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.

Reading

And ranting in the CSM thread keeps bringing me back to the idea that the creation of the Chaos Demons codex was the reason for the CSM codex being such a disappointment for many long-time CSM players.

Does anyone out there share this analysis?

Does anyone else hate the Chaos Demon codex as I do?

IMO this codex does a double disservice:

(1) It had a severe negative design influence on CSM

(2) As a codex it is really horrible. The builds are totally incoherent with previous fluff. It provides zero support for previous builds but creates plenty of new abortion lists. As a cynical exercise in model selling it takes the cake as the absolute most disgusting thing GW has ever published. Does anyone actually like the build it offers?

(3) Anyone agree that the rule about bringing in the army in two parts is total nonsense? Was this some kind of afterthought once they playtested a few times and found that a full Chaos Demon army deep striking into an enemy was so ridiculously overpowered! To use a moron rule as a kind of balancing devise because the list was designed broken is simply pathetic game design. The game may be designed for 12 year olds but does it HAVE to look like it was also written by 12 year olds?

(4) I'm not saying that it doesn't create viable or playable lists, or that players are wrong for using and enjoying these. I'm saying that in terms of the history of the game, and established armies it was a total design abortion. The critique is aesthetic at root rather than based in playability.

(5) If anyone wants to sing the praises of Chaos Demons, go for it!

OTG.

As regards your #2: I enjoy the playstyle offered by the Chaos Daemons in 40k.

Both the WHFB and 40k implementations suffer from some significant internal and external balancing issues (and frankly, I'm surprised Soul Grinders don't show up in Fantasy as some sort of war machine), but I have no issues with the concept behind "here's a whole army of daemons ripping their way into reality." It's a big universe; these things happen.

Daemonic Assault is a stupid rule. The lack of any adherence to established fluff is annoying.

I never liked the idea of a "demons only" Codex. The creatures of the warp have (as far as I know) always been described as some kind of primal force and the demons supporting the CSM were summoned only to battle their foes.
As far as fluff goes, I don't really see a Demonlord as the same kind of "general" who would lead his army across the stars to conquer other planets as pretty much everybody else does in 40k. It just seems very unlikely that an Ork Waaagh would encounter a Demon army the same way they'd encounter a force of Eldar or human soldiers.
When Demons become the defender in some sort of scenario it gets even more ridicoulus. Why would anyone in their right mind outside of Grey Knights (and Orks) attack a Demonworld?

I can only say that I agree with you 100% OP.
And me ranting on will not really contribute anything to the thread.

I can also say that due to this dex my beloved fluffy Black legion army got a dex nerfed to hell and back (pun intended) and my fluff was rendered useless... Half my army needed to be discarded and built in a differerent way; which I wouldn't do.

My solution? I've stopped playing CSM, and won't do it again until I get a codex that allows my previous lists (mind you, my list wasen't the old cheezy deamon bomber lists...

Moving to 40K Discussions.

1. Fluff could be adjusted to reflect major incursions into normal space, including major summoning by a chaos world defending itself. Missed opportunity to have weird optional demon terrain rules.

2. Deepstrike is ok but randomness is annoying. Would have liked an option where they were on the board or could flank, etc.

3. Should have had a variant of light demons. All demons are quite expensive. The troop units are generally not costed well, which helps to generate the elite heavy lists of now (read pavanes, bloodcrushers, and nurgle troops). Screamers are inefficient. I’ve never seen furies or nurglings in play or even discussed.

4. Demon codex would be fine if they follow with a legion codex with specific demons to each legion (WB being exempt of course).

My two cents only but I find demons are the typical paper, scissors rock. They are good against marines, especially termies, superior to mech guard, but get overwhelmed by orks or Nids.


EDIT: Personal note. My demon list started in the chaos book and shifted to LATD. When LATD bought the farm I modified it and used the Nid rules. Frankly I still like the Nid rules better. My wolfletter horde (genestealer shock) back by big beasties actually felt more "fluff real" and was a darn site more tactical. The random nature of the drop rules makes my butt itch.

