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.

daedalus-templarius wrote:/facepalm

Whatever you say guys. I mean, its fine if you want to say "since my old rules codex Daemon Prince is terrible, how about you let me get away with your guys not having preferred enemy against him?" That sounds pretty reasonable to me.

I wasn't being serious with that line, hence the emoticon.

Everything in the Daemons of Chaos Codex is a Daemon.
The Avatar is stated in it's rule set as being a Daemon.
Lesser and Greater Daemons in the Chaos Space Marine Codex are Daemons
The Unit that is the 'Daemon Prince' in both the Daemons of Chaos book and Chaos Space Marine book is a Daemon.

Possessed, Defilers and the like are debatable. They contain the essence of a Daemon inside them, so the Grey Knights, using a large amount of Psyker based attacks should be able to target the Daemon inside them. However, the unit is still not and actual Warp-spawned creature, which is why it is debatable.

The only real way this will be cleared up is in the FAQ. Just now, you either roll with the everything that is a Daemon in name, description, what the entity actually is, basically the list above, are all affected by Preferred Enemy : Daemons option, or you go with the other which is everything that is specified with a rule to be a Daemon, which is The Avatar and everything in the Daemons of Chaos book is affected by the Grey Knights rule, but the summoned Daemons in the Chaos Space Marine book aren't.

iproxtaco wrote:The Unit that is the 'Daemon Prince' in ..... .......Chaos Space Marine book is a Daemon.

Citation needed.

No, seriously. An actual rule would be good. Not fluff (that is contradictory in and of itself, as well as being not a rule), just a rule.

Not a lot to ask for.

iproxtaco wrote:....However, the unit is still not and actual Warp-spawned creature, which is why it is debatable.

Neither is a Daemon Prince. It is a once-mortal who has been granted immense amounts of power. But it still isnt a daemon. You dont need to summon a Chaos Marine daemon prince, and they are not unstable.

If you decide that a defiler is not a daemon as it is not "warp spawned", then neither is a chaos marine DP. Some consistency from the flluff-ists would be good.

Chaos Space Marine Codex p32 -

The ultimate ambition of all Champions of Chaos is to achieve daemonhood.

"Daemonhood" To be a Daemon.
The unit in the Chaos Space Marines Codex has therefore been made a Daemon, like the Summoned Daemons.

Aren't Daemon Princes, Nurglings, and Greater and Lesser Daemons listed in the first sentence of the "Daemon Summoning" rule in the Chaos SM codex? Something like:

"unlike Daemon Princes and Nurglings, Greater and Lesser Daemons must be summoned to the battlefield ..."

As far as I'm aware, that means the Chaos Space Marine codex does refer to Daemon Princes as daemons in the rules section, which is in addition to any fluff.

SJ

Iprox - so, still lacking a rule.

You quoted fluff. Again. Also adding -hood does not automatically make you the "thing" - see brotherhood. You are not actually brothers.

Anyone in a brotherhood would be a brother to every other member of the brotherhood. Them not being brothers by blood comes from the different meanings of "brother".

Again I will state that if GW wanted anything in the CSM codex to be a daemon they would have stated it, possessed have a special rule of Daemonkin, the Avatar that came out 11 months before the CSM codex has the Daemon rule, and C:CD has the Daemon rule.

As GW in the past has made Proffered Enemy = Orks they meant everything in the Ork codex So it would be safe to assume that they meant everything in the Daemons codes

rest of this post has been removed for being needlessly inflammatory.

Reds8n

Dr_Chin wrote:Again I will state that if GW wanted anything in the CSM codex to be a daemon they would have stated it, possessed have a special rule of Daemonkin, the Avatar that came out 11 months before the CSM codex has the Daemon rule, and C:CD has the Daemon rule.

As GW in the past has made Proffered Enemy = Orks they meant everything in the Ork codex So it would be safe to assume that they meant everything in the Daemons codes so GK players please go crush all the 13 year old boys at your LGS with your mediocre GK list. Because we call know that GK’s make a mediocre player in to a great player vs. anything with Daemons.

Is this supposed to be sarcasm? Just because they have preferred enemy does not instantly make one army better than the other. The Black Templar can get PE against anyone they play (with the right vow) and you don't see many people crying foul at that.

Why yes sir it is. Also Black Templar is not a over powered army!

Jidmah- they would be LIKE a brother.

A daemon prince is "like" a daemon, but isnt a daemon in a number of critical ways. THis is covered extensively in the fluff, but as we know - fluff really isnt rules.

jeffersonian000 wrote:Aren't Daemon Princes, Nurglings, and Greater and Lesser Daemons listed in the first sentence of the "Daemon Summoning" rule in the Chaos SM codex? Something like:

"unlike Daemon Princes and Nurglings, Greater and Lesser Daemons must be summoned to the battlefield ..."

