PDA

View Full Version : Loyalist armies and deamon summoning.



Limenix
28-05-2014, 15:28
Ok , so i had my 1st 7th Ed. game last night.
CSM's Vs Iron hands.(i'm the iron hand)

We put a little bit of everything in your lists (2000 pts) , just to see how things work.

I was really impressed with the Lev.3 chaos Demon prince that summoned by the end of the game X20 Bloodletters and X3 Bloodcrushers.
Not bad at all (with just 3+D6 power dice) and not too OP in my opinion.
30 power dice and 50 demons per turn is another story .... and not a funny one :cries:

Thing is ... i want that too.
So how can a loyalist army (any) take demonology and survive the process?
Since every doubles will be a perils , it comes down to survivability i think.
What/who psyker/psykers would manage to summon deamons to buff a loyalist army?
Not just for 1 turn , but at least 3-4 for a minimum of 3-4 summoned units.

Also...

What is the best demon unit to summon? (apart from Bloodthirsters/greater demons obviously)
I dont think bloodletters is the answer.
What Herald and what to buy with 30pts upgrades?

Theocracity
28-05-2014, 15:52
Well, if you're dead set on becoming a filthy heretic, the best way to go is the proper Traitor Marine way - get some saps to do your dirty work.

Ally in some Guard units and use their Primaris, Astropaths and Wyrdvane Psykers to do your summoning. You get more dice and perils-redundancy by burning the brains out of expendable mortals than you would by dirtying the hands of your powerful Librarian.

Just know that the Emperor is always watching, and always judging you for your crimes against him ;).

Limenix
28-05-2014, 16:03
LoL ... i can feel the ordo Hereticus outside my house already :-)

dragonet111
28-05-2014, 16:04
I think this can be the start of a very good campaign. would you stay loyal? Are you going to become a monster to kill another monster. As a casual player this daemonology offers a lot potential for fun narratively driven games.

jtrowell
28-05-2014, 16:18
Isn't the solution just to summon herals of Tz. first, and then use them to continue summoning, as they are daemon and do not suffer the increased miscast chance ?

Limenix
28-05-2014, 16:25
Astra militarum.
X2 command squads + astropaths
X2 6man wyrdvane psykers
X3 lev.2 Primaris psykers

10+d6 power dice at about 500-600 points.
Let the wyrdv... damn that name .... wyrdv-mutants summon the deamons.
throwing 6+ dice per attempt , twice per turn should summon X20 deamons per turn.
Back them up with AM big guns and let the enemy try to get to them , through the infernal hordes.

Oh yes ... i can feel the calling of tzeentch ...

Latro_
28-05-2014, 17:05
Take INQ as your primary, you can stack primaries so spam about 20 inquisitors as 20 detachments (1100pts 20+d6 warp dice) (INQ can just be an INQ no need for 2 troops)

Take your marines as the allied detachment.
Say tiggy for another 3 warp dice and 10 marines... should bring you to 1500ish :D

this is off the top of my head

edit: better yet take multiple 3 man psyker henchman squads for a mere 30pts not the 55inq cost :D (this might be a bit flakey, dunno if the rules specifically give these guys daemonology)

Not even bothering with allies and if psyker squads give daemonology:

1500pts:
INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

40+d6 warp charge points a turn. Fully battle focused picked army :D. If legal (at work cant check) then that should open up ye very own eye of terrrror

duffybear1988
28-05-2014, 17:20
Kill it! Kill it now! Fluff abomination alert! Burn the heretic! Purge the unclean!

Remember brothers, faith overcomes all!

don_mondo
28-05-2014, 17:38
Take INQ as your primary, you can stack primaries so spam about 20 inquisitors as 20 detachments (1100pts 20+d6 warp dice) (INQ can just be an INQ no need for 2 troops)

Take your marines as the allied detachment.
Say tiggy for another 3 warp dice and 10 marines... should bring you to 1500ish :D

this is off the top of my head

edit: better yet take multiple 3 man psyker henchman squads for a mere 30pts not the 55inq cost :D (this might be a bit flakey, dunno if the rules specifically give these guys daemonology)

Not even bothering with allies and if psyker squads give daemonology:

1500pts:
INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

INQ - Lvl 1 -55
3x psykers - 30
3x psykers - 30
4x psykers - 40

40+d6 warp charge points a turn. Fully battle focused picked army :D. If legal (at work cant check) then that should open up ye very own eye of terrrror

What's really sad is that I have the models to do this.

HoBoAnarki
28-05-2014, 17:54
Surely you could do this for less points by swapping the 3x psyker squads for 1 psyker and 2 warrior acolytes.

That's 18 points compared to 30.

Amnar
28-05-2014, 18:05
Man... What is wrong with this edition?

Spare Change
28-05-2014, 18:11
.. And so it begins.

Latro_
28-05-2014, 18:38
Surely you could do this for less points by swapping the 3x psyker squads for 1 psyker and 2 warrior acolytes.

That's 18 points compared to 30.

haha ok lets roll out a new list:

1500pts:

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

Another INQ (why not) 55

1472pts. 53 + d6 warp charge points. Again, Battleforged not unbound hah. If legal (guys?) and you get the first turn... its raining daemons

MarshalFaust
28-05-2014, 18:59
This is why we can't have nice things.

duffybear1988
28-05-2014, 19:02
I'm surprised it took this long.

AngryAngel
28-05-2014, 19:11
Kill it! Kill it now! Fluff abomination alert! Burn the heretic! Purge the unclean!

Remember brothers, faith overcomes all!

Yeah I was thinking the same thing....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp5ekMlQvi4

stroller
28-05-2014, 19:18
Nope. I don't get it.

I DO get "I want all the shiny toys from everywhere". I also get "I want the killiest list". I don't get "I want space marines fluff ... but with extras".

If you want daemons, go chaos in the first place.

duffybear1988
28-05-2014, 19:23
Yeah I was thinking the same thing....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp5ekMlQvi4

:)


Stroller I totally agree with you.

Killgore
28-05-2014, 19:28
Roll out the Grey Knights, there be Daemons to slay!


Half of those Psykers would go pop in a few turns anyway :P

Welfstar
28-05-2014, 19:30
Nope. I don't get it.

I DO get "I want all the shiny toys from everywhere". I also get "I want the killiest list". I don't get "I want space marines fluff ... but with extras".

If you want daemons, go chaos in the first place.

Yup. This.

From a fluff perspective, no Iron Hand has ever summoned daemons, not in 10,000-odd-years. Please don't start now. The Gorgon wouldn't be happy with you.

Theocracity
28-05-2014, 19:33
From a fluff perspective, no Iron Hand has ever summoned daemons, not in 10,000-odd-years. Please don't start now. The Gorgon wouldn't be happy with you.

Somewhere in the Warp, the Sapphire King is laughing.... ;)

Plague Lord
28-05-2014, 19:33
Shame they didn't insert RANDOM DAEMONS coming out of the psyker when he dies from perils - would be fun. Giving daemonology to loyalist/eldar (well imperial guard would be cool and fluffy) is BS in my mind.

Welfstar
28-05-2014, 19:36
Somewhere in the Warp, the Sapphire King is laughing.... ;)

Indeed. :D

Chem-Dog
28-05-2014, 19:46
I would like to see these Psyker battery lists going up against an equal points Value Culexus Assassin Army.

Formerly Wu
28-05-2014, 19:50
From a fluff perspective, no Iron Hand has ever summoned daemons, not in 10,000-odd-years. Please don't start now. The Gorgon wouldn't be happy with you.
That's incorrect. (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gaudinian_Heresy#.U4YvHq1dWp0)


Kristos plunged a nest of his mechadendrites into the fleshy receptors of the machines around him. Soon enough it became apparent that Kristos had given himself to the forces of Chaos (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Chaos), and was transformed into a hideous bulging machine-spawn of flesh and metal.[1] (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gaudinian_Heresy#fn_1)The corruption did not end at Kristos however, those loyal to him (known as Kristosians) soon became overcome by the "perfection" of these flesh-engines and succumbed to the same malignancy as the Iron Father. Soon enough Daemons (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Daemon) began to emerge from these fresh hosts, assaulting whatever loyal Iron Hands remained.

Welfstar
28-05-2014, 20:01
My mistake, two handfulls of Iron Hands have summoned daemons in 10,000-odd-years.

Feel free to continue the work of brave Brother Kristos.

Ayin
28-05-2014, 20:41
Shame they didn't insert RANDOM DAEMONS coming out of the psyker when he dies from perils - would be fun.

This is what's really still getting me. I just keep expecting this to be done. I expected it in the new Demons codex, then I expected it in the new edition, and it just keeps not happening.

Theocracity
28-05-2014, 20:47
This is what's really still getting me. I just keep expecting this to be done. I expected it in the new Demons codex, then I expected it in the new edition, and it just keeps not happening.

The Warp Storm table in the demons codex can make it happen. And I figure the worst result of the Perils table might as well be that.

And how annoyed would people be if fielding a psyker didn't just provide an option to buy and field demon models, but a mandatory requirement to do so?

insectum7
28-05-2014, 20:53
The Warp Storm table in the demons codex can make it happen. And I figure the worst result of the Perils table might as well be that.

And how annoyed would people be if fielding a psyker didn't just provide an option to buy and field demon models, but a mandatory requirement to do so?

The requirement should be that the psykers opponent have a daemon model. This would be a great little FU moment as the opponent chooses a daemon from his collection and places it on the table. :)

Losing Command
28-05-2014, 20:57
If you want to summon daemons, play psykers with the Daemon special rule. I've tried the summon thing with my Thousand sons sorcerer (and Ahriman) and all it did was drain lots of warp dice and take 2 wounds away from my valuable casters before they finally managed to summon a unit. Which then got shot in one round of shooting.

Loyalist daemon summoning is bound to suck, unless you can sacrifice lots of wounds and still eat all incoming damage from your opponent...

AngryAngel
28-05-2014, 21:06
If you were going to do it for loyalists I could see using better IC psykers to gain power dice. Then using the brotherhood of psykers groups to use them. As mostly you'd lose a member of the squad each time you do it. However, for like the wyrdvane psykers that isn't all that bad.

If your going to be a vile fluff murdering baby eater, that is.

Plague Lord
28-05-2014, 21:49
If you were going to do it for loyalists I could see using better IC psykers to gain power dice. Then using the brotherhood of psykers groups to use them. As mostly you'd lose a member of the squad each time you do it. However, for like the wyrdvane psykers that isn't all that bad.

If your going to be a vile fluff murdering baby eater, that is.

A covenant of human sorcerors following a tzeentch warband? ;] Not that bad fluffwise it get's worse when suddenly loyalist space marines or eldar summon daemons :(

Voss
28-05-2014, 22:07
Man... What is wrong with this edition?

They're just forging the narrative.

That it is one of abuse, pain, and background destruction can't be held against them, since it was obvious from the start that it was the inevitable result. Bad rules yield bad results.

innerwolf
28-05-2014, 22:37
The thing is, turning to Chaos to fight the power of Chaos, tempted by its power, is completely fluffy.

However, those summoning battery abominations where units are spammed ad nauseum until an army turns into a bunch of model-shaped counters and dice rolling are an insult to Warhammer, and while allowed by the rules it should be restrained by reasonable players.

Fear Ghoul
28-05-2014, 23:13
The thing is, turning to Chaos to fight the power of Chaos, tempted by its power, is completely fluffy.

Not for most of the named Chapters it isn't.

Spare Change
28-05-2014, 23:20
Not for most of the named Chapters it isn't.

I'm just amazed that the Imperium still exists at all, given that Chapters turn renegade every twenty seconds, according to Warseer. :rolleyes:

innerwolf
28-05-2014, 23:32
One certain game doesn't have to represent your every day battle in the uinverse of Warhammer 40k, you know. It may represent an isolated event of a certain character.

Gonefishing
28-05-2014, 23:38
and while allowed by the rules it should be restrained by reasonable players.

