What would you say if GW separated oldcrons and newcrons into two armies with their own codices?
>>47483459
I'd say that's retarded. They could just fluff it out a bit and say both type still exist in their own capacity.
Though, I could see GW doing that because they sell so well. Try to milk more money out of people. Dark Necrons and Regular Necrons.
You can still have the oldcrons with new codex. Maynarkh Dynasty from forge world, for example. NEWCRONS ARE YOUR DUDES, FLUFF THEM HOWEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT
>>47483524
You can't though. Even if you make your Necrons oldcrons, and there is not a single example of them as such in 40k anymore mind you, the C'tan are still sharded.
And the atmosphere of unstoppable killing machines is lost when 90% of people think of Trazyn and his wacky antics due to stupid /tg/ maymays anyway.
>>47483524
>You can still have the oldcrons with new codex
Stop being a retard. You can't have oldcrons with Newcron fluff.
>Maynarkh Dynasty from forge world, for example.
That's not example, you double retard. You should be beaten with a Necrodermis dildo to death.
Get this through your stupid fucking head. Maynarkh ARE NOT OLDCRONS. They are Newcrons in everyway. They talk to mortals, they have honour codes, they have courts of wacky lunatics, and they do not even field C'tan shards.
Why the fuck do you think they are Oldcrons?
>>47483459
"Wow, these two armies are nearly fuckin' identical."
>>47484470
You're the same moron who leaps in to make this point every single thread, aren't you?
Fucking pedant.
"Oldcrons" are just the same Necrons with less detail given to their behaviour, and you fucking know 3rd to 4th edition Lords still had personalities and would occasionally talk to people, with C'tan worship and omnicide.
Well, Maynark might not have C'tan worship, but they're certainly omnicidal. They're as close to "Oldcrons" as you can get -and modern Necrons are pretty fuckin' close already- without bringing back unsharded C'tan.
>>47484510
>Well, Maynark might not have C'tan worship, but they're certainly omnicidal. They're as close to "Oldcrons" as you can get -and modern Necrons are pretty fuckin' close already- without bringing back unsharded C'tan.
No, they are not. A lot of dynasties are already into genocide. Maynarkh is not unique in way except to being able to field C'tan shards.
Saying they are close to "Oldcrons" means you know nothing about the Necron lore, Newcron or Oldcron. Ergo, your opinion is worthless.
>"Oldcrons" are just the same Necrons with less detail given to their behaviour, and you fucking know 3rd to 4th edition Lords still had personalities and would occasionally talk to people, with C'tan worship and omnicide.
I know that. If I didn't mention this a thousand times in this board I doubt you would even know that.
Only a rare few of Oldcrons retained a spark of their minds and they rarely ever speak to mortal. The majority of the Necrons had nothing in them but hatred for all life as well as C'tan worship.
This type of Necrons has been utterly removed from the fluff.
>>47484480
>"Wow, these two armies are nearly fuckin' identical."
>Says the anon when as head reads the dozens of marine codexes
>>47484569
Maynarkh is not unique in anyway except not being able to field C'tan shards*
>>47483459
I'd be okay with that
>>47484569
Carnac detected.
>>47484599
You realise lots of people think all Loyalist marines should have one or at most two books right?
'X is stupid too' is not a counter argument to Y being stupid.
>>47483459
That's unnecessary. Just add some fluff about some Dynasties that lost control of their C'Tan shards and become enslaved by them.
Maybe flesh out the shards, cast some doubt about whether they're really controlled, speculate that the Night Bringer and Deceiver Shards seem to be gaining power and sentience, build it into another end-of-the-world scenario. 40K can never have enough of those.
An overhaul of their rules wouldn't hurt. Things like the C'Tan should be scary to play against. Unfortunately this edition seems to have made Fire Warriors more intimidating than transdimensional gods.
>>47484658
No.
I am saying if the practice is widespread and that marines and other factions are getting mini-codexes and supplements, then it's bloody stupid and petty of you to deny other fans their desire of having their own supplement for their underrepresented faction.
