Horus Heresy Book 8: Malevolence

[SkimaskMohawk]

Yes, and again, non-standardness is the design point. They want the daemon list to build and play dramatically different.

 

Now, count-as and proxying are a player thing rather than a rules design thing; the exact same argument can be used for the cult/militia list. If you're worried about remembering what unit does X, that's going to be more of a learning thing, similar to going up against mechanicum.

[Scammel]

Lego vs playdough I guess. The reward of creativity within restraints vs complete scope for anything you can imagine.

 

It's objectively poor game design, though. Less visibility is only bad for the game.

 

I'm stuck between Nighthaunt and Wyches rights now. Maybe I'll do both. Or chaos warriors. There is no limit to how amazing this is. 

That honestly sounds completely terrible from a gameplay perspective. 'Maybe I'll do both' genuinely strikes me as lethal to 30k - I'm assuming you wouldn't run both in the same force? I think sticking to a single range is going to be an absolute minimum expression of respect for opponents.

Edited March 26, 2019 by Scammel

[Ranwulf]

You understand that sounds amazing right? Total freedom to conceptualize and realize an entirely individualized army on the tabletop? I'm stuck between Nighthaunt and Wyches rights now. Maybe I'll do both. Or chaos warriors. There is no limit to how amazing this is. 

Some of the models of the Flesh Court could also work very well.

 

Ran

[Marshal Rohr]

Why on earth would that be lethal to 30k? 

[Fire Golem]

I don’t know why having Nighthaunt and Wyches both in one force is any different to having Bloodletters and Daemonettes, other than familiarity (which comes with time).

 

Any time any new army comes out, there’s a period of learning what all the new stuff is.

[Arkangilos]

Lego vs playdough I guess. The reward of creativity within restraints vs complete scope for anything you can imagine.

 

It's objectively poor game design, though. Less visibility is only bad for the game.

 

I'm stuck between Nighthaunt and Wyches rights now. Maybe I'll do both. Or chaos warriors. There is no limit to how amazing this is.

That honestly sounds completely terrible from a gameplay perspective. 'Maybe I'll do both' genuinely strikes me as lethal to 30k - I'm assuming you wouldn't run both in the same force? I thinking sticking to a single range is going to be an absolute minimum expression of respect for opponents.

I wholeheartedly disagree with everything you said.

[Marshal Rohr]

I think anyone trying to pull the wool over their opponents eyes is in the wrong, but I dont think opening up the entirety of the AoS range to our games is lethal. This is INQ28 level customization. 

[ProsperoStands]

Likely to be unpopular here....

 

This book looks terrible. As in, enough to put me off attending any events and thus killing off my interest in the game terrible.

 

Heresy appeals to me as a transparent, pseudo-historical game of sci-fi armies. Plenty scope for variation in a familiar, expansive, and fairly straightforward list once you figure out the RoW and unlocking mechanics offered by certain characters. Something faintly reminiscent of gritty old 3rd edition 40k.

 

And then we have The Daemons of the Ruinstorm. An entire army of counts as with invisible, esoteric rules and bizarre victory conditions. Something completely alien to the 'realistic' (massive quotation marks there) aesthetic of 30k. 

 

Oh man, I really don't want to hate this development but I loathe it completely.

 

Also: Holy proof-reading Batman, there's three different ways of capitalising and/or hyphenating 'Equinox Power Blade Case' on a single page.

 

To be fair, Millita is a giant army of "Counts as"

 

If one army is enough to make you not play the game, don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

[Sandlemad]

It does explicitly say that players should be clear about what's going on "in the interests of fair play and enjoyment of all" and avoid using the same models to represent different things. I think fundamentally if you're playing with someone suitably chill - which, I mean, is something that theoretically ought to come with having the mature/veteran fanbase that HH should have - it won't be a problem. Otherwise it's just familiarity, same as with Mechanicum or Militia.

