Switch Theme:

The 2nd Rate Soldiers  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ua
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 Hellebore wrote:

Yeah that's Gav Thorpe's personal retcon hobby horse that exarchs have bodies.... They are absorbed by their armour the older they get. Phoenix lords aren't unique they are just the oldest. Exarchs don't retire, death retires them. They are obsessed with fighting, they literally can't stop doing it. Thorpe writing them like teachers that retire is the dumbest gak I've ever seen and just another reason why I hate that GW decided he should be the one that writes them...


I don't have a problem with Exarchs not being absorbed by their armor. I think your ire is misplaced. Priestly wrote the 2nd edition book. Gav wrote the two from 3rd. I can't find a reference to this subject in either of those. Phil Kelly wrote the 4th edition book and that does say that exarchs don the armor with spirits of the previous exarchs and says nothing about being absorbed. Phil also wrote the 6th edition book which repeats almost verbatim the text from 4th.

Anyway, Kenainath doesn't really retire. His body dies before the battle. He just hands off his warriors to Hidden Death before he dies because he can no longer lead them.

PotW pg337.

Kenainath took off his helmet and placed it on the top of its stand. His face was emaciated, his eyes sunken and dull, his dry skin clinging to the sharp bones of his cheeks.

"I cannot lead them, I will not see this battle, my time here is short." Kenainath's voice was barely a whisper. "This body is old, the time of its end draws close, and will pass away. No other comes here. The Deadly Shadow will sleep waiting for rebirth."

"It is a cruel ending, one the eve of battle, one more glorious war," replied Morlaniath

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





Page 11 of the 2nd ed codex under Exarchs.

Very specific. And central to the unique nature of Exarchs and what a Phoenix Lord is. Similar to how the exarch of seers, farseers, turn to crystal. They are so obsessed with their path that their body is consumed by it.
[Thumb - exarchs.PNG]


   
Made in ua
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

Not sure why you posted that. I have the 2nd edition codex. I know the lore changed. I don't think it was Gav that changed it. I think it was Phil.

In any case, lots of stuff changed from 2nd to 3rd and later editions. Can we get Warlock Masters back, please? I would love to have had a WS6 BS6 S4 T5 3W warlock with initiative 8(!) running around smiting things in 5th.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





You said:

I think your ire is misplaced. Priestly wrote the 2nd edition book. Gav wrote the two from 3rd. I can't find a reference to this subject in either of those.

That's the reference in the 2nd ed book.

   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Yes, that's 2nd edition. It seems though that from 3rd edition on that has been retconned so that now only the Phoenix Lords fully absorb wearers into their armor, while retaining the personality of the original, while Exarchs may have a communal spirit pool, they still are flesh and blood (as also evidenced by their open helmet heads in the model sprues). Exarchs now seem to be more like possessed Eldar, with the souls of all the former Exarchs mingling with the current wearer of the armor. Maybe the very oldest Exarchs still absorb but GW has not portrayed that recently, and probably by that time the Exarch might as well be a Phoenix Lord, with the original soul becoming dominant.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/06/26 04:01:33


 
   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 Hellebore wrote:
You said:

I think your ire is misplaced. Priestly wrote the 2nd edition book. Gav wrote the two from 3rd. I can't find a reference to this subject in either of those.

That's the reference in the 2nd ed book.


I meant the two that Gav wrote in 3rd, Codex Eldar and Codex Craftworld Eldar. You blamed the retcon on Gav. I can't find where he did it. I can find the change in the 4th edition codex by Phil.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





For me, the bare headed exarch concept is still conducive with the eaten by your armour exarch - it doesn't happen immediately. It takes time. The oldest exarchs are just suits powered by sheer will and the souls of the dead. But younger exarchs are still mortal and have their souls. It takes time for them to be subsumed.

I have no problem with exarchs having bodies in part, but it's the complete removal of that sacrificing of the body to the path and being utterly consumed to war that really irk me, because it was a key aspect of the exarch identity and showed just how damned they were. Eldar feared them and now they're just dudes that get old and stop leading shrines?

Gav's book is the only time we see that concept appear and I hate it. It's makes less sense than a dreadnought deciding to give up.

He was also the one that tried to retcon the sacrifice to the avatar into an exarch - and that only exarchs can take up the mantle of the phoenix lord. It seems obvious these ideas required the exarchs stop being walking suits.