>>47484632
>>47484510
The most perplexing thing is how he used to be on the opposite side of this argument.
>and you fucking know 3rd to 4th edition Lords still had personalities and would occasionally talk to people
To be fair, "occasionally" makes it sound much more common than it was. The Oldcron codex confirmed that sapient Necrons existed, and the Medusa V campaign had two bits of fluff from an Oldcron POV, but GW never actually gave any examples of Oldcrons talking (or even said whether they could). Those only came from one BL book, and Dawn of War.
>>47484686
>mini-codexes and supplements
Are helping to kill the game but that is another issue.
And its not stupid at all, codex bloat is not a good thing.
>>47484701
Lies and slander. I never argued that it was possible to have Oldcrons or C'tan controlled dynaties in the post 5th ED era.
The fact that people insist on it and most aggravating insist that the creation of the HACKS of FW, the Maynarkh dynasty, are "Oldcrons" fizzes my circuits.
Anyway, GW = BL. There is no separation.
>>47484731
>Are helping to kill the game but that is another issue.
They weren't a problem in the 3rd Edition.
>>47484764
Have you not paid attention to the sheer volume of it all?
>>47484470
Man, that's some pretty strong autism you got bud
>>47484744
>Anyway, GW = BL. There is no separation
But that's wrong
>>47484972
BL is a part of GW. There is no separation.
If he said the design studio, then he might have been right. In reality, however, both the studio and BL are GW.
>>47484951
Being right is often viewed as "autism" on this board.
Instead of name calling how about you take on that guys argument. Prove that the Maynarkh dynasty are Oldcrons or at least how they differ than the other dynasties.
>>47483459
I'd be okay with that
I'd rather they be two armies in one codex. Variant lists nigga. Those were the days.
Newcrons with their expendable brainwashed peasant-robots, their tough soldier-robots, and their cool warmachines inexplicably piloted by Necrons.
Oldcrons with buffed C'tan shards, old style Wraiths, enhanced warriors, and some Lovecraftian living metal abominations.
I miss /tg/'s fluff about the oldcrons before the retcons.
Soulless Terminators vaguely aware that they were once much greater than what they are now. Sometimes having flashes to their former lives. I remember one story somebody wrote about a Necron lord purging a hive world. He picks up the flayed corpse of a noblewoman and remembers something a long time ago. He begins to dance. When he comes to the corpse falls apart in his arms and he has been dancing among the corpses of the hive rulers for a hundred years or more.I too once loved
I did not mean to imply that BL are third party or anything like that. "GW" was referring to material published by GW that was not BL or FW. So yes, design studio, or however you may wish to rephrase it.
>>47483459
I'd be happy. It's a concept that occured to me while exploring all the different subsets of each faction.
C'Tan Loyalists, the Triarchy/Praetorians and Centurions, Destroyer and Flayer Cults and Cryptarkies all make good variations from the now-default Space Tomb Kings.
>>47483459
I would say that necrons are not a popular enough army to need two books. People really just played them because they were cheesy as fuck, not due to a fondness for the edgy background.
>>47483488
that's what they've already done.
The life hating murder bots are still a thing. They're just not the only thing anymore.
>>47486050
>The life hating murder bots are still a thing. They're just not the only thing anymore.
You missed the point intentionally.
What people want is the Oldcrons which are C'tan worshipping Necrons. This does not exist in the new lore.
>>47486089
Not in the Codexes, but I see no reason why some might still worship powerful shards or what have you. Going by the exact letter is going a little against the point of 40k. The reason they added more fluff to the Necrons is so there would be more room for characterization and your-dudes.
>>47483459
I'd think it was entirely pointless
>>47486125
Misses the point again.
>but I see no reason why some might still worship powerful shards or what have you.
I see plenty of reason.
-Newcrons are arrogant and hateful towards the C'tan
-Anti-C'tan Protocols
-C'tan shards being feral dumb things
-Even C'tan shards that are sentient cannot break the protocols of Necron technology due to the fact that their minded are very limited
ALL escaped C'tan shards in the fluff destroyed the Necrons and fled to the stars. No attempts were made by the shards to take control over the Necrons probably because of the stated reasons above that is quite impossible.
