What if player's just picked a craftworld. Say the rule was "Craftworld: One of the following sets of rules may be selected for an army list - this selection is made at list building, and must be disclosed to your opponent."

and the rules would look something like...

"Craftworld Iyanden: All wraithguard units are taken as troops regardless of size. Wraithlords may be taken as elites. At least one Guardian unit must be taken, and only one of each unit with type 'aspect warrior' may be taken. Units which are not fearless are stubborn, and morale tests taken due to # of wounds in a single phase are taken after 20% of a unit is lost, instead of the normal 25%."

Certain units would be exempt, such as harlequins, and perhaps rangers. It would allow customization without buying a unit, but is a bit of a regression in codex design, if i recall correctly. The trick would be balance, as always.

Being too craftworld specific is a bad thing. I would not like eldar as much if that happened. Also do not play down the Phoenix Lords. It takes away from them immensly.

GW has dropped craftworlds, traits, mutations, and doctrines. Don't bring them back.

The Phoenix Lords do make for a crowded HQ section without properly bringing much to the table. One problem is that they are very important characters in the fluff, another that they, due to similarity of origin, are grouped together. This leads to important face-less beings. Important to be there, but not individuals that you'll care about.

Simply put, I think Phoenix Lords need to be developed or dropped. Each should be unique, less in common with the others.

DarknessEternal wrote:GW has dropped craftworlds, traits, mutations, and doctrines. Don't bring them back.

I just wished they'd drop chapters as well. Or bring the others back.

I think one of the best ideas proposed is for strategic doctrines to be purchasable by the the HQ units. I think this also compliments how we purchase gear and psychic powers for our HQ units already. Also I've been looking but haven't run across it in this thread, has anyone suggested that the Eldar receive a unit like the battle psyker squad? I think it would fit in with the fluff and play of the army nicely.

Well, if we want to provide ways to customize the list for craftworlds, i don't see a lot of options. Theres attaching the customizations to a single HQ, making them simple selections (which were phased out with mutations, doctrines, etc), or making individual HQs.

I feel like the PLs should go away, and be replaced with more flavorful HQ choices which change the FOC around a little bit, or add special rules, akin to current Space Marine rules. The Phoenix Lords can live on as an Apoc formation or something, but keeping them in the codex is a nod to history that is putting a serious cramp on the HQ slot.

The autarch should offer more tactical and strategic flexibility, depending on what is required. I feel like he should be customizable, powerful, etc.

Over all I've been thinking that I'd rather anything that messes with the FoC to either be an Eldar special rule or something like "A single HQ choice may take...". Out of those two option I like the second the best, let me add points to any one of my HQs in order to balance it out, but don't force me to take one particular HQ choice.

As for the Phoenix Lords, I think they should be kept, preferably as a HQ choice, but I wouldn't mind having them as an upgrade to an Aspect Warrior unit.

I'm split.

I think representing the diversity of the Eldar craftworlds is important - and should be represented more than with just a fluff page and a few rules in the codex (e.g. 10-man wraithguard squads are troops). As stated above, simple selection of a craftworld (akin to doctrines) has been moved away from, as a principle, by GW. Adding the rules as choices to an autarch doesn't work that well, since some craftworlds are led more by seers than anything else. There is some precedent for named characters leading craftworlds, such as eldrad, yriel, iyanna, etc, but having the generic HQs, the phoenix lords AND the craftworld HQs leads to an HQ section that has as many entries as the rest of the codex combined.

I think the best thing would be to have the generic HQs, and then have the named characters customize the FoC or add special rules (very like SM characters). The question is then, what to do with the PLs. Adding them as upgrades to exarchs or upgrades to aspect warriors might lead to a problem of representing a demi-god-like-level of aspect warrior in a "free" manner, from a FoC standpoint.

I don't have good examples of the sorts of rules i would see as the craftworld-specific benefits each SC would confer, but its more of a design schema than specifics at this point anyway.

I still say HQ wraithlord. We could up its initiative by one, have it loose wraith sight, give it a S 9 ap 2 heavy 2 lance pinning gun. Have his sword re role all misses. Give him the abilaty to join wraith gaurd squads. And we could put him up for like 220 or so points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also give it a 4+ invaunrable save

No HQ Wraithlord. Thats just OTT. What would make sence is the ability to upgrade one wraithlord to maybe a "Warithlord ancient" (undecided on names). This like the upgrade from Trygon to Trygon Prime.

There was talking of being able to customized the wraithlords to specific roles. This would work best if they were placed in the Elites slot in the FOC. Also a type of heavy wraithlord to occupy a slot in the heavy support section would also be cool. I still think a battle psyker squad would be beneficial to the eldar.

No invulnerable saves on wraithlords without lowering their toughness. Lascannons already wound on 3+, you want to make them ignore half of all wounds (before fortune)!? They'd be unstoppable.

I don't want to derail to WL, since we're talking about HQ, but give WL a 2+ save and it mitigates a good deal of their durability problem (which is a vulnerability to krak missles, mostly).

What are your ideas for this 'psyker battle squad'? The closest thing I can think of would be a seer-council in which all members were actually seers and worked together to employ their psychic abilities. This would be, in the fluff, one of the most powerful psychic entities in the galaxy.

--- a little derail to WL
One thing I've thought was interesting was a Elite wraithlord and a HS wraithlord, with the elite wraithlord being sort of a front-line unit, and a HS wraithlord being more of a gun platform, slower, more dakka.

Well, depending on the amount of psykers you had in the squad that would allow you to use different abilities, the more psykers the more powerful the abilities. Something like living lightning that dropped templates would be cool, or some kind of psychic artillery.

For the psyker battle squad idea, I think buy powers as a squad much like farseers do now, and have each power scale based on remaining models in the unit. One power a turn per squad with a spirit stone like upgrade for the squad. But if this were done, would we want a supportive role, an offensive one, or either based on chosen powers?

I'd like to see a mixed role, with powers ranging along the lines of:
Psy-Blast - 18" S:X, AP:4, large blast, X=number of squad members
Bolster - any Eldar unit within 3" per squad member my reroll leadership
Psychic Pressure - any foe within 3" per squad member may be forced to reroll any leadership test.
Twist of Fate - Until the start of the next Eldar turn, The Eldar player my any dice up to a total equal to the current number of squad members.


I don't like the idea of a WL HQ, more so I don't think for any reason any wraith unit should loose wraithsight. At best if you insist on a HQ, then have a spiritseer or two attachable. If Wraithlords are messed with dramatically, I'd want to see customizable Aspect Wraithlords. Also I agree a invun save is too much.

I've toyed with writing rules for an Aspect Wraithlord... it is incredibly fiddly.
I think it may be much easier to allow the lord more options and leave it at that.
A nice array of weapons, the possibility to take one support weapon as opposed to two "heavy" weapons, more varied under-arm choices and possibly some stat buffs (such up being able to purchase a 2+ save, a 5++, etc)

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 6 6 3 4 2 10 3+

A wraithlord must take one of the following...
Shuriken cannon
Scatter laser
EML
Star cannon
Brightlance
Wraithsword
Wraith gauntlets (2x S)
D-cannon support weapon
Shadow weaver support weapon
vibro cannon support weapon

A wraithlord may take one of the following, as long as it has not taken a support weapon...
Shuriken cannon
Scatter laser
EML
Star cannon
Brightlance
Wraithsword

A wraithlord must be armed with 2 under-arm weapons from the following list...
shuriken catapult
flamer
fusion gun
reaper launcher
death spinner

A wraithlord may also purchase two of the following...
Extended Wraithbone plating (2+ Save)
Reinforced Wraithbone skelenton (+2 Toughness)
Runes of fortitude (5++ save)

or something like that anyway...

----------

Regarding the PL dilema... i've personally never used them extensivly, if we were to keep them in i'd like to add in a warp spider and shining spear entry also. But i don't think we can have the PL, the generic HQ's AND craftworld heros (well, more craftworld heroes than there are now)

I think finishing off the autarch strategems should be done, then we can move onto possibly seers. Let the fate of the PL/craftworld heros mull over for a little, and someone might think of an amazing idea while drunk over xmas that will solve all our problems.

I think finishing off the autarch strategems should be done, then we can move onto possibly seers. Let the fate of the PL/craftworld heros mull over for a little, and someone might think of an amazing idea while drunk over xmas that will solve all our problems.

Agree'd, that's what I was trying to do before we went off on a tangent (PS. I think the idea of a WL HQ is stupid, making a wraith is necromancy, the Eldar don't choose to do it unless its a "life or death of the whole craftworld" situation like it was for Iyanden). I have quite a few very different approaches we could take with the farseer/seer council, but I'll keep them to myself for now to prevent de-railing the thread again.

Here we go with the Autarch stuff:

Massed Reinforcements: - xxx points
Up to three units that are in reserve may be grouped together. you only make one reserve for the group, if it is successful all the units in the group enter from reserve in the same way (outflank, deep strike, normally) within 18" of one another.

Logistical Espionage: - xxx points
Each turn you may make your opponent re roll up to D3 reserve rolls (successful or failed), these can include rolls to determine which board edge outflanking units enter from.

Ambush!: - xxx points
D3 Units of Rangers/Pathfinders, Striking Scorpions, Warp spiders or Harlequins (with a shadowseer) gain the infiltrate rule. These units also ignore the restriction that you may not infiltrate within 12"of the enemy if they can't draw LOS to them.

Vertical Assault: - xxx points
All jet bikes and skimmers have the option to enter from reserve by deep strike.


Completely overhauled Ambush, I like the idea of sneaky units being able to luck unseen so close to the enemy.

Thoughts? Ideally I think we could do with maybe 2 more.

Gorechild wrote:Massed Reinforcements: - xxx points
Up to three units that are in reserve may be grouped together. you only make one reserve for the group, if it is successful all the units in the group enter from reserve in the same way (outflank, deep strike, normally) within 18" of one another.

Think this is pretty much perfect now, wouldn't change it.

Gorechild wrote:Logistical Espionage: - xxx points
Each turn you may make your opponent re roll up to D3 reserve rolls (successful or failed), these can include rolls to determine which board edge outflanking units enter from.

Same with this one, could be interesting choices to ensure his entire reserves are held back, or make it so one unit turns up at a time and are easy pickings.

Gorechild wrote:Ambush!: - xxx points
D3 Units of Rangers/Pathfinders, Striking Scorpions, Warp spiders or Harlequins (with a shadowseer) gain the infiltrate rule. These units also ignore the restriction that you may not infiltrate within 12"of the enemy if they can't draw LOS to them.

interesting. If your going first you can get some turn 1 assaults going, something we're lacking at the moment. Although some simple deployment options could easily counter this. I can see this option being taken to outflank harlies more than anything else. It may be an option to allow the unit to gain infiltrate or scout. Although warp spiders should end up with scout anyway (IMO) so maybe this option could be extended to any unit gaining infiltrate/scout (but only the one)

Gorechild wrote:Vertical Assault: - xxx points
All jet bikes and skimmers have the option to enter from reserve by deep strike.

Simple and easy!

As for others...
Are we having +/-1 from reserves as standard? perhaps the 4+ sieze idea mentioned earlier could be good option.

I think Eldrad's Divination ability should be added to the Autarch's, though probably renamed and only d3 units may be redeployed.

Ambush!: - xxx points
D3 Units of Rangers/Pathfinders, Striking Scorpions, Warp spiders or Harlequins (with a shadowseer) gain the infiltrate rule. These units also ignore the restriction that you may not infiltrate within 12"of the enemy if they can't draw LOS to them.

The <12" should only be if the unit could normally infiltrate.

And just for some extra ideas...

Pinpoint Landing: - xxx points
Any deep striking Eldar unit scatter 1d6" less.

Hidden Assault: - xxx points
For the first turn any enemy wishing to shoot at an Eldar unit must roll spotting distance as if under the effect of Night fight rules.

Since we have officaily scraped the wraith lord HQ i think we should make wraith gaurd be able to be body gaurds for Farseers. If we choose to have some craftworld heros i think that Beil-tan should get Alanthrasil Swiftblade. For those of you who don't know who he is he is an eldar pirate lord from the eldar craftworld of the Biel-tan. He ws a master of some form of fighting stile called Imeluan. Something i think could be easily turned into a special ability of some sort. Almost identical to what Auserman did about puting his brothers soul stone into his blade Alanthrasil did the same. There is another chance to put in some sort special ability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But Alanthrasil had a sister not a brother.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
p.s. I dont think we should lower the wraith lords ST or T it would make it to easy for power fists to kill them.

Wraithlords are already driven by the souls of the greatest war heros. There's no way for a Wraithlord to get upgraded stats because of a more warlike soul, they already have the most warlike.

A soul that's limited by it's machine body, if we upgrade the Wraith Lords to fulfill different roles then they could have different stat lines. But back to the Autarch rules, the only thing that I might add would be something that affects units more specifically, such as wraithgaurd being troop choices, or banshee's etc.

Solo wrote:A soul that's limited by it's machine body, if we upgrade the Wraith Lords to fulfill different roles then they could have different stat lines. But back to the Autarch rules, the only thing that I might add would be something that affects units more specifically, such as wraithgaurd being troop choices, or banshee's etc.

That's more craftworld options. I think the Autarch stratagems we have now is good, if we include seize initiative on 4+. And I like the Pinpoint landing. Perhaps the Autarches should have access to some exotic gearstuff?
I mean, if we look at the Archon they have a damn huge pile of fun equipment. At least give Autarches something more interesting. Maybe, only maybe, their equipment should be unlocked by chosen craftworlds? I'm thinking
Wraith Pistol - range 6" SX AP2 Pistol
Just the same rules for wraithcannon
Only Iyanden Autarches

That is, of course, if we're adding craftworld options

It seems that phoenix lords should have more of an army wide consequence. Instead of having craftworld options we should put the PL's to work with some extra options. ie armies that have Maguan Ra get bonuses like tank killer and heavy weapons. Just a thought.

Autarch - 60 points
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
6 6 3 3 3 6 3 10 3+

SPECIAL RULES
(Jump) Infantry/jetbike depending on equipment, Fleet of Foot, Independent Character.

WARGEAR
Assault and defensive grenades.
Haywire grenades.
Shuriken pistol.
Forceshield: The Eldar favour sleeve-mounted field projectors over the clunky and restrictive armour used by other races. A forceshield confers a 4+ invulnerable save.

OPTIONS
An Autarch may be given one of the following:
Swooping Hawk wings (20)
Warp jump generator (25)
Eldar jetbike (30)
Reaper Gyrostatic system (5) - (confers relentless)

An Autarch may also be given one of the following:
Banshee mask (3)
Mandiblasters (10)
Reaper sighting link (5) - (-1 to enemy cover saves)

An Autarch may be given one single-handed weapon and one two-handed weapon:
-Single-handed weapons
Power weapon (10)
Scorpion chainsword (5)
Laser lance (only on jetbike) (15)
Distort pistol (10) - (12" S:X AP:2 pistol)
Vibro blade (10) - (counts as a rending CCW, can be used as a ranged weapon, R:12" S:4 AP:- Assault D3, pinning)
-Two-handed weapons
Avenger shuriken catapult (2)
Death spinner (5)
Fusion gun (10)
Lasblaster (1)
Reaper launcher (20)
Prism rifle (25) - (May fire focused or dispersed. Focused = Range:30" S:7 AP:2 Rapid fire. Dispersed = Range:30" S:3 AP:4 Rapid fire, blast)
Flamer (5)
Ranger long rifle (5)

Master Strategist: An Autarch may take upto two stratergies from the following list, however the second strategem will cost double the price indicated. (each strategem may only be purchased once per force)
Massed Reinforcements: - 15 points
(Up to three units that are in reserve may be grouped together. you only make one reserve for the group, if it is successful all the units in the group enter from reserve in the same way (outflank, deep strike, normally) within 18" of one another.)
Logistical Espionage: - 25 points
(Each turn you may make your opponent re roll up to D3 reserve rolls (successful or failed), these can include rolls to determine which board edge outflanking units enter from.)
Vertical Assault: - 25 points
(All jet bikes and skimmers have the option to enter from reserve by deep strike.)
Pinpoint Landing: - 20 points
(Any deep striking Eldar unit scatter 1d6" less.)
Hidden Assault: - 30 points
(For the first turn any enemy wishing to shoot at an Eldar unit must roll spotting distance as if under the effect of Night fight rules.)
Perfect Timing: - 10 points
(The Autrach may +/- 1 to any, or all reserve rolls)
Ambush!: - 25 points
(One unit may be given a USR, either Scout, Hit and Run or Infiltrate. In addition, The Eldar player will sieze the initiative on a 4+)
Deception: - 30 points
(The Eldar player may re-deply D3 units after all deployment has finished (this can include putting units into/out of reserves)

Ok... How does that look?
I dropped the basic cost a little as he no longer comes with master strategist, you have to buy it.
Addionally i threw in some weapons based on existing technology within the Eldar codex.
After that i collected up the idea for strategems from the last few posts (i changed Ambush, the ability to infiltrate closer than 12" seems a little wierd, and as someone posted, should only work on units who have infiltrate to start with, so more or less, thats the scorpions. So we may as well make that an Exarch power for them!)
For the strategems i added the possibility of buying 2 (2nd at double price) as there are a few nice combinations in there... if you find a combo thats too OTT please point it out.

Feel free to comment about the abilities and costs of everything. I have no idea how expensive these things should be! Especially the new weapons!

I like it!

I really like the war gear options, they would be ultra customizable. I think 8 Stratagems might be too many though considering there are only 5 farseer powers. My views:

Hidden assault I'd say is my least favourite of the lot, and maybe pinpoint landing could be added to vertical assault? that would bring us down to a more manageable number. I think the 4+ seize the initiative should be part of perfect timing (just seems to fit better IMO).
I don't like the thought of ambush being available to all units, I was thinking it would be good of allowing the sneaky units to get right up close for T1 assaults, but ymmv.

I'd like something like...
Ambush!: - 30 points
One unit of Striking Scorpions, Warp Spiders, Rangers, Pathfinders or Harlequins (if joined by a shadowseer) gets the Infiltrate and Scout USR.As long as no enemy model can draw LOS to the infiltrating unit, it may deploy anywhere on the board as long as they remain >1" away from an enemy model.

Massed Reinforcements: - 15 points
(Up to three units that are in reserve may be grouped together. you only make one reserve for the group, if it is successful all the units in the group enter from reserve in the same way (outflank, deep strike, normally) within 18" of one another.)
Logistical Espionage: - 25 points
(Each turn you may make your opponent re roll up to D3 reserve rolls (successful or failed), these can include rolls to determine which board edge outflanking units enter from.)
Vertical Assault: - 25 points
(All jet bikes and skimmers have the option to enter from reserve by deep strike. In Addition Any deep striking Eldar unit scatter 1d6" less.)
Perfect Timing: - 10 points
(The Autrach may +/- 1 to any, or all reserve rolls. Inaddition The Eldar player will sieze the initiative on a 4+)
Ambush!: - 25 points
(One unit of Striking Scorpions, Warp Spiders, Rangers, Pathfinders or Harlequins (if joined by a shadowseer) gets the Infiltrate and Scout USR. As long as no enemy model can draw LOS to the infiltrating unit, it may deploy anywhere on the board as long as they remain >1" away from an enemy model.)
Deception: - 30 points
(The Eldar player may re-deply D3 units after all deployment has finished (this can include putting units into/out of reserves)

Made the changes suggested... Although the only time i could ever possibly see rangers/pathfinder infiltrating that close would be to take out ratling snipers or a minimum size grot unit (can't see them surving long that close to anything else) I wouldn't mind seeing the option opened up for other units, its possible that there may be small webway portals located in the vicinity, allowing a small unit the ability to sneak up on the enemy.

The only things I can pick on is that the Prism rifle should be assault 1 or heavy 1, not rapid fire (I'm off the belief that Eldar shouldn't have rapid fire weapons), and that the wording of the extra stratagem should be:

Master Strategist: An Autarch may take upto two stratergies from the following list, however the more expensive of the two strategem will cost double the price indicated. (each strategem may only be purchased once per force)

This is simply because I can already see people trying to take a 30pts stratagem then a 10pts stratagem "second".

Pyro-Druid wrote:The only things I can pick on is that the Prism rifle should be assault 1 or heavy 1, not rapid fire (I'm off the belief that Eldar shouldn't have rapid fire weapons), and that the wording of the extra stratagem should be:

Master Strategist: An Autarch may take upto two stratergies from the following list, however the more expensive of the two strategem will cost double the price indicated. (each strategem may only be purchased once per force)

This is simply because I can already see people trying to take a 30pts stratagem then a 10pts stratagem "second".

Whats wrong with that. IMO thats fine and automatically doubling the most expensive ones is unfair.

I just feel it went against the intent of it, stuff like "Perfect timing" + "Vertical Assault" seems closer to the 60pt make then 45, though I could just be over pricing things. If others disagree I'm more than happy to play less for a second ability.

Back track/clarify slightly, how is this working if we were to take 2 Autarchs? Do we allow the possibility of 4 strategems to be taken, or do we limit it to either "One Autarch per army may take..." or "No more then 2 strategems per army."? If we do the 2/army, then is the points doubled only if the same Autarch takes the strategem twice?

I assume that they would be like the existing ability in that once the Autarch is dead you can't use it?

I'd still rather see Autarchs using Executioners, Firepikes, and that sort of thing rather than off the shelf wares.

Here's just something quick and random:

I don't like the Reaper powers, they are too ego-centric for the Exarch.

Reaper Barrage - The reapers lay down a suppressive barrage on the enemy unit, ripping apart flesh and cover with equal ease. Whenever the Exarch's squad fires on an enemy unit, the enemy suffers a -1 to their cover save for the rest of the turn. Several Exarchs may combine their power for a cumulative penalty.

Mahtamori wrote:Here's just something quick and random:

I don't like the Reaper powers, they are too ego-centric for the Exarch.

Reaper Barrage - The reapers lay down a suppressive barrage on the enemy unit, ripping apart flesh and cover with equal ease. Whenever the Exarch's squad fires on an enemy unit, the enemy suffers a -1 to their cover save for the rest of the turn. Several Exarchs may combine their power for a cumulative penalty.

Please take the time to read the older posts on this thread.

rivers64 wrote:

Mahtamori wrote:Here's just something quick and random:

I don't like the Reaper powers, they are too ego-centric for the Exarch.

Reaper Barrage - The reapers lay down a suppressive barrage on the enemy unit, ripping apart flesh and cover with equal ease. Whenever the Exarch's squad fires on an enemy unit, the enemy suffers a -1 to their cover save for the rest of the turn. Several Exarchs may combine their power for a cumulative penalty.

Please take the time to read the older posts on this thread.

You'd be surprised where I got the inspiration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm going to take a few minutes to update the article. Won't be able to cover it all...

DarknessEternal wrote:I'd still rather see Autarchs using Executioners, Firepikes, and that sort of thing rather than off the shelf wares.

The problem with this is the fluff. Firepikes and Executioners are ritual weapons, and the Exarchs are the priests. Why'd a Field Marshall use a holy symbol as a weapon when he has estranged himself from the path of the clergy?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another random thought (basically bringing back Pyro-Druid's expanded idea from page 6):

Army-wide special rule - Combined Arms.
Simply put, combining Eldar forces on specific targets allow Eldar to function better. This is to encourage Eldar players to divide and conquer rather than to create a massive front and then break it with a single strong unit.

Exactly how it functions... well... specifics aren't that clear for me, but it could be:
* A second unit attacks the same target - gain a +1 competence bonus on rolls to hit.
* A third unit attacks the same target - gain a +1 competence bonus on rolls to wound (1s still fail).
* A unit that is falling back and is within 6" of another Eldar unit may regroup even if it would normally be disallowed to do so from other circumstances.

Merry Christmas guys!
I think it looks like the Autarch is nearing completion, feel free to chip in any suggestions for tweaks if you get any awesome ideas. I'm going to be busy for the next few days (being why I'm up at 1:15 on Christmas morning posting ), but we can run through them all

When I get time (probably when I'm back at work on wednesday) I'll get all my Farseer/Seer Council ideas down for you all to tear apart

Deleted for trolling. -The Mgmt.

This thread is a bit stiff... I'll just sneak-start on Gorechild's next project by elaborating a previous idea.

Seer Council.
2-5 Farseers (cirka 55 points each)
3-10 Warlocks (cirka 20 points each)

Options: The council may purchase a dedicated transport as long as they are within the unit limit.

Psychic Powers: Psychic powers are purchased by the unit as a whole and are usable as long as there are Farseers present in the unit.
Communion: When casting psychic powers, nominate one Farseer who is the conduit. The conduit is considered the psycher for all purposes, and the remaining Farseers will bolster the conduit's psychic ability.
For each Farseer, the psychic test has a modifier of -1 (this has no impact on perils in the warp) and the psychic power may affect one additional eligible target, otherwise subject to normal psychic rules*

* That is, Mind War and Eldritch Storm may only target models in the same target unit

Gains:
* Psychic powers are effectively stronger the more Farseers you add
* Psychic powers are effectively cheaper since they allow extra uses per Farseer
* Psychic powers are more reliable, a squad of 3 will never fail unless there are modifiers
* The squad is even less likely to suffer losses from Perils in the Warp since only one psychic power is used for the effect of several

Losses:
* The Farseers may not be mounted on Jetbikes (throwback to Ulthwé council)
* The Council does not grant access to Warlock sqaud
* The Farseers are not independent characters
* Each individual psychic power is more vulnerable to Psychic Hoods et al.

Possible modification 1: Communion allows each Farseer to take a standard leadership test to add additional effects instead of adding straight up to the conduit. Psychic powers are more likely to fail this way, but the support Farseers are not in danger of suffering Perils.

