infantry but across the whole range. The defiler is a step in the right direction but they need more unique stuff.
Yes they dont have the rescources the Imperium has, but there also not constrained by the dogma of the Ad Mech and the have acces to loads of demony stuff. At the very least they should have there own Rhino and Landraider varients.

shabbadoo
23-01-2011, 23:59
With plastic kits becoming even more purposely designed for certain armies(i.e. the latest Space Wolves and Blood Angels offerings), this bodes well for the various Chaos Legions stylistically speaking. With the *Marine* part of Chaos Marines having been mostly ignored in the last five years, GW has a chance to unleash a whole slew of plastics for what is still one of the most popular of 40K armies. There has been an inkling that GW have been working on them for some time now. I would love to see not only new plastics for the 4 Cult Legions(I'll include Berserkers, as the models are simply horrid), Havocs, and Raptors, but also some sets for the Undivided Legions. Oh, and some plastic Plaguebearers. That's potentially 12 plastic sets right there(1 large initial release, two smaller wave releases). GW really has a chance to unload on the wallets of Chaos Space Marine players this next time around so far a plastics are concerned. My Chaos stuff is all but gone at this point, but a revitalized model range could suck me back in very easily.

qwertywraith
24-01-2011, 02:21
With plastic kits becoming even more purposely designed for certain armies(i.e. the latest Space Wolves and Blood Angels offerings), this bodes well for the various Chaos Legions stylistically speaking. With the *Marine* part of Chaos Marines having been mostly ignored in the last five years, GW has a chance to unleash a whole slew of plastics for what is still one of the most popular of 40K armies. There has been an inkling that GW have been working on them for some time now. I would love to see not only new plastics for the 4 Cult Legions(I'll include Berserkers, as the models are simply horrid), Havocs, and Raptors, but also some sets for the Undivided Legions. Oh, and some plastic Plaguebearers. That's potentially 12 plastic sets right there(1 large initial release, two smaller wave releases). GW really has chance to really unload on the wallets of Chaos Space Marine players this next time around so far a plastics are concerned. My Chaos stuff is all but gone at this point, but a revitalized model range could suck me back in very easily.

Very true plastics are getting better and better. The thing with the next chaos release (I speculate) is that the current dex had no new units added to it. I suspect the new codex will buff out the list with many new units so that will restrict GW's ability to produce resculped current models. With that in mind I would not be surprised to see:

1. Abbadon resculpted. He's old, and short.
2. A new Basic CSM box. These guys have been redone almost as many times as loyalists, even if just recut.
3. New bikes, plastic raptors, or obliterators.

I think that the cult boxes are functional enough that resculpting them will not be a priority. That doesn't mean they won't do it (see Pyrovore). Besides, they probably have tons of stock of the cult marines that are not selling since forge world already covers the 2 best cults, Thousand Sons are terrible, and the Emperor's Children box is a big waste of money when you can just but the weapons as bits and are not :( very good anyway.

Chem-Dog
24-01-2011, 03:28
Fluffwise, they had all

Not exactly, there was an article way back when (wd issue 128 or thereabouts) which went into the development of powerarmour from MkI "Thunder armour" right up to MkIIX "Errant" armour. I can't remember if it was in this article, or elsewhere but there was a list of what legion had what armour. I can remember seeing Jes Goodwyn's "Gothic and Eldrich" art book with a stunning picture of an Emperor's Children traitor marine and the design notes next to it commenting on the look (of all of the traitors) being indicative, in part, of the mark of armour they wore.
Those pictures led to these four models (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod890005a&rootCatGameStyle=)

Typically, a Heresy era Traitor would be in Mks 1-4 as MkV was a stopgap addressing resupply problems encountered during the Heresy, MkVI onwards are really creations of the post Heresy Imperium, this is why you don't get Chaos Wombles. Of course you have looting, physical reworking and the mutating power of chaos to consider in the 10k years hense.


And IIRC, Emperor's Children were thouroughly re-equipped with MkIV "Maximus" armour not long before the Heresy kicked in.



I think that the cult boxes are functional enough that resculpting them will not be a priority.


GW really should give cults more of a showing the next time round, I think this was one of their biggest mistakes in the current CSM Codex, if they got anyhere near giving each of the cults a single unit in each slot of the FOC (like they've done with each god for the Daemons) then new all plastic cult boxes would be a much more servicable idea. Hell, I'd take a Cult specific sprue for each cult if it meant I could build my Noise Marine army....even if it was direct only. Considering loyalist marine flavours (I'm looking at Black Templars, Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Blood Angels) can get an "Conversion pack" at least give the CSM's an equivalent....


Besides, they probably have tons of stock of the cult marines that are not selling since forge world already covers the 2 best cults

Not seeing the Logic here, they probably keep stock of Hybrid kits quite low as it is and it's not like those few kits they'll have knocking around will go spare, the metal can be re-used and the plastic....idk if it can be reused, but it's hardly the most costly element of the boxes, at worst they can go in the studio bitz box....:D.


Thousand Sons are terrible, and the Emperor's Children box is a big waste of money when you can just but the weapons as bits

The TS's aren't THAT bad, the Sorceror is the nicest sorceror they've produced to date (with the obvious exception of Arhiman) and one of my all time classics. The Noise Marine squad is a terribly bad buy though, I've spent ages working out what to order to avoid silly waste, problem is the only part that's not in the bitz pack is the Doom Siren, and all my Champs have to have one..... Hurrumph.

Sir_Turalyon
24-01-2011, 12:43
Theorethicaly, many of the Mark 5 suits users were adding chest plates to cover exposed cables; if I remember correctly 3rd edition codex had drawings of such armour and it looked very similiar to Mark7. Emperors Childern were puting chest plates on their Mark 4s to make room for imperial eagle chestpiece. So many of what looks like Mark 7s can be justified as upgraded older marks.

Not to mention kitbashing; given that Space Wolves have a leg piece with one Mark 6 and one Mark 7 greave, what CSM may archieve by personalisation or just using spares at hand may no longer resemble any standard model.

And yes, I do miss the older models, including RT twisted madness. What I really regret is that warped and meanacing CSM aesthethics introduced in Space Crusade never reallly took off. A good example can be found here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/131123/space-crusade?size=large

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 14:56
I don't think GW knows what they want to do with Chaos.

Based on the concept art of the old 2nd edition models, by Jes, they were more distinctive because he assigned different combinations of armor components to each cult, to make these different blended and distinctive looks.

GW's now relying less on composition to dictate distinctive aesthetic and more on specific detail. Instead of a particular mix of armor defining the chaos cults look its become more a matter of the added on bits... head-dress and chain axe, head-dress and loin cloth, gooey mutations, and distinctive cannons.

There is nothing wrong with those details being used to distinguish different cults of chaos from one another, the problem is that there is less and less distinguishing a chaos aesthetic from the Imperial, to a point where if you add those bits to imperial models there is no distinguishing them. Chaos has to be more than an afterthought to Imperial Space Marines.

Unfortunately GW's trend is toward making Chaos Marines more and more generic. The shift from Chaos Legions trapped in the eye terror, sent out like dogs by their deific chaos masters to that of Rogue Space Marines lured by chaos that stripped them of cult specific daemons is a clear example of that. The problem with the latter notion is it only promotes a direction of developement towards Imperial models plus chaos bits. As long as the chaos aesthetic is nothing but imperial marines with add-ons, chaos will only lose ground.

I think a number of things should be done to reinvigerate their aesthetic:

First, make a true Chaos Rhino, one that is distinctive from the Imperial one by virtue of chaos iconography and details being incorporated into the model rather than being glued on. This could have throwbacks to an earlier pre-heresy Rhino or have details showing some of the modifications done to keep these infernal machines running. In the very least the add-ons should be done atleast as well as the add-ons for the Imperial factions that benefit more significantly from their add on kit... SoB and Blood Angels for example. Chaos doesn't even have alternate panels.

Second, make the basic chaos marine more distinctive. Moving back to the more twisted appearance of Rogue Trader Era and 2nd edition models, incorporate some of the sort of details that the plastic possesesed chaos space marines have on their bits into the basic chaos space marines but to a lesser degree. Effectively show them further on that path towards corruption, than the current models.

Third, just because chaos is in the eye of terror, doesn't mean they don't develope technology. They have 50% of the Adeptus Mechanicus that joined chaos. Its the half that played with darker aspects of technology some of which manifests its self already... obliterators, Defiler, the weapons of the Chaos Cults. This should just become more wide spread. Give chaos marines a special weapon distinctive from loyal marines. More daemon engines and similar technolgies that show Chaos' use of the daemonic resources it has in abundance.

Aesthetically, 40k has much less opportunity for organic looking models; there are tyranids, orks, and kroot. Tyranids are purely organic; Orks stand as organic infantry with (low-)techy vehicles; and kroot aren't really going to get anything done to them. This leaves the opportunity for Chaos to retake ownership of an aesthic that blends organic and technological aesthetics into a single model; like obliterators, deamon princes, blood crushers and the soul grinder do. In taking ownership and defining their aesthetic around it, their aesthetic becomes more distinctive and becomes the focal point for improving Chaos Marines.

AlphariusOmegon20
24-01-2011, 15:45
Chaos doesn't even have alternate panels.

FW took care of that.


Second, make the basic chaos marine more distinctive. Moving back to the more twisted appearance of Rogue Trader Era and 2nd edition models, incorporate some of the sort of details that the plastic possesesed chaos space marines have on their bits into the basic chaos space marines but to a lesser degree. Effectively show them further on that path towards corruption, than the current models.

I could get behind them looking a bit more like the 2E models.

The RT models look horrid to me aesthetically.



Third, just because chaos is in the eye of terror, doesn't mean they don't develope technology. They have 50% of the Adeptus Mechanicus that joined chaos. Its the half that played with darker aspects of technology some of which manifests its self already... obliterators, Defiler, the weapons of the Chaos Cults. This should just become more wide spread. Give chaos marines a special weapon distinctive from loyal marines. More daemon engines and similar technolgies that show Chaos' use of the daemonic resources it has in abundance.

This is the big one, and the main reason why I've never understood why Chaos has never had Razorbacks, for example.

BTW, you also forgot the Vindicator, which Chaos got before any other Marines did.

Erwos
24-01-2011, 15:59
This is the big one, and the main reason why I've never understood why Chaos has never had Razorbacks, for example.
In the usual GW fashion, they almost certainly figured combi-weapons and havoc launchers were "just as good", despite being nowhere NEAR comparable. (That is to say, terrible shooting is not a replacement for good shooting.)


BTW, you also forgot the Vindicator, which Chaos got before any other Marines did.
Not in 40k. Maybe in Space Marine / Epic?

AlphariusOmegon20
24-01-2011, 16:05
In the usual GW fashion, they almost certainly figured combi-weapons and havoc launchers were "just as good", despite being nowhere NEAR comparable. (That is to say, terrible shooting is not a replacement for good shooting.)


Not in 40k. Maybe in Space Marine / Epic?

Yes, in 40K. The Iron Warriors had it before anyone else, though they could take it only as 0-1.

crandall87
24-01-2011, 16:17
I would definatly love to see older marks of armour used with chaos plastics. I personally convert a lot of mine up to use older armour. I am working on a MK1 Rhino and my Noise Marines use MK5 parts. I'm also a big fan of the HH terminator armour with the big shoulder pads.

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 16:25
FW took care of that.
That is a poor excuse for poor product coherency. FW is suppose to supplement and at most fill gaps, it isn't suppose to solve an armies woes.

I am talking about a "Chaos Rhino" being a"CHAOS Rhino" and not a decorated Imperial Rhino.

My aside about "front panels" was just to say the Chaos add-on doesn't even do what the add-on sprues for other Imperial factions do. That Chaos plays second fiddle even in comparisson to other armies that use hand-me-down kits. That this goes to the root of how low GW sees Chaos Marines' potential.

Aside from the Defiler and by extension the Soul Grinder chaos' only other unique vehicle kit is a circa 1995 metal Dreadnought. Chaos should not get the Imperiums toys, but it should get something.



I could get behind them looking a bit more like the 2E models.

The RT models look horrid to me aesthetically.
I used the 2E and RT as merely pointing the idea in a direction, but my point was merely to say "that way". I don't really want a full-on revisit to those models, but RT era the average chaos marines were more organic and more easily distinguished from the Imperial Marines and that distinctiveness is what I want. I prescribe looking at the nature of the detail on the Possessed Chaos space marines as an example of how it can be done. Tone the possessed marines down, to show Chaos marines at an earlier manifestation of corruption and you have something that is more than Imperial plus stars and arrows.




This is the big one, and the main reason why I've never understood why Chaos has never had Razorbacks, for example.

BTW, you also forgot the Vindicator, which Chaos got before any other Marines did.
I don't believe chaos should have a Razorback. Why would chaos ever invest time and energy into developing a Razorback approximation when it could instead produce something more worthwhile by means of daemonic infusion. It just goes to further move chaos towards being loyalist marines less newer units.

The vindicator existed for Space Marines long before it did for chaos. It was in WD for the imperium as a build it your self and rules (1989). It existed for the Imperium in Epic before chaos ('91-'92). It had an Armorcast add-on kit for the Imperium ('92-'96). It had the 3rd edition model before chaos ever even had rules ('99-'05). Am I missing something?

Jofus
24-01-2011, 17:16
I don't know why GW didn't give Chaos a 20 man transport when they upped the max squad size to 20. I am sure this would somehow be an unbalanced transport rule wise but sure beats walking 20 CSMs across the board. And why do CSMs follow the codex astartes? If a squad wants a heavy weapon in it they don't have some silly book telling them they need 10 men to take it.

I will be happy, and broke, gamer if GW every decided to make upgrade sprues for every legion, but at this point I really don not see it happening. We are lucky we got the metal bitz form back during the IA articles, minus Alpha Legion, Word Bearers, and Black Legion.

Erwos
24-01-2011, 17:38
Yes, in 40K. The Iron Warriors had it before anyone else, though they could take it only as 0-1.
Considering I bought a used SM Vindicator when Chaos 3.5E came out... pretty sure you're wrong.

And I agree that a 20-man transport would have been insane. LR variant of some sort?

Pasha
24-01-2011, 17:39
I think that the current models for chaos marines are horrid at best.

Berserkers have decent legs/body/shoulder/head, except vampire head, but there ridiculous Hulk SMASH hands just make them look silly.
I suggest Throwing out the hulk hands and just using the chaos space marine ccw , make berserkers look very decent. That goes to all the chaos miniatures if you think to put abit of personal touch they will look very good on the table.

Basically if some one is looking to build a good looking army For chaos, one have to mix and match almost the hole miniature range.

Lets not forget that most of the Original traitor marines are probably dead, or ELITE force in the world of 40k Marines that stuck around since Horus heresy are probably powerful warlords , well of retired in there Luxury ďFloridaĒ part of the Eye. And really come to visit there distant relatives in the imperial once in a blue moon with there Black Crusade.

So i would isume most of the fighting is done but resently turned marines with one or two old school marines in there warbands :evilgrin:

With that if you go ahead am mix in any of the regular space marine sprues with the chaos marines, you can make a very interesting looking army. Mostly because Chaos marine donít have squads, they have war bands. If you just go ahead and replace CM head with stupid looking pony tail with regular marine helm, its already going to make it look much better.

Erwos
24-01-2011, 17:45
You're describing Chaos as embodied by the 4E codex: a bunch of jumped-up space pirates who like daemons and have daddy issues. If this is the only version of the codex you've read, my sincerest condolences.

The version of Chaos most of us want is from 3.5E: the veteran Legionnaires of the Long War with ten thousand years of experience and hate. They have only one goal: the destruction of the false corpse-king, his empire, and his cronies. They will never forget, and they will never forgive. They lust for power and vengeance.

They are the Lost and the Damned.

Zweischneid
24-01-2011, 17:49
The other thread got me thinking. I really dislike how the plastic chaos marines are just mostly chaosified mk6/7 marines. According to the fluff chaos marines have remained in the warp since M31 where time has no meaning, so they should really be wearing older marks of power armour with newer bits scavenged from dead loyalists.

I disagree... mainly because the book is called Chaos Space Marines... not Horus Heresy Marines. Big, big difference.

Pasha
24-01-2011, 18:04
I disagree... mainly because the book is called Chaos Space Marines... not Horus Heresy Marines. Big, big difference.

I think youíre absolutely right. Chaos marines are not just the Original Traitor marines. They are all the marines that fell to the taint of chaos gods.

From most of the fluff and back round storyís I have read , I think that chaos marines are not interested in destruction of emperor. They seem to be more interested in gaining more favoured from there patron god. Those, making them mostly puppets for the chaos gods to show of and fight each other for sheer amusement of there masters. There is only one figure who actually looking to get revenge on the emperor , Abadon. Still it takes him long time to assemble any thing that resembles a fighting force to start his Black Crusade, and donít forget he have failed in all of them. If indeed all the traitor marines were so hungry to get there revenge on the imperial they would put there differences aside for greater victory. Still they donít because all of them have other agendas, which never involve destroying the Emperor.

Look at fluff the only thing thatís going for chaos marines is a bit of favour they gate from there masters. Most of renegades donít seem to be in constant state of Training/War like the imperial marines, all the do is squabble for there pity needs and wants. Were Space marines of imerium are constantly in Training or warfare against all of the 40k universe.:)

Lord Inquisitor
24-01-2011, 18:11
Well, if we're wishlisting.

I, too, would like to see more distance from the "spikey marines" thing. The way forward is as aka_mythos has put very well in his wall-o-text, lots more daemonic engines. This sort of giger-esque blending of organic and machine is a great way to differentiate the CSM from loyalists. Defilers and obliterators really are the only units that really differentiate the CSM more of this is what we need!

A full resulpt rhino kit with the gorgeous new plastic tech would be awesome, inset with murals and blasphemous designs (NOT just pointy arrows) would be a great idea, particular as this could form the basis of chaos preds and vindis.

In terms of the army design, I'd like to see some more distinction between the true original chaos marines and the faceless legions of bastardised offspring (who are, indeed, pretty much spikey marines), which shouldn't really be as impressive as their loyal kin. So maybe normal marine profile but BS3 and only Ld7/8, with the normal marking/icon upgrades. These are the chaff, newly-created CSM, fodder for the meat grinder. They aren't as well-trained as their loyalist counterparts, I can't imagine the Chaos Legions really spend as much care and effort with their new recruits, they gain their power through experience and survival of the endless crusade.

Then we have the veterans. These are "true" chaos space marines. So, for example, Chosen could do with a whole new kit, really individualistic like the possessed and the true masters of chaos. Lots of old armour pieces, trophies and esoteric or alien gear. These should be very impressive in game terms, WS6, 2A for starters, maybe even higher, great weapon options, really elite troops that are from the crusade era, possibly with "true" marks. The cult troops are somewhere in between, not quite as hardcore or experienced but totally devoted to their god.

Finally, a "generic cultist" unit is really needed to make even these beefed-up CSM veterans seems powerful. A one-sprue kit that allows you to make globs of cultist chaff. Not a return to LatD, but a single unit that can be used as living shields will get across the combined-arms approach of the Chaos Legions and contempt for human life without taking the focus too far away from the Marines themselves.

So I want: true badass elite troops as legionnaires, happy with "spikey marines" as the footsoldiers with a downgrade in skill, generic cultist unit and lots more daemon engines. That doesn't invalidate any existing kits, only adding new ones and would to my mind represent the Chaos Legions far better.

Erwos
24-01-2011, 18:27
Sounds like a good plan, Lord Inq. Give me proper Legion rules (after all, these guys get inducted into one sometimes!) and I'm sold.

Also, some of you are completely killing me here with this "they're all new renegades!" talk. That's an invention of the 4E codex, nothing more, and it's only because they were supposed to come out with a Legionaries book later (confirmed by both Gav and Allessio!).

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 18:50
I think you’re absolutely right. Chaos marines are not just the Original Traitor marines. They are all the marines that fell to the taint of chaos gods. The problem is that the Chaos Marines that are more characterful and distinguishable from the Imperial Marines, are the Chaos Legions. The chapters that go rogue and become Chaos Renegades as the newest book tries to represent them does a poor job of it. If we go with that notion of Chaos Marines, there is little or no reason for Chaos Marines to be much different from Loyalist Marines.

There are many notions of Chaos Space Marines. The current book fails to do a good job of representing any of them and thats it's problems.

The notion that the original legion's marines are long dead is flawed. The nature of chaos, the warp, and the eye of terror are such that individual chaos marines die all the time just to reemerge from the Eye of Terror again and again. The Eye of Terror is Schrodinger's cat gone horribly wrong.

Chaos renegades being freshly turned to Chaos, or scavenging and praying on loyalists for equipment should really have fewer pieces of ancient equipment and fewer pieces of the advanced tech they've shed in breaking ties. There is something much more neccessary that is missing for this notion to work than for Chaos Legions' to work.

The simple fact is "Chaos Renegades" was just an overly convenient way for GW to break away from the flaws of the Legion-centric codex without really fixing any of the other flaws.

I think a new Chaos codex should consider fractured nature of chaos more. Where with different warbands whether Legion or Renegade, the common thread is they have limited resources and supplement themselves by some infernal means. That means should define the army. In fluff Renegade chapters almost always have Traitor guardsmen running alongside; while an offshoot of Wordbearers would always have daemons. Other groups have supplemented themselves more directly, like the Techno-virus used by the chaos techmarines to become obliterators or Bile's experimentation. All the while armored might is replaced with daemonic armored might, with daemon engines striding across the field. These different drastic ends to which Chaos marines go for power are the greatest distinction for Chaos Marines from loyalists and those relationships really should be at the center of it all.