Necron worshipping the C'tan is in the same ball park as Half Eldar and female Space Marines. Utterly uncanon. You are suppose to work with the frame work given in the codexes, if you are going off the course, then we are not talking 40K.
>>47483459
>oldcrons
>intimidating mechanized slaves of inscrutable cosmic intelligences
>newcrons
>le tragic space egyptian robits with god pokemons
>>47486210
There are Necrons that are totally sentient, despite that also being directly against protocols. There is a certain amount of leeway with these things, especially considering the fact that not all the oldcron fluff has been retconned. I'm sure shards of the deceiver are just as wily and treacherous as ever.
>>47486210
Continued....
Furthermore, you are being quite rude and selfish.
Here is the translation of what you are actually saying "We must have all the love, attention, content from the developers while you Oldcron peasants can stick in that sad corner and enjoy your little headcanon".
You are a bad person, anon.
>>47486210
>Even C'tan shards that are sentient cannot break the protocols of Necron technology due to the fact that their minded are very limited
the codex (or at least the old one) specifically mentions that they can and that their failsafes aren't going too always work.
Ctan worshiping newcrons are absolutely doable and competely compatible with the fluff. Just read between the lines in the codex fluff and remember its a big galaxy and a lot can happen in the millions of years they slumbered.
>>47486242
>There are Necrons that are totally sentient, despite that also being directly against protocols.
Stopped reading there. Open codex and re-read or read it for the first time.
>>47486261
>the codex (or at least the old one) specifically mentions that they can and that their failsafes aren't going too always work.
It does not.
>Ctan worshiping newcrons are absolutely doable and competely compatible with the fluff.
As double as loyalist female marines.
>Just read between the lines in the codex fluff
How convenient can't point where these lines are.
>>47486210
Female space marines and eldar - human hybrids are completely against canon. On the other hand, Necrons worshipping C'tan is not explicitly mentioned to be impossible. So you could justify it with a lot of headcanon and mental gymnastics. It would be pretty retarded though.
But that's not even the problem, the problem is >>47486237
>>47484427
Just have a Necron force where the Shard got to the crons before they woke up and now serve it.
It's that simple. I'm not at all happy with newcrons in the fluff, mainly because that is all the fluff is now but it doesn't mean that there aren't more necrons in the background doing things a different way like they did in their older codex such as vanishing mid fight, scouring life entire worlds and generally being mysterious cunts in space.
Just use your imagination.
>>47486337
We are not talking about imagination are we? We are talking about canon lore.
>>47486317
>Female space marines and eldar - human hybrids are completely against canon.
Female space marines are.
Half Eldar were never retconned. The birth hybrids was never said to be impossible. They were dropped by omission. Same thing happened to Necrons who follow the C'tan.
5 years of Newcrons and not even a single line stating that there exists Necrons that worship the C'tan? What does that tell you? It tells me that there is a policy in GW regarding portraying the Necrons as such.
>>47486337
You
see
>>47486260
>You : ME ME ME ME. FEED ME!
>>47486349
Was replying to that anon in particular but in lore sense, unless Geedubz release a flavour of necrons exactly like oldcrons autis- people will just see newcrons as tomb kings in space.
>>47486413
Like I said, a selfish and rude bad person.
>The Burning One had corrected the Magnovitrium’s decaying orbit, and augmented the mighty device with a portion of its own godly power. Yet the C’tan Shard was but a single sliver of a once-great mind. It could follow its master’s orders, could even pour its own might into the Magnovitrium’s blast once it was triggered. It could not, however, subvert the device’s failsafes or override its firing protocols – such improvisation was simply beyond the god-shard’s ability to conceive. And so it hung in space, poised on the cusp of victory, yet unable to seize it.
-Shield of Baal
"I can bath a continent in comic fire but I can't into programming"
This some grade A wiring right here.
