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.

I don't have a problem with the concept of non psyker leaders, I just really don't like that autarchs replaced exarchs as the option.

The Eldar military has a command structure - guardians are led by ex aspect warriors for example.

But an autarch should be a strategic commander, not a beatstick.

Also, warlocks should have a higher rank.

So my thinking is thus:

Autarch (up to 3 as a single hq choice)
M7" WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W4 A3 LD9 SV3+

Path of command: Eldar within 6" re-roll morale tests. Guardian units re-roll 1s to hit.

Strategic genius: every time you use a strategem while one or more autarchs is on the table roll a dice. On a 5+ you receive an additional CP. for each additional autarch on the table increase the roll by 1, to a maximum of 3+.


Warlock master
M7" WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W4 A4 LD8 SV6+

Can activate up to 2 powers a turn.

Psychic fury: this model gains this psychic power and may imbue a melee weapon with additional psychic charge. Increase the weapons AP by 1d3 for that round. In addition, if a unit suffers 1 or more casualties from this unit it receives an additional mortal wound for each casualty. 5+ warp charge


Ancient exarch shrine master
M7" WS2+ BS2+ S4 T4 W5 A4 LD8 SV3+

Lost to khaine: 4+ invulnerable save

Master of the path: this model possesses 3 warrior powers from their shrine list. Aspect units of the same shrine re-roll 1s to hit within 6".

Ancient weaponry: pick one weapon carried by this model. It gains +1S, -1AP or +1 to its type of a range weapon (eg assault 2 becomes assault 3). Choose at the start of the game.




Autarchs can keep their aspect gear, but it's not there to make them fighters. Only exarchs should be the ones running around smashing things like that.

Hellebore wrote:


Autarch (up to 3 as a single hq choice)
M7" WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W4 A3 LD9 SV3+

Path of command: Eldar within 6" re-roll morale tests. Guardian units re-roll 1s to hit.

Strategic genius: every time you use a strategem while one or more autarchs is on the table roll a dice. On a 5+ you receive an additional CP. for each additional autarch on the table increase the roll by 1, to a maximum of 3+.

3 per slot feels a little weird. Even with your nerfs to their combat prowess, autarchs should still have a certain amount of gravitas.

I think I like giving them reduced offense and better CP regeneration, but only giving them better CP regeneration if you take at least two of them feels meh. Requiring someone to spend points on at least Two Ender Wiggins to have a 50% shot at regaining a single CP regardless of how many CP you spent is pretty meh. Taking 4 autarchs (assuming the 3 per slot thing bypasses the rule of 3) to automatically lower the cost of your first stratagem each round also feels odd.

Not a fan of making their reroll aura guardian-specific. I get that you wanted to make rerolls for aspects more the exarch's thing, but this would make autarchs weirdly guardian oriented. Like, a fluffy Biel-Tan list with lots of aspects wouldn't get as much use out of an autarch. Meanwhile, a fluffy Ulthwe list with lots of guardians makes a weirdly compelling case for you to take an autarch instead of a psyker.

I think you could get away with leaving the reroll aura as-is. Autarchs would be generalist buffers that support multiple units working in tandem while an exarch would be more killy and more specific with his buffs. Alternatively, I kind of like the idea of turning some of our stratagems into "orders" that an autarch can issue.

Warlock master
M7" WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W4 A4 LD8 SV6+

Can activate up to 2 powers a turn.

Psychic fury: this model gains this psychic power and may imbue a melee weapon with additional psychic charge. Increase the weapons AP by 1d3 for that round. In addition, if a unit suffers 1 or more casualties from this unit it receives an additional mortal wound for each casualty. 5+ warp charge

Like the concept. Like the statline. Don't like Psychic Fury. I feel like Witch Strike(?) from the Runes of Fortune table probably does what you're trying to do roughly as well and a bit more simply. It does leave him a bit meh at bypassing saves, but that's what Jinx and Smite are for. Alternatively, a "Master Witchblade" could just be a witchblade with a slightly better AP. Also, how many times can it deny the witch each turn?