As far as I'm aware, that means the Chaos Space Marine codex does refer to Daemon Princes as daemons in the rules section, which is in addition to any fluff.

SJ

Nurglings don't exist anymore for CSM so if anything you're thinking of the previous CSM codex.

The current one states that Greater and Lesser Daemons must be summoned onto the battlefield using champions and icons respectively and that units teleporting in can likewise use icons, but not units that are flying (ie daemon princes or raptors). Doesn't make any impact on this debate.

Now as far as this debate goes, I'm very curious to see this get FAQ'd at some point but this is my logic behind it all: going by strict RAW it is clear that the benefit only relates to C: D and the Avatar. The point raised about Preferred Enemy: Race only validates the ruling IMO. In this case it states the race you have preferred enemy against is Daemons. That race is represented with Codex: Daemons. In the case of the Avatar, that unit has a specific extra rule including him as being part of that race.

Counter example: If you had Preferred Enemy: Eldar, would you suggest you also get it against Dark Eldar Harlequinns, RAW?

That was my point....

morgendonner wrote:

jeffersonian000 wrote:Aren't Daemon Princes, Nurglings, and Greater and Lesser Daemons listed in the first sentence of the "Daemon Summoning" rule in the Chaos SM codex? Something like:

"unlike Daemon Princes and Nurglings, Greater and Lesser Daemons must be summoned to the battlefield ..."

As far as I'm aware, that means the Chaos Space Marine codex does refer to Daemon Princes as daemons in the rules section, which is in addition to any fluff.

SJ

Nurglings don't exist anymore for CSM so if anything you're thinking of the previous CSM codex.

The current one states that Greater and Lesser Daemons must be summoned onto the battlefield using champions and icons respectively and that units teleporting in can likewise use icons, but not units that are flying (ie daemon princes or raptors). Doesn't make any impact on this debate.

Now as far as this debate goes, I'm very curious to see this get FAQ'd at some point but this is my logic behind it all: going by strict RAW it is clear that the benefit only relates to C: D and the Avatar. The point raised about Preferred Enemy: Race only validates the ruling IMO. In this case it states the race you have preferred enemy against is Daemons. That race is represented with Codex: Daemons. In the case of the Avatar, that unit has a specific extra rule including him as being part of that race.

Counter example: If you had Preferred Enemy: Eldar, would you suggest you also get it against Dark Eldar Harlequinns, RAW?

Your statement goes against RAW, as the CSM codex includes rules which states that the Lesser and Greater Daemons are, well, Daemons. The Preferred Enemy rule on pg 75 of the rulebook does not mention race:

Some warriors are able to predict the moves of the enemies they are used to fighting. In close combat, they have developed special techniques that enable them to counter such enemies more effectively. Such troops can always re-roll their rolls to hit in close combat against their preferred enemy. This ability does not work when attacking vehicles without a Weapon Skill characteristic.

By requiring the "Daemon" rule, you are altering the Preferred Enemy rule to state that if such a rule does not exist on the unit/model, then you don't get the bonus.

A few posts have been removed and/or edited. Whilst a degree of conversational latitude is fine and dandy, there is no point in adding inflammatory or insulting remarks. This doesn't help prove one's point in any way.It would be much groovier if members could avoid doing so in the future. Thanks

nobody - Fine, then it only affects COdex: Daemons

Same as preferred enemy Orks affects just codex: Orks, and preferred enemy: Eldar would only affect units in codex Eldar, and not DE Harlequins.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Daedalus - stating, baldly, that people have ulterior motives is not being polite.

Where did I do this? What ulterior motive would someone have? People in this thread have said C:CSM Daemon Princes need all the help they can get, so therefore they shouldn't allow GKs to have Preferred Enemy against them. Stating it doesn't really make it an ulterior motive.

What does daemonhood mean? Oh wait!" IT means you were a normal mortal who has gained incredible daemon-like powers! Are you unstable, like daemons are known to be? No. Do you require someone to summon you to battle, like all daemons? ......erm, no!

Daemon princes in the chaos marine codex are NOT daemons, no matter how much you wish they were. They are the closest a mortal can get to being a daemon, but almost is not is.

This is a fluff disagreement. I say a Daemon Prince is a daemon, you don't, based on the fact it doesn't have the daemon special rule. This is fine, and in a game, I'd likely just say "whatever", and then say you're the guy who says Daemon Princes aren't daemons. I don't have the C:CSM in front of me, so maybe it would be fine, if you don't have the daemon special rule, you might not have eternal warrior either, so say hello to force weapon wounds. I don't play against any C:CSM players, so it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other at the moment. This is simply an academic discussion for me.

