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've never liked assault after DS for guys with a 6" charge range anyway. It promotes stupid risky Deep Strikes that will make or break the game, and lots of whining when it doesn't work.

Giving them all Relic blades is simpler, but also a seriously huge power beef, especially with assault and defensive grenades.

Though, if you're going to give them that 5+ invul to psychic gak, i'd widen it to include any daemon powers that cause wounds, otherwise its just a crappier version of the sisters power.

though honestly they don't need the anti psychic crap anymore as nothing daemons do is psychic, and the psychic hood is pretty much a required purchase already. (though it hsould be nerfed in line with the SM codex obviously)

ferrous wrote:To asmodeus complaints about the pt cost: You do realize that currently 5 PAGKs are 150, so its really only a 30 pt savings. And most of that is from the very overpriced justicar (he's more expensive than a GKT right now!)
To making the Shroud == night fighting, its overpowered IMHO.

Yeah for 5 of them. Which is more balanced of a point cost for what they get.

Shrouding isn't that great. I play Emperor's Children, Eldar and Dark Eldar by the time I get close enough to shoot you, out of my 4-6 squads, rarely can one not shoot. I think in all the games I've played grey nights, which is around 20 or so (used to have a Grey Knight player in my old gaming club), I've not been able to shoot at Grey Knights maybe twice.

ferrous wrote:I've never understood why the Justicar is 50 pts? shouldn't he be cheaper than a GKT? Or start with artificer armor standard?

I'm also against losing the NFW, as its kind of the iconic grey knight weapon, even if slightly confusing, they could just change the weapon names slightly per PAGK GKT usage.

NW = +2 str
NPW = +2 str power weapon
NFW = +2 str force weapon

I like what you've done with the Nemesis Weapons. I agree the Justicar is overcosted. At most, I think he should be +15 pts. Artificer armor I think is gonna be a waste of points and shouldn't even be offered as wargear for the Justicar. He's just a squad leader.

IMO, the only difference between PA GK and GKT should be the Armour.

That way, the GK player chooses between (better) Sv2+/5++ and (cheaper & quicker) Sv3+.

ferrous wrote:I've never liked assault after DS for guys with a 6" charge range anyway.

Giving them all Relic blades is simpler, but also a seriously huge power beef, especially with assault and defensive grenades.

Though, if you're going to give them that 5+ invul to psychic gak, i'd widen it to include any daemon powers that cause wounds, otherwise its just a crappier version of the sisters power.

though honestly they don't need the anti psychic crap anymore as nothing daemons do is psychic, and the psychic hood is pretty much a required purchase already. (though it hsould be nerfed in line with the SM codex obviously)

The DS risk could be managed with Teleport Homers. And enemy Icons...

Well, if you look at the models, they all have Relic Blades, and the grenades are largely "FREE" anyways. So this is a good, simple fit that is effective. And really, GK are HtH guys, so design and cost appropriately. If you need gunners, you take Sternguard as Deathwatch. So make GK as "extreme" HtH like Death Company, and it's OK.

The problem with the models is that they're all modeled with Psychic Hoods. So some kind of effect is good. Note that GKT already have 5+I, so it's only the PA GK who gain some small effect. It's a feel-good thing that doesn't drive cost.

I disagree with you John. They've never been CC monsters, they are unlike everyone else, in that they are very good at anti-infantry shooting, and very good at CC. But not the best at either, so you end up changing your tactics depending on who you fight, doing alot of shooting vs those who have better melee, and doing alot of melee vs though who outgun you.


Re Asmo & Shroud: I was referring to changing it to night fighting range, which is ..what 2d6 x 3?(avg 21) its a bit nasty then, as you can stand at the edge with someone and blast them with psycannons and storm bolters and chances are very great that they will not return fire. I agree that as it stands now, its fairly useless and rarely comes up except against the conversion beamer. Which is why i wanted 2d6x4, for a max of 48, avg of 28. (or 4d6x2 which is equivalent but more gradient)

Casper wrote:To me thats not overpowering GK expecially if it is only against deamons (their deamonhunters for a reason).

This isn't directed entirely at you Casper but, this quote just doesn't make any sense to me. For many players that suggest GKs should be powerful against daemons, think a bit about what that actual means.

