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.

 Arschbombe wrote:


Interesting notion that an exarch could change aspects. How would that work? Perhaps someone who walked more than one warrior path has enough control to choose the aspect when they fall? I don't see a new exarch having much agency in that regard. The new exarch goes to the shrine, puts on the ancient armor and becomes the original exarch. That exarch is not going to change aspects after thousands of years.

In 1st ed it was called the Menshad Korum, the hunter in pursuit of himself. It was a rare thing that did happen. But otherwise you can walk the warrior path a dozen times before getting trapped on one specific aspect. That doesn't mean you forget all your warrior training from the other aspects though, so there's at least 3 'types' of exarch right there - mono aspect, Menshad Korum, multi aspect. The MK would be the most flexible, as they'd be wielding weapons from all the shrines and using all the skills. the MA would be one aspect with skills from the other shrines, but locked to their final shrine's weapons. The mono aspect is the one we get in the squads now.

 Arschbombe wrote:

That's not how it was depicted in Path of the Warrior, Korlandril falls, is refused entry to the shrine of deadly shadow, is told to find his own shrine. He goes to the autarch chamber, sees the runes of the shrines and finds the shrine of hidden death. He goes there, dons the armor and become Morlaniath, first of seven to wear the exarch armor in that shrine. Korlandril was the eighth, but his spirit is submerged under the first. Soon his gets his first student.

Your first pupil.
One to be taught.
So soon?
Always it is so. A new exarch needs followers. The shrine calls to them.

I mean that's not how I read that. The shrine calls them, not the exarch. The exarch just happens to be there. And as a priest of a god, of course he wants more followers in his shrine. But he doesn't stop functioning as an exarch just because no one answered the shrine's want ad. He's still a fully formed exarch, with the capability to fight by himself.

 Arschbombe wrote:

The rules for the aspects have always put the juiciest bits on the exarch so that aspect squads would feel like ablative wounds/delivery systems for the exarch much like mobs of boyz used to be wounds for the nob with powerklaw. Still, you could always choose to run a bare squad for something like DAVU. The exarchs being so much better than the rank and file was explained as coming from the spirits of the previous incarnations of the exarch.

Rules and list building aside, it is still the exarchs that determine when aspect warriors are ready. The aspect warriors don't get to determine that themselves. I can't envision a squad of warriors deciding to go to war on their own without their exarch, who has decided to sit this one out for some reason. There's never any mention of an aspect leader who isn't an exarch. I suppose you could have an autarch join a squad of aspects in lieu of an exarch.

That's the point though - it was a rules mechanic not a background one that created the perception that aspects needed exarchs on the battle field. I used to play 2nd ed with exarchs running around like assassins while their squads performed their combat role. The background didn't require them to be part of the squad for them to function properly. It's also pretty insulting to think that the elite eldar units are less capable than their militia, who can go to war without a teacher to hold their hand.

It's a bizarre scenario to consider that those aspect warriors could go to war as guardians, but won't be allowed as aspects because their teacher didn't go with them? This is one of the biggest problems I've had with the folding of exarchs into squads since 3rd ed, they've created the impression that an aspect NEEDS an exarch to fight. But the aspects are trained to fight, not trained to follow their teacher everywhere. If they lose an exarch in battle, they don't suddenly stop knowing what to do. And it would be a pretty poor teacher that taught them how to fight only while their around. Somehow I doubt the Exarchs teach that poorly. I can't imagine any other combatant in the real world or 40k that needs their teacher present to be any good.

 Arschbombe wrote:

I don't see exarchs as berserker equivalents and they absolutely can stay out of a fight when the craftworld leadership, autarchs and the council tell them to.

I do like the idea of having freelancing exarchs in a host, but I do also think you can keep them under control. If the specific mission requirements don't require their specific aspect or many of that aspect then the council will make decisions about who goes and who stays. They don't send everyone to every battle.

My point is that the exarchs' ability to go to war has even less to do with them having students as an aspect warrior's does having an exarch. An exarch, so long as the strategy says it's good, can be on the field, regardless of the status of their students/shrine.

They lose all their students, do they stop fighting on the field? Do aspects stop being trained warriors on a path they are mastering just because their teacher isn't present? The point of the path system is to personally master the one you've chosen, and mastery can't happen if you are required to have your teacher there all the time.

 Arschbombe wrote:

I haven't seen anything to support these suppositions.

Apart from the rules forcing you now to take an exarch in a squad, there's no background info that says they are obsessed with their students and never leave them either. As I said, the rules have created this impression that's never been their in the background. For 2 editions exarchs were independent characters that could choose to join an aspect, but didn't have to (and they had the statline of a marine hero). For 7 editions they were non compulsory choices. For 5 editions they were no compulsory squad sergeants.

The suppositions are logical inference - not everything lines up nicely. Aspects die, exarchs die, exarchs have no students, craftworlds are desperate. There are many logical reasons why exarchs aren't necessary in a squad, or that exarchs don't need a squad to appear on the battlefield.

It's the path of the warrior, not the path of being led through war by a psycho. Once they master the path, they look for another one to master and so on.

The rules creating crappy exarchs and forcing you to take them as squad leaders still doesn't reflect their background.

Just wanted to chime in and agree with all that, Hellebore.

Also, it occurs to me that a lot of the sub-optimal exarch wargear options we've had in the past would make a lot more sense on a lone exarch than as part of a squad. A powersword hawkxarch or dragon's breath dragonxarch both make a lot more sense if you're not bringing the rest of your swordless/flamerless students along to fight a suboptimal target.If 40k ever re-expands to make characters more customizable again, squadless exarchs could be a good way to do that.

Mostly off-topic: Poking at the oldschool (like, 3rd or 4th edition) Kill Team rules has made me wonder if exarchs would be good candidates for "special forces" type operations. Need to assassinate the chaos champion in the middle of his palace? Sneak a few exarchs past the guards, and let them use their specialized tools to make their way to the target.