But it ignores the key thematic elements to those sacrifices in favour of 'exarch levels up' - the avatar takes the young king in a clearly virginal type sacrifice. Exarchs are his priests they are not the virgins. Similarly the phoenix lords require a soul to reignite them, it's not about the need for someone from their shrine to do it, as the first soul completely dominates whichever soul puts the suit on.


GW have since gone back to the original aspect warrior as young king and dropped the dumb Exarch as young King that Thorpe introduced.

I can only hope they do the same for these lame ass exarchs.





This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/06/26 23:15:17


   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 Hellebore wrote:
For me, the bare headed exarch concept is still conducive with the eaten by your armour exarch - it doesn't happen immediately. It takes time. The oldest exarchs are just suits powered by sheer will and the souls of the dead. But younger exarchs are still mortal and have their souls. It takes time for them to be subsumed.


Except we know that the bare headed exarch and warriors are there solely to be a visual marker for the ynnari. Prior to the ynnari appearance there were very few bare headed eldar models, just a few rangers here and there and the first plastic guardian kit from 1999.

Then in 2006, the 4th edition codex came out and along side it was the plastic dire avenger kit that included a bare head exarch option. And wouldn't you know it, that was the edition where the exarch changed from being an empty suit to a guy in a suit. This follows what we know about how models drive the fluff and then rules. So it probably wasn't even Phil Kelly's idea. It probably goes back to some Jes Goodwin sketches.


He was also the one that tried to retcon the sacrifice to the avatar into an exarch - and that only exarchs can take up the mantle of the phoenix lord. It seems obvious these ideas required the exarchs stop being walking suits.


I don't recall that only Exarchs can reanimate a Phoenix Lord. I know that's what happened in Path of the Warrior , but I don't think it was ever said that was the only way.


But it ignores the key thematic elements to those sacrifices in favour of 'exarch levels up' - the avatar takes the young king in a clearly virginal type sacrifice. Exarchs are his priests they are not the virgins. Similarly the phoenix lords require a soul to reignite them, it's not about the need for someone from their shrine to do it, as the first soul completely dominates whichever soul puts the suit on.


GW have since gone back to the original aspect warrior as young king and dropped the dumb Exarch as young King that Thorpe introduced.


The only issues I have with the Exarchs as sacrifices are mechanical ones. Like does that sacrifice result in the loss of all the spirits or just the one from the body of the current occupant? All but the original so that the shrine can be reactivated in the future? If it takes all of them, then they're sacrificing a shrine each time they rouse the Avatar. What do they then do with that armor?


I can only hope they do the same for these lame ass exarchs.


Exarchs are never going back to 2nd edition in either fluff or rules. It is known.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Arschbombe wrote:
 Hellebore wrote:
For me, the bare headed exarch concept is still conducive with the eaten by your armour exarch - it doesn't happen immediately. It takes time. The oldest exarchs are just suits powered by sheer will and the souls of the dead. But younger exarchs are still mortal and have their souls. It takes time for them to be subsumed.


Except we know that the bare headed exarch and warriors are there solely to be a visual marker for the ynnari. Prior to the ynnari appearance there were very few bare headed eldar models, just a few rangers here and there and the first plastic guardian kit from 1999.

Then in 2006, the 4th edition codex came out and along side it was the plastic dire avenger kit that included a bare head exarch option. And wouldn't you know it, that was the edition where the exarch changed from being an empty suit to a guy in a suit. This follows what we know about how models drive the fluff and then rules. So it probably wasn't even Phil Kelly's idea. It probably goes back to some Jes Goodwin sketches.



The bare headed Exarchs come from Jes Goodwin's sketchbooks, which were published by Black Library and which I have copies of. These came before the Ynnari. It was only afterwards that GW chose to say that Ynnari often choose to have their helmets off (not just the Exarchs but also Aspect Warriors), however it doesn't say that this practice is exclusive to the Ynnari. It was GW being lazy and not having Ynnari models and trying to find someway for people to visually distinguish between Ynnari and non-Ynnari.


The only issues I have with the Exarchs as sacrifices are mechanical ones. Like does that sacrifice result in the loss of all the spirits or just the one from the body of the current occupant? All but the original so that the shrine can be reactivated in the future? If it takes all of them, then they're sacrificing a shrine each time they rouse the Avatar. What do they then do with that armor?


