Chaos losing it's allure - The day the fluff died

[Shas'o R'Vre]

Hey guys,

 

Just a quick topic I thought I'd share with you all, and an issue that I'm really not sure how to address.

 

I played a tag-team game last night with some friends at the local gaming club, two chaos players, one grey knights/vanilla marine tag-team, one force organisation chart, 1000pts per player. To avoid taking a rinse-and-repeat Chaos list, we decided to go for a more fluff-motivated list, playing to our own army backstories. As an Iron Warror, I took plenty of Obliterators and some Chaos/Plague Marines and a Daemon Prince, whilst my team-mate tooled up his renegades with a Nurgle Lord, a unit of Raptors, some Chosen, a Vindicator and a 2x DCCW Dread. Not the most hardcore of lists, but that's not the point of the topic. Whilst the game was very hard fought and fun (ended in a draw, which was narrowly pulled back from a loss by the Dread Blood Frenzying on the last turn, pelting a full 15", tearing up a unit of Sternguard and eating a Chapter Master alive.), I felt a forboding feeling that I have found more and more common as I face the newer Codeces.

 

Our Codex units are BORING.

 

As I watched the Space Marines stand firm against the tide of heretics, providing fire support to the Grey Knights as they strode heroically into battle against daemon and blasphemer alike, my units began to feel very plain. My Chaos Marines played the same as my Plague Marines, my Oblits didn't feel like the hulking monstrocities they should, my Daemon Prince just shuffled around, not fiercely jumping into combat with my foes. The Raptors went off like a damp squib and the Chaos Lord felt like an ordinary Sergeant when he managed to poke himself in the eye with his scythe. The only unit that felt remotely like it should was the timely rage of the Dreadnought, and even then it just felt like he woke up and decided to fight, rather than working himself up into a frenzy.

 

So, my point is that our units don't FEEL quite as great as other units do. They don't really have rules accurately representing their fluff portrayals. Does anyone else find this, and how do you counter it?

[Pavement Artist]

Of course. It's one of the downsides of being the bastard child of GW's soon abandoned design philosophy where they tried to trim the fat in terms of special rules. I suppose it wouldnt sting as much if they stuck with it but now we have many 5th edition codices that are full of flavour and replete with fluffy and quirky rules and units.

 

It's a shame that Chaos- the most diverse element with in the 40k universe, currently has one of the blandest books. Im confident it will be remedied when they're updated however.

[AoC]

I counter it not playing the game ;) Work great.

 

So yeah, our units don't feel like powerful marines that traded their very soul for immense power. Rather like band of losers who lost their souls not gaining anything. I would say that i wait for new codex, but given GW record i believe it will be ton of crap and awful internal balance.

[Dan The Deamon]

You've stumbled upon what it means to be a true 5th Ed. chaos player. Whether the chips are up, down, or inside out, there's really nothing fun about playing with shoddy rules, no fluff, and weak flavor. I try and play a pretty themed, fluffy legion list mixing Night Lords and some Alpha Legion detachments. I've gone through hoops building the units to complement each other in fluff, and in game, and there is definitely a fleeting feeling that the army doesn't "feel" like anything other than stat-lines.

 

The wolves have counter attack, the angels have the thirst, and all of the plain marines still have scoring sternguard, flamethrower armies, stubborn yellow guys, and tactical geniuses. Not to mention the war gear capabilities to tailor a feel or theme to a squad independent of paint scheme.

 

I will give hugs to those who need it.

[minigun762]

If you have plenty of models and/or money, you can always start making the random super theme lists. Things like 3 Dreadnoughts, tons of spawns, MSUs of Noise Marines with Doom Siren Champs etc but then again you're really just being silly at that point.

 

I find myself making up lists for some of the new armies out there every few days, just to use some different choices. Hell I do it just to feel like I have a choice in what I can field. For example, right now I'm thinking about making a IG army that I could use as a Chaos merc army to support my CSMs in Apocalypse games and I'm actually overwhelmed by the number of options available.

[Larkyn]

Wait...ANOTHER thread about how bad the Chaos Codex is? Whoa. Haven't seen one of these in a while. :(

 

Chaos is bad, true, but it could be worse. At least we're better than Necrons.

[Dràyhèn]

Chaos is bad, true, but it could be worse. At least we're better than Necrons.

I find Necrons far more appealing to play than our current Chaos purely because the feel is there. I can get the vibe while fielding them - not so with Chaos.

[Kristoff]

Funny, I'm starting Chaos Marines because I get that feeling with my Tau.

 

But then, I've had a Cursed Chapter story sitting in my head for over a year now that REALLY wants to get out. And I really hate being a band-wagoner.

