Greater daemons 1 per detachment, 18+ Wounds
Smaller unit sizes (typically 10 on troops, 6 on elites)
Auras are command phase stuff
DS almost army wide
Instead of invulns armour that is unaffected by AP (why?) and different in melee vs range
Horrors split on a 5+ for free
Treason of Tzench is no auras for you, infernal gateway buffed (flat 3 on mega cast, and aura from target unit not model)
Bloodletters strong (A2 S5 ap-3 2D)
Khorne rendmaster
Bloodthirster, D3+3 damage big swing
Lots of +1 T for khorne Crushers 5 W
Plauge bearers T5 2W
DG version of DR
Nurglinings not troop
Nurgle better at wounding things
Beasts tanky
Slaanesh all round small improvements
Also: the same source comments that souping options have been added to the newest playtests
TonyH122 wrote: A few more rumours are turning up on Discord, via reddit, all of which apparently come from the guy whose Tyranid leaks were on point:
General:
-Further confirmation of daemonic saves, including two profiles for range/melee
-GUO has 4+/5+ against range/melee.
-LoC has 3+/5+ against range/melee.
-Icons: Give the ICON keyword, which is somehow relevant to the new Warp Storm table.
-Instruments appear to give morale re-rolls.
GUO Details -GUO has 4+/5+ against range/melee.
-T8, 22W
-GUO still has 5+++ -Vomit attack: 7", d6 auto-hits, S5, AP-2, D1.
-Bilesword has: Cleave at +1S, AP-3, Dd6, 6s to hit auto-wound; Sweep at SU, AP-3, 1D, double attacks.
-Bileblade: SU, AP-3, D2, re-roll wounds, and 'improves casting'
-Flail: 7", d3+3A, SU, AP-3, D2.
-Nurgling attacks in addition
-Bell has a resurrection-style resurrection action for Plaguebearers
-Gives Nurgle CORE re-rolls
Khorne -'most improved'
-Most have 4+/4+ or 4+/5+ against range/melee.
Tzeentch -3+ against ranged for most, but not all units.
-Always has a worse save against melee.
Conflicted -Apparently another user states that Pink Horrors, Plaguebearers, and Bloodletters are all 10pts each.
-People are generally doubtful of this, at least if the other rumours of their buffs are true.
About deepstrike
Spoiler:
Garrac wrote: Copypasted from the Discord server, by Trout:
" Happy Monday ya filthy heretics. A few keen eyed individuals (most everyone) had noticed the "Warp Locus" keyword on certain CSM units (Maater of Posession, Khorne Lord of Skulls). Well I'm here to tell you at least part of what it does. As you may have heard, you will be able to deepstrike Daemons for free--but that's not all! When in the Warp these daemons gain special deepstrike rules.
They can deepstrike as normal, or if you set them up wholly within 6" of a Warp Locus unit, they can be set up just outside 6" from enemy units! (Instead of 9"). If you have allegiances you gotta stick with your friends. Warp Locus isn't a particularly common keyword, but an important lynchpin to enable brutal strategies.
No longer are you shelling out 2 or 3 cp to get a virtually gaurenteed charge with Bloodletters. I mean you will still be able to enhance charges in other ways, but now the floor is much higher. Looking to counter or stop your enemy from dropping hell on your doorstep? You'll want to remove enemy Warp Locus models as efficiently as you can. But that certainly won't be simple in most cases. The cool news is that deepstriking via the Warp has some other interesting rules if you're pure Daemons that make it even more appealing; those fighting daemons should generally stay out of daemonic territory, and keep a good sense of leadership.
That's it for that. A good mechanic to keep in mind as you read any upcoming information. I think it offers some good counter play, while also enabling some of the most reliable charges in the game. [PSA: As always understand things can change before release. So salt it a bit. "
"Time for the angriest of Daemons - Skarbrand!
As is appropriate for Skarbrand, his damage output has gone from "middling" to "through the roof". His bellow has quite literally doubled in potency, and at top profile you get the choice between 9 attacks at S16 ap-4 D3+3 damage ignoring invulns or a whopping 18 at s8 ap-2 d2. His "rage embodied" also remains the same as ever, though the range has shortened a tad to only 6".
The beast is no slouch durability wise either - with 20 wounds, t8, and a 4+ save in both melee and shooting, he's far from easy to take down, but if you're still worried just feel free to deep strike him - everyone in daemons can do that, remember?
Oh yeah one other thing - he's a Warp Locus."
Garrac wrote: Waiting for friday bcs it looks like this was a Chariot week spetial
Gonna update later with daemonettes profile
The Daemonette Profile leaked. Pretty much all the Slaanesh units except HQ's and Fiends.
SLAANESH:
Command Phase: Fights First, Fights Last, Fight on Death abilities.
Daemonettes: improved offense near characaters: full re-rolls, and auto-wounding on 6.
Chariots: T6
Epitome: no longer prevents fallback, its a primarily a spell caster
Masque: no longer utility, really interest buffs and debuffs.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no rending rule like genestealers, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
4X S4/AP-2/Dam 1 attacks for 8-9 PPM is pretty scary with a 4+ ranged daemon save, innate deep strike, and herald buffs.
CSM Legionaries with the MOK have 4X at S5/AP-2/D1 attacks melee for more than twice the supposed points costs of the new Daemonettes.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no native rend, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
SEEKER CHARIOT: [cheap]
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A10, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:10X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Does MW on the charge, averages 1-2 MW.
Whips: 4X shots with old profile.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
HELLFLAYER: 80 pts
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A8, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:8X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Axel: 4X Attacks, Melee S6/AP-2/Dam 2/Auto-hits on charge
Double on the charge: 8 attacks
Gained -1 to hit.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
Greater daemons 1 per detachment, 18+ Wounds
Smaller unit sizes (typically 10 on troops, 6 on elites)
Auras are command phase stuff
DS almost army wide
Instead of invulns armour that is unaffected by AP (why?) and different in melee vs range
Horrors split on a 5+ for free
Treason of Tzench is no auras for you, infernal gateway buffed (flat 3 on mega cast, and aura from target unit not model)
Bloodletters strong (A2 S5 ap-3 2D)
Khorne rendmaster
Bloodthirster, D3+3 damage big swing
Lots of +1 T for khorne Crushers 5 W
Plauge bearers T5 2W
DG version of DR
Nurglinings not troop
Nurgle better at wounding things
Beasts tanky
Slaanesh all round small improvements
Rumor sounds like Daemons returning to their pre-6th edition status of a more elite army rather than the horde they've become since then. Which is not necessarily bad.
And I guess their save against range will be better than against melee, right?
It is generally better to have protection against ranged than against melee, but it depends of which team you're facing and how is the terrain
I understand they're trying to protect the biggest daemons from hammerstrikes. I've been playing CK those last weeks and it is so bad.
You can build a 24W T8 3+ 4++ antireroll 5+++ toy and dying fast anyways. As you can only bring 1 greater demon, they will probably want him to be cool in matches.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Rumor sounds like Daemons returning to their pre-6th edition status of a more elite army rather than the horde they've become since then. Which is not necessarily bad.
And I guess their save against range will be better than against melee, right?
God I would love that.
I hated the horde-ification of Daemons. Legitimately one of the worst choices GW has ever made.
Is this actually strong? I mean I know we don't know what heroes/army abilities/stratagems they have but that doesn't seem like a super great profile.
Presumably they get +1 attack on the charge as part of the standard Khorne rules. Then there will inevitably be some combination of extra bonuses available such as +1 to hit, extra strength, exploding hits, and so on. Greater daemons will buff them, character WLTs will buff them, icons and army special rules will buff them.
I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with more combat power than Bladeguard for way less points.
Instead of invulns armour that is unaffected by AP (why?) and different in melee vs range
This is 100% GW. First they make high AP guns which cant be saved on normal saves. Then they introduce a save which ignores AP. Then they introduce guns which ignore inv. And now they will introduce a save which cant be ignored.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Rumor sounds like Daemons returning to their pre-6th edition status of a more elite army rather than the horde they've become since then. Which is not necessarily bad.
This might get me to play 40K again. I hate hatehate the mindset of "they suck now, but they cost less points so you can field MORE of them!" That pushed me out of the last edition of Fantasy before the End Times implosion. I liked when 15 Plaguebearers meant something.
I hate that the fluff for a Bloodcrusher states they can shrug off small arms fire only to lose three per round in-game to scouts with bolt pistols!
Honestly, as someone who owns something like 80 Bloodletters, 140 Daemonettes, 90 Horrors, 100 Plaguebearers, 60 Seekers, 27 Screamers, 36 Flamers, 60 Nurgling bases, etc. etc. etc. I'm perfectly okay with Daemons remaining a horde army.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not to date, and I'd like to seem them keep some elements different between AoS and 40k in terms of the roster - which would include having some 40k-specific units/characters too.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not to date, and I'd like to seem them keep some elements different between AoS and 40k in terms of the roster - which would include having some 40k-specific units/characters too.
That would be pretty much the entire mortals portion of the range. I think any Daemon should be fairgame between the two.
Instead of invulns armour that is unaffected by AP (why?) and different in melee vs range
This is 100% GW. First they make high AP guns which cant be saved on normal saves. Then they introduce a save which ignores AP. Then they introduce guns which ignore inv. And now they will introduce a save which cant be ignored.
I'm not convinced that's the idea. Abilities to ignore invulns are still relatively rare, and generally available to units in specific roles such as hammerheads or anti-elite melee characters. Typically units you don't see sweeping through battleline daemons like horrors or plaguebearers. It's not a strong justification for an army wide rule like this.
I just noticed that summary is missing a detail from the video: daemons have split saves for different attacks that also differ for each god. For example Tzeentch is 3+ against ranged attacks but 5+ in melee.
Someone also noted above that AOS Nighthaunt have a rule that ignores both positive and negative modifiers to their saves, meaning daemons may not benefit from cover as well as ignoring normal weapon behaviour.
This would all add up to daemons behaving in a unique and unnatural way compared to other factions, which I think is the main intent.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not yet, though the difference being that Be'Lakor was always in 40k and just needed an excuse for an updated profile while Dex & Syn are new characters with potency high enough to justify more than a 'this dude is a thing now' in a new codex. Will probably just be that though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ArcaneHorror wrote: I wasn't expecting two wound Plaguebearers. What they really need is ap on their sword.
They went to 2W in AoS recently, so I'm expecting it in 40k. Also makes the DG version of disgustingly resilient work, though still the exact fething opposite of it's fluff.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not yet, though the difference being that Be'Lakor was always in 40k and just needed an excuse for an updated profile while Dex & Syn are new characters with potency high enough to justify more than a 'this dude is a thing now' in a new codex. Will probably just be that though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ArcaneHorror wrote: I wasn't expecting two wound Plaguebearers. What they really need is ap on their sword.
They went to 2W in AoS recently, so I'm expecting it in 40k. Also makes the DG version of disgustingly resilient work, though still the exact fething opposite of it's fluff.
Were they updated recently? I have the new Maggotkin codex, and off the top of my head, I thought that they only had one wound. And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
Against small arms, yeah. Which DR doesn't affect at all.
They basically have DR that doesn't matter at all against lasguns or bolters, matters A LOT against heavy bolters and autocannons and then doesn't really matter again against bigger damage weapons (d6+2 & etc). Its a bizarre niche that doesn't fit the fluff, but worked really well against the D2 spam that the loyalist SM codex provoked. The Death Guard codex was basically a meta-counter book, and faded pretty quick once that metagame state lost popularity.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not yet, though the difference being that Be'Lakor was always in 40k and just needed an excuse for an updated profile while Dex & Syn are new characters with potency high enough to justify more than a 'this dude is a thing now' in a new codex. Will probably just be that though.