But what defines a reasonable player? It's all subjective - what's considered overpowered pap by one player is considered fine and fluffy by another....mix there local meta into the list and they are probably both right. 40k has never been chess (and currently if it was you could spam 16 queens), but there should (from a gaming point of view) be at least some parameters that define and limit the scale of the game, it shouldn't be down to the players to police themselves - all it does is further polarise the remaining player base.

itcamefromthedeep
28-05-2014, 23:47
What's really sad is that I have the models to do this.That's funny.


Surely you could do this for less points by swapping the 3x psyker squads for 1 psyker and 2 warrior acolytes.

That's 18 points compared to 30.Pfffft.


Man... What is wrong with this edition?ahaha


.. And so it begins.HAHAHA


This is why we can't have nice things.AHAHAHA


I'm surprised it took this long.BWAHAAHAHAHA!

I love this thread.

Inquisitor Kallus
29-05-2014, 02:22
Man... What is wrong with this edition?

Its more a case of what's wrong with some gamers

Fear Ghoul
29-05-2014, 02:31
One certain game doesn't have to represent your every day battle in the uinverse of Warhammer 40k, you know. It may represent an isolated event of a certain character.

Like Ezekiel for instance?

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 02:50
Like Ezekiel for instance?

In an alternate timelie/continuity than the one you hold so fast to, yes. Why not?

Just Tony
29-05-2014, 02:54
Yup. This.

From a fluff perspective, no Iron Hand has ever summoned daemons, not in 10,000-odd-years. Please don't start now. The Gorgon wouldn't be happy with you.

One of the main reasons I played the Iron Warriors. Also, what is that avatar?


In an alternate timelie/continuity than the one you hold so fast to, yes. Why not?

I know what you mean, in an alternate timeline story I wrote Gulliman was actually one of the traitor Primarchs, and was supposed to be the second wave to attack Terra, but didn't attack because he figured he'd inherit the Empire if he played his cards right. Also the 1st company didn't die fighting Tyranids, they turned to Chaos wholesale and it was covered up by Calgar, who is secretly planning to orchestrate a coup with all the chapters that were spawned from the Ultramarines geneseed.

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 03:20
I know you are being sarcastic, but I wouldn't really have much issue playing against that. The games we play are "what if's", exploring the setting itself. And the setting is filled with people gaining knowledge they shouldn't and/or falling to corruption. Every Librarian is vulnerable to opening themselves up to temptation, and the Warp has a way of wearing away at even the strongest willed. And at least some Librarians are going to have knowledge that they probably shouldn't. Is it really that inconceivable that the chief Librarian of the chapter that holds the darkest secrets would have access to knowledge that the Inquisition would deem heretical?

And then I've got to ask. If the likes of Horus, Lorgar and Magnus could succumb to the temptations of Chaos, what makes Ezekial so special that he cannot?

AngryAngel
29-05-2014, 03:29
If every game you play ends up being the what if, it hardly feels like a rare occurrence anymore. Note, not trying to really fight it at this point, people will be people. I just hope this silly loyalist summons demons horse hockey passes by eventually, like a hurricane.

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 03:32
If every game you play ends up being the what if, it hardly feels like a rare occurrence anymore. Note, not trying to really fight it at this point, people will be people. I just hope this silly loyalist summons demons horse hockey passes by eventually, like a hurricane.

Once people realize that the summoning spells are more trouble than they are worth, it'll die down.

Spare Change
29-05-2014, 03:34
And then I've got to ask. If the likes of Horus, Lorgar and Magnus could succumb to the temptations of Chaos, what makes Ezekial so special that he cannot?

Why does everyone have to fall, though? There's a genuine lack of character depth to a setting where everyone is corruptible; and nobody makes the hard choices. I see your Horus, Lorgar and Magnus, and raise you a Dorn, Sanguinius and Guilliman.

Where's the thematic moment to represent a marine who actively dies for his beliefs - and brotherhood - rather than summons a bloodthirster because "things got hard"? Oh, that's right, there's no money to be made there.. we only "forge narratives" when there's cash motivation for Games Workshop.

With unbound as an option, loyalists have the ability to field a genuine sorcerer in their ranks to represent a corrupted librarian. We did not need demonology amongst loyalist codices.

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 03:37
Why does everyone have to fall, though?

Who says everybody has to fall? Everybody has the potential to, though. If you don't think Ezekial should fall, then don't take daemonology on him. It's that simple.

Spare Change
29-05-2014, 04:12
Who says everybody has to fall? Everybody has the potential to, though. If you don't think Ezekial should fall, then don't take daemonology on him. It's that simple.

It didn't need to be an option for loyalist armies. It's that simple.

Something that genuinely confuses me is that it seems to only be the "forge the narrative" types claiming we supposedly needed these options for thematic reasons, yet you're all supposedly part of clubs that house-rule, and allow things to be done in the name of fun/fluff anyways.

So you didn't need it, most of us didn't want it.. so why do we have it? Oh, right, cash-grabs.

But you're incapable of admitting something negative regarding Games Workshop, so the cycle of posting continues!

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 04:19
Not sure if you've noticed, but the odds of getting a Perils of the Warp are higher than successfully summoning a Daemon. It's beyond risky and downright stupid to do if you're trying to go for the win. Loyalists aren't going to be turning out in droves to buy new Daemons, so I don't see how it's a cash grab. In fact, I can't see how it's anything more than opening up an option for people who wanted to tell that particular story but felt like constraining themselves to the rules.

Spare Change
29-05-2014, 04:24
Not sure if you've noticed, but the odds of getting a Perils of the Warp are higher than successfully summoning a Daemon. It's beyond risky and downright stupid to do if you're trying to go for the win. Loyalists aren't going to be turning out in droves to buy new Daemons, so I don't see how it's a cash grab. In fact, I can't see how it's anything more than opening up an option for people who wanted to tell that particular story but felt like constraining themselves to the rules.

Look at the thread you're posting in; "loyalist" player is already caving, and attempting to make a demon-spam army, all because he played against one.

Seems like a pretty successful grab to me- but you're the business expert.

Ssilmath
29-05-2014, 04:27
You have an (thus far, singular) example. Some people posting gimmicky lists. When Librarians summoning daemons willy nilly becomes the norm, then talk to me.

Spare Change
29-05-2014, 04:29
You have an (thus far, singular) example. Some people posting gimmicky lists. When Librarians summoning daemons willy nilly becomes the norm, then talk to me.

You're as naive as Games Workshop play-testers if you think that it won't be the norm you encounter, until they FAQ it (if they do).

Even after it becomes the norm, I doubt I'd suddenly find the desire to speak with you, Ssil.

AngryAngel
29-05-2014, 05:15
To be fairly honest, I doubt Libbys summoning demons will be the norm. I could see a lot of, wyrdvane psykers or the like used to do the dirty deeds, risking more or less losing but a member of a cheapish squad, and the Libbys more as batteries for casting if that. Or the inquisitors, for instance, as we've already seen lists for.

I don't think Ssilmath is not saying it could happen, I think he's saying more it'll be a flash in the pan, and we won't see it much past a few months from now. I believe him in that, except for demon lists, I think that will remain a fad for them for awhile.

I also don't think GW didn't know what they were doing. They knew they'd sell demons with it, make people want to use it, even loyalists. However as is pointed out, it will also sell other models as the ones you'd need, as with just a libby or two they won't live long doing this.

Really the biggest issue, which perhaps will get fixed will be some kind of capping on the ability to summon new units, like a PD cap of some kind.

Though don't get me wrong, I think the loyalists summoning demons is beyond stupid.However as with the tightening of allies, I could see them taking it away next edition. I bet you won't be seeing them much after a few months aside from the random twink lists, which you should mock and scorn them for. ( I know I'm saying be mean to twink lists, but they earned it in such a case ).

mughi3
29-05-2014, 05:38
Man maybe its just me but I dont see the obsession with summoning all those squishy little demons.
maybe becase my lists have lots of cover ignoring dakka and pie. more kill points for me.

I'd be more worried if my opponent dropped 6 or 8 winged bloodthirsters as the core of his army before.adding in the summoning.

duffybear1988
29-05-2014, 08:33
Who says everybody has to fall? Everybody has the potential to, though. If you don't think Ezekial should fall, then don't take daemonology on him. It's that simple.

And everybody has the potential to turn into a spawn, daemon prince or a possessed yet we don't see that reflected in the rules yet. I imagine 8th edition will introduce those rules because it's cool right? They also have the potential for heart attacks and other sicknesses so maybe we should roll a D6 every turn and remove that many models from our armies to represent them dying of random illnesses.

This is just a kick in the pants for chaos marines and daemon players really. It's like handing out webway portals to all armies because there's nothing saying that a librarian or sorcerer couldn't have tapped into them. We know from the fluff that this has happened in the past. Can my IG get wave serpents to represent the one time Grease Monkey stole one? It happened once so it can happen again surely?

Dr Zoidberg
29-05-2014, 09:46
haha ok lets roll out a new list:

1500pts:

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

Another INQ (why not) 55

1472pts. 53 + d6 warp charge points. Again, Battleforged not unbound hah. If legal (guys?) and you get the first turn... its raining daemons

You'd want to hope you get the first turn. Because if you don't, you're going to die pretty quickly given that list is incredibly squishy.

HoBoAnarki
29-05-2014, 10:54
As funny as that list is, it's obviously not very good.

Summoning needs 3 warp charges, so to have a decent chance of success you need to roll 7 dice, so that's roughly 7 units you can get in a turn.

That also guarantees a perils result so that's probably going to kill 7 of your psykers, and that's not even taking into account the enemy killing your army. You'd almost certainly be better just taking a daemon list in the first place.

That said it's actually not an unfluffy list, if you take the inquisitors as counts as sorcerors, it could just be a chaos coven trying to open a warp rift, and the other player is trying to fight through the emerging daemons to stop a full blown daemonic incursion. Put like that it sounds pretty fun actually.

hobojebus
29-05-2014, 11:58
This thread rather perfectly displays why GW is getting no more of my money, not even when the new SW codex comes out shall the creak of my wallet be heard as its pried open by a servitor.

This perversion of the lore sickens me, and without the lore all you have is a sub par game.

duffybear1988
29-05-2014, 12:07
This thread rather perfectly displays why GW is getting no more of my money, not even when the new SW codex comes out shall the creak of my wallet be heard as its pried open by a servitor.

This perversion of the lore sickens me, and without the lore all you have is a sub par game.

I'm predicting that the SW codex will feature even more wolfie wolf wolfness than the previous one, which will be a shame and probably will mean I won't buy it unless I can do 13th company with proper wulfen again.

hobojebus
29-05-2014, 12:09
I'm predicting that the SW codex will feature even more wolfie wolf wolfness than the previous one, which will be a shame and probably will mean I won't buy it.

If only there was a place where people believe all info should be free and you'd be able to read the codex before laying down £30, a man can dream.

tneva82
29-05-2014, 12:17
You're as naive as Games Workshop play-testers if you think that it won't be the norm you encounter, until they FAQ it (if they do).

Even after it becomes the norm, I doubt I'd suddenly find the desire to speak with you, Ssil.

And I have seen reports of daemon spamming DAEMON army(no extra peril) losing twice in a row.

One game does not trend make.

Let's see. To cast primaris at barely decent probability(still not quaranteed) you will be investing more warp dice than lvl2 psyker alone will have available in average. Then you are fairly likely to peril. About half the succesfull castings will be with perils.

Seriously doubtful daemon spamming is going to be problem except possibly with daemon army. With rest just ain't worth the risk when there's other powerful more easily castable safer spells available.

Welfstar
29-05-2014, 14:00
I'm going to say this, then get the heck away from this thread ('cos it's toxic, hurts my soul, and burns my eyes).

If you really wanna summon Daemons with a loyalist Librarian (can't believe I just typed that), go ahead, you're allowed to. Know that it's not really a good idea, no matter who you use from my understanding, as no SM Librarian is a Daemon. It's also, IN MY OPINION, terribly unfluffy. If you encountered myself or a player like me (and yes, we're out there) across the table, you'd be in store for snide remarks. I wouldn't be a super **** about it, but you'd know what I thought about your army.

My recommendations:
- Go play play Unbound. I'm not really sure how it all works, I skipped that section in the rules... I don't know
- Go play Chaos Space Marines or Daemons or both
- Use your loyalist Chapter the way the Emperor intended


Also, what is that avatar?

