# csm codex 5th edition



## trutildeath360 (Apr 7, 2009)

is it true that in the new codex for csm that you can mix and match csm chapters..like have tson and berserkers in the same army..is their no more mark of chaos undivided..i only have the old codex...if anyone can help me out i would greatly appreciate it...and in the new codex does that mean that tsons can have csm bikers????????


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Yes, that is the new fallacy... erm, codex.


----------



## space cowboy (Apr 3, 2009)

Your terminology actually is somewhat lacking based on the way the new codex works. Yes, you may have Thousand Sons and Berserkers in the same army. Yes you may have Tzeentch-marked Bikers, although any mark for units comes from them having an Icon to a particular Chaos god. No, there is no mark of Chaos Undivided, only an Icon for units (nothing for characters.)

The big thing is that the new codex is designed around the Black Legion (similar to the way the Space Marine codex is based around the Ultramarines.) Since Black Legion is the 'generic' CSM force, everything in the list can be fielded by any CSM player. The only thing that restricts force selection is the Organization Chart and your own adherence to fluff.

Thanks,
Howard


----------



## lancefireball (Aug 12, 2008)

You can even have your Slennesh Sorc with a squad of Khorne as stupid as that is in the fluff.... GW is just making the game more and more boring really. alot of the things that make armies cool are going poof.


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

lancefireball said:


> You can even have your Slennesh Sorc with a squad of Khorne as stupid as that is in the fluff.... GW is just making the game more and more boring really. alot of the things that make armies cool are going poof.


Yes how dare they give CSM players more options! Thos bastards!


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

JokerGod said:


> Yes how dare they give CSM players more options! Thos bastards!




Actually, they have fewer options.


----------



## Bakx (Apr 2, 2009)

you can make fluffy lists out of it, but not as good as the old one. i always wanted to start as word bearers cause i want to use a mix of daemons and CSM, but back then i wasn't in the world of table top that time. i joined in about 2 years ago and bought the new 4th ed codex. then I met people who play 40k at a hobby store, they showed me the previous codex. WOW there it was, an option for a dark apostle,plenty types of daemons to chose from and daemonettes on steeds can be fast attack. then i look at the new codex:lesser daemons, greater daemons. pfff.... i wished i started several years before.

i tried to make a good fluffy WB out of the new codex but it wasn't at all that competitive. the only time i win games is when i use plague marines, zerkies, and 1k sons. so i'm abandoning my plans on building word bearers for now until they make a codex out of my favorite legion or when a new CSM codex comes with legion special rules like the old one.


----------



## Iraqiel (May 21, 2008)

Really, it seems almost as though the latest CSM codex is 'The book of undivided' from the last codex, except for the easing of restricting marks. They have completely cut the legions away, except for warbands or mercenaries.


----------



## LordWaffles (Jan 15, 2008)

JokerGod said:


> Yes how dare they give CSM players more options! Thos bastards!


Somebody didn't read the old dex.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

LordWaffles said:


> Somebody didn't read the old dex.


My thoughts exactly.
Like I said earlier, I think they have fewer options.
And aren't as fun to play, I must add.


----------



## xiawujing (Mar 2, 2009)

Wait, so there's a 5th ed. 'dex out there, or was there a second 4th ed. one? I thought it was the latter, but now you're all making me unsure.


----------



## dtq (Feb 19, 2009)

As I only ever play at home with the family I can still run the old or the new codex, in fact I can play any edition of the game i want as well , or as we often do make up our own mini games completely using GW minis. Although I do play with the latest chaos codex as its pluses vindicators, cheaper units etc. Less stuff taking up Heavy support selections etc

However the previous incarnation had LOADS more fluffy option, theres loads of stuff I like in the last codex, combat drugs warp amps serious vehicle mutations etc etc. This codex allows a more generic Chaos army the old one allowed real specialization and great detail within that specilisation, I happen to like sonic predators and dreads. Theres times I like to play a full fat Slaanesh army.

With the models I have tooled up, the difference between the codexs is that the new codex reduced the points value of my army by 25%, but thats is at the loss of a huge chunk of abilities, kit and rules...

Its fine for anyone wanting to follow abaddon in the greater cause of chaos, it gives access to some new toys, but it drastically cuts the flavour of specialised army or those dedicated to just one of the four powers.

The new codex seems to have a lot of "padding" with not a lot of "substance". That said it is perfectly playable, it just lacks details and the option to really specialise.


----------



## Xabre (Dec 20, 2006)

Fluff is always still the key. I wanted a fluffy Thousand Sons army, I made one... see the link in my sig. Granted, I had to bend quite a few stories around my pinky to give Thousand Sons a few squads of Noise Marines with a reason behind it, or Obliterators when Ahriman hated the idea of all chaos mutations.


For rules, it's as everyone has said. Any squad can now basically be marked to one of the four gods through an Icon which also counts as a Teleport Homer. Characters can be Marked of course. You can no longer dedicate vehicles, and many of the demon weapons are gone, leaivng only a single DWeapon based on the mark of the lord. 

Another thing to note is that the Mark of Tzeentch has undergone radical changes from the last edition; no more insta-perfect-sorcerers, no more 2-wound Rubrics. And for those that DID enjoy playing legion specific, no more Dedicated Numbers for the squads to give access to free upgrades.

Oh, and most painful to me (and the extra blastmaster bits I have laying around), no more marking Havocs and getting access to specific weapons.


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

> And aren't as fun to play, I must add.


I have to disagree with this. I have just as much fun, if not more, playing my Tsons now as I did playing my old BL lists from the prior codex. In fact, I have yet to play a game that I have thought to myself 'man this codex sucks' for whatever reason. Yes there is less wargear and other options but to me that is balanced out by the fact that units I could never take before are now available to me. More often than not it seems to me that the people who complain about how unenjoyable the new codex is are the fluff nuts who just can't seem to separate rules from fluff.

Fluff is cool, fluff is important. But fluff is not the game. I absolutely LOVE the Thousand Sons fluff but said fluff led to my army being absolute SHIT on the tabletop with the last codex. Now the fluff and the rules have been separated and the Sons given new rules and lo and behold: they are actually a competitive army now that *gasp* is fun to play.

I do think that GW went a bit overboard in stripping out the options in the current book but that said, I also think that overall this codex was a big step in the right direction.


----------



## Big Dave (Jun 13, 2008)

xiawujing said:


> Wait, so there's a 5th ed. 'dex out there, or was there a second 4th ed. one? I thought it was the latter, but now you're all making me unsure.


The last CSM codex came out just before 5th ed so it is technically a 4th ed codex. It is very vanilla, no not vanilla, just boring. It just shows that Gav Thorpe was working harder on the Daemon codex than the CSM codex.


----------

