Wh40k 10th Edition Faction Focus: Chaos Daemons

[jaxom]

I like what they've shown, but as a mono-Nurgle person I'll probably pass on Daemonic Incursion and wait until there are more specific detachments. I think it would be a challenge to do early objective grabs with a mostly slow moving army.

[Isual]

The shadow of chaos feels a little bit like a win-more-mechanic for me.

[danodan123]

11 minutes ago, Indy Techwisp said:

 

If they do make a New Lucius model, I hope they also make some new Noise Marine models too.

Needing to buy 2 different upgrade sprues just to make 1 unit of the EC's Cult Marine is a bit excessive.

 

Please tell me your choice of wording at the end was on purpose?

[danodan123]

24 minutes ago, Rain said:

Instead of doing what they did with the aligned demons limitation, they should have based it on keyword of the warlord. If the warlord has Khorne keyword and no other god keywords, Khorne demons only, if Nurgle, Nurgle only, etc.

 

If the warlord has all or none of the specific god keywords, you can choose any aligned demons. Would be elegant, thematic, and wouldn’t require Lucius to be “real” EC, but whatever. I guess it also assumes vanilla CSM can still take marks, which I’d hope is the case.

 

I’m looking forward to this. I wonder if I will be able to join my Juggerlord to a unit of Bloodcrushers under the new “leader” rules they mentioned. I want Jugger cavalry damn it. 

 

They've mentioned that the detachment ability is something to do with marks for CSM.

 

Also I doubt they'll let you add the lord to bloodcrushers since it would have to be on the leaders card to say which units they can join, otherwise daemons mixing with CSM units / leaders either way would be really interesting.

 

[jaxom]

4 minutes ago, KrakenBorn said:

Hopefully somebody in this topic knows something I don't as I am fearful for the Mortarion model currently on my painting table.

 

Do characters like Belakor have some kind of "look out sir" rule? Do they get the lone operative rule? What's to stop belakor being shot off the table turn 1 by some of the ridiculously high damage guns previewed the last few days?

The data slates, as shown so far, do not have Lone Operative. Be'lakor does have the Stealth rule though and he can use his Aura to not be targetable outside 18", assuming his Aura also affects him. Guilliman may be a more apt comparison as a fellow primarch. He has an ability that gives him Lone Operative when next to Space Marines. Perhaps Mortarion will have something similar (hopefully at t the very least for Deathshroud). 

[Kaiju Soze]

As pointed out, "Epic Hero" would be more accurately described as "unique hero".

[BluejayJunior]

40 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Due to not playing many daemon lists, what I found interesting was that daemons appear to now only have an invuln save. There was a FNP for the Keeper, but both the Keeper and Belakor didn't have an armor save. 

 

I'm hoping that weapons that ignore invuln saves will be kept to a minimum and mostly be melee weapons, as T'au and Votann railguns smashing through both armor saves and invulns were really feel-bad moments.

Both the demons shown definitely have a regular save and an invuln save. The regular save is at the top with their other stats. 

[jaxom]

I do kind of miss the counter-play by having a save versus shooting that is different than in combat. However, probably worth losing it to streamline things.

[Scribe]

I think I like what I see.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

For context, I have 1500-2000 points slanneshi demons, but have only played maybe 2 games with them in 8th (and none in any other editions).

 

Things to like from it:

• Greater demons have a 4+ invulnerable
• Keeper of Secrets' shield gives 5+++ feel no pain, which hopefully means there is more feel no pain elsewhere in the faction (here's hoping for all nurgle demons)
• The shadows of chaos is really interesting and potentially quite powerful.  As noted by @Isual, it seems to be quite "win more" in that it is more likely to keep you ahead when you are already ahead and doesn't actually help you get ahead (which in turns can mean it won't help you win more games, but instead make you "win bigger" those games you would have won without it).
• I like the Corrupted Realspace stratagem they show as it will actually help you win games by allowing you to keep control of objectives you would otherwise lose (though it won't help you keep from being shot off objectives in the round you get to them).  How useful it turns out to be will depend on a) how CP starved armies are; b) how useful the other demon stratagems are; and c) how cheap their chaff is - this stratagem gets a lot better if there are cheap units that can be "thrown away" to grab out of the way objectives.