Ancient exarch shrine master
M7" WS2+ BS2+ S4 T4 W5 A4 LD8 SV3+

Lost to khaine: 4+ invulnerable save

Master of the path: this model possesses 3 warrior powers from their shrine list. Aspect units of the same shrine re-roll 1s to hit within 6".

Ancient weaponry: pick one weapon carried by this model. It gains +1S, -1AP or +1 to its type of a range weapon (eg assault 2 becomes assault 3). Choose at the start of the game.

Like the concept. Like the statline. Have some nitpicks on the special rules.

Master of the Path is cool, but some power trees will have more options that are useful on a single-model beatstick unit than others. I kind of feel like the exarch power lists should've been broken up into "greater" and "lesser" powers and that exarchs should be able to take one of each. Three powers on this guy seems a bit excessive; you could probably feel pretty good giving him just two. Two powers lets him pick the two best powers for whatever his job is. Three powers lets you pick all the good ones or possibly both of the good ones and the least bad of the rest.

You could probably just drop Ancient Weaponry. It seems likely to have wildly different levels of usefulness on different exarchs. An extra reaper launcher or AML shot is pretty greeat. AP -1 or Strength 7 or 1 extra shot on a spider exarch's gun is a lot less good. Plus, as characters, many exarchs would be able to take relic weapons as-is. A shard of anaris on a swooping hawk exarch wouldn't be awful, for instance. Just give them access to the standard exarch gear.

You probably need discrete datasheets for different exarchs. A swooping hawk or shining spear exarch moves faster (and thus should cost more than) a dire avenger exarch. Plus, the increased strength and attacks stats will matter a lot more on a banshee than on a fire dragon.

Hmm. Do these HQ exarchs perhaps step on the toes of Phoenix Lords too much? I could see a banshee exarch with two exarch powers stealing jobs from Jain Zar, for instance.

Finally, "Ancient Exarch Shrine Master" is a mouthful. How about shortening that to "Shrine Master?"

My thinking on the autarch is that we keep ignoring the command ranks of the guardians - autarchs are at least part of that structure.

There is plenty of scope for more detail in the way the guardian forces operate, but we don't get them.

Exarchs are the command structure of the aspect shrines - originally they formed an exarch quorum to lead everyone before the retconns (or the EA Armageddon autarch that's an exarch anyway).



I agree on the special rule - what I would do is allow every autarch to roll a die, but the success increases with more autarchs (similar to a warlock council).

0-3 is because I see them as integral the guardian command structure and so there has to be a lot of them, relatively speaking. you could do 0-2 like primaris lieutenants instead.

I just want them to actually follow the path of command, rather than the path of exarchlite....



Master warlocks would deny 1 power per turn. They don't need to have a special rule, but id like them to be more fighty like they used to be.


Shrine master's also don't need unique ancient weapon rules. If they can take relics.

I don't really care if they compete with phoenix lords - I don't think Phoenix lords are currently any good anyway, despite redesigning Jain Zar.

Phoenix lords need a complete redesign to properly represent them.

Hellebore wrote:
My thinking on the autarch is that we keep ignoring the command ranks of the guardians - autarchs are at least part of that structure.

There is plenty of scope for more detail in the way the guardian forces operate, but we don't get them.

I get ya. But autarchs definitely aren't guardian-specific commanders. They definitely do command aspects. Especially on caftworlds that favor certain non-guardian units. Iybraesil autarchs should probably be able to buff banshees, for instance.

I'm not opposed to showing "guardian sergeants" on the tabletop, but that sounds like it might work better as a different datasheet or as an upgrade for a guardian squad rather than repurposing the autarch.

I agree on the special rule - what I would do is allow every autarch to roll a die, but the success increases with more autarchs (similar to a warlock council).

0-3 is because I see them as integral the guardian command structure and so there has to be a lot of them, relatively speaking. you could do 0-2 like primaris lieutenants instead.

I just want them to actually follow the path of command, rather than the path of exarchlite....

