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 liked the idea of not requiring the purchase of a justicar. In an all grey-knight army, this could save a lot of points very quickly.

I would hope that the requirement of 10man squads stays out of any new codex. Because of the cost of Grey Knights, I've found that one of the few ways I can effectively use them is to min-max.

I'd like to see Assault Grey Knights. The new rules that allow melee attacks on vehicles to hit rear armor offer a potential solution to the persistent problem of how do all GK armies deal with armor.

You could price the Assault GK at the same price as Vanguard Vets and even give them the Heroic Intervention Rule.

That may be a bit of a wet dream, but how about drop-pods for greyknights? Keep the same costs and same rules for them, but give them droppods.

I love the idea of assult gk. That would be great finally give them a fast attack choice besides just being able to deepstrike them. Also I doubt that they will require 10 man squads.

Not sure if denying Eternal Warrior would actually be all that valuable to Grey Knights when fighting daemons. All you're doing is saying that they can be killed in one shot, so troop heavy lists instead of daemon-zilla aren't going to be overly bothered by it. I have 84 single wound models in my 1850 daemon list. No eternal warrior doesn't bother me as much as no invulnerable save.

Unfortunately it looks like GW sort of dug themselves into yet another hole when they made the Daemon codex, as opposed to integrating daemons better into the CSM codex. It's going to be difficult to balance out a anti-daemon army against a daemon list, without making it over or underpowered. The easiest way I see is giving them something like +1 A against daemons or somesuch.

Hoo-boy... Expensive, shiny SM with Preferred Enemy: Daemons?!? Sign me up!

If you can't give the GK C'Tan-like Nemesis Force Weapons, then at least have the Nemesis Force Weapon cause enemies to re-roll any successful invulnerable saves.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Hoo-boy... Expensive, shiny SM with Preferred Enemy: Daemons?!? Sign me up!

If you can't give the GK C'Tan-like Nemesis Force Weapons, then at least have the Nemesis Force Weapon cause enemies to re-roll any successful invulnerable saves.

I like the preferred enemy part but the whole Nemesis Force Weapon causeing enemies to reroll a successful invunlnerable save is really pointless and takes away from the point of an invulnerable save if your going to do something like that why not just have them ignore the invoulnerable save in the first place. I would rather have something a bit more all around usefull that gives the weapon a benifit againts all regular troop choices not just deamons.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Hoo-boy... Expensive, shiny SM with Preferred Enemy: Daemons?!? Sign me up!

If you can't give the GK C'Tan-like Nemesis Force Weapons, then at least have the Nemesis Force Weapon cause enemies to re-roll any successful invulnerable saves.

I think this is good. A better chance at failing the invul save but not completely ignoring it.

Preferred Enemy is probably the *worst* thing you could give Grey Knights because it is a huge, but very narrow benefit. If you cost for it, GK are too expensive except against Daemons. If you don't, then GK are way overpowered against Daemons. Which pretty much where we are today.

That is why I recommended C'Tan-like NFWs that negate all saves, armour *and* Invulnerable. This is generally useful, but potentially too strong against Daemons.

If, for Fluff reasons, you need to restrict C'Tan-like weapons to the point that GK can't have them, then the next best solution is to have them negate armour saves while forcing a re-roll on passed invulnerables. This is also generally useful, while not quite as good against Daemons.

Grey Knights can use the following things to make them more "knightly"

- while in their transports, Grey Knights units should confer their "armor nightfighting rules" onto the vehicle.

- adjust points to bring them in line with the "new base level" (ahhaahahahaha)

- Leave NMF alone, like Britney, they didn't do anything to you, don't do anything to them! They're not "Ancient weapons from the early days of the imperium" they're "tuned mufflers for your throaty V8."

Same goes for the incinerator, psycannon, and psycannon bolts. Though the psycannon bolts would make an amusing unit upgrade - forget Daemons! Eldar farseers/warlocks scrambling for cover when a 10-man Grey Knights squad wanders by would be hillarious.

