Eetion Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 So with the new Chaos Codex on the way and it being heavily suggested its heading back towards focusing on the Legions. I was curious just how many fellow Chaos players embraced the idea of the warband, either mixed up their Legion colours, made their own renegade force or used one of the schemes from the dex. Im sure quite a few ditched their Chaos armies when Legions were no longer viable, but how many of you embraced the new direction and if so how. Also how much info and background do you think the Renegades that dominate the current Codex will be given in the upcoming release. I for one took the opportunity to try something different, sidelining my Alpha Legion and designing my own Tzeentch themed Warband, Led by a Thousand Sons Sorceror in his efforts to rebuild the Thousand Sons Legion in part by inductingand incorporating fallen and corrupted renegades and in part perfecting his science in gene seed replication in an effort to eliminate tne seed make up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khestra the Unbeheld Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Not I. Stuck with my Black Legion the whole time up until recently when I began my World Eaters project. Granted, Black Legion was a lot easier to transition into Chaos 4.0 with than I imagine the mono-Mark Legions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristoff Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I did, but I only started rather recently, so that isn't much of an excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A D-B Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 We've got to stop using "warband" incorrectly like this. "Warband" just means Chaos Marine Army. That's all. You have Renegade Chapter warbands; Legion warbands; warbands made of X different factions... It's not "Legions or Warbands". A Thousand Son army is a Thousand Son warband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eetion Posted January 15, 2012 Author Share Posted January 15, 2012 We've got to stop using "warband" incorrectly like this. "Warband" just means Chaos Marine Army. That's all. You have Renegade Chapter warbands; Legion warbands; warbands made of X different factions... It's not "Legions or Warbands". A Thousand Son army is a Thousand Son warband. Be that as it may. The dex pretty much scrapped Legion armies, nurgle lords not as durable as the plague marines, khorne Lords without furious charge. Slaanesh Lords without access to sonic weapons. Undivided Legions without any distinguishing factors from one another. Given that Legions are essentially unusable in their previous form change is required. Now we all know Chaos has not been popular as a result, and I can't say that I blame them. So players may have 'shelved' their armies whilst others such as myself have embraced the concept, and the variety on offer, making my own schemes and background, others will have mixed Legion units together. I used the term warband and Legions for the clarity involved. As it is the loss of the Legion rules that seems to have annoyed most people. Also we seem to have a shift back to a Legions mindset if rumours are true. So asking 'warbands in a warband dex' isn't exactly clear as to what I'm asking. I'm just curious how people adapted their armies and what they expect in the next codex for their armies, and also what background for all the new renegades, more? less? Gone completely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 We've got to stop using "warband" incorrectly like this. "Warband" just means Chaos Marine Army. That's all. You have Renegade Chapter warbands; Legion warbands; warbands made of X different factions... It's not "Legions or Warbands". A Thousand Son army is a Thousand Son warband. which all would be nice and all , if JJ and gav didnt tell us that the awesome and most important thing about this dex is that now we can [and should because it is so awesome] rune a khorn lord with 1ksons . Which is happy chaos family , everyone mixed with everyone . BL only recolored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatus Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Well, that has been possible in all of the Chaos Space Marine Codices since 2nd Edition. In all except for the 3.5 Codex. three out of four say it's all good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDarkApostle Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Khorne Lord with Thousand Sons was actually possible in the 3,5 dex. TDA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kythnos Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 We've got to stop using "warband" incorrectly like this. "Warband" just means Chaos Marine Army. That's all. You have Renegade Chapter warbands; Legion warbands; warbands made of X different factions... It's not "Legions or Warbands". A Thousand Son army is a Thousand Son warband. which all would be nice and all , if JJ and gav didnt tell us that the awesome and most important thing about this dex is that now we can [and should because it is so awesome] rune a khorn lord with 1ksons . Which is happy chaos family , everyone mixed with everyone . BL only recolored. Which isn't actually what he was talking about, if I'm not mistaken. The point was, that every Chaos army is supposed to be a warband, independent of the units and forces they consist of. And there is enough background material that supports the existence of various and widely differing warbands, which aren't all different colours of the Black Legion. That the current codex has failed to represent this situation (be they renegade, fallen, legion or whatever kind of warbands) as such is a whole different point, although I think many of us actually agree here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnosaur93 Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 to get back on topic... if it will become possible to make a sneaky-style (lots of DS and infiltrate... kinda alpha legion like), i will switch my renegate non-chaos marines to this dex, as using C:CSM was originally my idea for the army... also. if GW do