What do you want in the next "Codex: Chaos Space Marines" ?

[Black Hand]

The only things I really want to see in a new CSM codex is a little more fluff, so that I have more resources to call upon when creating an army or whatever (also because I really enjoy reading army fluff, it's one of my favourite things about new codexes) and some of the lesser or ignored units redone a bit. Possessed, in particular, spring to mind; they're not the worst unit ever, but they are a severe mixed bag, and I think the older "pick your possession" kinda worked better. Of course, I'm just a hobbyist, but I felt that their tactical value was somewhat limited by that random ability.

[Dryad]

Yes, there is a million different things I could wish for. However, I just have one major wish:

 

I want to open the book and be overwhelmed by the choices I have available to me. Plain and simple.

 

That was the fundamental problem with the current one since the day I turned my first page on it. It is streamlined, fool proof, and all the competitive choices are just openly displayed for the picking. Boring...

[maverike_prime]

Hey I just had a bit of a spark of inspiration to the whole Renage Vs Legion thing. Well not so much the legions, but the marines that have been kicking ass and taking names for 10,000 years. If the squad takes an Icon, it's renegade. The Icon can be cheaper due to the ability that it can be removed from the squad thanks to shooting attacks and what not. If the squad takes a mark it means it's a traitor marine unit and has been around for a while and have permanently marked by their patron gods. The mark would convey the effects for that particular god:

 

Mark of Khorne: +1 attack and Rage.

Mark of Nurgle: +1 T and Feel No Pain

Mark of Slaanesh: +1 I and Furious Charge

Mark of Tzeentch: +1 to Inv Save.

 

The Icons would convey the +1 stats only.

 

This way you have a hierarchy of the god's honor.

 

At the bottom of the pyramid you have the largest number of marines, the Wannabes, the recent additions, the... well you get the idea. the ones who are just there to be there. Probably the same as normal Marines, same points.

 

Next up you have the Marines that are attempting to earn their gods favor. They're the ones that are carrying the icons. I figure the Gods laugh when these guys get splashed. You buy the icon for the squad like the current codex.

 

Moving up you have the marines that have proven themselves capable of their gods favor. The marines that are permanently marked by their patron god. Higher point cost for the mark, probably X number of points per member of the squad like in the 3.5 codex.

 

Finally you have the Dedicated Marines, the Cultists, the apex of devotion to their chosen god. These are the Khorne Berzerkers, the Slaneeshie Noise Marines, the Nurgle Plague Marines, and the Thousand Sons.

 

What do you guys think of that idea?

[Chengar Qordath]

DP and oblits should be 0-1 choices too...it doesnt feel right spamming them (but we need to make other stuff worth taking too, i think the troops section is ok in the current dex...)

Or, instead of introducing a type of restriction that no other modern 5th edition codex has, you could just make Daemon Princes and Obliterators balanced so that people won't spam them. Personally, 0-1 limits just seem like pure balancing laziness to me; since it seems to get used as an alternative to actually bothering to fix unbalanced units or correct the reasons that people spam them in the first place.

 

I know people have a lot of nostalgia for the 3.5 codex; considering the sheer number of options that got cut, that is quite understandable, but GW is not going to and should not reverse every single part of their current codex design philosophy. Convoluted locking and unlocking schemes are out; flexibility is in. What the next codex needs is better balance and enough options to allow a nicely fluffy army for any of the legions, or a mixed warband, or renegades. I know a lot of Chaos players want to enforce mono-legion play on everyone, but personally I don't think non-legion players under the bus is very fair, even if the current codex has done some nasty things to legion players.

[Lexington]

Nothing. But by the same point nothing is given for painting your CSMs Boltgun metal and calling them Iron Warriors either.

I don't really see what's wrong with this - there's nothing that's particularly different, structurally, between the "undivided" Legions. They have their specialties in warfare, but it's not like there's ever been unique Iron Warrior Siege Squads or anything. A Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine, just as its been since the 2nd Edition Chaos Codex fifteen damn years ago.

 

Yes, during the IA/3.5 Chaos Codex era, you had specialty "Legion Lists" in the back of the book, but these were inherently ridiculous; nothing about letting some Plague Marines tag along to the battlefields makes Iron Warriors suddenly lose their siege abilities or muddles the trickery of the Alpha Legion, so why did only "Legion Exclusive" lists gain these abilities? It's silly, and I'm glad to see the backside of that ugly trend.

 

Imagine if in the next Space Marine Codex you have Rules for playing Ultra-Marines, and then you have rules for playing non-ultras. Not rules to play Salamanders or White scars, just non-ultramarines. Limiting the likes of the Iron Hands, Imperial Fists, and Crimson fists to be nothing more then names and colors. Do you think the Space Marine players would like that?

Well, that's the situation now, and I don't hear a lot of complaints about it. Sure, there's a few special characters in the book that play around with army-wide rules, but not every Imperial Fists army is led by Lysander, and, despite his surprisingly frequent appearances, you can actually make Salamander armies that aren't attached to Vulkan He'stan's wacky crusade. Without them, these Legions look and play identically to an Ultramarine force because they all hold more or less to the military structure laid down in the Codex.

