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

[Sception]

I guess I'm primarily in the "CHAOS space marines" camp, but even so, I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of legion-themed skin (whether specifically legion named or not) applied chapter-tactics style overtop our book as a whole, so long as the book it was layed overtop of was suitably diverse and functional to support those themes to begin with.

 

Like, an overall book more of the lost and the damned style, with a mix of cultist/lesser humans & mutants; dark mechanicus possessed war engines & obliteratoresque man/machine/daemon hybrids; and chaos marines with renegade/post-heresy chaos marine troopers lorded over by legion vet elites, champions, & commanders, where all the chaos marine units would have the 'chaos marine' special rule (hatred: loyalists, stubborn), and access to a generic 'veteran' upgrade (re-roll leadership) that would be replaced according to theme choice ('infiltrate / re-roll reserves' for alpha legion/"enemy within"; pref: enemy Imperial for Black Legion/"archenemy"; Zealot for word bearers/"dark faith"; etc etc), while elite units & characters would have some sort of 'legionnaire' rule, maybe FNP & cause fear, to represent the unnatural resilience needed to survive in the eye through the centuries.

[Wayniac]

I've always been in the Chaos SPACE MARINE camp, but also for a while that was what everyone wanted.  I recall in the WD when the 2nd edition codex came out, the reason that book was based around the traitor legions was because GW did some looking at the tournament scene at the time, and it was like almost all CSM backed up with others.

 

I honestly think at some point GW has lost sight of what Chaos is supposed to be in 40k, and instead have just tried to appeal to everybody and ends up appealing to nobody.

 

I'm actually interested in this codex and might pick it up once I have some RL things in order and can look at playing again; I've started to dig the Crimson Slaughter background and I plan to pick up the new novella detailing their fall soon for more background.  Competitive or not I think I'd have a good time with Chaos, and to be honest nothing else appeals to me anyways really.

[Trevak Dal]

 

Who cares what a supplement is called if it gives what most of us want?

 

Easy to play Khorne as Space wolves. But its too lame for me to do. 

 

Yeah, never really cared for furries...

[the jeske]

Why not make more marks . 4 seems to be not enough . Mark of the sneaky chaos god of sneakyness or Mark of the Scary Chaos , Mark of Sheptuha . Could have AL dudes with WE dudes with IW tanks with NL drakes[why limit marks to non vehicles] and a BL lord , with ally BL BL sorc , some undivided sorc and a possessed formation 

[Scribe]

Its certainly been proposed.

[the jeske]

I was being sarcastic.

[Scribe]

Not everyone who has made the suggestion, was. :D

[HsojVvad]

I am curious about something. What happens if GW makes Legion rules and they are not what you want? I made a thread about what do you want for your Legion rules/playstyle. So what happens you finally get it, but it's not what you want? Maybe it will be the Tyranid 6th edition codex all over again then. Look what happened there. New codex, but it's not what the internet wanted. 

 

So wouldn't it just be better to find something to represent what you want? In 4th/5th edition, a few DA players used the SW codex to represent DA. Not because it was more powerful, but because the rules better represented on how THEY THOUGHT DA should be played. 

 

Someone said they want name recognition. So if GW makes the rules for your Legion, and you don't agree with it, does that mean your name recognition is :cusse? Better be careful for what you wish for. After all We have Crimson Slaughter now. Isn't that what people wanted? More CSM? GW saw CSM players complaining that there is no stuff for CSM. GW gave what people wanted. People are still upset. So wouldn't it be just better to play your Legion the way you think it can be played.

 

After all, You may just not like the end result. 

[Scribe]

Frankly, all I want is the name. The rule can be meaningless in the wider context (Night Lords = Night Vision) seriously.

[Brother Amarel]

Why not make more marks . 4 seems to be not enough . Mark of the sneaky chaos god of sneakyness or Mark of the Scary Chaos , Mark of Sheptuha . Could have AL dudes with WE dudes with IW tanks with NL drakes[why limit marks to non vehicles] and a BL lord , with ally BL BL sorc , some undivided sorc and a possessed formation 

 

Uh-oh, it's a small step from here to Malal to thread lock.

[HsojVvad]

Frankly, all I want is the name. The rule can be meaningless in the wider context (Night Lords = Night Vision) seriously.

 

I don't understand. Can you please explain. I really want to understand. Would it be like Dark Angles for having their own codex? Would it be like Black Templar being merged into the Space Marine codex? Having your own book or rules will make them more unique?

[Hellrender]

Actually, for me its the opposite. The name means nothing in a wider context. I rather get rules to represent X warband/legion/group, then that i get bound by colour scheme to X book.

