Have Chaos Space Marines gone 2-D?

[Brother Nihm]

A thousand son is my avatar because I play TS as well as night lords and world eaters.

A cruel person would say that you are playing 3xBlack Legion in TS, Night Lord and World Eater colours. :D

 

A lot of valid points have been raised for both sides of the main argument, yet one fact remains, Chaos Marines used to possess a dark majesty with diverse options, flavour and a host of lists to choose from. Fluffy lists could be competitive and so could hybrid-lists. If I want to be competitive now I am forced to use less than half of the units in the book, and some of them are arguably not very representative of the Night Lords. To give an example of list-diversity from back then, with an average of 4 games per week back in 2nd ed, I never saw the same Chaos army twice for the first two years. There were red-tide becrzerker lists, Deathguard sloggers with and without daemon support, Noise Marine cults, Thousand Son cabals, alpha legion cultist armies, Chosen focused lists, biker lists, daemon-bombing biker lists, Siren lists, Raptor Cults (my own and another guy's :o), the infamous Obliterator/Basilisk IW lists, the list goes on and on and on. All the way up to 2007 I kept seeing new and unique chaos armies on a regular basis. Today I see a variation of the same 2-3 lists and worst of all, newer players know very little fluff, because there is very little in the single book we have, and out of all the relatively recent (meaning since 2007) BL additions, very few books managed to capture the CSM fluff of old or expand upon it in any meaningful way. Those additions that did are still not enough as the material is never used or represented in the Codex..

 

Themed lists,

Most lists are the same now, fluff is missing, mangled or downright stupid (hakanor's reavers and the scourged), thus setting the bar low for newer players. An example: in what little fluff there is in the book, CSM are portrayed as mindless killers and whiny runts, stereo-typical hollywood'esque villains. Now if you have access to it, take a look at the size of the 2nd ed. codex and compare it with the current one, hell, look at the Slaves to Darkness and Lost and the Damned books and anyone will see that a lot of fluff is missing. Now crack the book open and read, and prepare yourself to be amazed at how strongly themed everything is.

Granted, 3rd ed. was light on fluff but it still had more focused fluff than the newest codex (wow, Huron stole a cruiser and Abaddon did nothing) and that book was only there for a short time.

 

Now I do disagree with most people wanting Legions Legions Legions. Some people, like myself used to be Legion players and we feel cheated of options, and we will most likely complain about that until the day we get our Legions back. We're more vocal than newer hobbyists I guess.

Please note that I am not talking about the 3.5 ed./IA Legions, but from 2nd ed. and up until now.

 

As for the Renegades vs. Legions, vs warbands thing,

What we have is a test codex that is half an edition behind - delegating us to be a lower-tier codex than previously (we're not the 'Crons, thank the dark gods), overall I'd rate our power level at medium to high and many tournament reports show the same, so the main issues are not with our rules, as such. There are books out there more in need of a rules update. We however are stuck with a book that tries to represent two factions, Legions and Renegades, with the emphasis being placed on Renegades and it fails at both.

Where are all the renegade options, as surely the organizational structure of such a force would be vastly different than say a Legion which is already established in The Eye of Terror?

 

See what grinds most people is that they would like to have the option to do both a Legion force, and a Renegade force, and more - really. To have options that allow a player to field a force with a strong theme, character, and feel, while still being competitive. They don't have those options anymore.

 

Oh dear, I'm rambling again.

Yes I agree that CSM have become two-dimensional and I hope that the old fluff is brought back, improved and updated, along with rules and options that represent that fluff well.

 

 

*runs off to kill an Imperial Guardsman*

[KaosRaptor]

Oh dear, I'm rambling again.

Who cares about that man, you certainly covered all the points well.

What I really, REALLY don't understand about this book is what it's trying to represent. Sure, it may try to cover Renegades/Warbands with a small smattering of Legions, but how exactly does it do that? Sure, Huron and his Red Corsairs look like the up-and-coming Abaddon, and renegades may not have access to the powers of the warp like some of the Legions, i.e Thousand Sons and Word Bearers (here's looking at you, generic Daemons :) ). But then, it gets so many other things just plain wrong.

