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.

Hello Dakka members, I am currently developing a new CSM army, and I was wondering, what do you think is a better option for a Warlord, a sigil of corruption, with a 4+ invulnerable save, or the aura of dark glory, with a 5+ invulnerable save. There is the 10-point difference between the two, but I believe the advantage is worth it.

1) Aura of Dark Glory is a 5+ invul
2) Whats the rules question? This is YMDC, not tactics or general discussion

By my reckoning:

The upgrade is 10 points.
Roughly half the games, it's not going to be important, either because the IC survives without serious threat or is too thoroughly murdered for it to matter. 20 points. Adjust if you think your probability will be different.
When situations do come down to the wire, roughly half the time it's not your invulnerable save that matters. 40 points. Adjust if you think your probability will be different.
When saving, it decreases your fail rate by 25%; 1/4 of total preservation compared to without. 160 points.

So, that's your breakeven. If you're more than 160 points, it's probably worth protecting your investment, if you're less, it's probably not.

The poster above me is pretty much right. But I also feel it depends what you are trying to do. I give the Sigil because in my list my Lord is meant to be an annoyance more than anything else, or has the sole purpose of killing something big or tying it up as long as possible. So I want him to eat as many shots as possible. He can eat more high AP shots at a 4+ rather than a 5+. That being said. The poster above me is right. I rarely spend more than 140-150 points on my lord. Usually VotLW, Power Armor, Bolt Pistol or Combi-Bolter, which ever artifact I feel will be most useful, and MoN. I never really rely on him I'd much rather the opponent target my Lord as rather than my Plague Marine squads or Obliterators.

If you're running a Character of Tzeentch, the 4+ from the Sigil will become a 3+, which is pretty handy, especially since you don't have to give up a hand to use it, unlike loyalists who have to take a Stormshield.

A tzeentch lord on a Disc with Sigil, Powerfist and Lightning Claw is a pretty scary dude.

I think its usually worth the 10 points. Compare it to taking a MoT which also upgrades Invuln by 1 but costs 15. Of course you can take both as whitedragon suggests. Too bad they decided MoT lord doesn't unlock troops (Or MoN/S sorcs) Id rather take that than MoT sorc.

 YFNPsycho wrote:
Hello Dakka members, I am currently developing a new CSM army, and I was wondering, what do you think is a better option for a Warlord, a sigil of corruption, with a 4+ invulnerable save, or the aura of dark glory, with a 5+ armour save. There is the 10-point difference between the two, but I believe the advantage is worth it.

put him on a bike and give him sigil and MoN or MoT/aura

Always the sigil.

The reason is because, with the sometimes exception of the sorcerer, any model that can take a sigil is going to be one whose main job is to find your opponent's biggest, scariest unit, and try and beat him up in close combat.

If you're attacking something where the invul save won't help you, then you're probably attacking the wrong target (something too weak), and if you're attacking something where the invul save will help you, then you're going to be helped by that invul save being better. Especially since there are lots of things that will both ignore your armor save AND cause instant death.

The only time I can see going without a sigil is if you want to keep things cheap, but buying an aura isn't congruous with that (so still not a reason for an aura), and trying to cut points on CSM HQ is kind of a waste, as they get pretty dang beaty when you're not tight-fisted with them.

I agree, the only reason not to stack on MoT is you want Zombies...and I always want Zombies...

I'll join the always sigil, usually your warlord will be pretty expensive and you want him to last as long as possible.

The only time i don't buy sigil on my lord is when he is wearing his TDA, in which case I think it is pretty expensive to boost his invul by +1

Though really that's more of a strike against terminator armor than against sigils.

The loss of armor save is pretty mitigated by the fact that you already have a 2+ save in the form of look out, sir!, while the terminator lord making the squad unable to perform a sweep is really obnoxious.

The only time I can see terminator armor being all that useful is if you want to deepstrike him, or if you know you want him in a unit of terminators, but unless you're running a raider list, you're usually wanting your lord somewhere else to shore things up and/or pass out fearless.

pinecone77 wrote:I agree, the only reason not to stack on MoT is you want Zombies...and I always want Zombies...

Or you know, you actually want to use decent cult troops.

Ailaros wrote:Though really that's more of a strike against terminator armor than against sigils.

While I agree terminator armor is kinda a head scratcher for most lord builds, I think the real issue is the wargear table. There's no sensible reason that nearly every model should pay the same points cost for the same wargear. The sigil on the Termi lord should be cheaper than for a PA lord. I think its a glaring design mistake to have a single wargear table, no idea why they would switch back to it other than the pretty lame save paper/effort reasons.

Well, and for the lord in specific, the problem is that he DOESN'T pay the same price to upgrade to terminator armor - instead he spends ruinously more.

 Ailaros wrote:
while the terminator lord making the squad unable to perform a sweep is really obnoxious.

The model in terminator armor may not sweeping advance. Says nothing about his unit. If he's in Terminator armor and he's with, say, Khorne berserkers, you'd still get to sweeping advance.

 SRSFACE wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
while the terminator lord making the squad unable to perform a sweep is really obnoxious.

The model in terminator armor may not sweeping advance. Says nothing about his unit. If he's in Terminator armor and he's with, say, Khorne berserkers, you'd still get to sweeping advance.

Its in the assault section under 'disallowed sweeping advances.' The unit does not sweeping advance as far as I can tell.

 whitedragon wrote:
A tzeentch lord on a Disc with Sigil, Powerfist and Lightning Claw is a pretty scary dude.

This.
Like a 3++ sorc on a disk buffing units on the go.

And I always take the sigil on the AoBF Juggerlord of doom.