Possible modification 2: Instead of adding more casts, having a certain number of Farseers simply means the psychic power is cast at a stronger version.
Mind War - in addition, each model in the targeted unit suffers a wound with no armour save possible on a roll of 4+
Eldritch Storm - becomes S6 and Ap3
Guide & Fortune - affects all friendly targets within range
Doom - affects all enemy targets within range

After going through the DE codex, I am certain that the next Craftworld Eldar codex will move towards being aall Eldar are related and that only adherence to the various paths is what will seperate them from their dark kin. To me, the Incubi and the army wide BS 4 are strong hints of what we will be seeing. I also believe that GW may reinforce the specialist nature of the army by including craftworld specific rules and possibly reducing the presence of guardians in the next dex. If guardians are still there they will have a stat boost and their base weapon will have its range and RoF reworked.

Will post more later

No more suggestions for the Autarch then? As promised I'll have a crack at the Farseer, I have two different approaches that I'd like to chip in, see what you think would be best.

When discussing Guardians we were having trouble making the warlocks a good unit leader without really breaking the seer council. A way we could fix this could be introducing another psyker to make up the bulk of a seer council in place of the warlocks, Psychic powers could then be put into 3 tiers rather than the Farseer Powers/Warlock Powers split that we have now. Farseers could have the main powers (doom, guide, fortune ect), the offensive powers could belong to warlocks (mind war, destructor ect) and the lesser lever could have the buffs and some additional powers (embolden, conseal ect).

The idea I was leaning towards was that a psyker could use all powers from their tier and from any lower level (so farseers can do it all, warlocks have access to everything but the farseer powers and the "apprentice" psykers would only have access to their own tier. This would allow you to keep the farseer as an independent character with the option to be joined by the non-warlock models.

My other idea was similar to Mahtamori's, you dont buy a Farseer, you buy a Seer council that includes 1 Farseer + 4 Warlocks (or the previously suggested lesser version) with the option to add up to 2 more farseers and 5 more warlocks (=12 models, to fill a WS completely). The powers could then be worked out as a unit, depending on how many models are left, more models would give more powerful and reliable casting. This would effectivly remove the Farseer as an IC and replace them with a HQ unit.

Which do you think sounds best?

Farseers.

Council scaling: The big problem is making the psychic powers scale, I recon. Mind War is inherently difficult to scale, having it affect several targets might make it too good while having additional Farseers add to the LD difference might simply make a situation where eventually you sit with absolutely no risk of losing the roll.

Farseer support: We've previously explored the option of having them be entirely support characters. Limit them down to Doom, Guide, and Fortune (with further possible support psychic powers).
Mind War could be reduced to a Warlock power, a ranged option for them, which isn't quite as effective (maybe one wound instead of roll for wound).

Warlocks.

Warlock elite unit: Another way to deal with Warlocks is to simply have them be their own (elite) unit full stop. Maybe even have them lead by Farseers as unit leader.

Warlocks separated from Guardians: Guardians could be lead by Black Guardians or similarly named Guardian - that is a former aspect warrior - which would have access to slightly more exotic war gear (hand-held Shuriken Cannons, power weapons, etc).

Farseers, warlocks, and the council are one of the sticking points of the codex. I don't think we should remove the council. It is too central to the craftworld's distinction, its fun and fluffy, etc.

As above, the way to be able to buff warlocks but not OP the council is to separate the two - warlocks and the members of the seer council can't be the same entry as they are now.

The seer council is a current deathstar - why? Destructor, Jetbikes, 4++, and fortune.

For now, I'll call the members of the council 'Warseers' and the squad upgrade characters 'Warlocks'.

The usefulness of the council is going to be dependent on the usefulness of farseers. The role of the council depends on the role of the farseer. As it is, the seer has to be within 6" of any friendly unit he wants to help. Keeping this restriction makes the council useless, as it will require another transport and constant micromanaging to keep them all in the correct place. Far easier to take an IC farseer, stick him in the desired unit, and save yourself the cost of another transport. While the warseers in the unit should not be warlocks, the farseers should be regular farseers.

When I think of a seer council, I think of something along the lines of a cadre of psykers, doing mystical and witchy things affecting battle elsewhere. I don't think of 10 guys on jetbikes chopping up MCs. To that end, I don't think the council should be tooled as a front line assault/shooty unit. I feel it should be, in the end, a support unit worth the cost.

Here's an option/idea (just making stuff up): Add 6" to the effective range of all farseer powers for each additional warseer in the unit at the time of casting. 3 farseers and 7 warseers? 42 extra inches of range for you. Obviously the farseer must lose offensive powers for this to work - I'm fine with that, I'm fine with maht's/others suggestion to make the farseer a pure support character.

Council of Seers: For each warseer present in the unit, the leadership of all farseers in the unit is modified by +1. Their leadership is still capped at 10 - exercise this cap after all modifiers have been applied (for instance, if there are 2 warseers alive in the unit, and the unit's leadership is modified by -1 by an outside force, their total leadership would be 11 (10+2-1), but it would be capped at 10).
---- this power make the council far, far more durable in the face of things like Deathleaper or other leadership-modifying effects. Farseers could have a pre-cap leadership of 17.

If the range-amplifying rule is used, there is no need to give the council an ability to bypass hoods, as those are all 24" (and the GK inducted board-wide hood will be going away soon, I assume).

Farseer: (105 pts)
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 5 3 3 3 5 1 10 --

Wargear:
Rune armor (3++ save)
Ghost helm (as current)
Witchblade
Shuriken Pistol
Runes of War: The farseer may use his Witchblade as a force weapon.

Wargear Options:
Runes of Witnessing (20pts): The farseer must take all psychic tests on 3d6, and throw out the highest die, accepting the lowest two. Should any opposing effect cause the farseer to roll on more than two dice, both effects are ignored, and the farseer takes pychic tests on 2d6.
Runes of Warding (45pts): as now
Spirit Stones (30 pts): as now

Special Rules:
Independent Character (this rule is lost if the Farseer is taken as part of a Seer Council)
Psyker

Psychic powers:
All Eldar Psychic powers are cast during the Eldar movement phase, unless other wise noted. Also, all Eldar psyker powers do not require line of sight to the target unit, unless otherwise noted. Eldar Farseers may cast 2 powers per turn.

Select three powers when deploying forces:
Eldar Fortune: (as now) (6" range)
Guidance: (as now) + reroll failed to-hit rolls in close combat (6")
Doom of the Eldar: reroll any to wound or armor penetration rolls against target unit (as now, + vs vehicles) (24")
The Hand of Fate: Target friendly unit may elect to reroll all difficult and dangerous terrain tests, and all run moves, until the start of the next eldar turn. (6")
A Hand on Your Shoulder: Target friendly unit may reroll all failed leadership tests until the start of the next eldar turn. (6")

Farseers get a pretty big bump in power. For 155pts you get a farseer that has and can cast 3 powers per turn, a 3++ save, never takes tests on worse than 2d6, and has a force weapon. For 200 pts, you also get runes of warding.

The Seer Council:
1-3 Farseers, 3-7 Warseers

Special Rules:
Council of Seers: An Eldar Seer Council is one of the most feared psychic entities in the universe. All psychic powers used by a farseer have additional range equal to the number of warseers alive in the unit, times 6, in inches (so, a farseer with 6 warseers casting Doom of the Eldar may target any unit within 60" (24" + 36")). The leadership value of a farseer in a seer council is modified by +1 for each warseer present in the unit. The leadership value is still capped at 10, but this cap takes effect after all modifiers are accounted for.

Psychic Presence: The psychic power gathered in the council distorts time and space around the unit. Any unit wishing to assault the seer council is treated as moving through difficult terrain. All scattering effects (such as blast weapons), which target (or touch) the council scatter an additional 1d3 when scattering.

Warseers (35 pts)(I figure, 25+10 for the 'free' psyker power):
WS BS S T W I A Ld sv
4 4 3 3 2 5 3 9 --

Wargear:
Rune armor (4++)
Witchblade
Shuriken Pistol

Psychic Powers: Warseer psyker powers are similar to a warlocks in that they require no test to use, and thus cannot be nullified. One must be selected at deployment.
Psyker bodyguard: The warseer gains +1 WS and BS
Eldritch Bolt: Psychic shooting attack, S4 Ap4 R18" Assault 1

Seer Council Powers:
The seer council is a psychic entity all to its own. It may cast one psychic power per turn, aside from all the normal powers allowed. The leadership of the council is equal to the number of warseers in the council, +2 for each farseer, capped at 10. The leadership of the council cannot be modified by any force, friendly or hostile.

Eldritch Storm
Select a point on the table, marking it with a die. Scatter the point as you would a blast shooting attack, but do not subtract BS. All units within 12" of the final point are struck by a psychic storm of immense power. Vehicles suffer two automatic glancing hits. Infantry units suffer D6 S6 Ap6 hits.


Summary thoughts:
These units and statlines are obviously independent of the warlock entry which will accompany guardians and other units. My vision of it is as a "King" unit not unlike chess. It doesn't move much or get directly involved in the battle, but it can kill things that wander too close, and it is the principle unit on the eldar side of the table. The whole game will be determined by the ability to simultaneously protect the council and to use the council's abilities. I feel the few critical things to the council are the range-amplification rule, and the lack of a dedicated transport. I don't feel that the support powers outlined in the farseer entry are overpowered when extended to that range. I'm not at all set on the warseer powers or the 'council power', of which, if kept, there needs to be more of (1 selected at deployment).

Overall with farseers, I feel the powers should be free, three should be selected at deployment, and 3 should be the max # of powers used. Farseers should have a force weapon, warseers should not. Perhaps warlocks should have force weapons. The eldar should have access to offensive psyker powers, but they should not be on the farseer.

Ultimately, I feel that if we settle on an incarnation of the seer council which is fierce at shooting or close combat in an offensive manner, we have failed.

I like what i'm hearing so far. For my input... I'd go with different levels of psyker.

Farseer Ancient
Having held the position of Farseer for centuries, possibly millenia, the farseers powers have matured like a fine wine, growing stronger, more potent and more flavourfull (and with a hint of oak?).
The Ancient would have access to a wide range of Seer powers, being able to cast multiple powers in a turn, and have access to a few stronger powers that could be harder to cast (fails on any double?), or simply cost more points.

Farseer
Relativly new to the position, holding office for merely a few decades or centuries the seers powers are weaker than that of the ancients, with less powers available.

Warlock battlemage
Warlocks, before they become seers in their own right, but after serving as an apprentice. These warlocks will be assigned to lead other units on the field of battle, their superior abilities (compared to an apprentice) allow them to operate apart from other warlocks, their powers would be varied, with an option of taking a persistant and/or activated power.

Warlock apprentice
Warlocks who have barely set foot upon the path of the seer. These warlocks form a seer council for a farseer (or possibly farseers) and learn under their guidance. Their powers are limited, toned down version of those the battle mage posseses, with less variety, however, the warlocks will be able to focus their combined energies for powerful effects.

----------

Possible powers.

Ancient
-Doom rank 2
-Guide rank 2
-Fortune rank 2
-Isha's blessing rank 2
-Eldritch Storm
-Webway portal

Farseer
-Doom
-Guide
-Fortune
-Isha's blessing

Battlemage
-Enhance rank 2
-Conceal Rank 2
-Augment Rank 2
-Endure Rank 2
-Embolden Rank 2
-Regrowth
-Mind War
-Destructor
-Spear of Khaine
-Sunder

Apprentice
-Enhance
-Conceal
-Augment
-Endure
-Embolden

Seer council powers
-Regrowth rank 2
-Mind War rank 2
-Destructor rank 2
-Spear of Khaine rank 2
-Sunder rank 2

----------

Power effects

--Eldritch Storm
The Ancient summons up an unearthly storm, the skies become turbulent and storm clouds gather, disrupting the crude technology of the lesser races. Any enemy unit attempting to deep strike with X" of the psyker must immedietly ...perform action Y...
(possibilites include a simple x=18, or random x=4D6... Action Y could be to roll a die, on a 4+ the unit rolls on the mishap table)

--Webway portal
The Psyker enters a trance like state, feeling the tendrils of energy from all things around him. The seer reaches out and opens a temporary webway portal that allow him and his unit to enter and redeploy. The psyker and his unit is picked up from the table and immedietly placed anywhere on the board following the deep strike rules. Should the unit mishap, and are delayed, place them into reseves as normal, next turn they must attempt to deep strike again.

--Doom
Rank 1 = Range 24", target enemy unit. Any 'to wound' rolls made against the target unit may be re-rolled if they fail to wound
Rank 2 = Range 18", target enemy unit. Any 'to wound' rolls made against the target unit may be re-rolled if they fail to wound, in addition, any form of attack with a strength value will count as being (+1) strength (example, S:5 becomes, S:5(6)) The additional strength bonus is not used when calculating instant death.
(Could be interesting... those 12" cats suddenly seem worthwhile...

--Guide
Rank 1 = Range 12", Target friendly unit. Any failed to-hit roll made by the target unit may be re-rolled
Rank 2 = Same, 6" aura

--Fortune
Rank 1 = Range 12", Targer friendly unit. Any failed saves made by the target unit may be re-rolled.
Rank 2 = same, 6" aura

--Isha's blessing
Had an idea, forgot what it was

--Regrowth

--Mind War

--Destructor

--Spear of Khaine

--Sunder

--Enhance

--Conceal

--Augment

--Endure

--Embolden

----------

I'll get to the rest later... hungry, tired... thirty...

@Dayve- I was thinking about the idea of different levels for each power, similar to WHFB, where you can opt to do the basic spell or a more powerful version that is harder to cast. I dont realy know how it could translate well in 40k though. Although your suggestions are good, I don't really like the idea of purchasing Doom 1 or Doom 2, I'm sure a more elegant solution could be found if I have a think.

@Gwyidion- I really like your suggestion for the council, I'm starting to think its a much fluffier, cooler solution. I'm thinking along the lines of dropping "Farseer" as a HQ and just replacing it with "Seer Council" (I although I think Warseer is a bad name Maybe DakkaDakkaseer )

I wholeheartedly agree with you when you said "I feel that if we settle on an incarnation of the seer council which is fierce at shooting or close combat in an offensive manner, we have failed" (unless of course its blowing up the brain of a librarian who thinks he'll have a go at doing some magic tricks nearby)

Names are of course, entirely fluff decisions.

I like keeping a farseer as a standalone HQ choice, because any seer council which simultaneously lives up to fluff, is effective on the table top, and isn't utterly broken will cost lots of points - we should retain a psychic HQ option for smaller point games. Keep in mind that what I drew out above, if fitted with all the fixings, only one set of runes, and a full complement of something-seers would cost around 760 points.

Differing levels of powers ... i feel the only place powers should have differing levels of powers or scaling is in the seer council - as a function of the number of seers in the unit.

What about something like the Seer counsil of Ulthwe Apocalypse formation? The Warlocks can increase the range of the Psychic powers used by the Farseers? but, come on, These are farseers were talking about, do they really need a change?

Exploring all options, no they don't. What they could do with, strictly from a game perspective, is some tweaking.
Eldritch Storm and Mind War aren't terribly effective and Guide is often difficult to use due to it's short range. Same with Fortune, except it's usually the Farseer's own unit being targeted.

Eldritch Storm and Mind War should easily be Jaws of the World Wolf (or whatever it's called) equivalent in terms of potency, if fluff is to be kept consistent. That said, I'm not terribly fond of that power level psychic powers to begin with and would rather see the different space marine chapters' psychic powers brought down to a reasonable level instead.

@Gorechild. I was going for only purchasing "doom" rather than the ranks. Depending on the seer... purchasing doom would give you either rank 1 or rank 2, rather than having to select which ranking. The 'harder to cast' bit comes in with the seer actually costing more points the more powerful he is (and therefore the more powerfull his spells)

This unit is going to need alot of work before anyone settles on it, theres so much possibility and several different ways to do it, i suppose thats why its been left so late ^.^

I think a decent starting point would be to decide on the models themselves and get some temporary names, power can come later. First off, Farseers, just one stat line? or go the heamoncullus rout and have ancient seers? As for warlocks, i like the idea of the council being make up of apprentice warlocks (hence slightly nerfing the deathspar quality) while the more experianced warlocks are able to go power up the guardians. With 2 sets of warlocks, guardians can reap the benefits they bring, without overpowering the council. Once we've set up what were having, get the statline sorted out and work on wargear (like witchblades, ghosthelms, etc) then leave the hardest bit until last... powers.

I think it'd be nice that if a farseer would cast a power and the casting value is X (5 maybe?) or less then the power is unable to be cancelled out by hoods or the like.

How about this:

Runes of Shielding – 30pts

Whenever an enemy psychic defense (anything that nullifies or affects the power negatively) activates against a Farseer you may attempt to negate its effect and cast your power normally on a d6 roll of a 4+.

@Gwyidion - Sure the name is a fluff decision, but it super important Why would you use something that sounded lame?

Nulipuli2 wrote:but, come on, These are farseers were talking about, do they really need a change?

Just because they are competitive at the moment doesnt mean they are "right". Frankly I think any HQ that is meant to be a supporting unit, but can go toe to toe with almost all MC and slaughter them, is broken.

@dayve- Aah sorry, I misunderstood. I like the idea of a seer council of farseers only being allowed 1 power a turn and the "ancient" seer (think the name need's reworking, its a blatent steal from DE) having 2 (maybe SStones giving +1 on top of that for XX points?), then having the power's radius linked to the size of the council. Then you could be left with the basic short ranges if the seer is used as an IC?


Also, I'll chip in....
Runes of "Feth You Librarian"- If any non friendly psychic abilities target or effect a unit with the runes of "Feth You Librarian", The model casting the power suffers a S8 AP1 hit that ignores cover, as a backlash of psychic energy warps their mind.
Of course, the name is open for debate

Awe, but I like my melee farseer :-(

On a serious note, why not tweak the mechanics of some Eldar psychic powers to reflect how powerful Farseers are depicted as. I was thinking something like:

Mental Siege: The Eldar player declares a number of psychic tests it will attempt before rolling for all test. If all tests are passed a single enemy unit within 18" takes a number of S5 AP4 hits equal to the number of tests made.

Alternatively have a similar mechanic as a Farseer/Ancient Farseer rule (either default or purchased).

Runes of Focus: Once per turn a Farseer using a psychic power may also state a number of extra psychic tests he will attempt. Each test after the first results in an accumulative -1 to the Farseers Ld score for the remaining test. If all tests are pasts resolve the power as if it had been used a number of times equal to the number of tests taken.

I didn't add the Ld penalty the the strait power as I figured the power could be regulated. Advantages to the ability are obvious: Cast the same power multiple time. I can only see to disadvantages though: Higher risk of not casting and PotW. Possible changes could be: Not allowed to use a second power in the same turn, exclude psychic shooting powers (as I see that as a possible issue, 3-4 mind wars anyone?), or Ld penalty last until the start of the Eldar players next turn.

@Gorechild: Nah, I like the name. If needed we can shorten it to "Runes of Ful" and add some barely plausible fluff of some Farseer Ful to hide it's meaning. Even if the name is changed, I like the concept.

And to side track a little with end of year musings. Would the fluff support or condone having minor innate psykers scattered throughout the army. In general I know it is a yes, but I'm more asking about could someone on an Aspect path still potentially have minor powers. If it's ok fluff wise then:

Innate psyker: A single model in any non-vehicle unit may be upgraded to an innate psyker. The chosen model is considered a psyker for all purposes, additionally while alive the model provides one of the following to the entire unit, +1 WS, +1 BS, +1 I, +1 LD, +6 cover. This power is always in effect and doesn't require a psychic test to use.

In short it would be like a minor warlock any unit could take to give them an edge. Would also allow the current build of "all aspect warriors have the same stat line".

Veil of Tears is a harlequin specific psychic power, but surely some non-harlequin seer has managed to pull it off to a lesser degree.

Veil: Nominate a single unit within 6". Until the start of the next Eldar turn, any unit wishing to target the veiled unit must roll 2d6x2, this is their spotting distance in inches. If the unit is not within spotting distance they may not fire that turn.

And we need an armoury. Not sure what we'd have in it, but Exarchs and leader type models should have access to it.

And while I'm on customizable, is it reasonably to have minor option for Aspect warriors? For example: "A unit of scorpions my exchange their pistol and chainsword with a two handed chainsword (conferring +2 S)", "A unit of Avengers may replace their catapult with a pistol and close combat weapon.", or "A unit of banshees may replace their power weapon with a [name] (rending, +1 S)". All keeping within their current ability, but giving them slightly more option/effectiveness.

And... nope that's it for now, I think that's all the end of year musings I have.

Pyro-Druid wrote:If needed we can shorten it to "Runes of Ful" and add some barely plausible fluff of some Farseer Ful to hide it's meaning. Even if the name is changed, I like the concept.

LOL I love that try to use fuff to cover a blatent middle finger to SM's

All eldar have psychic ability, its a vital part of a lot of their tech, so an aspect working around that its perfectly reasonable.

I like your runes of focus and mental siege ideas, but they come across as being a little too complex. It may just be the wording, but we could work on it

Given all these cool rune suggestions I think something allong the lines of "A Farseer may take up to 2 (or maybe 3) runes into battle (no duplicates are allowed), they are:

RoWarding - XX points
RoWitnesing - XX points
RoFuL - XX points
RoFocusing - XX points
RoShielding - XX points"


Otherwise it would get uber confusing, and cost a stupid number of points.

I think it may be my wording, game play wise I envision it going something like this. "I'm using Doom. I'll use RoFocusing for an extra 2 (three total). *rolls three psychic test; all pass*. I doom units A, B and C." or on the down side, "I'm using Doom. I'll use RoFocusing for an extra 4. *rolls 5 test*. 1 fails, 2 get PotW, 2 fine. No one is doomed and I potentially take 2 wounds."

The -1 Ld is that on 3d6 taking the lowest, how often do you actually fail. As I was pondering how it would work I rolled 23 passes (and no double 1s, I may have been lucky there) before I gave up try to fail. In short, while I may have used the last of my luck for the year, it would be too much without the Ld penalty.

And I agree, if we're having a full list of runes a purchase limit may be a good thing if only for potential balance. Maybe allow Warlocks to take 1.

Whenever an enemy psychic defense (anything that nullifies or affects the power negatively) activates against a Farseer you may attempt to negate its effect and cast your power normally on a d6 roll of a 4+.

Rivers' RoShielding (above) would probably be better named as RoPiercing. For RoShielding I'd go: "the bearer and any unit he's joined is unaffected but psychic shooting attack on a 5+". That being said I like Rivers' Rune, I don't like my latter suggestion, "Doesn't work on X+" just doesn't feel Eldarish, and should be left to the lesser races.

Just so you know, with 3D6 and taking away the highest... the probability of passing a test on Ld:10 is over 98% (Without Embolden)... i worked that one out on a slow work day a while ago, not sure on the other Ld values if your throwing in -1's or more to it.

Runes: I like the idea of having more runes, however if we go for Runes of Ful (i like that name aswell ) Then maybe warding should not have a damage effect, and simply cause the power to fail, if the points are appropriate, a failure to cast could result in the enemy being unable to cast any more powers in that player turn. Runes of Ful seem damaging enough (but only works on offensive powers, personally i find the buffing powers more damaging)

Stat lines... so we need a big+little Farseer and a big+little Warlock... thiink up some name, mine are just working titles

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
Ancient Farseer (Old, weak and slighty crystaline)
3 4 3 4 3 4 1 10 3++
Farseer (Young[ish] enough to pack a punch in combat but not to be relied upon for combat abbilities)
5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 4++
Warlock Battlemage (Exarch level warlock for guardians, Ld:9, W:2, and WS/BS up puts him between apprentice and farseer)
5 5 3 3 2 5 2 9 4++
Warlock Initiate (normal stats, better than a guardian, worse than an aspect, initiates make up the seer council so as not to OP it with multiple battlemages, we can beef up warlocks without effecting the council performace this way)
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 4++

Wargear... lots of possibilities here.

Withblades: Always wound on a 2+, counts as S9 against vehicles, In the hands of a Farseer, the witchblade counts as a force weapon.
Singing spears: As witchblades, 2-handed, can be throw 12". When thrown, may not be used as a force weapon (or should it? )
Ghost helm: Ignores perils on a 3
Runes of Witnessing: As is.
Runes of Warding: Any enemy psychic must roll an extra D6, any roll of 12 or more will cause the psyker to be unable to cast any further powers this turn.
Runes of Ful: Any psychic power that Targets Eldar, or includes Eldar in their AoE... etc.... S8 AP1 hit
Runes of Focus: As previous post.
Runes of Fortitute: 5++ to any unit the psyker joins. (warlocks with guardians, warlocks with WG, Farseer joining scorpions, etc)
Runes of Power: And psychic test that totals 4 or less, cannot be countered by any means (total after removing the highest die is using RoWit) such as psychic hoods.

Get rid of spirit stones, simply allow a farseer 2 powers, an ancient 3.

Minor change in subject but I think farseers need an anti-vehicle power. Doom is great, but when your up against a line of 5+ rhino's there is not much a seer council can do other than throw spears at it.

Back to the unit formation, how does this sound:

Seer Council: XX Points

Unit: 1 Farseer
You may add up to 2 additional Farseers for XX points each, For each Farseer in the unit you may include 3 Initiates for XX points per model.