 

If you want to cover Renegades, why make the Black Legion the focus of the book, and somehow forget about Abaddon? If you want to cover Renegades, why give them access to Pre-Heresey Wargear (Reaper Autocannons) and yet make them forget how to use Assault Cannons, Attack Bikes, Land Speeders and the like? If you want to cover Renegades, why even give them Sorcerers if they can somehow have a Daemon Prince (or two!) anyway?

The fluff behind the forces at your disposal is contradictory in so many ways, and manages to represent neither a force of newly-turned Renegades, nor any of the Legions of old well at all (except the Black Legion of course, kinda). And then there are the rules themselves...but I won't get started on that, it's not my place, and I'm beginning to ramble.

 

Chaos just isn't what it used to be. It lacks any sort of flavour, cohesion, or accurate direction for the fluff to be driven towards, and there is no development of any sort of character within the force, except a slight development of Huron's forces (he captured a ship, whoo!). So yeah, Chaos is very 2D right now, and isn't the malevolent force bringing the galaxy to it's knees like it should be.

[Prot]

The problem for me, as a person who doesnt play chaos, is alot of the new kids coming in who dont know jack or diddly about the fluff for the faction theyre playing. They dont really know anything about the legions, they think slaanesh and khorne are BFFs, and theyre pretty sure that even a SM adorned with a hundred symbols of the blood god is nothing without a standard bearer nearby. Theyve never heard of furies, and theyre pretty sure that chosen arent all that impressive, even compared to regular troops- so what kind of honor is it really?

 

Some of them seem to know something, somewhere, is lacking. The ones that truely disturb me are the ones who think the fluff fully fleshed out, and that the stories of older gamers are just a bunch of hogswash.

Oh man, that just summed up everything about how I feel.

For me that also includes the new players who has only read Soul Hunter etc.

 

Oh I know where this is coming from! lol

 

I think it's an interesting topic, but too complicated to really take apart. I think the OP is right, but so is Grey Mage. That is to say 'recent' explanations of why Chaos? Are very thin, and full of short term motivations, and stupidity.

 

However, let's look back at WHY the individual Legions left.... this is where the beef is!

 

For example Iron Warriors. You might think Iron Warriors are flawed from the get go, but how much of their anti-old man in the wheel chair is fueled by Chaos? I see it as very, very little! Iron Warriors were tasked with some of the most arduous, mind numbing trench work. Gutting worlds that no one wanted to deal with.... While the Imperial Fists got the glory. Was Perturabo every fully trusted? Was he ever really offered a seat at the Big E's inner table? Who knows for sure, but I'm guessing not.

 

The Iron Warriors did tasks no one wanted, and quietly went on and did the next one, and the next one... They MAY have had some situations ignited or 'assisted' by chaos, like their homeworld going all AWOL.

 

At the end of the day, I don't think they were buying into the 'vision' anymore. They did not see the current political regime as a pure thing. They also felt slighted, and largely relegated to a very undesirable role. Who can't identify with that?

 

We could write up a huge mini article for each Legion like this, and maybe only a handful would have 'allegiance to chaos' as a top 3 motivator for leaving the Big E. Maybe Chaos manipulated some of these happenings, but the underlying reasons are usually far more complex, and left completely out of the typical current fiction and/or background.

[Prot]

As for the Renegades vs. Legions, vs warbands thing,

What we have is a test codex that is half an edition behind - delegating us to be a lower-tier codex than previously (we're not the 'Crons, thank the dark gods), overall I'd rate our power level at medium to high and many tournament reports show the same, so the main issues are not with our rules, as such. There are books out there more in need of a rules update. We however are stuck with a book that tries to represent two factions, Legions and Renegades, with the emphasis being placed on Renegades and it fails at both.

Where are all the renegade options, as surely the organizational structure of such a force would be vastly different than say a Legion which is already established in The Eye of Terror?

 

I quoted this in a different post because I think it's a different topic really, and really, really important to emphasize.

 

There are some people that believe you can have Renegades and Legions working out of the same "ruleset". I don't agree. I think a Renegade force can be VERY powerful indeed, but it will NOT operate the same, or have the same hierarchy, age, association with Chaos or experiences that a 'historic Legion' does.

