Dark Eldar Rules Re-Write, Age of Sigmar-style

I like streamlined, faster games.

Age of Sigmar by and far is actually quite balanced.

And the thing with the AoS Force Org is we can finally build the force we want.

Like you know, an entire army made of nothing but Trueborns in Venoms, backed up by Incubi in more venoms, led by an Archon... in a venom.

Or a lumbering cavalcade of Taloi.

AoS is not yet balanced at all.The balance comes in if you're outnumbered by a third and you can claim a sudden death victory.
100 clan rats is not better than 50 carnosaurs.

AoS is not balanced.

nexs wrote:

AoS is not yet balanced at all.The balance comes in if you're outnumbered by a third and you can claim a sudden death victory.
100 clan rats is not better than 50 carnosaurs.

AoS is not balanced.

The thing about having 100 clanrats, divided in big units, is that the 1" range of their weapons screws over big units. 20-25-30 is the magic number, if your unit depends on 20 to have a bonus, or 10-15-20, if it's 10, and it's a foot unit. I'd stick 10-12.

Also large units of cheap troops are likely to run away due to battleshock tests, but if you can negate that, they are excellent tarpit, until one unit retreats.

Sudden death victories can be achieved quite easily.

Let's be honest, 40k has points system and is still unbalanced like hell.

PainReaver wrote:

I like streamlined, faster games.

Age of Sigmar by and far is actually quite balanced.

And the thing with the AoS Force Org is we can finally build the force we want.

Like you know, an entire army made of nothing but Trueborns in Venoms, backed up by Incubi in more venoms, led by an Archon... in a venom.

Or a lumbering cavalcade of Taloi.

Oh, is that what you meant by options? I wish you'd just said so, it would have saved me the trouble cataloging Age of Sigmar's cookie cutter Vampires.

Of course, you can build those armies in 40k now using the rules for unbound armies.

PainReaver wrote:

And the thing with the AoS Force Org is we can finally build the force we want.

Like you know, an entire army made of nothing but Trueborns in Venoms, backed up by Incubi in more venoms, led by an Archon... in a venom.

Or a lumbering cavalcade of Taloi.

But you can already do this with an unbound list within the point requirement. So what you are doing is streamlining and cutting things out for "simplicity" sake while not really adding anything.

Edit Calyptra beat me to it before I could.

By all means, continue to develop your rules and I hopefully there are others in your community that like the concept and jump on board so that you can play some games in it. But for many of us, we don't want to see 40k be "simplified". Fantasy is dead to me with the coming of the End Times. I'm going to auction it off when my Lgs has their next event to do so. If 40k goes down the same road then I will be doing the same with it as I rely on random people to play with as I have no friends who play the game. Most will just go onto new systems like they are doing with Fantasy and others will only play the new rules so I am effectively out of the game anyway.

Calyptra wrote:

PainReaver wrote:

I like streamlined, faster games.

Age of Sigmar by and far is actually quite balanced.

And the thing with the AoS Force Org is we can finally build the force we want.

Like you know, an entire army made of nothing but Trueborns in Venoms, backed up by Incubi in more venoms, led by an Archon... in a venom.

Or a lumbering cavalcade of Taloi.

Oh, is that what you meant by options? I wish you'd just said so, it would have saved me the trouble cataloging Age of Sigmar's cookie cutter Vampires.

Of course, you can build those armies in 40k now using the rules for unbound armies.

Yes whilst that is technically true. But forces following charts always get better things.

I am of the belief that Dark Eldar is technically better unbound.

CurstAlchemist- GW is firmly first and foremost a business, and since most of their rivals have rules that are free to download, and have the amount of pages that could be counted on one hand, having a giant tome feels a little retrograde.

I don't get why people are defending the complexity, yet arguing for more clarity and better-written rules.

you can have complex rules that are well written.

Archon- Move 6", Wounds 5, Save 4+, Bravery 9
Archon's Venom- Move 18", Wounds 6, Save 4+, Bravery -

Parasite's Kiss- 12", 3 A, 3+ to hit, 3+ to wound, -1 to rend, 1 Damage
Huskblade- 1", 4 A, 3+ to hit, 3+ to wound, -1 to rend, D3 Damage

May take a Clone Field or a Shadow Field, and take a Webway Portal or a Venom

Shadow Field: Ignores mortal wounds on a roll of 4+

Clone Field: 3+ save, re-rolls 1 and 2s

Parasite's Kiss: Whenever attacks with the Parasite's Kiss scores an unsaved wound, the Archon gains 1 wound back. This may not exceed the original number of wounds.

Huskblade: On any to wound rolls of 6, it is counted as a Mortal Wound and does 3 damage.

