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.

Ielthan wrote:

Hellebore wrote:I think there's a big difference between farseers telling autarchs where they need to go to war and the autarchs prosecuting one.

Farseers should only be on the battlefield if there's a fated reason/need of psychic shenanigans to intervene in that particular instance.

Otherwise, the eldar army should function 100% under the autarchs and their command structure.

Farseers aren't military leaders, they're advisors.

Warlocks are overtly militaristic psykers as they are ex aspects, so them showing up on the battlefield is wholly expected.


So IMO they should be creating an Autarch and guardian command structure, build the army around that, and then add farseers and warlocks as optional support.

The army should completely function without a single psyker present.

No thank you.

Eldar are the most psychically powerful race. It's what they do. Let's not be imperial guard with elves. Bring back warlocks as guardian leaders, bring back seer councils, more psykers, not less. The autarch came in 4th edition, and was at least far more interesting than the current ultra bland version, but farseers are iconic. If you don't like them or psykers in general, to be frank eldar aren't the army for you.

Thats fine and I agree but at the same time We shouldint be in a position where castng the same 2 powers is cornserstone of every list you build.

I agree. Eldar psykery looks very pedestrian when you compare it to the likes of GK or even 1ksons.. . The idea of a psychic heavy force was the draw initially but when you have to just casting the same power over and over to make units work, its no fun. Not to mention you would never take a spirit seer of a warlock if you are already inevitably running a farseer because of seer council. Not to mention said warlock has less wounds then a feeble Human Guard psyker dressed in a tattered robe..

Personaly I would love to see the Bonesinger Character type make a return.
Im quite happy with the AOK currently for the most part. But he just needs to be cheaper and also allow for reroll charges at the very least.. And Yeah the FW AOK seems about the kind of £GW will charge for a plastic one if they ever do one.

There is the AOS cauldron of blood plastic AOK. I think thats a decent looking plastic sculpt.

Ielthan wrote:
No thank you.

Eldar are the most psychically powerful race. It's what they do. Let's not be imperial guard with elves. Bring back warlocks as guardian leaders, bring back seer councils, more psykers, not less. The autarch came in 4th edition, and was at least far more interesting than the current ultra bland version, but farseers are iconic. If you don't like them or psykers in general, to be frank eldar aren't the army for you.

Being the most powerful psychic race doesn't = only having farseer commanders. That's a ridiculously myopic perspective. there are plenty of iconic units for all armies that are iconic without being NECESSARY for the army to function.

Warlocks are not farseers and this conversation is about how utterly slaved to farseer army commanders the current force is due to the current army paradigm and the farseer's buff abilities.

Insectum7 wrote:@Hellebore: Hmmm . . .

So, for 2nd I definitely ALWAYS saw a Farseer because not having a competing Lvl 4 psyker when the opponent had a level 4 psyker was more or less disastrous. Either way, I don't think we can count on Farseers going away as an Iconic Eldar include.

I' not advocating that, only that the army shouldn't be useless without one so they become the default army leader. People complain about chapter masters/captains or Guilliman showing up to every skirmish and battle and farseers are just as rare but show up more often.

And in 2nd ed you could take a Level 3 warlock, or a level 4 shadowseer without taking a farseer. Farseers were also 0-1 in 2nd ed, making them as rare as avatars....

Insectum7 wrote:
As for the Autarch, I think the general feeling is that the army ought to have UNITS that are capable of doing their job without the outside support of the traditional Farseer (or Autarch).

Yes absolutely. But IMO the problem is that farseers are considered necessary for the army to function which for a super advanced and intelligent army is weird - orks are supposed to collapse when the warboss dies, but the army can run without one and isn't really affected by their death. Hive tyrants are similar. Farseers are more integral to the eldar army than armies whose background describes the death of leaders as destroying their cohesion...

