Using the Loyalist codex to represent Night Lords

[chillin]

Using the new Codex Space Marines merely for the drop pods (even though no chaos army list had them to date) or flanking all-bike armies (even though no chaos army had that to date) is one thing. But can those people stay away from Scouts, Scoutbikes, Stormshields, Landspeeders, Assault Cannons, 2 shot Cyclone Missile Launchers, Whirlwinds, Venerable Dreadnoughts? I already had to read in this thread how "fluffy" Night Lord Scout snipers would be, but really, in such a case the whole point of a fluffy list has been lost somewhere along the way.

 

As anyone who knows me (from my post on this forum), knows that I am a bit of a fluff nazi.

 

I totally agree, chaos should not have Scout bikes, landspeeders, ass. cannons, whirlwinds, man carried plas cannons (you forgot that one). I'm fine with AL (only) having scouts (cultists), in the old s/m dex scouts were ws4 bs4 so cultists didn't fit, but now that they are ws3 bs3.

Venerable dreads ? ..... would a dieing chaos lord put in a dread not be ws5 bs5 ?? not to metion that a chaos dread could be at least as old if not older the a loyalist dread.

As for flanking armies, there was no flanking (rule) b4 the 5th ed. rulebook. It would fit with established AL or NL's fluff though.

And drop pods...I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but in the HH books didn't they have drop pods? (it's been awhile since I read the books).

I don't know what a cyclon ML does, maybe it should be avoided.

 

I really do think that most people that are considering using the s/m dex are doing it to better represent and recapture the feel of their undivided legions, and self limiting what they use out of a dex is nothing new to those people (or myself for that matter).

[DeathsHead]

Using the new Codex Space Marines merely for the drop pods (even though no chaos army list had them to date) or flanking all-bike armies (even though no chaos army had that to date) is one thing. But can those people stay away from Scouts, Scoutbikes, Stormshields, Landspeeders, Assault Cannons, 2 shot Cyclone Missile Launchers, Whirlwinds, Venerable Dreadnoughts? I already had to read in this thread how "fluffy" Night Lord Scout snipers would be, but really, in such a case the whole point of a fluffy list has been lost somewhere along the way.

 

As anyone who knows me (from my post on this forum), knows that I am a bit of a fluff nazi.

 

I totally agree, chaos should not have Scout bikes, landspeeders, ass. cannons, whirlwinds, man carried plas cannons (you forgot that one). I'm fine with AL (only) having scouts (cultists), in the old s/m dex scouts were ws4 bs4 so cultists didn't fit, but now that they are ws3 bs3.

Venerable dreads ? ..... would a dieing chaos lord put in a dread not be ws5 bs5 ?? not to metion that a chaos dread could be at least as old if not older the a loyalist dread.

As for flanking armies, there was no flanking (rule) b4 the 5th ed. rulebook. It would fit with established AL or NL's fluff though.

And drop pods...I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but in the HH books didn't they have drop pods? (it's been awhile since I read the books).

I don't know what a cyclon ML does, maybe it should be avoided.

 

I really do think that most people that are considering using the s/m dex are doing it to better represent and recapture the feel of their undivided legions, and self limiting what they use out of a dex is nothing new to those people (or myself for that matter).

 

I will not be using the new SM Codex to represent my Chaos Space Marines, but not because of specific fluff perspectives. I actually think that a lot of the fluff-restricted items you listed are somewhat arbitrary (no disrespect intended). Rationales can easily be developed for a lot of those things, particularly if one starts considering the sheer broadness of the term "Chaos Space Marine".

 

The real reason I won't be using the SM Dex is because I think it kind of sucks. And frankly, I think a lot of the Codices (such as our own!) that GW releases kind of suck, because they're extremely simplistic. The huge reliance on Special Characters in the new codex is one example of this... It seems to promote a very unserious, unrealistic (i.e, un-fluffy) view of the 40k universe, geared at younger (or dumber) gamers. Granted, the SM codex is a little bit more dynamic than ours in terms of rules and diversity, but it's not much more intelligent.