You also fail at using fluff (and ignoring fluff you dont like) to justify an argument.

I hope you don't mean I fail at using fluff to point out that Daemon Princes are Daemons in the fluff. I mean, Daemon Prince is pretty broad too isn't it, it doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a corrupted Space Marine. I might do a cursory search and see if I can find a Daemon Prince that wasn't a CSM first.

You were stating that everyone arguing against the CSM DP being classified was doing so in order to gain an advantage. That is insulting, as you are essentially questioning peoples integrity. You also did it in a mocking way.

No, I say it isnt a daemon for 3 reasons, and you only listed one. By fluff they arent (and sometimes are! such is the nature of fluff and why attempting to base rules on it is bogus) daemons, they arent part of the Daemons codex (which is how you define PE for EVERY OTHER RACE out there) and has no rule stating it is a daemon.

DP in the CSM book DO have Eternal Warrior.

You have - erm, one. Thats it.

I was saying "you fail" because, in using fluff to justify a rule you conveniently overlooked / ignored any fluff that contradicted your view. Willful blindness doesnt make a good argument.

A daemon prince is was and always shall be* an elevated mortal. Thats it.

So, to summarise: given people arent accepting the "xdaemon special rule, or something that has a RULE saying it is a daemon" argument, then you fall back on how PE enemy works for EVERY army: only entries in the COdex: Daemons are daemons. That's it.

*unless GW changes it, of course.

I think I did it in a mocking way, because it is difficult to not have a somewhat mocking tone when someone says a Daemon Prince isn't a Daemon(nothing to do with special rules, etc), which is effectively what I was arguing. However, this is just a fluffy argument, where I see a Daemon Prince as a Daemon. An ascended mortal, I would still see as a Daemon, in fluff.

I agree with you on it not having the "Daemon" special rule. I see where you are coming from, but for the ruling, we will just have to wait for the FAQ.


Interesting way how the Daemon Prince is actually used in the C:CSM... 50 points of daemonic upgrades? I guess I could get behind a C:CSM Daemon Prince not being affected by preferred enemy, since he is really just a Chaos Lord (although they are pretty daemon-y as well, I certainly wouldn't say they should be affected by PE).

nosferatu1001 wrote:nobody - Fine, then it only affects COdex: Daemons

Same as preferred enemy Orks affects just codex: Orks, and preferred enemy: Eldar would only affect units in codex Eldar, and not DE Harlequins.

False, the Preferred Enemy rule does not state it is on a codex by codex basis. You'll need to provide a rules quote to support that unless you are admitting to making up rules.

EDIT: The Preferred Enemy Rule is written to be very open-ended. For example, GW could release a codex where a unit has "Preferred Enemy: Walkers" and the unit would be able to get their re-rolled hits on Space Marine Dreadnoughts, Chaos Defilers, and Ork Killer Kanz.

nobody wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:nobody - Fine, then it only affects COdex: Daemons

Same as preferred enemy Orks affects just codex: Orks, and preferred enemy: Eldar would only affect units in codex Eldar, and not DE Harlequins.

False, the Preferred Enemy rule does not state it is on a codex by codex basis. You'll need to provide a rules quote to support that unless you are admitting to making up rules.

EDIT: The Preferred Enemy Rule is written to be very open-ended. For example, GW could release a codex where a unit has "Preferred Enemy: Walkers" and the unit would be able to get their re-rolled hits on Space Marine Dreadnoughts, Chaos Defilers, and Ork Killer Kanz.

Or anything that walks lol so if a space marine was in a tank IE not walking then they do not get at re-roll but if they are not in a tank IE now walking they would? that is how I would take that rule anything that walks! lol But GW never makes up rules that dont make since so this will never be a rule, OR Did they (Tank hunters?) Insert evil music here!

Then you would be VERY wrong.

nobody wrote:
EDIT: The Preferred Enemy Rule is written to be very open-ended. For example, GW could release a codex where a unit has "Preferred Enemy: Walkers" and the unit would be able to get their re-rolled hits on Space Marine Dreadnoughts, Chaos Defilers, and Ork Killer Kanz.

This is a poor example because Walkers are a specific unit type. Daemons are not. The simple fact is that by strict RAW nowhere in the CSM codex does it outline rules wise that a CSM DP is a daemon, and a unit name is not a valid claim of definition as has already been pointed out many times in this and every other GK vs CSM DP thread. Similarly I think it's bogus for anybody to think Possessed should be counted because they have a rule called "Daemonkin".

You're debate that Preferred Enemy is written to be very open-ended is your own interpretation.

