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

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I got the feeling the Ynnari rules are ONLY going to be in the Triumvirate of Ynnead. As in they won't be anywhere else (Craftworlds codex included).

I'm sure the Internet will provide

Also what are the made to order things cast in ?

I would just like two different point costs: one for Ynarri and one without. I don’t use them but feel like WotP is incorporated into current point costs.

I don’t plan on repainting my entire Biel-Tan force but will see what rules and strategems we have available Friday.

The dice are meh. Black and red are hard to read, white and red are cool but can’t read the numbers.

If GW holds to form, swooping hawks Banshees and Fireprisms we’ll all be the new hotness.

I ‘m hoping for a point reduction for Wave Serpents or just auto include spirit stones.

Isnt the problem that balancing both Ynarri and Craftworlds simultaneously was almost impossible?

Like in 8th everyone says "Ynarri are awsome, Eldar are garbage... why would you run craftworlds when you can run Ynarri?"

I would rather Ynarri become less of a thing, and Craftworld not be forced into playing Ynarri to be competitive.

tekn0v1king wrote:
Isnt the problem that balancing both Ynarri and Craftworlds simultaneously was almost impossible?

Like in 8th everyone says "Ynarri are awsome, Eldar are garbage... why would you run craftworlds when you can run Ynarri?"

I would rather Ynarri become less of a thing, and Craftworld not be forced into playing Ynarri to be competitive.

I like the Triumvirate of Ynnead first, Eldar second. I'm sure there is more people like me. I don't want balanced Craftworlds and tacked-on Ynnari, I want to play Ynnari as a fully fledged 8th army. I think we deserve some kind of Stratagems and artifacts as the rest of the real armies are getting.

I don’t like the point tax penalty inherent in craftworld now because of Ynnari. Where do 17pt Dire Avengers come from again?

Is the Bonesinger quite a rare model?

People seem interested now its back.

 dan2026 wrote:
Is the Bonesinger quite a rare model?

People seem interested now its back.

Yes, it's rare. It was only ever released as a promotional model you got for buying a specific Eldar army bundle way back. I think it was around the release of DoW 1, as there are bonesingers in that game.

GW are going to discontinue the Index books eventually. When that happens I'd be surprised if all the factions included don't have a stand alone codex. Even if it is a slimline "allies" force like some of the later 7th releases.

 DanielFM wrote:

tekn0v1king wrote:
Isnt the problem that balancing both Ynarri and Craftworlds simultaneously was almost impossible?

Like in 8th everyone says "Ynarri are awsome, Eldar are garbage... why would you run craftworlds when you can run Ynarri?"

I would rather Ynarri become less of a thing, and Craftworld not be forced into playing Ynarri to be competitive.

I like the Triumvirate of Ynnead first, Eldar second. I'm sure there is more people like me. I don't want balanced Craftworlds and tacked-on Ynnari, I want to play Ynnari as a fully fledged 8th army. I think we deserve some kind of Stratagems and artifacts as the rest of the real armies are getting.

Ynnari will be able to use any of the generic stratagems and artifacts, just not the ones that are Iyanden specific or Ulthwe specific.

The Space Marines and IG codices both had gear that was available to any legion who wanted it, as well as some gear that was only for specific named legions. Don't see the Eldar codex being any different.

So we'll still have stratagems and artifacts to use. And ynnari already have their Craftworld trait in SfD, which along with WotP is a very good trait. They also have the "trait" of being able to take Eldar Soup detachments without losing SfD, which even the Imperium can't do.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
remember when 8th dropped, Ynnari were a separate faction on GWs website. I think we will see a codex for them, along with plastic aspects/warriors.

Custodes / Sisters of Silence are also their own faction on GWs website and just got a booklet in the box.

Ynnari might well be the same.

The booklet in the box was for 7th edition, not 8th.

Niiru wrote:

 DanielFM wrote:

tekn0v1king wrote:
Isnt the problem that balancing both Ynarri and Craftworlds simultaneously was almost impossible?

Like in 8th everyone says "Ynarri are awsome, Eldar are garbage... why would you run craftworlds when you can run Ynarri?"

I would rather Ynarri become less of a thing, and Craftworld not be forced into playing Ynarri to be competitive.

I like the Triumvirate of Ynnead first, Eldar second. I'm sure there is more people like me. I don't want balanced Craftworlds and tacked-on Ynnari, I want to play Ynnari as a fully fledged 8th army. I think we deserve some kind of Stratagems and artifacts as the rest of the real armies are getting.

