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.

Maybe "Art Book" is the wrong term; something more like the painting books that they've released for Tyranids, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar.

I wonder what other Eldar units will be available to the Harlequins?

Dancing Wraithknights anybody?

 Medium of Death wrote:
I wonder what other Eldar units will be available to the Harlequins?

Dancing Wraithknights anybody?

They don't have spirit stones in the established cannon, so no wraith-anything.
It'd be nice to have some borrowed tanks, but really I just want a playable army.

That's a good point. They used to have Wraithlords though no?

I guess the idea of the Wraithknight needing to be piloted by a Twin with the dead twin in the spirit stone kind of rules it out.

I wonder what Titans the Eldar had before the fall... or whether it was the existing designs and the spiritstones were integrated later to improve the pilot bond.

Not sure about more recent lists but in RT they had access to wraithlord precursors, but those were piloted 'dreadnoughts' at the time.
The 'wraith' stuff didn't really exist either, those were all eldar robots at that point.

 plastictrees wrote:
Not sure about more recent lists but in RT they had access to wraithlord precursors, but those were piloted 'dreadnoughts' at the time.
The 'wraith' stuff didn't really exist either, those were all eldar robots at that point.

Which explained why...
They could also drive landraiders...

In 3rd ed it was much more in tune with the canon of things

RT really shouldnt be used as canon for anything.. It was basically a totally different game with vastly different fluff.

2nd edition is start of current 40k.

 Kirasu wrote:
RT really shouldnt be used as canon for anything.. It was basically a totally different game with vastly different fluff.

2nd edition is start of current 40k.

Not really. 2nd + were still filled with plenty of stupidity, most notably the abhorrent 3.5 Chaos Codex and the watching-paint-dry-boring old-Cron-fluff.

5th Edition is the start of current 40k.

Except almost all the special characters are from 2nd edition and most of the fluff is recycled from that era (If that army existed in 2nd ed).

that's the beauty of 40K compared to other companies stuff, GW does not subscribe to the 'this is the one and only truth' theory,

rather what you get is just from different perspectives, so rather than retcons changes are just different storytellers views on the same story

it's all just as real and just as valid, you just have to choose which storyteller to listen to

I love that about gw, with the exception of the Necrons saying what the eldar call the war in heaven. That gak is annoying!

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
RT really shouldnt be used as canon for anything.. It was basically a totally different game with vastly different fluff.

2nd edition is start of current 40k.

Not really. 2nd + were still filled with plenty of stupidity, most notably the abhorrent 3.5 Chaos Codex and the watching-paint-dry-boring old-Cron-fluff.

5th Edition is the start of current 40k.

Paint dry Necron fluff?

It was understated and lovecraftian. I don't even know why I'm responding to this.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
RT really shouldnt be used as canon for anything.. It was basically a totally different game with vastly different fluff.

2nd edition is start of current 40k.

Not really. 2nd + were still filled with plenty of stupidity, most notably the abhorrent 3.5 Chaos Codex and the watching-paint-dry-boring old-Cron-fluff.

5th Edition is the start of current 40k.

O.o did you actually play 2nd?

2nd was actually much better than the later editions. Third had some nice ideas but it lost allot of what the game was during the 2nd to 3rd transition....

Later versions were just...... bad.

 Medium of Death wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
RT really shouldnt be used as canon for anything.. It was basically a totally different game with vastly different fluff.

2nd edition is start of current 40k.

Not really. 2nd + were still filled with plenty of stupidity, most notably the abhorrent 3.5 Chaos Codex and the watching-paint-dry-boring old-Cron-fluff.

5th Edition is the start of current 40k.

Paint dry Necron fluff?

It was understated and lovecraftian. I don't even know why I'm responding to this.

Or, y'know, some people might have felt differently to you and found it boring? Wow, it's like people can have different opinions or something!

The current sidebar is really more about background than rules, which I believe is what Wonderwolf was talking about.

Ruleswise 2nd edition was more of a true skirmish game, saying that 3rd edition 'lost' something suggests that it wasn't a concious effort to make an almost entirely different game at least from a high level 'feel' perspective.