And for everyone looking at this from a RaI perspective consider this: while the older DH book had a more detailed definition, that was also when CSM was the only way to field daemons (minus Avatar). CSM lost the ability to field specific named units, so as reasonable as you think it is that daemons are daemons, I think it's equally reasonable to determine that the intention was that they should not receive the penalty since they don't have the benefits of real daemons.

It was also probably left ambiguous on purpose so they didn't corner themselves as new chaos books come out and GK become outdated like they did with DH, but that's just side commentary.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:The Unit that is the 'Daemon Prince' in ..... .......Chaos Space Marine book is a Daemon.

Citation needed.

No, seriously. An actual rule would be good. Not fluff (that is contradictory in and of itself, as well as being not a rule), just a rule.

Not a lot to ask for.

iproxtaco wrote:....However, the unit is still not and actual Warp-spawned creature, which is why it is debatable.

Neither is a Daemon Prince. It is a once-mortal who has been granted immense amounts of power. But it still isnt a daemon. You dont need to summon a Chaos Marine daemon prince, and they are not unstable.

If you decide that a defiler is not a daemon as it is not "warp spawned", then neither is a chaos marine DP. Some consistency from the flluff-ists would be good.

Nos,


you are overlooking that we arn't told to use any specific rules to define what is and isn't a deamon.

the Deamon Prince isn't called a Deamon Prince for nothing.



we can't, RAW, say that its just things with the Deamon Rule as there are deamons without that rule and it wouldn't be inclusive.


for the Fluff argument, I can't see how anyone can say they arn't actually deamons in the fluff. they have been turned into proper deamons. if it wasn't then it really wouldn't be much of a reward.


a Deamon Prince doesn't need to be summoned because, with his ascention, he already has. once his original form is destroyed, he would reform in the warp and would be need to be summoned from that point on, but the original form is completely stable. but he is still deamonflesh.

Grey Templar wrote:you are overlooking that we arn't told to use any specific rules to define what is and isn't a deamon.

We are though. As is the case with other uses of Preferred Enemy, it applies to anything found in Codex: Daemons. Additionally, Avatar has a specific rule declaring itself to be a Daemon. Both are very specific answers to what defines a daemon.

That's not true though. What defines a Daemon isn't specified. There's nowhere that it says it only includes the units in Codex: Daemons of Codex, just Daemons in general, ergo. everything that is a Daemon is affected. Everything in C: DC are Daemons, The Avatar is stated as being a Daemon, Lesser and Greater Daemons in C:CSM are Daemons, the Daemon Prince is a Daemon.

Correct, which is why the Avatar gets lumped in. In a serious game if you wish to gain PE against my CSM DP, you need to show me a rule that says he's a daemon.

Where does it say that its limited to Codex Deamons and the Avatar?


the GK codex simply says Preferred Enemy: Deamons


the Preferred Enemy rule is even more vague. it just says "models with this special rule reroll misses in CC against the specified foe"


Preferred Enemy: Orks doesn't apply to everything in Codex: Orks. it applies only to orks, not Gretchin or Killa Kans. there isn't a special rule Ork to define what an Ork is. we just know what an ork is.


we supposed to just know what a deamon is. the only grey areas i see are things like Defilers and posessed vehicles.

There is no rule, like there's no rule to say Lesser and Greater Daemons are what they are. It's down to us to know what they are, Daemon Princes are stated as being mortals raised by the Chaos Gods to become Daemons.

morgendonner wrote:

nobody wrote:
EDIT: The Preferred Enemy Rule is written to be very open-ended. For example, GW could release a codex where a unit has "Preferred Enemy: Walkers" and the unit would be able to get their re-rolled hits on Space Marine Dreadnoughts, Chaos Defilers, and Ork Killer Kanz.

This is a poor example because Walkers are a specific unit type. Daemons are not. The simple fact is that by strict RAW nowhere in the CSM codex does it outline rules wise that a CSM DP is a daemon, and a unit name is not a valid claim of definition as has already been pointed out many times in this and every other GK vs CSM DP thread. Similarly I think it's bogus for anybody to think Possessed should be counted because they have a rule called "Daemonkin".

You're debate that Preferred Enemy is written to be very open-ended is your own interpretation.

And for everyone looking at this from a RaI perspective consider this: while the older DH book had a more detailed definition, that was also when CSM was the only way to field daemons (minus Avatar). CSM lost the ability to field specific named units, so as reasonable as you think it is that daemons are daemons, I think it's equally reasonable to determine that the intention was that they should not receive the penalty since they don't have the benefits of real daemons.

It was also probably left ambiguous on purpose so they didn't corner themselves as new chaos books come out and GK become outdated like they did with DH, but that's just side commentary.

The reason I provided the example was due to people arguing that it was on a race by race (rather, codex by codex) basis. If you are going to state that it is not open-ended, you will need to provide rules quotes to back it up.