 Hellebore wrote:

In 1st ed it was called the Menshad Korum, the hunter in pursuit of himself. It was a rare thing that did happen. But otherwise you can walk the warrior path a dozen times before getting trapped on one specific aspect. That doesn't mean you forget all your warrior training from the other aspects though, so there's at least 3 'types' of exarch right there - mono aspect, Menshad Korum, multi aspect. The MK would be the most flexible, as they'd be wielding weapons from all the shrines and using all the skills. the MA would be one aspect with skills from the other shrines, but locked to their final shrine's weapons. The mono aspect is the one we get in the squads now.

I had not seen that before. I only have the 2nd edition through 7th edition books. Thank you for attaching the image.

I'm still curious about how an exarch would go about changing aspects in a more current context. That text from 1st edition doesn't talk about immortality, soulstones, and spirits. It doesn't state things like "once put on the suit is never removed and becomes a permanent part of the Eldar, it's psycho-plastic form meshing with his tissues" like it does in 2nd. That would preclude switching aspect after becoming an exarch. It would seem to me that the idea of multiple warrior paths got folded into the Autarch in 4th.

I mean that's not how I read that. The shrine calls them, not the exarch. The exarch just happens to be there. And as a priest of a god, of course he wants more followers in his shrine. But he doesn't stop functioning as an exarch just because no one answered the shrine's want ad. He's still a fully formed exarch, with the capability to fight by himself.

Yes, the shrine calls them. Why does it call them? Why do they answer? I think it's to give the exarch something productive to do. "An exarch needs followers." What happens when an exarch does not have followers? Loose cannon with a single purpose? What does he do?

That's the point though - it was a rules mechanic not a background one that created the perception that aspects needed exarchs on the battle field. I used to play 2nd ed with exarchs running around like assassins while their squads performed their combat role. The background didn't require them to be part of the squad for them to function properly. It's also pretty insulting to think that the elite eldar units are less capable than their militia, who can go to war without a teacher to hold their hand.

That's fair. In second edition they were barely connected. The rules were very explicit in spelling out you had to have aspect squads in the army in order to take an exarch, but there didn't have to be any commonality between them. Which calls that requirement into question. Why tie the taking of exarchs to the taking of squads at all when no hand-holding is required?

It's a bizarre scenario to consider that those aspect warriors could go to war as guardians, but won't be allowed as aspects because their teacher didn't go with them? This is one of the biggest problems I've had with the folding of exarchs into squads since 3rd ed, they've created the impression that an aspect NEEDS an exarch to fight. But the aspects are trained to fight, not trained to follow their teacher everywhere. If they lose an exarch in battle, they don't suddenly stop knowing what to do. And it would be a pretty poor teacher that taught them how to fight only while their around. Somehow I doubt the Exarchs teach that poorly. I can't imagine any other combatant in the real world or 40k that needs their teacher present to be any good.

In the absence of the exarch, who is squad leader? Who is talking to the autarchs? In the 2nd edition book they talk about guardian squads having leaders drawn from the ranks of former aspect warriors, but those have never been differentiated in the rules.

My point is that the exarchs' ability to go to war has even less to do with them having students as an aspect warrior's does having an exarch. An exarch, so long as the strategy says it's good, can be on the field, regardless of the status of their students/shrine.

They lose all their students, do they stop fighting on the field? Do aspects stop being trained warriors on a path they are mastering just because their teacher isn't present? The point of the path system is to personally master the one you've chosen, and mastery can't happen if you are required to have your teacher there all the time.

Of course exarchs will keep on fighting even if they've lost all their followers in a combat action. Similarly, a squad can fight on after the loss of their exarch. Where I get hung up on the whole lone exarch thing is the shrines. Shrines without an exarch are dormant. Active shrines with exarchs attract students. Then there's the matter of Kenainath handing over his warriors of the deadly shadow to Morlaniath before battle because his body is too weak to lead them anymore. "Your squad is untested, your warriors unready, you cannot lead them. You need warriors, take on the deadly shadow, lead them in battle. They need an exarch, let them be the hidden death with you their exarch."

Apart from the rules forcing you now to take an exarch in a squad, there's no background info that says they are obsessed with their students and never leave them either. As I said, the rules have created this impression that's never been their in the background. For 2 editions exarchs were independent characters that could choose to join an aspect, but didn't have to (and they had the statline of a marine hero). For 7 editions they were non compulsory choices. For 5 editions they were no compulsory squad sergeants.

The suppositions are logical inference - not everything lines up nicely. Aspects die, exarchs die, exarchs have no students, craftworlds are desperate. There are many logical reasons why exarchs aren't necessary in a squad, or that exarchs don't need a squad to appear on the battlefield.

It's the path of the warrior, not the path of being led through war by a psycho. Once they master the path, they look for another one to master and so on.

The rules creating crappy exarchs and forcing you to take them as squad leaders still doesn't reflect their background.

So what do you think about how warlocks have been handled over the editions?

 Arschbombe wrote:

I'm still curious about how an exarch would go about changing aspects in a more current context. That text from 1st edition doesn't talk about immortality, soulstones, and spirits. It doesn't state things like "once put on the suit is never removed and becomes a permanent part of the Eldar, it's psycho-plastic form meshing with his tissues" like it does in 2nd. That would preclude switching aspect after becoming an exarch. It would seem to me that the idea of multiple warrior paths got folded into the Autarch in 4th.

Hmm. Are we sure that an exarch is completely incapable of changing aspects? My headcanon is that exarch weapons are basically the exarch "playing around" with weapons that don't symbolically adhere to the teachings of their aspect. So giving a whole squad of scorpions scorpion claws might make them more prone to being trapped on the path for whatever reason. I also headcanon that minor shrines (crystal dragons, slashing spheres, etc.) are the result of an exarch playing around/experimenting so much that his shrine is no longer recognizable as whatever aspect it was before. Ex: a fire dragon exarch is having so much fun with their dragon's breath flamer that they start using it almost exclusively and eventually decide to start teaching their students how to use flamers instead of fusion guns and start going by the name "crystal dragons."