Did you build a GKs army because you wanted to play fluffy games against daemons? Because if you advocate GKs being more powerful than daemons, you are dooming yourself to rarely getting a game in against daemons. If the game is stacked against a daemon player he is more than likely to not bother playing. Its not a case of him being a sore loser its just why would anyone want to go through all the trouble of moving his models around in a game that he has no hope of winning?

If you have played under the interpretation of the new chaos codex daemons counting as daemons in the daemon hunter codex, and then scrapped the sustained assault rules you would not say that they are powerful enough as it is. Such a battle is almost always a loss for the daemons.

Even if they were "powerful enough" what kind of statement is that? Daemons get no benefits against GKs that they don't get against every race. The fact that daemons have eternal warrior on every model isn't a gift for the anti-daemon rules GKs have, its a benefit that is built into their cost for use against all races. Its no different to space marines having power armour.

I do not think people would be aligned this way if for example there was a "Space Marine Hunter Codex" and that army had special rules that specifically worked only against space marines, such as making all space marines have to make difficult terrain checks to assault them. People wouldn't be saying, oh well its ok because they are suppose to be space marine hunters! They'd be saying why the hell is there whole armies that work like rock paper scissors?


In regards to the comments about sustained assault. I have just today received a reply from GW about some questions I asked them about it.

The questions I sent and the replies below are,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Are daemons from the chaos daemons codex intended to be amongst the 'daemon' terminology list as described on page 20?

GW: Yes.

2. If so then what benefits do I receive as daemons to counterbalance the many advantages that my friends gets against my army? (forcing me through diff terrain on charges being the most devastating to me) Seeing as sustained assault is an old ruling from 4th edition which no longer exists?

GW: Due to the fact that it was written a couple of editions ago, we suggest that you totally ignore the Daemonic Infestation rule. It would require a great deal of rewording to actually work properly.

3. When will this issue be FAQ'ed? Seeing as it does not seem like a new codex will arrive anytime soon.

We do not know.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Basically this is the way me and a lot of people I know have been playing since the daemon codex came out and all I have discovered through the many games I have played is that this is a messed up interpretation that stacks the rules unfairly against the daemons.

We have to remember how different the new Chaos daemons are to the old daemons in the chaos space marine codex. Back in the day you could probably expect a Chaos space marine player to field a few daemons, but not a whole army of them. If a GK has a special rule against daemons, then it only stands that if there are more daemons then that rule becomes more powerful.

Some people are suggesting to continue using Sustained assault into 5th edition. That in itself causes some problems. The new Chaos Daemons arrive (via deep strike). The whole codex is balanced on that fact. To make them walk on from their board edge towards the end of the game after they just died to GK shooting who have anti-daemon rules only to suffer the same fate again is not much of a benefit. Daemons are for the most part an assault based army, footslogging them across the board is not the best thing for

As unhelpful as the reply from GW was its clear to see they too do not see the daemonic infestation rule as being a silver bullet to this problem. He clearly states that it would require a great deal of reworking to work properly. But! at the same time we should remember what GW actually wrote in the Daemon Hunters codex when they included Daemonic Infestation. Something along the lines of "To offset the "considerable" advantages that GK's get against daemons were giving them this rule". The used the word "considerable advantages" so you can be sure that they meant to stack the stakes against daemons.

With all this said I will just summarize something. Many of you here are trying to find the right price to cost GK's and the right rules to give them. Everything I have said is important because you need to carefully decide what you will give to daemons to offset GKs hating on them. Giving daemons something is the only solution aside from giving the GK's nothing against daemons. To give the GKs anti-daemon rules and then cost them for it is folly. A 35pt GK should be worth 35pts against every race, not just against daemons.

Sorry about the length of this post lol

The problem is that GK are unfocused and generally taken in armies that have more than adequate shooting. Ergo, expensive GK are redundant.

But, as the models have these huge, fancy CCWs, then the obvious thing is to make them good at CC. Now, they serve a purpose and can be take for a reason.

Ok I know the sustained attack think is gone but what about this. Not saying its a fix all problem but what about allowing deamon unites to deep strike back in the next turn to the original location they first landed. They come in on a roll of a 3+ and automatically the turn after that. Or they could just land wherever. I have never played deamons or a deamon army so all of you who do tell me if you think this would be a good benefit to deamon. Also once they come back onto the board they are no longer able to hold objectives they can contest them and they are not worth kill points.

