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.

Do her rules or fluff say she's a daemon?

ooh its been a while, but that whole - dies and is reborn thing is kind of indicative.

I think that's getting a bit too far into the fluff and a very slippery slope. I don't see that being much different than saying "well this character does ____, therefore they must be a daemon"

For game purposes, it is something you'd have to address pre-game. The avatar lists itself as a daemon iirc as do c:cd units. As a CSM player, I'd have a hard time arguing a DP, and lesser and greater daemons aren't daemons.

I would not count daemonic possesed vehicles though, unless given a strong argument otherwise.

Note that Chaos lords cannot take 'daemonic gifts' like they could in their older codex, so it'd be pretty impossible to gauge that.

Frazzled wrote:ooh its been a while, but that whole - dies and is reborn thing is kind of indicative.

Uh just because you die and come back to life doesn't mean you're a daemon. I mean people legally die all the time and are brought back to life through resuscitation of some kind. Anyways ...


RaW you can go by what has the Daemon special rule.
This does not include Daemon Princes from C:CSM nor most things from C:CSM.

You can also argue that what the CH signifies as a Daemon.
This includes Daemonhosts, Greater Daemons and Daemon Packs, Daemon Beasts, Nurglings, Daemonically Possessed Vehicles (such as Defiliers) or those with Parasitic Possession, Living Vehicle, or Mutated Hull upgrades, Eldar Avatars, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, and Chaos Lords with the Daemonic Stature gift and/or over 50 points of daemonic gifts.

Or you can go and argue anything with the word Daemon in it's name or the Daemon special rule or anything that says Daemon because hey if it says Daemon for it then it must be a daemon.

Or you can use the INAT.

Or you can just D6 it when the relevant question comes up.

Possessed are not technically daemons, they are just possessed men with warped flesh. The Daemonkin rule is only there to show what ways their inner daemons warp them.

Grey elder wrote:Ok but codex Daemon hunters does say for terminology reason that possed marines and Daemon princes are daemons along with some other units , but iam to lazy to list them all.

Oh. Well if it lists them, then that's pretty simple. But if it just says Daemon, I wouldn't consider anything at all in the CSM a daemon. Because they don't get the benefits of being one and there's nothing that states they are one other than their name, which isn't a game attribute -- like, can a "LAND" raider not shoot stuff in the air, cuz it only raids on the land? Another thing I was looking at earlier, Daemons from the Chaos Daemons book, get Daemonic Gifts. The stuff in CSM are just psykers at the best. They aren't even Eternal Warriors.

And yes, I'm too lazy to type C:SM or whatever even though I typed it here and I'm still typing right now even though I'm not really saying anything.

Slarg232 wrote:Possessed are not technically daemons, they are just possessed men with warped flesh. The Daemonkin rule is only there to show what ways their inner daemons warp them.

But you could then argue (as i'm about to do) that because of the deamon within them that mutates/disfigures etc and the man takes on certain deamonic attributes that they could be classed as deamons.

If you're going to give out the anti-daemon bonus for merely being mutated or disfigured by daemons, you've just included the Blood Angels.

Sanginius got his wings as a result of warp taint, a polite word for demonic mutation. So where do you want to draw the line for how many of the Blood Angels to consider daemons?

what about c'tan?

C'tan are about the exact opposite of Daemons.

...anything with the word 'Daemon' in its name?
I don't know why anyone attempts to argue this. It really just makes me want to puke.
"You see this Bloodthirster? Well, despite the fact that it is a Greater DAEMON of Khorne, despite that it is from the Chaos DAEMONS codex, and the fact that one of its rules is 'Daemonic', it is not a Daemon at all. Yeah, sucks to be you."
And if anyone ever attempted to argue this I would immediately give them 0 sports comp in a tournament. I don't know why this is even argued at all.
Greetsz,
Mr. Self Destruct

Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:Possessed are not technically daemons, they are just possessed men with warped flesh. The Daemonkin rule is only there to show what ways their inner daemons warp them.

