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.

Hey guys,

So I've been reading Path of the Warrior, about 2/3rds of the way through...

Anyhoo, given the importance of the 'war mask' and the helmet's err... innate qualities, it made me wonder if an Aspect Warrior needs to wear the helm to separate his war mask and normal identity (as putting on the helm is a ritual to prepare you for war).

It's just, I was wondering, I believe that Rangers and Guardians are the only Eldar models that come without helmets; is this because they are militia/independents and thus do not receive much in the way of official instruction? Obviously Guardians do not have Exarchs but you'd think someone might tell them to wear their helmets...

I say this because I recall someone saying the helmet actually dulls an Eldar's considerable senses; some poster on here once said that there's a bit of fluff about an Eldar removing his helmet after a battle and suddenly weeping from the sheer emotion that overwhelmed him?

Anyhoo, I figured that the attributes of the helmets are perhaps a nice fluff reason for why Eldar models always have helmets.

While I'm yet to read the path books etc, on a common-sense note

Wearing something that helps you not get shot in the face as easily seems like a fairly good idea to me.

I just finished the Path of the Warrior and currently reading Path of the Seer. Do they have to ware their helmets? I would say no they don't have to but for the practical purpose of it aiding them in combat and protecting them I don't see a reason why they would not.

As far as the War-mask is concerned the donning of the helm is usually the last act in the ritual that they do to prepair for war and that brings out the war-mask. But it is possible to have the war-mask without the helm. But to say more would spoil a part of the book.

As far as models are concerned there is one aspect warrior who comes without a helm option and that is the Dire Avenger Exarch head. Granted in my opinion I thought it looked like crap so I never used it. But it is an option.

I take it that part of the ritual of doning the warrior self is the putting on of the armur and the helmit completes the sequence and normally the removel starts the process of returning to (Eldar) normalility.

So pretty much as Elthrai says - I think however it will vary a bit as Exarchs are pretty much always have their warrior self "on" for instance.

Several piecs of fluff have the Eldar removing their helmits and becoming overwhelmed with emotions, but again I think they would need to be consciously allowing their mask to slip?

Surely many Guardians do not have War Masks?

I'd say that eldar do not need to wear their mask.

You've answered most of your own question as guardians are not on the path of anger or what ever it's called and rangers are on no path at all so there is little ritual involved for them.

As for aspect warriors, all their rituals and training take them to the point where they use all of the armour.

There's also the fact that aspect warriors have useful equipment and or weapon systems in the armour. The Scorpian has the maniblasters, the banchees mask, probably Swooping hawks would need to have breathing apperatus.

Likewise Farseers use ghosthelms.

I think it's just easier to keep the helmet on.

They dont take them off like silly the mon-keigh do

What I mean is, if a Guardian takes off their helmet... surely they'll go nuts?

Eldar helmets are wargear that protects their head and provides targeting/battlefield information via a psychic interface connected to the suits psychic "computers" and the Autarch central command & control

Eldar "war masks" are psychological states that allows a Eldar to enter/leave a state of a vicious warrior.

They're different things, and an Eldar can don his warmask without putting his helmet on. Indeed any Eldar aspect warrior model on tabletop without a helmet is doing this.

Yep, getting shot in the face can ruin your whole day.

The helmets may also help reduce their intense psychic signiature.

Harriticus wrote:Eldar helmets are wargear that protects their head and provides targeting/battlefield information via a psychic interface connected to the suits psychic "computers" and the Autarch central command & control

Eldar "war masks" are psychological states that allows a Eldar to enter/leave a state of a vicious warrior.

They're different things, and an Eldar can don his warmask without putting his helmet on. Indeed any Eldar aspect warrior model on tabletop without a helmet is doing this.

I realise this and judging by other responses I've clearly miscommunicated my questions...

It is my understanding that the helmet dulls an Eldar's perceptions of battle and, going by what happens when the main character first puts his on in Path of the Warrior, also sort of... links the suit to the wearer and gets 'em doped up for war.

My point is, without the helmet on (which they put on as the final part of assuming the war mask) will an Eldar go crazeh in a battle? Do they need it as part of the psychological 'holding back' of the war mask? And without it is battle just too intense?

I did not mean to refer to physical dangers or imply that a helmet was literally a war mask...

Maybe Eldar without helmets have ear devices similar to human vox to hear their Autarch.
And I know only one Eldar warrior without the helmet - the Dire Avenger Exarch. There is a bare head in Dire Avenger sprue but his warrior personality may be in his plume)

It's a symbolic gesture, part of the ritual of donning the war mask. Most Eldar stick with the helmets, but a shrine that has rituals that don't require the helmet (probably Dire Avengers thematically and for ease of conversion) wouldn't be far-fetched.

AnomanderRake wrote:It's a symbolic gesture, part of the ritual of donning the war mask. Most Eldar stick with the helmets, but a shrine that has rituals that don't require the helmet (probably Dire Avengers thematically and for ease of conversion) wouldn't be far-fetched.

But they don't wear helmets on their Craftworlds (if it isn't at war like Iyanden).

Farseer Petriel wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:It's a symbolic gesture, part of the ritual of donning the war mask. Most Eldar stick with the helmets, but a shrine that has rituals that don't require the helmet (probably Dire Avengers thematically and for ease of conversion) wouldn't be far-fetched.

But they don't wear helmets on their Craftworlds (if it isn't at war like Iyanden).

They wouldn't wear their war mask (metaphorical) outside of the Aspect Shrines. On the Craftworld you are just your normal self so that you are not a danger; it's why Exarchs can't leave the Shrines.