Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What do other people think about the powers granted an Inquisitor by the Daemonblade? They get two rolls on a chart, and get things somewhat better than Marks of Chaos. A CSM Daemon Weapon gives you +2-6 attacks, but hurts on a 1. The Inquisition has no chance of hurting the Inquisitor, and can gain things like FnP & EW at the same time, or able to steal Wounds.

I'm not bitter about this choice of GW, I'm just find it interesting that the fluff says they can make such good use out of Daemonic Investments, at 15 points. I do understand the low cost, since the characters that can buy it have relatively low stats. But as a CSM player, I want more Randomness! }>


Chaos on all sides! Yeah that's right!

Does the Daemonblade have no negative effect on the user at all? If so, that's kinda dumb.

Nope, no down side.

2-3 - Warpflame: Attacks made with the Daemonblade are resolved at +3 Strength.
4 - Unholy Speed: The wielder has +3 Attacks.
5 - Etherblade: The Daemonblade has an AP of 2.
6 - Vampyre: When the Daemonblade inflicts an unsaved wound, its wielder immediately gains +1 Wound (to a maximum of 10).
7 - Daemonic Feud: Close combat attacks from this sword always wound Daemons on a roll of 2+. Furthermore, Daemons must re-roll any successful invulnerable saves against any wounds caused by this Daemonblade.
8 - Deathlust: The wielder of the Daemonblade has the Furious Charge and Rage special rules.
9 - Dark Resurrection: The wielder of the Daemonblade has the Feel No Pain and Eternal Warrior special rules.
10 - Daemon Venom: The Daemonblade has the Poisoned (2+) special rule.
11+ - Familiar: The wielder generates one additional Warp Charge point in each of his turns. In addition, the Daemonblade gains the Force special rule

So its a direct cut and paste from GK codex.

To me daemonblades are the worst offense in GK codex. Just seems so wrong, idea of GK and Inquistors binding a powerful daemon into a weapon, then being able to use it. Especially with the daemon having no possible negative effect. You want to wield Stormbringer, you take the chance of loosing your soul.

Yeah, to be fair, Daemon weapons wielded by non-Daemon/non-Chaos characters and having no negative effect is really pushing it. It should have some sort of chance to kill their own squad and himself.

For more fun, if the opponent plays a Chaos faction, they get to place 2D6 +3 Lesser Daemons where the squad once was.

I think this lack of drawback/backlash from the daemon is reflected from the failsafes built into the daemon blade by the Ordo Malleus' wards and catechisms of binding.

Don't forget that in terms of raw power the daemon blade is severely hindered in comparison to that of raw daemon-weapons like that of Drachn'yen, (which is why you have to randomly roll for 2 and not just get set stats) The Black Mace and The Axe of Blind Fury whose power fluctuates depending on the mood of its wielder+blade and how this output of power can be represented as unleashed at its max with the 6 on the D6 or it's minimum at a roll of 1 which is furthered from its rebellion towards its master.

 Grimskul wrote:
I think this lack of drawback/backlash from the daemon is reflected from the failsafes built into the daemon blade by the Ordo Malleus' wards and catechisms of binding.

Don't forget that in terms of raw power the daemon blade is severely hindered in comparison to that of raw daemon-weapons like that of Drachn'yen, (which is why you have to randomly roll for 2 and not just get set stats) The Black Mace and The Axe of Blind Fury whose power fluctuates depending on the mood of its wielder+blade and how this output of power can be represented as unleashed at its max with the 6 on the D6 or it's minimum at a roll of 1 which is furthered from its rebellion towards its master.

Don't forget that even the older 3.5 and 4E were far better in most cases as well, mainly because you actually get a consistent effect.

With a standard Daemon Blade you were getting d6 Attacks and at worst (in 4E) +1S. Now daemon weapons are incredibly more powerful (Well..cept the one in the Black Legion book..), and generally even in the Black Crusade (RPG) books there's methods for binding and removing the power of the Daemon with Inquisitor Tech, but it weakens them and causes their power to fluctuate.


