codex crimson slaughter.... yup, GW really hates us.

[A D-B]

 

 

Legion traits would make people happy. A lot of people. You don't have to use the trait. But you can. Easy enough. Even if it is just night vision for Night Lords. I've seen this discussion a million times and I know what your saying ADB, but traits would be cool. It wouldn't capture the complete blah blah of this legion and its varied warbands but who cares.

 

 

People who... like the lore? People who like the game? What you're literally saying is we should aim as low as possible and consider it awesome.

 

I love you ADB. But, If in the next codex Chaos Space marines, there were legion traits for each founding legion, people would be happier. You say traits are worthless and lazy but whats on offer now is even worse. 

 

And as I've said a squillion times: "Don't take a criticism of a bad system as a rousing endorsement of anything else, or what we have now."

 

It's not black and white. You can point out something as a weak idea without saying the other side is excellent.

 

I'm with ADB on the fact that Legion Tactics as a system similar to the one in C:SM would be a bad idea.

 

Though I think there are other ways to make a Legion warband distinct from another Legion's warband, just not by a standard blanket rule across the board like in C:SM. Not all Night Lords have Night Lord geneseed, there will be warbands where none fought at terra or in the heresy...and so on...

 

Yeppers. This. Exactree. No more, no less.

[Brother Heinrich]

It's just one of those things that sucks because it's basically "first come, first served." and Codex Marines always seem to get served first. I thought the chapter tactics idea was an outstanding addition, however now that our loyalist counterparts have it, there is no way in hell we can have anything close because we, "have to be different and unique." We will never have a seat at the table and we will never get anything other than a bland homogenized ruleset that typecasts us as all the same thing.

[Dravenguild]

I really feel you on chapter tactics, I'm not advocating that either.

 

Chaos has always been so faceted at first I thought "Make the traits available on the HQ level that will work!" But still, it's not complex enough to cover what people want out of chaos. Rather, I think a lot of the entries can be condensed and given a slew of options to tailor specifically on an army wide level, unit by unit.

 

For example, the humble chaos marine, a recently turned renegade he still shines his big metal boots with pride.

 

And basically start him off as a 10 point bolter wielder with the basic statline, then you have an entire page of different paths which will shift his force organization slot or status as a veteran, or status as a worshipper of chaos, a remnant of legion geneseed or keep him as cheap as possible to reflect his lowly status.

 

For example: I choose bike (X points, shifts to fast attack) Veteran of the long war (X points) a trait, let's say furious charge (X points) and a mark of let's say nurgle for X points.

 

By condensing the entries down to allow more options we can shift around elements of the army to better represent the fractured state of warbands or the remnants of the original legions.

 

Still sounds complicated, and my memory doesn't recall if this is what 3.5 did with basic chaos marines.

[Yogi]

 

And as I've said a squillion times: "Don't take a criticism of a bad system as a rousing endorsement of anything else, or what we have now."

 

It's not black and white. You can point out something as a weak idea without saying the other side is excellent.

 

I don't really think it is a weak idea. Traits are cool. If your warband is mongrel bastards #3315521 you have standard rules.

 

Better ideas no doubt exist, but they don't get put into practice. Crimson Slaughter does. 

 

I get that chaos is pleb warbands, I just don't want them to be. 

 

Anyways I'll shutup now. 

[Brother Heinrich]

I do feel there is a point where it gets too complex. Remember we are talking about 40k, a game that tries to capture the "overall" feel of a unified war-host on the tabletop. If you want true representation of the varied forms of chaos warbands then play the Black Crusade RPG. It doesn't need to be complex, just because I named all my little Night Lords doesn't mean I want different rules for Vadrek and different rules for Skaros, the Carcharodons renegade in his squad. I really do not care that much about full, immersive coverage of every facet and possibility under the umbrella of chaos, and I'm willing to bet neither does most of the chaos player base. We are so starved for even an ounce of character that we are willing to take anything at this point, even a light gesture at what it is to be an Iron Warrior 'in general' or an Alpha Legionnaire 'in general'.

