How will you play Word Bearers now?

[Galahad_Knight]

I believe the extent of the fluff on WB in the new dex is a picture of a WB holding an icon of chaos glory and a sentence that reads

Word Bearers

Zealous fighters, the Word Bearers are identified by the device of a flaming daemonic face.

[Lexington]

There's also a small paragraph in the background section about the Word Bearers, mainly covering their religious nature, and adding in a little tidbit about how they especially target Ecclesiarchy worlds. Much like the rest of the new Codex's background material, it's short and poorly-done.

[Smurfalypse]

Yeah, pretty sparce on the fluff for the legions...However there is a full 95 pages on how The Tyrant took over some space wolf ship :teehee: Joke of course, its only about two or three pages. So it seems the majority seem to think a specific mark on a lord is not fluffy, and icons in squads are, but cult troopers are not. Seems like a good deal, as much as i wanna run T-6 bikers as a delivery system for my daemons/terms/oblit's i dont think i can bring myself to actually do it...Im to anal about that type of stuff ;)

 

 

Smurfalypse

[Sneak]

I've been playing Word Bearers for many years and always stuck to being an undivided army,

 

I'm halfway reading through the new Dark Apostle book and they actually make reference to Word Bearer Marines that sway to closely following Khorne and releasing these guys where the fighting is going to be the most bloody. So maybe your idea of all marks being represented in troops is not soo bad, but a Dark Apostle is undivided through and through he would not of got to be master of the true faith by only giving one god a bit of loving.

 

Books really good though I would recommend it as a good read for any Word Bearers player really helps the fluff feeling.

[TheDarkApostle]

... The Word Bearers follow the words of their Dark apostles with utter loyality and faith in battle, and they in turn interpret the will of Lorgar by many varied means. The means to win a battle may be contained within the entrails of a particular captive, a particular alignment of the starts of the pattern of cast bones...

Notice the part I underlined, IMO, of the bones, entrails, pattern of whatever say that they should do, then I am ready to bet my ass on that they will do that without question. :yes: Be it that they should wear the Mark of Khorne into battle today or if they should attack with only empty rhinos.

 

Especially since:

... The reason for there changes has continued to baffle Imperial tacticians, as they often result in unwieldy or tactically inflexible formations that appear to have no battlefield precedent. The Word Bearers themselves accept these changes without question and none dare question the Dark Apostle's methods...

Once again notice the underlining people.

 

EDIT: And to answer the question, I'm going to play my Word Bearers exactly the way I've always played them. In a complex, strange style that makes no tactical sense and may seem compleately idiotic ;)

[Mhorr]

Ive been playing WB since second edition, back when we had very little fluff wise and no rules ;)...Ive kinda stuck with them through everything and when they were good great, when they were just normal marines in second ed. great. Point is, if you like WB, play em as such...If you like renegades, play them as such but its not WB, once you take the mark of slannesh on your leader you are no longer WB in my opinion...You can stick a feather up your butt that doesnt make you a chicken :P Not bashing, just my opinion. You are right though, lash seems like a very fluffy power for WB's to have, but taking the mark of slannesh completely negates that and then some.

 

Also, i think the lesser daemons are sorely underrated. The more and more i play with them, the more and more i realize they do well for themselves. Cheap, dont get shot-up, eat through swarm armies, tie up marine armies, soak fire for marines...The uses are endless. Ive used them in 9 or so games already with the new codex, and in everyone they do well for themselves. The greater daemon is just a friggin monster, the summoning rules for him are just insanely good, and well, he costs next to nothing. Its very very possible to have an "undivided" list and still do well for yourself, in the end you will have to make your decision...Play fluffy, or make random excuses and posts on the internet defending why you must take lash and how it fits in with your fluff. An excuse is an excuse and all the arguing in the world isnt gonna make it a WB army :P Be a man and own up with a list that is WB and be proud of being a WB player, there are going to be very very few of us true Apostles now :D

 

 

Smurfalypse

 

 

SACRED WORDS!!

[Sceleris]

I was in the process of re-vamping/updating my word bearers when solid rumours about the codex came out (most of which was subsequently proved accurate).

