thade Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Did I miss the memo where GK went from completely-anti-demon to "We're okay with using enslaved demons"? The previous codex was pretty strict about Daemonhosts not being allowed in an army with Grey Knight units...and now that the codex is GK-centric, they're allowing it so you don't HAVE to run with just a solid henchmen force. It's one thing for the most awesome Purifier alive to "bear the burden" of a crazy demon sword...he's more of its steward than its wielder. It's another thing entirely for GK to allow an Inquisitor to put a daemon to work in such a ridiculously uncontrolled way. It's a little weird to me. Anybody else? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chengar Qordath Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Well, it does fit in with the fluff about Grey Knights staying out of the Radical vs. Puritan debate. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800071 Share on other sites More sharing options...
space marine schnauzer Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Did I miss the memo where GK went from completely-anti-demon to "We're okay with using enslaved demons"? The previous codex was pretty strict about Daemonhosts not being allowed in an army with Grey Knight units...and now that the codex is GK-centric, they're allowing it so you don't HAVE to run with just a solid henchmen force. It's one thing for the most awesome Purifier alive to "bear the burden" of a crazy demon sword...he's more of its steward than its wielder. It's another thing entirely for GK to allow an Inquisitor to put a daemon to work in such a ridiculously uncontrolled way. It's a little weird to me. Anybody else? I never thought that GK used daemonhosts, just inquisitors, and then they were more radical. If you read the Eisenhorn books, he uses a daemonhost and is not well thought of in the ordo. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800079 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Shepard Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Did I miss the memo where GK went from completely-anti-demon to "We're okay with using enslaved demons"? The previous codex was pretty strict about Daemonhosts not being allowed in an army with Grey Knight units...and now that the codex is GK-centric, they're allowing it so you don't HAVE to run with just a solid henchmen force. It's one thing for the most awesome Purifier alive to "bear the burden" of a crazy demon sword...he's more of its steward than its wielder. It's another thing entirely for GK to allow an Inquisitor to put a daemon to work in such a ridiculously uncontrolled way. It's a little weird to me. Anybody else? It obvious GW changed drastically Grey Knights background. They stated it clearly in a WD article. The current GK are more pragmatic then before. They have a simple rule: "get the job done" at any cost. Humanity is on the edge on annihilation and only them stand on chaos' way. They don't have the privilege to bind their actions to a particular "morality". If killing an entire detachment of Battle Sisters is needed to exile a powerful daemon and compliting their duty, they will do. If shuttles carrying thousands persons must be destroyed to prevent a devious daemon to escape from a planet and infiltrate another world, they will do. They will bear the burden of such casualties but they will have no regret. They are no longer the male version of the zelant, pious and religious Battle Sisters, they are Grey Knights, the Emperor's last gift, the only line of defence against forces beyond human comprehension. Don't misunderstand me, I like Battle Sisters but they lack the GK ability to perform such kind of tasks. They are tailored for two different purposes: that's why the Sisters protect the faith of Imperial creed while Grey Knights protects the very survival of mankind and beyond. When the fate of your species, of every species rests in your hands you cannot refuse to use a valid asset and pretend to succeed and survive. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800087 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor =D= Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 When you look at it Grey Knights and Sisters are two sides of the same coin. + Sisters; protect the faith and only fall back when the world (and enemy) burns at their feet. + Knights; stop the threat before it gets too big with planet shattering force. But to answer the original question, I believe Ward left that part out of the rulebook to simplify things and probably believes we as the players can make that choice. Besides... Its not like the daemonhosts of this codex are as powerful as the past incarnation. The new ones feel like the child friendly version of daemonhosts, no Cherubael for us. =]D[= Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800124 Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE PORTCULLIS Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Daemonhosts in an army that can include Inquisitors is fine by me as you can argue that they are radical. But to be able to have Daemonhosts in an army with Grey Knights or Draigo himself beggers belief. I can't conceive that the unflinshingly zealous holy warriors of the grey knights order could believably stoop to materials of the most damned. It just doesn't tie in with the warm diahorrea that Ward continually spoons us. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800431 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Valerius Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 The rules shouldn't be completely divorced from the fluff, but I think you're arguing for something which is too close of a tie between rules and fluff. If you want to have a fluffy army, then make one. In a similar vein: should C:SM have a rule that if you take Vulkan, you can't take Land Speeders (or are limited)? Of course not. Things like this should be a player choice, not a designer choice. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800599 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 I admit I'm firmly in the "traditional fluff" camp and I still feel awkward about Daemonhosts being allowed in any force that is not entirely devoid of GK. I understand that "this is a game" and some times lists are built in a way that defy fluffy convention/thinking. I'm not a fan, though. While I get that the GK are "ends justify the means", remember that their goal is to destroy and oust demons. As I said...it's one thing for their mightiest Purifier to beard the burden of a demonblade. Another thing entirely for some crazed inquisitor to stick it in an ex-convict/unsanctioned psyker. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2800737 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demoulius Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 my guess is that they will fight along the inquisitor but just scrutinize him abit harder and keep their eyes fixed on him. he might think he can controls the deamon(s) indefenitly but i doubt they will be bound forever :rolleyes: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2803470 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marid Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 The present pitiful incarnation of daemonhosts seems like a way to claim that you can still use your models. I think a lot of us were hoping for a small change, such as the addition of Eternal Warrior. Instead of a daemon we got an imp. So while you still can use your models, I'm not sure you will want to and the the fluff question becomes academic. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2803672 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 When the fate of your species, of every species rests in your hands you cannot refuse to use a valid asset and pretend to succeed and survive. So you kept the Collector base then? ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804478 Share on other sites More sharing options...
