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.

Chaospling wrote:

No actually I meant leaders of Guardian squads besides Warlocks.

Right. I think we're talking about the same thing.

Are those former-Aspect Warriors a huge part of the background? I thought most Aspect Warriors stayed as such.

Nah. If you "stay" on a path forever, it's considered tragic. That's what an exarch is. The intention is that you spend some time on the path of the warrior while that's where you "need" to be for your own self-fulfillment and mental health, and then you move onto whatever other path calls to you next once you're ready. Staying on the path of the warrior implies that you can't escape your bloodlust and you either end up becoming an exarch or an autarch (depending on how tied you are to a specific aspect.)

So with that in mind, ex-aspect warrior guardians are "huge" in that they're presumably pretty common, but their existence doesn't seem to be hugely impactful to the setting or the eldar way of war. It's implied that former aspects just kind of know what they're doing moreso than guardians that may have never been on a battlefield before. The former aspect squad leader just knows what to expect as far as giving/receiving commands, what being shot at feels like, etc.

Anyway, in this Biel-Tan codex I'm giving the option to make the Warlocks former Aspect Warriors and I've got those rules covered, so... Should a former Aspect warrior just be like a Warlock but without the Psychic powers?

Actually, all warlocks are former aspect warriors. That's the recipe for a warlock: be an aspect warrior, then a seer, then get called to battle while you're still on the path of the seer. I think (someone check me) that most non-farseer seers that haven't walked the path of the warrior usually get put in a room or command wave serpent during the battle where the act as psychic support for your most important farseers.

I'm not sure what a "warlock but without the psychic powers" would look like. Their invuln saves (rune armor) and witchblades are both psychic in nature. Take those and the literal powers away, and you just have a storm guardian with an extra point of Ld, right? Which, tbf, is pretty much what I picture a "storm guardian squad leader" being.

For example, som Guardians wield Fusion guns or chainswords, so if those Guardians weren't former Aspect Warriors, but just outfitted and/or inspired by the squad leader, then it wouldn't be far-fetched to assume that the squad leader are even closer to the specific Aspect - the wargear as an example.

My concern would be: how much more similar to an aspect warrior can you make these hypothetical squad leaders without them just literally being aspect warriors? You can already give a guy a power sword. If you also give him a banshee mask, don't you basically just have cheaper, crummier howling banshees? If you give your fusion gun "sergeant" an extra point of armor and toughness, it won't really matter unless/until you start slow-rolling attacks against the last guy in the squad. Or you could give him Assured Destruction at which point he's basically just a fire dragon thrown into a storm guardian squad. (Which is fine, but it's going to feel like an actual fire dragon rather than a "former" fire dragon.) A former scorpion could gain mandiblasters to go with his pistol and chainsword, but I'm not sure how exciting people will find that.

But I'm not trying to yuck your yum. You do you.
Personally, when I think Biel-Tan, I think of an army that doesn't field (many) guardians in the first place because so many members of their population are actively on the path of the warrior. So a Vanguard detachment, basically.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Are those former-Aspect Warriors a huge part of the background? I thought most Aspect Warriors stayed as such.

Staying on the path of the warrior implies that you can't escape your bloodlust and you either end up becoming an exarch or an autarch (depending on how tied you are to a specific aspect.)

Autarchs are on the path of command. They will have trodden one or more warrior paths (which is how they get the cool gear), but they are not trapped like an exarch. If they ever got trapped on the path of the warrior, they'd never make it to the path of command.

Anyway, in this Biel-Tan codex I'm giving the option to make the Warlocks former Aspect Warriors and I've got those rules covered, so... Should a former Aspect warrior just be like a Warlock but without the Psychic powers?

Actually, all warlocks are former aspect warriors. That's the recipe for a warlock: be an aspect warrior, then a seer, then get called to battle while you're still on the path of the seer. I think (someone check me) that most non-farseer seers that haven't walked the path of the warrior usually get put in a room or command wave serpent during the battle where the act as psychic support for your most important farseers.