Totally see what you're going for. We might have different ideas about what an autarch should be though. I agree that exarchs should be more killy than autarchs. However, I also feel that autarchs should carry the same dramatic weight as, say, a farseer. Where a lieutenant is considered inferior to a captain in terms of both rank and experience, an autarch is very much a high-ranking hero in his own right. An autarch is more comparable, in my mind, to a captain than he is to an apothecary or master of ordnance. He's like... the eldar version of a GSC primus.

Master warlocks would deny 1 power per turn. They don't need to have a special rule, but id like them to be more fighty like they used to be.

Sure. 4 attacks that hit and wound on 2s and do d3 damage apiece (or d3+2 with the Runes of Fortune power) is pretty fighty though, right? Also, and this is more of an eldar psyker thing in general, maybe warlocks of all ranks should have ghost helms so that they don't murder their centuries/millenia-old buddies every 18th time they cast a power?

I don't really care if they compete with phoenix lords - I don't think Phoenix lords are currently any good anyway, despite redesigning Jain Zar.

Phoenix lords need a complete redesign to properly represent them.

I don't disagree with that. I actually kind of like where Jain Zar is at (killy and cheap enough to use), but I wouldn't be against upping both their performance and their points so that they better match their fluff.

I think autarch should be able to have all of the index options as well as be able to pick any two of the exarch powers and be kept as a single character with maybe 1 more attack. With the PL's sucking so much they should be the jack of all trades beat stick. The autarch has basically mastered every single aspect before ascending to command the entire army.. That's legendary level skills and should be reflected as such.

I know people are hating Autarchs because of the way eldar have been re-structured (Even after all these years...)

Anyway. We are badly lacking traits and relics that are worth a damn...

Ok, how about something like this:

Autarch
M7" WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W4 A3 LD9 SV3+

Pinnacle of command: all Eldar units within 12" reroll failed leadership tests and 1s to hit.

Strategic genius: roll a dice everytime a strategem is used. On a 4 you recover a single CP, on a 5 2CP and 3CP on a 6 (up to the maximum cost of the strategem played).

Demiarchs (0-3 as a single choice)
M7" WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W2 A2 LD8 SV3+

The path of command: all guardian Eldar units within 6" reroll wound rolls.

Strategic council: roll. A d6 for each demiarch you have in your army at the beginning of the game. For each 5+ rolled you gain an additional CP to add to your starting pool.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Argive wrote:
I think autarch should be able to have all of the index options as well as be able to pick any two of the exarch powers and be kept as a single character with maybe 1 more attack. With the PL's sucking so much they should be the jack of all trades beat stick. The autarch has basically mastered every single aspect before ascending to command the entire army.. That's legendary level skills and should be reflected as such.

I know people are hating Autarchs because of the way eldar have been re-structured (Even after all these years...)

Anyway. We are badly lacking traits and relics that are worth a damn...

I can see what you're going for, but exarchs are the only ones that can access those powers because they're partly psychic and entirely because they've fallen to the path. Allowing autarchs to take them undermines the entire existence of exarchs. If you can just follow a different path to get all the advantages of the warrior path and none of the downsides, then exarchs are pointless and pretty much a joke, rather than the scary supernatural space Shaolin masters they're supposed to be.

I see what you are saying. I really like the autarch badassery fluff resons. Wierdly eldar are almost space elf tribes people.

You have the spiritual leaders/shamans (seers) and then you have the tribe chief who ultimately tells people what to do in a pragmatic sense. I like this split. I think autarch should be a character rather than a unit. Aspects are supposed to be the elite squads.

Perhaps the exarch powers would undermine the exarchs role indeed. In which case I would like the autarch to be able to select 2 of the generic aspect abiltiies, for example: he could pick acrobatic(banshees) masters of stealth (scorpions)

Or assured destruction(fire dragon) and skyleap (swooping hawks) etc.

This would represent the fact that he has affinity for some of the specific aspects on top of using the various weapons.

There could be heaps of possibilities and conversion opportunities. I'm sure there would be some broken ass OP combinations so would certainly need some hashing out. Ahh one can only dream.

Hellebore wrote:
Ok, how about something like this:

Autarch
M7" WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W4 A3 LD9 SV3+

Pinnacle of command: all Eldar units within 12" reroll failed leadership tests and 1s to hit.