Vaktathi
24-01-2011, 19:06
Yes, in 40K. The Iron Warriors had it before anyone else, though they could take it only as 0-1.

I'm fairly certain Vindicators were available to all CSM armies in 2nd Edition looking at my 2E codex here.

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 19:12
GW saw one of the big problems with the old 3.5ed codex, and I agree, was that there were too many flavors of army builds in it, that made it nearly impossible for non-chaos players to know what to expect when they heard they were playing against Chaos. You had the 9 Legions, the Marks, and then all the veteran upgrades, giving basic units in the neighborhood of 100 different rule combinations, before upgrades. You can make argue how fitting it was, but it comes down to this being a game and there is a certain sportsmanship that was lacking.

I personally want to see the "big 4" god specific legions divorced from the codex, given their own book, and a new book refocused on the undivided, but with basic tinges of chaos cults left in. That would give a new book more room to better represnt Chaos. It cuts the 14 or so different "army lists" the 3.5 book had and brings it more reasonably down to 6 or so. Throw in the "Renegade" notion, a generic cultist or mutant unit and and a lesser daemon engine and you have a flavorful codex that only needs the tweaking of some unused self destructive units.

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 19:13
I'm fairly certain Vindicators were available to all CSM armies in 2nd Edition looking at my 2E codex here. 2nd edition allowed any Chaos army to take any imperial vehicle not present in the chaos codex by paying 50% more that the loyalist price.

DeeKay
24-01-2011, 19:23
Long post.

Seconded.

If you are serious about the whole Renegade Space Marine chapter approach, play a Space Marine force. In all honesty, Huron Blackheart is best suited for a new C:SM book anyway. Just give him a rule that says he can't take any other SC in the same force and that's that. Not all marine forces are focused on glory or duty.

In my mind, CSM should be technically inferior to normal SM (maybe even re-introduce the idea of Mk1 Plasma weapons) but they should be able to make up the deficiency with powerful, if unreliable daemonic support. And yes, I do mean the daemons themselves as well as daemonic engines. Also, someone brought up the point that most CSM lords are in fact more occupied with chasing daemonhood. As this is such a powerful theme, why isn't more done to promote that idea? Not to the extent of 3.5 but something similar.

With regards,
Dan.

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 19:41
In my mind, CSM should be technically inferior to normal SM (maybe even re-introduce the idea of Mk1 Plasma weapons) but they should be able to make up the deficiency with powerful, if unreliable daemonic support. And yes, I do mean the daemons themselves as well as daemonic engines. Also, someone brought up the point that most CSM lords are in fact more occupied with chasing daemonhood. As this is such a powerful theme, why isn't more done to promote that idea? Not to the extent of 3.5 but something similar. I think the simpliest way to put it... Daemons as technology. Chaos use daemons and daemon engines in place of where the Imperium uses a technological solution.

The "unreliable" thing has always been an issue I've had. I use a lot of units that most would call unreliable, but use them for the sake of varied play.

GW has this one annoying issue with their design of chaos units. Alot of other armies used to have units that had special rules that gave them the opportunity to be extra powerful at the cost of being self destructive... these are the "unreliable." For all the armies this has gone away, but GW for whatever reason has retained this self destructive tendency for Chaos. Just to add insult to injury though, Chaos units are charged a premium for it as if its always a good thing. Units are rendered unplayable and thats a shame. The point of there being a trade off is that it can be as bad as it is good, so why should you pay for something thats intended as break even. So while I agree with the sentiment I maybe disagree on the "how" to go about it.

I think GW should get away from "unreliable" and "self destructive" and instead make units "inconsistently good". Like how a run move is alway good, just sometimes less good. That is obviously a benefit and units should be priced accordingly.

Look at Enhanced warriors that too often lose a number of models to their own rules... you pay for the upgrade and when a model self destructs you've effectively added that premium to the rest of the squad. Whether its been "done", I dunno, but unless they said on average you lose X number of enhanced warriors and that equals this number of points so on average the cost of this upgrade should be that much less... you aren't just paying for the upgrade but paying beyond it. In much the same way if a dreadnought kills your own guys its effectively added to the cost of a unit that already struggles to make its cost back. Dreadnoughts should maybe have a random number of attacks and shots, while units like Enhance Warriors have a price re-balancing.

These are flavorful untis, and maybe the solution is to drop the cost, but GW tends to price these based on the best possible result despite the negative result being just as likely. So you tweek the cost or tweek how the benefit plays out. Seeing as "unreliable" is largely a vestigal rule structure that the rest of the game has moved away from, I favor "inconsistently good."

Vaktathi
24-01-2011, 19:50
2nd edition allowed any Chaos army to take any imperial vehicle not present in the chaos codex by paying 50% more that the loyalist price.

It's in there as a basic entry, not one of the "you can take loyalist equipment for +50%" thing I think (I knew I shouldn't have put it away yet)

aka_mythos
24-01-2011, 19:57
It's in there as a basic entry, not one of the "you can take loyalist equipment for +50%" thing I think (I knew I shouldn't have put it away yet) Exact wording aside, the points made, Chaos used to be able to do more, even if it was at a premium. And the Vindicator was pretty much available to all, but loyalists first.

I still think chaos should have the Saber instead of the Vindicator... if only as a matter of distinction.

Vaktathi
24-01-2011, 20:20
Well, with both the principle creators of the current CSM book no longer employed at the GW design studio, and the massive change in design paradigm, I'm fairly certain that whatever happens with the next CSM book, it will probably be closer to the 3.5 book than the 3.0 or 4.0 books. As has already been stated ad nauseum by many (including myself) in many threads like this, the book doesn't do anything it attempts to portray proper justice, and the refocus on Renegades over Legions wasn't the best of ideas.

I'm hoping they bring in some of the Siege of Vraks stuff, at least in some form, and put more emphasis on CSM's being few, but highly experienced and ingenious troops rather than just runaway loyalists.

daboarder
24-01-2011, 20:30
Put me in the camp that wishes CSM were more that Imperial+spikes. And not just on the infantry but across the whole range. The defiler is a step in the right direction but they need more unique stuff.
Yes they dont have the rescources the Imperium has, but there also not constrained by the dogma of the Ad Mech and the have acces to loads of demony stuff. At the very least they should have there own Rhino and Landraider varients.

I agree, I had a look through the fantasy WoC book and was AMAZED at the option they had. I think the next chaos book would benefit greatly from the inclusion of units like war shrines, mutant's and traitor guard elements all to support the CSM, buy all means don't force those choices on people but definitely flesh out the chaos worshiping loonies some more please.


Basically what I'm saying is that I want to be able to play an all marine list but it would also be nice to have the option to send out traitor gaurdsmen to die by the thousands in front of my deathgaurd....so a bit like the tyrants legion with chaos.

TheMav80
25-01-2011, 01:18
Finally getting some ACTUAL Chosen models would be great. A sprue that has a couple options from the various early marks would be great. So you could make a whole MK II, III, or IV model. Or mix them up with various bits with, like a MK VI arm, various styles of helmets and shoulder pads.

When your "good guys" are already dark gothic and covered in skulls...you need to do something else besides adding in even more skulls and spikes for your "bad guys".

Born Again
25-01-2011, 05:56
And why do CSMs follow the codex astartes? If a squad wants a heavy weapon in it they don't have some silly book telling them they need 10 men to take it.


Purely reasons of game balance.Some squads of CSM's do have lots of heavy weapons that break the codex astartes guidelines. Those squads appear in our Heavy Support section for balance reasons, and are called Havocs. It helps to not think of them as re-named Devestator squads.



If you are serious about the whole Renegade Space Marine chapter approach, play a Space Marine force. In all honesty, Huron Blackheart is best suited for a new C:SM book anyway. Just give him a rule that says he can't take any other SC in the same force and that's that. Not all marine forces are focused on glory or duty.


Then how do I include cult units and summoned daemons in my Huron-led army?

Stinkfoot
25-01-2011, 07:07
Am I really the only person who likes the GW Plague Marines?

Zweischneid
25-01-2011, 07:15
Seconded.

If you are serious about the whole Renegade Space Marine chapter approach, play a Space Marine force. In all honesty, Huron Blackheart is best suited for a new C:SM book anyway. Just give him a rule that says he can't take any other SC in the same force and that's that. Not all marine forces are focused on glory or duty.
.

Quite the opposite. I think Chaos Space Marines should be motley crews of a, perhaps Heresy area Chaos Lord/Sorcerer leading a rag-tag force of traitor, renegade and fallen Marines, a smattering of daemons, loyalist equipment (i.e. Rhinos, Landraiders) rumbling along outlandish Daemon-engines, some cult-troop mercenaries, etc., etc.. .

That is what makes a good Chaos Space Marine army.

If what you want "uniformity", and to play a force drawn exclusively from one chapter/Legion.. than you should use a Space Marine Book to make your World "Space Wolves" Eaters or Night "Blood Angels" Lords or whatever.

The Chaos Space Marine book doesn't need mono-lists, because uniform mono-armies is a horrible (not to mention unfluffy) way to play Chaos Marines in the first place.

What's worse, trying to do so would only clutter the book with unnecessary, dublicate and exploitable excess-options like the travesty that was the 3.5 Codex, so people can have "their" Fast Attack, HS, or whatever option for "their" mono-list, rather than looking at the CSM-list as ONE army to draw choices from. And if there are variant-list in a new CSM-Codex, they shouldn't be Legion/Mono-God themed, but instead provide interesting variant play-styles on the table.

Regards,
Zweischneid.

Erwos
25-01-2011, 10:34
It's in there as a basic entry, not one of the "you can take loyalist equipment for +50%" thing I think (I knew I shouldn't have put it away yet)
The Vindicator isn't in the 2nd edition codex. I just got up and looked at my copy. The only support choices are the Predator, Rhino, Dread, and Land Raider. It's also not in the 3.0E codex (it was right next to my 2E codex!). It IS in the 3.5E codex in the Iron Warriors list. If you somehow disagree, start citing page numbers. (And, FWIW, the 3E SM codex DOES have Vindicators in it.)

Also, Zwei, no one is particularly against a renegades list like what you're describing. What's obnoxious is your constant refusal to consider the feelings of others with regards to legion lists. I can't include daemons in a Blood Angels list, can I? So why is that suddenly a good proxy list for Nightlords? If you want to play a Nightlords list as traitor BAs, feel free, but demanding it not be called a Nightlords list is pretty much hypocritical. "You guys playing as Legions need to proxy; my renegades get the real deal."

Zweischneid
25-01-2011, 10:45
Also, Zwei, no one is particularly against a renegades list like what you're describing. What's obnoxious is your constant refusal to consider the feelings of others with regards to legion lists. I can't include daemons or cultists in a Space Wolves list, can I?

Is that so? There's quite alot of (quite arrogant) posts in this very thread once again stating or implying that Chaos Space Marines is/should be first and foremost the Legions and everything else is, at best, "second-class Chaos Marines" and should use a Loyalist Book (implying equal treatment in the Chaos Dex is not a priority).

These sort of biased opinions are certainly prominent enough to point out that in my opinion, going back to the "options-for-each-legion" in 3.5 style would be the worst thing to happen.

And while the 4.0 Codex aint perfect, and could use more options, those options in a future CSM-Codex should be game-play-driven, not motivated by a need to merge symmetrical list-options into each FoC-slot to cater to each and every Chaos God and Horus Heresy Novel at every major entry in the army list.

Erwos
25-01-2011, 10:57
Is that so? There's quite alot of (quite arrogant) posts in this very thread once again stating or implying that Chaos Space Marines is/should be first and foremost the Legions and everything else is, at best, "second-class Chaos Marines" and should use a Loyalist Book (implying equal treatment in the Chaos Dex is not a priority).
So, look: you're essentially saying that GW should ignore the nine legions in favor of renegades. Can you not even theoretically see how this would rub people, most of whom love the legions (poll proven!), the wrong way? Isn't that opinion arguably MORE arrogant, because it's not the popular one? It's one thing to screw people with the crowd, it's quite another to demand the crowd get screwed in favor of your unpopular personal preferences. The 3.5E codex even gave you what you wanted - renegades used the Black Legion list, which represented them extremely well.


These sort of biased opinions are certainly prominent enough to point out that in my opinion, going back to the "options-for-each-legion" in 3.5 style would be the worst thing to happen.
The flaw in your argument is that complexity is not NECESSARILY going to cause balance problems. You are essentially working on the assumption that GW will screw up if they make too large of a codex. And, frankly, so what if they do? TWC, Vendettas, Sanguinary Priests, etc. didn't break the game. It's really unlikely that some Legion variant lists would, especially to anything like the same degree - the problems in the 3.5E codex essentially stemmed from one or two variant lists, and they STILL did not break the game.


And while the 4.0 Codex aint perfect, and could use more options, those options in a future CSM-Codex should be game-play-driven, not motivated by a need to merge symmetrical list-options into each FoC-slot to cater to each and every Chaos God and Horus Heresy Novel at every major entry in the army list.
And, yet, that's what many of us want. And, moreover, if we got that, you would get what you want, too - there would be a renegades list! So, forgive me for not understanding the vitriol you direct towards the people actively promoting a design method that give you what you want. Again, you're promoting a false dichotomy: a gameplay driven codex does not need to completely ignore the fluff. Indeed, if you're looking for a pure system, 40k isn't the right one for you, period, end of story. Most of us put up with the rules because they love the universe and miniatures, not vica versa.

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 11:02
Finally getting some ACTUAL Chosen models would be great. A sprue that has a couple options from the various early marks would be great. So you could make a whole MK II, III, or IV model. Or mix them up with various bits with, like a MK VI arm, various styles of helmets and shoulder pads.

When your "good guys" are already dark gothic and covered in skulls...you need to do something else besides adding in even more skulls and spikes for your "bad guys". I agree. Chosen, as they are now, is just the laziest type of rules writing. The unit is an every option unit that has no defining characteristics. This is another perfect example of how GW doesn't really know what its doing with Chaos.

From a rules/fluff perspective the Chosen should be Chaos marines so exposed to Chaos as to start manifesting the physical signs of their corruption. The way Chosen are written is just a mish-mosh of equipment with chaos marines that aside from the extra gear don't really have much going for them.

The way Chosen rules are currently written they are really closer to how the average Chaos marines squad should be. While "Chosen" should have something more going for them. Whether you'd prefer an physically corrupted, mentally twisted, piratical, or cultish interpretaion Chosen should be towards the top of heap... just a few deeds of evil short of being a champion.

If the prescribed notion of chaos armies being a core group of chaos marines encircled with lesser minions of chaos is what we get, it insists that chosen have something more. If you look at the cult chaos marines and the "elites" of non-codex marine chapters it gives you a sense of the type of rules set Chosen should have.

Zweischneid
25-01-2011, 11:06
So, look: you're essentially saying that GW should ignore the nine legions in favor of renegades. Can you not even theoretically see how this would rub people, most of whom love the legions (poll proven!), the wrong way? Isn't that opinion arguably MORE arrogant, because it's not the popular one? It's one thing to screw people with the crowd, it's quite another to demand the crowd get screwed in favor of your unpopular personal preferences. The 3.5E codex even gave you what you wanted - renegades used the Black Legion list, which represented them extremely well.


This is not a popularity contest. Wether the 3.5E codex gave me what I "wanted" is irrelevant, because it was a broken mess that seriously disturbed the 40K gameplay. If I "want" 5 pt. Landraiders, would giving me what I "want" make a better game? No.

Legions are popular, no doubt, but trying to cater to them all in one list perfectly is a slippery road to disaster as proven by the atrocious 3.5 Codex (which gave people "what they wanted" I suppose). Barring a Codex for each Legion, sticking to Renegades with "Elements" drawn from the Legion-fluff to ground them in 40K history, while looking to build a single (or perhaps 2 or 3) viable list(s) from the combined elements the (plural) Legions and other parts of the Chaos fluff offer is the superiour strategy to creating a viable Chaos Dex as a "gameing product".



The flaw in your argument is that complexity is not NECESSARILY going to cause balance problems. You are essentially working on the assumption that GW will screw up if they make too large of a codex. And, frankly, so what if they do? TWC, Vendettas, Sanguinary Priests, etc. didn't break the game. It's really unlikely that some Legion variant lists would, especially to anything like the same degree - the problems in the 3.5E codex essentially stemmed from one or two variant lists, and they STILL did not break the game.


I disagree. On all the above.





And, yet, that's what many of us want. And, moreover, if we got that, you would get what you want, too - there would be a renegades list! So, forgive me for not understanding the vitriol you direct towards the people actively promoting a design method that give you what you want. Again, you're promoting a false dichotomy: a gameplay driven codex does not need to completely ignore the fluff. Indeed, if you're looking for a pure system, 40k isn't the right one for you, period, end of story. Most of us put up with the rules because they love the universe and miniatures, not vica versa.

Again, this is not a Kindergarden-debate of what I or others "want", but of what makes a good Codex. If my dichotomy is indeed a false one, I am looking forward to be proven wrong. As it stands, the 3.5 Codex above all is a shining example of the fact that my dichotomy is basically right and I would hope GW errs in favour of gameplay (i.e. 4.0 Codex), rather than in favour of fluff (i.e. 3.5. Codex) because the former can be supplemented by Black Library, FW, or whatever, while the latter means Chaos once again goes down the toilet.

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 11:45
The problem with the 3.5E codex was the excess volume of upgrades and variations to core units that in an unsporting way made it difficult for non-chaos players to know what a "chaos" army actually was.

I'm going off the top of my head... but for example, even before weapon options you had 9 different legions... 5 different marks... and 4+ veteran upgrades... and "Enhanced Warriors"... all different ways of reconfiguring the basic Chaos Space Marine. So before you take weapons options into consideration you had too many variations with in a single unit... not taking redundancies or restriction in consideration its over 100 rule combinations and permutations. IE too much.

It was like having multiple codices in one, but without the seperations and restrictions the codices would each have if they were independent of each other. Something like 3.5E codex could work, but you need many more pages in a Codex to make the tweeks necessary and put in place the appropriate restrictions to tone it down. As it was, it was too free form and by virtue of so many options really cut out the strategic thinking. The army had a spectrum of cost and capabilities such that it was easier to say a little less shooty a little more assault and there was a unit you could choose. This is a luxury other armies don't have... other armies have to make strategic choices that played to greater extremes with trade offs.

The 4th edition codex has the opposite problem of too few units and choices. I think the resentment from 3.5E to 4E is that between the legion specific rules, the chaos marks, veteran upgrades, and the variety of Daemons GW only needed to get rid of one maybe two of these to bring the volume of variations down to a reasonable level... GW got rid of three and because upgrades have a multiplicative relationship on number of variations you have a book with signifcantly too few units and choices.

AlphariusOmegon20
25-01-2011, 13:59
The Vindicator isn't in the 2nd edition codex. I just got up and looked at my copy. The only support choices are the Predator, Rhino, Dread, and Land Raider. It's also not in the 3.0E codex (it was right next to my 2E codex!). It IS in the 3.5E codex in the Iron Warriors list. If you somehow disagree, start citing page numbers. (And, FWIW, the 3E SM codex DOES have Vindicators in it.)



IIRC, The original publishing of the Iron Warriors WD IA article predated the 3E SM codex.

Granted that was a LOOONG time ago, and my memory may not be serving me well, but I do remember a few of the Ia articles in Wd being released during 2E, well BEFORE the 3E RULES or box set was.

AlphariusOmegon20
25-01-2011, 14:18
This is not a popularity contest. Wether the 3.5E codex gave me what I "wanted" is irrelevant, because it was a broken mess that seriously disturbed the 40K gameplay. If I "want" 5 pt. Landraiders, would giving me what I "want" make a better game? No.

Legions are popular, no doubt, but trying to cater to them all in one list perfectly is a slippery road to disaster as proven by the atrocious 3.5 Codex (which gave people "what they wanted" I suppose). Barring a Codex for each Legion, sticking to Renegades with "Elements" drawn from the Legion-fluff to ground them in 40K history, while looking to build a single (or perhaps 2 or 3) viable list(s) from the combined elements the (plural) Legions and other parts of the Chaos fluff offer is the superiour strategy to creating a viable Chaos Dex as a "gameing product".

As it stands, the 3.5 Codex above all is a shining example of the fact that my dichotomy is basically right and I would hope GW errs in favour of gameplay (i.e. 4.0 Codex), rather than in favour of fluff (i.e. 3.5. Codex) because the former can be supplemented by Black Library, FW, or whatever, while the latter means Chaos once again goes down the toilet.

So you're saying the current Space marine "Blue book" has broken the metagame? or to use your own words "is a broken mess that seriously disturbs the 40K gameplay"?

I think not. Because it is written in a similar manner to what the 3.5 codex was.


If anything, books like BA and SW, in their uber-single mindedness, are "broken messes that seriously disturb the 40K gameplay". JOTWW and the Libby dread have done more to break the game than ANYTHING out of ANY Chaos codex, including the 3.5 one.

Erwos
25-01-2011, 15:12
IIRC, The original publishing of the Iron Warriors WD IA article predated the 3E SM codex.
The Index Astartes article from the book says "see SM codex". The WD it was in was 255/256. WD255 came out in April 2001. Codex SM 3E came out in 1998. Sorry, but you seem to be wrong on this one.