I haven't found anything that talks about seers other than warlocks and farseers as part of a warhost. A third kind of psyker, the bonesinger (technically on the path of the shaper), is introduced in the 4th edition codex with a limited-edition model, but rules didn't appear until years later. It's possible that there was a mention of civilian seers having some role in an eldar force in some article or novel, but I just haven't found it.

For example, som Guardians wield Fusion guns or chainswords, so if those Guardians weren't former Aspect Warriors, but just outfitted and/or inspired by the squad leader, then it wouldn't be far-fetched to assume that the squad leader are even closer to the specific Aspect - the wargear as an example.

My concern would be: how much more similar to an aspect warrior can you make these hypothetical squad leaders without them just literally being aspect warriors? You can already give a guy a power sword. If you also give him a banshee mask, don't you basically just have cheaper, crummier howling banshees? If you give your fusion gun "sergeant" an extra point of armor and toughness, it won't really matter unless/until you start slow-rolling attacks against the last guy in the squad. Or you could give him Assured Destruction at which point he's basically just a fire dragon thrown into a storm guardian squad. (Which is fine, but it's going to feel like an actual fire dragon rather than a "former" fire dragon.) A former scorpion could gain mandiblasters to go with his pistol and chainsword, but I'm not sure how exciting people will find that.

I think he's making room by switching from the 40-year-old Warhammer D6 system to a more modern D10 framework that would allow for differentiation between basic guardians, special guardians, and aspect warriors. This way he might be able to find ways to make special guardians cooler and more flavorful with aspect-lite rules while still making it clear that the aspect warriors are still the high quality professionals.

 Arschbombe wrote:

Autarchs are on the path of command. They will have trodden one or more warrior paths (which is how they get the cool gear), but they are not trapped like an exarch. If they ever got trapped on the path of the warrior, they'd never make it to the path of command.

Fair, although I always got the impression that "path of command" might basically be a euphemism.
"What? Trapped on the path of the warrior? Of course not. He's uh. Walking the path of command! Yep. He walked that totally different path so well that they let him mix and match wargear and tell all the guys on that other path what to do!"

But I'm not sure about that one way or the other. Do we ever hear about former autarchs that went off to become poets or craftsmen or something? Are there non-autarchs on the path of command who just organize civil projects like who gets to reserve the Dome of Awesome Acoustics for a concert on Thursday? Is being an autarch sort of like being a warlock in that it's a sub-path of a non-warrior path that requires experience on the warrior path as a prerequisite?

I haven't found anything that talks about seers other than warlocks and farseers as part of a warhost. A third kind of psyker, the bonesinger (technically on the path of the shaper), is introduced in the 4th edition codex with a limited-edition model, but rules didn't appear until years later. It's possible that there was a mention of civilian seers having some role in an eldar force in some article or novel, but I just haven't found it.

Don't forget spiritseers! I'm mostly going off of blink-and-you'll-miss-it lines from Wild Rider and Valedor. IIRC, both have lines where someone in charge mentions that there are seers working with the seer council (not the old warlock+farseer unit; I think) to work out some important battlefield predictions. It's been a while since I read either of those, so I May be way off. Basically, I got the impression that most generic seers were too valuable to stick in guardian armor but too mentally fragile (lack of war masks) to send to the front lines, so they remained at the base camp adding divination support.

Maybe bonesingers are just valuable enough on the battlefield to occassionally get dispatched to rapidly fix up vehicles. I could see spiritseers without aspect warrior experience being seen as mentally "tough" enough to be on the front lines by virtue of having experienced war masks and deaths second-hand via the memories of the spirits they canonically help calm down.

I think he's making room by switching from the 40-year-old Warhammer D6 system to a more modern D10 framework that would allow for differentiation between basic guardians, special guardians, and aspect warriors. This way he might be able to find ways to make special guardians cooler and more flavorful with aspect-lite rules while still making it clear that the aspect warriors are still the high quality professionals.

Fair!