But you could then argue (as i'm about to do) that because of the deamon within them that mutates/disfigures etc and the man takes on certain deamonic attributes that they could be classed as deamons.

It could go either way. Technically, they are just disfigured humans. Technically, they do have daemons in them.

Mr. Self Destruct wrote:You see this Bloodthirster? Well, despite the fact that it is a Greater DAEMON of Khorne, despite that it is from the Chaos DAEMONS codex, and the fact that one of its rules is 'Daemonic', it is not a Daemon at all. Yeah, sucks to be you."
And if anyone ever attempted to argue this I would immediately give them 0 sports comp in a tournament. I don't know why this is even argued at all.

I don't think anyone is arguing the Chaos Daemons codex, if you took the time to read the post. They were asking about the Chaos Space Marines. Which aren't Greater Daemons of Khorne and which don't have its rules being "Daemon." Everything in the Chaos Daemons codex states it's a Daemon. Nothing in the Chaos Space Marines codex states it's a Daemon other than its title. And titles, as far as I know, aren't used for anything whatsoever in determining the rules of gameplay.

But I understand your frustration. I personally don't know why people sign their names to posts when every post shows their name automatically.

(DukeRustfield wrote this post, btw.)

I play Chaos, own CH and play with several people who do as well. I for one think that the list in there still stands. However, due to the update to C:CSM, it should be noted that a Chaos Lord who had more than 50pts was CLASSIFIED as a Daemon Prince, hence it seems safe to say that if it is in C:CD or has Daemon in its name, it is a Daemon. After all, the argument that a Greater Daemon is not in fact a Daemon is akin to saying a Fish Taco does not actually contain or have anything to do with fish. :/

Archmagos_Amadeus wrote:I play Chaos, own CH and play with several people who do as well. I for one think that the list in there still stands. However, due to the update to C:CSM, it should be noted that a Chaos Lord who had more than 50pts was CLASSIFIED as a Daemon Prince, hence it seems safe to say that if it is in C:CD or has Daemon in its name, it is a Daemon. After all, the argument that a Greater Daemon is not in fact a Daemon is akin to saying a Fish Taco does not actually contain or have anything to do with fish. :/

Why do I get the horrid feeling that Archmagos is somewhat under the age of consent in his jurisdiction, or if not, blissfully unaware?

Fish Tacos are a pretty common American food.

Archmagos_Amadeus wrote:I play Chaos, own CH and play with several people who do as well. I for one think that the list in there still stands. However, due to the update to C:CSM, it should be noted that a Chaos Lord who had more than 50pts was CLASSIFIED as a Daemon Prince, hence it seems safe to say that if it is in C:CD or has Daemon in its name, it is a Daemon. After all, the argument that a Greater Daemon is not in fact a Daemon is akin to saying a Fish Taco does not actually contain or have anything to do with fish. :/

Chaos Lord is infantry. There is no classification as Daemon Prince. Daemon Prince units are Monstrous Creatures. The names are fluff. You don't kill stuff with fluff. The Chaos Daemons codex, which is older than the CSM, lists a Special Rule as Daemon. That is a game attribute they possess. If they wanted to give it to CSM stuff, they would have. But those units don't possess the same abilities.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Fish Tacos are a pretty common American food.

I eat one all the time, but it's usually not 'mine'.

I'm fine with running everything in my CD codex as a "Daemon" along with CSM DPs, LDs, and GDs.

Unless you try to pull objective denial BS against my CDs with Sanctuary in a Landraider, that is.

I really *really* hope Grey Elder plays strictly RaW by this one, otherwise he would be a pick and chooser for his own benefit...

I would play everything RaW, only because we have one grey knight player that plays once in a blue moon, one non-competitive space wolves player, and on daemons player.

DukeRustField - um, no, Codex:CSM is older than Daemons, not the other way around.