 

Having skimmed the codex I decided that my existing/old style WB will remain a dedicated undivided force relying as much as possible on normal marines (with IoCG) and generic daemons, sticking to the old school fluff.

 

The new lot, instead of being a true WB army, will be a splinter force (ie the Dark Ap has seen in visions/read in the entrails etc an alternative approach - see TheDarkApostle's post above - and has split from the Legion) making use of the other gods' icons (but not cult troops) and generic daemons. As there are no "Word Bearer Rules" it doesn't hinder me while still being able to incorporate as much of the fluff as I feel happy with. Thus in due course the Brotherhood of the Dark Redemption will take to the field and will start to shed blood in the name of the Chaos Gods.

[Death jester]

I really see adding marks to a word bearers army as a way of making some cool models and to me thats the most important part. I aready started making a squad with shields and will use the IoT to represent that. I may even use some plague marines now cause i think some festering models with bells and robes would look ool in my army kinda like skaven plague monks.

[LorgarXVII17]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2609/3751280263_40b367901c.jpg

Theres a picture of a Dark Apostle for you. They arent that hard to make, but this is one of the less creative ones.

[chaplain belisarius]

Just my 2 cents-give lord power weapon (or daemon weapon) and model it as an accursed crozius, give mark of tzeentch (to count as rosarius) and thats it.

 

Is that ok?is it fluffy?

[templarboy]

Just my 2 cents-give lord power weapon (or daemon weapon) and model it as an accursed crozius, give mark of tzeentch (to count as rosarius) and thats it.

 

Is that ok?is it fluffy?

Well...the die hards will say no. There is a very narrow interpretation here for the most part about giving mark of anything besides Undivided. I try and make the best out my army by using cult troops ("marked") as "allies". My Noise Marines are painted EC, my 1k Sons are painted as 1k Sons. My zerkers are FW WE. My PMs are FW DG. No way I am going to pass up using some of the coolest troop models in the game. I bought them and painted them darnit.

[minigun762]

Just my 2 cents-give lord power weapon (or daemon weapon) and model it as an accursed crozius, give mark of tzeentch (to count as rosarius) and thats it.

 

Is that ok?is it fluffy?

 

I've never understood the sticking point that a Dark Apostle has to have a 4++ save.

I see no reason that an Undivided Daemon Weapon Lord can't be a DA. The Crozius gets corrupted, who says that that corruption couldn't empower the Marine while offering him less protection compared to a normal Chaplain's loadout.

[tyrannosaurus]

I agree with Refuse, fluff is important - without fluff we might as well play Risk. Fluff is what makes 40k unique - lot's of people don't play the game, they just read about the background of different legions. GW produces a dex that completely ignores large amounts of background [opposing gods for example] and people who complain about this are called whiners or told to stop crying. Why don't we just change the fluff to say that there are only Ultramarines, therfore the Horus Heresy didn't happen, therefore no chaos legions? Everyone gets to play ultramarines against ultramarines, over and over again.

 

Using cult troops in your Word Bearer army is not fluffy. This counts as argument is completely invalid. As I stated in another post if we're going to have everything as 'counts as' why use different models? Why use models at all? We can save money by using fruit and vegetables. My noise marines are noise marines cuz they've got big ass sonic weapons, they worship slaanesh and they're painted pink [which is optional I know, but they should at least be painted a garish colour].

 

I play Slaanesh so I get to use noise marines. I would happily have them in squads of 6 and gimp myself to stay fluffy. You play Word Bearers, you don't get to use noise marines, sorry. Do you see Ultramarine players bitching about not being able to use Death Squad, or Ravenwing?

 

You can't have your cake and eat it - well you can, if you go Black Legion [which is essentially Sons of Horus, and pretty lame in terms of background], but don't try to justify having Khorne Beserkers in a Word Bearers army, with all the benefits they bring, by calling them 'crazed marines'. They're Khorne Beserkers. And you're army aint a proper Word Bearer army, just like my Emperor's Children wouldn't be a proper Emperor's Children army with beserkers in it. If you can live with a totally unfluffy army fine, but don't criticise people who think it's lame, and the rules supporting their own fluffy armies are lame.