According to Gav Thorpe's Path novels, yes it means the sacrifice of all the souls and the death of the shrine effectively, an idea which I don't like.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/06/27 23:18:32


 
   
Made in ua
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

Iracundus wrote:


The bare headed Exarchs come from Jes Goodwin's sketchbooks, which were published by Black Library and which I have copies of. These came before the Ynnari. It was only afterwards that GW chose to say that Ynnari often choose to have their helmets off (not just the Exarchs but also Aspect Warriors), however it doesn't say that this practice is exclusive to the Ynnari. It was GW being lazy and not having Ynnari models and trying to find someway for people to visually distinguish between Ynnari and non-Ynnari.


I get that. The usual pipeline seems to be design>model>fluff>rules. So early on, even with the sketch there was no bare headed model so there was no contradiction. Then in the early 2000s a sculptor made the helmetless DA Exarch and the fluff needed to change. So it did. And now with the ynnari enabled aspect kits out, there's no going back.


According to Gav Thorpe's Path novels, yes it means the sacrifice of all the souls and the death of the shrine effectively, an idea which I don't like.


I am torn. It seems wasteful and inefficient. But maybe it makes sense from the eldar perspective. The exarch is already lost so sacrificing him is not actually that much of a sacrifice, whereas a new young aspect warrior still has the potential to walk other paths and eventually pass into the infinity circuit. That makes it more costly to their eyes.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Arschbombe wrote:
Iracundus wrote:


The bare headed Exarchs come from Jes Goodwin's sketchbooks, which were published by Black Library and which I have copies of. These came before the Ynnari. It was only afterwards that GW chose to say that Ynnari often choose to have their helmets off (not just the Exarchs but also Aspect Warriors), however it doesn't say that this practice is exclusive to the Ynnari. It was GW being lazy and not having Ynnari models and trying to find someway for people to visually distinguish between Ynnari and non-Ynnari.


I get that. The usual pipeline seems to be design>model>fluff>rules. So early on, even with the sketch there was no bare headed model so there was no contradiction. Then in the early 2000s a sculptor made the helmetless DA Exarch and the fluff needed to change. So it did. And now with the ynnari enabled aspect kits out, there's no going back.


Actually the original reason according to Jes Goodwin for the helmetless model was to show the Exarch could assume their psychological war mask (indeed, they never take it off) without the need for a physical mask/helmet.


According to Gav Thorpe's Path novels, yes it means the sacrifice of all the souls and the death of the shrine effectively, an idea which I don't like.


I am torn. It seems wasteful and inefficient. But maybe it makes sense from the eldar perspective. The exarch is already lost so sacrificing him is not actually that much of a sacrifice, whereas a new young aspect warrior still has the potential to walk other paths and eventually pass into the infinity circuit. That makes it more costly to their eyes.


It means shrines die out and there is no clear method for founding new shrines detailed in the novel. Again, I am not a fan of this.

For thematic reasons, the aspect warrior as Young King sacrifice makes more sense. It is a re-enactment of the battle of Eldanesh against Khaine. Eldanesh was the Adam-like first Eldar, and the battle with Khaine is symbolically a struggle for the Eldar soul, a battle that was fought in the first place because Eldanesh rejected Khaine's offer of putting aside his enmity towards the Eldar in return for Eldanesh (and all the Eldar) pledging themselves to Khaine body and soul.
   
Made in kw
Dakka Veteran




Iracundus wrote:
 Arschbombe wrote:
Iracundus wrote:


The bare headed Exarchs come from Jes Goodwin's sketchbooks, which were published by Black Library and which I have copies of. These came before the Ynnari. It was only afterwards that GW chose to say that Ynnari often choose to have their helmets off (not just the Exarchs but also Aspect Warriors), however it doesn't say that this practice is exclusive to the Ynnari. It was GW being lazy and not having Ynnari models and trying to find someway for people to visually distinguish between Ynnari and non-Ynnari.


I get that. The usual pipeline seems to be design>model>fluff>rules. So early on, even with the sketch there was no bare headed model so there was no contradiction. Then in the early 2000s a sculptor made the helmetless DA Exarch and the fluff needed to change. So it did. And now with the ynnari enabled aspect kits out, there's no going back.


Actually the original reason according to Jes Goodwin for the helmetless model was to show the Exarch could assume their psychological war mask (indeed, they never take it off) without the need for a physical mask/helmet.


