Wh40k 10th Edition Faction Focus: Chaos Daemons

[Large and Moving Torb]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

This is how it was in the olden days. Invuln only except for Khorne demons that wore physical brass armor. It’s a themaric quirk of demons being made of warp matter. There was even a demon weapon that hated other demons and would ignore invuln saves, but not regular armor saves.

 

Re: demons being made of warp matter - I get what you are saying here, but GW has always seemed to be of two minds about this in the fluff. For example, in the early books and stories going back to The Inquisition War there were references to daemon skulls and other body parts but also references to daemons being killed and "popping" out of reality (i.e. nothing left). Heck, in the pack of skulls GW sells they include a number of daemon skulls! It's always seemed to me to be yes, they are made of ether and also have physical form in the "real" world. And not. A "both and scenario" or just fluff inconsistencies, I don't know. I wouldn't say no to Bloodletters getting brass carapace back a la CSM 3.5 codex.

 

Sorry if this is wandering too far off topic.

[Blight1]

My guess is stealth is -1 to be hit by ranged weapons.

[BitsHammer]

3 hours 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.

They call it the grimdark for a reason.

[BitsHammer]

As for Luicius, I don't expect EC to get their solo book this early in the edition. GW likes to space things out a bit and dropping a third Primarch in under twelve months seems a bit much for them.

 

Plus WE still need their second wave release.

 

Daemons are definitely shaping up nicely though the loss of the dual save mechanic is a.bit sad because it was very flavorful that they'd work so differently from regular factions, but I can see how it was changed for ease of play.

[tzeentch9]

3 hours ago, happyslugger said:

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?

Based on the cards and the weapon stats we’ve seen, good luck with killing either of these big daemons turn 1. Or turn two for that matter

[Indy Techwisp]

15 minutes ago, BitsHammer said:

As for Luicius, I don't expect EC to get their solo book this early in the edition. GW likes to space things out a bit and dropping a third Primarch in under twelve months seems a bit much for them.

 

I expect if they are being split off from the main CSM dex, it'll be much later on in the edition, similar to when WE got their separate codex.

[Special Officer Doofy]

Some cool stuff but I still have worries for Daemons. Not sure what stealth is yet (I have my guesses) but Be'lakor had -1 to be hit and -1 to be wounded and a conditional -1 damage, all gone. Keeper of secrets for it's size is only S8 on its best attack (which was fine when the highest toughness of 8th and 9th for most of the editions was only 8). How is slaanesh supposed to deal with high toughness vehicles/monsters? Or nurgle? With not alot of range and what appears to be low strength (minus khorne of course), they will have a hard time against tanks with wounding on 5+ at best. Still too early to make any grand assumptions, but I'm not exactly thrilled by what was shown in the article.

 

Hopefully weapons that bypass invuln saves are gone. Daemon saves in 9th edition are wonky but necessary.

[ThePenitentOne]

5 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 How is slaanesh supposed to deal with high toughness vehicles/monsters? 

 

 

6 Ranged psychic attacks that deal devastating wounds, and 4 CC attacks that deal devasting wounds, so any sixes do Mortal Wounds- each of the psychic attacks is only worth 1 damage, but the claw attacks are 3, and if they become mortal that can hurt. Now if there's an enhancement or a strat to lower the threshold for critical hits even by one, you're doubling your odds of dealing mortals on ten attacks.

 

And even if not, you still get your 6 shooting attacks dealing 2 damage each, 6 cc attacks doing 3 damage each, and 3 cc attacks doing 2 damage each. All of these shots are at 2+ to hit, all of them have armour penetration, and as for wounding a 6 wounds anything.

 

I think the Keeper is going to do okay.

Edited May 10, 2023 by ThePenitentOne

[Khornestar]

Seems reasonable to hope bloodthirsters/skarbrand don’t have it, either.

 

Good catch! 
 

Would love for Angron to get cover more easily, but that might be wishful thinking.

8 hours ago, Blight1 said:

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

 

[spessmarine]

Shadow in the Warp into The Shadow of Chaos is a comical situation.

[Special Officer Doofy]

5 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

 

6 Ranged psychic attacks that deal devastating wounds, and 4 CC attacks that deal devasting wounds, so any sixes do Mortal Wounds- each of the psychic attacks is only worth 1 damage, but the claw attacks are 3, and if they become mortal that can hurt. Now if there's an enhancement or a strat to lower the threshold for critical hits even by one, you're doubling your odds of dealing mortals on ten attacks.

 

And even if not, you still get your 6 shooting attacks dealing 2 damage each, 6 cc attacks doing 3 damage each, and 3 cc attacks doing 2 damage each. All of these shots are at 2+ to hit, all of them have armour penetration, and as for wounding a 6 wounds anything.

 

I think the Keeper is going to do okay.

 

6 psychic attacks (or 9 if you do the hazard) that need to hit on a 2+, so mathematically less than one per turn is a devastating wound for one damage (with the non hazard). The 6 whip assault ranged can't even hurt T12 now (from my understanding?) 4 melee attacks with devastating, again hitting on 2+ and needing 6's.

 

So a keeper of secrets will get maybe 3 MW and 6 S8 attacks needing 5+ to wound a T12 tank. Not that promising. None of those S6 are wounding a T12 target unless it has devastating wound.

 

Im not saying the keeper of secrets is bad (specially since none of us know any point costs, which we all know can make or break any unit), but that is still not alot to deal with T12+ targets. Im just worried about anti tank for daemons. I'm sure the soul grinder (in melee) will be their shining hero, but it's so large and clunky without a base and easy to screen.

 

I just have a personal hunch that vehicles will be slightly over tuned this edition and we will see alot more of them, considering alot of faction's will need big scary vehicles to take out their opponents big scary vehicles.

 

Edit: I'm told 6's to wound still wound. I'll get the rules right when the book comes out I promise. Maybe.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Special Officer Doofy

[BitsHammer]

Anti-vehicle has always been a problem for Slaanesh. Back when we had armor values the had to hope for rending to help glance things 

 

Not sure how GW could fix it without adding more to the faction really.

[Kallas]

1 hour ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

The 6 whip assault ranged can't even hurt T12 now (from my understanding?)

You are misunderstanding.

 

[Edit: Going through articles to double check my statement, so I may be wrong that CWs have been confirmed to wound regardless of S/T]

 

6s to wound are Critical Wounds; that is that they always wound, regardless of Toughness. Some rules give Critical Wounds on different rolls (eg, Anti-Infantry 4+ on Combi-Weapons, so a 4, 5 or 6 causes a Critical Wound).

 

Devastating Wounds means that Critical Wounds cause Mortal Wounds to the target equal to the weapons' damage value instead of normal damage.

 

+++

 

I do think people are misconstruing the point of Devastating Wounds: they're not to defeat high Toughness, they're to defeat good saves. For anti-Toughness you want Anti-X or Lethal Hits, as these bypass the normal wound rolls.

 

As for the Keeper, it's an odd on. S8 means it's not great vs vehicles, but any successful wounds are likely to translate to damage because of Devastating Wounds or AP-3 (-2, +1 from the aura which presumably applies to itself, as it's not limited to 'other' friendly units, but 10e could change that). It's definitely a weaker one vs vehicles/monsters from the looks of things, but it will blend heavy infantry through high volume of high quality attacks.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Kallas

[Special Officer Doofy]

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

You are misunderstanding.

 

[Edit: Going through articles to double check my statement, so I may be wrong that CWs have been confirmed to wound regardless of S/T]

 

6s to wound are Critical Wounds; that is that they always wound, regardless of Toughness. Some rules give Critical Wounds on different rolls (eg, Anti-Infantry 4+ on Combi-Weapons, so a 4, 5 or 6 causes a Critical Wound).

 

Devastating Wounds means that Critical Wounds cause Mortal Wounds to the target equal to the weapons' damage value instead of normal damage.

 

+++

 

I do think people are misconstruing the point of Devastating Wounds: they're not to defeat high Toughness, they're to defeat good saves. For anti-Toughness you want Anti-X or Lethal Hits, as these bypass the normal wound rolls.

 

As for the Keeper, it's an odd on. S8 means it's not great vs vehicles, but any successful wounds are likely to translate to damage because of Devastating Wounds or AP-3 (-2, +1 from the aura which presumably applies to itself, as it's not limited to 'other' friendly units, but 10e could change that). It's definitely a weaker one vs vehicles/monsters from the looks of things, but it will blend heavy infantry through high volume of high quality attacks.

 

But the whip I mentioned doesn't have critical wounds? Only rule is assault. Or is a 6+ to wound always a critical wound and wound regardless and isn't a special rule? I'm a bit special myself so I could have it all messed up. It's hard to keep referencing 10 different warcom articles to remember this stuff haha.

 

Wasn't trying to doom and gloom, I just think daemons are going to have a hard time with higher T vehicles, which I also think will be more prevalent this edition.

[Kallas]

Critical Wounds are just unmodified 6s to wound. Anything can roll them, it's not a specific weapon rule like Devastating Wounds or Lethal Hits.

 

As far as we can tell from the previews, Critical Wound/Hit is just a better codified term for "on an unmodified 6 to wound/hit"

 

It's definitely one of the problems with the drip feed.

[Tokugawa]

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

Critical Wounds are just unmodified 6s to wound. Anything can roll them, it's not a specific weapon rule like Devastating Wounds or Lethal Hits.

 

As far as we can tell from the previews, Critical Wound/Hit is just a better codified term for "on an unmodified 6 to wound/hit"

 

It's definitely one of the problems with the drip feed.

There is difference. Critical wounds also have "always count as successful" meaning. It doesn't make difference for 6, but if abilities buffed it to 5+ or better, a critical of 5 is also successful even a 6+ is required normally.

[Kallas]

31 minutes ago, Tokugawa said:

There is difference. Critical wounds also have "always count as successful" meaning. It doesn't make difference for 6, but if abilities buffed it to 5+ or better, a critical of 5 is also successful even a 6+ is required normally.

Yeah, I've been trying to find this in the previews while at work, so it's been a bit awkward. I think you're right, I just can't find the article that spells it out. Maybe the one that shows Anti-X? 

 

Edit: Found the bugger!

On the Anti-X bit, "** A guaranteed success, normally achieved by rolling an unmodified six."

Edited May 10, 2023 by Kallas

[Doobles57]

7 minutes ago, Kallas said:

Yeah, I've been trying to find this in the previews while at work, so it's been a bit awkward. I think you're right, I just can't find the article that spells it out. Maybe the one that shows Anti-X? 

This one on the terminator datasheet It's hidden between the text and a footnote though so it's not the clearest explanation of it. But yes, a Critical Wound is a guaranteed success, normally an unmodified 6 to wound. Anti-X weapons - like the chain fist's Anti-Vehicle 3+ - score a Critical Wound on a 3+ (or whatever their Anti X rule states) regardless of strength vs toughness.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Doobles88

[Karhedron]

6 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

I just have a personal hunch that vehicles will be slightly over tuned this edition and we will see alot more of them, considering alot of faction's will need big scary vehicles to take out their opponents big scary vehicles.

 

I think this is probably accurate, after vehicles being almost extinct in 9th edition. A lot of tools that people have become used to relying on to deal with vehicles will be a lot less effective now they are up to T12+. If you look on the Marine thread, there is a lot of grief about Thunder Hammers going to 2D and players wondering how Marines are meant to deal with vehicles now.

 

Vehicles look like they will be more survivable in 10th thanks to the general reduction in AP and the lifting of the toughness cap. Melta, overcharged plasma, power fists, thunder hammers etc are all now going to need a 5+ wound most vehicles so will only be a reliable threat when fielded en-masse. Reliable anti-tank seems like it is going to be other tanks (or equivalent).

[Kallas]

12 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

I think this is probably accurate, after vehicles being almost extinct in 9th edition. A lot of tools that people have become used to relying on to deal with vehicles will be a lot less effective now they are up to T12+. If you look on the Marine thread, there is a lot of grief about Thunder Hammers going to 2D and players wondering how Marines are meant to deal with vehicles now.

I would probably agree too - though points remain to be seen. Costs will determine a lot about a unit's viability, so vehicles could be costed appropriately (but then GW's track record on points is not the best )

 

12 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

Vehicles look like they will be more survivable in 10th thanks to the general reduction in AP and the lifting of the toughness cap. Melta, overcharged plasma, power fists, thunder hammers etc are all now going to need a 5+ wound most vehicles so will only be a reliable threat when fielded en-masse. Reliable anti-tank seems like it is going to be other tanks (or equivalent).

Well, to be fair we've seen some solid anti-tank tools for infantry. Lascannons are now all 12/-3/d6+1, so they're decent into vehicles. Krak Grenade Launchers are 9/-2/d3 which is pretty amazing for a special weapon (and honestly I think that's kind of a crazy profile for a Krak grenade, but oh well). Autocannons are 9/-1/3 which is decent with their 2 shots.

 

We've yet to see quite a lot of other heavy weapons but especially Missile Launchers - if Grenade Launchers get S9 Krak, then MLs will likely get at least S9, and possibly even S10. 

 

Still, infantry anti-tank is relying on volume to bring down tanks, which is a bit concerning, even for someone like myself who is itching to get my Land Raiders on the table 

[Doctor Perils]

17 hours ago, prava said:

 

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

Not exactly, the EC's are particular in that we know they'll get their own codex sooner or later, unlike Ultras/other loyalists. They will be more akin to the World Eaters, Thousand Sons and Death Guard (ie, like the Wolves, Angels-s and Templars)

Still, it wasn't unexpected

[Doctor Perils]

17 hours ago, Large and Moving Torb said:

 

Re: demons being made of warp matter - I get what you are saying here, but GW has always seemed to be of two minds about this in the fluff. For example, in the early books and stories going back to The Inquisition War there were references to daemon skulls and other body parts but also references to daemons being killed and "popping" out of reality (i.e. nothing left). Heck, in the pack of skulls GW sells they include a number of daemon skulls! It's always seemed to me to be yes, they are made of ether and also have physical form in the "real" world. And not. A "both and scenario" or just fluff inconsistencies, I don't know. I wouldn't say no to Bloodletters getting brass carapace back a la CSM 3.5 codex.

 

Sorry if this is wandering too far off topic.

A Schrodinger's skull, if you will ;)

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

We've yet to see quite a lot of other heavy weapons but especially Missile Launchers - if Grenade Launchers get S9 Krak, then MLs will likely get at least S9, and possibly even S10. 

 

Still, infantry anti-tank is relying on volume to bring down tanks, which is a bit concerning, even for someone like myself who is itching to get my Land Raiders on the table 

 

Melta is going to S9 by the looks of things. That means it will be going from wounding Dreads on a 3+ to a 5+. Heavier tanks will be going from a 4+ to a 5+.

 

 

It does look like Infantry will have a harder time dealing with vehicles than they did in 9th, particularly in melee. I suspect that this is by design but we will have to wait and see if vehicles come out too powerful. Given how easily vehicles died in 9th, my hunch is that they will not be brokenly powerful.

[jaxom]

We also haven't seen what lighter tanks and vehicles look like. Sentinels, Tauroxes, etc may be where things like Str8 and Str9 shine.

[Special Officer Doofy]

9 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

Melta is going to S9 by the looks of things. That means it will be going from wounding Dreads on a 3+ to a 5+. Heavier tanks will be going from a 4+ to a 5+.

 

 

It does look like Infantry will have a harder time dealing with vehicles than they did in 9th, particularly in melee. I suspect that this is by design but we will have to wait and see if vehicles come out too powerful. Given how easily vehicles died in 9th, my hunch is that they will not be brokenly powerful.

 

The melta only being strength 9 worries me. In my DG my only anti tank was my multi meltas on my fart karts and the entropy cannons on my tanks. I don't want to bring a predator or helbrute for Las cannons (they don't get DR).

 

I would love for the new model that comes out with each Codex for daemons to be a new soul grinder (on a base too). I would finally get some!