I'm tempted to say that the twins shouldn't get ported over to 40k because their story is that they're basically the rebirth of Slaanesh. But since GW wouldn't pass up a chance to sell the models to 40k players, I'm sure they'll make up some BS reason for their appearance. I mean, the mechanical Soul Grinder made it into WHFB...
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
Not yet, though the difference being that Be'Lakor was always in 40k and just needed an excuse for an updated profile while Dex & Syn are new characters with potency high enough to justify more than a 'this dude is a thing now' in a new codex. Will probably just be that though.
I'm tempted to say that the twins shouldn't get ported over to 40k because their story is that they're basically the rebirth of Slaanesh. But since GW wouldn't pass up a chance to sell the models to 40k players, I'm sure they'll make up some BS reason for their appearance. I mean, the mechanical Soul Grinder made it into WHFB...
To be fair, the mechanical Juggernaught of Khorne had been in WHFB much longer.
I like it when they keep all Chaos Daemons compatible with both games. Including Dexcesssa and Synessa would be fun.
Limited Greater Daemons on the other hand could be anti-fun. I like the idea of a "Four Winds" army that has one of each.
chaos0xomega wrote: Honestly, as someone who owns something like 80 Bloodletters, 140 Daemonettes, 90 Horrors, 100 Plaguebearers, 60 Seekers, 27 Screamers, 36 Flamers, 60 Nurgling bases, etc. etc. etc. I'm perfectly okay with Daemons remaining a horde army.
But, if they didn't, and you complained... would that be manufactured outrage?
RIP people that played lots of Khorne-only stuff and regularly brought 3 Bloodthirsters because it was the only way to get some decent punch in your list.
I guess we'll see what else comes of this, but being limited to only 1 greater daemon reeks a bit.
chaos0xomega wrote: How is an armor save that ignores AP modifiers different from an invul save? Not sure I understand that design chhoice.
Those would ignore ignore inv save weapons.
So, basically ++++ save. Instead of, you know, nerfing idiotic Tau design choices. Wanna bet next Tau book will have guns ignoring ignoring AP modifiers? Or just saying no saves of any kind can be taken to save on ink waste, because throwing chunk of iron at them magically deletes even demigod level greater daemons eldar and necrons can't touch, go figure
And man, with 2D being common as dirt in this book we will suuure see more vehicles on the table, eh?
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Rumor sounds like Daemons returning to their pre-6th edition status of a more elite army rather than the horde they've become since then. Which is not necessarily bad.
It is kinda bad because it will leave niche of durable horde dead (by save not T, something something orkstodes) while elite slot is being really overcrowded. Making daemons into another flavor of SM, just gimmicky ones this time, will kinda make the game poorer. It will also destroy them as synergy army they are supposed to be in lore (buffed by characters/actions/army rules/game turn etc etc) because with increased stats buffs will be deleted or virtually meaningless to compensate.
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
Not really, same as with AoS unique S daemon prince model. All three are the size of new DP though, so can be used as S specific one?
blood reaper wrote: I hated the horde-ification of Daemons. Legitimately one of the worst choices GW has ever made.
If you actually read the chaos lore, the whole point of daemons in battle is endless numbers and overwhelming the enemy with first strike, before they weaken and poof from lack of energy and victims. Oh wait, my bad, I forgot in fanfiction even a lowly nurgling can easily beat ten custodes and everything chaos is bestest ever, do carry on, the army with the biggest number of cheap, small 25 mm base models in the game is sure elite not horde, silly me
nels1031 wrote: As an aside, have Dexcesssa and Synessa been shoe horned into 40K yet, like Belakor was?
I just bought a Synessa for my new Hedonite army and if there is crossover, that'd be cool if I ever decide to get back into 40K in some capacity.
I hope so, I'd like to see both of them.
Not I, I prefer they keep 40k and age of sigmar distinct. Then again I have no interest in age of sigmar.
These are Daemon models. The distinction would be the range of Hedonite mortals that would not get ported over. The twins would fit perfectly fine in 40k and the systems would still remain distinct.
It was at the height of Morathi's ascension to godhood that a drop of Slaanesh's own divine essence broke free from imprisonment and fled the cave between realms. Called the Newborn, this cursed hybrid was suffused with both the Dark Prince's power and the residual energy absorbed by Morathi herself, coalescing into twin beings that mirrored each other in body and soul.
Yeeeeeeah...no. They might be Daemons but they're definitely AoS locked.
GW has a very long history of putting even named Daemons in any setting they have on sale at the time. So while the current background might suggest something else, I am pretty sure we will see those "AoS specific" ones in 40K sooner rather than later.
More sales trump background restrictions all the time.
Darnok wrote: GW has a very long history of putting even named Daemons in any setting they have on sale at the time. So while the current background might suggest something else, I am pretty sure we will see those "AoS specific" ones in 40K sooner rather than later.
More sales trump background restrictions all the time.
Yeah absolutely. I'd be very surprised if the Slaanesh Twins weren't in 40k. GW wants MORE ways to sell models, not less.
I am amused by the insinuation* that it would be self-serving corporate calculus for GW to... give us more options. That's the sort of win-win move we want to see.
And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
Against small arms, yeah. Which DR doesn't affect at all.
They basically have DR that doesn't matter at all against lasguns or bolters, matters A LOT against heavy bolters and autocannons and then doesn't really matter again against bigger damage weapons (d6+2 & etc). Its a bizarre niche that doesn't fit the fluff, but worked really well against the D2 spam that the loyalist SM codex provoked. The Death Guard codex was basically a meta-counter book, and faded pretty quick once that metagame state lost popularity.
getting a second wound means theyre twice as resilient to small arms
getting T5 means theyre (some %) more resilient to small arms
And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
Against small arms, yeah. Which DR doesn't affect at all.
They basically have DR that doesn't matter at all against lasguns or bolters, matters A LOT against heavy bolters and autocannons and then doesn't really matter again against bigger damage weapons (d6+2 & etc). Its a bizarre niche that doesn't fit the fluff, but worked really well against the D2 spam that the loyalist SM codex provoked. The Death Guard codex was basically a meta-counter book, and faded pretty quick once that metagame state lost popularity.
getting a second wound means theyre twice as resilient to small arms
getting T5 means theyre (some %) more resilient to small arms
second wound means they're the same as every marine. (regardless of how long it took to roll it out to chaos marines, that was the standard set back at the beginning of the edition)
'getting t5' is just puzzling. I honestly don't remember a time they weren't (including the weird 4(5) for instant death purposes), but I'll have to double check the RoC:LotD list.
And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
Against small arms, yeah. Which DR doesn't affect at all.
They basically have DR that doesn't matter at all against lasguns or bolters, matters A LOT against heavy bolters and autocannons and then doesn't really matter again against bigger damage weapons (d6+2 & etc). Its a bizarre niche that doesn't fit the fluff, but worked really well against the D2 spam that the loyalist SM codex provoked. The Death Guard codex was basically a meta-counter book, and faded pretty quick once that metagame state lost popularity.
Yeah and against small arms they're guaranteed to survive one shot no matter what thanks to being W2
And how is the new DR not fluffy? Both Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons are famous for their durability.
Against small arms, yeah. Which DR doesn't affect at all.
They basically have DR that doesn't matter at all against lasguns or bolters, matters A LOT against heavy bolters and autocannons and then doesn't really matter again against bigger damage weapons (d6+2 & etc). Its a bizarre niche that doesn't fit the fluff, but worked really well against the D2 spam that the loyalist SM codex provoked. The Death Guard codex was basically a meta-counter book, and faded pretty quick once that metagame state lost popularity.
Yeah and against small arms they're guaranteed to survive one shot no matter what thanks to being W2
And so is every other marine, so disgustingly resilient does nothing to help this. I'm really not sure what's unclear here.
Disgustingly Resilient does nothing against small arms.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I am amused by the insinuation* that it would be self-serving corporate calculus for GW to... give us more options. That's the sort of win-win move we want to see.
*Though I could be wildly misreading things.
Right? Daemons let you play both games, that's potentially an entire full separate army GW is missing out on selling to someone. Daemon stuff seems pretty good for the average customer. 🤷
Kanluwen wrote: Yeeeeeeah...no. They might be Daemons but they're definitely AoS locked.
Because the fluff is set in stone and there's simply no wayGW could write them differently to fit in 40k.
NVM the fact that they've established pretty clearly that theres some sort of crossover between AoS chaos and 40k chaos. The warp/realm of chaos that runs through both settings is basically the same plane of non-existence or whatever you want to call it. The mortal realms aren't a place within the 40k setting, they're effectively a different dimension, but the warp connects both dimensions together.
After thinking about it, I just want to see the 3 Bloodthirsters rolled into a single entry. Just give it weapons options like the others and be done with it.
NinthMusketeer wrote: that Be'Lakor was always in 40k and just needed an excuse for an updated profile
Ah, I thought his introduction to 40K was a relatively recent development.
He was introduced in 6th or 7th Ed through a paid DLC Warscroll that also updated him for 8th ed WHFB pre-End Times. It also retcon'd Doombreed from being the first DP in 40K.
Wow I didn’t realize they screwed DOOMBREED over like that! Belekor better hope Breed doesn’t find out cuz he would get curbstomped Lickety split! Breed don’t play that kinda disrespect! :(
John D Law wrote: Wow I didn’t realize they screwed DOOMBREED over like that! Belekor better hope Breed doesn’t find out cuz he would get curbstomped Lickety split! Breed don’t play that kinda disrespect! :(
He's still the first daemon prince of Khorne, and insanely powerful.
The rules state that nearly every unit will be able to deep strike; that's cool, but will there still be the same restrictions on deep striking rules as the rest of the game? One of the biggest problems of daemons in 40k is being able to get them up the field fast enough to not get blasted of the board. It doesn't matter how powerful they are if they can't reach their targets.
Whenever I open an Ibris comment I am reminded of why I have him on ignore; by far one of the most annoying, pretentious, and downright dishonest posters on the site.
John D Law wrote: Wow I didn’t realize they screwed DOOMBREED over like that! Belekor better hope Breed doesn’t find out cuz he would get curbstomped Lickety split! Breed don’t play that kinda disrespect! :(
He's still the first daemon prince of Khorne, and insanely powerful.
The rules state that nearly every unit will be able to deep strike; that's cool, but will there still be the same restrictions on deep striking rules as the rest of the game? One of the biggest problems of daemons in 40k is being able to get them up the field fast enough to not get blasted of the board. It doesn't matter how powerful they are if they can't reach their targets.
If things like the Banner of Blood (3D6 charge for a Bloodletter unit) and charge re-rolls provided by characters are kept in the book, we should probably be okay. I am hopeful that Horrors and other shooting units have their ranged capabilities improved as well.
Life is tough in the 41st Millennium. Your average human is born into a life of gruelling menial labour, only to find themselves eaten by a Tyranid invasion force, whisked away to Commorragh for a round of Drukhari truth-or-dare, or drafted into the thankless meat grinder of the Astra Militarum.
If all that weren’t bad enough, there’s another ever-present threat lurking just behind the material veil. Gibbering, bloodthirsty legions of daemons claw at the walls of existence, taking advantage of any tear in realspace to manifest plagues and curses, tempt mortal souls, and slaughter untold millions. All it takes to invite devastation is one ill-considered ritual drawn from a blasphemous grimoire… speaking of which, Codex: Chaos Daemons is on the way.
The warp-wrought children of the Chaos Gods are bursting out of the immaterium with a 152-page tome packed with eldritch esoterica, forbidden daemonology, and in-depth rules for games of Warhammer 40,000.
As you’d expect from a Chaos Daemons codex, there are rules for conquering in the name of blood, change, plague, or excess – or mixing things up by running a kaleidoscopic force drawn from the whole accursed pantheon.