 Wyldhunt wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

Autarchs are on the path of command. They will have trodden one or more warrior paths (which is how they get the cool gear), but they are not trapped like an exarch. If they ever got trapped on the path of the warrior, they'd never make it to the path of command.

Fair, although I always got the impression that "path of command" might basically be a euphemism.
"What? Trapped on the path of the warrior? Of course not. He's uh. Walking the path of command! Yep. He walked that totally different path so well that they let him mix and match wargear and tell all the guys on that other path what to do!"

But I'm not sure about that one way or the other. Do we ever hear about former autarchs that went off to become poets or craftsmen or something? Are there non-autarchs on the path of command who just organize civil projects like who gets to reserve the Dome of Awesome Acoustics for a concert on Thursday? Is being an autarch sort of like being a warlock in that it's a sub-path of a non-warrior path that requires experience on the warrior path as a prerequisite?

Yriel was an Autarch. Then he went to become a corsair, showing that an Autarch is not trapped on the Path of Command as otherwise he could never have left. We do not know what someone trapped on the Path of Command would be like.

The Path of Command seems to be a Path that does as prerequisite require previous experience on more than 1 Aspect of the Path of the Warrior. However it seems at least in some cases, that one can be declared/chosen to walk the Path of Command even while one is on the Path of the Warrior, and because of that, they get given their parting gift of wargear when they leave that Aspect. Normal Eldar leaving an Aspect don't get given wargear to take with them. Maybe they get to keep their Aspect rune as a keepsake, which I think one of Gav Thorpe's characters did.

Oh duh! How could I forget about Yriel?

Would any of you be interested in doing a short intro-text for my Biel-Tan codex?

The text should not be an introductional text about Biel-Tan - it's a direct "speech" to the reader from an Aeldari with high authority, showing that the reader is a young Aeldari newcomer to the Biel-Tan craftworld.
This ceremonial speech should be spoken like the most fanatical of the Biel-Tan way, giving the impression that the reader has just agreed to offer his/her life and soul to this Craftworld and to its ways.

It doesn't have to be long, but it should be made to inspire even the staunchest Slaanesh follower to leave the dark powers behind and build the greatest Aeldari empire, the galaxy has ever seen.

I've made one such "speech" myself for the Blood Angels, but I'm not sure, how to do it for Biel-Tan.

Also, besides Autarchs and maybe Farseers, aren't there other titles or ranks of army leaders?

I'm not sure about Autarchs, regarding the Path of the Leader and what this path actually implies. I mean shouldn't a Path lead to somewhere like the Path of the Warrior can lead to being an Exarch.

Maybe an Autarch could have several titles or ranks depending on how many Shrines or Aspects, the Autarch has mastered?

Exarchs are not an inevitable culmination of a warrior path, they are eldar trapped in a tragic addiction.

The norm is to move on to fresh paths.

It does raise the question of whether non-combat paths have Exarch equivalents, like Exarch of the flower-arranging shrine of Isha or something.

 Haighus wrote:
Exarchs are not an inevitable culmination of a warrior path, they are eldar trapped in a tragic addiction.

The norm is to move on to fresh paths.

It does raise the question of whether non-combat paths have Exarch equivalents, like Exarch of the flower-arranging shrine of Isha or something.

We know they do. Gav Thorpe's Path of the Eldar novel series makes mention of the Path of the Dreamer. Dreamers delve into their dreams and inner world, sometimes with the help of psychoactive drugs. Basically they daydream all day or are in a drugged out state, with sometimes someone watching over them to bring them back to reality to tend to their basic needs. Those that finish the Path leave with a pseudo-eidetic memory/mind palace skill. Those that become trapped on the Path of the Dreamer are no longer able to distinguish between reality and their dreams.

Bonesingers are those trapped on the Path of the Artisan and specialize in the Path of Shaping which seems to be a sub-path specialized in creating and shaping wraithbone. Think of it as analogous to how Farseers are those trapped on the Path of the Seer end up as Farseers, which is a specialization in seeing the future.

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Exarchs are not an inevitable culmination of a warrior path, they are eldar trapped in a tragic addiction.