Armor of Misery: Enemy units within 3" of the Archon have -1 to their bravery

Webway Portal: If the Archon takes a Webway Portal, he may arrive via Deep Strike. Another unit from your army may also arrive with him. If he, and the unit arrives in this manner, they count as having moved, and thus may charge in the same turn.

Abilities:

Labyrinthe Cunning: You may re-roll the dice for any Priority rolls and Reserve rolls.

Command Ability:

Fear and Terror: May be activated in your hero phase and lasts until the end of the game turn. Allied units within 14" of the Archon do not take Battleshock tests at all. Enemy units within 14" have a -2 modifier to their Bravery (Stacks with Armor of Misery)

Well... 6 wounds on a Venom? Yikes, and I thought they were fragile now! 40K is about half vehicles, so you would have to change the AoS rules to accomodate that.

Right now we have one set of rules for vehicles, and one for fleshy peoples. To avoid that, we could add the keyword 'Vehicle' to any, well, vehicle, and this rule: 'Models with the keyword 'vehicle' are immune to damage from any weapon that does not have the keyword 'anti-vehicle'.' Otherwise you would have lasguns bringing down Land Raiders, and that would not do at all!

Of course, it also means that space meringues could no longer slap down our raiders like mosquitoes with their open palms. How I would miss that! But it's a sacrifice I'd be willing to make.

Then you would have to put in something about Transports. 'A unit may occupy a Transport if all the models in the unit are within 6" of it during their Hero Phase, or set up inside it when deploying for battle. Any number of units may occupy a vehicle, but the total number of models in them may not exceed the Transport's capacity. Remove the transported unit or units from the battlefield and set them aside. A unit inside a Transport may not be attacked, but up to 2 models inside the Transport may attack in the Shooting phase. A unit inside a Transport may exit it in their Hero Phase: to do so, place the unit on the battlefield so that all of its models are within 6" of the Transport. This counts as their movement for that turn. If the Transport loses its last wound and is removed as a casualty, replace it with any units that were still inside.'

But what about Open-Topped Transports? 'A unit inside a Transport with the keyword 'open-topped' may attack and be attacked in both the shooting phase and the combat phase, counting as being in cover. Measure the range for all models from any point on the Transport.'

Okay, so that's that. Then there's the Armour of Misery. -1 to Bravery, and within 3"? Pfft. Let's add a new mechanic instead, stealing it from Bolt Action: Suppression Counters.

'A unit suffering one or more casualties during the Shooting phase or during the Combat phase in a round of shooting or close combat receives a Suppression Counter. A unit with at least one Suppression counter must substract 1 from all of its 'To Hit' rolls. If it has half or more suppression counters as models remaining in the unit, then it must substract 2 from all of its 'To Hit' rolls instead. If a unit has more suppression counters than models remaining, it breaks and is eliminated from the game.

'During your Hero Phase When it activates, each of your units a unit may remove one suppression counter. Alternatively, a unit may remove D6 suppression counters if it forgoes its movement, shooting, and combat phases.'

Leaving the Armour of Misery thus: 'Armour of Misery: Enemy units within 12" of the Armour of Misery in your Hero phase when your Archon activates receive a suppression counter. If they are within 6", they receive 2 suppression counters instead.'

Also changing the rule for Fear. 'Fear: This unit is very frightening. Enemy units within 12" of at least one model in this unit during your Hero phase when it activates receive a suppression counter.'

'Fearless: This unit's 'To Hit' rolls are never affected by suppression counters, but it will still break if it has more suppression counters than models remaining.'

'And They Shall Know No Sense Of Fair Play: This unit is immune to battleshock and it's 'to hit' rolls are never affected by suppression counters, nor will it break if it has more suppression counters than models remaining.'

'Phantasm Grenades: Range 18", 1 Attack, to hit 3+, to wound * (the target suffers as many mortal wounds as suppression counters it has).'

Moving on... The Shadow Field should protect you from Mortal Wounds. How about, 'Shadow Field: Whenever the Archon suffers a wound or mortal wound, roll a dice. If the roll is 2 or more, the wound is ignored. If the roll is a 1, the Shadow Field will have no effect for the rest of the game after the end of the current phase.'

The Parasite's Kiss I like. Let's leave it! And the Webway Portal.

The Huskblade is kind of rubbish, isn't it? How about 5 Attacks, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, Rend -1, D3 Mortal Wounds, and if the roll to wound is a 6 it does D6 Mortal Wounds instead. If the Archon kills a Hero with the Huskblade, she may add +1 to all of her 'to wound' rolls for the rest of the game?