Anyway.
Anyone have any tiny pictures of something vaguely Harlequin related that we can scrutinize?

Trolled off the 'net. What the starweaver might look like??

 plastictrees wrote:
Anyone have any tiny pictures of something vaguely Harlequin related that we can scrutinize?

Since we now have our new WD with jetbikes, it's time to obsess over what the DT will look like and hunt for fresh leaks of the next few WDs

Ah good, btt. Yes similiar to those. The Venom was first introduced in the Citadel Journal Harlequin army list before Dark Eldar got it with their 5th Ed codex. It would make sense to give them a similiar vehicle again

I just wish they'd hurry it along with the rules...

Models first, rules somewhere down the line

 Januine wrote:
Models first, rules somewhere down the line

No, no, rules first... so I can play a game or two with what I have...since I don't forsee them getting much new stuff.

I just picked up my Harlequin Troupe today, and I confess to not reading all 38 pages of this thread, so my apologies if somewhere this was covered already.

First of all: there was some debate when images first surfaced, but the Harlequin bases are most certainly 25mm! So, what tea leaves shall we read into there?

The box comes with 1.5 sprues (3 half frames), which I suppose is quite good, considering that they are parts for 6 models. The quality of the plastic is excellent. In USD, after a discount, I would have paid something like $4.50 per model, which I can live with for a pretty good quality set.

It also comes with a transfer sheet with some white and yellow decals, but I really dont' know why they bothered -- almost all the shapes are very simple (like two rows of diamonds, and a bunch of spades with crosses at the bottom). Not that it isn't appreciated; just that all but a couple of the decals would be trivial to paint in.

The Masks are awesome! There are some full heads, as well as some two-part ones. Anyways, a picture is worth a thousand words. Here's a very high res snapshot of the Troupe sprues. (click to open, then use + to zoom in -- you can see the faces, etc.)

I also picked up the Solitaire, and that is a very solid model -- though it was hellaciously expensive :( I only bought 1, since he's Unique. A pity, as it is such a beautiful model.

Thanks for the pic. Since you have the box, can you confirm there are enough parts to make 7 torsos? The GW description says you 7 fronts, 5 backs, and 3 backs with coats, but I can't make out from the GW sprue pics if they all fit together so as to build 7 torsos.

I have a spare set of legs or two and an Eldar torso front, so if I can essentially get 8 models out of this set (5 Players, Troupe Master, Solitaire and Shadowseer converted from spares) then it goes from 'maybe' to 'definite'.

7 Torsos are buildable yes.

Awesome, I'll have to grab a set for sure. Cheers.

1 male leader front/reverse with coat

3 male front
3 female front

5 reverse
2 reverse with coat

8 complete heads when built

so add some compatible legs for a 7th troop member and if the elder front torso fits you could get an 8th

Picked my sets up as well.
Someone was considering it earlier so I'll point out that there is no direct compatibility with the Witch Elf kit. Lots of relatively easy conversions to make, but nothing a easy as straight head or body swaps.

I count 12 leg pieces though (for 6 sets of lower torso). Of course, the legs are not super exciting, and you can substitute something in; Dark Eldar look like they'd fit well.

Heads - there may be 8 heads complete, but there are 13 face masks. If you really wanted another head, just lop off the front of a DE non-helmet head, and stick on face mask

I wonder if Dark Eldar Scourge legs would work as they've got the prancing on bits of rock sorted (although they'd need the spikes/claws removed)

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I wonder if Dark Eldar Scourge legs would work as they've got the prancing on bits of rock sorted (although they'd need the spikes/claws removed)

Just looking at a Scourge sprue. Yeah, they are sort of the same shape, and anatomically made to the same scale. The same issue as using legs from Kabalites, though -- the legs from Scourges and Kabalites are "female" sockets (the upper torso has the extruding ball portion for the join), whereas with the Harlequins, the lower torso contains the ball part of the joint, and the upper torso contains the socket. However, that's not really a big deal; just roll a ball of green stuff.