Neomaul ill let you in on a secret - i dont play deamonhunters....or deamons for that matter, I just found this thread really interesting plus my brother plays them so my imput comes from playing against them mostly.

I understand your concern you can't put in special rules for 1 army and expect GW to be able to point them fairly against deamons and non deamons. (main reason they should just go 1 inquizition dex imo...)

I plan on getting hold of a deamon dex from a friend to look over to try to figure out some fair way for both armies.

My main idea with shrouding being = to nightfight was that it would work against all armies and help protect the small number of units that GK seem to suffur from (with the currently 3d6x3 i dont even flinch trying to shoot GK with my big guns as usually i'm in decent range). GK need a serious redoing to be fully competative again.

So I will ask again anyone have an idea what to give deamons in return for GK getting a few bonus's against them?

Emrab wrote:Ok I know the sustained attack think is gone but what about this. Not saying its a fix all problem but what about allowing deamon unites to deep strike back in the next turn to the original location they first landed. They come in on a roll of a 3+ and automatically the turn after that. Or they could just land wherever. I have never played deamons or a deamon army so all of you who do tell me if you think this would be a good benefit to deamon. Also once they come back onto the board they are no longer able to hold objectives they can contest them and they are not worth kill points.

So to understand this correctly, daemons wouldn't scatter?

It would be better I think if they would scatter half the distance of a normal deepstrike unit. I think that would work. However I dont have a deamon army to play againts so I cant try it out. Do you think it would work?

Casper wrote:
So I will ask again anyone have an idea what to give deamons in return for GK getting a few bonus's against them?

The only real recommendation I can provide that will make both armies balanced not just against each other but against other races is to completely remove all special rules that specifically target another army. Instead provide benefits that work against all armies but maybe slightly better against daemons. Psycannons are a great example of this.

If your desperate to convert some of the anti-daemon fluff that exists in the GKs background into actual rules you should remember that there is a lot of fluff for all races that gets ignored in the pursuit of a balanced and fun game.

Emrab wrote:It would be better I think if they would scatter half the distance of a normal deepstrike unit. I think that would work. However I dont have a deamon army to play againts so I cant try it out. Do you think it would work?

I think that would work but I also think it could be greatly advantageous to the daemon player that makes those risky deepstrikes.

NeoMaul wrote:The only real recommendation I can provide that will make both armies balanced not just against each other but against other races is to completely remove all special rules that specifically target another army. Instead provide benefits that work against all armies but maybe slightly better against daemons. Psycannons are a great example of this.

I think this is one of the best ideas yet.

NeoMaul wrote:If your desperate to convert some of the anti-daemon fluff that exists in the GKs background into actual rules you should remember that there is a lot of fluff for all races that gets ignored in the pursuit of a balanced and fun game.

QFT.

Err, no offense, but Daemons vs GK isn't that bad of a fight, even with mystics, its a pretty decent game if both players have good lists. The worst it can get is if someone fully kits out a GKGM with book, incense and hammer, and he's a big giant pointsink that will die to one hit from a BT. Granted if the BT charges the GKGM he'll go at 1 iniative and probably get stun-locked, but uhm, wtf would the BT charge the GKGM, plently of other juicy targets.

Sustained attack is gone, boo hoo, cry me a river. So is instability checks, and all daemon special powers are not psychic attacks. That means a great deal of GK psychic powers are useless and so is the Aegis, which would normally protect the GK from the great majority of dirty shooting from the DPs.

That really only leaves a few things GK have: Psycannons, Mystics, Rites and some expensive wargear. Rites is easily countered with Offensive grenades, which all the slaanesh have, Psycannons are countered with iron hide. Mystics are the real pain, and just need some revisions (limiting them to firing on DS units only up to the number of mystics in the squad might help, ex: 1 mystic means you can only shoot at one squad arriving by DS that turn )

I'm fine with losing Rites or modifying it to effect everyone, as Mystics and Psycannons are actually useful versus multiple races but happen to be good vs daemons.