[Dravenguild]

True, at that point it should be a purchasable trait or two you can buy for your lord, let's say out of a list of 10 or so and they confer to your army. That's my slight inclination, so if I want something "resembling" night lords, I buy fear and night vision on my lord, it confers to the rest of the army.

 

So it's not an affront to "HARUMPH THERE ARE NO LEGIONS IN 40K!" people, and you can get away with having psuedo "night lords", much better than the drivel we have now, where each chaos marine is exactly the same.

 

I mean, the warp is a CUHHHRAAAZY place, who's to say that warbands that dwell there for a long time don't develop some sort of predisposition for fear tactics because of their needs to survive, while getting acclimated to the dark?

[Rain]

Haven't been around for a while, and boy howdy look, it's this topic. Feels like coming home.

 

Anyhow, I still don't see how allowing people something like "Legion Tactics: Iron Warriors" is at all limiting. It's like letting us take VotLW now if we want to represent Heresy vets, you don't have to take it! If you want to play say, an IW army that doesn't fight sieges and just raids Imperial shipping to get by, then maybe even take the Alpha Legion or Night Lords tactics, depending on what those may be, and justify in your fluff.

 

Even in 3.5, which people seem to have wildly disparate and often illogical memories of, nothing stopped people from just running with the base list and mixing Khorne with unmarked multi-vet skill units with a summoned squad of daemonettes. The reason most people ran legion identified lists was that they liked it. They liked having the "identity" of belonging to a certain Legion and being just a bit different than those other colored emo marines over there. Why take away something that people like? Yeah you can bring up the fluff, but come on, get a grip guys, it's a game. Games are supposed to be fun and engaging for the players, and players found legions fun and engaging, and if they don't then they won't use the optional legion rules anyway and you can have your "non-boring non-legion-defined" armies romping around so it's all good. More choice is very rarely bad.

[daboarder]

Well adb you've convinced me of one thing.

 

GW are never going to listen to us, give us what we want or ven equivalent treatment to loyalist armies. They're just going to stick their head in the sand and justify their actions with drivel.

 

Everything you have said would equally apply to the chapters and yet the evidences shows the opposite. Chapter tactics no more dilutes the SMs than the same treatment would dilute us.

[Xenith]

A Big Book of Warlord Traits, Chaos Wargear, and Warband Tactics would come close to what I want, cram-packed with juicy lore,

 

but Legion Tactics: Night Lords and Legion Tactics: Iron Warriors would be missing the point so catastrophically...

I not quite sure whats going on here regarding the entire back and forth. Are these concepts not one and the same?

 

 

We're into the semantics of names here, which is dumb. Legion tactics/warband tactics/my guy is different from the guy over there in pink armour tactics. Whatever.

 

I think what we can all agree on, is that we would like some way of differentiating the basic marines from one another, which then, may or may not be used by some players to demonstrate how their version of a chaos warband works:

 

"These guys are my breach-takers, I want them to have furious charge" "This chosen squad is Honsou and his mates sneaking up the the fortress on Hydra Cordatus, they have infiltrate."

 

 

 

As an aside, I understand that you do not wish to see "All legion x get y", and I can understand how constraining that is, but each legion had genetic predispositions, that may or may not be affected by their training.

 

The Blood Angels 9th company fights in a very different way to the Blood Angels 8th company, but they still get he same universal rule, The Red Thirst. The Death company arguably a warrior cult within an existing structure...still the same genetics, follow the same rules for their genetic pre-disposition (Descent of Angels).

 

In my above example, both breach takers and stealth squad are still Iron Warriors, and have the mental abilities to plan and execute works and take fortresses, made innate through genetic predisposition and years of training.

 

A problem with allowing people to pick and choose which vet skills they want on each unit is inevitably that the havocs get tank hunters, the assault units get furious charge, at which point you may as well just build them into the cost of the unit (like they did with Eldar aspect powers).

[Slayer le Boucher]

All this talk about Legions been dead and there is no more Legionnaires...