Vega, the matador/ninja, of Street Fighter fame.

Spare Change
30-05-2014, 01:44
And I have seen reports of daemon spamming DAEMON army(no extra peril) losing twice in a row.

I'll assume you're referring to the SM versus CD battle report that was all over the forum upon the edition's release. You're aware that the SM player only won - admitted by both players - because he got an outrageously overpowered hand of VP cards, right? He was almost tabled, and the daemon player ended with 4,000 points of models..

But yeah, clearly this "won't be an issue".. Glad you're here to calm us all down.

Death Company
30-05-2014, 01:47
I'll assume you're referring to the SM versus CD battle report that was all over the forum upon the edition's release. You're aware that the SM player only won - admitted by both players - because he got an outrageously overpowered hand of VP cards, right? He was almost tabled, and the daemon player ended with 4,000 points of models..

But yeah, clearly this "won't be an issue".. Glad you're here to calm us all down.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Too many people are turning on their blinders, praying that some warp-charge limit will be imposed by GW. Which might happen, after they feel they've sold enough models. See heldrakes for a decent example of them "fixing" an issue long after they've ensured they made bank first.

Just Tony
30-05-2014, 02:32
I'm going to say this, then get the heck away from this thread ('cos it's toxic, hurts my soul, and burns my eyes).

If you really wanna summon Daemons with a loyalist Librarian (can't believe I just typed that), go ahead, you're allowed to. Know that it's not really a good idea, no matter who you use from my understanding, as no SM Librarian is a Daemon. It's also, IN MY OPINION, terribly unfluffy. If you encountered myself or a player like me (and yes, we're out there) across the table, you'd be in store for snide remarks. I wouldn't be a super **** about it, but you'd know what I thought about your army.

My recommendations:
- Go play play Unbound. I'm not really sure how it all works, I skipped that section in the rules... I don't know
- Go play Chaos Space Marines or Daemons or both
- Use your loyalist Chapter the way the Emperor intended



Vega, the matador/ninja, of Street Fighter fame.

Alright, was ringing a bell. Not a big bell, but a bell nonetheless.

hobojebus
30-05-2014, 12:55
I agree wholeheartedly.

Too many people are turning on their blinders, praying that some warp-charge limit will be imposed by GW. Which might happen, after they feel they've sold enough models. See heldrakes for a decent example of them "fixing" an issue long after they've ensured they made bank first.

Yeah in 18 short months they'll add a limit to charge counters and remove casting from horrors.

Inquisitor Kallus
30-05-2014, 14:35
Though don't get me wrong, I think the loyalists summoning demons is beyond stupid.

It's very rare in the case of Space Marines, but in the case of 'traitor guard' (using loyalist dex), Relictors or Radical Inquisitors it isn't. I think this ed. gives us lots of tools for the players to use, and like a lot of people feel, as have I for years, is that the players make and break the games they play. It really is down to us. 'Narrative Gamers' don't need those rules to be down in print, but it is nice and dies help create a better framework. I think the main probllem is people abusing things.

Welfstar
30-05-2014, 15:17
It's very rare in the case of Space Marines, but in the case of 'traitor guard' (using loyalist dex), Relictors or Radical Inquisitors it isn't.

I'm not aware of any instance where the Relictors summoned daemons. I was under the impression they limited themselves to the use of daemon weapons.

Muad'Dib
30-05-2014, 15:44
I'm not aware of any instance where the Relictors summoned daemons. I was under the impression they limited themselves to the use of daemon weapons.
Indeed, Daemon weapons and other Chaos artifacts. Even Radical Inquisitors were never said to directly summon Daemons; they bound Daemonhosts. The idea of summoning Daemons by non-Chaos psykers on the battlefield is more or less a flanderization of the background.

duffybear1988
30-05-2014, 15:55
It's very rare in the case of Space Marines, but in the case of 'traitor guard' (using loyalist dex), Relictors or Radical Inquisitors it isn't. I think this ed. gives us lots of tools for the players to use, and like a lot of people feel, as have I for years, is that the players make and break the games they play. It really is down to us. 'Narrative Gamers' don't need those rules to be down in print, but it is nice and dies help create a better framework. I think the main probllem is people abusing things.

My problem is that they did all this in the past but with a better framework and without the need to just throw open the box and say take everything and anything.

The old 3rd and 4th edition codices, supplements, campaign books and chapter approved articles all did much better jobs than anything the have recently put out, and back then they were a smaller company.

Personally I believe that sometimes restrictions actually drive the narrative and create the theme. For example back in the old 3.5 chaos codex if You played Night Lords then you gained a fast attack slot but lost a heavy slot to compensate. This drove a lot of people to assume that they were the fast attack raptor army and so people modeled their armies that way. There was a theme to the list and people built armies around it. Now there's nothing saying that Night Lords don't have hundreds of predators and couldn't field an entire army of them if they really wanted, but it didn't fit the theme. Of course there was (and is) nothing stopping narrative players taking an entire army of predators if they like. But then there is also no need to obey any of the rules at all if you feel like it.

In the good old days my favourite armies were the ones with the most restrictions - 13th Company, Ulthwe Strikeforce and Catachans. They don't come much more locked down than that, and that was the point. You played against, or with, any one of those armies and you knew what you were getting, just like if you played against Speed Freekz, Deathwing or Iron Warriors etc.

You say that 6th/7th edition gives us tools, but I disagree. Those old codices, CA articles and campaign supplements were tools. They let us theme our lists without going too far overboard. 6th/7th edition hasn't given us tools, it's destroyed the tools. It's a wrecking ball that's smashed through the wall of old options and narratives and left a gaping hole that they now are covering over with lots of cheap flashy posters and sticky tape. It may look good temporarily, but the second the wind blows through the hole it tears the covering off the wall revealing the cavity behind.

Ssilmath
30-05-2014, 16:35
So, you consider it a good thing that the Night Lords have been reduced to "Raptors and Fast Attack choices" rather than "Utilize swift strikes and other terror tactics, with a strong connection to the Raptor Cult". There is having a character, and then there is being pigeonholed. I'd rather a faction within the universe have a character that can be built upon than every army from that faction having the same composition.

itcamefromthedeep
30-05-2014, 16:54
So, you consider it a good thing that the Night Lords have been reduced to "Raptors and Fast Attack choices"They weren't. It looks to me like nobody ever said they were.

They had access to everything, but not all at once.

I think there are better ways of reinforcing a theme, but that method certainly wasn't a straightjacket.

Ssilmath
30-05-2014, 16:56
They weren't. It looks to me like nobody ever said they were.

They had access to everything, but not all at once.

I think there are better ways of reinforcing a theme, but that method certainly wasn't a straightjacket.

You didn't read the "fix Chaos" threads, did you? Raptors as troops and extra fast attack was pretty much the constant cry, if they weren't adding in infiltrate and stealth on everything. The idea of using the faster Heavy Support and CSM in Rhinos was quite often rejected as not being representative of Night Lords.

itcamefromthedeep
30-05-2014, 17:18
You didn't read the "fix Chaos" threads, did you? Raptors as troops and extra fast attack was pretty much the constant cry, if they weren't adding in infiltrate and stealth on everything. The idea of using the faster Heavy Support and CSM in Rhinos was quite often rejected as not being representative of Night Lords.Regardless of what the players in Rules Development were looking for, it wasn't in the edition in question.

3e Chaos Marines didn't use my favored way of representing the army, but it certainly wasn't a straightjacket. You could take more FA choices, but they weren't necessarily better.

Ssilmath
30-05-2014, 17:24
That's not what I am talking about, I am talking about the restrictions changing peoples perceptions until that faction becomes entirely focused on the restrictions. You go from Night Lords favoring swift strikes (Represented by extra FA slots) to Night Lords being about nothing but swift strikes in the minds of players. The same is happening with White Scars, where people recognize that White Scars favor bikers, and thus in their minds White Scars become all about the bikes.

AngryAngel
30-05-2014, 17:38
I don't see that being a problem of the game design. People will simply, most always, build to the Strength of the list. White Scars have good bikers and bike character ergo they focus on the bikes. Night lords have less heavy and an extra fast ergo they focus on the fast element. That is the fact people who play the game are gamers as well as hobbyists, so they pick the game tactics for focus in their lists. I would say more what you would like is forcing people to be well versed in a factions back story before they settle on their lists.

However I do think those things helped forge the character of the army, more so then all these over the top options. I bring up the guard doctrines. Now we got some real fluff and crunch in our new book. However I think they would have eclipsed any annoyance people had with the characters they took away, if they would have placed in doctrines again. As they let you also, craft the feel of your army, the back story. So while you see people losing focus, I see people just picking something that represents that focus and then running with it. All these choices now a days end up feeling more bland and like a tack on in comparison to a little extra work on GW's part to bring that kinda character back.

duffybear1988
30-05-2014, 18:29
I don't see that being a problem of the game design. People will simply, most always, build to the Strength of the list. White Scars have good bikers and bike character ergo they focus on the bikes. Night lords have less heavy and an extra fast ergo they focus on the fast element. That is the fact people who play the game are gamers as well as hobbyists, so they pick the game tactics for focus in their lists. I would say more what you would like is forcing people to be well versed in a factions back story before they settle on their lists.

However I do think those things helped forge the character of the army, more so then all these over the top options. I bring up the guard doctrines. Now we got some real fluff and crunch in our new book. However I think they would have eclipsed any annoyance people had with the characters they took away, if they would have placed in doctrines again. As they let you also, craft the feel of your army, the back story. So while you see people losing focus, I see people just picking something that represents that focus and then running with it. All these choices now a days end up feeling more bland and like a tack on in comparison to a little extra work on GW's part to bring that kinda character back.

This.

If everybody has access to everything then what's the point in having multiple books at all? Why not just have one list? In some ways restrictions bred variations.

Ssilmath
30-05-2014, 18:32
This.

If everybody has access to everything then what's the point in having multiple books st all? Why not just have one list? In some ways restrictions bred variations.

And in other ways the cut off all creativity. You're telling me that because Night Lords favored swift attacks, they never had sufficient heavy weapon squads to be able to focus three squads of Havocs into one force? They never had sufficient predators to make a heavily mechanized force? They never had enough Land Raiders to act as a spearhead? If you want to give bonuses, that's fine. But restrictions only stifle creativity.

Voss
30-05-2014, 18:36
Unlike pandas, creativity only breeds properly in captivity. Let loose upon the world, it just breeds stupid.

Wolf Lord Balrog
30-05-2014, 18:48
Unlike pandas, creativity only breeds properly in captivity. Let loose upon the world, it just breeds stupid.

^^This.



wftwg

hazmiter
30-05-2014, 19:12
Any loyalist librarian of rank would have the
Knowledge to summon the daemon.
For thematics, a librarian succumbing and exploding into a greater daemon is awesome sauce
For game play, it depends on your style and meta.

Its a risky gambit power tree for us loyalists.
It could pay off, or blow our Libby to the warp and back.

Fluff wise... He could be calling upon the souls of warriors long forgotten.

hobojebus
30-05-2014, 19:28
Exploding into a greater demon is very different from exploding and then having that demon work along side your loyal battlebrothers without them firing at it on sight.

There should of been a very real chance it would turn on your own army.

Sephillion
30-05-2014, 19:48
And in other ways the cut off all creativity. You're telling me that because Night Lords favored swift attacks, they never had sufficient heavy weapon squads to be able to focus three squads of Havocs into one force? They never had sufficient predators to make a heavily mechanized force? They never had enough Land Raiders to act as a spearhead? If you want to give bonuses, that's fine. But restrictions only stifle creativity.

Actually, that’s not true. I can’t believe you’ve never tried this in class – needing to write something, but with restrictions – don’t use this word, you need to include that or that element. It actually bolster creativity. Look at the way people made film before – there were restrictions as to what could be shown (length of kisses being a famous example), and they had technical restrictions as well, and they still managed to make great movies, showing their creativity to circumvent those restrictions.

