[Archive] Chaos Dwarf Players: Disgruntled or Delighted?

Thommy H:

Uh…okay…“delighted” isn’t quite the right word, but I needed something that started with ‘d’. Sue me :stuck_out_tongue:

Anyway, I got to thinking about this while reading a certain article in the wiki and noting a tone of dissatisfaction about how Chaos Dwarfs have been treated over the years. The article talked about [[White Dwarf Presents: Chaos Dwarfs]] in rather bleak terms, criticising it not just as an army book, but clearly implying it was a failure and its lacklustre nature somehow responsible for the niche status of Chaos Dwarfs.

I mean, let’s face it, we’ve never had an army book - the closest we got was a compliation of articles from White Dwarf and now we’re stuck using an outdated booklet that was given away free seven (!) years ago for our rules.

You could forgive a Chaos Dwarf player for being a little depressed about how his army has been treated over the years…

But are you?

I mean, thinking about it, I’m really happy that I’m a Chaos Dwarf player. My army elicits more interest than any other, collecting my army is a challenge rather than a chore, there is so little background that there’s room to pretty much see the army however you want.

I know this sounds like I’m trying to find the silver lining, but the reason I made this thread is not to say “hey guys, chin up!”, it’s because I really was confused to encounter the work of someone who was annoyed at the treatment of Chaos Dwarfs. The way I see it, they’ve always been a niche army and deciding to collect them in the first place (and this was during 5th Edition) was seen as a bit weird even then.

So I like it. I like scrounding background from where we can, and getting excited over minor refrences in White Dwarf and other army books. I like not knowing how my army is ‘supposed’ to look, since there’s no current version of the models. I like still having a blank canvas.

I wouldn’t play any other army.

What are everyone else’s thoughts?


You are totally right brother! The main reason I started CDs was because it alloted so much creativity to itself and the excitement of inventing your own unique units and look. I think however that this is somewhat tempered in that we do have to scan white dwarf for even a scant reference. disgrunteled? no. dissapointed. alittle.

cheers on a good topic:cheers


Meh. Both.

I like the fact that we haven’t been totally abandoned. But that’s like saying, hey, at least I didn’t have any money to burn down with my house when it caught fire.


It was me who wrote most of that. And I believe it to be true still.

The army was badly treated, and that made it a niche army. I’m not sure that we should celebrate being badly treated, especially those of us who’ve collected them since they first came out and were reasonably treated (I wouldn’t say they were ever well treated), just because it frightened most people off and we were hidden from everyone else. I don’t care about being a niche army, all of my armies are heavily themed so having an unusual army is not something I get from the lack of an armybook or models, it is something I create myself.


The main reason I came back to the CDs is: that it’s not a GW concept army - but a army of your own creation. But the fact that it’s not a fully GW-army is also the reason why we have discussions like “Fate of Chaos Dwarfs in the UK” and “Issues with the current Chaos Dwarf List”. All I need is an official updated 7ed army-list - that would make my army legal anywhere. I don’t need a shiny army-book and concept models. But a balanced, playable armylist with no “count as” and “opponent agrees”.

Uzkul Werit:

The fact that it is a rarely used army is what attracted me to it to begin with but after a while, I was wonedering why we weren’t getting anything new. It’s the most orginal army by far and yet no update?

Well, we would have if it wasn’t for those bloody Ogres.

Thommy H:

I'm not sure that we should celebrate being badly treated
Well, that's not exactly what I'm saying. My post isn't about making the best of a bad lot or anything, it's about me wondering whether there is a sense of betrayal regarding Chaos Dwarfs as a whole, or if it's the very fact that they've been forgotten that makes you so passionate about them.

I don't think I'd be on a message board posting pictures of my army or contributing to a wiki about Wood Elves or Empire or something if they were what I collected.

Maybe it comes down to what kind of player you are? A lot of people are talking about army list updates and legality, which makes me wonder if there really has been an issue with the opponent's refusing to play a Chaos Dwarf army - I find it hard to believe, but we've all met players who can be a bit...well...competetive, and would rather 'win' by refusing to play an 'illegal' list than actually beat someone in a game.

I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a GW fanboy (because most of their stuff is overpriced crap...) but it seems like bitching about them leaving Chaos Dwarfs in the dark is a bit like wishing they still supported Man O War, or wondering why there aren't Heroquest articles in White Dwarf anymore.

