The real problem with the Chaos Space Marines Codex

[Captain Idaho]

Hi all. I'm not one who wants to get invovled in negativity or moaning about new releases, and the recent Codex Chaos Marines is indeed fun to play with and against so we can't complain too much.

 

However something has been niggling me at the back of my mind with this release, something I didn't like but couldn't put my finger on.

 

After some important contemplation, I think I know what I don't like about the Codex; it's unfocussed.

 

Essentially, Chaos Marines suffer from a need to include so much and cater for everyone. We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition. We also want to see new units and releases too. But the problem GW have is supporting this diversity is holding back real depth in the Codex.

 

If you look at every other Codex book out aside from Chaos related ones, they all have great depth and concentration of themes. Chaos related Codex books are stuck because they HAVE to have certain releases to be supported which eat into the scope for new releases focussing on particular aspects of back ground etc.

 

What GW needed to do with Chaos is actually create separate Chaos Codex books for different aspects of the Chaos related forces in 40K. Look at Fantasy; GW actually came out and said that having Beastmen, Chaos Warriors and Chaos Daemons all in the same list made the Chaos Armies book difficult to build and expand upon, and woefuly unfocussed in theme.

 

Chaos in 40K should be separated further like that of Chaos in Fantasy. Perhaps three Chaos books; Codex Demonogues and Rogues (Cultists, Word Bearers and Alpha Legion rules), Codex Death to the False Emperor! (Black Legion, Iron Warriors and Nightlords) and Codex Slaves to Chaos (Cult Legions with Chaos Daemons thrown in).

 

The Ally Rules enable Cult forces to be included in other armies so this would work gloriously!

 

Does anyone else agree with my assessment? :tu:

[dswanick]

My thought for some time have been :

- Worshippers of Chaos : a codex devoted to those who fully embrace Chaos, chock full of mutations/horrors/etc, including any of the usual suspects (Princes, spawn, etc).

- Slaves of Chaos : a codex which goes light on the more "chaos"y elements to represent either the legions which were duped into service or current chapters who have only recently fallen.

- Daemons of Chaos : the current offering, centralizing all the Daemonic elements into a single book which could be used as allies.

- Then cultists could be included using allies from other current books.

[Shuggnuggath]

In my opinion the book is mostly fine. I think they wasted a lot of opportunities to please the legion fans by putting in redundant extra units.

 

I would have dropped mutilators and warp talons and the separate entry for dark apostle.

 

With the extra freed up page space I would have made Dark Apostle an upgrade for Lords, added raptors as troops if the lord has a jump pack. Given the lord the option to buy infiltrate for points.

 

Added a jump pack option to possessed.

 

Given chosen the option to buy infiltrate.

 

Added the option to buy terminator armour to the cult units.

 

Add landraider varient with twin linked autocannon sponsons and transport 12.

 

Give option to have Guard as battle brothers and Daemons as allies of convenience.

 

 

Everyone wins.

 

 

Gotta love hindsight :tu:

 

 

PS: I think the real reason they didn't do it that way is because third party studios would get all the different cult terminators and lord options out before GW.

[Brother Amarel]

I think I agree. I was going to post something similar, but was going to point the finger at a touch of 'boredom'; that is, everything just feels very 'safe' and lacking in real character, it's all just a bit flat. Unfocussed would be another way of explaining this.

 

I'm pretty much using the same stuff I've been using in every edition since 3.5 (when I did a big update on models due to the much nicer looking stuff) - certain things swap out (no Noise Marines or Daemonettes, this time around so they'll gather a little dust, but my extra guys for making 15-marine units are getting an airing), but no big changes. I could pick-up a Fiend or some Mutilators but they don't really have me excited (although I want to be excited about the Maulerfiend, I've seen it do so little on the tabletop that it's hard to justify even when playing friendlies).

 

Then I take a look across at the Horus Heresy Betrayal book and the pre-Heresy lists are amazingly cool - loads to play with and try out, a ton of character by giving each of the featured chapters a handful of specific special rules and characters and/or units and I think that this is what the Chaos book should have been. It's easy to make fluffy lists and quite powerful lists and combined lists and there's a load of interesting stuff to try out and very little of it is beyond what the Chaos Codex could have supplied.