The norm is to move on to fresh paths.

It does raise the question of whether non-combat paths have Exarch equivalents, like Exarch of the flower-arranging shrine of Isha or something.

We know they do. Gav Thorpe's Path of the Eldar novel series makes mention of the Path of the Dreamer. Dreamers delve into their dreams and inner world, sometimes with the help of psychoactive drugs. Basically they daydream all day or are in a drugged out state, with sometimes someone watching over them to bring them back to reality to tend to their basic needs. Those that finish the Path leave with a pseudo-eidetic memory/mind palace skill. Those that become trapped on the Path of the Dreamer are no longer able to distinguish between reality and their dreams.

Bonesingers are those trapped on the Path of the Artisan and specialize in the Path of Shaping which seems to be a sub-path specialized in creating and shaping wraithbone. Think of it as analogous to how Farseers are those trapped on the Path of the Seer end up as Farseers, which is a specialization in seeing the future.

I'm glad they explored the logical extrapolation of that concept.

Are they viewed in the same tragic light as Exarchs?

 Haighus wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Exarchs are not an inevitable culmination of a warrior path, they are eldar trapped in a tragic addiction.

The norm is to move on to fresh paths.

It does raise the question of whether non-combat paths have Exarch equivalents, like Exarch of the flower-arranging shrine of Isha or something.

We know they do. Gav Thorpe's Path of the Eldar novel series makes mention of the Path of the Dreamer. Dreamers delve into their dreams and inner world, sometimes with the help of psychoactive drugs. Basically they daydream all day or are in a drugged out state, with sometimes someone watching over them to bring them back to reality to tend to their basic needs. Those that finish the Path leave with a pseudo-eidetic memory/mind palace skill. Those that become trapped on the Path of the Dreamer are no longer able to distinguish between reality and their dreams.

Bonesingers are those trapped on the Path of the Artisan and specialize in the Path of Shaping which seems to be a sub-path specialized in creating and shaping wraithbone. Think of it as analogous to how Farseers are those trapped on the Path of the Seer end up as Farseers, which is a specialization in seeing the future.

I'm glad they explored the logical extrapolation of that concept.

Are they viewed in the same tragic light as Exarchs?

No, because unlike Exarchs, these others can still be released into the Infinity Circuits upon death. Exarchs are eternally quarantined off into their own suit's pool of all previous Exarch souls. Even while living, Exarchs are meant to stay in their own shrines, save for when going to war or for ceremonial duties, which themselves usually relate to going to war.

I got the impression that being trapped on any path was still considered unfortunate/mildly tragic; just not as tragic as being stuck on the path of the warrior.

Farseers, for instance, seem to be viewed with respect and allowed to come and go as they please, but a fair bit of the mentorship we see in Path of the Seer revolves around being safe and trying to avoid becoming trapped.

Are bonesingers trapped on their path? I just thought they were a a subpath of the artisan that took up the art of singing wraithbone into shape and existence.

As those trapped on a path tend to exhibit above-and-beyond skill in their arts, I wonder what someone trapped on the paths of service, mourning, helmsman, etc. might look like.

@OP: In case it hasn't been mentioned yet, it's worth noting that some paths are easier to get trapped on than others. The path of the warrior, for instance, is highly addictive because it calls to your inner bloodlust and adrenaline junky in a way that most paths don't. The path of the seer is addictive because of the power that comes with it and because it grants you the use of a sense that has been intentionally suppressed for most of your life. Imagine suddenly being able to hear conversations a mile away and then being asked if you want to give that up again.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
I got the impression that being trapped on any path was still considered unfortunate/mildly tragic; just not as tragic as being stuck on the path of the warrior.

Farseers, for instance, seem to be viewed with respect and allowed to come and go as they please, but a fair bit of the mentorship we see in Path of the Seer revolves around being safe and trying to avoid becoming trapped.

Are bonesingers trapped on their path? I just thought they were a a subpath of the artisan that took up the art of singing wraithbone into shape and existence.

