Daemon princes - jump or flyers?

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/459371.page

lot of discussion.. no real conclusion.

the "gw is flawless" crowd clings to Rules as Written, the "every angle i can swing" crowd clings to Rules and Intended.

I'm not fussed either way, but i would like to see what the general consensus is before i field any.

its a fairly significant difference.

From my own looking into the subject, I have found that in all foreign language FAQ's, they are FMC's, but in the English one they are just Jump MC's. Also, White Dwarf clearly marks them FMC's. The big rulebook only mentions them on foot as MC's, nothing about wings upgrade.

So, given that the English FAQ is the highest authority on rules, I am left with 2 interpretations:

1: They made a mistake and the English FAQ is wrong

2: They wrote the WD, they sent out the FAQ to be translated, but then, somewhere, someone said, "Flying Monstrous Creatures for 130-200 poinst? That is far too powerful!! We must FAQ them down to Jump Monstrous Creatures!" And so it was changed, but only in the English one because changing translations take time and money.

EDIT << And in the Chaos Daemons FAQ in english and foreign languages, they are FMC >>

The FAQ aren't even done by the design team, I'd hardly consider them the "highest authority".

They are obviously intended to be used as FMC's and as SC noted, this will be fiixed in... 37 days?

Its always somewhat confused me that the 40k community, as a whole, can realize something is wrong (cover in 5th) and not just say "screw GW, they all get nerfed by 1".

Rly? I thought it was the design team that did them.

Who does do them then?

Scrubs at the office, it came out in some interview a while back. If I can find it, I'll post it up.

Granted they try, but it's important to realize that just because they haven't FAQ's something, doesn't mean it isnt broken. (and if they have FAQ'd it, it doesn't mean it's fixed.)

I dont think people will make a fuss unless your bringing 3-4. If your doing that.. Then we might start hearing abput the cost discrepency between the csm prince and daemons book prince.

Play nice and there should be no problems. We'll prob use a house rule for the league.. Unless someone starts abusing it.

I heard Matt K. already is!!

How have people been feeling about the csm daemon prince as flyers rule?

Ive been using a prince with mok, so havent been using some of the better shooting rules.. My guy mihht get to swoop for a turn if hes brave enough.. Then is into combat that.

Just checking in to see if consensus is still good with this. The new book will be out soon then we'll have a definitive answer.

I have now seen them in a few games, both on my side, and on my opponent's

They do not feel that bad.

The Extra speed is nice, but it feels balanced by being unable to charge that turn

The being hard to hit is annoying, but that feels balanced by the 3+ or fall out of the sky and take a S9 AP2 hit

Hasnt come up for me yet. Would love to get some more games in =(

so far my DP's never choose to swoop. if you want a good "shooting" prince. hes 185+ points. and you cant use two bolt of change in the same shooting phase....so i find is too much to pay.

the melee princes want to be in combat asap, so swooping just seems like a good way to get knocked out of the sky. if you cant get to combat with 24 inches of jump, d6 of run and 2d6 of charge. your doing it wrong.

while speaking of shooty-princes. this came up against adam the other day...

When you choose spells for say a tzeench prince. which is a level 2 caster. do you have to choose all BRB spells, or can you trade them one for one with the CSM codex spells? personally, i would normally keep bolt of change and swap a 10 point power for a telepathy spell.. if i had my way. i think its done that way, but it seems to give an advantage to tz princes/sorcs. as they could bolt something, and then use their 2 warp charge to cast say, hallucination or invisibility.

Im pretty sure its done that way.. You can swap on a one to one basis from codex to brb.. Im pretty sure.

Sorry Mike.. Im assuming your move calculations arw for two turns right?

Yeah.. This csm monstrous creature thing is a pain. It appears on the larger scale that everyone is using csm dp as only jump creatures. Im wondering if that should be the case.

There is still confusion and debate regarding losing swooping if your grounded and how many grounded tests you have take.. One for each hit or one at the end og being shot at.

A quick simple faq woyld clear this all up fast.. Yeesh

As near as I can tell, and Canadin has the book out at his end (the down sides to going halvies), is that for every instance of shooting, rather than per shot.

IE: My Warrior squad lets loose some 30-odd shots and gets 20-odd hits, only one "miss the ground" test is taken for that, but when the Ghost Ark behind them opens up, that's another test. Once it is down, though, it's down.

