Switch Theme:

Proposed rules for Khorne Daemonkin Codex  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in nz
Regular Dakkanaut




Hey all.

I loved Khorne daemonkin when it came out, it was probably a well needed and fluffy codex for khorne players to truly play how the blood god demands. And i was a bit dissapointed when daemonkin was gone.

Anyway, i thought, since keywords and faction keywords are now a thing. And khorne bloodbound in AOS is actually pretty nice as a khorne themed book. I reakon there should be some rules for Daemonkin for 8th

And so i present some rules to play khorne daemonkin, complete with warlord traits, a trait for daemonkin and stratagems. (relics will probably be a work in progress)

Give some feedback on how it works people. And i hope you all enjoy.

as always

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!
 Filename Khorne Daemonkin Version 1.2.docx [Disk] Download
 Description Khorne Daemonkin (Proposed rules) V1.2
 File size 57 Kbytes

 Filename Khorne Daemonkin Version 1.2.pdf [Disk] Download
 Description Khorne Daemonkin (Proposed Rules) PDF v 1.2
 File size 542 Kbytes

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2018/04/05 04:45:54


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Lots of great stuff here. Well done! I like how you've given them very powerful stratagems but then reigned those in by having them only function on your own turn. A few thoughts:

* I don't like the Victory Point part of Khorne Cares Not. It effectively makes these rules incompatible with any mission that wasn't designed with this rule in mind. Think of any 8th edition game you've had where the end result has been sort of kind of close. What was the difference in points? 3? Maybe 5? Maybe just 1? Now imagine you have 10 extra points because you've killed at least half your opponent's army with your almost entirely melee army. In many missions, this will mean that the primary objective basically didn't matter as you've scored way more points by just killing stuff than playing to the mission could ever have allowed. Imagine games where the scoring means you're only likely to get like... 3ish points at the end of the game. Killing 4 units automatically scores you more points than playing the mission ever would have. And I get that Khorne cares less about objectives than about murder, but this still lends itself to really unfair games where your opponent basically never stands a chance. You could maybe balance this out (maybe) by letting your opponent also score bonus VP for killing units in your army, but this really feels like something that ought to be handled on the mission level. Imagine if Tzeentch armies scored a VP every time they manifested a psychic power.

* Icon of War seems really abusable. If I'm not mistaken, a limited version of this is a 3CP stratagem for Blood Angels. This lets huge swaths of your army benefit from it. Imagine, if you will, deepstriking as much of your army as possible and then reliably rolling an 11 for your charge range. Consider making it a generic "may reroll failed charge rolls" or "may charge after advancing" or something, though I imagine at least one of those is redundant with some extant Khorne rule.

* Destined For Glory also seems just a bit much. D3 + 3 wounds means that you'll basically get most non-MCs back at full health. Recovering with just d3 wounds or even 1 wound is already a pretty big deal. Consider changing this to a stratagem where you pay X command points to recover X wounds instead. As though all the blood of your victims crawls towards you and fuses with your flesh while you... *ahem* Also, maybe clarify that you can't come back to life with more wounds than you started.

*I'm not a big fan of the free reinforcement stratagems. I realize it's not as innately bonkers as 7e generic daemon summoning, but you're still looking at getting tons of free points worth of stuff. With Daemontide and 4CP, I can increase my army's starting size by 16 power level by the end of turn 2 alone. By 40 PL by the end of the game because getting 2CP a turn with this army is easy, and I'll start with some CP for being battleforged anyway.

Plus, you're basically giving them the deepstrike stratagem as part of these stratagems.

Maybe change Daemontide to add models to an existing unit rather than generating a new one? That way, your opponent can shut it down by killing of blood letter and flesh hound units (sort of like shutting down necrons), and you won't be generating additional scoring units. The skull cannon one seems difficult to make reasonable. Perhaps roll the blood crushers into Daemontide and have a stratagem that heals a skull cannon instead of summoning one? Fury Unbound I like a bit more because you have to get a character into optimal position and then kill him off to get the blood thirster, but it also begs the question: what's the cheapest Khorne character out there? And then the followup question: is that price discount worth the CP?