Strategic genius: roll a dice everytime a strategem is used. On a 4 you recover a single CP, on a 5 2CP and 3CP on a 6 (up to the maximum cost of the strategem played).

Demiarchs (0-3 as a single choice)
M7" WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W2 A2 LD8 SV3+

The path of command: all guardian Eldar units within 6" reroll wound rolls.

Strategic council: roll. A d6 for each demiarch you have in your army at the beginning of the game. For each 5+ rolled you gain an additional CP to add to your starting pool.

Looks pretty good to me. A couple a of things:
* I'm unclear on why the demiarchs have heavy aspect armor (3+ saves). Are they meant to be guardians that used to be aspects, or are they like... relatively new autarchs?
* A 6" bubble of automatically rerolling all wounds seems way more powerful than what you're going for. Keep in mind a lieutenant only allows rerolls of 1. Plus, "guardian units" can include some pretty hefty guns. Maybe bring that down to rerolling 1s? These guys seem like they're meant to be very cheap characters, but a bubble of Doom for guardians might call for an expensive price hike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Argive wrote:

There could be heaps of possibilities and conversion opportunities. I'm sure there would be some broken ass OP combinations so would certainly need some hashing out. Ahh one can only dream.

Eh. You'd end up with acrobatic bike autarchs that can advance 22" and charge 2d6+3". And autarchs with permanent -2s to being hit if you combo spectres with the shimmerplume. I suspect you'd mostly see those combos, and other combos would go unused and/or be largely inconsequential. Between the couple of possibly too powerful combos and the added complexity, I'm not sure it would be worth it to let autarchs take aspect powers. Plus, some of those powers are supposed to be locked to equipment. A skyleaping autarch without wings would be weird. A rangefinder autarch who's already wearing a banshee helm raises questions.

I wasn't clear.

The idea was to accept the concept of an autarch as a farseer level character (as you suggested) in the craftworld command structure and add another level that reflected someone learning the path of command.

This creates multiple ranks and shows that structure that is missing whilst also providing the lower level character I was describing.

The heavy armour is because autarchs have it.

They should also have the same rule lieutenants do, not the blanket.

In this structure, there is a craftworld command triumvirate:

Path of the Seer: farseers, warlocks spirit seers
Path of the warrior: shrine lords, exarchs, warriors
Path of command: autarch, demiarch, guardians

The sight
The sword
The strategy

Hellebore wrote:
I wasn't clear.

The idea was to accept the concept of an autarch as a farseer level character (as you suggested) in the craftworld command structure and add another level that reflected someone learning the path of command.

This creates multiple ranks and shows that structure that is missing whilst also providing the lower level character I was describing.

The heavy armour is because autarchs have it.

They should also have the same rule lieutenants do, not the blanket.

Ah. Got it. That seems pretty reasonable to me then. 3+ armor certainly isn't a problem. I just wasn't sure if it fit the fluff if they were meant to be guardians. I could see an autarch having to "apprentice" under a more experienced autarch to earn his authority. If autarch A has been succesfully leading your armies for 2,000 years and autarch B, who has lead all of 0 battles himself, disagrees with autarch A, autarch B is probably going to just get ignored. Plus, other paths seems to do the mentor/apprentice thing.

No objection to an aura of rerolling 1s to wound, guardian-locked or otherwise. If it works for marines, it should be fine for us. We already have access to a stratagem that does something similar, after all.

Honestly? Ditch the autarch. An unnecessary option in the codex.

Make Exarchs the proper madness that they used to be. End of.

 Elbows wrote:
Honestly? Ditch the autarch. An unnecessary option in the codex.

Make Exarchs the proper madness that they used to be. End of.

Eh. I mean, I feel like you're maybe missing the core assumption here. Autarch's have their role to fill. It's just that "killing stuff good" is not that role.