Wargear:
All models in a seer council are armed with a Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol
Ancient: Rune Armour 3++, Ghost helm
Farseer: Rune Armour 4++, Ghost helm
Initiate: Rune Armour 4++

Options:
If a Seer Council contain the full 12 models, one Farseer may be upgraded to a Ancient Farseer for XX points
Any model may repace their witch blade and Shuriken pistol with a Singing Spear for +2 points

Farseer- 90
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 4 3 3 3 5 2 10 4++
Ancient-
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 3++
Wargear:
Witchblade
Shuriken Pistol

May be upgraded to a Farseer Ancient-30 Points
May take:
Singing Spear-3 Points
Jetbike-25 Points
Runes of Witnessing- 15 Points
Runes of Warding- 10 Points
Runes of Ful-10 Points
Runes of Power-10 Points
May choose up to 2 psychic powers, Ancient may choose 3
Fortune(12" range)
Guide(12" range)
Doom- No Change
Fortitude-See: 5++ for entire unit (like Force Dome)
Eldritch Storm-Eldritch Storm
Select a point on the table, marking it with a die. Scatter the point as you would a blast shooting attack, but do not subtract BS. All units within 12" of the final point are struck by a psychic storm of immense power. Vehicles suffer an automatic glancing hits. Infantry units suffer D6 S6 Ap6 hits.
Mind War-Unit he targets counts as Ld8 unless it would be normally less
May take a Wave Serpent

For every Farseer in your Army you may add a Seer council, these do not take up any space in the FoC but otherwise function as a seperate HQ unit
Warlock: 35 Points
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 9 4++
Warlock Battle Leader 50 Points
Ws Bs S T W I A Ld Sv
5 4 3 3 1 5 2 10 4++
Composition:
3-9 Warlocks and a Battle Leader
May take:
Singing Spear-3
Jetbike-25
Each Warlock must take a Psychic Power
Embolden-No Change
Enhance-No Change
Destructor-No Change
Conceal-unit gaints Stealth USR, and 5+ cover in the open
Augment-Augment is used when a Farseer in the Seer Council succesfully used a Pyschic Power. Unlike
Warlock powers, the Warlock must pass a Psychic test to use Augment. If the Test is successful, the range
of the Farseers Psychic power is doubled.
May take a wave serpent.

For another runes, how about Runes of Amplifaction (new name?) – All ranges for spells are increased by 6".

rivers64 wrote:For another runes, how about Runes of Amplifaction (new name?) – All ranges for spells are increased by 6".

Its another decent option We were discussing the ranges being directly linked to the size of a seer council (ie Range = models in unit x 6"), both could work fairly well, but could result in a VERY different feel for the unit. I personally like the idea of the units role and method of being played changing as you have more points to use but YMMV.

These runes would be mainly for the lone Farseer.

Runes:

Runes of GoScrewYourself are too good. S8 Ap1 for any power which affects the eldar?! Thats a "fail your save and you explode" power. I think runes of warding, which make every psyker on the table take a perils nearly 40% of the time are plenty good enough.

And runes of warding - 10 points? they're already one of the best wargear options in the entire game. They need a price increase, not decrease.

Runes of focus - way, way too good. Your farseer who can cast only two powers joins a unit of guardians with an embolden lock, and has runes of witnessing. Now, he just takes 3 tests, 1 at 10, 1 at 9, and 1 at 8, all with 3d6-choose two, plus rerolls for failures. More often than not, he'll succeed, and, with proper placement, can guide/fortune half an eldar gunline. Effective 6 powers on a 150ptish model.

If you want to add more runes, add in runes of war - enabling the use of a witchblade or a singing spear (yes, a force weapon when thrown, they can allocate that wound), as a force weapon

Runes of Fortitude - no. You can't toss unit-upgrade invulnerable saves around the eldar codex which contains fortune like that. It is utterly broken on a unit like wraithguard, who currently possess a single weakness - rending or powerweapons in CC. Suddenly, the unit is T6 and has an effective 3+/4++, and is essentially invulnerable in close combat.

Runes of Power - an ability like this would be good, but i'm not sure i like this method of achieving the goal.

Innate Psyker - too good in an army of specialists. A Unit of BS5 reapers, a unit of WS6 Harlequins, a unit of WS5 banshees. Eldar units are powerful, and small changes can change a unit from being "very good at their role" to "broken". That harlequin unit goes first against nearly everything, hits nearly everything on 3s with rending, and has an invuln save which means they can tangle with well, anything. Adding in abilities which can change the statline of any unit in the codex makes units insanely hard to balance, as you have to take into account all possible combinations (for instance, we can't give wraithlords an invulnerable save, because if they are fortuned, they become invincible).

Veil - sure. I could see it being very useful.

Armoury - An exarch uses specific, ritualistic aspect weaponry. It isn't grabbed from a storage closet or a weapon rack. Customization for exarchs is good, customization for HQs and characters is good.... but they don't just head down to the armory and requisition a Triskele or a Tempest Launcher. Autarches and characters use one armoury, each aspect uses a different one.

Mental Siege, and any power which involves taking X number of psychic tests. Psychic tests are slow. You have to roll them one at a time. Taking 10 of them isn't like rolling 10 to-hits. Simplify.


Eldar should kick the crap out of everyone but daemons and CSM in psychics. Against a human psyker, even a marine, a farseer should be worlds beyond them. We need a method through which eldar powers are harder to nullify or cancel, and we need a method which messes with opposing psykers.

There are three methods of anti-psyker. Test-modification (sitw, eldar, deathleaper, pbs i believe), nullfication (SM, Inq) and unit immunity (null rod). Unit immunity should remain as it is. Test-modification should remain as it is, with a clarification on the interaction between runes of warding, SITW, and runes of witnessing (my preference - everything cancels, 2d6 as normal). The rubber meets the road in the nullifcation box. It is the #1 method any eldar player sees, it is the #1 method used by the player base. Psychic hoods and the SW bulls*** 3+ stuff.

I've had a proposed method for it, which I think i've mentioned before:
"Mind War: At any time an opponent uses an ability which nullifies, or cancels a eldar psychic power on a fixed die-roll (i.e., a Space Marine Librarian with a psychic hood), instead of the normal effect, roll a d6 and add each model's leadership. If the opposing player wins, the power is cancelled normally. If the eldar player wins, the model which possesses the wargear item or ability to cancel a psychic power takes the difference in wounds, with no armor or cover saves allowed."

Every time a marine player wants to cancel a power, he's risking his librarian.

Singing spear - switch for free. Its a tradeoff.

Warlock stuff:
Conceal - 5+ cover at all times, or stealth. Not both. The rules interact.






I like the addition of range to powers being based on the council size - a lone farseer i see attached to a unit, a council i see in the backfield, directing the flow.

I fixed it just for you

Nulipuli2 wrote:Farseer- 90
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 4 3 3 3 5 2 10 4++
Ancient-
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 3++
Psychic Prowness:
Any non-Daemon/chaos model, that attmepts to nullify a eldar psychic power, must reroll the result if it has suceeded
Wargear:
Witchblade
Shuriken Pistol

May be upgraded to a Farseer Ancient-30 Points
May take:
Singing Spear-3 Points
Jetbike-25 Points
Runes of Witnessing- 15 Points
Runes of Warding- 20 Points
Runes of Power-15 Points
Runes of War-20 Points
May choose up to 2 psychic powers, Ancient may choose 3
Fortune(12" range)
Guide(12" range)
Doom- No Change
Fortitude- 5++ for entire unit (like Force Dome)
Eldritch Storm-Eldritch Storm
Select a point on the table, marking it with a die. Scatter the point as you would a blast shooting attack, but do not subtract BS. All units within 12" of the final point are struck by a psychic storm of immense power. Vehicles suffer an automatic glancing hits. Infantry units suffer D6 S6 Ap6 hits.
Mind War-Unit he targets counts as Ld8 unless it would be normally less
May take a Wave Serpent

For every Farseer in your Army you may add a Seer council, these do not take up any space in the FoC but otherwise function as a seperate HQ unit
Warlock: 35 Points
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 9 4++
Warlock Battle Leader 50 Points
Ws Bs S T W I A Ld Sv
5 4 3 3 1 5 2 10 4++
Composition:
3-9 Warlocks and a Battle Leader
May take:
Singing Spear-3
Jetbike-25
Each Warlock must take a Psychic Power
Embolden-No Change
Enhance-No Change
Destructor-No Change
Conceal-No Change
Augment-Augment is used when a Farseer in the Seer Council succesfully used a Pyschic Power. Unlike
Warlock powers, the Warlock must pass a Psychic test to use Augment. If the Test is successful, the range
of the Farseers Psychic power is doubled.
May take a wave serpent.

Are we considering the Seer Council to be an addition to the Farseer himself? Meaning that he would join the unit if he takes it, much like a retinue?

If that is the case, then Augment should be the first thing you use each turn, if you want to use it, rather than adding a step in during a Farseer power.

If it is not the case, how exactly is Augment supposed to work? Which Farseers? All of them? One of them?

Ok, re-writing... this is pretty much how i feel it should go, taking into account all of the suggestions and modifying them a little.

WS BS S T W I A LD SV
Ancient Farseer
4 4 3 4 3 4 1 10 3++
Farseer
5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 4++
Warlock Battlemage
4 4 3 3 2 5 2 9 4++
Warlock apprentice
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 4++

Ok, i feel the ancient should have a worse statline than a normal seer, the fact he's so old should give him T:4 (like eldrad, ancients are turning into crystal, slowly) Also, i do not feel he would be as skilled in warmaking (so -1 WS, BS, A) And his invun should be 3++, the fact that his powers are stronger than anyone elses could be the reason the armour is buffed up.

Wargear

Witchblade
Shuriken Pistol
Ghosthelm (ignore perils on a 3+)

Any model may exchange their singing spear and shuriken pistol for a singing spear
The unit may purchase jetbikes at XX points per model.

Any Farseer may purchase the following runes.
Runes of Witnessing for XX points
Runes of Warding for XX points
Runes of Fortitute for XX points
Runes of Power for XX points

Runes of Witnessing: The model must roll an additional D6 when casting psychic powers, discarding the highest result.
Runes of Warding: Any enemy model attempting to cast a psychic power must roll and additional D6. Any roll that exceeds the Ld of the psyker will cause a perils of the warp attack.
Runes of Fortitute: 5++ to any unit the psyker joins. (warlocks with guardians, warlocks with WG, Farseer joining scorpions, etc) A clause to stop the OP of this could be that wraith units could never be fortuned (we were working on the avatar being unable to be fortuned) if your already dead, how fortunate can you be?
Runes of Power: Any psychic test that totals 4 or less, cannot be countered by any means (total after removing the highest die is using RoWit) such as psychic hoods. Models with complete immunity are still immune.

For units i was thinking...
You may take a Farseer (both flavours) as an IC. (Ancient Farseers would be limited to 1 per army)
For the seer councils, have it as another entry, consisting of 2-3 Farseers and 3-9 Warlocks (which is whats in the current council box) With the council, exclude battlemages. For powers i'd consider only the battle mage having a decent level of access to the powers, the coucil simply providing a buff for the seers, possibly with some council powers produced by their collective minds.

So... Powers

-----Farseer powers
-----A Farseer may select 2 powers, An ancient may select 3.
--Guide: As normal
--Doom: As normal, (dooming a vehicle will cause a +1 on the damage results table)
--Fortune: As normal
--Webway Activation: Gate of infinity power

-----Battlemage powers, select one.
--Enhance: Add +1 to WS, BS, I, A, Ld (choose one) gives some more variety, like having +1BS guardian defenders, or +1A on storm units. given the choice, its only +1 to 1 stat. I left out S, T, W and Sv due to being much better than the others. (and the possibility of having T:7 WG) You know alot of problems are coming with wraith guard... maybe having a warlock with them is a bad idea... maybe a different seer would be better, harlequins get a shadowseer, wraithunits could get a spiritseer as standard with different power options, or altered power options.
--Conceal: The Warlock and his unit recieve a 6+ cover save while in the open. Additionaly they have the USR:Stealth (giving a 5+ cover save in the open)
--Embolden: The unit may re-roll any failed Ld tests.
--Destructor: Counts as heavy flamer.
--Spear of Khaine: Counts as blood lance?????
--Sunder: Conunts as Melta gun

-----Council powers
-----Apprentice Warlocks may select 1 power for every 3 warlocks in their unit, or part there of
--Mind War: Target ANY enemy model (can pick out models in units) with in 24", that model will take a S:X hit, where X = the number of warlocks in the unit. (possible to allow it multiple uses, or let the council cast multiple powers, as a WHOLE council casting 1 mind war is a bit poor)
--Regrowth: All units withing x" of the council gain 5+ FNP. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Augment: For every 3 warlocks, or part there of, you may add an additional 6" to any Farseer powers originating from the unit.
--Endure: All units within x" of the council gain Stubborn. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Eldritch Storm: Needs work, an anti-DS power with the added ability that ALL models withing a certain range move as if in DT

Thats it for now.

Gwyidion wrote:Runes:

Runes of GoScrewYourself are too good. S8 Ap1 for any power which affects the eldar?! Thats a "fail your save and you explode" power. I think runes of warding, which make every psyker on the table take a perils nearly 40% of the time are plenty good enough.

And runes of warding - 10 points? they're already one of the best wargear options in the entire game. They need a price increase, not decrease.

Runes of focus - way, way too good. Your farseer who can cast only two powers joins a unit of guardians with an embolden lock, and has runes of witnessing. Now, he just takes 3 tests, 1 at 10, 1 at 9, and 1 at 8, all with 3d6-choose two, plus rerolls for failures. More often than not, he'll succeed, and, with proper placement, can guide/fortune half an eldar gunline. Effective 6 powers on a 150ptish model.

If you want to add more runes, add in runes of war - enabling the use of a witchblade or a singing spear (yes, a force weapon when thrown, they can allocate that wound), as a force weapon

Runes of Fortitude - no. You can't toss unit-upgrade invulnerable saves around the eldar codex which contains fortune like that. It is utterly broken on a unit like wraithguard, who currently possess a single weakness - rending or powerweapons in CC. Suddenly, the unit is T6 and has an effective 3+/4++, and is essentially invulnerable in close combat.

Runes of Power - an ability like this would be good, but i'm not sure i like this method of achieving the goal.

RoFul - I still think it's a good idea, though I'll admit that S8 AP1 is over the top. Also it only effect the one with the rune (and his squad) not Eldar in general. S6 AP2 would be enough.

RoWarding - Agreed if the price is altered (esspecially with the extra defenses like RoFul) it should be put up.

RoFocus - Given time to think about it more, I still really like it. I did mention limiting it to the only power you may use was an option. I honestly didn't think about the Ld reroll, good catch. Another balance could be the penalty is a set -1 Ld for each extra test you make, so if you make 2 extra, you make three tests at Ld 8. Yes it's powerful, but fluff wise so are the Eldar Farseers, I wouldn't expect the rune to be less the 30pts, and would want to see it more at the 40pts make, which would see at the current proposed pricing would see your 150ish model have only the rune and no powers.

RoFortitude - Agreed, mobile invun save should be avoided. Alternatively betters the basic 4++ to a 3++

RoPower - I think this is actually a very good one. Only, allow those completely immune to psychic powers to keep that.

Gwyidion wrote:Innate Psyker - too good in an army of specialists. A Unit of BS5 reapers, a unit of WS6 Harlequins, a unit of WS5 banshees. Eldar units are powerful, and small changes can change a unit from being "very good at their role" to "broken". That harlequin unit goes first against nearly everything, hits nearly everything on 3s with rending, and has an invuln save which means they can tangle with well, anything. Adding in abilities which can change the statline of any unit in the codex makes units insanely hard to balance, as you have to take into account all possible combinations (for instance, we can't give wraithlords an invulnerable save, because if they are fortuned, they become invincible).

There was talk a while back as to how to fix the Aspect warriors in general. I'm pretty sure one of the proposed options was indeed increasing melee aspects from WS4-5 and ranged aspects from BS4-5. This was simply one musings of how to implement that while also giving a chance to tweak you force, in addition to the basic WS/BS if you're versing alot of other high init forces, +1 I may be better. Running a foot slogger army? take the 6+ cover for the chance to survive those AP4 weapons. But again, good pick on the wraithguard. Limit it to non-vehicles, wraith units, psykers or ICs (maybe harlequins).

Gwyidion wrote:
Mental Siege, and any power which involves taking X number of psychic tests. Psychic tests are slow. You have to roll them one at a time. Taking 10 of them isn't like rolling 10 to-hits. Simplify.

The Farseer may take a penalty to his Ld for the test, one unite within 18" take two S5 AP4 hits for every -1 taken.

Gwyidion wrote:I've had a proposed method for it, which I think i've mentioned before:
"Mind War: At any time an opponent uses an ability which nullifies, or cancels a eldar psychic power on a fixed die-roll (i.e., a Space Marine Librarian with a psychic hood), instead of the normal effect, roll a d6 and add each model's leadership. If the opposing player wins, the power is cancelled normally. If the eldar player wins, the model which possesses the wargear item or ability to cancel a psychic power takes the difference in wounds, with no armor or cover saves allowed."

Only thing I have against this is that it shouldn't be a psychic power. Do I have to now cast a power for the chance to use it? If they have 2 psyker I can't counter the second. Gorechild's RoFul and Dayve's RoPower are better ideas in my opinion.

Gwyidion wrote:
Warlock stuff:
Conceal - 5+ cover at all times, or stealth. Not both. The rules interact.

Agreed, or reduce the cover save to 6+ (then have stealth increase that to 5+)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dayve110 wrote:
-----Battlemage powers, select one.
--Enhance: Add +1 to WS, BS, I, A, Ld (choose one) gives some more variety, like having +1BS guardian defenders, or +1A on storm units. given the choice, its only +1 to 1 stat. I left out S, T, W and Sv due to being much better than the others. (and the possibility of having T:7 WG) You know alot of problems are coming with wraith guard... maybe having a warlock with them is a bad idea... maybe a different seer would be better, harlequins get a shadowseer, wraithunits could get a spiritseer as standard with different power options, or altered power options.

The wraithguard problem could be solved by have spiritseer as a power rather than an upgrade then reword the Wraithguard entry to "A unit of Wraithguards may be lead by a Warlock with the spiritseer power." If a Warlock can only take one power then you don't risk OPing the unit.

dayve110 wrote:
-----Council powers
-----Apprentice Warlocks may select 1 power for every 3 warlocks in their unit, or part there of
--Mind War: Target ANY enemy model (can pick out models in units) with in 24", that model will take a S:X hit, where X = the number of warlocks in the unit. (possible to allow it multiple uses, or let the council cast multiple powers, as a WHOLE council casting 1 mind war is a bit poor)
--Regrowth: All units withing x" of the council gain 5+ FNP. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Augment: For every 3 warlocks, or part there of, you may add an additional 6" to any Farseer powers originating from the unit.
--Endure: All units within x" of the council gain Stubborn. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Eldritch Storm: Needs work, an anti-DS power with the added ability that ALL models withing a certain range move as if in DT

Thats it for now.

I liked the idea someone mentioned that the council as a whole has/uses the powers. So, "The council may pick a single power for each full 3 model in the unit (including Farseers). The council may cast 1 power for every 3 warlocks (or part there of) per turn."

Regrowth - I'm one of the ones who think that FNP is become too widespread and don't think Eldar of all armies should have it. Alternatively +1 T or
Regrowth: Add +1 to the dice roll of any armour save made by a unit within X" (X = number of warlocks in the council). Armour still count as their base value for AP purposes.

Eldritch Storm: If the final position of a deep striking unit places them within X" (X = number of warlocks in the council) of the council (target unit ???) scatter them 2d6" a second time (unaffected by special rules) as the storm buffers them/interferes with signals.

dayve110 wrote:Ok, re-writing... this is pretty much how i feel it should go, taking into account all of the suggestions and modifying them a little.

WS BS S T W I A LD SV
Ancient Farseer
4 4 3 4 3 4 1 10 3++
Farseer
5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 4++
Warlock Battlemage
4 4 3 3 2 5 2 9 4++
Warlock apprentice
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 4++

I like this set of stats, and your logic behind them.

Runes of Witnessing: The model must roll an additional D6 when casting psychic powers, discarding the highest result.
Runes of Warding: Any enemy model attempting to cast a psychic power must roll and additional D6. Any roll that exceeds the Ld of the psyker will cause a perils of the warp attack.
Runes of Fortitute: 5++ to any unit the psyker joins. (warlocks with guardians, warlocks with WG, Farseer joining scorpions, etc) A clause to stop the OP of this could be that wraith units could never be fortuned (we were working on the avatar being unable to be fortuned) if your already dead, how fortunate can you be?
Runes of Power: Any psychic test that totals 4 or less, cannot be countered by any means (total after removing the highest die is using RoWit) such as psychic hoods. Models with complete immunity are still immune.

OK with most of this, Runes of Power are kind pointless without Witnessing. I'd like to see something where I can take Power without Witnessing. For Fortitude, a special ability "Wraith" could be given to both Wraith units, outlining what can't be done to them and also detail their Wraithsight.

-----Farseer powers
-----A Farseer may select 2 powers, An ancient may select 3.
--Guide: As normal
--Doom: As normal, (dooming a vehicle will cause a +1 on the damage results table)
--Fortune: As normal
--Webway Activation: Gate of infinity power

A+. I have no issue with this, and really like it overall.

-----Battlemage powers, select one.
--Enhance: Add +1 to WS, BS, I, A, Ld (choose one) gives some more variety, like having +1BS guardian defenders, or +1A on storm units. given the choice, its only +1 to 1 stat. I left out S, T, W and Sv due to being much better than the others. (and the possibility of having T:7 WG) You know alot of problems are coming with wraith guard... maybe having a warlock with them is a bad idea... maybe a different seer would be better, harlequins get a shadowseer, wraithunits could get a spiritseer as standard with different power options, or altered power options.
--Conceal: The Warlock and his unit recieve a 6+ cover save while in the open. Additionaly they have the USR:Stealth (giving a 5+ cover save in the open)
--Embolden: The unit may re-roll any failed Ld tests.
--Destructor: Counts as heavy flamer.
--Spear of Khaine: Counts as blood lance?????
--Sunder: Conunts as Melta gun

I'd like to see a Spiritseer only being capable of being added to Wraith units (and get their own profile, stats, rules, etc). The rest of the powers seem ok, but what's a blood lance? Something to give them prowess in CC (such as making those with the power strike as though they had power weapons) could really make them customizable and ferocious for whatever you build them for. As well they should be - this is not a cheap unit to be taking.

-----Council powers
-----Apprentice Warlocks may select 1 power for every 3 warlocks in their unit, or part there of
--Mind War: Target ANY enemy model (can pick out models in units) with in 24", that model will take a S:X hit, where X = the number of warlocks in the unit. (possible to allow it multiple uses, or let the council cast multiple powers, as a WHOLE council casting 1 mind war is a bit poor)
--Regrowth: All units withing x" of the council gain 5+ FNP. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Augment: For every 3 warlocks, or part there of, you may add an additional 6" to any Farseer powers originating from the unit.
--Endure: All units within x" of the council gain Stubborn. Where X is equal to the number of warlocks in the unit.
--Eldritch Storm: Needs work, an anti-DS power with the added ability that ALL models withing a certain range move as if in DT

So, this mean from the 3-9 warlocks, you can have up to 3 powers, many of which are boosted due to numbers, yes? I like the regrowth option given for armor (with a new name, of course), and I kind of dislike the endure power. At best, units within 9" get stubborn? I prefer it to be one of two things, based on how you use it - backline, long-range army support (via buffs, de-buffs, and other methods), or close-up, in your face, frontline action. Many of the battlemage powers tend to this, and a few of these do, too. Stubborn works fine for the latter option, but that would be all. Eldritch Storm just seems out of place. Why not just make it an attack, like it is now? It could do kind minor damage, include the vehicle spinning and maybe cause pinning, or an auto-glance on vehicles instead of turning.

Overall, it's nice, and I think the Farseers themselves are A+. But the council needs some tweaking. The first priority is "what is this unit going to do". Is it going to provide long-range backline support, or be an in-your-face, leading the charge combat unit, or one of these two based on player choices?

I think it should be your own choice.

I'm leaning towards your own choice... yay a short post this time.

TheRedArmy wrote:Are we considering the Seer Council to be an addition to the Farseer himself? Meaning that he would join the unit if he takes it, much like a retinue?

If that is the case, then Augment should be the first thing you use each turn, if you want to use it, rather than adding a step in during a Farseer power.

If it is not the case, how exactly is Augment supposed to work? Which Farseers? All of them? One of them?

To clarify, Augment is used when a farseer in the council, just passed his/hers psychic test for one of the powers, then a warlock in the council uses augment, if passed the range is doubled, this is for one farseer, but of course if you have multiple warlocks with augment, then you could use it on more farseers. The Farseer can choose to join the unit, like an independent character.

Just to clarify, we are not getting rid of the lone Farseer, are we?

i certainly am not

I should have been more clear - the "mind war" fix to eldar power cancellation I proposed is not a psychic power, it is a special rule that is default for farseers.

I feel that adding a power (such as fortitude - 5++ for farseer and his unit) which requires stipulations to be made elsewhere in the codex in order to ensure that it doesn't become broken indicates that the power isn't well designed.

Adding in abilities which allow for modification to unit stats makes units difficult to balance. How do you balance a codex if you have multiple different entries which can effect units' stats in different ways?

Note that in the current codex, there are very few abilities which directly change a unit's stats. Enhance is one of the few (harlies have FC), and it is on the warlock entry, which is limited to very few units.

Adding an invulnerable save doesn't bolster the current role of a unit (as doom, guide, and fortune do, by adding wounding potential, hit potential, and resilience, respectively). Adding an invulnerable save adds a resilience against weapon types, which bolestering an armor save does not. If people are so set on the farseer having an ability or wargear item beyond fortune which makes a unit harder to kill, there are other avenues which can be persued which does not cause problems across the codex, which allowing for a invulnerable save to be added to most any unit does.

There are rules in the current codex which don't really need to be upgraded, and i feel enhance is one of them. Especially with the distribution of warlocks about the codex, that ability is well pointed and balanced. Better to leave it as it is and add more powers such as the spear of khain and sunder powers, which i think are great extensions of a warlock's offense (although keep in mind that adding a meltagun and blood lance to a storm guardian unit is going to swing the needle even further from defenders).

And keeping Enhance as +1WS/I will swing the needle further still.
Having the option to get a +1BS with an altered enhance on guardians might make them more worthwhile.

nobody takes enhance on guardians. If they do, they are fools. Guardians in combat? why?

Destructor is what warlocks with storm squads take.

Just because something doesn't work for you, it doesn't mean it doesn't work for anyone else.

