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 think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

Sounds fun to me.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

 Evileyes wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

Don't forget Slaanesh stuff like fiends can also mess up psykers.

 MDizzle wrote:
Guys I do play in tourneys but I am not a waac player in fact I have won best sports man over 5 times.

So I think I have some cred when talking about this from a casual gamers POV. Read the OP you are playing a buddy you took the time on a Saturday to get a game in and now because of one dice roll before any shots have been fired lets say the deamon player has the lord of change he dies thats 250pts in your list dead before any shots have been fired I think that would be incredibly frustrating and not any fun for both players.

If everything is that agreeable between you and your opponent, then just ignore the result. Between friends the rules are more like guidelines anyway

Alternatively, suck it up and see what you can pull out of the hat with a disadvantage.

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

I am starting a demon army because of how much I like the warp storm table and the gifts table. It adds so much variety from game to game I think it would be really fun. I also love the screaming bell from fantasy that thing is so much fun.

 gaovinni wrote:
Sounds fun to me.

This is the book summed up. You can build tricky lists and play with the best of them, but at the end of the day it's still fun to play.

I can't wait to see the nercon, GK and IG books get updated this way, the anger will be greater than the sun.

So the chart is OP?
Easy.
Flamers, screamers, crushers and fate took the nerf bat to the face to make up for this.

Also, daemons allways were random, which is why i started them in the 1st place.
Actually had a huge daemon army before it became seperate from chaos.

Adds to the fun IMHO.

 Jackal wrote:
So the chart is OP?

No, the chart is annoying. The objection has nothing to do with whether it's balanced on average or not, it is that it's poor game design to add a huge random element like that.

Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

 MDizzle wrote:
Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

I do not, the game is about having fun and this furthers that goal.

 MDizzle wrote:
Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

Yes. It is bad every time a demon army is present in a game, and it's bad because it's part of GW's trend of adding lots of "cinematic" random tables. Random warlord traits/psychic powers/mysterious objectives/mysterious terrain are some of the worst things about 6th edition and GW can't seem to figure out that they're a very bad idea. I don't care all that much about demons since I hate the army and would be happy if GW removed them from the game entirely, but it is a bad sign for more important armies in the future.

Not at all. It looks like fun, the odds of an extremely important /deadly result occurring are low, and usually the odds are also good (or better, say 3 vs. 11 if your opponent has no psykers) of the daemon player suffering too. It's not just a random roll to screw your opponent.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

Nobody hates mysterious objectives. They are completely fine, and actually help balance the game a bit and improve it, because 2/6 of them help scoring units shoot flyers. I don't think I've played in any events that didn't use them except for the first couple months of 6th, when everyone was scared and kept it really conservative.

Mysterious Terrain is more iffy, and I've only played in one event so far that used it, but I didn't find it too crazy in that event.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve. They are the only army, after all, that has another army, that has the sole purpose of destroying them. I don't think it's a coincidence that daemon's got a 1/11 chance of getting an anti psyker ability, when grey knight's have a 1/1 chance of having anti-daemon abilities on every model, for every turn.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

God i'm not looking forward to facing grey knight's now...force weapons on everyone mean anything with more than one wound is screwed royally. Which is, pretty much anything that isn't troops.

Let's imagine the space marines, got a weapon, that when fired, killed an enemy psyker outright, on a roll of 2d6, with a double 6 making it happen. And then they took a leadership test on 3d6 to see if they could avoid it.

No-one would ever take that weapon, even if it were 5 point's. Because the odd's of actually killing someone with it, are tiny. Mountain out of a molehill

What about Stormlord, or any gun really?....

As a whole, the chart is a bonus for daemons, its a very similar effect to playing Skaven in fantasy where you will occasionally blow up a thing or two, but usually something good will happen to the other guy.

Is it annoying? It is as annoying as anything else in other peoples army that take time. Facing off against 200+ gaunts, guardsmen or boyz is just as 'annoying' in that they take time, I have no say in what they are doing to me, and random luck (LD tests, excellent shooting, ect.) could fark me over.

This new book does a much better job representing a warp rift opening up. Its not the army I'll be playing, but its a hell of a lot more fun than playing solitaire against huge gun lines.

 Evileyes wrote:
Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve.

