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!
Stick with the Word Bearers
Give in to the power of Tzeencth
With the upcoming codex, I have found myself at an impass.
I recently assembled what was to be a Word Bearers army that included a Bloodthirster, Bloodletters and Deamonettes as well as the usual marine squads.
While it seems that the special legion rules will be going the way of the buffalo, I can still recreate them to an a certain extent (Thanks to Caluin, for the info on how to accomplish this). However, I am an obsessive fluff nut, and my armies all have to make sense within the framework of the existing 40k universe as it stands, so my other option seems to be to create a Tzeencth based army.
I modded all of my marine squads with bitz from the Chaos warriors fantasy sprue (head and banners) and my aspiring champions with the robed bodies of the Dark Angel Vets. So they can either look like Tzeencth or Word Bearer Champs.
So I now ask for your opinion, should I stay the course and create a workable fiction for my Word Bearers or bow completely to the lure of Tzeencth?
Well I have developed a rough outline for the fluff of my Word Bearers as I believe they will take shape within the new codex.
You can view it here
http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...ex-nicely.html (Fluff for my Word Bearers that should fit the fluff of the new codex nicely)
I guess the mods can close this thread as I only got one response (Thank you Andusciassus )
As Chaos, we're used to being able to have our cake AND eat it. Basically do whatever we want with our armies.
This is still possible with the new codex - in many ways it's more so.
I don't see any reason why you can't have a detachment of Word Bearers who have dedicated themselves to Tzeentchian worship.
This way, your fluff is fully justified for: Normal CSM, IoT (Icon of Tzeentch) Marines, Rubrics and pretty much anything else.
Wow.. what's this dice thing? *haiya*
LO RulesOriginally Posted by AnonymousOriginally Posted by Cyric
I also wanted to add that it is fully possible for your army to play as a TS army rules wise but for you to do the modelling / fluff / painting in the wordbearers style. You could just say that instead of tzeentch granting them their powers they come from their faith in the chaos powers or some such.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT!
I survived LO Chat thanks to: Karmoon, Rabbit, Process, Tossy and Meish.
Stick with Word Bearers, Tzeentch armies will become the new Iron warriors of the dex, everyone screaming cheese at them. WB are a nice army to paint to, nice scheme with daemonic faces in the armour. Nice fluff, and plenty of scope to include a unit of each cult if you so desire.
I would still go with the WB... I don't think they will have so many changes to their rules with the new codex! The daemons may be less though but not restricted! :yes:
Thanks to all the people showing faith in me
I sometimes feel that everyone will leave me and they will be on their own...
Go with whichever you like the sound and fluff of most..
Just because a few army lists are going doesn't mean any legions will be scrapped fluffwise, indeed, it means you'll be able to build a flexible army with anything (which is as it should be really, I always thought it was funny that it specifically mentioned mark bearers in the Night Lords IA but ruleswise they currently can't have them.)
In short, there will be ways and means to build word bearers, even if you don't get a special list for them.
If you like word bearer fluff you should stick with them, generic daemons in the new chaos dex will let you model them as you see fit, and when the daemon codex comes out next year you'll probably have more options available to you then if you stick to a tzeentchian theme!
Really, word bearers will be affected by the new dex less then most other legions . (aside from the lack of a crozius)