Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Am I missing the thread on the new Dex?

What does everyone think?

Things I found interesting:

The pricing on Khornate Chariots, and the rules surrounding them. They're cheaper than Juggernauts, but do more to improve the models statline. But they cause the model to lose its IC status. Apparently being an IC will be a big advantage in 5th?

The "changes" to Fzorgle. The Daemon version is much nerfed. Odd that Daemons of Slaanesh would be worse at the spell than renegade followers of it. Is this an admission that the old rule was drastically overpowered?

What's a Toughness check?

When the heralds lose their IC status, they can't come in attached to units and thus become very easy to kill before doing anything worthwhile.

But I guess this really isn't news or a rumour.

And yet, you still felt compelled to hit "submit..."

In 5th edition there is no IC shooting protection when not attached to a unit. So an IC running around on his own is vulnerable.

So yes, losing the IC ability is pretty dangerous for heralds on chariots.

That said, you get a tremendous amount of abilities for a very small points cost when taking a chariot upgrade.


And yes, there is a tactics thread going on in the tactics forum along with some battle report discussions in that forum.


Overall I find the army very intriguing, and it definitely is a very different style of army from anything else in the game and that alone is a good thing IMHO.

I don't think it will ever be a tournament powerhouse because it is simply too dependent on luck.

Its the first codex in a long time that I've actually read and enjoyed all the fluff. At first I thought I'd hate the idea of Daemons fighting on their own (in the fluff), but I have to admit by the time I finished reading the fluff my thoughts had reversed nicely.

While I still think GW went too far generalizing Daemons in the CSM codex I do now agree with the idea of splitting them into separate forces, mainly because it creates an army with a very different style of play than what has existed before.

I have to second yakface's opinion about the codex being "good". Not worrying too much about the actual rules and how it would perform in a tournament environment, I have found it to be a great read and full of that fluff thing as well as an overall feeling behind it which generates interest and to play them as a force.

it's a nice change from yet-another-MEq army, and I think it will do ok in tourneys, just because the _average_ tourney army won't be tooled up to fight daemons. (Whereas a customised anti-daemon army will do great against daemons but not too well against all the other tourney armies.) I agree it won't win too many tourneys though, there's just too much luck involved in deployment

I plan to buy both the 40K and Warhammer versions and raid them for any good ideas for our own Chaos rules. Other than that... couldn't care less really. I have no desire to play an All-Daemon army - I much perfer mixed CSM/Daemon armies, something impossible under the CSM Codex. Pity for me.

I do want some of those Bloodcrushers though. Those Juggers are ace!

BYE

By Juggers, I hope you mean the steed and not the Daemon's...chest parts.

I got the book over the weekend, seems good so far. I'm planning to mostly just use bloodletters and plaguebearers in my csm apoc army, I wanted to use the real rules instead of the generic csm ones. I'm going to keep them on square bases though instead of round and possibly expand it into a wfb army, but not sure yet.

But it seems pretty cool so far from what I've read. But, what if you wanted more of a themed army like just khorne or just slaanesh? would you nerf yourself too much by not taking things from other gods?

What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?

whitedragon wrote:What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?

According to the leaked PDF:

Offensive grenades (frag, plasma, etc) allow attackers to strike at normal initiative when assaulting models in cover (in 5th edition assaulting through cover drops the attacker's Initiative to 1 instead of boosting the defenders Initiative to 10).

Defensive grenades (Photon) denies attacking models the +1A bonus for charging.

Necros wrote:

But it seems pretty cool so far from what I've read. But, what if you wanted more of a themed army like just khorne or just slaanesh? would you nerf yourself too much by not taking things from other gods?

If you want to play the army as competitively as possible then I think you would definitely want to stick with a mixed force. That said, I do think it is doable to win with god-themed armies on a fairly regular basis.

What I really do like about playing with different god-specific builds is that they all would play rather differently from each other.