There are more ways than ever to bend the mortal plane to your will, thanks to 56 datasheets split between the four Chaos Gods – and Be’lakor, with his very own Army of Renown – alongside 25 Warlord Traits, 24 Relics, 36 Stratagems, and a profane slate of psychic powers for all.*
Though mortals may cower and worlds may burn, the Dark Gods that command these incomprehensible hordes regard the war for existence as little more than an endless game – which you can play yourself, thanks to a comprehensive Crusade section.
We’ve got plenty of news about this daemonic force coming up shortly on Warhammer Community, which you can have delivered straight to your inbox via Geller-shielded emails by signing up for our newsletter.**
this feels like everybody left getting pipped at the post, but.. fine.
No mention of models, which is a concern. (Thought that daemon prince is lurking about, but may be stuck with Slaves to Darkness in December).
Gert wrote: Whoever did the CSM and Daemons covers has done a stellar job.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god (the shadow suggests Belakor, not fanfic boy that was never in 40k), and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
this feels like everybody left getting pipped at the post, but.. fine. (it doesn't help that the article exists, but isn't on the front page of warcom yet, at least for me).
No mention of models, which is a concern. (Thought that daemon prince is lurking about, but may be stuck with Slaves to Darkness in December).
Gert wrote: Whoever did the CSM and Daemons covers has done a stellar job.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god, and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
I have no doubts we will see no new models. Daemons are a complete range with the oldest figures being plastic figures from like, 2008.
So, current Chaos Daemons 'dex looks like it has 50 datasheets. Be'lakor will obviously be upgraded to the new version, but that's not an additional datasheet.
I can see that the Infernal Enrapturess, Syll’Esske and Shalaxi Helbane are missing, which might leave 3 datasheets unaccounted for at present?
this feels like everybody left getting pipped at the post, but.. fine. (it doesn't help that the article exists, but isn't on the front page of warcom yet, at least for me).
No mention of models, which is a concern. (Thought that daemon prince is lurking about, but may be stuck with Slaves to Darkness in December).
Gert wrote: Whoever did the CSM and Daemons covers has done a stellar job.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god, and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
I have no doubts we will see no new models. Daemons are a complete range with the oldest figures being plastic figures from like, 2008.
It'd be the first 9th edition codex with not even one. I also vaguely recall a promise that every 9e codex would have at least one model, but WarCom is terrible for hunting down old information.
this feels like everybody left getting pipped at the post, but.. fine. (it doesn't help that the article exists, but isn't on the front page of warcom yet, at least for me).
No mention of models, which is a concern. (Thought that daemon prince is lurking about, but may be stuck with Slaves to Darkness in December).
Gert wrote: Whoever did the CSM and Daemons covers has done a stellar job.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god, and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
I have no doubts we will see no new models. Daemons are a complete range with the oldest figures being plastic figures from like, 2008.
It'd be the first 9th edition codex with not even one. I also vaguely recall a promise that every 9e codex would have at least one model, but WarCom is terrible for hunting down old information.
MAYBE we'll get the new Daemon Prince with it? I mean what is there to replace? The old resin Herald of Khorne on Juggernaut?
MAYBE we'll get the new Daemon Prince with it? I mean what is there to replace? The old resin Herald of Khorne on Juggernaut?
That'd be a decent one. Or a herald of slaanesh on foot, rather than making do with a spare 'alluress' from the chariot kit, so a herald that actually looks important or stands out.
Or, you know, something new... There isn't actually a restriction on new things.
Dysartes wrote: So, current Chaos Daemons 'dex looks like it has 50 datasheets. Be'lakor will obviously be upgraded to the new version, but that's not an additional datasheet.
I can see that the Infernal Enrapturess, Syll’Esske and Shalaxi Helbane are missing, which might leave 3 datasheets unaccounted for at present?
From my counting, seems like 56 contains all the existing units.
BTW aboutn ew models: according to the leaks there's going to be a new Rendmaster model for Khorne followers.
I don't have any complaints about daemons line, since they updated the horrors everything seems fine to me. There are other armies in most need, I think
Dysartes wrote: So, current Chaos Daemons 'dex looks like it has 50 datasheets. Be'lakor will obviously be upgraded to the new version, but that's not an additional datasheet.
I can see that the Infernal Enrapturess, Syll’Esske and Shalaxi Helbane are missing, which might leave 3 datasheets unaccounted for at present?
From my counting, seems like 56 contains all the existing units.
Huh - which three units (excluding the AoS Twins) did I forget?
Gert wrote: Whoever did the CSM and Daemons covers has done a stellar job.
Also Adeptus Mechanicus and Genestealer Cults. Pretty sure they are all the same artist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Garrac wrote: BTW aboutn ew models: according to the leaks there's going to be a new Rendmaster model for Khorne followers.
I don't have any complaints about daemons line, since they updated the horrors everything seems fine to me. There are other armies in most need, I think
The rumor that I saw seemed to be unaware that the Rendmaster was an existing unit/model already and assumed it was being added, so I'm not sure that theres something actually coming.
Garrac wrote: BTW aboutn ew models: according to the leaks there's going to be a new Rendmaster model for Khorne followers.
I don't have any complaints about daemons line, since they updated the horrors everything seems fine to me. There are other armies in most need, I think
The rumor that I saw seemed to be unaware that the Rendmaster was an existing unit/model already and assumed it was being added, so I'm not sure that theres something actually coming.
Um... well, the article says there'll be 56 new datasheets, and the current codex has that 57...
(and yeah, it looks like to be the end of the furies)
I usually just hope for decent rules for my soulgrinders, and that they bring over a Gaunt Summoner to 40k. But I dont expect it to happen this time either.
If GW took Chaos Daemons serious, I would expect them to update the soulgrinder with a more comic book approach -loads of swirly gak and over obvious bling and head options to clearly show their patron god. Probably with some new "must have" weapons options so the old model would be obsolete. But as they really dont care about chaos daemons, the old cool model will be safe for now.
Maybe we're all counting different but 56 looks like the exact count of extant kits, not including anything new, unless they collapsed Bloodthirstiest into one entry.
Pretty wildly disappointed, I was really hoping the twins would port since Syll'Esske did.
I think that the Soul Grinder looks fine, the upper half is especially quite well done. In an ideal world, we would get a Ku'gath model, but we'll probably get a plastic version of one of the old resin.
Rydria wrote: The Bloodthister could easily be 1 datasheet with weapon options instead of 3 different datasheets.
I went through the app earlier today and between the current codex, PE: Engine War, and Be'lakor, I counted 58. My guess - and hope - is that they condensed the Bloodthirsters into one sheet.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god (the shadow suggests Belakor, not fanfic boy that was never in 40k), and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
Feels a bit weird to me. The layout suggests a fifth figure (in the upper right) which implies a fifth god (the shadow suggests Belakor, not fanfic boy that was never in 40k), and the plaguebearer-that-looks-like-a-daemonette shouldn't really be the central figure.
Malice, poor chaos god lost and forgotten to time
Malice definitely needs to be brought back into the mainstream of 40k, along with rules for the Sons of Malice, although I think that he should be given a different name. I read that the Mirror of Hate subfaction in the Daemons of the Ruinstorm army seems to reflect Malice.
As to the rules concerning Tzeentch shooting, the shooting power for them definitely needs to be taken up, as you don't want most of them to get into melee. Also, I would love to see the exalted daemons rules to be applied to lesser daemon units as well, reflecting the mechanics in the new Total War game, where you can pay to upgrade them.
ArcaneHorror wrote: Malice definitely needs to be brought back into the mainstream of 40k, along with rules for the Sons of Malice, although I think that he should be given a different name. I read that the Mirror of Hate subfaction in the Daemons of the Ruinstorm army seems to reflect Malice.
We just had a Chaos Codex that managed to take away more than it gave, so I doubt that we'd be getting anything new for them like that, especially with a legally questionable add-on like Malal.
ArcaneHorror wrote: Malice definitely needs to be brought back into the mainstream of 40k, along with rules for the Sons of Malice, although I think that he should be given a different name. I read that the Mirror of Hate subfaction in the Daemons of the Ruinstorm army seems to reflect Malice.
We just had a Chaos Codex that managed to take away more than it gave, so I doubt that we'd be getting anything new for them like that, especially with a legally questionable add-on like Malal.
Much of what was lost in the CSM codex was due to the lack of certain models and weapons options in stock. Chaos Daemons don't suffer from any of that. Also, while Malal is not canon, Malice is, though he's not mentioned often, and the Sons of Malice are mentioned both in the novel Cadia Stands and in Battlefleet Gothic II.
ArcaneHorror wrote: Malice definitely needs to be brought back into the mainstream of 40k, along with rules for the Sons of Malice, although I think that he should be given a different name. I read that the Mirror of Hate subfaction in the Daemons of the Ruinstorm army seems to reflect Malice.
We just had a Chaos Codex that managed to take away more than it gave, so I doubt that we'd be getting anything new for them like that, especially with a legally questionable add-on like Malal.
Much of what was lost in the CSM codex was due to the lack of certain models and weapons options in stock. Chaos Daemons don't suffer from any of that. Also, while Malal is not canon, Malice is, though he's not mentioned often, and the Sons of Malice are mentioned both in the novel Cadia Stands and in Battlefleet Gothic II.
Much of what was lost in the CSM codex was due to sheer incompetence.
There's little chance anything major will be added to this book, but I do expect some heavy changes/updates to some of the datasheets. I'd like to see Daemons return to a more elite army as some have speculated previously.
Voss wrote: Honestly, the soul grinder (and the despoiler its based on) are one of the first models I'd update. They're both terrible, clunky and out of scale.
You mean Defiler, not Despoiler. Don't see how they are out of scale, the Soul Grinder is a great sculpt, but in any case the Soul Grinder is still a fairly modern kit, don't see that being redone anytime soon.
Voss wrote: Honestly, the soul grinder (and the despoiler its based on) are one of the first models I'd update. They're both terrible, clunky and out of scale.
You mean Defiler, not Despoiler. Don't see how they are out of scale, the Soul Grinder is a great sculpt, but in any case the Soul Grinder is still a fairly modern kit, don't see that being redone anytime soon.
The Defiler on the other hand...
I think D-word robot names ran into Warjack names and just sort of short-circuited. But yeah, defiler.
As to the out-of-scale, I'm going partially on the venomcrawler (which I like a lot more and is far more sensible in size) and experience when kit-bashing defilers into a brass scorpion. Going through the bits box, the weapons from the defiler kit (autocannons, heavy flamers, and the terrible flail) really stood out as over-sized.
It matters less these days, but in the era before knights and all that junk, the sheer size of that kit (and so also soulgrinders) really stood out compared to other vehicles .
H.B.M.C. wrote:Faced with the prospect of keeping the Defiler or getting more Dinobots, I'll keep the Defiler.
That's a weird false dichotomy to stand up for, but ok.
Nurglings are no longer available online on GW webstore and it doesn't say temporally out of stock (UK) so perhaps Nurglings are either getting axed or are getting a new kit ?
Rydria wrote: Nurglings are no longer available online on GW webstore and it doesn't say temporally out of stock (UK) so perhaps Nurglings are either getting axed or are getting a new kit ?
They are just getting the updated packaging. GW doesn't axe new plastic kits.
Voss wrote: That's a weird false dichotomy to stand up for, but ok.
Is it? Forgefiend, Maulderfiend, Helstalker, Heldrake and the Venomcrawler. They're all more Daemon Engine than Daemon Engine, and share no aesthetic similarities (beyond spikes/arrows) with the Defiler. So yes, given one or the other, I'll take the one that looks like a vehicle created to house a Daemon, rather than a Daemon that looks a bit like a robot.
