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.

I am an Inquisition player, and im finding myself in quite a pickle. Me and my friend (a Chaos Marine player) are having a 800 point match on his birthday, he is bringing Abaddon and I am taking The Sanguinor (tis is not the problem) which it all fine and dandy. However, does a Daemon Prince count as a Daemon... Ive looked at the rules and either I have poor eyesight or cannot find anythig linking the Prince with Daemons. It may seem I went of topic at the start, but we are taking 2 HQs each, and I want to know if I should brng a Daemon Hunter or a Witch Hunter (Daemon Princes are psykers, especially in his case).

CSM DP's are not daemons (how that works, Idk.)

Chaos Daemons though (oddly enough) do have daemon Daemon Princes.

Strictly the only entries are Daemons are those with the Daemon special rule (which the CSM daemon prince does not have) and the entries which the Daemon Hunter codex states are Daemons, which is mostly null and void since the 4th ed CSM codex came out.

Okay, thanks for that. Now may I ask some strategic advice. I know that my friend is deploying Abaddon, and a Daemon Prince who is a Psyker. My counter for Abaddon is The Sanguinor, so that wll prove to be an epic battle. My answer for the Daemon Prince is a Witchhunter (using Power Stake, Bolter-Stake Crossbow and Psychic Hood) acompanied by 3 Acolyteswith Mancatchers and 2 chuiregeons, they will force the Prices atacks to one and the render that attack moot against my Inquisitor. The low armour is a problem so I mounted them in a Rhino to get them to the Price faster. The rest of My force consits of an anti- everything unit of Sanguanary Guard accompanied by Sanguanary Priest (Brother Corbulo) to kill of the rest of his forces, using The Sanguinor as backup if he survives. Now heres the twist, there is also a Tau player. I actually dont care if I lose to him, I just want to pester my friend on his birthday.

There is no definition of a Daemon in the rules. People like to point to the use of the daemon special rule as a defining factor, but in many places if you told someone a Daemon Prince wasn't a Daemon thhey'd look at you very strangely.

Some people like to make choices as to what is "fluff" and what is "rules", and then claim their stance is indisputable RaW and that RaW is the rules. In the CSM codex it clearly states that a daemon prince is a daemon (as are summoned daemons). Because some people choose to write this off as fluff does not make it irrelevant.

Ask yourself, do you really need to be told that a Daemon Prince is a Daemon? Do you really need that confirmed after his stat-line even if it is mentioned before?

FlingitNow wrote:Ask yourself, do you really need to be told that a Daemon Prince is a Daemon? Do you really need that confirmed after his stat-line even if it is mentioned before?

Yes. The same way you have to be told what the Combat Tactics special rule does.

By your logic, Vulkan gets a Command Squad because he was a Captain in the fluff, even though the rules clearly do not allow him to have one.

Fling - a Daemon prince is NOT a daemon, it is a chaos lord that has been given immortality and greater powers, but remains at core NOT a daemon. So yes, you need to be told a DP is a daemon, otherwise it isnt.

Well in the codex Chaos Space Marines book I've read it clearly states Daemon Prince is a Daemon, but to be honest I didn't need to be told that.

Who "decides" what is classified as "fluff" and what is classified as rules? I've seen nothing in the rules that tells me which is which so how do I know?

By RaW how do you know what is fluff and what isn't? Given that you are incapable of knowing anything beyond RaW?

FlingitNow wrote:Well in the codex Chaos Space Marines book I've read it clearly states Daemon Prince is a Daemon, but to be honest I didn't need to be told that.

Who "decides" what is classified as "fluff" and what is classified as rules? I've seen nothing in the rules that tells me which is which so how do I know?

By RaW how do you know what is fluff and what isn't? Given that you are incapable of knowing anything beyond RaW?

OMG! QUICK! HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT THE WORD "IS" MEANS, RAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I find it hilarious you constantly attack people who advocate RaW as being unreasonable and crazy, try and claim the RaW is different to the rules, yet you think it's ok to say "I've seen nothing in the rules that tells me which is which so how do I know?". Yes, we are the unreasonable ones. </sarcasm>

The fact is, the Dæmonhunter rules that call for Dæmons have a VERY Specific list of what a Dæmon is. Anything not on the list is not affected by those rules. If you don't like it make a house rule. The RAW is 110% clear. Likewise, another example is a Space Wolves Runic Staff, that wounds Dæmons on a 2+, but never tells you what Dæmons are, so never actually works. That is RaW. That is the Rules.

