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 played my first games with the Daemon Codex last weekend, proxying the army to see if my gut feelings were correct. (FYI, my gut feeling was there are some extremely powerful builds in there, but that the balance between units would be critical.). After reading through the Daemon Codex numerous times, I came to the conclusion that GW actually gave good advice - a daemon army of mixed gods was utterly necessary to creating a successful army build.

I may actually write up another In Tactica article...I was that impressed by the potential of the Daemon Codex. (For those who haven't been around since older Dakka, the "In Tactica" series of articles were tactica written by a variety of people that focused on armies that were generally considered by most to be substandard: V4 Daemonhunters, V3 Guard, V3 Catachans, and V3 World Eaters).

Anyways, after numerous readings of Chaos Codex, I came up with the following theories:
#1 - Tzeentch is Fundamental. In particular, Horrors are Fundamental.
Because Tzeentch provides the only real shooting in the army (aside from a few specialty units like the Plaguefather, Khornate Death Strike, and the Soul Grinders/Daemon Princes), a solid core of Tzeentch units would be necessary in order to hit critical enemy units.

#2 - The #1 consideration of a Daemon force needs to be resiliency, or ability to absorb damage. Because only half the army appears on turn 1, its critically important that you keep those initial arrivals alive until the reinforcements begin appearing. For this reason, despite the incredible damage potential of Slaanesh units (we were playing with the V4 rules, and a local Tournament Series will continue using the V4 rules until August), their sheer fragility generally makes them a sub-optimal choice. T3 and a 5+ inv save just doesn't cut it by any stretch of the imagination.

#3 - Armies must be designed so that either half can survive the initial drop until reinforcements arrive. That also means that "front-loading" a Daemon army (say, putting all the assault units into one half) is a bad idea, because your initial deep strikes needs to be able to survive and cause damage until reinforcements arrive, regardless of what the dice say when you roll for daemonic assault. Which led me to the following connclusions. Essentially, you need to assume that either force could be the first ones deployed.

So when I looked at the units:
Greater Daemons - honestly, these all looked fine to me. Personally, I used the Lord of Change (because of the shooting abilities) but as I looked at it, every GD seemed worthwhile.

Heralds - Every one looked good, except Slaaneshii daemons. The Pavane almost made me look at them some more, but t he T3 plus the inability to join any other units except other T3 units seemed like a deal-breaker for me. The only possible exception I looked at was the Herald on a Seeker /w Fiends daemons. But T4 still isn't much to write home about.

Elites - Pricy, but potentially worth the cost. I was particularly struck by the Flamers of Tzeentch and the Bloodcrushers of Khorne. While expensive, both units seemed well-suited to dropping behind terrain, and both are reasonably resilient (Flamers because of their ability to hide and move out 12", and Bloodcrushers due to the T5, W2.

Troops - Bloodletters and Slaaneshii Daemons really didn't excite me. Bloodletters hit really hard, but having their only save be a 5+ Inv seemed to make them a losing proposition. Daemonettes lacked survivability, due to their T3. I really wanted to try and find them a home...but every time I looked at them, they just screamed fragility, and unless I was going to take a really, really, large block of them, it seemed like a bad idea.

Fast Attack - To be honest, nothing in here seemed like a really good idea, with the possible exception of the Khornate Hounds. Seekers were just too vulnerable, Screamers were too specialized, and furies just got hit by the nerf-bat in a major way.

Heavy Support - Pure gold. Soul Grinders seem useless until 40K 5 comes along (When the phlegm attack no longer needs a to-hit roll) and the Daemon Princes seemed like an exceptionally good idea until 40K 5 comes along.

Special Charactes - silly good to deceptively poor, was my impression. The only one that really didn't impress me: The Masqe. Potentially ridiculously disruptive...but without the ability to join units, seemed like a an easily identified, easily killed target.

Well, does that clash with anyone elses' experience/theoryhammer?

I think you need to go back and look at that Seeker profile again.

19-24" assault range, plus you can run after you land, which can buy you time, and they throw a TON of attacks out at high initiative; I don't know that you can do without them against horde armies (read: orks).

I'll probably end up with a Tzeentch/Slaanesh mix, but that'll be a side-effect of my FB army of similar composition (though I'll need Daemon Princes, as they have no home in a FB daemon list anymore).

do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

Tacobake wrote:do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

They cannot unless they have a rule that allows it.

Aka Ork Stormboyz special character.

Stelek wrote:

Tacobake wrote:do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

They cannot unless they have a rule that allows it.