Which is a long-winded way of saying I think exarchs might sometimes change up their style out of, basically, boredom/curiosity. I could see an exarch with no students perhaps going to an exarch of a different aspect for training and basically having the specialized systems of his armor swapped out or the stones in his armor integrated into a new suit.

In the absence of the exarch, who is squad leader? Who is talking to the autarchs? In the 2nd edition book they talk about guardian squads having leaders drawn from the ranks of former aspect warriors, but those have never been differentiated in the rules.

Presumably every aspect warrior has an exarch whose shrine they study at. I imagine that the exarch assigns squad leaders before his warriors are deployed. Then again, both the Jain Zar novel and that short story about the banshee squad shows banshees bickering over decision making when their exarch is no longer around, so... *shrug* It seems like the squad would basically be tuned into their assigned voice chat, and you'd just sort of figure out which guy in your squad gets to respond.

Also, quick reminder that exarchs weren't mandatory until, what? 8th edition? They used to be a purchasable upgrade. So the mandatory exarch is a new thing. Frankly, it's weird that they're not still an upgrade that costs points.

On exarchs changing aspects; remember that Asurmen taught all of the other Phoenix Lords; none of them are Dire Avengers though. So it’s not like individuals of one aspect are incapable of learning other martial arts (and teaching something is amongst the most effective ways to learn something) or anything; they just don’t necessarily use them, or don’t necessarily have the equipment to pull it off.
As for the armour being glued to the wearer… it’s made of psycho-reactive plastic and contains potentially dozens of psychic souls. I reckon if an exarch wants their armour to change shape/colour/thickness it absolutely will.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Hmm. Are we sure that an exarch is completely incapable of changing aspects?

I don't know where the fluff actually stands at the moment. We know it's changed subtly and not so subtly over the editions. Clearly in 1st edition they could, but 1st edition had a lot of weird stuff that got dropped or radically changed. I mean wasn't there a half-eldar space marine back then before the 8ft tall superhuman thing got going? Also clearly in 2nd edition they couldn't because suit bonding to flesh as I quoted. Somewhere in 3rd to 6th they could take off their armor. In Path of the Warrior we see two exarchs come to greet Morlaniath upon his return and they're in robes.

My headcanon is that exarch weapons are basically the exarch "playing around" with weapons that don't symbolically adhere to the teachings of their aspect. So giving a whole squad of scorpions scorpion claws might make them more prone to being trapped on the path for whatever reason. I also headcanon that minor shrines (crystal dragons, slashing spheres, etc.) are the result of an exarch playing around/experimenting so much that his shrine is no longer recognizable as whatever aspect it was before. Ex: a fire dragon exarch is having so much fun with their dragon's breath flamer that they start using it almost exclusively and eventually decide to start teaching their students how to use flamers instead of fusion guns and start going by the name "crystal dragons."

I like headcanon for filling in gaps, but not when it supplants established lore. With respect to exarch weapons they are always described as incredibly ancient, arcane or the extreme expression of their aspect. So I don't see room in there for them to be individualistic experiments. There's also the general theme of decline in 40k. The time for new developments and experimentation was always in the distant past. New models and weapons are generally retconned to have always been around. So there aren't any new aspects developing on some craftworlds that we'll learn about someday as they are revealed like primaris marines. If GW invents a new aspect it will always have been there the same way warp spiders, shining spears and crimson hunters got added.

Which is a long-winded way of saying I think exarchs might sometimes change up their style out of, basically, boredom/curiosity. I could see an exarch with no students perhaps going to an exarch of a different aspect for training and basically having the specialized systems of his armor swapped out or the stones in his armor integrated into a new suit.

Well this kind of points to my own headcanon about eldar autonomy. I think each individual eldar moves along the Path thinking that they have free will and they make their choices freely. But I suspect that a craftworld really functions like one giant psychic organism. When a craftworld is preparing for war, more citizens just get drawn to the warrior path. As more warriors are trained and the shrines fill up, there may be a need to reactivate a dormant shrine and so a warrior will lose himself to khaine and find his way to the shrine and become that ancient exarch. So perhaps a craftworld will need to augment its strength in one particular aspect and an exarch will feel drawn to change aspect. He might think of it as driven by a desire for change as you say, but really he's just responding to psychic stimuli pushing him that way.

Also, quick reminder that exarchs weren't mandatory until, what? 8th edition? They used to be a purchasable upgrade. So the mandatory exarch is a new thing. Frankly, it's weird that they're not still an upgrade that costs points.

I think this change is tied to the whole power level thing. Exarchs represent such a large chunk of a squad's power they decided to make them part of the basic cost because to do otherwise made the math hard. I don't think it was born from some deep analysis of eldar organization.

Mr_Rose wrote:On exarchs changing aspects; remember that Asurmen taught all of the other Phoenix Lords; none of them are Dire Avengers though. So it’s not like individuals of one aspect are incapable of learning other martial arts (and teaching something is amongst the most effective ways to learn something) or anything; they just don’t necessarily use them, or don’t necessarily have the equipment to pull it off.
As for the armour being glued to the wearer… it’s made of psycho-reactive plastic and contains potentially dozens of psychic souls. I reckon if an exarch wants their armour to change shape/colour/thickness it absolutely will.

I don't think they work that way. The psycho active stuff seemed to be generally about fit and function. A new warrior puts on an old suit and it resizes itself to fit him. Things like targeting reticles, mandiblasters, banshee masks etc are psychically activated. To me that's the extent of it. I can't see an exarch trying to change his armor from scorpion to banshee for example. In any case the whole one-with-the-suit thing was 2nd edition and has since been superceded.