I feel that the deamon dex should've been made to reflect one chaos god's large summoned force (for apoc games it's a nice reason to field 100ish deamons), but the deamon rules for CSM shouldn't have been removed. They were fine as they were.

I hate the fact that it's a fluff killer

IMO,

Demons was a real case of GW looking for a new way to sell models.

I wish there had been someone in the studio who had the presence of mind to do that and also maintain continuity with the established army builds.

Which they would have achieved by writing LEGIONS first, and then Chaos Undivided, and then LATD, all with variations on how to use demons, but with the pure demon style forces coming later in the design process.


GW ignored the design repercussions for CSM in 40K.

The reason was clear enough.

From the business point of view Demons was a winner, because it allowed them to sell the same range of models for two systems: 40K and Warhammer.

The gaming results were not so salutory.

In Warhammer the demon lists are very nearly game breaking.

In 40K the result was worse, because it destroyed so many army builds and conventions.

I think they rushed it and followed the wrong set of priorities.

OTG.

Orc Town Grot wrote:IMO,

Demons was a real case of GW looking for a new way to sell models.

I wish there had been someone in the studio who had the presence of mind to do that and also maintain continuity with the established army builds.

Which they would have achieved by writing LEGIONS first, and then Chaos Undivided, and then LATD, all with variations on how to use demons, but with the pure demon style forces coming later in the design process.


GW ignored the design repercussions for CSM in 40K.

The reason was clear enough.

From the business point of view Demons was a winner, because it allowed them to sell the same range of models for two systems: 40K and Warhammer.

The gaming results were not so salutory.

In Warhammer the demon lists are very nearly game breaking.

In 40K the result was worse, because it destroyed so many army builds and conventions.

I think they rushed it and followed the wrong set of priorities.

OTG.

I've found myself musing over these same points,and I'm inclined to agree with you.
It does seem that GW regulated daemons to "generic" status in the CSM codex simply for no more reason than increasing sales,perhaps not,but it certainly seems that way.

@OP: I could swear you've got this mis-posted in 40k instead of WFB...

Codex: Chaos Daemons is the epitome of the models first, rules second, fluff distant third paradigm. Utter fail.

I think the original poster forgot to include a variant of the phrase "Daemons were a slap to the face". That oversight robs the message of so much impact.

As for the other points:
1. I'm sorry, but didn't this fit into one of the other complaint threads about CSM?
2. Yes, some people do.
3. Drop pod assault. What's the difference?
4. I think I'm supposed to make a disparaging remark about your posting style or something, but the only thing I can think of is that putting parentheses around your point markers looks silly.
5. Okay.

Praises for the Chaos Daemons codex:

The Chaos Daemons codex provides a nice, fun play style where the effects of randomness quite often outweigh other concerns. To be quite honest, lining up one's forces in a row and then advancing towards the enemy is horribly, horribly boring, and I don't see why anyone would want to do it on a regular bases.

One of the themes which detractors fail to see is that a daemonic army is misleading. The daemonic forces are as often as not not an organized military force but instead the collection of whatever entities and beings which are there. It's just as easy to describe the daemonic forces as engaging in a contest amongst themselves with the opposing army as the prize or obstacle, as it is to describe those forces as an "army".

I'd ask if the next topic was going to be how the Space Wolves codex is ruining the CSM codex, but I've probably missed that already.

Your right, Codex Daemons has a hell of a lot of plot holes.

I have a chaos daemon army. It is fun as hell. It is a nice change of pace from my "line up my tyranids in a line ane rush forward" army.

Daemonic incursions can happen anywhere at anytime if the forces of the warp are strong enough to break into real space.

I'm guessing that most people hating on Codex: Daemons have never even played with it or against it. It's not a powerful tournament army but does EVERY army HAVE to be.

I'd say Codex Daemons is pretty well internally balanced. ALL the troops are good in their own way, pts cost is not way out of left field internally; the only crap units I really see are BoN, Furies, Screamers and Fleshhounds. Seekers are fantastic but I personally feel that Fleshhounds are pretty good. Grinders and DP's both rock and are both viable and powerful without being OP.

I'm glad that Daemons play so different to other armies. If I wanted a conga line army with a crap save I'd play IG or Orks.