>>47486434
You're a funny guy.
>>47483459
Keep newcrons as newcrons.
Make Men of Iron the mindless killing machine army.
>>47486349
>We are talking about canon lore.
Which is something 40k writers have never expressed much interest in.
>>47486587
The funniest.
>>47486602
I disagree.
I have read plenty of WD interviews and had seen plenty of Podcasts. They are shining with passion for their work.
>>47486050
>>47483524reusing old assets from a previous thread
Problem is, as soon as murderbots aren't the only thing, they're not a thing at all.
You can't have mysterious murdermachines and give them human goals. The second element weakens the first one considerably.
>but there still some dynasties that are nothing but murdermachines serving C'Tan (shards).
"Well hello, relatively friendly Cryptek, would you mind giving us a few pointers on how to defeat that other dynasty that threatens us all?" "But of course, inferior meatbag."
That's not cosmic horror anymore.
Essentially, it's the same as getting an additional bro-tier Chaos god that hangs out with people sometimes, or a reasonable tyranid queen. The threat potential of the entire group is greatly reduced.
>>47486125
>The reason they added more fluff to the Necrons is so there would be more room for characterization and your-dudes.
May I point out that previous Necron players were pretty fine with the fact that they played alien Skynet, and that some choose the faction specifically for that reason?
It's like wanting to give the Hivefleets various personalities to make them distinct and relatable.
>>47485120
>My lord too once loved
That was the best piece of Tomb King fluff I've read.
>>47484480
We could have one them reskinned as Men of Iron, Dark Mechanicus, or a new alien faction, though.
>>47486659
There's already cosmic horror. It's called Tyranids and Chaos. Both of which predate the Necrons by a wide margin and do it better. The C'tan are knock off cthulhu's with less personality than the Tau. The way they are now is a lot more interesting.
>>47486626
Now you're just pulling my leg anon.
>>47486674
Not even in the slightest.
Having Anti-Chaos Gods/Evil Material Gods was awesome.
Read the 3th ED Oldcron codex and then the 4th ED Tyranid codex. You will see that the Oldcrons pull the ancient cosmic horror quite well than the Tyranids.
>>47483459
>Necron?
>NECRON?!
>NEEEECRROOOONNNNN!!!!
>>47486721
quite better*
>>47486691
Google Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin Dark Eldar interview.
>>47486626
>They are shining with passion for their work.
Which is why they never bother with things like consistency
I have no doubt that they like elements of the fluff; everyone does. However that's all 40k has been reduced to - a big wall that everyone throws shit at and occasionally you get a few good things among the turds.
Man, whatever happened to the old Carnac who would shitpost against Oldcrons and Oldcron fans, wank Newcrons, and generally make Newcron fans look worse by association, rather than the inverse as he does now.
>>47486674
>The way they are now is a lot more interesting.
Yeah, because contrary to cosmic horror, there wasn't any faction in 40k that played the "court intrigues" angle...
>>47486897
I like both, leaning more to the Oldcrons. However, I recognize the Newcrons glaring faults and I don't appreciate apologetic geared for them and lies told to handwave these faults.
I kicked Oldcron fans around in past because it was impossible to have a discussion about Newcron lore without some moron coming in to start a Oldcron vs Newcron fight where it wasn't needed.
People can have complex opinions about things. Not everyone deals with absolutes, mister Sith Lord.
>>47486944
This.
A major problem with the Newcrons is that they written so human. Some writers even want you to sympathize with them.
Then you get FUCKING HACKS like FW try to pass them off as cosmic horrors through the laziest writing methods/techniques I have ever seen in my life. Guess what? It doesn't work. It's jarring, it's lazy, and it's insulting.
You can't have them being human and unknowable at the same time. Pick one and stick with it.
>>47486991
I like to think newcrons and oldcrons existing, just depending on the perspective. I enjoy newcrons more though.
A human expedition ends up awakening a Necron tombworld? They're the same as oldcrons, mindless and skeletal killing machines. Same as the 3rd edition codex cover Necrons.