 Arschbombe wrote:

I like headcanon for filling in gaps, but not when it supplants established lore. With respect to exarch weapons they are always described as incredibly ancient, arcane or the extreme expression of their aspect. So I don't see room in there for them to be individualistic experiments. There's also the general theme of decline in 40k. The time for new developments and experimentation was always in the distant past. New models and weapons are generally retconned to have always been around. So there aren't any new aspects developing on some craftworlds that we'll learn about someday as they are revealed like primaris marines. If GW invents a new aspect it will always have been there the same way warp spiders, shining spears and crimson hunters got added.

Eh. I see where you're coming from but don't totally agree. We know that the eldar have "recently" invented the hemlock specifically as a means of fighting tyranids, and it's canon that new aspects are a thing that happens. It would be easy enough to say that the new Zapping Armadillo aspect has had a small, dispersed presence across the craftworlds for millenia but that it's finally becoming popular enough to become a more common sight. The eldar don't seem to do a lot of inventing, but they also don't seem to be incapable of it.

As for the exarch weapons, I guess I don't see being arcane and extreme expressions of their aspect as being mutually exclusive with being the inspiration for a new aspect. You let a swooping hawk exarch spend enough time swinging his power sword around, and eventually he hands out a bunch of power swords and "sun pistols" to the class. And thus are born the Sun Hawks, blinding the enemy with volleys of sunpistol fire as they soar into the fray with their power swords. It also makes more sense to me that new aspects would be the result of an exarch wanting to shake things up rather than some guy just popping up out of nowhere.

Well this kind of points to my own headcanon about eldar autonomy. I think each individual eldar moves along the Path thinking that they have free will and they make their choices freely. But I suspect that a craftworld really functions like one giant psychic organism. When a craftworld is preparing for war, more citizens just get drawn to the warrior path. As more warriors are trained and the shrines fill up, there may be a need to reactivate a dormant shrine and so a warrior will lose himself to khaine and find his way to the shrine and become that ancient exarch. So perhaps a craftworld will need to augment its strength in one particular aspect and an exarch will feel drawn to change aspect. He might think of it as driven by a desire for change as you say, but really he's just responding to psychic stimuli pushing him that way.

Sure. That's the vibe I get too.

Mr_Rose wrote:On exarchs changing aspects; remember that Asurmen taught all of the other Phoenix Lords; none of them are Dire Avengers though. So it’s not like individuals of one aspect are incapable of learning other martial arts (and teaching something is amongst the most effective ways to learn something) or anything; they just don’t necessarily use them, or don’t necessarily have the equipment to pull it off.
As for the armour being glued to the wearer… it’s made of psycho-reactive plastic and contains potentially dozens of psychic souls. I reckon if an exarch wants their armour to change shape/colour/thickness it absolutely will.

I don't think they work that way. The psycho active stuff seemed to be generally about fit and function. A new warrior puts on an old suit and it resizes itself to fit him. Things like targeting reticles, mandiblasters, banshee masks etc are psychically activated. To me that's the extent of it. I can't see an exarch trying to change his armor from scorpion to banshee for example. In any case the whole one-with-the-suit thing was 2nd edition and has since been superceded.

While I agree it's a bit of a stretch, it also sounds pretty cool, so I want it to be at least partially true. More likely, I could see an exarch requesting a new suit of armor for his stones to be transferred into or having a bonesinger make adjustments to his current suit so that there's a port for swooping hawk wings or mandiblasters or whatever. I could also see things like tweaks to armor thickness, aesthetic elements, etc. being the sort of thing that changes gradually over time if an exarch has a big epiphany or something.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
On exarchs changing aspects; remember that Asurmen taught all of the other Phoenix Lords; none of them are Dire Avengers though. So it’s not like individuals of one aspect are incapable of learning other martial arts (and teaching something is amongst the most effective ways to learn something) or anything; they just don’t necessarily use them, or don’t necessarily have the equipment to pull it off.
As for the armour being glued to the wearer… it’s made of psycho-reactive plastic and contains potentially dozens of psychic souls. I reckon if an exarch wants their armour to change shape/colour/thickness it absolutely will.

A key detail though is Asurmen taught the idea of the Warrior Path, and from it the Path system in general. He didn't as far as we know teach the Dire Avenger aspect to the Asurya. At that time shortly after the Fall, the Aspects of the Warrior Path had not yet crystallized or taken on their current forms. So the Asurya learned the idea of the Warrior Path, the idea of the psychological war mask, and then developed their own Aspects. For a time it seems the ideas of the Aspects were still a bit fluid as shown by how Arhra and Karandras had differing ideas of what the Striking Scorpion should be. Since then however, it seems these ideas have hardened, which can be seen as part of the 40K theme of decline.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Eh. I see where you're coming from but don't totally agree. We know that the eldar have "recently" invented the hemlock specifically as a means of fighting tyranids, and it's canon that new aspects are a thing that happens. It would be easy enough to say that the new Zapping Armadillo aspect has had a small, dispersed presence across the craftworlds for millenia but that it's finally becoming popular enough to become a more common sight. The eldar don't seem to do a lot of inventing, but they also don't seem to be incapable of it.

Yeah, but the hemlock is a wraith construct and we were talking aspects, specifically an exarch of one aspect changing his stripes. It's the same thing as when the wraithknight was invented in 6th edition. Those make sense in the context of desperation in a crippled craftworld. That whole release and the Iyanden supplement went all in on the wraith host concept. Still, I can see other new things being added to the eldar, variant war walkers, other kinds of grav tanks etc. At some point a few FW items might make their way to plastic and a codex entry, but they'll most likely be presented in the usual way as having always been there.