In 40K,having to deal with restriction can also foster creativity. Loyalist not having access to Daemonology wouldn’t have stifled creativity. The player who really, REALLY wants to have good old Ezekiel summon a Bloodthrister could have used the CSM codex to represent his army – many players codex-switch anyway, representing their legion with the codex most appropriate. I’m not sure how an Eldar player could have managed the same, but really, how many people were clamoring for Eldar to be able to get in bed with Chaos? How many players really thought “Man, the game is soooo limiting, I cannot summon Daemons with my Eldar?”

I mean, if you really want to portray Eldrad as a fallen psyker who’s gone down Chaos path and is now in cahoots with Slaanesh, you could always convert models; or write fanfic, or play with friends, you know, people who would let you that crazy stuff. There was already a wealth of possibility before 7th, probably even more so than WHFB, much more than Warmachine, Malifaux and the likes, but there were still some limitatiosn that made sense – you could do all but the most extreme, corner case armies.

They decided to open the door to those corner case armies. It wasn’t needed, I’m not sure it was the best way to treat the fluff. There is a limit to how the fluff can be flexible without it losing meaning.

insectum7
30-05-2014, 20:20
Unlike pandas, creativity only breeds properly in captivity. Let loose upon the world, it just breeds stupid.

Nonsense. It breeds like everything else, the most adaptable survive. The non-adaptable get disillusioned and have to go get a desk job.

Inquisitor Kallus
30-05-2014, 21:31
I'm not aware of any instance where the Relictors summoned daemons. I was under the impression they limited themselves to the use of daemon weapons.


Indeed, Daemon weapons and other Chaos artifacts. Even Radical Inquisitors were never said to directly summon Daemons; they bound Daemonhosts. The idea of summoning Daemons by non-Chaos psykers on the battlefield is more or less a flanderization of the background.

No, never directly (so far that i've seen), but their unequivocal use of Chaos artefacts could easily lead to daemons being summoned accidentally unlike other Marine Chapters that steer clear of 'utilizing' Chaotic items. Thus it leads to a distinct possibility of it happening at some point. Again I see this more from a narrative perspective and less the whole 'spam as many daemons as you can' view. It's feasible.




My problem is that they did all this in the past but with a better framework and without the need to just throw open the box and say take everything and anything.

The old 3rd and 4th edition codices, supplements, campaign books and chapter approved articles all did much better jobs than anything the have recently put out, and back then they were a smaller company.

Personally I believe that sometimes restrictions actually drive the narrative and create the theme. For example back in the old 3.5 chaos codex if You played Night Lords then you gained a fast attack slot but lost a heavy slot to compensate. This drove a lot of people to assume that they were the fast attack raptor army and so people modeled their armies that way. There was a theme to the list and people built armies around it. Now there's nothing saying that Night Lords don't have hundreds of predators and couldn't field an entire army of them if they really wanted, but it didn't fit the theme. Of course there was (and is) nothing stopping narrative players taking an entire army of predators if they like. But then there is also no need to obey any of the rules at all if you feel like it.

In the good old days my favourite armies were the ones with the most restrictions - 13th Company, Ulthwe Strikeforce and Catachans. They don't come much more locked down than that, and that was the point. You played against, or with, any one of those armies and you knew what you were getting, just like if you played against Speed Freekz, Deathwing or Iron Warriors etc.

You say that 6th/7th edition gives us tools, but I disagree. Those old codices, CA articles and campaign supplements were tools. They let us theme our lists without going too far overboard. 6th/7th edition hasn't given us tools, it's destroyed the tools. It's a wrecking ball that's smashed through the wall of old options and narratives and left a gaping hole that they now are covering over with lots of cheap flashy posters and sticky tape. It may look good temporarily, but the second the wind blows through the hole it tears the covering off the wall revealing the cavity behind.

No tools have been destroyed, merely added to. I can make use of 2nd and 3rd ed bits and pieces in my games as well as stuff from 4th, 5th and 6th. I have a whole wealth of possibilities to choose from, this makes it so much better. Then again I dont normally just play pick up games....


So, you consider it a good thing that the Night Lords have been reduced to "Raptors and Fast Attack choices" rather than "Utilize swift strikes and other terror tactics, with a strong connection to the Raptor Cult". There is having a character, and then there is being pigeonholed. I'd rather a faction within the universe have a character that can be built upon than every army from that faction having the same composition.


And in other ways the cut off all creativity. You're telling me that because Night Lords favored swift attacks, they never had sufficient heavy weapon squads to be able to focus three squads of Havocs into one force? They never had sufficient predators to make a heavily mechanized force? They never had enough Land Raiders to act as a spearhead? If you want to give bonuses, that's fine. But restrictions only stifle creativity.

Agreed Ssilmath. Though I think restrictions sometimes are nice, usually just to help reduce the OTT stuff

itcamefromthedeep
30-05-2014, 21:34
The fewer restrictions you see in list-building, the more generic the armies get. As people figure out ehat's "best" they slot it into their army.

When you have restrictions, players try out the more restricted lists in an attempt to make the army "work" despite its limitations.

While players could have done an Imperial Fists army for decades now, I never seemed to see any on the table until the latest Chapter Tactics. Having unique rules and restrictions for the army allowed me to play against marines of a flavor I hadn't fought before. I still haven't played against a dedicated World Eaters list or a Tzeenchian daemon list... just generic armies that may or may not include a unit like that.

Inquisitor Kallus
30-05-2014, 21:42
Ironically im trying to work on an all Khorne WE force atm. Its nice to see the variety. I think the only problem is the whole 'Bezerkers arent paticularly great' thing. I am also doing some khorne 'ish' (lol) traitor guard too when I want some variety with them. I think generally its because the two armies you mentioned (apart from screamerstar *yawn*) arent paticularly powerful. Im lucky in that my group isnt power gamery, though the Eldar guy has a lot of S6 shooting with Spiders and Serpents.

Son of Morkai
31-05-2014, 00:02
Am I the only person trying to think of a decent counts-as instead of just planning to throw daemon models on the table? Perhaps partially materialized Legion of the Damned Librarians to represent Horrors. Not that I plan on building them or even using summoning, but trying to come up with a justifiable idea is a nice creative exercise.


Nonsense. It breeds like everything else, the most adaptable survive. The non-adaptable get disillusioned and have to go get a desk job.

I have never seen a panda with a desk job. Would like to, though. Sounds cute, if depressing.

duffybear1988
31-05-2014, 00:16
Any loyalist librarian of rank would have the knowledge to summon the daemon.


No they wouldn't, you're just making things up. They might know how to fight them but there's a huge difference between banishing and summoning.

It is repeatedly stated in the fluff that marines that fight against daemons or who come into contact with heretical material are mind wiped by the inquisition or their fellow brothers in the chapter. If everybody knows then why the wipe? This idea that just because you know some prayers that banish daemons then you automatically know how to summon them is ridiculous and so far there's been no evidence put forward to support it. You're just making it up as you go along.

duffybear1988
31-05-2014, 00:40
And in other ways the cut off all creativity. You're telling me that because Night Lords favored swift attacks, they never had sufficient heavy weapon squads to be able to focus three squads of Havocs into one force? They never had sufficient predators to make a heavily mechanized force? They never had enough Land Raiders to act as a spearhead? If you want to give bonuses, that's fine. But restrictions only stifle creativity.

Did you even read my posts?

You want to play a tank heavy Night Lords list? Try taking an army chosen from the standard CSM list. You prefer to play a lightning strike fast attack force? Play the variant Night Lords list. Problem solved.

You've got your generic army with lots of options, and multiple modified variant flavour lists that each play differently. And there's no need to throw restrictions out of the window or chuck in all the gimmicks from 6th and 7th.

Isn't it time you gave up being intentionally difficult? You're not fooling anyone.

hazmiter
31-05-2014, 05:07
No they wouldn't, you're just making things up. They might know how to fight them but there's a huge difference between banishing and summoning.

It is repeatedly stated in the fluff that marines that fight against daemons or who come into contact with heretical material are mind wiped by the inquisition or their fellow brothers in the chapter. If everybody knows then why the wipe? This idea that just because you know some prayers that banish daemons then you automatically know how to summon them is ridiculous and so far there's been no evidence put forward to support it. You're just making it up as you go along.

To prevent the summoning of a daemon you must first know what goes into the summons.

Or are you going to tell me your going to dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together?

elparker
31-05-2014, 05:57
I'm quite surprised at how much of a reaction this thread has gotten so far. I feel the urge to put my two cents in here, because there is a fair bit of crazy that I've seen in this thread.

First off, summoning daemons in a codex that is normally loyalist such as Marines and Millitarum are not inherently fluff breaking, any more than using "the wrong models" to represent an army does. While I can concede that the current named chapters of SM may not be the best choice to summon daemons in, it does perfectly represent a chapter that is going renegade and has modern SM equipment. I sincerely doubt that traitors would lose centurions, land speeders, and their scouts seven seconds after deciding that they were done with the Imperium, nor would they necessarily have access to all the different chaos goodies. That is just foolish to think. The same is true for representing a traitor guard force. Believe it or not, there IS room in established fluff for these two armies to be able to summon daemons in the current fluff. You just have to think outside the box a little and have some imagination.
Another factor that I can't believe has been overlooked is the rampant counts as that I've seen over the last several years (looking at all the khorne players who used the blood angels and space wolves codexes). My dad is planning on running daemon summoning guard at some point to represent an army that has been blessed by angelic hosts from fervent prayer to the Emperor. It really is no stranger than dead space marines that pop out of nowhere to save the day when least expected. The daemon rules may not be a perfect fit to represent angelic hosts warping into the battlefield to lend strength to a crucial battle possibly at the expense of the relatively fragile human psykers, but it is close enough.

I do have to admit here though that on occasion reasonable restrictions do occasionally aid in creativity. I think the most inventive lists came out of the guard and SM codexes that first utilized doctrines and chapter traits. As long as the benefits come with a reasonable cost variety will still be present. If all of the different armies had that level of customization we would see a huge boost to the different types of lists players would build. Imposing additional limits based on how far away from the stock standard a player went in design would limit the amount of freaking crazy we would see.

Lastly, I think GW has made it pretty clear that they did NOT design 40k in recent editions to be a competitive, tournament oriented game. If they had we wouldn't have anywhere near the amount of balancing issues that are readily obvious in the design. The current edition is quite plainly designed for the beer and pretzels crowd. Just look at the way army lists are built now for your proof. They have very firmly decided that it is up to local groups and tournament organizers to determine for themselves what will be fair and have determined a very open rules set for their own tournament environment. I've noticed the rather basic restrictions have not been considered good enough in most of the tournament scenes that I know of, such as the Bay Area Open.

This is a hobby that has always required a lot of time and effort to make fair and fun for all involved. It's always required a certain maturity from the community to work well, and it has always done best and been most interesting when players have been able to run with an idea. The current daemon summoning rules are fine as is. I've seen a few battle reports with daemon summon spam, and I've seen the daemons lose hard using the standard missions i.e. big guns never tire. It's a gimmick that is not over powered and is vulnerable to the same things daemon lists have been vulnerable to for the last few years.

That's all I got on this topic. I'm out.

Mr_Foulscumm
31-05-2014, 09:47
You start out by complaining that all GW does is try to get people to buy daemons... followed by you going out and buying 8000 points worth of daemons. This will surely show GW that they made a huge mistake with this Edition!

Sometimes I get the feeling that the 40k community is mentally handicapped. :rolleyes:

Also:

To prevent the summoning of a daemon you must first know what goes into the summons.

Or are you going to tell me your going to dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together?

You shoot the heretic in the face without any intention of putting his face back together.

hazmiter
31-05-2014, 13:16
You shoot the heretic in the face without any intention of putting his face back together.

I stand corrected ;)
I guess its up to the players on what they decide to do.
Either summon a tonne of evil daemons and commit heresy.
Or just be loyal and cleanse the heretic.

Sephillion
31-05-2014, 13:22
To prevent the summoning of a daemon you must first know what goes into the summons.

Or are you going to tell me your going to dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together?

How is that even a proper analogy? I CAN dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together, the point of banishing is for the daemons not to come back. Presumably, I would dismantle a motorcycle in the intent of putting it back together at some point... Besides, it stands to reason that the Imperium would destroy any source of info to summon daemons. They're so paranoid, and with reason, this knowledge is probably extremely rare.