 

The codex astartes is where most marines operate out of. Right there is a small but important FACT that came about after the heresy thanks to the royal blue boyscout himself. Until then Legions ran around with IMMENSE armies of all different types at their disposal. Iron Warriors with Titans? Sure, but it's much deeper than that.... and it goes beyond the Codex Astartes.

 

I would identify something that is lost right now: Historic Legions. To me these are Legions that operated pre Codex-Astartes, and have been out of the Imperium for an immense amount of time. They have established a way of life for themselves over thousands of years, leveraging tactics, wargear, weapons, bases, navy units, air craft, etc, that largely don't exist anymore, or evolved over that time frame.

 

"Renegades" (depending on era) are going to have different advantages and disadvantages. I'm not just talking about 'Should Red Corsairs have land speeders while Thousand Sons cannot?"

 

These two 'types' can't be given the same treatment. Sorry. Unless you completely mangle the established history and background, and completely disrespect all that's out there from the true era of the Heresy, you can't do it.

 

There is an in between. Can a sizable company of fed up 'Defector Marines' join the Black Legion? Why not?

 

But in the end I strongly believe Legions, and Renegades are two distinct and different armies within 'Chaos' that share 'similarities' at best, but cannot be treated with the same brush stroke of rule sets.

[McNs]

I know this probably going to get me lynched here, but what if the yet-to-be made CSM 'dex took a cue from Privateer Press and did some permutation of "Theme Lists"?

 

For those not in the know, Warmachine/Hordes players get bonuses for taking model combinations in theme for a specific army. The lists tend to be battle/temporally specific (e.g. - when eCaine was fighting in Sul, he's got one list - post-Sul is another list) and they get new lists via PP's bi-monthly magazine. Obviously, this wouldn't slot the same way, but what if we got Books of Chaos using the idea. For instance:

 

Book of Khorne (World Eaters):

 

Restrictions: All models must be marked Khorne or have no mark at all. No devestators, obliterators, or sorcerors. Chaos Space Marines cannot take Heavy weapons

Bonus: Khorne Beserkers count as troops. Lords can take the following upgrades (::insert here::(. Terminators can take the following upgrades... Vehicles can take the following upgrades...

 

Very similar to 3.5, but done via Army-Wide rules rather than "key-lock" HQ choices.

[Kristoff]

That's both a good and bad thing. If there's a model/unit you really like to use, and it's not on that list, you lose every organizational benefit for trying to use the theme.

[McNs]

That's both a good and bad thing. If there's a model/unit you really like to use, and it's not on that list, you lose every organizational benefit for trying to use the theme.

 

I agree, but the units on that list should be fluff based.

 

So you can't have a Sorceror in your World Eaters army, or Raptors in your IW army, etc etc. Much like 3.5

[Grey Mage]

That's both a good and bad thing. If there's a model/unit you really like to use, and it's not on that list, you lose every organizational benefit for trying to use the theme.

Yeah, on the other hand it backfires- see the 4rth edition C:SM for details- when a player says 'huh, well I dont like the two units that are placed in restriction here, and I like this bonus, so its a no brainer.

 

Id rather have a series of well balanced options, and need no insane bonuses that GW probly wont put enough thought into.

 

See what grinds most people is that they would like to have the option to do both a Legion force, and a Renegade force, and more - really. To have options that allow a player to field a force with a strong theme, character, and feel, while still being competitive. They don't have those options anymore.

 

Codex: Chaos Legions. Codex: Lost and the Damned. Expansion Codex: Thralls of Power (Renegade IG).

 

.... I was really hoping splitting demons off would be the start of something beautiful.

[Brother Nihm]

You and me both! :)

[maverike_prime]

.... I was really hoping splitting demons off would be the start of something beautiful.

 

I'm sorry, but that's rather un-reasonable. GW is able to put out less then 10 books per year (I want to say 8 is the standard plan but don't quote me on that number) that is 8 books! so it would be 7 Fantasy Army Books and one Codex and 0 background books and 0 expansions, or 2 Fantasy Army Books, 2 Codexes, 2 Background Books and 2 Expansions. Or 4 Army Books, 3 Codexes, 1 Background book and 0 expansions. or... well you get the idea.

