The Djin Blade (I know....)

Hi Everyone!

Now, I know that the Djin Blade is widely known as too expensive for what it does, but I'm so sick of the Archon fluffing his rolls and doing nothing. He has access to AP3 only, therefore every marine that touches him should die...
So has anyone had any success with it?


Also, what's the consensus on the sentient blade rule vs shadow field?
"...at the end of any phase in which the model suffers one or more unsaved wounds."
If the Djin blade rolls a 1, it causes a wound with no saves allowed, meaning that you couldn't attempt a save at all. Would this remove the shadow field even though the shadow field says an "unsaved" wound (meaning you fail to make a save)?

I have had no success with it, albeit I have never bothered to try it - because I think it looks like a terrible wargear option.

An unsaved wound is, by definition, a wound that you suffer, not a wound that you failed a save against. A model with no saves at all still suffers unsaved wounds. The wound caused by the Djinn Blade *will* pop the Shaodwfield. That said - remember that FNP is not a save and also can protect the Shadowfield.

i dont think it SHOULD kill the field seeing how there is no failed save on the field, and as for the djin blade take the agonizer you NEED your attacks to wound (at least if your running soul-trap)

We have many ways to get out a ton of cheap attacks no reason to take a risky option for a very small buff the djin blade might be good after your agonizer scores you more strength in a challenge

Thor665 wrote:

I have had no success with it, albeit I have never bothered to try it - because I think it looks like a terrible wargear option.

An unsaved wound is, by definition, a wound that you suffer, not a wound that you failed a save against. A model with no saves at all still suffers unsaved wounds. The wound caused by the Djinn Blade *will* pop the Shaodwfield. That said - remember that FNP is not a save and also can protect the Shadowfield.

Being able to take the FnP against that is pretty good... That's taking alot of risk out of the sentient blade rule.

Grimcrimm wrote:

We have many ways to get out a ton of cheap attacks no reason to take a risky option for a very small buff the djin blade might be good after your agonizer scores you more strength in a challenge

Other than taking a pistol to get the one extra attack, how else do you load up on attacks?

I have never once tried it.

Haemonculi and Succubi have better options, and I have yet to find a reason to field a combat Archon.

The Shredder wrote:

I have never once tried it.

Haemonculi and Succubi have better options, and I have yet to find a reason to field a combat Archon.

Neither Haemy, nor Succubus hav a 2+ invuln save....

nexs wrote:

Neither Haemy, nor Succubus hav a 2+ invuln save....

Indeed. But then, if I'm taking wounds on either it's because either a) I'm putting a wound on the haemonculus to make use of IWND or b) the rest of their squad is dead and they're soon to follow.

The thing is, I don't care about the Archon's invulnerable because it doesn't help him *do* anything. He has a squad to soak up wounds - what I want him to do is kill stuff. The succubus and even the Haemonculus (to a lesser extent) can deal with 2+ saves. The Archon costs a lot more than either and can do naff-all against 2+ saves - despite having the most expensive weapon of all 3.

How does a Haemonculus get IWND, and what purpose does taking a wound on him achieve? (perhaps it's the coven book stuff, which I don't own...)

re: the archon's lack of AP2 gear... yes i hear you 100%! It was a silly choice of GW to do, but my meta is very space marine heavy. AP3 is all he needs to kill squads.
The blasterborn can survive without the WWP inside a venom/raider for long enough to do something, so he doesn't really need to be there.
The problem I have is that the archon is good enough in all areas to make the choice difficult. The succubus is easy - archite glaive with incubi.

nexs wrote:

Other than taking a pistol to get the one extra attack, how else do you load up on attacks?

Your Thinking in melee were not a melee army if you need more attacks shoot them more, The djin blade is a glorified power weapon at twice the cost with a 1/6 chance to shoot ...er stab yourself in the foot.

Sigh. You're right... the archon is a shooting machine.. but my dice LOVE 1's... to wound.

i know your pain man

Thor665 wrote:

I have had no success with it, albeit I have never bothered to try it - because I think it looks like a terrible wargear option.

An unsaved wound is, by definition, a wound that you suffer, not a wound that you failed a save against. A model with no saves at all still suffers unsaved wounds. The wound caused by the Djinn Blade *will* pop the Shaodwfield. That said - remember that FNP is not a save and also can protect the Shadowfield.

I think not.
You pop shadowfield only if u fail 2+ save.
From Djin blade u take 1 wound without saves off any kind allowed. So u definetly save your shadowfield for next time

That's not at all what it says in the codex.
The codex says the shield pops when you suffer an unsaved wound. In the event the your Djinn Blade bites you: you have suffered a wound, and that wound has not been saved, meeting all the criteria for the shadowfield popping.

According to the rule book, you can still take the fnp even when "no saves of any kind allowed". It specifically says so. Does that have any bearing on this discussion?

Devilogical wrote:

Thor665 wrote:

I have had no success with it, albeit I have never bothered to try it - because I think it looks like a terrible wargear option.