Aka Ork Stormboyz special character.

I meant in 5th.

Centurian99 wrote:I played my first games with the Daemon Codex last weekend, proxying the army to see if my gut feelings were correct. (FYI, my gut feeling was there are some extremely powerful builds in there, but that the balance between units would be critical.). After reading through the Daemon Codex numerous times, I came to the conclusion that GW actually gave good advice - a daemon army of mixed gods was utterly necessary to creating a successful army build.

I guess my question is, which demon army is balanced enough for all-comers?

Centurian99 wrote:I may actually write up another In Tactica article...I was that impressed by the potential of the Daemon Codex. (For those who haven't been around since older Dakka, the "In Tactica" series of articles were tactica written by a variety of people that focused on armies that were generally considered by most to be substandard: V4 Daemonhunters, V3 Guard, V3 Catachans, and V3 World Eaters).

Interesting. I don't see it, but I've been playtesting the stupid thing for 6 months.

Centurian99 wrote:Anyways, after numerous readings of Chaos Codex, I came up with the following theories:
#1 - Tzeentch is Fundamental. In particular, Horrors are Fundamental.
Because Tzeentch provides the only real shooting in the army (aside from a few specialty units like the Plaguefather, Khornate Death Strike, and the Soul Grinders/Daemon Princes), a solid core of Tzeentch units would be necessary in order to hit critical enemy units.

Correct. Sadly their limited range and vulnerability to deep strike mishaps (and being shot dead or assaulted into nothing) makes me a non-believer.

Centurian99 wrote:#2 - The #1 consideration of a Daemon force needs to be resiliency, or ability to absorb damage. Because only half the army appears on turn 1, its critically important that you keep those initial arrivals alive until the reinforcements begin appearing. For this reason, despite the incredible damage potential of Slaanesh units (we were playing with the V4 rules, and a local Tournament Series will continue using the V4 rules until August), their sheer fragility generally makes them a sub-optimal choice. T3 and a 5+ inv save just doesn't cut it by any stretch of the imagination.

Since only Nurgle actually offers this, and even then it's limited...where are you going to get it from?

Being detached from CSM armies means the resilient units no longer exist.

Centurian99 wrote:#3 - Armies must be designed so that either half can survive the initial drop until reinforcements arrive. That also means that "front-loading" a Daemon army (say, putting all the assault units into one half) is a bad idea, because your initial deep strikes needs to be able to survive and cause damage until reinforcements arrive, regardless of what the dice say when you roll for daemonic assault. Which led me to the following connclusions. Essentially, you need to assume that either force could be the first ones deployed.

Sadly, 2000 versus 1000 is still not a winner. The more points you put in Tzeentch, the less likely you are to survive the counter stroke, and while strong in CC Khorne and Slaanesh both have serious weaknesses.

Centurian99 wrote:So when I looked at the units:
Greater Daemons - honestly, these all looked fine to me. Personally, I used the Lord of Change (because of the shooting abilities) but as I looked at it, every GD seemed worthwhile.

I'd agree with you.

Centurian99 wrote:Heralds - Every one looked good, except Slaaneshii daemons. The Pavane almost made me look at them some more, but t he T3 plus the inability to join any other units except other T3 units seemed like a deal-breaker for me. The only possible exception I looked at was the Herald on a Seeker /w Fiends daemons. But T4 still isn't much to write home about.

Indeed. It's a weakness of the entire list really.

Centurian99 wrote:Elites - Pricy, but potentially worth the cost. I was particularly struck by the Flamers of Tzeentch and the Bloodcrushers of Khorne. While expensive, both units seemed well-suited to dropping behind terrain, and both are reasonably resilient (Flamers because of their ability to hide and move out 12", and Bloodcrushers due to the T5, W2.

Centurian99 wrote:Troops - Bloodletters and Slaaneshii Daemons really didn't excite me. Bloodletters hit really hard, but having their only save be a 5+ Inv seemed to make them a losing proposition. Daemonettes lacked survivability, due to their T3. I really wanted to try and find them a home...but every time I looked at them, they just screamed fragility, and unless I was going to take a really, really, large block of them, it seemed like a bad idea.

This is why they're given to you in the spearhead.

Centurian99 wrote:Fast Attack - To be honest, nothing in here seemed like a really good idea, with the possible exception of the Khornate Hounds. Seekers were just too vulnerable, Screamers were too specialized, and furies just got hit by the nerf-bat in a major way.

