Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Ok, I have lots of questions about Daemons as I've never played them, never seen them played, and overall don't know much about them!
1. If you make an army for 40k, is that same army useable in fantasy?
2. If you do make a double army is it competetive in both without having to overhaul your entire list?
3. Can armies be made effectively with low model counts? After orks and kroot I don't want something filled with loads of units
4. Is it more effective to do a themed army or a mixed army?
5. If one were to play a themed army, which would be the most competetive?
6. Is painting difficult for this army? I know painting is a fairly objective thing, but if you look at my profile you can see some of my ork units. (as a way of answering this question I would say painting space marines or necrons are "easy" sure you can add lots of detail and a great painter will go further with them than a basic painter, but a basic painter can still make a "good" looking army without having to be an expert)
1) Yes and no. The models each system uses are the same (except for the Soul Grinder) and the bases don't matter (you can use squares in 40k and you use movement trays in WHFB anyways). But the two systems use different FOC systems. 40k uses X units per type (3 Elites, 6 Troops) while WHFB uses percentages (25% of your list can be Rares, Minimum 50% is Core). Because of this its easy to makes list legal in one system but not the other namely because you don't need as many troops in 40 as you do in fantasy and Daemon Princes are Heavy Support in 40k but a General in WHFB (so you can only take 1 in WHFB most of the time but you can take 3 easy in 40k). You can totally write legit lists for both systems, it just may not be its probably isn't even close to competitive in one of the systems.
2) Probably not. Both systems have units that are good in one systems but terrible in the other. And Fantasy is all about taking large blocks of infantry and expensive characters that in 40k would be way too much and ineffective. Your best bet is to buy 1 1/2 armies. You get a solid core that both systems will use then a couple more models to add to make the list really pop in the system you playing. There are also some units that are great in both systems (Fateweaver and Flamers come to mind). If you wanted to focus on a system more I would go with 40k since it's daemons have a lot more crap units and are much harder to play right while in Fantasy you can use most of its units effectively if you build them right.
3) Not in fantasy. Fantasy wants you to take big blocks of infantry. In 40k you can run Daemonzilla 5 MCs (2 greater daemons and 3 daemon princes) and then finish it off with you great elites and some of your troops (use Fateweaver for extra brokenness). But that list is totally not legal in Fantasy.
4) Mixed is most effective, especially in 40k. In 40k each god is pretty much focused on one job (Khorne are anti-MEQ, Slaanesh are anti-GEQ, Nurgle are tarpit, and Tzeentch are shooting/support). All of these jobs are very important so when you focus on one god you lose the ability to handle those other tasks. In fantasy Its the same but to a much lesser degree since you just need to build the units right to play them effectively.
5) Tzeentch. In 40k its capable of performing all four jobs. In Fantasy it has the armies two best units and its core unit is not too shabby.
6) They are pretty much one base color with a bunch of intricate detail (especially on the bigger models). I can't say if that's difficult or not though, probably intermediate level for something that's good looking.
THANKS A TON! I would give you +rep but I don't know how.
1. Thanks I'm unfamiliar with Fantasy, but have some interest in playing it so I was completely in the dark there.
2/3. I will be focusing more on 40k than fantasy, so I would probably start by fleshing out a 40k list then tweak/adjust for fantasy.
4. Could you help point me to a sample army that is mixed and Daemonzilla like? It seems that is what I'm after as the larger models are the ones I find most stunning!
5. I don't think I will do a themed army then, as the ones that I would have been interested based on look would have been khorne or nurgle.
6. Interesting, I have painted space marines/orks/necrons/tau . Have you painted any of those armies and if so what is it most similar to?
7. Are they competetive?
8. With the Addition of Grey Knights is anyone bailing out? (willing to sell an army for cheap?)
9. As far as deployment goes whats the deal with all deep striking? Is there anyway to make it safer to deep strike (eg scatter less?) Or do you get some troops on the board to start?
10. Whats your favorite unit and why?
7) Very, but a lot of people don't think so. They think that being all deep strike makes us inconsistent and ineffective. But we just have a high learning curve. Daemons have been in the top three of all the major tournament standings I've looked at, that should say something.
