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.

So back in 7th there was the greatest codex in the world - Khorne Daemonkin. It wasn't overpowered, it wasn't even too great but it provided something no other codex offered - the chance for an extremely fun and themed army around the most iconic chaos god.

In 8th, they never reappeared however and it doesn't look like they will in 9th either. This is weird for me because the exact opposite happened in AOS - daemonkin equivalent armies were released in even greater numbers and even expanded.

The question therefore is why not in 40k? I regularly saw players fielding these list at clubs and generally these forums saw lots of lists around it because as said - it was a very thematic army and great fun to play so what made GW give up on this?

P.S. I know you can still do this kind of list with a general chaos keyword but that's not the same as an actual army with an actual codex and some cool mechanics on how to play them.

The codex didn’t fail. It was quite awesome as you have pointed out. The reason we didn’t have it in 8th or something similar now for 9th is because we don’t need it. There’s no place for it, no reason for it to be a thing. We have the ability to make very similar armies, nearly identical, in some cases exactly identical with the current army construction rules. We didn’t have such freedoms in 7th edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Open Play is now a thing and is very conducive to playing armies like Deamonkin.

Sumilidon wrote:
So back in 7th there was the greatest codex in the world - Khorne Daemonkin. It wasn't overpowered, it wasn't even too great but it provided something no other codex offered - the chance for an extremely fun and themed army around the most iconic chaos god.

In 8th, they never reappeared however and it doesn't look like they will in 9th either. This is weird for me because the exact opposite happened in AOS - daemonkin equivalent armies were released in even greater numbers and even expanded.

The question therefore is why not in 40k? I regularly saw players fielding these list at clubs and generally these forums saw lots of lists around it because as said - it was a very thematic army and great fun to play so what made GW give up on this?

P.S. I know you can still do this kind of list with a general chaos keyword but that's not the same as an actual army with an actual codex and some cool mechanics on how to play them.

For whatever reasons, GW won't commit to a change in the 40k chaos product line. I think they suspect they'll get more money dangling a string of hope in front of chaos players. But they've invested so much into Legions, Renegades and the Big 4 that they can't or won't just pick a direction and stick to it out of fear that it will all blow up. Or eclipse loyalists, I guess. Though I'm not sure why good sales in another part of the product line would be bad?

Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

I think that a good compromise would be to allow players to pay command points to integrate CSM and daemons into each others' armies to varying degrees.

 oni wrote:
The codex didn’t fail. It was quite awesome as you have pointed out. The reason we didn’t have it in 8th or something similar now for 9th is because we don’t need it. There’s no place for it, no reason for it to be a thing. We have the ability to make very similar armies, nearly identical, in some cases exactly identical with the current army construction rules. We didn’t have such freedoms in 7th edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Open Play is now a thing and is very conducive to playing armies like Deamonkin.

I didn’t say the codex failed, rather the entire concept to the point the army as daemonkin was never continued. In terms of it not being needed, I draw parallel to AOS. A far less popular game but with a huge number of armies. 40k in comparison has far fewer armies than it did in 7th (or at least recognised and fully supported armies) with some being merged and others lost. Just seems silly to me.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

Why? As long as you don't have to use daemons, any more than you have to use terminators, dreadnoughts, or a tank, what would be the difference? The Chaos line is big enough to cover lots of different themes. CSM and daemons used to be in the same codex, and it wasn't a problem back then.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

I think that a good compromise would be to allow players to pay command points to integrate CSM and daemons into each others' armies to varying degrees.

Yeah that's not a good compromise with how much command points are needed, especially since Chaos is penalized already for needing to spend it to take 30k units because GW has decided for some reason to ensure a penalty to Chaos.

You can can't you? There's a Chaos Daemons army, though it is a little left behind apparently, and would be a force organised around a keyword if you included astartes and not entirely "pure" so to speak as you said.

Are there no rules or strategems or army themes for taking a solid khornate list from the chaos Daemons codex?

I think at the most basic, Chaos in 40K is based around either the Legions or Daemons, with additional support to Renegades and things like Chaos Knights. Daemonkin was additional design requirements they just don’t have space for, especially given there are no Daemonkin models.

Since the rules now support daemonkin-style armies out-of-the-box, they don’t need to spend design resources on a codex for armies with no models. Instead, you get little helpings like Disciples of Belakor.

Because tourney players whined.

Same reason why AdMech is this disgusting hodgepodge of things thrown together now.

Admech were clearly always intended to be one army though since both Codexes weren't even half full. But since it was the edition of mini-Dexes apparently it was OK. The games team were clearly testing concepts and the mini-Dexes were a failed one with only Harlequins surviving into 8th.
And have you got anything to back the "tourney players complained" thing about KDK? It wasn't a competitive army in the slightest, it was just a big meme fest.

AdMech were clearly not intended to be a complete army though. As much as James Hewitt keeps repeating that statement, it makes zero sense when one actually notes how the shift from 7E to 8E worked for AdMech...notably, not very well.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

Welcome back to the 90s? Daemons on their own as either entirely inappropriate animosty-less combined lists or sad little mono-god lists missing most of the 40k toolkit is a pathetic remnant of something that used to work just fine.

