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.

< Taken by the void dragon. >

-To combat the extreme randomness of reserves roll:
If you control a greater daemon in play, you may modify reserve rolls of units that belong to the same Chaos God by one (either +1 or -1) maybe you don't want something to come in
This effect is not cumulative (does not stack) if you take multiple greater daemons of the same God. Should it stack, Would it be too powerful if the units didn't belong to the same Chaos God as the greater daemon?

-Make it an upgrade for Heralds to have the same ability as above maybe +15 or +20 points.

-To combat the scatter of units DS'ing: taking into account the above rule
You have the choice to either have your units come into play with or without scattering. After you have made your reserve rolls, but before any scatter rolls are made, you must declare if that unit will will or will not scatter.
The units that do not scatter deploy using the normal deep strike rules they stick their landing but can't assault, but may run as usual. The units that do scatter may assault the turn they come into play. Units must role for the assault distance: 2d6" for cavalry/beasts and 1d6" for everything else. Kind of like a Slow and Purposeful lite.
All mishap rules still apply.

If your army has an Icon you must declare if any units will be using the Icon or deep striking or deploying next to the Icon.

The above rules just augment the Daemonic Assault rule in the areas dealing with reserves and deep strike deployment not with making 2 waves and rolling for them for them or declaring ICs as in groups or acting alone as in the codex.

-Make DP wings the same cost as in Codex:Chaos Space Marine
-Make Bolt of Tzeentch s9ap1 or S10ap1 but Heavy
-Taking Reece's suggestion "Maybe a few more little benefits if the squads are in the favored multiples of the appropriate chaos god."
-"Sergeant-like" upgrade for Troops choice that has a 3+ armour
-I like GC Mandrake's idea on the beast of nurgle perhaps change that to all nurgle units

Something to deal with deep strike mishap and starting with only half the army deployed. Its very easy to obliterate a Daemons army when they lose up to a third of their troops to accidents and give their opponents the opportunity to focus fire on half their army. Its a nice idea but its actually a serious problem for the army. At my club we had a daemons player and he never won a match. Not that his units were bad or over-priced per sae, but they were too fragile to be deployed in the manner they are. Even my tyranids could just gun them down piece-meal.

So, one of 4 possible things

*All Daemons get deep strike but deploy normally onto a battlefield

* Keep half the army but daemons ignore the mishap table (deploy like drop pods)

*or keep the half army and weakness to mishap, but, Daemon units can assault on the turn they deep strike.

* a kind of daemonic icon that allows units to enter from reserves, deploying within three inches of the unit holding the icon.

< Taken by the void dragon. >

Fold them back into the Chaos Codex

No



Anyway, they should have the option to start on the table. at least the first wave for sure.

Some units should have the ability to outflank. Flesh hounds and Seekers for sure.

The ability to force Nightfighting first turn or some other way to interfere with long ranged shooting at least temoporarly.

Certain units able to assault out of Deep Strike would be a good way of making the Deep Strike attractive, but still risky.

Che-Vito wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:Something to deal with deep strike mishap and starting with only half the army deployed. Its very easy to obliterate a Daemons army when they lose up to a third of their troops to accidents and give their opponents the opportunity to focus fire on half their army. Its a nice idea but its actually a serious problem for the army. At my club we had a daemons player and he never won a match. Not that his units were bad or over-priced per sae, but they were too fragile to be deployed in the manner they are. Even my tyranids could just gun them down piece-meal.

So, one of 4 possible things

*All Daemons get deep strike but deploy normally onto a battlefield

* Keep half the army but daemons ignore the mishap table (deploy like drop pods)

*or keep the half army and weakness to mishap, but, Daemon units can assault on the turn they deep strike.

* a kind of daemonic icon that allows units to enter from reserves, deploying within three inches of the unit holding the icon.

The first is a bit unclear.
The second could be quite a bit broken
The third would be powerful, but with an associated risk to it as well.
The last point already exists, and allows units to enter with 6"

I think I was saying they just deploy like any other army on the board; but they all have deep strike as USR. Basically just do away with the unique deployment entirely.

People are saying 4++ saves but they are forgeting that that is the same as a Tau armour save that cannot be ignored. Give them 5+ armour and a 5++ save. and give them a special rule to explain the armour.

a 5+ armor and 5++ invuln makes no sense unless 6th edition allows multiple saves. Currently, an armor save gives you nothing if your Invuln save is the same or better(now that Psy-weaponry doesn't ignore invulns anymore)

a flat out 4+ invuln is better, unless 40k goes the way of Fantesy and allows multiple saves to be taken against wounds.

Still either give them a 4++ or make them cheaper but dont do both.