Any official legions that would use a mix of cult troops?

[chillin]

They gained several more unit choices. They can now use Berserkers, Plague Marines, Thousand Sons, Noise Marines, Obliterators, Vindicators and Greater Demons.

 

Like I said b4, NL could have all those things in 3.5 as well, it just ment you couldn't use NL's special rules if you took cult troops. So NL's have gained nothing, and like every other choas army have lost alot. But you are obviously not going to back of your "NL's couldn't

use cult troops in 3.5 (dispite the fact that there was nothing stopping you). So there is no use going round and round about it.

[Legatus]

No, and I have explained why NLs could not. There was a specific set of rules that explained how a "Night Lords" army was constructed. If you were not using thsoe rules you had to declare to your opponent that you were not going to play your Night Lords models accorsing to the Night Lords rules. That is like using the Codex Space Wolves for your Black Templar models. If you entered a tournament and stated "Night Lords" as your army but were then using Berserkers, you would have been accused of Cheating.

 

 

In the 4th Edition Codex there are no rules that describe how a Night Lord army has to look compared to other Chaos armies. Night Lord armies are created from the basic list. Thus you will now not have to declare to your opponent tha you are not playing your Night Lords with their specific rules.

[Night Lord Dred]

You have berzerkers so therefore it is a black legion list. Just because the majority is painted blue and consists of SMs belonging to NLs doesnt mean that it's NLs at all.

 

3.5:

 

-Can play as Night Lords with Special Rules

-Can play as "Night Lords" who have cult troops, but no special rules.

 

4:

 

-Can play as "Night Lords" who have cult troops, but no special rules.

 

 

That is the problem. If you felt that using black legion with a majority of units belonging to one legion is equivalent to using an entirely different codex...that's insane. This is completely a mental block in your own head that no one else feels the same way about. What everyone else sees is the FACT that there are less options now, as seen in the very simple lists above.

[Legatus]

Night Lord painted Marines with Berserkers:

 

3.5 Codex: You are NOT playing Night Lords according to the rules they are supposed to use.

 

4th Codex: You are playing Night Lords according to the rules they are suppsoed to use.

 

It is so simple. In 4th, that is how Night Lords are played. You are using the official and sanctified rules for them. You do not have to declare that you are not using the correct rules.

 

Under 4th: "I am playing Night Lords" - Check.

 

Under 3.5 "I am playing Night Lords, but not according to Night Lords rules. I am using the basic Codex list."

[Night Lord Dred]

Im sorry, but that is a ridiculous argument. You are playing the exact same army, but because theres no NL rules to ignore it's somehow better?

[Legatus]

Yes, it actually is. Believe it or not, some people prefer to play an army according to the rules that are provided for it. Others feel free to play their Black Templars according to Codex Space Wolves or Tau according to Codex Eldar. Some people like to use the "official" set of rules.

[Lay]

Under 3.5 "I am playing Night Lords, but not according to Night Lords rules. I am using the basic Codex list."

The bottom line is that anyone could do that and there was nothing problematic about it.

[Night Lord Dred]

Yes, it actually is. Believe it or not, some people prefer to play an army according to the rules that are provided for it. Others feel free to play their Black Templars according to Codex Space Wolves or Tau according to Codex Eldar. Some people like to use the "official" set of rules.

 

No, the closest equivalent of playing Salamander Space Marines without Vulkan, which is perfectly acceptable. You are still playing under the same codex with the majority being the exact same units. It is absolutely nothing like playing tau according to Eldar. The fact you made that comparison makes me question if youre actually serious or trolling.

[Legatus]

You are playing Army X, but you are not using the rules that are intended for army X. Whether the other set of rules you are using comes from a different Codex or not is a minor component. If you want to stay within the same Codex, it is like playing Imperial Fists but using Khan as your Special Character. Or in the last Codex Space Marines, playing Imperial Fists but using the Chapter Traits for Iron Hands. It is still proxying. But I guess if you don't mind proxying, then it was not a problem under 3.5.

[Night Lord Dred]

There are officially Night Lord units in Black Legion, so your comparisons are moot. There are no tau in eldar, and there are no imperial fists in iron hands.

[Legatus]

So you would be playing Night Lords from the Black Legion then. I am not sure that's better.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

The current codex does not allow for a night lords list at all. It lacks the correct composition or special rules. This is codex: Black Legion. Gav himself has called it Black Legion/Renegades. You are still only playing black legion painted blue.

 

If you think it does allow for Night Lords, then surely it is a matter of defining what nightlords are? In my mind, they are defined by certain units and special rules, mainly those usable in the 3.5 codex. But you think they can be played with this codex, and all they are in this one is a color scheme. Rulewise they are the same as every other undivided legion. If all the legion to you is a color scheme, then you should have no issue with playing it as just a color scheme with 3.5 rules.

 

You make the argument about having to declare what you are playing. If under the 3.5 codex you said "nightlords" and then were actually black legion painted blue people would be a bit annoyed. Well what happens with this codex when you say you play nightlords? You get looked at funny and someone asks you to make sure you have the latest codex. Of course, it wasn't hard at all to say that you are playing nightlords but not using their special rules. Thats like 1 extra sentence. Are you really telling me that it was worth losing 9 viable army builds in return for having to say 1 less sentence each game?

