A high level discussion on changing the DH codex

[ferrous]

Something that i wanted to discuss without derailing any other threads, is some of the things that GK need from a higher level perspective. Not the low level stat line discussions or specific new unit ideas, but more of an overview.

 

I think the main thing that the DH codex needs is to remove ALL specific anti-daemon references. It sounds crazy, but I don't think DH will really be all that worse for the wear, as our greatest weapons against daemons at the moment are not daemon specific anyway. (Psycannons, Icinerators and Mystics) It is entirely possible to make a codex that is good vs. daemons, but without specific anti daemon rules, and it will be much easier to balance and to make sure we dont' spend points on innate abilities and wargear that are useless against all the other codices, and make daemons not want to play us. I know this is against fluff, but I think it will make our codex less lopsided and more playable.

 

The second main point is to drop all allied codex stuff. No crazy cross allying codex stuff to have to try to balance, no weird slightly different rules on our own units because some came from a newer codex. Let our codex stand on its own, and don't let it be cheapened by letting others take our units and special abilities. If you want to do cross allegiance stuff, play Apoc.

 

And some minor thoughts:

 

Radicals need to be more fleshed out, or cut entirely. They need interesting and unique units, wargear, and psychic powers that make puritan players actually feel like they are giving up something by taking GK.

 

Puritans need more units as well, but the new stuff needs to differentiate them from being SM with pointy sticks.

 

More specifically GK, as has been said, are very good at anti-inf shooting, and very good at assaults, but not the best at either, so any new abilities should maintain that balance. They also should keep their anti vehicle weakness, but i don't necessarily think the entire codex should have that weakness.

[nathan-san]

Good points you raise!

 

I do agree with getting rid of anti-daemon stuff, in part - I'd like to see all of our wargear and special rules apply to every army equally. As you say, our best gear against daemons, like Mystics and psycannons, are flavourful and effective enough, without specifically being tied to anti-daemon work

 

BUT, in the event that we do fight daemons, I'd like to see a special section of the book that gives a few optional rules for both DH and Daemon armies that play each other (just to make the battles between them feel slightly different - i.e. upping the power of the grey knights whilst equally reducing the cost of daemons)

 

 

The second main point is to drop all allied codex stuff. No crazy cross allying codex stuff to have to try to balance, no weird slightly different rules on our own units because some came from a newer codex. Let our codex stand on its own, and don't let it be cheapened by letting others take our units and special abilities. If you want to do cross allegiance stuff, play Apoc.

QFT - I get so disappointed when I read a "Daemonhunters" army list thats actually made up of more Inducted units than our own. ALSO, so much time is wasted in the FAQs and Erratas on silly Allies questions when there are clearly more pressing things to answer (do our NFW count as force weapons, do we get modern rules assault cannons, etc)

 

 

One thing I think has so much potential, but was severely underused, was psychic powers. The codex and all the fluff goes to great lengths to convince us how each Knight is a mighty psyker, and yet only Heros and Inquisitors can pick powers. Developing the Psychic aspect of Daemonhunters I think would really help set us apart from regular Marines (much like how acts of faith really give Sisters that extra unique feel)

[Uncle Mel]

Radicals need to be more fleshed out, or cut entirely. They need interesting and unique units, wargear, and psychic powers that make puritan players actually feel like they are giving up something by taking GK.

 

agreed, the reason i don't play radical (ever) is because it makes me miss out on all gk activity and lets me gain... daemonhosts, that is just not worth it for me, give the radicals daemonweapons, possesed troops, weird heavy support troops, real chaotic stuff!

 

another point i would like to see is a real teleport GK army, in line with the droppod marines, knights should ALL be able to teleport.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

I think the main thing that the DH codex needs is to remove ALL specific anti-daemon references. It sounds crazy, but I don't think DH will really be all that worse for the wear, as our greatest weapons against daemons at the moment are not daemon specific anyway. (Psycannons, Icinerators and Mystics) It is entirely possible to make a codex that is good vs. daemons, but without specific anti daemon rules, and it will be much easier to balance and to make sure we dont' spend points on innate abilities and wargear that are useless against all the other codices, and make daemons not want to play us. I know this is against fluff, but I think it will make our codex less lopsided and more playable.

 

Agreed, but I think it would be better to word it as "changing our anti-daemon rules to be effective against armies", juts in case somebody sees think and worries about getting rid of the rules altogether. :)

 

I suggest we use rules like The Aegis and The Shrouding as templates. They are designed (at least in fluff) to be effective against Daemons, but their effects are not limited to Daemons.