 

What I really want is a codex that does (what is apparently) the impossible: give us the possibility of creating a wide variety of lists composed of properly balanced units, each with a fair degree of customability, without having to rely on a cheesy parade of "Special" characters to do so. In my mind, the most perfect incarnation of a really interesting, dynamic codex is the current Tyranids codex and the recently out-dated Chaos codex.

 

Actually, in all honesty, what I reallywant is a whole different 40k: a new, more sophisticated rules-set, and a more serious approach to tactical war-gaming... which isn't necessarily a more 'competetive' approach to tactical wargaming, mind you.

 

But that's a whole other issue... sort of.

[Penmarch']

I will not be using the new SM Codex to represent my Chaos Space Marines, but not because of specific fluff perspectives. I actually think that a lot of the fluff-restricted items you listed are somewhat arbitrary (no disrespect intended). Rationales can easily be developed for a lot of those things, particularly if one starts considering the sheer broadness of the term "Chaos Space Marine".

 

The real reason I won't be using the SM Dex is because I think it kind of sucks. And frankly, I think a lot of the Codices (such as our own!) that GW releases kind of suck, because they're extremely simplistic. The huge reliance on Special Characters in the new codex is one example of this... It seems to promote a very unserious, unrealistic (i.e, un-fluffy) view of the 40k universe, geared at younger (or dumber) gamers. Granted, the SM codex is a little bit more dynamic than ours in terms of rules and diversity, but it's not much more intelligent.

 

What I really want is a codex that does (what is apparently) the impossible: give us the possibility of creating a wide variety of lists composed of properly balanced units, each with a fair degree of customability, without having to rely on a cheesy parade of "Special" characters to do so. In my mind, the most perfect incarnation of a really interesting, dynamic codex is the current Tyranids codex and the recently out-dated Chaos codex.

 

Actually, in all honesty, what I reallywant is a whole different 40k: a new, more sophisticated rules-set, and a more serious approach to tactical war-gaming... which isn't necessarily a more 'competetive' approach to tactical wargaming, mind you.

 

But that's a whole other issue... sort of.

 

No, it isn't, and you're absolutely right.

[Legatus]

in the old s/m dex scouts were ws4 bs4 so cultists didn't fit, but now that they are ws3 bs3.

They are still S4 and T4 however, and considering that there are different WS4 and BS4 regular humanoids (Imperial Veterans for example) that seems to be more of a problem than higher fighting skills.

 

Venerable dreads ? ..... would a dieing chaos lord put in a dread not be ws5 bs5 ?? not to metion that a chaos dread could be at least as old if not older the a loyalist dread.

But as we all know chaos dreads are not put to sleep between actions, so the older one of them becomes the more he will go insane. A really old and powerful chaos dreadnought might seem to be a valid idear, but loyalist and chaos dreadnoughts are substantially different in how they are treated and utilised. You could not really demand an older and wiser dreadnought for chaos.

 

And drop pods...I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but in the HH books didn't they have drop pods?

To be honest, as much as I like the image of loyal marines deep striking with drop pods, this is a game element GW should have perhaps left to Apocalypse, or as a specialised mission where the whole force is dropped in. It just does not make sense that the Marines would have squads waiting to be dropped in in every kind of recon or skirmish mission. Now, especially that there finally will be a drop pod model, whenever you fight space marines they will throw a few drop squads at you.

[DeathsHead]

To be honest, as much as I like the image of loyal marines deep striking with drop pods, this is a game element GW should have perhaps left to Apocalypse, or as a specialised mission where the whole force is dropped in. It just does not make sense that the Marines would have squads waiting to be dropped in in every kind of recon or skirmish mission. Now, especially that there finally will be a drop pod model, whenever you fight space marines they will throw a few drop squads at you.

 

Yeah, a few drop squads (and/or dreadnoughts) with a light peppering of Orbital Bombardment.

 

Oh, and as far as Chaos and Venerable dreadnoughts, while I think that the idea of 'totally bat-sh*t' dreadnoughts is pretty cool on an aesthetic level that suits Chaos in a very, very general sort of way, I think it's pretty ridiculous to suppose that every single group of Chaos Marines and/or Renegades has exactly the same policy on dreadnought hibernation. But then again, if we extended this logic, we'd have to address the issues of new vs. old technology and all the other little inconsistencies that 40k is rife with on a 'rules' level.... and we've all done that more than enough.