Daemons, Gwar, not Dæmons.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Daemons, Gwar, not Dæmons.

No. I am spelling it right. GW are spelling it wrong.

I am nitpicky about these things. It also annoys me when people spell Khârn the Betrayer as Kharn the Betrayer. ( >.< )

Spelling? Well excuse me, I thought we were discussing the rules as written.

Fluff wise: Well, he has daemon in his name, however, that is fluff, not rules.

rules wise: All daemons as clearly stated as such by the special rule.


So its simple really.
Do the rules call a CSM daemon prince a daemon?
Nope, he is there for just a lord with gifts.

The C: Daemons one though is a daemon as his/her special rules state it.

۞ Jack ۞ wrote:Fluff wise: Well, he has daemon in his name, however, that is fluff, not rules.

rules wise: All daemons as clearly stated as such by the special rule.


So its simple really.
Do the rules call a CSM daemon prince a daemon?
Nope, he is there for just a lord with gifts.

The C: Daemons one though is a daemon as his/her special rules state it.

Again, just because he has a special rule called Dæmon, doesn't mean that he is considered a Dæmon by the Dæmonhunters rules.

Didi I mention your name still breaks on Firefox? D:

OMG! QUICK! HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT THE WORD "IS" MEANS, RAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I find it hilarious you constantly attack people who advocate RaW as being unreasonable and crazy, try and claim the RaW is different to the rules, yet you think it's ok to say "I've seen nothing in the rules that tells me which is which so how do I know?". Yes, we are the unreasonable ones. </sarcasm>

The fact is, the Dæmonhunter rules that call for Dæmons have a VERY Specific list of what a Dæmon is. Anything not on the list is not affected by those rules. If you don't like it make a house rule. The RAW is 110% clear. Likewise, another example is a Space Wolves Runic Staff, that wounds Dæmons on a 2+, but never tells you what Dæmons are, so never actually works. That is RaW. That is the Rules.

My point was your position is becoming more and more untennable. You claim you can only "know" what you are told. Yet without being told you claim you know what is rules and what is fluff. So even by your own principals you are being inconsistent.

Granted I don't know the daemonhuter's codex well enough to argue what is considered a Daemon for their special rule and I was going more along the lines of the SW codex and runic weapons.

If the Daemon hunters codex has a list of what counts then sure only what is on that list is effected.

FlingitNow wrote:If the Daemon hunters codex has a list of what counts then sure only what is on that list is effected.

It does. By strict RAW, Daemon Princes aren't included, as they aren't on the list. Some players do choose to play it as thought they are, though... for one of two reasons. The first being that the unit is a Daemon Prince, and the second being that the DH list does include Lords with excessive Wargear or Daemonic Stature... which were the things that made Chaos Lords into Daemon Princes at the time the DH codex was written.

This is why RAW don't work... its also why GW need to tighten their game, why people play warmachine, and why TO's need to be sensible.

*It also is the cause of AIDS, fundementalism, and monkey poo.

This is why I play Tau, not some outdated army.

Anyways, if the Daemonhunters have a specific list of what they call a Daemon, then that's what you gotta go by.

If they don't, then it would be anyone with the Daemon rule.

Why it would effect CSM Daemon Princes but not the Codex: Daemons Daemon Prince, fluff wise, is beyond me. Maybe the CSM Daemon Prince hasn't been one as long as the Codex: Daemon ones, so tthe CSM Daemon Princes are still enough CSM to not be full Daemon.

It does. By strict RAW, Daemon Princes aren't included, as they aren't on the list. Some players do choose to play it as thought they are, though... for one of two reasons. The first being that the unit is a Daemon Prince, and the second being that the DH list does include Lords with excessive Wargear or Daemonic Stature... which were the things that made Chaos Lords into Daemon Princes at the time the DH codex was written.

Thank you very enlightening and brings me back to my previous veiw that daemons should count.

The thing is that RAW actually do work, even if some rules might cross-reference each other and some situations should be avoided since they tend to produce endless loops. Actually playing the game is a matter of mutually agreeing on which RAW works for both players and which rules do not, unless you're in a tourney at which point it's a matter of what works for the TOs.