Rydria wrote: Went threw the webstore for all the daemons in 40k/age of sigmar this is what i found
Spoiler:
1. lord of change
2. great unclean one
3. keeper of secrets
4. bloodthister
5. kairos
6. heralf of slaanesh {finecast}
7. pox bringer
8. Bloodmaster
9. The masque
10. spoilpox scrivener
11. sloppity bilepiper
12. the changeling
13. karanak
14. skulltaker
15. Bloodthrone
16. infernal enrapturess
17. herald of khorne on juggernaut [finecast]
18. fluxmaster
19. daemon prince
20. fateskimmer
21. epidemius {finecast}
22. syll'esske
23. horticulous slimux
24. skarbrand
25. rotigus
26. the blue scribes {finecast/temp out of stockl}
27. flamers
28. exalted flamer
29. beast of nurgle
30. bloodcrushers
31. brimstone/blue horrors
32. daemonettes
33. bloodletters
34. plaguebearers
35. pink horrors
36. nurglings [no longer available online}
37. seekers
38. seeker chariot
39. screamers
40. skull cannon
41. feculent gnarlmaw
42. burning chariot
43. flesh hounds
44. fiends
45. soul grinder
46. plague drones {temp out of stock}
47. Shalaxi Helbane
48. Exalted seeker chariot
49. Hellflayer
50. Be'lakor
51. contorted epitome
52. Furies
53. Dexcessa [Aos only]
54. synessa [Aos only]
55. gaunt summoner [Aos only)
56. Herald of slaanesh chariot [Aos only]
57. Herald of slaanesh exalted seeker chariot [Aos only]
Put the big list in a spoiler to save space...
I fully agree on 1-52 being in the book. We'll probably still see the Bloodthirster as 3 datasheets (taking the count to 54), but I'm not convinced they'll split the Horror datasheet, which would merge 31 & 35 on your list, dropping us back to 53.
Someone else said their count was already at 56 - what am I missing here?
I wish GW would finally provide some new Deamon Models, especially some suited more for 40k. The new Thirster for HH is a missed opportunity for an awesome plastic sculpt btw. I would almost expect them to transfer the new named Keepers from AoS to 40k with the Codex. But to be honest I see little to no odds for really new sculpts in near future, alone because they need to weite and balance them for both, AoS and 40k, which are designed by different teams iirc.
To be honest the actual new daemon releases should be boxs of 10 new basic daemons with an upgrade sprue to make them exalted versions like total war where they just give upgraded heads. Option to exalt any unit as a points upgrade would give a little more interest in how you build the army
The core issue with the model line is boring base units (the daemonettes being hyper static is their main issue), maybe they could also fix it by doing 4 underworlds warbands with 1 herald +5 daemons with varied poses to help break up the units.
I would love the twins to be ported over but doubt they will, chaos feels like its being rushed out door to get back to other stuff. As for them being AOS, syllesske was an AoS character and still was ported over.
I would love to se more daemon engines for chaos daemons -as a posibility to get unalligned units that work for any daemon army.
Lore for the mysterious masters of the daemon forges, that trick banished daemons to accept an eternity as slaves, trapped in daemon engines as a quick way to get remanifested in realspace is worth expanding on I think.
Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
Mothman wrote: To be honest the actual new daemon releases should be boxs of 10 new basic daemons with an upgrade sprue to make them exalted versions like total war where they just give upgraded heads. Option to exalt any unit as a points upgrade would give a little more interest in how you build the army
The core issue with the model line is boring base units (the daemonettes being hyper static is their main issue), maybe they could also fix it by doing 4 underworlds warbands with 1 herald +5 daemons with varied poses to help break up the units.
I would love the twins to be ported over but doubt they will, chaos feels like its being rushed out door to get back to other stuff. As for them being AOS, syllesske was an AoS character and still was ported over.
I don't think writing one or two datasheets for the twins is such a problem that it would prevent their inclusion. Approaching it from the other side, GW isn't going to make any new models for Daemons, so if they port over the twins, they can still advertise them as new models because they haven't been in 40k before.
I don't see why they wouldn't port them over, to be honest.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fayric wrote: Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
The problem is that GW should just get over themselves and write mixed mortal and Daemon codices for each god like they do in AoS. Splitting off Daemons was a mistake for exactly that reason. The Daemon bestiary for each god was never meant to stand on its own like that.
Mothman wrote: To be honest the actual new daemon releases should be boxs of 10 new basic daemons with an upgrade sprue to make them exalted versions like total war where they just give upgraded heads. Option to exalt any unit as a points upgrade would give a little more interest in how you build the army
The core issue with the model line is boring base units (the daemonettes being hyper static is their main issue), maybe they could also fix it by doing 4 underworlds warbands with 1 herald +5 daemons with varied poses to help break up the units.
I would love the twins to be ported over but doubt they will, chaos feels like its being rushed out door to get back to other stuff. As for them being AOS, syllesske was an AoS character and still was ported over.
I don't think writing one or two datasheets for the twins is such a problem that it would prevent their inclusion. Approaching it from the other side, GW isn't going to make any new models for Daemons, so if they port over the twins, they can still advertise them as new models because they haven't been in 40k before.
I don't see why they wouldn't port them over, to be honest.
I didnt see any reason why they would not bring Gaunt Summoner over to 40k, but its been a while, and I still have to use it as a herald. Anyway, the named daemons have really awfull data sheets so perhaps its just as well.
If I recall correctly the Gaunt Summoner after its introduction in Silver Tower was put in the Everchosen faction before it got put in the Tzeentch book.Whereas, as mentioned in a post above, the new daemonic Slaanesh models were ported immediately(ish) after they came out for Hedonites.
Perhaps that's how GW sees it, Gaunt Summoner as a councilor to Archaon and therefore fully an AoS model whereas the new Slaanesh Daemons were always meant to be dual system.
Granted, that's a bit of wishful thinking because I want Slaanesh to get as much attention as possible.
I really dislike the idea a surprisingly large selection of people have of forcing Daemons players to lose their armies so people can go back to this sort of asinine "Actually, Daemons HAVE to have mortal followers around with them" idea. There certainly should be more rules for mixing Daemons and mortals, but pure Daemon lists should be an option, and should not be lost. Likewise, Undivided Daemon Hordes should not be scrapped either.
dan2026 wrote: Why are people thinking Furies have been dropped from the book?
I believe it was mentioned in the leak video that they were gone.
Fayric wrote: Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
I agree by in large. The other issue is that Chaos Daemons are top heavy. HQ choices outnumber all other slots combined!
Look at Mono-Khorne. 1 Troop, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Heavy support, and 1 fortification. HQs? You have 3 named characters, heralds of various mounting, and greater daemons. Tzeentch is about the same, however it's worse for Nurgle and Slaanesh who have recently had strong releases that focused on new characters.
I would like GW to expand the non-character options, and unaligned units are a great possibility for this.
dan2026 wrote: Why are people thinking Furies have been dropped from the book?
I believe it was mentioned in the leak video that they were gone.
Fayric wrote: Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
I agree by in large. The other issue is that Chaos Daemons are top heavy. HQ choices outnumber all other slots combined!
Look at Mono-Khorne. 1 Troop, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Heavy support, and 1 fortification. HQs? You have 3 named characters, heralds of various mounting, and greater daemons. Tzeentch is about the same, however it's worse for Nurgle and Slaanesh who have recently had strong releases that focused on new characters.
I would like GW to expand the non-character options, and unaligned units are a great possibility for this.
And at the same time the detachment rules make it hard to even field the HQ you need. Back in 8th edition you could atleast take a supreme command detachment so the HQ heavy list could be put to use. These days you struggle to field all the HQ you need. Greater daemons is a must have, but they are so squishy you need minimum 2 of them to draw enemy fire. But you also need heralds too make your crappy lesser daemons usefull. And the lesser daemons is to expencive in points to build up enough detachments for the HQ you need. In the end you end up with a boring compromise that struggle to handle even the basic units of the enemy.
dan2026 wrote: Why are people thinking Furies have been dropped from the book?
I believe it was mentioned in the leak video that they were gone.
Fayric wrote: Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
I agree by in large. The other issue is that Chaos Daemons are top heavy. HQ choices outnumber all other slots combined!
Look at Mono-Khorne. 1 Troop, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Heavy support, and 1 fortification. HQs? You have 3 named characters, heralds of various mounting, and greater daemons. Tzeentch is about the same, however it's worse for Nurgle and Slaanesh who have recently had strong releases that focused on new characters.
I would like GW to expand the non-character options, and unaligned units are a great possibility for this.
Which leak video is that?
The rumours in that started this thread make no mention of Furies.
Fayric wrote: I would love to se more daemon engines for chaos daemons -as a posibility to get unalligned units that work for any daemon army.
Lore for the mysterious masters of the daemon forges, that trick banished daemons to accept an eternity as slaves, trapped in daemon engines as a quick way to get remanifested in realspace is worth expanding on I think.
Edit: one of the biggest problem with chaos daemons is that its basicly 4 minor armies with just a handfull of units each. Need more units that dont have a fixed patron god.
GW could fix a lot of problems that Chaos Daemons have if Daemon Engines could be fielded as part of Daemon armies. It used to be so back in the 6th edition era, that things like Greater Blight Drones, Brass Scorpions, etc. were both Chaos Space Marine and Chaos Daemon units. They filled a lot of holes in the Daemons roster, especially if you were trying to play Khorne or Nurgle armies as they had more daemon engine support than Slaanesh/Tzeetnch... but then 8th edition came around and they decided that only Chaos Space Marines should be able to field Daemon Engines and its been downhill ever since.
IMO, fixing this mistake would go a long way to making Daemon armies of all flavors more playable. The Defiler, Venomcrawler, Heldrake, Forgefiend, and Maulerfiend as unaligned Daemons could slot into any monoGod army and provide a range of capabilities that monoGod armies currently lack. Add in the god-specific and Forgeworld daemon engines like Greater Blight Drones, Bloat Drones, Blight Haulers, etc. and monoGod daemon armies generally become more competitive. Slaanesh and Tzeentch are a bit under-represented in this regard, but at this point I think Slaanesh has more options to mess around with anyway thanks to some of the additional AoS support they've received, whereas Tzeentch daemons are a bit option starved.
ALSO, nobody has yet been able to explain to me why the feth Mutalith Vortex Beasts and Slaughterbrutes are not/should not be Daemons.
I'm hoping we'll see alot of the incidental character units (bilepiper, enrapturess and similar) move to the Elite slot, would free up some detachment space.
that or some special way of taking not Great Daemon HQs as multiple in a slot.
In olden times, Heralds (which is what they used to call things like the Bloodmaster, Changecaster, Fateskimmer, Fluxmaster, Poxbringer, Skullmaster, etc.) were 2 per HQ slot. I wouldn't mind seeing some of the current Herald options re-classified and moved into the Elites slot, personally. I think if they just went back to having one Herald per God in the HQ slot and put the rest of the Heralds in the elite slot it would probably help army building a lot.
Geifer wrote: If I recall correctly the Gaunt Summoner after its introduction in Silver Tower was put in the Everchosen faction before it got put in the Tzeentch book.Whereas, as mentioned in a post above, the new daemonic Slaanesh models were ported immediately(ish) after they came out for Hedonites.
Perhaps that's how GW sees it, Gaunt Summoner as a councilor to Archaon and therefore fully an AoS model whereas the new Slaanesh Daemons were always meant to be dual system.
Granted, that's a bit of wishful thinking because I want Slaanesh to get as much attention as possible.