Re: the down thing, I asked a GW rep and they said that they would interpret the rule as once a Grounding Test had been failed, the bugger is on the ground and subsequent shooting is at full BS.

Rhaevyn wrote:http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/459371.page

lot of discussion.. no real conclusion.

the "gw is flawless" crowd clings to Rules as Written, the "every angle i can swing" crowd clings to Rules and Intended.

I'm not fussed either way, but i would like to see what the general consensus is before i field any.

its a fairly significant difference.

Rules as intended needs to be used for alot of things. there are rules in imperial guard that arent FAQed yet (grav shute insertion and leman russ lumbering) Flying monsterous creatures counted as jump last edition cause there was no fly, so now I would rule them as flyers not jump.

C'mon Stash.. Really, that's ummm? I'd like to know how you know what the rulemakers were 'intending'. Did they tell you? Gave you a quick phone call?

The rule does NOT say Flying Monsterous Creature. That's it. Of note, aren't the main rumours of the upcoming codex saying that the DP is jump? Thus, coinciding with the faq.

gluvzer wrote:C'mon Stash.. Really, that's ummm? I'd like to know how you know what the rulemakers were 'intending'. Did they tell you? Gave you a quick phone call?

The rule does NOT say Flying Monsterous Creature. That's it. Of note, aren't the main rumours of the upcoming codex saying that the DP is jump? Thus, coinciding with the faq.

Well I dont have the tyranid book infront of me but I am sure their 'flying' stuff counts as jump (5th ed codex). If it isnt FAQed for 6th then I would say any winged monsterous creature should fly not jump.

Also you can tell the the FAQs for bringing old codexes into 6th are half fast as GW rules usually are. They miss alot of detail such as two large details in the I.G. codex. I have never seen an era in GW history where you can go completely Rules as Written.

What do Tyranids have to do with the Chaos faq? Everything was faq'd for 6th. It had to be.

In history? You haven't even played in what, 3-5 years? It's the Rules!

gluvzer wrote:What the hell do Tyranids have to do with the Chaos faq? Everything was faq'd for 6th. It had to be.

In history? You haven't even played in what, 3-5 years? It's the Rules!

Tyranids are the other main faction with winged MCs. Also FAQs have never really been cohesive, so in the past rules have to be extrapolated from other codexes FAQs

For example the CSM FAQ labels any models with wings count as jump. Ok characters can take wings which count as jump packs.
The Daemon FAQ says winged demon princes count as flying monsterous creatures.

Basically two different rules for essentially the same selection. Either the laws of physics are fickle with daemon princes, or take rules as intended: non MCs with wings jump, ALL daemon princes fly.

You can say essentially, but it's NOT the same selection. They are DIFFERENT codex's. I'll mention again, all the codex's recieved a faq for 6th because they had to and those were the rules we were given.

gluvzer wrote:You can say essentially, but it's NOT the same selection. They are DIFFERENT codex's. I'll mention again, all the codex's recieved a faq for 6th because they had to and those were the rules we were given.

I made an edit about I.G. that didnt stick

We have to make some rulings as a community for the holes left by the incomplete FAQs since unfortunately rules as written take prescedence. The demon prince thing is relatively clean to do rules as written, but I.g. is not

The leman russ lumbering behemoth rule grants no special shooting rule...it fires snap shots with its weapons as per the new rules simply by the way the rule is worded.

The valkyrie can disembark its passengers in the shooting phase ONLY if it moves flat out (it really needs to move flat out to disembark its passengers in the shooting phase for whatever reason).

Like I said the FAQs are half fast and incomplete....the rules dont work as intended

Ive been using my chaos daemon prince just as jump personally. Ive also been takng a bloodthirster ally so have still been at least getting a real flyer in. .. Although man has he been dropping the ball. Dykng quickly, failing 4" charges.. Its humiliating.. But at least he gets lots of atyention when he shows up

I'm not fussed either way, as long as whoever is running things(league/tourney) is consistent, I'll go with it.

The CSM prince is 50+ points cheaper than the CCD prince. And, tbh the only good thing about DP flight is vector strikes on other flyers. Otherwise, its just a good way to get shot down.

worth mentioning, he can fly now.