 

So that's my plan - 30k it up :sick:.

[Vesper]

Your analisis feels perfectly right to me, and that's far from being new. Every Chaos codex suffers from that perticular problem : Chaos is too huge, diverse and deep for a simple codex.

It's a nightmare for GW, as they don't want to multipliate codices (they can't even update them all at a decent rate, which is pretty shameful because it ruins our (the customers) experience of the hobby. If you ask me, I do think you can almost sue GW for that.

More important, GW has a crush on the imperium. Wet dreams and stuff (half the codices around are imperials, and the fluff is made from an imperial point of view, and is really imperial friendly (which leads to complains about the loss of the grimdark feel, as the imperium feels perfectly fine (do really think GW is out of good fluff writers, I have yet to find something as great as the Realm of Chaos books).

That leads to the state of Chaos. It's unthinkable to make multiple codices for Chaos, because Chaos don't deserve it (as most people play imperials, as GW wishes). Daemons got their own, mostly thanks to the their presence in WFB, and stuff.

 

There is really many things to create from Chaos, codex : Legions, codex : Renegades, codex : Traitor Guard, codex : Chaos Cults... But there's no room for those, so everything is put in the Chaos codex, wich is crazy for the guy who writes it. Some made the best they could (Chambers and Haines were going in the right direction with 3.5, they made their best to illustrate, by the rules, the diversity and the infinite amount of combinations, and it is still the best codex GW ever printed...), other don't care, like Gavin Thorpe.

In the end, we, the players, absolutly don't know what we'll get out of a new codex, because there is so many in Chaos, and writers can't put everything in a book.

 

Chaos will never get the space needed to expand like it should, and I blame GW focus on imperials, and dumb codices writing rate and policy.

[Panzerbjørn]

Personally, I think they should really look at doing the Codices the way they, sort of, did the 3rd edition codices.

 

For example, the previous Space Wolf codex was quite thin and it referenced C:SM for much of their weaponry and standard rules.

If they did this for all the armies that were relevant, they would be able to release more with less effort and possibly release more frequently.

 

In your example of an unfocussed C:CSM, they could have a C:CSM and let it be generic with certain legion traits, and then release seperate 'mini-codices' the reference this main codex.

This could easily be done with Eldar as well (One for each craftworld and one for the inhabited maiden worlds) and since Necrons have been downgraded to a non-threat, they could have the same mini-codices for different dynasties.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

Does anyone else agree with my assessment? :sick:

 

Yes, but make mention of it to anyone who doesn't play Chaos and it's "greedy" to want "more".

[the jeske]

nah . last thing we need is more dex. Am ok with being forced in to BL lists . It is not bad as long as chaos dex bring something new to the game[as in other the different looking models] . As of right now the chaos dex does nothing the loyalist codex couldnt do [with the real problem being SW who can realy do the same stuff chaos does] . Rest is mechanics , sometimes they get them right , sometimes they get them wrong . there will never be a 3.5 dex and I doubt that we will ever see legion/warband rules outside of FW stuff. We knew that the dex is going to be made based on the gav one[well at least I was telling this for years] and that aside for the double big kit etc we wont get much new stuff . What GW didnt do is the minimum extra I would have wanted . no new game changing units . drake is a very weak flyer compering to what IG or necron can run and forges/maulers are oddly bad for a big/new kit unit , they should be like oblits under gav dex but they arent. no new HQs . was wasting the slots on a dark mecha and dark chappy that suck worth it , which again is odd , those are new units they should have rules that make chaos players want to play them .

 

those are the things I dont get about chaos dex. I can understand a bad dex or a good dex. but making players not want to use the new models or just wanting them for looks , makes no sense. It is as If GW thought that what ever they do chaos players would just jump from joy ,as long its better then the gav dex[to make a worse one they would have to reprint the JJ chaos dex]. the Russian in me hopes that all future dex are going to look the same and give the same feeling to their player base.

[Verythrax Draconis]

I don't think different codices are needed, the idea of using a char to unlock cult units covers for that - the main issue is in fact the lack of workable builds for certain (almost all) themes. If Tzeentch wasn't all that weak, and the other cults weren't that nerfed, not counting the lackluster features of some marks, it would be ok, having this actual codex as one-size-fits-all codex a la the current C:SM.