As those trapped on a path tend to exhibit above-and-beyond skill in their arts, I wonder what someone trapped on the paths of service, mourning, helmsman, etc. might look like.

@OP: In case it hasn't been mentioned yet, it's worth noting that some paths are easier to get trapped on than others. The path of the warrior, for instance, is highly addictive because it calls to your inner bloodlust and adrenaline junky in a way that most paths don't. The path of the seer is addictive because of the power that comes with it and because it grants you the use of a sense that has been intentionally suppressed for most of your life. Imagine suddenly being able to hear conversations a mile away and then being asked if you want to give that up again.

Bonesingers are trapped. In Path of the Seer the main character talks with her father, who is a Bonesinger, and they touch on the fact he is trapped, though of course he does not see it as a problem.

Is that all bonesingers, or that particular bonesinger?

 Haighus wrote:
Is that all bonesingers, or that particular bonesinger?

If he is trapped then that by definition applies to all Bonesingers. All Farseers are trapped just as all Exarchs are trapped. One does not become a Farseer and then become trapped. One becomes trapped and therefore becomes a Farseer. The same sort of situation applies to Bonesingers

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Is that all bonesingers, or that particular bonesinger?

If he is trapped then that by definition applies to all Bonesingers. All Farseers are trapped just as all Exarchs are trapped. One does not become a Farseer and then become trapped. One becomes trapped and therefore becomes a Farseer. The same sort of situation applies to Bonesingers

Why? Bonesinger could be the more generic wording? As in, equivalent to aspect warrior, not exarch. All exarchs are aspect warriors, not all aspect warriors are exarchs.

 Haighus wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Is that all bonesingers, or that particular bonesinger?

If he is trapped then that by definition applies to all Bonesingers. All Farseers are trapped just as all Exarchs are trapped. One does not become a Farseer and then become trapped. One becomes trapped and therefore becomes a Farseer. The same sort of situation applies to Bonesingers

Why? Bonesinger could be the more generic wording?

Except it is not generic wording, just as Farseer is not generic seer wording.

See Gav Thorpe's blog: https://gavthorpe.co.uk/2010/12/13/path-theory/

To become trapped on a Path is is give in wholly to the underlying emotional cause, rather than the physical representation. An Exarch is trapped in his or her anger. A Bonesinger is trapped in the creative moment. Others may become locked in selfless devotion or grief. The nature of this is that the trapped Eldar cannot see that they are trapped, because they are locked in a cycle of the same emotion without any context or self-awareness.

The trapped are aware they are trapped on an intellectual level, but they do not seem to see it as a problem or something to be sad about. Being trapped can seem like a form of enlightenment for the trapped. The Exarch character sees himself as shedding extraneous concerns and details that are no longer important for them.

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Is that all bonesingers, or that particular bonesinger?

If he is trapped then that by definition applies to all Bonesingers. All Farseers are trapped just as all Exarchs are trapped. One does not become a Farseer and then become trapped. One becomes trapped and therefore becomes a Farseer. The same sort of situation applies to Bonesingers

Why? Bonesinger could be the more generic wording?

Except it is not generic wording, just as Farseer is not generic seer wording.

See Gav Thorpe's blog: https://gavthorpe.co.uk/2010/12/13/path-theory/

But Gav says this in one of the comments (to which you replied 11years ago ):

Gav Thorpe wrote:I think it is important to understand also that it is possible to spend a long time on a particular path without being psychologically trapped. That is, an Autarch or bonesinger, for instance, may spend several hundred years (probably the eldar’s last path) doing the same thing without the need to move on.

Which strongly suggests bonesingers are not trapped. However, in the body of the article:

Gav Thorpe wrote:To become trapped on a Path is is give in wholly to the underlying emotional cause, rather than the physical representation. An Exarch is trapped in his or her anger. A Bonesinger is trapped in the creative moment.

So clearly Gav isn't exactly clear whether bonesingers are trapped or not.

The logical conclusion is that some bonesingers are trapped, and some are not.