[templarboy]

I play Slaanesh so I get to use noise marines. I would happily have them in squads of 6 and gimp myself to stay fluffy. You play Word Bearers, you don't get to use noise marines, sorry. Do you see Ultramarine players bitching about not being able to use Death Squad, or Ravenwing?

 

You can't have your cake and eat it - well you can, if you go Black Legion [which is essentially Sons of Horus, and pretty lame in terms of background], but don't try to justify having Khorne Beserkers in a Word Bearers army, with all the benefits they bring, by calling them 'crazed marines'. They're Khorne Beserkers. And you're army aint a proper Word Bearer army, just like my Emperor's Children wouldn't be a proper Emperor's Children army with beserkers in it. If you can live with a totally unfluffy army fine, but don't criticise people who think it's lame, and the rules supporting their own fluffy armies are lame.

Well alrighty then. I didn't realize it was such a sore spot. Can't wait for GW to write a book or rule that invalidates all that...oh wait. I have had my word bearers for a really long time. I claim no "fluffiness". What you are telling me is that to be "cool" in your eyes I need to paint my stuff black? Then it will be "fluffy"? You are also saying that the Word Bearers have never fought along side any other legion. Ever. I have a pal who uses two Codex:SM armies. Both are from the same list. One is green, and one is black. Is it fluffy for him to say that both chapters are working together? Like maybe the EC and LW did in "Horus Rising". I am not repainting just because I want some variety. My opponents never even seem to notice.

[tyrannosaurus]

Well alrighty then. I didn't realize it was such a sore spot. Can't wait for GW to write a book or rule that invalidates all that...oh wait. I have had my word bearers for a really long time. I claim no "fluffiness". What you are telling me is that to be "cool" in your eyes I need to paint my stuff black? Then it will be "fluffy"? You are also saying that the Word Bearers have never fought along side any other legion. Ever. I have a pal who uses two Codex:SM armies. Both are from the same list. One is green, and one is black. Is it fluffy for him to say that both chapters are working together? Like maybe the EC and LW did in "Horus Rising". I am not repainting just because I want some variety. My opponents never even seem to notice.

 

Sorry man, came upon this thread a bit late, this post is mostly directed at Galahad_Knight, don't know why I respond to obvious trolling really. Just felt I needed to stick up for the ball-less, crying, uncreative, timid chaos players out there who think the new dex sucks big hairy ones and don't want to use troops from other legions, or 'counts as', but want a characterful, fluffy and fun set of rules to play with, supported by characterful, fluffy and fun models to play with. Too much to ask?

[templarboy]

Well alrighty then. I didn't realize it was such a sore spot. Can't wait for GW to write a book or rule that invalidates all that...oh wait. I have had my word bearers for a really long time. I claim no "fluffiness". What you are telling me is that to be "cool" in your eyes I need to paint my stuff black? Then it will be "fluffy"? You are also saying that the Word Bearers have never fought along side any other legion. Ever. I have a pal who uses two Codex:SM armies. Both are from the same list. One is green, and one is black. Is it fluffy for him to say that both chapters are working together? Like maybe the EC and LW did in "Horus Rising". I am not repainting just because I want some variety. My opponents never even seem to notice.

 

Sorry man, came upon this thread a bit late, this post is mostly directed at Galahad_Knight, don't know why I respond to obvious trolling really. Just felt I needed to stick up for the ball-less, crying, uncreative, timid chaos players out there who think the new dex sucks big hairy ones and don't want to use troops from other legions, or 'counts as', but want a characterful, fluffy and fun set of rules to play with, supported by characterful, fluffy and fun models to play with. Too much to ask?

Not too much to ask at all ;) :) . Re-reading my post I came off a bit of a jerk. I just wanna use my cult troops and my old army. Guess I am "anti-fluff". Heck I still have a converted chaos techmarine. Chaos is already really limited.

[tyrannosaurus]

Not too much to ask at all :( :) . Re-reading my post I came off a bit of a jerk. I just wanna use my cult troops and my old army. Guess I am "anti-fluff". Heck I still have a converted chaos techmarine. Chaos is already really limited.

 

As long as you kick some loyalist ass you can do whatever you want :rolleyes: I love the Word Bearers, it would be awesome for them to get some legion specific rules and new models so that they wouldn't have to use cults as 'counts as' cuz they would be scary without them. At the moment though they are just Black Legion painted red, which sucks.

