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.

Alright so, lets say that I take CS as my primary detachment. Does everything have fear or just possessed (since they are the only units in the book)?

(asking because some people say that only the possessed will have it)

Everything. The Harbingers of the Tormented states

"All Models in a Crimson Slaughter detatchment have the Fear special rule."

Possessed already have fear with the Daemon rule anyway.

If what Nightlord 1987 quoted is the line in the supplement then even your rhinos have Fear as long as they are in a Crimson Slaughter detachment.

Yeah, and cultists...

 CrashCanuck wrote:
If what Nightlord 1987 quoted is the line in the supplement then even your rhinos have Fear as long as they are in a Crimson Slaughter detachment.

are they models?

Yes, vehicles are models.

Thanks everyone.
From what I understand, if I have a normal csm army without any of the relics and have the CS book, I can just say it is crimson slaughter and get fear on everything?
Just sounds dumb when said like that, so some people were telling me otherwise.

p8ntba1141ife wrote:
Thanks everyone.
From what I understand, if I have a normal csm army without any of the relics and have the CS book, I can just say it is crimson slaughter and get fear on everything?
Just sounds dumb when said like that, so some people were telling me otherwise.

write your list from the CS book and yes, your stuff gets fear.

scary rhinos.

As if Fear was a useful ability...

More so on a non-walker vehicle...

rigeld2 wrote:
As if Fear was a useful ability...

When your entire army has it for free, its a big deal. Marines may not care, but lots of xenos will, and that's what the top tier lists are these days.

 BarBoBot wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
As if Fear was a useful ability...

When your entire army has it for free, its a big deal. Marines may not care, but lots of xenos will, and that's what the top tier lists are these days.

You are still not going to build an army around it.

Most of my armies are too low in weapon skill for it to matter anyway.
Oh you Tau, you and your crazy disgust for melee.

 BarBoBot wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
As if Fear was a useful ability...

When your entire army has it for free, its a big deal. Marines may not care, but lots of xenos will, and that's what the top tier lists are these days.

Its not just being affect by fear that matters, they also have to be able to be fail that fear check (which necrons or eldar don't) or have failing it actually matter (which with tau it doesn't)

Seriously fear is useless against almost all armies

When you pay no points for it and every unit gets it for free its far from useless...

Are you claiming necrons and eldar can't fail a Ld check? Ha! I guess perils of the warp never happens either right?

When every single unit in your army causes fear for free, your going to have fear checks failed. Its called statistics.

I'll take free army wide fear ANY day.

I play daemons, I already have army wide fear. And having played them since 6ed launched, in the almost two years and hundreds of games played with fear it has only mattered less then 10 times. That's a single digit number. And I rarely play against marines.

It is utterly useless

Statistics disagree with you.

Statistics disagrees? I have a 200+ games of empirical sampling for hundreds of instances of fear. Statistics is on my side.

Sorry, but the odds of failing a LD test even at LD 10 are not concurrent with your experience.

Hundreds of games with multiple instances of fear tests being taken each game and you claim 10 times in total that someone has failed a LD test?

Even if I believed you, are so naive as to think that that's the statistical norm? Its called math. Failing a LD test happens... And when you get that special rule army wide for FREE there is no down side.

Haters gonna hate.

 BarBoBot wrote:
Hundreds of games with multiple instances of fear tests being taken each game and you claim 10 times in total that someone has failed a LD test?

No, only 10 times did fear actually do something. LD has been failed tons of times and a few of those times it was a fear check, but almost never did fear actually affect the game.

Oh so there were times that that army wide FREE special rule was a benefit?

Its almost as if there is no drawback.

 BarBoBot wrote:
Oh so there were times that that army wide FREE special rule was a benefit?

Its almost as if there is no drawback.

the drawback is its a complete waste of time

There's the answer. You probably don't even use fear. You think its a waste of time.

Its no wonder you claim that its only helped 10 times in hundreds of games.

I won't waste any more of your precious time with minor things like game rules.

I always use fear in the hopes it does something and because its a mandatory rule

I play a Typhus army.

Fear is my weapon.

At least you don't have to buy a silly Icon of Despair for the same effect...

 BarBoBot wrote:
There's the answer. You probably don't even use fear. You think its a waste of time.

Its no wonder you claim that its only helped 10 times in hundreds of games.

I won't waste any more of your precious time with minor things like game rules.

It's efficacy in the game is low. The number of games where a fearless or ATSKNF unit is getting charged in my meta is low, even then with lots of warlord traits giving a bubble of effect you are still rolling 9 or 10 on the LD and probability (which is different from statistics) tells that it is a good chance to pass.

For crownaxe the statistics pan out for fear being useless.

The downside is you get different (though admittedly largely better) Warlord traits and less access to Veterans of the Long War. So it's an even trade off. You don't get to use the largely useless due to being over costed VotLW but instead get the largely useless fear everywhere for free.

Once you take out Fearless and ATSKNF armies what are you left with?

Guard: generally stubborn Ld10 or little units that you hit first on 3s. So fear has no real effect on the game.

Tau: Ws2 means you don't need fear to beat them in combat. Getting there is the problem.

Necrons: all Ld10 and mostly reliant on tricks in combat. This is the most likely army for fear to be useful agaibst and it is all Ld10.

Eldar: The only units you're likely to be in combat with will be either Fearless or Ld10 with a reroll...

Dark Eldar: Ld9-10 with a reroll and made of paper if you get in combat with themyou either win regardless of fear or you're in a world of trouble against an Ld10 rerolling beast pack...

So I think it is about fair. The CS supplement is just flatout better than the original in pretty much every way much like the Iyanden one for Eldar. I'd advise every chaos player to use it. Though that advice has nothing to do with the army wide Fear.

 CrashCanuck wrote:
If what Nightlord 1987 quoted is the line in the supplement then even your rhinos have Fear as long as they are in a Crimson Slaughter detachment.

so if your enemy fails his fear check, he hits your moving rhino on 4's, like only fateweaver can!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The downside is you get different (though admittedly largely better) Warlord traits and less access to Veterans of the Long War. So it's an even trade off. You don't get to use the largely useless due to being over costed VotLW but instead get the largely useless fear everywhere for free.

I hate this thinking.

Fear is not useless, it just doesn't come up most of the time. There's a difference.

I said mostly useless and as you concur most of the time it gives you no benefit I don't see how that's different? I didn't say entirely useless just gives infrequent marginal benefits.