Again, no prizes for pointing out that GW produce codexes to sell models.

That said, I'm also inclined to agree that this one was too obviously aimed at selling more of the new plastic Demons. They were obviously concerned that they may not recoup the costs of doing some of them in plastic (I would expect Demon models to be more common in WHFB armies). So we got a codex for them.

I thought it was overwritten, and put way too much emphasis on this aspect of Chaos. For all the graphic fluff, Demons still come across as belonging in fantasy. WH40k may have a strong medieval flavour, but the Demons are pure Dante's Inferno, and armies of them just don't feel right to me in the context of WH40k (arguably, Chaos is way too prevalent in WH40k, and should be a shadowy influence rather than an overt enemy, but that's a different topic). The Lost and the Damned was, I think, the ideal way of depicting a Chaos force in WH40k - a rabble of outcasts, mutants and brainwashed humans led by a few powerful Chaos units. Perfect.

In terms of the models, if we're going to have demonic entities in WH40k, they shouldn't be transplanted straight from fantasy. The Soul Grinder was a more promising direction, because it combined technological and demonic features. To have been convincing as a sci-fi army, I think WH40k Demons should have been done in a similar style. But that would have meant separate WH40k models, which would have defeated the purpose. As for the rules, I think at the very least they could have included options for a Lost and the Damned style list.

I hope it isn't re-done for 5th Edition. Maybe when it comes to re-do the Chaos Marine codex, they will have sold enough plastic Demons to be content to slot the established types back into it. However, I suspect that they may use a revised Demon codex as a platform for releasing plastic Greater Demons, when those are ready to release.

Yes, because I'd be so happy to have my army squatted so people can justify using 1 or 2 units they *apparently* had to shelve. Funny thing is the 4.5 'dex has entries for generic daemons.

Ah well. Guess someone liking the 4.5 CSM codex and Daemon Codex doesn't deserve an army anymore than those hating on the 4.5 Dex and Daemon codex.

I've only ever met one person with the intent to start a Chaos Daemons army. In all honesty, I think they should never have written it. I'm normally all for variety in 40k, but the time spent with Chaos Daemons could have gone to any army book that hasn't been updated in a decade, take your pick. All in all I don't care for many of the models, I'm not interested in fighting the buggers, and I think they should have stayed as a coaxial force with the Chaos Marines.

Never played with or against this really,
No one in our group has either I imagine (other than the GW employee).

I don't mind the concept,
it kinda works (and gave us more models),
but I don't think that this codex was the reason that CSM got nerfed,

They could have done CSM with basic Daemons and still been great, they just didn't

As for the fluff,
not so fussed, sure these guys defending makes no sense, but so does every Marine on Marine game that every takes place, or that Eldrad is fighting, at all times, everywhere against everyone... at once!!

Codex: Unnecessary or Codexaemons is the biggest waste of time in 40K as it stands. And not because they're overpowered or underpowered. I like Chaos Daemons - I have (had) a Word Bearer army filled with Daemonettes, Seekers, Bloodletters and Greater Daemons and my Death Guard are full of Plague Bearers - but it's the implementation into 40K which drives me away from the army. Or, at least, that's one part of the reason I hate them.

The other part of it is that Daemons were made generic in the Chaos Marine list for no other reason than a cynical attempt at giving GW a new Codex to push. If Codex Unnecessary didn't exist, Daemons would still be part of the CSM lists.

But back to my original point, I don't like Codex Daemons because of their implementation. I find the whole 'Everything Deep Strikes' thing to be utterly absurd in every way. Beyond breaking the fluff about Daemon incursions being rare and therefore such a mass attack should not happen normally enough to be considered a 'normal' 40K army, I have to ask, why does nothing start on the table?

Why do Daemon armies always happen to pop out at the right time at the right spot where there's an enemy army just sitting there waiting for them? How does the enemy army even know to be there? How do Daemons make any sense at all as the Defender in Planetstrike?

If they were more like a conventional army where elements of it could be summoned as normal, then it would make sense and I wouldn't have such a problem with them. As it stands though, your Guard army now shows up to a field or a ruined city for no apparent reason and then HOLY FETH DAEMONS!!!!!!