When you switch the perspective to Necrons themselves, things obviously change. That still hugely varies depending on how the Overlord in charge is.
Why did the Old Ones, that by all accounts looked like a bunch of giant bloated frogs, engineer lesser races like the eldar, humans and orks, that seems to look much more like the necrontyrs (like the metal skeletons of said necrontyrs, anyways)?
>>47487801
We just don't know. Maybe the frog/amphibian form is better for ultra-creative superpsychic beings, but the mammalian/simian is better for any other purpose? The Old Ones recognised that the Necron design was a more practical starting point for their own creations than themselves.
>>47487801
Because the writers are humans. Also they wanted fantasy tropes in space.
>>47487801
Because Necrons were biologically inferior and the Old Ones didn't want anything evolving to rival them in the incredibly long run. Then they died anyways because the most powerful Psyhic beings in the galaxy couldn't figure out how to shoo away a bunch of warp jellyfish.
>>47485044
>Being right is often viewed as "autism" on this board.
Not that guy, but no, dude, it isn't.
What is considered autism on this board is plugging your ears and insisting you're right when others are telling you that you might be incorrect on a single key detail.
The way 40k works, unless the fluff explicitly says that it cannot happen, then it can happen, no matter how unlikely.
"Imperial Guard" working with foul xenos? It can happen.
Space Marines fighting alongside a hated foe to exterminate a greater mutual threat? It can happen.
A faction of Space Marines who use technology considered heretical while they themselves are considered mostly pure? It can happen.
A splinter of Necrons who worship the eldritch horror that gave them their metal skellingtons? It. Can. Happen.
>>47483459
I'd say that the money they spent on that is more money NOT spent on updating Sisters.
>>47483459
How can you have all the C'tan sharded and 4 remaining C'tan that ate the rest at the same time?
>>47483459
Best of both world. Necrons would have more character without retconing and more oportunity for story and conflict and fans of both are satified
>>47483488
>>47484470
Just make your own fluff for your own Dynasty.
A Dynasty that;
>woke up with no ability of verbal communication.
>worships their Shard.
>only interested in killing all living things and feeding them to their Shard.
Stop being so fucking unimaginative and autistic.
>>47490694
But I don't want to be reasonable and creative. I want to be told what to do but only as long as it's the one thing I like
>>47490694
>>47491267
You
see
>>47486260
>>47489990
>are telling you that you might be incorrect on a single key detail.
They have yet proven me incorrect. Saying I am incorrect because of your FEELs does't make me incorrect.
If you think that C'tan worshipping Necrons can happen, then prove it within the fluff. You cannot because the fluff is antithetical to it for many of the reasons I mentioned in this thread.
Like i said in the thread, "Oldcrons" are as canon as Half Eldar navigators.
>>47485120
This is pretty good
I dony know why the oldcron kid is getting so triggered but for some reason its kinda hilarious. Now im gonna pick up a necron box and fluff up a shard worshipping murder dynasty to make me laugh.
>>47483459
No one cares they're boring as an army either way but I do prefer newcrons.
>>47492710
Like I care. Go ahead and waste your money.
At the end of the day, it's just your non-fluffy headcanon.
>>47483488
>Dark Necrons and Regular Necrons.
STOP GIVING THEM IDEAS!
Oldcrons are 100% compatible.
Just fluff your army as "this necron dynasty's cryostasis preservation fucked up and even the Tomb Lords are braindead automatons because I have shit taste and prefer completely personality devoid terminators over skeletors
It really is a shame that GW decided to make them vastly less interesting with the update.
>>47493156
>Oldcrons are 100% compatible.
No, they are not. Fucker, you think you are clever but you are as dumb as a brick. Oldcrons worship the C'tan and still retain some of their personalities and feelings.
What you are purposing is called "Severed" Necrons in the fluff. These Necrons have lost their minds during sleep. The Tomb computers programs these braindead Necrons into acting like regular dynastic Necrons as best it can. However, they would be as jerky and clumsy as False Necrons in their imitation of proper Necrons.