[BrotherWasted]

Multiple codices would require GW to change the Allies table in the BRB, which would require a new printing of the BRB. Yes, us gods can simply print out or will know the updated table off by heart, but new customers will just have ANOTHER thing to take into account.

[Sception]

Putting all the mortal forces of chaos in one codex is fine, imo. Specific legion lists could be safely left to Forgeworld, as its the kind of thing they seem to like to do.

 

That said, if you look at other recent books, you can see that there really was room to do more in this codex. An expanded armoury with more gifts of chaos and chaos artifacts, including aligned-only options for all four powers, more daemon weapons, and some techno-gear for the smiths wouldn't have been an issue, neither would additional special characters so that every legion had at least one key personality in the book. There would also have been room for four or five more units - maybe one for each alignment (blood crushers, rubric terminators, etc) plus an alternate transport option (land raider variant? Assault rhino? dreadclaw/droppod?).

 

As it is, the book is pretty close to including everything I would want in a Chaos Marine codex. Maybe not everything is executed well, but it's mostly there. The fact that this book is almost everything I wanted it to be, but just seems to fall that one step short, seemingly due not to a lack of competence but a simple lack of effort and ambition, is probably the most frustrating thing about the book to me.

[Lord Ragnarok]

And you forgot one...Codex Renegades.

[Prot]

This idea has been tossed around a million times. I remember eons ago Pete Haines actually said in a message to me that they were considering breaking up legions into more specific army books. He asked me what I thought would be a logical breakdown of the codexes.

 

I can't remember what I said, but I do recall they wanted to keep the legions really diverse, and different from each other ruleswise. Again this was eons ago... so it's been tossed around a lot.

 

As far as being a little more specific and less of a mosh pit of marks and mixed units, I really thought they could have just simply used army general 'traits'. It exists now, and it has in the past. It would have been so easy.

 

I'm not asking for anything as 'involved' to develop as the good ol' Index Astartes articles, but you have to admit those were fun times, and very diverse! Army specific lists are cool, but we're back to spikey marines. (not a complaint, just an observation)

[Noctus Cornix]

We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition.

 

 

I nearly spit out my drink laughing.

[Brother Ambroz]

Vesper summed it up pretty damn nicely. Well said.

[Kol Saresk]

We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition.

 

 

I nearly spit out my drink laughing.

I kind of have to agree with this assessment. 3.5 was a one-dimensional, very biased way of representing the Legions and it has given rise to very biased ways of thought. I still find it ironic that some of the most die-hard Puritan Night Lord fans love A-D-B's Night Lords.

 

As far as 3.5 being a powerhouse, yeah it was a powerhouse. In all the wrong ways. From I've everything I've been able to find, the only way it lost was if it went up against a very good player or it was played by someone who was either new to the game or had no grasp of tactics. That's not competitive, that's overwhelming. Competitive means everyone else has as equal a chance of winning as you do. It comes down to strategy and luck of the die.

 

We could have Codex: Legions, Codex: Renegades and all that jazz. But I don't want it. Well, I wouldn't mind something just for the Traitor Guard. But as far as CSM go, I don't want a Codex: Legions. It means that in order to "represent" my Legion, I have to conform to a very specific and narrow view. No. I'm sorry, but the answer is no. Love me, hate me, say what you want about me, my answer is and always be no.

[Captain Idaho]

We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition.

 

 

I nearly spit out my drink laughing.

 

Hyperbole aside, you got the point and intention behind my statement and the 3.5 Codex.

[Brother Amarel]

As far as 3.5 being a powerhouse, yeah it was a powerhouse. In all the wrong ways. From I've everything I've been able to find, the only way it lost was if it went up against a very good player or it was played by someone who was either new to the game or had no grasp of tactics. That's not competitive, that's overwhelming. Competitive means everyone else has as equal a chance of winning as you do. It comes down to strategy and luck of the die.

It really wasn't that bad, is this a history is written by the victors thing?

 

There were a couple of stand-out issues (most notably, Iron Warriors and their Obliterator spam (FAQ corrected by making Obliterators T4(5)) and also their ability to take Basilisks, as I recall) and it was certainly a good Codex, but it was hardly something that couldn't be won against. It wasn't up with the current GK or Necron power, for example.