And instead of calling people fools and disregarding peoples ideas, why not post some of your own ideas on how to change or improve them?

Quite frankly I always take conceal on my guardians whenever I do take them It tuns out invaluable results.

the problems with defender guardians will be solved by alterations to the defender guardian unit. One of the problems with defender guardians is not their lack of BS4. Trying to make a unit better/taken more often by giving the upgrade option it shares with other units better abilities is not a good method of balancing the power of units.

Yet any way of improving guardians is always shot-down by someone or other, for varied reasons.
There appears to be very little you can do with guardians...

The main thing with Guardians is their cost. They are effectively Guardsmen in their stats with I4. If they cost 6 points a model, I could see myself taking some for light CC support (Storm Guardians), or for the weapons platform (throwing in more Heavy Weapons). As they cost at 8, they simply aren't worth it, since anything charging them (short of Tau, and even that is in doubt) will make them rout, and if they charge anything better than a Guardsmen, they get cut down. I think leaving Guardians as they are (their stats reflect their abilities - citizen soldiers) and simply dropping their cost (and maybe adding that third squad idea - Forgot it for now), and they are fine.

Enough with the off-topic, though, we're talking Farseers.

nulipuli2 wrote:To clarify, Augment is used when a farseer in the council, just passed his/hers psychic test for one of the powers, then a warlock in the council uses augment, if passed the range is doubled, this is for one farseer, but of course if you have multiple warlocks with augment, then you could use it on more farseers. The Farseer can choose to join the unit, like an independent character.

I thought so. Then yes, I dislike this idea. The order of events now goes -

1. Declare using a Farseer Power
2. Roll Psychic Test (continue if passed)
3. (Optional) Test for Perils
4. Declare using Augment.
5. Roll Psychic Test
6. (Optional) Test for Perils
7. Declare Target for power.
8a. Augment passed, measure using new range of ability.
8b. Augment failed, measure using regular range of ability.

You see how complicated this has become? The way I prefer, at the beginning of the turn, you can roll all Augments you want at once and simply apply them to the Farseers in the unit. I prefer Augment to be affecting the entire units' Farseers - a second Augment would be used if one is lost (due to perils, wound allocation, etc.).

And to clarify, the Seer council is 1-3 Farseers (of any rank), with 3-9 Warlocks (of any rank), yes? Does that mean that Farseers are part of the unit, and are permanently attached? Do they retain Independent Character? I hope not, otherwise that would be a good way to get way too many Seers (as tempting as 6 Seers is in a list).

I think that if we do a 'seer council' unit, the farseers in the council should not be independent characters. I also don't like the idea of an active ability which affects the farseer's psychic powers. Instead, the farseer should gain the benefit to their powers (increased range, immunity to nullification, whatever) merely by being present in a seer council, and the magnitude of the benefit should be defined by the # of models alive in the council. It is most simple that way.

I don't want to go back to guardians. It seems like we spent 10 pages on them already.

The key elements of the seer council (as I see them):
Low mobility - mobility, along with the inevitable durability of a fortuned unit with an invulnerable save, can make the seer council way more effective offensively than i feel it should be. Especially a unit with singing spears or witchblades, high mobility could make a small council an AT unit (which should not be its purpose).

Low ranged offensive power - having a decent hitting strength inside 18 inches (outside of eldritch storm, a possible eldritch bolt type power, and mind war (if it remains as is), is fine, but this shouldn't be a ranged weapon.

Low close combat power - the council cannot have power weapons. witchblades, as now, is fine, and the seers having force weapons is fine, but if they have power weapons they are eldar-ish termies, not what i see a council being (i know that no one has suggested power weapons)

Psychic power - their 'power level' should put the unit instantly mentioned in any conversation which includes the words "best psyker unit in the game".

Nullification resistance - the achilles heel of the current council, and any list that relies on psychic powers, is the spread of nullification methods. The seer council should either be completely immune, or partially resistant to psychic powers. I still feel a new special rule for a non-psychic power opposed leadership check, incorporating mind war, is the best method. It isn't an outright immunity, but it puts the burden of taking wounds on the opposing player. It is very eldarish.

Simple - we can't have eldar players taking 5 psychic tests for one power, or subsequent tests with lots of outcomes. The current schema for psychic powers works well, and we should work within, or alter the parameters (leadership, # of dice, reroll) within that schema. As far as successfully casting powers, eldar psykers are already the best in the game. Passing extra tests is not only complicated, but far, far too easy. I feel that having 1-3 farseers with active psychic abilities, 3-7 warlocks with passive abilities, and the "seer council" as a whole having a few active abilities is plenty enough.

My own specific idea for the council are above.

I think that if we do a 'seer council' unit, the farseers in the council should not be independent characters. I also don't like the idea of an active ability which affects the farseer's psychic powers. Instead, the farseer should gain the benefit to their powers (increased range, immunity to nullification, whatever) merely by being present in a seer council, and the magnitude of the benefit should be defined by the # of models alive in the council. It is most simple that way.

I don't want to go back to guardians. It seems like we spent 10 pages on them already.

The key elements of the seer council (as I see them):
Low mobility - mobility, along with the inevitable durability of a fortuned unit with an invulnerable save, can make the seer council way more effective offensively than i feel it should be. Especially a unit with singing spears or witchblades, high mobility could make a small council an AT unit (which should not be its purpose).

Low ranged offensive power - having a decent hitting strength inside 18 inches (outside of eldritch storm, a possible eldritch bolt type power, and mind war (if it remains as is), is fine, but this shouldn't be a ranged weapon.

Psychic power - their 'power level' should put the unit instantly mentioned in any conversation which includes the words "best psyker unit in the game".

Nullification resistance - the achilles heel of the current council, and any list that relies on psychic powers, is the spread of nullification methods. The seer council should either be completely immune, or partially resistant to psychic powers. I still feel a new special rule for a non-psychic power opposed leadership check, incorporating mind war, is the best method. It isn't an outright immunity, but it puts the burden of taking wounds on the opposing player. It is very eldarish.

Simple - we can't have eldar players taking 5 psychic tests for one power, or subsequent tests with lots of outcomes. The current schema for psychic powers works well, and we should work within, or alter the parameters (leadership, # of dice, reroll) within that schema. As far as successfully casting powers, eldar psykers are already the best in the game. Passing extra tests is not only complicated, but far, far too easy. I feel that having 1-3 farseers with active psychic abilities, 3-7 warlocks with passive abilities, and the "seer council" as a whole having a few active abilities is plenty enough.

I can agree with this just fine. I think this is a prime idea for the unit as a whole. Note I left out the CC abilities. I don't mind them being capable in CC. I think they already are, due to multiple wounds on Seers, Witchblades, and Fortune, Doom, Guide, all being potential options to buff your abilities. Like I said, I would not mind a passive Warlock power that makes their witchblade a Power Weapon. Remember that Banshees all have Power Weapons, and a few other Exarchs (Avengers, Scorpions) have options for power weapons themselves (they are Exarchs though). I don't mind the option existing for them to become viable in CC, though perhaps it should be more expensive than for another race to doing something similar (remember, they already have force weapons and permanent invulnerables, along with the powers mentioned).

As for the Warlocks, I think a few options for activated powers that do not require a test (as it is now) would be fine.

i think that witch blades should be power weapons

Eldrad wrote:i think that witch blades should be power weapons

Simply making them power weapons right out is a bit strong, not to mention that now you have to pay for that ability when some people maybe don't want to use them in that way. Kinda how pathfinders have to buy a devilfish for no good reason.

I thinking making it an optional power for warlocks and/or Farseers is just fine. A passive power, of course.

Power weapons are bringing them into the power builds area.
The general concensus is the council to buff other units.

Although if you've played dawn of war, the seer council in that is rather good in combat, fast, has lighting at their fingertips... etc etc etc...

A warlock with a witchblade that is also a power weapon is a model with WS/BS 4, S/T3, 1W, I4, 2A, and a 4++ invuln, and they always wound on a 2. Add in fortune, whatever else we give them, 1 warlock with enhance... thats getting silly.

If they retain jetbikes... thats a deathstar.

I think most of us are in agreement that the council should be a support unit. But honestly I'd like to see a front line offensive psychic unit, either as a separate entity or just a different build (probably best to leave it separate).

Warlocks: Very short ranged/offensive powers, witchblades/singingspears, no bonus to farseers

Council members: Long ranged/Support powers, bonus to Farseers.

Pyro-Druid wrote:I think most of us are in agreement that the council should be a support unit. But honestly I'd like to see a front line offensive psychic unit, either as a separate entity or just a different build (probably best to leave it separate).

Warlocks: Very short ranged/offensive powers, witchblades/singingspears, no bonus to farseers

Council members: Long ranged/Support powers, bonus to Farseers.

All sounds good. That means that Council members either need to be Warlocks with different abilities open to them, or a different unit all together.

I like the idea of a Farseer option being able to be taken on the melee unit (probably only 1, though), but at least 1 being necessary for the council.

We could do this - borrow a page from grey knights.

All witchblades wound on 2+

seer-initiates have normal witchblades (council members) have relatively minor support powers for the council

warlocks have witchblades that are power weapons (squad upgrade models, as they are now), have more potent squad-buff powers and offensive powers

farseers have witchblades which are power weapons and force weapons, and their loadout of powers

Could think about a new unit which is an elite unit, just warlocks, but it would have to be kept fairly small in order to avoid being just a deathstar in the elite slot.

Hmm, power weapon witchblades will just make the unit a death star. Over glorified if the cost per model is too high.

Now, I'll keep lurking a bit more, I don't consider Farseers or Warlocks in general in need of any real attention (only the unit conceptualization and certain psychic powers).

I don't know about warlocks, but I think Farseers witchblades should also count as power weapons.

I still think that Alanthrasl Swift blade should be put into our codex as an hq.

his stats could be like this
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
7 6 3 3 3 6 5 10 3 4++
Blood lines- Due to his sisters spirit stone inbetted into his blade he re roles all missed hits.

Fearless- he was a pirate king

Imuluan- Martial arts Alanthrasil mastered giving him one plus attack if he doesn't shoot that turn

War gear
Pulsar Pistol- ST 4 AP4 Pistol 1
Power sword
Grenades

or somthing like that...

So he's a phoenix lord, but not? (WS = PL WS, 5+1 (+1!) A base, reroll failed to-hit in CC, 4++....)

If we're going to add a phoenix lord, why not... add a phoenix lord?

8 attacks on the charge....

rivers64 wrote:I don't know about warlocks, but I think Farseers witchblades should also count as power weapons.

I disagree. Witchblades are absolutely amazing at taking out MCs, other high T models and vehicles. This is balanced by the fact that they're rather poor against excellent armor saves.

If you want to improve the Witchblade, I'd suggest a simple "It triples the user's strength in CC". That way, it would avoid FNP (on T4 or less) and cause ID on quite a few choice targets.

Making it always wound on 2+ and a power weapon turns the Farseer (or Warlocks if they get it) into a bit too CC oriented. It becomes a power fist that still strikes at base I.

Read his back round on lexi and you will understand why i made his stats what they are and Yriels has some very simaler stats to phoenix lords. And no he isn't a phoenix lord he is a fricken Pirate Prince whos fleet was destroyed by orks. Read up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That was to Gyidion


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also there is only one Phoenix lord with an 4++ save by the way

I'm distracted so I'll be quick. Witch Blades fine how they are, power weapons would just be too much. No to a second pirate prince special character, I don't see them as so common as to justify two. If we're adding more special characters, then we need a phoenix lord for each aspect... and if we're not, we need a phoenix lord for each aspect.

Ok well then warp spiders wouldnt work because he would die to much in the story line and in the game so shining spears


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im just wondering but does any one want a battle psycher?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
we need somthing to compete with librarian

holy crap....

We don't need to add yet another phoenix lord - like character when we already don't have a phoenix lord for each aspect, and the PLs are underpowered as they are. Your character there has 8 attacks hitting on 3's on the charge, is a power weapon, and rerolls misses. That is better than pretty much every PL out there, without even going into the fact that he has a invuln save.

The HQ slot is too crowded as it is - if we want to start adding characters that are specific to background like pirates, or iyanden, or ulthwe, or altaioc, we can, but the PLs will have to go.

An offensive psyker isn't a bad idea, and if you read the previous pages you'll find some suggestions to that effect, but in terms of competing with librarians, we really don't need anything. We already make them our b**** with runes of warding, and eldar psykers aren't as flashy and dirty as human psykers.

Phoenix Lords could be made faceless. One common statline, a common set of special rules, then specific wargear depending on aspect.

If I remember my fluff right (although admittedly this is old fluff, not current), Phoenix Lords aren't immortal or corporeal, but rather a sort of ghost spirit in the Eldar psyche pool.
You'll probably correct me since I'm wrong, but you get what I mean.

Standard statline, battlefate, and for example be able to take aspect warriors as retinue.
Shining Spears lord would be armed with a special Star Lance, a Jetbike, and have the appropriate Exarch powers.

Essentially cram Phoenix Lords all into one slot, even more than they do at the moment.

I think we should do the Pheonix Lords after we have done each of the Aspects.

The problem with farseers to me is the overall value of Eldrad. Also there is the general increase in abilities of other psykers in the game.

Proposed:

Ancient Farseer: Any 4 abilities - may use 3 abilities per turn but no duplication. (This remains Eldrad's bonus - he is improved ancient allowing one duplication.)

Farseer: Any 3 Abilities - may use 2 abilities per turn.

The statlines as is are fine an ancient still dies fast but is a psychic pain. Attacks 2. Spirit Stones and both runes built into the cost of both farseers.

Witchblade - As is - perhaps one addition - forceblade option LD test and die. It is still not a power weapon but this makes it a 2+ wound + instant death if the wound is successful.

Singing Spear - 2 Hnd Wpn. Thrown as is. Possibly this is also a power weapon. This makes singing spears more deadly but at the cost of volume of attacks.

Warlock Battlemage - Ld 9 1 Farseer ability. 1 Passive warlock ability. No runes or ghosthelm. Attacks 2. These are squad leader upgrades only.

Warlock council - Ld 8. Passive abilities only.



Eldritch storm - Lg Blast, 18", S 3 AP 6. Glances any vehicle on a 6.
Guide - 6" As is.
Fortune - 6" As is.
Mind War - 12". 2d6 plus LD - Ld of target. This is the strength of 1 attack. Cover and invulnerable saves only.

Prescience - +1 to Sieze initiate or may designate one unit to outflank. (Note this is pre-game and automatic but uses one of the farseer psychic slots.)

(Would like to see more ideas like Prescience but can't think of one right now.)




Passive:
Enhance: +1 WS +1 I
Embolden: Reroll Ld test
Destructor: Hvy Flamer
Conceal: Stealth or 5++ cover save.

Seer council: 1 Ancient farseer and 0-2 Warlock Battlemage + 3-9 Warlocks.

Council warlocks do not have an individual ability. They qualify based on numbers of the current squad including farseer and battlemages.

1-4 Enhance
5-8 Enhance & Embolden
9-12 Enhance, Embolden & Extend (Add 12" range to all Farseer powers.)

In additon you may chose one seer council power - 1 Destructor per 3 Warlocks or +1 S -1 AP per 2 Warlocks for any farseer ability.

Example: 1 Farseer Ancient w 4 abilities (Fortune, Doom, Eldritch Storm & Prescience)
1 Battlemage w 1 ability (Mindwar) passive Enhance
1 Battlemage w 1 ablity (Eldritch Storm) passive Embolden
9 Warlocks

Squad has Enhance, Embolden and Extend. 3 Destructors or S6 AP3 for the two Eldritch storm and +3 S to the Mindwar.

This makes it a psychic juggernaut but differentiates it from other HTH aspect units. Cost of course is where this will play out as making it viable, a points-sink or a cheezy overkill unit.

I'm not really sure if you have all unanimously decided everything about the Dire Avengers, but when i read their codex fluff, they seem to be more in close combat instead of hanging around the back, so i was thinking of making them equal in stats to a DE warrior but giving them hit and run (they shoot-they fight-they retreat. and that every turn.)

After searching through thesaurus.com I found a name I like for the new council-warlocks: Verdant. I think renaming the existing warlocks would just over complicate things, keeping everything the same and adding in the ancient seer and the new council members would be less confusing. I'll update my last suggestion and re-work it with some of new ideas to see what you think

Gorechild wrote:
Seer Council: XX Points

Unit Size:
1 Farseer
You may add up to 2 additional Farseers for XX points each, For each Farseer in the unit you may include upto 3 Verdants for XX points per model.
If the unit consists of a single model its is an independant character, if more than 1 model is in the unit they are a retinue.

Wargear:
Ancient: Rune Armour 3++, Ghost helm, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol
Farseer: Rune Armour 4++, Ghost helm, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol
Verdant: Rune Armour 4++, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol

Special Rules:
Farseer: Fleet, Seer
Ancient Farseer: Fleet, Master Seer
Verdant: Fleet, Conseal, Distort, Amplify, Protect

Options:
If a Seer Council contain the full 12 models, one Farseer may be upgraded to a Ancient Farseer for XX points

Any model may repace their witch blade and Shuriken pistol with a Singing Spear for free

Each Farseer or Ancient Farseer can take up to 4 powers from:
Doom - XX points
Fortune - XX points
Guide - XX Points
ect ect ect...

Each Farseer may take 1 rune from the following (Ancient Farseer's may take up to two)
RoWarding - XX points
RoWitnessing - XX points
ect ect ect...

Just to explain a few things I added:
Seer: The farseer may use up to two different psychic powers a turn, any sucessful atempts to nulify either power must be re-rolled.

Master Seer: The Farseer may use up to three psychic powers a turn, each power may be used a maximumm of twice per turn, any sucessful atempts to nulify either power must be re-rolled.

Distort: Like nightshields (range of all weapons fired at unit is reduced by 6") units assaulting count as moving through difficult terrain

Amplify: All farseer powers cast within the unit have +6" range

Protect: short ranged shooting attack? unit assaulting counts as moving through dangerous terrain, models removed as casualty on a 1 or 2? not completely decided on this, but something to stop the council getting murdered by deep strikers.


This would stop us making yet another HQ entry, but still allows for an independant farseer as well as a council. Thoughts?

What is the problem people have with Swooping Hawks?

Do we want the council to sit at the back of the board humming and ahhing with some long range psyker powers or do we want a close range support unit?

OPTION 1:
Deploy the council, leave it alone, let it power up the army from afar.

OPTION 2:
Move the council with the army, supporting units nearby and generally hampering the enemy.

Option 1 would be great when needing to defend a scoring unit close to home, no1 wants to get close to a seer council, they still all have witchblades afterall. It'd also open up more possibilities, allowing them to cast to several units quite far apart.
I think option 2 would fit better with the Eldar tactics of getting close to do damage with the majority of the rest of the army, also they would be perfect for getting into the centre of an enemy formation and causing general mayhem of a non-lethal variety.

But i'll save my re-write until people decide =D i'm for option 2 myself

How about dire avengers for 10 pts
WS 4 BS 4 S3 T3 W1 I6 A1 LD 9
with an armor save of 4+?

dayve110 wrote:Do we want the council to sit at the back of the board humming and ahhing with some long range psyker powers or do we want a close range support unit?

OPTION 1:
Deploy the council, leave it alone, let it power up the army from afar.

OPTION 2:
Move the council with the army, supporting units nearby and generally hampering the enemy.

Option 1 would be great when needing to defend a scoring unit close to home, no1 wants to get close to a seer council, they still all have witchblades afterall. It'd also open up more possibilities, allowing them to cast to several units quite far apart.
I think option 2 would fit better with the Eldar tactics of getting close to do damage with the majority of the rest of the army, also they would be perfect for getting into the centre of an enemy formation and causing general mayhem of a non-lethal variety.

But i'll save my re-write until people decide =D i'm for option 2 myself

Im also with Option 2 for the same reasons you are.

I agree with the fire dragon idea, they`re called FIRE dragons,not "run up to a LRBT and turn it into oatmeal with 10 meltabombs" dragons.

Squigsquasher wrote:What is the problem people have with Swooping Hawks?

Generally speaking:
* High cost for low performance
* Strange performance (yoyo hawks)
* Poor return on the main weapon
* Odd Exarch / Phoenix Lord focus on melee
* Bad compatibility between main weapon (medium range, lasblaster) and secondary weapon (melee, haywire)

Essentially, you need to get a 20+ point model to melee to assault a tank but want it at as long range as possible to shoot at the infantry it contains. The roles are backwards compatible. Then we've got the fact that one of their most efficient roles is to act as an infinite range grenade launcher, meaning they don't really get to use their other abilities at all since they're yoyo-ing all the time... The concept of a ranged jump infantry targeting mainly light infantry is swell, but you pay a LOT extra for stuff that you either do exclusively or don't do at all.
It's like giving Devastators power weapons default, upping their price a LOT. Sure, it is theoretically useful, but you're either going to use your weapons or go into melee, not both at the same time (since you can't).

I believe they're on Farseers and Warlocks atm, though.

I think we're more focusing on the council rather than either Farseers or Warlocks specifically. Perhaps once we're done we should have another overview of the changes we've made and just have a day or two what could use work or not before moving on to the next unit.

dayve110 wrote:Do we want the council to sit at the back of the board humming and ahhing with some long range psyker powers or do we want a close range support unit?

OPTION 1:
Deploy the council, leave it alone, let it power up the army from afar.

OPTION 2:
Move the council with the army, supporting units nearby and generally hampering the enemy

...

Personally I want the option of both, as I've said earlier, either as two separate entities or just how you build them. As an additional idea on the build choice (names need work, as per usual):

Path - A Seer Council much choose either the support path or the offensive path. All warlocks in the council must choose a power from either the basic list or the path list chosen by the council. In addition all Farseer powers cast from the unit may be affected buy the path's council power

Support: Warlock powers (list would support staying back, so no destructor or enhance)
Council power - Amplify: Range of farseer powers is increased 1" for every living warlock in the council

Offensive: Warlock powers (list would support front line, so destructor and enhance)
Council power - Aura: Nonshooting Farseer powers that effect a unit (not a model) may reduce their range to 1" per 2(3 ???) warlocks. If this is done it effects all units within range.

I see no reason why there is anything wrong with alinthrasil's stats as i put i it i also think that pirat lords should be able to get pirate body gaurds


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a more relivant topic i think we should have the council advance with the army but just out of reach of the enemy.

Obviously we're looking at two completely different units. I suggest we make the current seer council into support only to be taken with a farseer (though not mandatory). And add a whole other elites battle warlocks.

I'll let you guys duke it out for a while and write up something Friday, i seem to be getting good at the whole writing rules thing... apparently!
A;though making everyone happy will be difficult!

Mahtamori wrote:

Squigsquasher wrote:What is the problem people have with Swooping Hawks?

Generally speaking:
* High cost for low performance
* Strange performance (yoyo hawks)
* Poor return on the main weapon
* Odd Exarch / Phoenix Lord focus on melee
* Bad compatibility between main weapon (medium range, lasblaster) and secondary weapon (melee, haywire)

Essentially, you need to get a 20+ point model to melee to assault a tank but want it at as long range as possible to shoot at the infantry it contains. The roles are backwards compatible. Then we've got the fact that one of their most efficient roles is to act as an infinite range grenade launcher, meaning they don't really get to use their other abilities at all since they're yoyo-ing all the time... The concept of a ranged jump infantry targeting mainly light infantry is swell, but you pay a LOT extra for stuff that you either do exclusively or don't do at all.
It's like giving Devastators power weapons default, upping their price a LOT. Sure, it is theoretically useful, but you're either going to use your weapons or go into melee, not both at the same time (since you can't).

I believe they're on Farseers and Warlocks atm, though.

I think I'll take my shot at something that seemingly isn't willing to be solved. Though I've never actually played a game, I work with the fluff enough on a daily basis to eke out what I know. That said, go for the softest morsels last when you start to devour me. ^^; I might request clarification or some additional assistance to fill in my gaps.

I would concur, like everyone else, that the performance to cost ratio is awful. So assuming the same cost, the performance has to go up in some way. This thought then forces us to define a role for him to specialize in, such that he isn't stuck between trying to haywire vehicles and snipe squads of GEQ. Fire Dragons are the pre-dominant force for AV (Though I too support Flamer diversity) and Warp Spiders would make better use of Haywire Grenades for rapid-punch AV.

So here's what my thoughts are:

- Maintain the current statline, with the addition of +1 to BS. To fly in the air and shoot targets requires far more skill than sitting on the ground and taking shots. I'm of the mind that not all Aspect Warriors deserve quite the same stats and there should be more customization according to ability.

- Focus on medium to long range GEQ elimination, with large emphasis on aggressive mobility. Warp Spiders are your fast, up-close anti-infantry option, and Dire Avengers serve as the medium range, flexible force. Dark Reapers serve more as MEQ killers and lack the mobility needed to respond to threats across the battlefield. A slight retailoring of abilities will be required to accomplish this goal.

- Eliminate the yo-yoing with the grenade pack. This has come up in previous suggestions and it makes sense, if you want a unit to maintain an actual presence on the battlefield instead of serving as a grenade launcher. The Grenade Pack can be used in another way, which I'll elucidate below. (Though I'll have to take some liberties in doing so)

- As for wargear, let's keep the basic Lasrifle, but buff the ROF to Assault 3, with R24", S3, and AP5. Possible buffs are an increase to R30" or S4, but first I'd like to hear what people have to say. Swooping Hawk Wings would remain as is (Jump Infantry, Deep Strike) with Fleet on the side. I concur that Hit & Run would be a useful power and there are several angles one could take with it and the Grenade Pack.

- Let's see what the Grenade Pack, that devilish little thing, can do now. Obviously the role of a mid to long ranged unit doesn't fall in line with being in close range, and under logical rules, a Grenade Pack would require the Hawks to be near an enemy unit if one were not to yo-yo with it.