>>47493319
Yeah, they'd be screwed up versions of normal necrons. They'd be little more than murder bots, and would probably be easily manipulated by a powerful entitysuch as a C'tan whose containment was also damaged
>>47493419
Anti-C'tan Protocols and the fact that C'tan Shards are also dumb as bricks should put as stop to that.
>>47493498
Nah. This time it got lucky
>>47493522
Doubt it,
A full C'tan couldn't. A shard will never.
>>47493656
Nah, it got lucky and did.
>>47493678
I don't think so. That's like saying a guardsman got laid by an Eldar banshee and 50 years later a Half Eldar was born from their union.
>>47493773
Nothing specifically states it can't happen. It's a really big goddamn galaxy, and GW deliberately let people be creative.
Let people have their fun with their necrons
>>47493890
>Nothing specifically states it can't happen
Try telling that to Eldarfags.
>Let people have their fun with their necrons
I am not stopping you from making your non-fluffy Necron army, man.
Anyway, I am off to bed. Ciao.
>>47493938
>I am the GUARDIAN OF NECRON FLUFF
A) Everything is canon, not everything is true
B) GW isn't really in the business of restricting what people do with fluff. It's fairly broad strokes as it, and people have pointed out that, given how many necrons there are in the galaxy, that it could happen
New to 40k but what is the difference between "Oldcrons" and "Newcrons" exactly?
>>47494078
OldCrons are what the necrons used to be: emotionless hordes of killing machines who served the C'tan and wanted to slaughter life in the galaxy
Newcrons: A people with their own personalities (that get corroded over time) more personal emotions, thoughts, etc, who were tricked and got revenge, and made the C'tan their bitches.
Both are good, but Newcrons existing, and the freedom given by them shouldn't mean Oldcrons can't exist
The C'tan were the worst part of necron fluff.
Their designs clashed greatly with both oldcron and newcron shit, and were generally unimpressive. They felt like shit that should have been with Vampire Counts or something from WHFB.
>>47486598
Honestly if I wanted mindless killing machines, I'd play Tyranids. I never really found the oldcrons to be scary or mysterious. They just seemed like a weaksauce version of Chaos, right down to having four patron gods.
I'm also getting sick of all the Imperial armies as well, especially the five or six iterations of Space Marines.
>>47492710
>oldcron kid
See >>47486897
>>47493890
>Let people have their fun with their necrons
This is someone who has attempted to hold up the inclusion of "bwahahaha!" in a rule description as a bad thing. Whether he genuinely believes that or is just pretending (which is a question that hangs over this particular thread's argument too, as well as many others), either way, that should give you an idea of the sort of person you're dealing with.
>>47494078
>emotionless
One emotion was all most of them had left.
>and wanted to slaughter life in the galaxy
"Slaughter" in the same way that livestock are slaughtered, it should be stressed. A practically universal misconception is that the 3rd edition C'tan and Necrons meant to exterminate all life, when the truth was anything but.
>>47483524
Second post best post.
>>47494106
This.
By the rules and the lore, both exist in some capacity, and the new dex allows you to do either and say that it is perfectly alright.
My issue with Oldcron players is what they want means that EVERYONE has to do it their way, rather than have a choice.
>>47495343
Yeah. The biggest flaw I can see with the Newcrons is that GW didn't make a Dynasty that was just oldcrons. While theoretically possible, they should have been more explicit in saying 'hey, if you don't want these new dynasties, the old terminator bots still exist'
>>47487801
Because for whatever reason, the Old Ones worked off a simian base creature to create Eldar, Orks, Jokaero, and maybe humans. We don't know exactly why.
Destroyer lords and cults are a thing. Just work your fluff to where a cult rules a world or system. Even in new fluff they're driven by thier genocidal urges.
>>47497368
Don't you understand, if you're not playing 100% by what the new codices and BL novels say, you're having bad-wrong fun and not playing 40k anymore.
The point is that even IF old style dynasties exist it destroyed the previous feeling the faction as a whole had.