[Lungboy]

I agree with the minor points bits, but couldn't disagree more on the anti-Daemon and allied stuff.

[Inquisitor =D=]

I think the main thing that the DH codex needs is to remove ALL specific anti-daemon references. It sounds crazy, but I don't think DH will really be all that worse for the wear, as our greatest weapons against daemons at the moment are not daemon specific anyway.

I'm in agreement with this but only just. While we do need to expand many of our abilities to affect a broader spectrum losing the anit-daemon part kind of takes the feel from it. But as I said I can understand the need for it.

 

Radicals need to be more fleshed out, or cut entirely. They need interesting and unique units, wargear, and psychic powers that make puritan players actually feel like they are giving up something by taking GK.

Agreed. The only reason I never started playing a radical force was simply because I felt I might as well build a Guard force and just have the =][= tag along. And to be honest I've never been much a fan of Cadia anyway.

The second main point is to drop all allied codex stuff. No crazy cross allying codex stuff to have to try to balance, no weird slightly different rules on our own units because some came from a newer codex. Let our codex stand on its own, and don't let it be cheapened by letting others take our units and special abilities. If you want to do cross allegiance stuff, play Apoc.

This I can't agree with to be honest. One major section of our fluff and storyline is that an =][= has the authority to drag whatever poor souls into the daemon's den as he sees fit. I know its seems like a crutch but it gives our codex a large advantage over other armies, the ability to flex and change soo much you can't even guess whats next.

 

=]D[=

[Verythrax Draconis]

All good points, I just disagree about the allied part, too. =I= is more commonly seem as an inquisitor rallying local forces than deploying a =I=-only army, fluffwise. So prefer those to stay, but better done to make it more interesting, with easier and better rules to make another armies take =I= as allies, what could mean a very easy extra bucks for GW.

 

I agree about fleshing out the radicals better, but not like some heretical proposes presented in the other threads :)

[Dragons]

I'll agree with the Radical need for Radical expansion.. (though I really LIKE Puritan). And the 'good against all comers' wargear/abilities.

 

But if you lose the 'allies' then you basically are saying that the Fluff doesn't matter.

 

the Inquisiton and Grey Knights don't fight as armies except under the MOST dire circumstances. The 'armies' of the Inquisition is 'requisitioned' from whoever/whatever is at hand.

 

-Dragons

[Ominous Anonymous]

I think the main thing that the DH codex needs is to remove ALL specific anti-daemon references. It sounds crazy, but I don't think DH will really be all that worse for the wear, as our greatest weapons against daemons at the moment are not daemon specific anyway. (Psycannons, Icinerators and Mystics) It is entirely possible to make a codex that is good vs. daemons, but without specific anti daemon rules, and it will be much easier to balance and to make sure we dont' spend points on innate abilities and wargear that are useless against all the other codices, and make daemons not want to play us. I know this is against fluff, but I think it will make our codex less lopsided and more playable.

 

I agree with this point: it would allow us to cut costs on stuff that a lot of players won't even use depending on the local metagame. Our main anti-daemon weaponry should be confined to the wargear section for the times when we do have to fight a daemon player but not be chained to using it all the time.

 

The second main point is to drop all allied codex stuff. No crazy cross allying codex stuff to have to try to balance, no weird slightly different rules on our own units because some came from a newer codex. Let our codex stand on its own, and don't let it be cheapened by letting others take our units and special abilities. If you want to do cross allegiance stuff, play Apoc.

 

Unfortunately I'm going to have to agree with what others have said and say that one of the big fluffy points of the Inquisition is requisitioning other armies to work for them when the situation warrants it. Not only will this make GW a little more money by encouraging players to buy from different armies and maybe one day expand what was meant to be an allied portion of their armies into a full-blown force, but more importantly having the allies rules, in return for the tedious FAQ process about it, gives the army a near-limitless flexibility. You can requisition Space Marines for their elitism and tactical flexibility (and gives a good excuse to have Jump Pack marines in a Grey Knights army :blink:) or Imperial Guard for sheer manpower for a gunline or their tanks for some heavier firepower and would go a long way towards helping Grey Knights with their anti-tank weakness.

 

And some minor thoughts:

 

Radicals need to be more fleshed out, or cut entirely. They need interesting and unique units, wargear, and psychic powers that make puritan players actually feel like they are giving up something by taking GK.

 

Puritans need more units as well, but the new stuff needs to differentiate them from being SM with pointy sticks.

 

Agreeing here as well. One idea would be to give Radicals access to something like the Relictors, which is a renegade/on probation Marine chapter that is faithful to the Imperium/Emperor but has access to things like a Daemon Weapon and Fearless troops. Would anyone know the White Dwarf the rules for the Relictors came in?