 

I wouldn't want that concern to interfere with what seems like interesting design and maybe the most customisable, modeller-friendly army to come out of GW in, oh, about 19 years. This really feels like it's digging into a spirit of the hobby that GW utterly disavowed in nearly everything else it does besides maybe Necromunda. Specifically limiting your conversions to a single range of models for sale on the basis that your opponent is too dumb to get what a unit is without recourse to a list of kit SKUs is... oof.

 

Also the way that chaos is being written about in the snippets here - halting, pseudo-Lovecraftian, horror-influenced, with reference to 'aetheric dominions' rather than clearly defined greek-style gods - is as brilliant as I'd hoped. It actually feels considerably more 'realistic', mature and in keeping with FW's mil-hist interpretation of the heresy than its 40k iteration.

It trades wonderfully on the in-universe lack of knowledge, of the incomplete picture and the hasty attempts to codify what they're dealing with. It was done very well with the anthropologist's view of the Space Wolves in Inferno and knight houses like AErthegn in Retribution. Ambiguity and a good idea of how incomplete and partial the sources are should be the hallmark of any good fictional military history.

 

Curiously, just from looking at what's been mentioned,  I'm not at all sure that there are simple 1:1 analogies in the daemon range for some of these units. Greater daemon beasts, daemon behemoths, daemon brutes... I can think of plenty of options for converting these from the wider 40k and AoS lines, as well as FW's catalogue, but no out-of-the-box example from the plastic daemons line.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Sandlemad

[ProsperoStands]

Lego vs playdough I guess. The reward of creativity within restraints vs complete scope for anything you can imagine.

 

It's objectively poor game design, though. Less visibility is only bad for the game.

 

I'm stuck between Nighthaunt and Wyches rights now. Maybe I'll do both. Or chaos warriors. There is no limit to how amazing this is. 

That honestly sounds completely terrible from a gameplay perspective. 'Maybe I'll do both' genuinely strikes me as lethal to 30k - I'm assuming you wouldn't run both in the same force? I thinking sticking to a single range is going to be an absolute minimum expression of respect for opponents.

OR, hear me out. Your opponent very clearly labels them and lets you know ahead of time. I do agree, you should use one type of model per unit.

[Scammel]

I don’t know why having Nighthaunt and Wyches both in one force is any different to having Bloodletters and Daemonettes, other than familiarity (which comes with time).

 

Any time any new army comes out, there’s a period of learning what all the new stuff is.

Bloodletters and Daemonettes and Wyches and Chaos Warriors and Nighthaunt and Gors and Dryads and Skeletons and Ghouls and Zombies and Clanrats and Stormvermin all as the same unit, all with different combinations of invisible upgrades.

 

This is INQ28 level customization. 

Having never played it, I'm assuming this is the laid-back RPG with five guys a side?

 

Why on earth would that be lethal to 30k? 

Ok, I'll be fair - lethal to what I enjoy about it.

 

Heresy appeals to me as a transparent, pseudo-historical game of sci-fi armies. Plenty scope for variation in a familiar, expansive, and fairly straightforward list once you figure out the RoW and unlocking mechanics offered by certain characters. Something faintly reminiscent of gritty old 3rd edition 40k.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Scammel

[Fire Golem]

 

 

I don’t know why having Nighthaunt and Wyches both in one force is any different to having Bloodletters and Daemonettes, other than familiarity (which comes with time).

 

Any time any new army comes out, there’s a period of learning what all the new stuff is.

Bloodletters and Daemonettes and Wyches and Chaos Warriors and Nighthaunt and Gors and Dryads and Skeletons and Ghouls and Zombies and Clanrats and Stormvermin all as the same unit, all with different combinations of invisible upgrades.

No one said about mixing them in a unit? I mean we’re talking common sense here, not making things deliberately confusing to know what’s what.

[Nova_Dew]

It does explicitly say that players should be clear about what's going on "in the interests of fair play and enjoyment of all" and avoid using the same models to represent different things. I think fundamentally if you're playing with someone suitably chill - which, I mean, is something that theoretically ought to come with having the mature/veteran fanbase that HH should have - it won't be a problem. Otherwise it's just familiarity, same as with Mechanicum or Militia.