Though to be honest, I miss the old Daemonhost, where you couldn't even use GK and it had power behind it, not some wimply humanish thing.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
I think this lack of drawback/backlash from the daemon is reflected from the failsafes built into the daemon blade by the Ordo Malleus' wards and catechisms of binding.

Don't forget that in terms of raw power the daemon blade is severely hindered in comparison to that of raw daemon-weapons like that of Drachn'yen, (which is why you have to randomly roll for 2 and not just get set stats) The Black Mace and The Axe of Blind Fury whose power fluctuates depending on the mood of its wielder+blade and how this output of power can be represented as unleashed at its max with the 6 on the D6 or it's minimum at a roll of 1 which is furthered from its rebellion towards its master.

Don't forget that even the older 3.5 and 4E were far better in most cases as well, mainly because you actually get a consistent effect.

With a standard Daemon Blade you were getting d6 Attacks and at worst (in 4E) +1S. Now daemon weapons are incredibly more powerful (Well..cept the one in the Black Legion book..), and generally even in the Black Crusade (RPG) books there's methods for binding and removing the power of the Daemon with Inquisitor Tech, but it weakens them and causes their power to fluctuate.


Though to be honest, I miss the old Daemonhost, where you couldn't even use GK and it had power behind it, not some wimply humanish thing.

Yeah, that's one pet peeve of mine that always led me to dislike the new GK not to mention add upon the list of fluff crimes Ward has committed. They should be guys like bloody Cherubael in the Eisenhorn series with stats almost on par with monstrous creatures with choices of releasing levels of binding to allow access to further powers/abilities on a leadership test instead of randomly rolling for abilities/stat increases. *le sigh* A player can dream...

 Grimskul wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
I think this lack of drawback/backlash from the daemon is reflected from the failsafes built into the daemon blade by the Ordo Malleus' wards and catechisms of binding.

Don't forget that in terms of raw power the daemon blade is severely hindered in comparison to that of raw daemon-weapons like that of Drachn'yen, (which is why you have to randomly roll for 2 and not just get set stats) The Black Mace and The Axe of Blind Fury whose power fluctuates depending on the mood of its wielder+blade and how this output of power can be represented as unleashed at its max with the 6 on the D6 or it's minimum at a roll of 1 which is furthered from its rebellion towards its master.

Don't forget that even the older 3.5 and 4E were far better in most cases as well, mainly because you actually get a consistent effect.

With a standard Daemon Blade you were getting d6 Attacks and at worst (in 4E) +1S. Now daemon weapons are incredibly more powerful (Well..cept the one in the Black Legion book..), and generally even in the Black Crusade (RPG) books there's methods for binding and removing the power of the Daemon with Inquisitor Tech, but it weakens them and causes their power to fluctuate.


Though to be honest, I miss the old Daemonhost, where you couldn't even use GK and it had power behind it, not some wimply humanish thing.

Yeah, that's one pet peeve of mine that always led me to dislike the new GK not to mention add upon the list of fluff crimes Ward has committed. They should be guys like bloody Cherubael in the Eisenhorn series with stats almost on par with monstrous creatures with choices of releasing levels of binding to allow access to further powers/abilities on a leadership test instead of randomly rolling for abilities/stat increases. *le sigh* A player can dream...

Codex Radical Inquisitors: Alliance of Convenience with Chaos.

remember though, it starts at AP - and the CSM ones start at AP 4 IIRC

 BewareOfTom wrote:
remember though, it starts at AP - and the CSM ones start at AP 4 IIRC

The Mace is Ap4, but the Axe is Ap2. Spinshiver is AP 3

Inquisitors are generally whimps in comparison to the guys that potentially could weild a daemonblade.

You have to think about who is gonna field it. Risking a lot to create a mediocre fighter isn't exactly hot.