And fantasy/sci-fi lore is full of examples of characters able to banish entities without having any idea how to summon them. I agree with the Comedian, unless you come up with a source for that claim, I'm going to assume you're making stuff up at this point.

Sephillion
31-05-2014, 13:28
Plus,. the thing that's bugging me with daemonology is that everyone can do it. Everyone has access to these disciplines, even those factions where it would be an extreme corner case, but somehow, Ahriman cannot use Divination; Ezekiel cannot use Biomancy, but somehow can summon bloodthristers?

Vanilla Marines still cannot cast Divination, but people justify them having access to powers that, in the Imperium, would be rare and taboo? It made a *little* sense when the table from the psychic card deck was relevant (i.e. before it was rendered useless the moment FAQs came up) since then most armies had access to a lot of disciplines, with almost no restrictions, but now it shows that they were so generous in granting access to it just because it's "the new thing". It feels like Oprah. "You have access to daemonology! You have access to daemonology! Everybody gets to summon daemons!" :shifty:

Voss
31-05-2014, 14:47
To prevent the summoning of a daemon you must first know what goes into the summons.

Or are you going to tell me your going to dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together?

Bad analogy aside, the one army that is specifically the best (in theory) at banishment is the only one completely prevented from summoning. So it doesn't even work on the system's own logic.

itcamefromthedeep
31-05-2014, 15:41
First off, summoning daemons in a codex that is normally loyalist such as Marines and Millitarum are not inherently fluff breaking, any more than using "the wrong models" to represent an army does. While I can concede that the current named chapters of SM may not be the best choice to summon daemons in, it does perfectly represent a chapter that is going renegade and has modern SM equipment.It does a poor job of representing troops that go renegade, because those models are still almost universally "Come the Apocalypse" allies or "Desperate Allies" with other Chaos forces.

Imagine if you will, a sidebar. "TURNING TRAITOR. Throughout the history of the Imperium, many of its mightiest heroes have turned away from the Emperor's Light and fallen to the Dark Gods. To represent an army that has fallen under the sway of Chaos, you may add in Traitor detachments from any faction except Grey Knights, with the following exceptions. A Traitor detachment is treated as a Chaos Space Marine detachment for the purposes of determining its levels of alliance. A Traitor detachment may use the discipline of malefic daemonology, but may not use sanctic daemonology. A Traitor detachment may not use any of the special characters from that faction (they haven't fallen... yet).

^^^ Wouldn't that do a much better job of representing what's going on here? Wouldn't that make it much easier to represent renegade armies?


I do have to admit here though that on occasion reasonable restrictions do occasionally aid in creativity. I think the most inventive lists came out of the guard and SM codexes that first utilized doctrines and chapter traits. As long as the benefits come with a reasonable cost variety will still be present. If all of the different armies had that level of customization we would see a huge boost to the different types of lists players would build.Back when I saw people play with those lists, everyone in my area just took the doctrines and traits with the greatest mechanical advantage, ignoring the others. It was incredibly same-y all over the place. In my experience, doctrines cut down on variety rather than adding to it.

The more you open up the options, the fewer people actually use.


Lastly, I think GW has made it pretty clear that they did NOT design 40k in recent editions to be a competitive, tournament oriented game. If they had we wouldn't have anywhere near the amount of balancing issues that are readily obvious in the design. The current edition is quite plainly designed for the beer and pretzels crowd.Competitive, tournament oriented games don't need to have good game balance. The WAACy players are just fine using the strongest list available to them and they tend not to mind stomping so-called "fluffy bunnies".

Game balance is more important for the people who choose their models for the looks or for the background, because in a balanced environment you can use whatever models you like without handicapping yourself. The most toxic kind of experience players have is when they walk into a game knowing they couldn't have won, regardless of how good a player they were. The better game balance is, the less likely you'll encounter a scenario like that. Poor game balance helps nobody, but the players it hurts the most are the casual and semi-casual players.

Muad'Dib
31-05-2014, 15:52
The more you open up the options, the fewer people actually use.

That's cause everytime GW decides to give a plethora of options (such as many magic lores or sub-factions in army lists), the end result is that several of them are utterly sub-par, while 1-2 are clearly top tier. It's not a problem with options, but GW's refusal to release a balanced game.


No, never directly (so far that i've seen), but their unequivocal use of Chaos artefacts could easily lead to daemons being summoned accidentally unlike other Marine Chapters that steer clear of 'utilizing' Chaotic items. Thus it leads to a distinct possibility of it happening at some point.


No. Nowhere it was indicated that Relictors occasional use of a few Chaos tainted items would result in summoning Daemons; nowhere in 40k's background we have any indication that Daemon weapons come with the benefit of weakening the veil. Summoning Daemons doesn't work on the basis of them simply flocking & materializing wherever there is an eight pointed star or Chaos tainted individuals. There have to be specific conditions and/or specific rituals undertaken; for example Daemonettes are often described as materializing in vicinity of manic artists. In Siege of Vraks, it describes an entire warband (an off-shot of Word Bearers) who are valued and sought out specifically because they know the rituals to summon Daemons.




Competitive, tournament oriented games don't need to have good game balance. The WAACy players are just fine using the strongest list available to them and they tend not to mind stomping so-called "fluffy bunnies".

Game balance is more important for the people who choose their models for the looks or for the background, because in a balanced environment you can use whatever models you like without handicapping yourself. The most toxic kind of experience players have is when they walk into a game knowing they couldn't have won, regardless of how good a player they were. The better game balance is, the less likely you'll encounter a scenario like that. Poor game balance helps nobody, but the players it hurts the most are the casual and semi-casual players.
Indeed, the "wants balance = dislikes background and is 'tournament player'/WAAC" false dichotomy leaves me quite aghast; in reality the people who don't care about a balanced game are simply those that don't care that much about deep/challenging gameplay (regardless of their stance on background or how important winning is) There are also people who seem to have never experienced balanced/deep gameplay, and so think that GW's games are the pinnacle of what a game might be; and anything better is practically not possible.

From my experience, lack of balanced game seems to drive away the average, casual-ish players who just want to play a game with miniatures they painted.

itcamefromthedeep
31-05-2014, 16:11
That's cause everytime GW decides to give a plethora of options (such as many magic lores or sub-factions in army lists), the end result is that several of them are utterly sub-par, while 1-2 are clearly top tier. It's not a problem with options, but GW's refusal to release a balanced game.By no means is this phenomenon restricted to GW games.

Give a human a cornucopia of options, and most get ignored. Even marginal differences in perceived effectiveness can be huge drivers of player choice.

Sephillion
31-05-2014, 18:31
Lastly, I think GW has made it pretty clear that they did NOT design 40k in recent editions to be a competitive, tournament oriented game. If they had we wouldn't have anywhere near the amount of balancing issues that are readily obvious in the design. The current edition is quite plainly designed for the beer and pretzels crowd.

Yet they advertize their own tournaments and organized play - they mention it in their BRB. They have their own stores to facilitate PUG. So they send mixed messages - they clearly aren't able to position themselves adequately.

Also, a balanced game favors just as much beer and pretzel players as the tournie players. Tournie players end up having more options and competitive lsits see more variations,e ven if there are always options that are more common; beer and pretzel players can enjoy games where the odds aren't stacked against them from the outset, or at the very least, where the odds of an unbalanced game are lessened. GW also targets young players, who are more likely to abandon the game if the army they play ends up so underpowered that they have no fun... again, a problem of positioning.



I've noticed the rather basic restrictions have not been considered good enough in most of the tournament scenes that I know of, such as the Bay Area Open.

And the new editions didn't help on this matter. It will *probably* make things worse on that front. That's not a positive.

hazmiter
31-05-2014, 19:26
Bad analogy aside, the one army that is specifically the best (in theory) at banishment is the only one completely prevented from summoning. So it doesn't even work on the system's own logic.

The grey knights also collect true names of daemons to aide them in banishing the little munsters.
One would also assume that they collect and remove all types of daemonoc paraphernalia.
This also leads to the suspicion that they also know rituals to summon and bind daemons (re: the chambers of purity *binding* if thats a daemon of course)
Also the sanctum sanctorum, repository of all daemonic knowledge they have thus far gained.

Grey knights know the ins and outs of summoning, hence why they excell at banishing.

Sephillion
31-05-2014, 20:21
The grey knights also collect true names of daemons to aide them in banishing the little munsters.
One would also assume that they collect and remove all types of daemonoc paraphernalia.
This also leads to the suspicion that they also know rituals to summon and bind daemons (re: the chambers of purity *binding* if thats a daemon of course)
Also the sanctum sanctorum, repository of all daemonic knowledge they have thus far gained.

Grey knights know the ins and outs of summoning, hence why they excell at banishing.

Keep making assumptions and inventing things if you want to make daemonology work in your vision of the fluff.

duffybear1988
31-05-2014, 20:27
The grey knights also collect true names of daemons to aide them in banishing the little munsters.
One would also assume that they collect and remove all types of daemonoc paraphernalia.
This also leads to the suspicion that they also know rituals to summon and bind daemons (re: the chambers of purity *binding* if thats a daemon of course)
Also the sanctum sanctorum, repository of all daemonic knowledge they have thus far gained.

Grey knights know the ins and outs of summoning, hence why they excell at banishing.

Yes and Grey Knights are THE chapter created to slay daemons. Nobody is questioning that the GK know how to banish and therefore summon daemons - that's their role and why they were created. They possess that extra knowledge that normal marine chapters don't have. Why bother going to the trouble of creating a specific chapter to combat daemons if every librarian called Tom, Dick or Harry already knows how?

In the Imperium knowledge is power and only those deemed worthy are gifted that knowledge. Essentially you are told only as much as is really necessary and nothing more. Librarians will be told only what they need to know to fight against the warp and daemons, as any more is too risky a venture. With the constant Chaos threat do you really believe they are just going to start handing out textbooks on daemon summoning to every new student of the librarium? Christ, they nuke entire planets and exterminate whole regiments because of 1 rogue psyker and the potential chaos that could cause, but they're totally cool about teaching summoning? I don't believe it.

Muad'Dib
31-05-2014, 20:30
Keep making assumptions and inventing things if you want to make daemonology work in your vision of the fluff.
Actually I think hazmiter has a point in this case; Grey Knights, in theory, could be capable summoners, because of how much of lore, grimoires & artifacts they have stashed.
But this also shows how ridiculous anyone else having access to any Daemonology is - the whole reason the Grey Knights (and Ordo Maleus) exist is that only them can be trusted with such knowledge! The procedure for Daemonic invasion is call the Grey Knights/Inquisition, not a Space Marine company with attached Librarians! I'm quite aghast how people are now coming out of woodwork and behaving as if banishing/summoning Daemons is something within (potential) repertoire of most chapters' Librarius. It's not, GW does not care about operating within established background; they retroactively change or ignore it to sell more models.

They possess that extra knowledge that normal marine chapters don't have. Why bother going to the trouble of creating a specific chapter to combat daemons if every librarian called Tom, Dick or Harry already knows how?

Indeed; and this is why in both versions of their books Grey Knights alone had powers that were centered on hindering or banishing Daemons.

itcamefromthedeep
31-05-2014, 20:33
Grey Knights are banned from using malefic daemonology, and I can only assume it's because having them summon daemons for battle wouldn't make sense, given the background.

I don't see why it makes any more sense in the case of good ol' Zeke.

---

I GW wants to make rules for marines on the edge of falling, or pulling some strange shenanigans, then they should probably make a supplement for that. I'm sure plenty of players would be interested in a Relictors supplement.

Inquisitor Kallus
31-05-2014, 21:11
Nobody is questioning that the GK know how to banish and therefore summon daemons - that's their role and why they were created. They possess that extra knowledge that normal marine chapters don't have. Why bother going to the trouble of creating a specific chapter to combat daemons if every librarian called Tom, Dick or Harry already knows how?

.

It does not necessarily follow that if you know how to summon daemons that you also know how to banish them, though I agree with the crux of what you have said.