 

The fact you made that comparison makes me question if youre actually serious or trolling.

 

These threads always end up this way. To his credit, Legatus did once have a guy agree with him.

[Legatus]

If you think it does allow for Night Lords, then surely it is a matter of defining what nightlords are? In my mind, they are defined by certain units and special rules, mainly those usable in the 3.5 codex.

I have been playing them since 2nd Edition. Tell me, why should I require the specific rules of one of the Codices since 2nd Edition to play them? You are telling me I was not playing Night Lords prior to 3.5 (perhaps Index Astartes) and now that the Codex is gone I again cannot play them anymore. You can just as well tell players with Blood Raven armies that they are not really playing Blood Ravens, because they used to have Chapter trait rules in the previous Codex but are now based on the basic Space Marine list. I know we have gone this route before, but these claims do not become any less absurd.

 

 

If all the legion to you is a color scheme, then you should have no issue with playing it as just a color scheme with 3.5 rules.

Perhaps this time it will stick! :P In the 3.5 Codex there was a specific army list for Night Lords. Not playing according to that army list meant you were not playing Night Lords according to their intended rules.

The intended rules for Night Lords in the 4th Edition Codex is the basic 4th Edition army list. If you are playing Night Lords with the 4th Edition army list, you are not playing with the "wrong" army list, as you would have in 3.5.

 

 

Well what happens with this codex when you say you play nightlords?

Hopefully the opponent has read about Chaos and knows it is one of the famous Legions. Would I have to say "Chaos" so as to not confuse him? If I play Ultramarines, do I have to say I play "Space Marines"? I could not state that I play Raptors or Silver Skulls?

 

 

Of course, it wasn't hard to all to say that you are playing nightlords but not using their special rules. Thats like 1 extra sentence.

The important point is not so much that it takes longer to say. The important point is that there was an official army list for the army, but you were not using the official army list. You were essentially proxying in 3.5 if you did that. Now you are not.

 

 

The question had been raised why anyone could possibly have seen the 3.5 Codex as restrictive. The answer is that if you want to play one of the Legions without proxying or "counts as" you were denied 80% of the army list choices. If you have no problem with using a different army list for your models than the one they are intended to use it obviously was not much of a restriction. If you prefer to use the the intended lists, then it was.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Perhaps this time it will stick! In the 3.5 Codex there was a specific army list for Night Lords. Not playing according to that army list meant you were not playing Night Lords according to their intended rules.

The intended rules for Night Lords in the 4th Edition Codex is the basic 4th Edition army list. If you are playing Night Lords with the 4th Edition army list, you are not playing with the "wrong" army list, as you would have in 3.5.

 

Yes, i get this. What i have repeatedly asked is if it was worth it? Is it worth losing 9 army lists in return for one just so you can be more official about it? Lets look at it from the more selfish view possible: Suppose you don't care about all the legion stuff since thats not how you play it anyway. Was it worth losing all the unit and HQ customization? Is optionless DPs and weak lords and sorcs worth it? Is losing the customization from veteran skills worth it? Is having ~80% of our unit options be terrible worth it? You are not following the official rules for nightlords, but is that worth all the other stuff you've lost?

[Lay]

If you think it does allow for Night Lords, then surely it is a matter of defining what nightlords are? In my mind, they are defined by certain units and special rules, mainly those usable in the 3.5 codex.

I have been playing them since 2nd Edition. Tell me, why should I require the specific rules of one of the Codices since 2nd Edition to play them?

You don't.

You could always go for vanilla. And it wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

You are telling me I was not playing Night Lords prior to 3.5 (perhaps Index Astartes) and now that the Codex is gone I again cannot play them anymore. You can just as well tell players with Blood Raven armies that they are not really playing Blood Ravens, because they used to have Chapter trait rules in the previous Codex but are now based on the basic Space Marine list. I know we have gone this route before, but these claims do not become any less absurd.

Just as absurd as claiming that playing NL with the vanilla list in 3.5 was "wrong".

 

Of course, it wasn't hard to all to say that you are playing nightlords but not using their special rules. Thats like 1 extra sentence.

The important point is not so much that it takes longer to say. The important point is that there was an official army list for the army, but you were not using the official army list. You were essentially proxying in 3.5 if you did that. Now you are not.

There is nothing important about it. It's a triviality. One that is settled after you make your choice.

 

The question had been raised why anyone could possibly have seen the 3.5 Codex as restrictive. The answer is that if you want to play one of the Legions without proxying or "counts as" you were denied 80% of the army list choices.

Those supposed 20% were at least customizable due to gifts, wargear and Daemons - choices we are denied under the current book. We weren't left with 100% of the previous codex' vanilla options.

[chillin]

So, since it seems to be your only rational that make any sense at all, how many tourneys were you thrown out of back in 3.5 days for trying to put brzrkrs in your NL's army instead of using the NL's rules ??

[Brother Nihm]

Another dead horse this

We would rather be free!

Another topic ends like this

Lock and Key - Baby you know me!