Homebrew Codex: The Huskblade

Why are both points equivalent?

And what HQ do you know that Strike at initiative and can smash a dreadnought? (except a Mc)

Demantiae wrote:

How about an artifact - Creeping Darkness.

I'd have to cost plenty of points, I can't be everywhere at once you know

Sounds a bit potent, although I like the trade off of the wielder's taking hits. Worth noting that if you increase both the number and strength of the hits with the number of psykers, you have something that scales non-linearly in power. I can't help but think removing every psyker on the board subject to instant death on a 2+ is a tad too much though, especially in big battles.

How about a static effect that taints warp charge? Say after warp charge have been generated, d6 (more? Dependant on casualties caused somehow?) of their dice are replaced by tainted dice, corrupted with the agony of the fallen etc. Enemy psykers using those dice take a S3 hit per die used, no armour because psychic, but invulnerable fine.

The Shredder wrote:

There's this bizzare idea that because Archons are fragile, they should also be really weak in combat (hence why their best weapons are S3 AP3 Poison 4+, whilst other HQs are touting weapons that can beat dreadnoughts to death and still strike at initiative). The point is, that's the exact opposite of what a glass cannon is supposed to be. They're supposed to be really deadly - because their main defence is killing enemies before they can strike back.

Absolutely agree. An ability to boost S or lower AP isn't an advantage, it's a threshold capability for an Archon to even be a melee effective character.

Creeping Darkness wrote:

Absolutely agree. An ability to boost S or lower AP isn't an advantage, it's a threshold capability for an Archon to even be a melee effective character.

I don't get why the Archon needs to be a melee juggernaught. The codex has the Succubus, she's the DE melee beast and she has AP2. She also has the whole glass cannon thing going on too. I dunno why she isn't getting the strength boost from challenges instead.

I prefer to think of the Archon as someone who will murder regular units but when faced with tough 2+ just sends in the Incubi to shred them.

BTW @Creeping Darkness your article on DE disynergy is very good reading. Shame GW will never see it or understand it.

Demantiae wrote:

I don't get why the Archon needs to be a melee juggernaught. The codex has the Succubus, she's the DE melee beast and she has AP2. She also has the whole glass cannon thing going on too. I dunno why she isn't getting the strength boost from challenges instead.

I prefer to think of the Archon as someone who will murder regular units but when faced with tough 2+ just sends in the Incubi to shred them.

BTW @Creeping Darkness your article on DE disynergy is very good reading. Shame GW will never see it or understand it.

Thanks At least now it is out of my head there is a chance, however infinitesimal, of making a contribution.

I don't actually mind if the Succubus is the main melee character. I don't care who can do it, as long as someone can do it. And if it isn't the Archon, can he/she be good at something else instead please? Not "oh, I can do four or five things in a fairly mediocre fashion", but "I have a couple of options, and can really kick butt doing some of these things".

Honestly, there is a proliferation of hobbyist rules design about this book because the rules were clearly not thought through very well. I think this is because the Codex was targeted to address several business issues:

1 - Remove rules instances not covered by models. We all know what that meant.
2 - Bring rules in line with existing kit options. Winners were Scourges. Losers were pretty much everyone else.
3 - Get it out quickly so we can sell some Voidravens then move on to more interesting books.

Therefore, the quality of the rules, the playability of the faction, and the interaction of the book with 7ed in general and other factions in particular was never considered a priority, and resourced appropriately.

You can argue that streamlining special rules into USRs (with the lamentable exception of Soulfright) and the removal of Harlequins to make room for the dedicated minidex were subordinate or flowed from the above. And a certain minimal amount of change is generally desirable to prevent the feeling of 'why did I buy this, it is the same'.

But, essentially, I do not believe that "getting the rules right" was in any way a business objective with this release. And sadly, it really shows.

I think you're wrong. They don't design a codex for the rules. They don't even try to balance it. They just want to make it cool for themselves. They've stated numerous times that they are a model company and that they don't care for competitive games. They just want to make a fluff book. It's basically a bunch of kids "oh! That would be cool!" that is into Marines.

CptMetal wrote:

They don't design a codex for the rules. They don't even try to balance it. They just want to make it cool for themselves.

I don't dispute that this is the usual model. But even this tends to result in some cool things for the players (if not necessarily their opponents!).