How would you feel about making the summoning stratagems ONLY fundable with Blood Tithe points? It would prevent you from starting off the game by turning a cheap character into a blood thirster or getting 8PL of "free" blood letters or what have you. You'd have to actually spill sufficient blood to benefit from them. The summoning would become something you start seeing halfway through the game when you've accumulated enough points and started sinking into the enemy lines instead of something you'd be doing on turns 1 and 2.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in nz
Regular Dakkanaut




Wyldhunt wrote:
Lots of great stuff here. Well done! I like how you've given them very powerful stratagems but then reigned those in by having them only function on your own turn. A few thoughts:

* I don't like the Victory Point part of Khorne Cares Not. It effectively makes these rules incompatible with any mission that wasn't designed with this rule in mind. Think of any 8th edition game you've had where the end result has been sort of kind of close. What was the difference in points? 3? Maybe 5? Maybe just 1? Now imagine you have 10 extra points because you've killed at least half your opponent's army with your almost entirely melee army. In many missions, this will mean that the primary objective basically didn't matter as you've scored way more points by just killing stuff than playing to the mission could ever have allowed. Imagine games where the scoring means you're only likely to get like... 3ish points at the end of the game. Killing 4 units automatically scores you more points than playing the mission ever would have. And I get that Khorne cares less about objectives than about murder, but this still lends itself to really unfair games where your opponent basically never stands a chance. You could maybe balance this out (maybe) by letting your opponent also score bonus VP for killing units in your army, but this really feels like something that ought to be handled on the mission level. Imagine if Tzeentch armies scored a VP every time they manifested a psychic power.

* Icon of War seems really abusable. If I'm not mistaken, a limited version of this is a 3CP stratagem for Blood Angels. This lets huge swaths of your army benefit from it. Imagine, if you will, deepstriking as much of your army as possible and then reliably rolling an 11 for your charge range. Consider making it a generic "may reroll failed charge rolls" or "may charge after advancing" or something, though I imagine at least one of those is redundant with some extant Khorne rule.

* Destined For Glory also seems just a bit much. D3 + 3 wounds means that you'll basically get most non-MCs back at full health. Recovering with just d3 wounds or even 1 wound is already a pretty big deal. Consider changing this to a stratagem where you pay X command points to recover X wounds instead. As though all the blood of your victims crawls towards you and fuses with your flesh while you... *ahem* Also, maybe clarify that you can't come back to life with more wounds than you started.

*I'm not a big fan of the free reinforcement stratagems. I realize it's not as innately bonkers as 7e generic daemon summoning, but you're still looking at getting tons of free points worth of stuff. With Daemontide and 4CP, I can increase my army's starting size by 16 power level by the end of turn 2 alone. By 40 PL by the end of the game because getting 2CP a turn with this army is easy, and I'll start with some CP for being battleforged anyway.

Plus, you're basically giving them the deepstrike stratagem as part of these stratagems.

Maybe change Daemontide to add models to an existing unit rather than generating a new one? That way, your opponent can shut it down by killing of blood letter and flesh hound units (sort of like shutting down necrons), and you won't be generating additional scoring units. The skull cannon one seems difficult to make reasonable. Perhaps roll the blood crushers into Daemontide and have a stratagem that heals a skull cannon instead of summoning one? Fury Unbound I like a bit more because you have to get a character into optimal position and then kill him off to get the blood thirster, but it also begs the question: what's the cheapest Khorne character out there? And then the followup question: is that price discount worth the CP?

How would you feel about making the summoning stratagems ONLY fundable with Blood Tithe points? It would prevent you from starting off the game by turning a cheap character into a blood thirster or getting 8PL of "free" blood letters or what have you. You'd have to actually spill sufficient blood to benefit from them. The summoning would become something you start seeing halfway through the game when you've accumulated enough points and started sinking into the enemy lines instead of something you'd be doing on turns 1 and 2.