1. At any time during the movement of a unit of Swooping Hawks, if an enemy unit is within 6" of any place the Swooping Hawks could move, the Hawks are allowed to divert off course and unleash their grenade packs from above. For every 2 Hawks in a unit who choose to do this, a S3, AP 5, Small Blast occurs, which may scatter D6". [Or every hawk --> single S3, AP5 hit, scatter applies] Roll once to determine the scatter of every grenade dropped. Units that drop Grenades then finish the rest of their move from the place where they chose to divert off course in any direction (even backwards!), but may not fire in the shooting phase. They still may move 6" in the shooting phase and may assault as normal. The total movement range possible during this skill is 24".

- The function of this skill is to adhere to the fluff as best as possible, while actually trying to make the Hawks' Grenades useful in their own right outside of the yo-yo way. If the concept seems interesting, please improve on it. Or if it's vastly imbalanced, what can be done to reign it within normal limits?

- Now for Exarch wargear and abilities. Correspondingly with the above change, the Exarch would retain the same statline as is, save +1 to BS. The Hawk's Talon and Sunrifle would still exist, under the following stat-lines:
Hawk's Talon: R24", S5, AP4, Assault 4
Sunrifle: R30", S3, AP4, Assault 6, Pinning

Now for Abilities:
Skyleap: The Exarch and his Squad can redeploy during their movement phase at any point and will do so via Deep Strike. If in HTH, the squad must pass a Hit & Run Test. Roll 1D6 for Scatter. (This is all Addict's, because it makes sense) Upon Deep Striking, the unit gains a 4+ Cover Save.

Death From Above: At any point in the movement phase, the Exarch and his Squad may choose to fire their weapons at an enemy unit while moving, but from a range of 15" alone. These attacks ignore cover saves, but allow the units fired at one round of shooting at the Exarch and his squad, who have a 5+ cover save. This action cannot occur in conjunction with Grenade Packs, but the Swooping Hawks may still participate in the shooting phase. (This is the most troublesome ability, because I worry of its potential imbalance)

It's late, and I don't feel like adding anything, so let's sum it all up.

Compared to the original:

- Increase in BS
- Increase in ROF on main weapon
- New Mechanism for Grenade Packs [This is more like an actual yo-yo, which is the only way to use the Packs without compromising the range needed for this kind of SH]
- No Haywire Nades
- Increase in AP of Exarch Weapons
- New Exarch Ability, which adds a round of fire, with restrictions.

All in all, I tried to satisfy the performance issue, get rid of deep striking Nades, made the main weapon a tad bit better, and fixed the compatibility issues (kind of). Baharroth, though, is a completely different kind of animal and will need a bit more thought (as well as sleep) to think about.

Without further ado, unleash the wolves. ^^;

dayve110 wrote:Do we want the council to sit at the back of the board humming and ahhing with some long range psyker powers or do we want a close range support unit?

OPTION 1:
Deploy the council, leave it alone, let it power up the army from afar.

OPTION 2:
Move the council with the army, supporting units nearby and generally hampering the enemy.

The problem I have with option 2 is mobility, if they need to be close to be effective then the council will either be confined to foot slogging lists or living in a wave serpent, whereas being a long range support unit they can be viable in all lists without depending on a serpent. I see the "leading from the front" to be more of the autarch approach, where as long range support would be better for the farseers. I'm clearly in the inority with this though so I'll stay quiet

rivers64 wrote:Obviously we're looking at two completely different units. I suggest we make the current seer council into support only to be taken with a farseer (though not mandatory). And add a whole other elites battle warlocks.

This I agree with, they can't effectivly perform both roles. Adding another (I'm guessing elite) unit will crowd the slot even more, but I can't see any other option other than biting the bullet and saying goodbye to the death star super killy seer council (I wouldnt complain about this though tbh).

Gorechild wrote:

Gorechild wrote:
Seer Council: XX Points

Unit Size:
1 Farseer
You may add up to 2 additional Farseers for XX points each, For each Farseer in the unit you may include upto 3 Verdants for XX points per model.
If the unit consists of a single model its is an independant character, if more than 1 model is in the unit they are a retinue.

Wargear:
Ancient: Rune Armour 3++, Ghost helm, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol
Farseer: Rune Armour 4++, Ghost helm, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol
Verdant: Rune Armour 4++, Witch Blade and Shuriken Pistol

Special Rules:
Farseer: Fleet, Seer
Ancient Farseer: Fleet, Master Seer
Verdant: Fleet, Conseal, Distort, Amplify, Protect

Options:
If a Seer Council contain the full 12 models, one Farseer may be upgraded to a Ancient Farseer for XX points

Any model may repace their witch blade and Shuriken pistol with a Singing Spear for free

Each Farseer or Ancient Farseer can take up to 4 powers from:
Doom - XX points
Fortune - XX points
Guide - XX Points
ect ect ect...

Each Farseer may take 1 rune from the following (Ancient Farseer's may take up to two)
RoWarding - XX points
RoWitnessing - XX points
ect ect ect...

Just to explain a few things I added:
Seer: The farseer may use up to two different psychic powers a turn, any sucessful atempts to nulify either power must be re-rolled.

Master Seer: The Farseer may use up to three psychic powers a turn, each power may be used a maximumm of twice per turn, any sucessful atempts to nulify either power must be re-rolled.

Distort: Like nightshields (range of all weapons fired at unit is reduced by 6") units assaulting count as moving through difficult terrain

Amplify: All farseer powers cast within the unit have +6" range

Protect: short ranged shooting attack? unit assaulting counts as moving through dangerous terrain, models removed as casualty on a 1 or 2? not completely decided on this, but something to stop the council getting murdered by deep strikers.


This would stop us making yet another HQ entry, but still allows for an independant farseer as well as a council. Thoughts?

Beautiful. Can't think of too much of a way to improve. Would each Verdent have a power of their own, or would the unit as a whole benefit from only one? Further, if they each have one, would the effects stack, or simply be redundancies?

Gorechild wrote:
This I agree with, they can't effectivly perform both roles. Adding another (I'm guessing elite) unit will crowd the slot even more, but I can't see any other option other than biting the bullet and saying goodbye to the death star super killy seer council (I wouldnt complain about this though tbh).

Unfortunately, this seems to be the case. I would hate to add in another elite (because I want to take 5 elites with only 3 slots), but I think this is the best solution. I think support council should be the primary function. A second "Verdent" (love the name) unit for CC would be ideal.

Woo finally some feedback Thanks TheRedArmy.
I was thinking that Ampify would stack (ie if 3 use it the range is increased by 18"), Depending on how it would work, protect's strength could be related to how many verdants use it that turn.
I'm not sure about distort, purely because if all 9 verdents used it you'd be able to reduce range by 54", making the council basically unshootable (amybe adding "the range of all weapons fired at unit is reduced by 6" down to a minimum of 6"" or 12"? or down to half its normal range?

I was thinking as the Verdant's to be the support for the council (as it's means new/fresh/growing). They would be the initiates to the Path of the Seer. Then leaving the warlocks as the new elite unit (like nobz, they'd both lead units and join together into a single hammer unit).

Distort sounds like a good psychic power, to replace one of the offensive ones if the Farseer (council) is moved to support and a different psycher is moved to offense.

As to the defense against deep strikers, well, we've discussed having Eldritch Storm be an anti-deep strike power instead. It could simply be that any unit which would land within 12" of the model casting Eldritch Storm suffers a mishap instead.
There are a lot of permutations we've hashed on this, naturally, but you get the effect. I'd add a small note to it stating it can't be used while inside a vehicle or building (sending up a lightning storm into the roof of a bunker is hazardous)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.s. I might've missed this, but an alternative to the Warlock problem could be found in the Dawn of War II game. You have a Warlock leader which is a potent and, for the game, powerful offensive psycher and then you get lesser Warlocks in the normal units.

This stronger warlock could be a HQ choice on it's own, focusing on martial arts and offensive psychic powers (battlefield application Mind War, etc) while lesser Warlocks are the ones you get as bodyguards in council and Guardian units - more appropriate for a unit sergeant.

The lesser warlocks could simply have a single passive power "Any unit containing at least one <lesser warlock> is emboldened, and are able to re-roll any failed leadership tests".
Destructor can then be made more powerful, same with Enhance, as befitting a solitary HQ choice with an estimate cost of around 80 excluding gear.

Mahtamori wrote: Distort sounds like a good psychic power, to replace one of the offensive ones if the Farseer (council) is moved to support and a different psycher is moved to offense.

I can't remember if I put this in the suggestion but I was intending to remove all the offensive powers from the farseer. As I see it they are a support unit and shoud be used purely for support, not with a few random offensive powers, offensive powers are the Warlocks job IMO.

Mahtamori wrote:As to the defense against deep strikers, well, we've discussed having Eldritch Storm be an anti-deep strike power instead. It could simply be that any unit which would land within 12" of the model casting Eldritch Storm suffers a mishap instead.
There are a lot of permutations we've hashed on this, naturally, but you get the effect. I'd add a small note to it stating it can't be used while inside a vehicle or building (sending up a lightning storm into the roof of a bunker is hazardous)

Rather than it being a fixed "within 12" of the unit" I'd like to see the Farseers call down the storm at range, something like "Place a marker anywhere within range, If the farseer can draw LOS to the marker it will not scatter, if it cannot be seen then it scatters 2D6". Until the next Eldar turn, any unit that deep strikes within 12" of the marker will suffer a mishap on a D6 roll of 1,2 or 3". It will allow them to support their army by protecting flanks and detering DS-ers from harrassing important units.

Gorechild wrote:Woo finally some feedback Thanks TheRedArmy.
I was thinking that Ampify would stack (ie if 3 use it the range is increased by 18"), Depending on how it would work, protect's strength could be related to how many verdants use it that turn.
I'm not sure about distort, purely because if all 9 verdents used it you'd be able to reduce range by 54", making the council basically unshootable (amybe adding "the range of all weapons fired at unit is reduced by 6" down to a minimum of 6"" or 12"? or down to half its normal range?

I also agree with Amplify stacking. I think protect, at least the way it is now, shouldn't be stacked. Protect could unleash an effect much like the Venomthrope from Tyranids - The council gets Defense Grenades, a cover save, and units assaulting count as dangerous. All that together might be too much, unless the power is heftily priced (which also means that you wouldn't want to take more than one with it), but two separate powers doing the two relevant things could work.

Protect (Verdent Power) XX points - The Seer Council counts as having defensive grenades, and any unit wishing to assault must take a dangerous terrain test. For every 2 models with this power beyond the first, the dangerous terrain test is failed on one higher (3 would cause the test to fail on 1-2, 5 would cause the test to fail on 1-3, etc.) [The language needs work, but the idea is understood, I think]

Warp Space (Verdent Power) XX points - The Seer Council counts as having both the Stealth USR for all models in the unit (including independent characters) and a permanent 6+ cover save. For every 2 models with this power beyond the first, the cover save increases by 1.

I like this because if you want to always run them in the open, you can spam Warp Space, or if you always get assaulted, you can make units short of SS Terminators very queasy.

Gorechild wrote:I was thinking as the Verdant's to be the support for the council (as it's means new/fresh/growing). They would be the initiates to the Path of the Seer. Then leaving the warlocks as the new elite unit (like nobz, they'd both lead units and join together into a single hammer unit).

It sucks that they are elite, but agreed. They don't fit anywhere else. Unfortunately. Just make Harlies Fast Attack. Do it, GW.

Mahtamori wrote:As to the defense against deep strikers, well, we've discussed having Eldritch Storm be an anti-deep strike power instead. It could simply be that any unit which would land within 12" of the model casting Eldritch Storm suffers a mishap instead.
There are a lot of permutations we've hashed on this, naturally, but you get the effect. I'd add a small note to it stating it can't be used while inside a vehicle or building (sending up a lightning storm into the roof of a bunker is hazardous)

Gorechild wrote:Rather than it being a fixed "within 12" of the unit" I'd like to see the Farseers call down the storm at range, something like "Place a marker anywhere within range, If the farseer can draw LOS to the marker it will not scatter, if it cannot be seen then it scatters 2D6". Until the next Eldar turn, any unit that deep strikes within 12" of the marker will suffer a mishap on a D6 roll of 1,2 or 3". It will allow them to support their army by protecting flanks and detering DS-ers from harrassing important units.

I'm kinda against making Storm a DS defense. It makes sense, and I definitely get the merit, but I think storm could still be close to what it is today (more effective against vehicles) and have a different power for Deep Strikers. I don't know in what manifestation it would take (maybe like the rumor of the new GK anti-DS power) and keep Storm as a pretty ineffective anti-infantry blast that has uses against vehicles.

...On second thought, the DS power is warming up to me. Perhaps we could make it an entire reserve thing - The Eldar player could make Outflankers re-roll and DS re-roll too.

I can't remember if I put this in the suggestion but I was intending to remove all the offensive powers from the farseer. As I see it they are a support unit and shoud be used purely for support, not with a few random offensive powers, offensive powers are the Warlocks job IMO.

Agreed.

The thing is, if we allow a more powerful Warlock (since I am limited to 3rd and 4th edition codex for fluff, how does this work with fluff?), Eldritch Storm is a good power to have as reserve for them. At least in general shape and form.

If Warlock is not chosen for this, I do remember from 3rd edition that Craftworlds are repositories of highly advanced weapons of mass extinction. Essentially, you could just dump powerful (one-shot?) abilities on an Autarch to make him more offensive, for example.

But, the big question for Council, Guardian, and HQ:
Are Warlocks mini-psychers or normal psychers? Is there room for venerable Warlocks, and if so how are the more normal Warlocks shaped?

Looks like the Verdants take the place of Warlocks in Gorechild's suggestion. Let me just paint how I'd envision a Venerable :

Roughly 60 points
WS 6 | BS 6 | S 3 | T 3 | W 3 | I 6 | A 3 | LD 10
Witchblade, Shuriken Pistol, Ghost Helm (4+), Rune Armour (4++)
Choose at least one psychic power (rolled as in core rule book):
Destructor (20 points). Template, S6 AP3.
Eldritch Storm (25 points). Large Blast, S6 AP-, Barrage (unit(s) will move as if in difficult terrain in their next movement phase).
Soul Rend (10 points). Use at any time a wound with a witchblade or singing spear has been confirmed. The wounded model suffers instant death and may not take an armour save against this attack.
Buffet (20 points). Use instead of shooting. Usable in close combat. All non-vehicles and non-monstrous creatures under a template are pushed straight away from the Warlock until they no longer touch the template and make an immediate dangerous terrain test.

Mahtamori wrote:
But, the big question for Council, Guardian, and HQ:
Are Warlocks mini-psychers or normal psychers? Is there room for venerable Warlocks, and if so how are the more normal Warlocks shaped?

To be honest I don't really see the need for a Warlock unit or HQ. I though (originally) that the only reason we were splitting the warocks was so that we could make them solid unit leaders without completely breaking the Council? If we made the existing Warlocks really worth 30-40 points as a unit leader for Guardians, Storm Guardians and Wraithguard, they could be the proper psykers that we were trying to introduce across the army. Then replacing 'locks with the Verdants would mean the Seer Council could still perform brilliantly doing what its meant to do, but not be the deathstar that it is in 4th Ed.

Mahtamori wrote:
Looks like the Verdants take the place of Warlocks in Gorechild's suggestion. Let me just paint how I'd envision a Venerable :

Roughly 60 points
WS 6 | BS 6 | S 3 | T 3 | W 3 | I 6 | A 3 | LD 10
Witchblade, Shuriken Pistol, Ghost Helm (4+), Rune Armour (4++)
Choose at least one psychic power (rolled as in core rule book):
Destructor (20 points). Template, S6 AP3.
Eldritch Storm (25 points). Large Blast, S6 AP-, Barrage (unit(s) will move as if in difficult terrain in their next movement phase).
Soul Rend (10 points). Use at any time a wound with a witchblade or singing spear has been confirmed. The wounded model suffers instant death and may not take an armour save against this attack.
Buffet (20 points). Use instead of shooting. Usable in close combat. All non-vehicles and non-monstrous creatures under a template are pushed straight away from the Warlock until they no longer touch the template and make an immediate dangerous terrain test.

If we are going with a Warlock HQ then this seems ok.
Destructor - Greatly improved, don't know if there is precident for anything like this (appart from being placed on a tank). I think 20pts is a little low for the possibility of being able to wipe out am in-cover marine unit in 1 pop. Costed appropriatly I could get on board with it though.
Eldritch Storm - My first impression was "night spinner lite", I don't know how useful it would be if the "counts as being in difficult and dangerous terrain" are more widely available though. I'd see much more use for it if it was.... Large Blast, S6 AP-, Barrage (Area under the template counts as impassable to any deep striking units until the start of the next Eldar turn).
Soul Rend- Again I like this but just to clarify, would this be usable muliple times a turn? The way its phrased "any time" could suggest you you can just use it on any wound that goes through, if so i think 10pts is too much. If its only for 1 wound if you sucessfully pass a test, then I like it.
Buffet- I llike this a lot, I think it could end up with lots of rules queries, but who cares, it sounds interesting

Essentially, they all follow the rules for psychic powers, NOT Warlock powers.
Destructor - it's meant to wipe Astarte out, it's used at near point blank where they can protect themselves with Psychic Hoods, after all.
Eldritch Storm - is a bit improved, but I agree it's essentially a Night Spinner. Note however that the wording on the difficult terrain is different (it won't go away if the unit is charged). The power as I wrote it is probably too expensive.
Soul Rend - Normal psychic rules. One use per player turn. I did not intend to make you able to pick a Witchblade Force Weapon. Does work with thrown Singing Spears, though
"Any time" is to be read similar to "Used at the beginning of the turn". Nothing forces you to use it. Poorly written, I agree, though.

Buffet - you have no idea how many times I re-wrote this. First it was a power that simply pushed one target away from the Warlock (Force Push), but then I figured that it didn't make much sense or difference other than denying one single enemy uber-mensch a turn of CC.
Simply pushing the enemy away with a 1/6 chance of suffering a wound is in itself powerful. It won't save the Warlock's unit from an assault the next turn, but it will through a serious dampener on an enemy's ability to fight in CC for a turn until they are once again allowed to close in.
(Also note that the Warlock is in this incarnation a decent melee fighter, and Buffet is likely to remove enemies from his range of attack as well - thus being a slight deterrent from abusing it)

Well. The big question for a future codex stands: where are the Warlocks. I don't see them as anything less common than an apothecary, and particularly Ulthwé players have a lot of them.
Guardian sergeants?
Farseer minders?
Apothecary-esque?
Death Company-esque?

[hint] I'm waiting to see if dayve will throw a Seer Council/Farseer suggestion out there if he's lurking [/hint]

I'd like to see the Warlocks as a unit leader, but also a powerful model in its own right (like a Nob). Swap the combat prowess and 2nd wound for some nasty mid range psychic coolness. We could maybe go back to the previous suggestion of being able to use a Warlock to determine LOS for nearby Farseers, but if we stick with the ampify power, this might not be needed. YMMV.

I think a big thing we need to tackle now is the Farseer wargear. should we keep it simple (shuripistol + witchblade or SSpear + ghosthelm and runes)? or does anyone have anything more creative to chip in?
We seem to be loosing momentum and getting bogged down in something when there is so much more that we haven't been through properly. Once we've come to a conclusion on the other Farseer stuff we can have another look at warlocks.

I can't really think of anything that we need to add to the base wargear, but if we're having the number of runes and greater variety/level of powers, maybe have the witchblade and ghosthelm as optional. My thought is we can get the points up very quickly at current, so even if it's only reduces it by a few points it may be appreciated.

I think the general consensus would to get rid of spirit stones and just incorporate their effect into the basic cost, So you get 2 powers a turn as standard (3 for the ancient).

That would leave you with something like:

Wargear:
Rune Armour (4++)
Ghost Helm
Shuriken Pistol
Witchblade

Options:
May replace their Witchblade with a Singing Spear for free.
Each Farseer can take up to 2 of he following runes (ancients may take 3):
Runes of Warding - XX points
Runes of Witnessing - XX points
Runes of Ful - XX points
Runes of .........
Runes of .........

Each Farseer may take up to 4 psychic powers:
Doom - XX points
Fortune - XX points
Guide - XX points
Eldritch Storm - XX points
.............. - XX points

Gorechild wrote:[hint] I'm waiting to see if dayve will throw a Seer Council/Farseer suggestion out there if he's lurking [/hint]

I'm feeling really ill... my head is too clogged up to compose a unit entry that could potentially be very complicated...
Plus i've been playing Fallout Online, and i love Fallout... so its distracting.

dayve110 wrote:

Gorechild wrote:[hint] I'm waiting to see if dayve will throw a Seer Council/Farseer suggestion out there if he's lurking [/hint]

I'm feeling really ill... my head is too clogged up to compose a unit entry that could potentially be very complicated...
Plus i've been playing Fallout Online, and i love Fallout... so its distracting.

Fair enough dude, I'll carry on my rambling by myself then

Gorechild wrote:
Wargear:
Rune Armour (4++)
Ghost Helm
Shuriken Pistol
Witchblade

Options:
May replace their Witchblade with a Singing Spear for free.

Each Farseer can take up to 2 of he following runes (ancients may take 3):
Runes of Warding - XX points
Runes of Witnessing - XX points
Runes of Ful - XX points
Runes of Dispersing - XX points
Runes of Channeling - XX points

Each Farseer may take up to 4 psychic powers:
Doom - XX points
Fortune - XX points
Guide - XX points
Eldritch Storm - XX points
Curse - XX points

A few more ideas came to me during an very dull lunch break

Curse - A vehicle version of doom, was my initial thought (trying to find a way to hep counter the meta game and mix things up a bit). All glancing hits against a cursed vehicle count as penetrating. I can't really tell if this is horribly OP, but it could be changed about, I like the general idea though.

Runes of Channeling - Thinking about re hashing the old idea of being able to use LOS/measure range from a friendly warlock instead of the farseer. dont know if its needed, but it could be a great way to include the idea if we decided to stick with the idea.

Runes of Dispersing - don't know what to do about it or even what to suggest just as a thought as another way to nullify enemy psychic powers, any suggestions would be good

Runes of Dispersing: Any non-template enemy psychic power that effects the farseer or his unit may instead effect a valid target within 6".

Does that work? Maybe only on a Ld test.

I really like this, I think this would make the Eldar a legit team again. I probably have to agree most with the increase range on the guardian weapons. 12"? Terrible... Maybe whenever they redo the codex it will look something like this.

@Pyro- I like it, but it seems a little more direct that the effects of the other runes. I'll have another think of another approach, but your idea would certainly work. If they were named RoDeflection it would fit though

Hmm. Any chance you guys could compile the best stuff so far into an article, i would love to see your ideas. My input: shuriken Cataplults R18" Strength 4 AP 6 Assault 2.
I can't think of anything else as i don't play eldar.

Perkustin wrote:Hmm. Any chance you guys could compile the best stuff so far into an article, i would love to see your ideas. My input: shuriken Cataplults R18" Strength 4 AP 6 Assault 2.
I can't think of anything else as i don't play eldar.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ideas_for_5th_edition_Eldar_codex,_a_compilation

It's very high level, no specific numbers. Feel free to contribute the stuff I've missed, but try to keep exact numbers out of it and try to keep ideas that have been shot down horribly out of it (such as increased T or some silliness like that)

Mahtamori wrote:

Perkustin wrote:Hmm. Any chance you guys could compile the best stuff so far into an article, i would love to see your ideas. My input: shuriken Cataplults R18" Strength 4 AP 6 Assault 2.
I can't think of anything else as i don't play eldar.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ideas_for_5th_edition_Eldar_codex,_a_compilation

It's very high level, no specific numbers. Feel free to contribute the stuff I've missed, but try to keep exact numbers out of it and try to keep ideas that have been shot down horribly out of it (such as increased T or some silliness like that)

I'm slowly, very slowly, putting it all into a fandex, once we've covered all the units and ironed out the stumbling blocks I'll post it. Its taken me a couple weeks to do just a few pages, so its not going to be any time soon

@Mahtamori - Whats your view on the Runes and other Farseer power?

Mahtamori wrote:

Perkustin wrote:Hmm. Any chance you guys could compile the best stuff so far into an article, i would love to see your ideas. My input: shuriken Cataplults R18" Strength 4 AP 6 Assault 2.
I can't think of anything else as i don't play eldar.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ideas_for_5th_edition_Eldar_codex,_a_compilation

It's very high level, no specific numbers. Feel free to contribute the stuff I've missed, but try to keep exact numbers out of it and try to keep ideas that have been shot down horribly out of it (such as increased T or some silliness like that)

I like this a lot

Gorechild wrote:

Mahtamori wrote:

Perkustin wrote:Hmm. Any chance you guys could compile the best stuff so far into an article, i would love to see your ideas. My input: shuriken Cataplults R18" Strength 4 AP 6 Assault 2.
I can't think of anything else as i don't play eldar.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ideas_for_5th_edition_Eldar_codex,_a_compilation

It's very high level, no specific numbers. Feel free to contribute the stuff I've missed, but try to keep exact numbers out of it and try to keep ideas that have been shot down horribly out of it (such as increased T or some silliness like that)

I'm slowly, very slowly, putting it all into a fandex, once we've covered all the units and ironed out the stumbling blocks I'll post it. Its taken me a couple weeks to do just a few pages, so its not going to be any time soon

@Mahtamori - Whats your view on the Runes and other Farseer power?

Alright, let's see...

Gorechild wrote:A few more ideas came to me during an very dull lunch break

Curse - A vehicle version of doom, was my initial thought (trying to find a way to hep counter the meta game and mix things up a bit). All glancing hits against a cursed vehicle count as penetrating. I can't really tell if this is horribly OP, but it could be changed about, I like the general idea though.

Runes of Channeling - Thinking about re hashing the old idea of being able to use LOS/measure range from a friendly warlock instead of the farseer. dont know if its needed, but it could be a great way to include the idea if we decided to stick with the idea.