 

*Check his Apocalypse book, and see the Band of Legionnaires Formation Datasheet*...Oh look at that!...

[Xenith]

All this talk about Legions been dead and there is no more Legionnaires...

 

*Check his Apocalypse book, and see the Band of Legionnaires Formation Datasheet*...Oh look at that!...

Psst, Slayer:

 

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1120003a&prodId=prod2090040a

 

Actually, the more I think about this, the less I realise that I care.

 

So what if we don't have specific rules to represent a warband made of legionaires on table. I play Thousand Sons and already do, just about.

 

My Iron Warriors are thus enthralled to the will of Tzeentch, under my sorcerer lord (who needs people to open libraries for him) and are represented by taking the mark of nurgle on most things (lol).

[daboarder]

Well I play deathguard.

 

But I only have 2-3 units in the book

 

Typhus

Plague marines

Zombies

[Dam13n]

What I've considered for a while is the idea that a Chaos Marine force could be individualised by the taking of a number of traits, each one coming with both a strength and a weakness.  This way a list could be themed to a certain play-style and back-story, yet not be hidebound into "If you are playing X Legion then you must always have Y special rules".  As this is limiting, and one thing Chaos is not (by it's very nature) is limiting (IMHO)

 

So, to continue the Night Lords theme (always appropriate when both AD-B and Heinrich are posting in the topic), here are two I quickly came up with that would fit the established background of a traditional Night Lords force*:  

(*Not to say that this is the only way that Night Lords could be represented, which is the whole point of what I'm trying to get across).

 

1 - Sons of Nostramo.  A significant number of this warband's members have originated from the Night Lords home planet of Nostramo.  As a result they have eyes characteristic of that dark world.  All models in a detachment with this trait have the Night Vision special rule, however due to their increased sensitivity to bright light they suffer a -1 penalty to all Blind tests they are required to take.

 

2 - Terror Tactics.  This warband is known for it's brutal and callous methods of warfare.  They also use all manner of disturbing tactics in order to unsettle and demoralise their foes.  All models in a detachment with this trait have the Fear special rule.  However such tactics take time to put into effect, therefore any model in this detachment looking to arrive from reserves suffers a -1 penalty on their reserve roll.

 

etc.

 

There could be any number of these traits available.  The idea being that you could create just about any Warband you like, whether it be a pure Legion force or a Renegade Chapter, or Reavers who've come from many different sources, but have now developed their own style of warfare that takes advantage of those differences.

 

 Now I'm not saying this is perfect, or right.  I'm not expecting anyone to agree with it, but it is a thought, and one that could (if done right) allow for some quite unique lists that allow the player to feel like he is playing the army he wants to play.  Whether that be a pure Legion force, or something bizarre and wonderful.

 

Add to that a selection of different Warlord tables, each of which follows a certain style of play (like the ones in the BRB, just with extra tentacles) and a good selection of different Artefacts, Gifts and Upgrades that allow you to create some interesting characters to lead your own personal warband.

 

I do think that while Chapter Tactics may be just about OK for the loyalists (because they are much more rigid in their traditions and organisation), it isn't necessarily right for Chaos.  A Chaos Army should be mutable, it should be unique.  It should follow the whims and tendencies of its Lord (the player).

 

You can't do that with the same system as Codex: Space Marines.

[daboarder]

There are a lot of ways to give us what we want wuth various strengths and weaknesses. We've spent 2 editions sh o wing that. They give us lip service and ignore us

[Dravenguild]

What I've considered for a while is the idea that a Chaos Marine force could be individualised by the taking of a number of traits, each one coming with both a strength and a weakness.  This way a list could be themed to a certain play-style and back-story, yet not be hidebound into "If you are playing X Legion then you must always have Y special rules".  As this is limiting, and one thing Chaos is not (by it's very nature) is limiting (IMHO)

 

So, to continue the Night Lords theme (always appropriate when both AD-B and Heinrich are posting in the topic), here are two I quickly came up with that would fit the established background of a traditional Night Lords force*:  

(*Not to say that this is the only way that Night Lords could be represented, which is the whole point of what I'm trying to get across).