[Noctus Cornix]

We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition.

 

 

I nearly spit out my drink laughing.

 

Hyperbole aside, you got the point and intention behind my statement and the 3.5 Codex.

 

I understand exactly what you mean, good sir. I simply call foul because there was nothing fluffy or fair about the 3.5 edition and its terrible Legion rules. I'm sorry but what is there that's fair when say the Night Lords Legion gets an extra slot of raptors and the most useless special rules in the game, and in return Iron Warriors can have 9 obliterators and 4 tanks or the Word Bearers who could deepstrike 8 Blood Letter squads who still had power armour then right on your face? and that's to name just a few examples.

 

There should never be any legion rules because the legions no longer exist. Chaos of 40k is one homogeneous blob of warbands who shackle together out of necessity. Warbands comprising solely of one Legion are a rarity when it comes to the fluff and the antiquated concept of 'puritain' legions is a relic of the past that should be left buried.... Forever.

 

The 3.5 codex was the most untested and broken mess in the history of 40k and ill sell every single one of my models if I ever see that garbage show its face again.

[Brother Ambroz]

As far as 3.5 being a powerhouse, yeah it was a powerhouse. In all the wrong ways. From I've everything I've been able to find, the only way it lost was if it went up against a very good player or it was played by someone who was either new to the game or had no grasp of tactics. That's not competitive, that's overwhelming. Competitive means everyone else has as equal a chance of winning as you do. It comes down to strategy and luck of the die.

It really wasn't that bad, is this a history is written by the victors thing?

 

There were a couple of stand-out issues (most notably, Iron Warriors and their Obliterator spam (FAQ corrected by making Obliterators T4(5)) and also their ability to take Basilisks, as I recall) and it was certainly a good Codex, but it was hardly something that couldn't be won against. It wasn't up with the current GK or Necron power, for example.

 

Bro Amariel is right. There were a few powerhouse lists, (IW and daemonbomb being a few) but there were also underpowered ones. Just look at Thousand Sons back then (which is what I played at the time). They weren't much better than the present but they were way more fun to play (and fluffier I think). The only improvement that I see now is the psychic powers (being able to select from the BRB).

[Kol Saresk]

As far as 3.5 being a powerhouse, yeah it was a powerhouse. In all the wrong ways. From I've everything I've been able to find, the only way it lost was if it went up against a very good player or it was played by someone who was either new to the game or had no grasp of tactics. That's not competitive, that's overwhelming. Competitive means everyone else has as equal a chance of winning as you do. It comes down to strategy and luck of the die.

It really wasn't that bad, is this a history is written by the victors thing?

 

There were a couple of stand-out issues (most notably, Iron Warriors and their Obliterator spam (FAQ corrected by making Obliterators T4(5)) and also their ability to take Basilisks, as I recall) and it was certainly a good Codex, but it was hardly something that couldn't be won against. It wasn't up with the current GK or Necron power, for example.

I'm not sure if it's "history written by the victors" but like I said, everything I've been able to find points to this being a very strong Codex. Insanely strong. As far as GK standards, ever 6th came out, everything I've been hearing and finding kind of shows the GK to have been sort of "equalized". They're still a powerhouse, but not like what they were. As far as Necrons go, haven't really heard much about them. I would think they're still the same since I haven't heard any differences. But I still hear of the Necrons being beat from time to time, it just takes time, effort, playing your strengths against their weaknesses and as usual, the luck of the die.

[Noctus Cornix]

Correction Kol. Grey Knights are now what 3.5 Chaos was.

[Legatus]

After some important contemplation, I think I know what I don't like about the Codex; it's unfocussed.

 

Essentially, Chaos Marines suffer from a need to include so much and cater for everyone. We all want to see all the Legions represented fully and fairly, just like 3.5 edition. We also want to see new units and releases too. But the problem GW have is supporting this diversity is holding back real depth in the Codex.

 

If you look at every other Codex book out aside from Chaos related ones, they all have great depth and concentration of themes.