Ynnari will be able to use any of the generic stratagems and artifacts, just not the ones that are Iyanden specific or Ulthwe specific.

The Space Marines and IG codices both had gear that was available to any legion who wanted it, as well as some gear that was only for specific named legions. Don't see the Eldar codex being any different.

So we'll still have stratagems and artifacts to use. And ynnari already have their Craftworld trait in SfD, which along with WotP is a very good trait. They also have the "trait" of being able to take Eldar Soup detachments without losing SfD, which even the Imperium can't do.

I hope that will be the case. Generic Eldar thingies (TM) would be enough on top of SfD to make them into a real army.

OP has been updated.

Going to be buying a load of bonesingers if metal. feth that guy trying to sell one on eBay for £100+. That Autarch had been in finecast before so don't know in what material he will be released.

 Korlandril wrote:
OP has been updated.

Going to be buying a load of bonesingers if metal. feth that guy trying to sell one on eBay for £100+. That Autarch had been in finecast before so don't know in what material he will be released.

Are you getting a load of them in the hopes of being able to sell them for £100+ in a couple years? lol

I'm tempted to pick up a couple, as well as the old rogue trader farseer, just to make some unique character options for my army. Bonesinger I guess would be good for a spiritseer, but unfortunately spiritseers are currently completely pointless (though I hope this changes) but could still use them as exarchs or something. Or just have them as cool models to paint.

Though I dont think my painting skill could live up to them really.

Niiru wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
OP has been updated.

Going to be buying a load of bonesingers if metal. feth that guy trying to sell one on eBay for £100+. That Autarch had been in finecast before so don't know in what material he will be released.

Are you getting a load of them in the hopes of being able to sell them for £100+ in a couple years? lol

I'm tempted to pick up a couple, as well as the old rogue trader farseer, just to make some unique character options for my army. Bonesinger I guess would be good for a spiritseer, but unfortunately spiritseers are currently completely pointless (though I hope this changes) but could still use them as exarchs or something. Or just have them as cool models to paint.

Though I dont think my painting skill could live up to them really.

No all for myself lol. Though I would be tempted to undercut anyone trying to sell for such high prices by maintaining a large stock pile myself.

You could use it to represent the Iyanden relic, there may be other relics it would be good for representing. It could be any psyker really

 DanielFM wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I got the feeling the Ynnari rules are ONLY going to be in the Triumvirate of Ynnead. As in they won't be anywhere else (Craftworlds codex included).

That would be quite a kick in the teeth for people buying the Triumvirate and expecting to play them as a real army. No Stratagems, no warlord traits and no relics in exchange for SfD and mixing units from Aeldari? Sorry but that won't cut It in 8th.
So much for the new faction of Eldar

I hope it's just a placeholder

They may well put them in the Codex or have them in Chapter Approved where all the the others deprived of Codex power boosts will hopefulyl get something.

Jealous that IG didn't get the Made to Order treatment :(

Not fair, Eldar get custom dice and Guard doesn't.

Well...that article is not terribly inspiring.

The wargear piece is luckily free...as it's MASSIVELY narrow in its use. Oh, and the only piece of wargear I've seen yet which kills half the units which benefit from it...so, yay?

The dice are neat, and I may pick some up to sell them off later, but they're pretty horrid when it comes to reading dice. I wish GW would not try so hard when doing dice. Make them the colour of the craftworlds and put the emblem on the '6' face...it's just that easy.

Five Craftworlds was expected but is a let down for sure - hope they're a bit more fleshed out due to lack of options. I'll be keen to read all the hints and teases this week. I do wonder if they'll put the Bonesinger in the codex --- would be nice to have an Eldar techmarine for wraith units or vehicles, etc. Eldar have inexplicably never had recovery options for any of their armies (no medics, no repair eldarses...). Even the Warlocks don't have options to heal or refurb stuff.

My wishlist for the Eldar codex is all unlikely to happen so I won't even bother typing it out.

I don't like that they're re-using the cover art from the 7th ed codices, it increases the risk of confusion and makes it seem a bit cheap. Not that the Craftworlds codex is the first one where they did this though.

 Elbows wrote:
Well...that article is not terribly inspiring.

The wargear piece is luckily free...as it's MASSIVELY narrow in its use. Oh, and the only piece of wargear I've seen yet which kills half the units which benefit from it...so, yay?

The dice are neat, and I may pick some up to sell them off later, but they're pretty horrid when it comes to reading dice. I wish GW would not try so hard when doing dice. Make them the colour of the craftworlds and put the emblem on the '6' face...it's just that easy.