I would say that the majority of 'standard' grey knight battle brothers wouldn't know how to summon Daemons though, but I imagine a number of more senior characters would have access to that knowledge and be able to. Although why they would ever do this seems to be going against their whole creed unless absolutely vital (for information etc)

NemoSD
31-05-2014, 23:11
No they wouldn't, you're just making things up. They might know how to fight them but there's a huge difference between banishing and summoning.

It is repeatedly stated in the fluff that marines that fight against daemons or who come into contact with heretical material are mind wiped by the inquisition or their fellow brothers in the chapter. If everybody knows then why the wipe? This idea that just because you know some prayers that banish daemons then you automatically know how to summon them is ridiculous and so far there's been no evidence put forward to support it. You're just making it up as you go along.

With out agreeing or disagreeing with your point, I think a lot of this comes from real mythology. In Greek, and Egyptian Mythology, the banishment of overworldly creatures/demons are often covered in the same sources that secret of summoning them are. In fact, with some Greek stories, another 'demon-like' entity must often be summoned to banish the other entity. Sects of Christianity have continued with this, which is why they burned 'witches' and the such, as trafficking with another demon to get rid of a demon was just not the right thing to do. Even modern games, like DnD often times couple summoning and banishment as parts of the same coin. In current pathfinder, the best banishers are Summoners and Clerics... they are also the best summoners.

It is a reasonable and logical argument, as is yours. The poster who mentioned a bike. I can take apart a motorcyle just fine, but I aint got a clue how to rebuild it. I might be able to carefully figure it out if I methodically track what I do as I take it apart, but there is no promise of a functioning bike at the other end. We are now entering the realms of metaphysics where it is hard to come to a true answer.

Is banishment the deconstruction of the manifestation of the demonic entity in our reality, or is the banishment the shutting of the door to our reality? One requires to know how the demon takes shape, the other requires a can of metaphysical WD-40, and a door hinge.


By no means is this phenomenon restricted to GW games.

Give a human a cornucopia of options, and most get ignored. Even marginal differences in perceived effectiveness can be huge drivers of player choice.

Star Wars: The Old Republic is a great example. The healing difference between a properly specced out Counsalar vs Scoundral is less then 1%. The DPS of a Scoundral is less than 1% different from a Sentinel (Over a period of time, the scoundral actually comes out of the gate stronger.) However, my DPS scoundral would frequently be accused of being poor, before I was even in the party, because a .05% difference was break or make in some players minds. So the more options that are given, the more 'elite' players are going to try and force a narrow definition of top tier viable. However, there are people who find those options interesting and want to explore them without min-maxing and squeezing the mathematically 'perfect' options out of a list.

DoctorTom
01-06-2014, 01:15
If every game you play ends up being the what if, it hardly feels like a rare occurrence anymore. Note, not trying to really fight it at this point, people will be people. I just hope this silly loyalist summons demons horse hockey passes by eventually, like a hurricane.

It will. People will start including Farseers so that they have the Ghosthelms to help against Perils when summoning these critters. :cheese:

DoctorTom
01-06-2014, 01:29
The grey knights also collect true names of daemons to aide them in banishing the little munsters.
One would also assume that they collect and remove all types of daemonoc paraphernalia.
This also leads to the suspicion that they also know rituals to summon and bind daemons (re: the chambers of purity *binding* if thats a daemon of course)
Also the sanctum sanctorum, repository of all daemonic knowledge they have thus far gained.

Grey knights know the ins and outs of summoning, hence why they excell at banishing.

Yet they can't summon the daemons they know so much about summoning. Even the Inquisitors in the Grey Knight Codex who might turn to Chaos.

Thomson
01-06-2014, 02:08
Yet they can't summon the daemons they know so much about summoning. Even the Inquisitors in the Grey Knight Codex who might turn to Chaos.

They could, but they just don't do it. They are the only ones who are completely resistant to the call of chaos (and nobody knows exactly why... yeah only one in 100000 makes it...), so they simply don't do it.

Usually all non chaos psykers won't ever summon demons, too. But they are prone to the lure of chaos. So if the situation is dire, and the player has decided power is more important then the purity of his victory...

(One explanation I have is that what is seen in 40k as demons is just not real but the result of mass halluzination. The grey knights are the only ones who know it and therefore are much more resitant to that psychological desease.)

hobojebus
01-06-2014, 02:16
They could, but they just don't do it. They are the only ones who are completely resistant to the call of chaos (and nobody knows exactly why... yeah only one in 100000 makes it...), so they simply don't do it.

Usually all non chaos psykers won't ever summon demons, too. But they are prone to the lure of chaos. So if the situation is dire, and the player has decided power is more important then the purity of his victory...

(One explanation I have is that what is seen in 40k as demons is just not real but the result of mass halluzination. The grey knights are the only ones who know it and therefore are much more resitant to that psychological desease.)

Which still fails to account for why the demon won't attack the side that summoned it, lore wise you have to sacrifice alot of people do a whole bunch of chanting and make a deal with that demons patron God to make it do your bidding, giving yourself over to possession mid fight won't let you control what bursts free.

Muad'Dib
01-06-2014, 02:46
By no means is this phenomenon restricted to GW games.

Give a human a cornucopia of options, and most get ignored. Even marginal differences in perceived effectiveness can be huge drivers of player choice.
The trend you describe gives another, very strong reason why balancing all options is absolutely vital. If all options are viable, then sooner or later you will have players start to experiment - especially in a background driven game like 40k (I wonder how many Word Bearer armies got axed in planning stage when players discovered Dark Apostles are lackluster?) In Starcraft 2 it took Protoss players like over a year to start developing strategies/builds beyond "Tech to Collosi ASAP and mass them.", but when they finally did, it was a joy to see Protoss strategies become like 2x-3x more varied - and this was only possible because Starcraft 2's units have correct costs for their capabilities.

I bet if GW wanted to balance the games (and didn't imbalance them purposefully), considering the games have had pretty consistent rules for 15+ years, the community would long have matured enough to see much more varied armies, an actual tournament metagame and a real variety in possible tactics/strategies (rather than each edition being biased towards one or two)

Ssilmath
01-06-2014, 02:48
(I wonder how many Word Bearer armies got axed in planning stage when players discovered Dark Apostles are lackluster?)

For whatever it is worth, not mine...

Voss
01-06-2014, 02:54
I bet if GW wanted to balance the games (and didn't imbalance them purposefully), considering the games have had pretty consistent rules for 15+ years, the community would long have matured enough to see much more varied armies, an actual tournament metagame and a real variety in possible tactics/strategies (rather than each edition being biased towards one or two)

It could have been interesting. Instead we got Spam X! Break X, Spam Y! Break Y, Spam Z!
Huh. 7th is making me miss Rhino Rush. At least it had some background justification (Close Combat is Awesome! + Our Genetic Freaks Are Better Than Yours!)

Brother-Captain Endymion
01-06-2014, 05:21
Indeed, the "wants balance = dislikes background and is 'tournament player'/WAAC" false dichotomy leaves me quite aghast; in reality the people who don't care about a balanced game are simply those that don't care that much about deep/challenging gameplay (regardless of their stance on background or how important winning is) There are also people who seem to have never experienced balanced/deep gameplay, and so think that GW's games are the pinnacle of what a game might be; and anything better is practically not possible.

From my experience, lack of balanced game seems to drive away the average, casual-ish players who just want to play a game with miniatures they painted.

Friend, I am quite aghast with this statement.

I do not agree that people who don't care about a balanced game are simply those that don't crave a deep and/or challenging game. Could it be that players who aren't as concerned about imbalance (which is completely different to not caring) are, in fact, not being affected by it via meta or mentality?

I find it slightly disconcerting that I'm lumped into a group of players that don't care about the rules (which is fine, by the way, if you are more into the hobby aspect of 40k) simply because no one in my gaming group would dream of abusing the possible configurations of the current edition.

And while I agree that some players are unaware of games that are more balanced (X-Wing comes to mind) and may not be aware of the existence of such balance, I disagree wholeheartedly that our imbalance drives away casual gamers.

I don't think casual 40kers exist. How can you drop this kind of money on a hobby and be indifferent about it?

NemoSD
01-06-2014, 06:23
And while I agree that some players are unaware of games that are more balanced (X-Wing comes to mind) and may not be aware of the existence of such balance, I disagree wholeheartedly that our imbalance drives away casual gamers.



X-wing has one of the most relaxed/'casual' player bases I have ever seen. Very few people play it as their 'primary' game, and it is very much used to pass time. It has dedicated events, but even those feel more relaxed and party like. So a good, balanced rule set does not preclude casual play. That being said, the dynamic balance in 40k and WFB also doesn't always encourage casual play. However, I want to take a moment to do a mini-rant on 'casual.'

Most 'casual' players, are not casually into this game. In fact, I will bet good money that the average 'casual' player actually has more proportional time invested in 40k or WFB then the 'non-casual/'elite'/tournament player.' When you factor in time painting, converting, etc. Yes, non-casuals do often engage in those activities as well. However, look at the individuals on this site with project blogs, and compare it to the self-professed tournament players. You will see few names cross paths. There is nothing wrong with that at all.

What the problem is though, is that casual infers less of an investment into the hobby, which is a way of diminishing those opinions.

hobojebus
01-06-2014, 12:49
I always look at casual meaning your more interested in fun than winning, I've actually been ranted at because I don't take the game seriously enough, I don't stick with one list I've done everything from loganwing to an outflanking force of scouts and wolf guard in a landraider just to see how it would work (not very well).

I've never played in a tournement and unlike some people I know I don't beat myself up after a loss, it's meant to be fun and 6th hasn't been fun but I at least I had the lore until 7th came along and spit on that too.

I've now become supermegaultra casual by stopping playing altogether, I'm not going to reward GW for such a sloppy mess so now catalyst and FF get to profit from GWs madness.

Muad'Dib
01-06-2014, 12:55
I do not agree that people who don't care about a balanced game are simply those that don't crave a deep and/or challenging game. Could it be that players who aren't as concerned about imbalance (which is completely different to not caring) are, in fact, not being affected by it via meta or mentality?
You can't say imbalance doesn't effect you cause of meta - because your meta, whatever it is, is limited/strangled by and carved out of 40k's imbalances. You not being affected by imbalance is like someone not being effected by a closed motorway segment that forced him to take a twice as long way. 40k/WFB are most likely the most imbalanced games in history (because they are being purposefully imbalanced), which means any current meta of 40k is a retarded version of what true variety could be. If you are content with playing balanced game within cause your groups builds armies of similar power level, you are either not aware of just how better a balanced game would be or you don't care that much about good/deep gameplay/rules.

Same about mentality - mentality won't change the games rules & army lists, which as written divide armies and units in several discrete power tiers; and elements with too wide power disparity are incompatible due to resulting in a totally lopsided game. Also, if you aren't affected by imbalance due to your mentality...I'm at a loss how can it be so for you in any other way than by shifting your mentality so that you care less?

The crux of what I'm saying is that - considering that imbalance is one two foremost things strangling both WFB and 40k (the other being archaic rules like IGOUGO turn system) - if you don't care about imbalance, then you are only pretending it doesn't effect you; and you can do it only because you don't care much about deep, complex, varied gameplay.



I find it slightly disconcerting that I'm lumped into a group of players that don't care about the rules (which is fine, by the way, if you are more into the hobby aspect of 40k) simply because no one in my gaming group would dream of abusing the possible configurations of the current edition.
I'm talking about perception of balance - why are you mentioning "abusing the possible configurations" ?

I say you're a player that don't care much about the rules because you claim balance isn't that importance, and that it doesn't effect you if the game is imbalanced. The possibility of fixing possibly nr. 1 problem with the game is not of principal important to you - ergo, you don't care that much about the rules/gameplay and/or you're not aware just how much better the game would be if it would be balanced.


And while I agree that some players are unaware of games that are more balanced (X-Wing comes to mind) and may not be aware of the existence of such balance, I disagree wholeheartedly that our imbalance drives away casual gamers.
[By casual I mean: 1) Is drawn to the game primarily by the 'more than the sum of it's parts' combination of wholesome combination of painting your models + social interaction + gameplay + possibly background 2) None of those is favoured by him, but take away one of these aspects and his interest diminishes greatly. 3) Warhammer is not his nr 1. hobby or interest, or nr 2. It's more of a things he enjoys and would like to do regularly, but he can live without it. 4) Sees Warhammer primarily as a game with hobby element; not a hobby.]