I think I will disagree with you on that premise. Yeah, the Codex SW, BA and GK are very focused. But that is because they only focus on one single Chapter. The Codex Space Marines and the Codex Imperial Guard, in comparison, do not do any of the involved parties much credit either. E.g. the Codex Space Marines was designed to allow for different Chapters, so the army list allows certain choices (like Bikes as Troops or Veteran Assault Marines) that are not particularly fluffy for an Ultramarines force, even though the Codex is commonly seen as a "Codex Ultramarines". There are no rules for different Chapters per se, but there are Special Characters that have thematic "Chapter Tactics" rules, which means a lot of people will feel that they have to include that Special Character in their army if they want to play that Chapter. The Codex Imperial Guard, similarly, does not offer a dedicated list for Catachans or Walhallans, but it has a couple of Special Characters that come with thematic army upgrades as well.

 

So, I would not exactly say that those Codices do a better job at representing all the different parties they are meant to include than the Codex Chaos Space Marines does. Neither do the Ork and Eldar Codices. You could probably say the same about the Tau, Necron and Tyranid Codices, but those factions have not been defined with clearly distinguishable parties as much as Marines, IG, Eldar and Orks have been, so it is not as noticable.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Here we go, another Chaos thread devolves into a 3.5-bash.

 

I loved that 'dex. It was my first army in this game. But I understand now that it wasn't balanced against itself, much less against lots of other things (I lost plenty to Biel-Tan Eldar and Black Templars though, I'll have you know). That being said, I think that I and others like me do not want to re-point the 3.5 dex to a new edition; all we want are Legion-specific rules so that we can play Legion-pure warbands.

 

Noctis, I hate to this, but you're wrong. Dead wrong. There IS a need for Legion-specific rules. Even though the Primarchs lack interest and the command structure of each Legion has broken down, there are still warbands that consist of members of a single Legion. ADB's Warband of the Broken Aquila is a great example: aside from the Bleeding Eyes (and Raptors have always been seperate from the Legions), the entirety of the group were Night Lords. The Dark Something series talks about bands of pure Word Bearers. Evil, stupid, cartoon villains though they were, the Chaos Marines in Hunt for Voldorius were pure Alpha Legion.

 

And a group of Marines from a single Legion are going to continue to operate, as closely as circumstance allows, using their Legion's standard operating procedures. The Iron Warriors of Storm of Iron still practiced siege warfare, right? But that's a lone Great Company with no links to the Primarch or the rest of the Legion, so they shouldn't get special rules reflecting their siege experience, right? /sarcasm

 

When mention is made of the 3.5 dex, we don't want it ported in. We just want to be able to accurately represent the tactical specialties of our chosen avatars. I'm counts-as-ing Huron for my Alpha Legion because it assures me an infiltration ability. I'd rather have blanket Outflank, or non-scattering deep strikes, or Wolf Scout-style Outflanking off the enemy board edge. . . . but as it is, I have to counts-as, which means that I'm no longer telling the story of MY Alpha Legion army on the table; I'm telling the story of Huron Blackheart on the days he chooses to wear blue and green instead of red and black. It's very frustrating.

[Brother Amarel]

When mention is made of the 3.5 dex, we don't want it ported in. We just want to be able to accurately represent the tactical specialties of our chosen avatars. I'm counts-as-ing Huron for my Alpha Legion because it assures me an infiltration ability. I'd rather have blanket Outflank, or non-scattering deep strikes, or Wolf Scout-style Outflanking off the enemy board edge. . . . but as it is, I have to counts-as, which means that I'm no longer telling the story of MY Alpha Legion army on the table; I'm telling the story of Huron Blackheart on the days he chooses to wear blue and green instead of red and black. It's very frustrating.

And this is where I think the Horus Heresy book prevails (accepting cost and that not every group will allow it). Even without the Alpha Legion special rules being available yet, it's fairly easy to make something approximating them. Take Vigilator and/or Mortitat HQ's, Assault and Recon Squads in Troops, Veteran Tacticals with Outflank or Destroyer Squads as Elites, Seeker Squads from Fast Attack, etc.

 

To be fair, I think that the Heresy books are what a lot of people who talk about the Legions actually want from the CSM book, while the CSM book is, perhaps, more aimed at those who want a more obvious Chaos force. Which I think is probably fine, if you can justify the cost the Heresy book.