On a separate note JohnDD seems to want to use them as something that is allied in from other codices. This is a mistake, and the game will never be balanced well with cross codex alliances (especially with ones that don't get updated once every five years), and i think it should be phased out, be a stand alone dex, or go home.

ferrous wrote:
Sustained attack is gone, boo hoo, cry me a river. So is instability checks, and all daemon special powers are not psychic attacks. That means a great deal of GK psychic powers are useless and so is the Aegis, which would normally protect the GK from the great majority of dirty shooting from the DPs.

What are you even talking about? The loss of instability checks? Daemon special powers are normal attacks? These things aren't advantages Daemons get against GKs they are the fundamental abilities of the chaos daemon army. The chaos daemons codex has been priced accordingly for these abilities against all races.

ferrous wrote:Err, no offense, but Daemons vs GK isn't that bad of a fight, even with mystics, its a pretty decent game if both players have good lists. The worst it can get is if someone fully kits out a GKGM with book, incense and hammer, and he's a big giant pointsink that will die to one hit from a BT. Granted if the BT charges the GKGM he'll go at 1 iniative and probably get stun-locked, but uhm, wtf would the BT charge the GKGM, plently of other juicy targets.

Sustained attack is gone, boo hoo, cry me a river. So is instability checks, and all daemon special powers are not psychic attacks. That means a great deal of GK psychic powers are useless and so is the Aegis, which would normally protect the GK from the great majority of dirty shooting from the DPs.

That really only leaves a few things GK have: Psycannons, Mystics, Rites and some expensive wargear. Rites is easily countered with Offensive grenades, which all the slaanesh have, Psycannons are countered with iron hide. Mystics are the real pain, and just need some revisions (limiting them to firing on DS units only up to the number of mystics in the squad might help, ex: 1 mystic means you can only shoot at one squad arriving by DS that turn )

I'm fine with losing Rites or modifying it to effect everyone, as Mystics and Psycannons are actually useful versus multiple races but happen to be good vs daemons.


On a separate note JohnDD seems to want to use them as something that is allied in from other codices. This is a mistake, and the game will never be balanced well with cross codex alliances (especially with ones that don't get updated once every five years), and i think it should be phased out, be a stand alone dex, or go home.

Even better than the last.

I think I love you.

Which Ferrous gets back to the point I was trying to make earlier. Drop Rites, tweak the NFW (which to me is the defining part of GK's.) And then adjust the other rules so that they are balanced against most armies with maybe a slight inclination against daemons.

For example as I said prevously Justicars and GK's can force a reroll on invuln instead of using power weapons. Helpful against everyone more so against Daemons.

Deamonhammer limited to GKGM, and maybe take away the daemon limit, but strike at half initiative, or double the cost and let it function as it was?

Also against Daemons why is everyone keep saying give the GKGM a Force Weapon. It's useless, while the DH codex maybe written in such a way that it can be argued that they can "instantly slain" even Eternal Warrior models. It's very clear from the current trend that this won't be the case in a new dex.

So why give the already expensive GKGM a weapon that isn't even effective for it's cost, against the units that according to fluff he should specialize against?

Its just me but I think that Justicars should get a power wep. If SM sargents can get them why cant justicars have them.

NeoMaul wrote:

What are you even talking about? The loss of instability checks? Daemon special powers are normal attacks? These things aren't advantages Daemons get against GKs they are the fundamental abilities of the chaos daemon army. The chaos daemons codex has been priced accordingly for these abilities against all races.

Previously, Daemon special powers were psychic, they had to take psychic tests, etc. Which meant the Aegis would protect GKs from their powers somewhat, and instability was a test Daemons had to take every turn, and get wounded if they didn't make it, GKs had some psychic powers that greatly effected their instability, and some units that lower their leadership, which is now all pointless. Basically, Daemons no longer need the sustained attack rule, as GKs lost several of their bonuses versus daemons evening out the mix quite a bit, with the only real holdover bonus being the Rites-difficult terrain test thing and some expensive wargear that only works vs daemons.

But more importantly, i think just about everyone is in agreement, that to make GKs a viable codex, its more important to do away with special rules and just give the units abilities and equipment that works well versus daemons, but not specifically so. Mystics and Psycannons are in this camp, and i don't really think they need all that much more, except for maybe a few changes in general that will help them out overall.