 

happy chaos family ?different legions working at warband level or even squad level .

Once again, we're talking about concepts that've been canonical since the mid-90's. Open up a 2nd Edition Chaos Codex, and you'll find a story running throughout the book about a Night Lords raid that utilizes Berzerkers and Noise Marines. Contrary to the strange origin myth that's penetrated the Chaos Marine community over the last few years, Chaos did not simply spring fully-formed from Pete Haines' brow, armed with Legion lists and ultra-customizable Daemon Princes. The 3.5 Chaos book was a hiccup in what's otherwise been a fairly well-established army list.

[maverike_prime]

Nothing. But by the same point nothing is given for painting your CSMs Boltgun metal and calling them Iron Warriors either.

I don't really see what's wrong with this - there's nothing that's particularly different, structurally, between the "undivided" Legions. They have their specialties in warfare, but it's not like there's ever been unique Iron Warrior Siege Squads or anything. A Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine, just as its been since the 2nd Edition Chaos Codex fifteen damn years ago.

 

Yes, during the IA/3.5 Chaos Codex era, you had specialty "Legion Lists" in the back of the book, but these were inherently ridiculous; nothing about letting some Plague Marines tag along to the battlefields makes Iron Warriors suddenly lose their siege abilities or muddles the trickery of the Alpha Legion, so why did only "Legion Exclusive" lists gain these abilities? It's silly, and I'm glad to see the backside of that ugly trend.

 

And there's nothing preventing a unit of Legion of the Damned from going to field along side an army of Salamanders. I do not disagree with the... issues of the 3.5 legion lists. I simply disagree with the lack of any real encouragement of their presence in the current codex. GW sells an Iron Warrior conversion pack. It's $17 dollars. You need a box of CSMs to use it. THat's $35. So for $52 I can put a unit of Iron Warrior Models on the table. And what do I get in comparison to the guy who just painted his CSMs in boltgun metal? nothing. I'm not saying make the WYSIWYG rules so explicent to require the Iron Warrior Models to be able to use Iron Warrior rules. But I would like the Iron Warriors, and the Night Lord, and the Alpha Legion to be something other then a name which is what they have become.

 

15 years ago the Salamanders, Black Templar and White Scars were just names. Now they have their own rules. Do you really think people wouldn't get upset if they suddenly went back to just being names and the party line is "You can still paint them as [insert chapter name]. We're not stopping you." ?

 

Imagine if in the next Space Marine Codex you have Rules for playing Ultra-Marines, and then you have rules for playing non-ultras. Not rules to play Salamanders or White scars, just non-ultramarines. Limiting the likes of the Iron Hands, Imperial Fists, and Crimson fists to be nothing more then names and colors. Do you think the Space Marine players would like that?

Well, that's the situation now, and I don't hear a lot of complaints about it. Sure, there's a few special characters in the book that play around with army-wide rules, but not every Imperial Fists army is led by Lysander, and, despite his surprisingly frequent appearances, you can actually make Salamander armies that aren't attached to Vulkan He'stan's wacky crusade. Without them, these Legions look and play identically to an Ultramarine force because they all hold more or less to the military structure laid down in the Codex.

 

 

um I'm sorry but you are flat wrong with that. The rules that are presented for White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial fists, ect are quit different from Ultramarines. The Space Marines still have Chaplins and they are most definatly NOT Captians with a different name. Yes, you can choose to just go the Vanilla marine route with different colors and that's fine. The point is the option is there if you want to try something else. We don't have that option in the Chaos Codex right now. Sure we can swap a Character for the daemon prince if we want, or if we're feeling adventurous we can take a lord with wings. If we're playing a strictly fluff army, fine. But we're hampering our ability to be competitve by doing it. Khorne berzekers have little ability to take out tanks and so will get owned by a Mech heavy army. So if I do a pure World Eaters army I'm rather disadvantaged against Mech armies. Thousand Sons... well if I do a Thousand Sons army all the enemy has to do is stay 25" away from me and they're going to blow me off the map with out issue. I still can't understand why I would want to do an Emperor's Children army.

[Rik Riorik]

Once again, we're talking about concepts that've been canonical since the mid-90's. Open up a 2nd Edition Chaos Codex, and you'll find a story running throughout the book about a Night Lords raid that utilizes Berzerkers and Noise Marines. Contrary to the strange origin myth that's penetrated the Chaos Marine community over the last few years, Chaos did not simply spring fully-formed from Pete Haines' brow, armed with Legion lists and ultra-customizable Daemon Princes. The 3.5 Chaos book was a hiccup in what's otherwise been a fairly well-established army list.

 

Whilst I don't deny the logic by which you arrive to the conclusion that the 3.5th was a 'hiccup' it doesn't really matter if there were loads of books before it of a certain ilk if (note the use of the word

if') the 3.5th is the prefered one. I know that you aren't saying anything else than the fact that 3.5th altered the way in which Chaos armies were constructed and introduced Legion rules. But it does seem that at least the current generation of active players (the vocal ones at least) do favour 3.5 and not 2nd, 3rd and most definetly not 4th.

