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

[incinerator950]

Well, let me know if you can still take Plague Marines regularly.

[Chiv]

Some of these rules have potential :D Hopefully they're true.

[Trevak Dal]

VOTLW apparently, GW is so inept at these things they could actually think thats a major drawback

 

While I agree with Malisteen that it's probably not going to happen-if they come out with the Vets Dataslate/Supplement it would be.

[Prot]

I do find it funny that a long time ago I posted how disappointed I was in the lack of 'possessed' style units. I didn't just mean possessed (as they are a cool kit that no one used but me.... and even then it was limited).

 

I never fully painted my possessed and remembered posting that I wish they made changes to all models with a possessed kind of feel to them, like Brutes, Possessed, Forgefiends, and mutilators.

 

Crimson Slaughter is pretty close to what I hoped for. I'm not going to lie and say it sounds awesome because it seems to be rumour so far but honestly it's pretty exciting for me.

 

I plan on kit bashing possessed and doing some light conversion work and see how it looks on the table. I've also always used my Helbrute AND Forgefiends only to be ridiculed by the communitty in general but if Diviniation is possible who will have the last laugh now?!?!? (I know AV12, but still)

 

As a side note the idea of GW putting out a new Helbrute model without spicing up the rules or giving a pod... I'm not sure the thinking there?

 

I for one will continue to use what I had, including my  3 Forgefiends, and Helbrute, and now I get to sprinkle Possessed in.

 

I do kind of feel for Black Legion players though. I almost bit on that codex but I just couldn't get into it (past the fluff which was awesome.) This supplement (Crimson Slaughter) feels more... game changing, and seems to have some additional twists to it..... looking very forward to this.

[incinerator950]

Silly question, but is the Supplement a standalone codex, or do I still need the regular codex?  (Have not bought the current codex yet)

[Dam13n]

It is a supplement.  You still need the parent codex (as supplements don't have any units in them).

[Trevak Dal]

Yeah, when your basic book is pretty much despised your looking at any kind of rules change as food to the starving...

If it makes you feel better, as a Daemons first, CSM second player, I wont be using this.

I wouldn't see a problem if you were a Mono-Khorne army.

I use Khorne or no marks with my guys. The only thing I take Mark of Nurgle on (begrudgingly) is my 3 Obliterators. They cost so much already, I don't need them getting punked by a melta gun or lascannon

[Kol Saresk]

 

 

 

If this codex was called "Codex Word Bearers" no one would complain. Well many still would, but less.

However it's called Crimson Slaughter, and it's clearly very inline with Word Bearers... So just play it like I am, as word bearers.

If this was Codex Word Bearers and people were happy with it, personally I'd be disappointed that people expected so little of the XVII Legion after making such a fuss. But that's just me.

 

I dunno. I'm kind of hyped for the Crimson Slaughter. Or maybe I'll make a DYI.....

Well, I think you should be disappointed people expected so little of a Chaos warband called the Crimson Slaugther too.

Let me put it this way. How long has the Chaos community been screaming and whining for "Legion rules"? Quite a while, right?

 

But when I suggest "Hey let's settle for supplements that represent Renegades and Warbands."

 

I'm told "No!".

 

So when we get here where more than a few are suddenly "I can use this rules for Renegades to represent my Legions!" it is a bit surprising since all of the whining gave me impression that the bar for Legion rules had to be pretty high.

 

Instead its Possessed troops, a better Dark Apostle and free Fear.

[Scribe]

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

[Kol Saresk]

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

And where's the recognition? It has a Renegades on the cover, not a Legion. And unless the Word Bearers were one of the "Traitor allies" that I saw mentioned, the XVII won't even be mentioned. This is actually less than what I asked for when i said "Supplements that could represent both".

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for this. I'm just surprised that all of this talk about recognition and how Legion rules need to be Legion rules and Renegade rules be Renegade rules how easily satisfied that the very people who told me no are by a Renegades supplement.

