Codex Harlequins Review

http://lkhero.blogspot.com/2015/03/codex-review-harlequins.html

Feel free to post your comments on the blog or right here

What's up with Phantasmancy? I saw it mentioned in the Shadowseer profile, but haven't seen the rules yet.

Jimsolo wrote:

What's up with Phantasmancy?  I saw it mentioned in the Shadowseer profile, but haven't seen the rules yet.

I'm sure google can find some of the rules for you. The lore in general is good if you're running footslogging, especially if you're planning to deathstar, but I don't think it's as good as Telepathy.

Yeah, when I first saw phantasmancy I was super excited - but really, only the primaris and first power are anything worth getting - anything that is not a blessing has so many things stacked against it going off successfully.

Telepathy has more useful powers throughout the tree and the primaris takes out one of the biggest problems of witchfire powers (the need to roll to hit).

If I were to take a shadowseer with a footslogging harlie unit - I'd probably just give her the primaris from both Phantasmancy and Telepathy. With the negative leadership modifiers you can stack, psychic shriek could hit pretty hard.

Man Hero, you made me sad about the shadowseer - was one of the units I was most looking forward to because of the support potential - just having 2 to 3 of them in key units - like a Veils spamming SS in a unit of scourges etc.

I definitely agree with you about the troupe tax - frustrating as hell. wouldve been far better if it was 1-3 instead of just 3 min. I'll also be getting death jesters in each of my starweavers. Except I'll be taking the starweavers in the fast attack slots too as I just don't like the skyweavers.

Otherwise, a "hard truths" kind of review, thanks for that - helped me out with some things I think, gonna see what kind of things I can put together with them soon hopefully.

Just FYI Caldria - shriek still must roll to hit...

Damn, why did I think it didn't - my bad on that.

Did they FAQ that?  It didn't used to.

Funny, btw, because I was thinking only powers 5 and 6 were worth looking at. Then again, I'm looking for a psyker to stick in a Covens list that is heavy one LD shenanigans, so there's that. If the Shadowseer is the only psyker I have, I'd go Telepathy. If I already have a Telepathy Farseer I might go Phantasmancy.

Witch fires have always required a to hit roll as they are a shooting attack

Hero, What are your thoughts on the Faolchu's blade formation from the book? You mentioned in your review you thought Skyweavers where good, the formation allows you to take 2 units of Skyweavers with only a voidweaver tax and the formation allows you to re-roll failed cover saves for units in the formation.

2 units of 3 Skyweavers (stock with star-bolas) and a voidweaver with prismatic cannon comes to 380 points. Not a bad little formation and one I'm keen to try out

Very good overview/review of the Harlequin codex, Hero.  Sadly, I agree with all of your conclusions about the relative utility of the Harlequins.  I was initially super excited for the release when I saw the Death Jester and Shadowseer rules/psychic powers, but the ridiculous lack of HQ forces us to take a formation, when I all I really want is to run a Shadowseer with Mask and several Death Jesters, with only minimal Troupe tax.  I may play around with them in fun games using my Wyches (at least they're good for something, right?) as proxies, but ultimately, I just don't think they're worth it.

Quote :

when I all I really want is to run a Shadowseer with Mask and several Death Jesters, with only minimal Troupe tax

Thats why they dont have HQs.

Spot on review HERO

I really want to make quins work in a competitive setting, but that will take some amazing discovery that no one discovered yet.

I will bring quins to smaller non so competitive tournaments and for fun games. Like against my buddies scion army

Massaen wrote:

Witch fires have always required a to hit roll as they are a shooting attack

Unless the power tells you how to resolve it otherwise, which Shriek does.

Yeah, it's actually also news to me that Psychic Shriek requires a To-Hit roll. :-/

ArchonVaz wrote:

Hero, What are your thoughts on the Faolchu's blade formation from the book? You mentioned in your review you thought Skyweavers where good, the formation allows you to take 2 units of Skyweavers with only a voidweaver tax and the formation allows you to re-roll failed cover saves for units in the formation.

2 units of 3 Skyweavers (stock with star-bolas) and a voidweaver with prismatic cannon comes to 380 points. Not a bad little formation and one I'm keen to try out

Yeah its not bad. I would take star weavers over the bikes, I wish the bikes were troops instead. On my phone

Jimsolo wrote:

Massaen wrote:

Witch fires have always required a to hit roll as they are a shooting attack

Unless the power tells you how to resolve it otherwise, which Shriek does.

The rule book explicitly states that witchfire powers must roll to hit, nowhere to my knowledge does it mention "unless the power tells you ho to resolve it otherwise".

40k rule book wrote:

Similarly, a witchfire power must roll To Hit, unless it is has the Blast special rule, in which case it scatters as described in the Blast special rule, or it is a Template weapon, which hit automatically.

Psychic shriek is a witchfire and is not a blast or template, so therefore must roll to hit.

I think slot of what you say is true, in so far as the totally clumsy Madque detachment. I also agree that starweavers, DJs are win.

That being said, I remeber when the wraith knight first appeared. You know how much suck was said about that guy? A ton and I bought two the first day they released; now I am considered cheese boy. lets not get hung up on direct comparison, more should be given on play testing.