I have no further commentary for Zwei; I don't really need to reason with people who aren't interested in listening, and aren't interested in their fellow players. Enjoy the terribad codex that your philosophy has given us - it seems we'll be stuck with it until at least 2012 or 2013. I doubt it's going to suddenly become more enjoyable in the meantime.

Luko
25-01-2011, 15:41
Certain people may need to relax a little bit. The main problem is the time....and by that I mean the time spent away from the imperium. How would you cover everything in one codex? If the traitor legions left the imperium 10k yrs ago and a group of marines left 7k yrs ago and another 3 yrs ago how would you cover the distiction between wargear? it would be vastly different. It would not be possible to cover it all in one book or to fufill everybodies desires.

What needs to be done is to create two books. Or possibly three... 1 for the four gods, one for the rest of the legions and another for the renegades. Oh and another for lost and the damned...but lets not get started on that. First things first proper represenation of marks is a starting point. Lets consider the death guard or plague marines ( now being the same thing). In a death guard army every death guard unit should be similar to the plague marines troop choices. So lords with fnp and blight grenades as well as termies with the same thing ( but maybe cloud of flies?). The generic summoned daemons need to be able to be given marks as well!

But what we will get is one book with the focus on special characters. With some sort of new flyer or similar large model. Look at the recent trends, guard, blood angels soon to be released grey knights. Even the DE got a flyer!

Games Workshop is no longer about the fluff, its about the profit from 14yr old parents. Unfortuneately just accept it and try to move on. Or create your own versions of dexes and play with your mates :-).

Luko

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 15:57
IIRC, The original publishing of the Iron Warriors WD IA article predated the 3E SM codex. The Vindicator's rules were in WD for the 1st edition of 40k. White Dwarf issue 118 and then in Adeptus Titanicus... for loyalists. The first official GW model for the Vindicator was released alongside White Dwarf issue 231. The Index Astartes Iron Warriors article was issue 256... 2 years after the models release.


So you're saying the current Space marine "Blue book" has broken the metagame? or to use your own words "is a broken mess that seriously disturbs the 40K gameplay"?

I think not. Because it is written in a similar manner to what the 3.5 codex was.

If anything, books like BA and SW, in their uber-single mindedness, are "broken messes that seriously disturb the 40K gameplay". JOTWW and the Libby dread have done more to break the game than ANYTHING out of ANY Chaos codex, including the 3.5 one.
I disagree. The current SM codex isn't like the 3.5 chaos codex. The current SM codex has a number of characters that have specific special rules that alter specific units' or weapons' rules that establishes very baiscally the way the armylist will be built. The 3.5E Chaos Codex had open free form rules that let you mix and match marks, daemons, Legion, and veteran skills that allowed all chaos players to have many more variation to their list.

I don't believe the current SM codex has broken the metagame, but its on the verge of doing so. That book has close to double the number of units to choose from as almost any other army. Chaos Space Marines and Chaos Daemons... excluding CD special characters.... is still fewer units to choose than the SM codex. The only thing that makes that acceptable is that most of those units are some of the most mundane units in the game. There is a point where the volume of units is so drastic that it does by other means what the 3.5E Chaos Codex did, I don't think SM is there yet but close.

3.5E Chaos disturbed the balance by allowing chaos to play in so many different ways it was effectively free of the decisions that other armies have to make, trade-offs that come from going with one unit over another were replaced by choose a unit and upgrade it till it fills the gap between its baser form and another more elite unit.

The single mindedness of Non-codex Marine armies is not misbalanced. They have a limited variation of game play that can singled out and countered pretty straight forwardly. Do they have broken units?-Yes but only as much as the next army. Single broken units is cheesy and has less to do with the metagame than the over arching structure of each codex, the combination of units and upgrade choices.

With single minded lists and broken units, there was at least some thought put into the combination of rules. With 3.5E Chaos, there was no way GW could account for every combination and the ramification of having so many. One problem was someones flawed reasoning for pricing, the other was systemic.

Erwos
25-01-2011, 16:31
Oh, and I should state that I'm actually not a big fan of "build a marine", as found in the 3.5E codex. I think Lord Inq's concept of having Cultists, Renegades, Legionaries, and Cult Troops is actually pretty great, provided there is a moderate amount of flexibility within those choices.

Based on what GW's done so far, my guess is that the next CSM codex will probably be designed in a similar fashion to the current SM codex: characters unlocking and locking certain units as troops, special characters replacing a general USR (ala combat tactics), etc. Ironically, this isn't actually that far off from what the 3.5E codex provided; you just didn't have to take the SCs to do get your special rules (and there were more of them). The question then becomes, what paradigm do CSMs fit into?

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 17:16
The question then becomes, what paradigm do CSMs fit into? I think the most suitable paradigm... is one with a small core of elite units surrounded by varieties of fodder. That the focus should be about the Chaos Lord and his immediate followers in their assertion of dominance and power over weaker followers of chaos. It should stay clear of the Ork and Tyranid army list model, but their are obvious similarities at face value. I think the distinction is that there should be a direct correlation between that "core" of Chaos marines and the type of lesser chaos in the list. Depending on your choice of chosen and lord, you might be limited to daemons or mutants or traitors or just chaos marines. The important aspect is it isn't based on single special characters as much as the combination of lord and retinue. That as these Chaos warlords become more powerful, more and more powerful followers of chaos look upto them as an opportunity to gain favor.

I picture this "Corruption" scale. Where the choices you make for that core gives your army a level of corruption that unlock more and more units to choose from, but begin to lock out lowest end as you reach the highest level. I imagine 4 levels. On the lowest end you're Renegades (basic marine items and squads, Rhinos, Bikes) with Traitor guard and mutants, utilizing more conventional options like stolen basilisks or something... while at the high end you're the oldest Chaos Legion utilizing exclusively god cult units, and daemons. Then in the low middle you get more of the mundane Chaos Marine things, like dreadnoughts and predators. The mid-high would be defilers possessed and obliterators. Special characters would likely reach out and gain access to units their level of "corruption" might not otherwise have access to.

The setup for corruption points would be something like a Lord has 1 and a Retinue has 1. Give each a mark which brings corruption and you have 4. Or have the lord by himself become a daemon prince and have 3, add a mark to make it 4. Where these points come from or the level of corruption could also have an impact on specific units. Such as if you attained most of your corruption by fielding a daemon prince, their might be a bonus to other daemonic choices.

The point of all this is it allows a volume of variation of units while constraining the list to a smaller number of play styles.

I think its an interesting concept, but thats all it is an imperfect concept.

DuskRaider
25-01-2011, 18:48
Don't bother arguing with Zweishneid, if it were up to him Chaos would have no flavor or fluff at all.

Vaktathi
25-01-2011, 19:11
Something I think needs to be said is that GW's products exist because of its IP and the fluff. Without it, the rules and mechanics are nothing, there are many other game systems with better mechanics, but it's the IP, the fluff, and that ability to translate that to the table, that makes this game what it is. That's why the current CSM codex has been so maligned even though it was fairly powerful for the first couple years it was out (in terms of power, there wasn't *too* much wrong with it aside from poor internal balance until SW's and BA hyped up the MEQ metagame).

Lord Inquisitor
25-01-2011, 19:11
From a rules/fluff perspective the Chosen should be Chaos marines so exposed to Chaos as to start manifesting the physical signs of their corruption. The way Chosen are written is just a mish-mosh of equipment with chaos marines that aside from the extra gear don't really have much going for them.
Indeed. It's also worth looking over to the WFB Chosen. They are WS6, extensive weapon options with a free Eye of the God roll. So rock hard and with a bit of random chaos goodness thrown on top.


Legions are popular, no doubt, but trying to cater to them all in one list perfectly is a slippery road to disaster as proven by the atrocious 3.5 Codex (which gave people "what they wanted" I suppose). Barring a Codex for each Legion, sticking to Renegades with "Elements" drawn from the Legion-fluff to ground them in 40K history, while looking to build a single (or perhaps 2 or 3) viable list(s) from the combined elements the (plural) Legions and other parts of the Chaos fluff offer is the superiour strategy to creating a viable Chaos Dex as a "gameing product".
Broadly I agree, although you are as hard headed as ever about getting your point across.

A good codex should trump other considerations. Problem is, the 4e codex is a good codex design - simple, few unique rules, generally not terrible internal balance, really only needs some good points tweaking to become a great codex. Much better design than the 5e codecies with the "kitchen sink" approach - in my opinion.

Problem is, firstly, if it were actually done this way we'd hit the "Dark Angel effect". It was a great, well balanced fluffy codex. If that was the way all codecies looked, DA players wouldn't be complaining - and I think the game as a whole would be better - more tactical and more fun. But then Codex Space Marines came along and blew them away. Cheaper, more options, more toys, leaving Dark Angels deeply dissatisfied.

Trying to do every Legion justice in one book is difficult true, and while as you say, a new codex is not a popularity contest, as far as I can tell Legion players are in the majority. The codex NEEDS to cater to at least provide Legion players the ability to field their armies on the tabletop, or there needs to be a dedicated Legions codex. I play a pure Emperor's Children army, at a minimum I need to be able to use my army on the tabletop. If a new codex doesn't at least allow this, I would probably give up on 40K altogether. But on the Codex: Space Marines format, there's no reason the list couldn't be flexible enough to allow at least basic functionality to the Legions - no, I don't think C:SM is the paragon of codex design, but that's the format these days.

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 19:27
A good codex should trump other considerations. Problem is, the 4e codex is a good codex design - simple, few unique rules, generally not terrible internal balance, really only needs some good points tweaking to become a great codex. Much better design than the 5e codecies with the "kitchen sink" approach - in my opinion.
...
Trying to do every Legion justice in one book is difficult true, and while as you say, a new codex is not a popularity contest, as far as I can tell Legion players are in the majority. The codex NEEDS to cater to at least provide Legion players the ability to field their armies on the tabletop, or there needs to be a dedicated Legions codex. I play a pure Emperor's Children army, at a minimum I need to be able to use my army on the tabletop. If a new codex doesn't at least allow this, I would probably give up on 40K altogether. But on the Codex: Space Marines format, there's no reason the list couldn't be flexible enough to allow at least basic functionality to the Legions - no, I don't think C:SM is the paragon of codex design, but that's the format these days. The "kitchen sink" is unfortunately what we end up with when GW needs new products and doesn't want to invalidate older units. Volume of units is just unfortunately the name of this edition and though its lead to some poor design, it could be a lot worse.

As far as legions go... I really think the "big 4" should get their own book and leave the "Chaos Space Marines" for the flavors of undivided. Codex Chaos Daemons probably never should have happened... but if GW were willing to reconceptualize and go back having all those daemons as part of a book that focuses on the "big 4," (Codex Ruinous Powers sounds good) with a few more units thrown in that book would stand as much better parallel book. Chaos Daemons gutted one of the few distinctive parts of of the Chaos Marines. It was a case of GW could have removed 2 of 5 things in the 3.5E codex and balanced things out, but instead pretty much removed them all.

Vaktathi
25-01-2011, 19:45
I think when they redo Codex: Chaos Space Marines, they need to just ditch the "renegades" thing. In all honesty, such forces are best left to simply being based off of C:SM with some spikes added on the models. I think that, above all else, was the biggest mistake, focusing on such Renegades instead of the Legions. They left in all the Legion weapons, units and unit organization, wargear availability (or lack thereof) but then tried to make the fluff centered on armies that really should be Codex marines in terms of how they actually should play.

The Chaos Legions make up not only the bulk of the Chaos Space Marines themselves, but of the playerbase as well.

Going back to the Legion focus, as opposed to renegade warbands of post-heresy Codex marines, should help a lot. Personally, as much as I like the Chaos Space Marines and their Traitor Legions, and if any SM faction should have variant books it should be the Traitor Legions above all others given how disparate they are from each other, especially relative to the loyalist books (I don't think any of the loyalists need their own book in the slightest, especially as their differences have been created primarily to justify them having their own books), I'd rather not see additional Space Marine codecies.

We already have 7 Space Marine books, adding an 8th I'm not sure is good for the game, when currently there are already only 16 armies in total, with basically half being Space Marines of some sort and two others loaded very Space Marine-esque troops (BS4 bolter wielding, high Ld 3+sv Sisters, WS4/BS4/S4/T4/Ld10/3+sv Necrons, etc)

aka_mythos
25-01-2011, 20:14
While I think Legions should be playable, I don't think it needs to be the central to the next codex. I would love to see more attention given to the undivided legions, but I think as long as the "big 4" are present in the codex everything else will be overshadowed. Focusing exclusively on the Legions only serves to narrow the playable concept of what "chaos" is. Renegades kinda went too large, by being so all encompasing as to lose the flavorful distinctions. There needs to be balanced middle ground that allows for something beyond legions, but still be distinctive.

I posted the idea of placing the nature of the corruption being central to a Chaos revision, and while that may not be the best option it is necessary the Chaos find a new center that isn't just Legions or Renegades. Chaos as corruption is a theme that resonates when you bring in traitors and mutants in. Its about taking one step back from 4E but knowing you can never go back to 3.5E.

Given the way 5th edition has been done what would a Legion-centric codex look like?-Given the current representation it would be the addition of upto 4 special characters. It would a number of special characters added that unlock a unit as a troop choice and probably give any unit the model accompanies a special rule. That would be it for representing the legions. Beyond that you move into "god" specific territory... where maybe each of the "big 4" would get a single new unit. I don't feel that really does enough. You need something more than this or we just have marines with spikes and interesting bits.

Erwos
25-01-2011, 20:21
I disagree about the renegades; as far back as 2E, they've really promoted that some Chaos warbands really are just recent traitors (eg, Huron as a special character, access to more recent SM equipment, etc.). It's ironic that GW's codex design these days actually hurts those players more than ever, due to a lack of allies to provide more modern (albeit limited) equipment.

Honestly, I'm predicting a kludge along the lines of "CSMs get stubborn and Ld9; replace stubborn with some special rule for a particular special character". Honestly, they deserve better, but maybe if they're 14 points a piece... I use Grey Hunters as the benchmark.

DuskRaider
25-01-2011, 20:48
I don't know why people think that a codex has to be overly confusing to support Legions. In all honesty, I didn't find 3.5 confusing either, but I can also see how some would. For Legions, all it has to come down to is this:
-Marks for Gods / Legions
-maybe a few rules / limitations for each Legion
-some specific wargear for each Legion
-a few SCs, although even these aren't NEEDED

That's it. Make it so Iron Warriors are Tank Hunters or have an extra HS slot while losing a FA slot. Give Night Lords a rule where enemies in CC suffer -1 or -2 Ld, give them a weapon similar to the Lash Whip. I don't know, I'm not a game developer and I shouldn't have to make homebrew codices to try and fix the failure of GW.

If you want Renegades, GW should make it an option OR you should have to use C:SM. Chaos Marines are first and foremost Legions, accept it or move on.

TheMav80
26-01-2011, 00:18
Here is the thing to me. The points battles we plat 40K at are small. In my 1750 Blood Angels list I have just under 40 marines.

The idea that the Legions only operate at warbands is fine...but you can't tell me that there are not warbands out there that consist of 40 guys from the same Legion. That IS a warband.

So there should be a way to field an army that represents most of the Legions. C:SM does it with special characters in some ways. Other ways with just the FoC. I.E. Captain on a bike makes bikes troops and the Master of the Forge unlocks more Dreads.

I know lots of people don't like the special character way of doing things, but it is something. I would rather have to take a Night Lords special character to give my Chaos Marines Stealth and Move through Cover than just have GW pretend they don't exist.

DuskRaider
26-01-2011, 00:38
I don't like the idea of SCs unlocking Legions and whatnot. For instance, I play Death Guard. We KNOW that if they have a Death Guard character, it will be Typhus, which is a problem in and of itself, as Typhus is no longer Death Guard. Seeing as I play with fluff first, I'd hate the idea. That and say your army is led by a Daemon Prince in your fluff. Well, there goes that idea. I don't know, that's my biggest issue with C:SM. I can definitely see "if your Chaos Lord takes a Jump Pack, Assault Marines (or Raptors, whatever) can be taken as a Troop Choice".

kardar233
26-01-2011, 00:40
I'd like to see Chaos done as a small core of rock-hard, Nob-level Legionnaires, starring Chaos Cultists in the star role of Human Shields, with the small manpower of the Marines themselves backed up by creepy, Giger-esque flesh/machine hybrid Daemon engines. Add some Lovecraftian, creepy Daemons, not sissy Lesser Daemons, that's what Cultists are for, these are for the nasty things you don't want to throw Legionnaires into.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 00:53
I don't like the idea of SCs unlocking Legions and whatnot. For instance, I play Death Guard. We KNOW that if they have a Death Guard character, it will be Typhus, which is a problem in and of itself, as Typhus is no longer Death Guard. Seeing as I play with fluff first, I'd hate the idea. That and say your army is led by a Daemon Prince in your fluff. Well, there goes that idea. I don't know, that's my biggest issue with C:SM. I can definitely see "if your Chaos Lord takes a Jump Pack, Assault Marines (or Raptors, whatever) can be taken as a Troop Choice".
I don't think anyone actually LIKES this, it just happens to be how GW seems to be structuring things these days.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 00:56
I don't know why people think that a codex has to be overly confusing to support Legions. In all honesty, I didn't find 3.5 confusing either, but I can also see how some would. For Legions, all it has to come down to is this:
-Marks for Gods / Legions
-maybe a few rules / limitations for each Legion
-some specific wargear for each Legion
-a few SCs, although even these aren't NEEDED

That's it. Make it so Iron Warriors are Tank Hunters or have an extra HS slot while losing a FA slot. Give Night Lords a rule where enemies in CC suffer -1 or -2 Ld, give them a weapon similar to the Lash Whip. I don't know, I'm not a game developer and I shouldn't have to make homebrew codices to try and fix the failure of GW.
The problem with that is it end up focusing the codex almost exclusively on legions. The designers' vision of Chaos in 4th is that at this point there is more than just legions composing their ranks. The estimate I heard in conversation was that roughly 50% are still "Legion" or closely affiliated while the other 50% at this point are either renegades or so far removed from their legion of origin as to be unrecognizable. So while it maybe tempting to marginalize Renegades in favor of Legions its just as bad as ignoring Legions.

My point is your proposed fixes go to fix representing "Legions" but I think the designers of the next book, should go equally as far for better representing Renegades but not necessarily in the same way.

Renegades being far more diverse than the legions need something beyond Huron. Where Legions have those specific modifications to their rules tied to special character Renegades might instead just have a few units set aside specifically for them, but where there use isn't tied to a special character. Units that are effectively blocked off if you do use any legion specific special character.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 01:04
I don't like the idea of SCs unlocking Legions and whatnot. For instance, I play Death Guard. We KNOW that if they have a Death Guard character, it will be Typhus, which is a problem in and of itself, as Typhus is no longer Death Guard. Seeing as I play with fluff first, I'd hate the idea. That and say your army is led by a Daemon Prince in your fluff. Well, there goes that idea. I don't know, that's my biggest issue with C:SM. I can definitely see "if your Chaos Lord takes a Jump Pack, Assault Marines (or Raptors, whatever) can be taken as a Troop Choice".

Even though I doubt it'd ever happen, I'd just like to see a book that deals exclusively with the "big 4" chaos god cults and those who follow it. Taking the 4 god dedicated chaos marine characters, the 4 cult units, and a number of "Chosen" and daemon engine of each god and mixed with the chaos daemon codex to allow for god specific armies. That would both give those 4 more room to diversify and shine and allow the more undivided Chaos Marines to have their own limelight.

Seismic
26-01-2011, 01:24
Even though I doubt it'd ever happen, I'd just like to see a book that deals exclusively with the "big 4" chaos god cults and those who follow it. Taking the 4 god dedicated chaos marine characters, the 4 cult units, and a number of "Chosen" and daemon engine of each god and mixed with the chaos daemon codex to allow for god specific armies. That would both give those 4 more room to diversify and shine and allow the more undivided Chaos Marines to have their own limelight.

Same here.

I'd think it would be easier to add a Wolf guard type unite to the Daemon book and call it a day. I'd would make easier on rule designs and balance but leave enough room to distinguish the various facets of Chaos.

DuskRaider
26-01-2011, 02:08
The problem with that is it end up focusing the codex almost exclusively on legions. The designers' vision of Chaos in 4th is that at this point there is more than just legions composing their ranks. The estimate I heard in conversation was that roughly 50% are still "Legion" or closely affiliated while the other 50% at this point are either renegades or so far removed from their legion of origin as to be unrecognizable. So while it maybe tempting to marginalize Renegades in favor of Legions its just as bad as ignoring Legions.

My point is your proposed fixes go to fix representing "Legions" but I think the designers of the next book, should go equally as far for better representing Renegades but not necessarily in the same way.

Renegades being far more diverse than the legions need something beyond Huron. Where Legions have those specific modifications to their rules tied to special character Renegades might instead just have a few units set aside specifically for them, but where there use isn't tied to a special character. Units that are effectively blocked off if you do use any legion specific special character.

Well, that's exactly what I think the next book needs to focus on: Legions. Renegades are great and all, if GW wants to they could allow Chaos Renegades to gain access to newer Imperial technology and maybe Apothecaries (although I think Legions should regain access to these guys) and Chaplains, at the loss of Cult troops (because for the most part, they're too recent to gain the favor of any god) and some daemon tech.