[d@n]

Some of these rules have potential :D Hopefully they're true.

they are. I saw a copy of the supplement do day, and also heard that chosen are out tomorrow aswell

[Sception]

The apostle isn't even that much better.  So, what, for an indeterminate increase in cost, he hands out zealot to his unit and another, instead of just to his own, and fear to the other, with hatred against most enemies purchasable by the second unit for about the same cost as the upgrade will probably be, anyway?  Doesn't seem like that meaningful an improvement, honestly.  Not enough of a buff to be worth fielding a rather costly melee HQ without all that much personal melee power to bring to bare.

 

As with apostles in general, the CS apostle just pales in comparison to sorcerers as a support HQ.  And while CS apostles may be a smidgeon less bad, the CS divination sorc is a big improvement over regular sorcerers, so the gap is only wider.

 

maybe if the aura was greater than 6", or handed out more than zealot, or if the apostle was a more meaningful melee element in his own right, or if he was a bit cheaper, and 3/elite instead of 1/hq.  As it is, the list of HQs to include before you even consider him is pretty long - tricked out CS lord, CS divination sorcerer, Warpsmith (meh, but still better, imo), Be'Lakor, Huron, Typhus, Khârn (if CS can indeed field them), Prince with wings (even without daemon weapon)...  I mean, if you're taking an apostle to take one just because, then so be it, but you can take an apostle just to take one in the parent book, too.

[Scribe]

 

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

And where's the recognition? It has a Renegades on the cover, not a Legion. And unless the Word Bearers were one of the "Traitor allies" that I saw mentioned, the XVII won't even be mentioned. This is actually less than what I asked for when i said "Supplements that could represent both".

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for this. I'm just surprised that all of this talk about recognition and how Legion rules need to be Legion rules and Renegade rules be Renegade rules how easily satisfied that the very people who told me no are by a Renegades supplement.

 

Dude, are you missing the comments about 'If only it was titled: Codex Word Bearers'?

 

The rules crunch as you can see is going to be latched onto by anyone bored, or dissatisfied. If they had called it Word Bearers, and filled it with new WB fluff, I 100% am sure it would have been better received.

 

The rules dont need to be crazy, and Chaos Legion fans condition themselves to ask for less so that it at least seems feasible, instead of omg we should be Grey Knights ++ (which we should be....)

 

Relics to make yourself a Possessed.

Troops as Possessed.

 

Gal Vorbak what?

 

Relics to make a 'better' Apostle? Someone should check against the 3.5 Apostle, is it essentially the same rules?

 

Call it Word Bearers, and it would have been better recieved, but that doesnt mean the rules cant be used by those who see it as a better fit. This isnt a renegade book anyway, unless you swear to chaos and dump your Drop Pods into the void right? :p

[Sception]

Call it word bearers, and it probably would have had the same vet tax as black legion, instead of the no-vets non-penalty that they do have.  I still think it would have been received batter, at least among the digital and realspace communities I frequent, but it likely would have been 'less good'.

 

As for Gal Vorbak, I always saw them as less a common thing to be represented by troop possessed, and more a venerated, respected elite, best represented by possessed that remain elites, but with some sort of extra upgrade.

 

But whatever.  I can't argue with WB players who think this book is, if not a perfect fit, then at least a better fit than the parent book.  Particularly as my legion already has their own supplement, and I'm considering running them out of the slaughter book, anyway.

[Kol Saresk]

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

And where's the recognition? It has a Renegades on the cover, not a Legion. And unless the Word Bearers were one of the "Traitor allies" that I saw mentioned, the XVII won't even be mentioned. This is actually less than what I asked for when i said "Supplements that could represent both".

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for this. I'm just surprised that all of this talk about recognition and how Legion rules need to be Legion rules and Renegade rules be Renegade rules how easily satisfied that the very people who told me no are by a Renegades supplement.

Dude, are you missing the comments about 'If only it was titled: Codex Word Bearers'?

The rules crunch as you can see is going to be latched onto by anyone bored, or dissatisfied. If they had called it Word Bearers, and filled it with new WB fluff, I 100% am sure it would have been better received.

The rules dont need to be crazy, and Chaos Legion fans condition themselves to ask for less so that it at least seems feasible, instead of omg we should be Grey Knights ++ (which we should be....)

Relics to make yourself a Possessed.

Troops as Possessed.

Gal Vorbak what?

Relics to make a 'better' Apostle? Someone should check against the 3.5 Apostle, is it essentially the same rules?