Ok, so the khorne cares not i was going for a more fluffy approach to how they would function gameplay wise, now i know that objectives are worth 3 each for victory points and that tactical objectives are really varied on what they give you in terms of victory pts (1 for capture,2 for defend, d3 for most important missions and 3+d3 for priority or mission critical objectives) hence the victory points for kills, but in exchange for getting that you are loosing out on objective secure, so that means none of your units can hold an objective if a objective secure unit is parked on top of it.
It is fluffy, but ATM i cannot tell if it's too overpowered or not until people try it out on both standard mission and maelstorm.

ATM you can get 18 Victory pts total for a primary objective mission, +3 for secondary objectives (First Blood, Line breaker, Slay Warlord), 21 pts can be claimed.

in that respect, your opponent would need to have 18+ units in their army to lose on main objectives alone with objectives (you dont get obj secure so if they can park an obj unit that can stand their ground, their pretty much gonna give you a hard time)

Maestorm is more tricky, Since the pts can fluctuate so wildly since it's more on chance than advantages. In this scenario i could see this being more powerful as you get access to victory pts without needing cards. This one im not so sure how it would go

I think I will change the Icon of War to something else, was thinking changing it to a +1" aura for advance and charge, this makes the warlord be able to help his army get into the fighting but also makes him much more tamed compared to a extra d6

Destined for glory was a tricky one for me, cause this is actually the third illustration i though of, at first i was d6 for 2+ and full recovery for a 6, then i tamed it down significantly cause i thought it was way too powerful. So im thinking instead make it a 3+, make the heal d3 and the 6 a D3 + 3 instead. Also, FAQ states you cannot go past your starting wounds so you don't need to worry bout that one

The reinforcements bring back the 7th edition codex and it's nice fluffyness. But as you stated i can easily see some problems with it. I think the idea of maybe either reducing the cap of the main 2 (daemontide and harbingers) or making them only able to be used with blood tithe command points probably makes more sense (leaning towards the blood tithe one, as it still allows you to spend normal command pts on other things, plus it sounds WAY more fluffy)

Anyway, thanks for the feedback. It'll be greatly received and tweaked


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just tweaked rules and such. Version 1.1 is now uploaded

Changed The reinforcement stratagems to use only blood tithe points, Makes so much more sense

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/04/04 05:15:45


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





mchammadad wrote:


Ok, so the khorne cares not i was going for a more fluffy approach to how they would function gameplay wise, now i know that objectives are worth 3 each for victory points and that tactical objectives are really varied on what they give you in terms of victory pts (1 for capture,2 for defend, d3 for most important missions and 3+d3 for priority or mission critical objectives) hence the victory points for kills, but in exchange for getting that you are loosing out on objective secure, so that means none of your units can hold an objective if a objective secure unit is parked on top of it.
It is fluffy, but ATM i cannot tell if it's too overpowered or not until people try it out on both standard mission and maelstorm.

ATM you can get 18 Victory pts total for a primary objective mission, +3 for secondary objectives (First Blood, Line breaker, Slay Warlord), 21 pts can be claimed.

in that respect, your opponent would need to have 18+ units in their army to lose on main objectives alone with objectives (you dont get obj secure so if they can park an obj unit that can stand their ground, their pretty much gonna give you a hard time)

Maestorm is more tricky, Since the pts can fluctuate so wildly since it's more on chance than advantages. In this scenario i could see this being more powerful as you get access to victory pts without needing cards. This one im not so sure how it would go


A couple of things here:
1. I think you're putting too much stock in obsec and too little stock in getting points for killing things. The former is a rule that, while nice, only matters when you happen to have troop units on an objective your opponent has non-troop units on and that you both happen to be trying to score. The latter is a thing that you will be doing basically every turn of the game, possibly more than once each turn.

2. I'm less concerned with the Khorne player killing 18+ units to completely invalidate the primaries and more concerned that this will give the Khorne player enough of a VP boost to make close (read: good) games into runaway (read: annoying) victories for the Khorne player. How many enemy units would you say you tend to kill over the course of a 2,000 point game on average? Let's throw out the number 10 for the sake of discussion. What is the difference between the winning and losing scores in a 2,000 point game on average? If it's less than 10, then on average you'll win the game because you did what your army was already trying to do in the first place (kill stuff in melee). Consider if Tau got an extra VP each time they shot something to death.