 

We already have 15 codexes. And GW is now talking about a 6th edition (Dear god, please no! Let us get just 1 year with every codex being up to snuff with an edition)

[Prot]

I could see them using the new edition to 'fix' things... like most universal rules are out of wack. How different would... let's say Blood Angels be if 'Feel No Pain' was armour and 6+? Or if "Run" wasn't avaible to everyone? I'm just putting that out there as an example. We've seen in the past how a simple universal rule change can have massive effect on an army.

 

BUT I digress, I would hope priority one would be getting -every- codex "functional" under one ruleset for once. (Although I could see Gauss weaponry getting a wicked boost, then getting nerfed by 6th edition.... just like 5th did.)

 

Anyway, I think we hopefully agree we need to see all codex rules up to date before hitting the reset button once again.

[minigun762]

I really think that the main yardstick I use to decide if the next Chaos codex was success (besides much better fluff) is if I feel I can make a Renegade army, a mixed warband or a pure Legion army and have all of them be viable.

[Vilicate]

I'm definitely on the same page as Prot. Even though I sold off most all my Iron Warriors stuff a couple of years ago (and then all my Flawless Host a bit after that), I still consider myself a chaos player foremost, even if I play Xenos most of the time right now.

 

Quite simply, if they kept the current book relatively the same, and added special characters that changed force selections, available marks and/or game special rules to fluffy units in the book (ala SM, BA and even now GK). Basically, give true marks, none of the icon BS, and make them all Fearlesss, with other marks giving units adjustments. Then some small points breaks on the cult troops, and you'd be good to go. Definitely like to see an Iron Warriors, Word Bearer, Night Lord and Alpha Legion characters in the new book.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I know this probably going to get me lynched here, but what if the yet-to-be made CSM 'dex took a cue from Privateer Press and did some permutation of "Theme Lists"?

 

For those not in the know, Warmachine/Hordes players get bonuses for taking model combinations in theme for a specific army. The lists tend to be battle/temporally specific (e.g. - when eCaine was fighting in Sul, he's got one list - post-Sul is another list) and they get new lists via PP's bi-monthly magazine. Obviously, this wouldn't slot the same way, but what if we got Books of Chaos using the idea. For instance:

 

Book of Khorne (World Eaters):

 

Restrictions: All models must be marked Khorne or have no mark at all. No devestators, obliterators, or sorcerors. Chaos Space Marines cannot take Heavy weapons

Bonus: Khorne Beserkers count as troops. Lords can take the following upgrades (::insert here::). Terminators can take the following upgrades... Vehicles can take the following upgrades...

 

Very similar to 3.5, but done via Army-Wide rules rather than "key-lock" HQ choices.

 

The problem with this idea though is that then you get problems like why doesn't Khorne get Havoks, when they've been explicitly stated as having them before (the Teeth of Khorne). GW's trying to move away from the "to do this army, you cannot ever use X, Y or Z". Hell, Khorne even used to have Sorcerors, back in the day. I'd really like to see that brought back. Give a Sorc a mark of Khorne and he can't use powers, but he gets an uber psychic hood, and benefits attacking psykers.

The 3.5 codex also had that Night Lords couldn't take any marks, despite their background stating that while the Night Lords themselves have little faith in the gods, they're willing to work alongside mercenaries or other forces who do worship them, so they'd have access to Cult units.

 

As A D-B has said, the Legions simply aren't that simple. What's true for one warband couldn't be further from the truth for another. While each Legion warband will have its own little preferences and specialties, you've also got to take into account that 10,000 years of fighting means there's been a lot of time for changes to set in, and compromises have to be made in order to survive.

 

Another factor against this idea ever happening is GW is trying to distance themselves as far as possible from sub-lists. I kinda agree with it, as long as the book is made to be inclusive, like the Ork and Eldar codex, rather than like ours.

[Grey Mage]

.... I was really hoping splitting demons off would be the start of something beautiful.

 

I'm sorry, but that's rather un-reasonable. GW is able to put out less then 10 books per year (I want to say 8 is the standard plan but don't quote me on that number) that is 8 books! so it would be 7 Fantasy Army Books and one Codex and 0 background books and 0 expansions, or 2 Fantasy Army Books, 2 Codexes, 2 Background Books and 2 Expansions. Or 4 Army Books, 3 Codexes, 1 Background book and 0 expansions. or... well you get the idea.