Call it Word Bearers, and it would have been better recieved, but that doesnt mean the rules cant be used by those who see it as a better fit. This isnt a renegade book anyway, unless you swear to chaos and dump your Drop Pods into the void right?

No, I've seen Wade do his "I want my teddy bear because the CS are scarier than Death Guard now!" skit.

But this is also what I mean. Such whining and crying and gnashing of teeth over Legion rules and the reaction is "I'll just call it Word Bearers because Word Bearers were only the fifty Gal Vorbak."

All this demand for "Legion rules" and all of a sudden its "I'll just pretend its something else and be happy with it." Really? Make that much of a fuss and when GW finally delivers on something good and you're going to settle? They just raised the bar. After making that much of a fuss, why not make them raise it further?

[daveNYC]

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

And where's the recognition? It has a Renegades on the cover, not a Legion. And unless the Word Bearers were one of the "Traitor allies" that I saw mentioned, the XVII won't even be mentioned. This is actually less than what I asked for when i said "Supplements that could represent both".

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for this. I'm just surprised that all of this talk about recognition and how Legion rules need to be Legion rules and Renegade rules be Renegade rules how easily satisfied that the very people who told me no are by a Renegades supplement.

I'm a Thousand Sons fan, so I could post a frothing at the mouth rant if it'd make you feel more comfortable about the seeming acceptance of this new supplement.

[Kol Saresk]

I have no problem with it being accepted. If I did, I wouldn't have just pre-ordered it on my phone. I'm just surprised by who is accepting it.

[Scribe]

Like I said.

Crunch - I honestly would expect many CSM players to jump.

Fluff/Representation - Still an issue.

You are listening to the wrong people Kol. Tons of just just want consistency and recognition, as we went over at the start of the week or whenever it was.

And where's the recognition? It has a Renegades on the cover, not a Legion. And unless the Word Bearers were one of the "Traitor allies" that I saw mentioned, the XVII won't even be mentioned. This is actually less than what I asked for when i said "Supplements that could represent both".

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for this. I'm just surprised that all of this talk about recognition and how Legion rules need to be Legion rules and Renegade rules be Renegade rules how easily satisfied that the very people who told me no are by a Renegades supplement.

Dude, are you missing the comments about 'If only it was titled: Codex Word Bearers'?

The rules crunch as you can see is going to be latched onto by anyone bored, or dissatisfied. If they had called it Word Bearers, and filled it with new WB fluff, I 100% am sure it would have been better received.

The rules dont need to be crazy, and Chaos Legion fans condition themselves to ask for less so that it at least seems feasible, instead of omg we should be Grey Knights ++ (which we should be....)

Relics to make yourself a Possessed.
Troops as Possessed.

Gal Vorbak what?

Relics to make a 'better' Apostle? Someone should check against the 3.5 Apostle, is it essentially the same rules?

Call it Word Bearers, and it would have been better recieved, but that doesnt mean the rules cant be used by those who see it as a better fit. This isnt a renegade book anyway, unless you swear to chaos and dump your Drop Pods into the void right?

No, I've seen Wade do his "I want my teddy bear because the CS are scarier than Death Guard now!" skit.

But this is also what I mean. Such whining and crying and gnashing of teeth over Legion rules and the reaction is "I'll just call it Word Bearers because Word Bearers were only the fifty Gal Vorbak."

All this demand for "Legion rules" and all of a sudden its "I'll just pretend its something else and be happy with it." Really? Make that much of a fuss and when GW finally delivers on something good and you're going to settle? They just raised the bar. After making that much of a fuss, why not make them raise it further?

This part is hilarious though.

I could write a magnum opus of such sublime perfection that Lorgar, Fulgrim, and Curze would bow at my feet. GW wouldnt give a :cuss, are you kidding me here?

'Make them raise it further'

Please do tell on how we can POSSIBLY do that.

Have no fear though brother. I'm not happy, and I'll gladdly dump vitriol into every thread that comes around.

[Kol Saresk]

If it couldn't be done then how did we get this Supplement that, from what I am hearing, actually isn't too bad and is apparently good enough that it is already being considered to represent Word Bearers?