When autarchs could manipulate reserves, they actually felt like they were doing the "path of command" thing pretty well. They had a place in any army leaning into reserves. In 8th edition, they got one of the first and worst versions of CP recycling and retained the better-than-exarch combat stats they've had for several editions. So the end result is that they don't feel particularly good at commanding (you'd rather spend your points on an extra psyker most of the time), but they do seem to be better combatants than exarchs (which is weird). Thus Hellebore's suggestions being aimed at making exarchs more killy than autarchs and making autarchs more commandy than they currently are.

Unless you just mean that you want autarchs to be removed because they literally aren't mandatory and you personally don't like them all that much. In which case, I think your favorite unit should be removed, so there! Nyeh!

No, I'm simply stating that Autarchs were and are a stupid design choice and serve no purpose in an Eldar army, full-stop.

 Elbows wrote:
No, I'm simply stating that Autarchs were and are a stupid design choice and serve no purpose in an Eldar army, full-stop.

I'm personally not a fan of the inclusion of autarchs as they interfere with the concept of an exarch, as they are currently written.

However they are undoubtedly here to stay and there's nothing wrong with the concept of a command path per se. In 2nd the only characters that could be army commander were farseers and the avatar - exarchs were not command units.

It's not feasible to have a farseer lead every army, so other unit types are important.


Hence this thread to reconcile the natures of autarchs and exarchs and give them distinct roles.

 Elbows wrote:
No, I'm simply stating that Autarchs were and are a stupid design choice and serve no purpose in an Eldar army, full-stop.

Why?

The Autarch is a poorly thought out ham-fisted attempt at giving the Eldar a Space Marine Captain...instead of actually leaving Exarchs, Warlocks and Farseers as capable fighters in their own right. The Autarch doesn't make any thematic sense, since he's a combination of Exarchs of various shrines but somehow never got lost on the path...the way you become an Exarch?

They should have never neutered the feth out of Warlocks, Farseers, and Exarchs...diminishing them to frail street magicians and squad leaders...garbage.

 Elbows wrote:
The Autarch is a poorly thought out ham-fisted attempt at giving the Eldar a Space Marine Captain...instead of actually leaving Exarchs, Warlocks and Farseers as capable fighters in their own right. The Autarch doesn't make any thematic sense, since he's a combination of Exarchs of various shrines but somehow never got lost on the path...the way you become an Exarch?

They should have never neutered the feth out of Warlocks, Farseers, and Exarchs...diminishing them to frail street magicians and squad leaders...garbage.

You can use the shrine master exarch profile above as a menshad korum -the hunter in pursuit of themselves.

The menshad korum can replace the autarch. An exarch that moves through the aspects forever chasing themselves. this experience can then grant them command special rules ala the autarch ones above.

Menshad korum
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S4 T4 T4 W4 A4 LD9 SV3+

Lost to khaine: 4+ invulnerable save

The hunter in pursuit of themselves you may take up to 3 exarch powers from any shrine lists, but no more than one from each.

Path of war: any Eldar unit within 6" can re-roll 1s to hit. Any aspect unit within 6" can also re-roll to wound rolls.

Wisdom of a thousand lifetimes: whenever a strategem is used, roll a d6. On A 4 Gain 1, 5 2 and 6 3, up to max of the strategems value.


Wargear
Menshad korum may take any combination of wargear accessible to exarchs.

Something to consider is that various Eldar craftworlds have chieftains and matriarchs, which are commanders. I think that the autarch presented here would represent them well, except that they shouldn't have access to aspect weapons.

A list of Eldar wargear would be provided that is unique

Sun pistol 12" S3 d1 ap- pistol3
Star pistol 12" S6 D2 ap -3 pistol 1
Neural shredder 12" s* ap-2 pistol 1 always wounds on a 3+. If the target takes a wound, it suffers an additional mortal wound

 Elbows wrote:
The Autarch is a poorly thought out ham-fisted attempt at giving the Eldar a Space Marine Captain...instead of actually leaving Exarchs, Warlocks and Farseers as capable fighters in their own right. The Autarch doesn't make any thematic sense, since he's a combination of Exarchs of various shrines but somehow never got lost on the path...the way you become an Exarch?