 

(Edited: now 150% more whinging!!!)

[Lord_Caerolion]

Yeah, I have to agree with DeathsHead about the Dreadnoughts. I find it hard to believe that they just went "Ok guys, we're Chaos now, so no more sleep for you!"

And about the Drop-pods, Marines are supposed to be the rapier of the Imperial military. Go in hard, smash the single target, and get out quick. Drop pods fit that perfectly, allowing them to drop right onto the enemy before they can react, and then have the Thunderhawks pick them up in 10 minutes when the fighting's done.

[Arschbombe]

There was a dread in Dark Apostle who was a little off his rocker. He would be like a grand parent suffering from dementia. He kept asking, "Do we fight with Lorgar still?" But he still knew friend from foe. It was NOT like the berzerker in a box of the current rules.

 

About the loyalist equipment. I think there is really not a lot of things in the loyalist codeci that would be impermissible in a chaos force from a fluff perspective, if only because a chaos force can be anything from a 10,000 year-old framented legion to a recently corrupted warband. But from a gaming perspective it clearly makes sense to distinguish between loyalist and traitor forces. Who would play loyalist marines if chaos got everything the loyalists did plus princes, daemons, oblits, cult marines, and defilers?

 

*edit*

Edited to change the line in the first para about the berzerker in the box. Warmonger was NOT totally insane.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Thats what I'm saying. If you want to have Chaos-y elements to your Chaos Marines, use the Chaos rules. If, like me, your army still fights like it did during the Crusade, without all that Chaos stuff, then use Loyalists, restricting yourself to older equipment, which still gives you a more variable force than what the Chaos codex would allow.

[Jarulek]

There was a dread in Dark Apostle who was a little off his rocker. He would be like a grand parent suffering from dementia. He kept asking, "Do we fight with Lorgar still?" But he still knew friend from foe. It was like the berzerker in a box of the current rules.

 

Yes, you're talking about Warmonger (I love that book). He was like the sergeant of Dreadnoughts. At te final battle he ripped the carcass from a crazed dreadnought's hull to stop it from firing at his own men.

 

Speaking of which, of course Chaos uses Drop Pods (Dreadclaws), how the hell are they suppose to reach the planet surface? Even if you had a buttload of sorcerers to teleport them in, they still need icons and not all legions (World Eaters) use sorcerers.

[Smurfalypse]

There was a dread in Dark Apostle who was a little off his rocker. He would be like a grand parent suffering from dementia. He kept asking, "Do we fight with Lorgar still?" But he still knew friend from foe. It was like the berzerker in a box of the current rules.

 

Yes, you're talking about Warmonger (I love that book). He was like the sergeant of Dreadnoughts. At te final battle he ripped the carcass from a crazed dreadnought's hull to stop it from firing at his own men.

 

Speaking of which, of course Chaos uses Drop Pods (Dreadclaws), how the hell are they suppose to reach the planet surface? Even if you had a buttload of sorcerers to teleport them in, they still need icons and not all legions (World Eaters) use sorcerers.

 

Well alot of the current rules are ideas that JJ thought were good in the 3.0 chaos codex. We had the randomized abilities of the possessed and the crazed rules of the dreadnaught, which are identical to what we have now in their crazed rules. He obvioulsy had a big influence on certain aspects of the 4.0 chaos dex and it shows. This isnt about codex bashing, was just saying :)

 

I apsolutely LOVED the way the dreads and defilers were portrayed in the book "dark apostle", how they had them chained up because they were crazy and how the word bearers retreated to let them cover their retreat. That was the inspiration for the army list i wrote up with 3 dreads that start on the board and the rest of the army sits in reserve. I got bashed pretty hard when i posted it in the army list area and asked for some advice to try and make it at least somewhat competative. Even chillen ripped into me for not running possessed (probably my only list ever without possessed, im even running 20 in this weekends ard boyz). Either way, our dreads should be crazed but definitely not as bad as they are in the rules and if so at least drop a significant amount of points off of their total cost. When you look at the marine dread with the multi-melta, its literally 5 points more than our's with a multi-melta so obviously a huge oversite there in points cost for ours.