This is backed up by a lore vignette in WD when the 3rd Ed codex came out. It is again a scorpion exarch dying to restore Kharandras, but the interesting bit is it starts with the Exarch alone in his shrine when it’s Webway gate fires up for a visitor and it has him get ready.
Pointedly he annoints himself with blood as part of the ritual that ends with aspect warriors putting their war masks on with their helmets, but he doesn’t need the helmet to have the mask on.
   
Made in ua
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

Lord Zarkov wrote:

This is backed up by a lore vignette in WD when the 3rd Ed codex came out. It is again a scorpion exarch dying to restore Kharandras, but the interesting bit is it starts with the Exarch alone in his shrine when it’s Webway gate fires up for a visitor and it has him get ready.
Pointedly he annoints himself with blood as part of the ritual that ends with aspect warriors putting their war masks on with their helmets, but he doesn’t need the helmet to have the mask on.


Interesting. I have that issue and never read that story before. Reading it now, what stands out to me is the war mask. It was my understanding that the inability to remove the war mask it what made one exarch. Here we have the exarch putting the war mask back on. How did he get it off in the first place? The 4th edition codex doesn't say explicitly that this is the case though. It says :

CE pg 10.

Aspect warriors learn how to control their warrior-selves, putting on and casting aside their blood-hungry persona as they don or discard their ritual costumes. An Aspect Warrior who becomes an Exarch loses this ability to dissociate himself.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Arschbombe wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:

This is backed up by a lore vignette in WD when the 3rd Ed codex came out. It is again a scorpion exarch dying to restore Kharandras, but the interesting bit is it starts with the Exarch alone in his shrine when it’s Webway gate fires up for a visitor and it has him get ready.
Pointedly he annoints himself with blood as part of the ritual that ends with aspect warriors putting their war masks on with their helmets, but he doesn’t need the helmet to have the mask on.


Interesting. I have that issue and never read that story before. Reading it now, what stands out to me is the war mask. It was my understanding that the inability to remove the war mask it what made one exarch. Here we have the exarch putting the war mask back on. How did he get it off in the first place?


I would say the war mask never comes off, and he no longer needs any physical helmet or mask, but goes through the blood ritual because it's ritual and part of the tradition.
   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

Iracundus wrote:

I would say the war mask never comes off, and he no longer needs any physical helmet or mask, but goes through the blood ritual because it's ritual and part of the tradition.


That's fair.

The other part of that issue of WD that I find interesting is Gav's take on the role of the Guardians. He states:

First of all, the army list in Codex Eldar is intended to represent an average Craftworld's army. By average, I mean that the bulk of its fighting forces is made up of Guardians and their vehicles, with some Aspect Warriors to support them. I've heard people argue that surely the Aspect Warriors would be the Craftworld's first choice of fighters, backed up by the Guardians. Well, in my view it comes down to simple numbers. Even in the largest of Craftworlds there are relatively few Eldar actually on the Path of the Warrior at any one time. The vast bulk of Eldar will be Guardians, thus it follows that the greatest proportion of their army will be made up of Guardians. In fact, with Dire Avengers in the Troops section, people can have an all-Aspect Warrior army is they so desire. That said, the army has been designed and balanced with the idea in mind that a fair number of Guardians, jetbikes, Falcons, and so on will be present.


So there it is. It always bothered me that Guardians seemed necessary and all because of Gav back in 3rd.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Arschbombe wrote:


The other part of that issue of WD that I find interesting is Gav's take on the role of the Guardians. He states:

First of all, the army list in Codex Eldar is intended to represent an average Craftworld's army. By average, I mean that the bulk of its fighting forces is made up of Guardians and their vehicles, with some Aspect Warriors to support them. I've heard people argue that surely the Aspect Warriors would be the Craftworld's first choice of fighters, backed up by the Guardians. Well, in my view it comes down to simple numbers. Even in the largest of Craftworlds there are relatively few Eldar actually on the Path of the Warrior at any one time. The vast bulk of Eldar will be Guardians, thus it follows that the greatest proportion of their army will be made up of Guardians. In fact, with Dire Avengers in the Troops section, people can have an all-Aspect Warrior army is they so desire. That said, the army has been designed and balanced with the idea in mind that a fair number of Guardians, jetbikes, Falcons, and so on will be present.


So there it is. It always bothered me that Guardians seemed necessary and all because of Gav back in 3rd.


