Lysimachus Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 If you're a casual player, why not make up your own? There are some nice homegrown examples of Chaos SCs in the EoT Legio Imprint, which admittedly need updating for 6th ed and the new 'dex. Might be something to take over to the homegrown rules forum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Nathan Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 for those who cant find the forgeworld update mentioned above http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Prod.../Characters.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azekai Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Haha, Zhufor is fun- send him at an IG blob and rack up the victory points (and he doesn't have champion of chaos, so no potential spawnhood or crappy daemonhood for him!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 IA characters... don't get me wrong, I love 'em. Based my army around Necrosius and his band. But they only filled the gap of one of what we're talking about (Alpha Legion), and added two more Inquisitors to a list that already had how many? Coteaz, Karamazov, Valeria? I guess FW is our best hope for filling in those gaps, but they're busy with HH now so that's a long shot as well (and I don't think those rules mesh with 40k). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Oh Arkos the Faithless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Oh Arkos the Faithless! And that's exactly what I'm talking about. Reading about him in the IA book gave me an urge to start up an Alpha Legion warband. I have too many irons in the fire, or I would, but it's fluff and background behind (existing and playable) characters that motivate some players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 That's just it. Every character fleshes his Legion/warband's background. And I want cool Legions/warbands. To do list : A DP character would be nice (it's apparently the ultimate goal of every Chaos lord, yet no one in our codex have achieved it). An IW character. A good ol' Warsmith. A WB character. Coryphaeus, Chaos Crusader, famous/powerful Dark Apostle. A NL one. Cool and creepy warlord or something. AL character (pretty hard, for sure, but Arkhos is really cool, for example). And why not, other characters for BL, WE, DG, EC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think they should either make the FW characters legit, or roll them into the codex. Necrosius complementing Typhus would be amazing. He gives zombies furious charge if he's on the board, and has a decent psyker attack. I believe he was partly responsible for the summoning of Scabeithrax on Vraks as well. Zhufor is a legit WE commander, that while I'm sure his warriors fear him, they don't fear he'll just turn on them just to sate his own bloodlust. Great model, too. There are a few daemon prince characters from FW as well. Mammon is part of the Tainted nurgle warband. All I'm sayin is this: why do we have to rely on FW do give us the flavors we want? I don't think 8-10 more pages would hurt. That's not even enough to warrant an expansion book, and would satisfy a lot of gaps, and add so much. It's not taking away from anything. People that want to play their Legion/warband the way they want to still have the option to purchase a Lord/Sorcerer/whatever to make their army their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think they should (...) make the FW characters legit Well, they are. FW stuff is 100% useable in any 40k game without asking how your opponent feels about it. They are, in fact, codex extentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Can you get me a source on that? 'Cause I've tried looking and just can't substantiate the claim. I'd love for it to be true... probably 10% of my force is FW and doesn't see many games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I thought Forgeworld supplements required permission from the other player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 The proofs are multiple. The presence of GW's logo on FW books, the total absence of any "You must have to ask your opponent gnagnagna". The fact that FW prints "THIS can be used as a WHATEVER choice in a X army" (expantion of codices, right here). The fact that FW stuff is a part of the GW IP and exists in their respective universes (meaning GW is perfectly ok with that (due to the fact that GW owns FW (It's still two staffs, working independantly with GW making codices and FW doing all the awesome stuff)), therefore FW stuff and rules are an official, and integral part of both the games and the fictional worlds they represent. The fact that, in IA Apocalypse Second Edition FW actually says they're official, but that "it's still a good idea to tell your opponent before the game". Besides that, the question of legality is only related to tournament scene. Which is a pretty dumb one, because they like to think they play a competitive game when said game is imbalanced. Plus, you'll note they used to ban Special Characters, who where printed in every GW book. So the "tournament legality" of the FW toys is in the hands of the tournament organisers (they often ban it, because it makes things harder for hardcore tournament players). And organisers don't want to piss off hardcore tournie players, because those are the ones who make a tournament successful. Out of that scene, FW is legal to the max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I would like us to have the DP form of the fallen primarchs, even if they get ultra nerfed for balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I would like us to have the DP form of the fallen primarchs, even if they get ultra nerfed for balance. Those exist... For Epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killax Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I would like us to have the DP form of the fallen primarchs, even if they get ultra nerfed for balance. Those exist... For Epic. For Apocalypse to, a few. I guess FW might do them in the future, because why not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 I was aware of those things, I just wondered if there was a specific statement made by GW or some such. But that is a valid argument, and hard to dispute. Still, a player can choose not to play you for whatever reason anyhow, and there are those that are hard to budge. Angron rules exist for Apoc, and they're planning on making models (so I must assume rules as well) for the fallen primarchs, but again, I don't think the HH rules mesh with 40k rules, do they? Well... they do use the 6th ed. rulebook... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killax Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Angron rules exist for Apoc, and they're planning on making models (so I must assume rules as well) for the fallen primarchs, but again, I don't think the HH rules mesh with 40k rules, do they? Well... they do use the 6th ed. rulebook... They mix, the only problem you could have with fielding them is because the scoring units have to be 10+ models. Or at least I believe so. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 It would be epic if they decided to add more, it would be epic if they would give a WD or something similiar that would give you more legion specific rules and options. GW will never do it however. Forgeworld did. Horus Heresy I: Betrayal features legion specific rules and special characters for SoH/BL, WE, DG and EC. Book II will have AL and WB, book III NL and IW, but even the generic Legion list does a better job at portraying the non-marked Traitors than C:CSMeh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearingtheword Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 While I love that they Updated the IA characters I wish they'd update to the new dex not just core rules... For ex.... Zhufor has that useless, generic, personal icon still... Also, while it is fairly easy to just create your own generic or counts as Lord it would be nice to have all the varied options available to buy for your char..... Eternal Warrior, Demagogue, Boon as opposed to Gift, Fearless. Fleshmetal, etc. That was one place 3.5 excelled. Yeah it could get expensive real fast but it would be nice to have those options.... Anyhow just happy to have choices period now! Haha, Zhufor is fun- send him at an IG blob and rack up the victory points (and he doesn't have champion of chaos, so no potential spawnhood or crappy daemonhood for him!) I won't be surprised if they update him again soon dropping the aforementioned personal icon (that's useless now) and give him Champion of Chaos instead, hehe. Can you get me a source on that? 'Cause I've tried looking and just can't substantiate the claim. I'd love for it to be true... probably 10% of my force is FW and doesn't see many games. Check IA:11 Doom of Mymeara; the Introduction page has a box that explains the use of and classifications of the unit "types" explaining what's "legal" to use where. (Think its been in any released after it was and perhaps a couple prior to it) Though it still implies that it's sporting to make sure your opponent is familiar with the unit entry and are "happy to play a game using Forge World models." Luckily my gaming group has no issues with expanding the character, unit and fluff pools as long as it's appropriate for the game type we are playing... ~BtW Edits: Found some questions and statements begging for answers and responses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.