As for the exarch weapons, I guess I don't see being arcane and extreme expressions of their aspect as being mutually exclusive with being the inspiration for a new aspect. You let a swooping hawk exarch spend enough time swinging his power sword around, and eventually he hands out a bunch of power swords and "sun pistols" to the class. And thus are born the Sun Hawks, blinding the enemy with volleys of sunpistol fire as they soar into the fray with their power swords. It also makes more sense to me that new aspects would be the result of an exarch wanting to shake things up rather than some guy just popping up out of nowhere.

That's fair. We do get some mention here and there of shrines that deviate from the official doctrine and also that the phoenix lords periodically make the rounds to ensure everyone is holding to the standards. The first exarch of a new aspect must then become another phoenix lord in spirit if not in actual power.

While I agree it's a bit of a stretch, it also sounds pretty cool, so I want it to be at least partially true. More likely, I could see an exarch requesting a new suit of armor for his stones to be transferred into or having a bonesinger make adjustments to his current suit so that there's a port for swooping hawk wings or mandiblasters or whatever. I could also see things like tweaks to armor thickness, aesthetic elements, etc. being the sort of thing that changes gradually over time if an exarch has a big epiphany or something.

The mutating suit seems within the realm of possibility, but the exarch will still want/need the special weapons and those would come from the forges so a complete self-willed transformation would seem to be off the table.

Iracundus wrote:Since then however, it seems these ideas have hardened, which can be seen as part of the 40K theme of decline.

Mostly agree, although it seems like there's still a bit of wiggle room and variation within a given aspect. Which is what I understand the various exarch powers to represent. One swooping hawk shrine might emphasize the importance of evasive maneuvering or of making your lasblaster shots count or whatever. And whatever tactics they emphasize probably have symbolic or philosophical significance that calls to different needs for different eldar.

Arschbombe wrote:
Yeah, but the hemlock is a wraith construct and we were talking aspects, specifically an exarch of one aspect changing his stripes.

Fair. I was just trying to point out that craftworlders aren't completely stagnant even if they do tend to be set in their ways.

That's fair. We do get some mention here and there of shrines that deviate from the official doctrine and also that the phoenix lords periodically make the rounds to ensure everyone is holding to the standards. The first exarch of a new aspect must then become another phoenix lord in spirit if not in actual power.

Since I saw the term "asuryata" being thrown around, I've head-canoned that there are "asuryata" Phoenix Lords (the main ones we know from the codex plus maybe Drastanta) and non-asuryata Phoenix Lords. With the latter basically just being the founder of an aspect but not necessarily someone who studied directly under Asurmen and picked up some of that fate-bending weirdness that PLs apparently have. So Irrilyth would probably be a non-asuryata Phoenix Lord as he's clearly a phoenix lord but doesn't seem to make it to any of the team meetings we see in the phoenix lord novels. Lhykosidhe would maybe fall into that category too if you uh... like that particular detail of the Goto books.

The mutating suit seems within the realm of possibility, but the exarch will still want/need the special weapons and those would come from the forges so a complete self-willed transformation would seem to be off the table.

Oh sure. I'm picturing some slow, gradual changes to the armor; not a mid-combat transformation or something. Hmm. If exarchs do change aspects, I wonder how that impacts their shrine. Like, the physical location; not the students. Does the shrine terraform itself to be a better fit? Does the exarch control the "settings" of the shrine? And if not, can the shrine get upset with him and kick him out, forcing him to go find a more appropriate location? (And what kind of escort detail do you assign to the exarch wandering around the craftworld house hunting?)

 Arschbombe wrote:

In any case the whole one-with-the-suit thing was 2nd edition and has since been superceded.

I couldn't find anything about Exarchs in the 7th and 8th edition codices, but in 6th edition codex, it states that "... his spirit mingles with those Eldar who have borne it since the shrine's inception. It is the presence of the spirit-pool of raw psychic energy that gives the suit and warrior - for the two are indistinguishable - their special warrior powers."

Isn't this the same as it is now or have something happened about this subject since 6th edition?

About Shrines:
Are they unique or can the same Shrine be found on several/each Craftworld?

Shrines are basically Dojos. Each one is independent of the others. Not all Craftworlds have Shrines for the most common Aspects, and some will have entirely unique Shrines.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Iracundus wrote:Since then however, it seems these ideas have hardened, which can be seen as part of the 40K theme of decline.

Mostly agree, although it seems like there's still a bit of wiggle room and variation within a given aspect. Which is what I understand the various exarch powers to represent. One swooping hawk shrine might emphasize the importance of evasive maneuvering or of making your lasblaster shots count or whatever. And whatever tactics they emphasize probably have symbolic or philosophical significance that calls to different needs for different eldar.

Sure, but the idea of the Aspect seems to have crystallized. Different variations of the Striking Scorpion might emphasize the claw, chainsword, or mandiblasters more, as demonstrated or implied by their different Exarch weaponry and powers, but they don't differ so much as to suddenly pull out a fusion gun and call that the Sting of the Scorpion.

Chaospling wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

In any case the whole one-with-the-suit thing was 2nd edition and has since been superceded.

I couldn't find anything about Exarchs in the 7th and 8th edition codices, but in 6th edition codex, it states that "... his spirit mingles with those Eldar who have borne it since the shrine's inception. It is the presence of the spirit-pool of raw psychic energy that gives the suit and warrior - for the two are indistinguishable - their special warrior powers."

Isn't this the same as it is now or have something happened about this subject since 6th edition?

The helmetless Exarch models show that not all Exarchs have merged with the suit. Phoenix Lords still are animated walking suits. I suppose older Exarchs might get to that point once the spirit pool of energy grows strong enough.

Could I bother you for your creativity/knowledge of the Aeldari background?

I'm creating special rules for Autarchs, which will cost 0 points as whatever pros, they'll have, are outweighed by cons. They are there for giving your Autarch personality and a "title".