I personally don't think Renegades add anything to Chaos and don't care if they go, but I also realize people do play them and would like to see those folks get at least something. Just as Zweishneid can tell Legions folks to use Blood Angels or Space Wolves or C:SM to represent our Legions, I think it would make a lot more sense to tell Renegade folks the same thing as they'd have access to things we Legions players wouldn't. Make their troops the same as Chaos Space Marine basic troops, have them stay Fearless to differentiate from normal Space Marines, let them take ICONS while Legions get MARKS, as I said access to recent tech while losing Cult troops & some Daemon Engines (can still access Raptors and Obliterators, probably Defilers, Hell Blades & Hell Talons as well since they're recent), and call it a day.

Born Again
26-01-2011, 06:52
I think when they redo Codex: Chaos Space Marines, they need to just ditch the "renegades" thing. In all honesty, such forces are best left to simply being based off of C:SM with some spikes added on the models.


I said this once in the thread already and it was overlooked, so will restate it again: then how do I include daemons and cult units in my Renegade army?

I'm sure just about everyone here can agree that Zweischneid has an inflammatory method to his posts, and I'm not out to do the same, but he does make a valid point. I'm tired of hearing "Renegades should use C:SM". Why does this come up? Are Legion players that ******** over the current 'dex that they want to swing things in the exact opposite direction to screw over Renegades? You don't need to take it out like that. I'm sure the 4E book wasn't spurred on by people taking Gav at knifepoint and saying "give us more Renegades, or else!" It's not their fault and they shouldn't be punished for it next time around.

Regardless, some people seem to refuse to see them as anything more than Imperial Marines with spikes, which they are not. As I have said before in other threads, there are 3 types of non-Loyalist marines: the original Traitor Legions, those Post-Heresy Renegades that have thrown their lot in with Chaos, and those who are no longer part of the Imperium, but have not sworn themselves to Chaos.

Now, if you're playing the last kind, then sure, you could use the C:SM book quite comfortably. If you're playing the second kind, however, this just will not do. Sure, it raises all sorts of odd questions like "did they forget to bring their assault cannons?" and "did all the Land Speeder pilots remain Loyalists?" but you get the exact same question if you go the other way. It would be like this:

"This is my homebrew chapter, the Pungent Stench. They rebelled against the Imperium in M35 and for the past 6,000 years have been staunch followers of Nurgle. But in that time not one has gained Nurgle's blessing, been Possessed by a daemon, and they certainly don't bother with this daemon-summoning business. They're also waiting until the price comes down on Defilers, the Dark Mechanicus charge obscene prices..."

Which really isn't much different from an Emperor's Children player now not being able to take sonic weapons on his dreads and termies. Given the option, I think it makes more sense for their assault cannons to have fallen in to disrepair, don't you? Then let's not forget they've been mentioned (and playable!) at least as far back as the 2E book, and provide fluff not only for players making up their own colour schemes, but give a sense of urgency to the Chaos threat: even 10,000 years after the Heresy, entire Chapters going rogue is still a very real threat to the Imperium. Like it or not, there needs to be a way to include Post-Heresy Renegades in the Chaos book.

Now, having said all that, I think anything which chops up and changes the list with extra rules and limitations based on a paint scheme is a bad idea. The best lists are the ones which include everything, and then let you make your own choices instead of saying "oh, you like the Word Bearers colour scheme? Well sorry, no Cult units for you!" Players should be free to take the options they want. If the options are there, the players who are into making an army based on one Legions fluff will follow the background to do just this. They don't need a set of rules to do it for them.

Special Characters can be a handy way of imposing an army wide rule, but it's not perfect as Typhus doesn't lead every Nurgle-based army in the galaxy. Basing it on what Mark or Wargear your HQ has would be a much better option.

Vaktathi
26-01-2011, 07:32
The reason is that "renegades" would not be using Legion equipment, wargear, or organization, those things that make Chaos marines different from normal Space Marines as functional game units.

Most of Huron's forces for example would still generally fight in whatever manner their originating chapter did, most likely as Codex marines, with normal Space Marine wargear and tactics (modified to some degree by their own preference and circumstances of course), not those of the Heresy era Legions as they do now. Renegade Terminator units are not suddenly going to start wielding lots of combi-weapons, TL Bolters, basic powerweapons, and Reaper Autocannons, instead they are going to have access to Assault Cannons, Cyclone Launchers, Stormshields, Thunderhammers, and Stormbolters. Likewise, they aren't going to drop their Codex tactics, wargear loadouts, and squad operations and pick up the Black Legion standard manual of operations and equipment (as they functionally would now in game terms).

Trying to fit both in the same book in a balanced, yet separated manner is probably not going to work real well, and is going to duplicate a lot of stuff, yet trying to cram both significantly post-Heresy Renegades and pre-Heresy Legion troops into the same mold doesn't work either.

Also currently, CSM's don't really have access to Cultist untis, and very limited Daemon access. This will probably be true of any future Chaos Space Marine books as long as Chaos Daemons remains a distinct and separate army.

I apologize if I come off as rude, I don't mean to harp on the "Renegades" as something to create an army around, I just don't think that recently turned traitors really fit within the framework of the Chaos Space Marine army books as they've historically been. The CSM units have different wargear because that's what they used during the Heresy and have continued to use, renegades from M35, trained and equipped to 5,000 years of Codex standards aren't going to just hop on the Heresy era train, and Huron's renegades from the late 41st millenium certainly aren't. If all those disparate Space Marine chapters that operate as their own tiny self contained entities, especially the large proportion with extremely limited, or even no contact with the Mechanicum or Administratum and either no homeworld or no industrialized homeworld, can keep themselves supplied and equipped Codex standard wargear and vehicles, I don't see why those that turn rogue cannot.

Personally, I'd have made Huron a C:SM Character and included an addendum of changes one can make to the C:SM army if they want "renegades".

It's easier to cove post Heresy renegades as a modification of C:SM (allowing various marks, icons, daemon summoning abilities, etc) rather than trying to cram them into the Heresy Era Legion model of C:CSM (with its Legion specific Cult units like Thousand Sons that really won't be seen in other forces, Heresy era wargear and unit organization, etc), which, in all honesty, I'd rather be "Codex: Chaos Legions" with "Chaos Space Marines" simply being a generalization of all CSM forces which would be both Chaos Legions and the aforementioned modification to C:SM.

Carlosophy
26-01-2011, 08:43
Chaos needs to reflect the leader of its warband and thus your HQ choices should change the shape of the army:

- There should only ever be one leader, either Lord or Prince. You may not include 2.

- Cult units are pushed back up to Elites

- Undivided Lords get to have Chosen as troops and in the fluff they represent ex-legion units. This is reflected by allowing them to have veteran abilities provided they are painted in the proper scheme, thus for your Chosen to be able to have 'Tank Hunters' they must be painted as Iron Warriors. This adds fluff conviction to legion players but prevents abuse by power mongers


- Marked Lords may choose their respective cult units as troops, birds of a feather and all that. In addition they may choose their power specific daemons as well, so your Berzerker army can finally march alongside bloodletters once again.

This makes legion representation easy as each one conforms to a simple special rule:

- Emperor's Children: Cult Slaanesh army
- Iron Warriors: Tank Hunters
- Night Lords: Stealth
- World Eaters: Cult Khorne army
- Death Guard: Cult Nurgle army
- Thousand Sons: Cult Tzeentch army
- Black Legion: Counter Attack
- Word Bearers: Stubborn
- Alpha Legion: Outflank

- Undivided lords can choose from more generic daemons like furies and suchlike.

- Rivalry returns. Khorne lords may not have noise marines and so on.

- Possessed must still roll on their table but you may pay extra for additional rolls to create some powerful, albeit random combinations.

- Cultists are added as a troops choice, and in terms of fluff and rules are treated with more disdain than grots.

- The summoning rules for daemons are changed to something a little more colourful:
-- At the start of a turn roll a D6 and add the number of models killed by requisite units (so by models with the mark of khorne for bloodletters and so on) If you roll over the number of models in the unit they may enter play. This makes larger units harder to summon but more potent if you do, and encourages you to get stuck in!
-- Cultists may be shot/assaulted by friendly models in an attempt to cause more casualties for daemon summoning!
-- Daemons must deep strike within 6" of a friendly unit (marker or not) and may assault on arrival. This means killing cultists on your first turn to bring your bloodletters on does not guarantee an alpha strike as they can be shot at.
-- Undivided daemons are thus not as good as cult daemons but easier to summon.

- Abaddon allows all cult units and daemons as troops choices.

Born Again
26-01-2011, 08:50
The reason is that "renegades" would not be using Legion equipment, wargear, or organization, those things that make Chaos marines different from normal Space Marines as functional game units.

Most of Huron's forces for example would still generally fight in whatever manner their originating chapter did, most likely as Codex marines, with normal Space Marine wargear and tactics (modified to some degree by their own preference and circumstances of course), not those of the Heresy era Legions as they do now. Renegade Terminator units are not suddenly going to start wielding lots of combi-weapons, TL Bolters, basic powerweapons, and Reaper Autocannons, instead they are going to have access to Assault Cannons, Cyclone Launchers, Stormshields, Thunderhammers, and Stormbolters. Likewise, they aren't going to drop their Codex tactics, wargear loadouts, and squad operations and pick up the Black Legion standard manual of operations and equipment (as they functionally would now in game terms).

You're correct in mentioning that their equipment and, in some cases, their organization would be based on more modern Imperial standards. However the exact point I was trying to make was that if it comes down to choosing modern equipment or Chaos troops/ items, it makes far more sense to take the chaos option.

Nowhere, in either incarnation of his rules, or any fluff that I'm aware of, have the Red Corsairs or other Post Heresy Renegades been excluded from taking daemons, cult troops or other "chaos" items. Being Post-Heresy has always been about getting extras, not less.


Also currently, CSM's don't really have access to Cultist untis, and very limited Daemon access. This will probably be true of any future Chaos Space Marine books as long as Chaos Daemons remains a distinct and separate army.

I was referring to Cult units as in Berzerkers, Plague Marines etc, but Cultists would be good. Daemons are another issue altogether which I won't get in to now.


Personally, I'd have made Huron a C:SM Character and included an addendum of changes one can make to the C:SM army if they want "renegades".

It's easier to cove post Heresy renegades as a modification of C:SM (allowing various marks, icons, daemon summoning abilities, etc) rather than trying to cram them into the Heresy Era Legion model of C:CSM (with its Legion specific Cult units like Thousand Sons that really won't be seen in other forces, Heresy era wargear and unit organization, etc), which, in all honesty, I'd rather be "Codex: Chaos Legions" with "Chaos Space Marines" simply being a generalization of all CSM forces which would be both Chaos Legions and the aforementioned modification to C:SM.

NOOOOO.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how that could be anything but a bad idea. You're saying it would be easier to include rules that would replicate marks, Icons and daemons in the SM book but ONLY if you take Huron (or some other renegade leader), than giving Huron (or again, a "post Heresy" characteristic upgrade for your Lord) a rule in the chaos book that says " all Reaper autocannons become Assault Cannons, all combi bolters become storm bolters"? Granted, there's a few more things that might need to be upgraded, and there are Razorbacks/ Speeders etc... but including rules for daemons in a Loyalist SM book would strip uniqueness and character from Chaos even more, and be open for all sorts of horrible exploitation.

Zweischneid
26-01-2011, 09:19
The reason is that "renegades" would not be using Legion equipment, wargear, or organization, those things that make Chaos marines different from normal Space Marines as functional game units.


...............


Personally, I'd have made Huron a C:SM Character and included an addendum of changes one can make to the C:SM army if they want "renegades".

It's easier to cove post Heresy renegades as a modification of C:SM (allowing various marks, icons, daemon summoning abilities, etc) rather than trying to cram them into the Heresy Era Legion model of C:CSM (with its Legion specific Cult units like Thousand Sons that really won't be seen in other forces, Heresy era wargear and unit organization, etc), which, in all honesty, I'd rather be "Codex: Chaos Legions" with "Chaos Space Marines" simply being a generalization of all CSM forces which would be both Chaos Legions and the aforementioned modification to C:SM.

I disagree. First, Chaos Space Marine Equipment is not "Legion Equipment". You're creating a false dichotomy if you claim that stuff like Combi-weapons, TL-Bolters, Reaper Autocannons, etc.., are "Legion stuff". There is no reference to this and it is a highly biased reading of the equipment list. Just as likely, these things are jury-rigged wargear used by Chaos Space Marines freed from the constraints of Imperial Dogma (irrespective of whether that happened 10.000 years ago, or 1 year ago).

Second, the very variety of Renegade Warbands, incorporating both 10.000 year old traitors, random misfits, Daemons, modern and old equipment, etc.., is what demands a unique army list precisely because this variety can not be depicted in a loyalist book. A mono-World Eater, Night Lord or Thousand Sons list on the other hand would be much better served with a Special Character in the Space Wolves, Blood Angels or Grey Knight Codex that allows you to play these already specialized forces with a different, Legion-flavoured approach to the same specialization.

So the guys that need to be moved to the existing (and future) Loyalist Books (perhaps as a WD add-on) rather than the Chaos Book would be Kharn, Ahriman, Lucius and all those "single-list-types", not Huron.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 10:10
I disagree. First, Chaos Space Marine Equipment is not "Legion Equipment". You're creating a false dichotomy if you claim that stuff like Combi-weapons, TL-Bolters, Reaper Autocannons, etc.., are "Legion stuff". There is no reference to this and it is a highly biased reading of the equipment list. Just as likely, these things are jury-rigged wargear used by Chaos Space Marines freed from the constraints of Imperial Dogma (irrespective of whether that happened 10.000 years ago, or 1 year ago).
You've got to read something other than the current codex; the 2nd edition codex actually says "this is the stuff they were using at the time of the Horus Heresy, that's why they're still using it". That would seem to make it Legion equipment by default. Some of it has inevitably gone to secessionists and more recent traitors, but you're overplaying your hand here. Incidentally, back in 2E, when dreads were funny/awesome instead of pathetic, they got all their fancy weapons that the Imperial ones didn't (and then they gave everyone DCCWs, and then they gave the Imperials special dread weapons... and left Chaos with DCCWs. ARGH!)

And this is another good time to note that this codex was supposed to be renegades - both Gav and Allessio have confirmed a Legions codex was supposed to come later. It never did, so a lot of us got screwed. But, there you have it: even the authors of the codex never intended for Legion players to have it quite this bad in the long term.

Zweischneid
26-01-2011, 10:24
You've got to read something other than the current codex; the 2nd edition codex actually says "this is the stuff they were using at the time of the Horus Heresy, that's why they're still using it". That would seem to make it Legion equipment by default. Some of it has inevitably gone to secessionists and more recent traitors, but you're overplaying your hand here. Incidentally, back in 2E, when dreads were funny/awesome instead of pathetic, they got all their fancy weapons that the Imperial ones didn't (and then they gave everyone DCCWs, and then they gave the Imperials special dread weapons... and left Chaos with DCCWs. ARGH!)

Why? Things were different in 2nd Edition. A given. Guess what, this isn't 2nd Edition and things changed. And for the better too.



And this is another good time to note that this codex was supposed to be renegades - both Gav and Allessio have confirmed a Legions codex was supposed to come later. It never did, so a lot of us got screwed. But, there you have it: even the authors of the codex never intended for Legion players to have it quite this bad in the long term.

I keep hearing that. Have a source? Why are characters like Ahriman in the supposed "Renegades Dex". Why isn't it called Chaos Renegades?

Also, I'd like to point out how this (assuming for a second it is true) contradicts your previous point in the same post. If the current 4.0 Dex was specifically designed to be Renegades, than TL-Bolters, Havoc-Launchers, Combi-Weapons and all the rest were specifically meant to go to Renegades, not the Legions.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 11:14
GW is not the purist that some people imagine them to be. Just because something was one way in 2E doesn't mean it is now or wil be. As Zweischneid points out the 4E chaos codex ret-cons any 2E fluff; as it is now Havoc Launchers, combi weapons, and Reaper Autocannons are effectively the weapons Renegades have cobbled together. Renegades are now a part of Chaos Space Marines; ignore them and you're ignoring half the Chaos Marines in the galaxy.

GW has made a consistent effort to rework each codex in a new way. Based on their recent history its very unlikely they will go back to doing "Legions." The insistance some people have for "Legions" is as stubborn as insisting GW bring back the 2E rule that let us take Imperial equipment at a premium cost. Its not happening, its a step backwards and flies in the face of GW's current trend. If "Legions" are brought back, they will only be part of what happens in that new codex.

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 11:38
If the new codex focused on renegades, where you can create your own warband, with options for cultists, daemons (proper ones, not the lobotomised 'lesser daemons'), daemonic engines of war (blood slaughterer? Blood Reaper? Doom Blaster? Brass Scorpion? Cannon of Khorne? Lord of Battle? Couldron of Blood? Tower of Skulls?), then I wouldn't mind if there was WD addons that said "If you want to make X army, just take this as a C:SM/SW/BA". In the end, people are doing that already. Giving them support to do so (as long as the special character is taken!), and then a codex that supports the more creative aspect of Chaos, would be perfect (to me).

I need to read about the old Dreads. I love the wackiness of the new dreads, but they are at the end, a waste of points unless you're good at never rolling 2 in 3. They do make great conversational pieces though. Is it possible to make them like Possessed, or, that when they take a hit, they have to roll on a table to see what they do? It might be it gets completely wasted by las-cannon shots, but you roll a lucky 6, where the thing makes one last move/attack, before collapsing... or that the controller, so warped by chaos, goes up like an atom bomb, etc.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 12:02
And this is another good time to note that this codex was supposed to be renegades - both Gav and Allessio have confirmed a Legions codex was supposed to come later. It never did, so a lot of us got screwed. But, there you have it: even the authors of the codex never intended for Legion players to have it quite this bad in the long term. I think you have the time line of this out of order. The 4E was always intended to cover all Chaos Space Marines. It was only after it came out that they realized how badly they screwed Legion players. It was after that they promised they would address it and they hinted at another book that never materialized.

Rumor is Chaos codex will be in Q3 of 2012... I guess GW's going for that "End of times" release date.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 12:40
Just to move this conversation along, I think whenever this codex is revisited a good number of Chaos' minis will be redone. Codex: Chaos Daemon, really diverted alot of GW's resources away from Codex: Chaos Space Marines, as a result a number of models that probably should have be redone haven't. In normal GW fashion those models by virtue of being redone will guide the codex, I think there are some things we'll be able to infer from those "needed" updates. For example, the Dreadnought, the model is left overs from 2nd edition and the rules currently are lacking; in the next edition I think GW will want to do more with it. In plastic aside from making the different weapon options available, they could make it more of a daemon engine or a variant like that, that stands diametrically opposed to the Grek Knight's librarian dreadnoughts and penitent engines.

Raptors need to transition to plastic for the same reasons other metal models that are "hovering" do. That could maybe lead to a Night Lord "option" with an increased number of jumppacks in the army.

Thousand sons, Plague Marine, and Emperor's Children need plastic models pretty badly. Plastic-metal hybrid kits are on the way out and being the most widely used of such kits in the Chaos army need full plastic kits badly. This though presents an opportunity to give those units new upgrade options or a new function in the army. I think that if they get new kits, there standing as "troops" isn't likely to change.

All that is what would come out in one "wave" and given GW's approach to multiple waves, beyond that there would likely be a whole wave of "new" stuff.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 12:43
First of all, the concept that previous codex fluff is now null and void with a new codex is simply insane to me, and I do not accept it. These are all source books. I will accept that actual contradictions should be resolved using the newest source, but I don't accept that we discard everything from pre-4E - especially given how crappy 4E was in terms of fluff in general. Incidentally, the quote from Gav below basically disagrees with this philosophy, too.

In particular, there's no contradiction about the Reaper Autocannon: the 4E codex actually says "this is old tech", more or less. There's nothing wrong with renegades using older technology that they've had to press back into service, and I don't appreciate people putting words into my mouth about how they can't have this stuff; recent renegades should just have access to some newer stuff, too.


I think you have the time line of this out of order. The 4E was always intended to cover all Chaos Space Marines. It was only after it came out that they realized how badly they screwed Legion players. It was after that they promised they would address it and they hinted at another book that never materialized.
Both you and Zwei are dead wrong about this. That's not what the authors themselves have said:
Alessio Cavatore: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2011/01/wherein-mr-cavatore-responds.html


It's true that we held back the Legion-specific stuff to leave freedom for potential future releases (that might or might not end up seeing the light of the day...), but we also provided a sprinkling of theming, just enough so that is it is still possible to field very god-specific armies.

Gav Thorpe: http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/differences-of-opinion/


The decision was taken, as it was in Warhammer, that such diversity couldn’t be given a proper treatment in just a single volume. Rather than dismiss some of the most entertaining parts of the background (and potential miniatures) as footnotes, it was decided that they should be given books of their own, to delve into their histories and personalities and armies with separate volumes (and, of course, cool new miniatures).

There's your sources, Zwei.

It's not MY opinion, it's what the authors themselves have stated: the current codex was NEVER meant to encompass the Legions, and the lack of them in it should not be taken that they are now ret-conned out of existence. Fascinatingly enough, the special characters they included actually DO operate in warbands outside of their normal legions (or, in the case of the Black Legion, the Legion operates like a warband). So I do not take their existence to be problematic per se.