 

We already have 15 codexes. And GW is now talking about a 6th edition (Dear god, please no! Let us get just 1 year with every codex being up to snuff with an edition)

GW promised me, years ago, 4 codices a year, 4 army books a year, and an expansion each year. Every 3 months, a main book. And that each and every one of those books would be updated before the next edition.

 

All Im asking is that they live up to that promise. On a five year cycle doing 2-3 expansions and 18 codices shouldnt be that hard.

 

Some days, I blame it all on LotRs. But I know its not true...

[Lay]

The problem with this idea though is that then you get problems like why doesn't Khorne get Havoks, when they've been explicitly stated as having them before (the Teeth of Khorne). GW's trying to move away from the "to do this army, you cannot ever use X, Y or Z". Hell, Khorne even used to have Sorcerors, back in the day. I'd really like to see that brought back. Give a Sorc a mark of Khorne and he can't use powers, but he gets an uber psychic hood, and benefits attacking psykers.

Not really. In Rogue Trader, the CSM army list was still pretty much a copy of the Space Marine list, so World Eaters got Devastators and Librarians, while Khorne Berzerkers didn't even exist back then. Ever since 2nd edition, the background has been pretty consistent about them turning into Berzerkers and killing their Librarians.

 

As A D-B has said, the Legions simply aren't that simple. What's true for one warband couldn't be further from the truth for another. While each Legion warband will have its own little preferences and specialties, you've also got to take into account that 10,000 years of fighting means there's been a lot of time for changes to set in, and compromises have to be made in order to survive.

And yet, CSM armies were vastly more customizable in 3.5.

[Lord_Caerolion]

The problem with this idea though is that then you get problems like why doesn't Khorne get Havoks, when they've been explicitly stated as having them before (the Teeth of Khorne). GW's trying to move away from the "to do this army, you cannot ever use X, Y or Z". Hell, Khorne even used to have Sorcerors, back in the day. I'd really like to see that brought back. Give a Sorc a mark of Khorne and he can't use powers, but he gets an uber psychic hood, and benefits attacking psykers.

Not really. In Rogue Trader, the CSM army list was still pretty much a copy of the Space Marine list, so World Eaters got Devastators and Librarians, while Khorne Berzerkers didn't even exist back then. Ever since 2nd edition, the background has been pretty consistent about them turning into Berzerkers and killing their Librarians.

Well, World Eater librarians in Realms of Chaos existed, and they gave a benefit to stopping enemy psychic powers. They don't need to be the original librarians though, but Khornate Sorcerors. They don't use powers, but they work to stop enemy powers.

 

As A D-B has said, the Legions simply aren't that simple. What's true for one warband couldn't be further from the truth for another. While each Legion warband will have its own little preferences and specialties, you've also got to take into account that 10,000 years of fighting means there's been a lot of time for changes to set in, and compromises have to be made in order to survive.

And yet, CSM armies were vastly more customizable in 3.5.

I never said they weren't. I just said that they weren't the most accurate portrayals of Chaos Marines in regards to Legions. The Legions mostly don't exist as proper fighting forces anymore, with the exception of the Black Legion, and possibly the Word Bearers. The versatility should definitely be brought back, but the restrictions of "World Eater armies may only comprise of X, Y and Z, and may never have A, B or C" should definitely be removed.

[Lay]

Well, World Eater librarians in Realms of Chaos existed, and they gave a benefit to stopping enemy psychic powers. They don't need to be the original librarians though, but Khornate Sorcerors. They don't use powers, but they work to stop enemy powers.

Well, I don't know if Khorne sorcerers need to be (re)introduced, but the current lack of sorcerers doesn't go against the portrayal of the WE in all editions except RT.

 

I never said they weren't. I just said that they weren't the most accurate portrayals of Chaos Marines in regards to Legions. The Legions mostly don't exist as proper fighting forces anymore, with the exception of the Black Legion, and possibly the Word Bearers.

Funny how this claim never came up during the IA and 3.5 days. I don't see how my army was misrepresented back then.

 

Sure, the legions have changed since the great crusade, but that doesn't conflict with the concept of mono-legion warbands with their respective traits. The vast majority of fiction features dedicated legion armies, just like legion rules allowed for dedicated army builds. The old Codex even advised players to use the vanilla list to portray rag-tag warbands.