The logical conclusion is that Gav Thorpe made a mistake and did not remember he had just said Bonesingers were trapped. Gav has made major errors before. Gav Thorpe made a major chronological error in his Jain Zarr novel that I pointed out, and which was hard to recover from as it made a major difference to the plot. Within the Path of the Seer book itself, it is clear that Bonesingers are trapped Artisans.

Every single example we know of Eldar that become trapped, they take on a new title and role. Seers (of which Warlocks are a subpath) become Farseers. Warriors become Exarchs. It would break that continuity to suddenly have a special case for Artisans. Artisans becoming Bonesingers when trapped would not break the existing precedence. The preeminent practitioners of the skill of each Path are always trapped, and Bonesingers are clearly at the pinnacle of the Eldar Path of the Artisan as wraithbone is the most durable and hardest to manage of the psychoplastics that the Eldar use. Therefore if the main character's father is a Bonesinger, and is trapped, then the only conclusion is that Bonesingers are the role and title of those trapped on the Path of the Artisan.

At some point in the Path series (sorry I am not going to search all 3 books for this one reference), some Eldar debate the seeming hypocrisy or incongruity of talking about the Path and how Eldar are supposed to switch, yet have the masters and teachers of each Path be those that are trapped, which would seem to be elevating failure.

Iracundus wrote:
The logical conclusion is that Gav Thorpe made a mistake and did not remember he had just said Bonesingers were trapped. Gav has made major errors before. Gav Thorpe made a major chronological error in his Jain Zarr novel that I pointed out, and which was hard to recover from as it made a major difference to the plot. Within the Path of the Seer book itself, it is clear that Bonesingers are trapped Artisans.

Every single example we know of Eldar that become trapped, they take on a new title and role. Seers become Farseers. Warriors become Exarchs. It would break that continuity to suddenly have a special case for Artisans. Artisans becoming Bonesingers when trapped would not break the existing precedence. The preeminent practitioners of the skill of each Path are always trapped, and Bonesingers are clearly at the pinnacle of the Eldar Path of the Artisan as wraithbone is the most durable and hardest to manage of the psychoplastics that the Eldar use.

At some point in the Path series (sorry I am not going to search all 3 books for this one reference), some Eldar debate the seeming hypocrisy or incongruity of talking about the Path and how Eldar are supposed to switch, yet have the masters and teachers of each Path be those that are trapped, which would seem to be elevating failure.

Sure, he could have made a mistake immediately below the short article. That is possible. It seems more likely that he feels bonesinger is more flexible than exarch.

There are other precedents. Eldar who follow the path of the warrior are not just called "warriors", but also fire dragons, dire avengers, striking scorpions etc. As such, an individual eldar can be a warrior and specifically a dire avenger without being an exarch. So it is pretty straightforward to see how an eldar could be an artisan and specifically a bonesinger, without being trapped. Or to be an explorer/wayfinder and specifically a steersman, but not trapped.

Gav also specifically calls out bonesingers alongside autarchs, who have a specific title and explicitly have examples who are not trapped.

Are warlocks trapped?

I think we are at the point where further argument is futile.

The term is used inconsistently by one of the key creators, and this can't really be resolved until it is formalised in some way by GW.

Its also not necessarily that important... The concept of the path system is clear. Eldar can be trapped in the path of the material-creator. whatever term an individual chooses to apply to that role will be no less correct than the terms put out there by the actual background duder responsible for them.

 Haighus wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
The logical conclusion is that Gav Thorpe made a mistake and did not remember he had just said Bonesingers were trapped. Gav has made major errors before. Gav Thorpe made a major chronological error in his Jain Zarr novel that I pointed out, and which was hard to recover from as it made a major difference to the plot. Within the Path of the Seer book itself, it is clear that Bonesingers are trapped Artisans.

Every single example we know of Eldar that become trapped, they take on a new title and role. Seers become Farseers. Warriors become Exarchs. It would break that continuity to suddenly have a special case for Artisans. Artisans becoming Bonesingers when trapped would not break the existing precedence. The preeminent practitioners of the skill of each Path are always trapped, and Bonesingers are clearly at the pinnacle of the Eldar Path of the Artisan as wraithbone is the most durable and hardest to manage of the psychoplastics that the Eldar use.