Insectum7 wrote:
The Autarch then has to find yet another personal capability or niche-buff to put forward to have any worth. So, either he be a buff-elf, or he be able to sorta roll the way that 2nd Ed Exarchs used to roll, with lots of custom options with which to tailor their role.

Soo, yeah. . . I dunno what to do with those. I was pretty ok with their original incarnation but GW has trimmed back their options because of no-model-no-rulez. So I guess I'd advocate a much more customizeable unit and a sweet new kit or two (jetbike and non-jetbike Autarch kit with tons of options for each?) Then give him a nice ability to buff uints either this way or that.

People pretty much just take 2 farseers, because farseers are the only way to make the eldar units functional. Or, if GW have let one unit slip through the cracks, spam that unit and over buff them with farseers (see scatbikes, shining spears etc).

There's just no value in having an autarch despite GW specifically describing them as the leaders of eldar armies.

I would like to see Warlocks become the Librarian equivalents they used to be in 2nd. That way they could also lead smaller Eldar forces. Maybe less psychic warriors and more warrior psykers.

@Hellebore: Ahh, I didn't realize that Farseers were 0-1 in 2nd. I think Captains might have been 0-1 as well, actually.

In summary I think we agree that the Eldar relies too much on the presence of Farseers just like how Marines relied on Chapter Masters(or Primarchs) in every match in 8th. Yes, these are elite armies with elite soldiers and elite chains of command that should be functional without these character-centric setups.

Maybe we can hope for an Eldar Codex that limits 1 Farseer per detatchment in the way that the Marine book limits Captains. It still doesn't seem like enough without some other radical rebalancing so that Eldar units aren't relying on them so much. The Eldar codex will be a sort of GW litmus test for me this edition. Nids too.

I really agree with the sentiment Autarchs seem almost superfluous not just as commanders but as warriors and that's sad to me as I've liked the concept of them since their inception in 4th. They feel to me they should be the embodiment of self discipline, having been through at least two warrior paths without falling. I'm not too sure what can be done for that.

I think the idea of a 6+FNP roll for normal on foot Eldar is a good one to represent their agility is great. And if they advance that goes to 5+. I'd also make it 5+ in close combat as it's easier to dodge a swinging sword or fist than a bolter round etc.

I mostly agree with Hellebore's sentiments about farseers. The codex as a whole shouldn't be balanced around the assumption that you've cast Doom on something, and I'm okay with overhauling Doom to change that.

Regarding autarchs, my pet idea lately has been to give them something akin to guard orders. In the command phase, each autarch can use one of the following abilities:
* Gain a 1CP (only usable by one autarch per turn)
* A selected unit within line of sight may shoot/charge after falling back this turn.
* A selected unit within line of sight may immediately move 7" after shooting in the shooting phase.

To my mind, that would feel much more "commandery" for the "path of command" guys than an abstract reroll to-hit aura. It would also bring back some of the mobility that eldar have lost over time.

For warlocks, I want...
* The character version that we have now.
* The option to include a warlock as a squad leader for guardians; possibly with a return to the "safe" always-on powers of yester-year.
* A modified version of the warlock conclave. Give each individual model fewer wounds, and give them a boost to powers they cast on themselves. This would let you lower the overall cost of the unit while still letting space elf jedi squads be a thing. And they'd be less likely to get effed over by an unlucky psychic test.

Also,give all psykers "ghost helms," and change ghost helm to just prevent the model from actually dying to their own perils.

Wyldhunt wrote:
I mostly agree with Hellebore's sentiments about farseers. The codex as a whole shouldn't be balanced around the assumption that you've cast Doom on something, and I'm okay with overhauling Doom to change that.

Regarding autarchs, my pet idea lately has been to give them something akin to guard orders. In the command phase, each autarch can use one of the following abilities:
* Gain a 1CP (only usable by one autarch per turn)
* A selected unit within line of sight may shoot/charge after falling back this turn.
* A selected unit within line of sight may immediately move 7" after shooting in the shooting phase.