Honestly. It's so 1-dimensional and boring.

'Course, if GW had decided to not anally violate Chaos when they re-wrote the Chaos Marine Codex, and had left Daemons as part of the book, then we wouldn't have this issue...

I would say icons ruin it for most people.

Demons bother alot of people. But I think most would be happy if they could still realisticially (you cant use that word with 40k!) use cult termies, raptors bikes.

It was a terrible idea to make the demons codex.

It would have been far better if a traitor guard codex was made instead.

It would have crappy cultists, savage sorcerors, mutated spawn, and elite gifted chaos soldiers, a slew of ancient imperial tanks, and the ability to summon demons.

Don't forget the headless horseman style (not headless, of course, but with a black, red-eyed horse) rough riders.

Not knowing too much about the fluff other than what the codex reads, I'm inclined to agree on the point alone that in the 'dex it says all the chaos gods war with each other constantly and ONLY team up if a huge threat presents itself... so why would khorne and nurgle be fielded in a skirmish with some space marines?

Obvious clashes between the dex and lists aside, I would have loved to actually play my demons in a chaos army and they NOT suck. Personally I hate the way demons play (drop in, get blown to pieces in one turn against a good list) and refuse to play them ever again. At least the fluffs interesting in helping me determine how to run my chaos more fluffy

Exarch_Nektel wrote:It was a terrible idea to make the demons codex.

It would have been far better if a traitor guard codex was made instead.

It would have crappy cultists, savage sorcerors, mutated spawn, and elite gifted chaos soldiers, a slew of ancient imperial tanks, and the ability to summon demons.

Don't forget the headless horseman style (not headless, of course, but with a black, red-eyed horse) rough riders.

Now why on earth would GW want to do a codex for traitors and cultist (armies the Imperium often find themselves pitted against),when Codex deamons is just so much more interesting and necesary.

Brother SRM wrote:I've only ever met one person with the intent to start a Chaos Daemons army. In all honesty, I think they should never have written it. I'm normally all for variety in 40k, but the time spent with Chaos Daemons could have gone to any army book that hasn't been updated in a decade, take your pick. All in all I don't care for many of the models, I'm not interested in fighting the buggers, and I think they should have stayed as a coaxial force with the Chaos Marines.

I'm the opposite. I think the models and the fluff for the daemons are a lot of fun, and have been building (or built) chaos daemon armies for each god.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
The other part of it is that Daemons were made generic in the Chaos Marine list for no other reason than a cynical attempt at giving GW a new Codex to push. If Codex Unnecessary didn't exist, Daemons would still be part of the CSM lists.

I'll agree with you, that they suck in C:SM because that lets the Chaos Daemon codex sell. But I like that I'm not tied to running a MEQ army when I really only want to use the daemons.

But back to my original point, I don't like Codex Daemons because of their implementation. I find the whole 'Everything Deep Strikes' thing to be utterly absurd in every way. Beyond breaking the fluff about Daemon incursions being rare and therefore such a mass attack should not happen normally enough to be considered a 'normal' 40K army, I have to ask, why does nothing start on the table?

Why do Daemon armies always happen to pop out at the right time at the right spot where there's an enemy army just sitting there waiting for them? How does the enemy army even know to be there? How do Daemons make any sense at all as the Defender in Planetstrike?

I agree with some of this, and disagree with some of it.

On the fluff: First, fluff changes. There used to be magic numbers, now there aren't. The gods enmity used to be much stronger than it is now. Oh well, these things changed. Daemonic incursions might be more common now. On the other hand, there are supposedly only 1000 marine chapters, in the entire universe, and yet they're involved in over 50% of 40k games. Marines, by the fluff, are also a rare sight. I find it no more ludicrous that daemonic incursions happen in a game than I find it ludicrous that the marines are everywhere, that Eldrad has joined every craftworld, and that Vulkan pimps out the weapons for every chapter these days.

About the deployment style: Obviously, part of this is to make sure that they play differently - and that's good. It's nice to have an army that you have to improvise with. But I agree with you that in some situations, it makes no sense. It would have been better if the rule had been written in regard to 'standard missions', allowing daemons to start on the table when they were defending in planetstrike (as that's not a standard mission), and so on.