 

I wouldn't want that concern to interfere with what seems like interesting design and maybe the most customisable, modeller-friendly army to come out of GW in, oh, about 19 years. This really feels like it's digging into a spirit of the hobby that GW utterly disavowed in nearly everything else it does besides maybe Necromunda. Specifically limiting your conversions to a single range of models for sale on the basis that your opponent is too dumb to get what a unit is without recourse to a list of kit SKUs is... oof.

 

Also the way that chaos is being written about in the snippets here - halting, pseudo-Lovecraftian, horror-influenced, with reference to 'aetheric dominions' rather than clearly defined greek-style gods - is as brilliant as I'd hoped. It actually feels considerably more 'realistic', mature and in keeping with FW's mil-hist interpretation of the heresy than its 40k iteration.

It trades wonderfully on the in-universe lack of knowledge, of the incomplete picture and the hasty attempts to codify what they're dealing with. It was done very well with the anthropologist's view of the Space Wolves in Inferno and knight houses like AErthegn in Retribution. Ambiguity and a good idea of how incomplete and partial the sources are should be the hallmark of any good fictional military history.

 

Curiously, just from looking at what's been mentioned,  I'm not at all sure that there are simple 1:1 analogies in the daemon range for some of these units. Greater daemon beasts, daemon behemoths, daemon brutes... I can think of plenty of options for converting these from the wider 40k and AoS lines, as well as FW's catalogue, but no out-of-the-box example from the plastic daemons line.

 

not just 40K and AoS but also LotR stuff and 3rd party pieces, the Nazgul and the watcher in the water would fit in well, hell throw in a few trolls too, anything and everything from human myth and nightmare is up for grabs as long as it fits on the right bases, 

[ChainMachete]

Really not sure about the base size stuff. Is it a recommendation or an absolute?

 

A lot of it doesn’t even match current GW models. For example:

 

1. FW says 30k Daemon Cavalry should be on 70x25mm oval bases (biker bases?). Bloodcrushers used to be on 60mm rounds, but are now on 90x52mm ovals. Bloodcrushers are much too wide to fit on biker bases. Seekers used to be on biker bases, but since the Wrath and Rapture set came out, are now on 60x35mm bases. Can’t think of any daemonic cavalry models that are currently on biker bases.

 

2. 30k Daemon Beasts should be on 40mm bases. Old style metal Beasts of Nurgle and Fiends of Slaanesh used to be on 40mm bases, but the new plastic Beasts of Nurgle are on 60mm bases and the new Fiends are on 75x46mm ovals. Screamers are on the small 30mm flying bases. Flesh Hounds originally came on biker bases, moved to 50mm round and are now on 60x35mm ovals with the new plastic models. I’m not even sure it’s possible to fit Flesh Hounds on 40mm bases.

 

3. Lesser Daemons should be on 32mm bases. But Daemonettes come on 25mm bases, as do Blue Horrors. Most of my Lesser Daemons are the old metal ones and would look pretty daft on 32mm bases, particularly the old Diaz Daemonettes.

 

So if I want to be tourney legal I have to use different bases for my 30k and 40k daemon armies. If I put my Daemonettes, Flesh Hounds, Bloodcrushers, etc on the 30k base sizes, then the models are going to look stupid and people are going to complain and/or accuse me of cheating when I use them in 40k. If I use the correct 40k bases then I can’t use them for 30k. Slaanesh Daemons are hit particularly badly since I don’t think there’s a match up for any of their models.

 

It’s all a bit of a mess.

[Ranwulf]

People have different local communities, and I hope not everyone here expects that the HH is this saintly heaven of only chill players, because even in this forum I recall some serious debates and fighting.

 

What I am getting here is that Scammel is worried that such an open armylist will cause a lot of confusion and trouble, which I think its fair. Depending on his community, there might be a chance of people showing up with grey plastic and say: "This is my ruinstorm army", and you can barely tell what the hell is what. Not that should impede other communities and players, but I think its wise to not disregard that point of view.