This army is going to be real rough on noobs as it's THE finesse army. Now, you are going to have to take allies, no way around that. So of the combos are pretty crazy. WWP archon with AoM a DJ the Mask and a few screams....in a unit of grots. You have a pretty good shot at getting a unit to dash off the table with -6 LD.

In my mind, the first three turns are about zipping around in the starweavers, then whipping depleted units. We all know that wave serpents are gonna get kicked in the nuts with the nerf toe, and yes we will have trouble with them till then, but is that different from now with venoms?

Hannibal.Lictor wrote:

That being said, I remeber when the wraith knight first appeared. You know how much suck was said about that guy? A ton and I bought two the first day they released; now I am considered cheese boy. lets not get hung up on direct comparison, more should be given on play testing.

This is exactly why I want to playtest things before making final decisions - I remember the rantings about how bad the wraith knight would be too - based on its stats on paper. The same were said about centurions and now the centstar is one of the top marine lists and centurions in general are pretty great. Ofc it works both ways too, things that seem great on paper may not be so great in play either.

But as such I think (or at least I'm hoping) that a competitive harlie build will surface, but is indeed being hampered by the stupid restrictions of the masque. 1-3 troupes and 0-1 Heavy would fix a lot of issues.

Now that would be great.

Caldria wrote:

Hannibal.Lictor wrote:

That being said, I remeber when the wraith knight first appeared. You know how much suck was said about that guy? A ton and I bought two the first day they released; now I am considered cheese boy. lets not get hung up on direct comparison, more should be given on play testing.

This is exactly why I want to playtest things before making final decisions - I remember the rantings about how bad the wraith knight would be too - based on its stats on paper. The same were said about centurions and now the centstar is one of the top marine lists and centurions in general are pretty great. Ofc it works both ways too, things that seem great on paper may not be so great in play either.

But as such I think (or at least I'm hoping) that a competitive harlie build will surface, but is indeed being hampered by the stupid restrictions of the masque. 1-3 troupes and 0-1 Heavy would fix a lot of issues.

What kind of ridiculous reviews have you guys been reading?

I think it's pretty clear to me that we'll see WWP, Wraithguard, stacked psyker deathstars with the Shadowseer, or we'll see gimmicky leadership bombs, but I don't think we'll see a "balanced" Harlequin list.  They have about the same staying power as Dark Eldar, but with less range and are more expensive.  I mean... from that alone you can see how far it will go competitively.

So far I havnt seen them loose, even against a horrible tau match up. It's a good army.

Hannibal.Lictor wrote:

So far I havnt seen them loose, even against a horrible tau match up. It's a good army.

Tau is a great matchup for leadership shenanigans. They have LD7 pretty much across the board, and their riptides are LD9 but not fearless.

I think you guys will be grossly disapointed if you try run Harlies as i go there and punch all the faces with cost effective harlies units.

Most of the reviews i saw on the net was pretty much about this tactic + throw in some LD stuff. Thats all on the surface and i think will not bring too much wins.

Many (or all?) reviews say, that the Voidweaver is a tax. While for some armies that would definitely be true, I personally think, that it brings something that DE miss. Reliable (more or less) AP3. Yes, it is a blast (and I saw one scatter 5" away yesterday), but what other options do we have for that job? Lanceweapons, as we all know, CAN do the it, but then we aren't firing them on more worthwhile t
targets. And they are pricy as hell on mostly squishy units. Dissies can do it good too, but then we aren't equipping lances in the first place, which are still more important imo. Posion you say ... well, more often than not, my venoms only manage to inflict 2-4 wounds, which are enough to maybe kill one marine. Splinterboats are great, that's true, but they cost as much as two voidweavers. Against marines I'd rather take two AP3 blasts that wound on 3 and six S6 bladestorm shots for their added versatility. And again, to get the most out of the gunboat, it has to either DS or flatout turn one, so no Shooting for at least one turn. Wereas the voidweavers can realistically threaten the enemy on turn one (36 threat range).

In a comparsion between ravagers and voidweavers, the ravagers will win most of the time, I think. They are cheaper and better in one job (either AT, or TEQ), but the true power of the weaver lies in it's ability to Switch targets easily. Face a full tactical squad? - blast it with AP3, with average rolls it should net you 2-3 hits depending on placement that ignore their armour. Face hordes like small bugs, guard or orks? - They'll learn to love your large blast from turn one (razorwing can deal more damage in one round, but not before turn 2). Want to take a potshot at that leman russ? - you can try it with at least a Chance to do it harm. And on top of it, the main weapon synergises well with the shurikencannon (same range, similar targets). On the durability side, it's hard to say. While weavers can be glanced with bolters, they get an invul against those ignore cover weapons, which is nice to have.

I'm obliged to say, that I'm with HERO on Voidweavers, although I definitely want to try the voids in a squadron of at least 2, preferable 3. The only real Thing I'd consider as tax on the voidweaver, is it's aft cannon. It's situational at best, but nothing I'd count on, or move the weaver in a way to use it. Although it could be really funny against DP/DS armies

Very strange review.