Labyrinthine Cunning... Nice, but we could also take the opportunity to change the 'I-go-you-go' turn. Let's say that you win the Initiative. You activate a unit: it does psyker stuff, moves, shoots, charges, and fights a combat (if applicable). Then we roll again: if you win, you get to do that with another unit, but if I win, I get to pick a unit to move, shoot, charge, etc. No unit may activate twice in the same turn. We go on like this until every unit has had a chance to activate, the turn is over and we start again.

I guess that means that there's no 'Hero Phase' as such, so change every mention of it above to 'When this unit activates'!

I think that it makes a more dynamic game, because you're not just standing there during your opponent's turn. It also forces you to play more carefully, as you don't really know whether you can protect an exposed squad before your opponent gets a crack at it. And it balances out the problem of melee v. shooting, so there's no need for artificial and unnatural restrictions about charging on the first turn or when you arrive from reserves at all.

Labyrinthine Cunning goes from 'nice' to 'crucial'!

Moving on again. You haven't mentioned 'Power From Pain'. Dark Eldar without PFP? Never! (Well, okay, the first Codex. But never again!)

I know some people would like to go back to pain tokens, but I kind of like the 'steadily growing power' thing that we have going now. With all the rules printed on the warscrolls instead of a codex, there's no reason why pain has to affect every unit the same way. It wouldn't make sense for the Archon to get 'Fearless', for example, because she's never going to have any suppression counters! So, the Power From Pain for the Archon could look like this:

Turn 1: Nothing
Turn 2: The Archon can re-roll all failed saves.
Turn 3: The Archon gains an extra attack with each of her weapons.
Turn 4: The Archon counts Mortal Wounds as normal wounds instead.
Turn 5: The Archon can activate twice in the same turn.

What do you think?

EDIT: Anyone?

Barking Agatha-

Now 5 attacks doing D3 mortal wounds, with D6s on wounds of 6 would be way too brutal. Heroes would die in one turn, as well as entire units, if not two.

I feel 4 attacks is enough, considering most foot heroes has 3. However he shouldn't be as skilled in combat as the Succubus, as his role is to support his fellow Kabalites, keep them in the fight until they are all dead, or come home with the bounty.

I should probably reverse the Shadow Field and Clone Field rules. Good pointing out that.

Probably not utilizing the suppression counter mechanic. Like to keep things simple and fast.

Now the Succubus would have 2 weapons, each with 4 attacks- 4 with the Agonizer, 4 with the Glaive. The Agonizer would have special rules against targets with the keyword 'Monster', whilst the Glaive would have a -2 rend, doing 1 damage each. And all 8 attacks get re-rolls to hit and wound.

Succubus- Move 6", wounds 5, Save 5+, Bravery 10
Agonizer, 1", 4 A, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, -1 Rend,
Archite Glaive, 1", 4 A

Bloodbride- Move 6", wounds 2, Save 5+, Bravery 10
Bloodbride's Wych Weapons
Syren's Agonizer

Venom- Move 16", Wounds 6, Save 4+, Bravery -

The Succubus is accompanied by 4 Bloodbrides in a Venom. The Bloodbrides are armed with Wych Weapons, and led by a Syren who is armed with an Agonizer and a Splinter Pistol or a Blast Pistol.

Blood Dancer: Succubus and Bloodbride's save is improved to 3+ when 1" away from enemy models.

Soulthirst: Succubus and Bloodbrides may re-roll all failed to hit rolls

PainReaver wrote:

Barking Agatha-

Now 5 attacks doing D3 mortal wounds, with D6s on wounds of 6 would be way too brutal. Heroes would die in one turn, as well as entire units, if not two.

Math it out. With 5 attacks hitting on 3's you could expect 3 hits. Wounding on 4's means 1.5 wounds... let's be generous and call it 2. You roll 2D3 and, let's say you get a 4.

Hero not dead, entire unit not killed!

Maybe it is a bit much, I just feel that the Archon should actually be a thing to be afraid of.

Barking Agatha wrote:

PainReaver wrote:

Barking Agatha-

Now 5 attacks doing D3 mortal wounds, with D6s on wounds of 6 would be way too brutal. Heroes would die in one turn, as well as entire units, if not two.

Math it out. With 5 attacks hitting on 3's you could expect 3 hits. Wounding on 4's means 1.5 wounds... let's be generous and call it 2. You roll 2D3 and, let's say you get a 4.

Hero not dead, entire unit not killed!

Maybe it is a bit much, I just feel that the Archon should actually be a thing to be afraid of.

As much as the community wants to see killy-Archon, I see Archon as a more of a support/leader type character to support and improve a Kabalite force. So when I wrote him in mind, it was in this role. He's no slouch in combat, can hold his own, but he's not going to go off slaying entire armies of the Astartes.

But against a single Hero model, he might not be so bad.