Runes of Dispersing - don't know what to do about it or even what to suggest just as a thought as another way to nullify enemy psychic powers, any suggestions would be good

Curse - Well, could do with a different name more appropriate. Weakened Integrity or something to the effect. It's not horribly overpowered at all, until you take into account the plethora of weapons Eldar have that simply causes glancing blows: Eldritch Storm, Vibro Cannon, D-Cannon, D-Gun, Haywire Grenades (several units), and of course the multitude of high-attack S6 weapons against the rather common AV11/12.
It's good. Worthy of being a psychic test and worthy of replacing Eldritch Storm (in favour of making Farseers more (de)buff oriented).

Runes of Channeling - depending entirely on what happens to the council. For solitary Farseer design, I think this should be a baseline ability, while for council design the council itself should be self-sufficient.

Runes of Dispersing - Might be good for a psychic power or a lucky charm. I'm not certain whether it should be permanent (against the appropriate army it'll be over powered to the extreme, more so than RoWard). Could be something like a one-use "my psychic power just succeeded and you can't do bugger all about it, and I don't care what special character you are".

Other than this, I must admit I've been phased out of the specifics about Farseers. Something like "why fix what is working bloody awesome?". For me it's the offensive psychic powers that are pitiful little things. I mean, Eldritch Storm (current version) would be an alright Warlock power, but not a Farseer power.

Mahtamori wrote:Other than this, I must admit I've been phased out of the specifics about Farseers. Something like "why fix what is working bloody awesome?". For me it's the offensive psychic powers that are pitiful little things. I mean, Eldritch Storm (current version) would be an alright Warlock power, but not a Farseer power.

I'm not saying Seer's aren't awesome, I'm just trying to give remove their direct killing power and sort out the Seer council.

I'll keep working on an suggestion by myself for a while, but due to the underwhelming response and debate the farseers seem to be causing I think it might be a good idea to move along to something else.

Special characters? At the moment we have Eldrad, Yriel and the Lords. I (shock horror) think its time Eldrad is removed. He's been presumed dead for ages and (if we incude Farseer Ancient) they will be very similar. Yriel could have an additional Iyanden themed autarch stratagem; improved wraith sight or something? Other than that I think he's a deacent HQ.

The main issue is the Pheonix Lords. Would they be best kept as a single entry (to allow for a few more SC's) or to seperate them all to allow them to be more individual. I think introducing craftworld specific SC's would make for a more interesting army llist, whilst keeping the lords as a more generic HQ. Maybe identical stats, a unit of their aspect is scoring but each has a fancy weapon?

Thoughts?

Agreed, we seem to be going round in circles with the farseers at current, we've more or less have them sorted out. We just need to choose one path or the other and add points cost and they would be done. So, on to Pheonix Lords? I guess I'll rattle off some thoughts.

The PLs should keep the same base statline, so long as each aspect keeps the same as well. If we change the stats for each aspect then we should have that reflected on the PLs. As for overcrowding the SC options, I'dd be more worried about overcrowding the HQ slot in general.

A PL should be able to take a retinue of their aspect as the one HQ choice.

PLs should be limited to joining only joining units of their aspect. I honestly didn't realise that wasn't the case until someone on dakka wrote up having one and a farseer with a full unit of harlequins. But that thought could simply me being picky.

All units of their aspect should gain something while the PL is alive, not just the unit it has joined. Gorechild's idea of being scoring is a good one, maybe not limited to "while alive" for that. Though the thought of having 3 scoring units in place only to have their PL taken out with a lucky shot on the last turn, thereby no longer being considered scoring, entertains me greatly and would fit well with the "one mistake can cost you" play style we currently have, so honestly I'd prefer even that to be "while alive". Alternatives: fearless to the aspect, all of the aspect count as having both exarch powers, aspect's type changes to troop or "may be taken as troops", +1 WS/BS, aspect may always use PL's LD, a 3rd all encompassing Exarch power... umm, that's all of the top of my head.

They should have one for each aspect. I won't budge from this. The only problem with that now is that if each has some unique equipment or rule they may take up too much space, yet at the same time I wouldn't want to make them generic.

Over all I feel have a PL of a particular aspect should make you want to take a good showing of that aspect. To that I would personally prefer the scoring unit, troop choice and 3rd power options on all.

"A Pheonix Lord may only join a unit of their aspect, If a pheonix lord is taken as a HQ then their aspect can be purchased as Troops instead of Elite/Fast attack/Heavy support. Pheonix Lords know all the exarch powers of their respective aspect."

They could have a 4+ inv accross the board, 3+ for the DA dude (or 5++/4++?)

If they become troops instead of remaining in their FOC slot but being able to score you could have very themed armys. What do you think would be best?

Purchased as troops is very risky.

Feugan and 6 dragon wagons? Thats a hell of a lot of firepower, and the elite and HS slots haven't even been touched.

Maugan freeing up the HS slots by moving 2 or 3 (improved) reaper squads to troops? Reapers camping on home objectives and decimating enemies from long range?

Scoring is good.... taking them as troops is really freaking amazing.

Part of the balance of the current codex is that several good units (really, just banshees and dragons) are in the elite slot, and everyone and their brother takes two squads of dragons.

A conceptual decision should be made regarding the HQ SCs - do we want to stay with the PLs, or do we want to go with other characters. Do we want these characters to have an effect on the FOC, ala codex: SM characters?

All PLs should have a 4++ ... anything less is insulting, really. A lowly autarch gets a 4++ invuln and they don't? The prospect of a fortuned PL comes at the expense of having upwards of 350pts invested in the HQ slot alone (PL + farseer)

Requiring a PL to be attached to their aspect (or, put another way, banning them from attaching to anything not of their aspect) is fine, but they need to really add something to their aspect. A common criticism of the PLs in their current incarnation is that they do nothing for their aspect more than an exarch does, at 10x the price. Another criticism is that for the price of a PL, you can get an entire 2nd squad of the aspect, with all the fixings. In other words, the PLs need to bring something special to the table - a honest-to-god reason to take them.

I don't see why Dire Avenger lord would be better at defense that way than the others, unless Dire Avengers themselves are changed to be more of a hold-the-line aspect and less a kill-them-with-liberal-fire.

I'm all for allowing troop Banshees and Scorpions, but I dread troop choice Fire Dragons...

There's really two ways of dealing with Phoenix Lords: Keep Fuegan et al or simply have each and every one of them be named Phoenix Lord (of this aspect here).
The first option will have the HQ section remain crowded, while the second option will be a bit more difficult to make neat and to the point.
I mean, a special character that's Squad Leader X with +2 BS/WS/I/W - how fun is that?

The best way to go about it is probably how they currently have it. One stat line, list of wargear for each one, and 3-4 pages of rules. We can't fully have a generic PL as the the pts for each one would have to be different, even with the current Exarch powers there's as much as a 25pt difference between two Exarches taking both.

Just to see if we're all on the same page, does anyone have any objections/reasons against PLs effecting the entire aspect in some way?

Gorechild wrote:"A Pheonix Lord may only join a unit of their aspect, If a pheonix lord is taken as a HQ then their aspect can be purchased as Troops instead of Elite/Fast attack/Heavy support. Pheonix Lords know all the exarch powers of their respective aspect."

Instead or in addition to? Either way I very much Like this idea. Though I do also have the concern that we'll see 6-9 units of Fire Dragons as a standard, then again this threat could significantly cut back on the number of mech lists. Seriously though, if we bring Fire Dragon's points cost in line with their value would that fix how broken that would be?

If it's "in addition to" we should probably also have all the aspect count as scoring, that way we don't have any confusion of "Was it this unit of Banshees that are scoring, while this unit of identically painted/equipped Banshees?".

Additionally, if we do have the troop bit, would adjusting the PLs' point value to reflect the effect of an average of 3 units being taken as troops be help.

Possible Aspect wide powers:
Scorpions: Stealth (fair simple that one)
Banshees: Hit & Run (honestly I think that it should be an exarch power. Why would a highly nimble first strike aspect not teach its warriors to break off for a second assault?)
Dragons:
Dire Avengers: Defend reduced attacks by 2
Shining Spears: may re-roll LD to use hit & run
Hawks: roll 2d6 for fleet, choosing the better
Spiders: may re-roll their assault move
Reapers: Roll 3 dice for scatter taking the lowest 2


Random off topic thought: For anti-deep strike, Dire avengers (or a different squad) add one to the number of shots/attacks made against a unit that deep striked the previous turn. The possibility of a 10 man squad firing off 40+ shots (bladestorm included) should give pause to anyone deep striking too close... if not, doom/guide and chuck a second squad into the mix. It would definitely define their roll as hold the line however.

The troop choice thing is a bit generic and leads to a risk of spamming. Ideally an Eldar player wouldn't want more than one or two squads of any given aspect in the first place, since filling an entire troop section with the same aspect hints that that aspect isn't specialized.

What you do need is some way to ease the congestion in elite section for more melee oriented armies and the congestion in heavy support for ranged oriented.

My preferred method is simply remove Independent Character from Phoenix Lords and let their Disciples say "Up to X of their aspect may be added to the Phoenix Lord's squad for Y points per model".
This way you give a "free" slot (let's not forget that Dire Avengers are troop) but without giving up more kill points and sticks a middle finger at scenarios which have a single HQ unit from each side alone on the board.

If Eldar are missing a more sturdy unit which can claim objectives, then Dire Avengers is an obvious target since they are troops and already suffer from similarity-syndrome. Altering them to more heavily rely on Shimmer Shield (say it's a straight up 5++) and Defend and then change Blade Storm (heresy!) into a ranged defensive power so that you can stick them down on objectives.

Pyro-Druid: in my own experience Eldar aren't in very dire need of being able to react decently to deep strikers which drop down and then wait for next turn to assault, it's more the deep strikers which drop down and then run up to you and smash your face on the same turn.
If Blade Storm was changed to be anti-infantry deep strike, I'd more rather see it as "Any unit deep striking within weapons range of the Dire Avengers will immediately suffer a barrage from the Dire Avengers after landing".
This could lead to a situation where a single Dire Avenger sqaud shoots 100+ shots in the opponent's movement phase, but the more common situation would be 20+20 shots (enemy movement then your own shooting) or 20->assaulted.

SOME sort of deep strike deterrent is necessary, or we'll keep seeing Mechdar forever since their foot armies can't really defend against deep strikers that may assault after deep striking. (Or against deep strikers with strong fire power)

One option would be to alter the way in which deepstrike occurs.

We could, for instance, add deepstrike disruption to the fluff that surrounds eldar (since they are all psychic, to some degree) and make it so that any unit deepstriking within X" (12) have an effect, such as always scattering 2d6" - with no modification of the distance for any reason whatsoever - so decent of angels and drop pods both scatter normally. Or, deepstrikers within X" roll a d6 and suffer a mishap-misplaced (or whatever it is called) on a 4+, a delayed on a 6+.

The enemy could always avoid this rule by simply not deepstriking close - essentially removing the benefit that deepstriking provides, which is an alpha-strike capability.

OK, I'm still a bit ill, but feel alot better... if i don't explain anything clearly then just say so and i can edit this...
I know you want to move on, but i missed out on the Seer Council discussion so i'm posting it anyway (And this will make Gorechild happy at any rate)
So... on with the show!!!

Farseer 5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 -

Unit Type: Infantry (or Jetbike if mounted on a jetbike)

Wargear: Ghosthelm, shuriken pistol, witchblade and rune armour

Special Rules: independent Character, Fleet of Foot, Farseer Psychic powers (and any other racial special rules we come up with)

Options: A Farseer may be given any of the following:
Upgrade witchblade to singing spear – X points
Eldar Jetbike – X points

A Farseer may choose upto 2 of the following runes:
Runes of warding – X points
Runes of witnessing – X points
Runes of Guidance – X points
Runes of Dispersing – X points
Runes of Fortitude – X points

A Farseer must take between 1 and 4 psychic powers:
Doom – X points
Fortune – X points
Guide – X points
Curse – X points
Isha's blessing – X points
Eldritch Storm – X points

Seer Council
Ancient 4 4 2 4 3 4 1 10 -
Farseer 5 5 3 3 3 5 2 10 -
Verdant 4 4 3 3 1 4 1 8 -

Unit Type: Infantry

Unit Size: The Seer council must consist of at least one Ancient and 3 Verdants. Upto 2 Farseers may be purchased and upto 6 additional Verdants.

Wargear: Witchblade, Rune armour, shuriken pistol. Farseers and Ancients also have ghosthelms.

Special Rules: Fleet of Foot (and any other racial special rules we come up with). Farseers and Ancients have Farseer psychic powers, Verdants have Verdant Psychic powers.

Options: A Farseer has all the same options as in the Farseer entry, however s/he may not take a Jetbike.

An Ancient has all the same options as in the Farseer entry, however s/he may not take a Jetbike. In addition, an Ancient may take upto 3 sets of Runes and must purchase at least 1 Farseer psychic power, with no upper limit. (So could take them all)

Any verdant may replace their witchblade with a singing spear – X points

For Every 3 Verdants you may select one verdant power:
Distort – X points
Augment – X points
Endure – X points
Channel – X points

Warlock 4 4 3 3 2 5 2 9 -

Unit Type: Infantry (Or jetbike if mounted on a jetbike)

Wargear: Shuriken pistol, witchblade, rune armour
Special Rules: Fleet of Foot, Warlock Psychic powers (and any other racial special rules we come up with)

Options: A Warlock may be given any of the following:
Upgrade witchblade to singing spear – X points
Eldar Jetbike – X points

A Warlock may choose 1 of the following runes:
Runes of warding – X points
Runes of witnessing – X points
Runes of Guidance – X points
Runes of Dispersing – X points
Runes of Fortitude – X points

A Warlock must take between 1 and 2 psychic powers:
Conceal - X points
Embolden - X points
Enhance - X points
Regrowth - X points
Unnatural Speed - X points
Destructor - X points
Spear of Khaine - X points
Sunder - X points
Mind War - X points

Spiritseers and Shadowseers will have a differnt statline to any of the above, with access to different powers/options. As a spirit seer with Regrowth and Runes of Fortitude would be rather sickening with some Wraithguard.

And now... for the describy bits!

Farseer – A Farseer may cast upto 2 Powers per turn.
Ancient Farseer – An Ancient may cast upto 3 powers per turn, you may cast the same power twice.
Warlock – A Warlocks first power is passive, and is “always on” and does not require a psychic test. If a second power is also chosen, then this power required a psychic to use as normal.
Verdant – A Verdants powers do not require tests to use and are considered to be passive.
Rune Armour – Rune armour provides the wearer with an Invulnerable save. In most cases this is a save of 4++, however, the Ancient receives a 3++.
Witchblade – A witch blade always wounds on a 2+, Against a vehicle is counts the users strength as 9. In the hands of a Warlock, a witchblade will also count as a power weapon. In the hand of a Farseer or an Ancient, the witchblade will also count as a force weapon.
Singing spear – 2-handed, follows all the rules of a witchblade. It may be thrown in the shooting phase with the following profile:
Range: 12” Strength: X AP: N/A Type: Assault 1
Runes of warding – Any enemy attempting to cast a psychic power must roll and additoinal D6 and add it to their total to cast. Any roll exceeding their Ld value will trigger a Perils attack.
Runes of witnessing – Any model with these runes must roll an additional D6 to cast powers, discarding the highest result.
Runes of Guidance – Any Friendly unit attempting to Deepstrike within 12” of a model with these runes will only scatter D6”, if the deepstriking unit would land within 6” of the model with these runes, the unit may for forgo its shooting in order to charge this turn.
Runes of Dispersing – Any enemy Psychic power that targets a unit within 6” or originates within 6” of a model with these runes is cancelled on a 5+.
Runes of Fortitude – Any unit that a model with these runes joins gains a 5++ invulnerable save.
Doom - Either, All 'to wound' rolls against this unit can be re-rolled until the start of the next Eldar turn or, the target unit must re-roll all successful saves until the start of the next Eldar turn.
Fortune – As is now
Guide – As is now
Curse – May be cast on any enemy vehicle or vehicle squadron within 24”, all rolls to penetrate the vehicle can be re-rolled until the start of the next Eldar turn. (doom for vehicles)
Isha's blessing - Nominate one unit with a model within 24” of the Farseer. Either all 'to wound' rolls this units makes have a -1 modifier until the start of the next Eldar turn or the target unit reduces its WS by 1 until the start of the next Eldar turn.
Eldritch Storm - Any time an enemy unit attempts to deep strike on scatters within 4D6 inches of the Farseer (roll each time a unit deep strikes) then that unit will count as being delayed on a roll of 5+. If the unit succeeds in coming through they must take a dangerous terrain test. (If the unit lands in difficult terrain then they will be forced to take a second dangerous terrain test) The only exception to this rule is if the unit mishaps and the Eldar player places the unit, in that case Eldritch Storm has no effect.
Conceal - The psyker and his unit receive the USR: Stealth and gains a 6+ cover save when in the open. (which stacks to a 5+ with stealth)
Embolden - The psyker and any member of his unit may re-roll any Ld tests they are required to make.
Enhance - The psyker and every member of the unit he has joined gain +(1) to any of the following: WS, BS, S, T, I, A. The increases must be chosen before the game starts, and cannot change during its course. Each stat may only be enhanced once.
Regrowth – The psyker and his unit receive the USR:FNP.
Unnatural Speed – The psyker and his unit receive the USR's: Move through cover and skilled rider. In addition, the psyker and his unit may run 2D6, but may not assault in the same turn as doing so.
Destructor – Psychic shooting attack with the following profile:
Range: Template S: 5 AP: 4 Assault 1
Spear of Khaine - Psychic shooting attack with the following profile:
Range: 18” line S: 8 AP: 2 Assault 1, Lance
Sunder - Psychic shooting attack with the following profile:
Range: 12” S: 8 AP: 1 Assault 1, Melta
Mind War - This psychic power is a psychic shooting attack. Nominate one unengaged model in line of sight within 18” of the psyker. Both players roll a D6 and add the Ld of their respective models; the Eldar player adds one to this roll. For each point the psyker wins by, the target loses a wound, with no armour or cover saves allowed.
Distort – All ranged weapons fired at the seer council, or any unit within X, has its range reduced by X (Where X is the current number of Verdants alive within the unit)
Augment – Any Farseer psychic power has its range increased by 3X (Where X is the current number of Verdants alive within the unit)
Endure – Any friendly unit within X” will count as stubborn (Where X is the current number of Verdants alive within the unit)
Channel – X/3 (rounding down) Farseer powers may be channelled each turn, when channelling a power, you may measure the origin from any other friendly psyker, that psyker may not use any power this turn that requires a psychic test. (Where X is the current number of Verdants alive within the unit)

just picking on a couple of things:
Conceal: if provided USR:Stealth, it should only provide 6+ cover (but this will stack to 5+)
Regrowth: Still don't agree with eldar getting access to FNP... but that may just be me.

Pyro-Druid wrote:just picking on a couple of things:
Conceal: if provided USR:Stealth, it should only provide 6+ cover (but this will stack to 5+)
Regrowth: Still don't agree with eldar getting access to FNP... but that may just be me.

Agreed on conceal, but as for Regrowth, remember that their Toughness is still only 3. It's not hard to ID them. It's a great power, but definitely situational. Against mech guard, there's too many ML or ML shots coming your way to want to use it over, say, fortune.

Pyro-Druid wrote:just picking on a couple of things:
Conceal: if provided USR:Stealth, it should only provide 6+ cover (but this will stack to 5+)
Regrowth: Still don't agree with eldar getting access to FNP... but that may just be me.

O yea.... Will edit it to 6+
As for Regrowth, i think most people dislike of FNP would be getting WG units and council deathstars with it. Which will be avoided. And with a name like Regrowth... its not really feeling no pain... just has a similar effect.

Hey guys,

I've been following the thread and feel it is time for me to interject with an observation or two. I started the first thread in order to open a discourse of ideas on how to bring the Eldar into 5th ed while remaining true to the Eldar back story and philosophy. I also was looking for ideas on how to have a balanced codex that allowed for a reasonable variety of builds. I never expected the thread to go into multiples or to spawn articles. The fact that it has is a testament to the creativity and passion of those participating in these threads.

Having said such, I would like to express the concern that we may have focused on the ideas to the point of loosing site of the Eldar. In essence, we have been looking so hard on watching where we step that we wandered off the path without noticing.

I bring this up because of the proposed farseer/warlock revisions and the numerous new units that are now being considered. One of the problems with the Eldar is that they have so many(some would say to many) units that care has to be taken when contemplating any new units because at some point some of the established units will be forced out of the coded by the newer ones.
[list
Don't get me wrong, I am in favour of new units as much as anyone(if not more so), but I also recognize the limitations of how many units can be in a single codex before a strict balancing mechanism has to be implemented. Also, the greater the number of units, the more heavy handed the balancing mechanism will have to be in order to help prevent exploitive builds. Such exploitive builds actually end up limiting the number of playable ones unless there ends up being several such builds. What I am getting at is that we should take care to not create auto win units/builds.

Next, I would like to point out that GW has taken steps to make the DE and Craftworld Eldar much more closely related and that we might want to look at the new DE for guidance on what we suggest for the next codex.

I bring this up because of the suggestion that was made to do away with spirit stones. In the DE codex,
soul stones are mentioned in the Incubi fluff as being used to build tormentors. While not exactly the same as spirit stones they are connected and the stones are an integral part of the CE backstory that I would hate to see completly removed.

Again, I think you guys are coming up with some amazing ideas and only wanted to suggest that we take a moment to remember what the CE are. A fast but fragile army of highly specialized units.

Oh yeah, one more thing before I go back to lurking. Wraithlords and guard will have to be revised for inv saves. This is because any Iyanden themed army is currently an automatic loss. To the DE's splinter weapons.

Will catch you guys later. Keep up the good work
, later

I agree and disagree with you post. Yes we do need to keep the fluff in mind, occasionally we have needed to step back a bit and acknowledge that we've strayed from from the fluff to much and need to pull it back in. But for the most part I feel we have kept to the fluff, the major points where we've strayed the furthest are when we've come across point that's left us asking "Why isn't this the case?" (most notably Aspect Lords).

As for adding new units, I don't feel we actually have as much as we've simply refined what was already there. The current seer council more or less exists, but if we leave it as is it will break as we revise Warlocks and Farseers, so we've simply addressed that problem.

@Focused - Re the spirit stones: I see were the issue is coming from, I phrased my ideas a little badly. I didn't mean to just remove them completely from fuff. The way I see it they are pretty much a "must have" so their effect and cost should just be built into the basic farseer. They'd still be there for fuff and everything, they'd just be 20 (?) points more expensive and able to cast 2 powers instead of 1 as standard. The fluff behind the spirit stones is key to alot of Eldar fuff and I really like it so I'm not wanting to just wipe them out of the codex.

@Dayve - I like it theres a few things to sort though.
Enhance should not boost T at all ever, being able to make T4 guardians would make DA's redundant and make Wraithguard even tougher. T5 JSJ jetbikes is also insane.

Were you intending Warlocks to be a unit in their own right then giving them power weapons will ake banshees useless, just as unit leaders it could be okay though, if not, then would rending be better?



Back to the PL's....I wasn't 100% about the aspect being troops, just thought I'd throw it out there. I like the retinue idea, it frees up a hotly contested Elite slot. I also agree that having some elite and some troops for the aspect would cause alot of confusion. If you're allowed to take them as a retinue then it would make sense to just add "all units of their aspect are scoring".

Gorechild wrote:@Focused - Re the spirit stones: I see were the issue is coming from, I phrased my ideas a little badly. I didn't mean to just remove them completely from fuff. The way I see it they are pretty much a "must have" so their effect and cost should just be built into the basic farseer. They'd still be there for fuff and everything, they'd just be 20 (?) points more expensive and able to cast 2 powers instead of 1 as standard. The fluff behind the spirit stones is key to alot of Eldar fuff and I really like it so I'm not wanting to just wipe them out of the codex.

Plus spirit stones are still a vehicle upgrade, and every model has a bajillion of them on their armour. Also there will most likely be a few paragraphs on their use and implimentation regarding direswords and exarch armour etc.

Gorechild wrote:@Dayve - I like it theres a few things to sort though.
Enhance should not boost T at all ever, being able to make T4 guardians would make DA's redundant and make Wraithguard even tougher. T5 JSJ jetbikes is also insane.

Were you intending Warlocks to be a unit in their own right then giving them power weapons will ake banshees useless, just as unit leaders it could be okay though, if not, then would rending be better?

I can take out the T, and i do not intend warlocks to be an upgrade for wraithguard anyway, spiritseers could be a seperate entry with a seperate list of powers to stop WG becoming uber (although if your paying £8.70 per model, i have no problem with WG being uber, you are giving up eating for a fortnight after all to build an army of them)
As war warlocks forming a unit... i really dislike deathstars, so i'd prefer not to have a unit of warlocks, if we did, i'd expect a cap of 5 and the cost to be astronomical considering all the powers involved. But for unit leaders the wraithsword PW could add much needed punch and threat to many a guardian unit.

Gorechild wrote:Back to the PL's....I wasn't 100% about the aspect being troops, just thought I'd throw it out there. I like the retinue idea, it frees up a hotly contested Elite slot. I also agree that having some elite and some troops for the aspect would cause alot of confusion. If you're allowed to take them as a retinue then it would make sense to just add "all units of their aspect are scoring".

Scoring sounds good.
But what about Mr Asurman?

dayve110 wrote:As war warlocks forming a unit... I really dislike deathstars, so i'd prefer not to have a unit of warlocks, if we did, i'd expect a cap of 5 and the cost to be astronomical considering all the powers involved

I agree, I'm not a fan of them becoming a unit in their own right either, I was just asking as many posters seem adament to give up their deathstar.

dayve110 wrote:

Gorechild wrote:Back to the PL's....I wasn't 100% about the aspect being troops, just thought I'd throw it out there. I like the retinue idea, it frees up a hotly contested Elite slot. I also agree that having some elite and some troops for the aspect would cause alot of confusion. If you're allowed to take them as a retinue then it would make sense to just add "all units of their aspect are scoring".