Screamers are too specialized but against 5th edition tanks I'd bring them.

You aren't going to kill tanks with anything else reliably that should not also be doing something else.

Centurian99 wrote:Heavy Support - Pure gold. Soul Grinders seem useless until 40K 5 comes along (When the phlegm attack no longer needs a to-hit roll) and the Daemon Princes seemed like an exceptionally good idea until 40K 5 comes along.

Still useless in 5th, barring one for LOS blocking utility.

The DP are still good in 5th. They aren't great, but they do bring more big models to the table. Without them taking 4 lascannons each, your soulgrinders do--and they tend to blow up as a result.

Centurian99 wrote:Special Charactes - silly good to deceptively poor, was my impression. The only one that really didn't impress me: The Masqe. Potentially ridiculously disruptive...but without the ability to join units, seemed like a an easily identified, easily killed target.

Well, does that clash with anyone elses' experience/theoryhammer?

Only a little bit, really.

On the face of it, Demons look allright.

Then you play them.

And against them.

Then you change your mind.

Tacobake wrote:

I meant in 5th.

Stelek was talking about v5. No one can assault after Deep Striking except units that specifically say they can like Zagstruk.

Tacobake wrote:

Stelek wrote:

Tacobake wrote:do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

They cannot unless they have a rule that allows it.

Aka Ork Stormboyz special character.

I meant in 5th.

I too, meant in 5th.

I'd agree with Cent on Seekers. I'm finding Flesh hounds better choices as they are cheaper, survive longer, and with 5th edition in mind, the seekers aren't getting enough rends off to the necessary damage to survive the swing back. in 4th, Seekers are amazing. In 5th, not so much it would seem.

I'd also agree with Stelek on Screamers, in 5th they will be useful (and at 16 pts a pop, 1 cheap squad is not a burden) as many vehicles will be relatively still.

From my time with the daemons, trying many builds, the multi-god army is quite necessary. With FNP being negated by AP2 and AP1 weaponry in 5th, nurgle is not quite as resilient as necessary to justify their subpar fighting and I agree with the other analysis of the gods.

I will say that Flamers are solid gold, great suicide units. Also, I find Fiends to be excellent multi-role units that are fast enough to catch skimmers and with rending, str 5, 6 attacks on the charge, and vehicles getting hit in rear armor, they can act as light vehicle hunters, but also with T4, good at hitting squads (although not great).
I've not had good experiences with Bloodcrushers. They look good on paper, but they draw a lot of heavy fire and getting them behind cover is not easy. But perhaps in 5th with run after DS, it'll be easier to hide them.

The most success I've had have been with multi-god forces, running mono-god forces has been humorous to painful.

Conversions are going to be the only way we'll see viable daemon armies that don't look like someone spilled Skittles across the gaming table.

On the good side, I look forward to seeing winged Screa.. er, flying Daemonettes, and kitbashed Fla... er, Bloodletters with bronze flame-throwers. At least the new plastics will make converting potentially cheaper, too.

haha OK. thankee.

So in V5, can some units move after deepstrike? (via fleet) Can all units? (via run?)

running is ok.

Assaulting is not.

I disagree with C99's conclusion regarding either half of the army being able to survive the drop as a necessity. I've tested the 19 unit swarm (which of necessity gives you roughly 1k points in each half, and over time I've switched to a more Big Inning architecture.

Thus, you always end up with ~1000 points vs. 2000 points. If you front load your force you can roll ~1500 to 2000 2/3 of the time, and ~500 to 2000 the remaining 1/3 of the time, but if you get the ~500 you can plan your drop/run to take advantage of this, and get yourselves into hiding/out of range, then when you move out and drop the remainder of the army you are back up to the ~1200 mark, minus whatever they were able to catch up to and destroy. The key is that the enemy must always deploy as though the heavy end of the army is coming in.

Further, my experience indicates C99 is wrong about the Greater Daemons. GUO's are alright, the rest are not worth it, as they simply get gunned down more easily than equivalent points of Heralds, which also inflict more pain. By contrast, every Herald in Chariot (except Nurgle's) is worthwhile.

Troops: Nurglings, Pink Horrors and Bloodletters are all worthwhile troops. The other 2 aren't terrific, though I've experimented with min-sized Plaguebearer units with Icons as stealth scorers/ enemy fire wasters, and the results have been mixed.