3. Not all missions are EW or Maelstrom. Even if you come up with a VP manipulation mechanic that works reasonably well for EW and Maelstrom and Open War and every tournament circuit mission pack out there, you still risk having a clunky, intrusive rule that doesn't mesh well with, for instance, a gimmicky campaign mission or your friend's homebrew mission that really only calls for low overall VP scores (like 1 VP per objective held at the end of the game or something.)

4. It doesn't scale super well. Let's say that players usually score about X points when playing a given mission. Let's say that for every 500 points we use to build our armies, my list features about 4 units. Let's say that in an average game between the two of us, you tend to kill about Y% of my army. For the sake of easy math, we'll assume Y = 50% (half my army). That means that if you and I were to play a 1k game, I'd have about 8 units and you'd get about 4 bonus VP for killing half of them. If we played 1500 points, you'd score about 6 extra VP in an average game. If we played 2k, you'd get about 8 extra VP. If I'm playing an especially MSU army or if you typically kill more than half my army, these numbers become even more exaggerated. Basically, the higher the points we play, the larger your innate VP advantage becomes.

5. I get that you want to feel like you're doing Khornate things instead of awkwardly sitting on an objective off to the side because the mission says so. I'd suggest limiting this to friendly/narrative games by hashing out the type of mission with your opponent rather than baking it into the army's rules. If you want to play kill points, great, but don't give yourself a huge advantage doing so. (As an aside, this rule means that you effectively score double what your opponent does in kill point missions). You also might consider giving them some custom 11-16 maelstrom objectives that focus on charging and stabbing rather than objective holding. That ought to help you out in maelstrom games.


I think I will change the Icon of War to something else, was thinking changing it to a +1" aura for advance and charge, this makes the warlord be able to help his army get into the fighting but also makes him much more tamed compared to a extra d6


Seems reasonable.


Destined for glory was a tricky one for me, cause this is actually the third illustration i though of, at first i was d6 for 2+ and full recovery for a 6, then i tamed it down significantly cause i thought it was way too powerful. So im thinking instead make it a 3+, make the heal d3 and the 6 a D3 + 3 instead. Also, FAQ states you cannot go past your starting wounds so you don't need to worry bout that one

d3 and d3+3 on a 6+ seems reasonable to me. The previous version made rolling seem almost like a formality on infantry characters.


The reinforcements bring back the 7th edition codex and it's nice fluffyness. But as you stated i can easily see some problems with it. I think the idea of maybe either reducing the cap of the main 2 (daemontide and harbingers) or making them only able to be used with blood tithe command points probably makes more sense (leaning towards the blood tithe one, as it still allows you to spend normal command pts on other things, plus it sounds WAY more fluffy)

I prefer the latter personally. The former basically asks the question, "How many free army points with deepstrike is a command point worth?" So then you either give the player enough free points per command point for it to be worth it to them (in which case you have the problems I pointed out earlier, albeit in a potentially diminished fashion) or else you give them so few army points per command point that it isn't worth it and the stratagem basically doesn't get used.

By making the the summoning stratagems only purchasable with blood tithe points, you can make them desirable and worth their cost but also grant both players some agency regarding how often the Khorne player will have enough blood tithe CP to actually use them. Basically, it forces the Khorne player to earn his reinforcements, and it gives the other player a chance to mitigate them through interesting game decisions.


Anyway, thanks for the feedback. It'll be greatly received and tweaked


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just tweaked rules and such. Version 1.1 is now uploaded

Changed The reinforcement stratagems to use only blood tithe points, Makes so much more sense


Always happy to offer my two cents. I hope I"m not coming across as overly critical.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in nz
Regular Dakkanaut




Not a problem.

Still, the only thing i can see that would need serious tweaking would be the Khorne cares not rule...... got any suggestions? Want to make it feel like you killing is doing the job, but at the same time i feel that it needs some tweaks to not be too powerful.