An unsaved wound is, by definition, a wound that you suffer, not a wound that you failed a save against. A model with no saves at all still suffers unsaved wounds. The wound caused by the Djinn Blade *will* pop the Shaodwfield. That said - remember that FNP is not a save and also can protect the Shadowfield.

I think not.
You pop shadowfield only if u fail 2+ save.
From Djin blade u take 1 wound without saves off any kind allowed. So u definetly save your shadowfield for next time

As stated from others, this is definately wrong. Anything that reduce your Wounds statistics by one (or more) count towards "unsaved wounds". That you weren't allowed to attempt a save in the first place is completely irrelevant.

So, after fnp, if you lose a wound, you lose the shadowfield?

nexs wrote:

So, after fnp,  if you lose a wound, you lose the shadowfield?

Yes

Score!

I've been musing on giving it to a Succubus (well, more like a back up Succubus, or a distraction Succubus), as the wounding yourself rarely matters as most things she'll be fighting are going to instantly kill her.

Surely not all 7+ attacks bounce off of them.

Thing is, if you give the Archon AP2, there's not much reason to take the succubus. Now we have three clear choices. If you want AP2, take the succubus, if you want cool wargear and a wicked save, take the archon, and if you want to buff those around you, take the haemy.

As for the djinn blade, it's straight up a bad choice, 2 extra attacks at S3? I'd rather have two less and be guaranteed to wound on a 4+ thanks, with a 2++ (I can even take on a wraithknight with that sort of equipment).

With respect to finding a reason to take an archon - try using his 2++ to shield a unit of WWP heat lance scourges. in my last DE game I took the archon with urien in that unit, and they soaked up well over 100 lasgun shots, which managed to kill a grand total of 3 scourges

nexs wrote:

How does a Haemonculus get IWND, and what purpose does taking a wound on him achieve? (perhaps it's the coven book stuff, which I don't own...)

Yeah, it's coven stuff. Especially with Grotesques (who can also get IWND), it's useful to spread wounds out as much as possible - so that you're making multiple IWND rolls (rather than losing one model at a time).

nexs wrote:

re: the archon's lack of AP2 gear... yes i hear you 100%! It was a silly choice of GW to do, but my meta is very space marine heavy. AP3 is all he needs to kill squads.

No, sorry. AP3 does nothing worthwhile for me. Anything that can be killed by AP3 can be torrented to death from 36" away. Or, just killed my massed Grotesque attacks. The Archon is not required. On the other hand, 2+ save units (which are depressingly common) are much more of a pain to get rid of in combat - hence my hatred of non-AP2.

For me, that decision by GW killed the Archon as a melee character.

nexs wrote:

The problem I have is that the archon is good enough in all areas to make the choice difficult. The succubus is easy - archite glaive with incubi.

I like her with Grotesques, but that's coven stuff again.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

Thing is, if you give the Archon AP2, there's not much reason to take the succubus. Now we have three clear choices. If you want AP2, take the succubus, if you want cool wargear and a wicked save, take the archon, and if you want to buff those around you, take the haemy.

Why can't the Succubus just be a cheap HQ?

I mean, by the same logic, shouldn't Chapter Masters also be deprived of all AP2 weapons so that they don't compete with Captains?

The Shredder wrote:

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

Thing is, if you give the Archon AP2, there's not much reason to take the succubus. Now we have three clear choices. If you want AP2, take the succubus, if you want cool wargear and a wicked save, take the archon, and if you want to buff those around you, take the haemy.

Why can't the Succubus just be a cheap HQ?

I mean, by the same logic, shouldn't Chapter Masters also be deprived of all AP2 weapons so that they don't compete with Captains?

If i am looking to try and explain why it's done, this is how I would reason it.

In terms of status, power, etc, the Archon, as head of a Kabal, is the equal of both the Succubus as head of a Wych Cult and the Haemonculus as head of a Coven. There are three clear strands there, which I noted before.

If you want to make the Succubus a cheap HQ, she would have to be cheaper than the Archon, which she isn't, because she's a better combat fighter than him (despite all logic to the contrary, GW still seem to think that combat hq's are the way to go - just look at the warlord traits across all armies (possibly except tau) to see that, there are rarely more generic traits than combat buffs). That means making the archon more expensive or the succubus cheaper. If you make the Archon more expensive you'd have to give him access to AP2, I think a major reason he's so cheap is because he can't get it (talking about combat here obviously, I know he can get blaster and blast pistol). If you make the succubus cheaper than the archon now, then giving her the AP2 glaive would be a steal, she's already pretty much an auto-include for her cost in my opinion). Restricting her access to the glaive you then have the counter argument of why does a super gladiator not have a weapon that can cut through 2+ armour (yes I know, wyches, but I'm talking specifically about the succy here).

All that leads me to the conclusion that if you want a cheap, simple hq, take the archon, he can still be pretty killy in combat, just not against 2+ armour (why would he risk himself against the best opponents anyway?). If you want that combat AP2 potential, then you have the Succubus. It seems to me that GW did a reasonable job of pushing you into following the fluff with the wargear choices for our hq's - I've just got one issue.