What about the fact that it's randomness is unpredictable and you may gain a trait that's not particularly useful for your situation? At least with a daemon weapon aside from rolling a 1 you know what you're getting i.e. MORE ATTACKS!

I think our Daemonweapons are much less interesting than they should be, and the Inquisitions are much more interesting than they should be.

Not sure where the balance should be, but it definitely feels skewed at the moment.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
I think our Daemonweapons are much less interesting than they should be, and the Inquisitions are much more interesting than they should be.

Not sure where the balance should be, but it definitely feels skewed at the moment.

Well it depends on the Writer, Ward likes making fancy weapons and gear. Kelly prefers to rehash things.

Thing is though, people (I.E none chaos players) would soon complain if a chaos lord could randomly get poisoned 2+ and ap2 without any real downside. On a T3 S3 model it's a good deal less impressive. If need be look at it this way, Chaos daemon weapons behave themselves, the inquisitors having to bicker with the bloody thing and is likely at constant battle with the thing to keep it on a leash. Look at the one...that one GK guy wields who's name completely evades me, one of the GK's "uber holy choir boys" and he won't even turn it on, should give you some idea of just how bad weapons like that could go wrong.

I guess we have enough randomness in our Mutations, and they seem cheap at 10pts. At least it is not as bad as Chaos Daemons, whose randomness boggles the mind.

I'm content, I guess. Besides, we all know that the Imperium of Man needs to cheat to win over Chaos. >

Could be worse, you could be stuck with the old RoC mutation rules, which "forced" you to remodel the miniature completely if it got, say, tentacles... or lost one or both of its legs. Or its head shrank. Or it got a flaming skull head.

The Daemonweapons from then were.... more powerful, on average, but rolled for randomly. They could be worse on the wielder than on the enemy!

My thoughts when I saw Imperial Daemon Weapons are more reliable and have better options than Chaos...

"Wow, such typical"

I'm not saying that the Chaos Daemon Weapons need to be really random, but a few more varieties of effects and god-specfic weapons would have been nice.

And, frankly, the Inq version should simply be AP3 +D6 A, 1 equals a wound.

Their Daemon Weapons should kill them with no saves of any kind allowed on a roll of 1. Spawning a Chaos Herald in their wake.

Also.. Why is the Grimoire of True Names in C:I ... I know it does nothing of the sort that C: Daemons has for rulings, but, couldn't they have named it differently?...

Are they trying to follow the fluff of banishment towards Daemons by knowing their "true names" ?

If so, we should follow the corruption level and simple soul suckingly perverse application of wielding a weapon bound with the soul of a writhing Daemon....

Lets face it... GW dun boned the lore on this one... GKs shouldnt have had Daemon Weapons to begin with, C:I gets a not only interesting, but potentially randomly, game altering effect depending on the randomness of your roll (EW? Really...) with NO side effect?... The amount of times Abaddon has poked himself in the eye.... I can see the disdain in his 1 good eye right now...

If so, we should follow the corruption level and simple soul suckingly perverse application of wielding a weapon bound with the soul of a writhing Daemon....

Lets face it... GW dun boned the lore on this one...

You remember that the Ordo Malleus has tons of methods of binding and keeping a daemon from leaving, along with trapping it right? I mean Inquisitors have had Daemonhosts back in Codex: Daemonhunters...
All those purity sigils, holy marks, liberal application of things that burn daemons and keep them in check..


They didn't bone the lore, you just don't actually know the lore.

 doc1234 wrote:
Thing is though, people (I.E none chaos players) would soon complain if a chaos lord could randomly get poisoned 2+ and ap2 without any real downside. On a T3 S3 model it's a good deal less impressive. If need be look at it this way, Chaos daemon weapons behave themselves, the inquisitors having to bicker with the bloody thing and is likely at constant battle with the thing to keep it on a leash. Look at the one...that one GK guy wields who's name completely evades me, one of the GK's "uber holy choir boys" and he won't even turn it on, should give you some idea of just how bad weapons like that could go wrong.