To my mind, that would feel much more "commandery" for the "path of command" guys than an abstract reroll to-hit aura. It would also bring back some of the mobility that eldar have lost over time.

For warlocks, I want...
* The character version that we have now.
* The option to include a warlock as a squad leader for guardians; possibly with a return to the "safe" always-on powers of yester-year.
* A modified version of the warlock conclave. Give each individual model fewer wounds, and give them a boost to powers they cast on themselves. This would let you lower the overall cost of the unit while still letting space elf jedi squads be a thing. And they'd be less likely to get effed over by an unlucky psychic test.

Also,give all psykers "ghost helms," and change ghost helm to just prevent the model from actually dying to their own perils.

You want to give 2W T3 warlocks fewer wounds? I believe that they are already character with the least wounds on its profile in the game..

 Argive wrote:

You want to give 2W T3 warlocks fewer wounds? I believe that they are already character with the least wounds on its profile in the game..

I want to make the models in the conclave unit datasheet 1 wound. Mostly to justify lowering their cost so that they're not 40 points apiece. The fluff justification being that these are less experienced/powerful warlocks than the character version. They're entering into psychic communion to better coordinate their physical and psychic efforts during the battle as a way of making up for their lack of individual efficacy.

I love the concept of a squad of space elf jedi, but their high points cost has been a bit of a design hurdle for them. If you make them durable enough to warrant their pricetag, then they end up being frustrating to play against. And if you don't make them hyper-durable, then they end up being too expensive to see play. They were the latter for most of 8th edition and the former in editions where they could be invisible and/or go around rerolling 4++ and 3++ saves.

The character warlock could probably stand to gain a wound if anything, though I'd settle for just giving him some sort of ghost helm type rule to keep his head from exploding.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 Argive wrote:

You want to give 2W T3 warlocks fewer wounds? I believe that they are already character with the least wounds on its profile in the game..

I want to make the models in the conclave unit datasheet 1 wound. Mostly to justify lowering their cost so that they're not 40 points apiece. The fluff justification being that these are less experienced/powerful warlocks than the character version. They're entering into psychic communion to better coordinate their physical and psychic efforts during the battle as a way of making up for their lack of individual efficacy.

I love the concept of a squad of space elf jedi, but their high points cost has been a bit of a design hurdle for them. If you make them durable enough to warrant their pricetag, then they end up being frustrating to play against. And if you don't make them hyper-durable, then they end up being too expensive to see play. They were the latter for most of 8th edition and the former in editions where they could be invisible and/or go around rerolling 4++ and 3++ saves.

The character warlock could probably stand to gain a wound if anything, though I'd settle for just giving him some sort of ghost helm type rule to keep his head from exploding.

So you'd have T3 1W models without character protection whose main buff is a boosted up Smite (i.e. you have to get them closest to a particular enemy to hurt them?) Sorry man. You've had some good ideas in this thread but that just seems like a way to end up with a multitude of dead Warlocks. And they're already (far) less tough than Marines with (9e) storm shields; why is that considered frustrating to play against when storm shields aren't?

I think it's pretty clear that what we're all talking about is a massive overhaul to Eldar for 9th, with some retrospect vision of how Eldar used to play and apply that to what game 9th has become. Whether we see that or just a bandaid overhaul remains to be seen.

I would like to see more defined roles for the characters.
Warlocks for sure should be battle leaders for Guardian squads, where their psychic abilities buff that particular unit. You could give them completely new psychic abilities to choose from (not powers they choose pregame) such as defensive buffs (conceal = -1 to hit, another to count as in light cover), and others that are more offensive that could increase the range of shuriken catapults, or at a higher cast, make them D2. The offensive options would be similar to how SIA works for deathwatch. I think 3 defensive and 3 offensive buffs would suffice and each warlock simply knew all of these powers (would save time pointing out who had what powers etc). So I guess you have a minus to hit, an improve armour save, an additional move, an increase in range, an increase in damage, and of course destructor (change it up so it's a choice over D2 shurikens...which means it would have to be greater than 12" range for starters). At least it would be a way to improve shuriken weapons indirectly. 24" away? Cast to double the range. Enemy up close and personal? Cast D2. Performing actions? Go with defensive buffs.
To remove other janky interactions, weapon platforms have the same toughness and save as the guardians. You're not getting 10 dudes hiding behind the platform chanting "please hit the gun, please hit the gun". It's now just the same defensive rolls as everyone else in the squad.