 

The fact that there needs to be a thread discussing how best to represent dark apostles as there are no specific rules [despite the fact that DA's are the 'definitive' WB unit] shows that the chaos dex fails. 'Counts as' is a way to get around a shoddy product, but the fact that people have come up with ways of getting around the dex doesn't hide the fact that it's a shoddy product.

 

I really wanted to start a Night Lords army, but then I realised that they would just be generic CSMs oainted dark blue, I'm still gonna start one though, with maxed out raptors and lots of bikes, because I love the fluff and the bat wings on the helmets. Some rules to differentiate them would be great though in the same way that loyalists get different rules to represent different troops from their chapters [-1 leadership to enemies in cc, fleet for NL raptors imo].

[templarboy]

Having specific rules for each legion was a bit weird in the past. I have about 30 bloodthirsters all painted up just sitting there. The only problem I have with really specific legion armies is that there is zero balance. I think that the designers of the most recent codex had something like that in mind. If they were successful is not for me to say. Legion specific lists would draw out the beardy min-maxers. Just my opinion (and I do own and have played all editions of 40k, I am really old) but the new way of doing the codices and the attempt at balance is better than the bad old days.

[Askari]

A Lord with power weapon or D weapon should do well as a counts as Dark Apostle. A core of 2 or three csm squads adequately tricked out and with IoCG. Daemon packs of 8-12 models supporting the CSM's. Obliterators and maybe a defiler, havoks are pretty good too if decked out with quad meltas or flamers. Give one of your CSM squads double plasma and a naked champ so you can summon a greater daemon. Possessed are a poor substitute for zerkers but some sacrifices must be made for

[chaplain belisarius]

Its just in the old dex and the index astartes article a dark apostle has an acursed crozius (i buy a power weapon for this) and a 4+ save (i buy the mark of tzeentch to recreate this, but its not really the mark of tzeentch, if you get what i mean?)

 

Surely this is ok? I just want my dark apostle back and this is the only way i can do it in the current dex!;)

[tyrannosaurus]

Having specific rules for each legion was a bit weird in the past. I have about 30 bloodthirsters all painted up just sitting there. The only problem I have with really specific legion armies is that there is zero balance. I think that the designers of the most recent codex had something like that in mind. If they were successful is not for me to say. Legion specific lists would draw out the beardy min-maxers. Just my opinion (and I do own and have played all editions of 40k, I am really old) but the new way of doing the codices and the attempt at balance is better than the bad old days.

 

I understand the balance issues, but legions only really have one, or maybe two, 'signature' units. ECs = noise marines,NL = raptors [and maybe bikes], WB = dark apostle and daemons, AL = infiltrators [and maybe cultists]. Rules to represent even one of these signature units per legion, plus maybe one legion specific HQ, would be better than what we have, and wouldn't unbalance things. Playing ECs i get my signature unit, which is cool, but I'd also like to see other legions get some love. Gives me an excuse to buy more models ;)

 

I think the current dex lends itself much more to cheesey lists [oblits, twin lash 2 dps etc.] than before.

[chaplain belisarius]

In my opinion-basic chaos marines are fantastic in the current dex but I miss the "flavour" that was added by the previous dex (legions should just have 1 or 2 signature units to distinguish them from each other-at the moment chaos is a bit bland)

[Possessed Marine]

I would love to just have straight WB's and no cult troops, as it's fluffy... just doesn't win very well... you almost NEED the cult troops these days (not all of 'em but at least 'zerkers) so to stay 'fluffy' and have my WB's I say that they pledged themselves to the warmaster, and the big A says "play nice with these guys"

[Khaeron Baoth]

I don´t use cult troops in my Word Bearer army, it has played quite nicely. Most my games are draw, with few victories and losses. However I use icons with my units. Fluffwise units have blessing from one god in one battle and from other god in another battle. Icon represents that blessing. I think that even they are undivided they can pray gods individually.

 

My dark apostle in simply chaos lord with power weapon aand mark of Tzeentch as count as crozius.

[chaplain belisarius]

Thats kind of what im thinking of doing (but with a plasma pistol!). I miss the old dark apostle rules and that is the only way to recreate them in the current dex!