So what I need is grand titles, which are the names for those special rules.

Here are the titles for Blood Angel Captains to give you an idea of what I'm looking for:
Shield of Baal
Lord of Skyfall
Archangel
Lord Adjudicator
Soulwarden
Orator of the Priesthood
Repulsor of the Flaw
Caller of the Fires
Master of Sacrifice

Wyldhunt wrote:
Oh sure. I'm picturing some slow, gradual changes to the armor; not a mid-combat transformation or something. Hmm. If exarchs do change aspects, I wonder how that impacts their shrine. Like, the physical location; not the students. Does the shrine terraform itself to be a better fit? Does the exarch control the "settings" of the shrine? And if not, can the shrine get upset with him and kick him out, forcing him to go find a more appropriate location? (And what kind of escort detail do you assign to the exarch wandering around the craftworld house hunting?)

I don't think the exarchs can control the construction of the shrines. I think the singers build them to exarch specifications. I don't think the shrines have an identity independent from the exarch. So if an exarch wanted changes he could arrange to have them made without any resistance from the shrine itself.

So, I don't think you'd have an exarch wandering around looking for a new home after getting evicted. This ties back to the psychic organism idea. If there isn't a vacant shrine, no one becomes a new exarch. New shrines would get built in advance because a Phoenix Lord will show up and tell the leadership that one is coming and request a new shrine be built. Then once the shrine is built, the new exarch will feel the call, go to the vacant shrine and get trained by the Lord becoming the first of that line.

Chaospling wrote:
I couldn't find anything about Exarchs in the 7th and 8th edition codices, but in 6th edition codex, it states that "... his spirit mingles with those Eldar who have borne it since the shrine's inception. It is the presence of the spirit-pool of raw psychic energy that gives the suit and warrior - for the two are indistinguishable - their special warrior powers."

Isn't this the same as it is now or have something happened about this subject since 6th edition?

This is basically how it's been since third edition. I found the same blurb in the 7th ed book. I think it's in a section about aspects or shrines. There's no section titled exarchs like the older books had.

Iracundus wrote:
The helmetless Exarch models show that not all Exarchs have merged with the suit.
Phoenix Lords still are animated walking suits. I suppose older Exarchs might get to that point once the spirit pool of energy grows strong enough.

The helmetless heads in the new plastic kits were included to represent ynnari forces. I don't think they gave it much thought beyond that. In Path of the Warrior, when Korlandril becomes Morlaniath he notes that the voices of the other spirits are strongest when he has the helmet on. He's not fully merged with suit, but putting it on the first time is what completed his transition to exarch. The other exarchs are also not fully melded with their suits as shown when they come to visit the returned Morlaniath in their robes. I think this can be interpreted as the suit is the repository for the exarch's spirits. When the physical body fails due to age (like Kenainath) or is killed in battle the spirits remain in the suit waiting for the next warrior to put the suit on. Korlandril was the eighth body to inhabit the Morlaniath suit so it would seem to take many more spirits before the suit can animate itself like a Phoenix Lord. Or maybe, it'll never happen because there can only be one Phoenix Lord for an aspect.

 Arschbombe wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
The helmetless Exarch models show that not all Exarchs have merged with the suit.
Phoenix Lords still are animated walking suits. I suppose older Exarchs might get to that point once the spirit pool of energy grows strong enough.

The helmetless heads in the new plastic kits were included to represent ynnari forces. I don't think they gave it much thought beyond that. In Path of the Warrior, when Korlandril becomes Morlaniath he notes that the voices of the other spirits are strongest when he has the helmet on. He's not fully merged with suit, but putting it on the first time is what completed his transition to exarch. The other exarchs are also not fully melded with their suits as shown when they come to visit the returned Morlaniath in their robes. I think this can be interpreted as the suit is the repository for the exarch's spirits. When the physical body fails due to age (like Kenainath) or is killed in battle the spirits remain in the suit waiting for the next warrior to put the suit on. Korlandril was the eighth body to inhabit the Morlaniath suit so it would seem to take many more spirits before the suit can animate itself like a Phoenix Lord. Or maybe, it'll never happen because there can only be one Phoenix Lord for an aspect.

No, the first helmetless Exarchs came before the Ynnari were introduced. Look up Jes Goodwin's sketches and you will see designs for helmetless Exarchs:

https://www.collecting-citadel-miniatures.com/wiki/index.php/Eldar_(Sketches_and_Concepts)_-_Collectors_Guide


That was 2004 and 2005 from the date on the sketches, and the first helmetless Exarch was in the Dire Avenger box which came out around 4th edition, long predating the Ynnari. If you can find the old Jes Goodwin talk video about it, his rationale was some Exarchs no longer need a physical helmet as symbolic war mask, while their head is protected by force fields that give as much protection as their old helmet.

It just more recently GW has tried saying that some Ynnari take off their helmets. However there is no requirement that they do so, nor is it said that non-Ynnari cannot use that helmetless option.

Not sure merging with the suit ever involved discorporation? Just a merging of spirits/souls?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not sure merging with the suit ever involved discorporation? Just a merging of spirits/souls?

Actually it did. The bit about merging with the suit said that the suit would be found without a body inside, as it would have since merged with the suit.

Phoenix Lords are like that. Gav Thorpe has written Karandras both in a WD article and in his Path novels as being severely, even "mortally", wounded. Through the gaping gash in the armor is seen a swirling galaxy of stars, basically the spirit pool of all those that have previously worn the suit, but no physical body.