What I'm saying is that this time around even less attention was paid to the rules than normal, due to other business imperatives. Bad luck for us.

I hope the shoddy job of the dex is reflected in sales (the only thing GW cares about). You can't say the DE was made to be fluffy because there's no rule to represent the Voidravens ability to enter combat space completely undetected (it's meant to be silent and practically invisible to detection right?) and Incubi haven't got their Tormentor Helms or anything to replace their ability to shoot. I get why they removed a lot of the other fluffy stuff (no models) but addressing those fluff-based issues would require nothing but actually writing rules.

My theory is that the codex was written intentionally to be weak, to encourage players to mix in the much stronger Eldar codex units. I think this is part of the easing process to unify the entire Eldar race at some point in the next few years. It makes sense. Space Marines operate with a central vanilla dex and branch chapter dex's. I can see a central Eldar dex in the future with branch dex's for what are currently separate armies. Makes a lot of sense, the combined number of Eldar players is pretty large, enough to warrant a unification into a robust second "faction". You can see this now as the DE codex is amazing as a supplement to the Eldar dex and vice versa.

CptMetal wrote:

Why are both points equivalent?

Because the Archon costs half of what a chapter master costs. Not taking this into account means that cheap HQs pay too much for their wargear and expensive HQs too little.

CptMetal wrote:

And what HQ do you know that Strike at initiative and can smash a dreadnought? (except a Mc)

A Chapter Master with the Burning Blade (S7 AP2), a Wolf Lord on TWC mount with one of the relics (ends up at S6 AP2 Rending IIRC).

CptMetal wrote:

Why are both points equivalent?

And what HQ do you know that Strike at initiative and can smash a dreadnought? (except a Mc)

Just the first ones that come to mind...

Karandras
Fuegan
Autarch with Lance
Shining Spear Exarch with Star Lance
Striking Scorpion Exarch with Claw
Abbadon
Huron
Kharn
Necron Lord with Warscythe
Solitair
Draigo
SM with Burning Blade
Dark Angel with Mace of Redemption

My space marine wargear knowledge is a bit out of date, but iirc the Relic Blade is AP3, wounds on 2+ against almost any commander, and against T3 (not rare) causes instant death, though it was two-handed. Is this still the case?

FuelDrop wrote:

My space marine wargear knowledge is a bit out of date, but iirc the Relic Blade is AP3, wounds on 2+ against almost any commander, and against T3 (not rare) causes instant death, though it was two-handed. Is this still the case?

Yep, that's still correct. Though ironically, the Relic Blade isn't actually a relic.

FuelDrop wrote:

My space marine wargear knowledge is a bit out of date, but iirc the Relic Blade is AP3, wounds on 2+ against almost any commander, and against T3 (not rare) causes instant death, though it was two-handed. Is this still the case?

Relic Blades are S+2, AP3, 2-Handed. S6 is usually enough to damage Dread's although not reliably and probably not quick enough to kill them before they kill you.

Might depend on what defences they have. I know some Chapter Masters can have EW and a 3++ - which aren't exactly easy for dreads to chew though.

That being said, dreads recently had their attacks doubled, so it's certainly more risky than it used to be.

I'm pretty sure none of our HQ options get anything that can smash a Dreadnought.

In fact, going through our entire wargear list, the only thing in our army that can even hope to take on a Dreadnought in CC is either a Talos (which isn't exactly a sure thing, more like a hail mary) and maybe a very lucky set of Reavers on a charge.

2/3rds of our codex is CC focused, in several cases to the point of exclusiveness. We don't have anything I'd call reliable against vehicles on that list, now that Haywire is squad leader only.

Poison is all well and good, but we need to be more than 1-trick ponies in CC if that's 2/3rds of our options.

FuelDrop wrote:

I'm pretty sure none of our HQ options get anything that can smash a Dreadnought.

In fact, going through our entire wargear list, the only thing in our army that can even hope to take on a Dreadnought in CC is either a Talos (which isn't exactly a sure thing, more like a hail mary) and maybe a very lucky set of Reavers on a charge.

2/3rds of our codex is CC focused, in several cases to the point of exclusiveness. We don't have anything I'd call reliable against vehicles on that list, now that Haywire is squad leader only.