 

1 - Sons of Nostramo.  A significant number of this warband's members have originated from the Night Lords home planet of Nostramo.  As a result they have eyes characteristic of that dark world.  All models in a detachment with this trait have the Night Vision special rule, however due to their increased sensitivity to bright light they suffer a -1 penalty to all Blind tests they are required to take.

 

2 - Terror Tactics.  This warband is known for it's brutal and callous methods of warfare.  They also use all manner of disturbing tactics in order to unsettle and demoralise their foes.  All models in a detachment with this trait have the Fear special rule.  However such tactics take time to put into effect, therefore any model in this detachment looking to arrive from reserves suffers a -1 penalty on their reserve roll.

 

etc.

 

There could be any number of these traits available.  The idea being that you could create just about any Warband you like, whether it be a pure Legion force or a Renegade Chapter, or Reavers who've come from many different sources, but have now developed their own style of warfare that takes advantage of those differences.

 

 Now I'm not saying this is perfect, or right.  I'm not expecting anyone to agree with it, but it is a thought, and one that could (if done right) allow for some quite unique lists that allow the player to feel like he is playing the army he wants to play.  Whether that be a pure Legion force, or something bizarre and wonderful.

 

Add to that a selection of different Warlord tables, each of which follows a certain style of play (like the ones in the BRB, just with extra tentacles) and a good selection of different Artefacts, Gifts and Upgrades that allow you to create some interesting characters to lead your own personal warband.

 

I do think that while Chapter Tactics may be just about OK for the loyalists (because they are much more rigid in their traditions and organisation), it isn't necessarily right for Chaos.  A Chaos Army should be mutable, it should be unique.  It should follow the whims and tendencies of its Lord (the player).

 

You can't do that with the same system as Codex: Space Marines.

 

 

What is wrong with my suggestion? The problem I see with yours is it's still locked thematically to the legionnaires and suffering from imposed penalties on us, as if we didn't have enough working against us as is?

 

I think the most sensible way to placate this would be the lord or warlord has two tables with a list of traits available to him in which he can choose one in each, let's say for example "Bitter Survival/infighting" and "Warp adaptations" or something along those lines and then it's applied to the entire army.

 

EX.A My chaos lord takes "Tank hunters" from the first table, reflecting the fierce tank battles fought within the eye or otherwise and then on the opposite table I take "Night vision" which is a result of living in a world of perpetual night.

 

It doesn't have to be locked into a legion trait, you can mix and match willy nilly and you still will have a way to represent some semblance of night lords.

[Scribe]

Its time to move away from 'chaos gets bonus' only if they accept a penalty.' Thats not how other factions work, and GW doesnt have the balls to pull the trigger on benefits worthy of a penalty.

[Iron Hands Fanatic]

Be careful what you wish for: I waited since their Index Astartes article for the Iron Hands to get some attention, both in rules and fluff. And lo and behold, with the latest edition of Codex: Space Marines, chapter tactics brought about the recognition I'd been waiting all that time for! Yay!

 

Then in less than three months, the Raukaan Supplement turned a Chapter with an incredibly rich background into the Ultramarines with a bionics fetish.

 

There's always a chance that the recognition rules-wise you want will dilute the character that you're interested in so much that you remember those years of being ignored with nostalgia, and wish that GW had just left your faction alone.

 

Then again, maybe that's just me being bitter.

[Scribe]

Iron Hands exist in the novel Wrath of Iron, not the abomination that followed with C:SM, as far as I am concerned. :p

[Slayer le Boucher]

WHat people don't seem to realise is that wanting to play a CSM Legion Force/Warband, is the exact same thing as Wanting to play a Primogenitor Chapter, its something with a lot of history and weight behind it.

 

So SM Chapters can play according there enheritance of their Primogenitors, while been only fractions of what they where..., where is the freakin difference with Primogenitors traitors?...