 

It shows a lot of promise - if the rest of the faction's rules carry through (in particular unit point costs) I may well actually play my demons, instead of just painting them.

 

One concern I have is the emphasis there seems to be on battle shock - this kind of previews have a tendency to overhype whatever the new mechanic is, and I feel this one does that with its reference to Shadow of Chaos' interaction with battleshock - obviously, Shadow of Chaos gets a lot better the more you can get units to fail their battle shock roll, but I'm left worried that is something that is rarely going to happen.  On the other hand, from the previews we saw, leadership values are generally lower than they were in the past for non-marine units and we have yet to see any rules allowing units to circumvent battleshock or leadership tests, so I am cautiously optimistic.  As well, given that shadows of chaos gives a minus to the test and a penalty for failing, but doesn't actually force any tests, it may never trigger except where you already have local dominance - adding to the "win more" rather than making it more generally useful.

Edited May 9, 2023 by Dr_Ruminahui
Implemented Indy Techwisp's correction

[Indy Techwisp]

Isn't their ability called Shadows of Chaos, not Shadows of the Warp?

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Indeed it is - that makes a lot more sense, and got the two mixed up.    Gone back and fixed that. 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Dr_Ruminahui

[Burni]

34 minutes ago, Kaiju Soze said:

As pointed out, "Epic Hero" would be more accurately described as "unique hero".

Exactly, that would have been clearer. And did GW have to specify that in such a bold way? Were people constantly taking two Calgar’s in the last few editions? I feel that graphic caused more confusion than clarity…

[Indy Techwisp]

6 minutes ago, Burni said:

Exactly, that would have been clearer. And did GW have to specify that in such a bold way? Were people constantly taking two Calgar’s in the last few editions? I feel that graphic caused more confusion than clarity…

 

With the way their new detachments worked, you could argue you could take multiple.

Also some "Epic Heroes" like the Swarmlord aren't a unique entity, but rather a class of entities.

Calling them "Unique Heroes" could potentially cause issues for the Lore-heads.

[Kaiju Soze]

5 minutes ago, Burni said:

Exactly, that would have been clearer. And did GW have to specify that in such a bold way? Were people constantly taking two Calgar’s in the last few editions? I feel that graphic caused more confusion than clarity…

I feel like I get the reasons behind the choices made (more flavourful, less like a CCG mechanic, obvious example), but a simple [unique] would be easier.

[tinpact]

Lot of shadows in the 41st millennium. You'd think they'd invest in better lighting, but maybe it spoils the ambiance.

 

Really liking the ally rules, although I guess if they don't get their army rules (or stratagems?) it'll come down to how good their profiles are.

[danodan123]

7 minutes ago, tinpact said:

Lot of shadows in the 41st millennium. You'd think they'd invest in better lighting, but maybe it spoils the ambiance.

 

Really liking the ally rules, although I guess if they don't get their army rules (or stratagems?) it'll come down to how good their profiles are.

 

It is grimDARK after all ;)

[Rain]

1 hour ago, danodan123 said:

Also I doubt they'll let you add the lord to bloodcrushers since it would have to be on the leaders card to say which units they can join, otherwise daemons mixing with CSM units / leaders either way would be really interesting.

 

Well, crap. You’re probably right.

[jaxom]

23 minutes ago, Dr_Ruminahui said:

The shadows of chaos is really interesting and potentially quite powerful.  As noted by @Isual, it seems to be quite "win more" in that it is more likely to keep you ahead when you are already ahead and doesn't actually help you get ahead (which in turns can mean it won't help you win more games, but instead make you "win bigger" those games you would have won without it).

Agreed, to a degree. I think it helps that SoC is always on in the Daemon deployment zone. If the other player wants to go after those objectives, it can help keep the Daemon player in the game. I do like that the rule is very straightforward. I imagine that a lot of Daemon games will have hotly contested fights over objectives. I think it helps force certain styles of army to have to engage with the Daemons or cede board control in a more meaningful way than just VP.

 

As for the Daemonic Incursion Warp Rifts rule, until we see points, it's hard to tell how reasonable it would be for a Daemon player to keep enough units in Reserve to really make use of the 6" Deep Strike range for it to be more than a nice boost for a unit or two.

[happyslugger]

Looks fun to me and worth a go. I can run my Daemons as an army and mix in with my DG /TS / WE up to 25%.  I think some fun games may lie ahead. 

 

Does their lack of lone operative mean they can be targeted and possibly removed early doors though? If so, that's a bit pants as nothing stopping these models just being wiped out T1 (based purely on the cards).

 

Have I got that right?

Edited May 9, 2023 by happyslugger

[Bouargh]

3 hours ago, AceofCase said:

The weird wording for Lucius being restricted to only Slaanesh daemons seems to confirm that subfactions are very much gone. 

 

I would not overinterprete it. I would rather put my bet on the simplest explanation: there is no Emperor´s Children codex so far and there is no reason to get any short cutted scrapy rules issued as a draft at 10th Ed launch. So putting LUCIUS as a keyword is a tricky way to manage the stuff. Otherwise World Eaters would have been swapped to Khârn  for example...

 

As far as the Shadow of Chaos is concerned it is a nice come back of a reworked Daemonic instability as in past-past editions (or may be was it only in WFB?). My only bemol is that I would have rather seen a malus to Daemons failing a battle shock test outside of the Shadow rather than additional losses to the ennemy failling their own test within the shadow of chaos area... but this is probably subject to many many balance discussions

[Karhedron]

51 minutes ago, happyslugger said:

Does their lack of lone operative mean they can be targeted and possibly removed early doors though? If so, that's a bit pants as nothing stopping these models just being wiped out T1 (based purely on the cards).

 

Have I got that right?

 

I think Belakor's Stealth ability probably provides some protection but I don't know what it does in 10th (unless someone else knows). To be fair, there is not very much stopping Belakor getting blown off the table in 9th edition so I don't think he has lost anything.

[Blight1]

Glad to see that neither Be'lakor or the keeper have towering so they can hide behind ruins.

[happyslugger]

Just now, Blight1 said:

Glad to see that neither Be'lakor or the keeper have towering so they can hide behind ruins.

 

I missed that 

[prava]

3 hours ago, Doctor Perils said:

True. More "disappointingly" it means we won't get an EC detachment on release either (in quotes as it was pretty much expected in fairness)

 

Does that mean Epic Heroes will be able to mix and match in a detachment, or that they have to be your warlord I wonder?

 

That EC wasn't getting a detachment is something we all knew. For the same reason that Ultramarines aren't getting one. 

 

3 hours ago, Indy Techwisp said:

Note that it doesn't specify what faction Lucias is Leading.

Part of me thinks that this is a slight future proofing for EC getting moved to their own codex, but leaving the door open for people to actually play their EC CSM army with the Indexes.

 

Also we've got more Psychic Shotguns again, one safe profile and one dangerous profile so looks like this is just how Psykers work now.

The Keeper of Secrets only has the Psychic keyword on their ranged attack, right?

It doesn't seem to be anywhere else on the sheet.

 

LUCIUS is the only god-specific character in the CHAOS SPACE MARINE CODEX, correct? Thus, it is the only one that will add restrictions to your list if you pick him. 

 

2 hours ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Due to not playing many daemon lists, what I found interesting was that daemons appear to now only have an invuln save. There was a FNP for the Keeper, but both the Keeper and Belakor didn't have an armor save. 

 

I'm hoping that weapons that ignore invuln saves will be kept to a minimum and mostly be melee weapons, as T'au and Votann railguns smashing through both armor saves and invulns were really feel-bad moments.

 

My take is that stuff that voids invuln saves will be close to non-existant. In 9th they had to create a rule for a new type of save, "daemonic save" because of power creep. I hope this time the invuln save is always there and can't be touched.

 

2 hours ago, KrakenBorn said:

Hopefully somebody in this topic knows something I don't as I am fearful for the Mortarion model currently on my painting table.

 

Do characters like Belakor have some kind of "look out sir" rule? Do they get the lone operative rule? What's to stop belakor being shot off the table turn 1 by some of the ridiculously high damage guns previewed the last few days?

 

LOOK OUT SIR is gone, and characters get NO protection, inherently. So, a character with no rules can be targeted, regardless of any other stuff (provided you have LOS, that is). Regarding character protection, we know of 2 keywords at this time: 

 

a) Leader.

b) Lone operative.

 

LEADER allows you to enter a unit as the game starts and stay there. You can't leave it, and if the unit is destroyed you are on your own and can't join another. LEADER characters MUST start the game in a unit if they don't want to die turn 1. So, for all intents and purposes, they will have an accompanying unit.

LONE OPERATIVE means you can't be targeted if you are 18"? away. Dont quote me on the 18" figure.

 

At this time we know that ABADDON is a leader (so he better not lose his leading squad, called "bodyguard" or else he can be shot) and that GUILLIMAN is a lone operative if he is nearby marines.

 

ALSO, BELAKOR and the KEEPER OF SECRETS have no special rules. No titanic. No nothing. So you keep them behind ruins and they are obscured. MORTARION... my take is that he will get the same treatment. No special rules. Which means he will be more survivable than he is now because being Titanic he can always be targeted if you see him.

 

At the same time, some miniatures are TITANIC (Baneblade and also Monolith) and some are TOWERING (Monolith). TOWERING means you don't get obscured by terrain, TITANIC I believe we don't know yet.

 

2 hours ago, jaxom said:

The data slates, as shown so far, do not have Lone Operative. Be'lakor does have the Stealth rule though and he can use his Aura to not be targetable outside 18", assuming his Aura also affects him. Guilliman may be a more apt comparison as a fellow primarch. He has an ability that gives him Lone Operative when next to Space Marines. Perhaps Mortarion will have something similar (hopefully at t the very least for Deathshroud). 

 

Nah, Mortarion won't get any rule for protection. We will be lucky if he isnt TOWERING because this means he will be able to benefit from obscuring terrain. And this stats should be legendary...

 

2 hours ago, Dr_Ruminahui said:

For context, I have 1500-2000 points slanneshi demons, but have only played maybe 2 games with them in 8th (and none in any other editions).

 

Things to like from it:

• Greater demons have a 4+ invulnerable
• Keeper of Secrets' shield gives 5+++ feel no pain, which hopefully means there is more feel no pain elsewhere in the faction (here's hoping for all nurgle demons)
• The shadows of chaos is really interesting and potentially quite powerful.  As noted by @Isual, it seems to be quite "win more" in that it is more likely to keep you ahead when you are already ahead and doesn't actually help you get ahead (which in turns can mean it won't help you win more games, but instead make you "win bigger" those games you would have won without it).
• I like the Corrupted Realspace stratagem they show as it will actually help you win games by allowing you to keep control of objectives you would otherwise lose (though it won't help you keep from being shot off objectives in the round you get to them).  How useful it turns out to be will depend on a) how CP starved armies are; b) how useful the other demon stratagems are; and c) how cheap their chaff is - this stratagem gets a lot better if there are cheap units that can be "thrown away" to grab out of the way objectives.

 

It shows a lot of promise - if the rest of the faction's rules carry through (in particular unit point costs) I may well actually play my demons, instead of just painting them.

 

One concern I have is the emphasis there seems to be on battle shock - this kind of previews have a tendency to overhype whatever the new mechanic is, and I feel this one does that with its reference to Shadow of Chaos' interaction with battleshock - obviously, Shadow of Chaos gets a lot better the more you can get units to fail their battle shock roll, but I'm left worried that is something that is rarely going to happen.  On the other hand, from the previews we saw, leadership values are generally lower than they were in the past for non-marine units and we have yet to see any rules allowing units to circumvent battleshock or leadership tests, so I am cautiously optimistic.  As well, given that shadows of chaos gives a minus to the test and a penalty for failing, but doesn't actually force any tests, it may never trigger except where you already have local dominance - adding to the "win more" rather than making it more generally useful.

 

The Shadows rules is also incredibly good at defending your deployment area, because in that area you will be allowed to deepstrike at 6" all game. This means you can have a counter-charge unit in reserves to handle any enemy that dares get into your deployment zone.

 

24 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

I think Belakor's Stealth ability probably provides some protection but I don't know what it does in 10th (unless someone else knows). To be fair, there is not very much stopping Belakor getting blown off the table in 9th edition so I don't think he has lost anything.

 

My take is that STEALTH means you get the benefit of cover all the time.