I like the classic Farseer powers, they've been around forever. However, Doom is too powerful and should simply be changed to what jinx now is (which is also powerful, but wouldn't be as bad if not able to be combined with Doom). An Autarch could then give a reroll 1 to hit and wound aura to show his worth as an battle leader. Reroll all wounds could then simply disappear.

As someone else mentioned, Autarchs are locked into their weapon choices due to model/rules interactions (which we all know is dumb), but they can be buffed in other ways not related to the weapons they have. The downside is that we've really only got one choice (barring failcast Yriel and skyrunner). They are supposed to take pieces of various Aspect shrines with them as they follow the path of the leader, but the model is pretty much stuck with Hawks and Scorpions (I guess you could also say Dragons due to the fusion pistol). Allowing them to pick 2 Exarch powers from the tables would be a nice touch, but those tables need some serious rework anyway. Oh, and if they do rework the Exarch tables, a Phoenix Lord should know every single one of them and be able to choose which one to utilize in a battle round at the start of the command phase.

Anyway, I think many here have great thoughts for Eldar, and they could be such an interesting list to play. However, I will brace for disappointment as usual.

Some good suggestion there Bully.

Question: Is Doom more powerful than Bolter discipline, which everyone in the entire Marine army has without having to pass a psychic test to activate?

^Yeah I think Doom is fine. It can only be activated once per turn, requires a test, and can only affect one unit. I mean, it's a great power, but not something that needs to be changed.

That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

 bullyboy wrote:
That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

It's still very poor game design and hinders the power of the army more than it helps it. And nothing feels worse than losing a game because you failed to cast a spell and you house of cards just crumbled on turn 1. I'd much rather have non gamechanging psychic powers than purely offensive/defensive ones.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

It's still very poor game design and hinders the power of the army more than it helps it. And nothing feels worse than losing a game because you failed to cast a spell and you house of cards just crumbled on turn 1. I'd much rather have non gamechanging psychic powers than purely offensive/defensive ones.

Well you don't want to balance the whole army around access to a single Psychic Power.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

It's still very poor game design and hinders the power of the army more than it helps it. And nothing feels worse than losing a game because you failed to cast a spell and you house of cards just crumbled on turn 1. I'd much rather have non gamechanging psychic powers than purely offensive/defensive ones.

Well you don't want to balance the whole army around access to a single Psychic Power.

Thats what i mean, but we all know that our units are priced as if they were always receiving the maximum amount of buffs. Eldar and CSM have it worst in the game with how different the powerlevels are between buffed and unbuffed.

I would agree to the idea that the Autarchs need the ability to have their own command abilities. It is what they're designed for in general that shouldn't be tied specifically to command points.

What I also believe they should have is access to all Exarch abilities as well that they could select (if GW ever gives them back the ability to build an Autarch how they're supposed to be anyways). Being able to choose X amount of Exarch abilities from Y amount of aspects to represent their walk down the paths but not falling to any to make them the ultimate customizable leader.

Doom should be a +1 to wound. It then becomes a nice bonus and not a reroll system.

 Eldarsif wrote:
Doom should be a +1 to wound. It then becomes a nice bonus and not a reroll system.

feth no, the wounding table is already crap, anything that plays on it will simply be broken. I say this as a sad CSM player that needs his VotL to function

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
Doom should be a +1 to wound. It then becomes a nice bonus and not a reroll system.

feth no, the wounding table is already crap, anything that plays on it will simply be broken. I say this as a sad CSM player that needs his VotL to function

Could then be a -1 or -2 to enemy unit saves. Either those two or just remove Doom from the pool. Personally I am betting on +1 to wound as GW appears to be attempting to reduce somewhat the dice rolls in the game(with varying success).