 

Me I've got all of the above mentioned books whilst I never actually played before 3.5th. But going to 4th it was like I had been down the night before and peeked at all the shiny presents only to find out we'd been burgled on Christmas morning, left only with gift wrappings and empty boxes. I don't care what was in the earlier books because 3.5th was the coolest of the bunch and is still one of the most interesting Codii ever brought out by G-Dubya.

[Hellios]

DP and oblits should be 0-1 choices too...it doesnt feel right spamming them (but we need to make other stuff worth taking too, i think the troops section is ok in the current dex...)

Or, instead of introducing a type of restriction that no other modern 5th edition codex has, you could just make Daemon Princes and Obliterators balanced so that people won't spam them. Personally, 0-1 limits just seem like pure balancing laziness to me; since it seems to get used as an alternative to actually bothering to fix unbalanced units or correct the reasons that people spam them in the first place.

 

I know people have a lot of nostalgia for the 3.5 codex; considering the sheer number of options that got cut, that is quite understandable, but GW is not going to and should not reverse every single part of their current codex design philosophy. Convoluted locking and unlocking schemes are out; flexibility is in. What the next codex needs is better balance and enough options to allow a nicely fluffy army for any of the legions, or a mixed warband, or renegades. I know a lot of Chaos players want to enforce mono-legion play on everyone, but personally I don't think non-legion players under the bus is very fair, even if the current codex has done some nasty things to legion players.

 

The old dex didn't force you to monol legion... you could mix all the different units if you wanted and you could take units allied to different gods in one dex...

 

Also I think you will find lots of codices have units that are restricted 0-1... they just call it unique now... mainly special characters... but not just special characters...

 

Nothing. But by the same point nothing is given for painting your CSMs Boltgun metal and calling them Iron Warriors either.

I don't really see what's wrong with this - there's nothing that's particularly different, structurally, between the "undivided" Legions. They have their specialties in warfare, but it's not like there's ever been unique Iron Warrior Siege Squads or anything. A Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine is a Chaos Space Marine, just as its been since the 2nd Edition Chaos Codex fifteen damn years ago.

 

Yes, during the IA/3.5 Chaos Codex era, you had specialty "Legion Lists" in the back of the book, but these were inherently ridiculous; nothing about letting some Plague Marines tag along to the battlefields makes Iron Warriors suddenly lose their siege abilities or muddles the trickery of the Alpha Legion, so why did only "Legion Exclusive" lists gain these abilities? It's silly, and I'm glad to see the backside of that ugly trend.

 

Imagine if in the next Space Marine Codex you have Rules for playing Ultra-Marines, and then you have rules for playing non-ultras. Not rules to play Salamanders or White scars, just non-ultramarines. Limiting the likes of the Iron Hands, Imperial Fists, and Crimson fists to be nothing more then names and colors. Do you think the Space Marine players would like that?

Well, that's the situation now, and I don't hear a lot of complaints about it. Sure, there's a few special characters in the book that play around with army-wide rules, but not every Imperial Fists army is led by Lysander, and, despite his surprisingly frequent appearances, you can actually make Salamander armies that aren't attached to Vulkan He'stan's wacky crusade. Without them, these Legions look and play identically to an Ultramarine force because they all hold more or less to the military structure laid down in the Codex.

 

happy chaos family ?different legions working at warband level or even squad level .

Once again, we're talking about concepts that've been canonical since the mid-90's. Open up a 2nd Edition Chaos Codex, and you'll find a story running throughout the book about a Night Lords raid that utilizes Berzerkers and Noise Marines. Contrary to the strange origin myth that's penetrated the Chaos Marine community over the last few years, Chaos did not simply spring fully-formed from Pete Haines' brow, armed with Legion lists and ultra-customizable Daemon Princes. The 3.5 Chaos book was a hiccup in what's otherwise been a fairly well-established army list.

 

A chaos space marine is not a chaos space marine is not a chaos space marine... otherwise why do we have rules for cult units or chosen or those in terminator armour... which are all chaos space marines...

 

Yes you can make a salamander army without Vulcan... the annoying thing which people do complain about is... Vulcan leads the ultramarines to vioctory and why can't I have Salamander special traits without Vulcan... he won't suddenly come along and make everyones weapon work better... except apparently that is what happens...

 

Yes night lords will use mercs from various chapters... hell I bet a few Night Lord cult units even exist... Still not sure that you get Khornate Daemon princes leading an Emperors Children warband...

 

I'm not sure what the problem with 'silly restrictions' is as long as they are optional which most of the wierd stuff was... Hell I call it choice and I think it is a good thing... I realise it might be a problem for those who have a tough time deciding which shoe to put on a foot... but for most people I don't see the issue.

[Black Hand]

Thousand Sons... well if I do a Thousand Sons army all the enemy has to do is stay 25" away from me and they're going to blow me off the map with out issue. I still can't understand why I would want to do an Emperor's Children army.

 

Uh, not to be an annoyance, but that's easier said than done. If we take the average board as 4' across, they have to be just over half of that board away to not be a target for the Thousand Sons. That sounds fine and dandy, but given that most set-ups involve your units being some way onto the board, it seems a little impractical to try and play a game of tag with the Rubric Marines. True, they are slow and purposeful, but I can still see some issues with the plan of "staying out of range."

