Shenaniganz Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 I haven't seen the chaos codex in a while and i was wondering if they could still take it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chengar Qordath Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 Nope, the option went away with the new Codex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chromedog Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Nope. they had to give the basilisks back to their renegade guard brethren and take Vindicators instead. Iron Warriors are just CSM with shiny metal and a hazard stripe paint scheme now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Chaos_Brute Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 And you had to go and remind me ... ... ... like I could forget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawks Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 in a friendly game, if your opponent doesn't mind, then you can have whatever your evil chaos-warped heart desires. basilisks included. but officially, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiantKiller Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I haven't seen the chaos codex in a while and i was wondering if they could still take it? No. CSM armies can no longer take basilisks. For that matter, there is no longer any such thing as an "iron warriors" army outside of your own personal fluff. They're all just different-colored CSM in the eyes of the new codex. The author of the new CSM codex has explained some of his reasoning for taking away that and other options in this article on his blog. -GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronWinds Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 If your opponent agrees, or in apoc games. My favorite thing about apoc games is taking my twin basilisks. Some people don't like the idea of mixing units from armies because you could get additional advantages from doing so but people see the basilisks as very fluffy and know that is why I take them. I've yet to have a complaint about them. The author of the new CSM codex has explained some of his reasoning for taking away that and other options in this article on his blog. I'm glad I read that. I actually disliked him even more through most of that article. The very last paragraph about the CSMs rose him up a notch. Talked a LOT about part of the reason there was no fluff or anything on the legions was that they intended to create specific books for those legions. Then he talked about how that was how it was when we had the index astartes. So all well in good.... assuming Codex:Legions had already came out ;) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.