Ok had to register to post this one. Keep the progression that GK have right now. But add the invul save option to it as well. Sages and GK Elites ie termies get the option to force an invul reroll and GK Grandmasters can chose to negate a Invul or armor save. This means they are a little less dangerous against Khorne daemons that have ironhide but... eh. Also psybolt ammo like SM Captains have hellfire rounds. Would be a nice idea. I'm not totally sure what it would do, force invul rerolls in shooting? wounds daemons on a 2+? The current AP 4 and ignore invul seems really harsh.

They also need a revamp of several of their units. FA that DS? Yahhh lets get shot to all hell and back for a round before we can assault, but have far less of the durability of termies. If they are serious about it give them a special version of shrouding that rolls 4d6 and takes the lowest 3. That or take a page out of the Veteran Vanguard Squad and allow Assault after the DS, but get rid of that stupid declaration of which unit your going to charge.


Edit: clarified an incomplete thought about sarges and termis.

Dude the whole point of the Grandmaster is that he is so powerful. 145 points base let him have a maxed out NFW they do not need to change the rules about the NFW at all. All of their wep's are fine they just need to redo the rules againts deamons. Also they should be really good againts deamons hence the name DH while getting no real benifit from fighting other armies. They arnt called Eldar Hunters after all.

wow you guys are tough on grey knights they arent that good they cant be too much or theyll be run over by orks cheap large units

Emrab I think you're missing the point. Negating or Rerolling invul is stupid powerful against most deamons. As most of them have nothing but a 5+ invul. You're usually darn lucky to make one 5+ much less two in a row. As JohnwangDD said if you make them monsters against Deamons they have to pay a huge point cost for abilities that won't translate into benefits against other armies. Thus they are uncompetitive against most other armies.

So the best thing to do is focus a few things that give them what you want, which is to make them nasty against deamons. But also give them what someone like JHDD or I want which is that those abilities are an edge but not also an albatross.

Forcing invul rerolls is nasty but not ungodly unfair, SM libbys can do it now in a 24" radius. Which means that it would justify the relative point cost they have now, and still make them effective against modern deamons.

I'm not saying that tweaking NFW alone would fix everything. For example Fearless has IMHO become less powerful than it used to be because of the No Retreat rule. So would it be better to make them Stubborn or is that too powerful?

Also the point was against Khorne deamons they wouldn't get to negate armor and invuln but still have the Force weapon. Which with most deamons that have multiple wounds having eternal warrior it seems likely that FW is kinda useless. So maybe for him giving him the ability to negate both would be a better option and then drop Force Weapon?

I mean other than attacking that obvious "Weak" point of the Deamons what do you suggest? Forcing rerolls on Deep Strike? THAT would be hideously unbalanced against deamons.

Also a few features of the current DH dex do translate into nasty abilities against some people like eldar. Farseers only have an invuln, psybolt negates that and psycanons insta kill them... but they aren't deamons.

So it would seem to me most of the "Cool" things that DH's used to have are outmoded or work better against other armies than their intended targets.

Caleth wrote:Also a few features of the current DH dex do translate into nasty abilities against some people like eldar. Farseers only have an invuln, psybolt negates that and psycanons insta kill them... but they aren't deamons.

So it would seem to me most of the "Cool" things that DH's used to have are outmoded or work better against other armies than their intended targets.

Eldar aren't really the best example to go by. They have 3 units (farseer, warlock, harlequin) with -/x+ save schedules out of how many?

True, but outside of Scorpions, Fire Dragons, and i think Warp Spiders, everything has a 4+ or worse. Which means things like Psybolts upgrades shred right through them, and in the case of their farseers it insta kills what can be a very expensive model. Now this is negated somewhat with the new cover rules but still, pretty darn powerful.

What if, for the en masse Daemon-killing weapons, instead of negating invulnerable saves that they are reduced by a value of 1 or 2, depending?