[Captain Malachi]

I definately agree that making the radicals have some bonuses would be good. WhenI tried to make my radical DH list it ended up with a stupid amount of killpoints and little real killing power. And it was even worse at tank killing than a normal DH list thanks to a lack of GK vehicles.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Agreeing here as well. One idea would be to give Radicals access to something like the Relictors, which is a renegade/on probation Marine chapter that is faithful to the Imperium/Emperor but has access to things like a Daemon Weapon and Fearless troops. Would anyone know the White Dwarf the rules for the Relictors came in?

 

I'll look it up for you, and I actually posted the entirety of the Relictors special Daemon Weapons rules in 7eAL's Inquisition Project some time ago. Would you like me to repost them for discussion?

 

EDIT: It's WD 295 (UK).

[Ominous Anonymous]

Agreeing here as well. One idea would be to give Radicals access to something like the Relictors, which is a renegade/on probation Marine chapter that is faithful to the Imperium/Emperor but has access to things like a Daemon Weapon and Fearless troops. Would anyone know the White Dwarf the rules for the Relictors came in?

 

I'll look it up for you, and I actually posted the entirety of the Relictors special Daemon Weapons rules in 7eAL's Inquisition Project some time ago. Would you like me to repost them for discussion?

 

EDIT: It's WD 295 (UK).

 

Yes please! :D

[number6]

No posting the complete text of copyrighted material!

 

This includes private messages.

 

Anybody caught breaking GW IP will receive an official warning ... and perhaps worse, no exceptions. It's all spelled out in the B&C rules.

[Ominous Anonymous]

No posting the complete text of copyrighted material!

 

This includes private messages.

 

Anybody caught breaking GW IP will receive an official warning ... and perhaps worse, no exceptions. It's all spelled out in the B&C rules.

 

My apologies then number6, forget that I asked. Is there anything Tyrak could tell us, though?

[Grand Master Tyrak]

My apologies then number6, forget that I asked. Is there anything Tyrak could tell us, though?

 

No more than I have.

 

Number6, I assumed it was OK since I had been allowed to do it before quite a while ago. Obviously that's not the case, so here is the link to the original material so it can be edited accordingly.

[Melissia]

I think the main thing that the DH codex needs is to remove ALL specific anti-daemon references. It sounds crazy, but I don't think DH will really be all that worse for the wear, as our greatest weapons against daemons at the moment are not daemon specific anyway. (Psycannons, Icinerators and Mystics) It is entirely possible to make a codex that is good vs. daemons, but without specific anti daemon rules, and it will be much easier to balance and to make sure we dont' spend points on innate abilities and wargear that are useless against all the other codices, and make daemons not want to play us. I know this is against fluff, but I think it will make our codex less lopsided and more playable.

 

Agreed, but I think it would be better to word it as "changing our anti-daemon rules to be effective against armies", juts in case somebody sees think and worries about getting rid of the rules altogether. ^_^

 

I suggest we use rules like The Aegis and The Shrouding as templates. They are designed (at least in fluff) to be effective against Daemons, but their effects are not limited to Daemons.

I concur entirelly. GKs are a great concept, and they're probably the only Marine army I'm tempted to buy, but at the same time they're very focused, to their own detriment...

[Mutt-Man!]

I'll just stroll with the topic in the essence of what I think, bypassable if un-interesting. =p

 

GK codex:

 

All GK units, all Land Raider Variants at appropriate costs, all dreadnought variants from vanilla codex at appropriate cost.

 

IG allies template expanded to any IG units, however its limited by points, not force orginisation slots, excluding the required units (two troop one hq being GK only if its the parent codex). Lets say for the sake of every 500 points played, you can toss in 100 points worth in imperial guard out of that 500. (400 pts in 2000) Marine allies and SoB allies would be restricted of course.

 

-On the subject to the IG codex points limiter, there are certain "requirements" to use a leman russ.. So dont be fooled, it will be in higher cost games that they can use them.

 

Have shrouding be a cover save rather then a sight limiter. It sounds silly and bad, but it is more streamlined. LD checks alternately be the reason they cant be shot (intelligence of the shooters rather then their eyesight random chance).

 

Sounds, similar? Not making any progress with this post am I =P...

 

 

 

EDIT:

Infiltrating GK's sound good? All teleport in, some held in reserve for fast attack GK's, and the elite Termies can do it whenever. Some could teleport off to the side and outflank. Infiltrate because shrouding helps them to. (I mean, come on, shrouding is night fight rules based, might as well?)