Fast Attack: In 5th, Hounds are almost the equivalent of Seekers, but I'd still go with the gals. The Screamers, to my mind, are too specialized. Too many games will be vs. other daemons, or Orks, or Crons, or Nids or just vehicle light versions of Marines and CSM's. I might change my mind on this as I get more 5th experience.

Heavy Support: Both are incredible units. Currently I prefer Daemon Princes by a narrow margin, but 5th, again, might change that (it sure did in my most recent game!) I usually run 2 Princes, one Grinder

Elites: Avoid Beasts of Nurgle and you can't go wrong in here. The other 3 are all incredible. Flamers, in particular, provide functionality you can't get elsewhere.

I've tried out most of the Specials, and the Masque is alright, Scarbrand and Ku'gath are too expensive, the Bluescribes are alright, Epidemius and Kairos are amazing in lists built around them.

I agree with C99 about the necessity of Tzeentch. To my mind, the strongest forces are at least half Tzeentch, that first round shooting is just so crucial.

40kenthusiast wrote: I disagree with C99's conclusion regarding either half of the army being able to survive the drop as a necessity. I've tested the 19 unit swarm (which of necessity gives you roughly 1k points in each half, and over time I've switched to a more Big Inning architecture.

Thus, you always end up with ~1000 points vs. 2000 points. If you front load your force you can roll ~1500 to 2000 2/3 of the time, and ~500 to 2000 the remaining 1/3 of the time, but if you get the ~500 you can plan your drop/run to take advantage of this, and get yourselves into hiding/out of range, then when you move out and drop the remainder of the army you are back up to the ~1200 mark, minus whatever they were able to catch up to and destroy. The key is that the enemy must always deploy as though the heavy end of the army is coming in.

I never thought of it that way...silly me. Another variable for me to work around.

40kenthusiast wrote:
Further, my experience indicates C99 is wrong about the Greater Daemons. GUO's are alright, the rest are not worth it, as they simply get gunned down more easily than equivalent points of Heralds, which also inflict more pain. By contrast, every Herald in Chariot (except Nurgle's) is worthwhile.

I've only played two test games, but I've found the Lord of Change to be eminently survivable. That 3+ invulnerable save makes a huge diference when I crunched numbers. No doubt that the GUO is superior in terms of resilience, but I think that the LoC gets the job done, and adds more vital shooting.

40kenthusiast wrote:
Troops: Nurglings, Pink Horrors and Bloodletters are all worthwhile troops. The other 2 aren't terrific, though I've experimented with min-sized Plaguebearer units with Icons as stealth scorers/ enemy fire wasters, and the results have been mixed.

How are you doing with Bloodletters? I just can't see that a 5+ inv save is good enough, when a unit is that destructive in HTH. It just screams priority target to me.

40kenthusiast wrote:
Fast Attack: In 5th, Hounds are almost the equivalent of Seekers, but I'd still go with the gals. The Screamers, to my mind, are too specialized. Too many games will be vs. other daemons, or Orks, or Crons, or Nids or just vehicle light versions of Marines and CSM's. I might change my mind on this as I get more 5th experience.

They'll be good for gutting a single unit...but then they're going to be stuck out there in the open. I just don't see them as being reliable enough. In their favor, the 6+d6+12 move is undoubtedly invaluable.

40kenthusiast wrote:
Heavy Support: Both are incredible units. Currently I prefer Daemon Princes by a narrow margin, but 5th, again, might change that (it sure did in my most recent game!) I usually run 2 Princes, one Grinder

I'm using Princes in 40K 4, but Soul Grinders seem like a better choice in 40K 5. The phlegm attack seems like a ridiculously good thing.

40kenthusiast wrote:
Elites: Avoid Beasts of Nurgle and you can't go wrong in here. The other 3 are all incredible. Flamers, in particular, provide functionality you can't get elsewhere.

Agree 100%. How are you finding that fiends work?

40kenthusiast wrote:
I've tried out most of the Specials, and the Masque is alright, Scarbrand and Ku'gath are too expensive, the Bluescribes are alright, Epidemius and Kairos are amazing in lists built around them.

I used Skulltaker...simply amazing. Mounted him on a Juggernaut, accompanied by Skullcrushers. Weathered lots of fire, and got stuck in nicely.

40kenthusiast wrote:
I agree with C99 about the necessity of Tzeentch. To my mind, the strongest forces are at least half Tzeentch, that first round shooting is just so crucial.

That's the concepts I'm working with right now. Are you finding that fewer larger squads of horrors are better, or more smaller squads?

