Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Okay, reading the old codex, it says slaneesh hte khorne and nurgle hate tzeentch and vice versa, so how come GW have contradicted themselves and let you attach characters with different marks to different marked squads?
The Only Pyscho Doll
I believe they have done this as part of an overall attempt at making the codex easier to use. By cutting down the number of limitations and restrictions they strive to make it more straightforward to compose a Chaos army list. No longer some units counting as elites if they had a certain mark and was in an army lead by a general without the same mark etc etc.
So now you are free to join your Slaaneshi sorcerer with Lash to a squad of Khorne Berzerkers if you like. While there may be many and solid fluff reasons for the restrictions it does make good sense to leave them out. I always thought it was odd that my devastators with mark of Slaanesh suddently became an elite choice when I gave my Chaos Lord a mark of Nurgle. Why should this restriction mean that I could actually take 6 heavy support choices
If the radiance of a thousand suns
Were to burst at once into the sky,
That would be like the splendor of the Mighty One...
I am become Death,
The shatterer of Worlds.
Sadly they managed to confuse the term 'simplification' with 'remove every trace of fluff from the army list and consequently make it as easy to use and a minor variant on a Marine list'.
Which will lead to armies of Khorne Berserkers and Plague Marines being led by Tzeentch sorcerors...
Hive Fleet Fuzzy Bunny: Lots and lots of points of Nids (4000pts+)
The Chapter of the Damned: 5500pts of Dark Angels
The Children of Fulgrim: 5-6000pts of Emperors Children
The Kabal of the Bloodied Claw: 2000pts of Dark Eldar
Well I always thought ancient enemies and sacred numbers were silly. The fluff was bad and didn't make any sense. I mean, why can't chaos guys get along to kill the enemy? Other armies can do it just fine. I'm happy the rules are gone and I just wish they replaced them with some good fluff or backstory for the army. It is pretty lame as it it stands now.
The fluff was in place not only for "fluffiness" but also the create specific Chaos army lists. Now we got one big generic Chaos army.
And maybe thats what chaos is... GW seem to think that anyway. I personally think the new codex is ok, could have been better but could also have been way worse!
This is how I see it.
The new Chaos Codex is a generic list.
It is meant to simulate renegade chapters and maybe the Black Legion. All the Legions have sworn to follow Abaddon in one time or another. That is the strength of Black Legion. The renegade chapters such as the Red Corsairs can sometimes allow warriors from the different legions to join them, or hire them as mercenaries. There is no unfluffiness about that.
Yes, I know there isn't any rules concerning the Legions, but that's good in my opinion. As it were in 3rd Ed. those rules was a joke. They simplified the Legions into something that wasnt playable. To have legion specific rules we need a couple of new codexes. I refuse to play a legion whose entire story, background, special characters and overall rules can fit on two or three pages. Thats an insult for my legion. I say were better off this way - until they start making the Legion Codexes.
I don't like to compare the Legions of Chaos to Space Marine Chapters. They are organised extremely different and are led by very different kinds of leaders.
"The more choices you force the opponent to make, the better the chance for you to capitalize on his mistakes"
Ok and predators, vindicators and land raiders but if you take them away people will scream at GW for killing chaos.
Okok and bikers and assault marines. And terminators.
I'm kind of killing my own point here aren't I...No, they did not remove anything of the sort. The only thing they removed was restrictions and the favoured number (a ridiculous concept anyway). Just because you are no longer restricted doens't mean fluff and playstyle is dead.Sadly they managed to confuse the term 'simplification' with 'remove every trace of fluff from the army list and consequently make it as easy to use and a minor variant on a Marine list'.
And no chaos isn't a god over 40k, I don't think it having the same style of codex as the rest of the universe is a particularly bad thing...
As for the fluff of it (the original topic) I think its perfectly feasible. Why would khorne hate slaanesh so much? why would berserkers hate noise marines so much? because noise marines are pansies?
That kind of thing leads to infighting...not a snobbish refusal to work together (and I expect my chaos marines to regularly fight amongst themselves).
Check out my Codex: Farmyard Animals here!
If anyone wants any kind of help writing fluff for any kind of GW army just ask.
I reckon, bottomline, if <insert marks here> are together in the same place against a foe, there would be good reason for it- and seeing as Chaos is a heirachy from 'most powerful to the rest', I doubt even the Traitorous Superhuman will argue with a superior Champion, especially if he be of a different patron....Originally Posted by Chachazero
Something along the lines of "Why? I carry more favour with my patron than you do with yours, and I say so, or else" :rofl
About the entire list itself, outside IC attachment, theres the added benefits of easier list construcion, anyone can follow their own Spidey-fluff-senses, and it's basically a different setup of power besides Juicing up on Daemonic Wargear for a few select Characters and some Veteran Skills for cheap tactics. Cruel, but fair 8Y Don't worry, I miss 3rd Ed too... just that this new edition has a different power perspective, like a Tailorable Traitor MEQ Tyranid stat altering army of Nastyness
Last edited by jONESIE; September 13th, 2007 at 02:04.
LO RULESOriginally Posted by Jaffar_Hasad
I love the new freedom but will still keep most of my old style of play.
My World Eaters army will still run in units of 8 and will be pure Khorne, same with the other armies. There is nothing stopping you maintaining the old "fluff" if you want, there are just no benefits for doing so.
Every now and again I will use a Black Legion list and will mix and match to my hearts content.
Mirage Arcana Podcast
The "A Smart Player Will..." theory is a complete paradox. If we make an assumption that everything we do is outsmarted, then theoretically we can never win.
I don't actually understand what people mean when they say that there's no character, variation or fluff in the new codex. Is it because there are no special rules for fielding the Traitor Legions? Then just impose your own limitations on yourself. Just because there's no rules saying "to field an army of the Traitor Legions you must do this", doesn't mean that you can't do that kind of stuff yourself. Is it because your army is no longer competitive? Then say so and don't blame the codex for a lack of fluff. Is it because you no longer gain any benefit from playing a Traitor Legion army? Well, I'm sorry but if that's the case then I'm sure you'll be fine moving on to a different army that will be able to satisfy your competitive urges, since you were mainly attached to the bonuses anyway.