Why not make doom +1D ? It could even come with AP debuff too.

Tbh I'm expecting them to take the easier, low effort routes, e.g. just buffing all the heavy weapon profiles (as is necessary!), Shuriken cannon d2, maybe starcannons upto 3 shots like the old days, scatter lasers to get back some form of laser lock. I'd like Bright Lances to get back their lance rule in the form that no enemy toughness can be greater than 8.

Doom is fine, Eldar need the lower variance allowed by rerolls, +1 modifiers just make them more swingy, and less reliable. I'd like to see fortune return to what it used to be, found it a bit crap in 9th.

The main problem with Eldar psykers in 9th is only being able to cast each power once tbh. I get it, but they haven't really gotten anything to make up for it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

It's still very poor game design and hinders the power of the army more than it helps it. And nothing feels worse than losing a game because you failed to cast a spell and you house of cards just crumbled on turn 1. I'd much rather have non gamechanging psychic powers than purely offensive/defensive ones.

Well you don't want to balance the whole army around access to a single Psychic Power.

A lot of this..

 Argive wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
That is true, affecting only one unit (and WC7) makes it fine as is.

It's still very poor game design and hinders the power of the army more than it helps it. And nothing feels worse than losing a game because you failed to cast a spell and you house of cards just crumbled on turn 1. I'd much rather have non gamechanging psychic powers than purely offensive/defensive ones.

Well you don't want to balance the whole army around access to a single Psychic Power.

A lot of this..

Probably the whole psychic phase is a bit of a relic, with random powers being rather daft. And would probably serve better as special ability’s on unique units.

But an army being reliant on there leaders is not bad design, it’s just how GW gets there that really is the issue.

Farseers and warlocks should probably be more similar than current, with one being more backline and the other for more frontline.

Guardians need a revamp, they are the backbone of the Eldar warhost Support to all the different forces within it and are well trained and equiped. They need a HQ unit and a veteran unit as well.

For the Eldar ability at forsight, you could give many units a start of game choice. Aspect units getting the choice between more attacks or more strength on weapons. It does not have to make them amazing outside there given field, but gives them options.

I actually fear a exodite release, really cool but it just comes off as another Eldar faction to neglect.

Actually my idea for one alterantive way to show Eldar foresight ability would be to do something similar to the SOB and their Miracle dice. Except rather than just boosting one's own, maybe have it also include bad luck for the enemy by allowing the substitution of bad dice into the enemy's roll.

"That heavy weapon that would kill my character if it hit and it hits on a 2+? I guess I'll substitute in a 1 then."

So fighting the Eldar would mean the enemy could have freak "bad luck" like weapons jamming, targeting systems glitching, fumbled blows etc.. to represent the Eldar having manipulated fate in their favor.

 Hellebore wrote:
IMO one of the reasons they've never had a proper refresh is their position in 40k.

Alongside the imperium and arguably the tau (the tau have a more antagonistic relationship with the imperium because they offer membership to humans and undermine the imperium while the eldar are happy doing their own thing), they're a 'good guy' faction. That is, they're far more likely to appear on the side of the imperium than any other army.

So what this means in terms of releases is that they are unlikely to appear as an antagonist force in a starter box with marines.

Xenos armies seem to get their rebuilds when they hitch a ride to the marine wagon, which generally only happens in that antagonist spot.

As they have never in 9 editions put a non imperial (and non space marine) faction into the starter as the protagonist good guy, eldar are in perhaps the worst position than any other army in the game.

They won't ever have the spotlight and they won't ever get the shared spotlight of the antagonist of the imperium.