Considering AP1 and AP2(plasma) will remove the FNP I actually dont see the grandiosity of the GUO. SnP isnt that fun either on your toughest guy.

Depending on your troop slots awailable small horror squads w. bolts are very nice, abit like the old las-plasma marines.

@C99

LOC vs. GUO:

I've also only played 2 test games with the LoC (and in one he was Kairos), so we are on the same page. He got gunned down by a pair of las/plas squads, but that was some bad luck, in retrospect. The shooting was certainly sweet...mostly the reason I'm down on him is the price tag. He's as expensive as one and a half GUO, or 4 HoT w/Chariots. In a dex that's already at a points disadvantage I can't see paying this much for someone who takes as much bolter fire to down as 4 SM bikers. I'll try him out some more, maybe I"m being too hard on the guy.

Mostly I dislike the Thirster and KOS. The Lord of Change at least makes an attempt to justify that obscene price tag with some sweet shooting.

I find that Letters are usually able to get cover somehow (5th's ridiculously liberal cover rules to the rescue) and the phrase "priority target" covers just about everything (I mean, are they more priority than Seekers? Flamers? Fiends? The Grinder that's near a non-Fist unit?). I like to drop them (and all scoring troops really) in the second wave. Their job is as much scoring as it is mopping up. Basically the decision between Horrors and Letters, to my mind, hinges on how much of the enemy army I expect to be in combat by the enemy's second shooting phase.

In Fast Attack, you are only really choosing between Hounds and Seekers. The Seekers seem, to my mind, to have the edge. If I want killy cav I go Seekers. I don't think the +1 toughness you get from the dogs is enough to justify the loss of Rending and Grenades, and the drop in attacks, even with the rending nerf.

I find Fiends to be exquisite. In particular, the s5 is easy not to notice in the face of RENDING!!!, but it's actually the thing that differentiates them from the Slaanesh pack. s5, t4, greandes, Hit & Run, 2 wounds....what's to dislike? If they weren't up against crushers and flamers I'd say that they were mandatory, also, if the models were less wretched.


To be honest, I haven't tried out Skulltaker in 40k (seems like he or the unit he's in would just get capped), just tried him out in Fantasy. I'm glad to hear that he's a house, his rules certainly look fierce. My feeling is that if I'm dropping 4 Chariots with Icons the enemy is going to be capping one or two anyway, no need to give em extra for calling one of them Skulltaker as he takes his armor saves. I hadn't tried out using him on a Jugger with a unit though. That's a pretty cool notion.

I like min-sized units of Horrors, with Bolt and put the Changling in one. The less in the squad, the less shots I lose if I decide to gamble on hitting with the Bolt, along with all the usual advantages of split-squads.

@KB:

I'm still a fan, despite the weaknessing of FNP vs. plasma/las. At least poison helps his killiness out a lot, and he's got that extra wound. I usually find he never gets to move (just a big sponge for most of a shooting phase), so his S&P has never bothered me. If the enemy could count on it during their shooting phase I'd view it as a big deal.

Sorry if this is the wrong thread to ask, but I missed hwere AP1 and AP2 negated FNP. I do not want to start a flame war or anything, I just don't remember seeing that rule - where is it?


And to add to the thread, I so badly wanted to run an all Tzeentch force, but I believe that there must be some intermingling of forces. Each unit does something the others don't and the key will be finding the combos that work best for your style of play. Personaly, I am now leaning to a Epi/Tzeentch list as I like the Nurgle and Tzeentch models better than any of the others.

I like the horror squads on the small size for the reason listed above (less wasted shots when using Bolt). I am also a big fan of the DPs for heavies as they provide a bit of HTH punch that my horrors and plaguebearers lack and require more than 1 lucky shot with a lascannon to take down.

Zero_Cool wrote:Sorry if this is the wrong thread to ask, but I missed hwere AP1 and AP2 negated FNP. I do not want to start a flame war or anything, I just don't remember seeing that rule - where is it?

40K 5.

Cent:

Did you give the bloodcrushers w/ skulltaker an icon? I've been trying to sort out what units are worth giving an icon to, there aren't a ton of great options....everyone just jumps on plaguebearers but bloodcrushers might be a pretty good alternate or additional choice I didn't notice before.

lambadomy wrote:Cent:

Did you give the bloodcrushers w/ skulltaker an icon? I've been trying to sort out what units are worth giving an icon to, there aren't a ton of great options....everyone just jumps on plaguebearers but bloodcrushers might be a pretty good alternate or additional choice I didn't notice before.