[ferrous]

Hmm, i see some people understand changing of Daemon specific rules is a good thing, and i really think thats the only way to make the codex less gimmicky, and into a full codex that can stand on its own, and make it on the tourney scene, instead of something thats trotted out for campaigns and allied in for some quick special abilities. (See bell of lost souls, where Jwolf adds two inquisitors solely for their mystics for his tourney list)

 

Someone mentioned leaving it all to anti daemon specific wargear, which is not how it should be done. Just like most people frown on tailoring a list to fight a specific person. We already have lots of wargear that is only daemon, and i find myself almost never taking it, as its too expensive except against daemons, when a simple tweak or two and suddenly the item is useful against all armies, and can be costed appropriately. This way DH lists could be built like other armies, for all-comers, but would find they have some weapons that do very well vs daemons. As it is now, DH vs Daemons isn't all that lopsided of a fight, as long as the DH didn't completely tailor their list to fight daemons-- which is about how it should be.

 

Why i think codex allying is bad from a gameplay standpoint: It is hard enough to balance a single codex that stands on its own, let alone trying to worry about cross allying combinations, especially as codices age. If we want to represent the inquisitor being able to requisition IG units, put the IG-like units inside the codex. I'd love to have a conscript squad in the codex itself.

 

I see the downsides of not being able to mix things in, people are less likely to buy a unit of GK, and then maybe like them so much to build an army, but I think there is Apoc for that nowadays, where you experiment and mix and match to your hearts content, and get a nice fluffy game.

[Ominous Anonymous]

Someone mentioned leaving it all to anti daemon specific wargear, which is not how it should be done. Just like most people frown on tailoring a list to fight a specific person. We already have lots of wargear that is only daemon, and i find myself almost never taking it, as its too expensive except against daemons, when a simple tweak or two and suddenly the item is useful against all armies, and can be costed appropriately. This way DH lists could be built like other armies, for all-comers, but would find they have some weapons that do very well vs daemons. As it is now, DH vs Daemons isn't all that lopsided of a fight, as long as the DH didn't completely tailor their list to fight daemons-- which is about how it should be.

 

While I am the person you are referring to here, I agree with what you mean. However, I am unfamiliar with Codex: Daemons, so I'm not sure what we could necessarily do to daemons that would help against other armies other than using anti-Deep Striking and anti-Invulnerable saves, but on the last one it is especially hard to target only that when other armies rely on them to protect their expensive HQs.

 

What are daemons able to do that we could attack directly that would also be a boost against other armies? Perhaps focus on being anti-Psyker? Create more Psy-weapons?

[Captain Malachi]

Going anti-psyker wouldn't help at all against daemons, not one of our powers are psychic abilities.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

If we want to represent the inquisitor being able to requisition IG units, put the IG-like units inside the codex. I'd love to have a conscript squad in the codex itself.

 

Yes, that's a much better idea. We should be able to take, say, a Leman Russ tank, but we shouldn't be able to get 3 in one HS slot since that's a Guard special ability. This would allow us to take the Leman Russ without treading on the toes of the Guard. Same applies to other IG and SM units.

[ixzion]

I agree about putting some IG units in the codex. What I would love to see for the radicals is a radical inquisitor with access to more "evil" stuff (maybe even daemonweapons).

[Melissia]

It would be a good way to get rid of Allies without actually taking away Allies.

[Mutt-Man!]

While putting theme and decent concept of "anti daemon militia" storm troopers with updated guns and such for traditional warfare and such would be superb. Though, its redundant against most except brass armored daemons. (Ap3 hellguns)..

 

I think maybe, if IG would be added they would be given sufficient gear (bio-chem and mind protective) equipment, and the weapons would be heavy use on par with having full blown flame squads and sniper squads. (To cleanse and hunt)

 

Giving inducted guard-like units role equipment rather then standard gear since GK's are heavily equipped themselves, their comrades would als be equipped above standards. I'm not saying full units of meltas, plasma or grenade launchers, just something that gives them a suggestive push towards being taken in a GK list.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Mutt-Man! Posted Today, 01:10 AM

While putting theme and decent concept of "anti daemon militia" storm troopers with updated guns and such for traditional warfare and such would be superb. Though, its redundant against most except brass armored daemons. (Ap3 hellguns)..

 

The problem with giving specific roles to ISTs is that it doesn't really fit with their role. They have to guard the Inquisition fortresses against any threat, not just that of the particular Ordo they worked with last. This really makes them all-rounders, which in the context of the army lists allows them to cover for the Chamber Militant's weaknesses whilst still having a standard IST entry across all Inquisition codicies.