Then balance them properly. As I said already, the objection is not that the table is overpowered, it's that GW's idea of "cinematic" randomness isn't fun.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

No it isn't. Because:

1) It also applies to armies that aren't GK. If GK and their anti-demon abilities are a problem then you either nerf GK or give demons an anti-GK ability to balance it.

2) It isn't consistent enough to be a balancing factor. The majority of the time when you don't roll the right effect it isn't fun because your army is too weak, and when you do get lucky and roll it you're not having much fun either because you just dominated your opponent because the dice said so, not because you earned a victory.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve.

Then balance them properly. As I said already, the objection is not that the table is overpowered, it's that GW's idea of "cinematic" randomness isn't fun.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

No it isn't. Because:

1) It also applies to armies that aren't GK. If GK and their anti-demon abilities are a problem then you either nerf GK or give demons an anti-GK ability to balance it.

2) It isn't consistent enough to be a balancing factor. The majority of the time when you don't roll the right effect it isn't fun because your army is too weak, and when you do get lucky and roll it you're not having much fun either because you just dominated your opponent because the dice said so, not because you earned a victory.

Then it's just your opinion. I beleive the random is fun, you don't. But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

Demons getting access to soul-destroying, yet random, warp-storms...I don't play demons, nor have I fought a demon army, and that sounds f'ing cool.

Sure it'll suck when my Librarian fails his leadership and explodes into a demon, but hell, them's the breaks. Honestly I think the demons needed something cool and possibly game breaking given how they've been treated over the last edition.

People going to rage? Of course. Will it matter? Probably not. Don't like the rule? Find a way to deal with it, react and counter your enemy, don't just call cheese and stomp off.

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

Let me tell you a little secret. You don't have to play with or against Daemons. I really like the new codex, but I have some issues with it. I will still play with and against it. I do not generally play against Grey Knights because that is the embodiment of cheese.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

I find it fun, because every time I play my army, it won't be the same. Even with bad warpstorms, I can still win, and it will feel more fun because I will feel I won even with the odd's stacked against me slightly. I also find it cinematic. I'm not a WAAC player, I play for the fun of it.

My army won't be static and predictable, with the same formula to win in each game.

And, not playing against an army, is stupid. I play daemons, but I won't deny a game to a grey knight player, even if they are vastly more likely to beat me now. I don't like deathwing armies, but I will still play against them. I don't like that dark eldar will shred through my tough stuff, but I will still play them.

Because, it's about fun, not about winning at all costs. If I met someone who wouldn't play me, because they couldn't predict exactly what was going to happen when they played me, i'd be glad, and i'd find a player who was a bit less uptight to play.

"I don't want to play you, because if you roll well, my army will be weakened" Yeah...if any army rolls right, they will win, daemon's will just win or lose in less predictable ways.

And here I thought players hated flamers and screamers so much that they would have done anything to see them nerfed. You don't see Daemon players wearng T-shirts printed with "I lost Breath of Chaos and all I got was this lousy Warpstom Chart".

Just look forward to the chance you get to have that Tzeentch Herald go poof! Its not like your Librarian has the same Leadership issues the Daemons now have.

It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

I'm more bothered by the lack of eternal warrior, fearless and the leader ship drops. I'm not gonna shelve an army due to a "maybe" on a chart.

This is just more evidence for my theory that GW themselves are trying to kill the tournament aspect of their games. both 8th edition fantasy and 6th 40k added a lot of random effects that no one can count on. More random things added to a game makes it less predictable and thus less viable for serious competition. They couldn't stop tournaments from happening after they dropped all support for them so they are making the game less strict and armies more random. The game should just be silly fun with cool models and that's just what they are doing.

I can't beleive anyone could call this overpowered, or game breaking. Just because something is random, doesn't mean it break's tournament's. Being adaptable, -is- the mark of a good army, and if you can't adapt, and lose because of it, consider it a weakness of your army.

If you build a list, that can only win one specific way, and if any randomness throws a spanner in the works, you lose, that isn't a good army. It's a one trick pony.

It's like saying "Were playing kill points, because my army is built for it, and i'm not letting a random dice roll decide it's an objective game"

You need to be adaptable.

 The Shadow wrote:
It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

So...Because nobody paid points for it, aside from it being apart of the army itself it should go away?

What if the entire army was technically +1 points because of that chart?

 Brotherjanus wrote:
This is just more evidence for my theory that GW themselves are trying to kill the tournament aspect of their games.

I prefer to think of this as them trying to kill off their WAAC players.

Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?