They should have never neutered the feth out of Warlocks, Farseers, and Exarchs...diminishing them to frail street magicians and squad leaders...garbage.

I've never seen that as an issue. Exarchs make bad commanders, Farseers look in the future not the present so they aren't good at it either. I don't see how you look at an Autarch and get they're a combination of Exarchs either.

Autarchs make sense as they are and while Exarchs and such don't have rules to match what they should be that applies to a lot of things in the game.

Sure, and that's your opinion - which I don't agree with. That's the beauty of the internet. Autarchs don't make sense and are a needless add, end of.

 Elbows wrote:
Sure, and that's your opinion - which I don't agree with. That's the beauty of the internet. Autarchs don't make sense and are a needless add, end of.

which is a fine opinion to have - but not in a 'proposed rules forum' where you have to propose rules, not their absence.

I've proposed several alternatives above which you've not commented on, in which case we can discuss the concept of autarchs in the background forum. Otherwise you're not adding anything to the discussion on rules that this forum is for.

The idea of the autarch isint that hes been an exarch(because exarchs are so lost absorbed in the path thats all they know).

The idea is thats hes walked all of the aspect paths as an aspect. Therefore making him flexible. An exarch only knows how to fight and and kill in one dimension. A farseer pulls at the threads of fate and future (with various degrees of skill levels/powers) so they are not reactive/pragmatic. They may have a dream in which they see a place their craftworld needs to go to but they wobt see a detailed battle plan they can implement in order to save as many eldar lives as possible.


I realy like the idea of Autarch being able to utalose different aspect wargear as well as sone of the aspect skills.

I would like the autarch to retain a very dimiliar stat line with an extra attack. Give 2 flat 2CP when taken as an option and have some unique army wide trigger abilities

Like once per game he can call in the fleet to do an action . Like a bombardment - So this eould work similiar to orbital bombardment. Deal a couple extra MW'. Anywhere he can see once per battle.

Or order a forcefield device drop. - That models wholly within 6" from centre point get 5++ for one turn from ranged attacks and minus 2" to charge affected units.

Appologies - trying to type fast on my phone with my fat fingers...

Technically any eldar can walk all the aspect paths, including exarchs - they are trapped in the path of the warrior, not trapped in a specific aspect.

In fact the menshad korum is an exarch who doesn't stop in an aspect, he keeps chasing himself through all the aspects of his path.


This is why I agree with elbows concerning the current description of an autarch. They don't make sense as described.

However, they do make sense if the path of command is actually is own path that focuses on strategy.

Having travelled the path of the warrior and left it is not a special thing, nor is avoiding falling to it - guardians, warlocks et Al have all travelled the path of the warrior.


Hence autarchs, with their own special path should have rules that reflect that specific path, not rules that reflect previous paths they have traveled.

Even warlocks don't have access to aspect powers and they get their gear from inside the aspect shrines because they are so closely tied to them. However, the violent tendencies they exhibit are reflected in the type of psychic abilities they focus on while on the path of the seer.

Thus an autarch's skills are to do with battle even though they don't follow the path of the warrior.

There are only 3 path states:

Currently on the path and accessing all the abilities the path offers (an aspect warrior, or bonesinger)

Have previously followed the path in which case you don't get access to all the skills (but do have experience to draw on) (a guardian or warlock)

Fallen to the path where you are consumed by it, and subsequently become a supreme practitioner ofthat path, developing many supernatural skills as a result

Farseers and exarchs are both fallen to their path and unable to leave it.

Remembering that being stuck on the path of the warrior means the whole path not just bits of it. This is why in 2md and 1st Ed an exarch could mix and match their wargear.

They are just as good with a catapult as they are with an executioner.

Hellebore wrote:

The menshad korum can replace the autarch. An exarch that moves through the aspects forever chasing themselves. this experience can then grant them command special rules ala the autarch ones above.

While I agree that exarchs can basically grab whatever wargear they feel like, I've alway seen that as being the method through which new aspects are developed. So a swooping hawk exarch that gets bored of using the same handful of hawk weapons might pick up a meltagun and practice with that in his shrine so as to better understand the capabilities of similar weapons. If he decides he really likes the short-ranged kick of a fusion gun over the powers of a sunrifle or lasblaster, then maybe the Fire Weaver aspect shrine is born.