Poison is all well and good, but we need to be more than 1-trick ponies in CC if that's 2/3rds of our options.

Agreed.

The problem is, other races get weapons like power fists, the Burning Blade, evicerators and whatever that SW relic is called, which are basically great against virtually everything. Some of the might strike last, but when you're talking about 4-wound, T5, 2+/3+ characters it doesn't really matter.

In contrast, our weapons don't excel against anything. Agonisers are mediocre against more things, and abysmal against anything with a 2+ save. Huskblades are abysmal against anything with a 2+ save, against anything with 1 wound, and against anything with high toughness. Our power swords are good against absolutely nothing, and the Djin Blade only works when its user pokes it up his own nose. And, of course, none of these can even scratch AV10.

Moreover, the only anti-vehicle melee defence our characters can take is haywire grenades. Contrast this with the melta-bombs SM characters can take (not that they need them). Meltas are designed to cripple or destroy a vehicle with a single hit, whilst haywire needs multiple hits to even have a hope of destroying it. Or, to put it another way, they're completely worthless on ICs as any sort of defence against vehicles.

I mentioned this earlier, but I think it needs reiterating. There seems to be this idea with DE that, because they're fragile, they should also be really feeble in combat - terrible strength, terrible or nonexistant AP, sparse grenades on an army that relies on high initiative, no or useless special rules, and worthless poison values (4+ poison... yeah, that's really worth getting into melee for ). So, rather than being glass cannons, our melee units just end up being glass pea-shooters.

I'm also sick of hearing "but you get to strike first". So what? That only matters if we can actually cause damage. So my wyches get to strike first against your dreadnought, wow, I bet the pilot is really crapping his pants now. Or perhaps my Archon gets to strike first against your Chapter Master - boy must he be frightened of that 1/3 of a wound he might suffer.

It's like getting to shoot first in a duel, except that you're armed with a water pistol. And your opponent is in a tank.

I think the soul trap should provide eternal warrior after the weilder kills something. Makes sense IMO, as he is essentially hording souls for himself rather then reveling in the shared bin of PFP.

Husk blade should be S- AP3 fleshbane, rending, lethal dose. Idea being that it's good for ID'ing something he really focuses on rather then the first fething blow.

Red Corsair wrote:

I think the soul trap should provide eternal warrior after the weilder kills something. Makes sense IMO, as he is essentially hording souls for himself rather then reveling in the shared bin of PFP.

Another possibility (which works better if pfp becomes more like 5th edition pfp or Blood Points), is if the soul trap gives the Archon extra benefits from pfp.

Red Corsair wrote:

Husk blade should be S- AP3 fleshbane, rending, lethal dose. Idea being that it's good for ID'ing something he really focuses on rather then the first fething blow.

Lethal Dose really doesn't fit the flavour of the weapon. And, if it's going to stay AP3 (which is awful to begin with, given how many multi-wound models have 2+ saves), then it really needs Instant Death as standard. Hell, I'd argue that you could also give it Shred, and it still wouldn't be remotely overpowered.

With S3, AP2 instant death and shred would be ok. Still not great. Not until you can boost S to a more respectable level.

Say the soultrap was hardcore... maybe something like this?

"At the start of the fight sub phase, nominate the number of wounds your archon intends to inflict. Increase your S by this amount for this phase. If you successfully inflict this many wounds or more, all is well, but if not then the shortfall must be drawn from the archon or other friendly models within 2". "

So bid 3 wounds and get plus 3 S... But if you roll badly and only get 2, then lose a wound or sacrifice a nearby 'friend' to make up the difference.

Of course, this would take the Archon from struggling to slap a Space Marine to death to wiping a Corpsethief Claw in a phase, so probably a bit much. *shrug*

Creeping Darkness wrote:

With S3, AP2 instant death and shred would be ok. Still not great. Not until you can boost S to a more respectable level.

What about making it S+1 then?

Creeping Darkness wrote:

Say the soultrap was hardcore... maybe something like this?

"At the start of the fight sub phase, nominate the number of wounds your archon intends to inflict. Increase your S by this amount for this phase. If you successfully inflict this many wounds or more, all is well, but if not then the shortfall must be drawn from the archon or other friendly models within 2". "

So bid 3 wounds and get plus 3 S... But if you roll badly and only get 2, then lose a wound or sacrifice a nearby 'friend' to make up the difference.