return to the 3.5 style of viable non-mixed chaos, depending on what it offers, i might scratch my idea of khorne loganwing in exchange for a pure Tzeentch army focussed on change and mutations, rather than sorcery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warsmith Aznable Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The current codex's problem isn't in the fluff section, but the wargear and army list section. What is lacking is diverse choices that perform well in multiple configurations. As for the OP question, I play a homemade warband conceived as a Legion spin-off. That's not going to change if a Legion heavy book is published. Some certain Legions and special characters will end up donating their special rules and stat lines to my independent warband, however. I think that's how it will play out for many of us who have invested in either homemade warbands or in specific canon independents, like Skyrar's Dark Wolves or The Purge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Rawl Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The current codex's problem isn't in the fluff section, but the wargear and army list section. What is lacking is diverse choices that perform well in multiple configurations. This. We went from the must customisable armies at the time to the restrictive 'happy families' as people call it. Such a bitter, sour pill to swallow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Nihm Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The current codex's problem isn't in the fluff section, but the wargear and army list section. What is lacking is diverse choices that perform well in multiple configurations. This. We went from the must customisable armies at the time to the restrictive 'happy families' as people call it. Such a bitter, sour pill to swallow. While the main problem is the aforementioned army list section there's also issues with the fluff imho.We get a short piece on the Heresy, some new and ill-thought out fluff (armour made of lava, lightning running across armour, CSM that can hear the lies whispered by man, oooooooh! stupid..). But nothing concrete, grand and infernally majestic as it once was. (It is an upgrade over the fluff-less book that was the 3rd ed. book though!) Try this if you can, Grab the gav-'dex. and read the fluff sections. Then pick up the 2nd ed. book and do the same. You will be amazed at the difference in both quality and quantity. As for the OP, I stuck with my Legion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Caerolion Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 After being swayed by A D-B, I've recently started to build up a warband of Iron Warriors who gave themselves over to the worship of Slaanesh during the Heresy. They no longer go by the name of Iron Warriors (I've yet to think up their new name, but I'm thinking the Gilded Host), and wear gold armour with bone trim made from the melted tributes of their victims (with the bone actually coming from the victims). As others have said, the Legions as they once were are gone. Warband doesn't mean what people think it means, it simply means a force of Chaos Marines. They might be comprised entirely of Legionnaires, they might be recent Renegades, it might be a mix. It could be what I've done, and be a Legion force that has split from the wider Legion over ideological/theological/monomaniacal differences, depending on why they left. My force is still technically comprised of members of the Iron Warriors legion, it's just that they've split off, and go by a new name and scheme. It doesn't make them any worse, it just means they have more depth than "yeah, my army is Stereotypical Iron Warriors Grand Company X". Chaos is varied and limitless, people. Let's stop slavishly following the stereotypes as if doing anything different, or allowing any change, is the worst thing possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totgeboren Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I kept my Legion, though they have certainly been on the sideline ever since the 4:ed codex came along. They look exceedingly pretty though, so I'm hoping for new rules to make em more playable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goreshed Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 There is multiple ways to look at this issue. You have the rules and the fluff side of it (I'm leaving the models out of this since...well I can go on for a long time about what could be changed there) but in general I think of it like this. Fluf wise: The issue: There is a difference, huge, on how this plays out. We got jipped flat out in our current dex compared to the others. The reason why I fell in love with chaos to begin with was the fact that I could play a Legion army and I could play a warband army and you know what? They both had rules. If I wanted to play a 'warband' I'd just pick pretty much whatever I wanted out of the dex. If I wanted to change to a legion I had some restrictions and I had some bonuses. That is gone from this codex. Now I simply have the 'build it how you want but call it what you want' option. Not to mention the fluff....meh don't get me started. It was lackluster at best. Hopefully..... With the new legions book I hope they bring it into the idea of 3.5. Where you have rules for warbands (i.e. pick what you want al-la cart style) or you can pick a legion and use those rules. Why? Because its the warp. Some people pop out a couple months after the Heresy. Others, many years later. And not to mention sometimes parts of a legion stick together. But it gives the options of both. Chaos Marines, specially the Legions are a big part of what makes chaos, Chaos as it is now. Rules wise: The issue: To me a lot of things were changed because people complained about them. Oblits going from t5 to t4(5) is just one example. Plus a lot of them seem (but then again I could be wrong) not as up to date as the rest of the rules coming out. Hopefully.... We see less of that and more as to what chaos was. Awesome but it cost a lot of points to do it. Why? Because it was awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.