[Warsmith Aznable]

The statlines and special rules might be boring, but I'm working very hard on my warband's theme and back story to keep things interesting. You get out of the game what you put into it, so while I'm as frustrated by the codex as the next person the blame can't lay 100% with the book. Come up with a theme, name your characters, give them personalities, goals and objectives, so that even if you're not winning straightforward tourney style point victories you have a running narrative to keep you entertained. I play the greatest majority of my games against one friend, and we have lots of fun with our named units and building rivalries between lists.

 

For instance: My second Rhino is named "Ulfknacker" and has an arm modeled into the treads. His Space Wolf army maneuvered through a city fight and managed to face all my units separately, so I couldn't flood him with assaults all at once to overpower his ridiculous saves. One particular character caused me the most grief by single-handed killing most of my stuff, including my Daemon Prince. My Chaos Lord ate up an entire pack of his Space Wolf scouts but then lost a fight with his own Daemon Weapon when it really mattered. So the Space Wolves are sauntering away in the last turn of the game, with my only remaining combat units being Heavy Support armor that happens to be missing tracks and legs on the other side of the table. Out of frustration I send my last Rhino, who had been ignored for actual threats throughout the game, charging at his remaining Wolves. Instead of just getting out of the way he decides to make a point and kill it, but flubs his Death or Glory! roll with the very same character that had been giving me pain. So I run down his MVP with a Rhino on the last turn of the game! So now that Rhino has a name and fun story, the arm will be painted Space Wolf grey and I'm going to put a blood smear on the front of the Rhino to recall this past glory forever.

 

He wins most of the time, but I'm still having a lot of fun with it. It's just a game, and it's only what you make it. The rules can make it hard to win, but they can't make it impossible to enjoy your faction of choice if you don't want it to.

[Mr. Sandbot]

The statlines and special rules might be boring, but I'm working very hard on my warband's theme and back story to keep things interesting. You get out of the game what you put into it, so while I'm as frustrated by the codex as the next person the blame can't lay 100% with the book. Come up with a theme, name your characters, give them personalities, goals and objectives, so that even if you're not winning straightforward tourney style point victories you have a running narrative to keep you entertained. I play the greatest majority of my games against one friend, and we have lots of fun with our named units and building rivalries between lists.

 

For instance: My second Rhino is named "Ulfknacker" and has an arm modeled into the treads. His Space Wolf army maneuvered through a city fight and managed to face all my units separately, so I couldn't flood him with assaults all at once to overpower his ridiculous saves. One particular character caused me the most grief by single-handed killing most of my stuff, including my Daemon Prince. My Chaos Lord ate up an entire pack of his Space Wolf scouts but then lost a fight with his own Daemon Weapon when it really mattered. So the Space Wolves are sauntering away in the last turn of the game, with my only remaining combat units being Heavy Support armor that happens to be missing tracks and legs on the other side of the table. Out of frustration I send my last Rhino, who had been ignored for actual threats throughout the game, charging at his remaining Wolves. Instead of just getting out of the way he decides to make a point and kill it, but flubs his Death or Glory! roll with the very same character that had been giving me pain. So I run down his MVP with a Rhino on the last turn of the game! So now that Rhino has a name and fun story, the arm will be painted Space Wolf grey and I'm going to put a blood smear on the front of the Rhino to recall this past glory forever.

 

He wins most of the time, but I'm still having a lot of fun with it. It's just a game, and it's only what you make it. The rules can make it hard to win, but they can't make it impossible to enjoy your faction of choice if you don't want it to.

 

While I do agree that something like that makes it more fun (My warband currently have a rivalry going with my friend's black templar), the problem here is that even playing the game as chaos doesn't feel interesting or chaotic enough.

IG can issue commands to one another, GK have the aegis and their other crazy psychic powers, and vanilla marines have more fun variations to their army than chaos does. The only thing that makes our army feel chaotic is when something goes wrong, like a Lord smacking himself with his weapon or one of our dreadnoughts going mad and either eating a chapter master or lighting up one of our own squads to the point where they might as well be Christmas trees.

 

The fluff in this dex is dead.

[nurglez]

indeed it is. When I play chaos I play a nurgle only force, and man, is that boring. The only troops I allow myself to take are plague marines, I only let myself take 1 daemon prince, and then, well, what else is there to choose from? vehicles, right. I stopped using lords because my lord got promoted to a daemon prince ages ago, If I want to play different chaos I've started mixing it up a bit and taking Abaddon or some landraiders or something, but its still just not fun.