Also, I'm not really using 'casual' in reference to the PC games 'casuals'; I literally mean people who take the hobby more casually - devote less time to it, post on forums less or not at all, buy less stuff et al.

Lack of balance drove away three very casual friends of mine - each of us four had an army in different tier of 6th WFB, and we couldn't literally play battles that weren't steamrolls; another (non-casual) friend got disillusioned after he had the misfortune of collecting first Dark Elves and then Tomb Kings - the two worst armies in 6th WFB. I think I was also quite casual over a decade ago, and I dropped Warhammer and never picked it up again largely due to my grotesque experiance of first playing a tier 4 army (Strigoi Vampires) and then a tier 1 (Daemonic Legion) - 50-75 % of my games were decided before rolling the first dice.

Lack of balance drives casuals away because they don't feel the drive, the willingness to make the games despite both of them being horribly flawed on many levels in regards to gameplay/rules.


I don't think casual 40kers exist. How can you drop this kind of money on a hobby and be indifferent about it?
You'd be surprised at the things people can do and be indifferent about them. Considering you can always earn more money, and that GW games aren't insanely expensive. (like I dunno, diamonds or luxury cars?), I don't see price as a barrier for someone with a casual attitude to the hobby.

In fact, I think many casual players leave because they are unwilling to just drop money onto the hobby when, let's say, GW decides to make Aegis Defence Line the only reliable counter to flyers for many armies.


What the problem is though, is that casual infers less of an investment into the hobby, which is a way of diminishing those opinions.
I didn't mean to suggest this; quite the contrary. The reason why I mentioned casuals is that I think rampant imbalance is especially harmful to those who chose not to devote much of their time & effort into the hobby. And it shouldn't be so that their enjoyment suffers because they, for example, haven't researched & conformed to the local metagame; or cause they haven't bought newly released overpowered tier 1 units.

Back when I played WFB, me & 3 friends tried to hang out for most of the day/evening and play games together as a group, but we really couldn't - our armies were totally imbalanced versus each other. And the group drifted apart (the Orcs&Goblins player dropped out first, cause his Orc focused army was totally lackluster in battles) - the alternative of balancing four armies, of totally different power levels, through house rules wasn't really possible for us...


Most 'casual' players, are not casually into this game. In fact, I will bet good money that the average 'casual' player actually has more proportional time invested in 40k or WFB then the 'non-casual/'elite'/tournament player.' When you factor in time painting, converting, etc. Yes, non-casuals do often engage in those activities as well. However, look at the individuals on this site with project blogs, and compare it to the self-professed tournament players. You will see few names cross paths. There is nothing wrong with that at all.

By casual players I don't mean some some antithesis of a tournament players; nor I mean a fluffy bunny player. I mean literally a player who cares less than most 'fans' about Warhammer.

Mr_Foulscumm
01-06-2014, 13:46
Wait, wait... someone suggested X-Wing as a more balanced game?! Haha, good one! :D

ihavetoomuchminis
01-06-2014, 15:44
Wait, wait... someone suggested X-Wing as a more balanced game?! Haha, good one! :D

More than 40k, that's for sure.

Come on......

NemoSD
01-06-2014, 16:31
I always look at casual meaning your more interested in fun than winning, I've actually been ranted at because I don't take the game seriously enough, I don't stick with one list I've done everything from loganwing to an outflanking force of scouts and wolf guard in a landraider just to see how it would work (not very well).

I've never played in a tournement and unlike some people I know I don't beat myself up after a loss, it's meant to be fun and 6th hasn't been fun but I at least I had the lore until 7th came along and spit on that too.

I've now become supermegaultra casual by stopping playing altogether, I'm not going to reward GW for such a sloppy mess so now catalyst and FF get to profit from GWs madness.

So, you have decided you are quitting 40k. You are out the door.

So you remain here, telling all of us that did not leave that our game is so bad, and broken, that a diehard fan like you was run out of the building.

In short, your continued presence is merely to contribute to world suck. Glad to know.

itcamefromthedeep
01-06-2014, 17:59
So, you have decided you are quitting 40k. You are out the door.It sounds to me like he's putting his army in the closet until 8e. It should be a long in a few months, I'm sure.

DoctorTom
01-06-2014, 18:04
It sounds to me like he's putting his army in the closet until 8e. It should be a long in a few months, I'm sure.

Or playing older editions with the models he already has.

hobojebus
01-06-2014, 19:08
It sounds to me like he's putting his army in the closet until 8e. It should be a long in a few months, I'm sure.

You sir are correct, nothing's being sold or thrown away just stored until a time when 40k is again worth playing be it 8th in a year or 9th six months after that.

I've played since 2nd I've got SW,IW, crons, an old tau force from when they first came out and some orks, I've put time and effort into 40k over two decades and I've earned the right to voice my opinion after sinking so much time and effort into GW products.

Plus my friends will still be playing it so it's not like it's out of my life, but I can't reward GW for a cash grab edition that failed to fix major issues but had plenty of time to ruin lore by letting everyone summon demons so they can sell models.

duffybear1988
01-06-2014, 20:41
You sir are correct, nothing's being sold or thrown away just stored until a time when 40k is again worth playing be it 8th in a year or 9th six months after that.

I've played since 2nd I've got SW,IW, crons, an old tau force from when they first came out and some orks, I've put time and effort into 40k over two decades and I've earned the right to voice my opinion after sinking so much time and effort into GW products.

Plus my friends will still be playing it so it's not like it's out of my life, but I can't reward GW for a cash grab edition that failed to fix major issues but had plenty of time to ruin lore by letting everyone summon demons so they can sell models.

Think of us like the Black Legion. We may have failed to take Terra, but that doesn't stop us crusading. :)

DoctorTom
01-06-2014, 21:16
Think of us like the Black Legion. We may have failed to take Terra, but that doesn't stop us crusading. :)

And 7th edition is the "VotLW tax" GW's trying to extract from you now? :p

Brother-Captain Endymion
01-06-2014, 21:58
You can't say imbalance doesn't effect you cause of meta - because your meta, whatever it is, is limited/strangled by and carved out of 40k's imbalances. You not being affected by imbalance is like someone not being effected by a closed motorway segment that forced him to take a twice as long way. 40k/WFB are most likely the most imbalanced games in history (because they are being purposefully imbalanced), which means any current meta of 40k is a retarded version of what true variety could be. If you are content with playing balanced game within cause your groups builds armies of similar power level, you are either not aware of just how better a balanced game would be or you don't care that much about good/deep gameplay/rules.

Same about mentality - mentality won't change the games rules & army lists, which as written divide armies and units in several discrete power tiers; and elements with too wide power disparity are incompatible due to resulting in a totally lopsided game. Also, if you aren't affected by imbalance due to your mentality...I'm at a loss how can it be so for you in any other way than by shifting your mentality so that you care less?

On the contrary, that's exactly why imbalance doesn't affect me as much. My meta, as limited as it may be, is constructed by our group's mentality. It's less like having to take a longer route because of a closed motorway and more like taking the alternate route because I've never had need to use the motorway. It's a slight distinction, I'll give you, but a distinction nevertheless. The mentality of a gaming group does change army lists (not so much game rules, though you could make the argument that house rules fit in here). A fluff bunny will not be bringing Heldrake/Riptide/Wraithknight spam, or what have you. It does not matter which tier your codex falls under. These thoughts are absent from our group, thus our tendency to play with units that are 'inefficient' has the ability to regulate our lists. My CSM-heavy IW list doesn't start off with a foot in the grave against my friend's Necrons because I don't have to fight an army of Wraiths (an optimal unit). He uses the supposedly ineffective Flayed Ones and we have a grand time fighting it out. Another broad example would be that I didn't need to melta spam in 5th or plasma spam in 6th.

Look at it this way, friend. It's not that we care less about the obvious imbalance in the system. I think only a great fool would say that such a thing does not exist. It's only in the way that we play, with the lists and units we take, that we don't have to worry about the imbalance. It is, simply put, our meta. I can sympathize with those who say that meta should not determine your enjoyment of the game - we're just playing the hand we were dealt and making the best of it.

I am aware of balanced gaming systems and how much more smoothly they run, but that does not mean that I don't care about gameplay - only that I don't let it negatively affect how I play the game. If you (figuratively, not the literal 'you') need a tighter ruleset to have an enjoyable evening of gaming, I understand that. But please don't lump the players like myself that enjoy the game for what it is, regardless of the current shape of the rules, into the "casual" group. We do care. That's all I was trying to say.



The crux of what I'm saying is that - considering that imbalance is one two foremost things strangling both WFB and 40k (the other being archaic rules like IGOUGO turn system) - if you don't care about imbalance, then you are only pretending it doesn't effect you; and you can do it only because you don't care much about deep, complex, varied gameplay.

See above.


I'm talking about perception of balance - why are you mentioning "abusing the possible configurations" ?

I say you're a player that don't care much about the rules because you claim balance isn't that importance, and that it doesn't effect you if the game is imbalanced. The possibility of fixing possibly nr. 1 problem with the game is not of principal important to you - ergo, you don't care that much about the rules/gameplay and/or you're not aware just how much better the game would be if it would be balanced.

I mention abusing possible configurations in response to perception of balance. Balance, regardless of how you perceive it to be, becomes irrelevant (or at least less relevant) to a group that does not spam/abuse optimal units. I think they are tied together.

And as I mentioned above, I do not believe this (not caring) is the case. I am completely aware of how much a tighter ruleset could benefit the game.


[By casual I mean: 1) Is drawn to the game primarily by the 'more than the sum of it's parts' combination of wholesome combination of painting your models + social interaction + gameplay + possibly background 2) None of those is favoured by him, but take away one of these aspects and his interest diminishes greatly. 3) Warhammer is not his nr 1. hobby or interest, or nr 2. It's more of a things he enjoys and would like to do regularly, but he can live without it. 4) Sees Warhammer primarily as a game with hobby element; not a hobby.]

Also, I'm not really using 'casual' in reference to the PC games 'casuals'; I literally mean people who take the hobby more casually - devote less time to it, post on forums less or not at all, buy less stuff et al.

Lack of balance drove away three very casual friends of mine - each of us four had an army in different tier of 6th WFB, and we couldn't literally play battles that weren't steamrolls; another (non-casual) friend got disillusioned after he had the misfortune of collecting first Dark Elves and then Tomb Kings - the two worst armies in 6th WFB. I think I was also quite casual over a decade ago, and I dropped Warhammer and never picked it up again largely due to my grotesque experiance of first playing a tier 4 army (Strigoi Vampires) and then a tier 1 (Daemonic Legion) - 50-75 % of my games were decided before rolling the first dice.

Lack of balance drives casuals away because they don't feel the drive, the willingness to make the games despite both of them being horribly flawed on many levels in regards to gameplay/rules.

I can understand this, though it has not been my personal experience. Thank you for clarifying. It's too bad your friend didn't stick around for 7th DE - we all know how that turned out...


You'd be surprised at the things people can do and be indifferent about them. Considering you can always earn more money, and that GW games aren't insanely expensive. (like I dunno, diamonds or luxury cars?), I don't see price as a barrier for someone with a casual attitude to the hobby.

In fact, I think many casual players leave because they are unwilling to just drop money onto the hobby when, let's say, GW decides to make Aegis Defence Line the only reliable counter to flyers for many armies.

Touché. Now that I've had time to digest your meaning, I do believe you are correct here.


Think of us like the Black Legion. We may have failed to take Terra, but that doesn't stop us crusading.