 Kanluwen wrote:
AdMech were clearly not intended to be a complete army though. As much as James Hewitt keeps repeating that statement, it makes zero sense when one actually notes how the shift from 7E to 8E worked for AdMech...notably, not very well.

Yeah because one bad codex is such a good indicator. Everyone knew they pretty much were supposed to be one codex and were only keeping them apart due to trying to milk players.

If they were so designed to go together, it would have been zero effort.

Voss wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

Welcome back to the 90s? Daemons on their own as either entirely inappropriate animosty-less combined lists or sad little mono-god lists missing most of the 40k toolkit is a pathetic remnant of something that used to work just fine.

CSM and daemons being in separate codexes is just another bad result of the 4th Edition Abomination. That codex was the worst thing that ever happened to Chaos.

 Kanluwen wrote:
If they were so designed to go together, it would have been zero effort.

Yes you are correct every other codex is perfect as they've been designed from the beginning. It's not as if codex's have had completely inane rules through or issues in the same edition they were in that have failed completely.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If they were so designed to go together, it would have been zero effort.

Yes you are correct every other codex is perfect as they've been designed from the beginning. It's not as if codex's have had completely inane rules through or issues in the same edition they were in that have failed completely.

You understand that the constant "AdMech were meant to be one army!" thing completely ignores that none of the rules really interacted with each other, right?

And that apparently for such a "meant to be one army" faction concept...they cut a lot of rules?

That's not even getting into things like the removal of squadroned Onagers.

Prob the dude who wrote it left the company.

You could play Nurgle Daemonkin just fine in 8th. You just allied Nurgle Daemons and CSM or Deathguard. With Epidemius you'd even have a unique army rule. Put those Obliterators around Nurgle trees and bring up the tally .
Overall it was very easy to ally CSM and Daemons in 8th, there were some synergies between the two in addition to the CP bonus you got from taking several detachments in the first place.

What you really miss about Khorne Daemonkin is the Blood Tithe mechanic, but from what I've read about the Codex it was also the only unique thing about the book that was otherwize just a copy and paste job.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the OP here and hoped the DG Codex would be like Maggotkin of Nurgle with Daemons and even Gellarpox Infected included, but GW likes its very fractioned approach to 40K with too many books. However, it's still very easy to put together a "Daemonkin" army if you want to.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

I think that a good compromise would be to allow players to pay command points to integrate CSM and daemons into each others' armies to varying degrees.

Good news! You can do exactly that by buying an allied detachment with CP. ;D

But yeah, agree with Cortez that the Blood Tithe mechanic is the secret sauce that they're missing these days. That was a tasty army rule. It was thematic. It took the sting off of losing your own units. It could potentially change the way your army as a whole played... I wish more of the new doctrine-slot rules felt more like Blood Tithe did. Not literally those same rules, but rules that were more about creating an ebb and flow to the gameplay and less about stacking random buffs onto units throughout the game.

Blood Tithe was indeed the thing that made KDK unique and fun. I think a reworked version of that could be fun in a hypothetical 9th edition KDK codex.

I don't play Chaos anymore so it wouldn't affect me personally, but I'd love to see Khorne Daemonkin return, perhaps with some unique units (like Khorne Berzerkers riding Juggernauts!).

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If they were so designed to go together, it would have been zero effort.

Yes you are correct every other codex is perfect as they've been designed from the beginning. It's not as if codex's have had completely inane rules through or issues in the same edition they were in that have failed completely.

You understand that the constant "AdMech were meant to be one army!" thing completely ignores that none of the rules really interacted with each other, right?

And that apparently for such a "meant to be one army" faction concept...they cut a lot of rules?

That's not even getting into things like the removal of squadroned Onagers.

Gw1: we need this range in 2 books
Gw2: 2 codex?
Gw1: yes, make them stand alone
Gw2: that's not what we wanted though
Gw1: tough luck
Gw2: OK better make one half have different rules to the other just because!

That's likely what happened and just because they were 2 books that cemetery ignores the rules staff would have been told to make it so they sisters interact.

Then oddly they needed more than 1 attempt to blend them together in a way that worked. Reference the dark eldar and daemons codex for other armies with the same issue.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

Welcome back to the 90s? Daemons on their own as either entirely inappropriate animosty-less combined lists or sad little mono-god lists missing most of the 40k toolkit is a pathetic remnant of something that used to work just fine.

CSM and daemons being in separate codexes is just another bad result of the 4th Edition Abomination. That codex was the worst thing that ever happened to Chaos.

This !
Also, quite likely as a test for a future World eaters dex.

But like many awesome things gw decided to go with everything else first and foremost.
Just like GW ruleswriters still only reference 2nd, and 4th edition codex for inspiration as we could see in WD during the release of the 6th ? or 7th edition codex.
Which quite frankly especially in regars to the shitshow the 4th dex was is the main reason why chaos marines baseline just SUCK for all types of chaos players really.