 

I love my nurgle force, and I play well with it, but, I know exactly how it works, and its just so boring. Recently I moved into where I live so have much more disposable income then before, so I started a renegade logan wing army, and that is just so damn fun. Different decent but "fluffy" lists that I have made play differently and are fun, FUN while able to win (winning is second to fun, else I'd stick with my nurgle force, got a better win/loss ratio with them).

 

I've actually just ordered 1500 points of Grey Knights too (well, 15 termies 2 dread knights and draigo :) ) because I really like the feel of small elite armies, but chaos just cant do that for me any more.

[Zeller]

Without proper rules to represent my WB and the old "seen it all" that I expect of each of my marines I feel like I'm playing with a band of pirates in power armor who have taken the armed to da teef mentality from the Black Orcs. There's a reason the army sees maybe 1 game for every 15 or so BA games.

[Warsmith Aznable]

Shas'O R'Vre started this thread with the question, "Does anyone else find this, and how do you counter it? " in regards to how the current codex sucks at representing the established fluff. So it's not just another "the current codex sucks" thread, but how to deal with it constructively. I gave my answer of delving deeper into your particular warband's identity and personality. Other people are using counts-as codices all the time. Some people even commit the heresy of writing their own codices or use collaborative efforts downloaded from the internet, something that I think is great.

 

I want a better codex to be published as much as the next guy, believe me when I say that, but I'm not going to abandon the memory of my beloved Warmaster and his vision of a perfect Galaxy. I have multiple lists for my Chaos Marines. Some of them are basic and straightforward of the "this is really the only competitive thing to do with this codex" variety. Others are of the "I probably won't win with this but I like the models and the fluff behind it". Another one is "I totally made this unit up that allows me to do this and my friend looked at it and said he didn't mind".

 

That's how I constructively deal with it. The fluff isn't dead, the current codex just straightjackets it. The fluff is still there, and we are ultimately responsible for our own good time. We are not beholden to the ideas of anyone else except who we have agreed to play with. So if the current codex straightjackets it, take off the straightjacket. Play a 3.5 list. Or make up your own units. Work with your gaming partners to find something that is playable and everyone is happy with.

 

I remind myself why I liked Chaos Marines to begin with, why I bought the Chaos Marine codex over any other army's. Because when I did I had no idea how they compared with one another, or even older versions of itself, I just knew I hated the Imperium and all it stood for. And I wait for another codex, convinced that the direction that they've taken with the most recent codices means that the next Chaos Marine codex will be balls to the wall awesome.

 

And I work on my side projects, because nothing makes you forget the troubles of your 4th edition army like building your 3rd edition army...

[Candleshoes]

Does anyone else find this, and how do you counter it?

 

I agree the allure of the codex is dulling. I am a big fan of using items and options that make an army unique amongst it's peers and unfortunately, Chaos (as well as Dark Angels) never saw that translation from fluff to rules manifest as fully as it could have.

 

How to counter it? As long as you are playing with (and painting) the army you love the most, there is no reason you can't use other rules to represent what you like, to ensure you have more fun with it. Some days I like the simplicity of the Chaos book, even when it isn't competetive.... I love the simple, non effectual fact CSM's have bolters/bp/ccw. Model wise, I have always made the most of this and truly add character to my Legionaries. Does this mean they compete with other top troops? No. However, there are days where the mileage really shows in the book, and I feel like I want to use "real" psychic powers, or a "real" land raider, or "real" cultists (scouts), or a rapid insertion vehicle (stormraven), or drop-pods (heaven forbid ....), or non-drooling dreads, or ... well, you get the idea. All of us have our own interpretations with the rules/dex in combination with our chosen Legion or warband ... and for the ones who don't submit to the gods, certainly play as second class marines. That is fine, I just remind myself one day vengeance will occur swiftly like the Grinch who stole Christmas ... po po to the who's!

 

I also read a lot of fluff, BL, HH work to remind myself the idea of the whole, is much greater than what we have infront of us. I also keep in mind that as we get more information about the past Legion structure, effective game ideas are more likely to develop in our future book. The longer we wait, the better it should hopefully be.

[c-wrex]

Shas'O R'Vre started this thread with the question, "Does anyone else find this, and how do you counter it? " in regards to how the current codex sucks at representing the established fluff. So it's not just another "the current codex sucks" thread, but how to deal with it constructively. I gave my answer of delving deeper into your particular warband's identity and personality. Other people are using counts-as codices all the time. Some people even commit the heresy of writing their own codices or use collaborative efforts downloaded from the internet, something that I think is great.

