Chaos Generals; Idea to fix the exploitation of the list's diversity

[Skelmgurn]

My idea:
If the Chaos General dies, apply the old Daemon animosity rules, applying them between all differently marked units. Also they could be applied between the different army types, i.e. mortals, beasts and Daemons.

Seeing as its only the General keeping all these mortal enemies together it makes sense that without him they revert to type. Savagely attacking their rivals. Seems pretty full of the Chaos character. This would reward players sticking to one God and army and helping balance the tactical limitations involved.

Placing a downside to taking varied Gods and may help reduce the number of armies taking different God's for tactical reasons rather than for character. Plus its still possible to take all the different Gods and armies in one force just one more reliant on the General.

Any thoughts? Opinions?

[Gazak Blacktoof]

To be honest there aren't any really good ways to exploit a mixture of marks even as it stands. Its dificult to get even one of every mark in each army unlees you use marked chariots. Most chaos players don't mix marks because it interferes with the way their army plays if they pick one mark in addition to another.

I don't really see a need for a rule like this. Plus it can be useful to mix marks if you are attempting to represent a minor god.

[Nekharoth]

i wouldn't apply animosity between beasts, mortals and daemons. it is quite 'realistic' to have a mark army with all three included. besides there are already rules which dictate that beast units cannot be joined by mortal characters, vice versa, and the same goes for daemonic characters and non-daemonic units.

i agree that daemon animosity should be brought back though. from memory it was khorne and tzeentch; and nurgle and slaanesh that held animosity towards one another. animosity should be based on proximity to rivals and the rivalry between certain gods as mentioned above. i wouldn't extend this to mortal & beast units/characters with marks. chaos armies are unruly and unpredictable but not nearly as petty minded and undisciplined as goblins, for instance. it would be out of character for chaos armies to completely fall apart, but i guess their relatively high leadership would prevent this. also i would suggest that daemon animosity always applies to rival units with 12" and this could be extended to maybe 18" if the general dies. greater daemons other daemonic characters (including characters with the chalice of chaos) should be immune to animosity tests.

it would also be good to have animosity tests for khorne daemons, characters and regiments within say 12" of a 'friendly' wizard.

on a slight tangent, i think there should be more undivided daemons besides only furies. it would be good to encourage players to actually use the mark of chaos undivided as an 'intentional' choice and tactical decision rather than merely a means to be able to use marks, daemons and spell lores from multiple gods. in fact... this gives me an idea for a thread in the rules development forum...

[Trunks]

Khorne should not have animosity against friendly wizards.

Khorne does not hate wizards. He views their way of battle as cowardly but can respect their power. Khorne and Tzeentch have allied many times. They would not kill friendly wizards in the middle of a battle. That would be stupid.

The demon animosity oppositions are Khorne/Slaanesh and Nurgle/Tzeentch. I do not think this rule needs to be implemented. The only way to get opposing demons is in an Undivided army. This requires an Undivided Demon Prince/Exalted Demon, who by his very nature should have command over any of the four factions he pleases. Maybe you could have this come into effect if the general of the army is killed, but it makes little sense while the leader is still alive.

[Nekharoth]

Yeah sorry, I had the god combinations mixed up. Although in fact I think my ones make more sense, but anyway...

Your point about Khorne and wizards is valid. Perhaps a better suggestion would be that units and characters with the Mark of Khorne, including daemons may not be included in an army led by a Wizard. This includes Undivided Chaos Sorcerers, Undivided Bray-Shamans, and Undivided Exalted Daemons and Daemon Princes with a magic level.

I think you are forgetting that daemons and the Chaos Gods themselves are fickle and spiteful by their very nature, and chaos as a general rule is very difficult to control. This is why most high level chaos characters have Ld 9 rather that 10.

I still think that more should be done to limit the use of multiple marks/daemons of different gods. The fact remains that MOST people who do this are doing for tactical reasons, rarely ever for 'fluff' reasons. Remember that daemon animosity worked pretty much as I suggested in 5th edition. They might have decided to change the rules in Hordes of Chaos for 6th edition, but since then the misuse of these rules has only increased.

[Trunks]

When it comes to Demon Legions, most people do not mix them for pure "tactical" reasons. You see demons allied to two Gods of Chaos in a 2000 point game for the most part, anything more and you are probably going to have an ineffective army. It works perfectly within the background material just because of the nature of what it is to be a Demon Prince of Chaos Undivided.

The idea of Undivided Sorcerers leading Khorne Warriors to battle is a little silly though. I don't think the rule makes perfect sense in a Demon Legion though (especially a legion of Khorne and Tzeentch).

[Nekharoth]

When it comes to Demon Legions, most people do not mix them for pure "tactical" reasons. You see demons allied to two Gods of Chaos in a 2000 point game for the most part, anything more and you are probably going to have an ineffective army. It works perfectly within the background material just because of the nature of what it is to be a Demon Prince of Chaos Undivided.

it's more HoC armies that are the perpetrators of this exploitation rather than Daemonic Legion armies. but even so, choosing daemon units based on their combat role rather than their allegience is certainly not going to give you an ineffective army, in fact the exact opposite is true.

the background/fluff is contradictory about exactly what Chaos Undivided is anyway, which is kinda appropriate considering the nature of chaos. there are more chaos gods than just the main four, they are just too minor to justify official inclusion in the army list.

the randomness of chaos means that it is varied, and chaos armies have a huge selection of different troops to choose from. but the current incarnation of the rules encourage players to create unrealistic (or at least inconsistent with the ethos of the game) combinations of troops/chaos powers etc merely for the sake of maximised tactical effectiveness.

[Trunks]

I said it gets ineffective if you mix more than two allegiences, not if you mix allegiences at all. I can field full armies of each of the four allegiences and have mixed them many times

Fielding a Khorne/slaanesh/Tzeentch army, for example, tends to be alot weaker than if you would have only taken two of those (Slaanesh/Tzeentch is nice for magic/speed superiority, Slaanesh/Khorne for a brutal close combat phase combined with some speed a normal Khorne army doesn't get, Tzeentch/Khorne gives you a a weaker magic phase than pure tzeentch but some nice combat punch).

[dioscuri]

It's the age old Warhammer problem of Variety Vs. Exploitation. Everyone craves variety in their army list to add some flavour but it's this amount of choice that allows people to beard it up, creating fanatic delivery systems and gunlines. It's a shame people need to suggest ideas to stop bearding, we should able to police ourselves...