No, the first trial I ran used only two icons, with a squad of plaguebearers in each detachment. I'm thinking heavily that the skulltaker/bloodcrusher unit would be another prime unit to carry an icon, though...that unit was just ridiculously tough (especially with a LOC around to also attract fire)

Here is my current test list:

Bloodthirster
2x Herald of Tzeentch on chariot w. BoC

8x Bloodletters w. all upgrades
8x Bloodletters w. all upgrades
8x Bloodletters
8x Bloodletters

4x Fiends
4x Fiends
3x Flamers

2x Nurgle DP w. flight, iron hide & noxious touch

I split the army as such:

BT
Tzeentch Herald (Icon)
8x BL w. all upgrades
8x BL
4x Fiends
4x Fiends

Tzeentch Herald (Icon)
8x BL w. all upgrades
8x BL
Flamers
2x DP

So far very hard hitting and can get stuck in quickly due to daemons with flight plus the fast Heralds with icons. It's your basic shake and bake list.

G

Tacobake wrote:do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

1. (unless someone asnwers before I scroll down). Demonettes have fleet.
2. I have to disagree with Cent on the demonette cav. For (3?) points you get an extra attack and cav movement. Thats not bad at all.

jfrazell wrote:

Tacobake wrote:do demonettes have fleet? Because I think I read that fleeting units can charge the turn they deepstrike.

1. (unless someone asnwers before I scroll down). Demonettes have fleet.
2. I have to disagree with Cent on the demonette cav. For (3?) points you get an extra attack and cav movement. Thats not bad at all.

On #1, I was the one who couldn't read. Mea Culpa and all that. On my initial glance of the 40K 5 rules, I misread the rules for deep strike and thought it said that units that could fleet could assault. I was wrong.

On #2 - I wouldn't say that I'm necessarily against them... but while fiends are great, the extra attack means less because of the rending nerf. Cav movement is sweet, but if the unit doesn't survive the initial drop, it won't do them any good. It'll take some more playtesting to figure out.

The other elite choices (particularly bloodcrushers and flamers), also strike me as exceedingly good.

Where does it say that? I looked at the book the other day and in the Deepstrike entry it said models may not move at all unless a special rule allows them to.

Capt K

Centurian99 wrote:running is ok.

Assaulting is not.

It says pretty specifically that in the movement phase, the deep striking model can shoot or run as normal.

can you guys explain how shooting works with we are legion and mastery of sorcery? i'm a bit confused. If the lord of change has it, does this mean he gets to shoot 3 weapons, all of them different, or the same?

also, does Kairos' Ld rule save him from death, or is it if he loses all of his wounds, he's dead, and the leadership rule just kills him earlier?

thanks

Leadership rule just kills him earlier. It's a disadvantage

Normal MCs can shoot two weapons. Master of Sorcery ups that to three. We are legion allows you to shoot at two different targets. So he can cast any three (different) spells at up to two different targets

Ah alright. Has anybody had any experience with Kairos? Does he survive long enough to make a difference?

I'm thinking that it'd be better to have a LOC and a herald, maybe

I've used Kairos in 3 games so far, and he's about 2 for 1. First game, he managed to kill a Chaos Lord in CC and tied up a DP and a pack of summoned daemons for about 5 rounds. Game 2 he died pretty quick to Harlies that got the charge off on him (and well, I should have tried to keep him away more but he was supporting two DP's and I was a moron). Game 3 he took on two summoned daemon packs and a squad of thousand sons once they got him, not to mention a lot of shooting damage to some squads/obliterators.

Overall, he's pretty good in my little opinion. A 3++ rerollable is pretty amazing, not to mention the bubble really helps those 5++ matter more. Hitting on 2+ is also nice for ranged attacks. He is expensive, but a LOC able to do all he can do, minus the reroll field and BS 5, (but str/toughness 6 and no danger of running away), is 37 more points. I'd rather have Fateweaver, although I may try just a normal LOC with Legion to see how it goes, if that 43 point difference really tips the balance one way or another.

I'd like to pose a question to the others though that's been asked before: Small horror squads or big ones? So far, I've run mostly the 5 horror bolt formation, which is nice for having lots of troops and lots of bolts (even if they do hit on a 4+) but against infantry, 12 or 15 warpfires shots really isn't enough to do damage. They rarely ever see another turn after they drop because they can't do enough damage to those around them. But larger squads take up more points that I prefer to drop into DP's, GD's, and fast/elite choices.

Anybody find a happy medium?