What my rambling is trying to get at is that "exarch who uses weird weapons" is basically just a normal exarch, right? If a hawk exarch has gotten weird enough with his gear loadout that he starts carrying a fusion blaster or a reaper launcher, then he's now the exarch of an obscure aspect that doesn't have rules support. He's like a slashing sphere of Zandros at that point. I also don't feel that spending extra time practicing with different weapons should make an exarch a highly competent battlefield commander in the same way that Jason Vorheez doesn't become a leader of armies if he learns to use a machete and a gun. Exarchs are still bloodthirsty axe murderers that are largely concerned with getting their own turn in the fray. They're not blind to the larger battle plan, but they don't strike me as "commander" types.

The hunter in pursuit of themselves you may take up to 3 exarch powers from any shrine lists, but no more than one from each.

That seems difficult to balance. That gives you, what? 63 exarch powers (plus 1 for Shadow Spectres) to mix and match? It seems like there's probably an abusable combo in there somewhere.

Path of war: any Eldar unit within 6" can re-roll 1s to hit. Any aspect unit within 6" can also re-roll to wound rolls.

See above about disagreeing about the level of competence an exarch should have as a front-lines commander. This makes him as good at commanding as a marine captain (or official rules autarch) but also gives him better-than-lieutenant wound rerolls. Plus, the wound rerolls mean that he's suddenly stepping on the doom seer's toes.

Wisdom of a thousand lifetimes: whenever a strategem is used, roll a d6. On A 4 Gain 1, 5 2 and 6 3, up to max of the strategems value.

This would be one of the better CP recycling abilities in the game. Like, up there with the dedicated command-focused autarch rules you pitched above. Which feels very generous for a guy whose job description is hunting himself and whose gimmick is improving his own personal combat prowess.

Something to consider is that various Eldar craftworlds have chieftains and matriarchs, which are commanders. I think that the autarch presented here would represent them well, except that they shouldn't have access to aspect weapons.

A list of Eldar wargear would be provided that is unique

Sun pistol 12" S3 d1 ap- pistol3
Star pistol 12" S6 D2 ap -3 pistol 1
Neural shredder 12" s* ap-2 pistol 1 always wounds on a 3+. If the target takes a wound, it suffers an additional mortal wound

Banning them from taking aspect gear seems unnecessary. A Wild Rider leader should probably be allowed to take a laser lance. An Iybraesilian leader should probably be able to take some banshee gear. If you want to make a "chieftain" with more generic gear, you can always field them with a power sword and shuriken weapon or fusion pistol. Basically, if you have fluff reasons to not use aspect gear, then just take generic weapons on your autarch. If you have fluff reasons to take aspect gear, then do that. I don't see a mechanical reason to take away those options. Autarchs (with the official rules or the rules you've pitched above) aren't setting the standard for raw offense.

Your new wargear options are neat, but I question whether they're necessary given that we already have sort of similar aeldari weapons. A Sun Pistol is an anti-infantry gun that probably maths out to be pretty comparable to a shuriken pistol. The Neural Shredder seems thematically similar to (though mechanically better than) a neuro disruptor. The star pistol is pretty unique, but I think I'd be more interested in existing weapons being more available to seers and guardians rather than creating more weapon rules that are only available to a single model.

This menshad korum was a replacement for the autarch for elbows, so I kind of just mashed them together.


As for the craftworld commanders, the wargear was more the unique stuff - mandiblasters etc.

Fusion guns are used by storm guardians, laser Lance's are used by dragon knights, lasblasters are used by corsairs etc so I don't really see them as unique.

Imo it would be more interesting if chieftans had unique clan weapons rather than just reusing excistng weapons.

And that all characters had access to these weapons.

They have millions of years of history, I'm sure they've got all sorts of equipment to draw on.

Hellebore wrote:
This menshad korum was a replacement for the autarch for elbows, so I kind of just mashed them together.