Nurgle is slow but tough so you'd have to drop right in front of the enemy trying to soak up the damage and then charge the next turn.

Slaanesh is fast but vulnerable to fire so you'd want to drop in behind cover and then charge through in the following turn.

Tzeentch would play closer to a shooty drop army we're used to, like the old Elyasian list (sans the demo charges).

Khorne is slower than Slaanesh and definitely not as tough as Nurgle but does a *hell* of a lot more damage in close combat than Nurgle. But it does have pretty tough units in the blood crushers and very fast units in the Flesh hounds. The big change from previous incarnations of Khorne is how relatively vulnerable Bloodletters are compared to what they used to be (no regular armor anymore).


However, with any god besides Tzeentch you're going to be really stuck without any real AT firepower (and not much shooting of any sort really) which means you'd probably need to load up on 3 Soul Grinders with the 'tongue' upgrade.

It is my belief that they will end up being just like the Orc and Goblin army book for WFB. The reputation for the Orc army book is that it is a good army, but just too random. So, in a 5 game GT environment they will do well, but bad rolls will bite them in the rear in at least one game.

Demons should be the same way. Do you get the half of the army that you want to start the game with on the board? Do you have bad scatters when you deep strike? Do you scatter too close and lose units or right in front of your opponent in to rapid-fire range? Do you scatter to far away and become a non-factor? Do you roll bad for reserves and not get the units that you want to on turn #2, or do you have a lot of units staying in reserve until turns 3 and 4? Etc.

whitedragon wrote:What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?

I don't know, but I find the idea of a grenade that defends offensive!

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

whitedragon wrote:What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?

I don't know, but I find the idea of a grenade that defends offensive!

I couldn't agree more!!!

And thank's yakface!

I found the book to be pretty cool. I was also put off by the mixed Daemon forces at first, but now I don't have the same objections.

I am finishing up a 1750 list for an RTT in two weeks (Pittsburgh Iron Legion - come and play!!). From my test game vs. Necrons, the list was solid. The Bloodletters dish out tons of damage, and Nurgle soaks up a lot and keeps coming. The Daemon Princes are where the heavy hitting is at. You can customize them pretty well and they are total beasts in combat. I look forward to playing more games with them.

Fantasy is where the army will really shine though. I am very excited about a Warhammer Daemon army.

Jeff

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

whitedragon wrote:What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?


I don't know, but I find the idea of a grenade that defends offensive!

sigged

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:I don't know, but I find the idea of a grenade that defends offensive!

I wouldn't like to be in the receiving end of either.

Though I do like the Antiplant, just to piss off Exodites, and the Sourprize Xplodin' Piñata (great for ork parties).

On another train of thought, why don't the Orks use squigs as offensive grenades? I can see everyone coming out of cover faster than wild fire.

Anyway, sorry for the
offtopic, and now for a Malfred
moment.

yakface wrote:
While I still think GW went too far generalizing Daemons in the CSM codex I do now agree with the idea of splitting them into separate forces, mainly because it creates an army with a very different style of play than what has existed before.

*cough*Lustwing*cough*

GW has a history of going too far more often than not.

And the pendulum definitely swung too far with the latest C: CSM.

Still, I am looking forward to picking up both Daemon Army books for the fluff, if nothing else...

Altough I am looking forward to use some of that stuff in Apocalypse games (as far as I get it, Epidemus special rules work just as well with Nurgle Marines), I don't think I'll ever use them as a stand-alone army.

and personalyy, I think the fluff is....well, bad. Every line is like, "oooh, this Khorne/Nurgle/Slaneesh demon is so brutal/ugly/pervers."
not really interesting, but that's only my two cents.

OK, maybe I am not looking forward to the fluff so much...

I think the demons may work out pretty well on regular basis. Sure, they will get screwed by bad random rolls once in a while, but thats the thing with a dice game.