To Caleth: Daemonhammers are limited to one per army, thats good enough limitation as is, i'd just make it strike at intiative or simultaneous vs all monstrous creatures instead of just Daemons. I think all force weapons should've been tweaked to do an additional wound instead of slay outright against eternal warrior, they can do that specifically for the DH codex i suppose.

To Emrab: I'm not advocating no power weapon, what I'm suggesting is a choice in the turn you assault. Up against a bloodletter, great use the PW. Up against a 2+ invul *cough* gazghull *cough* great force that reroll. But you can't do both the same turn.

Typically it's one person per squad that can do this, unless its the GKTs. I think that's pretty reasonable.

To Ferrous: If Force Weapon interacted with Eternal Warrior that way I wouldn't mind it. As it stands though unless you go for *imho* cheesing around the intent of EW, with a Very rigid RAW interpretation. It is a usless ability.

Now if we took the idea suggested of a Nemesis Weapon, a Nemesis Power Weapon, and a Nemesis Force Weapon, and then wrote that specific caveat.

I like simplifying it that way, GK's NW, Justicar up NPW, and NFW for the GKGM that can cause an extra wound if the Model is an EW. Must becareful how you word it or it can mess up how it interacts with Gargantuan Creatures in Apoc.

ferrous wrote:On a separate note JohnDD seems to want to use them as something that is allied in from other codices. This is a mistake, and the game will never be balanced well with cross codex alliances (especially with ones that don't get updated once every five years), and i think it should be phased out, be a stand alone dex, or go home.

I believe that a standalone Sisters Codex doesn't need anything Inquisitional grafted on, nor Inducted forces, nor Allies. That means Sisters returns to being a clean "base" Codex, as in 2E and 3E.

Heroes of the Imperium still need a home for Inquisitors & their Retinues, Assassins, Stormtroopers, along with the exceedingly rare specialists like Deathwatch and Grey Knights from the WH & DH books. The problem is that this doesn't necessarily make for a particularly effective fighting force, nor does it cater to the collections or mixed play that has developed over the years. I believe that GK should be playable, as part of a pure Inquisition force.

Thus, I see HotI returning as C: Inquisition and picking up all of the miscellaneous stuff, while retaining some more tightly-limited Allies rules (i.e. 0-1 HQ, 0-1 Elite), along with incorporating much more limited (i.e. generic) Inducted Guard / Marines. With these kinds of restrictions, the balance and theme problems basically disappears because you simply can't restructure the Allied army with cheap Scoring Storms or other Allied stuff.

JohnDD I think the fact that you brought up stormtroopers a good thing. They are cheep and very nice as long and you have them mounted an a chrimera. I think they are a must keep for when the new codex comes out.

ferrous wrote:

NeoMaul wrote:

What are you even talking about? The loss of instability checks? Daemon special powers are normal attacks? These things aren't advantages Daemons get against GKs they are the fundamental abilities of the chaos daemon army. The chaos daemons codex has been priced accordingly for these abilities against all races.

Previously, Daemon special powers were psychic, they had to take psychic tests, etc. Which meant the Aegis would protect GKs from their powers somewhat, and instability was a test Daemons had to take every turn, and get wounded if they didn't make it, GKs had some psychic powers that greatly effected their instability, and some units that lower their leadership, which is now all pointless. Basically, Daemons no longer need the sustained attack rule, as GKs lost several of their bonuses versus daemons evening out the mix quite a bit, with the only real holdover bonus being the Rites-difficult terrain test thing and some expensive wargear that only works vs daemons.

I know how the old daemon rules worked, I was baffled by your claim that somehow the change in daemons made them more powerful against GKs specifically and that therefore justified not giving them anything for the anti-daemon rules that remained, Rites being one of which is the most devastating. The change didn't make daemons more powerful against GKs, GW built a whole new army that in itself is balanced for the points it costs. Losing instability for fearless doesn't balance the fact that there still exists rules that hate on daemons. Fearless is costed into their points.

Basically, GKs get bonuses against daemons and daemons get nothing against GKs but thats ok because its not as much of an advantage as before?

I have to disagree and say, Rites of all the rules is the most disadvantageous rule for daemons, which are essentially an assault based army.