 

I want a better codex to be published as much as the next guy, believe me when I say that, but I'm not going to abandon the memory of my beloved Warmaster and his vision of a perfect Galaxy. I have multiple lists for my Chaos Marines. Some of them are basic and straightforward of the "this is really the only competitive thing to do with this codex" variety. Others are of the "I probably won't win with this but I like the models and the fluff behind it". Another one is "I totally made this unit up that allows me to do this and my friend looked at it and said he didn't mind".

 

That's how I constructively deal with it. The fluff isn't dead, the current codex just straightjackets it. The fluff is still there, and we are ultimately responsible for our own good time. We are not beholden to the ideas of anyone else except who we have agreed to play with. So if the current codex straightjackets it, take off the straightjacket. Play a 3.5 list. Or make up your own units. Work with your gaming partners to find something that is playable and everyone is happy with.

 

I remind myself why I liked Chaos Marines to begin with, why I bought the Chaos Marine codex over any other army's. Because when I did I had no idea how they compared with one another, or even older versions of itself, I just knew I hated the Imperium and all it stood for. And I wait for another codex, convinced that the direction that they've taken with the most recent codices means that the next Chaos Marine codex will be balls to the wall awesome.

 

And I work on my side projects, because nothing makes you forget the troubles of your 4th edition army like building your 3rd edition army...

 

I don't usually do big quotes, but this one is incredible. Awesome and true. You sir, are a gamer!

 

May I sig a bit of it? Specifically:

We are ultimately responsible for our own good time. We are not beholden to the ideas of anyone else except who we have agreed to play with.

[the jeske]

We are not beholden to the ideas of anyone else except who we have agreed to play with.

you must realy play in a small circle of people for that to work , anything that is 20+ would need to enforce rules else it would fall apart.

 

IMO there is two things you can do . If your not playing chaos as a gamer , but your more in to the painting/converting stuff , do that dont worry about list legality [you probably dont play offten anyway] . If your a gamer change the dex or the system you play . chaos sucks hard and there is nothing you can do about it .

 

for sunday gamers that play 2-3 games a week it doesnt matter , the burn out before they realy check that most of the stuff in the dex doesnt work takes more time then an avarge w40k player plays the game . It only realy hits the vets [who know what they lost] and gamers that play a lot . After playing a NM army in tournaments [which as everyone knows dont happen every 2 days] , I can say that even if someone tried to switch to NM/1ksons it doesnt help in the long run . Not to mention the fact that for a lot of people NM or 1ksons are still a "different" army , even if it isnt put in the rules of the dex.

[Mr. Sandbot]

Does anyone else find this, and how do you counter it?

 

I agree the allure of the codex is dulling. I am a big fan of using items and options that make an army unique amongst it's peers and unfortunately, Chaos (as well as Dark Angels) never saw that translation from fluff to rules manifest as fully as it could have.

 

How to counter it? As long as you are playing with (and painting) the army you love the most, there is no reason you can't use other rules to represent what you like, to ensure you have more fun with it. Some days I like the simplicity of the Chaos book, even when it isn't competetive.... I love the simple, non effectual fact CSM's have bolters/bp/ccw. Model wise, I have always made the most of this and truly add character to my Legionaries. Does this mean they compete with other top troops? No. However, there are days where the mileage really shows in the book, and I feel like I want to use "real" psychic powers, or a "real" land raider, or "real" cultists (scouts), or a rapid insertion vehicle (stormraven), or drop-pods (heaven forbid ....), or non-drooling dreads, or ... well, you get the idea. All of us have our own interpretations with the rules/dex in combination with our chosen Legion or warband ... and for the ones who don't submit to the gods, certainly play as second class marines. That is fine, I just remind myself one day vengeance will occur swiftly like the Grinch who stole Christmas ... po po to the who's!

 

I also read a lot of fluff, BL, HH work to remind myself the idea of the whole, is much greater than what we have infront of us. I also keep in mind that as we get more information about the past Legion structure, effective game ideas are more likely to develop in our future book. The longer we wait, the better it should hopefully be.

 

Well in direct response to the thread then, I do believe you have the right idea in having a rivalry with a friend, or even simply making campaigns that weave a story around your warband. An example would be after a battle you add a few more things to your MVPs or troops you think you can make a story with.

[Lord_Caerolion]

While having a theme is all well and good, the fact remains that once you look past the theme, my Night Lords Chaos Lord is simply a lord with a power weapon. Anything daemonic goes against his theme, and I'm not changing it because I've had the story of this guy since I started playing Chaos, really. The problem especially comes from the fact that in nearly every other Codex they can go "this is my theme, so I've focussed on these units, and taken this HQ and loadout to further that theme". I get "this is my theme, so I'm limited to less than half of the list and equipment. I get to spam basic CSM, and that's about it", despite that not actually being the theme of my army. My Marines are supposed to be a small, elite band that shuns everything to do with Chaos. To represent this... I lose access to Marks, Cult units, Icons, daemons, obliterators, defilers, daemon weapons, possessed... pretty much everything that makes the current list unique. Previously, I had Veteran Skills to create my theme, and that worked perfectly.

