Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I always thought that the soul trap should be in addition to the pistol options, not instead of. Choose your pistol, choose your CCW, choose a piece of wargear.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I always thought that the soul trap should be in addition to the pistol options, not instead of. Choose your pistol, choose your CCW, choose a piece of wargear.

Oh for sure. And in past editions, I'm almost positive it was. Making it a pistol swap is, I suspect, the result of GW opting to model it as an object the archon is holding. And possibly an attempt to start creeping towards giving us options even if those options probably shouldn't actually be competing with eachother?

 ingtaer wrote:
Agreed, take that tangent to its own thread and quit derailing this one.

With respect I'd say "are splinter weapons effective enough into terminators for anti-infantry weapons when an intercessor outperforms them" is entirely on topic.

Probably, Dudeface, but I think the mods are saying that trying to define what does and doesn't count as a terminator equivalent for purposes of that discussion is tangential.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Probably, Dudeface, but I think the mods are saying that trying to define what does and doesn't count as a terminator equivalent for purposes of that discussion is tangential.

Possibly, but in that case yes, splinter weapons do need a buff vs TEQ, I just can't see how beyond a unilateral increase in AP, or some method of showing how toxins impact a model beyond the armour itself. Maybe some form of hit or movement impact as a result of the toxins impacting the surviving model? It doesn't over punish 1w models then at least.

I don’t agree. Terminators are meant to be tough. Yes, any armour is going to have weak points, but that’s all relative.

If my most heavily armoured areas are equivalent to say, 6” of steel? My thinner, more vulnerable areas could still be the equivalent of 3” of steel. So even on the thinnest area, small arms still have basically no chance of hurting me. And that’s what Terminator armour has always been. A reliable answer to small arms.

Just…let Terminators be a difficult opponent.

Instead, I think DE need to lean more into the kidnapping angle. Let some weapons reflect they want you alive, first and foremost. Injured if needs be, but uninjured being particularly prized. Once your in their grasp? They can winkle you out your tin can further down the road.

I’m thinking, just to use existent 40K tech? Stasis fields, tangle nets (maybe with EMP tech to switch off fancier armours), gravity traps etc.

That way, any would-be victims who can’t be rapidly or reliably subdued by poison (which needn’t always be deadly!) can be nabbed via other means.

If we subtlety reimagine the Shredder? We could end up with a mono-filament weapon that forces the foe to remain stationary lest they get julliened. Haywire weapons which shutdown Power Armour etc.

Basically, not everything has to be something that makes other things go splat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashkerly. Mentioning kidnapping has me curious about another toy they could have.

We know Battleshock partially represents squad members losing their nerve rather than being slain, yes? At least that’s my understanding.

How about some VP Mechanism, tied to the number of models lost to Battleshock, representing victims taken back to Commoragh.

Let it be something tallied at the end of the game, representing that the Dark Eldar come for more than just breaking your stuff. The Raids are there to gather new slaves. And so even if the raiding force takes a mauling? Provided enough slaves are gathered, it can still be a victory.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I don’t agree. Terminators are meant to be tough. Yes, any armour is going to have weak points, but that’s all relative.

If my most heavily armoured areas are equivalent to say, 6” of steel? My thinner, more vulnerable areas could still be the equivalent of 3” of steel. So even on the thinnest area, small arms still have basically no chance of hurting me. And that’s what Terminator armour has always been. A reliable answer to small arms.

Just…let Terminators be a difficult opponent.

Instead, I think DE need to lean more into the kidnapping angle. Let some weapons reflect they want you alive, first and foremost. Injured if needs be, but uninjured being particularly prized. Once your in their grasp? They can winkle you out your tin can further down the road.

I’m thinking, just to use existent 40K tech? Stasis fields, tangle nets (maybe with EMP tech to switch off fancier armours), gravity traps etc.

That way, any would-be victims who can’t be rapidly or reliably subdued by poison (which needn’t always be deadly!) can be nabbed via other means.

If we subtlety reimagine the Shredder? We could end up with a mono-filament weapon that forces the foe to remain stationary lest they get julliened. Haywire weapons which shutdown Power Armour etc.

Basically, not everything has to be something that makes other things go splat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashkerly. Mentioning kidnapping has me curious about another toy they could have.

We know Battleshock partially represents squad members losing their nerve rather than being slain, yes? At least that’s my understanding.

How about some VP Mechanism, tied to the number of models lost to Battleshock, representing victims taken back to Commoragh.

Let it be something tallied at the end of the game, representing that the Dark Eldar come for more than just breaking your stuff. The Raids are there to gather new slaves. And so even if the raiding force takes a mauling? Provided enough slaves are gathered, it can still be a victory.

I think in terms of game balance they still need something. If you've suffered an internal wound from a neurotoxin, I aren't sure what the layers of steel offer.

Ofc the other option is likely more sensible and that's stop intercessors spamming 40 shots a unit.

Going through other half-remembered rules of old. And not just from 40K.

BFG wise, Dark Eldar ships had mimic drives. I do have the relevant book upstairs but can’t be arsed to go check. But it essentially messed with your enemy in the early game.

Something like that could be adopted into 40K. A rule or equipment option which mitigates first turn shooting. Give the DE player a solid chance at the first strike.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I don’t agree. Terminators are meant to be tough. Yes, any armour is going to have weak points, but that’s all relative.