[Hellios]

Thousand Sons... well if I do a Thousand Sons army all the enemy has to do is stay 25" away from me and they're going to blow me off the map with out issue. I still can't understand why I would want to do an Emperor's Children army.

 

Uh, not to be an annoyance, but that's easier said than done. If we take the average board as 4' across, they have to be just over half of that board away to not be a target for the Thousand Sons. That sounds fine and dandy, but given that most set-ups involve your units being some way onto the board, it seems a little impractical to try and play a game of tag with the Rubric Marines. True, they are slow and purposeful, but I can still see some issues with the plan of "staying out of range."

 

The thing is you don't sit 25 inches away... you sit anywhere you want in a Land Raider and laugh as the rubrics try and cut their wrists... and fail... because... they are dust.

[Black Hand]

Thousand Sons... well if I do a Thousand Sons army all the enemy has to do is stay 25" away from me and they're going to blow me off the map with out issue. I still can't understand why I would want to do an Emperor's Children army.

 

Uh, not to be an annoyance, but that's easier said than done. If we take the average board as 4' across, they have to be just over half of that board away to not be a target for the Thousand Sons. That sounds fine and dandy, but given that most set-ups involve your units being some way onto the board, it seems a little impractical to try and play a game of tag with the Rubric Marines. True, they are slow and purposeful, but I can still see some issues with the plan of "staying out of range."

 

The thing is you don't sit 25 inches away... you sit anywhere you want in a Land Raider and laugh as the rubrics try and cut their wrists... and fail... because... they are dust.

 

 

Sounds like a better plan to me. It certainly involves less running away.

[Chengar Qordath]

The old dex didn't force you to monol legion... you could mix all the different units if you wanted and you could take units allied to different gods in one dex...

I didn't say it did, I said that a lot of players want to go to a system that forces players to be mono-legion (or at least mono-god).

 

Also I think you will find lots of codices have units that are restricted 0-1... they just call it unique now... mainly special characters... but not just special characters...

Funny, I can't think of anything other than special characters (who really don't count) in any 5th edition codex that uses 0-1 limits. I suppose you could stretch it to count the Death Company, but even they're very different from the old 0-1 rule in 3rd edition codices.

[the jeske]

Once again, we're talking about concepts that've been canonical since the mid-90's. Open up a 2nd Edition Chaos Codex, and you'll find a story running throughout the book about a Night Lords raid that utilizes Berzerkers and Noise Marines

and that was retconed + chambers said it more then once that the way 2ed chaos dex looked like was because of space. the first version had lists for all legions only the book was too big and it was either give legions rules too all or let people who played beastman or demon armies , they decide on the second option.

+ if that stuff was still true then my AL are all tzeench and not undivided.

I also doubt you will find many people who think that there is 0 difference between how the legions work . AL and IW are the same in sieges ? they have the same way of traning ? they have the same way philosophy that drives them on and what is important , did the legions look the same pre heresy ? no they didnt . They were different . NL had a full grand company of raptors , no other legion had that . WB and AL are known for mass use of cultists , more then any other legion and at all level of battles .

 

The thing is you don't sit 25 inches away... you sit anywhere you want in a Land Raider and laugh as the rubrics try and cut their wrists... and fail... because... they are dust.

dont need a LR for that , a pure fluffy 1ksons lists wont run oblits so even a rhino is a almost undestructible battle bunker.

 

Or, instead of introducing a type of restriction that no other modern 5th edition codex has, you could just make Daemon Princes and Obliterators balanced so that people won't spam them.

I know what "balance" means , it means nerfing . and while It is ok for something like sm where they just jump from 4-5 good options [las/plas minimax , 2xAC termis , landspeeders with AC , chaplains ] and trade them for other good options[rifle man , MM attack bikes , powerful specials, TH/SS termis ] . but what would it mean for us ? nerfed DP and nerfed oblits means we have no HQ to speak of and no support units to speak of . we would be playing a weaker version of SW lists . I would rather stay with this dex that has so few options , but at least some of them are good.

 

 

I still can't understand why I would want to do an Emperor's Children army.

well lets say in 4th ed , GW told you how EC were cool , gave you nice models and more then 2 builds that are different and they were still good [not BL khorn or IW , but ok to play with] and you were noob enough to buy all those metal nettes and metal weapons . you even seen some cool FW models and either went realy wild and bought them or bought even more metal weapons and converted .... Gav dex came , you still want to play and only models you have are EC and by god you dont want to spend more. When that happens you play an EC list .

[Chengar Qordath]

Or, instead of introducing a type of restriction that no other modern 5th edition codex has, you could just make Daemon Princes and Obliterators balanced so that people won't spam them.

I know what "balance" means , it means nerfing . and while It is ok for something like sm where they just jump from 4-5 good options [las/plas minimax , 2xAC termis , landspeeders with AC , chaplains ] and trade them for other good options[rifle man , MM attack bikes , powerful specials, TH/SS termis ] . but what would it mean for us ? nerfed DP and nerfed oblits means we have no HQ to speak of and no support units to speak of . we would be playing a weaker version of SW lists . I would rather stay with this dex that has so few options , but at least some of them are good.