 

ANYWHO

 

I was actually thinking of doing an ork army with the new marine dex. Ive always loved the clan that trades with humans and trys to mirror marine tactics, they have actually been documented retreating only to catch marines in a pincer move. Was thinking of converting up a bunch of orks and making the drop pods look orky ect ect...Im sure i will run into a pile of resistence but, i think it would be awesome.

[Arschbombe]

I apsolutely LOVED the way the dreads and defilers were portrayed in the book "dark apostle", how they had them chained up because they were crazy and how the word bearers retreated to let them cover their retreat.

 

Me too. I've got some FW dread models and being able to use them effectively in games is a big reason why I'm looking at the loyalist book. I took the chain idea from Dark Apostle and bought some cheap chain at a craft store and have been adding chain bits to one of the dreads. If it turns out well, I'll do the other one too.

 

 

edit:

forgot to add an idea I had last night. We know our dreads cost a little less than the loyalist ones. Building on that, what if we could get dreads at variable price points based on variable levels of craziness? Instead of one frenzy table why not, say, three tables with the current table being the worst level of crazy?

 

Something like:

 

mildly nuts: chance to charge the enemy. -5 points

medium nuts: table from 3.5, fire frenzy or charge, enemy only. -10 points

totally nuts: table from 4.0. -15 points

 

Obviously this will take some refinement, but the idea is to let the player choose what level of crazy he's comfortable with and give an appropriate discount from the loyalist version. I think this could go a long way in alleviating the complaints about the current rules.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Yeah, Orks is something I wouldn't go as far to accept. Appearance is one thing, but radically changing the statline of units is another.

[Smurfalypse]

Yeah, Orks is something I wouldn't go as far to accept. Appearance is one thing, but radically changing the statline of units is another.

 

LOL if they have bolters and are showing their proper equipment, than there is nothing you can do about it if someone pulls out their hot looking ork/marine army ;)

 

Hence the point of this whole post.

[BloodRed]

Would scouts work for the Alpha Legion to represent those infiltrator marines the Alphalegion produces that are not as tall as regular marines? I could swear I read they made regular height marines sometimes so they could function in society and liason with the cults without attracting attention like a giant hulking supersoldier. The lower WS & BS and 4+ save might be a good way to represent them.

 

One thing I think is very important when using C:SM for a secular Chaos Legion or a renegade force is to make a list of limitations. Figure out what doesn't fit and stick with it.

 

Also, remember the options of inducting Inquisitorial units that count as a variety of stuff.

[Rain]

What's funny about the chaos venerable dread argument is that in Dead Sky Black Sun, one of the Iron Warrior commanders was a dreadnought and he was lucid enough to command troops and had a siege drill (a weapon that loyalist dreads are apparently getting).

[the jeske]

it if someone pulls out their hot looking ork/marine army

I remember one of our guys going to an UK GT and geting disqualified in one game because his orks had a mix of 3ed bolters and shotas from gorka morka . it was in the 3ed . I remember this happening to my team when we were in the US[illegal of course] and attened a tournament there .

[Smurfalypse]

it if someone pulls out their hot looking ork/marine army

I remember one of our guys going to an UK GT and geting disqualified in one game because his orks had a mix of 3ed bolters and shotas from gorka morka . it was in the 3ed . I remember this happening to my team when we were in the US[illegal of course] and attened a tournament there .

 

 

Thats very very lame, though back them "counts as" didnt exist as it does now. I kinda like the counts as rule as it promotes conversions ect ect...I would have waited for the judge in the parking lot if it were me though and put the boots to him, medium style. Thats just me though.

 

Just to clarify i wasnt thinking and not sure how good you are with the english-american slang....That means i would have kicked the crap out of him. :) As disqualifying because of different bolters is just retarded.

[BloodRed]

Don't forget the guy who was not allowed to play in the Australian GT after his brown space wolves won a Golden Daemon elsewhere and were featured in white dwarf. During the 3rd ed days there were tons of WYSIWYG enthusiasts who took things way, way too far.