The Daemon special rule is listed in Codex: Chaos Deamons. It is not a universal special rule. Does the rule give you special powers against any daemon? Yes it does by RaW. Does it say anything with the Daemon special rule? No it does not. Therefore anything described as a daemon - the name, the special rule, verbage saying this is a daemon - becomes a daemon. In Daemonhunters there is special verbage to go and explain what exactly a daemon is. That is for the DH codex only and it actually states that as well.

By RaW DH do not get bonuses against CSM Daemon Princes but other codices that give special rules against daemons do get the bonus if they have daemon in their name or rules.

Arguing that a Daemon Prince is not a Daemon is like arguing that it a frog prince is not a frog. Yes he might not be a frog at one point in time but at one point in time he is definitely a frog. You cannot exclude a word in a title of something unless a rule specifically states something - aka the DH rule explains what exactly a daemon is to DHs and only to DH. No one else uses their special rules. If you take Grey Knights with Space Marines the regular space marines do not get the special powers that Grey Knights have because the rules do not apply to them.

rogueeyes wrote:Arguing that a Daemon Prince is not a Daemon is like arguing that it a frog prince is not a frog.

So Witch hunters are all witches, and Daemon hunters are all daemons, too? Not to mention Vampire hunters and vampire slayers?

Frazzled wrote:ooh its been a while, but that whole - dies and is reborn thing is kind of indicative.

so... Yarrik are demon too ? and necrons? - they stand back as well!

Necrons are most definitely NOT daemons...almost the exact opposite in fact...

rogueeyes wrote:Does the rule give you special powers against any daemon? Yes it does by RaW. Does it say anything with the Daemon special rule? No it does not. Therefore anything described as a daemon - the name, the special rule, verbage saying this is a daemon - becomes a daemon.

LOL. So Daemonhunters are also Daemons because they have Daemons in their name. And anyone with Preferred Enemy: Ork is actually an Ork because it says Ork in the text. And if a Sanctioned Psyker/Primaris Psyker/Psyker Battle Squad make any kind of attribute test, like leadership/initiative, a Librarian can nullify it using their Psychic hood because it's literally a Psychic Test, not only that another Librarian can nullify their Psychic hood test because it's also a Psychic Test. There's a million other ways you can make up stuff based on names or description. That stuff is fluff.

This why games have characteristics. And the game works off those. Page 6 of the handbook lists all the characteristics. It includes Weapon Skill->Armor Save, wargear, special rules, vehicle characteristics. Title is not one of them. Description is not one of them. Warhammer 40K does not list that among the characeristics that define a profile.

Per the Witch Hunters FAQ:

Q. Do Arco-Flagellants require a Witch Hunter
Priest to be fielded or can an Imperial Guard
Priest fulfill the requirement?
A. Yes – the Priest referred to is the Priest in the
Witch Hunters Codex.

What the? But it has Priest in the name!!!

nosferatu1001 wrote:Necrons are most definitely NOT daemons...almost the exact opposite in fact...

I think the point is that St Celistine isn't a demon because she dies and come back, since other things do that too.

Oh, and just browsing around I saw under the Eldar codex, a note for Avatar. He has the Special Rule: Daemon, with the further note, "to all intents and purpsoes, an avatar is a Daemon and therefore will be affacted by weapons and abilities that affect Daemons." Minus the text, all entries under Chaos Daemons have the same Special Rule, i.e., theirs just says "Daemon." Nothing in Chaos Space Marines has that rule.

@ various people, with the whole daemon hunters has daemon in it so = daemon, but daemon prince is a CSM who has been elevated to 'daemonhood' therefore I'd say that probably classifies it as a daemon. Also with daemon/ witch hunters, the important word to rememcer is HUNTER as in goes out and beats seven bleeps out of whatever it's hunting.

Still on anything that has Daemon in the name then you might have to include Daemon Hunters.
And there are those that would argue that a Daemon Prince isn't a Daemon because it isn't necessarily a fully warp born being (given its mortal origins).