Beastmen chariots

[Just Tony]

Figure I'll just post screencaps. I'm thinking house rules unless someone knows this was published in a FAQ somewhere...

Screenshot_20250405_151311_Facebook.jpg (837.85 KiB) Viewed 109097 times

Screenshot_20250405_151648_Facebook.jpg (748.9 KiB) Viewed 109097 times

[Alarantalara]

Someone asked and was told no once by Gav Thorpe: https://6th.whfb.app/faq#may-a-beasts-o ... zeentch-or

I have the suspicion it was a balance/fun issue that GW caught before release. People already complain about the "20" power dice Tzeentch army using 140 point chariots. Being able to swap in the mark of Tzeentch, based on having to use the same costs as the Hordes of Chaos, would let you go to 25 using 12 chariots, reaching the point where you might run out of spells before dice.

[Just Tony]

It's one of those things where there's conflicting rules statements in the book itself, which is part of the problem.

[Alarantalara]

I wouldn't say there's conflicting rules statements. I would instead say the text at the start of the "Marks of the Dark Gods" is poorly worded edit of the Hordes of Chaos text and it's otherwise entirely consistent.

It lists characters, chariots, and one unit of bestigors; but omits minotaurs because they don't get free choice of mark. It then says "they can replace...", which would normally refer to everything listed, but can't even when chariots are not considered. Bray-shamans can't take the marks of Khorne or Tzeentch and nobody finds that surprising or exceptional because the Hordes of Chaos book did the same. It also says, "at the cost shown opposite", and there's no one claiming that that means no character can take the mark of Khorne or Tzeentch because they're not on the opposite page but instead below/following that sentence.

Basically, the unit profiles are authoritative on what options can be taken, the mark list exactly matches the costs (though it generalizes to hero and lord instead of excluding bray-shamans from some marks), and there's no definitive indication anywhere that tuskgor chariots can take any mark other than undivided.

The next sentence refers to the marks applying to the character, unit or chariot bearing it, but this isn't conflicting because the undivided mark does exactly that, as would the others if they were allowed.

So the only conflict is an overly broad use of the word they that could have been fixed with more careful writing.

There's also a reference to chariots with other marks in the section on the chaos general and army list organization, but chariots from the hordes of chaos army list need to be accounted for there, so there still isn't a conflict, though it does get even more confusing.

[Just Tony]

If it's any consolation my brother is 100% in your camp about this. I just figure given the source I cited I'd lean that way, but Gav was indeed the author of the Hordes book so he shouldn't be discounted out of hand. It could also be he was given a stern talking to for taking the Chaos book too far, and that reflected on his statement.

[Augrimm]

Sorry for the late reply.

Beast Chariots come with the mark of Chaos Undivided and have no options to exchange if for another like in Chaos Warrior Chariots. Therefore unless a Beast character has the Mark of Chaos Undivided, they cannot ride in a Beast Chariot.

There is no rule contradiction. The Beast character can only ride in a chariot "When permitted". The usual rules for mixing marks apply, and so a character with a different mark is not permitted to ride in a chariot.

If it happened to be the case that they had intended to be able to join chariot units, GW would have posted an Errata with the appropriate point costs (or simply stated that it was the same as Warrior chariots). They never did so, either in White Dwarf magazine not in an Annual. So we must assume the result was intentional.

[Just Tony]

The discussion on Facebook resulted from one of the Mark entries mentioning Beastmen Chariots swapping marks but the rule entry not having the option. The post I posted screencaps of, made by the lead developer of 6th Edition for the record, discussed what the intent had been. This is also why I used the words "house rules" in my first post. I'm well aware of what the rules as printed were.



On the plus side this update helped me spot a typo in my first post to fix...

[Alarantalara]

Personally, I like the idea of characters in chariots, but wouldn’t want it to become a source of cheap mark bonuses. The Khorne and Tzeentch ones are sort of scary in their army wide bonuses when so cheap.

As such, if I were to make a house rule, it would allow beast chariots to be purchased by characters and those chariots must swap marks to match the rider. They pay the cost from Hordes of Chaos for them. Chariots without characters would still be limited to undivided only.

As I mentioned in my first comment, I think the absence is likely a response to Tzeentch chariot swarms and the desire to keep it from getting worse. Giving them back to just characters seems fun without also permitting abuse.

[Augrimm]

Yeah, if you just want to house rule it, then I'd use the cost for Warrior Chariots.

My post was more about the speculation that it was an oversight rather than a deliberate choice on part of the developers (I think Gav and Alessio developed the 6th Ed. Chaos book?... might be wrong). They might have had the option to take marks in the earlier interations and had it taken out after play testing or it just might have been copied out of the Warriors of Chaos book and altered slightly to accomidate the new book without the descrepancy being noticed.....