If my most heavily armoured areas are equivalent to say, 6” of steel? My thinner, more vulnerable areas could still be the equivalent of 3” of steel. So even on the thinnest area, small arms still have basically no chance of hurting me. And that’s what Terminator armour has always been. A reliable answer to small arms.

Just…let Terminators be a difficult opponent.

Instead, I think DE need to lean more into the kidnapping angle. Let some weapons reflect they want you alive, first and foremost. Injured if needs be, but uninjured being particularly prized. Once your in their grasp? They can winkle you out your tin can further down the road.

I’m thinking, just to use existent 40K tech? Stasis fields, tangle nets (maybe with EMP tech to switch off fancier armours), gravity traps etc.

That way, any would-be victims who can’t be rapidly or reliably subdued by poison (which needn’t always be deadly!) can be nabbed via other means.

If we subtlety reimagine the Shredder? We could end up with a mono-filament weapon that forces the foe to remain stationary lest they get julliened. Haywire weapons which shutdown Power Armour etc.

Basically, not everything has to be something that makes other things go splat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashkerly. Mentioning kidnapping has me curious about another toy they could have.

We know Battleshock partially represents squad members losing their nerve rather than being slain, yes? At least that’s my understanding.

How about some VP Mechanism, tied to the number of models lost to Battleshock, representing victims taken back to Commoragh.

Let it be something tallied at the end of the game, representing that the Dark Eldar come for more than just breaking your stuff. The Raids are there to gather new slaves. And so even if the raiding force takes a mauling? Provided enough slaves are gathered, it can still be a victory.

We used to have most of that. Haywire grenades used to be available to wyches in general, most generic characters, and I *think* most sergeant types. And of course, said haywire used to be about shutting tanks down rather than making them go boom. We used to have shardnets that kept enemies from falling back. The ghost of which now exists in the wyches' No Escape rule. We used to have chain snare upgrades for our vehicles representing the chains snagging people and leaving them dangling beneath the hull as they were hauled around the battlefield. Hellions used to be able to yoink characters out of squads with stun claws...

The slave taking mechanic also existed back in the 3rd edition book. It was cool, but any kind of "bonus VP" mechanic is hard to introduce into modern 40k because there isn't really a set constant for how many points you should expect to score. A Matched Play mission might have you aiming for 100 VP while a Crusade mission or the mission at the end of the core rules document might have you maxing out at only a handful of points. So if I can reliably score +5 VP from taking captives, that might be a cute little drop in the bucket or it might double my total score depending on what kind of mission I'm playing.

It probably works better as some sort of Crusade mechanic or something. Do our current crusade rules do anything like that? I don't think I've checked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Going through other half-remembered rules of old. And not just from 40K.

BFG wise, Dark Eldar ships had mimic drives. I do have the relevant book upstairs but can’t be arsed to go check. But it essentially messed with your enemy in the early game.

Something like that could be adopted into 40K. A rule or equipment option which mitigates first turn shooting. Give the DE player a solid chance at the first strike.

Kind of like ye olde Night Fighting rules or Night Shields. :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think in terms of game balance they still need something. If you've suffered an internal wound from a neurotoxin, I aren't sure what the layers of steel offer.

Ofc the other option is likely more sensible and that's stop intercessors spamming 40 shots a unit.

Yeah. I think the original point on the splinters vs bolters topic was basically just that splinters are both more specialized than intercessor bolters and also less effective into targets where their strengths are supposed to shine point-for-point. But I think that intercessors putting out 4 shots apiece with Oath of Moment is a bit whacky, and I think that kabalites having up to 5 special weapons in a 10 man squad makes it tricky to compare them in 10th edition.

As for neurotoxins vs armor, that kind of gets back to the question of what you want venomous weapons to do in the first place. I think there are a bunch of different viable, fluffy ways to go with it, but they all probably require a fair bit of overhauling, and any one-size-fits-all approach will probably be a bad fit for one kind of poison weapon or another.

That sort of thing, yeah. Not a foolproof “you can’t shoot me at all in the first turn” necessarily. That might be too boring to face.

But something like “add 6” to all enemy range” wait. Add, or subtract? Hopefully you get what I mean.

Slave Taking could be expressed as nominating X number of enemy units which are the true quarry, and scoring VPs for taking them out.

All about fighting dirty and with cunning as much as scalpel precision.

Slave Taking could be expressed as nominating X number of enemy units which are the true quarry, and scoring VPs for taking them out.

This is basically the sort of thing we had with faction-specific secondaries in 9th edition. In a 10th edition context, they'd probably be best suited to being some sort of Crusade Agenda.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Slave Taking could be expressed as nominating X number of enemy units which are the true quarry, and scoring VPs for taking them out.

This is basically the sort of thing we had with faction-specific secondaries in 9th edition. In a 10th edition context, they'd probably be best suited to being some sort of Crusade Agenda.

Agree with this.

If you are going to have faction specific secondaries they need to be balanced far better then GW has shown the ability to do. If not when you match up against an army with a broken one, it’s an uphill battle as they are going to max it out casually, while you need to work at yours. Matched play should be mostly even.

Crusade agenda is a much better spot for fluffy things like this. Win or loose the game? Whatever! I’ve got my slaves to take back for the pits (and the units that took them get bonus XP to buy upgrades)