The 9 Gaunt Summoners by their very fluff directly serve Archaon, so I can see them keeping as an AoS only thing.
chaos0xomega wrote: In olden times, Heralds (which is what they used to call things like the Bloodmaster, Changecaster, Fateskimmer, Fluxmaster, Poxbringer, Skullmaster, etc.) were 2 per HQ slot. I wouldn't mind seeing some of the current Herald options re-classified and moved into the Elites slot, personally. I think if they just went back to having one Herald per God in the HQ slot and put the rest of the Heralds in the elite slot it would probably help army building a lot.
I would be surprised if we get HQ slot efficiency. Space Wolves have historically had similar benefits, but haven't for 8th/9th. Moving some of the heralds to Elite would be nice though. Things like Sloppity / Spoilpox / Infernal Enrapturess would be prime candidates IMO. I'm not sure what one might move around for Tzeentch / Khorne. I don't expect this to happen though.
chaos0xomega wrote: GW could fix a lot of problems that Chaos Daemons have if Daemon Engines could be fielded as part of Daemon armies. It used to be so back in the 6th edition era, that things like Greater Blight Drones, Brass Scorpions, etc. were both Chaos Space Marine and Chaos Daemon units. They filled a lot of holes in the Daemons roster, especially if you were trying to play Khorne or Nurgle armies as they had more daemon engine support than Slaanesh/Tzeetnch... but then 8th edition came around and they decided that only Chaos Space Marines should be able to field Daemon Engines and its been downhill ever since.
IMO, fixing this mistake would go a long way to making Daemon armies of all flavors more playable. The Defiler, Venomcrawler, Heldrake, Forgefiend, and Maulerfiend as unaligned Daemons could slot into any monoGod army and provide a range of capabilities that monoGod armies currently lack. Add in the god-specific and Forgeworld daemon engines like Greater Blight Drones, Bloat Drones, Blight Haulers, etc. and monoGod daemon armies generally become more competitive. Slaanesh and Tzeentch are a bit under-represented in this regard, but at this point I think Slaanesh has more options to mess around with anyway thanks to some of the additional AoS support they've received, whereas Tzeentch daemons are a bit option starved.
ALSO, nobody has yet been able to explain to me why the feth Mutalith Vortex Beasts and Slaughterbrutes are not/should not be Daemons.
Wasn't there something about most Daemons within Daemon engines being forced into their role, rather than it being by choice, and most of the DEs being created by Dark Mech or CSMs?
No argument on the MVB and Slaughterbrutes, though - can't see the harm in adding them.
Geifer wrote: If I recall correctly the Gaunt Summoner after its introduction in Silver Tower was put in the Everchosen faction before it got put in the Tzeentch book.Whereas, as mentioned in a post above, the new daemonic Slaanesh models were ported immediately(ish) after they came out for Hedonites.
Perhaps that's how GW sees it, Gaunt Summoner as a councilor to Archaon and therefore fully an AoS model whereas the new Slaanesh Daemons were always meant to be dual system.
Granted, that's a bit of wishful thinking because I want Slaanesh to get as much attention as possible.
The 9 Gaunt Summoners by their very fluff directly serve Archaon, so I can see them keeping as an AoS only thing.
Aren't the Gaunt Summoners mortals/pseudo-daemons though? The fluff for them previously said that they were like the most dedicated mortal servants of Archaon/Tzeentch elevated to a sort of sub-daemon princedom as a reward. IIRC the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletom confusingly gives them both the mortals and daemons keywords.
I would be surprised if we get HQ slot efficiency. Space Wolves have historically had similar benefits, but haven't for 8th/9th. Moving some of the heralds to Elite would be nice though. Things like Sloppity / Spoilpox / Infernal Enrapturess would be prime candidates IMO. I'm not sure what one might move around for Tzeentch / Khorne. I don't expect this to happen though.
I don't expect it to happen either, but its nice to dream. Realistically, I think the most we will get is probably something like "If a Greater Daemon is your warlord then Heralds of the same God do not count as an HQ choice" type things.
Cool. My Chaos forces lose even more units.
Hopefully Furies are the only loss, I'm still stinging about the loss of my daemon engines from older editions :(
Wasn't there something about most Daemons within Daemon engines being forced into their role, rather than it being by choice, and most of the DEs being created by Dark Mech or CSMs?
No argument on the MVB and Slaughterbrutes, though - can't see the harm in adding them.
Like with many things, the fluff is inconsistent. Some sources say the daemons are forced or tricked in, others say that they do so willingly through various pacts with the dark mechanicus as they enjoy the power and destructiveness that they gain by inhabiting the various warmachines that they can be joined with, as well as relative safety/ease of corporealization vs the other means by which daemons manifest in the "real world". IIRC - daemons that are destroyed in the real world cannot reform themselves for a very long period of time (centuries? millennia?) while they more or less regenerate, and spend that time basically as a formless shape in the warp unless they are specifically summoned and bound to a mortal body. Daemons apparently aren't big on being formless shapes (except maybe Tzeentch daemons? lol) and look for opportunities to re-manifest into a more defined body ASAP - thats where the Dark Mechanicus gets willing volunteers for daemon engine-hood.
The Soul Grinder is an example of a Dark Mechanicus built daemon engine that has a semi-voluntary daemon - they get a metal body in exchange for paying a price in souls to the dark mechanicum, the daemon can't be freed from the soul grinder body until it makes good on its debt, but apparently theres an interest rate on the number of souls they need to settle their debt because the number is constantly rising and very few daemons ever reach that number and get freed. If they are destroyed before settling the debt then they more or less forced back into a daemon engine again with an even higher debt (as they have to settle their original debt, plus the cost of being interred into a new metal body, even if they didn't want to go back to the daemon engine life).
Theres also some fluff that says some daemon engines are built in the Materium and contain containment vessels and these are the ones that daemons are forced into against their will and basically beaten and tormented into behaving according to the whims of their mortal masters, but then others are built in the Immaterium by entities unknown (presumably not the Dark Mechanicus?) and are summoned to the materium through dark rituals, etc. and these contain daemons that have more willful control over themselves. The Brass Scorpion is specifically mentioned as being an example of a Warp-built daemon engine that is summoned to reality.
In any case the fluff is as GW wills it to be, and I see no real justification why it can't or shouldn't be retconned to justify them in daemon armies.
I don't expect it to happen either, but its nice to dream. Realistically, I think the most we will get is probably something like "If a Greater Daemon is your warlord then Heralds of the same God do not count as an HQ choice" type things.
Many recent codexes have had the option to take slotless characters if a related unit is picked in the same detachment. In other cases characters in overloaded slots been moved to another one.
It's definitely an issue they've been paying attention to.
dan2026 wrote: If they keep Greater Daemons and Daemon Princes in HQ and move all the others to Elites.
It would solve a massive problem imo.
By my count Daemons have 35 different HQs!
But only 5 Elites choices.
They have to sort this.
I’d rather have a “Heralds are slotless with a Greater Daemon” or “one HQ pick, up to three Heralds”.
I often run my Nurgle without a Prince, and don’t even own a GUO.
I think a lot of the current heralds could/should be Elites choices, with each god only having a single HQ level "Lord Herald" type thing. That would fix a lot of the issues. Then make the Elite Heralds multiple per slot or a way to get slotless Heralds just to ensure access to buffs and variety, etc.
chaos0xomega wrote: I think a lot of the current heralds could/should be Elites choices, with each god only having a single HQ level "Lord Herald" type thing. That would fix a lot of the issues. Then make the Elite Heralds multiple per slot or a way to get slotless Heralds just to ensure access to buffs and variety, etc.
What would this Lord Herald be like?
Would it just be an upgraded statline from the regular Heralds, or what? (Not meaning to knock this idea-it seems like a solid one!)
I would like to see some upgrades on the Herald statlines-when a Marine Captain (T4, W5, 3+/4++) can take 30 Bolter hits to kill and a Herald of Nurgle (T5, W4, 6+/5++/5+++) takes only 27... Something's gone screwy. Admittedly, they're both Characters, so they shouldn't be getting shot a ton anyway, but it still irks me.
Geifer wrote: The problem is that GW should just get over themselves and write mixed mortal and Daemon codices for each god like they do in AoS. Splitting off Daemons was a mistake for exactly that reason. The Daemon bestiary for each god was never meant to stand on its own like that.
They could give demons a rule like how Dark Eldar can run multiple patrols at no cp cost, one for each god.
I think "Demons of Chaos" works better as a faction then spiking them into the mortal factions.
A few more rumours are turning up on Discord, via reddit, all of which apparently come from the guy whose Tyranid leaks were on point:
General:
-Further confirmation of daemonic saves, including two profiles for range/melee
-GUO has 4+/5+ against range/melee.
-LoC has 3+/5+ against range/melee.
-Icons: Give the ICON keyword, which is somehow relevant to the new Warp Storm table.
-Instruments appear to give morale re-rolls.
GUO Details -GUO has 4+/5+ against range/melee.
-T8, 22W
-GUO still has 5+++ -Vomit attack: 7", d6 auto-hits, S5, AP-2, D1.
-Bilesword has: Cleave at +1S, AP-3, Dd6, 6s to hit auto-wound; Sweep at SU, AP-3, 1D, double attacks.
-Bileblade: SU, AP-3, D2, re-roll wounds, and 'improves casting'
-Flail: 7", d3+3A, SU, AP-3, D2.
-Nurgling attacks in addition
-Bell has a resurrection-style resurrection action for Plaguebearers
-Gives Nurgle CORE re-rolls
Khorne -'most improved'
-Most have 4+/4+ or 4+/5+ against range/melee.
Tzeentch -3+ against ranged for most, but not all units.
-Always has a worse save against melee.
Conflicted -Apparently another user states that Pink Horrors, Plaguebearers, and Bloodletters are all 10pts each.
-People are generally doubtful of this, at least if the other rumours of their buffs are true.
I could see 10 point troops with buffs if they drop them down to 10 max unit size.
Saves being different per gods is a cool idea. Tzeentch better vs shooting, worse vs melee. Khorne the opposite. Nurgle with the extra fnp. Slaanesh maybe a bonus to saves for advancing,?
Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
It's kind of their thing though ? Tzeentch and Nurgle deamons are both tough but in different ways no ?
Surprised how little we know about Slaanesh so far, especially in terms of stats or saves. Wonder if they're going to incorporate their rend on 6 ability as a baseline rend like Genestealers did.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
It's quite likely he'll also have a FNP of some sort.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
It's quite likely he'll also have a FNP of some sort.
He'll have that... and he'll be -1 damage it sounds like.
Still, his biggest weakness was also trundeling up the board. Not seeing much that helps here.
Sasori wrote: He'll have that... and he'll be -1 damage it sounds like.
Still, his biggest weakness was also trundeling up the board. Not seeing much that helps here.
I don't think it's the same problem as it was in 8th. In 9th you don't have to go far to be engaged with the mission and the opponent has to come take you off.
Bumping him to at least M8 wouldn't hurt though. I imagine his shooting will remain assault so running, gunning, and casting should be enough turn 1.
It's rumored that the GUO will have an easily attainable FNP, probably 5+++ via Psychic Power (in addition to the -1D as mentioned).
I dunno, I see his cap being something like the souped-up Knight Abominant. Which, sure, it's really cool and tanky AF. But CK have a lot of strong offensive tools (ranged and melee), Nurgle Daemons historically have not.
I don't play Nurgle, I could easily be wrong here. But that rumor leaves me pretty whelmed.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It's rumored that the GUO will have an easily attainable FNP, probably 5+++ via Psychic Power (in addition to the -1D as mentioned).
I dunno, I see his cap being something like the souped-up Knight Abominant. Which, sure, it's really cool and tanky AF. But CK have a lot of strong offensive tools (ranged and melee), Nurgle Daemons historically have not.