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 12:48
For example, the Dreadnought, the model is left overs from 2nd edition and the rules currently are lacking; in the next edition I think GW will want to do more with it. In plastic aside from making the different weapon options available, they could make it more of a daemon engine or a variant like that, that stands diametrically opposed to the Grek Knight's librarian dreadnoughts and penitent engines.

Hope not! I just bought two metal Chaos Dreadnoughts!! :P

I'd love to see a daemon engine. Those that take legion troops would take a loyalist Dread that has been "converted" enough to show it's new allegiance, while the renegades/daemon lovers would have this oozing, crawling monstrosity on the table (if they are nurgle based anyway!).

Erwos
26-01-2011, 12:53
It might be just nostalgia, but I do love the metal Chaos Dread. The rules just suck for it, especially now that special close-combat weapons are back in vogue for Imperial dreads. The old Power Scourge rules gave Chaos dreads a unique advantage against hordes, for one thing.

And, yes, I'd expect to see the rest of the CSM troop choices finished off in plastic, along with a plastic dread. I assume there will be some sort of unique FA vehicle to fix that slot, and maybe a plastic Dreadclaw. I could even see Plaguebearers going plastic, if they rolled daemons back in. Add a few new metal special characters, and you're done. The rest of the range is actually pretty nice, IMHO.

Malice313
26-01-2011, 13:16
Anyone else miss the old 2nd edition range?

That's all I still use, mainly because I have a metric s***tin (2.7 f***loads by old reckoning) of them and can't justify the cost of new Mk7-with-horns models.


I think the Rogue Trader-era Chaos Marines were the best. They had lots of personality and for the most part conveyed malevolence...

I just finished off my full collection yesterday with an eBay purchase! Now to find enough old school back packs *eyes high temperature RTV silicon and thinks naughty thoughts*

Personally I felt they had an element of Bosch/Bruegal surreal visions of final judgement, which fit the 40K "Medieval Catholicism in Spaaace" feel really well!

Certainly better than "GrraaH! Me naughty, 'n' have getz horns and spikes so must be mean-bad" at any rate.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 13:35
First of all, the concept that previous codex fluff is now null and void with a new codex is simply insane to me, and I do not accept it. These are all source books. I will accept that actual contradictions should be resolved using the newest source, but I don't accept that we discard everything from pre-4E - especially given how crappy 4E was in terms of fluff in general. Incidentally, the quote from Gav below basically disagrees with this philosophy, too.Its like any other source book, take the encyclopedia if a new edition comes out often enough a topic is updated to take into consideration newly learned information on a subject. This is no different.



Both you and Zwei are dead wrong about this. That's not what the authors themselves have said:...

There's your sources, Zwei. Let's hear the apology about claiming I didn't have one - in fact, I had two. :) .

My statement is still true.


I think you have the time line of this out of order. The 4E was always intended to cover all Chaos Space Marines. It was only after it came out that they realized how badly they screwed Legion players. It was after that they promised they would address it and they hinted at another book that never materialized.
While their comments show they had foresight explanation and intent for more was never expressed till months afterwards. These justifications they posted both occured months after the codex came out. It doesn't change the time line events occured in but it does give cause to reevaluate my wording which was based on my view of it when it happend and stated retrospectively. When I say they intended this to cover all Chaos Space marine, I mean they obviously wanted to let people decide to impose their own restriction in creating what ever chaos faction they wanted to represent. Does it explicitly try to represent Legions?-No, but I never claimed that, just that it represents Legions in the same way codex Space Marine represents thousands of lesser known chapters.

Its too "simple" that it ignores the concept of chaos Renegades in favor of a watered down version of chaos as it had been represented in 3.5E minus Legions.

I do like Gav's comment:

By listing very specific allowances and restrictions, the old Codex essentially presented very narrow interpretations of the background, again removing the choice from the players. This is particularly the case with the Legions and Power-specific lists. While they did introduce some cool new options (which I’ll get back to later) the majority of those sub-lists were about restriction, not choice. It presented a very defined view of what was and was not possible in the vast galaxy of the 41st millenium. This I think summarizes well the issues with a purely legion approach as it was done.




...the current codex was NEVER meant to encompass the Legions, and the lack of them in it should not be taken that they are now ret-conned out of existence.I think you took my statement about retcon a bit backwards to how I intended it. It was speaking more to the equipment than units. It was speaking not to the elimination of Legions but to a growing prominance of the Renegade chaos space marines. The implication with 3.5E was that Legions and their immediate sub-factions constituted almost all of the Chaos Space marines in the galaxy, while 4E tried to show that numerical preeminance had been diminished by the increased number of Renegades and rogue Legion marines.

The point I've been trying to get at though is that both concepts now exist. That GW either allows them to co-exist in one or two books, or it will have to retcon one out either in totality or by marginalizing them. At this point I'm doubtful we will see a pair of Chaos Marine codices drawn along the Renegade-Legion distinctions, if GW were going to do it, it would have happened by now. It hasn't and at this point GW will have started the ground work for updating the "Renegade" book and I think in all likelyhood Legions will make their return there.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 13:45
My statement is still true.
Only if you're calling both Alessio and Gav liars who rewrote history to protect themselves. Neither of them said "oops, we should do a legions codex to make up for it" - they said "we were planning a legions codex FROM THE START". The burden of proof is now on you to disprove what they wrote. Sources, please. :)


I do like Gav's comment: This I think summarizes well the issues with a purely legion approach as it was done.
And, if you'll forgive the pun, there are comments from legions of people who despise it. I actually suspected that Zwei was really Gav for a while because they sound EXACTLY the same so much of the time (and so oblivious to everyone else, truth be told).


It hasn't and at this point GW will have started the ground work for updating the "Renegade" book and I think in all likelyhood Legions will make their return there.
This, I agree with. There's no way they're going to pull another 4E codex after having written what they have this edition, and having seen the absolute hate that players have for the current codex. I actually think I will be very pleased with the next codex.

Lord Inquisitor
26-01-2011, 13:47
I'm of the opinion that you could make a single codex that would represent all legions and renegades well without being the insanity of 3.5. The trick is to include all of the aspects that people need to create a legion without getting carried away trying to make army wide special rules or constrain the army list. Sometimes all this needs to be is a single entry or upgrade - all Word Bearers actually need is a Dark Apostle with an Acursed Crozius (which can be just an upgrade for a Lord or a special character) and access to lesser daemons. Beyond that, it's up to the player if they want to select the units to make a fluffy Word Bearers army.

Speaking as an Emperor's Children player, allow noise marines to take terminator armour, bikes or multiple heavy weapons at the cost of moving to the appropriate FOC and I'm pretty stoked. The only slaanesh specific wargear that I really miss is combat drugs.

At a bare minimum, if you added generic cultists, servo arms, dark apostle upgrade or SC, infiltrator character upgrade or SC, all cult troops allowed terminator armour upgrades (and bikes or heavy weapons as appropriate), raptors as troops night lord SC, cult upgrades for characters and beef up chosen and terminators, you've got yourself a codex. Tweak some points values and you're done.

Sure I've plenty of other things I'd like to see but the above would allow all legions to be fielded as fluffy armies without dominating the book with legion specific rules.

Malice313
26-01-2011, 13:48
I do like Gav's comment: This I think summarizes well the issues with a purely legion approach as it was done.

I don't think bandying about statements like "restriction of choice" really works to defend the current C:CSM.:D/:cries:


Not exactly, there was an article way back when (wd issue 128 or thereabouts).

WD129... Not a bad memory there Chem-dog.:cool:

I find it curious that all that was retconned even then.

The entire Horus Heresy was basically dreamed up to explain away why Warlord Titans and 5mm Mk6 Corvus Marines were beefing with each other (other than the obvious limited miniatures range of the time).

Actually, Chaos wasn't even mentioned in the HH until the RoC books.

WD117 had the Drop Assault rules to play out the Isstvan Massacre (a virtual carbon copy of 2000AD's Rogue Trooper story... which was disturbingly close to the original Star Ship Troopers deployment concept), complete with a Mk6 looking at his watch, along with brand new rules for Ork infantry and the never before seen Eldar Falcon Grav-Tank, Swooping Hawks and Avenging Warriors.

...but of course specialist games don't add to the core games.:(


If the new codex focused on renegades, where you can create your own warband, with options for cultists, daemons (proper ones, not the lobotomised 'lesser daemons'), daemonic engines of war

When I heard "Renegades" I immediately though of the old army list in WD106... which looks NOTHING even remotely resembling the current codex.

The in true Forge World fashion, the Badab Wars books blows GW's awkward "one-size-fits-all" attempt out of the water for style, design and feel. It also links in Apocalypse and BFG (despite the GW sin of cross-marketing support).

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 13:48
It might be just nostalgia, but I do love the metal Chaos Dread. The rules just suck for it, especially now that special close-combat weapons are back in vogue for Imperial dreads. The old Power Scourge rules gave Chaos dreads a unique advantage against hordes, for one thing.

And, yes, I'd expect to see the rest of the CSM troop choices finished off in plastic, along with a plastic dread. I assume there will be some sort of unique FA vehicle to fix that slot, and maybe a plastic Dreadclaw. I could even see Plaguebearers going plastic, if they rolled daemons back in. Add a few new metal special characters, and you're done. The rest of the range is actually pretty nice, IMHO. It has been a venerable model and has held up pretty well. GW just needs to do something with it. Hopefully a plastic update will be faithful to its design and only add extra levels of customization without taking away too much.

A dreadclaw would be nice and with rumors of aircraft for more races I think we could also expect to see a Hellblade or something like it a filling the FA void. A fast-ish moving Daemon Engine might also be a neat way to fill that absence, some like the Blight drone or Blood Slaughter. I don't know if having dreadclaws across the entire army is the best or if its too much of a Loayal Marine thing.

I'm doubtful Daemons will go back. I think any redone daemon models will be held off till that book is redone. Its an army noone really wanted but I think GW will just end up trying again with them.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 13:55
Well, Dreadclaws, if they appear, need to capitalize on the whole "something went haywire in their AI/machine spirit to make them EVIL". They can also lift off again, so there's that aspect to examine.

Again, it really comes down to "what is the paradigm for CSMs?" What are these guys uniquely good at? It has to be something, because if it's not, they're competing for "generalist" with Index Astartes SMs. So many of the advantages that Chaos has had have been either given to Loyalists (BP+CCW), stripped away (daemons), or are simply not all that unique anymore (cult troops).

Myself, I like the concept that Chaos is uniquely good at non-traditional deployment (teleporting, summoned daemons, drop pods, etc.). If nothing else, Chaos is ferociously offensive when it comes to battle strategies (excepting Iron Warriors at times), and they are exactly the sort to take the fight right to the enemy. So why not provide them with some special abilities in that area, like being able to act normally after deep-striking on an icon for all units? Or giving the Dreadclaw some additional offensive capabilities?

Malice313
26-01-2011, 13:57
Its an army noone really wanted but I think GW will just end up trying again with them.

QFTT!

Was it a band-aid solution to the daemon bomb army?:confused: I would have thought that only being able to take a squad of daemons for every CSM troops squad of equal or greater strength would have killed that off in a trice.

Pah! Too easy I guess?:angel:

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 14:13
[COLOR="Magenta"]I'm of the opinion that you could make a single codex that would represent all legions and renegades well without being the insanity of 3.5. The trick is to include all of the aspects that people need to create a legion without getting carried away trying to make army wide special rules or constrain the army list. Agreed, as thats what I've been trying to show. Restrictions if any would be minimal things and likely be rare.


Only if you're calling both Alessio and Gav liars who rewrote history to protect themselves. Neither of them said "oops, we should do a legions codex to make up for it" - they said "we were planning a legions codex FROM THE START". The burden of proof is now on you to disprove what they wrote. Sources, please. :)

And, if you'll forgive the pun, there are comments from legions of people who despise it. I actually suspected that Zwei was really Gav for a while because they sound EXACTLY the same so much of the time (and so oblivious to everyone else, truth be told).
I'm not calling them liars. I'm saying they only posted those remarks after they realized how much they screwed over Legion players with 4E by not including those rules and holding those back.

I look at this work and see little intent aside from the absence of something seemingly critical. I do however see the inclusion of units and options that contradict the intended design of the book. You want proof of something thats circumstantial so I can only offer circumstantial evidence.

They either made very dumb choices or they're covering their asses or both; neither one is good.

I said
It was after that they promised they would address it and they hinted at another book that never materialized.
They obviously intended a set of Legion specific rules, but it wasn't until the absence of those rule in the 4E book was felt that they mentioned that they were "holding them back" and it wasn't till after the 4E book that they hinted at another book.

Its like someone walking out of store with something they didn't buy. If they tell you after the fact, they forgot they had it, or they intended to pay for it... does it change the circumstance of their actions?-No. They put out a codex and sold it as the new Chaos Space Marine book. People feel wronged that the legions that were such a large part of the previous book aren't present. They tell us "they held them back" and they tell us "possibly for another book". Their intent doesn't change the reality of how the book was sold or what GW wanted us to use the book to represent.


I don't think bandying about statements like "restriction of choice" really works to defend the current C:CSM.:D/:cries:
I'm not defending the current book. I was chastizing its predessessor.

Between 3.5E and 4E I believe both codex releases were equally flawed but in different ways.

Lord Inquisitor
26-01-2011, 14:24
QFTT!

Was it a band-aid solution to the daemon bomb army?:confused: I would have thought that only being able to take a squad of daemons for every CSM troops squad of equal or greater strength would have killed that off in a trice.

Pah! Too easy I guess?:angel:

Na, that wasn't the reason. The decision was made in WFB to split the Warriors, the Beasts and the Daemons of Chaos into three stand-alone armies. Beasts was already a self-contained army book, the idea was to do Warriors and Daemons justice in their own right.

The same carried over to 40K, the Chaos Space Marines were somewhat overshadowed by daemonic units like Bloodletters and the book didn't really do the Daemons justice either. Since Daemons were getting their own whole army book, it made sense to do a codex too.

Problem was, while Daemons translated into a perfectly good army on the tabletop in Fantasy (horribly broken in 7th, but it at least looked like a normal army), the 40K Daemons don't look like a normal 40K army. No guns. The decision made sense, but with only one 40k-specific kit (soulgrinder), maybe two if you add in the 40K daemon prince, the army just looked like a fantasy army in space.

But that doesn't mean splitting the daemons off was a bad idea (although it took me a crazy long time to get used to the idea of generic lesser daemons) nor that Codex: Daemons has no potential.

Lesser daemons are good because: they only need one profile. This was absolutely sound. They also fit thematically - Chaos Space Marines aren't so much pals with the daemons but they entrap and enslave them, forcing them into the servitude of defilers and daemon weapons. I quite like the idea that lesser summoned daemons aren't mighty bloodletters sent by Khorne Himself to help out the World Eaters in a big happy head-chopping Khorne-worshipping family ... but warp filth entrapped and enslaved, any daemons weak enough to be summoned and bound to be released onto the enemy. So I think a generic profile is fine, the fluff just needs to make it clear. Further to this, I think we could do with mechanics that represent these more, a random number of daemons summoned per pact bought, or bonuses to reserve rolls with units killed (both sides!), or even a chaos warshrine equivalent that summons continuously like a tervigon that is drawing daemons to the carnage. So I'm fine with generic daemons but there's a lot more that can be done.

As for Codex Daemons, there's two words that would fix it and make it a "proper codex". Daemon Engines. The Soul Grinder is great - give us more. Bloodletters riding in a might daemonic steam engine! Subterrainian daemonic Tremors that burst forth from the ground (okay maybe not). Flying daemonic engines or warp cannons! New biomechanical daemonic unit types would also be cool. Give us 4-5 new daemonic vehicles/units that are specifically geared to 40K and have ranged weapons and you've got yourself a list. Even better, if you look to making bound and unbound versions of each daemonic engine (like the defiler/soulgrinder) then you can pad out the Chaos Marines' need for more gigeresque weirdness in their list.

Malice313
26-01-2011, 14:32
Between 3.5E and 4E I believe both codex releases were equally flawed but in different ways.

So in 3.5 there was a down side over specialisation? Chaos thrives in an environment of excess. There are few instances of wanton excess than compared with the fanatical following of extreme dogma by zealots.

I used to play Undivided. I never really found it too flawed. I don't see how making cookie-cutter-less-is-more armies addresses the "problem" of lack of diversity in a codex that supported some 10 different actual reasons to putting some thought into your choice colour scheme.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 14:37
Well, Dreadclaws, if they appear, need to capitalize on the whole "something went haywire in their AI/machine spirit to make them EVIL". They can also lift off again, so there's that aspect to examine. I'd like to see Dreadclaws be limited but more devestating on deployement. Instead of gently moving enemy models out from under it like the loyalist pod, allow it a number of Str X attacks equal to the number of models displaced... and price it accordingly.



Again, it really comes down to "what is the paradigm for CSMs?" What are these guys uniquely good at? It has to be something, because if it's not, they're competing for "generalist" with Index Astartes SMs. So many of the advantages that Chaos has had have been either given to Loyalists (BP+CCW), stripped away (daemons), or are simply not all that unique anymore (cult troops).

Myself, I like the concept that Chaos is uniquely good at non-traditional deployment (teleporting, summoned daemons, drop pods, etc.). If nothing else, Chaos is ferociously offensive when it comes to battle strategies (excepting Iron Warriors at times), and they are exactly the sort to take the fight right to the enemy. So why not provide them with some special abilities in that area, like being able to act normally after deep-striking on an icon for all units? Or giving the Dreadclaw some additional offensive capabilities?I find these two paragraphs almost contradictory. While Chaos might go about things atypically... there isn't much distinctions between Chaos using jumppack deep striking... "teleporting, summoning daemons, and droppods" and Loyal marines using jumpacks, teleporting, deep striking speeders, and drop pods... they also have the Stormraven now, too. You're playing the Loyalist's game.

The thing Chaos currently does better than space marines is they can field many more "elite" units as troops. Beyond that I think we should look to their corruptive nature. Obliterator techno-virus, Plague Marine zombie plague, Alpha Legion cultists, and Word Bearer daemon summoning are examples of how Chaos corrupts imperial worlds. A space marine will fight face to face, a chaos marine either forces or convinces someone to stand between him and the loyalist to better his odds. I'd imagine more booby trapping, more sabotaging, more outflanking moves, and anything else indicative of Chaos' savage unorthodox nature. Chaos marines in 3.5E were shown to be generally more veteran than loyalists... but given the high attrition that comes with being a Chaos marine, where there aren't any Apothecaries, the only way they could ever have survived is ovewhelming weaker targers or having others be their fodder. Fluff shows all these different types of fodder Chaos uses yet none, aside from Daemons, are present.

Bloodknight
26-01-2011, 14:43
a random number of daemons summoned per pact bought,

I doubt that daemons in the CSM army would survive that incarnation. Randomness in a CSM army basically every time means that you pay for something that doesn't live up to its price. See daemon weapon, dreadnought, possessed. Randomness is only ok if all random outcomes are beneficial in the same way (like, for example, the old DE combat drugs that were all good, and 5 out of 6 were statistically about the same; funny thing is that they failed to carry that over into the new book where some boni are much more situational and some are mathematically much worse than others). Also, pricing is impossible to balance for such a thing. Making a guy pay 100 points for 2 daemons is just as bad as making him pay 100 points for 12, when 100 points are actually the price for 7.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 14:44
I find these two paragraphs almost contradictory. While Chaos might go about things atypically... there isn't much distinctions between Chaos using jumppack deep striking... "teleporting, summoning daemons, and droppods" and Loyal marines using jumpacks, teleporting, deep striking speeders, and drop pods... they also have the Stormraven now, too. You're playing the Loyalist's game.
Yeah, but most of the loyalists are not particularly good at any of those things. Chaos could be. And I mistakenly left "outflanking" out - having Chaos be extra good at outflanking would be quite interesting. The exclusion of jump packs was deliberate - BAs have this covered. (And no one deep-strikes speeders any more.)


The thing Chaos currently does better than space marines is they can field many more "elite" units as troops. Beyond that I think we should look to their corruptive nature. Obliterator techno-virus, Plague Marine zombie plague, Alpha Legion cultists, and Word Bearer daemon summoning are examples of how Chaos corrupts imperial worlds. A space marine will fight face to face, a chaos marine either forces or convinces someone to stand between him and the loyalist to better his odds. I'd imagine more booby trapping, more sabotaging, more outflanking moves, and anything else indicative of Chaos' savage unorthodox nature. Chaos marines in 3.5E were shown to be generally more veteran than loyalists... but given the high attrition that comes with being a Chaos marine, where there aren't any Apothecaries, the only way they could ever have survived is ovewhelming weaker targers or having others be their fodder. Fluff shows all these different types of fodder Chaos uses yet none, aside from Daemons, are present.
Yeah, but then you're just talking elite space marines with fodder. That's what Daemonhunters and Sisters of Battle do. I'm not against using the concept, but it's not unique to Chaos. Having the fodder deployed and then smacking the enemies from all sides with the CSMs using the fodder for guidance... that's more interesting as a concept. You have some cultists/traitor IG on the board, and then drop pods, teleporters, and summoned daemons hit the enemy like a hurricane.

I like it the more I think about it. It's like the unique deployment method of daemons, but with less randomness (I assume some reserves control here). It also feels more like a raid, which is how Chaos tends to operate.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 14:51
So in 3.5 there was a down side over specialisation? Chaos thrives in an environment of excess. There are few instances of wanton excess than compared with the fanatical following of extreme dogma by zealots. The flaw was that it was excessive and difficult for non-chaos players to follow what type of army they were going up against because the number of variations the most basic units could have left opposing players completely unsure of what the rules we were using against them. For some it was fine for others not so much, but winning by overwhelming your opponent with uncertainty and inconsistency between games is unsporting and not fair. If chaos needed to be so specialized it should have been many more immutable units with less capability to bridge every gap.