 

So, I'd say the old Codex portrayed legion warbands pretty well.

 

The versatility should definitely be brought back, but the restrictions of "World Eater armies may only comprise of X, Y and Z, and may never have A, B or C" should definitely be removed.

Fluffwise WE are fully comprised of Berzerkers and don't have any psykers, so unless the fluff changes, a pure WE army list should reflect just that.

[the jeske]

Well, World Eater librarians in Realms of Chaos existed, and they gave a benefit to stopping enemy psychic powers. They don't need to be the original librarians though, but Khornate Sorcerors. They don't use powers, but they work to stop enemy powers.

they had tech marines , apothecaries and sonic weapon armed WE too . Does that mean they should have those back ? A lot of the RT fluff was plain bad or retconed .

And I dont agree with the point of view that there should be one army for all chaos legions/warbands . Why ? because I dont trust GW to make more then a single working list and having 4+ years of bad gaming would be more then enough. not to mention the fact that till now WE are even in the gav fluff midless berzerkers , NM are dudes with +1I etc and all 1ksons are rubrics .

 

A dex can be made in two different ways [a working one] you can give it one very powerful build , that more or less ignores what the enemy is doing and plays his own game [like eldar circus in 4th ed] or you can make a dex that gives access to 2-3 builds . Now thechnicly chaos dex does exactly that. we have mecha LR rush and the sub lists like 1ksons or NM builds . Thing is the chaos dex is not a dex for one faction . It is a dex for 9 . If GW wants to make a BL dex it is ok . Just dont name it chaos space marines and dont tell people that all the legions are ok and viable and playable . 3.5 dex was awesome you could make legion lists with it . you could also make units with almost identical set up but some different stuff. Someone wanted to play demons and an infiltration army , but AL forced him to use cultists [and he couldnt use WB because he had a glaive DP as HQ] ? you took the same army only infiltration costed 3 pts instead of 1. People offten forget that a non legion list had it own buffs too[extra hvy slots] , BL let you mix marks the way you liked. WB let you mix demons without mixing marks . Want to play a Khorn army but your RT fluff says you have khorn havocks ? welcome to BL khorn one of the best builds had at 1750 pts in 4th ed.

 

only thing we couldnt have was 9 oblits . but we had tons of other stuff and if someone realy realy wanted he could use 3 .

[McNs]

Agree with the_jeske.

 

Having the option to take a Legion list doesn't preclude you from taking a non-Legion list. Don't like the Legion restricitons? Take the BL list themed per your tastes.

 

I think we can all agree on one thing though: the 4th ed Chaos book makes it very hard to have a competitve themed list. All I want is that option back.

[AoC]

I don't agree with jeske as i would like just ONE army list for chaos marines. 3.5 had their bad stuff like all models with mark of khorne are berzekers, all with mark of nurgle are plague marines, all with mark of tzeentch are sorcerers/rubrics, ditto for slaany.

 

You said that it was possible to have khorne havocs. No, it was impossible.

 

@Lay: what means someone is berzerker anyway ? From fluff standpoint every berzerker have implants that increase his aggression, right ? What prevent them from wielding heavy weapons or meltas or using jump packs ? Nothing.

And Khornate sorcerers were great idea, and seriously need to be re-introduced. (just like apothecaries and whirlwinds for everyone). Some chaos fluff was badly done in the past, there is no need to stick to it. Retconning retcons is the way to go, chaos need to go away from one dimensional marks of chaos and one dimensional legions of chaos. Each and every legion work in multiple ways, there is no need to create army lists for each legion as it will FAIL TO PORTRAY IT ACCURATELY and it will create bunch of narrow minded fools who think that some legions always operate within such limits that is NOT TRUE.

[Lay]

You said that it was possible to have khorne havocs. No, it was impossible.

Come on, using a generic Havoc squad and pretending that they're heavy weapon toting Berzerkers is a minor inconvenience compared to all the unusable AL cultists, IW Basilisks, Sonic Dreadnoughts and boring generic Daemons we have now.

 

@Lay: what means someone is berzerker anyway ? From fluff standpoint every berzerker have implants that increase his aggression, right ? What prevent them from wielding heavy weapons or meltas or using jump packs ? Nothing.

