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.

A space wolf Rune priest's runic weapon allows a +2 to wound any daemon model...

My friend said that this only applies to a model with the daemon rule as shown in the daemon codex...

But does this runic weapon wound on a +2 on a daemon model from, say chaos codex or the Avatar of Khaine.

Avatar has the daemon special rule, so I would assume it would work on him.

Mattieau wrote:Avatar has the daemon special rule, so I would assume it would work on him.

Do you know if it works on Daemon price in chaos codex or Greater Daemons?

Neither of those have the daemon special rule as far as i can remember. Someone could correct me on this. I'd imagine that it's supposed to work on any daemon, but the way it's phrased means it only works on them if they have the rule.

It works on any Daemon.

Unfortunately without the Daemon special rule we do not know what is and what is not a Daemon. Greater and summoned daemons from Chaos Marines may or may not be daemons(they are in name and Fluff, but no-where in rules), And the Daemon Prince is entirely in limbo.

Now Fluff =/= rules so we cannot extrapolate that because fluff says Greater and Summoned are in fact daemons that they are.

Also Names are right-out. If we went by the names(along with the rule) and then later some years down the line we get a New "Space Slaan Codex" which includes sunit with the Dragon special rule, and then a Space marine unit gets some weapon that has an effect vs "Dragons" and we were going by name: Eldar Fire Dragons would suddenly be effected by the Anti-Slaan weapons for no good reason.

In short Only concrete models that are affected by the runic weapon are Codex Chaos Daemons models and the Eldar Avatar.

[quote=Kommissar Kel
Also Names are right-out. If we went by the names(along with the rule) and then later some years down the line we get a New "Space Slaan Codex" which includes sunit with the Dragon special rule, and then a Space marine unit gets some weapon that has an effect vs "Dragons" and we were going by name: Eldar Fire Dragons would suddenly be effected by the Anti-Slaan weapons for no good reason.

His point is that fluff (which names are) does not equal RAW, and he's right.

In any case, it only affects models with the "Daemon" special rule.

A model is not a demon in terms of the game unless it actually has the demon rule.

Just because fluff says its a demon, or logic does, does not make it so in game terms.

I could argue that tyranids are all beasts because they are all animals, or described as beasts in fluff. Yet only one tyranid has the beasts special rule.

So as others have said, the weapon will only work against models that have the demon special rule.

Ok I respect that it only affects an model with the daemon rule but however it is not just a name the model is in fact a daemon so realistically it should still work.

I think we can all agree it is a weird (and could be worded better) rule.

It was written in a very bad manner. The confusion could have been easily cleared with "affects models with the demon special rule."

SaintHazard wrote:His point is that fluff (which names are) does not equal RAW, and he's right.

In any case, it only affects models with the "Daemon" special rule.

Have to strongly disagree here, sorry.
Name are NOT fluff, they are descriptors.
When we call an item a "RED APPLE" it's name tells us what we need to know.
Anyone who discusses the item knows that it is both "RED" and an "APPLE"
So when something is named "DAEMON PRINCE" it is obviously both "DAEMON" and "PRINCE"
Since in our context their are specific rules for Daemon, those rules would affect said model.

Yes but when something is called a "FIRE DRAGON" it isn't actually both on fire and a dragon.

Honestly, you have to make a house ruling on this one.. Every time you fight someone with a "Daemon" whether it has the rule or not you and the people you are playing with have to decide if it is or if it isnt. I personally agree if in Fluff, and in the name, and it looks the part, then it is a freakin demon. If it walks like a chicken, clucks like a chicken, and looks like a chicken, it is a chicken. Or at least close enough right?

Akbar wrote:Honestly, you have to make a house ruling on this one.. Every time you fight someone with a "Daemon" whether it has the rule or not you and the people you are playing with have to decide if it is or if it isnt. I personally agree if in Fluff, and in the name, and it looks the part, then it is a freakin demon. If it walks like a chicken, clucks like a chicken, and looks like a chicken, it is a chicken. Or at least close enough right?

The most reasonable post on this thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would like to mention names don't matter Fire Dragons are not dragons they're name may say dragons but they are not well done i passed my first day of school. But a daemon prince is still a daemon even if it were called suzie. Names do not matter but if they are actually daemons regardless of the name then this rule should apply...

I think it is all models with the Daemon special rule as a Daemon Prince is a Daemon by name but it is not a Daemon because otherwise it would have the Daemon special rule. As Komissar Kel said if there was a dragon model made and then a space marine weapon would affect all "dragon" models then fire dragons would be affected because they have dragon in their name. I Think it should be worded better so it says all models with the Daemon special rule.