We're an obscure army - that's what being a Chaos Dwarf player is all about, isn't it? You do it so that when you set them up people are impressed that you bothered to do something different instead of just buy a box of High Elves or Brettonians.


Does that mean you will stop collecting CD’s if GW releases an army book and range of figures?

Admittedly, it’s the lack of availability of CD’s that attracted me to them. Having said that, I am more of a painter than a gamer. I agree that you get a lot more satisfaction out of converting a unit of CD’s than you do buying a box of pointy ears, but I have collected a few armies (well, hunting parties!) and I always try to make them completely different from the start point.

Should a new army book and figure range be released tommorrow, I would carry on as I was doing anyway, maybe incorporate the new models that I think look the best. My armies tend to be flawed in their selection, but I don’t care as long as they look awesome on the battlefield, and in the end, people talk about the great armies they have seen, not the ones that won. Unless of course it was their army that won!!!

Thommy H:

Does that mean you will stop collecting CD's if GW releases an army book and range of figures?
Not at all, I'm just not chomping at the bit to see it right now, I guess. I know it isn't happening any time soon, after all, and I'm happy doing my Chaos Dwarfy stuff in our forgotten corner of the Warhammer world.


" and in the end, people talk about the great armies they have seen, not the ones that won."

more people should adhere to that way of thinking.

back on topic, i dont chaos dwarfs have been treated too badly, if they were a 40k race they would have been dumped ages ago, its a lot harder to wipe someone off the fantasy map.

of course a full release would do wonders for them, but its not really a sound financial investment for GW, the fat cats will compare how well they are expected to do this time to how badly they did last time and say no. simple as that.

Like others have said a legal PDF is enough for me, as i enjoy converting my army how i want it. on no other army's forum will you see so many different examples of the exact same core unit. the great thing is about converting your own army is no-one else has one like it!


Chaos Dwarfs are only a niche army because that is what GW made them.

The reason most other armies are more popular than CD is because they were marketed and supported more by GW. CD could be far more popular than they are if GW wanted to make it so. The thing that disgruntles me is that so many people assume that CD are a niche army due to the fact that they are somehow inherently unpopular, rather than the fact that GW more or less abandoned them.

That is what bugs me.

Thommy H:

Except they were always pretty niche…

I started playing them during 5th Edition, when they were available in Games Workshop still and, even then, they were pretty obscure. Bearing in mind that their rules were released in White Dwarf rather than in an army book and their range never recieved any additions after the initial release.

So yeah, obviously that’s not great support, but what I’m saying is that they never had support comparable to The Empire or Orcs and Goblins or any other ‘core’ army.


Judging by the way GW leeches cash from it’s customers, if it was financially viable to support CDs they would have done. Look at this new 40k apocalypse thing. Realising that the core rules restrict the use of massive armies, GW have released apocalypse to justify selling a boxed all plastic space marine army that is going to cost �275, and a baneblade tank that will cost �60. They’re not daft and people will pay it.

CDs are niche because they never received the initial support, not just from GW, but from gamers as well. People I speak to (the ones who are old enough to remember) liked the army & background but would not collect them themselves. We can chastise GW as much as we want, however, if GW ploughed it’s money into projects under a misguided sense of loyalty to a sinking ship, I daresay we would not be having this discussion more to the fact that GW were bankrupt than us having our way. The time and money spent on boosting the core game and armies funds the development of our hobby and ensures that we at least still have one!

Thommy H:

CDs are niche because they never received the initial support, not just from GW, but from gamers as well.
Yeah, I think this is an important point. Anything can be a success if people buy it - why would GW create an army for the sole purpose of not supporting it so it dies?

No, Chaos Dwarfs were not succesful in the past because, for whatever reason, people didn't latch onto them. When I had my first game with my revamped army a few weeks ago, the first thing someone asked me was, "So...why do you play Chaos Dwarfs...?" He was a veteran player, who had been around when they were supported, so it wasn't as if he was just asking why I played an unsupported force - he wanted to know, full stop, why I'd decided to play such a weird army.

They were always a weird army: rules given away free in White Dwarf, geographically isolated from the rest of the Warhammer World (with no justification for going anywhere outside their home land), utilising units and models from an existing army, their own monsters, magic and war machines (in a period where this wasn't usually the case)...it goes on...