At some point in the Path series (sorry I am not going to search all 3 books for this one reference), some Eldar debate the seeming hypocrisy or incongruity of talking about the Path and how Eldar are supposed to switch, yet have the masters and teachers of each Path be those that are trapped, which would seem to be elevating failure.

Sure, he could have made a mistake immediately below the short article. That is possible. It seems more likely that he feels bonesinger is more flexible than exarch.

There are other precedents. Eldar who follow the path of the warrior are not just called "warriors", but also fire dragons, dire avengers, striking scorpions etc. As such, an individual eldar can be a warrior and specifically a dire avenger without being an exarch. So it is pretty straightforward to see how an eldar could be an artisan and specifically a bonesinger, without being trapped. Or to be an explorer/wayfinder and specifically a steersman, but not trapped.

Gav also specifically calls out bonesingers alongside autarchs, who have a specific title and explicitly have examples who are not trapped.

Are warlocks trapped?

Anyone who does become trapped takes on a new title. A warrior, whatever the aspect, that becomes trapped becomes an Exarch, not a mere Aspect Warrior any longer. The main character of Path of the Warrior becomes trapped with hardly any real battle experience yet he does not stay as a Striking Scorpion Aspect Warrior but immediately goes to become an Exarch. Any seer, and that includes Warlocks, becomes a Farseer when they become trapped. The Trapped have different titles to the non-trapped follower of that particular path. Warlocks are Seers but they are not trapped. When the main character of Path of the Seer becomes trapped, she goes from Warlock to Farseer. She does not stay as "trapped Warlock". There is no such thing as one trapped on the Path of the Seer that remains a Warlock. They all become Farseers no matter what kind of Seer they were before. That just seems to be how the Path system works, with the masters having new titles and roles.

If a character is trapped and is called a Bonesinger, that means the only conclusion is Bonesinger is the title of those trapped on the Path of the Artisan. It cannot be otherwise as if Bonesingers were not the title of Trapped Artisans, then they would have changed to whatever is the title of Trapped Artisans as soon as they became trapped. It is also strange to somehow think that the pinnacle of Eldar materials crafting, those that shape their rarest material, wraithbone, is not the title of the Trapped when every other Path example we have has the pinnacle of achievement on that Path be Trapped. The positing of "What if it is a Bonesinger that is not trapped?" is akin to "What if it is an Exarch that is not trapped?" or "What if it is a Farseer that is not trapped?". All Farseers by definition are trapped, as that is the only way they can have become Farseers.

All those other Paths, that of the Mariner etc..., we do not have the title of the Trapped on those paths. A mariner or steersman is not trapped because if they were, they would be known by some other title. We know Autarchs are not trapped on the Path of Command, but we do not know what the title of one who is trapped would be called. Again, you seem to fail to understand the concept that for the Eldar Path system, all those that become trapped become something else. They do not stay in their old original role of a rank and file follower of that Path.

There are only 3 maybe 4 Trapped titles we know about as readers. Exarchs, Farseers, Bonesingers, and maybe Pathfinders if one views the Path of the Outcast as an actual Path.

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but isn't it possible that only some paths provide fancy titles when you get trapped on them? It seems important to distinguish exarchs from non-exarchs because they scare people when not in their shrines and they seem to be constantly on the verge of violence. So identifying and isolating them is a safety concern. Identifying a farseer might be important because (iirc) they tend to develop greater divination skills quite quickly once they give in to the path; so their predictions likely warrant a greater degree of credibility than a standard seer. Pathfinders might be identified as such purely to avoid the frustration and awkwardness of people asking them when they're going to settle down and walk a respectable path.

But maybe it's less important to have those special distinguishers for someone on the path of service/the mourner/the artisan.