It's not Gav. From Epic 2nd edition, the force construction was selecting Company cards and then adding on specialist detachments to them. All the Company cards for Eldar were Guardian based, even the vehicle ones like the Tempest super-heavy grav tank. Aspect Warriors were the elite detachments. For a 40k scale game though, I could see all Aspect forces being easily possible especially if escorting a VIP like a Farseer or Autarch.

Epic 2nd edition was also where the first distinctions between the big Craftworlds were made as each major Craftworld got a free bonus detachment card. Biel-Tan got a free Dire Avengers detachment. Saim-Hann got some Guardian Jetbikes. Alaitoc got Rangers. Ulthwe got some more Guardian infantry. Iyanden got Wraithguard.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2025/06/30 07:24:29


 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





This is because Eldar fight like space marines - very selective of the battlefield and conditions. Making strikes at extremely valuable targets with elite forces before leaving. They don't fight pitched battles.

And so they only deploy elite forces to perform their strikes.

The only time guardians appear is when they are caught in or rarely choose, a pitched battle. They are the reservists brought up when things are fubar.

40k however treats every game like it's a pitched battle, so you see many armies fighting in ways not representative of their normal methodology.




   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






And at least they’re not running around with Lasguns anymore!

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Hey look! It’s my 2025 Hobby Log/Blog/Project/Whatevs 
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And at least they’re not running around with Lasguns anymore!


Lasguns at least had range…

Not that I’m still bitter about 3rds shuriken cat nerf. Hey, we’re a dying race, lets give our militia SMGs so they need to be in charge range of the galaxy’s horrors to fight…

/bitter.

   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 Nevelon wrote:

Not that I’m still bitter about 3rds shuriken cat nerf. Hey, we’re a dying race, lets give our militia SMGs so they need to be in charge range of the galaxy’s horrors to fight…

/bitter.


I know, right. In Gav's piece he talks about Guardians being a good deal. He says that players who just take the squads of 5 with a platform to hide in the backfield are doing it wrong. Guardians should be squads of 10 plus platform and Warlock. He says his squads built this way can take out elite targets through weight of fire.

Warlocks are another area that bugs me. Why do they only go with Guardians, in their own councils or as retinues for Farseers? Why can't I have one with some Dire Avengers?

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






^Honestly I think I agree with Gav there. The Shuriken Catapult of 3rd was clearly meant to be "in the mix" because of their Assault category. That and their Heavy Weapons platforms could move and fire.

There was a funny thing aboit their Heavy Weapons though. The 3rd ed book has the Bright Lance as an Assault weapon. In 4th ed it becomes Heavy, and their Shuriken Cannon became Assault. It's a weird flip, and I wonder if that was ever erratad.

But the ability to move, fire, then Assault waa a big deal.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





Having played eldar during 3rd ed, the technical ability to move shoot and assault was only ever good on paper - virtually no enemy unit was worth assaulting with WS3 guardians. I pretty much only did it with dire avengers, but even they dropped dead against tactical marines. 10 guys 20 attacks, 10 hit, 3 wound, 1 failed save. The exarch didn't get enough attacks at S3 to make much of a dent. While the return attacks with a sergeant PF/PW was plenty to rout the unit.

You were better off concentrating fire on the unit within assault range than shooting with one unit and charging it to avoid being assaulted next turn.


When the strategy is 'your guns are so short ranged you're now in danger of being wiped out in a charge next turn so you should charge and lose in combat this turn instead', it's not a strategy at all.

Space marines should have had assault guns and guardians rapid fire. If you gave marines the catapults and guardians the bolter profiles, they would have accomplished their roles far better. But marine players would not want to have such short ranged guns.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/07/02 02:33:38


   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Hellebore wrote:
Having played eldar during 3rd ed, the technical ability to move shoot and assault was only ever good on paper - virtually no enemy unit was worth assaulting with WS3 guardians. I pretty much only did it with dire avengers, but even they dropped dead against tactical marines. 10 guys 20 attacks, 10 hit, 3 wound, 1 failed save. The exarch didn't get enough attacks at S3 to make much of a dent. While the return attacks with a sergeant PF/PW was plenty to rout the unit.

You were better off concentrating fire on the unit within assault range than shooting with one unit and charging it to avoid being assaulted next turn.


When the strategy is 'your guns are so short ranged you're now in danger of being wiped out in a charge next turn so you should charge and lose in combat this turn instead', it's not a strategy at all.