The thing with this situation is that it's covered by RAW (daemonhunters codex must specify it's a daemon or each other army must explicitly say it's a daemon, although that's really cutting it since it's a codex-specific rule - name isn't really enough, since the Eldar army really isn't made up of birds and insects, honestly) and it's covered by the main rules FAQ (namely that if a rule in an out-dated codex seem to refer to nothing or doesn't seem to work, well... then it doesn't work.)

So, as far as YMDC (or rather how the rules work), well, Gwar! is right, like it or not. Play it how it makes sense if both you and your opponent agree, though.

Ummmmm I have been playing Chaos since Rouge Trader and this topic of is a Demon Prince a Demon?

1) Chaos Lord favored by one of the 4 Gods, given gifts to be a possessed hero in the Chaos army. Yes Demon.

2) Codex expresses he is a Demon (Demon Prince).

3) Besides he is nothing more than a HQ choice as a special hero, not that I like what GW has done to the DP char. This char used to be a very tough foe to face with all kinds of options, but now he has become a fluff bunny for chaos.

LordWynne wrote:Ummmmm I have been playing Chaos since Rouge Trader and this topic of is a Demon Prince a Demon?

And I have been playing Space Wolves since 2nd edition, Orks since 4th and Eldar (on Vassal) since 5th. What's your point?

1) Chaos Lord favored by one of the 4 Gods, given gifts to be a possessed hero in the Chaos army. Yes Demon.

Please give a page reference to the rule that says this.

2) Codex expresses he is a Demon (Demon Prince).

Please give a page reference to the rule that says this.

To anser all your questions in one book,.....buy a Realms of Chaos book and read it if you can read Space Puppy. Maybe that keg of beer is again blurring your memory and eyes.

LordWynne wrote:To anser all your questions in one book,.....buy a Realms of Chaos book and read it if you can read Space Puppy. Maybe that keg of beer is again blurring your memory and eyes.

Is that a codex? I am pretty sure it isn't...

LordWynne wrote:buy a Realms of Chaos book and read it if you can read Space Puppy.

This sort of comment is a great way to cut short your time on the forums.


Books from previous editions of the game are not a valid source of rules for this edition. It's fine if you want to use it as a guide for your own games, but that's about all.

LordWynne wrote:To anser all your questions in one book,.....buy a Realms of Chaos book and read it if you can read Space Puppy. Maybe that keg of beer is again blurring your memory and eyes.

You actually need to post a reference page, not just saying read this. Since the CSM Daemon Prince does not have the Daemon Special Rule, he is not a Daemon for all intents and purposes of abilities/wargear affecting Daemons.

Realms of Chaos is a codex, its also full of interesting information as to why so many demons are in the WH40k universe. I bought it around 2nd edition and there were 2 books discribing all 4 gods and the undivided. A huge history about verious chaos chapters, demons, battles and use of everything Chaos has and uses in battle.

LordWynne wrote:Realms of Chaos is a codex, its also full of interesting information as to why so many demons are in the WH40k universe. I bought it around 2nd edition and there were 2 books discribing all 4 gods and the undivided. A huge history about verious chaos chapters, demons, battles and use of everything Chaos has and uses in battle.

Yes, Realms of Chaos is a codex, but it is outdated and does not pertain to this edition.

LordWynne wrote:Realms of Chaos is a codex, its also full of interesting information as to why so many demons are in the WH40k universe. I bought it around 2nd edition and there were 2 books discribing all 4 gods and the undivided. A huge history about verious chaos chapters, demons, battles and use of everything Chaos has and uses in battle.

And is it a current codex? No.

This seems to be quite a reoccurring topic.

One thing I like to point out is that, from Daemonhunter's perspective, there are two important lists:

1.) The list of things that are Daemons, and that the DH get bonuses against.
2.) The list of things that benefit from the "Daemonic Infestation" rule, which balances out the bonuses against list #1. (or even how to play this rule, since it's from 4th)

People like to argue RAW and RAI and fluff and all sorts of other things to cram as many things into list #1 in order to get benefits all the time. However, they never remember to figure out what fits into list #2 to make sure things are balanced. This is why I'm more than happy to just pretty much ignore all the benefits against daemons until a new codex comes out. Having Psycannons goes a long way against most daemon armies anyway, since they have a decent number of things with only invuln saves. (Unrelated: an upgrade to make the Psycannons AP 3 would be amazing, though. They seem like more expensive heavy bolters against anything with an actual save)