Scoring sounds good.
But what about Mr Asurman?

In answer to your question.....I completely forgot about him
Off the top of my head, a couple of options are:

Do nothing, the other lords could just have thier points cost slightly higher to reflect the advantages of their aspect being made scoring.

Give him another power (on top of the suggested other PL exarch power).

Make his abilities more powerful to ballance the cost with the other PL's

Give him special wargear that gives a bonus to all DA's (Shimmershields provide Inv even at range?)

Thoughts?

Some great ideas, thanks all.
Subscribed.

Personally I like the phoenix lords but they get into the shuffle with the other HQ choices and tend to lose out.
Their cost is the biggest issue as the other options really help the whole army.

Two possibles - lose them as HQ but preserve them as upgrades to exarchs. Statlines are as today for each of them minus wounds which max at two. The all confer the ability to "count as troops" for controlling objectives but limited to their own squad. This makes phoenix lords into super exarchs rather than HQs.

The other is to maintain them as HQs. Then buff them out a little more and add a couple abilities.

1. Confers stubborn rule to all aspect warriors within 12". Not just their own aspect. They are an inspiration to all much like an avatar but limited only to aspect warriors.
2. Makes all of their aspect "count as troops." A small variation is to allow HBs and SSs to be taken AS troop choices. Don't allow it for the others just to avoid weird spammed armies. Count as scoring units is enough incentive for the other aspects. Perhaps even breakdown based on type of aspect. Dire Avengers - possibly gain something to make them nastier in Asurmen's presence seeing they are already troops. Say preferred enemy to go along with stubborn or super defend - +1 to all saves in HTH. (i.e. 3+ armor saves and 4++ SS saves in HTH.)

The first option would see them used a lot more for special strike units.

@ DAaddict-

Or because the PLs are wanderers that no longer call any craftworld home and only appear in times of dire need, they are considered to be indepent characters that operate outside of the FOC.
Just an idea.

focusedfire wrote: @ DAaddict-

Or because the PLs are wanderers that no longer call any craftworld home and only appear in times of dire need, they are considered to be indepent characters that operate outside of the FOC.
Just an idea.

Idea! Just steal the wording from some other counts as HQ but doesnt use a HQ slot blah blah entry

What if Dire Avengers were made so special that they had to be upgraded to standard 16 points per model and removed from Troop selection in standard case? They'd probably go to Elite in that case (hello, guys, see you've got a crowd here), but play with the thought...

Farseer
Ancient Farseer
Warlock - fine
Verdant - fine
Rune Armour -fine
Witchblade -fine
Singing spear- fine
Runes of warding
Runes of witnessing - both of these are good, better than the current rules
Runes of Guidance - The d6" scatter is the more important part. can't think of assaulting with any of our DS units...
Runes of Dispersing - meh... warding is already brutal psychic defense. I'd rather have these be something which prevents nullification
Runes of Fortitude - have to vote no (or whatever it is we do when we disagree) - invulnerable save upgrades to units in a codex with fortune is a very risky thing. It depends entirely on what units the warlock can attach to - and the farseer!? A 5+ invulnerable on a wraithguard unit makes that unit ignore 55% of all wounds against it. Amazing, considering they are already one of the flat-out hardest to kill troop choices in the game.
Doom - Interesting change. I don't know if its good, overpowered, or underpowered, but i'd like to find out.
Fortune – As is now
Guide – As is now
Curse – why not just make this the function of doom on vehicles (i mean add it as a 2nd half to doom "if casted on a vehicle" etc)?
Isha's blessing - Seems more like Isha's curse, but interesting.
Eldritch Storm - could be more elegantly worded, but i like it. Perhaps it should be a fixed range.... i dunno, but i like the idea a lot.
Conceal - This interacts better with current rules, and makes the ability a benefit, even when already in cover. nice.
Embolden - yep
Enhance - So, this one is iffy as heck, and again, dependent entirely on what units the warlock can be a part of. As you have it drawn up, it seems warlocks are part of guardians only, so it isn't as risky, but this sort of power in wraithguard or a council could be broken as all get out.
Regrowth – As above - it isn't as bad as an invuln save because it can't be fortuned, but it depends no the units it can be attained on.
Unnatural Speed – interesting, both parts.
Destructor – is it a heavy or reg. flamer in the current codex?
Spear of Khaine - cool
Sunder - cool
Mind War - The important change here is the no cover. The +1 is nice, but i've always though cover from a mind war is rediculous.
Distort – nice
Augment – ok, could do with more range bonus, but nice in concept.
Endure – interesting, but the council really has to be buffed to 100% to have a paltry 9" stubborn bubble?
Channel – Interesting, but again, i'd rather have this ability be something to do with surpassing nullification.


As to the PL/Aspects arrangement.... there's lots of options.

Do we want to tone back the PLs in the fluff? It isn't 100% clear to me if the Phoenix Lords are the suits or the guy wearing the suits. Do we want to make them little more than Aspect heroes, or do we want to make them as they seem to be now, of some sort of mythical primarch type character.

I lean to - predicated on PLs remaining HQ choices - PLs conferring scoring to all of their aspect warriors, fearless to the squad they are attached to/their retinue, stubborn to all their aspect warriors they are not attached to, and one or two aspect-specific benefits.

Gwyidion wrote:
Runes of Guidance - The d6" scatter is the more important part. can't think of assaulting with any of our DS units...
Well... maybe a unit in the new dex could make use of it. Currently i woundn't mind seeing hawks assault a vehicle
Runes of Dispersing - meh... warding is already brutal psychic defense. I'd rather have these be something which prevents nullification
Could do with a name change, i was going to add a preventnig nullification with the ghost helm but forgot it. Rolling a 4 or less to cast causes the spell be non-nullifiable. Obviously with better wording. With RoWit the 4+ would still be rare enough to get that it shouldn't be OP. We could always have a rune for it though.
Runes of Fortitude - have to vote no (or whatever it is we do when we disagree) - invulnerable save upgrades to units in a codex with fortune is a very risky thing. It depends entirely on what units the warlock can attach to - and the farseer!? A 5+ invulnerable on a wraithguard unit makes that unit ignore 55% of all wounds against it. Amazing, considering they are already one of the flat-out hardest to kill troop choices in the game.
We were regarding wraith units being un-fortunable at one point, depends on if thats thrown in will depend on the effect this rune could have. But if your paying for a full unit of WG and dedicating a seer to them thats alot of points invested and i wouldn't see a problem with it. TH/SS termies have a better invun even with re-rolls and will crush the WG utterly.
Doom - Interesting change. I don't know if its good, overpowered, or underpowered, but i'd like to find out.
Same!
Curse – why not just make this the function of doom on vehicles (i mean add it as a 2nd half to doom "if casted on a vehicle" etc)?
Could be an option, but would make doom a must take in any mission, more so than it is now
Isha's blessing - Seems more like Isha's curse, but interesting.
isha's curse sounded wrong ^.^
Eldritch Storm - could be more elegantly worded, but i like it. Perhaps it should be a fixed range.... i dunno, but i like the idea a lot.
Not great with words so some1 else can change the wording before putting it in the article if needs be. As for range, storms should ebb and flow with the focus of the seer, i thought the random ranges fitted well
Enhance - So, this one is iffy as heck, and again, dependent entirely on what units the warlock can be a part of. As you have it drawn up, it seems warlocks are part of guardians only, so it isn't as risky, but this sort of power in wraithguard or a council could be broken as all get out.
Might just leave it as a choice between BS and WS. Warlocks are being left out of WG and there is no council with lock (in my world), the spirit seer can be re-jigged to better fit WG units and for "deathstar" councils... i dont know...
Regrowth – As above - it isn't as bad as an invuln save because it can't be fortuned, but it depends no the units it can be attained on.
Just for guardians though, it seems like a decent secendary power to take
Destructor – is it a heavy or reg. flamer in the current codex?
heavy
Augment – ok, could do with more range bonus, but nice in concept.
didn't wanna go overboard with the range
Endure – interesting, but the council really has to be buffed to 100% to have a paltry 9" stubborn bubble?
xould be higher, but 9" is pretty big considering how far a unit can spread out
Channel – Interesting, but again, i'd rather have this ability be something to do with surpassing nullification.
given surpassing nulliication is adressed above... still worth it?

Wait... so the Warlock would be its own HQ?? I'm confused.

rivers64 wrote:Wait... o the Warlock would be its own HQ?? I'm confused.

Someone had that idea... but with everyone having different ideas... things get awkward.

dayve110 wrote:

focusedfire wrote: @ DAaddict-

Or because the PLs are wanderers that no longer call any craftworld home and only appear in times of dire need, they are considered to be indepent characters that operate outside of the FOC.
Just an idea.

Idea! Just steal the wording from some other counts as HQ but doesnt use a HQ slot blah blah entry

Pretty much what I was thinking. Make them similar to the BT emperors champion but without the mandatory "if over x point game" wording.

DAaddict wrote: lose them as HQ but preserve them as upgrades to exarchs. Statlines are as today for each of them minus wounds which max at two. The all confer the ability to "count as troops" for controlling objectives but limited to their own squad. This makes phoenix lords into super exarchs rather than HQs.

I suggested this quite a while ago but it was put down as a bad idea seing as the Lords are such a fundamental part of the Eldar fluff. I think it coud work though. Set them up as an Eldar equivalent of Sgt Tellion or Kaptin Badruk. Make them fairly expensive (75-100 points?) they confer all exarch powers, count their unit as scoring and have a fancy piece of wargear each and the same set of stats. It would stop all the shenanigans with putting the PL's in random units and would free up room for a craftworld specific SC in the HQ slot.

I wouldn't mind having them as an upgrade, it would ensure at least one unit of their aspect is there. But even if we agree to that, I still feel they should be just as powerful as a full blown HQ (at least 100pts worth).

Removing them from the FOC is an interesting idea. What peoples thoughts on taking ti a step further:

Aspect Call: Any full unit of the Phoenix Lord's aspect that includes an Exarch does not take up a slot in the FOC. Despite not taking up a FOC slot, each unit still count as their designated unit type for all other purposes (i.e. Dire Avengers still scoring).

Again, I know, Fire Dragon spam (we really need to do something about them), I was hoping that forcing a full squad may do something against that... but I'm realistic.

If we do take PLs out of the HQ slot we need to take into consideration of taking two or more of them. If they're made worth taking then if I have a spread out list for my aspects, will it break them by bring a PL for each of them (Say a Banshee/Dire/Spider combo).

Also I propose either a retinue is mandatory or "must include at least one squad of their corresponding aspect".

How about something along the lines of

"If there are at least two full units of the same aspect warrirors in an army, one may replace its Exarch with a Pheonix Lord for XXX points. Whilst the Pheonix Lord is alive, his unit counts as scoring and doesn't take up a slot in the force organisation chart."

That keeps DA's as scoring and means your army would have an appropriate number of the aspect to seem sort of fluffy.

Effectivly means you could field 2 units of Banshees, 2 units of Dragons, 2 units of scorpions, 7 units of Avengers, 2 units of warp spiders, 2 units of shining spears, 2 units of Hawks and 4 units of Dark Reapers
That would be 14 scoring units (and a heck of a lot of points )

I don't understand why we keep suggesting to have the PL's aspects not take up slots or be moved to troops. There is a reason the FoC exists. It is to limit the use of unit which, if spammed, are overpowered. Most of the PL suggestions are fine - just leave the units in their FoC slots as normal. If we want to make them scoring... thats fine. But don't make them troops, and don't give them a null FoC slot, because that just causes problems.

As I - at least - stated. Phoenix lords are cool but farseers, avatars and even autarchs provide some benefit to the army as a whole. Phoenix lords do nothing right now and cost more than any other HQ except maybe Eldrad and no one would argue that that is not the best HQ option right now.

Removing them from HQ and making them an exarch upgrade would see them hit the board but of course they would not be like a god-like named character HQ choice.

Making them extraneous from the FOC HQ slots would not make my choice a phoenix lord (i.e. super single HTH character) or another HQ choice that enhances my army.

The other alternative is a rework that actually makes them worth taking up a slot and making their effect worthwhile.
If - for instance -you make Jain Zar qualify Howling Banshees as troops - she might be worthwhile. If she is just a super-buffed howling banshee with +1 on a few stats and some neat items, she is not worth 200+ points when I can take a farseer and and avatar and be able to doom targets and make my army fearless for a little more.

Gorechild wrote:How about something along the lines of

"If there are at least two full units of the same aspect warrirors in an army, one may replace its Exarch with a Pheonix Lord for XXX points. Whilst the Pheonix Lord is alive, his unit counts as scoring and doesn't take up a slot in the force organisation chart."

That keeps DA's as scoring and means your army would have an appropriate number of the aspect to seem sort of fluffy.

Effectivly means you could field 2 units of Banshees, 2 units of Dragons, 2 units of scorpions, 7 units of Avengers, 2 units of warp spiders, 2 units of shining spears, 2 units of Hawks and 4 units of Dark Reapers
That would be 14 scoring units (and a heck of a lot of points )

Only change I'd make to it is add "...two full units with Exarch...". I really like it. Only being scoring while the PL is alive works in really well with how I perceive Eldar's play style (come to think of it, I think I mentioned that earlier), also deal with my earlier mentioned problem of "How do we mark out which are scoring and which aren't". Swinging it the other way that can be as many as 4 units of any one aspect (and yes 7 for DA). Both extremes seem nice. Standard game if I were to go aspect heavy, would still see me with a minimum of 3 scoring units. I'm happy to leave it at this, are there any opposed?

Gwyidion wrote:I don't understand why we keep suggesting to have the PL's aspects not take up slots or be moved to troops...

The key reason we do that is because most of our slots are over crowded. A lot of us seem to feel that taking a PL should, fluff wise at the very least, see you taking a notable amount of their aspect. But if we do that then we prevent ourselves from taking a number of other units and thereby we no longer have a balanced/competitive list, half the reason why we're doing this. There's only two ways to do that, either mess with the FOC and free up some space or make the PL and their effect on the aspect so OTT that we don't have to worry about not taking other units in that slot. If you can think of a third option, then post it up and well give it a look through. (Please note, it isn't intended to sound as mean as it seams to read to me, I just can't think of a less blunt way to phrase it.)

How about just making a Phoenix Lord be able to take a single squad of their aspect as troops. Making them upgraded exarches is a very very ugly idea.

I think PLs should be HQ units, nothing else makes sense for a model with their abilities. However I like the idea of them not taking up an HQ slot and being forced to buy a retinue of their aspect. Therefore PL still allow you to take one extra squad of they're aspect than is normally allowed. I'm still not sure whether the pheonix lord and his retinue should count as scoring but it would allow a wider variety of lists.

What do you think about giving PLs a rule so that if they die there body counts as an objective (in objective missions) or gives up extra KP/VP unless there are Eldar within 3" of it at the end of the game (in missions that use them)? It would represent the Eldar trying to retrieve the armor of the PL so that PL wouldn't e lost forever.

rivers64 wrote:How about just making a Phoenix Lord be able to take a single squad of their aspect as troops. Making them upgraded exarches is a very very ugly idea.

Care to explain your reasoning?

Pyro-Druid wrote:
Only change I'd make to it is add "...two full units with Exarch...". I really like it. Only being scoring while the PL is alive works in really well with how I perceive Eldar's play style (come to think of it, I think I mentioned that earlier), also deal with my earlier mentioned problem of "How do we mark out which are scoring and which aren't". Swinging it the other way that can be as many as 4 units of any one aspect (and yes 7 for DA). Both extremes seem nice. Standard game if I were to go aspect heavy, would still see me with a minimum of 3 scoring units. I'm happy to leave it at this, are there any opposed?

I meant "with an exarch" but apparently missed that out, good catch! Maybe saying only one PL is allowed per army? I've just realised how mad it would be with that many scoring units

balthydes wrote: I think PLs should be HQ units, nothing else makes sense for a model with their abilities. However I like the idea of them not taking up an HQ slot and being forced to buy a retinue of their aspect. Therefore PL still allow you to take one extra squad of they're aspect than is normally allowed. I'm still not sure whether the pheonix lord and his retinue should count as scoring but it would allow a wider variety of lists.

Its a valid point, how would you suggest we make them a viable choice compared to a Farseer or an Autarch with the new options we've suggested though? I think making their aspect scoring is one of the few sensible ways we could make them a more appealing option. Personally I think craftworld specific SC's would be much more popular choices.

balthydes wrote:What do you think about giving PLs a rule so that if they die there body counts as an objective (in objective missions) or gives up extra KP/VP unless there are Eldar within 3" of it at the end of the game (in missions that use them)? It would represent the Eldar trying to retrieve the armor of the PL so that PL wouldn't e lost forever.

I really like this idea

I think craftworld specific characters are the ones who should move the FOC around (i.e. the Iyanden character allows small squads of wraithguard as troops, the Saim-Hann character makes vypers and/or shining spears troops, Biel-tan gets some extra aspect warrior squads as troops etc.). PL should be better in combat than those characters and IMO their abilities should reflect that.
What do you think about each PL giving additional buffs to all squads of their aspect (or a general +1 A aura for all Eldar). Some possible buffs could be:
Asurmen- Dire Avengers get defensive grenades and/or counterattack
Jain Zar- Howling Banshees get furious charge
Baharroth- Swooping Hawks only scatter d6" when deepstriking (depends on how the squad changes next codex)
Karandras- Striking Scorpions get preferred enemy
Fuegan-
Maugan Ra- Dark Reapers can fire there weapons as a barrage (ignores cover from intervening models) or a simple +1BS
??????- Shining Spears can turboboost 36" or always hit on 3+ on a charge
??????- Warp Spiders can choose to move either 3d6 or 2d6 in the assault phase

Anyway, the point is that I think Pheonix Lords should be similar to the Avatar in that they give combat boosts but different because they are more specialized and fit better in fast mechanized armies.
However PLs could also be given special stratagems similar to the Autarch because of their millennia of combat experience.

If we do make the PL's a HQ each and do a HQ for each major craftworld we're looking at about 15 SC's. On top of the 3 generic HQ's thats a stupid number of HQ options.

That gives us 3 options:

Don't include craftworld HQ's

Down grade the Lords to special Exarch's

Make a stupidly long list of SC's where 75% of them will never be used

Personally I'd like to see the lords get an entry along the lines of:

Jain Zar
One Howling Banshees Exarch may be upgraded to Jain Zar for XXX points.

BS--WS--S--T--I--A--W--Ld--Sv
-5---9---5---3--9--4--2---9---3+

Special Rules:
Fleet
War Shout
Acrobatic
Howling Fury

Wargear:
Banshee Mask
(whats the name of her weapon)

Howling Fury- All members of Jain Zar's unit have the Furious Charge USR

Weapon- Single handed power weapon, can also be used during the shooting phase with the following profile R12" S4 AP4 Assault D6 Rending

I am, myself, a fan of the upgraded exarch path, if only to trim down the HQ section - and let's face it, Maugan Ra will never be so bad ass as is described in fluff without moving him to epic/spearhead level game play.

This also gives room for more interesting HQ units such as Bonesingers (perfect way to move the army fundamentally towards Iyanden) etc.

The HQ section really does show that the Eldar race, as a whole, is something like cramming all the specials from Space Wolves and Blood Angels into Ultramarines codex. There is more than enough Eldar diversity to make several distinct codices with a rather extreme difference in character.

P.S. Oh, and then there's this from Forgeworld - Heavy Support: A Warp Hunter is a Heavy Support choice for an Eldar army and an Eldar Corsairs arm.
Exciting times. But enough of the wishful thinking. /sleep

Right, apart from one unexplained complaint from rivers we all seem to like the Exarch+ route, If thats the case I think doing the specific rules and wargear is best left until we do each aspect.

That leaves us with the Craftworld HQ's:

Iyanden - Yriel
Ullthwe - Eldrad
Saim Han -
Biel Tan -
Alaitoc -

Are they the the ones we want to stick with or would extending to places like Lugganath and Yme-Loc be an interesting idea?

As previously said, I think its time Eldrad finally dissapeared from the codex and becomes more of a legendary character of the eldars fluff (lets be honest, even the last codex admitted he's basically assumed dead).

I think all the SC (except Ulthwe's) should be more like autarch's. Saim Han's SC could count shining spears as troops. Biel Tan's counts scorpions and/or banshees as troops. Give Yriel a wraith specific stratagem. Thoughts?

Aren't Alaitoc more or less governed by farseers in a theological manner? Iyanden also makes a lot of sense having a Warlock/Farseer-like character, while Yriel is more of a Corsair (something we might see in the future).

This presumes a step back from the generic codex of today.

Iyanden - Yriel AS IS for items and personal stats. The addition would be qualifying squads of any size of Wraithguard as troops and perhaps allowing all generic warlocks and farseers the spiritseer ability.

Ullthwe - Eldrad The addition here could be something to make black guardians. Perhaps enhancement from Ulthwe warlocks includes +1 BS to the already +1 WS and +1 I. An alternative is allowing them to upgrade all guardians base. The other is making the super seer council only available to Eldrad.

Saim Han - Autarch equivalent - If you want to go back a special modified Vyper as a mount. If bikes as troops is left for all then my suggestion would be the fast attack aspects being converted to elite choices. This allows for a standard of Shining Spears, Hawks or Spiders getting the Elite slots and Vypers becoming the defacto fast attack choice. Otherwise it qualifies for bikes as troops. To include the fluff of Saim Hann barbarity, perhaps all bikes qualify for furious charge perhaps a +1 Ld to bikes.

Biel Tan - An autarch equivalent - This could unleash aspects on all FOC slots. Another option is it makes all aspect warriors able to claim objectives. This makes biel tan
a bear in objective games as you could potentially field 15 units that are capable of controlling objectives. If you view a return to the Craftworld Codex, allow scorpions and banshees as troop choices though I would argue dire avengers already allow for an all aspect warrior army.

Alaitoc - An autarch equivalent - perhaps armed with a sniper rifle himself. A couple of thoughts - my old argument was removing pathfinders as an option for standard and non-alaitoc armies and make the pathfinder a free upgrade to all rangers led by the Alaitoc autarch. Another option might be that all Alaitoc rangers and pathfinders are considered relentless or slow and purposeful. The only thing I don't want to see is a return to the old Craftworld Codex pre-game disruption rules. Somehow making Alaitoc rangers/pathfinders better than standard eldar rangers is the key change.

Obviously you can add character-ful items and abilities like Y'riel or Eldrad to them as you like but the key for me is making the craftworld named character unleash the
craftworld specialties. (e.g. Saim-hann character with a special lance like power weapon or the alaitoc character with a sniper rifle.)

Yriel- keep him as he is but add the stratagem "Prince of Iyanden" - Any model with the Wraith special rule counts as scoring. Obviously that requires wraithguard/lords being given a small extra rule (maybe incorporate wraithsight into it?)

Ulthwe- pretty straight forward IMO, give them a fat seer council, allow more seers/verdants and let them cast more powers per turn.

Saim Han- is there not an old vyper riding character we could work off?

Biel Tan- Maybe a super Avatar? probably not a good idea but i'm putting it out there Otherwise I think scoring banshees/scorpions woulf be good.

Alaitoc- All sniper rifles are changed to Assault 1 instead of heavy?

I feel that PLs as exarch upgrades is a decent idea, and I also feel that craftworld-specific HQs is a good idea, and very in-the-mode of 5th edition codexes. That being said, I want to caution some things and promote other things, and generally give thoughts.

If you look at the recent release from forgeworld, there is a non-vague reference to an upcoming corsair list. I know that forgeworld isn't GW proper, but we shouldn't ignore it.

All of the craftworld HQs have to be considered along with the units they affect, when being constructed. For instance, an Alaitoc craftworld HQ isn't going to be very good if the units he affects are still rather ineffective (as they are now). An Ulthwe craftworld HQ will be overtaken and broken if the real goal is the seer-council the HQ gives access to is broken or OP.

specifics:

I feel that each craftworld list alteration should have both benefits and drawbacks (and they should be real drawbacks!).

Yriel - he's a fun character now, but as he is now, he is more of a corsair than a Iyanden character. Set off a bomb that kills everything near you? not something you do when your craftworld is dying. I think he'd be better for a corsairs list, than iyanden, because for iyanden, we have:

Iyanna - she's mentioned on the Iyanden fluff page, near the bottom in the current codex. A spiritseer whose husband is implanted in a wraithlord - awesome.

Craftworld specific ideas, with varying levels of details:

Ulthwe - With the selection of Eldrad (or similar character) it unlocks a seer council, and black guardians (+1 BS/WS, +1 Ld), but each guardian squad must have a warlock upgrade character (who selects a power for free, instead of at-cost)

Biel-Tan - The avatar of khaine may take an upgrade - the Avatar of Biel-Tan - which grants +2S, +1T, Sv 2+, and 6" on the fearless bubble, for X pts. Pathfinders, guardians (in any form), and wraithguard may not be taken, making DAs a 2+ selection. Any Elite choice with unit type "aspect warrior", which has the maximum number of individuals allowed in a unit, has an exarch, and at least one Exarch upgrade (wargear or exarch power) does not occupy a FoC slot, and is scoring as long as the exarch is alive.

Alaitoc - this one is combined with a change I'd like to see in pathfinders to make them more effective:

Rangers - on a 6+ to hit, ignore cover. weapons are Sniper, so are rending, Ranger Long Rifles wound on a 3+, same stats as now, retain stealth, infiltrate, outflank, and move through cover, 16ppm (they are equivalent to an Outcast Aspect Warrior).

Pathfinders - +9ppm. Ignore cover on a 5+. Rend on a 5+. Retain Improved Stealth, infiltrate, outflank, and ignore cover (the same as flip belts, with different fluff). Gain:

Relocate: During the Eldar player's Assault phase, if the pathfinder unit shot in the immediately preceding Shooting phase, the pathfinder unit may make a normal 6" move.