I also like the "reroll invulnerable saves" deal. That's not awful, but still daemon killing (and thus necessitating the special rules when you're playing daemons).

Caleth wrote:True, but outside of Scorpions, Fire Dragons, and i think Warp Spiders, everything has a 4+ or worse. Which means things like Psybolts upgrades shred right through them, and in the case of their farseers it insta kills what can be a very expensive model. Now this is negated somewhat with the new cover rules but still, pretty darn powerful.

Dragons are 4+, but you missed the Spears, Reapers, and Jetbikes, along with Wraithguard and Wraithlords.

Personally, when I field Eldar, I generally don't bother with the Sv4+ infantry. Either Guardians for cheap AGPs, or Sv3+ Aspects for survivability.

Caleth wrote:Emrab I think you're missing the point. Negating or Rerolling invul is stupid powerful against most deamons. As most of them have nothing but a 5+ invul. You're usually darn lucky to make one 5+ much less two in a row. As JohnwangDD said if you make them monsters against Deamons they have to pay a huge point cost for abilities that won't translate into benefits against other armies. Thus they are uncompetitive against most other armies.

So the best thing to do is focus a few things that give them what you want, which is to make them nasty against deamons. But also give them what someone like JHDD or I want which is that those abilities are an edge but not also an albatross.

Forcing invul rerolls is nasty but not ungodly unfair, SM libbys can do it now in a 24" radius. Which means that it would justify the relative point cost they have now, and still make them effective against modern deamons.

I'm not saying that tweaking NFW alone would fix everything. For example Fearless has IMHO become less powerful than it used to be because of the No Retreat rule. So would it be better to make them Stubborn or is that too powerful?

Also the point was against Khorne deamons they wouldn't get to negate armor and invuln but still have the Force weapon. Which with most deamons that have multiple wounds having eternal warrior it seems likely that FW is kinda useless. So maybe for him giving him the ability to negate both would be a better option and then drop Force Weapon?

I mean other than attacking that obvious "Weak" point of the Deamons what do you suggest? Forcing rerolls on Deep Strike? THAT would be hideously unbalanced against deamons.

Also a few features of the current DH dex do translate into nasty abilities against some people like eldar. Farseers only have an invuln, psybolt negates that and psycanons insta kill them... but they aren't deamons.

So it would seem to me most of the "Cool" things that DH's used to have are outmoded or work better against other armies than their intended targets.

Ok I see your point about the NFW and yes they are good againts eldar I mean I was just saying they should have more of an advantage againts deamon armies then non deamon armies.

I play Chaos Daemons and my friend plays pure GK's. We play once a week and have been doing so for most of the time since the chaos daemons codex came out. Therefore I think I might have some valuable input.

Yes I get raped, I get raped A LOT. I mostly only win 10% of the time. Early on it wasn't so bad because I mostly played with a slaanesh force. Since building my army up to 2000pts I have branched out and have taken units from the other chaos gods, this has strangely weaken me against GKs but strengthened me against other races.

There are two massive disadvantages that I always face when playing against my opponent.

1. Shooting that ignores invul.
2. Difficult terrain checks on assaulting.

Of those two the ABSOLUTE WORST disadvantage is the difficult terrain checks, I cannot stress enough how bad this actually is. I have no idea why people are mostly ignoring this difficult terrain ruling in favour of dealing with the invul disadvantage. Sure the psycannon and incinerator are deadly but its not like his whole army has one. To me its just basically another badass weapon in a squad, every race has a unit with something cool.

What is terrible though is how completely ineffective some of my units become with having to assault thro difficult terrain, which for an assault based army is a terrible thing to have to deal with.

For the daemon units without grenades (bloodletters, fiends etc) basically don't even bother trying to assault with them. If you do expect to fall short of your charge most of the time and then when you do finally get in expect to get wiped out in one turn as you fight at initiative 1. If you do somehow survive with one or two models, don't get too attached to them as you will soon have to make no retreat saves. Best thing you can do with such a unit is to go to ground on an objective.