Akbar wrote:Honestly, you have to make a house ruling on this one.. Every time you fight someone with a "Daemon" whether it has the rule or not you and the people you are playing with have to decide if it is or if it isnt. I personally agree if in Fluff, and in the name, and it looks the part, then it is a freakin demon. If it walks like a chicken, clucks like a chicken, and looks like a chicken, it is a chicken. Or at least close enough right?

This is the only good answer. It's not satisfactory to have obviously daemonic units unaffected, neither does using the name as decider solve the problem.

The Daemonhunters codex offers some guidelines on this: "Throughout this Codex, the term "Daemon" refers to the following units: All Daemonhosts, Greater Daemons and Daemon packs, Daemon Beasts, Nurglings, Daemonically Possessed Vehicles such as Defilers) or those with the Parasitic Possession, Living Vehicle or Mutated Hull upgrades, Eldar Avatars, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, and Chaos Lords with the Daemonic Stature gift and/or over 50 points of daemonic gifts."

Unfortunately, this is so out of date to be virtually worthless from a RAW perspective, the vast majority of these things no longer exist. However, we can extrapolate from the units it referred to when it was written.

Codex Chaos Daemons units
Summoned Greater Daemons
Summoned Lesser Daemons
Defilers
Vehicles with Daemonic Possession
Avatar
Possessed Chaos Space Marines
Daemon Prince

That would be my suggestion for a house rule.

Twiggy wrote:I think it is all models with the Daemon special rule as a Daemon Prince is a Daemon by name but it is not a Daemon because otherwise it would have the Daemon special rule. As Komissar Kel said if there was a dragon model made and then a space marine weapon would affect all "dragon" models then fire dragons would be affected because they have dragon in their name. I Think it should be worded better so it says all models with the Daemon special rule.

Kommissar Kel's example is not valid as there is a giant difference between a name given and a biological existence fire dragons are given a name which is "fire dragons" they are not biologically dragons and a "daemon prince" is biologically a daemon. No one can argue that it isn't.

The chaos and chaos daemons codexes should have been clear as to which units are or aren't daemons. That's the only way to make it clear and consistent.

Proteus wrote:Have to strongly disagree here, sorry.
Name are NOT fluff, they are descriptors.
When we call an item a "RED APPLE" it's name tells us what we need to know.
Anyone who discusses the item knows that it is both "RED" and an "APPLE"
So when something is named "DAEMON PRINCE" it is obviously both "DAEMON" and "PRINCE"
Since in our context their are specific rules for Daemon, those rules would affect said model.

Not even remotely correct.

Yes, a "red apple" is both "red" and an "apple," but an Eldar "Wave Serpent" is neither serpentine nor aquatic. A Tau "Hammerhead" does not have a head, let alone one shaped like a hammer. An IG "Chimera" is not a mythological three-headed beast. A Space Marine "Whirlwind" is not a violent conical weather phenomenon.

Names are fluff in 40k, nothing more.

And to use your own example, a "Daemon Prince" is NOT a Daemon, but a mutated human, and his parents are not royalty.

Therefore, anything that has "Daemon" in its name cannot be immediately assumed to be a "Daemon" in terms of the rules.

I think the best answer I've heard so far is that this needs to be house-ruled. If your opponent plays DH as well as whatever he has fielded at the time, he may have a vastly different idea of what constitutes a "Daemon" than if he plays Chaos Daemons, or Chaos Space Marines.

Discuss it with your opponent pre-game.

Not sure why this one got so much back and forth lol.

If it has the Demon special rule it is a demon. If it doesn't have it but you think it should effect it, such as the demon prince, then discuss pregame. If you are in a tourney discuss with TO.

Golden Rule: Fluff doesn't equal rules or Necrons would be auto-win

BlueDagger wrote:Golden Rule: Fluff doesn't equal rules or Necrons would be auto-win

How so

GoDz KI11JOY x wrote:

BlueDagger wrote:Golden Rule: Fluff doesn't equal rules or Necrons would be auto-win

How so

On the tabletop, they have a 50% chance of coming back when they die.

In the fluff, they don't die at all.

SaintHazard wrote:

Yes, a "red apple" is both "red" and an "apple," but an Eldar "Wave Serpent" is neither serpentine nor aquatic. A Tau "Hammerhead" does not have a head, let alone one shaped like a hammer. An IG "Chimera" is not a mythological three-headed beast. A Space Marine "Whirlwind" is not a violent conical weather phenomenon.