[lcfr]

So setting aside the raging debate for a moment....has there been a review of the actual CS Supplement yet?

[HsojVvad]

So setting aside the raging debate for a moment....has there been a review of the actual CS Supplement yet?

 

I didn't think it was out yet. 

[d@n]

So setting aside the raging debate for a moment....has there been a review of the actual CS Supplement yet?

well it's not out yet. There's on.y been a few hints about the rules from a few people who got hold of a copy. As far as I know

[Scribe]

 

Frankly, all I want is the name. The rule can be meaningless in the wider context (Night Lords = Night Vision) seriously.

 

I don't understand. Can you please explain. I really want to understand. Would it be like Dark Angles for having their own codex? Would it be like Black Templar being merged into the Space Marine codex? Having your own book or rules will make them more unique?

 

I've come to the following place, after 20 odd years of this.

 

1. The game will never be balanced, this is intentional on GW's part.

2. The game will never 100% reflect the fluff.

 

When I accept those 2 conditions, what is the best we can hope for? Acknowledgment, and respect paid, to our faction (or sub-faction) of choice.

 

I dont care really what the rules are, I would prefer them to be uniform across my Detachment, but even then, I could live with it, because GW cannot write balanced rules, they dont want to.

 

So instead, just give me a rule, that say's the models on the table are World Eaters. Its not about play style for me anymore (I can run any MEQ list with Marines, few Tournaments even care) so as a MEQ player, I have tons of play styles, just not in the CSM book.

 

So for me, what matters? Acknowlegment of my faction, OUR factions, place in the setting.

 

We are the Legions of Chaos, we broken the Imperium's back, and its been a slow lingering decline because of us. Call it out, and give it life on the table. Thats what I want.

 

I dont want to run Chaos Space Marines. I dont want to run Blood Angels, with bunny ears, chain axes, and Khorne Icons.

 

I want to run World Eaters, and have nobody question what they are, who they are, and what they are about.

[Brother Ambroz]

I want to run World Eaters, and have nobody question what they are, who they are, and what they are about.

Do you know what the paint scheme of every Tau or Eldar group stand for? I certainly don't. You're always going to have people that don't know what your army is. Back when I used bat wings on my minis I had someone come and say "those are weird looking thousand sons".  Sure I corrected him but I wasn't like "HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW WHAT THESE GUYS ARE?!?! WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?". Alot of people don't even pay attention to chaos outside of the overpowered heldrake they accuse chaos players of. Sure they'd probably know if you were running a "world eater list" from a world eater supplement but GW is not going to do 9 supplements for each, Heinrich is right about that. 9 supplements would have all the other factions raging, why would GW spend that much time on a faction? Especially when there are so many others that still need updating.

[Prodigal Son of Magnus]

Here's an idea: what about Phoros' idea of squad-based legion choices but if you take all of 1 legion you get a bonus. For example: A squad with the Word Bearers (or whatever you want to call it) upgrade takes LD tests on 3D6 picking the lowest and ignore Daemonic Instabilty so daemon ICa can join WB squads and vice-versa. But if you take all WB your Independant characters get Zealot. How does that sound?

[King Jackal]

Man I want an artifact that confers 'daemonic instability.' Word Bearers need to be able to at least give no scatter to daemon allies deep striking.

[Scribe]

 

I want to run World Eaters, and have nobody question what they are, who they are, and what they are about.

Do you know what the paint scheme of every Tau or Eldar group stand for? I certainly don't. You're always going to have people that don't know what your army is. Back when I used bat wings on my minis I had someone come and say "those are weird looking thousand sons".  Sure I corrected him but I wasn't like "HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW WHAT THESE GUYS ARE?!?! WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?". Alot of people don't even pay attention to chaos outside of the overpowered heldrake they accuse chaos players of. Sure they'd probably know if you were running a "world eater list" from a world eater supplement but GW is not going to do 9 supplements for each, Heinrich is right about that. 9 supplements would have all the other factions raging, why would GW spend that much time on a faction? Especially when there are so many others that still need updating.

 

You'll have to forgive me, if I am repeating myself here and I'm sure I am.

 

40K is the story of humanity. The rest are just foils.

 

The story of humanity is one of ascension to greatness (The Great Crusade), Betrayal (Horus Heresy) and the slow march to extinction (present 40K, end of all things).

 

To me, those are undeniable truths. I do believe that the various factions should all have the same level of distinction on the table, if they are Eldar, or Tau, or whatever. If someone doesnt know the Chaos Legions, I dont fault them for their ignorance, I couldnt be bothered.

