Agreed.

In that case, make the DP 0-1 and the mandatory Supreme Commander. They are supposed to be special after all.

_________________
Visit www.epic-battles.de the ultimate german epic site&forum!

People already complain about the number of 0-x units in the army.

As well, unless there is some evidence that the unit is problematic I can't see justifying a limit on it.

And forcing the player to make it a Supreme Commander strikes me as forcing the player to play the army as we see it being played.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

My sole argument is fluff reasons, ephemereal as these may be.

Can you picture a mighty DP taking orders from a mere mortal?

As to 0-1, the "one per faction" is about as artificial/0-5 as 0-X is. If they were just another character option like Icon Bearers or Sorcerors, they would not be restricted at all, right?

Anyway. no biggy, just a thought.

Are DPs a problem? I don´t think so, in all the years there were occasional complaints about 3+RA but never a conclusive argument.

Personally, I´m usually happy with just one DP, always winged, and occasionally a second 3+RA as SC tucked way back on the Blitz with a Retinue sporting a Defiler for limited shelling. This is a rare choice for me, though.

_________________
Visit www.epic-battles.de the ultimate german epic site&forum!

Fluff shouldn't be allowed to have that great an impact in the game.

Maybe the DP is pursuing its own agenda.

As to 0-1, the "one per faction" is about as artificial/0-5 as 0-X is.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

The biggest problem normally for 0-x limits is 2000 point games normally. This is simply because the limit is normally to ensure such powerful options don't dominate at 3000 (as opposed to the fluff limits some armies have). Typically at 5000 they have a very small impact.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Abaddon.

_________________
Eradication of Earth's
Population loves Polaris

Nicodemus scooped me, so what he said.

Abaddon (Abbadon? why do both always look wrong?) can order around a Daemon Prince, and in Fluff could just kill the thing if it defied him.

Losing the Hated formation rules will likely speed things up, especially since special rules shouldn't be beneficial if you forget about them, and forgetting to measure 30cm for this one benefits the CSM player, rather than disadvantaging him like if an Eldar player forgot what Hit & Run did.

_________________
Fear is for the enemy, fear and bullets.
-James O'Barr, the Crow

Remembering how to spell Abaddon is easy because he is "a bad Don". Got it?

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

That this is sufficient an issue for you to have a mnemonic for "Abaddon" ... doesn't surprise me at all, BL...  

Abbadon is A Bad 'un.  

Also, he's an angel of destruction in the Hebrew testament, IIRC, but that's completely irrelevant.  

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

You mean... no... you can't mean... GAMES WORKSHOP STOLE THE NAME?!?

Next you'll be telling me that they didn't think up the name "Azrael"...

How would forgetting it be beneficial? It gives +1 to activations if you remember it. Without it Chaos units only activate on 2+.

And I definitely would like it kept in, to discourage the super best friends army lists where the gods are all buddy buddy. But to solve both the hated formation rule and the five demon prince issues, how about a new, simple special rule: An army may not field formations belonging to opposed gods. No watering down of ancient rivalries. After all, marines and IG would be far more often seen together, yet they aren't crammed into the same army list.

Because the rules says they have a 2+ Initiative, but get a +1 bonus when activating if no hated formations are in range.

Most people I've seen remember it by saying they have a 1+ but get a -1 in range.

So when you don't measure people tend to go with 1+.

But I like your further point.

Why allow them to commingle at all? Surely Black Legion commanders wouldn't risk those animosities when planning where to allocate their forces.

_________________
Fear is for the enemy, fear and bullets.
-James O'Barr, the Crow

That's exactly the original logic behind the 2+ initiative - if you forget the ancient enemies rule it penalises you. Unfortunately, every Chaos Marine player tends to automatically think of his troops as being initative 1+ (which they effectively are if you don't use hated formations), at which point he can forget the rule.

There are several reasons to abandon the rule and certainly not introduce a more stringent version.

1) Most obviously, this rule has been completely removed from 40K and Fantasy, even the Daemons of the four gods are able to play happily together. Indeed, it is now much more difficult to play a mono-god army in any army and either system (although I persist despite the current as my soul belongs to Slaanesh whatever system I play...)

2) To nip any "we don't need to follow every little change in 40K's rules" I would point out that this has been a major shift in the entire background for both systems. Slaaneshi daemons can end up fighting alongside Khornate daemons against other Slaanesh - such are the convoluted games that the Chaos Gods play. The emphasis is placed on varied forces - it is pracically impossible to build a working Daemon army with forces from only one God.

Even more of a case in point with the Black Legion, while different detachments within the Legion may be associated with any given God, this association is almost always transient (with the exception of the real cultist nutters). It makes even less sense that these would not act in a cohesive manner as they might be worshipping a different God tomorrow.

3) From a game balance perspective it makes little sense. It's really just a little fluffy rule. You really think that mixing Khorne and Tzeench is more balanced than Khorne and Slaanesh? If this rule is there purely for background reasons that no longer exist, what's the point?

4) It is easily forgotten (both innocently and deliberately) and really rather a pain to actually use. It slows the game down, affects tactics and for no real reason.