Or, and I know this is a completely insane idea, which is why you made the logical assumption of thinking that I'm part of the GW conspiracy to destroy the Chaos codex as a viable army list, you could actually make the other units worth taking in order to make Daemon Princes and Obliterators more balanced. Make lords and sorcerers better and you won't see DP spam. Give Chaos more viable options for long-ranged firepower and Obliterator spam won't be an issue.

[Brother Nihm]

The old dex didn't force you to monol legion... you could mix all the different units if you wanted and you could take units allied to different gods in one dex...

I didn't say it did, I said that a lot of players want to go to a system that forces players to be mono-legion (or at least mono-god).

I can only speak for the B&C but, not at all, the majority is (and has since v4 arrived) been wanting the option back - the option that was taken away by a bad design choice.

[Lexington]

And what do I get in comparison to the guy who just painted his CSMs in boltgun metal? nothing.

You're a fine poster, mav, and I hope you'll take none of this personally, but that particular sentiment drives me up the wall with annoyance. As design philosophies go, I see it as one of the most destructive elements ever introduced into the game of 40K. Central to that idea is the assumption that the background and hobby portions of the game are distinct from the play experience, and that it is necessary to incentivize players into playing an army "correctly." Background and modelling become currency for a transaction between designer and player, and the player community begins to expect a specific reward for doing what should be the bare minimum for participation. Worse, these "fluffy" lists are inevitably just a bland, restrictive sub-set of the original army list's entries, with a few goodies tossed in as a trade-off, straight-jacketing every faction into fighting battles with their chosen gimmick. It narrows the game and the universe to a set of myopically narrow tactical preferences let loose at each other, with depressingly predictable results.

 

Besides all that, it lets the designers off the hook for doing a half-assed job with the game overall. "Well, sure, that's broken," players say, "but that wouldn't happen if they played the army like it's supposed to be played." Unfortunately, "supposed to" in this case translates into "exactly as shown in established background." The thing that sets 40K apart from most other games is the breadth and mutability of the setting. If the game is going to punish imagination and engagement for the fell crime of not playing to the averages, we might as well just drop all this 40K junk and go play Warmachine. Sure, there's fewer overall options, but when Privateer decided to overhaul their core systems, they hired a hyper-analytic electrical engineer to go over every rule and make it work better. When Games Workshop wants a change of pace, all we get is Matt Ward.

 

um I'm sorry but you are flat wrong with that. The rules that are presented for White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial fists, ect are quit different from Ultramarines.

Um, excuse my obtuseness, but how am I wrong here? Unless I'm radically mistaken, there's no way to gain access to these rules without taking a specific special character, which is my point. These Chapters don't have individual rules; the special characters do. Without Lysander, an "Imperial Fists" army plays the same as any other Codex Marine army, and while I think that's a dumb way to dole out Chapter rules, Space Marine players as a whole don't seem to mind. They certainly haven't gone into the multi-year depressive funk that Chaos players have.

 

Why do people think this is? I have a pretty good theory, m'self.

 

and that was retconed

It was?

 

+ chambers said it more then once that the way 2ed chaos dex looked like was because of space. the first version had lists for all legions only the book was too big

Really? Got a cite for this? I have literally never, ever heard this before, and it's an extraordinary departure from everything else published in 2nd Edition. Not that I necessarily discount the possibility - Chambers was always one to experiment - but it seems like quite a curveball in what was, compared to today, an era of fairly stable design philosophy.

 

I also doubt you will find many people who think that there is 0 difference between how the legions work . AL and IW are the same in sieges ? they have the same way of traning ? they have the same way philosophy that drives them on and what is important , did the legions look the same pre heresy ? no they didnt . They were different .

Different in outlook, training and focus? Sure. Different in available resources? Not so much. Yes, some had larger selections of one troop type or another, but there were more than enough to go around, and certainly more than what could be reasonably put to use on a 40K-scale battlefield.

 

But it does seem that at least the current generation of active players (the vocal ones at least) do favour 3.5 and not 2nd, 3rd and most definetly not 4th.

Oh, undoubtedly! However, if over a decade of involvement with the online GW community has taught me anything, it's that there's an almost shockingly high correlation between "what the community wants" and "bad ideas." :cuss

[Notanoob]

I'm just going to throw an idea out there for the whole legions and renegades stuff...

 

Options:

regular stuff for CSM squad...

remove personal icons/squad icons

May select one of the following:

Khornate(+1A)...x points per model

Nurglich(+1T)...x points per model

Slaaneshi(+1I)...x points per model

Tzeentchian(+1InvSv)...x points

Alpha Legionary(A2 Ld10, Infiltrate)...x points per model

Black Legionary(A2 Ld10, essentially Chaos Chosen without infiltrate)...x points per model

Death Guard...(A2 Ld10, +1T, FNP, Fearless, Defensive nades, only may take special weapons)x points per model

Emperor's Child(A2 Ld10, +1I, Sonic Blasters as option for every squad member, Blastmaster, Sonic Pistol, Doom Siren)...x points per model