 

Counts as is the best thing to happen to 40k in a long time. It's a nice reminder that people need to chill and be charitable to their opponents (both allowing things and making sure your conversions and counts as models are not confusing).

 

If I were to build another Alpha Legion army, I'd go with the Codex: Space Marines list and use a good smattering of loyalist parts mixed in with the chaos stuff. To represent the armour used when the Alpha Legion impersonates loyalist marines (oh, and they do).

[northoceanbeach]

Well, they did have a rule before for the Night Lords taking over the comms arrays of the enemy, it gave the enemy a negative to Reserves rolls. I'd much rather have that, along with free Night Vision, access to Daemonic Visage, and Steath Adept, to represent my Night Lords than cheap Raptors. The Daemonic Visage represents that the enemies heart isn't in them, and they're much more likely to run, due to the scare tactics already employed. Also, Night Lords previously had the option of forcing a game to be played using Night Fighting if they were the attackers.

 

I'm just going to leave your arguments about army tactics. You seem set on Night Lords being just "Rargh! Cut them and broadcast it!" and nothing beyond that.

 

I'm, seeing both of your sides and am yet to make up my mind. However, I have to agree with the lego guy more here. You seem to keep saying that since everything that kills you is scary, everything is fluffy for Night Lords. But come on, can't we try and narrow it down a little bit? Yes, sniper rifles are scary, but they're not NL'y, for someone who seems up on his fluff you've got to give a little and admit, they do tend to a more specific type of terror.

 

EDIT- I have since read another post of his that praises the writing of the Dark Angles codex, which I consider the least competative and worst codex of all time, so I feel bad about myself for agreeing with him....it's gonna be a long night.

[northoceanbeach]

I'll also add that I think it's sad that the chaos book is so bad that we're glad to use this new SM codex, which like an above poster said, really is pretty boring too. I'm afraid once the initial infatuation wears off, we'll look at our NL's armies using SM rules and not be glad.

 

If you step back and think, there's not much going for that book either, I didn't want to lose what I did with my old Emperor's Children army, but this new SM codex, while there are some shiny things to make you go "ooo" it's sadly character based, and it's really only better for NL in the case a of a few special rules. And I'm not sure if we should get them.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I'm not saying that everything that kills is Night Lordy. What I said was that sniper rifles are an important part of psychological warfare. Quite a lot different from "Sniper rifles kill, therefore Night Lords should have them."

[northoceanbeach]

Why not give us an example of your previous fluffy army list in brief using the chaos book and then one using the new SM dex. I know I would like to learn more, and I think that would help the discussion, to really picture what can be done in comparison.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Well, under both 3.5 my list changed a bit, but the thing that remained constant, and was how I "Night Lord"ified the list, rather than unit selections (of course, using the Night Lord sub-list limitations). As for the new Marine codex, I haven't gotten the codex yet...

[Legatus]

EDIT- I have since read another post of his that praises the writing of the Dark Angles codex, which I consider the least competative and worst codex of all time, so I feel bad about myself for agreeing with him....it's gonna be a long night.

Well, Space Marine squads from battle companies are 10 men strong. They are not 7 men or 9 men strong. And Terminator squads are 5 men strong. Not 6, or 8, or 10. I was hoping that the new Space Marine Codex would get similar squad structures, where you could only get 5 men combat squads or full 10 men squads, and only 5 men Terminator squads, but unfortunately whoever was in charge of the new Codex Space Marines (I assume it was not JJ, since he made Codex DA and BA) chickened out and kept the variable squad sizes. I could imagine that Jervis's idear was that loyal marines get set unit sizes but combat squads, while chaos marines get variable squad sizes. But they did not go with it.

That means until the Dark Angels Codex is redone and gets all the new flashy stuff, a Dark Angels army will be more closely and strictly organised after the Codex Astartes than most of the Ultramarine armies you will see, with the possible exception of mixed weapons in Terminator squads. But I guess the fluffy list is not allways the "most competetive" and thus sucks for some people. I think the Codex Dark Angels was the best thing for Space Marines in a long time, and I was hoping for the Codex Space Marines to be basically a Codex Dark Angels without Deathwing and Ravenwing rules.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I agree with you on that. Marines should be very strictly organised, with squad sizes in groups of 5.