Five Craftworlds was expected but is a let down for sure - hope they're a bit more fleshed out due to lack of options. I'll be keen to read all the hints and teases this week. I do wonder if they'll put the Bonesinger in the codex --- would be nice to have an Eldar techmarine for wraith units or vehicles, etc. Eldar have inexplicably never had recovery options for any of their armies (no medics, no repair eldarses...). Even the Warlocks don't have options to heal or refurb stuff.

My wishlist for the Eldar codex is all unlikely to happen so I won't even bother typing it out.

Giving the bonesinger rules would be great. It does fit having it heal Wraithbone constructs. The fact that they're adding a whole new keyword to the army in the codex (wraith construct) at least implies they're adding or changing the rules that relate to them.

Also that piece of wargear doesn't kill half the units that it effects... it only does D3 wounds, so it will only kill a single wraithguard if you roll a 3. On average you'll lose 2 wounds from a wraithguard (I'll admit, that's pretty nasty), or 2 wounds from a knight or lord (not that bad really). What you gain, is a unit of 10 blades with swords, when charging, will do 60 attacks instead of 40. So you'll be attacking like a squad of 15 for a turn. And this buff extends to all wraith for that turn within 6". For a Iyanden army that's pretty good. Situational, sure, but so are quite a few wargear options. You'd only use it if you were building around it.

 Elbows wrote:
Well...that article is not terribly inspiring.

The wargear piece is luckily free...as it's MASSIVELY narrow in its use. Oh, and the only piece of wargear I've seen yet which kills half the units which benefit from it...so, yay?

The dice are neat, and I may pick some up to sell them off later, but they're pretty horrid when it comes to reading dice. I wish GW would not try so hard when doing dice. Make them the colour of the craftworlds and put the emblem on the '6' face...it's just that easy.

Five Craftworlds was expected but is a let down for sure - hope they're a bit more fleshed out due to lack of options. I'll be keen to read all the hints and teases this week. I do wonder if they'll put the Bonesinger in the codex --- would be nice to have an Eldar techmarine for wraith units or vehicles, etc. Eldar have inexplicably never had recovery options for any of their armies (no medics, no repair eldarses...). Even the Warlocks don't have options to heal or refurb stuff.

My wishlist for the Eldar codex is all unlikely to happen so I won't even bother typing it out.

The Bonesinger would seem a great addition in all ways - new option, cool model, new tactics - but they don't seem to be adding new non marine models at the moment :( The older model they will likely just say counts as a Farseer - if we were really lucky we might have got Iyanna.

Agreed re the dice - my deathwatch dice are borderline unusable.

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
Jealous that IG didn't get the Made to Order treatment :(

To be fair, Guard, Marines and Chaos have already had made to order events.

Niiru wrote:

 DanielFM wrote:

tekn0v1king wrote:
Isnt the problem that balancing both Ynarri and Craftworlds simultaneously was almost impossible?

Like in 8th everyone says "Ynarri are awsome, Eldar are garbage... why would you run craftworlds when you can run Ynarri?"

I would rather Ynarri become less of a thing, and Craftworld not be forced into playing Ynarri to be competitive.

I like the Triumvirate of Ynnead first, Eldar second. I'm sure there is more people like me. I don't want balanced Craftworlds and tacked-on Ynnari, I want to play Ynnari as a fully fledged 8th army. I think we deserve some kind of Stratagems and artifacts as the rest of the real armies are getting.

Ynnari will be able to use any of the generic stratagems and artifacts, just not the ones that are Iyanden specific or Ulthwe specific.

The Space Marines and IG codices both had gear that was available to any legion who wanted it, as well as some gear that was only for specific named legions. Don't see the Eldar codex being any different.

So we'll still have stratagems and artifacts to use. And ynnari already have their Craftworld trait in SfD, which along with WotP is a very good trait. They also have the "trait" of being able to take Eldar Soup detachments without losing SfD, which even the Imperium can't do.

I'm not sure that it will work this way. For example, if the Eldar codex uses basically the same wording as the codices we've already seen, then, per the Ynnari rules in the Xenos index, you could get a Craftworld Attribute and SfD. Ynnari units don't stop being Asuryani or <Craftworld> units, and they have SfD on a unit by unit basis by virtue of being Ynnari infantry or bikes. The only problem would be the one detachment which has the Ynnari character in it, but of course Chapter Tactics type rules have so far worked on a detachment by detachment basis. Most of the released codices have also handed out exemptions for certain units, and while this would be the first time where the exempted unit does not itself appear in the codex, it's not implausible that either the CWE codex or updated Ynnari rules would allow a detachment to get an Attribute even if one of the three Ynnari HQs is in it. The index just treats SfD as an army list special rule like Battle Focus or ATSKNF, not as anything like a Chapter Tactic. There's nothing very weird about it, rules-wise, except in the way that it replaces another rule. Space Marines also don't lose ATSKNF when they soup.