Iron Warrior(A2 Ld10, Tank Hunters/Stubborn/reduces enemies or improves own cover save)...x points per model

Night Lord(A2 Ld10, Stealth, Acute Sense, -1Ld to enemies in CC)...x points per model

Thousand Sun(A2 Ld10, AP3 Bolters (Heavy, Storm, Pistol, Combi), Relentless Aspiring Chap replaced with Sorcerer)...x points per model

Word Bearer(A2 Ld10, Fearless, not sure what else though, something to do with Daemons?)...x points per model

World Eater(A2 Ld10, +1WS, A, Fearless, Furious Charge, maybe FNP?, no bolters and no weapons options but replace every 8th bolt pistol with plasma pistol)...x points per model

 

The Squad may take a Chaos Icon, it functions as a teleporter homer. If the model with the Icon is killed, assume another squad member picked it up.

 

Thus, you can represent any legion, their cheaper initiate cousins/Renegades, but without the restrictions that 3.5 dislikers dread. Just throw this hunk on every infantry unit, include some changes based on unit (ex. Nightlord upgraded Raptors become troops), and the appropriate upgrade possibilities for vehicles (Destroyer, warp fire, bodies strapped to it night lords style etc.) then you're a good ways there.

 

After the above throw in Cultists, Beastmen and the Daemons dex (with the ability to run them alone, so as not to deny anyone anything), add Dark Mechanicum stuff in the vein of Forge World's stuff, fix a few other things (NO insanity rule for the dread in any way shape or form, possessed choose mutation, reasonable point costs on FA choices, usable lords/sorcerers) and you've got everything.

[maverike_prime]

And what do I get in comparison to the guy who just painted his CSMs in boltgun metal? nothing.

You're a fine poster, mav, and I hope you'll take none of this personally, but that particular sentiment drives me up the wall with annoyance. As design philosophies go, I see it as one of the most destructive elements ever introduced into the game of 40K. Central to that idea is the assumption that the background and hobby portions of the game are distinct from the play experience, and that it is necessary to incentivize players into playing an army "correctly." Background and modelling become currency for a transaction between designer and player, and the player community begins to expect a specific reward for doing what should be the bare minimum for participation. Worse, these "fluffy" lists are inevitably just a bland, restrictive sub-set of the original army list's entries, with a few goodies tossed in as a trade-off, straight-jacketing every faction into fighting battles with their chosen gimmick. It narrows the game and the universe to a set of myopically narrow tactical preferences let loose at each other, with depressingly predictable results.

 

No worries, Lex. I'm too lazy to take anything personally. Yeah, that came across totally differently then what I was thinking. That's what I get for posting while I'm working on business homework. Sadly I can't remember exactly what my point was when I was making the post. Oh well. if I remember what the point was I'll post it.

 

um I'm sorry but you are flat wrong with that. The rules that are presented for White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial fists, ect are quit different from Ultramarines.

Um, excuse my obtuseness, but how am I wrong here? Unless I'm radically mistaken, there's no way to gain access to these rules without taking a specific special character, which is my point. These Chapters don't have individual rules; the special characters do. Without Lysander, an "Imperial Fists" army plays the same as any other Codex Marine army, and while I think that's a dumb way to dole out Chapter rules, Space Marine players as a whole don't seem to mind. They certainly haven't gone into the multi-year depressive funk that Chaos players have.

 

Why do people think this is? I have a pretty good theory, m'self.

 

Okay, in hind sight I realize I could have phrased that better. The point I was making, and failed to do so, was that the rules are there to represent those other chapters. Yes, they are tied to those particular characters. Not arguing that point. I'm not exactly a fan of the Special Character = Special Army rules idea, but love it loathe it, it is the current trend in the codexes. Am I going to argue the merits of this system versus other systems of application of special rules? Not here. There are other forums for that.

 

But my point is that the rules exist to play Salamander Space Marines. Weather the individual player chooses to use them is a different question all together.

[Chengar Qordath]

The old dex didn't force you to monol legion... you could mix all the different units if you wanted and you could take units allied to different gods in one dex...

I didn't say it did, I said that a lot of players want to go to a system that forces players to be mono-legion (or at least mono-god).

I can only speak for the B&C but, not at all, the majority is (and has since v4 arrived) been wanting the option back - the option that was taken away by a bad design choice.

I'm all for adding back in the option to make a very fluffy and competitive mono-legion list; far too many options and bits of unique wargear got cut out in the 4th edition codex. However, there does seem to be a vocal minority that is in favor forcing players to play a mono-legion/god set of rules, or at least penalizing them for not doing so by giving all of the legion lists a bunch of extra goodies.

[caboosebe]

I'm all for adding back in the option to make a very fluffy and competitive mono-legion list; far too many options and bits of unique wargear got cut out in the 4th edition codex. However, there does seem to be a vocal minority that is in favor forcing players to play a mono-legion/god set of rules, or at least penalizing them for not doing so by giving all of the legion lists a bunch of extra goodies.

Same here, add mono-legion stuff/rules to the codex, but make a non-mono-legion as balanced as a mono-legion for those who wish to be more "black crusade"-type players. Don't kill those people off too just because you don't like them :P

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I've seen nothing proposed thus far that trumps the complexity of the 3.5 Codex, and the only people that were afraid of that Codex's complexity were the people that didn't play that Codex.