 

There is no more Legions but Warbands?, just like Marines with their Chapters, its a poor excuse to throw at us.

 

CSM and SM are the 2 sides of a mirror, they are Brothers made enemies and still...there is more threat from Tau's or Orks then with their Arch-Nemesis, CSM...

[Dam13n]

 

So, to continue the Night Lords theme (always appropriate when both AD-B and Heinrich are posting in the topic), here are two I quickly came up with that would fit the established background of a traditional Night Lords force*:  

(*Not to say that this is the only way that Night Lords could be represented, which is the whole point of what I'm trying to get across).

 

There could be any number of these traits available.  The idea being that you could create just about any Warband you like, whether it be a pure Legion force or a Renegade Chapter, or Reavers who've come from many different sources, but have now developed their own style of warfare that takes advantage of those differences.

 

 

What is wrong with my suggestion? The problem I see with yours is it's still locked thematically to the legionnaires and suffering from imposed penalties on us, as if we didn't have enough working against us as is?

 

Nothing, however unlike GW did with Chapter Traits, which I don't agree with (you shouldn't get extra rules for free, they need to either be taken into account in terms of pts, or balanced in such a way that the effective value of the model/unit remains unchanged).

 

I just gave 2 examples that could be used for a "traditional" night lords force, as that was the example Legion being used by others.  Once expanded there would be a great many more with the idea that they could be mixed and matched to create a really varied and individual army.

 

So a Tank Hunter trait and a Night Vision trait, to represent a force that specialises in ambushing armoured columns.  Fine.

Or a Crusading trait and a Fleet trait to represent a highly mobile and adaptable force that's able to redeploy quickly.  Also Fine.

 

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough first time around.

[Rain]

As far as fears of fluff butchery go, that really can't get much worse than it already is. If anything, the Black Legion supplement which I bought out of sick curiosity was actually pretty decent fluff wise and did well to give the BL a sense of common purpose despite the disparate histories and predelictions of its various lords. Still doesn't hold a candle to the character and menace dripping from that fluff blurb at the beginning of the 3.5 codex told from the persepctive of a Black Legion Heresy vet about how modern loyalists have "forgotten themselves" and are nothing like the ones he remembers fighting on the walls of Terra, but it's not bad either.

 

I guess the main thing that has become lost in terms of fluff and theme is that CSM used to be written by CSM fans and had a kind of Hannibal Lecter appeal to them. Sure they were evil and sadistic and imprisoned, but they were still damn menacing and had a character and perspective unto themselves seperate from just being the bad guys that exist to be evil and for loyalists to be heroic by beating. Chaos went from being Darth Vader to being the stormtroopers.

[Smurfalypse]

 

 

Notice how this rumour about "you can roll beatss on the possessed" showed up after people on plenty of forums said that it would be good if they were beasts...also, what good is that roll if you are already in combat? Also, that chart would invalidate giving them MoT so I don't think it's true whatsoever...

If you read it, it says " gain a D3 roll at the start of their owning players turn. 1". So it is more like the old school Possessed ability (if true, which I am very skeptical of).

 

I don't remember the old Possessed ability, could you please clarify?

 

The old Possessed abilities used to be to roll when the game began, not during each combat.

 

In 3rd Possessed rolled 3D6 on a chart and got three abilities (doubles and triples were wasted). 

Back in 3.5 Possessed paid points for their upgrades. Things like, Flight, Fleet of Foot, Rending, est est.

In Fourth we rolled once at the beginning of the game and got one ability. 

Sixth as you know we roll each fight sub-phase.

[daboarder]

3.5 we're the only useable possessed in my opinion.

[Smurfalypse]

I may fervently disagree with you on the stance of Legion rules, Scribe (and likely will be until I actually see a working version that makes sense which I doubt) but people  wanting the rules isn't silly and I won't mock you for having them. I find it to be somewhat misguided, but I blame that on the 3.5 codex. Everyone has something they want out of this hobby, nothing wrong with voicing it.

