CSM codex faq out

[Plaguecaster]

 

 

I was saying using "FLUFF" as an excuse for justifying force organisation is stupid and has should have no impact on the game.

Which in itself shows your relatively new to the game and don't understand as to why 40K has so many fans.

 

As always everybody is entitled to their opinion, the prime reason as to why narrative should have effect on design has directly to do with the immersiveness of the game. Players like good stories and because of Games Workshop a good story is applied for all popular miniature games. Which I can also recommend you giving a try.

So far Im playing all kinds of miniature games, 40K, AoS, Warmachine, Malifaux, used to play WFB, Mordheim and will likely pick up many more games. The one thing that gets you hooked on a game is the miniatures, what keeps you into it is the stories of your army, further inspiring you to create a particular army or warband.

 

The fact of the matter is all players like their sub-army to be unique aswell, reflective of their character. Because of this Games Workshop clearly included army rules in the Index, these rules now have been clearified to be used with the Codex aswell. For this edition these arn't new rules, for this edition nobody asked for Berzerker Troops, they recieved it the moment the Index hit the shelves. All this update informs you is that all the Index rules are still in use.

 

Stating that this has to do with complaints of players in itself is reflective of not knowing why the game works the way it does. Understand that this edition revolves a lot around Keywords and those Keywords are directly related to narrative. In the narrative of World Eaters and Emperor's Children we have had for well over a decade now Berzerkers and Noise Marines have clearly been the main troops of these armies. If this edition would skip on it it would actually negate all the work writers and game designers have created in the last 30 years.This Troop rule is not new, it's actually very old. Because of that accepting it has become a norm not an oddity.

wow insulting me by claiming I'm a newbie who knows nothing, real mature :D

 

Well I'm awkward explaing things but the original post I should of quoted but was lazy using ^^^^^ claimed it was somehow unfluffy a unit wasn't troops but does it it really matter what slot they are fluffwise ??? I could take a word bearers vanguard dettachment with possessed they arnt troops but does that matter it's still a possessed heavy force which the word bearers are famed for likewise if I took multiple raptors in a outrider formation for nightlords, the amount of dertachments focused on one type of force organisation proves this, people only complained because they couldn't take them as troops for the batallion tax so they got more CPs otherwise they still could of easily taken a vanguard dettachment if they were wanting a fluffy Beserker heavy force. That's what I was meaning it doesn't matter after all even though wouldn't get actual traits I could easily field a vanguard dettachment with heaps of plague marines as elites and it would still be a somewhat fluffy death guard style force since fluffwise they mostly are all plague marines so it shouldn't matter gamewise if they are elites or troops I'm still fielding a fluffy force

Edited August 22, 2017 by Plaguecaster

[Sception]

A simple look at the 6th, 4th, 3.5th, ia, and 3rd edition csm rules will give an idea of where things have been, while a glance at the thousand sons and death guard will give an idea of where things are going. We're moving from a past where the cult legions have always had their cult marines as troops to a future where cult marines are the /only/ marine troops the cult legions have access to.

One can repeat 'not all members of the cult legions are cult troops' all they want, but the TS and DG releases make clear that all cult all the time cult legions are exactly what's in store, and anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves.

A middle stage where cult legion players were supposed to use regular marines as troops, whether the product of oversight amid over-rushed development or a sudden but thankfully fleeting lapse in judgement, was always a terrible idea, encouraging people to buy units that GW knows full well they intend to remove from their army altogether sooner or later.

 

..................................

 

EDIT: this came out more confrontational than I intended.  I personally wouldn't mind a design shift towards a future where cult troops weren't the default troops of the cult legions, I don't think that's a bad narrative direction to take with them, and I always thought it was odd that Magnus never tried to rebuild his legion with new recruits given how opposed he had been to the rubric in the first place, and I always thought actual heresy vets (ie, cults, chosen, etc) should be reserved for elite and HQ slots, with other slots given over to lesser post-heresy recruits, but that's neither here nor there.  Regardless of what directions they might have taken, that's clearly not the direction GW is choosing to go with the cult legions, so it would have been poor form for them to pretend otherwise.