The way to think of it... at the time a typical codex had 20 units or so, but by virtue of the our options and combinations of upgrades we effectively had 100+ units that were all tucked away into smaller subheaders and profiles. I'm not being exact with the numbers, but that notion of excessive options is inherently unfair. It was good for us but not everyone else.

Vaktathi
26-01-2011, 14:54
You're correct in mentioning that their equipment and, in some cases, their organization would be based on more modern Imperial standards. However the exact point I was trying to make was that if it comes down to choosing modern equipment or Chaos troops/ items, it makes far more sense to take the chaos option.

Nowhere, in either incarnation of his rules, or any fluff that I'm aware of, have the Red Corsairs or other Post Heresy Renegades been excluded from taking daemons, cult troops or other "chaos" items. Being Post-Heresy has always been about getting extras, not less.


I was referring to Cult units as in Berzerkers, Plague Marines etc, but Cultists would be good. Daemons are another issue altogether which I won't get in to now. Well, to be honest, Most of the "Cult" troops shouldn't really be seen outside their specific Legions. Thousand Sons are Thousand Sons as a result of the Rubric of Ahriman, no other Tzeentch Marines are going to be like them. Berzerkers are a byproduct not only of their worship for Khorne but also of the World Eaters psycho-lobotomization surgery and gladiatorial background of their Primarch, whereas other Space Marines that dedicate themselves to Khorne aren't going to have quite the same complete focus on close combat. Plague Marines of the Death Guard are unique as a result of their interaction with the Destroyer virus and the pact by Mortarion with Nurgle. Granted there's wiggle room in much of this but does that make a sort of sense?



I think that's one of the few things the current book got right was the distinction between the special circumstance Cult troops of the Legions, and that other troops dedicated to a god are not going to have the same changes wrought upon them, or at least not to the same extent. They may be accompanied by Legion style Cult troops who have joined their Warband, but they would be freelancers, "elites" essentially, not really of the Renegades themselves but allied with them.

Now, I don't think that Renegades shouldn't be able to get Daemons, or some way to dedicate themselves to a god like with Icons (but those could use some tweaking), and access to Daemon engines and the like, but they should really be more C:SM+Chaos options rather than the current Chaos Legions standard template that C:CSM has always used and likely will continue to use.





NOOOOO.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how that could be anything but a bad idea. You're saying it would be easier to include rules that would replicate marks, Icons and daemons in the SM book but ONLY if you take Huron (or some other renegade leader), than giving Huron (or again, a "post Heresy" characteristic upgrade for your Lord) a rule in the chaos book that says " all Reaper autocannons become Assault Cannons, all combi bolters become storm bolters"? Granted, there's a few more things that might need to be upgraded, and there are Razorbacks/ Speeders etc... but including rules for daemons in a Loyalist SM book would strip uniqueness and character from Chaos even more, and be open for all sorts of horrible exploitation.Nonono, I'm not saying one would need to take Huron specifically to field a Renegades army, I'm saying I would best like to see him included in an addendum to a C:SM list. He shouldn't be necessary to field that, but should be included there, not with Legion characters.

EDIT: keep in mind that I play an undivided Legion with no real Cult troops or dedication to any Chaos god, so personally most of these changes won't really have any effect on my army too much


I disagree. First, Chaos Space Marine Equipment is not "Legion Equipment". You're creating a false dichotomy if you claim that stuff like Combi-weapons, TL-Bolters, Reaper Autocannons, etc.., are "Legion stuff". There is no reference to this and it is a highly biased reading of the equipment list. Just as likely, these things are jury-rigged wargear used by Chaos Space Marines freed from the constraints of Imperial Dogma (irrespective of whether that happened 10.000 years ago, or 1 year ago). There may not be references in the current 4E CSM book, but it also gives hardly more than a name and a color scheme for most Chaos factions too. There's plenty of fluff on these wargear differences in previous CSM books, especially 2nd edition. The fluff is most definitely there. There's certainly no fluff describing a Reaper Autocannon as a jury rigged make-shift Imperial Weapon for instance, but it is described in previous books and BL fluff as a precursor to the Assault Cannon, most recently in "A Thousand Sons", and the TL-Bolter has been described as the precursor to the current Storm Bolter.



A mono-World Eater, Night Lord or Thousand Sons list on the other hand would be much better served with a Special Character in the Space Wolves, Blood Angels or Grey Knight Codex that allows you to play these already specialized forces with a different, Legion-flavoured approach to the same specialization. Uh, why? Most of those armies really shouldn't have their own books in the first place, and are based heavily on post-heresy developments, and may suit only a couple Legions, and if then only because C:CSM was so underdone and C:BA/SW were so *overdone*. You'd be doing the same thing with each one of these for each legion that you could just do with a Legion book and a Renegade addendum which would probably a lot less messier and more reflective of the fluff as well.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 14:55
I think the Loyalist chapters should just use Chaos Legion rules if they need to be special.

*ducks*

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 14:58
In theory, Chaos corrupts. It starts off corrupting the planet's population, who then disable the PDF and guard, and then pave the way for a full scale Marine invasion. These heretics then disable, sabotage or generally act as cannon fodder, tying up marine and guard forces, while the heretic marines massacre everything in between.

In that case, I wonder if it would be possible to have something similar to the old Death Company rules, where choices means you can take cultists and renegade PDF. A Chaos lord might not produce as many cultist points as a Daemon Prince (more daemonic control over the heretics), and regular chaos marines would also accrue cultist points, which then can be used to add in Cultists (5-30 per squad), which exist outside the FOC. These are possibly weaker than imperial guard, scoring troops, armed with CCW/Las Pistols, or special weapons as an upgrade, and have rules for infiltration or scouts, so that they deploy ahead of the main forces.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 15:03
Yeah, but most of the loyalists are not particularly good at any of those things. Chaos could be. And I mistakenly left "outflanking" out - having Chaos be extra good at outflanking would be quite interesting. The exclusion of jump packs was deliberate - BAs have this covered. (And no one deep-strikes speeders any more.) True, but its the volume of diverse capabilities that make loyalists special. I'd say picking one or two and making them the focal points would be best... doing them all better is too much.



Yeah, but then you're just talking elite space marines with fodder. That's what Daemonhunters and Sisters of Battle do. I'm not against using the concept, but it's not unique to Chaos. Having the fodder deployed and then smacking the enemies from all sides with the CSMs using the fodder for guidance... that's more interesting as a concept. You have some cultists/traitor IG on the board, and then drop pods, teleporters, and summoned daemons hit the enemy like a hurricane.

I like it the more I think about it. It's like the unique deployment method of daemons, but with less randomness (I assume some reserves control here). It also feels more like a raid, which is how Chaos tends to operate.
The thing is Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle are suppose to lose much of their fodder in their updated books, as their respective codices focus in on them more.

I think this modus operandii you describe seems appropriate and probably does a good job of representing most of chaos, renegades and legion. The variations would revolve around what entry/deployment meathod is prefered and which type of fodder they use. Examples: Cult legion armies would use daemons and dreadclaws to deploy elite infantry. Alpha legion, cultists and outflanking marines. Word Bearers conventional marines with daemons. Night Lords with Jumppacks. Renegades would have less reluctance to use large proportions of traitor/mutant/cultist... but otherwise follow the same model. Black Legion would be the "Chaos Marines only"... relying exclusively on chaos marines. Iron Warriors might be the only ones left out of this game play style... they'd be the static army... maybe get more out of their daemon engines or dreadnoughts.


...which then can be used to add in Cultists (5-30 per squad), which exist outside the FOC. These are possibly weaker than imperial guard, scoring troops, armed with CCW/Las Pistols, or special weapons as an upgrade, and have rules for infiltration or scouts, so that they deploy ahead of the main forces. I think that'd be difficult to adjust for points wise... unit rules wise they sound like a cross of Penal Legion/Conscripts.

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 15:08
I think that'd be difficult to adjust for points wise... unit rules wise they sound like a cross of Penal Legion/Conscripts.

Maybe then just use it like lesser daemons. X points per cultist, just like the penal legion/conscripts. Cheap, cheerful bodies that jump into the fray and get slaughtered. If you take a champion they are fearless (driven to such heights of depravity by their orating leader, they don't care that they are dying in droves), and they do the "ork horde" shuffle across the battlefield, getting slaughtered, while the chaos lord sits there laughing into his armoured gauntlet.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 15:11
True, but its the volume of diverse capabilities that make loyalists special. I'd say picking one or two and making them the focal points would be best... doing them all better is too much.
OK, so let's say it's teleporting and summoning. After all, both deal with the warp. Doesn't rule out Dreadclaw usage, but that'll be a variation on normal.


I think this modus operandii you describe seems appropriate and probably does a good job of representing most of chaos, renegades and legion. The variations would revolve around what entry/deployment meathod is prefered and which type of fodder they use. Examples: Cult legion armies would use daemons and dreadclaws. Alpha legion, cultists and outflanking. Black Legion would be the "Chaos Marines only"... Renegades like Huron would be the "any fodder type". Iron Warriors might be the only ones left out of this game play style... they'd be the static army... maybe get more out of their daemon engines or dreadnoughts.
Yep. You could represent Legions by doing single USR and unit swaps. Doesn't need to be as complex as 3.5E, but could be slightly more than Codex: SM. If they actually cost the units correctly, competitive variations will naturally occur as well.

Edit: Heck, a clever variation might be "replace the generic Legionaries unit with this special Legion-specific unit". As long as the generic Legionaries unit was good, you'd actually have to make a tough decision. (And if it was "teleport on deep strike terminators" as the generic unit, you'd think twice about replacing it.)

FOC changes could also be useful... what if the maximum number of elites that Chaos could take was expanded, perhaps with only one HQ in exchange? You could splice the cults back into elites, but not actually destroy the number you could take.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 15:26
I think that works.


Edit: Heck, a clever variation might be "replace the generic Legionaries unit with this special Legion-specific unit". As long as the generic Legionaries unit was good, you'd actually have to make a tough decision.

FOC changes could also be useful... what if the maximum number of elites that Chaos could take was expanded, perhaps with only one HQ in exchange?Legion specific units would simplify things, though it isn't how GW currently does things. I think having it where a very few special characters could take a specific unit as their retinue... that unit gets a little bump in cost and an extra rule... and counts like any other retinue as an HQ choice would fit the framework of the current rules better.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 15:31
Well, GW innovates SOMETIMES. This isn't much of an innovation.

Let's take this even further: we'd even be able to finally accommodate recent renegades with this approach. You'd swap out Legionaries with "New Traitors", and they'd be able to upgrade to terminator armor with assault cannons, or they could take a Razorback - you get the idea.

(Note that there would be another "renegades" entry to represent non-Legionaries with traditionally-Chaos gear.)

Malice313
26-01-2011, 15:42
...but winning by overwhelming your opponent with uncertainty and inconsistency between games is unsporting and not fair...

Hey... I wonder what you'd call such a chaotic army list?:angel:

Is reliance on predictability what constitutes sporting behaviour?

If you are dancing to the tempo set by your opponent and they're given the opportunity to rotary polish the floor with you, raining down on you with all the hoopty froop juice points can buy, nerfing the bejeebus out of his codex isn't going to save you.

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 15:44
Let's take this even further: we'd even be able to finally accommodate recent renegades with this approach. You'd swap out Legionaries with "New Traitors", and they'd be able to upgrade to terminator armor with assault cannons, or they could take a Razorback - you get the idea.

(Note that there would be another "renegades" entry to represent non-Legionaries with traditionally-Chaos gear.) That is an appealing idea, though the notion of how recently-traitor-loyalists work ruleswise might need to be refined better.

What I mean is, just because their recently traitor doesn't mean they'd use standard loyalist equipment in a typical way or have a typical unit configuration. A mix of assault, tactical, and devastator squad in one.... where instead of relying on the weapon they personnally had, they ripped a stormbolter off a rhino or a combi-weapon from their betrayed commanders hands. The horus heresy artbook had pre-heresy marines carrying sniper rifles and assault cannons. Have some of those weapons be less reliable due to failing maintainance... point to the direction of them inevitably equipping themselves with Chaos weapons. I'm not saying they need to be "that" way, just there are varied approaches to such a unit.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 15:49
That is an appealing idea, though the notion of how recently-traitor-loyalists work ruleswise might need to be refined better.

What I mean is, just because their recently traitor doesn't mean they'd use standard loyalist equipment in a typical way or have a typical unit configuration. A mix of assault, tactical, and devastator squad in one.... where instead of relying on the weapon they personnally had, they ripped a stormbolter off a rhino or a combi-weapon from their betrayed commanders hands. The horus heresy artbook had pre-heresy marines carrying sniper rifles and assault cannons. Have some of those weapons be less reliable due to failing maintainance... point to the direction of them inevitably equipping themselves with Chaos weapons. I'm not saying they need to be "that" way, just there are varied approaches to such a unit.
Sure, but it's almost irrelevant how you implement that unit - I'm not writing a fandex here, I am discussing design approaches. And this is one that actually might satisfy almost everyone in this thread. It's still simple, it doesn't require a hundred special rules, and your opponents know, basically, what's inside the codex.

I would also like to get away from "units and weapons randomly go horribly wrong sometimes, hehe" design paradigm. Not only has it been implemented badly in the past, but it's just not fun to see your guys randomly punch themselves in the face unless you have tons of them to spare (as is the case with Orks).

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 15:49
Hey... I wonder what you'd call such a chaotic army list?:angel:

Is reliance on predictability what constitutes sporting behaviour?
I'm speaking of the consistency of rules and their understanding as sporting. As a matter of strategy those things would be fine. As a matter of a rule book being difficult to follow for the outsider its unfair. The situation with the 3.5E codex was only a hair better than outright disallowing your opponent from seeing the rule.

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 15:52
What I mean is, just because their recently traitor doesn't mean they'd use standard loyalist equipment in a typical way or have a typical unit configuration. A mix of assault, tactical, and devastator squad in one.... where instead of relying on the weapon they personnally had, they ripped a stormbolter off a rhino or a combi-weapon from their betrayed commanders hands. The horus heresy artbook had pre-heresy marines carrying sniper rifles and assault cannons. Have some of those weapons be less reliable due to failing maintainance... point to the direction of them inevitably equipping themselves with Chaos weapons. I'm not saying they need to be "that" way, just there are varied approaches to such a unit.

The thing is, your former life and training carries on. Yes you take part in debauchery, slaughter, sadism etc. But the training you had, the equipment you take with you will still be there. A team will work and stay together... up until the distrust and such rips it apart, and if you are specially trained in the use of special weapons, you won't toss aside the very weapon that has been part of your being since you was issued it, just because you see something shiny. I can imagine that renegades have to modify or adapt their original weapons, and maybe even change squad sizes to account for their new place within a warband, but negating years of training, comradeship with the squad and weapons familiarity seems a bit weird.


I would also like to get away from "units and weapons randomly go horribly wrong sometimes, hehe" design paradigm. Not only has it been implemented badly in the past, but it's just not fun to see your guys randomly punch themselves in the face unless you have tons of them to spare (as is the case with Orks).

It makes for good storytelling when Mr Cuddles the Dreadnought suddenly turns wacko and takes out half of your army... but I have to agree. The randomness, the fickle nature of Chaos should be represented, but could be done in less suicidal ways. At the moment with the Dread and daemon weapons at least, it's like the Chaos Gods are saying "Hey, doesn't matter to us who dies, just get on with it!". Fine with Khorne, less fine with Tzeentch, who has spent years master-minding this exact conflict, and then goes "Ah, bored now" and lets the dreadnought wack the Chaos Lord.

streetsamurai
26-01-2011, 16:03
Chaos needs to reflect the leader of its warband and thus your HQ choices should change the shape of the army:

- There should only ever be one leader, either Lord or Prince. You may not include 2.

- Cult units are pushed back up to Elites

- Undivided Lords get to have Chosen as troops and in the fluff they represent ex-legion units. This is reflected by allowing them to have veteran abilities provided they are painted in the proper scheme, thus for your Chosen to be able to have 'Tank Hunters' they must be painted as Iron Warriors. This adds fluff conviction to legion players but prevents abuse by power mongers


- Marked Lords may choose their respective cult units as troops, birds of a feather and all that. In addition they may choose their power specific daemons as well, so your Berzerker army can finally march alongside bloodletters once again.

This makes legion representation easy as each one conforms to a simple special rule:

- Emperor's Children: Cult Slaanesh army
- Iron Warriors: Tank Hunters
- Night Lords: Stealth
- World Eaters: Cult Khorne army
- Death Guard: Cult Nurgle army
- Thousand Sons: Cult Tzeentch army
- Black Legion: Counter Attack
- Word Bearers: Stubborn
- Alpha Legion: Outflank

- Undivided lords can choose from more generic daemons like furies and suchlike.

- Rivalry returns. Khorne lords may not have noise marines and so on.

- Possessed must still roll on their table but you may pay extra for additional rolls to create some powerful, albeit random combinations.

- Cultists are added as a troops choice, and in terms of fluff and rules are treated with more disdain than grots.

- The summoning rules for daemons are changed to something a little more colourful:
-- At the start of a turn roll a D6 and add the number of models killed by requisite units (so by models with the mark of khorne for bloodletters and so on) If you roll over the number of models in the unit they may enter play. This makes larger units harder to summon but more potent if you do, and encourages you to get stuck in!
-- Cultists may be shot/assaulted by friendly models in an attempt to cause more casualties for daemon summoning!
-- Daemons must deep strike within 6" of a friendly unit (marker or not) and may assault on arrival. This means killing cultists on your first turn to bring your bloodletters on does not guarantee an alpha strike as they can be shot at.
-- Undivided daemons are thus not as good as cult daemons but easier to summon.

- Abaddon allows all cult units and daemons as troops choices.



Great post, especially the cultist part.

But, I think that cultist should be allowed to suicide in order to facilitate deamon summoning, insted of being shot at

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 16:05
Sure, but it's almost irrelevant how you implement that unit - I'm not writing a fandex here, I am discussing design approaches. And this is one that actually might satisfy almost everyone in this thread. It's still simple, it doesn't require a hundred special rules,

I would also like to get away from "units and weapons randomly go horribly wrong sometimes, hehe" design paradigm. Not only has it been implemented badly in the past, but it's just not fun to see your guys randomly punch themselves in the face.I was just commenting that the way you had proposed the unit left it open to a larger and more diverse possibility than you later implied.

Units and weapons going horribly wrong... well I tend to agree they've been done poorly, but I feel there is someway to work it out. With weapons as mundane as basic imperial weapons like these, I would not propose they dramatically explode killing half the squad when they fail... something that just results in it being less predictable but determined at the start of the game... like "after deploying roll 1d6" and where "Heavy 3" weapon becomes "Heavy d3"... or a sniper rifle is reduced from 36" to 24".

When we think of this sort of thing, Enhanced warriors and dreadnoughts come to mind and really reveal the failings of those random rules that make units almost unplayable. While the example above doesn't real do it, I've always thought with these two units the randomness needs to get away from a "good or bad" result and instead just be "inconsistently good" results. With enhanced warriors it could just be "in the assault phase roll 1d3 for X, Y, and Z"... where each is a better bonus. Or the Chaos dreadnought, "in the shooting phase roll 1d6 on a 6 shoot twice; in the assault phase roll 1d6 on 6 double normal number of attacks"... Rules that have a chance of making the model better without self destructing the unit.

MarshalFaust
26-01-2011, 16:12
Well, to be honest, Most of the "Cult" troops shouldn't really be seen outside their specific Legions. Thousand Sons are Thousand Sons as a result of the Rubric of Ahriman, no other Tzeentch Marines are going to be like them. Berzerkers are a byproduct not only of their worship for Khorne but also of the World Eaters psycho-lobotomization surgery and gladiatorial background of their Primarch, whereas other Space Marines that dedicate themselves to Khorne aren't going to have quite the same complete focus on close combat. Plague Marines of the Death Guard are unique as a result of their interaction with the Destroyer virus and the pact by Mortarion with Nurgle. Granted there's wiggle room in much of this but does that make a sort of sense?

I see what your saying and i dont really intend to call you out specifically but almost in all instances in the background those troops do show up in other warbands that are not part of the legion.

Ahriman has been banished drom his legion and basically sells his services to the highest bidder to further his own goals.

Typhus is no longer with the deathguard and leads many plague marines that were not originally part of the deathguard.

The emperors children do not exist as a legion anymore and show up and fight for whoever they want to.

Kharne and many other world eaters lead their own warbands outside of the original legion.

out of the four cult troops only the thousand sons are special in that recent traitors cannot join their ranks. nothing about being a berzerker precludes non-world eaters from becoming one so long as it pleases Khorne.

im in no way arguing against having legions better represented, hell i have invested in 5000 points of pure iron warriors that i would love to see get some proper attention from GW but i just want people to stop being so rigid and proscriptive in their interpretation of an army that is called CHAOS space marines.