The webway portal. Great piece of kit and I can totally understand why they gave the Archon access to it, BUT.

the Archon's basic cost plus the webway portal means you don't really want to spend any more points on that model if he's not your warlord, and therefore the archon who isn't a warlord becomes a disposable asset used solely for delivering a unit onto the battlefield. That would be fine if the portal then allowed him to escape back to the safety of his own lines, sadly it doesn't.

TL:DR - The Archon and Succubus are roughly equal, just for two different purposes. If you want a cheap hq then complain about the Dracon/Syren not being able to be taken as an HQ choice.

I'm confused about what you're saying. I'm not saying that the Succubus needs to be cheaper - I'm saying she's already cheap. Really, all you need is a weapon - which puts her up to 95pts.

However, since Archons don't come with any sort of protection, you're generally going to be buying that as well (otherwise you might as well just take the Succubus). So, once you add Shadowfield and a weapon, the Archon now costs 130pts. And that's before any other artefacts or arcane gear.

In any case, I disagree - GW did a hamfisted job of balancing both HQs and left the Archon with a useless, overpriced weapon in an age where 2+ saves are rampant.

And, I ask again, why are Chapter Masters allowed AP2 weapons when they compete with Captains? Why are Wolf Lords allowed AP2 when they compete with Wolf Guard? Why are Necron Overlords allowed Warscythes when they compete with regular Lords?

In that case I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion, because I can honestly see situations where I would want all three of the hq choices.

Surely if the succubus is 95 points and equipping your archon how you want costs 130, she is a cheap hq? 95pts is pretty cheap for an hq in my opinion.

Regarding your last point, I think I would just look again at how dark eldar society is segregated and the purpose of our hq's.

Captains and Chapter Masters are both combat hq's, intended as such and crucially, perform basically the same role within their respective military organisation. Same with Wolf Lords and Wolf Guard and Overlords and Lords. Archons and Succubi are from fundamentally different organisations and are designed to fulfill fundamentally different roles on the battlefield, and recognising this is key to using them successfully.

Taking on my previous points - if you try to use the succubus as a tank for another unit, she'll die very quickly, the Archon is substantially more survivable. If you try to buzz round in a raider full of blasterborn with the succubus, she's a costly addition to the unit that provides no benefit to it. The Archon with a blaster however increases its effectiveness significantly.

Similarly if you stick the Archon in a unit of Incubi and throw them at a bunch of terminators then he's going to hold them back, whereas the Succubus improves their damage output.

Round pegs, round holes, the basis on which the whole of our codex works, and knowing what you want your hq to achieve dictates which one you take. As I said before, I want my hq to wwp a unit of heat lance scourges to their target and provide them with protection against return fire - the archon with wwp and shadowfield does that perfectly, the succubus does not.

In my alternative list I want a combat hq to buff the damage output of my unit of grotesques, specifically if they have to fight against terminators or honour guard etc I want something that busts through their armour so that the grotesques high quantity of attacks aren't insignificant - those units tend to come in small numbers and an extra couple of kills from the hq can make a huge difference (particularly with the armour of misery). For that I take the Succubus and Glaive, because the Archon wouldn't improve the unit against their likely targets.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

In that case I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion, because I can honestly see situations where I would want all three of the hq choices.

Surely if the succubus is 95 points and equipping your archon how you want costs 130, she is a cheap hq? 95pts is pretty cheap for an hq in my opinion.

Isn't that exactly the point I just made?

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

Regarding your last point, I think I would just look again at how dark eldar society is segregated and the purpose of our hq's.

Captains and Chapter Masters are both combat hq's, intended as such and crucially, perform basically the same role within their respective military organisation. Same with Wolf Lords and Wolf Guard and Overlords and Lords. Archons and Succubi are from fundamentally different organisations and are designed to fulfill fundamentally different roles on the battlefield, and recognising this is key to using them successfully.

Taking on my previous points - if you try to use the succubus as a tank for another unit, she'll die very quickly, the Archon is substantially more survivable. If you try to buzz round in a raider full of blasterborn with the succubus, she's a costly addition to the unit that provides no benefit to it. The Archon with a blaster however increases its effectiveness significantly.

Here's the thing - you're trying to argue fluff, yet you're also proposing that a) Archons - the most powerful and influential DE - somehow cannot afford good weapons. Because, it's not about their melee prowess, it's about what weapons they have access to.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

Round pegs, round holes, the basis on which the whole of our codex works, and knowing what you want your hq to achieve dictates which one you take. As I said before, I want my hq to wwp a unit of heat lance scourges to their target and provide them with protection against return fire - the archon with wwp and shadowfield does that perfectly, the succubus does not.

I'm confused as to how you can argue fluff with one hand, and then suggest a use for an Archon that is diametrically opposed to his actual fluff. Are you seriously telling me that an Archon would risk his own life to shield others?