So GW drip feeds them between other things, releases a few things with a codex, or will have to deliberately rebuild them in a massive release independently of any other factor.

I hope we get a massive update, but they will need to deliberately engineer the space to do that, rather than just do it in association with other factions.

Wake the death was aeldar vs marines box, but the bad guys marines won in the end of the mission.

Iracundus wrote:
Actually my idea for one alterantive way to show Eldar foresight ability would be to do something similar to the SOB and their Miracle dice. Except rather than just boosting one's own, maybe have it also include bad luck for the enemy by allowing the substitution of bad dice into the enemy's roll.

"That heavy weapon that would kill my character if it hit and it hits on a 2+? I guess I'll substitute in a 1 then."

So fighting the Eldar would mean the enemy could have freak "bad luck" like weapons jamming, targeting systems glitching, fumbled blows etc.. to represent the Eldar having manipulated fate in their favor.

The salt would never end flowing and we'd run out fresh water to drink globally resulting in a societal collapse and made max...

With regard to Farseers and Warlocks.

They are of course central to Eldar armies. And its certainly true their tricks really haven’t changed over the year. Doom, Fortune, Eldritch Storm et al have been staples since pretty much forever (though I will double check my RT collection to see if I can pin down a definitive beginning).

And I very much agree that when we look at other forces in the game, they can pull the traditional tricks. But, feeding into the core theme of this thread? They got other tricks too.

Perhaps we need to see a diversification of Farseers and Warlocks. If we look at Necron Crypteks, we might find some inspiration, even if a direct copy isn’t exactly desirable.

Each of the four current flavours of Cryptek do different things for your force, but they all broadly remain Unit Support, as is also the traditional role of the Warlock, whether as a unit champion upgrade, or a roving independent model.

If so, what specialisations/sub classes would you suggest?

 Argive wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
Actually my idea for one alterantive way to show Eldar foresight ability would be to do something similar to the SOB and their Miracle dice. Except rather than just boosting one's own, maybe have it also include bad luck for the enemy by allowing the substitution of bad dice into the enemy's roll.

"That heavy weapon that would kill my character if it hit and it hits on a 2+? I guess I'll substitute in a 1 then."

So fighting the Eldar would mean the enemy could have freak "bad luck" like weapons jamming, targeting systems glitching, fumbled blows etc.. to represent the Eldar having manipulated fate in their favor.

The salt would never end flowing and we'd run out fresh water to drink globally resulting in a societal collapse and made max...

Mathematically it wouldn't be that different really than the SOB Ebon Chalice now being able to for example get an automatic success on their first 6++. That's equivalent to forcing a miss of a 2+ to-hit in terms of negating harm to a target.

Ircandus’ “dill weed dice” idea is great.

It’s very, very Eldar, precisely because it’s frustrating for your opponent. Especially if it’s perhaps extended to enemy Damage rolls, or “one per phase of rolling”

Imagine this....your opponent isn’t very good at the game so has chosen a unit of 4 Devastators with 4 Lascannons. Or indeed Chaos Havocs with the same. He declares their target as say...a Wraithknight, one that’s bearing down and about to kick snot out of something he doesn’t want the snot kicked out of.

The Eldar player is having none of this, and has three dill weed Dice to play with. Each of this can change a roll to a 1 or a 6 (because 6 can mean failed morale).

The Lascannons open up. Three natural hits, and one natural miss. dill weed Dice is used, reducing it to two hits.

Bah, say the Lascannons. But at least both wound. Yay! Oh, wait. dill weed Dice turn that to a single Wounding hit.

Wraithknight fails its save. The final dill weed Dice ensures that’s only for 1 point of damage.

Now, if the DD are rendered as a finite resource (either a set amount at the start of the game, or so many a turn, and a Farseer lets you carry some over turn to turn), the skill comes from appropriate usage. Certainly they shouldn’t be abundant as such, at least not without specifically structuring your army in that way.