Edited August 23, 2017 by malisteen

[Panzer]

A simple look at the 6th, 4th, 3.5th, ia, and 3rd edition csm rules will give an idea of where things have been, while a glance at the thousand sons and death guard will give an idea of where things are going. We're moving from a past where the cult legions have always had their cult marines as troops to a future where cult marines are the /only/ marine troops the cult legions have access to.

 

One can repeat 'not all members of the cult legions are cult troops' all they want, but the TS and DG releases make clear that all cult all the time cult legions are exactly what's in store, and anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves.

 

A middle stage where cult legion players were supposed to use regular marines as troops, whether the product of oversight amid over-rushed development or a sudden but thankfully fleeting lapse in judgement, was always a terrible idea, encouraging people to buy units that GW knows full well they intend to remove from their army altogher sooner or later.

110% this!

[Dardl]

In all honesty after reading this thread I'm gonna retract my opinion. Cult units should be troops for their legion. It will still grind my gears when I see competitive players crying about how they can't spam the latest competitive list and it always will as it just takes out the fun in the game for me. But I salute you World eater and Emperors Children players, Enjoy your troop choice, Maybe one day I'll get my raptors! 

[the jeske]

That's what I was meaning it doesn't matter after all even though wouldn't get actual traits I could easily field a vanguard dettachment with heaps of plague marines as elites and it would still be a somewhat fluffy death guard style force since fluffwise they mostly are all plague marines so it shouldn't matter gamewise if they are elites or troops I'm still fielding a fluffy force

 

 

0_o what the hell are you talking about. This is a case of army by army comperation. If most armies can be build around more CP giving formations then this is the standard, that is how the game is played. It is the same  as 7th imperial/eldar formations and early chaos formations. One gave ton of free points for stuff, and the other did nothing. Chaos players were being pro activly punished for picking their army and their faction, and the fact that their armies could be done "fluffy"[not always the case in 7th, at least till the legion book] did not change the fact that a bad army may as well not exist. Plus it makes no sense for half the legions getting their cult units as troops and the other half not, just because GW decided to split them in to 4 separate books, when they could have easily fit all cults in to one.

[Sersi]

 

^^^^^

Well it is closer to World Eaters who actually would summon the Khornate Daemons over Big Red especially since you don't need psykers anymore

 

Not everyone wants daemon scum in their Power Armour Legion.

 

 

Daemon scum?!! I think you mean shards of the gods!   I am very happy to have my Noise Marines as troops again however.  Mono-god has been hard to play since the start of the 4th. So yeah for WE and EC.

[MoK]

Mono god is easy. You can add plenty of pew pew to a Worldeaters force. I have as many Chaos Marine squads as I do Berzerkers in my WEs.

[Dhar'Neth]

Quick question. Can Raptor Champion tak Lightning Claw and combi-plasma?

[Sception]

with one lightning claw and one combi plas? Yes. With a pair of lightning claws plus a combi plas? That's... ambiguous. I'd lean towards no, but it could be read either way.

[Commissar K.]

Quick question. Can Raptor Champion tak Lightning Claw and combi-plasma?

One of each, certainly. But a pair of Claws and a Combo-Plama isn't possible.

 

The Lightning Claw is indeed costed as a pair aswell but the Wargear list itself notes that a single Lightning Claw is a single choice from the list we can choose 2 form.

 

Cheers,

[Dhar'Neth]

Thank you vey much! I’ll settle for a single claw then.

[Sception]

the thing that makes it iffy is there are two lists, one you can take two items from, and one you can take one item from.  The champion can trade their pistol and chain sword for 'items from the champion list', so one reading would be that they drop all their default gear, and then you just pick as many items as the champion lists let you pick, which is two of the first list and one of the second list, for up to three weapons total, just like the olden days.

 

But a more conservative reading is that the champion /individually/ trades his starting weapons for weapons from the champion list.  In which case the fact that the champion equipment list allows two items from the first list and one from the second wouldn't change the fact that your champion still only has two individual weapons to trade, and as such can only ever get two weapons back total.

 

The more restrictive reading is the one I tend to default to, if only so I don't end up converting models that then have illegal equipment sets, though that can happen anyway, as with my poor chosen, due to rules set changes.