More of my headcanon: I took the withering away inside the suit thing to be something that happens if you stay inside the armor non-stop long enough. Almost like plant roots digging in and siphoning out energy. Getting out of the armor might "tear up the roots" so to speak thus preventing complete physical subsumption. So exarchs whose bodies have been "eaten" are the ones who just haven't bothered to take their helmets off in a while. I pictured the suit not being truly empty but just having this husk of an elf inside that literally crumbles to dust when you damage the suit enough to "kill" the exarch. So by the time you pop off their helmet, the elf mummy has disintegrated. I imagine the vitality of the wearer being used to basically build stronger, more permanent connections between different parts of the suit. So the helmet doesn't fall off because psychic connective tissue has formed along the helmet and neck, for instance. But again, just headcanon.

Chaospling wrote:
Could I bother you for your creativity/knowledge of the Aeldari background?

I'm creating special rules for Autarchs, which will cost 0 points as whatever pros, they'll have, are outweighed by cons. They are there for giving your Autarch personality and a "title".

So what I need is grand titles, which are the names for those special rules.

Here are the titles for Blood Angel Captains to give you an idea of what I'm looking for:
Shield of Baal
Lord of Skyfall
Archangel
Lord Adjudicator
Soulwarden
Orator of the Priesthood
Repulsor of the Flaw
Caller of the Fires
Master of Sacrifice

Well a few quick thoughts:
* There probably aren't a lot of canon titles like that, so we'd mostly be making them up.
* It's hard to come up with titles for rules if we don't know the rules. I could throw out something cool-sounding like "Faolchu's Emissary," but it might not make much sense as a title for a non-falcony autarch, for instance.
* If they cost 0 points because they're not powerful and are just there to add flavor, why make them special rules at all? You could just include a list of cool titles as part of a heirarchy chart or something.
* Just autarchs? I don't think there are a ton of autarchs per craftworld,. And titles among craftworlders seem to usually be tailored to the person based on past deeds rather than a passed-down title. Iyanna Arienelle is the "Angel of Iyanden," for instance, but that seems to be unique to her; not a job title. Ditto Illic NIghtspear.
* Contrary to my last point, look at Nuadhu Fireheart. Pretty sure he has a title like "Master of the Wildhunt" or something due to being the leader of the Wild Riders. This particular title does appear to be passed down.

Iracundus wrote:


No, the first helmetless Exarchs came before the Ynnari were introduced. Look up Jes Goodwin's sketches and you will see designs for helmetless Exarchs:

https://www.collecting-citadel-miniatures.com/wiki/index.php/Eldar_(Sketches_and_Concepts)_-_Collectors_Guide


That was 2004 and 2005 from the date on the sketches, and the first helmetless Exarch was in the Dire Avenger box which came out around 4th edition, long predating the Ynnari. If you can find the old Jes Goodwin talk video about it, his rationale was some Exarchs no longer need a physical helmet as symbolic war mask, while their head is protected by force fields that give as much protection as their old helmet.

Yeah, I forgot about that DA exarch option. Funny that Jes chose the same concept that was used to explain away all the unhelmeted astartes characters.

It just more recently GW has tried saying that some Ynnari take off their helmets. However there is no requirement that they do so, nor is it said that non-Ynnari cannot use that helmetless option.

The connection is there though. Jes made some sketches of exarchs without helmets, but not the warriors. Apart from that one DA head, these exarch designs went unrealized until we got plastic banshees in 2019. When they did finally come there were helmetless options for all of them not just the exarch. This pattern was repeated with the new dark reapers and the warcom article specifically points out the unhelmeted heads as the ynnari option: "For the first time, you’ll also find unhelmeted options for each warrior for use in Ynnari armies." (with the caveat that the article writers are not the arbiters of the lore- they make mistakes) So again I think this is much less about any deep thoughts about how exarchs interface with their suits of armor and much more about a simple visual marker for ynnari armies.

Looking at the sprues, I think it is still only the Exarch that has the helmetless option.

I agree it is just a simple visual shorthand for possible Ynnari. I am just saying that helmetless does not automatically mean Ynnari however as the idea of helmetless Exarchs predates the Ynnari. A Ynnari army can also still use completely helmeted options as well.

Iracundus wrote:
Looking at the sprues, I think it is still only the Exarch that has the helmetless option.

I agree it is just a simple visual shorthand for possible Ynnari. I am just saying that helmetless does not automatically mean Ynnari however as the idea of helmetless Exarchs predates the Ynnari. A Ynnari army can also still use completely helmeted options as well.

You can see the head options for the reapers here. Each warrior has helmet and no helmet options. Exarch has three options: helmet, helmet+hood, and no helmet. It's similar to the banshee kit that has helmet and no helmet for each banshee and then the exarch has 3 helmet options and one no helmet option. One of the banshee exarch options has the pigtails from the sketches you linked to earlier.

 Arschbombe wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
Looking at the sprues, I think it is still only the Exarch that has the helmetless option.

I agree it is just a simple visual shorthand for possible Ynnari. I am just saying that helmetless does not automatically mean Ynnari however as the idea of helmetless Exarchs predates the Ynnari. A Ynnari army can also still use completely helmeted options as well.

You can see the head options for the reapers here. Each warrior has helmet and no helmet options. Exarch has three options: helmet, helmet+hood, and no helmet. It's similar to the banshee kit that has helmet and no helmet for each banshee and then the exarch has 3 helmet options and one no helmet option. One of the banshee exarch options has the pigtails from the sketches you linked to earlier.

I almost said I did not see it but finally saw the rank and file Reaper helmetless option.

Ultimately what the Ynnari need to be is a faction with their own models, and not just a faction that cannibalizes from others.