8) A lot of people are but people are just over reacting to a new codex and blowing their rules out of proportion. Especially since Daemons specialize at killing elite MEQ units, and Grey Knights are the most elite of them all, we should be able to make mince meat of them easy enough. They probably won't be any harder then Space Wolves or Blood Angels (for us anyways).
9) All of our units deep strike. We split are army into two halves, pick one half and roll a d6. on a 3+ the picked half comes deep strikes turn one, on a 1-2 the other 1/2 deep strike turn 1. The remaining half sits in reserves and deep strikes normally. We have Chaos Icons, daemons that deep strike within 6" of an icon don't roll scatter, but they're expensive and you can't use them the turn the unit deep strikes in so you never get to use an icon turn 1 and will only help 1/2 of your army. The best thing to do is just deep strike as close as you can while still remaining in cover so that you take little damage from the incoming fire and then charge in next turn. I also tend to put my shooting units in my first wave so that I can do damage turn one and soften the incoming fire for my assault units (who are generally the more important unit)
10) Fiends of Slaanesh. One of our best elites if not the best, Fiends are amazing because they are good multi-taskers which is something daemons lack. They have a a ton of S5 rending attacks so can rip through any unit type and tear open most vehicles with ease and are beasts so will get catch any units easily. They also have hit & run so they can duck out of fights with threats they can't handle and charge into something else. They are also incredibly cheap for how strong they are.
Follow up) I don't have any more advice in for you here. I've only painted Necrons and they aren't much for comparison (especially since they're my first army) and I'm not an avid painter anyways. As for army lists just browse the army list forum, you find plenty of insight on a lot of different lists.
P.S. The rep button is the 6-pronged star in the bar under everyone's post (same bar with "reply with quote")
Well, thank you again my friend! You just earned some rep!
I agree with Crownaxe on most points, but just to add a second opinion:
1. If they're on square bases, you can technically use them in both games, legally, but it will be a big confusing in close combat, especially with the smaller infantry models. It might work better if you put the small infantry on round bases, and in fantasy use movement trays to move them around.
2. All the troop choices, besides Daemonettes, work well in both. The elites and fast attack are good for both. Daemon Princes, Greater Daemons, and heralds on chariots are only good in 40k. Heralds on foot are only good in fantasy, but you can use normal infantry models for them.
3. As Crownaxe said, you need a LOT more infantry in fantasy than you need in 40k. In 40k the unit size for daemon units is usually 5-9, and in fantasy it's 20-30. The only low model count armies in fantasy are all cavalry armies, and Ogres.
4. Mixed works a lot better, although theme can work, especially with Tzeentch and Khorne (both 40k and fantasy). Mixed is always better though. Slaanesh doesn't work mono because daemonettes are too fragile, and generally inferior to bloodletters. Nurgle's just too slow to make it on his own.
5. Definitely Tzeentch, for both.
6. They aren't that difficult to paint, besides daemonettes and seekers, which both have a LOT of tiny details to paint.
7. They're quite competitive in both, although as Crownaxe said, many don't believe they're competitive in 40k. Regardless, they do very well in tournaments at every level. The reason they do very well in 40k is that most 'competitive' armies are mainly prepared to deal with either lots of vehicles, or hordes of infantry. Most armies aren't prepared for deep striking, close combat focused units all with eternal warrior, invulnerable saves, and fearlessness. In fantasy, they're very competitive, and no one questions that fact.
8. Grey Knights aren't that scary. They're actually a much bigger problem for Tyranid players.
9. Deep striking is all about judging where you should go, how close you should land to the enemy, and deciding how much risk you want to take. You can also take an icon in each wave if you like, but I prefer to just deep strike 'defensively'.
10. Daemon Prince of Tzeentch in 40k (monstrous creature that's very good in close combat, has a 4+ invulnerable save, and fires a S8 AP1 bolt that hits on 2+, all for only 140 points), and Flamers of Tzeentch in Fantasy.
"Any job worth doing, is worth doing with a powerklaw."