 

Here, here. That was my first ever Codex; the first one I ever cracked open and read, the first one I ever bought, and when I actually picked up other ones (the Eldar and Craftworld Eldar ones, I believe) I was shocked at how simple they were in layout compared to my precious Chaos book.

 

But getting to this whole mono-Legion or not to mono-Legion discussion, the 3.5 Codex did not force you to go mono-Legion or even mono-god. You could have your character unmarked and the whole book was open to you. You could not use the optional Legion rules in the back with a marked character and most of the book was still open to you. I'm not one for pigeon-holing people into specific tactics or methods of army-building; I like options. And because I like options, I want the option to run my 100% Infiltrating Alpha Legion army. I want the option to run a Thousand Sons army -- not a Tzeentch-marked army, I mean an army of nothing but dust-in-armor Thousand Sons -- that can be effective on the tabletop. I also want the option to run something other than Daemon Princes, Obliterators, and Plague Marines and have an army capable of wiping the walls with other folks.

[maverike_prime]

And what do I get in comparison to the guy who just painted his CSMs in boltgun metal? nothing.

You're a fine poster, mav, and I hope you'll take none of this personally, but that particular sentiment drives me up the wall with annoyance. As design philosophies go, I see it as one of the most destructive elements ever introduced into the game of 40K. Central to that idea is the assumption that the background and hobby portions of the game are distinct from the play experience, and that it is necessary to incentivize players into playing an army "correctly." Background and modelling become currency for a transaction between designer and player, and the player community begins to expect a specific reward for doing what should be the bare minimum for participation. Worse, these "fluffy" lists are inevitably just a bland, restrictive sub-set of the original army list's entries, with a few goodies tossed in as a trade-off, straight-jacketing every faction into fighting battles with their chosen gimmick. It narrows the game and the universe to a set of myopically narrow tactical preferences let loose at each other, with depressingly predictable results.

 

damn it! Why do I think of things at 3 in the morning?

 

Anyway. In response to your comments lex. I whole heatedly disagree with the concept that the background and play experience should be separate from one another. If anything, the fluff should dictate how the armies work. The White Scars are a raiding force that has a culture were raised around and on horses. Because of this they are exceptionally good at riding bikes. So how should that translate into the game itself? Allow a White Scar army to take more bike units then a standard Space Marine army and give them a skill bonus/special rule to reflect their ability at riding the bikes.

 

I think we can agree that they've done this with the rules you get with Khan. Now if someone wants to take the standard space marine list and paint them as White Scars, go for it. I'm not saying that if you want to play White Scars you should be required to take a minimum of 20 biker marines. But I do beleive that there should be rules to allow you play in accordance with how that particular army is portrayed in the fluff.

 

Now, having said that, lets look at how well the Chaos Codex accomplishes this.

 

The Iron Warriors are portrayed as siege specialists and being utterly stubborn and resistant to the possibility of being moved from their entrenched positions. To aid in these abilities, the Iron Warriors make use of Servo arms in the effort of building trenches. During their sieges, Iron Warrior employ considerable amounts of ordnance to shell the enemy into submission or obliteration. They have a... ongoing understanding with the Obliterator cults. The exact details of which are unclear, but the Iron Warriors tend to make use of more obliterates then other war bands.

 

So, fluff characteristics will be green, while the options to accomplish this in game will be in red.

Iron Warriors are Stubborn

-Hmm, don't see anything to make Chaos Marines that are painted boltgun metal any more likely to not run when the going gets tough then CSMs with blue armor and lightning bolts.

 

Iron Warriors make use of Servo Arms to reinforce their fortifications

-Well, the Aspiring champions can take Power Fists. I guess that can kinda count as a servo arm, at least in terms of attacks.

 

Iron Warriors use more obliterators then other Chaos Warbands

-hmm... Any and every chaos army can take up to 9 obliterators. So as far as the game goes, everyone can use the same number of Obliterators.

 

Iron Warriors use a lot of Ordnance in their opening sieges.

-Well you can take a trio of Defilers... they're sort of in the category of ordnance. And there's always the option of a trio of Vindicators. Lord knows anything that 3 Vindicators decide they don't like isn't going to survive the day. But they're very short range. Not really sure how this lines up with the whole siege idea.

 

I was going to go on and do the same break down for the Night Lords, and Alpha Legion but time just isn't on my side tonight. It's already 3:45 in the morning and I have a full day ahead of me. I'll have to come back to this.

[caboosebe]

damn it! Why do I think of things at 3 in the morning?

 

Anyway. In response to your comments lex. I whole heatedly disagree with the concept that the background and play experience should be separate from one another. If anything, the fluff should dictate how the armies work. The White Scars are a raiding force that has a culture were raised around and on horses. Because of this they are exceptionally good at riding bikes. So how should that translate into the game itself? Allow a White Scar army to take more bike units then a standard Space Marine army and give them a skill bonus/special rule to reflect their ability at riding the bikes.