That's a terrible analogy, duff! The Black Crusades are massive failures (unless you take GW's revisionist "Oh, but they accomplished so many other goals!" approach)! ;)

DoctorTom
01-06-2014, 22:36
That's a terrible analogy, duff! The Black Crusades are massive failures (unless you take GW's revisionist "Oh, but they accomplished so many other goals!" approach)! ;)

Well, they've now convinced all armies with psykers in them except for Grey Knights that it's okay to summon daemons if your cause is righteous, so I think their plan is working. ;)

hazmiter
02-06-2014, 03:22
Well, they've now convinced all armies with psykers in them except for Grey Knights that it's okay to summon daemons if your cause is righteous, so I think their plan is working. ;)

Not for me it didnt. I went through the omg i can summon free troops for about 2 days thinking of ways it could be done.
Now im thinking of ways to survive such a list when i play one.
Tbh, any force could succumb to the lure of chaos with the exception of our grey knight friends (who seem to be making their entrance into lists)
Ive already decided survivability is worth more than spawn babies.
Ie, forewarning, sanctuary on a unit of paladins armed with force swords.
May not be able to reroll ones like screamers, but the 2+ invulnerable makes a big change vs high ap.
Add in endurance for a 4+ fnp and your on a roll.

totgeboren
02-06-2014, 09:57
To prevent the summoning of a daemon you must first know what goes into the summons.

Or are you going to tell me your going to dismantle a motorcycle without knowing how to put it back together?

I really really think it's the other way around. If you are gonna summon daemons, you'd better know how to banish them (otherwise things will end badly for you). But knowing how to summon daemons is in no way required in order to learn how to banish one. I really think learning how to banish one would be the very first thing someone who embarks upon the part of daemonology learns.

Picking a motorcycle apart is much easier than putting back together, and that is a much better metaphor. It requires much less skill to disassemble a bike, you just need the right tools, than the skill and knowledge needed to reassemble said bike and have it working.

don_mondo
02-06-2014, 20:11
If only Banishment actually banished them.

itcamefromthedeep
02-06-2014, 23:07
Well, they've now convinced all armies with psykers in them except for Grey Knights that it's okay to summon daemons if your cause is righteous, so I think their plan is working. ;)Don't worry, Tyranids got the memo. They totes have the Grey Knights' back on this.


If only Banishment actually banished them.It seems you have to Forge that particular Narrative yourself.

Dis-assemble, Johnny-5 style.

Inquisitor Kallus
03-06-2014, 01:25
No. Nowhere it was indicated that Relictors occasional use of a few Chaos tainted items would result in summoning Daemons; nowhere in 40k's background we have any indication that Daemon weapons come with the benefit of weakening the veil. Summoning Daemons doesn't work on the basis of them simply flocking & materializing wherever there is an eight pointed star or Chaos tainted individuals. There have to be specific conditions and/or specific rituals undertaken; for example Daemonettes are often described as materializing in vicinity of manic artists. In Siege of Vraks, it describes an entire warband (an off-shot of Word Bearers) who are valued and sought out specifically because they know the rituals to summon Daemons.




Yes...
I didnt specifically state daemonic weapons, but 'artefacts' . The portalglyph is one such artefact.

Just because the mechanics dont necessarily mesh with thing like performing ceremonies or certain rituals doesnt mean they cant be used narratively. A player using khornate style force could take a psyker (oh the heresy) and essentially try to manifest a squad of bloodletters after a khorne characters sqord/axe/whatever has spilled blood.

'As the drops of his enemies blood splash to the ground they coalesce, into shapes, mass added from some other place defying the laws of physics. Where once were pools of blood now stood red fiends from darkest nightmares, bloodied and gore soaked, teeth, barbs and a bestial fury wielding huge blades of pure onyx.
Sergeant Vorskan froze in terror, nothing had prepared them for this.....'


Eisenhorn inleashed a Daemon Prince (like a burning white star...), Cherubael.... . This could be made into something similar. Or psyker represents a twice/thrice bound Daemonhost (using a power or two to represent his bound psychic ability or not in the case of Khorne) The summoning of a greater daemon to represent his 'chains' being broken as the host explodes in a shower of gore.

The planet they are fighting on is linked closely to the warp or lots of bodies/statues on the ground turn into daemons and rise up...

The point is im making with the Relictors is that of all Marines Chapters if any did have daemons popping up around them they might be likely with their acquisition of daemonic artefats. The games rules stated a while ago I believe that they could take certain things from the chaos codex a few editions ago. The Riftbringer sword from the Daemon Codex could be used as an example of something they might 'pick up' in background terms. Theres all kinds of things that can happen without just sayin my Ultras summon daemons just because. Not that Relictors would necessarily summon daemons on purpose. In a game the Bloodletters would go after the opposing force naturally, who is to say that they don't go after the Relictors once 'the game has ended'? A number of character have damned themselves by using heretical weapons/artefacts to get themselves out of a tight spot because those things were 'on hand'

Im a massive, massive background nut, running Dark Heresy games and setting up campaigns and huge battles in stores with a big narrative behind them. I didnt like the idea of it at first, but it opens up some avenues and cool stories and ideas. Yes, some people will abuse it. Summoning them if youre not a daemon is risky as it should be. Do I like the idea of Ezekiel doing it? No. Did I like the idea of Orks capturing Carnifexes and letting them ride in their transports in Apocalypse games. No. Do I like the idea of unbound? Yes. Do I like the idea of people doing stupid stuff that goes against real solid background? O Shovah fighting side by side with Ghazkull and daemons? No

If you dont want to see loyalists summoning daemons left right and center with no thought behind it other than an excuse to use daemons to win and because part of your 40k soul dies a little inside (like me) you can choose not to play them. Playing in a tournament? They might be used that way, if you want to take part then thats your choice, and you need to accept whats within the limits of the tournament rules wise.

Losing Command
03-06-2014, 03:57
Anything without out the daemon special rule that tries to use daemonology is so ineffective I'd be suprised if you will see summoning used by anything else than the daemon codex on tournaments. Plus it is about the only army that can cram enough ML in a list for a decent amount of warpcharges.

I've tried it a few times with Chaos sorcerers, and most of the time all they accomplished was reducing their own wounds, and sometimes summon a unit once a game. The only loyalist summoning you'll probably see is from ppl playing Radical Inquisitors and the like, and some others who got just beating by a daemon summoning farm for the first time and think they don't have to switch armies to do the same.

And there have been other fluff breaking options in the past too. Space marines with bow and arrow, or shuriken catapults. Tau being besties with marines. Black templars rather fighting alongside Eldar than Sisters of Battle. It even has been possible for ages to build an army of khornate berserkers led by a sorcerer of tzeentch, no matter how impossible that is according to the fluff. So in the end we might even survive this Daemon summoning nonsense ;)

totgeboren
03-06-2014, 07:16
But the thing with loyalist summoning is that you only need to succeed with the Primaris once. At first you summon a unit of Horrors, pick Malefic for them so you get the primaris and one more power, and now you have your very own Daemonologist with the Daemon special rule.
After that it's just a matter of channelling all your warp charge into your daemon summoners. So this 'big drawback' of daemonology isn't that big nor that bad since you only need to cast one daemonolgy power successfully once with your non-daemon psyker, after that he is safe to just act as a battery.

Losing Command
03-06-2014, 08:02
Then still it's : loyalist summons one unit turn one. Assuming said unit survives a turn, it summons a second unit on turn two. Assuming both units are still alive, they both summon an additional unit for a total of four on turn three. If they all survive, you have six units on turn four. Then the game is almost over and for four turns you had units on the board that did nothing but summon more units, and this is all assuming the opponent is kind enough to completely ignore them all. Long shot if you ask me ... specially considering how quick Pink Horrors can evaporate, the main reason people almost never took them untill Malefic.

Latro_
03-06-2014, 10:00
Then still it's : loyalist summons one unit turn one. Assuming said unit survives a turn, it summons a second unit on turn two. Assuming both units are still alive, they both summon an additional unit for a total of four on turn three. If they all survive, you have six units on turn four. Then the game is almost over and for four turns you had units on the board that did nothing but summon more units, and this is all assuming the opponent is kind enough to completely ignore them all. Long shot if you ask me ... specially considering how quick Pink Horrors can evaporate, the main reason people almost never took them untill Malefic.

1500pts:

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

Another INQ (why not) 55

again, please someone give this army a test just for the lols.

hazmiter
03-06-2014, 14:25
Latro what have you done!!!!! Exterminatus extremis upon thy heretical list ;)

Latro_
03-06-2014, 14:36
pfff its perfectly fluffy.

Its the 666th Annual Xanthism (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Xanthism#.U43OV_ldWMU) INQ conference list (or AXIC for short).

INQ's from across the galaxy meet up once a year (give or take a warp storm) with 3 of their best potential pshychic nut jobs (each one is guarded by a couple of warriors as an escort) to turn chaos against its self in a ritual of chaotic daemon summoning, buffet lunches, keynote speeches and free pens.

<insert your opponent's army> crashes the conference and its game time!

:D, see makes more sense than 'derp i have a knight cus i have a knight um knights!'

Inquisitor Kallus
03-06-2014, 15:29
I've just been sick... :eek:

Ha haa that list is pretty extreme.

hobojebus
03-06-2014, 17:57
Someone else had it right to make demons work for imperials you just summon one unit of horrors then have them do all the summoning to avoid issues with perils and the rest of the imp psykers act as batteries.

So suddenly all that assurance of "perils will stop it" lose all credibility, and the accounts of how difficult to deal with the clown car increase.

NotMyIfurita
03-06-2014, 18:03
The horrors will only cast one a turn.. you will need the imperials to keep summoning more horrors :P

hobojebus
03-06-2014, 18:04
The horrors will only cast one a turn.. you will need the imperials to keep summoning more horrors :P

Hence me saying use the rest as batteries thus implying you'll have more than one psyker.

don_mondo
03-06-2014, 18:30
The horrors will only cast one a turn.. you will need the imperials to keep summoning more horrors :P

Just summon multiple units of horrors on turn one. If you're running 35-40 WC, it's not an impossibility.

DoctorTom
03-06-2014, 20:13
Don't worry, Tyranids got the memo. They totes have the Grey Knights' back on this.

Totes McGoats


It seems you have to Forge that particular Narrative yourself.

Personally, I prefer an authentic narrative over a forged narrative.


1500pts:

INQ lvl 1 55
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18
1x psyker, 2x warrior ac 18

(*snip* Rinse and repeat to get to 1500 pts)
again, please someone give this army a test just for the lols.

Truly an evil list. For some reason I picture someone in the Adeptus Mechanicus getting this group together. "We're gathering this group and seeing if they can pierce the warp to pull out Daemons in the name of SCIENCE!" Unfortunately he forgot to bring the GK backup squads to take care of what might come through.

hazmiter
04-06-2014, 15:13
Hahaha nailed that doc Tom.
Oh hey lets do science with daemons (enter the greater daemon of khorne in a confined space) "hes claustrophobic you sa....... RUN!!!!"

Theocracity
04-06-2014, 15:26
Truly an evil list. For some reason I picture someone in the Adeptus Mechanicus getting this group together. "We're gathering this group and seeing if they can pierce the warp to pull out Daemons in the name of SCIENCE!" Unfortunately he forgot to bring the GK backup squads to take care of what might come through.

Isn't that the plot of Doom?

hazmiter
07-06-2014, 13:20
Isn't that the plot of Doom?

I do believe so theo.
Wasnt too impressed with that movie tbh.
Back to the topic at hand.
I for one as a loyalist shall be looking at ways to tank the spawn lists, without resorting to summoning the gribblies.

hobojebus
07-06-2014, 13:26
Hey dooms a bad movie but its far from unwatchable, just take it for the tounge in cheek comedy it is.

Ssilmath
07-06-2014, 15:01
Hey dooms a bad movie but its far from unwatchable, just take it for the tounge in cheek comedy it is.

+1 to this. A lot of 'bad' movies can be enjoyable if you go into it expecting it to be bad and just enjoy it for what it is.

Theocracity
07-06-2014, 15:19
I do believe so theo.
Wasnt too impressed with that movie tbh.


Oh, the movie is that special kind of enjoyably terrible. I was actually referring to the original video game though.

Madfool2
08-06-2014, 11:55
"And one man stood out of the ashes of the Daemonic horde....stained with the foul smelling excuse that passed for blood from Daemon kind, and all he could do was shout.....

RIP AND TEAR!!!!"