>>47492874
>non-fluffy headcanon.
almost every author who works on 40k material is working with at least a little headcannon rather than pure established information and that's probably how the fluff changes over time through out 40k
>>47493773
by oldcron logic, there would be ABSOLUTELY no reason for people to paint there models anything but silver and black, which i find gets a little dull after a while
>>47501141
"I want to, so I will" seems like it should have been reason enough desu.
>>47500808
The point everyone else is making is that what you thought you were dealing with was actually Reflavored Chaos in a setting with redundant threats of the same nature. Future, it meant that on the table, players were outright restricted in army composition to what YOU wanted, and it wasn't good then, wouldn't be now.
>>47501214
Yeah, and that same reasoning can be used to justify oldcrons currently.
>>47501321
Silly Anon, the Newcrons mean that YOU CAN'T CAN'T CAN'T play as Oldcrons, because almighty Carnac says so. And as we know, Carnac has never, never been wrong.
>>47494014
And I am back. Damn this thread is still going?
>A) Everything is canon, not everything is true
That's a myth (picture related) stop saying lies.
>B) GW isn't really in the business of restricting what people do with fluff. It's fairly broad strokes as it, and people have pointed out that, given how many necrons there are in the galaxy, that it could happen
GW gives you a framework to work with in the fluff. If you step out, then you are out of 40K traitor.
There is a reason why Tau serving marines and Half Eldar don't exist in the setting because THEY DON'T WORK. It's pretty much the same with C'tan worshipping Necrons.
>>47494456
No one reads you post or cares.
>>47495100
Worst post you mean because dude was a punk who didn't know shit about Necron fluff.
>>47495343
>By the rules and the lore, both exist in some capacity
Stop lying.
Show me where in the new lore that says that Oldcrons as in Necron serving the C'tan exist. You can't.
Like I said in the thread many times, the fluff doesn't show that option. For 6 years going, GW has been averting having the C'tan in any authority role within the Newcron lore. They even went out of their way to make it impossible.
What Oldcron players want is to have some content thrown their way. There is no going back but have we get a bone thrown for us at least. No, that would be too much.
So I have to refer you to this post >>47486260
>>47501370
Prove me wrong.
I mean look at the dumb brick right here >>47497368. We say we want C'tan worshipping Necrons and he says role with the Destroyer Cults.
He does not know that
A) Destroyer Cults are explicitly said do not follow any god or acknowledge any authority save for their to end all life
B) Oldcrons were not about the destruction of all life
>>47498180
No one is saying that.
If you want to role with unfluffy armies like Chaos Grey Knights and Half Eldar rangers, do as you please. Nobody is stopping you here.
This is about talking about getting content and how it works in the setting.
>>47501219
>Reflavored Chaos in a setting
Oldcrons and Newcrons (to some extent) are a rising forgotten threat.
Chaos and Tyranids are in your face and you see them coming to get you. You will never see the Necrons coming. Well, that was the past. Most Necrons in the Newcron fluff announce their arrivals to systems by shouting through quantum megaphones. You know, because the honour protocols.
>>47487801
Because the setting was originally conceived as Warhammer Fantasy IN SPACE.
>>47501660
their desire to end all life*
Also I would like to mention that Destroyers ARE NOT SILENT KILLERS.
They shout, coo, and hoot as they murder the living. Cackling like lunatics all the way. The rest of the Necrons think they are retarded and that's because they are. They emerged from the Great Sleep with their minds damaged more than most.
Have you read the "Devourer" novel? Anrakyr was swagging all over the place and then a Destroyer came right next to him and started doing some retarded shit. Anrakyr had to stop and say, "Dude, you are retarded".
I swear the Neecron fluff is build to destroy the image of Oldcrons. Even the Newcron warriors scream!
>>47501219
>Reflavored Chaos
how so?
>players were outright restricted in army composition and it wasn't good then
Yeah, people were dumb, those who picked necrons in third edition didn't know what they wanted.
Myself, I cried a lot when I opened the first codex and discovered that I was limited to mindless killer bots. I mean, nothing in WD, the stores or the net could have prepared me to that limitation. Oh, if only I had known beforehand I would have picked another army....... You realise people usually make informed choices when they get an army? I got in the boat for Terminator, and now I have the Mummy.
I suppose we should refluff the tau to satisfy those that want psychic powers. Or refluff nids so we can have individualistic characters. Or the orks so we can have high-tech waaaghs.
You know what? I'm fine with "count as". I don't mind playing against a tau using IG rules, or an ork using eldar rules. Or mechanicus corrupted by the necrons and going crazy.
But current necron fluff destroyed the threat that they presented.
Now C'tans are pseudo-avatars instead of being Gods (very original btw, Khaine's lawyers called), and any murderbot dynasty is simply a dynasty instead of being a whole race hell bent on the eradication of all life. No more unity, no more implacability, no more mysterious motives, no more alien gods.
I have to play a crazy kind worshipping a idol instead of a puppeted by a a star vampire.
I would have been fine with a mini codex about how the mindwipe failed on some tomb worlds, with necrons that retained their memories and freedom. They didn't have to destroy the C'tans.
Also, I liked my pariahs, and now they are taking dust.
>There are no Oldcrons anymore, only Tomb Kings in Space. Oldcrons are no longer fluffy because Matt fucking Ward didn't say otherwise
>The Maynarkh are the closest thing left to Oldcrons, their variant list isn't pointless, and the entire concept isn't retarded sub-homebrew-tier bullshit that FW used to pad out a book
>C'tan-worshipping, silver-and-black Necrons with the "personality" of silent Daleks weren't as cool as Ward's super-neato DeviantArt-tier original characters
I know Carnac's a fucking retard, but are the rest of you smoking crack?
>>47484744
Actually currently that part with the C'Tan ruling whole Dynasties also is valid because after being sharded, the C'Tan are Khorne-tier mad at the Necrons and they want to a) reunite their shards and b) wipe out the Space Goth Terminator Tomb Kings for their betrayal.
>>47486587
I always imagined The Silent King to look similar to Star Gate's (the movie that spawned the whole franchise) main big bad, but with a ginormous head ornament and with much swaggier robes over his robotic body.
So swag that the Necron Ladies get a temporal blue screen when they are too close.
>>47487112
That's the Thok Dynasty who fills the human part (to some point).
A large majority of Dynasties are massive douches.
>>47503382
>Actually currently that part with the C'Tan ruling whole Dynasties also is valid because after being sharded, the C'Tan are Khorne-tier mad at the Necrons and they want to a) reunite their shards and b) wipe out the Space Goth Terminator Tomb Kings for their betrayal.
Please free to point out where in the fluff exists C'tan ruled dynasties. I assure you that they don't exist.
100% of the shards of the lore were either prisoners or loners. 85% of them were mindless and feral.
>always imagined The Silent King to look similar to Star Gate's
The Silent King's body is similar to the C'tan. He is not Skeletal.
>>47503407
You mean that the Thokt dynasty is rumored to have thinking and sentient warriors.
>>47503661
>You mean that the Thokt dynasty is rumored to have thinking and sentient warriors.
Yeah, and that they are going to become the basis of reuniting the Necrons.
I need to have actual canon-stuff from GW to believe in it.
>>47503661
Considering that information on the current C'tam shard fluff constantly talks about how they're alwaya hard to control and scheming to escape? It isn't that far-fetched.
Transcendent C'tan #384 manages to escape its largely mindless necron masters, then uses its phenominal cosmic power to make them serve him.
Alternatively, have a full C'tan from the far past use his powers to tear open a portal in time and fling himself into the future, where his evil isn't law, and so he goes about trying to fix that.
Seriously, this is like complaining that because there is no canon Imperial Fists successor with a blue and orange color scheme that went renegade but not to Chaos exists, that one can't exist, because GW hasn't specifically said it could exist, and it instead require the player to read into things and extrapolate from details.