What is great though is daemonettes and pretty much anything with grenades. But! even then you still have to make checks to see if you can make it into combat, which basically makes the daemons who are already a chancey kinda army even more unreliable when your units designed for assault can't even be guaranteed to do their job.

People who are suggesting ignoring invul with relic blades OMG are you trying to make me cry? So my daemons are designed for assault but you want them to get raped even more when they get into it? Shouldn't I be rewarded for putting the right units in the right place? If a unit is assault based it makes sense it should die to shooting (psycannon) and then be awesome in CC.

I do not think all these solutions about invul saves are the best way to go about this issue. You cannot just balance rules by reading them out of the codex. If people played more games with daemons against GK's I think they will see what the real disadvantages are.

I propose at the very least that GK's lose the ability that forces difficult terrain checks on daemons. OR come up with some rule that forces daemons to make difficult terrain checks but does not reduce their initiative.

With regards to the special rules that specifically target daemons my opinion is that with a new codex gw should phase out all such rules in favour of more generic rules that justify the GK's points against all races.

Though I don't agree with proliferation of the word "raped", I agree with NeoMaul on making NFW ignore invuls. I think that's really unnecessary.

As for making Demons make difficult terrain tests to get into combat, I think the fact that the GK will probably be outnumbered by Demons makes this rule ok.

What about the benefits Demons get from fighting GK army? Have you found those to be useful?

I apologize for my language.

What benefits? Are you referring to sustained assault? As far as I am aware that does not apply to Chaos daemons or even the CSM codex anymore.

Really? Why is the sustained assault rule voided?

Yeah, Sustained Assault is what "balances" the GK bonuses against Daemons.

We play off the Independent National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ v2.1 that yakface came up with. Not because I play in tournaments a lot (I rarely ever do) but because it generally makes sense of a lot of things that are hard to understand. According to that faq sustained assault is gone and the rule that dictates what a daemon is, is modified to include all daemons from the chaos daemons codex.

As per RAW technically none of the greyknights anti daemon rules should work against the chaos daemons codex as it specifically states which units are daemons for the purposes of those rules and it does not include anything from the chaos daemons codex naturally.

I have yet to meet anyone who actually plays this way though. Which is fine by me. The idea of daemons not counting as daemons is just a bit too out there for us in a pure fluffy sense.

You should try playing some games against your friend's GK using the sustained assault rule and see if it makes any difference.

To be honest, when I played my GK, I never had a chance to use them against demons. I really don't know how good they are against them. I do know this. Psycannoning a kitted out farseer was great. Now everyone brings eldrad, so I rarely get that pleasure any more.

NeoMaul wrote:We play off the Independent National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ v2.1 that yakface came up with.

According to that faq sustained assault is gone and the rule that dictates what a daemon is, is modified to include all daemons from the chaos daemons codex.

As per RAW technically none of the greyknights anti daemon rules should work against the chaos daemons codex as it specifically states which units are daemons for the purposes of those rules and it does not include anything from the chaos daemons codex naturally.

I have yet to meet anyone who actually plays this way though. Which is fine by me. The idea of daemons not counting as daemons is just a bit too out there for us in a pure fluffy sense.

Wow, Chaos: Daemons don't count as "Daemons"?

FAIL.


I am very thankful that my group doesn't use the INAT FAQ.

Why do you all play with rolling for difficult terrain to assault the GK then?

IMO, the answer is to play a couple games the other way:
- Chaos: Daemons count as Daemons for Sustained Assault
- Chaos: Daemons don't count for difficult terrain

After that, it'll be pretty easy to conclude that either *both* rules apply, or *neither* applies.

Ok after getting blasted into submission everytime i said that they didnt need to change the NFW i am glad someone actually agrees with me on that topic. THEY ARE FINE so just deal with that people.