Of course, this would take the Archon from struggling to slap a Space Marine to death to wiping a Corpsethief Claw in a phase, so probably a bit much. *shrug*

I think it would make more sense if you had to sacrifice wounds/models beforehand to gain strength, and then (as a separate ability) gain a wound for each wound you cause. Importantly, this can take him above 3 wounds. Though, he'd probably have to have EW for that to mean something.

Another random possibility, but what if the soul trap was a bit like a mini Blood Point system? The Archon gains soul counters whenever a model within say 12" dies (friend or foe!), and can then use them to increase his strength or gain other effects.

If we're honest, these's a *lot* of cool stuff you could do with a Soul Trap.

Probably right, a "pay before you slay" model is more appropriate.

There is definitely huge scope for doing cool things with a soul trap, I hope GW think so too!

Perhaps... we are talking about the wrong issue here? I am afraid that the Archon in his current form will always pale as a melee character when compared to Succubi.

And while I never had the pleasure to play with 5th edition rules, I love the way a 5th edition Archon + ST + HB sounds... so rather than changing the character of the Huskblade, why not changing back the soultrap to a extra S per killed enemy? And of course, making the Huskblade a proper pre-nerf power weapon (AP2).


I would go as far and make the Huskblade available to all HQs, but the Archon get's it a little bit cheaper.

This would leave us either with a weapon on a character that is at least somewhat good in melee or the classic "crappy at first, but potentially nightmarish" Str 6+ Archon with ID.

While I have read a lot of interesting ideas, none of those would actually improve the situation a lot. Surely, it would change the weapon, but most necessarily improve it in terms of gameplay value.

This is an odd weapon to fear would become overpowered. Glass cannon is our entire raison d'etre, if we're not doing more damage than space marines then the codex is failing on a fundamental level. Fleshbane, ap2, instant death for 35 points would be well within the realm of appropriate. As would dark lances being s9, splinter rifles being s4 poison, etc. The community needs to get over this same fear that GW has of writing actually decent rules for the army

Leninade wrote:

This is an odd weapon to fear would become overpowered. Glass cannon is our entire raison d'etre, if we're not doing more damage than space marines then the codex is failing on a fundamental level. Fleshbane, ap2, instant death for 35 points would be well within the realm of appropriate. As would dark lances being s9, splinter rifles being s4 poison, etc. The community needs to get over this same fear that GW has of writing actually decent rules for the army

Agreed entirely.

This is the reason why so many DE units are terrible - because they have all the drawbacks of glass cannons, but lack the whole 'cannon' part.

There's also an odd fear of giving our units actual strength bonuses (+1S is the most I've seen any weapon give). But, why? Other races don't seem to have this problem, and Eldar even have a Power Fist that strikes at initiative. Yet, we seem to be stuck at S3-4.

A side note.... we need the 'Dark Gate' back from the previous codex..... and we still need it ST10 and Ap1....other weapons we need back from the previous codex are the shattershard and the orb of despair....all the cool little stuff... bring back with old stats, that would add a little oomph to the cannon part... BUT i say dont make them '1 shot' ,make them useable every turn, hell ,finally have stuff back that would garner respect and terror a little....

I think I will try a couple friendly games with the old stuff and a combo of the fan codex stuff to see what happens....i mean can DE really ever be called OP nowadays?....

Archon Rievect wrote:

A side note.... we need the 'Dark Gate' back from the previous codex..... and we still need it ST10 and Ap1....other weapons we need back from the previous codex are the shattershard and the orb of despair....all the cool little stuff... bring back with old stats, that would add a little oomph to the cannon part... BUT i say dont make them '1 shot' ,make them useable every turn, hell ,finally have stuff back that would garner respect and terror a little....

That would be nice.

I'm also wondering if our ranged poison weapons should be Fleshbane (4+), instead of poison. If Gargantuan Creatures are going to be in the game, it seems rather idiotic that they're just immune to what is basically our only weapon against them.

Archon Rievect wrote:

i mean can DE really ever be called OP nowadays?....

I think Sisters of Battle players will offer to handicap themselves against us to even the odds.