 

Chaos Marines aren't Chapters. They no longer follow a strict set of guidelines that dictate their art of warfare down to the letter and they rarely practice any measure of doctrine that they once had because most simply lack the ability or means too, and others just don't care.

 

I'm with AD-B on this one.

 

You are right, we are not Chapters and we are not (for the most part) Legions. 

 

We should however had the ability to play out units in various ways like many other codexes. We should have the ability to run our armies in ways we "see" the old Legion Tactics. While there are no Legion operations, there are certainly warbands lead by old Legionaries who use tactics in line with what they were taught. Nothing wrong with someone wanting to run a Night Lords Warband who uses terror and fast strikes to throw the enemy off balance right? Or are we saying that we should not do that? Do we not get an option for anything to use Chaos Space Marines cept in a Rhino or x20 man and call it a day? How bland and soulless this has become. We want flavor and fun and the ability to run our warbands in different ways to differentiate us from others.

 

On one hand you say Legions are dead but we thousands of different warbands but our rules show us one warband. We have one way to play and no options on how to play differently. The part I find sad is that you support this kind of approach to CSM Codexes. 

 

However, on the flip side (speaking from a competitive standpoint now) we also have a very ill conceived codex. 13pt base CSM that is short two rules to a base Space Marine (And They Shall Know No Fear and Chapter Tactics), we really gain nothing in return so there needs to be some bend on this in a way. Our units/models have similar costs and exactly the same statlines but always slightly lesser in some way.

I am probably one of the few to say this but the Dino-Bots were a great step in a direction away from the Space Marine Codexes, none of them were balanced properly, but it was a good step away from what the SMs have in general. I enjoy that. 

The problem lies in the stuff that stays the same. CSM vs Tact Marine, not even a contest. One point different and one has much much less. 

Dev Cents vs Oblits (we sorta got ripped off on this one)

Lack of transports

Lack of flyers (we have one OP one, but then it ends)

Not just units that are slightly overpriced but units that absolutely gouge you point wise. Possessed 26pts each? Warp Talons 30pts each? Chosen 17pts each?

**I have x40 Possessed that I cannot use because to run a single unit of 20 takes up literally half of my army points. . . It is insane. I cant even run these in random pick up games for fun because the price is so high. 

 

I agree that the Legions are mostly disbanded and what we see are basically warbands running around doing their own things, however, there should be better rules written in this regard. If we are pirate/murderers, then that is how our codex should represent us, it is very much half assed currently and nothing was really changed from the 4th ed book to this one, just a few minor tweeks and a few new units that are horribly balanced added. 

[Dravenguild]

 

 

So, to continue the Night Lords theme (always appropriate when both AD-B and Heinrich are posting in the topic), here are two I quickly came up with that would fit the established background of a traditional Night Lords force*:  

(*Not to say that this is the only way that Night Lords could be represented, which is the whole point of what I'm trying to get across).

 

There could be any number of these traits available.  The idea being that you could create just about any Warband you like, whether it be a pure Legion force or a Renegade Chapter, or Reavers who've come from many different sources, but have now developed their own style of warfare that takes advantage of those differences.

 

 

What is wrong with my suggestion? The problem I see with yours is it's still locked thematically to the legionnaires and suffering from imposed penalties on us, as if we didn't have enough working against us as is?

 

Nothing, however unlike GW did with Chapter Traits, which I don't agree with (you shouldn't get extra rules for free, they need to either be taken into account in terms of pts, or balanced in such a way that the effective value of the model/unit remains unchanged).

 

I just gave 2 examples that could be used for a "traditional" night lords force, as that was the example Legion being used by others.  Once expanded there would be a great many more with the idea that they could be mixed and matched to create a really varied and individual army.

 

So a Tank Hunter trait and a Night Vision trait, to represent a force that specialises in ambushing armoured columns.  Fine.

Or a Crusading trait and a Fleet trait to represent a highly mobile and adaptable force that's able to redeploy quickly.  Also Fine.

 

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough first time around.

 

Ah my bad, it's crystal clear now.