Space marines should have had assault guns and guardians rapid fire. If you gave marines the catapults and guardians the bolter profiles, they would have accomplished their roles far better. But marine players would not want to have such short ranged guns.
I really have to disagree with that. As someone who charged into Orks with Tactical Squads all the time there was absolutely value to getting that first charge (and denying the enemy theirs) even when it put your own troops at risk. And while the Guardians weren't as tough as the Tactical Squad (obviously), their combined Shooting plus CC attacks meant they brought more offensive power to it. Obviously the results will all depend on the strength of each squad involved and whatever supporting assets you bring to soften up the enemy beforehand or also get involved in the assault, but the ability to shoot then Assault was pretty great.

10 Guardians vs 10 Orks (slugga boyz)
Guardians fire with Shuriken Catapults (.5x.5x20)=5 Orks dead
Guardians charge (.5x.333x.89x20)=2.89 Orks dead
Only 2.1 Orks left to swing back. (6.3x.666x.5x666)=1.39 Guardians dead. Guardians win the combat (though I forget the Ld modifiers for CC in 3rd)
9ish Guardians left to 2 Orks (if they didn't get wiped out from Morale). If the Orks go unsupported, the Guardians should clean them up in the next round or two.

If you don't Assault the Orks, the Orks have their 5 guys who
Shoot (5x.333x.666x.666)=.7 Guardians dead
then Charge, Guardians fight first (10x.5x.333x.83)=1.38 Orks dead
Orks fight (14.48x.666x.5x.666)=3.2 Guardians dead. Orks win the fight, 6ish Guardians left to 4 Orks, and it'll be a tough fight from here on out.

The second scenario is also assuming the Orks don't pass their Waagh test since they're a small squad, but there's a 30ish percent chance that they do, and they'd be hitting at the Guardians Initiative at Strength 4 instead.

I know the Guardians ore only S3 and T3 etc. But hitting first still matters and tying stuff up still has great value.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





It was as I said, not worth it. Because these aren't happening in isolation. There's a whole game going on.

What other units in the game are so tactically restricted in their actions that the only option they have is to charge with terrible models against a unit they just shot rather than hold their ground on an objective or some other option.

And they had to start the round 12" or less away from their target to get this ability. Move 6, shoot, assault 6. Fleet happened instead of shooting. The number of games I played trying to use 10 man guardian squads where they fof to get closer, getting shot to pieces before they were even in range made them useless.

Not only did they suck at doing the one thing their guns forced them to do, it was also a highly difficult manoeuvre to pull off because of the range. So you had to survive incoming fire, get within 12" and still the only option was suicidal charging.

It was completely self destructive. I wouldn't have don't it with a 3+ save, let alone a 5+.

If they had the offensive capability to wipe a unit after performing all these actions, then yeah I can see value. But when it's the only option to get any use out of the unit it's laughable.

There's a reason they were only deployed 5 man squads with heavy weapons.


   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Hellebore wrote:

It was completely self destructive. I wouldn't have don't it with a 3+ save, let alone a 5+.

I did it with 3+ save guys all the time with 10-man Tacs, successfully, even though the prevailing wisdom was 5-man Las/Plas teams. And my Tacs couldn't shoot before charging either.

I didn't have to move to the Orks, the Orks came to me. So you get to plink away with your heavy until those troops get close. And because there is a larger battle going on, as you say, the troops in question are sometimes relatively unhurt because the opposing army is trying to deal with other threats.

At sime point you get the option: Keep moving away to stay out of Assault range, doing 1-2 Casualties if you have a weapon like a Scatter Laser, Starcannon or Shuriken Cannon. Or you can dive in and kill 8ish in a turn, and possibly wipe a squad in the process. Post Assault, if you were victorious, you can get the added benefit of consolidating into a new squad, which might mean the end of the Guardians, but denys the enemy movement and might buy time for your other units to launch a counterattack. Or, the Guardian charge is part of a larger counteroffensive and they get to live because you have other units in the mix that keep more Orks off of them.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

My beef with Guardians is more about thematics than effectiveness. I never liked the idea of the citizen's militia being called out for these little 40k battles. Larger scale actions like in Epic? Yeah, ok.