I don't play Nurgle, I could easily be wrong here. But that rumor leaves me pretty whelmed.
I think you also have to contextualize the army. He probably shouldn't be more durable than knights when Daemons have access to small units that Knights don't.
I could see the drones going to W5 and GUO getting a spell to res them. That sort of unit requires anti-tank as well, which pulls from GUO targeting.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It's rumored that the GUO will have an easily attainable FNP, probably 5+++ via Psychic Power (in addition to the -1D as mentioned).
I dunno, I see his cap being something like the souped-up Knight Abominant. Which, sure, it's really cool and tanky AF. But CK have a lot of strong offensive tools (ranged and melee), Nurgle Daemons historically have not.
I don't play Nurgle, I could easily be wrong here. But that rumor leaves me pretty whelmed.
psst- the meaning of 'whelmed' is the same as 'overwhelmed.' [Young Justice was trying to be clever, but mostly made Robin seem like an idiot with a poor education]
But I'm not sure why you feel the GDs should stack up against knights. They're leaders, (mostly) psykers and melee monsters, not primarily gun platforms.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It's rumored that the GUO will have an easily attainable FNP, probably 5+++ via Psychic Power (in addition to the -1D as mentioned).
I dunno, I see his cap being something like the souped-up Knight Abominant. Which, sure, it's really cool and tanky AF. But CK have a lot of strong offensive tools (ranged and melee), Nurgle Daemons historically have not.
I don't play Nurgle, I could easily be wrong here. But that rumor leaves me pretty whelmed.
psst- the meaning of 'whelmed' is the same as 'overwhelmed.' [Young Justice was trying to be clever, but mostly made Robin seem like an idiot with a poor education]
But I'm not sure why you feel the GDs should stack up against knights. They're leaders, (mostly) psykers and melee monsters, not primarily gun platforms.
Is that the profile of a melee monster? It looks... Okay, in Close Combat.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It's rumored that the GUO will have an easily attainable FNP, probably 5+++ via Psychic Power (in addition to the -1D as mentioned).
I dunno, I see his cap being something like the souped-up Knight Abominant. Which, sure, it's really cool and tanky AF. But CK have a lot of strong offensive tools (ranged and melee), Nurgle Daemons historically have not.
I don't play Nurgle, I could easily be wrong here. But that rumor leaves me pretty whelmed.
psst- the meaning of 'whelmed' is the same as 'overwhelmed.' [Young Justice was trying to be clever, but mostly made Robin seem like an idiot with a poor education]
But I'm not sure why you feel the GDs should stack up against knights. They're leaders, (mostly) psykers and melee monsters, not primarily gun platforms.
Is that the profile of a melee monster? It looks... Okay, in Close Combat.
I put it third for a reason (well, that and the profiles listed are incomplete, so I'm not terribly fussed on the details). And what Tyran said.
I'm more worried about having 'warp storm table' nonsense again.
I put GDs in the same category as Knights because they're the same size, they cost about as much $-wise, and the rumor is that you can only have one of them per detachment. With the incredibly paltry selection of units otherwise (when sticking to mono-god lists), if you only get one of 'em, they really should stack up to a Knight, otherwise Daemons are kind of screwed from a variety perspective.
I don't mean to be chicken little or anything, we know very little so far. But I think it's reasonable to be unimpressed with what we know about the GUO.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: I put GDs in the same category as Knights because they're the same size, they cost about as much $-wise, and the rumor is that you can only have one of them per detachment. With the incredibly paltry selection of units otherwise (when sticking to mono-god lists), if you only get one of 'em, they really should stack up to a Knight, otherwise Daemons are kind of screwed from a variety perspective.
I don't mean to be chicken little or anything, we know very little so far. But I think it's reasonable to be unimpressed with what we know about the GUO.
Greater Daemons are waaay smaller than Knights though. Way way smaller.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
The GUO supposedly has a 4+ save vs range, a 5+ feel no pain, and -1DMG for DR.
The LOC just has a 3+ vs range.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: I put GDs in the same category as Knights because they're the same size, they cost about as much $-wise, and the rumor is that you can only have one of them per detachment. With the incredibly paltry selection of units otherwise (when sticking to mono-god lists), if you only get one of 'em, they really should stack up to a Knight, otherwise Daemons are kind of screwed from a variety perspective.
I don't mean to be chicken little or anything, we know very little so far. But I think it's reasonable to be unimpressed with what we know about the GUO.
Greater Daemons are waaay smaller than Knights though. Way way smaller.
Yes, Shalaxi is the slightest bit shorter and obviously less bulky (though I suspect a GUO would be closer in bulk). But it's pretty close, and Shalaxi is technically taller with the spear. I don't think it's a stretch to say that a GD should have stats around the same magnitude as a Knight, especially offensively/in melee.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Maybe I'm missing synergies or not doing the math right while drinking my coffee, but that GUO profile seems pretty underwhelming to me? Especially given the rumors that these guys would be Knight-tier since you can only take one per detachment... I think I'd rather have a Knight than a GUO? Yeah, the GUO is moderately tougher at a baseline, but it seems to way underperform a Knight's damage output. And it's not like Knights have absurdly high damage per point anyways.
If that's the GUO profile and you can't take more than one, that's a bad sign. It's also hilarious that (at least from a save perspective), a LOC is tougher than a GUO
The GUO supposedly has a 4+ save vs range, a 5+ feel no pain, and -1DMG for DR.
The LOC just has a 3+ vs range.
The GUO is a lot tougher.
Eh. We know a lot more of the special rules about the GUO. We don't know what Locus of Trickery does, presumably that will make the LOC tougher also (or any of the Tzeentch psychic powers). I'm not convinced yet.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: I put GDs in the same category as Knights because they're the same size, they cost about as much $-wise, and the rumor is that you can only have one of them per detachment. With the incredibly paltry selection of units otherwise (when sticking to mono-god lists), if you only get one of 'em, they really should stack up to a Knight, otherwise Daemons are kind of screwed from a variety perspective.
I don't mean to be chicken little or anything, we know very little so far. But I think it's reasonable to be unimpressed with what we know about the GUO.
Greater Daemons are waaay smaller than Knights though. Way way smaller.
Yes, Shalaxi is the slightest bit shorter and obviously less bulky (though I suspect a GUO would be closer in bulk). But it's pretty close, and Shalaxi is technically taller with the spear. I don't think it's a stretch to say that a GD should have stats around the same magnitude as a Knight, especially offensively/in melee.
Her head tucks under the knight's chin, (which is set below the carapace), and can entirely fit between the knights legs. When people talk about model size and height, they're not talking about a weapon in hand.
Nah, I know and agree. But I would call her "smaller". Not "way way smaller", which oversold the difference to benefit chaos' argument. And I she is pretty much the narrowest one; I don't have a GUO or a Bloodthirster but I would imagine both are beefier than a KOS.
Has there been any talk of how the Forgeworld LOW named daemons work with new book? The one bloodthirster per detachment sounds like Anngrath will have a better time fitting in a 2,000 point list.
Carrying a 10 foot stick above my head doesn't make me 16 feet tall. Nor does having horns, crazy hair, etc. make me taller or larger in any meaningful way that matters when you are using size as the basis for comparison to evaluate power level. The fact remains that the Knight is not only taller, but significantly bulkier - each of the knights legs is about as wide as Shalaxis torso, and that counts for a lot. Keep in mind your square-cube law, etc. - it seems a common error for gamers and scifi nerds to evaluate relative power based on height (or length when it comes to spaceships), but theres a lot more to size than one dimension. Volume matters more, and when it comes to volume the knight is WAY WAY WAY larger than any of the greater daemons (with the exception of the GUO of course).
chaos0xomega wrote: Carrying a 10 foot stick above my head doesn't make me 16 feet tall. Nor does having horns, crazy hair, etc. make me taller or larger in any meaningful way that matters when you are using size as the basis for comparison to evaluate power level. The fact remains that the Knight is not only taller, but significantly bulkier - each of the knights legs is about as wide as Shalaxis torso, and that counts for a lot. Keep in mind your square-cube law, etc. - it seems a common error for gamers and scifi nerds to evaluate relative power based on height (or length when it comes to spaceships), but theres a lot more to size than one dimension. Volume matters more, and when it comes to volume the knight is WAY WAY WAY larger than any of the greater daemons (with the exception of the GUO of course).
That's all fair but it doesn't prevent GW from classifying them the same way in terms of kit pricing. And looking at things like the Void Dragon, Avatar of Khaine, etc., it doesn't prevent GW from classifying smaller kits the same way in terms of rules. It's all otiose in a niche anyways, GW will do what they want. But if I realistically only get 1 GD in a list, I want it to *count*.
Does anyone else get the feeling that GW released the community article because of the Daemons leaks, and not because they were ready to start advertising/publishing content? I would have hoped for a second article on WarCom by now.
They have been reacting to leaks this way for quite some time now - for one to prevent misinformation to spin out of control and second because a hastily slapped together article with pretty pictures is still better advertisement than a screenshot of a discord message.
Dysartes wrote: What soup options do you need them to confirm?
There was a rumour a while ago, it said that daemon allies could occupy until 25% of your amy whitout breaking any Veteran rules. But I haven't seen it so far at the recent waves of leaks.
Dysartes wrote: That sounds like a rule I'd've expected to see in the CSm book rather than the Daemons one, Garrac, but I guess either makes as little sense.
It's a rule that's already in Codex: Chaos Knights when taking a Dreadblade.
Rather than repeat the exception in every Codex that could take an allied Dreadblade or Daemon detachment, it's much easier to just list the exception in Codexes: Chaos Knights and Chaos Daemons. That makes it backwards compatible with existing Codexes (i.e. Death Guard and Thousand Sons), and makes it much easier for them to change the rule in future editions (i.e. just by updating Codexes: Chaos Knights and Chaos Daemons).
" Happy Monday ya filthy heretics. A few keen eyed individuals (most everyone) had noticed the "Warp Locus" keyword on certain CSM units (Maater of Posession, Khorne Lord of Skulls). Well I'm here to tell you at least part of what it does. As you may have heard, you will be able to deepstrike Daemons for free--but that's not all! When in the Warp these daemons gain special deepstrike rules.
They can deepstrike as normal, or if you set them up wholly within 6" of a Warp Locus unit, they can be set up just outside 6" from enemy units! (Instead of 9"). If you have allegiances you gotta stick with your friends. Warp Locus isn't a particularly common keyword, but an important lynchpin to enable brutal strategies.
No longer are you shelling out 2 or 3 cp to get a virtually gaurenteed charge with Bloodletters. I mean you will still be able to enhance charges in other ways, but now the floor is much higher. Looking to counter or stop your enemy from dropping hell on your doorstep? You'll want to remove enemy Warp Locus models as efficiently as you can. But that certainly won't be simple in most cases. The cool news is that deepstriking via the Warp has some other interesting rules if you're pure Daemons that make it even more appealing; those fighting daemons should generally stay out of daemonic territory, and keep a good sense of leadership.
That's it for that. A good mechanic to keep in mind as you read any upcoming information. I think it offers some good counter play, while also enabling some of the most reliable charges in the game. [PSA: As always understand things can change before release. So salt it a bit. "
"Time for the angriest of Daemons - Skarbrand! As is appropriate for Skarbrand, his damage output has gone from "middling" to "through the roof". His bellow has quite literally doubled in potency, and at top profile you get the choice between 9 attacks at S16 ap-4 D3+3 damage ignoring invulns or a whopping 18 at s8 ap-2 d2. His "rage embodied" also remains the same as ever, though the range has shortened a tad to only 6". The beast is no slouch durability wise either - with 20 wounds, t8, and a 4+ save in both melee and shooting, he's far from easy to take down, but if you're still worried just feel free to deep strike him - everyone in daemons can do that, remember? Oh yeah one other thing - he's a Warp Locus."
