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 interested to see how other people handle this dilemma or have seen other players handle it (maybe at your club for example). I am even more interested to hear if you are someone who plays GK's, GKs pure, or chaos daemons.

The dilemma I have if you are not sure is thus.

- Sustained assault is gone in 5th ed.

- The daemonic infestation rule that is in the daemon hunters codex says that it was included to offset the considerable advantages GKs get against daemons.

- As per RAW, Daemons from the new Codex Chaos Daemons do not count as daemons for the purposes of the anti-daemon rules in the daemon hunters codex. On page 20 it states precisely what is a daemon and it obviously doesn't include anything from the Chaos Daemons codex.


So we have a very mixed situation with many potential interpretations.

1. You can go by RAW. Daemons don't count as daemons for anything written in the daemon hunter codex.
[No sustained assault, but no anti-daemon rules]

2. You can go by one interpretation. Daemons are obviously meant to be included on page 20 under the daemons list. But sustained assault is gone in 5th edition so daemons do not get daemonic infestation.
[No sustained assault, but anti-daemon rules remain]

3. You can go by another interpretation. Daemons are obviously meant to be included on page 20 under the daemons list. Even though sustained assault is gone in 5th edition give them it anyway.
[Sustained assault, and anti-daemon rules remain]

4. Something else?


Majority of people I know play with option number 2. The Independent National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ goes by option 2. As does GW I would assume so. Below is a response I received after asking them these questions through their rule email question thingy.


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

The questions I have are,

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

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?

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.

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


The problem I have with option 2 is that it simply removes a rule that GW created specifically to offset the "considerable advantages" against daemons, and yet at the same time does not remove the rules that give them those considerable advantages.

So I am curious to know, how do other people play with this dilemma?

IMO, the best solution is to go by RAW - GK have no benefits or drawbacks against Daemons, and vice-versa.

RAI-wise, it is odd, but the rules are stupid, so it's better to just go RAW and play the game.

Admittedly, just saying "Use the Sustained Attack rules from 4th edition, it's not like your old rulebook exploded", is easy, but people might contend that giving an ENTIRE ARMY sustained attack might be unbalanced...

The Fluid 40K guys decided to go with the option of bringing back daemonic infestation by giving troop choices sustained attack versus Grey Knights.

I've only played one game against a Daemonhunter army and at the time, since he wasn't using Sanctuary, I opted to waive Daemonic Infestation. He killed all of my assault troops and my Tzeentch units and Soul Grinder shot his guys to death.

Honestly, at this point I'd suggest scrapping Daemonic Infestation if you're also scrapping the difficult terrain effect. Everything else requires the Daemonhunter player to pay points, and then it becomes obvious if the list is being made to kill daemons at the expense of being worthless against everyone else.

DH vs Chaos Daemons is tricky. By strictest RAW, you end up with some fairly funky conclusions, most importantly:

#1 - Nurgling, Soul Grinders, Daemon Princes, and Greater Daemons are the only things that count as Daemons (along with Avatars)

Perhaps the biggest benefit of GKs is that they have weapons that ignore invulnerable saves. This came up in a tourney last friday. It was the lack of saves from psycannon(and the other weapon) that caused the most trouble to the daemon player.

I think their reasoning of making greyknights more expensive due to having a advantages against specific armies is pretty stupid.

Hollismason wrote:I think their reasoning of making greyknights more expensive due to having a advantages against specific armies is pretty stupid.

Well they claimed they didn't:

DH Codex, page 8 wrote:Designers' Note: The Daemonic Infestation rule is intended to offset some of the Grey Knights' considerable advatages when fighting Daemons. This is done rather than simply making them cost more points, so they are not penalised unfairly when fighting non-daemonic opposition.

Hollismason wrote:I think their reasoning of making greyknights more expensive due to having a advantages against specific armies is pretty stupid.

They cost so much because they have Storm Bolters and St 6 and all those other rules.

Afterall, an army with St 6 has a lot going for it.

Yeah everyone having storm bolters is a big plus and the fact that they also carry a close combat wep. I would say that you should use the 4th edition rule book if you want to use the special rules if not just scrap the rules that give both armies advantages againts each other.

I agree, option 1 seems the best course of action. I tried a game with it today and it felt fairer.