Hey idea. Why not just give the GK's preferred enemy deamons.

edit: or counter attack?

Emrab wrote:Hey idea. Why not just give the GK's preferred enemy deamons.

edit: or counter attack?

[[Smack]]

Ok I had just played a game and that came up as a very simple solution and i couldnt remember if it had been shot down before or not.

PE: Daemons was shot down pretty early.

There are two problems:
1. "Daemon" isn't a keyword like "Monstrous Creature", leading to the wonkiness that we have with the current DH Codex definition of "Daemon" not including anything from C: Daemons...

2. Costing for PE: Daemons makes GK too expensive for normal play, while not costing for it makes them too good against Daemons. Adding Sustained Attack as a "balance" only makes things worse, because if Sustained Attack properly balances for PE: Daemons, then you might as well drop both rules. and keep things simple.

NeoMaul wrote:
Basically, GKs get bonuses against daemons and daemons get nothing against GKs but thats ok because its not as much of an advantage as before?

I have to disagree and say, Rites of all the rules is the most disadvantageous rule for daemons, which are essentially an assault based army.

Are you familiar with codex power creep? Its fairly obvious that the new Daemon Codex is more powerful than an very old DH codex. An easy 1:1 example is the space marine codex, rhinos drop to 35 pts, storm shields increase to 3++ saves, similiar things have happened to the daemon codex, its just a bit harder to see because it didn't have a codex all its own previously to compare to, and having half a good chunk of the GK anti-daemon arsenal now worthless on top of being an older codex puts the fight at about even considering Rites is mostly useless against slaanesh.

But i think this is pretty tangential, as we both agree that rites would change in a new codex, as we are in agreement that daemon specific rules should fall by the way side in favor of stuff that does well against daemons, but doesn't work only against daemons specifically. (Psycannons and mystics being examples.)

To JohnDD: I am in no way saying get rid of stormtroopers/inquisitors and make the codex pure GK, i am just saying get rid of Allies, as defined in the codex. When you suddenly have to balance a list if someone throws in an inquisitor from the WH codex and some sisters or decides to use space marines as a base with GK allies, things get wonky and balance is harder to establish.


Also, why the hell didn't they start to add Daemon as a keyword in the Chaos and Daemon codices? GW really should embrace the keyword system more, it allows for greater rules clarity.

GW really just needs to get a massive team working togeather and just write all of the codex's at the same time. Yes it would take longer but there would be much less confusion and make things somewhat uniform between the armies.

ferrous wrote:To JohnDD: I am in no way saying get rid of stormtroopers/inquisitors and make the codex pure GK, i am just saying get rid of Allies, as defined in the codex. When you suddenly have to balance a list if someone throws in an inquisitor from the WH codex and some sisters or decides to use space marines as a base with GK allies, things get wonky and balance is harder to establish.

OK, sorry, I kinda misunderstood you, and you kinda missed what I was suggesting. I like Allies, but in a far more limited and tightly-structured form than what we have today.

Sisters of Battle becomes a base Codex, like SM / IG, without any Allies rules.

Inquisition includes all of the "wierd" stuff from DH & WH (e.g. Arco-Flagellants), along with Storms and Assassins and such. It has discrete entries for generic Inducted Guard and generic Inducted Marines, following the generic Daemon model, with all options specified in the entry list and no external reference to C: SM or C: IG. Then Allies allow for 1 HQ and 1 Elite to be taken by an Imperial Army. I hardly see how a single HQ and single Elite can totally unbalance an otherwise balanced army list. In my case, the reason for this is not so much balance as simplicity, as, like GW, I don't worry too much about "perfect balance" per-se. If it can be "close enough", that will do just fine. I just like the idea of an Assassin helping the IG, or the occasional GK unit.

But if it bothers too much, simply limit Allies to IG only, as in, "an Imperial Guard may take up to 1 HQ and 1 Elite unit as Allies", as IG are the most in need of Allies, and the most likely to see them via Fluff.

ferrous wrote:Also, why the hell didn't they start to add Daemon as a keyword in the Chaos and Daemon codices? GW really should embrace the keyword system more, it allows for greater rules clarity.

I have no idea. For grins, try to figure out what a "Monster" is in WFB...