It means that the WE are a legion of Khorne Berzerkers, who, according to the fluff, "are now armed entirely with pistols and close combat weapons, chain-axes and chainswords". If GW wants to change this and make more wargear available to them, fine. Bottom line is, that legion specific rules should reflect legion specific fluff.

 

Each and every legion work in multiple ways, there is no need to create army lists for each legion as it will FAIL TO PORTRAY IT ACCURATELY and it will create bunch of narrow minded fools who think that some legions always operate within such limits that is NOT TRUE.

There's a number of sub-factions for most armies in 40K that represent certain archetypes. There are brawlers like the World Eaters or Goff Clan Orks, shady infiltrators like the Raven Guard or Alpha Legion, or howling bikers like Evil Sunz Orks, the Saim-Hann Craftworld and the White Scars. Since the fluff of shady CSM infiltrators appeals to me, so do the respective rules.

 

I don't find this narrowing, if anything it helps broaden the scope of characterization beyond that of generic vanilla armies. By contrast, if anything is possible, nothing is interesting.

[Brother Nihm]

From fluff standpoint every berzerker have implants that increase his aggression, right ? What prevent them from wielding heavy weapons or meltas or using jump packs ? Nothing.

You might want to re-read your Khorne Berzerker fluff. :cuss

[the jeske]

3.5 had their bad stuff like all models with mark of khorne are berzekers, all with mark of nurgle are plague marines, all with mark of tzeentch are sorcerers/rubrics, ditto for slaany.

ah so you rather like . hmm csm with MoT which are crap . csm with IoN which are crap . IoS .... crap again . oh and khorn...wait zerkers still are superior for a hth build . yeah totaly giving us options for non cult god units worked so well ... But wait what If I wanted to that "dedicted to khorn but not mindless thing" in 3.5 ... It is not like I could take FC or counter attack for my csm , which would make them exactly that . slanny ? how about not buying sonic weapons[which were overcosted just like now] etc

 

 

You said that it was possible to have khorne havocs. No, it was impossible.

take undivided army buy havocks take FC for them[god knows why , but you wanted it] . take special weapons like melta.

And khorn teeth as in WE units that were khorn were retconed . So no they shouldnt get rage and extra A .

 

 

 

what means someone is berzerker anyway ? From fluff standpoint every berzerker have implants that increase his aggression, right ? What prevent them from wielding heavy weapons or meltas or using jump packs ? Nothing.

read some non RT fluff for WE . they are lobotomised and uncontrolable [which of course rises the question how do they get transported etc] , mindless killing machines . unless something changed in BL books .w40k khorn is not the WFB khorn.

WE dont do the whole "dont kill unworthy opponents etc" .

 

 

Retconning retcons is the way to go, chaos need to go away from one dimensional marks of chaos and one dimensional legions of chaos

aha so lemman russ is an imperial general and ultramarines are a later founding chapter made to fill in the gap made by a same named chapter that went rogue . yeah lets go back to that.

[Grey Mage]

Each and every legion work in multiple ways, there is no need to create army lists for each legion as it will FAIL TO PORTRAY IT ACCURATELY and it will create bunch of narrow minded fools who think that some legions always operate within such limits that is NOT TRUE.

As opposed to the broad minded fools who think a slaaneshi sorcerer is the perfect leader for twenty khorne berserkers?

 

Sorry, its alot easier to tell people "You know, you could do night lords by putting undivided squads in dreadclaws and supporting them with raptors instead of just spamming raptors and furies right? Just use the generic list instead" instead of "you know, itd be awesome if we could take raptors as troops for our nightlords force eh?".

 

Either way there will be ignorance and a lack of thought- but the extent would be greatly reduced. How do we know? Because it was never, ever, this bad before.... and right now weve got exactly that- no army lists for each legion et al, and a bunch of disatisfied people and a number of fools or unfortunates who think that things operate in a way they dont.

 

I don't find this narrowing, if anything it helps broaden the scope of characterization beyond that of generic vanilla armies. By contrast, if anything is possible, nothing is interesting.

Thats right- rules should give context to the fluff.

 

Not only does a lack of restrictions in lists mean that things to go a bit bland as certain choices start winning out over other similar units, but it means that things are much harder to balance as the number of options goes up......

 

Oh wait, that sounds just like the 4rth ed codex.