It's also very likely that if an Ynnari detachment can get the generic stratagems, then they can use the Craftworld-specific stratagems. In all of the other codices you unlock the <subfaction> stratagems just by virtue of having a <faction> detachment, it's just that the stratagems only do anything for <subfaction> units. Edit: What Ynnari armies wouldn't get, without the Eldar codex or updated Ynnari rules saying otherwise, is relics or warlord traits, since those have so far been tied to the faction of the army's warlord.

I doubt the Bonesinger will get rules. I can't see them giving them to a Ltd Ed model that never had rules in a full Codex release.

Did it get them in the Xenos 1 Index?

That reminds me, I have one of those. Friend of mine ended up with two and gave me his spare.

The Bonesinger doesn't have rules, has never had rules, and I highly doubt it will get them in this codex.

Collect it, paint it, show it to people, play it as an Eldar psyker if your opponent lets you.

Even if there are only 5 big names, there are others that are in the codex and are their own factions. (Unlike successor chapters)

Nobody has a problem with guys like mordians or black Templars getting separate and special rules, why not yme-loc, altansar, or mymeara?

They're available, you have the story for them and a brief description of their strategies, just add some rules for it instead of forcing everyone to play like the 5 big guys.

I know mymeara and corsairs are forgeworld, but once you start mentioning them in the codex and core rulebook you give people the impression they'll A) exist in the game besides three unit entries and B) they're going to have some of their lore expanded upon.

Just seems like a waste to not expand, instead of constrict. Especially when the difference is a friggin paint job!

I don't have a problem with only five craftworlds, there are too many to give each their own rules anyway, so why not stick to the fab five?

I run my own craftworld, I'm going to pick whichever one of the five suits my fluff best. If you run Mymeara, Yme-Loc, Iybraesil or whatever, you can do the same thing.

 Cream Tea wrote:
I don't have a problem with only five craftworlds, there are too many to give each their own rules anyway, so why not stick to the fab five?

I run my own craftworld, I'm going to pick whichever one of the five suits my fluff best. If you run Mymeara, Yme-Loc, Iybraesil or whatever, you can do the same thing.

I think the objection is less that they're excluding Yme-Loc, specifically, and more that with 7 or 8 options to choose from you're more likely to be able to find one that best fits what you want to do. I mean, it's not like they seemed to have had much trouble coming up with 8 Regimental Doctrines for Guard, and those even split and do different things for infantry than for vehicles.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
I don't have a problem with only five craftworlds, there are too many to give each their own rules anyway, so why not stick to the fab five?

I run my own craftworld, I'm going to pick whichever one of the five suits my fluff best. If you run Mymeara, Yme-Loc, Iybraesil or whatever, you can do the same thing.

I think the objection is less that they're excluding Yme-Loc, specifically, and more that with 7 or 8 options to choose from you're more likely to be able to find one that best fits what you want to do. I mean, it's not like they seemed to have had much trouble coming up with 8 Regimental Doctrines for Guard, and those even split and do different things for infantry than for vehicles.

Didn't Guard get doctrines for exactly the regiments that have have (non-FW) releases? They may have felt it was a nice gestures to release doctrines for all of their own models at least.

There are five Eldar craftworlds that stand apart in how well-known and represented they are, it makes sense to feature these specifically.

Also, this is GW. Don't expect equal treatment. They play favourites a lot.

From what I've seen, things like CHapter Tactics and Doctrines are acutally rather simple and straightforward in what they offer. I'm hoping that in concentrating on just 5 Craftworlds (the obvious 5) they can actually flesh them out to offer far more character to them than just -1 to hit for enemies more than 12" away (que people whinging about Eldar getting all the good rules).

Lets be honest, if the Craftworld traits can properly represent massed Aspect Warriors (Biel-Tan), Jetbike/Skimmer spam (Saim-Hann), Ghost Warriors (Iyanden), Rangers (Alaitoc) and Guardians & Warlocks (Ulthwe) then they would have properly covered all aspects of how the army works and your unique Craftworld can be formed from using detachments of different Craftworld traits.