The units are really nice and have so many options and tactics that it will be very fun to see how pepole will use them. Like Yak wrote, they can be fast, resilient or in between.. they got some nasty shooting of they want that route too.. So many possibilites.

Janthkin wrote:

yakface wrote:
While I still think GW went too far generalizing Daemons in the CSM codex I do now agree with the idea of splitting them into separate forces, mainly because it creates an army with a very different style of play than what has existed before.

*cough*Lustwing*cough*

You are, of course, correct that the old daemonbomb played somewhat similar to this new army, but the major difference is that you don't have nearly indestructible units delivering the deepstrikers onto the board and the deepstrikers aren't charging the same turn they arrive. This of course actually means the opponent has some say in whether the game is won or lost. This is opposed to the daemonbomb army which, when tuned to the max, was virtually unstoppable except against the most potent of tournament builds.

yakface wrote:
You are, of course, correct that the old daemonbomb played somewhat similar to this new army, but the major difference is that you don't have nearly indestructible units delivering the deepstrikers onto the board and the deepstrikers aren't charging the same turn they arrive. This of course actually means the opponent has some say in whether the game is won or lost. This is opposed to the daemonbomb army which, when tuned to the max, was virtually unstoppable except against the most potent of tournament builds.

Not quite the same - while I know my beloved Lustwing eventually got lumped into the catch-all term "daemonbomb," it actually sounds much closer to how the new Daemons might play. Deepstrike a few squads of terminators, hope to land safely, shoot a few carefully-selected targets (provided that you didn't land funny), survive the following turn, and hope you get adequate daemonic support. Substitute daemon princes for the Terminators (and rejoice that you don't require icons to get your daemons on the ground).

Ha! I love it. You can't type Codex: Daemons without the Dakka Ork laughing at it.

C

Hahahaha!

BYE

As a side note:


Why is there nothing on the GWUK website about the new Daemon launch? All they've got are links to the online store. No painting guides, army guides (as useless as they usually are), designer's notes - nothing. They don't even have Daemon sections in either 40K or Warhammer. It's like they've just forgotten them.

BYE

Because even GWUK realizes the codex was a waste of ink and time.

yakface wrote:

whitedragon wrote:What are "offensive" and "defensive" grenades?

According to the leaked PDF:

Offensive grenades (frag, plasma, etc) allow attackers to strike at normal initiative when assaulting models in cover (in 5th edition assaulting through cover drops the attacker's Initiative to 1 instead of boosting the defenders Initiative to 10).

Defensive grenades (Photon) denies attacking models the +1A bonus for charging.

I found it odd that the codex includes these wargear items that are essentially unplayable until the 5th edition rules hit.. but included rending as THE upgrade option for the khorne units.. an option that becomes all but pointless in 5th edition on models that already have power weapons.

Or, could this possibly be an indication that rending is not getting nerfed as much as rumoured?

H.B.M.C. wrote:As a side note:


Why is there nothing on the GWUK website about the new Daemon launch? All they've got are links to the online store. No painting guides, army guides (as useless as they usually are), designer's notes - nothing. They don't even have Daemon sections in either 40K or Warhammer. It's like they've just forgotten them.

BYE

The GWUK site is often behind the times. Whatever staff they have running that site certainly never seems to be as on top of things as the staff running the other country sites. For example, at least the US site has a few different articles up for the Daemons.

swize1 wrote:


I found it odd that the codex includes these wargear items that are essentially unplayable until the 5th edition rules hit.. but included rending as THE upgrade option for the khorne units.. an option that becomes all but pointless in 5th edition on models that already have power weapons.

Or, could this possibly be an indication that rending is not getting nerfed as much as rumoured?

I thought that too (about the rending), but remember that rending allows you to penetrate vehicles too, so the rending upgrade for Khorne gives the model the ability to take on vehicles.

I too am surprised they didn't put a blurb about offensive/defensive grenades at least into White Dwarf or online somewhere for the couple of months until the new edition hits.