Ignore the names, this is so annoying i know my description of a daemon prince is not entirely correct as he is a lord of chaos who has descended into DAEMONHOOD but ignore the names anyway a Greater Daemon or lesser Daemon (despite the name) are clearly daemons but people on this thread keep using "fire dragons" or Wave Serpent" as an example when these are just names given to the model that doesn't mean anything.


Point is don't take the names seriously there are too many people using these examples in the wrong context.

Point 2 just consult with your opponent their opinion is the one that matters.

The only real RaW answer is to use the daemons rule to define what is and what isn't a daemon.

Fortunately I play Warhammer not RaWhammer and the rules for Warhammer 40k state any daemon model and a Greater Daemon, Lesser Daemon and Daemon Prince are all quite obviously daemons.

If you play it that only the Daemon rule defines a model I assume you also play that no models can be placed on the table at the start of the game (as you have no permission to).

On the tabletop, they have a 50% chance of coming back when they die.

In the fluff, they don't die at all.

They do however take casualties and phase out. A model removed isn't necessarily dead...

There is a simple way to understand why it may not work the way the OP thinks it should.

All daemons might not have the special rule 'daemon', just those with such powerful abilities to be considered to have the rule.

Basic way to figure it...an Imp doesn't get daemonic abilities on part with those of a more powerful daemon, so the Imp wouldn't have the rule even though it'd be technically classified as a daemon by the Imperium of Man.

This is Daemon in game terms, not in fluff terms(as the Avatar is a good example of this distinction).

Ki11j0y: My example with Fire Dragons was supposed to border on the ridiculous. The only way to Identify a Daemon is with what the Rules say; and the only rules that identify a Daemon it the Daemon special rule.

I fully agree that based on fluff(that is what we know of the following units) Daemon Princes, Lesser Daemons, and Greater Daemons from the Chaos Marine Codex should all be Daemons. However rules-wise they are not.

I will go on to say that when you discuss it pregame; and a Chaos marine Player wants to say "hey, my daemons aren't Daemons" you should likely not play that opponent as he is being TFG; or find out just how RAW he wants to play and use that against him.

Also there is a very large difference between what the Rules actually say in these cases and how it is usually played(I usually play it the looser way myself). In these discussions I will identify what the rules actually say, whether that is how it is commonly played or not.

Kommissar Kel wrote: you should likely not play that opponent as he is being TFG; or find out just how RAW he wants to play and use that against him.

Wow.

TFG = Thereupon Factual Ground?

Farseer Faenyin wrote:There is a simple way to understand why it may not work the way the OP thinks it should.

All daemons might not have the special rule 'daemon', just those with such powerful abilities to be considered to have the rule.

Basic way to figure it...an Imp doesn't get daemonic abilities on part with those of a more powerful daemon, so the Imp wouldn't have the rule even though it'd be technically classified as a daemon by the Imperium of Man.

This is Daemon in game terms, not in fluff terms(as the Avatar is a good example of this distinction).

If it's classified as a Daemon by the Imperium of Man, how is this game terms and not fluff? Does the rulebook at any time say "if, in the fluff, the Imperium of Man classifies a model as something, that's what it should be classified as in game terms?" No, it doesn't.

And if you're going to use such a loose definition to classify a Daemon, how is that not using fluff to determine RAW?

The bottom line is that there are two ways to decide what is a Daemon: models with the "Daemon" special rule are Daemons, or models identified in Codex: DH are Daemons. You need to agree with your opponent on how you're deciding what is and is not a Daemon on the tabletop before the game begins, but you need to be using a concrete definition, not "Oh, well, that looks kind of like a Baphomet, so we're going to call it a Daemon, even though it doesn't say it is," or "That model uses Daemonic abilities, so we're going to call it a Daemon, even though nothing in the codex or rulebook classifies it as such." Nevermind that this is based entirely on a western definition of a Daemon or demon, and Oriental and Middle-Eastern cultures have entirely different definitions of what constitutes a Daemon or demon... and this a game that's played worldwide.

The whole Daemon thing has been nicely messed up by GW. They made a point of mentioning it for the avatar then failed to mention it for lots of obvious things in C:CSM.

Are these supposed to be so obvious it's not worth mentioning? Apparently it's not worth a FAQ either...

Scott-S6 wrote:The whole Daemon thing has been nicely messed up by GW. They made a point of mentioning it for the avatar then failed to mention it for lots of obvious things in C:CSM.

Are these supposed to be so obvious it's not worth mentioning? Apparently it's not worth a FAQ either...

That's the truth.

I would really like to know, for certain, which of my Daemons can be killed by things that kill Daemons, instead of having to discuss it beforehand or guess. Or wonder if GW thinks it's so obvious it doesn't deserve mention.