(which also helped popularise IA13 and R&H incidentally because that list gave back your dudes to you.... until GW decided to feth that too. No fun allowed corner it is since then for Chaos players)

Yeah. Going purely off of the streamlined statblocks from the back of the 3rd edition main rulebook, I always had the impression that chaos used to have a really different playstyle from loyalist marines that never really came back after they split the faction into CSM and Daemons.

Like, cultists usually just feel like worse guardsmen. Chaos marines mostly feel like worse marines (perhaps never moreso than now with the Wound gap they refuse to errata.) But chaos marines with supernatural wargear, cultists that can serve as deepstrike beacons for daemons, and that tasty marine gun + daemon claw synergy? That seems like it was probably good stuff.

Every daemon codex I've ever ready has basically felt like three and a half flavors of stabbing things slightly differently (with Tzeentch being the exception), and a thematic (read: monogod) army should probably only use 1/4th of the codex at a time. You really feel that absence of all those CSM units that would slot in so well alongside the daemon stuff.

Daemonettes getting covering fire from noise marines. Hordes of nurglings and GUOs with chonky, anti-tank toting plague marines in the middle. Elite, anti-marine rubricae surrounded by hordes of objective grabbing horrors and cover-clearing flamers...

Khorne has a bit less synergy as both his CSM and daemon units are basically just a bunch of variations on stabbing, but at least CSM could bring some guns to help the daemons get into melee.

Sumilidon wrote:
In 8th, they never reappeared however and it doesn't look like they will in 9th either.

In a weird twist of fate, when I first opened this thread I happened to have the Khorne Daemonkin Codex open on my desk in front of me, as I was getting information for one of the players in my Black Crusade group who had a query about types of Bloodthirsters.

When I read the above quote, specifically the bolded bit, it got me thinking: I think we will see them again. Sort of.

See in the KD book there are the 'Bloodsworn Hordes', and I could see them adapting these for an eventual World Eater Codex. In the same way we have the Plague Companies of the Death Guard, and the Legion Cults for the Thousand Sons, I could very easily see GW basing the World Eater specialist sub-faction rules around The Skullsworn, The Wrath, The Harvest, The Eightscarred and The Bloodgorged.

Now I left off the Brazen Beasts, as they're currently a Renegade Chapter in the CSM rules, but there's no reason they couldn't be subsumed into the WE ranks, especially if they want to push the 'shattered legion' side of the World Eaters. I also think that they'd come up with two more to give us eight in total (I mean, they better bloody well - Nurgle got 7 and Tzeentch got 9, so Khorne should get 8!).

I don't think they'll have Daemons, hence why I said I think they'll sort of come back, but I think that some of what we had could be restored or reimagined via the WE book.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Because if GW ever committed to integrating daemons into CSM then the people who just want to play spiky angry loyalists would riot.

That makes zero sense. You wouldn't have to take Daemons any more than you have to take Land Raiders, or Helbrutes, or Cultists now.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Because tourney players whined.

Blaming the players, as always.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Same reason why AdMech is this disgusting hodgepodge of things thrown together now.

Again with this total falsehood? C'mon Kan. The guy who worked at the studio at the time said that they were meant to be one army, but were split into two by the higher powers that be.

I don't think it failed, I just think the 'design space' went in different directions, namely that the Thousand Sons and Death Guard appeared as standalone armies (well, TS were still a CSM supplement but only for like five minutes at the tail end of 7th). You could argue they did flirt with the Daemonkin concept by including Tzeentch and Nurgle Daemons in their respective Legion's 8th codexes, but of course, their rules undermined the Marines in a way Daemonkin didn't punish you - and encouraged - pairing them up. I think the 40k designers just want to keep a much more obvious split between different factions.

Compare that to AoS where 'Daemonkin' battletomes are the norm for the Chaos Gods, so apparently the AoS team still like the idea.

 Kanluwen wrote:
AdMech were clearly not intended to be a complete army though. As much as James Hewitt keeps repeating that statement, it makes zero sense when one actually notes how the shift from 7E to 8E worked for AdMech...notably, not very well.

Next you'll tell me Storm Troopers Tempestus Scions and their whopping four units weren't supposed to go into the Imperial Guard 'dex and totally weren't arbitrarily pulled out to sell another £25 codex.

regarding admech the rumor is that GW split skitari and cult mech into 2 books so that they didn't have a codex come out without the minis avaliable right away due to GW having smaller release waves etc.

as for khorne demonkin a biiiiig part of the problem is it was based around "kill gak to summon stuff" it was a fun concept but sadly there was backlash agaisnt "free units" from summoning and detachments. while most of the ire was aimed at stuff like the marine battle company and tzzetch "massive summoning blob" armies, I suspect KDK are a case of a fun concept suffering from this as well.

In short the baby got thrown out with the bathwater. Also GW viewed the rules for 8th edition as effectively allowing that type of army via soup

The issue with those who say “You can do it with allies,” is that DG and Nurgle Daemons break the DG purity bonus.
Same for TS and Tzeentch Daemons.
And it’ll probably be the same for CSM and Daemons, when they get their updated Codecs.