Erwos
26-01-2011, 16:12
I agree with you. This is just my observation, but people like it when things become randomly better in the same way (see: Dark Eldar combat drugs). They don't like it when things become randomly worse (see: Daemon Weapons), act randomly (see: Chaos Dreads), or randomly better in completely different ways (see: Possessed and Penal Legion).

aka_mythos
26-01-2011, 16:12
The thing is, your former life and training carries on. Yes you take part in debauchery, slaughter, sadism etc. But the training you had, the equipment you take with you will still be there. A team will work and stay together... up until the distrust and such rips it apart, and if you are specially trained in the use of special weapons, you won't toss aside the very weapon that has been part of your being since you was issued it, just because you see something shiny. I can imagine that renegades have to modify or adapt their original weapons, and maybe even change squad sizes to account for their new place within a warband, but negating years of training, comradeship with the squad and weapons familiarity seems a bit weird. I'm not talking about them breaking away from training, I'm talking about them reverting to the weapons that they've been trained with but doctrine says belongs in a different squad formation.

In the current fluff marines start as Scouts and move on to Devastator Squad and Assault squad before joining a tactical squad. So at some point assuming after they've been a tactical marine... they go Renegade... they've been trained in sniper rifles, chain swords, and bolt pistols etc. They rever to their prefrences while simultaneously having to adapt to the deteriorating condition of their more difficult to maintain equipment. Its less about throwing away what you were trained with as it is about shedding the doctrine and dogma that kept you from using the weapon you had previously been trained to use.

Caitsidhe
26-01-2011, 18:10
Heh. I just want a damn CSM drop pod for our otherwise useless Dreadnaughts. If I could drop mine on my opponent's side of the table, they might actually see use.

Ritualnet
26-01-2011, 20:49
I'm not talking about them breaking away from training, I'm talking about them reverting to the weapons that they've been trained with but doctrine says belongs in a different squad formation.

In the current fluff marines start as Scouts and move on to Devastator Squad and Assault squad before joining a tactical squad. So at some point assuming after they've been a tactical marine... they go Renegade... they've been trained in sniper rifles, chain swords, and bolt pistols etc. They rever to their prefrences while simultaneously having to adapt to the deteriorating condition of their more difficult to maintain equipment. Its less about throwing away what you were trained with as it is about shedding the doctrine and dogma that kept you from using the weapon you had previously been trained to use.

That's a fair enough view :D I was going to argue on this, but then thought about when I play games such as Halo. I will keep weapons (i.e. scoped pistol, sniper rifle) long after the areas you pick them up, because they are my prefered weapons. I can switch and use any weapon I find, but I'd prefer to use a scoped weapon if one is available.

TheMav80
26-01-2011, 23:12
In trying to come up with a design philosophy it will be important to decide what types of lists your Codex is going to be able to effectivley create. Units that you will combine in an army to make an effective force, and hopefully still stick with the backround.

Using the C: SM as an example...
*You can take a captain on a bike and make a biker list. Making that one choice defines the rest of your army.
*You can decide you want to go mechanized, so you make sure you take plenty of Rhino/Razorback chassis and the units you need to support it.
*You can take a Master of the Forge because you want lots of Dreads in your army list and you build your list around that.

That is three very different army lists, with variations within each of those three. All of which are competitive from a tournament stand point and perfectly in synch with the backround.

The Space Wolves and Blood Angels are the same. They each have several different unique builds that still have variations within each of those themes.

Part of the problem I run into when thinking about Chaos, is all of their unique units are highly specialized. Or at least people are forceing them to be. People think that taking a World Eaters army means taking nothing but Berzerkers and having no shooting in your army. Well, I'm sorry...but that makes a horribly ineffective army. This is much more of a backround issue. We need to get away from the World Eaters/Khorne are all psychotic nutbags who do nothing but charge headlong into the enemies guns frothing at the mouth.

Same with the other specialized Legions. The Death Guard aren't so dumb that they fail to recognize the benefit of having a Rhino take them to the battle.

So we need toc ome up with three (at the very least) fairly unique general themes we want to be able to do well. Then go from there. It doesn't even have to be everything, you will never get that. Not even the Loyalists get it all in one book. Just like if you wanted to play an all Terminator army as the Ultramarines, you would have to use a different book. Or if you wanted to do an all Jumper List as the Raven Guard you would have to use a different book. The Chaos Marines will end up the same way. Concessions will have to be made in the name of game balance and expediancy.

Born Again
27-01-2011, 00:36
Well, to be honest, Most of the "Cult" troops shouldn't really be seen outside their specific Legions. Thousand Sons are Thousand Sons as a result of the Rubric of Ahriman, no other Tzeentch Marines are going to be like them. Berzerkers are a byproduct not only of their worship for Khorne but also of the World Eaters psycho-lobotomization surgery and gladiatorial background of their Primarch, whereas other Space Marines that dedicate themselves to Khorne aren't going to have quite the same complete focus on close combat. Plague Marines of the Death Guard are unique as a result of their interaction with the Destroyer virus and the pact by Mortarion with Nurgle. Granted there's wiggle room in much of this but does that make a sort of sense?

I think MarshalFaust covered this for me:


I see what your saying and i dont really intend to call you out specifically but almost in all instances in the background those troops do show up in other warbands that are not part of the legion.

Ahriman has been banished drom his legion and basically sells his services to the highest bidder to further his own goals.

Typhus is no longer with the deathguard and leads many plague marines that were not originally part of the deathguard.

The emperors children do not exist as a legion anymore and show up and fight for whoever they want to.

Kharne and many other world eaters lead their own warbands outside of the original legion.

out of the four cult troops only the thousand sons are special in that recent traitors cannot join their ranks. nothing about being a berzerker precludes non-world eaters from becoming one so long as it pleases Khorne.

im in no way arguing against having legions better represented, hell i have invested in 5000 points of pure iron warriors that i would love to see get some proper attention from GW but i just want people to stop being so rigid and proscriptive in their interpretation of an army that is called CHAOS space marines.

That old line about "all World Eaters are Berzerkers, not all Berzerkers are World Eaters" and everything...


I think that's one of the few things the current book got right was the distinction between the special circumstance Cult troops of the Legions, and that other troops dedicated to a god are not going to have the same changes wrought upon them, or at least not to the same extent. They may be accompanied by Legion style Cult troops who have joined their Warband, but they would be freelancers, "elites" essentially, not really of the Renegades themselves but allied with them.


Yes, I agree with you there. I really like the distinction between those who merely like Nurlge, and those who are willing to dedicate themselves body and soul to him. Again yes, whether they are Cult Troops drawn from the Legions themselves or allies, it doesn't matter, as long as they're made available.



Nonono, I'm not saying one would need to take Huron specifically to field a Renegades army, I'm saying I would best like to see him included in an addendum to a C:SM list. He shouldn't be necessary to field that, but should be included there, not with Legion characters.

Ok, but whether it be him or a generic Renegade option in the SM book, I still think it's wrong, and simpler to adjust the Chaos book than the Loyalist one. I also strongly doubt it will happen purely because it would create a grey area in the SM book's background ("They are the loyal, mighty defenders of the Imperium! The Emperor's Chosen! But these guys here ran off to start their own party!"). They want to make each army as hyped up, turned to 11, over 9000 as possible in their own codex, not mix them up with their sworn enemies.

AlphariusOmegon20
27-01-2011, 02:23
They want to make each army as hyped up, turned to 11, over 9000 as possible in their own codex

If this is the case, then what happened in the current codex? It ranks about a 4 on the "loudness" scale, compared to other codexes.

DuskRaider
27-01-2011, 04:09
The current codex was GW's disastrous attempt at the saying "less is more"... which, as shown by both Dark Angels (even though they recently got a big boost... lucky them) & Chaos, is not the case. The worst part of it all is they had decided to test it on us, the results were poor, and now we're left out in the wind.

Here's an idea that would appease you Renegade folks... how about Cult Units as Elites for Renegade players? That way you can still take your Cult Troops, but your army just cannot consist purely of them. A restriction would be that you cannot take Cult Units of opposing Gods in the same army. Can't have your cake and eat it too, kids. Otherwise, make a Legion list and paint them as your own warband... kind of like you've been suggesting to us Legionnaires with Loyalist books and this **** poor book of ours.

Born Again
27-01-2011, 06:20
Here's an idea that would appease you Renegade folks... how about Cult Units as Elites for Renegade players? That way you can still take your Cult Troops, but your army just cannot consist purely of them. A restriction would be that you cannot take Cult Units of opposing Gods in the same army. Can't have your cake and eat it too, kids. Otherwise, make a Legion list and paint them as your own warband... kind of like you've been suggesting to us Legionnaires with Loyalist books and this **** poor book of ours.

So... use rules for, say, Death Guard Legion, but paint them in my own colours to represent my own warband with my own fluff? Yep, that sounds exactly like what I've been after all along.

See everyone, we can coexist!

AlphariusOmegon20, what I meant is that there is generally nothing in the books detailing the terrible losses and defeats of said army. In the example I was addressing, including renegades in an otherwise Loyalist book would rather ruin their image as the glorious honour bound knights of the Imperium.

DuskRaider
27-01-2011, 07:02
Well you want to play Renegades, and that's fine. But Renegades won't have access to Pre-Heresy technology (as in, technology that fell out of use Post-Heresy), which means to accurately portray them you'd use Post-Heresy Tech. Ok, that's fine. But as I said, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you're playing a Mono-God list, use a Cult Legion list and paint it your own way, give it your own back story, etc. but you can't have all of these new goodies that C:SM get AND all of the choices Legions get as well.

As I've said, GW could certainly make a list possible for Post-Heresy Renegades with recent Imperial Technology, generic daemons, Hell Blades & Hell Talons, Drop Pods, Defilers, Obliterators, Raptors, and move Cult Units to Elites. I think that's perfectly reasonable for Renegades, they'd get the LR variants, Landspeeders, Whirlwhinds, etc. AND they'd also have some Daemon options.

aka_mythos
27-01-2011, 11:35
...Using the C: SM as an example...
*You can take a captain on a bike and make a biker list. Making that one choice defines the rest of your army.
*You can decide you want to go mechanized, so you make sure you take plenty of Rhino/Razorback chassis and the units you need to support it.
*You can take a Master of the Forge because you want lots of Dreads in your army list and you build your list around that.

That is three very different army lists, with variations within each of those three. All of which are competitive from a tournament stand point and perfectly in synch with the backround....

Well I think Chaos will have a number of special characters that would take care of some flavors, but some of the plainer ones could end up with less attention and end up parralleling the above. I'm going to make a lot of assumptions for the sake of examples. I think for Chaos, the immediate parrallels would look something like this:
*If your chaos lord takes jumppack(or daemonic equivalent) Raptors may be taken as troops.
*Lords & Sorcerers may take the upgrade "Arch-heretic" - all traitor and mutant infantry is scoring... to build more mortal swarm armies.
*Dark Apostle taken to improve the reserve rolls of Daemons... for armies centered around deep striking daemons.

Born Again
27-01-2011, 13:07
Gonna dial back the conversation a few pages to the way the models actually look...

I was just going back over my copy of The Gothic & The Eldritch, looking at Jes' concept sketches for Chaos Marines in there. While many people have stated their preference for the old, RT era marines, it seems from Jes' sketches this is exactly what they were trying to avoid. He has specifically marked out for them to retain the distinctive Space Marines silhouette, but in a more archaic fashion and with all the spikes, chains and associated chaosery (yes I just invented a word).

Personally, I think that's far better. While the older models had some good ideas, their crazy, warped power armour made them look a bit, I don't know... weak? They lacked that definite SM shape. I'm all in favour of mutations and stuff, but I think these could be nicely done by combining the regular CSM kit with Possessed... there's a cool looking tentacle on the Termie kit that they could use more of. They used to do the mutations sprue that I think is still on direct order only... maybe an updated version so people can add as many warped faces, tentacles, claws and so on as they like, but the basic shape would still definitely be a marine. I think if they lost that, it just takes away from them too much.

Also, if GW did a plastic kit of Noise Marines that looked like Jes' sketch, I would add a squad to my army instantly, no questions asked. Best Noise Marine design ever.

FW's Plague Marines are also the best PM models I've ever seen, probably because they hark back to Jes' original design. When GW gets around to doing their own plastic, they'd do well to base them as much on these as possible.

And Dusk Raider, that all sounds pretty fair to me. As a Red Corsairs player I'd be happy to wear your suggestion, though I would make it a restriction on including forces of a rival god (ie Khorne/ Slaanesh, Tzeentch/ Nurgle) as opposed to just enforcing mono-god choices (unless of course you were basing your army on a mono-god army type).

DuskRaider
27-01-2011, 13:57
Well yeah, I'd say you can actually take multiple marked Cult Units as Elites, but they can't be of opposing Gods. Didn't mean to come off as harsh before.

Zweischneid
27-01-2011, 15:02
Well you want to play Renegades, and that's fine. But Renegades won't have access to Pre-Heresy technology (as in, technology that fell out of use Post-Heresy), which means to accurately portray them you'd use Post-Heresy Tech. Ok, that's fine. But as I said, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you're playing a Mono-God list, use a Cult Legion list and paint it your own way, give it your own back story, etc. but you can't have all of these new goodies that C:SM get AND all of the choices Legions get as well.

As I've said, GW could certainly make a list possible for Post-Heresy Renegades with recent Imperial Technology, generic daemons, Hell Blades & Hell Talons, Drop Pods, Defilers, Obliterators, Raptors, and move Cult Units to Elites. I think that's perfectly reasonable for Renegades, they'd get the LR variants, Landspeeders, Whirlwhinds, etc. AND they'd also have some Daemon options.

I think there is a confusion of Renegades with "recently corrupted" Space Marines. Many Renegades have been around since the Heresy. Many have once been part of the Legions. Others perhaps rose to the "top of the food chain" in the Eye of Terror by malice and strategy, thereby secruing themselves a stock of commonly used Chaos Equipment.

In short, again in gaming terms, Renegades is not a distinction from "Legion marines", but simply a shorthand to making a DIY-Force with the same rules/wargear available to GWs pre-fluffed Legions not dissimilar to how "2+ founding" chapters allow you to use GW-made lists for official Chapters with a fluff/colouring of your own.

Bloodknight
27-01-2011, 15:06
Many Renegades have been around since the Heresy. Many have once been part of the Legions.

If they were around during the heresy they must have been part of a legion because there was no such thing as a chapter back then. Renegades like Red Corsairs are the noobs, I'm afraid.

aka_mythos
27-01-2011, 15:24
...I was just going back over my copy of The Gothic & The Eldritch, looking at Jes' concept sketches for Chaos Marines in there. While many people have stated their preference for the old, RT era marines, it seems from Jes' sketches this is exactly what they were trying to avoid. He has specifically marked out for them to retain the distinctive Space Marines silhouette, but in a more archaic fashion and with all the spikes, chains and associated chaosery (yes I just invented a word).

Personally, I think that's far better. While the older models had some good ideas, their crazy, warped power armour made them look a bit, I don't know... weak? They lacked that definite SM shape. I'm all in favour of mutations and stuff, but I think these could be nicely done by combining the regular CSM kit with Possessed... there's a cool looking tentacle on the Termie kit that they could use more of. They used to do the mutations sprue that I think is still on direct order only... maybe an updated version so people can add as many warped faces, tentacles, claws and so on as they like, but the basic shape would still definitely be a marine. I think if they lost that, it just takes away from them too much.

Great book by the way. I think Jes has great designs in the book, but they are largely the "big 4" cult legions. I think at the time the rational was that these guys their corruptions and distortions by chaos were a bit more internalized. That's fair.

I wasn't saying we go back to RT era models, just that there were conceptual aspects of that visual depiction of corruption that should be revisted and expanded beyond just possessed marines and obliterators. Conceptual-fluffwise I would say that the corruptions of chaos needs an outlet. That those who have given themselves to over to the chaos gods completely see it manifest differently than those who don't.

Its mostly intended as one more way to give basic chaos marines a greater distinction in aesthetic from Imperial Marines. As Jes showed through his art there are ways to distinguish chaos, but his was meant for to distinguish it from itself. The average Chaos marine should be more than an Imperial marine with horns, arrows, and stars.

There could be more chains, more chaos runes, more general battle damage to break up the clean mint condition feel.

For Warhammer fantasy... between Chaos Warriors, Empire Knights, and Bretonnian knights, there are a lot of distinctions between the three. They are characterful in a way that you can tell without even picking up the model. For chaos space marines its only the little things that distinguish the two.

It all goes back to the fact that GW has put into Chaos only a bit more effort than it gives to non-codex Marine books and models... but since Chaos is stand alone, thats largely been inadequette due to that effort being more thinly distributed.

Mannimarco
27-01-2011, 15:28
Indeed the Red Corsairs are the noobs here and there more justification for them having the more recent imperial tech than the original Legion equipment.

Ive always thought it was a good thing Huron has vast stockpiles of reaper autocannons and twin linked bolters lying around to equip his troops since every new piece of equipment you have falls apart the second you turn to Chaos. Huron and his troops turned fairly recently did they not? By the time he turned the reaper autocannon was obsolete and replaced by the assault cannon so after all his assault cannons disintegrated the second he turned where did all these reapers come from? Bearing in mind he is based in the Maelstrom which (AFAIK) is the home of a sizeable amount of Word Bearers who I wouldnt imagine opening up the doors of their armouries so the RC could help themselves.

I think Zweischneids point about many renegades being around from the Heresy is a lot of these latter day renegades are actually members of the Legions themselves who are off doing their own thing now: Spiky Bob, the leader of Blood Reavers pirate warband, former Talon Master of the Night Lords. He might be singing "yo ho ho a pirates life for me" but hes still a NL.

aka_mythos
27-01-2011, 15:31
If they were around during the heresy they must have been part of a legion because there was no such thing as a chapter back then. Renegades like Red Corsairs are the noobs, I'm afraid. Though significanlty few there were random instances of traitors amongst the Loyalist legions, even aside from the Dark Angels, though to a lesser degree than Traitors Legion marine staying loyal. Garro laying the ground work for the Inquisition or Luther with the Fallen Angels; I think it'd be reasonable to argue that those different groups were still space marines in the Heresy era, but had ceased being in a "Legion."

I know that its a pretty slim distinction; but I think he was just making a blanket statement to simplify his point, that Legion Chaos Marines, fractured and split from there Legions towards the end of the Heresy as they went into exile into the Eye of Terror.

TheMav80
27-01-2011, 19:49
Well I think Chaos will have a number of special characters that would take care of some flavors, but some of the plainer ones could end up with less attention and end up parralleling the above. I'm going to make a lot of assumptions for the sake of examples. I think for Chaos, the immediate parrallels would look something like this:
*If your chaos lord takes jumppack(or daemonic equivalent) Raptors may be taken as troops.
*Lords & Sorcerers may take the upgrade "Arch-heretic" - all traitor and mutant infantry is scoring... to build more mortal swarm armies.
*Dark Apostle taken to improve the reserve rolls of Daemons... for armies centered around deep striking daemons.

Which would work out okay as well, but I would like to move further away from what the Loyalist marines already do. If we already have a marine list that does jump packs, I don't think we need another one that also does jump packs...but with more spikes.

I actually think the Chaos Marines should work more like a Tyrannid book. With several large monsters (daemons, daemon princes, daemon engines), a couple elite units (the actual space marine squads and cult units), then your cheap screening units (cultists and summoned lesser daemons).

I don't think it will step on the toes of the Tyranids too much, because the army aesthetics will be so different even if the army theme is fairly similar.

So we could have
#Reserve List: A focus on Dread Claws, summoned daemons, outflanking cultists, teleporting Terminators, and burrowing/deep striking daemon engines
#Monsters: Which I envision as somewhat of a cross between the Dread Bash and Monstrous Creature heavy Tyrannid lists. Maybe requires taking a Warsmith so you will be able to get more Walkers in your list. Or a Daemon Prince to get more monstours creatures.
#Mech: A list that focuses on the standard Legion/Chapter formations. Rhinos of Space Marines backed up by Dreadnought, Land Raiders, etc. Something that would mostly avoid summoned daemons and stuff for our Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors out there.

Mannimarco
27-01-2011, 19:55
For the monsters list Id probably lean more towards Fabulous Bill. It would definitely make him a viable character if he opened up a monster and mutant heavy list.

Souleater
27-01-2011, 22:02
I got my WD today. I read the stuff about BA and thought...

...Psychic Dreadnoughts...shouldn't that have been Tzeentch?

...effective psychotic Dreadnoughts...shouldn't that have been Khorne?


The more they try and push the variance of the loyalist chapters the more they tread on the turf of the Traitor legions. It annoys me that Chaos Marines are beginning to feel more vanilla than the lackies of the Corpse God.

I don't want to see seperate Legion books - we have too many Marine Dexes already. But I would love to see a Chaos Marine Codex the size and thickness of the MRB.


The worst part of it all is they had decided to test it on us, the results were poor, and now we're left out in the wind.

No, the worst bit is this was exactly the mistake they made with the first few 3rd Edition codexes (including CSM). Really hope they have learnt their lesson now.

TheMav80
27-01-2011, 22:37
For the monsters list Id probably lean more towards Fabulous Bill. It would definitely make him a viable character if he opened up a monster and mutant heavy list.

Forgot about him. :p

Maybe we can even get a generic HQ out of him. A Fleshsmith, or something.

The Cult armies are the hardest ones for me to figure out. Khorn and Nurgle are easy. Mark anything with Khorne and it gets +1 WS and Furious Charge. Mark anything with Nurgle and it gets +1 Toughness and Feel no Pain. Slaanesh and Tzeentch though are much more complex though. I'm not sure how to spread them across a whole codex.

aka_mythos
27-01-2011, 22:53
Wow... you guys are talking my armylist. I play Fabius, with enhanced warriors, Dreadnoughts, Defilers, and Chaos Spawn. Its my for fun self-destructing list... 50/50 odds it kills itself.