They're the equivelant of Sisters of Battle in 40K - they're still around, and they're supported in some small way, but they're not exactly an army you see a lot of and you'll always get interested looks when you take them out to play a game. Bizarrely enough, I once collected Sisters of Battle too, actually.

Anyway, the point is that I think it's cool to collect and play something a bit different.


An army with limited models and no real army book cannot be fairly compared to other armies.

CD are only a niche army relative to other armies GW have chosen to fully support.

CD were only ever a White Dwarf army with some limited model support. If they are to be compared to anything it should be to other WD armies like Hell Pit or Zombie pirates, both of which they are vastly more popular than.

We simply won’t know how popular CD really are until GW release a proper army list for CD with a full model range and market it at least as much as other armies. Then and only then will we have a fair indication of whether it actually is a niche army or not.

Uzkul Werit:

But there’s a chance that CD will never get the chance. At the moment, GW seem busy with giving armies support that don’t need it (i.e. Marines/IG with Apocolypse) whilst the likes of Chaos Dwarfs and 40K Orks get shunned. And it’s always about getting money from people who will only visit their store once or twice. You know, my local staff are getting all the 40K players excited about this release but they don’t seem to get that you’ll only end up using those three Baneblades once in a blue moon.


But there's a chance that CD will never get the chance. At the moment, GW seem busy with giving armies support that don't need it (i.e. Marines/IG with Apocolypse) whilst the likes of Chaos Dwarfs and 40K Orks get shunned. And it's always about getting money from people who will only visit their store once or twice. You know, my local staff are getting all the 40K players excited about this release but they don't seem to get that you'll only end up using those three Baneblades once in a blue moon.

Uzkul Werit
Sadly the fact of the matter is more people play 40k, in GW's eyes that makes it more important, before long it'll be just like Forge World, who are too busy making Super Super X-tra heavy Cheese-Coated Tanks, and resin eyebrows so you can give your guardsmen sarcastic expressions to bother about making anything for Warhammer Fantasy :mad. Is it so much to ask for something exclusive to fantasy to be released, thus far the newest WHFB stuff has been the Greater Daemons and they still only released rules for them to be used in 40k, and they've got that bloody Aeronautica Imperialitus or whatever the hell its called wasting perfectly good resin (who seriously plays that? anyone?)... :~

Guess that makes us WHFB players the GW rebels... :P ;) :cheers


I have the Aeronautica Imperialis book. It’s actually pretty good, and the models are great. The only problem is, and it’s a big one, not many others have. The couple of games I’ve played as well have shown that the game doesn’t go into enough detail with weapon systems and such like. There’s no rules for missile defence (like flares to confuse heat seekers etc) and the only difference between weapon systems is strength & rate of fire. There are no rules for formations either, which is a pity. I would like to have seen a variety of weapon systems with outlandish effects and defence systems. As it is, it’s just a dakka dakka fest with most of the emphasis being on manouvering. Having said that, it is still an enjoyable game, but as usual, Imperium has about 50 different planes, there are 2 ork planes, 3 eldar, 3 Tau and 2 chaos. See this thing about supporting the most popular army!

Anyway, back on topic. I think you will find Necrons were a White Dwarf army, but they were popular and people baught lots of them, so GW released an army book and a miniatures range and continue to support them. People did not buy CDs, so they didn’t release an army book or new miniatures. Maybe they came close, which is why they got at least some miniatures and the WD Presents book, but the fact remains, people didn’t buy enough of them to warrant GW going any further with them. This is why our main mission should be to deliver CD’s to those too young to remember, breathe fresh popularity into the race and get more people to join our cause. Believe me, from what I have seen during the 14 years I’ve been collecting GW stuff, if they can make money out of it, they will.


Does that mean you will stop collecting CD's if GW releases an army book and range of figures?
That I think would be foolish, but I certainly won't be replacing all my models. I was asked by a GW staffer whether I was considering updating my Chaos Warriors to 7th edition models to which my answer was a resounding NOOOOOOOOOO! You can still carry on converting your unique army even if there is an official miniatures range

Uzkul Werit:

The only true WFB release from Forge World is their Giant and yet at every Games Day, their stall is the most packed. Do the maths and you’ll unfortunately see where the money lies.