Now, these changes are suggested because if we want to make the alaitoc upgrade character (who i think should be a character Ranger) make the pathfinder upgrade free, rangers/pathfinders should be effective, or he's never gonna see the table. I think Alaitoc's character should add infiltrate/outflank to all vehicles, but it needs a fluffy drawback.

Iyanden - Limit of 1 unit with type "aspect warrior" in the list. Limit of 2 units of type "guardian". Limit of 3 units with an Armor value. Iyanna has a retinue of 5 wraithguard who are not scoring. Any size unit of wraithguard may be taken as troops. Wraithlords may be taken as elites. Units of type "Wraith" get FNP as long as Iyanna is alive. Units of type Wraith gain a 4++ save at all times. Iyanna requires the selection of a second HQ unit which is a wraithlord with special options.

note that this use of army-wide regrowth and a 4++ save for all wraith units is combined with a configuration that makes it impossible to take a farseer in any way at all, precluding the use of fortune in the army - this makes wraith units very tough against regular weapons, with a 3+, 4+ FNP, and more resilient than their current incarnation, with a 4++ against AP3+ and powerweapons. This doubles the effectiveness of wraithlords and wraithguard in CC, and makes wraithguard 5% less durable against AP2 ranged weaponry, but more durable against ranged AP3 weaponry, due to FNP. The serious lack of CC ability available to a hardcore Iyanden list in this configuration needs to be addressed, unless I am mis-remembering the changes we made to Wraith units.

Saim-Hann - (fixed) Shining spears as elites or FA. (fixed) Vypers as FA or HS. Army-wide Twin linking (to compensate for the fact that every shooting unit available to Saim-Hann is BS3).

Yriel - I really think that Iyanna is a better fit for Iyanden than he is. The way he needs to be used, his cavalier fluff, etc, lends him more to a corsair army than an iyanden army. That being said, there is no corsair army. Either we assume GW will add one with the Forgeworld corsair list, or we make a faux-corsair list using storm guardians, vypers, and wave serpents.

My two cents but i think Hoec should be Alatioc's Special Character

Essentially a super Pathfinder, has an epic sniper rifle, gives some bonus to other rangers, probably an armywide stealth rule

I like the idea of having Iyanna as Iyanden's special and moving Yriel as a pure corsair (It even mentions in his entry that he stills travels the galaxy, presumably to find a way to destroy the spear of Twilight)

I believe that Saim-Hann has Nuhadu Fireheart (probably mispelled that) he rides a Vyper into Assaults (supports the idea of moving Vypers into Jetbikes) but this could easily be changed into an awesome jetbike

Biel-tan i'm at a loss at, but i guess some sort of Autarch that's like an Aspect Warrior lord

Ulthwe- stick to Eldrad, I always believed that when someone used him he would instead be that apprentice who still believes he's alive, or we just continue his legacy with his triumph against chaos, he escaped the Warp and defeated the Blackstone fortress and came back to Ulthwe like nothing happened (because he's just epic like that)

Alaitoc character might be an Autarch with a Long Rifle with a bit of special rules, but more importantly associated Alaitoc-esque abilities. Most of all, he'd allow for units to infiltrate that normally wouldn't be able to.

Here's something that's sprung up from reading the Shadow Spectre FW rules regarding Swooping Hawks:
Points - say roughly 18
Hawk Wings - Grants JET infantry, not jump.
Skyleap - Grants Turbo-boost.
Exarch able to take Haywire Launcher
Otherwise generally unchanged. The weakness of the main weapons are still there, yo-yo removed, the vulnerability to blast templates removed (6" assault phase move), and the cost reduced. Additionally, turbo-boosting allows for rapid movement at cost of shooting as well as cover.
As an added benefit, wing-equipped Autarchs become more interesting!

P.S. Biel-Tan is naturally Court of the Young King. Not a special character, but a special unit. A small-ish squad of Exarchs with special rules for how to deal with the Exarch powers.

oh god swooping hawks again. Those hawks are mobile, sure, but they still suck at doing anything. They'll never be a threat in shooting, even with guide and doom, and their assault isn't very scary when it is sacrificing a 200pt unit for a not-very-good-chance to kill a vehicle.

Ye, sorry for dredging them up again, but I it's just something that's been itching at the back of my head since reading the Shadow Spectres. Main point is the jet pack, though, it provides an elegant solution to a large portion of their problems.

MUAHAHAHA i knew this would come in handy one day...
*opens up Codex:Eldar (by Gavin Thorpe)*

Ok...

Iyanna Arienal, Spiritseer of Iyanden. Should be easy enough to convert into 5E with wraith-associated abalities.

Iyanna---5 5 3 3 2 5 2 10 -

Special Rules:
Spiritseer of Iyanden: While Iyanna is alive, no unit in your army needs to test for wraithsight.
Iyanna is purchased as a HQ choice, she MUST be accompanied by a retinue of 5 Enduring Ones for XX points.
Guardian of the lost: Non-troop choice wraithguard (and the Enduring Ones) units count as scoring while Iyanna is alive.

Wargear:
Spear of Teuthlas: Follows the rules for a singing spear, except it is S10 against targets with an AV and ignores armour saves. In addition it has a range of 18"
Armour of Vaul: This armour confers a 4+ invulnerable save to Iyanna, in addition its radiating effects confer a 5+ invulnerable save to her unit.

Enduring ones---5 5 6 6 2 4 2 10 2+

Special Rules:
Wraiths: Follows all the rules for wraithguard units
Chosen Protectors: The Enduring Ones are specially chosen warriors who are as eager to serve their craftworld as they were in life. The Enduring Ones know that without Iyanna, Iyanden would already be lost. Once per phase, one wound that is allocated to Iyanna may be taken on an Enduring One.

Wargear:
Wraithcannon: As normal
Wraithblades: Confers Rending to close combat attacks

Ok, so its a rush job, but you get the idea... Expensive? Yes... but i think its fitting given the little short story in the old dex.

Nuadhu 'Fireheart', Wild Rider of Saim Hann

WS BS S (FAV SAV RAV) I A
5 4 4 (11 11 10) 6 3

They are his old stats... perking them up a little we get to this...

6 6 3 (11 11 10) 6 4

Yes i know, S went down... i'll get to that bit!!! Put WS/BS up to be in line with autarchs and put A to 4 on par with Yriel.

Wargear:
Alean - the Steed of Khaine: holo-fields, vectored engines
Spear of the wind: Nuadhu's spear acts like a DCCW, it doubles his S in combat and ignores armour saves.

Alean - the Steed of Khaine: Nuadhu rides upon a viper that has been built to allow him to fight from its back, much as Khaine rode to war on the legendary steed Alean. Nuadhu and the vyper are considered a single model; he cannot leave his fighting platform. Think of Nuadhu as a unique type of vyper with the special rules detailed below.
--Type: Fast,Skimmer,open-topped
--Weapons: Shurican cannon, 2 shurican catapults
--Close combat: Nuadhu fights in combat the same way as a dreadnaught, using the profile above. He may make a 6" Assault move in the assault phase providing he moved no more than 12" in the movement phase.
--Hit and Run (confered to unit)
--Reckless: Ignores crew shaken and crew stunned
--Chief of the Wild Riders. Nuadhu may only join jetbike units. Any unit joined by him becomes fearless and gains furious charge.

Messy.... but more a less a copy/paste with only slight changes, but its something to work on.

Iyanna simply needs a cost. Also, Wraithblades is a very good candidate to perk up normal Wraiths...

Having WS on an AV unit, as well as an AV HQ for a craftworld that's known for it's jetbikes... why not a Jetbike?

6 6 3 3(4) 3 6 4 10 3+(4+)

Alean - Jetbike that confers 4+ invulnerable save

Rest more or less the same

Mahtamori wrote:Iyanna simply needs a cost. Also, Wraithblades is a very good candidate to perk up normal Wraiths...

Having WS on an AV unit, as well as an AV HQ for a craftworld that's known for it's jetbikes... why not a Jetbike?

6 6 3 3(4) 3 6 4 10 3+(4+)

Alean - Jetbike that confers 4+ invulnerable save

Rest more or less the same

The original rules have him on a vyper, so i just went with that! I never managed to try him out so i don't know how well the vyperdread thing actually worked.

Few things i would add to the old characters

Iyanna- instead of the enduring ones (although they are cool) i was thinking of a special Wraithlord, sort of like a Catellan+Kell pair, in that they work well while together

Nahadu- Put him on a cool Jetbike, and give him a retinue of Assault based Jetbikes (Power Weapons and such)

On a side note I'm not sure about the Court of the Young King as a special unit for Biel-Tan, yes it makes sense fluff-wise, but how do we make the Exarchs work well together in a squad (they would never be able to agree what to attack)

For Iyanna, we should make one or the other HQ (probably the Wraith) optional, and simply provide great benefits if you take him (like Kell for Creed), but make Iyanna good enough to take alone, or else they become too easy to single out from one another (or simply get targeted if they form a single unit).

However, I was iffy on craftworld specific stuff, but it's shaping up real nice, particularly Iyanna, I can't find her story in my dex, where is it, or is it third edition?

Nahadu should be on a Jetbike, and have an optional retinue. Who wants Vypers, even with holo-fields?

TheRedArmy wrote:For Iyanna, we should make one or the other HQ (probably the Wraith) optional, and simply provide great benefits if you take him (like Kell for Creed), but make Iyanna good enough to take alone, or else they become too easy to single out from one another (or simply get targeted if they form a single unit).

However, I was iffy on craftworld specific stuff, but it's shaping up real nice, particularly Iyanna, I can't find her story in my dex, where is it, or is it third edition?

Nahadu should be on a Jetbike, and have an optional retinue. Who wants Vypers, even with holo-fields?

It could be interesting to either have her with an elite WG unit or unlock an elite WL. Both units could have merits that the other does not.

Yes there was a story on her 3rd ed codex entry.

As for Nuadhu... well... I'd like a Vyper, as that is what he comes with in 3rd ed. A bike might be nice, but the idea of a vyperdread... or fastskimmerwalkerthing just sounds fun.

The problem with craftworld specific rules is if you are creative and make your own craftworld you are put at a giant disadvantage.

rivers64 wrote:The problem with craftworld specific rules is if you are creative and make your own craftworld you are put at a giant disadvantage.

Rather than craftworld specific rules i'm thinking just craftworld specific charecters. Those charecters could remove 0-1 limits, mess the Foc up a little, or let you take a unique unit.
The charecters themselves would most likely be expensive, and if the autarch rules we were discussing beforehand are how we settle on them then i'd seriously consider taking 2 and having all sorts of fancy rules that craftworld specific charecters do not have access to.

If its done right then craftworld specific rules will not be a no-brainer choice, rather a playing style choice.

And on that note... Were left with Ulthwe, Alaitoc, Beil tann + possibly others... (If we go with Iyanna and Nuadhu, with some more changes most likely)

rivers64 wrote:The problem with craftworld specific rules is if you are creative and make your own craftworld you are put at a giant disadvantage.

Do think that Vulkan He'stan or Pedro Kantor being in the Space Marines codex is a problem? Essentially its exactly the same, it just adds another way to make the codex more varied. There's no reason you can't have a "counts as" Iyanna for your own made up craftworld if it's got a wraith-y theme, or a "counts as" Eldrad council if your made up craftworld has bad ass psykers.

@Dayve110 - I think the Nuadhu idea is a bit over complicated, I like the idea but it could be done similary and much more simply as a jetbike. Making a fast/Skimmer/Open topped/Walker vehicle would get a bit confusing
if it was just a T5 S4(8) 2+ 4++ jetbike then it would be fine. You could even model it on a vyper but just class it as a jetbike (like beastmasters are on a JI style sky board yet are classed as beasts).

@Gorechilde – The thing about Pedro Cantor and Lysander is that they replace a rule you would be getting anyway. If you want to go this way then make some general rule that any eldar army gets no matter who they are and have it replaced by craftworld specific rules.

rivers64 wrote:@Gorechild – The thing about Pedro Cantor and Lysander is that they replace a rule you would be getting anyway. If you want to go this way then make some general rule that any eldar army gets no matter who they are and have it replaced by craftworld specific rules.

That would work, it would be very "lets just copy space marines" though, and thats a sentiment that I absolutely detest. As others have suggested it would probably be better (IMO) to just have a penalty attached to the special rule alongside the craftworld themed bonus.
For example:

An army that inculdes *insert name of Alaitoc character here* may not include Dire Avengers or Guardians as troops, however, all sniper rifles in the army count as being "Assault 1" instead of "Heavy 1"

An army that inculdes *insert name of Biel Tan character here* may not include Guardians or Rangers/Pathfinders, however, Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions count as Troops instead of Elites

An army that inculdes *insert name of Ulthwe character here* may not include Rangers or Dire Avengers as troops, however, the range of all psychic powers is increased by 6"

I won't nit-pick on the suggestions there, Gorechild, but I do like the Alaitoc one a lot - simple and effective.

There's really two ways of doing craftworlds. One way is to add special, named, characters and the other is to make it entirely generic (i.e. kill off the major craftworlds as identifiers and simply identify them as "eldritch", "sword storm", "wind rider" etc).
Whether the latter is appended to key characters or simply there per default ("Choose the nature of your craftworld") a'la space marine codex. Well...

well, the mutations and doctrines and etc have been pretty completely phased out. It seems that the last several codicies have leaned towards the selection of characters to define the majority of the list. While it was rather overt in C:SM, it is less so, but still present, in the following releases.

So that being said, it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see something similar done with the next Eldar codex - especially given the background present in the current codex and the extant characters (Yriel and Eldrad). I think the most realistic eventuality is to see the Phoenix Lords go to Apoc, and to have a further development of the craftworlds. They have rich fluff, characters, playstyles, etc. I think it will happen with the official codex. To what extent that should influence our direction here.... I can't say.

Again I'll stress that the effectiveness of a Craftworld HQ choice will ultimately hinge on the effectiveness of the units they encourage taking. Our Saim Hann leader won't be very useful if Vypers and Shining Spears are still as mediocre and bad (respectively) as they currently are. Likewise our Altaioc HQ choice will be rather ineffective if Rangers are speedbumps and the army is based on War Walkers.

And, I should say that I agree with those who have reservations about a craftworld centric approach to the HQ section. The Space Marine HQ choices are much-maligned for their special rules - the proclivity of players to take the few most effective choices in every single army annoys people. That being said.... there will never be a codex which doesn't have some units that are better than others, and are exploited for doing so. If the idea is to make Farseers and Autarchs be effective enough on the tabletop to at least offer a reasonable alternative to the craftworld specific HQs, I think thats enough. I should say that I don't feel the C:SM generic HQs are good enough, in light of their special character counterparts.

Mahtamori wrote:I won't nit-pick on the suggestions there, Gorechild, but I do like the Alaitoc one a lot - simple and effective.

Thanks

Mahtamori wrote:There's really two ways of doing craftworlds. One way is to add special, named, characters and the other is to make it entirely generic (i.e. kill off the major craftworlds as identifiers and simply identify them as "eldritch", "sword storm", "wind rider" etc).
Whether the latter is appended to key characters or simply there per default ("Choose the nature of your craftworld") a'la space marine codex. Well...

Gwyidion wrote:well, the mutations and doctrines and etc have been pretty completely phased out. It seems that the last several codicies have leaned towards the selection of characters to define the majority of the list. While it was rather overt in C:SM, it is less so, but still present, in the following releases.

I agree with Gwyidion, Whilst it would work, its a bit of an outdated solution.

Gwyidion wrote:Again I'll stress that the effectiveness of a Craftworld HQ choice will ultimately hinge on the effectiveness of the units they encourage taking. Our Saim Hann leader won't be very useful if Vypers and Shining Spears are still as mediocre and bad (respectively) as they currently are. Likewise our Altaioc HQ choice will be rather ineffective if Rangers are speedbumps and the army is based on War Walkers.

My initial aim was to come up with a set of rules for each unit so that every one would be a viable option. If we manage that then each character would at least be viable.

Gwyidion wrote:And, I should say that I agree with those who have reservations about a craftworld centric approach to the HQ section. The Space Marine HQ choices are much-maligned for their special rules - the proclivity of players to take the few most effective choices in every single army annoys people. That being said.... there will never be a codex which doesn't have some units that are better than others, and are exploited for doing so. If the idea is to make Farseers and Autarchs be effective enough on the tabletop to at least offer a reasonable alternative to the craftworld specific HQs, I think thats enough. I should say that I don't feel the C:SM generic HQs are good enough, in light of their special character counterparts.

I think the main advantage of the generic HQ's is how much you can customize them. With the huge wealth of options we were suggesting for the Autarch and the new approach to the Farseer/Council then I think each option would have its own merits.

Just to be clear, I'm not a fan of specific craftworlds simply because it is so very difficult to make them all meaningful - but I do enjoy discussing them and their implementation. However, I would like to see a completely separate Corsair faction (where Yriel would play a larger role).

If, however, special characters are opted to make the inclinations towards specific craftworlds, then we don't really need to have even all the major craftworlds represented. There is something to be said for the current codex - it makes a damned good representation of militia-Ulthwé or Saim-Hann. And Yme-Loc for that matter (Davu!).

An army that inculdes *insert name of Alaitoc character here* may not include Dire Avengers or Guardians as troops, however, all sniper rifles in the army count as being "Assault 1" instead of "Heavy 1"

An army that inculdes *insert name of Biel Tan character here* may not include Guardians or Rangers/Pathfinders, however, their Avatar of Khaine has +2A

An army that inculdes *insert name of Ulthwe character here* may not include Rangers or Dire Avengers as troops, however, any sucessful attempt to nulify a psychic power cast by the eldar player can be ignored on a 3+

An army that includes *insert name of Saim Han character here* may only include units on jetbikes, skimmers and units embarked within vehicles at the start of the game. In exchange, all jetbikes and vypers gain a 5+ cover save if they move in their last movement phase.

An army that includes *insert name of Iyanden character here* may not include Dire Avengers, Rangers/Pathfinders or more than 1 unit of Guardians, however, all units with the "Wraith" rule count as scoring.

Updates in orange

Unless I've missed something, all combinations of the HQ's would allow you to make a legal list. But obviously just running 1 would allow a better craftworld themed army.

Thoughts?

The Biel Tan Character needs to be changed. To gain any benefit from him at all you would need to take the Avatar which would take up way too many points and slots.

I'm really against to limiting your army choices just because you take a certain special character, people wouldn't want to take a special character if it limited their choice in troops, I know I wouldn't. If anything just including a bonus to taking a certain troop choice would be incentive enough for people to take more of that type of unit.

My proposition:

Alatioc character (who I still believe should be Hoec)- grants all rangers and pathfinders longrifles assault 1 instead of Heavy 1

Saim-Hann character (Pretty safe to assume it will be Nuhadu at this point)- grants all Jetbikes Furious Charge and maybe allow them to purchase power weapons

Ulthwe character (All for sticking with Eldrad here, just add a bit more fluff on his ongoing legend)- gives some bonus to Warlocks (not quite sure here, maybe let them have two psychic powers that they can use on the same turn)

Iyanden character (supporting Iyanna here)- Removes the Wraithsight rule for all Wraith units (assuming that Wraithguard become Troop choice here)

Biel-Tan (Still not sure about this guy)- I dunno maybe grants some bonus to Exarchs, the entry states that there are more Exarchs in Biel-Tan then any of the other craftworlds so why not give them something nice?

Even after removing these penalties, I'm still more likely to use Rangers then Jetbikes in an Alatioc army, but if I want to have a small group of Jetbikes for some purpose (like last turn objective grabs) I'm still able to take them.

Oriallis wrote:
Saim-Hann character (Pretty safe to assume it will be Nuhadu at this point)- grants all Jetbikes Furious Charge and maybe allow them to purchase power weapons

Jetbikes should be allowed to purchase power weapons anyway. I know, new unit, but essential.

Hoec - XXX points

-BS-WS-S--T--I---A-W--Ld--Sv
--8--5---3--3--6--2--3--10--3+

Unit Type
Independant Character

Wargear:
Silence
Defensive Grenades

Special Rules:
Less Than a Shadow
Mentor of Guile

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Silence- Range 48" S8 AP1 Heavy 1 Pinning or Range 48" S5 AP3 Assault 3 Pinning

Less Than a Shadow- Hoec and any unit he joins have all cover saves improved to 2+. In addition, Hoec has a 4+ invunerable save against any wounds inflicted by a weapon that ignores cover.

Mentor of Guile- every ranger long rifle in an army that includes Hoec changes its type from "Heavy 1" to "Assault 1"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How's that look?

Oriallis wrote:I'm really against to limiting your army choices just because you take a certain special character, people wouldn't want to take a special character if it limited their choice in troops, I know I wouldn't. If anything just including a bonus to taking a certain troop choice would be incentive enough for people to take more of that type of unit.

Even after removing these penalties, I'm still more likely to use Rangers then Jetbikes in an Alatioc army, but if I want to have a small group of Jetbikes for some purpose (like last turn objective grabs) I'm still able to take them.

The current rendition of the codex moved a number of things around in an attempt to allow what the Craftworld Codex allowed on a generic basis. So the Craftworld straightjacket was removed for some watered down options.

1. Alaitoc - (fuzzy on this one) Rangers and Pathfinders had a 1-shot-per-unit effect on the game before the game started. Current codex increased minimum squad size and pathfinders became troop upgrade.

2. Biel-Tan - used to get SS and HB as troop choices. Current codex buffed Dire Avengers to the point they are the troop choice.

3. Ulthwe - Black Guardians and Council. Well sorry you got genericed other than Eldrad seems to lead about 80% of all eldar armies.

4. Iyanden - WG & WL as troops. In the current codex, never mechanized and alway @ 400 pts each but you still can field wraithguard as troops.

5. Saim Hann - Used to have special character and special lead bike squad. Bikes moved to troops and cost lowered so that bike based armies are available to all.

The generic nature of the codex has its benefits in that it has allowed the Eldar to remain competitive over time. The sad new is that you can probably reduce them down to some variation of wave serpents, fire dragons and dire avengers. So the question to me is. Are we happy with the generic representations that may be weaker but in theory allow great flexibility in your build or do we accept some restrictions (shades of Codex: Craftworld) to allow otherwise non-viable or even illegal builds to present different flavors of eldar.

My vote is to get away from the wave serpent+fire dragons + dire avengers usually led by Eldrad and get some flexibility and perhaps enhancements through some means. If not by a codex: craftworld of yore but present the options through the flavor of the day - named characters.

I would like to see these options/enhancements made available and through a forced IC expenditure is a good method. As stated before, the effectiveness of what each option unlocks is key to making them used. The other side is not making the enhancement OP so it gets abused.

Moving slots (e.g. Biel Tan autarch allowing HB and SS to be taken as troops.) allows for a specialized army build but doesn't modify the troops. OTOH if say you added furious charge and say +1 to the attack line of all bikes led by a Saim Hann autarch it may be acceptable but would it make them viable? If you added say a PW option to all riders for say +5 or +10 pts would it make for an OP build?

Those are the issues in my mind. The benefits need to allow for a unique philosophy but ideally should be overall neutral as opposed to any other option or lack of an option. By attaching it to a named IC, you are automatically forcing a change in that you have only one free HQ slot left. Then considering that and the points invested are we going to see - for example - 50/50 generic lists versus a craftworld focused list or do we create a monster and end up with say 80/20 Biel Tan lists versus generic and the other Craftworld options as just inferior options that rarely get used.

Gorechild wrote:Hoec - XXX points

-BS-WS-S--T--I---A-W--Ld--Sv
--8--5---3--3--6--2--3--10--3+

Unit Type
Independant Character

Wargear:
Silence
Defensive Grenades

Special Rules:
Less Than a Shadow
Mentor of Guile

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Silence- Range 48" S8 AP1 Heavy 1 Pinning or Range 48" S5 AP3 Assault 3 Pinning

Less Than a Shadow- Hoec and any unit he joins have all cover saves improved to 2+. In addition, Hoec has a 4+ invunerable save against any wounds inflicted by a weapon that ignores cover.

Mentor of Guile- every ranger long rifle in an army that includes Hoec changes its type from "Heavy 1" to "Assault 1"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How's that look?

I like it, Silence looks totally awesome, and if you include him with a Pathfinder Squad he'll be incredibly difficult to get rid of when sticking to area terrain.

Personally I think we have a winner

Specify pathfinders as the unit he must join. Otherwise the 2++ cover would be worth taking him every time. Also we need to work on new ranger rules for him to be viable.

rivers64 wrote:Specify pathfinders as the unit he must join.

It would be worthless if it was only pathfinders, they already get 2+ cover 95% of the time

rivers64 wrote:Otherwise the 2++ cover would be worth taking him every time.

I think thats why we were going to include a downside to taking each character, so none of them would be a "must have" obvious choice, you have to make a sacrifice for the awesomeness.

I was thinking of adding a Tellion style "wounds inflicted by Hoec in the shooting phase are allocated by the shooting payer instead of the target player. These wounds are allocated first, before the rest of the wounds from the rest of his unit."

Then you'd have a SC who is actually brilliant at range - 2+ reroll 4+ to hit, then the option to quick-fire and potentially bring down 3 marines or snipe to insta-kill a HQ. That on top of the fact he can join a move-and-shoot unit of pathfinders that rend on a 5+

How many points do you reckon that suggestion would be worth? how about with the wound alllocation bit added in?

2+ cover Wraithguard? You're kidding right?

How about Hoec and whichever unit he is in works under same rules as Grey Knights, in addition to him having Master Stealth (since stealth is conferred to unit from IC)? (That's Night Fighting, but equipment which helps against night fighting doesn't work on it, and they are rolled for separately)

A unit of Dark Reapers or Pathfinders would benefit greatly but the enemy would be able to counter it.

Oh, and just 'cause I spend too much time on YMDC - "Every Long Rifle in the army is treated as Assault 1 instead of Heavy 1" so it doesn't only apply to Rangers (so that Pathfinders can use them as well)