An idea i have is make it so that for every X units killed (friend or foe) you get a victory point. Still sounds fluffy, a.k.a still killing off units to win but can be tamed back into a sweet spot so games don't feel too one sided.

Thinking of starting with maybe 4 units per victory point, and might tweak upwards (5) or downwards (3) if it proves to be either too powerful or underwhelming.

Also, tweaked it so it only works for objective based missions, cause I saw the problem of double stacking kill points
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





mchammadad wrote:
Not a problem.

Still, the only thing i can see that would need serious tweaking would be the Khorne cares not rule...... got any suggestions? Want to make it feel like you killing is doing the job, but at the same time i feel that it needs some tweaks to not be too powerful.

An idea i have is make it so that for every X units killed (friend or foe) you get a victory point. Still sounds fluffy, a.k.a still killing off units to win but can be tamed back into a sweet spot so games don't feel too one sided.

Thinking of starting with maybe 4 units per victory point, and might tweak upwards (5) or downwards (3) if it proves to be either too powerful or underwhelming.

Also, tweaked it so it only works for objective based missions, cause I saw the problem of double stacking kill points


It's 40k, and you've already given this army more reason than most to want to kill things. Not only will killing the enemy make it easier to win and reduce your losses, but you're also rewarding them for killing the enemy with blood tithe points. Your most reliable method for killing things thus winning games and getting more blood tithe points is to stab more things. Honestly, you're already encouraging plenty of fluffy stabbing. I'd encourage you to ditch the bonus VP mechanic entirely. It's creating problems but not really solving any. As I mentioned before, if you want to guarantee that killing units is the name of the game (even more so than in a standard 40k game), just express this to your opponent and ask about playing KP missions or something. Again, how would you feel about facing a Tau player that gets bonus VP when they shoot you to death?

Rewarding bonus VP for stabbing things at at 1 point for X units mitigates the difference in scores you'll see at the end of the game, but it doesn't actually get rid of any of those problems. It still won't scale well for the same reasons I explained in my last post. You'll still be giving the Khorne player bonus points for killing off the enemy while simultaneously not requiring them invest as many resources into holding objectives. Unless you want to make the case that Khorne armies are at such a stark disadvantage to other armies in the game that they need bonus VP to have a roughly even chance of winning, you're basically making them mechanically imbalanced for the sake of fluff. And it's cool fluff, I get it, but the VP manipulation mechanic still has numerous flaws right from the premise. :(

Making it only work in objective missions is a flawed idea. I mean, it's an improvement in that you won't be using the VP manipulation in as many games, but doubling your points for KP is basically the same thing as getting a bunch of bonus VP in an objectives game. Imagine that the tau player only gets bonus VP for shooting you to death in objective games.

If you really, really want to keep VP manipulation, I guess you could let the non-Khorne player also score VP for killing off the Khorne player's units. It's still problematic for a number of reasons, but at least both players would have a way to earn a bunch of bonus points each game.

So to reiterate, I see VP manipulation as a problematic mechanic. You are already encouraging Khorne players to stab things and rewarding them for doing so (which is good). It's 40k, so murdering things is generally already the point to some extent or another. Again, I hope I'm not coming across as overly harsh.



ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in nz
Regular Dakkanaut




ok. i see where your coming from.

Tweaked it to remove the extra victory points.

V1.2 is uploaded, added Artifacts of Slaughter and a few more stratagems, also tweaked Khorne cares not.


On a small note. What about if only your dudes dies you get victory points? means that the closer you get to being tabled, the greater the risk of you potentially winning the game if your opponent doesn't wipe you out
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





mchammadad wrote:



On a small note. What about if only your dudes dies you get victory points? means that the closer you get to being tabled, the greater the risk of you potentially winning the game if your opponent doesn't wipe you out


In a typical game of 40k, both sides end up losing units. So in a typical game of 40k, you will be giving yourself X extra victory points just for playing the game in a standard fashion. Which is just another variation on all the other VP issues I've mentioned.



ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: