Daemon FAQ Draft up!

What do you all think?
Daemon-FAQ-1-768x873 Daemon-FAQ-6-768x873 Daemon-FAQ-5-768x873 Daemon-FAQ-4-768x873 Daemon-FAQ-3-768x873 Daemon-FAQ-2-768x873



About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

25 Responses to “Daemon FAQ Draft up!”

  1. Avatar
    gvcolor August 24, 2016 4:04 pm #

    Q: Should the Lash of Despair have Rending?
    A: No, but you should be lashed for asking this question.

  2. Avatar
    Matt August 24, 2016 5:56 pm #

    Reese when you’all do the review of the faq, can you’all go over the page 5 part on objectives and objective corruption? Seems strange with the errata – seems confusing on how it works with corruption vs OPSEC/non-scoring units. Thanks!

    • Avatar
      Grizzyzz August 25, 2016 1:53 am #

      Talked to my demon friends yesterday after this dropped. Maybe Reese and Frankie can confirm this more. What we concluded were the following scenerios (space marine army (SM) vs demons (DM)):

      – SM (no obsec) cleansed and held
      – SM (obsec) cleansed and held
      – SM (no obsec) and DM not contested, not cleansed
      – SM (obsec) and DM cleansed and held

      Hope this helps!

    • Avatar
      Threllen August 25, 2016 5:21 am #

      Essentially it boils down to this: If a unit would cause the objective to be *contested* then it’s not actually contested and the daemon still holds it (i.e. – any enemy without obsec gets in range of a corrupted objective while a daemon model is still in range as well. Daemon would still hold it).

      If a unit has something that allows them to take control of the objective (i.e. – they have obsec and the daemon doesn’t) then the corruption is cleansed and they take it.

      • Avatar
        Kevin Lantz August 28, 2016 5:27 pm #

        on the flip side nearly every space marine is running the big formation for free transports, and it’s all ob sec all the time!

  3. Avatar
    Sanchezsam2 August 24, 2016 7:11 pm #

    I’m hoping after all the major tournies review thier faqs we see a lot more conformity between everyone. It will put a lot of events on the same standard.
    While I think the major Itc changes to 2+ reroll, str d roll of 6, and invis nerf stay. And things like missions and to an extent army construction are slightly different I’m hoping the few minor changes like blasts hitting all levels goes the GW faq way.

    The faqs ironically went very close to most of the ITC rulings more so the several “rules as written” interpreters. So it will be nice to see organized play less fractured again.

    • Avatar
      westrider August 24, 2016 8:52 pm #

      The only one I really don’t want to see adopted is the Drop Pod Doors. That one is just a nightmare.

      • Avatar
        Sanchezsam2 August 25, 2016 5:48 am #

        I’m fairly certain that is being addressed in the GW final official faq

  4. Avatar
    Vercingatorix August 24, 2016 8:27 pm #

    I know they’ve stayed with it for a long time and it would probably be OP but I would really like flickering fire to actually go off on how many you throw at it. It’s so disheartening to say three and have it only go off on two or be thinking two but you never specified so you have to suck up your warp charge 1 that you threw 5 dice at.

    • Avatar
      AbusePuppy August 25, 2016 12:35 am #

      The answer is to git gud.

      • Avatar
        Vercingatorix August 25, 2016 8:13 am #

        lol, the answer to all issues.

  5. Avatar
    Blight1 August 25, 2016 3:07 am #

    The psychic focus being used at the same time as chaos psychic focus threw me for a loop. Had thought one was used in place of the other.
    Nice to see the exalted flamer actually act like a flamer though wish it could move and fire.
    Was surprised they resolved the chaos psychic power limit with a special rule added to the decurion.
    Fateweaver will just have to hide on the table now.

    • Avatar
      Nurglitch August 25, 2016 5:56 am #

      The Exalted Flamer can still fire its D3 Lascannon shots at BS1 when it moves. Probably handy for having roving anti-air, to jump the Exalted Flamer so it has LOS, and then cut loose.

  6. Avatar
    Threllen August 25, 2016 5:25 am #

    Getting Chaos Focus and Psychic focus at the same time is kind of awesome. I sometimes like to go Divination with my LoC for the sweet powers. Now I would get Flickering Flame and Prescience automatically along with the three rolls on the table.

    Does kind of suck, though, that the detachment bonus for the Incursion implies that if you don’t take a DI then you can’t roll all your powers on a god table.

    • Avatar
      Blight1 August 25, 2016 7:22 am #

      I believe that the only reason it says you don’t get chaos focus is because if you are already rolling all your powers on a daemon lore then regular focus gets you the primaris anyway. This way you don’t somehow get the primaris twice. No real rules change there.
      I know summoning heavy builds will love getting the summoning power for free on top of their god’s primaris.

      • Avatar
        Threllen August 25, 2016 8:07 am #

        What I meant with the second part wasn’t about the primaris powers. I just meant that it states you have to take a full daemonic incursion if you want to roll all your powers on your god table. So if I took an ML3 herald as part of a CAD, I could not roll everything on the Tzeentch table. I would only be able to roll half of them on the table just like the old restriction.

  7. Avatar
    Blight1 August 25, 2016 7:25 am #

    There was something I was wondering about. When it comes to questions that the ITC hasn’t answered but the GW draft FAQ has what is the ITC’s stance.
    Like with the chaos focus plus regular focus thing. Their answer isn’t a rules change just a clarification that not a lot of people recognized before. Wouldn’t you just default to playing it like that?

    • Avatar
      tag8833 August 25, 2016 9:01 am #

      It’s in the ITC FAQ. So Until the GW FAQ’s go live….

  8. Avatar
    Vercingatorix August 25, 2016 8:58 am #

    Not a fan of adding a command benefit for what I think should have been just a straight replacing of rules.
    What’s the purpose of making a LoC from a CAD weaker than a LoC from an incursion? It doesn’t add anything to the game, doesn’t really change power levels, but makes it so that its yet another confusing thing to keep track of.

    • Avatar
      Rasmus0 August 25, 2016 2:53 pm #

      Its a workaround for The relic that gives all tzeentch Spells if your wl got all tzeentch spells witch required you to have a level 1 herald or daemon prince witch was stupid

      • Avatar
        Vercingatorix August 25, 2016 3:27 pm #

        yeah, but why keep the rule at all now? Just errata that? Like, instead of removing the thing causing the issue, they added an additional rule on top of the problem to undo what it did instead of just removing the problem.

        It’s like telling someone to do a U turn in a cul-de-sac as part of the direction instead of continuing by the dead end road.

        And I know why they did it, I’ve had a LoC in a CAD as my warlord for months!

        • Avatar
          AngryPanda August 25, 2016 7:51 pm #

          They love extra rules. If they designed a car it would only turn right and have a “reverse turn” switch that lets your turn left if you turn the wheel right while hitting it.

          • Avatar
            Rasmus0 August 26, 2016 4:44 am


          • Avatar
            Vercingatorix August 26, 2016 7:51 am

            Precisely. I’ve been loving re-rolling my warlord trait on the tzeentch table. One tournament I rolled the +1 invlu to all tzeentch units 4/5 times. lol

Leave a Reply