Edited August 25, 2017 by malisteen

[Gothical]

the thing that makes it iffy is there are two lists, one you can take two items from, and one you can take one item from.  The champion can trade their pistol and chain sword for 'items from the champion list', so one reading would be that they drop all their default gear, and then you just pick as many items as the champion lists let you pick, which is two of the first list and one of the second list, for up to three weapons total, just like the olden days.

 

But a more conservative reading is that the champion /individually/ trades his starting weapons for weapons from the champion list.  In which case the fact that the champion equipment list allows two items from the first list and one from the second wouldn't change the fact that your champion still only has two individual weapons to trade, and as such can only ever get two weapons back total.

 

The more restrictive reading is the one I tend to default to, if only so I don't end up converting models that then have illegal equipment sets, though that can happen anyway, as with my poor chosen, due to rules set changes.

 

I have the same conclusion but for different reasons. 

 

Firstly, the old concept of trading one weapon for one weapon is gone (apart from where explicitly detailed in the datasheet, see Character choices). The unit leader trades in the specified equipment for access to the Armoury, regardless of how much equipment you take from it.

 

Now, if you delete the actual lists from the Champion Equipment list, the rules state the following : "The Champion can take up to two weapons chosen from the following list... One of the Champion's weapons can be chosen from the following list..." To me this means you can only take 2 weapons, because that is what the "one of them refers to.

 

Finally, compared to the other Codex I have the wargear options for unit leaders are worded differently between the books. Codex: Space Marines says "Up to two weapons can be chosen from the following list... One weapon can be chosen from the following list..." and therefore can take 2 weapons from the first list AND a combi-weapon, given it lacks the "one of them" restriction.

 

Thus I conclude a Raptor Champion (or any other CSM unit leader) can take a Lightning Claw and Combi-Plasma, but not a pair of claws and the gun.

[Commissar K.]

I can see the reasoning behind the 'items from list idea' but the unclearity that rule presents is cleared up by the Champions Items list itself I believe. Example being, this is what it says now with the updated Errata part in place:

 

Since a 'pair' suggests a couple or better put two I'd say that the Lightning Claws as a pair would still thake up two slots of the maximum two slots available.

The new wording simply states you can thake up to two of the list and a part of that list can only be taken once. Now for sure if opponents agree you can play it however you like but since the Space Marine Champion list works the same way I deem it extremely likely that a TO or random player in the shop would still come to the same conclusion. That is that the first part of the list essentially has a 0-2 maximum per weapon, the second part a 0-1 maximum per weapon and that all Champions simply put can only have up to two weapons. 

In regards to the Datasheet note again, Im under the impression that the moment you pick one of the weapons from this list both Bolt Pistol and Boltgun are directly removed. If you still wanted to add them you can do so through the list and it will not cost any points because the cost attached to these weapons actually is 0 anyway. So whatever you pick doesn't have to increase costs. For example if one wanted a Chainsword and a Combi-Flamer there is only a cost for the Combi-Flamer.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Commissar K.

[Gothical]

 

The new wording simply states you can thake up to two of the list and a part of that list can only be taken once. Now for sure if opponents agree you can play it however you like but since the Space Marine Champion list works the same way I deem it extremely likely that a TO or random player in the shop would still come to the same conclusion. That is that the first part of the list essentially has a 0-2 maximum per weapon, the second part a 0-1 maximum per weapon and that all Champions simply put can only have up to two weapons. 

 

In regards to the Datasheet note again, Im under the impression that the moment you pick one of the weapons from this list both Bolt Pistol and Boltgun are directly removed. If you still wanted to add them you can do so through the list and it will not cost any points because the cost attached to these weapons actually is 0 anyway. So whatever you pick doesn't have to increase costs. For example if one wanted a Chainsword and a Combi-Flamer there is only a cost for the Combi-Flamer.

 

The Codex: Space Marine list is worded differently (even post the Chaos FAQ) and by RAW can have 3 weapons, but otherwise your points are solid.

 

Part of the reason the CSM FAQ is so great is that you do indeed give up both weapons for access to the wargear list, and *previously* if you took a Combi-Weapon you couldn't take any pistols or CCWs with it. Now, you can at least "buy back" either the Bolt Pistol or a Chainsword for free, meaning your Champ isn't randomly less equipped than the others in his squad just by buying the Combi-Weapon.