Wow, I wasn't aware of the Difficult Terrain aspect. The only people I know with Deamons, run either Tzeentch or Nurgle. Most Nurgle Daemons have S&P and tzeentch should really never be in assualt, at least as far as I can tell.

As for the Chaos Dex thing I'd heard of it, I always figured it would be rectified in the new =I= dex, when ever that is. Anyway again the difficult terrain thing only really effects about half of all "Daemons."

*edit*
Ok after flipping through a copy of the daemons dex the GK difficult terrain things yeah hurts Slaanesshi and Khornate daemons the most, but with fleet for the Slaaneshi ones it's not as bad. So really if we look at the proposed changes to NFW, would balance out? Khorne takes a hit in the assault area, where they are best and all the others take a hit in their saves. If we include the sustained assault rule, for lesser beasts (ie. troops, and maybe fast attack?) would that work out to a balance?

Emrab, dude not trying to "blast you into submission," I'm trying to point out that NFW got gimped against current daemons. You yourself have asked for things that make GK more powerful against daemons, but if you look at what GK's currently have the best bit is (IMHO) the Rites of Exorcism. (Which I just noticed )

To be clear NFW have three things that they do: +2 STR, PW, and FW for every model. PW and FW are only on certain models. Now lets look at their general effects on the current deamon dex. +2 STR: This is just awesome and is really helpful against everything from light tanks, troops, to MC's. Zero complaints here.

PW: Ignoring armor saves.... against daemons? Except for Khorne with Ironhide use less against Daemons. None of them have and armor save. Points are paid for something that is situational. Example Khorne HQ and Elites are the only stuff PW really effects, oh and Daemon Princes. Against any other army in the game this is amazing. But again you're paying for a bonus that really doesn't gel with the Daemon Hunters Mission Statement. Also the PW feature is only available to Sargents and up similar to other armies.

Force Weapon: Two words; Deamon Rules. All creatures with the Daemon descriptor are immune to Instant Death. (It's debatable ATM if GK FW works this way but that's more of a writing issue.) So depending on your FLGS's and/or Game Groups rules FW can be worth nothing. So your Grandmaster is paying for an ability that you can't even use against the army that you're built to kill.

So on review NFW which to my mind is one of the two or three defining reasons to play GK; besides fluff/look, and the other rules; has taken a serious beating with the release of the new Daemons Codex. It also seems to fail the criteria that you asked for which is to be more powerful against daemons than other armies. That is why I've been vocal about it, and I apologize if that came off as insulting. I never intended for it to be, so again sorry if it was.

I have a feeling much of this will be moot when the new =I= Dex comes out but since that might not be until 2010 at the soonest it would behoove us to make some tweaks.
But hopefully with a few tweaks to what is, I feel, one of the defining parts of the GK's and some removal of just plain silliness like Codex Chaos Deamons "not really" being Deamons, it makes GKs a more viable option for those who love their fluff and look. Personally I'm praying for plastic models and heads when the new dex releases.

Don't have the books with me, but I thought the Sustained Assault rule was in the 4th ed BRB, and is not present in the 5th ed. Since the grey knight codex referred to sustained assault from the BRB, it's a rule that is now dead, and to be ignored.

The reason for my concern with the ignoring invulnerable saves is that for the most part, it's completely unnecessary. They've already got it in the shooting phase with the psycannons and incincerators, and don't forget their free shot at each unit when you deepstrike. It's a bit over the top to add it on in CC as well, on most things it's a 5++. Only 1/3 of the time will you make it. I could see it on elite units, if the daemons were sporting 4++ on the non-tzeentch and 3++ on the tzeentch, maybe. But when you combine it with the difficult terrain tests to get into assault, it's overkill. It makes me glad that the guy I usually play against is switching from GK to drop guard, now if only he wasn't bringing more HW and Special weapons than I had necrons on the table at the last tournament...