 

I think we can agree that they've done this with the rules you get with Khan. Now if someone wants to take the standard space marine list and paint them as White Scars, go for it. I'm not saying that if you want to play White Scars you should be required to take a minimum of 20 biker marines. But I do beleive that there should be rules to allow you play in accordance with how that particular army is portrayed in the fluff.

 

Now, having said that, lets look at how well the Chaos Codex accomplishes this.

 

The Iron Warriors are portrayed as siege specialists and being utterly stubborn and resistant to the possibility of being moved from their entrenched positions. To aid in these abilities, the Iron Warriors make use of Servo arms in the effort of building trenches. During their sieges, Iron Warrior employ considerable amounts of ordnance to shell the enemy into submission or obliteration. They have a... ongoing understanding with the Obliterator cults. The exact details of which are unclear, but the Iron Warriors tend to make use of more obliterates then other war bands.

 

So, fluff characteristics will be green, while the options to accomplish this in game will be in red.

Iron Warriors are Stubborn

-Hmm, don't see anything to make Chaos Marines that are painted boltgun metal any more likely to not run when the going gets tough then CSMs with blue armor and lightning bolts.

 

Iron Warriors make use of Servo Arms to reinforce their fortifications

-Well, the Aspiring champions can take Power Fists. I guess that can kinda count as a servo arm, at least in terms of attacks.

 

Iron Warriors use more obliterators then other Chaos Warbands

-hmm... Any and every chaos army can take up to 9 obliterators. So as far as the game goes, everyone can use the same number of Obliterators.

 

Iron Warriors use a lot of Ordnance in their opening sieges.

-Well you can take a trio of Defilers... they're sort of in the category of ordnance. And there's always the option of a trio of Vindicators. Lord knows anything that 3 Vindicators decide they don't like isn't going to survive the day. But they're very short range. Not really sure how this lines up with the whole siege idea.

I think what Lexington is trying to say is that he doesn't want a dex that obligates you to take more obliterators, have Ordnance to win a game. More like: "I just love Iron Warriors, I love their colors, I love their style. But for this game I would like to attack head on for ones, I don't want to sit back and have Ordnance and Obliterators kill evrything in shooting fases, I want to have some assault fases. Now to make it a bit fluffy, I'm going to say that the battle is for a piece of technology to make better Siege-craft, but by bombarding the enemy, it may get destroyed, so I'll have to use hand to hand combat.

 

Now if we follow your point of view, and I'm not saying it's wrong, the player in question would have to create a 'losing' list because he isn't playing in Iron Warrior style at that moment.

Lexington wants an open mind to all this. Creativity is a thing that makes Warhammer so good. Now I know fluff is important, well atleast it's for me, but Astartes, Chaos or Loyalist are known for their flexability.

Your point, and again, it's not just plain wrong, limit's people actions, sure it's fluffy and all, but people just don't like to be forced to do things without giving it a personal toutch. Best example: Current codex. Why do people hate it? Because they are forced to take always the same units/options to make it a bit competitive.

 

Well, that what I think Lexington was trying to say, could be wrong ofcourse.

[Hellios]

Also I think you will find lots of codices have units that are restricted 0-1... they just call it unique now... mainly special characters... but not just special characters...

Funny, I can't think of anything other than special characters (who really don't count) in any 5th edition codex that uses 0-1 limits. I suppose you could stretch it to count the Death Company, but even they're very different from the old 0-1 rule in 3rd edition codices.

 

I think the Avatar of Khaine has the limitation... I've certainly never seen two outside of Apocalypse... and fluffwise more than one exists. Thats just off the top of my head as an Eldar player.

 

@Caboose... but if you don't want to sit back and shell people with Iron Warriors... I'm pretty sure the old Iron warriors allowed you to take more heavy support (and more choices) and oblits (elites) if you wanted... Not Iron warriors must take 4 tanks and 9 oblits.

 

I think say the Deathguard list would be a better example where you could only take a limited number of rhinos... However that being said you could make a nurgle list that wasn't deathguard with plague marines in it and while you didn't get the deathguard rewards you also didn't lose the options for rhinos... so the thing is the choice was there...

 

If we go with the line of thinking that fluf and the game do not relate then eldar and space marines should use the same rules.

[caboosebe]

Never said I don't like it Helios, I just thought to clear the argument between Lexington and Malverike Prime. And 'general' options are good, like more heavy support. But they way I see it, and I could be seeing it wrong, is that Malverike doesn't want 'general' options, but he wants that there are rules like 'If you play Iron Warriors, you are forced to stay behind the deployment zone till you destroyed half of the enemy units'

 

this quote makes me think so:

. If anything, the fluff should dictate how the armies work

Now again, I could be reading it wrong, or he could have wanted to explain it in a diffrent way, if that is the case, I'm sorry, but my point is that hard coded fluff rules make a game less enjoyable for players. Don't get me wrong, I love fluff. I'm insane enough to make all 9 legions, even buying and painting 5 Daemon princes to have evry mark covered.

All I want to say is that even though people like fluff and such, don't be too specific in you're 'I want this'. Think about the bigger picture, be more 'general', think about evry Chaos fan, mono-legion or otherwise ^_^

 

If I misinterpreted this all, accept my apologies and ignore the post :P