I think the ground work for a "Monster" lists exist, they'd just be enhanced version of existing units. Greater spawn and mutants would be simple enough additions. Heck even some Daemon engines might qualify as more "monstrous creature" less walker vehicle.

Mannimarco
27-01-2011, 23:29
Nobody said 50/50 odds of it killing itself, indeed thats worse than what we have now and we know how popular those random units are right now.

Born Again
28-01-2011, 00:36
I think there is a confusion of Renegades with "recently corrupted" Space Marines. Many Renegades have been around since the Heresy. Many have once been part of the Legions. Others perhaps rose to the "top of the food chain" in the Eye of Terror by malice and strategy, thereby secruing themselves a stock of commonly used Chaos Equipment.

In short, again in gaming terms, Renegades is not a distinction from "Legion marines", but simply a shorthand to making a DIY-Force with the same rules/wargear available to GWs pre-fluffed Legions not dissimilar to how "2+ founding" chapters allow you to use GW-made lists for official Chapters with a fluff/colouring of your own.

Yes, a fact that is rarely paid attention to. Even if they're Post-Heresy, they could still be 7,8, even 9000 years old in the service of chaos. But we all know those first founding marines look down on their baby brothers :p

TheMav80
28-01-2011, 00:48
I like the idea that the Heresy Marines do look down on all the other Space Marines. Those that are still alive from the Heresy are not as far removed from their Primarchs as these newer Marines are. Their blood would be diluted. They are therefore weaker and inferior.

At least so far as the Heresy Marines are concerned.

Personally I think this would be a cool addition to the setting if it were true. Or at least in typical 40K fashion sort of hinted at to be true...maybe...sorta...rumoured...

Born Again
28-01-2011, 01:26
^ It is. Honsou was looked down upon as he contained Imperial Fists gene seed.

Mannimarco
28-01-2011, 01:51
Although not always the case: Lord Zhufor is believed to be one of Abaddons lieutenants and commands a pretty large World Eater sub faction despite being a captured and reconditioned Storm Lord. I suppose if anybody did look down on him he'd likely rip their head off though.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Zhufor

Erwos
28-01-2011, 02:05
Man, I'd love it if you could do an amped-up MC list with Fabius Bile.

As others have noted, the "renegades" term is generally used to denote post-Heresy traitors, whereas Legionaries is used for Heresy-era. Given that there were traitors from all the Legions during the Heresy, Legionaries does not necessarily mean that you're from the nine legions associated with Chaos these days. It would be unusual, but not completely implausible, to have Heresy-era Ultramarine traitor Legionaries AND post-Heresy Ultramarine traitor renegades.

But, as we've all just mutually discovered, there are approaches to make Chaos unique and flavorful while retaining legions and renegades. GW just needs to freaking implement it!

Excessus
02-02-2011, 15:21
Is that so? There's quite alot of (quite arrogant) posts in this very thread once again stating or implying that Chaos Space Marines is/should be first and foremost the Legions and everything else is, at best, "second-class Chaos Marines" and should use a Loyalist Book (implying equal treatment in the Chaos Dex is not a priority).
well, they are second class marines compared to the 10k years old marines that were veterans even before they turned to chaos...

These sort of biased opinions are certainly prominent enough to point out that in my opinion, going back to the "options-for-each-legion" in 3.5 style would be the worst thing to happen.
Everybody's opinions are biased, including yours and mine, our way of thinking is a result of our experiences...

And while the 4.0 Codex aint perfect, and could use more options, those options in a future CSM-Codex should be game-play-driven, not motivated by a need to merge symmetrical list-options into each FoC-slot to cater to each and every Chaos God and Horus Heresy Novel at every major entry in the army list.
Then why have all the different fascist-marine codices then? Why not only have a smurf one and all the others follow their rules? (that's probably how it would be if you'd work as a dev at GW, right?)

We are talking about maybe 18-27 pages maximum here incorporating fluff and extra choices and restrictions for the legions, not whole extra books for them...

Despite your best wishes, the legions still exist and fight in a very different way from each other. It should be represented in the codex in some way...

This is my opinion ofc. I have mine as you have yours...

aka_mythos
02-02-2011, 15:47
Despite your best wishes, the legions still exist and fight in a very different way from each other. It should be represented in the codex in some way...
The issue of should is really more a matter of degree. Are the distinctions between each of the Chaos Legions and Renegades as pronounced at the distinctions between Raven Guard and Ultramarine or as strongly pronounced as Ultramarines and Blood Angels?-If it's the latter it shouldn't be included at all since there is no way to do it justice. If it's only as distinct as the first, then I think it stands to reason that just like the Loyalist codex not all legions are truely equally distinctive or worth dedicating pages too.

Just saying sacrificing worthwhile rules only for sake completeness is a waste and setting aside 1/4 of an entire codex to cover every legion is silly. Several of of GW's designers have said as much that in writing the Index Astartes articles, they created a bad precedent where they created alot more distinction for the sake of distinction, than they would have otherwise. The Legions significant enough to represent in all their glory should be present, but the lesser ones maybe only in spirit through the inclusion of new units available to all... dark apostle, cultists, etc.

N0-1_H3r3
02-02-2011, 16:43
well, they are second class marines compared to the 10k years old marines that were veterans even before they turned to chaos...
Thing is, and this is so frequently overlooked by people claiming how awesome the Traitor Legions are, not all Traitor Legionnaires are ten millennia old, just like not all Renegade Astartes are wet-behind-the-ears newbies.

Between continued recruitment post-heresy and the vagaries of warp travel/time in the warp, members of the Traitor Legions (or equivalent forces, where the Legions have fragmented) who are less than ten millennia old (in some case a lot less - look at the Night Lords in Soul Hunter, for whom the Heresy is only a relatively recent memory, the war having started on a matter of centuries ago from their perspective) are extremely likely, and yet almost completely ignored.

And that doesn't even account for groups and individuals which may once have consisted of Traitor Legionnaires and who since have redefined themselves as independent, being neither Legion forces nor 'newbie' renegades.

Lord Inquisitor
02-02-2011, 17:10
That's what I'd like to see as a divide in the Legions on the tabletop. The Iron Warriors books seem to make a big divide between the new recruits - mass produced and poorly trained (for space marines anyway) - and the centuries/millenia-old veterans. Indeed the Iron Warrior books all revolve around a central theme of production of new Chaos Marines.

So I'd like to see core Troops being not much better than Blood Claws, maybe WS4, BS3 with only Ld7 lead by aspiring champions that are WS5, BS4, Ld9-10. So combat capable but not as skilled or brave as your average loyalist marine, but lead by highly capable veterans. Then make the Chosen/Terminators complete badass nutters with stats to make a Wolf Guard cry. That way the army list would have a clear divide between the new mass-produced recruits and the ancient, simmering veterans of the Long War.

aka_mythos
02-02-2011, 17:26
I'm not saying it should be like this in a codex, but it seems if you wrote a book exclusively about the Legions and wanted this distinction you'd have two troop choices. Legionaires... much like how chosen currently are and "Initiates" who might have that lower profile but otherwise like the current CSM troop choice... maybe some randomized thing like IG penal squads to show their more ragtag undisciplined ways with maybe a smaller unit size restrictions for the Legionaries.

DarkstarSabre
02-02-2011, 20:48
You see, having read through all of this...my main gripe is as follows.

The 4th ed. Chaos Codex pretty much shoved the Legions to one side. After Index Astartes and 3.5 Chaos where the Legions were stars of the show they got so genericised it wasn't even funny. At the time we accepted it - we saw what they did to Dark Angels. We saw what they did to Eldar. Jervis even stated something about this design philosophy during the Dark Angel release. We all thought it would be the 'norm'.

Ho ho ho. Enter Mat Ward. And Codex Space Marines. 3.5. Where suddenly ALL the random little options that irked us but were accepted as gone (the 2+ saves, the extra attacks, the rerolls to wound etc.) reappeared....for Imperial Space Marines.

But not only is there that odd sort of power creep.

There's the 4th ed. Chaos Space Marine design notes. Where they stressed so very much that this wasn't so much about the Legions (who pretty much should have something of their own or at least something more than a single image and 3 lines of text for a colour scheme)...as it was about traitor Space Marines. The ones that have recently turned from the Imperium, the Corsairs, the Renegades....that whole archetype.

Ok. We can accept that. We can accept a different focus.

Wait. Let's look at this Codex. Yes, you finally gave us twin lightning claw Terminators, several editions later from the 2nd ed. Codex, we appreciate that. But....looking at the list of Wargear and units and vehicles....er...

What exactly makes 4th ed. Chaos Space Marines....Renegades? They're using all the older weaponry (combi bolters, reaper autocannons, autocannons), don't really seem to have any of the more recent equipment that a 'recent' traitor chapter would still have (psychic hoods, land speeders, land raider variants, plasma cannons) and worse still...the 'odd' units that made Chaos so different have been heavily genericised to the point of bland (hello daemons!).

So...they're not recently turned, traitor or corsair Space Marines, are they?

They're Legion-age equipment....on rather generic Imperial Marines. The 'cults' have been reduced to a single unit in the Codex each with no real appropriate ways of showing them otherwise (Hey, look. An icon. Oh. The guy holding it is dead. We're no longer dedicated to this god, let's go worship another.) and Imperial Marines in comparison were buffed and made somewhat shinier in comparison.

There's actually a lot more variety in Imperial Marines these days. I've come across a lot of people making Imperial Marine - Chaos stand-ins. Khornewing Space Wolves. Space Marine Iron Warriors with Masters of the Forge and Techmarines. Night Lord Blood Angels.

They really dropped the ball.

TheMav80
02-02-2011, 20:55
Things are going to have to be cut out. There is no doubt about it. As an example, I love the Night Lords, but I don't feel they need any special rules for me to make a Night Lords army in a CSM book, because they don't really fight that much differently.

I would really like to reiterate that we are talking about representing Legions in a 2000 point warhammer game. We know that the Legions are fractured and subject to in fighting. We know that not all Chaos Marines are veterans of the Great Crusade...but they exist. The small scale of our table top games can easily represent a force consisting entirely of one Legion...because it will probably only be 40 dudes at most.

Vaktathi
02-02-2011, 21:01
That's what I'd like to see as a divide in the Legions on the tabletop. The Iron Warriors books seem to make a big divide between the new recruits - mass produced and poorly trained (for space marines anyway) - and the centuries/millenia-old veterans. Indeed the Iron Warrior books all revolve around a central theme of production of new Chaos Marines.

So I'd like to see core Troops being not much better than Blood Claws, maybe WS4, BS3 with only Ld7 lead by aspiring champions that are WS5, BS4, Ld9-10. So combat capable but not as skilled or brave as your average loyalist marine, but lead by highly capable veterans. Then make the Chosen/Terminators complete badass nutters with stats to make a Wolf Guard cry. That way the army list would have a clear divide between the new mass-produced recruits and the ancient, simmering veterans of the Long War.

This sounds...interesting. I like it.



What exactly makes 4th ed. Chaos Space Marines....Renegades? They're using all the older weaponry (combi bolters, reaper autocannons, autocannons), don't really seem to have any of the more recent equipment that a 'recent' traitor chapter would still have (psychic hoods, land speeders, land raider variants, plasma cannons) and worse still...the 'odd' units that made Chaos so different have been heavily genericised to the point of bland (hello daemons!).

So...they're not recently turned, traitor or corsair Space Marines, are they?

They're Legion-age equipment....on rather generic Imperial Marines. The 'cults' have been reduced to a single unit in the Codex each with no real appropriate ways of showing them otherwise (Hey, look. An icon. Oh. The guy holding it is dead. We're no longer dedicated to this god, let's go worship another.) and Imperial Marines in comparison were buffed and made somewhat shinier in comparison.

There's actually a lot more variety in Imperial Marines these days. I've come across a lot of people making Imperial Marine - Chaos stand-ins. Khornewing Space Wolves. Space Marine Iron Warriors with Masters of the Forge and Techmarines. Night Lord Blood Angels.

They really dropped the ball. +9000 internets.

KingDeath
02-02-2011, 22:44
That's what I'd like to see as a divide in the Legions on the tabletop. The Iron Warriors books seem to make a big divide between the new recruits - mass produced and poorly trained (for space marines anyway) - and the centuries/millenia-old veterans. Indeed the Iron Warrior books all revolve around a central theme of production of new Chaos Marines.

So I'd like to see core Troops being not much better than Blood Claws, maybe WS4, BS3 with only Ld7 lead by aspiring champions that are WS5, BS4, Ld9-10. So combat capable but not as skilled or brave as your average loyalist marine, but lead by highly capable veterans. Then make the Chosen/Terminators complete badass nutters with stats to make a Wolf Guard cry. That way the army list would have a clear divide between the new mass-produced recruits and the ancient, simmering veterans of the Long War.

I think you don't give the rank and file Iron Warrior enough credit. They don't seem to be less incompetent than loyalist marines, siegewarfare is just insanely lethal ( and they lack the character shields which are so common to the corpsegod's servants ).
But i really like your idea regarding those "badass nutters".

TheMav80
02-02-2011, 22:54
WS4 BS3 is hardly incompetent. Even Ld 7 wouldn't be that bad if they keep the re-roll for ld checks. Space Wolves are "only" ld 8.

ScooterinAB
19-02-2011, 03:28
Here is what bugs me about this whole "Legions" thing. There never were special army rules for Legions. They didn't exist in Rogue Trader. They didn't exist in 2nd Edition. I don't recall them really existing in 3rd Edition, although there were a billion rules amendments for everything except Squats. Special rules didn't exist in 4th Edition. There is little historical basis for this argument.

Why should they? I have read many discussions on Legions and have never heard why they should have special rules. I have never, for example, heard why a Night Lords army needs different rules from a Word Bearers army. This is along the same lines as why Crimson Fists and Aurora all use the basic Space Marine codex; they only differ in physical representation and army composition. As for armies like World Eaters or Thousand Sons, simply by the units with your Mark of Chaos, and give the Mark of Chaos to everything that doesn't have it already. Want World Eater Terminators? Make them, but don't expect special rules for them because they do not need them.

Should any "special rules" be including in an upcoming release, I would like to see the Ork approach. As you take different models and units, you get options to shift models around in the FOC. The best example I can think of for this is actually on the Loyalist side. Aurora Marines use more tanks than other chapters tend to use. This can easily be represented by allowing a Marine Army with a Techmarine to take tanks in different slots. For Chaos, this could be options based on how a Lord is equipped and Marked, or based on other unit selection. You wouldn't need any actually special rules, and each army could be very different from the last (by the way, I think this is how Loyalist Marine armies should be done. Too many special rules and rule inconsistencies that it creates).

Personally, I like the idea of the hobo-Space Pirates, be it Red Corsairs or general traitors. I love spinning a yarn about a Chaplain who falls to Khorne and convinces his Death Company to join him (as Khorne Berserkers). I love the idea of being able to create your army without drawing on 10 000 years of daddy issues and material that I don't feel I can do justice to. And from a modeling stand point, I love that I can buy any single model in power armor and use it, providing that I do some conversion work to it (ala the Original Chaos Marine models as presented in the Codex and White Dwarf). Why is that freedom a bad thing?

Huff. End rant.

Now, that being said, I agree with alot of what was said on the first page or so of the thread. Chaos does need more variety than Imperial+. I've never liked the horns and spikes motif, and agree that Chaos should look like Chaos, not Space Marines. When I read this, I thought back to the old 2nd Edition vehicles rules. I remember wanting to do a Rhino with a deamon bursting out of it, or a Predator that was festering and decayed. Having actual parts for this would be great. Likewise, having a Chosen box that was made up entirely of pre-Mark VI armor would also be great; not only would Chaos players use it, but Loyalist players could buy it for Veterans and Heresy armies.

The inherent problem though, is that Chaos has really always been angry marines. If I remember right, original Chaos armies only differed by using different models. From a logistical standpoint, having Chaos as an Imperial variant saves a lot of time, money, and resources. Having a Land Raider kit with an Chaos sprue is a lot easier and more efficient than having a completely different Land Raider kit. Likewise, being able to draw on Imperial models (or Loyalist drawing on Chaos models) allows alot of flexibility for players.

Ritualnet
19-02-2011, 04:35
I would like an actual Codex Chaos book, however I'd like to see the ability for a chaos player to use the SM codex too. Firstly, it means that any non SM Chaos player will then go out to buy that codex (more money for GW!), and also with adequate points added to represent that the more 'modern' technology is harder to come by, a Chaos player can accurately represent not only a "pure chaos" army, but also renegades, legions, even independent chapters.

I still liked the trait system that the last SM codex had, where you could alter your chapter based on positive and negative modifiers. Something like that would enable chaos forces to be different. The basic branch allows general army building, then adding traits allows the player to add more to his army with appropriate negative modifiers. Obliterator Support, as a positive, allows a chaos army to take obliterators (assuming that the new codex rightly enhances the heavy support options so they are not the 'only' option to take), Warp Blessed allows daemons and daemon engines to be taken etc.

Regarding the models, I'd love to see something of a return to the older figures and vehicles. Imagine a rhino kit for Chaos (and Imperial) based on the Mk1, but being the same size as the Mk 2c. Landspeeders, that are based on the second metal model. Chaos can have that archaic look but with modern plastics, that can be easily carried into any SM army that wants to do either Pre-Heresy, or have venerated vehicles. For the figures, a lack of horns, spikes and skulls, and more of that bio-corruption. I'm sick of clipping and filing off horns and spikes! Although most people dislike them, I do love the old metal renegades. They had so much character, which you'd expect in warp-bathed marines.

AlphariusOmegon20
19-02-2011, 15:06
Here is what bugs me about this whole "Legions" thing. There never were special army rules for Legions. They didn't exist in Rogue Trader. They didn't exist in 2nd Edition. I don't recall them really existing in 3rd Edition, although there were a billion rules amendments for everything except Squats. Special rules didn't exist in 4th Edition. There is little historical basis for this argument.



Really? That is highly incorrect. I believe the IW IA article with it's variant list, among the other IA articles that had their own variant lists, originally came out sometime between 1998 and 2000. That would have been 3rd Ed. The collected IA article books weren't printed until 2002, that I believe was 4th ed IIRC.


5th ed. wasn't released until 2008.

So there IS precedent, despite your post saying there wasn't.

TheMav80
19-02-2011, 16:24
Not in codex form though. Lots of things have had special rules in Chapter Approved or White Dwarf or what have you.

There was a Kroot Merc list too. I don't think we really need it as a whole codex though.

Bloodknight
19-02-2011, 16:29
The legions got special rules (starting with cult terminators) via WD in early 3rd edition because the first 3rd ed. CSM codex sucked so much, it was even blander than the current one and - on top of it - not competitive.

qwertywraith
19-02-2011, 16:39
Not in codex form though. Lots of things have had special rules in Chapter Approved or White Dwarf or what have you.

There was a Kroot Merc list too. I don't think we really need it as a whole codex though.

There were no codices in rogue trader. Chaos did get 2 whole hardcover books (covering both fantasy and 40K). 1 book dedicated to Slaanesh and Khorne, and another dedicated to Nurgle and Tzeetch. In each book were seperate lists for each God's forces. In Slaves to Darkness, they were lists for Emperor's Children, World Eaters, and The Black Legion.

Chaos in 40K began with the legions.

EDIT. I meant to reply to ScooterinAB, I'm not sure I replied to you Mav. I'm not paying attention I guess since my long catalogue of all the emphasis on legions from Rogue Trader through 2nd edition was in a thread that has since been deleted. So frustrating.

TL.DR. The orginal books of 40K were about the legions. 2nd edition was about legions. They were not invented in 3.5.

Kjell
19-02-2011, 17:42
Night Lords or whatever don't need a book of their own but they sure deserve a page with their own force organisation chart and some special rules. Just like all the other First Founding legions!

Scribe of Khorne
20-02-2011, 02:08
It really shouldnt be this hard.

A book that contains the majority of normal SM units (dropping stuff like the newer LS variants, Thundercannons, whatever) with those specialists replaced by cult specific additions in each slot, with a simple mark (4 total) and legions (that incorporate marks for the cult legions), add in Cultists, and (saddly) lesser daemons, and call it done.

Excessus
20-02-2011, 08:15
the 2nd ed Chaos Codex had page after page of fluff for all the legions, and a flexible enough selection of units and characters that you actually could build a fluffy force that actually was decent... (it's a bit funny how the selections were back then, you could select a max of 50% characters(lords and unit champions), at least 25% squads(almost everything including terminators(that had cult rules), veterans and cult troops), max 25% support(allies and vehicles) and max 25% daemons(hello daemon codex) points wise)

AlphariusOmegon20
20-02-2011, 14:29
Not in codex form though. Lots of things have had special rules in Chapter Approved or White Dwarf or what have you.

There was a Kroot Merc list too. I don't think we really need it as a whole codex though.

The issue was not whether they were in Codex form or not. The issue was whether or not the Legions had special army rule sets, pre 3.5, which they did.

Scooter claimed they did not have rules sets prior to 3.5. I showed they did.

It's as simple as that.

Borgnine
20-02-2011, 22:54
In my opinion, CSM have been brutal ever since the SW came out and became CSM++