Now... I've continued my theme in a different direction, and use the Tyrants Legion list. It feels much, much more like my army than what the Chaos list can do.

[Thradok]

Odd. Thinking back, I was pretty much happy with CSM until I came to these forums and started hearing about what lists were/were not competitive, and much more importantly what was lost from the previous codex. I'm not sure what to make of that.

[Warsmith Aznable]

May I sig a bit of it? Specifically:

We are ultimately responsible for our own good time. We are not beholden to the ideas of anyone else except who we have agreed to play with.

 

Of course!

 

For competitive gamers who don't want to go the DIY route with the main game there's Apocalypse, Imperial Armour lists, or Spearhead formations. Or Killzone, which is a fun set of alternate rules for very small skirmishes, though it's not an official publication. Those are also ways to deal with the codex being not good.

[caboosebe]

How do I counter it? Bit the same way as -Max- making my own story behind it. But in the insane way of making a Black Crusade, and have every damn legion in there, (even if the units a considered bad) like havocks Iron Warriors, possessed Word Bearers, Lucius, Abbadon, Khârn, Typhus and so on.

I know most people don't like the 'working together', and I understand. Playing normal games, I try to make my models as mono-legion as I can.

As the only Chaos player in the club, (wich normally makes you give up faster on your army) I enjoy making fun of other legions by creating that wich can't stand. I'm making a fallen Dark Angels squad, and a Skyrar's Dark Wolves as traitor wolves (not going into discussion if traitor space wolves exist or not)

And as a mini side project, I'm painting up some star wars / warhammer squad, with a black Darth vader Champion with lightsaber/powersword and White and Black stormtroopers.

 

 

All in all, my ultimate goal is to play an apocalypse, where I have every God Daemons, Traitor Guards man, and all my Legions and renegades on the field. I don't care that I can't take super heavies and get blown to bits in the first round. I just want the following to happen:

-These are my titans, and a few squads, where are yours?

-Oh, I have a Black Crusade, it's on that table ... and that one ... oh, and on that one too

 

FOR CHAOS!

[Abyssel]

Odd. Thinking back, I was pretty much happy with CSM until I came to these forums and started hearing about what lists were/were not competitive, and much more importantly what was lost from the previous codex. I'm not sure what to make of that.

I will have to agree with the fact that I am now the same.

I use to be ignorant and happy with CSM's..use to have my Berzerkers who would be vomited forth from a land raider with Khârn and rip someone a new one.

Then I lost interest in zerkies..

switched to PM's..

and it has been a steady decline sense I came onto this forum. It has opened my eyes to the fact that "wow holy crap everything is bland in this book". I use to take all special characters, mainly Khârn and Typhus.

 

Now its always 2 Daemon Princes.. Read all the special character fluff, every one else I've kind of disregarded. It's just "eh" to me... I like my CSM army, but they just feel like a stat line. I envy my friend who plays Black Templar and has fun with it, both fluff wise and tabletop wise.

[the jeske]

Odd. Thinking back, I was pretty much happy with CSM until I came to these forums and started hearing about what lists were/were not competitive, and much more importantly what was lost from the previous codex. I'm not sure what to make of that.

 

well i see it this way . if you tested the dex or even dont tested but just played . you would have gone through all options in the dex and came to the same conclusions as everyone else [dp only viable hq, oblits best support , pms are golden etc etc]. it would probably take you more time then reading the forums , but the out come would have been the same . What writing reviews about the dex did was to save you money . You didnt go and buy 24 bikes or 30 possessed .

 

And seeing the builds of the past [top tier or just for fluff. doesnt matter as long as the game play is different] aint bad too , at least you know it is not people telling you crazy stuff that the gav dex sucks .

[Master of fact]

Do what i do, if you play with friends use the last dex, i do it from time to time. I still play current dex at events though.

[Brother Nihm]

Odd. Thinking back, I was pretty much happy with CSM until I came to these forums and started hearing about what lists were/were not competitive, and much more importantly what was lost from the previous codex. I'm not sure what to make of that.

One who has but tasted oatmeal all his life know not the taste of heaven. Or some such nonsense.. :)

 

As for dead fluff, I mostly try to ignore it by playing player run campaigns. The tournament-goer in me dies a little every time I attend one though.