breng77 Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I think a lot of this comes from GW not wanting to limit player options, Daemonhosts in the old Daemon hunter codex (while flufffy) rule out use of more than 1/2 of the codex, if you put it in the new codex, it might as well say, play cotaez and no Grey knights and you can use Daemonhosts. In all reality that was never going to happen. I do wish that perhaps they had created a separate inquisition codex. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804490 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted June 27, 2011 Author Share Posted June 27, 2011 When the fate of your species, of every species rests in your hands you cannot refuse to use a valid asset and pretend to succeed and survive. So you kept the Collector base then? ;) Awesome. Are you kidding? No. I blew that crap the hell up. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804502 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Did I miss the memo where GK went from completely-anti-demon to "We're okay with using enslaved demons"? The previous codex was pretty strict about Daemonhosts not being allowed in an army with Grey Knight units...and now that the codex is GK-centric, they're allowing it so you don't HAVE to run with just a solid henchmen force. It's one thing for the most awesome Purifier alive to "bear the burden" of a crazy demon sword...he's more of its steward than its wielder. It's another thing entirely for GK to allow an Inquisitor to put a daemon to work in such a ridiculously uncontrolled way. It's a little weird to me. Anybody else? It obvious GW changed drastically Grey Knights background. They stated it clearly in a WD article. The current GK are more pragmatic then before. They have a simple rule: "get the job done" at any cost. Humanity is on the edge on annihilation and only them stand on chaos' way. They don't have the privilege to bind their actions to a particular "morality". If killing an entire detachment of Battle Sisters is needed to exile a powerful daemon and compliting their duty, they will do. If shuttles carrying thousands persons must be destroyed to prevent a devious daemon to escape from a planet and infiltrate another world, they will do. They will bear the burden of such casualties but they will have no regret. They are no longer the male version of the zelant, pious and religious Battle Sisters, they are Grey Knights, the Emperor's last gift, the only line of defence against forces beyond human comprehension. Don't misunderstand me, I like Battle Sisters but they lack the GK ability to perform such kind of tasks. They are tailored for two different purposes: that's why the Sisters protect the faith of Imperial creed while Grey Knights protects the very survival of mankind and beyond. When the fate of your species, of every species rests in your hands you cannot refuse to use a valid asset and pretend to succeed and survive. The problem is, such a stance WILL doom humanity. Purity, in every form, is the only way to stand against chaos. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804663 Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Heretic Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Honestly. Who uses daemonhosts anyway :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804925 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piousservant Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Did I miss the memo where GK went from completely-anti-demon to "We're okay with using enslaved demons"? The previous codex was pretty strict about Daemonhosts not being allowed in an army with Grey Knight units...and now that the codex is GK-centric, they're allowing it so you don't HAVE to run with just a solid henchmen force. It's one thing for the most awesome Purifier alive to "bear the burden" of a crazy demon sword...he's more of its steward than its wielder. It's another thing entirely for GK to allow an Inquisitor to put a daemon to work in such a ridiculously uncontrolled way. It's a little weird to me. Anybody else? It obvious GW changed drastically Grey Knights background. They stated it clearly in a WD article. The current GK are more pragmatic then before. They have a simple rule: "get the job done" at any cost. Humanity is on the edge on annihilation and only them stand on chaos' way. They don't have the privilege to bind their actions to a particular "morality". If killing an entire detachment of Battle Sisters is needed to exile a powerful daemon and compliting their duty, they will do. If shuttles carrying thousands persons must be destroyed to prevent a devious daemon to escape from a planet and infiltrate another world, they will do. They will bear the burden of such casualties but they will have no regret. They are no longer the male version of the zelant, pious and religious Battle Sisters, they are Grey Knights, the Emperor's last gift, the only line of defence against forces beyond human comprehension. Don't misunderstand me, I like Battle Sisters but they lack the GK ability to perform such kind of tasks. They are tailored for two different purposes: that's why the Sisters protect the faith of Imperial creed while Grey Knights protects the very survival of mankind and beyond. When the fate of your species, of every species rests in your hands you cannot refuse to use a valid asset and pretend to succeed and survive. I think you're mistakenly conflating two things. The old Grey Knights would, if necessary, execute a detatchment of Battle Sisters (or Guardsmen, or even Astartes) to ensure that the Daemonic taint did not spread. They would even execute (or if they were lucky mindwipe) those who had fought Daemons and survived... In that respect, you are entirely correct, they would not hestitate in taking that sort of action. However there is a massive difference between executing Battle Sisters to prevent the risk of Daemonic taint and sacrificing Battle Sisters as part of some sorcererous ritual. The second is something the Grey Knights (in the past) would never have done, they were defined by their unyielding purity and it was that which allowed them to battle Chaos. Now they're able to fight Chaos by using Chaos - but apparently without being tainted themselves down to some innate Mary Sue-ism. It's a little disappointing if you ask me. It reads like an attempt to make the GK more "grimdark", whilst completely missing what actually made them grimdark in the first place... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2804943 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Valerius Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 I think you're mistakenly conflating two things. The old Grey Knights would, if necessary, execute a detatchment of Battle Sisters (or Guardsmen, or even Astartes) to ensure that the Daemonic taint did not spread. They would even execute (or if they were lucky mindwipe) those who had fought Daemons and survived... In that respect, you are entirely correct, they would not hestitate in taking that sort of action. However there is a massive difference between executing Battle Sisters to prevent the risk of Daemonic taint and sacrificing Battle Sisters as part of some sorcererous ritual. The second is something the Grey Knights (in the past) would never have done, they were defined by their unyielding purity and it was that which allowed them to battle Chaos. Now they're able to fight Chaos by using Chaos - but apparently without being tainted themselves down to some innate Mary Sue-ism. It's a little disappointing if you ask me. It reads like an attempt to make the GK more "grimdark", whilst completely missing what actually made them grimdark in the first place... You're interpreting that story wrong. They aren't using Chaos to fight Chaos, they're using the purity of martyred sisters to fight Chaos. It's the same thing as they've always done by using sacred, purified relics and such. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2805042 Share on other sites More sharing options...
f.desrochers Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 I honestly don't get the problem here guys. You want to play a fluffy army, choose the units that fit your theme and whatnot. That daemonhosts are eligible as a unit selection is really a zero-impact issue. If you want fluffy then pick fluffy; the current daemonhosts certainly aren't a game breaker by any means. As an opposing perspective, I wouldn't agree to fielding daemonhosts in my army with GK. I won't stop someone else from doing it.... Of course we also keep seeing "Henchmen" lists pop up with 3 x dreadnaughts and I keep asking the question "Where did they come from?" ;francois Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2805083 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ragnarok Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 So a =][= brings a daemonhost with all his wards and confinements and the GK's refuse to fight? Would they really do that? If this is during the battle, and the Daemonhost kills half the unbound daemons they are fighting will the GK's go against =][= orders and target the daemonhost or the unbound daemons? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2805089 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted June 28, 2011 Author Share Posted June 28, 2011 So a =][= brings a daemonhost with all his wards and confinements and the GK's refuse to fight? Would they really do that? If this is during the battle, and the Daemonhost kills half the unbound daemons they are fighting will the GK's go against =][= orders and target the daemonhost or the unbound daemons? This reasoning is why I hesitate to put my foot down on the issue...and really I suspect the reason a daemonhost in a GK force is acceptable. Provided that the GK summarily exterminate it and the radical Inquisitor after the battle. ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2805135 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Caerolion Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 So a =][= brings a daemonhost with all his wards and confinements and the GK's refuse to fight? Would they really do that? If this is during the battle, and the Daemonhost kills half the unbound daemons they are fighting will the GK's go against =][= orders and target the daemonhost or the unbound daemons? They'll destroy the Unbound daemons first, as they're the immediate threat. Once the battle's over, the heretical little Xanthite should be getting a rather swift lesson as to what "too far" means. Seriously, if having daemonhosts around you isn't enough to get you labelled a heretic, why are the Xanthites so hated? It used to be that using a daemonsword was a one-way ticket to purgation, but apparently now the Grey Knights decided it's an awesome idea, and they should do it too. Will they start carrying Icons next? After all, they have their mythical hand-wavium protecting them from corruption, so they should be able to utilise them. Even if we do accept that the GK are incorruptable, the fact remains that mostly it isn't the GK using these things, but a "mere" Inquisitor, who is fully able to be corrupted by what they're wielding. They may be Inquisitors, but turning up to your local Conclave with a daemonweapon in hand, and a daemonhost or two behind you is a surefire way to get yourself declared Excommunicate Traitoris, and executed on the spot. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2806038 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildfire Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Rules =/ fluff. Just because you're allowed to do something ruleswise doesn't meant that it's mandatory. Seriously, get over it. People were all in a tizzy over BA getting to take LRs as dedicated transports as well, but no where in their codex does it suggest it's common for them to do so. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/232732-okay-i-give-in-daemonhosts-you-are-not-forgiven/#findComment-2806829 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.