[Vesper]

 

 

 

 

If this codex was called "Codex Word Bearers" no one would complain. Well many still would, but less.

However it's called Crimson Slaughter, and it's clearly very inline with Word Bearers... So just play it like I am, as word bearers.

If this was Codex Word Bearers and people were happy with it, personally I'd be disappointed that people expected so little of the XVII Legion after making such a fuss. But that's just me.

 

I dunno. I'm kind of hyped for the Crimson Slaughter. Or maybe I'll make a DYI.....

Well, I think you should be disappointed people expected so little of a Chaos warband called the Crimson Slaugther too.

Let me put it this way. How long has the Chaos community been screaming and whining for "Legion rules"? Quite a while, right?

 

But when I suggest "Hey let's settle for supplements that represent Renegades and Warbands."

 

I'm told "No!".

 

So when we get here where more than a few are suddenly "I can use this rules for Renegades to represent my Legions!" it is a bit surprising since all of the whining gave me impression that the bar for Legion rules had to be pretty high.

 

Instead its Possessed troops, a better Dark Apostle and free Fear.

 

Let us reverse the argument. Once upon a time, there were so called "Legion rules". Nobody ever dared say "THIS is what that Legion and all its warbands look like". It tried to capture some archetypes that were somehow representing a certain aspect of a Legion's legacy. It wasn't perfect, nobody said it was, but when you try to represent something through a set of rules, you have to make some sacrifices. You will probably throw to me the "Raptor Legion" thingy you're spreading everywhere, that's fine. Yet, that was also the opportunity for players to field a Raptor Cult. Were the Alpha Legion rules reflecting EVERY Alpha Legion warband in the world ? Nah. Yet, it was also the opportunity to play a Chaos insurgency led by random warband #567435, and to field stuff differently.

Yes, those ruleset were given Legion names, that's because they're archetypes. They weren't a codex on their own. Just some minor optional tweaks, for diversity's sake.

 

And now, people cry and rip their clothes off screaming how aweful it was, how Legions rules were an heresy, etc.

 

You miss the point. You've always had. Screw Legion rules. Those were alternative rulesets, that allowed a Chaos player to play his army nine different ways. Those including different wargear, different deployments, different feels, different goals...

And that was it.

Because back then, some people were saying : "Oh cool, I can use that Legion ruleset to represent my Renegade Chapter on the tabletop !"

 

You rejoice on a supplement about a renegade chapter. Fine, I do too (solely for fluff, btw). Yet, I could argue that this supplement utterly fails to capture the diversity of what the Crimson Slaughter was, is and will be. All that because its ruleset is way too narrow, you know. What about Squad #748 that joined the CS in late M41 ? Those guys were Night Lords that fought during the Heresy, you know. They should have Night Vision or something, and VOTLW ! Yet they can't. Why that ? Because it's a god damn ruleset, and you have to make some sacrifices.

[Kol Saresk]

Umm funnily enough, I think I can be quoted within this very thread saying that all the Legion rules are nothing more than army archetypes.And without fail, every time I have made that point I was told "No Kol, you're missing the point." If you decide to go back and look, I specifically said that because they were archetypes, then it shouldn't be a problem if we stop calling them Legion rules and instead use them to represent a Legion and the Renegades that acted most like them.

Here, for reference I'll just post my most recent post regarding that subject, although it is all the way back on page 22.

@Scribe: My "view"(or whatever you want to call it) is that there are Night Lords, Death Guard, Emperor's Children, World Eaters, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and Sons of Horus out there. Just not as Legions. Sometimes its a solitary Legionnaire in a warband of renegades(the EC in the Tyrants Champion). Sometimes its reversed(Variel). Sometimes its a "pure" Warband(Marduk's Host). Sometimes its mixed(Black Legion).

The kicker is, the Legions' "specialities" are no longer the sole purview of the respective Legions. Its becoming diluted because time goes on, the new kids are taking after the old geezers and adopting their trade. Basically, the specialties aren't so special anymore. World Eaters aren't the only Berzerkers on the block. And since the psycho-surgeons will do implantations for anyone, even the Nails aren't a specialty.

So as a result, there is the question "What separates the Traitors from the Renegades who act just like them?" It can't be the list for obvious reasons. Is it traits? Okay, what traits?