Anyway, since this is the background forum, how does being a Guardian actually work? We know a few things:

- citizen militia (except Ulthwe)
- basic infantry
- wear a war mask
- crew vehicles and artillery
- unit leaders are former aspect warriors

We don't know things like:
- how Guardians get conscripted
- how much training they get
- who trains them
- how often they are called up (1 weekend a month, 2 weeks a year)
- how long they are on the hook for service

From PotW we see something that adds context to these questions. Korlandril was never a Guardian before becoming a Striking Scorpion since he had to be taught how to don the war mask by his Exarch. This means service as Guardian is not universal/automatic, at least on Alaitoc.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





So this was clearer before they messed with the eldar path and background by adding Autarchs*, rather than bringing beatstick exarchs back like they should have been (apparently you're either a lame warrior or a phoenix lord, you can't be anything in between).

*I don't like the concept and implementation of Autarchs, rather than the idea that other paths are available. The Path of the warrior is where the warriors are, the path of command should be intellectual and strategic, not warrior focused like the current implementation. Basically an autarch should be like an imperial guard colonel, providing orders and coordination, not weilding weapons and beatsticking. The exarchs are who do that, you know the ones that aren't interested in training students.


In the 2nd ed codex, it state ALL eldar are trained as guardians and that the squads are led by those that have trod the warrior path and left it. Those eldar form the guardian office corps (that phrase is specifically used in the codex).

So the guardians and their officer corps were not a path related activity per se. They were an extra curricular reservist/national guard style of thing, with their commanders all being 'real' soldiers that have retired/discharged. They are all eldar that have their own path they are following, and the ex aspects teach them how to war mask up and shoot a gun. I believe the current background says storm guardians are all ex aspects, but I can see that still fitting into the previous structure by saying that they are guardian 'veteran' squads.

The black guardians are an anomaly in that they are a standing army, but aren't following the path of the warrior. So either they aren't following any path, or they've got a new black guardian path, or they're still considered to follow whatever path they are on despite never doing it. They are definitely NOT on the path of the warrior.

Because the black guardians are the most common, there aren't many ex aspects on ulthwe, so I expect that the officer corps are all just veteran guardians.


If I were to revise the path of command concept into the more appropriate strategic and leadership role, I'd say that the officer corps of the guardians would be where the initial students start, developing their leadership and tactical acumen. With previous experience of the warrior path like Warlocks, they draw on their martial training to teach basic combat to the civilian population. The autarch would then be the Exarch of that path, fallen to strategy and living only for creating mental wargames in their head (like Queen's Gambit scenes of replaying chess). They would be a round table of strategic savants who spend all their time in virtual wargames fighting one another, treating everything like the actions of battle.

The current autarch beatstick would transition to the original Exarch concept of the Menshad Korum, the hunter in persuit of himself. A warrior lost on the path who is forever chasing themselves across all aspects of Khaine, rather than sticking to a single one. That all aligns far better with the path system and the way that the warrior path is THE method of being an eldar warrior, rather than the autarch just becoming uber special without being on it.






This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/07/03 04:30:02


   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 Hellebore wrote:
So this was clearer before they messed with the eldar path and background by adding Autarchs*, rather than bringing beatstick exarchs back like they should have been (apparently you're either a lame warrior or a phoenix lord, you can't be anything in between).


Yes, it would be cool to have super Exarchs and also master Warlocks


*I don't like the concept and implementation of Autarchs, rather than the idea that other paths are available. The Path of the warrior is where the warriors are, the path of command should be intellectual and strategic, not warrior focused like the current implementation. Basically an autarch should be like an imperial guard colonel, providing orders and coordination, not weilding weapons and beatsticking. The exarchs are who do that, you know the ones that aren't interested in training students.


I like the Autarchs. I like their models. They are shoehorned into being combat mooks because the game just doesn't have command and control mechanics of any depth. When released in 4th, the Master Strategist rule gave Autarchs strategy ratings of 4 (which helped in random mission selection) and +1 to reserve rolls. That's it. An Autarch should be doing things like Eldrad's Divination redeploy mechanic from back then.


In the 2nd ed codex, it state ALL eldar are trained as guardians and that the squads are led by those that have trod the warrior path and left it. Those eldar form the guardian office corps (that phrase is specifically used in the codex).


Second said all. Third said "In times of need, those taught the ways of war form squads of Guardian Defenders." 4th said "...every Eldar is trained and ready to fight as a Gurdian if need be." In 10th that's now "All Asuryani are naturally intelligent and physically capable, and most, even those who have yet to walk the Path of the Warrior, undergo some combat training. Therefore, if called upon to serve as a Guardian, they are already well-versed in the potent weapons of their people."