I was wondering if Daemons were going to get ignores invuln abilities and that answers that question. It will be interesting to see if we get a way to ignore the wound caps on C'Tan's, Ghaz, Abbadon etc.
If Heralds are Warp Locus, then I could imagine running a mounted herald up the field just to get Skarbrand in close before the enemy has a chance to do damage to him.
I purchased a used Skarbrand a couple of years ago and never got around to re-painting him to fit with my style. It looks like I might need to strip him off and paint him up!
Yep, it appears that taking anything other than a patrol detachment when allying in your Daemons with CSM is going to be quite detrimental. I suspect that unless Daemons have a powerful unit option, that we won't see CSM / Daemon allies in top tier competitive play.
JakeSiren wrote: Yep, it appears that taking anything other than a patrol detachment when allying in your Daemons with CSM is going to be quite detrimental. I suspect that unless Daemons have a powerful unit option, that we won't see CSM / Daemon allies in top tier competitive play.
Personally, I'm kinda sick of competitive play, anyway, so I say bring on the CSM/Daemons/Knights armies!
JakeSiren wrote: Yep, it appears that taking anything other than a patrol detachment when allying in your Daemons with CSM is going to be quite detrimental. I suspect that unless Daemons have a powerful unit option, that we won't see CSM / Daemon allies in top tier competitive play.
We'll see, soup almost always ends up with some unforseen broken combos. A patrol detachment is probably more than enough given the 25% limit of Daemon Allies. If Daemon troops are as jucied up as claimed and can deep strike for free; they will be worth taking. If their rummored 10 pts or less cost and melee boosts are true; you could take 2 superior Daemon Troops for the Cost of 1 melee gear Legionarie. For my Emperor's Children I can probably take 3 Daemonettes for the cost of 1 sonic armed Noise Marine; and take 2 Heralds to perform psychic actions.
While not happy about having only on Greater Daemon per detachment though; I have 6 Keepers counting Shalaxi and Zarakynel. The rumors sound really good so far. The new codex sounds like a blend of the 4 edition Codex with it stronger daemons that were immune to instant death, gifts and abilities; and the with some of the 6th edition codex rules with the Warpstorm Table and Masque regaining actual fluff based abilites.
I think EC might get the most out of allies if rumours are that slaanesh daemons are toolbox for combat phase, like if the masque debuffs are solid I could see her and a squad of daemonettes (for master of possession to possibly pocket sand throw at someone getting too close to him). Slaanesh have a bunch of units with good chances to have a solid debuff or support ability that could help ec.
Death guard might get use if nurgle daemons can lower strength or other enemy stats to help them bog opponents down.
Meanwhile thousand sons might not find as much use maybe as they already have good psykers, maybe pink horrors as tarpits or screamers for movement.
I imagine greater daemon spam may get a army of renown at some point.
Even keeping just one unit of Bloodletters as a cheap option seems like a good idea. If I'm already running up the board with Possessed and a Master of Possession, might as well take advantage of it.
Out of curiosity, anyone know when the start collecting boxes for Khorne and Nurgle vanished? Slaanesh and tzeentch still seem to be on the website, but not the other two.
Wondering if combat patrols are being inflicted on the range, but only for half the gods.
Voss wrote: Out of curiosity, anyone know when the start collecting boxes for Khorne and Nurgle vanished? Slaanesh and tzeentch still seem to be on the website, but not the other two.
Wondering if combat patrols are being inflicted on the range, but only for half the gods.
Interesting. Guess i should grab khorne one from flgs asap
Mothman wrote: I think EC might get the most out of allies if rumours are that slaanesh daemons are toolbox for combat phase, like if the masque debuffs are solid I could see her and a squad of daemonettes (for master of possession to possibly pocket sand throw at someone getting too close to him). Slaanesh have a bunch of units with good chances to have a solid debuff or support ability that could help ec.
Death guard might get use if nurgle daemons can lower strength or other enemy stats to help them bog opponents down.
Meanwhile thousand sons might not find as much use maybe as they already have good psykers, maybe pink horrors as tarpits or screamers for movement.
I imagine greater daemon spam may get a army of renown at some point.
I wouldn't mind running a Daemon Bomb/Tide list again. There are plenty of fast Slaanesh units that can shudown shooting turn 1-2 with charges.. I'll also be giving the chariots a try T6 could be interesting, maybe they'll let us run them in cavalcades again. I have like 9 that have been sitting on the shelf for years now.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Any place where these rumours are being collated?
They fled Dakka, unfortunately, due to the negativity that attended every rumour, particularly regarding the CSM codex. Now it's a question of trawling Bolter & Chainsword, Reddit, and Discord for crumbs :(
H.B.M.C. wrote: Any place where these rumours are being collated?
They fled Dakka, unfortunately, due to the negativity that attended every rumour, particularly regarding the CSM codex. Now it's a question of trawling Bolter & Chainsword, Reddit, and Discord for crumbs :(
Sersi wrote: They lost Rending but that fine since the cost under 10 pts. But did you see the Chariots? Those have me excited as well. Very nice changes indeed.
The hellflayer is looking to be incredible with the impact hits, also love the -1 to hit will really help them get into melee.
Garrac wrote: Waiting for friday bcs it looks like this was a Chariot week spetial
Gonna update later with daemonettes profile
The Daemonette Profile leaked. Pretty much all the Slaanesh units except HQ's and Fiends.
SLAANESH:
Command Phase: Fights First, Fights Last, Fight on Death abilities.
Daemonettes: improved offense near characaters: full re-rolls, and auto-wounding on 6.
Chariots: T6
Epitome: no longer prevents fallback, its a primarily a spell caster
Masque: no longer utility, really interest buffs and debuffs.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no rending rule like genestealers, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
4X S4/AP-2/Dam 1 attacks for 8-9 PPM is pretty scary with a 4+ ranged daemon save, innate deep strike, and herald buffs.
CSM Legionaries with the MOK have 4X at S5/AP-2/D1 attacks melee for more than twice the supposed points costs of the new Daemonettes.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no native rend, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
SEEKER CHARIOT: [cheap]
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A10, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:10X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Does MW on the charge, averages 1-2 MW.
Whips: 4X shots with old profile.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
HELLFLAYER: 80 pts
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A8, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:8X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Axel: 4X Attacks, Melee S6/AP-2/Dam 2/Auto-hits on charge
Double on the charge: 8 attacks
Gained -1 to hit.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
Garrac wrote: Waiting for friday bcs it looks like this was a Chariot week spetial
Gonna update later with daemonettes profile
The Daemonette Profile leaked. Pretty much all the Slaanesh units except HQ's and Fiends.
SLAANESH:
Command Phase: Fights First, Fights Last, Fight on Death abilities.
Daemonettes: improved offense near characaters: full re-rolls, and auto-wounding on 6.
Chariots: T6
Epitome: no longer prevents fallback, its a primarily a spell caster
Masque: no longer utility, really interest buffs and debuffs.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no rending rule like genestealers, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
4X S4/AP-2/Dam 1 attacks for 8-9 PPM is pretty scary with a 4+ ranged daemon save, innate deep strike, and herald buffs.
CSM Legionaries with the MOK have 4X at S5/AP-2/D1 attacks melee for more than twice the supposed points costs of the new Daemonettes.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no native rend, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
SEEKER CHARIOT: [cheap]
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A10, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:10X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Does MW on the charge, averages 1-2 MW.
Whips: 4X shots with old profile.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
HELLFLAYER: 80 pts
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A8, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:8X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Axel: 4X Attacks, Melee S6/AP-2/Dam 2/Auto-hits on charge
Double on the charge: 8 attacks
Gained -1 to hit.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
Garrac wrote: Waiting for friday bcs it looks like this was a Chariot week spetial
Gonna update later with daemonettes profile
The Daemonette Profile leaked. Pretty much all the Slaanesh units except HQ's and Fiends.
SLAANESH:
Command Phase: Fights First, Fights Last, Fight on Death abilities.
Daemonettes: improved offense near characaters: full re-rolls, and auto-wounding on 6.
Chariots: T6
Epitome: no longer prevents fallback, its a primarily a spell caster
Masque: no longer utility, really interest buffs and debuffs.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no rending rule like genestealers, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
4X S4/AP-2/Dam 1 attacks for 8-9 PPM is pretty scary with a 4+ ranged daemon save, innate deep strike, and herald buffs.
CSM Legionaries with the MOK have 4X at S5/AP-2/D1 attacks melee for more than twice the supposed points costs of the new Daemonettes.
Gained +1S [base 4], wounding MEQ on 4+ instead of 5+.
Gained +2A [base 4].
Gained +1M [base 7"].
Gained +1AP [no native rend, but they have ways of increasing AP with stragems and Heralds].
1X buffed up bomb unit and a few smaller units.
SEEKER CHARIOT: [cheap]
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A10, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:10X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Does MW on the charge, averages 1-2 MW.
Whips: 4X shots with old profile.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
HELLFLAYER: 80 pts
M14", WS3, BS3, S4, T6, W7, A8, LD8, SV4/4
Claws:8X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 1
Seeker:4X Attacks, Melee S:user(4)/AP-/Dam 1
Axel: 4X Attacks, Melee S6/AP-2/Dam 2/Auto-hits on charge
Double on the charge: 8 attacks
Gained -1 to hit.
Can be taken as a Herald mount.
LOS, and the claws go to 8X S:user(4)/AP-2/Dam 2.
Warlord Traits, Relics, Buffs to Daemonettes, and Core units.
MajorWesJanson wrote: It feels like khorne ought to have gotten the bonus tzeentch did, with tzeentch maybe a reroll for shooting?
It's the same with Khorne in the Chaos Marine Codex.
Nurgle - You get tougher!
Tzeentch - You can ignore damage!
Slaanesh - You always go first.
Khorne - You can... have an extra pip of strength... I guess? But only if you charge/get charged/be a hero. Yeah. That'll do.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Any place where these rumours are being collated?
They fled Dakka, unfortunately, due to the negativity that attended every rumour, particularly regarding the CSM codex. Now it's a question of trawling Bolter & Chainsword, Reddit, and Discord for crumbs :(
If I've learned anything it is that the community dumps hate and defends every action GW takes, simultaneously, in excess, on every rumor. There is little to no positivity as well as resounding praise, again simultaneously and on every rumor.
Putting sarcasm aside, people say whatever they want about 'the community' with little regard for evidence; I wouldn't read much into it. As witnessed in this very thread there is quite often positive reactions to changes which are good, and even at its most negative many reactions to CSM still went out of their way to mention things they liked as well. Further, there is abundant evidence that the negative response to CSM was based on very real impacts to how people enjoyed the game. If someone cannot handle people reacting negatively to things which impact them negatively that runs WAY deeper than some internet forum.
Wow if those soulgrinder rumors are true, and Nurgle one will be spicy. I use the CSM Land Raider and the T9 makes a profound difference in survivablity, and it doesn't have a 4++.
Well, they did it. The fools actually done did it:
** While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
I look forward to Grey Knights, Eldar, and possibly Necrons and a Space Marine relic or psychic power getting their individually 'bespoke' counters to anti-anti-invulnerable
Well, they did it. The fools actually done did it:
** While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
Bloodletter statline looks nice, though. They might actually threaten someone.
...why do I feel like split saving throws is just going to be a general thing for everybody in 10th?
Interesting to see that Horrors are confirmed to have a 3+ save against shooting, they're basically set to be backfield objective holders then.
Well, they did it. The fools actually done did it:
** While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
Bloodletter statline looks nice, though. They might actually threaten someone.
...why do I feel like split saving throws is just going to be a general thing for everybody in 10th?
I mean... they took away things like initiative to see who attacks first, and comparing weapon skills to see who hits better... how else can they show how some things are good at fighty fight....
good luck making sure you sue the right saves and not mess up guys!
Well, they did it. The fools actually done did it:
** While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
I look forward to Grey Knights, Eldar, and possibly Necrons and a Space Marine relic or psychic power getting their individually 'bespoke' counters to anti-anti-invulnerable
While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
So we have invulnerable saves, weapons that ignore invulnerable saves and now we have invulnerable saves that ignore weapons that ignore invulnerable saves.
While this may look an awful lot like an invulnerable save, it’s not – daemons are far stranger! Even a railgun can’t just ignore Daemonic Invulnerability.
So we have invulnerable saves, weapons that ignore invulnerable saves and now we have invulnerable saves that ignore weapons that ignore invulnerable saves.
back to the good old days of 7th Edition
so I guess in 10th we will see the level system coming back?
Unit A has save level 1 that is ignored by weapons with ignore saves level 2 and and unit B gets save level 2 that is ignored with level 3 weapons
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
I look forward to Grey Knights, Eldar, and possibly Necrons and a Space Marine relic or psychic power getting their individually 'bespoke' counters to anti-anti-invulnerable
This already exists and is called mortal wounds. GW should have saved themselves a major headache and just made a new save called Daemonic save that acts like an armor save immune to armor pen instead of having the silliness of having an invulnerability save that is not an invulnerable save (or avoided invulnerability ignoring weapons in the first place ), but GW rarely chooses the smarter choice...
anti-anti-invulnerable save! We have achieved full special rules escalation!
I look forward to Grey Knights, Eldar, and possibly Necrons and a Space Marine relic or psychic power getting their individually 'bespoke' counters to anti-anti-invulnerable
This already exists and is called mortal wounds. GW should have saved themselves a major headache and just made a new save called Daemonic save that acts like an armor save immune to armor pen instead of having the silliness of having an invulnerability save that is not an invulnerable save (or avoided invulnerability ignoring weapons in the first place ), but GW rarely chooses the smarter choice...
It feels like it would be very fluffy and lore appropriate that Night Lords are strong into Daemons who are scared of all their skulls and flayed skin.
I think it works in the context of daemons, who are very much a different sort of being than those from every other faction. It is two numbers on their stat line that are easy to know and keep track of. As long as there aren't a ton of factors modifying it (to be seen) I don't think it's bloated.
Though I do agree it is a symptom of how mismanaged invulnerable saves have been, and saves in general, that such a rule was even needed. IMO invulnerable saves should be exceedingly rare and usually supernatural, but cannot be ignored or modified by anything except mortal wounds, period. Meanwhile armor can simply come with a resilience score which counteracts AP. Many units that currently have invulnerable saves could be moved to having higher resilience. Not perfect and could use some extra nuance but it seems to me like such a system would better represent what GW is trying to do.
EightFoldPath wrote: It feels like it would be very fluffy and lore appropriate that Night Lords are strong into Daemons who are scared of all their skulls and flayed skin.
It wouldn't suprize me if there is a rule that makes Chaos Daemon LD is unmodifiable.
EightFoldPath wrote: It feels like it would be very fluffy and lore appropriate that Night Lords are strong into Daemons who are scared of all their skulls and flayed skin.
It wouldn't suprize me if there is a rule that makes Chaos Daemon LD is unmodifiable.
Ah. Yes. We definitely need to go back to armies that aren't affected by leadership tests. That's never been bad.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I remember how everyone was a big fan of easily obtained 3++ in 6th and 7th, so this was a good call on GWs game designers.
Its only tzeentch. There's never been any broken tzeentch based save shenanigans, right?
You both have me worried about past mistakes coming round again.
JakeSiren wrote: Maybe Daemons will go back to 7th where by they only care about casualties inflicted in melee for morale? That would make sense for ld6.
That's certainly a good observation, and certainly fits as GW seems to retreading the same beats as before.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I remember how everyone was a big fan of easily obtained 3++ in 6th and 7th, so this was a good call on GWs game designers.
True, but in this case it is 3++ vs shooting and 6++ versus melee. Having a built-in way around the 3++ might be enough to make it reasonable.
I just hope Tzeentch has ways to sneak out of melee, or has enough shooting to avoid it in the first place; GW appears to be doubling down on Tzeentch and melee not mixing well. I mean, not only does Tzeentch generally suck at melee, but now they're effectively going to be punished for getting charged.
This makes me wonder if if Gk will get an FAQ giving various weapons changes to allow them to hit daemons better. It'd be a bit strange if the dedicated Daemon killers are barely more effective than anyone else.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I remember how everyone was a big fan of easily obtained 3++ in 6th and 7th, so this was a good call on GWs game designers.
True, but in this case it is 3++ vs shooting and 6++ versus melee. Having a built-in way around the 3++ might be enough to make it reasonable.
It's not reasonable, period.
I mean... They're T3 W1 models. With a 3+ save-yes, you can't modify that with anything (for now), but they're less durable than a Marine against the vast majority of small arms fire.
Hell, a Hotshot Lasgun (S3 AP-2 D1) at BS3+ takes 9 shots to do a wound to a Pink Horror-the same as a Marine.
A regular Lasgun, at BS4+? 12 as compared to 18.
Bolter, at AP0 or -1 and BS3+? 6.75 as compared to 9.
Those Psychic power changes are excellent, especially the Slaaneshi ones.
Symphony of Pain [WC7]:
one enemy unit suffers -1 to hit in the fight phase [OLD]
one enemy unit suffers -1 to hit and wound in the fight phase [NEW].
Minus 1 to hit was already a great defense debuff for a Daemonette squad going into another melee unit; but -1 to wound really helps a lot when your T3.
Hysterical Frenzy [WC7]:
Allowed a SLAANESH unit to fight in the Psychic Phase [OLD].
SLAANESH CORE unit gains +1A and exploding 6's to hit [NEW].
The old version was situational and hard to use. But this adds +10 attacks to a 10X Daemonette squad before gaining +8.5 hits for exploding 6's on average. So, that's 5 marines or 28 guardsman without any re-rolls or other buffs. If they still have thei Razor-Sharp Claws Stratagem, for +1AP, or the rumored buff full re-rolls or auto-wounding on 6's they will be quite brutal.
Heralds:
Not a fan of replacing their +1S aura with re-rolling 1's to wound, bringing them in line with space marine lieutenants. Its fine since the strength boost is baked in to the troops now. But its a good thing their psykers and are daemonic loci, so they still have a purpose.
Greater Daemons:
According to Wallace's most recent video rumor the 1 Greater Daemon per detachment limit from the play test codex was dropped. But he also doesn't believe that having more than one of the new Greater Daemon's in a Detachment is balanced.
Not a fan of replacing their +1S aura with re-rolling 1's to wound, bringing them in line with space marine lieutenants. Its fine since the strength boost is baked in to the troops now. But its a good thing their psykers and are daemonic loci, so they still have a purpose.
Since a lot of Tzeentch's shooting is currently S = User, I'd much rather have the Strength bonus aura (since we know Horrors are staying at S3).
Not a fan of replacing their +1S aura with re-rolling 1's to wound, bringing them in line with space marine lieutenants. Its fine since the strength boost is baked in to the troops now. But its a good thing their psykers and are daemonic loci, so they still have a purpose.
Since a lot of Tzeentch's shooting is currently S = User, I'd much rather have the Strength bonus aura (since we know Horrors are staying at S3).
I wouldn't expect Tzeentch shooting to stay the same, GW will have taken the aura changes into account. With units getting reduced in size their shooting would have to be made stronger, so it won't be user strength based. So, probably going back to having either a fix strength values or random S3+3 non-sense because Tzeentch.
Slaanesh casting debuffs will have value in allied detatchments with emperors children. Have one melee brick with black rune and herald debuffing another enemy unit. Slaanesh might become king of melee control through mass debuffs
Mothman wrote: Slaanesh casting debuffs will have value in allied detatchments with emperors children. Have one melee brick with black rune and herald debuffing another enemy unit. Slaanesh might become king of melee control through mass debuffs
The Heralds will be great for Psychic Secondaries as well. That said the CSM codex can't match the economy of the melee units avalible in the CD codex. Legionaires are twice as expensive as Daemonettes, Chosen 3-4X's as much. When the basic Daemonette has 4X S4/AP-2/D1 attacks, advance & change, deep strike, and a 4++ save at range. I'm taking as many as I can get into a patrol detachment with the 25% ally allotment.
Can someone explain that bloodletter stratagem? It is early and it confuses me. Mostly it is the last line. Is it saying that if the unit made a normal move in the move phase than it is 2cp? Can you use the stratagem to move into engagement range?
Normal Moves as defined in the core rules cannot end within engagement range. Looks like the 2CP version of the strat is just an extra turn of movement in the fight phase.
Correct. You either pay 2 CP if the unit is not in engagement range to make a normal move, or you pay 1 CP when the unit is in engagement range and you pile in.
That's strat will have some pretty good utilty. Nice to see the Flesh Hounds got some decent buffs: S5 and Damage 2 on the charge. Hopefully they got at least AP-2 as well.
Domandi wrote: Can someone explain that bloodletter stratagem? It is early and it confuses me. Mostly it is the last line. Is it saying that if the unit made a normal move in the move phase than it is 2cp? Can you use the stratagem to move into engagement range?
it's basically a fancy version of heroic intervention. You move them six 6 inches toward the nearest enemy and if you are in engagement range you have them pile in during the fight phase without activating the unit. After that you can activate them and pile in and fight. You can do this during your opponent's turn or your turn.
Can see it being used to get models into objective and of course opponent turn could be used to bring closer for charging your turn but 2cp is pretty pricey. Not every game strategy likely but good to have in toolbox
artific3r wrote: It's not a heroic intervention because you can't end Normal Moves in engagement range.
oh I think you are right, but in the right circumstances you can get extra movement to make charges easier in your turn and grab objectives. one good use would be something like this
(enemy units)
___
/obj \
\___/
________ (cover)
(bloodletters)
if the distance between the bloodletters and the objective is less than 6 inches you get to snag an objective before your turn. You can also use it during your opponent turn to try to engage additional units specially if there is a way to increase your pile in move.
Valkyrie wrote: When would you want/need to pay 1CP for an extra pile-in?
When your normal pile-in doesn't get your models into engagement range. This is relevant in cases where you barely make your charge roll and some models are too far back to make it all the way in.
It's also useful to gain an extra 3" lateral movement to get to an objective on your turn or your opponent's turn.
The 2CP 6" normal move on your opponent's turn is pretty spicy since it happens after your opponent is done shooting. If you use it on your opponent's turn it's effectively 2CP to give your bloodletters a 12" move for your next turn.
Valkyrie wrote: When would you want/need to pay 1CP for an extra pile-in?
You base their models with a pile-in before they move theirs. This robs them of movement which can prevent them from piling into a character as much or from consolidated into a unit behind if you do poorly among other scenarios.
God Keywords: All
Warp Locus: can bring any flavor of Daemon in from deep strike; other warp loci are god specific.
Supreme Commander
Can no longer be obscured
aura re-roll 1's to hit for DAEMONS [excluding vehicles]
-1 to hit and cannot re-roll to hit him
-1 to wound
-1 damage vs ranged attacks
WLT: 9" Command Ability of re-roll any or all hit dice for DAEMONS or Disciples of Be'lakor [excluding vehicles]
Aura of -1 LD, -1 Combat Attrition
Hates all of other Daemon Princes: they can be taken but not in his detachment.
Mono-Slaanesh and Mono-Nurgle don't need Be'lakor as they are strong enough on their own.