You're thinking of Castellan Crowe. He's not weilding just a normal daemon blade, choosing not to activate it, he's weilding the Blade of Antwyr. It's like a super duper daemon blade. He is the champion of the Purifiers, because in an army of uncorruptable soldiers, there's an elite unit of even more uncorruptable people, and of them he is the uncorruptablesest of them all! So basically he's the only one that would manage not to let it loose. Anyone else would be all over tapping that power.

This blade is so bad, that they decided they couldn't keep it in a box, deep in a vault, because whomever guarded it would have their brains stolen by the blade, so instead they put it out in the open, in the hands of a dude that walks around swinging it about the heads of the other grey knights, and even whatever fools have allied with his army. LOGIC!

 Purifier wrote:

 doc1234 wrote:
Thing is though, people (I.E none chaos players) would soon complain if a chaos lord could randomly get poisoned 2+ and ap2 without any real downside. On a T3 S3 model it's a good deal less impressive. If need be look at it this way, Chaos daemon weapons behave themselves, the inquisitors having to bicker with the bloody thing and is likely at constant battle with the thing to keep it on a leash. Look at the one...that one GK guy wields who's name completely evades me, one of the GK's "uber holy choir boys" and he won't even turn it on, should give you some idea of just how bad weapons like that could go wrong.

You're thinking of Castellan Crowe. He's not weilding just a normal daemon blade, choosing not to activate it, he's weilding the Blade of Antwyr. It's like a super duper daemon blade. He is the champion of the Purifiers, because in an army of uncorruptable soldiers, there's an elite unit of even more uncorruptable people, and of them he is the uncorruptablesest of them all! So basically he's the only one that would manage not to let it loose. Anyone else would be all over tapping that power.

This blade is so bad, that they decided they couldn't keep it in a box, deep in a vault, because whomever guarded it would have their brains stolen by the blade, so instead they put it out in the open, in the hands of a dude that walks around swinging it about the heads of the other grey knights, and even whatever fools have allied with his army. LOGIC!

To further that point. GKs don't actually use "Power Weapons" (except for the Techmarine) in the convential sense. Their Swords, Falchions, Hammers, etc are are psychically powered.

Crowe's daemonblade actually gives a benefit to units that charge him. He only gets 4+ rending with it due to his extreme prowess with any blade.

Still love my 2x demonblade, power armor, mastery lv 1 inqiusitor. Most of the blade's powers change the bearer's stats. You can get really good combos like +3a on character+1 mastery on one and +3S AP2 on the other. Or vamprism + FNP and Eternal Warrior combo. Or Mastery 3 every once in a rare while.

Fluff wise the bonuses generated are pretty poor for binding a demon to a weapon. I would expect better bonuses and a higher cost. If it had a "on a 1 to hit it hits you" also it probably would make sense.

It's also two handed...so no bonus there.

 ductvader wrote:
It's also two handed...so no bonus there.

iirc not all bonuses on the blade requires you to weild it to get the bonus.

 Purifier wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
It's also two handed...so no bonus there.

iirc not all bonuses on the blade requires you to weild it to get the bonus.

You are correct. No bonus attack was all I meant.

ductvader has a point though, if you ended up rolling powers that only benefit from being wielded you're suddenly going to have to pick which your swinging. Good conversion potential though, pair of matched swords or something.

That is always a problem, even if they were 1 handed. You only get benefits from one weapon's special effects. Most of the options are pretty obvious what you want. +3 str you use against light armored foes and AP2 vs MEQ. Anti-demon is, obviously, vs demons. Poison is again obvious. When going against enemies, the only really debate comes at things like 4+ saves vs +3 str/poison and AP2. And those dont happen enough to bother with. Things like attacks, furious charge/rage, fnp/eternal, and mastery level are all on character. And if you roll the same twice, you get to pick, which is huge.