Fair.

As for the craftworld commanders, the wargear was more the unique stuff - mandiblasters etc.

Fusion guns are used by storm guardians, laser Lance's are used by dragon knights, lasblasters are used by corsairs etc so I don't really see them as unique.

Imo it would be more interesting if chieftans had unique clan weapons rather than just reusing excistng weapons.

And that all characters had access to these weapons.

They have millions of years of history, I'm sure they've got all sorts of equipment to draw on.

Also fair. I'm all for characters being more customizable again in general. I'm just not as big a fan of creating something like a star pistol if it's only going to be available to a single datasheet.

I'd personally like to see Warlocks get consolidated to fewer entries. Rather than having a multi-model unit option and a single model character option, I prefer to see a single entry of 1-5 Characters that are deployed together, but act as individual Characters form than point on.
Give them a rule that boosts powers if 2 or more Warlocks are within 2" (i.e. coherency) of each other.

For example, I could buy 3 Warlocks in a single slot. All 3 would deploy within 6" of each other.
If 1 Warlock is within 2" of another during the Psychic Phase, they can forego using their power to boost the casting roll of the other by +1
So I could have 2 of the Warlocks within range of the 3rd, give up using their powers so that the 3rd would get +2 to cast.

This would be marginally better than the current Conclave as you'd have the choice for multiple Warlocks casting powers, or a single one casting a boosted power.

-

 Galef wrote:
I'd personally like to see Warlocks get consolidated to fewer entries. Rather than having a multi-model unit option and a single model character option, I prefer to see a single entry of 1-5 Characters that are deployed together, but act as individual Characters form than point on.
Give them a rule that boosts powers if 2 or more Warlocks are within 2" (i.e. coherency) of each other.

For example, I could buy 3 Warlocks in a single slot. All 3 would deploy within 6" of each other.
If 1 Warlock is within 2" of another during the Psychic Phase, they can forego using their power to boost the casting roll of the other by +1
So I could have 2 of the Warlocks within range of the 3rd, give up using their powers so that the 3rd would get +2 to cast.

This would be marginally better than the current Conclave as you'd have the choice for multiple Warlocks casting powers, or a single one casting a boosted power.

-

I like that. Very fluffy. Like they all do a ritual and concentrate together to cast a bigger power.
I think the conclaves should have access to runes of fortune though if this was a thing. Would make sense that sever warlocks can do what one farseer can do.

aspect warriors should be decreased in size to 3 like dark reapers so you can get more exarchs. Or even 1-20 so you can either have several single exarchs acting solo or leading a big unit. that would be cool.

 Argive wrote:
I think the conclaves should have access to runes of fortune though if this was a thing. Would make sense that sever warlocks can do what one farseer can do.

Nah, that takes training, which Warlocks don't have. But maybe giving up a casting would give +1 to cast for a nearby warlock AND +6" to the casting range.

-

This is going slightly off topic, but I also think aspects should come in smaller squad sizes.

But I also think that the Eldar armies all need a core rule rethink.

T3 units in squads of 3 are going to die go a stiff breeze.


Imo, all Eldar armies should have some kind of basic 'speed over armour protection' rule.

This could be a default -1 to hit them at all times, or it could be you can't hit them on better than a 3+. This would apply to shooting and melee.

Eldar should be fast, hard to hit and low number. When you do hit them, they die.



I have always thought that they should expand the detail of the shrines more. Each one can be up to a marine chapter in scale.

You can have trainees, warriors and veterans (those that keep coming back to this aspect, but have not yet fallen to the path).


It's ridiculous to think that there are Only warriors and exarchs.


There's so much potential for how they fall, tiny squads of exarchs who all fell at once and become a triumvirate mini squad of bonded exarchs. Etc. Different exarchs with different focuses within the aspect (using a scorpion claw is a very different philosophy to using chain blades), appearing as different fighting styles etc


It really annoys me that they keep squeezing smaller and smaller differences within marine chapters, but they can't even flesh out the shrines...

Id like an overcast option for conclaves or even other psychers.
I'm a sucker for high risk explosive manouvers