 

I dont care if others dont know about the World Eaters, its not their fault that GW has lost the plot. Its not their fault that GW doesnt even know its own soul these days and that in their mad rush to release more Imperial factions they are ignoring all the great things that make 40K what it is.

 

If GW did wake up, and did return to sub faction lists, people would know. They would experience that same depth in the fluff, on the table, and actually get a sense of history that this game carries with it.

 

As it is now? It doesnt matter, we are just bad guys, there to be struck down by the righteous Iron Hands, who just want to get back to their humanist roots.

 

Right? ;)

[Wayniac]

That's why GW should advance the plot.  Push the game into the 42nd millenium, shake it up so you keep the same tone but change it up.  The Golden Throne fails, the Imperium fractures.  The Ultramarines set up the Dominion of Ultramar under Roboute Guilliman, calling their successors to form the Ulramarine Legions.  The Imperium itself maintains some worlds but others act in open rebeliion, declaring their independence, and the HIgh Lords don't have enough resources to subjugate them, nontheless calling for a second Great Crusade to unite the galaxy.  The Space Wolves declare Fenris an independent world, with some warbands deciding to act as mercenaries.  The Dark Angels and Blood Angels, loyal to the end, remain with their successors as the Imperium's Angels of Death.  The Imperial Fists act as the Praetorian Guard of the Imperium, while the Black Templars zealously pursue traitors and renegades to bring them to justice.  Other Marine chapters side with one, or the other, or neither, some declaring their homeworlds independent, others allying with the Imperium or with Ultramar.

 

That's what they should do.  It's about time.  That would also allow for Marine v. Marine or Marine v. Guard or Guard v. Guard scenarios without some contrived "Who's the heretic?" fluff reason.  You would have an air of true "grimdark" as the Imperium tries to cling to what little it has left, with allies and enemies on all sides looking to pick at its carcass.

[Scribe]

I dont see why we should advance the plot at all. They cant seem to get their history right, why would we expect them to move ahead without plowing over vast swathes of the setting?

[Brother Heinrich]

Personally I'd love to see Tyranids get supplements for Hive fleet splinters and so on, as well as Orks having clan specific supplements. GW really has an awesome thing going with the supplement idea to build upon an army's base rules. Why do you think a Veterans of the Long War supplement sounded so damn good to us chaos guys? It's not re-writing our plot, it's not forcing players to play their army one way, it's just adding to it and allowing for even more of the fluff to be expounded upon with a handful of additional rules.

 

GW still has time to rectify their mistakes as always, but the biggest issue I have with this Crimson Slaughter BS is who the F asked for it? Why not address actual player input rather than come flying out of left-field, AGAIN. Do they not understand how satisfaction works? Someone asks for something and you give it to them, they get happy. Simple as that, if my wife asks for flowers and I give her flowers, they may not be exactly what she envisioned, but she still got flowers and she's happy. Now if I give her a shiny new power tool that I like, she's going to be pissed. It's not about what I want, it's about what she wants. Ergo, it's about what the customer wants, and I see more folks in the, "give me something related to the original 9" camp, than I do the, "holy crap why doesn't the Crimson Slaughter have their own ruleset" camp.

[Kol Saresk]

@Heinrich, you can blame fluffbunnies like me. Fluffbunnies who are tired of looking at the same background over and over and over and over and over and want something new to absorb. And not just "new" as in "We've expanded the background section on the World Eaters" but a complete and extensive showing of a new player. May not be a Crimson Slaughter fan, will most likely never do a Crimson Slaughter warband, but my need for fluffcrack is strong than my need for rules. Besides, if they never put pen to paper about the Night Lords, then I don't have to worry about losing my background like the Black Templars and Iron Hands did.

[Brother Heinrich]

@Heinrich, you can blame fluffbunnies like me. Fluffbunnies who are tired of looking at the same background over and over and over and over and over and want something new to absorb. And not just "new" as in "We've expanded the background section on the World Eaters" but a complete and extensive showing of a new player. May not be a Crimson Slaughter fan, will most likely never do a Crimson Slaughter warband, but my need for fluffcrack is strong than my need for rules. Besides, if they never put pen to paper about the Night Lords, then I don't have to worry about losing my background like the Black Templars and Iron Hands did.

Very true on that note. Chaos players are hilarious, myself included, because we are all constantly clamoring for change in some form or another. However the second there is even a whiff of change on the wind regarding our specific faction we get extremely excited, immediately followed by gut-wrenching paranoia about whether or not they will destroy the very foundations you've always held dear. Case in point: Iron Hands and Black Templars, most definitely a cautionary tale right there.