 Flinty wrote:
Doesn’t even need to be between different craft worlds. If there are multiple shrines to the same aspect on one craft world, they could have different fighting styles. Ultimately, differences would come down to a few archetypes I think under something like the following categories:
- things bigger/smaller than the eldar
- multiple/single targets
- heavy/light armour
- fast/slow things

The sl’gsqush’r shrine of Alaitloc being famous for excelling against multiple small slow targets with no armour

It would be interesting to create a whole Codex dedicated to a single Warrior Aspect.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Well a few quick thoughts:
* There probably aren't a lot of canon titles like that, so we'd mostly be making them up.
* It's hard to come up with titles for rules if we don't know the rules. I could throw out something cool-sounding like "Faolchu's Emissary," but it might not make much sense as a title for a non-falcony autarch, for instance.
* If they cost 0 points because they're not powerful and are just there to add flavor, why make them special rules at all? You could just include a list of cool titles as part of a heirarchy chart or something.
* Just autarchs? I don't think there are a ton of autarchs per craftworld,. And titles among craftworlders seem to usually be tailored to the person based on past deeds rather than a passed-down title. Iyanna Arienelle is the "Angel of Iyanden," for instance, but that seems to be unique to her; not a job title. Ditto Illic NIghtspear.
* Contrary to my last point, look at Nuadhu Fireheart. Pretty sure he has a title like "Master of the Wildhunt" or something due to being the leader of the Wild Riders. This particular title does appear to be passed down.

Well it's perfectly alright to make cool-sounding titles yourself. It's not a job title given because of rank or hierarchy, it's a title/name which is earned because of their personality, deeds and achievements. I will write the rules based on the titles.

The 0 point cost is not because they are not powerful, but because there are pros and cons, when taking the special rule. Could be that a characteristic gets a bonus, but another gets a penalty.

My mistake.

Chaospling wrote:

Well it's perfectly alright to make cool-sounding titles yourself. It's not a job title given because of rank or hierarchy, it's a title/name which is earned because of their personality, deeds and achievements. I will write the rules based on the titles.

The 0 point cost is not because they are not powerful, but because there are pros and cons, when taking the special rule. Could be that a characteristic gets a bonus, but another gets a penalty.

I've been thinking about this a bit. We don't know much about eldar organization. From what we do know there really isn't any kind of formal structure with slots to be filled like the marines have. The number of autarchs a craftworld might have would vary from time to time depending on who felt drawn to the path of command and how long they stayed on it. I have the impression that the path of command is one that is entered into late in an eldar's life after accumulating experience in a number of other disciplines. It kind of feels like it would be their last path, but that is probably a human projection because most of our leaders are old people. Maybe an autarch could retire after some time to take up other pursuits towards the end of their life, but I suspect they don't.

Anyway, we don't know how many autarchs a typical craftworld might have and whether they have any kind of specializations like mass surface battles, covert actions, fleet actions, sieges, defense etc. They might have an autarch who is a fleet admiral like Yriel, for example. What title would he have and how could you make it relevant to the tabletop? Eldar don't do dropships or drop pods. Reinforcements come from the webway. So the obvious route of making his title influence friendly reserves is out. What about interfering with enemy reserves? Promising, but much too powerful for a 0 point bit of flavor I think.

One idea that keeps coming to mind is a title of Hidden Hand. This autarch specializes in clandestine operations, infiltrations, assassinations, sabotage etc. I don't know much about 9th edition rules so I'm weak on how to implement this in a neutral way. Perhaps he can increase the power level of units kept in reserve for a given CP cost?

I can totally see a gung-ho young Eldar of barely a century or so choosing the warrior’s path as their very first and their parent’s despairing that their precious gift was going to become an exarch before their third century. Meanwhile, kiddo has a Plan; learn the best three aspects (because of course they have an Opinion on that. Teenagers) then go Outcast for a decade or three to see the wider galaxy. Come back and make moody Wraithbone art of the horrors of the Imperium/Orks/whatever then jump into the path of command because there’s no way those old fogies have had a new thought in the last millennium and they totally need some fresh ideas to kick mon’keigh posterior.

Chaospling wrote:
The 0 point cost is not because they are not powerful, but because there are pros and cons, when taking the special rule. Could be that a characteristic gets a bonus, but another gets a penalty.

Friendly game design reminder that penalties in stats that you weren't using aren't real drawbacks. So if I have an autarch that I intend to keep in the backfield buffing dark reapers, penalties to things like WS, Wounds, and Attacks are kind of "fake" drawbacks. Especially if you still have the default version of the autarch around as an option; power armor librarians aren't made worse by the option to take a terminator librarian. Just something to keep in mind while you come up with your rules.

Arschbombe wrote:Maybe an autarch could retire after some time to take up other pursuits towards the end of their life, but I suspect they don't.

Well, as discussed earlier in the thread, autarchs aren't trapped on their path, so the option to leave it must still exist. And iirc, Yriel technically isn't an autarch any longer. Technically.

Eldar don't do dropships or drop pods. Reinforcements come from the webway.

Pretty sure eldar use wave serpents and falcons as "dropships". Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that either the tanks were void capable or that the carrier spacecraft they use are capable of dipping into a planet's atmosphere to release the grav tanks into the sky. Thus you get things like the "cloudstrike" rule. I'm pretty sure one of the (out of print?) FW flyers was also a dropship. If the eldar didn't have void-to-planet transportation, they wouldn't be able to land forces on planets without active webway portals.

Mr_Rose wrote:I can totally see a gung-ho young Eldar o P.S. barely a century or so choosing the warrior’s path as their very first and their parent’s despairing that their precious gift was going to become an exarch before their third century. Meanwhile, kiddo has a Plan; learn the best three aspects (because of course they have an Opinion on that. Teenagers) then go Outcast for a decade or three to see the wider galaxy. Come back and make moody Wraithbone art of the horrors of the Imperium/Orks/whatever then jump into the path of command because there’s no way those old fogies have had a new thought in the last millennium and they totally need some fresh ideas to kick mon’keigh posterior.

Could totally see an eldar having that sort of plan, sure. But I get the impression that changing paths is more about feeling a "calling" than plotting out the perfect life or resume.

Eldar tanks can fly and drop from orbit. But they're not fast enough to protect themselves so wouldn't do it often.

The main drop ship for the eldar is the Vampire Raider.