It's probably not terribly important either way, but it does sort of recontextualize bone singers if you happen to use them in your army or want to include them in your narrative.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
I know I'm splitting hairs here, but isn't it possible that only some paths provide fancy titles when you get trapped on them? It seems important to distinguish exarchs from non-exarchs because they scare people when not in their shrines and they seem to be constantly on the verge of violence. So identifying and isolating them is a safety concern. Identifying a farseer might be important because (iirc) they tend to develop greater divination skills quite quickly once they give in to the path; so their predictions likely warrant a greater degree of credibility than a standard seer. Pathfinders might be identified as such purely to avoid the frustration and awkwardness of people asking them when they're going to settle down and walk a respectable path.

But maybe it's less important to have those special distinguishers for someone on the path of service/the mourner/the artisan.

It's probably not terribly important either way, but it does sort of recontextualize bone singers if you happen to use them in your army or want to include them in your narrative.

Seems reasonable to me.

May also be very Craftworld dependent in how their own traditions manage this.

Hah… maybe it’s both. Bone singers sing to bone, while bone singers singe it

And best not to ask what bone sinners do…

Like the exarchs on the Warrior Path, or the bonesingers or farseers, the Everdreaming were trapped.

-Path of the Outcast, p. 33

I did a quick search of the Gav Thorpe novels and the title of those trapped on the Path of the Dreamer is the Everdreaming, so we have again an example of a civilian Path with fancy titles for its trapped. However once again, the novel itself calls out bonesingers as trapped.

That seems pretty conclusive then. At least on Alaitoc, "bonesinger" is a term used to describe someone trapped on the path. And as other terms for being trapped (exarch, farseer, etc.) seem to be universal among craftworlders, I'm inclined to think the term bonesinger is as well. Well huh.

It is a bit weird to think of all the DoWar video game bonesingers as been trapped on the path, but that also probably explains why mid-battle bonesinging isn't more of a thing; rapid repairs like that are something that only the best of the best can pull off. If bonesingers are roughly as rare as exarchs, you probably don't want to expose those guys to the battlefield any more than you have to.

Fair enough, point conceded.

Now I feel kinda bad for my Bonesinger. It is one of the few Eldar models I own, and it only has some Guardians for protection...

 Wyldhunt wrote:
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy.

Unfluffy for Aeldari or all factions?

I mean, shouldn't meddling with the Warp be risky business for?

Chaospling wrote:

 Wyldhunt wrote:
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy.

Unfluffy for Aeldari or all factions?

I mean, shouldn't meddling with the Warp be risky business for?

Happy to answer the question, but JFYI that's part of my signature. It shows up below all my posts.

Honestly, psychic tests are pretty unfluffy for all factions except maybe imperial guard and whatever form R&H still exists in. The issue I take with psychic tests in general isn't that they're dangerous (but see below), it's that they can fail completely. In the lore, you never really see a psyker fail to make something psychic happen. Maybe he loses control and Perils of the Warp happen, sure, but you never see a librarian raise his hand to shoot lightning and just... not have anything happen. In the lore, even unaugmented mortal psykers are generally able to make their powers happen. Heck, in A Thousand Sons, we even see untrained psykers who have more trouble turning their powers off than on. So I find it really annoying that sometimes psychic powers just straight up fail to happen.

It wasn't such a big deal back in the day when passing a psychic test generally just meant rolling a 2-10 on 2d6; you could just headcanon those relatively rare failures as the product of stress/the psyker taking a bit to do the thing. But nowadays, psychic tests fail often enough for it to feel.. strange.

Now all that said, I do feel that eldar should be better at getting psychic powers off safely than most. Once upon a time, our warlocks' powers were just "always on" without requiring a psychic test because they were extremely competent psykers using extremely safe and practiced methods to use familiar powers. It was an excellent nod to the differences between an eldar psyker and something like a librarian. I love that we have ghost helms on everything again allowing us to avoid dying from random perils out of nowhere. So even if the current rules still make it possible for us to look silly by failing to cast powers, at least our millenia-old psykers don't randomly explode while doing it.