That's why, to me, the nine 3.5 lists are archetype lists, the basis of a list. But are the basis for a warband. The warband chooses the list, not vice versa. So, let's make the lists.

But we still have the problem on traits. How do we show those? Do we just put certain traits with the lists? Or do we put them in the base codex and share with the supplements?

Personally, I'd take Phoros idea and make that baseline. Maybe reserve a few to be supplement specific.

Of course, this all predicated on the obvious need for a new Codex.

And its funny you say "sacrifices", but Forgeworld seems to do a pretty good job of making Legion traits, a Legion Rite of War(which a Legion-specific alternate format for running your army in a very specific way) as well as Legion-specific wargear and units. Entire units. And with the exception of a few World Eaters, I can't really say I've heard many complaints and there has been no sacrificing of fluff because even the baseline list is more than enough variety.

But hey, I just keep missing the point, right?

EDIT: If you desire, I have no problem pulling up every single post I made involving the topic of archetype lists.

[Vesper]

And its funny you say "sacrifices", but Forgeworld seems to do a pretty

good job of making Legion traits, a Legion Rite of War(which a

Legion-specific alternate format for running your army in a very

specific way) as well as Legion-specific wargear and units. Entire

units. And with the exception of a few World Eaters, I can't really say

I've heard many complaints and there has been no sacrificing of fluff

because even the baseline list is more than enough variety.

But hey, I just keep missing the point, right?

A pretty good job at depicting what we know about the Legions. But we really know next to nothing. They're so huge, many Legionnaires never got to actually see their Primarch.

Just try to picture the countless fleets sent in every direction possible from Terra. Maybe one of them, a Luna Wolves one, ended up against an Ork empire. And they had to develop a new kind of warrior that I call "The bombastic Ork-slayers of Bobby the invincible". Yet we've never heard of those guys. And Forge World will never publish any rules for them, even if God knows they deserve some !

FW have been delivering (and expanding) stuff that we already heard about, they even created stuff from scratch, but there are tons of material we'll never know about.

And I'm complaining ! Because I want a friggin book called "Luna Wolves / Sons of Horus" that depicts every single army from the LW/SoH. So that we could say : "Finally a book that is a good reflection of a Legion as a whole". Because so far, I've never seen a single one.

I'm being super childish about it (to the point where it's ridiculous), but that's in order to show that at any point, we can do almost eveything and be fluffy. I can use Ultramarines rules for my Sons of Horus because "Yeah, they were sent far from their Primarch and started acting kinda girly and stuff". Who cares ? It's just a ruleset.

The tabletop will always fail to represent anything from the setting because the setting isn't balanced by point costs or restricted by a tabletop ruleset.

And my apologies about the archetypes thingy, I haven't witnessed you've realized it. No offense but a few months back, you kept throwing the good ol' "3.5 sucks, NL = Raptor Legion is dumb" tirelessly. So I assumed it was more or less still the case. Glad you got the fact that those were only archetypes, because that's really how they were used, back in 3.5. And that is why people loved them and miss them so much.

[Kol Saresk]

I've always realized they were archetypes. My complaint was more towards the people who believed they actually represented the respective Legions in the entirety and that we should bring them back representing the Legions in the exact same way.

 

And honestly, after seeing Forgeworld make a RoW/arrchetype-list that utilizes a unit that pretty much specializes in ambush-type maneuvers, I really don't see the need to go back to "All Night Lords gets is stealth, night vision and an extra FA slot."

 

Besides, remember that thread about "Why weren't the Night Lords a Raptor Legion"?

 

It's been said before and not by me alone, the archetype lists resulted in the "Legions" being pinholed to certain things. So I'd rather see it done in a way that doesn't "pinhole", if it is to be done at all.

[Rain]

He still throws that. He threw it at me like 2 days ago, and I made the same argument you did essentially, that you could also play an infiltrating no-Raptor NL army which is fluffy and awesome or you could play a Raptor cult using NL rules which was also interesting and a different way to build an army.

[Scribe]

Archetypes are fine, just call the rules World Eater, or to make it more contextual, Word Bearer, instead of Crimson Slaughter.