In 'standard missions', I see nothing wrong with the enemy being there before the daemons. A game of 40k is defined as being a smaller part of a larger battle. Your commander's have equipment that says, 'the warp barrier is weak over there', and they send some troops over in expectation of the barrier breaking. Yeah, that was so hard to rationalize.

Again, I agree, as defenders in planetstrike, it makes no sense at all. But in a normal game it works just fine.

Zid wrote:Not knowing too much about the fluff other than what the codex reads, I'm inclined to agree on the point alone that in the 'dex it says all the chaos gods war with each other constantly and ONLY team up if a huge threat presents itself... so why would khorne and nurgle be fielded in a skirmish with some space marines?

Actually, it doesn't say that. Re-read page 8, you'll see that it says that is is not unknown for all four to work together for a common purpose.

I would have loved to actually play my demons in a chaos army and they NOT suck. Personally I hate the way demons play (drop in, get blown to pieces in one turn against a good list) and refuse to play them ever again.

Sounds like you're playing them wrong. I hate it when I line my marines up in tight clumps and the guard tanks blow them off the table on turn 1 too. User-error is not the same as a codex sucking.

I like to play daemons because I find that their style makes the game interesting. I never know exactly what units I'll get when, or where they'll be. That means I need to improvise. Not everything works how I want it to - that means I need to adapt and adjust. It makes the games a challenge for me, unlike playing my eldar or my orks, where I know exactly what I'm getting all the time, and I'm a good enough player to use that knowledge to win almost all my games.

Daemons play differently than any other army, got it.

I think people just like to play against daemons because they don't want to make adjustments to how they play their armies.

Examining the codex at close range, it's interesting in terms of gameplay on either side of the table. And I think the fluff is an interesting read. Something about the army list puts me to sleep, though.

Taking a step back, it was a missed opportunity for all the reasons other posters have said. Personally, I think a *Daemonworld* approach -- with mutants, vehicle/artillery options other than the Defiler and rules for fighting on Daemonworlds -- would have been a more expansive and interesting book.

However, CSM and CD fit the scaled-down, limited vision design ethos of the time. Part of how they're viewed now is thanks to the annoyingly consistent pattern of design shifts within the studio. So next to more recent codices and ones yet to come (SW, I'm looking at you), the CSM and CD codices look fairly spartan and bland.

And that's one of my biggest complaints about the studio. If they stuck with one approach or the other, the customers would adapt. But it's the back and forth that leads to hard feelings from the customers -- and inevitably toward imbalances and rules issues.

Jervis is a good guy, but he isn't the one to lead the studio toward a consistent vision. Witness his 3rd edition Dark Angels and Space Wolves codices. It's fairly clear that criticism of one led to a different approach on the other. Watch Legions (if it ever happens) end up looking like CSM v3.5 revisited.

I love the daemon codex and it is my favorite ever. From a background perspective:

Daemon >> CSM

G

Yeah, what Redbeard said.

People need to quit seeing every 40k battle as just that, a small skirmish. 40k battles usually represent bigger conflicts.

As to not making sense in Planetstrike. Since PS is just an expansion played for fun like Apoc I don't think GW should need to make special exceptions or circumstances. That would be akin to say "Well you can't play an Apoc game unless you field a super heavy or Titan as an Apoc represents a clash of armies, not just a small contingent of men/mutants/bugs/whatever...

I like the Chaos Daemons book. It's really different to a lot of other armies playstyle wise, which is refreshing.

For people complaining about the rarity of Daemons, I'll put out there that there are probably bajillions more Daemons than Chaos Space Marines, if you really think about it. So Daemonic attacks are probably more common than being attacked by any of the legions.
Also: Daemonhunters existed first, so Boo.

I'd still be happier with Lost and the Damned, though.
GW are such morons when it comes to that army.

I got into CSM's because of the idea of demons and monsters back in 3rd edition. I eventually bought full armies of every CSM cult, but have never felt as much of a chaos player as I do when I play demons. They're my new baby.