Originally Posted by Thomas Mondrup
1. Would you say no: "I don't even want to try that"?
Well no, why would I. As long as my opponent seems like a nice person to play against there's no reason to decline this particular challenge. Also, quite a few lists from regular 40k can easily lay waste to a Betrayal list.
2. Would you ban you opponent from using his/her Primarch?
A difficult subject really. The standard 40 codices have nothing comparable they could field in their place. But then again, it isn't even needed. The bigger the games points limit, the more heavy firepower will be avaiable to bring down a primarch. So, I'd prolly decline facing them in a game of 2.000 pts., but considering larger games or even Apocalypse their respective prowess should become more or less diminished.
3. Would you ban him/her from using super-heavies?
Betrayal let's you bring 'Super Heavies' to the table in games that are clearly not Apocalypse per se. For example, it's perfectly possible to integrate a SH into a list of 2.000 points. For fairness sake, I'd ask my opponent to only bring them in games of Apocalypse size (3.000+ pts.). Then everything should be fine, really.
4. What about the changes to the FOC slots? Would he/she have to use the 40k FOC?
I'd politely ask my opponent to use the standard 40k FOC when facing 40k armies.
5. Something else you would demand before you would play the person.
No really. If both players are in the mood for a mixed game of HH / 40k then who's going to stop you ? Of course, it's perfectly possible for situations to arise that'd need a house rule or two, but for a friendly game it should be fine.
The only place I probably wouldn't like to see HH lists would be at a tournament I guess, if only for the confussion that would follow for some people. Speaking of which ... a HH only tourney could be nice though ...