 

@Scammel you tell me if thats what you mean.

[Marshal Rohr]

Absolutely, that should be discouraged

[rendingon1+]

You can't represent all upgrades with existing chaos demons models btw. You choose Crimson fury dominion and (of course) use bloodletters - now, will you model brass collars on every model? And what about hell blades they carry - there is no such emanation. I wouldn't even enter WYSIWYG territory in case of this army.

 

I think demon list's  concept is just perfect, endless possibilities for converting and player world building. Of course there will be lazy people who'll bring their tyranids and pretend that that's how imagine demons of X dominion but people who really care will have really cool customized armies.

[Nova_Dew]

 

I don’t know why having Nighthaunt and Wyches both in one force is any different to having Bloodletters and Daemonettes, other than familiarity (which comes with time).

 

Any time any new army comes out, there’s a period of learning what all the new stuff is.

Bloodletters and Daemonettes and Wyches and Chaos Warriors and Nighthaunt and Gors and Dryads and Skeletons and Ghouls and Zombies and Clanrats and Stormvermin all as the same unit, all with different combinations of invisible upgrades.

I'm happy with that if the units are marked in some way that means i know what unit is what, say all unit's on X sized blue painted bases are Y unit, X sized red bases are Z unit, the yellow rubber duck is a deamon brute.

 

I've played games where the rules state you can use bottle caps/mini's from other games/the severed ears of your vanquished foes as long as you tell the person you're playing against, what that counter is and it's not open to later fudging and it wasn't uncommon to have two or more of the same unit with differing markers.

[Marshal Rohr]

My initial inclination was a demon army like the Daedra from Skyrim, but not a direct port. Guys in heavy armor. After Night Haunt came out I began to love the idea of shadow demons like ring wraiths. 

[Pearson73]

I think the Daemon list is really brilliant in the breadth and depth it gives players to explore the nature of chaos, both in how they see it and also how it's perceived in universe. There are some aspects that look terrifying, such as a tooled up greater lord (not it's correct title, but nearly there) but they're also unlikely to come up in anything but big games. The rifts and waning strength of the daemons is a really cool mechanic too.

 

I do understand that for a while, daemon lists will be very bewildering to play against, especially as each player will most likely have very different looking forces, however I think that it's also going to lead to some amazing looking forces and projects.

 

@Marshal Rohr - Nighthaunt based wraith armies would be very cool, on the Skyrim track, I've always seen the daemonic entities in that other dimension reached through reading those giant books as very fitting to the warp and chaos.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Pearson73

[SkimaskMohawk]

I rarely agree with Rhor, but I'm fully behind him in this.

 

It's the player's onus to make sure their armies are clear and consistent. If he has two identical units of wyches but their upgrades are different, then that's on him. If he has 6 units of completely mixed 25mm models, but all the same upgrades, there should be no problem.

 

Daemons, like cult/militia and even mechanicum give a lot of room for cool conversions and kitbashes that go outside the 30k/40k range. 

[1ncarnadine]

Some of the Endless Spells alone might make awesome Daemons, or the basis for great conversions. Imagine a bunch of those floating Khorne skulls crying rivers of blood all over everything, or especially the Beasts of Chaos spells with burning bulls or the spectral crows!

[Marshal Rohr]

I rarely agree with Rhor, but I'm fully behind him in this.

 

It's the player's onus to make sure their armies are clear and consistent. If he has two identical units of wyches but their upgrades are different, then that's on him. If he has 6 units of completely mixed 25mm models, but all the same upgrades, there should be no problem.

 

Daemons, like cult/militia and even mechanicum give a lot of room for cool conversions and kitbashes that go outside the 30k/40k range.

Peace in our time

I wanted to make demon beasts whose corporeal form was spent brass for ages and now I can

[talos402000]

I know that Daemons are the hot new thing now, but has anybody put up a table of contents yet? Or is there any word on the Dark Mechanicum army list?

[Marshal Rohr]

Its a few pages back I think, hidden in spoiler tags.