So the guardians and their officer corps were not a path related activity per se. They were an extra curricular reservist/national guard style of thing, with their commanders all being 'real' soldiers that have retired/discharged. They are all eldar that have their own path they are following, and the ex aspects teach them how to war mask up and shoot a gun. I believe the current background says storm guardians are all ex aspects, but I can see that still fitting into the previous structure by saying that they are guardian 'veteran' squads.


The idea of Storm Guardians being ex-aspects was from 3rd.

So the concept is muddled, like lots of things in 40k. I guess my big beef with Guardians is just as a concept in the big bad Grimdark where the scale and numbers never make sense. The Eldar are the Dying Race TM and their army list for decades has been designed and balanced around this idea of them sending their reserve militia into all the battles. The Farseers are picking and choosing these battles, so why can't they ensure they have actual warriors available for these fights? I don't know, maybe this is part of their Grimdark. Eldar lead idyllic lives as artists, writers, poets, sculptors and at any minute they can get called up to go fight the big bads of the galaxy with their submachineguns. It's supposed to be this big deal when they call upon the ghost warriors. Why isn't it a big deal when Chad the bartender gets sent off to war?



The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Arschbombe wrote:

So the concept is muddled, like lots of things in 40k. I guess my big beef with Guardians is just as a concept in the big bad Grimdark where the scale and numbers never make sense. The Eldar are the Dying Race TM and their army list for decades has been designed and balanced around this idea of them sending their reserve militia into all the battles. The Farseers are picking and choosing these battles, so why can't they ensure they have actual warriors available for these fights? I don't know, maybe this is part of their Grimdark. Eldar lead idyllic lives as artists, writers, poets, sculptors and at any minute they can get called up to go fight the big bads of the galaxy with their submachineguns. It's supposed to be this big deal when they call upon the ghost warriors. Why isn't it a big deal when Chad the bartender gets sent off to war?

It makes a lot of sense that a faction with a small population base isn't fully stocked up on full-time soldiers. All those Guardians might have important non-warrior tasks that they have to do when the Craftworld isn't at war. I think there's also a cultural aspect to it, where being on the path of the warrior for too long is too dangerous, too consuming. There's probably some of their arrogance in it too. "We Eldar are so superior that we don't need to go full warrior to fight the other races". And to be fair, in their ideal situation (which is not a typical 40k battle) they can usually fly circles around their opponent in their high-tech grav-tanks, and only deploy their militia infantry when the battle's already been decided.

To my knowledge, Guardians pilot nearly every war machine the Eldar have with few exceptions. The citizen militia isn't just the infantry with their Shuriken Catapults. They're also the tank squadrons, the artillery, the reconnaissance units and direct fire support.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/07/04 23:45:04


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Insectum7 wrote:
 Arschbombe wrote:

So the concept is muddled, like lots of things in 40k. I guess my big beef with Guardians is just as a concept in the big bad Grimdark where the scale and numbers never make sense. The Eldar are the Dying Race TM and their army list for decades has been designed and balanced around this idea of them sending their reserve militia into all the battles. The Farseers are picking and choosing these battles, so why can't they ensure they have actual warriors available for these fights? I don't know, maybe this is part of their Grimdark. Eldar lead idyllic lives as artists, writers, poets, sculptors and at any minute they can get called up to go fight the big bads of the galaxy with their submachineguns. It's supposed to be this big deal when they call upon the ghost warriors. Why isn't it a big deal when Chad the bartender gets sent off to war?

It makes a lot of sense that a faction with a small population base isn't fully stocked up on full-time soldiers. All those Guardians might have important non-warrior tasks that they have to do when the Craftworld isn't at war. I think there's also a cultural aspect to it, where being on the path of the warrior for too long is too dangerous, too consuming. There's probably some of their arrogance in it too. "We Eldar are so superior that we don't need to go full warrior to fight the other races". And to be fair, in their ideal situation (which is not a typical 40k battle) they can usually fly circles around their opponent in their high-tech grav-tanks, and only deploy their militia infantry when the battle's already been decided.

To my knowledge, Guardians pilot nearly every war machine the Eldar have with few exceptions. The citizen militia isn't just the infantry with their Shuriken Catapults. They're also the tank squadrons, the artillery, the reconnaissance units and direct fire support.


Given that we have the Crimson Hunters, I am now waiting for the Tank driver/pilot Aspect
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Background
Go to: