Dark eldar homebrew ( or Balanced 40k and you)

I too am working on a Dark Eldar fandex (yet another one, not just the one on my signature) and would like input on it. I'm going for rules that are as simple as possible without sacrificing fluff. Of course I won't guarantee your ideas will make it into the fandex but you never know.... Happy gaming/wishlisting!

Is there any definition for soul leech or life leech? I saw them mentioned a few times but couldn't see what it does

I'm assuming it's the ability on Parasite's Kiss - whenever that weapon inflicts a wound, it's owner heals a wound.

If so, then I like the idea as it fits our flavour pretty well. Now if only we could find a way to get wounded without being insta-glibbed by most things.

One day we have the technology to take a bullet or maybe even a punch, but today thats the talos job

It is supposed to be the same ability as the Parasite's Kiss, sorry forgot to list it, will update soon.  Also looking into Warlord Trait Generation...the problem being that some warlord Traits are objectively better than others...so maybe a generation modifier on the Archon? (something like +/- 1) but that's still a powerful bonus

I normally don't make comments on homebrews, but I don't think the book is bad per se, it's just incredibly boring.  When you examine the 5th Ed. book to the current book, they literally stripped it bare bones of all flavor.  I'm talking about tiny things like, why is the Implosion Missile S6 AP2 and that's it?

It's filled with a lot of whys and head-scratching, and loathe from my perspective at the sheer laziness of it all.   We should be mirrors of the Eldar codex's special rules, by design.  While the Eldar have Monofilament, Shurikens and D-weapons, we have Darklight, Poison and Soultech.  They have Battle Focus, we have Power from Pain.  They have psykers, we have anti-psyker, they have more special rules in their heroes/units, we have higher combat stats.  The only difference in all of this, is that theirs is better in almost every way in terms of actual battlefield application.

This just proves to me that GW designers don't actually play their game or understand their armies or a mix of both.  They're excellent at translating fluff to playable rules, but have no idea how to balance the armies around each other at all. They're incredibly focused on designing based on the senses: does this feel, sound, look right? Not enough actual thinking unfortunately.

HERO wrote:

I normally don't make comments on homebrews, but I don't think the book is bad per se, it's just incredibly boring.  When you examine the 5th Ed. book to the current book, they literally stripped it bare bones of all flavor.  I'm talking about tiny things like, why is the Implosion Missile S6 AP2 and that's it?

It's filled with a lot of whys and head-scratching, and loathe from my perspective at the sheer laziness of it all.   We should be mirrors of the Eldar codex's special rules, by design.  While the Eldar have Monofilament, Shurikens and D-weapons, we have Darklight, Poison and Soultech.  They have Battle Focus, we have Power from Pain.  They have psykers, we have anti-psyker, they have more special rules in their heroes/units, we have higher combat stats.  The only difference in all of this, is that theirs is better in almost every way in terms of actual battlefield application.

Whilst I think that our book is also awful balance wise, I agree with the rest of your points. It's just so utterly flavourless. Power from Pain in particular is about as exciting as filling out my taxes.

Also, the other thing I'd say we lack is variety. e.g. you say that we're anti-psyker, but we only have 2 anti-psyker weapons in our entire army. One is utterly useless, and the other is one-per-army and has far too little range of be of any great use. Compare that to the vast array of psychic powers Eldar have access to - not to mention the power of those abilities. Likewise, in addition to the weapons you mentioned, Eldar also get Missile Launchers, Scatter Lasers, Star Cannons etc. What do we get? Um... more poison and more dark lances. Outstanding.

HERO wrote:

They're excellent at translating fluff to playable rules

This is something I simply can't agree with. There are just too many cases where fluff outright contradicts rules. To name a few:
- Archons are tactical geniuses. Hence their 0 rules to reflect this.
- Still on Archons, they apparently get the best weapons available... so why so Succubi and Incubi have access to better weapons?
- Ravagers (and DE vehicles in general) are supposed to be mobile. The Dark Eldar laugh at the slow vehicles of the imperium. So, why then are Ravagers punished for moving more than 6"?
- Bladevanes are located below Reaver Jetbikes, yet somehow now used for ramming attacks - rather than flyby attacks.
- Cone Field's effect has sod all relation to its description.
- Back to the Archon - apparently his soul trap only works if the enemy agrees to honourable combat first. God knows why. Are we in the world of Yugioh, and the Archon is challenging people to Shadow Duels?
- The Crucible of Malediction is supposed to drive psykers insane, but what it actually does is kill a random bloke in the same squad as a psyker.
- The Electrocorrosive Whip is supposed to sap its victim's strength and will to fight, yet it apparently works in reverse - instead sapping the Dark Eldar player's will to keep playing this crap.
- Drahzar is supposed to be this great combat champion, but he will lose to virtually every comparable HQ in the game.
- The aforementioned Power from Pain has no correlation whatsoever to pain inflicted.
- Judging by its rules, the only possible function a Djin Blade could perform is Seppuku.

And that's just a few from our book. I could go on to talk about all the disconnects between fluff and rules in other books or in the rulebook itself. "No! Don't shoot that Wraithknight - you might hit those guardsmen who come up to its ankles."

Hell, there are even rules that seem to contradict reality itself. Let's say I have two squads of Scourges with Shardcarbines. One gets an order to run (to cover more ground), the other first shoots an enemy, then assaults them - managing to break and sweep them. So, which moved further? Well, the squad that ran advanced d6". Conversely, the identical squad that first stopped to shoot and then stopped again to fight somehow managed to advance 3d6". Please reinstall universe and reboot.

Quote :

This is something I simply can't agree with. There are just too many cases where fluff outright contradicts rules. To name a few:

Let me rephrase this a little better..

I mean for someone to take the fantasy of things, and then design a weapons profile and special rules around it afterwards, is a little impressive. Not the most amazing thing in the world, but pretty smart.

Whether or not all the rules are spot on are another thing. Like I said, lazy book design.

So, I'm late to this party, with little contriteness. First, I've skimmed the thread, and looked at the doc, although not closely. It is a great little piece of work. And misses an important point: too much t5/s6, to say nothing of all the different s6/7 pieces now in the game. Those numbers put us at a minimum 30+% disadvantage everywhere in the game. Now, t4/s4 stuff? We're generally at a roughly 15% disadvantage which we make up in our sheer generalship to use speed and pick our targets. That's winnable, usually easily. Not 30%.

So. To equalize things, all we need to do is the smallest possible (wait, smallest? No, least obvious) change to bring us back to 15%.

Here's some simple suggestions:
1. S4/T4. Before y'all go Wishlisting!!, consider that S represents the total ability to find a weakness, in what can be hit. Even in the most abstract, it doesn't take into account the native perception ability. We're fast, we're eldar, and we unlike guardian scum, we have trained our entire life to find the chink. Likewise, T4. Toughness represents the likelihood of getting wounded. It's not 'toughness' in the sense of thick skin, it's toughness based on speed and agility, awareness, yes raw inurement to pain (see?) and many other factors. What does that do? If we leave the 5+ save alone, it means that one normal tac marine is going to survive 20-30% more often instead of 50%, one on one. That's close to our our sweet spot. Cost you say? Ok, in the new book, it looks like a tac marine costs 12.5 points (5 for 70, including a sergeant), so 14 points raw but discount by the sergeant. So, a 10 point warrior is about right.

Don't like that? OK.
Not 5+ armour, 5++. Period. Think of it as whatever armor we have, plus that intangible ability to avoid even things like flamers. Then add FNP. Think of all the places a 5++ is the only thing you need.

Make poison effective on a 6+ against vehicles, and a hull point on a 5 or 6. Think of it as corrosives. The beauty of this is it lets us keep our Dark Lances at the same cost.

Let us buy upgrade poisons. Make the Llhamean useful. Pesky Wraithknight, or Mechanic(um/is) No problem. (Maybe too easy... ;-)

Now to really mess things up, give us 'null zone', nothing psychic, not a curse, not a blessing, works within 6" of a character (independent or not). Invisibility? I think not. Rather like the late lamented Malys.

And finally, 3-up, maybe a 4-up on the Deny the Witch. We live our entire lives psychically fighting a God That Destroyed A Race With A Psychic Scream. No mortal Psycher can break us, unless our will wavers completely.

Play it out. See what happens. Will GW ever do this? Make an elf as tough as a Spezz Mahrine? Of course not. But that's how simple it could be. The real trick is to not OP the DE.

Yours, for my glory, and the ascendancy of Cormorragh
JTC

Given how much ink is spilled about the physical prowess of Dark Eldar ("their athletic physiques are lined with whipcord muscle, honed and enhanced until they are superior to even those of their craftworld cousins") I would really like for a Kabalite, who has trained and fought her whole life, to be superior to a civilian Guardian, either in terms of stat line or special rules. It would be a paradigm shift, but I could get behind S4/T4 Dark Eldar, because the background arguably supports it.

Having said that, how would that effect Coven? Do Wracks and Haemonculi stay T4 or become T5? On the one hand it seems excessive. On the other, given what's been in some of recently-released codices, it would hardly be game-breaking.

I also agree that for a race who are supposed to use psykers as playthings, our anti-psyker tech is a bit lackluster.

Well, Great Minds think Similarly...and so do ours apparently. Changes made just now:
Added Helms of Spite as options, they are not relics in this, but are mutually exclusive with mobility increasing options where available.
All Wych Cult units gain +1 Strength
Updated Djinn Blade Profile and Special Rules
Standardized Soul-leech special rule as the one we're going with.
Klaive and Demi-Klaive Profiles updated to allow for competitiveness with Wych Cult units.
Added Ancient Archon as once per detachment HQ Upgrade.
Haywire Grenades are back on more units (and more models per unit).
Arcane Craftsman rule updated.
and Started doing a Changelog xD

I'm hesitant to make the army on the whole +1T as it kind of takes away from the Glass Cannon feel of the army too much in my opinion

joe twocrows, I actually like a lot of your ideas. I'm not sure T4 is appropriate, but S4 certainly is. Although, saying that, Archons could easily be S4 T4 to represent the durability from devouring thousands of souls over the years.

Calyptra wrote:

Given how much ink is spilled about the physical prowess of Dark Eldar ("their athletic physiques are lined with whipcord muscle, honed and enhanced until they are superior to even those of their craftworld cousins") I would really like for a Kabalite, who has trained and fought her whole life, to be superior to a civilian Guardian, either in terms of stat line or special rules. It would be a paradigm shift, but I could get behind S4/T4 Dark Eldar, because the background arguably supports it.

I also still find it annoying that Eldar are faster than us (with Battle Focus). I always thought we were the fast ones.

Calyptra wrote:

Having said that, how would that effect Coven? Do Wracks and Haemonculi stay T4 or become T5? On the one hand it seems excessive. On the other, given what's been in some of recently-released codices, it would hardly be game-breaking.

I'd say that Haemonculi should be T5. In fact, I've said before that Urien is what a Haemonculus *should* be for what they cost. With no invulnerable save, they really need better than T4. Although, I'm not even clear on why they're not allowed to buy a Clone Field.

Anyway, I'm not sure about Wracks. Perhaps they could stay T4, but become troops. My concern is that making them T5 would eat into Grotesque territory. Hmm, tricky.

I'm not sure that S or T 4 is really a good way to go with DE. There are other ways to represent our power but that should stem from a better Power from Pain mechanism. I'd keep the existing table but add to it with a Tally of Pestilence style table that improves our abilities depending on enemy models killed. We could have increases to our poison strength, improved FNP, Regeneration and I'm sure there are plenty of other flavourful options.

Count Adhemar wrote:

I'm not sure that S or T 4 is really a good way to go with DE. There are other ways to represent our power but that should stem from a better Power from Pain mechanism. I'd keep the existing table but add to it with a Tally of Pestilence style table that improves our abilities depending on enemy models killed. We could have increases to our poison strength, improved FNP, Regeneration and I'm sure there are plenty of other flavourful options.

I agree completely, our army is about finesse and not about pure strength.
However, I think T5 Haemonculi and T4 Archons are reasonable, given their background.


To be honest, I think the power from pain chart should be redone. Aside from FNP and later, the chart is only of little use for shooty kabalite units.
I would either just make 3 PfP tables (current for Cults, supplement chart for Covens and a new ranged focus one for kabals) or really mix it with a Tally of Pestilance style table.

I prefer simple rules which make things not too complex, so I don't know which would be better.


Btw. shouldn't the heat lance be available to Truborn (or made a Special weapon)?
In a way I think Trueborns are supposed to be our Fire Dragons and with a +10 pts heat lance, they are about as expensive (with a much worse save, of course).

Count Adhemar wrote:

I'm not sure that S or T 4 is really a good way to go with DE. There are other ways to represent our power but that should stem from a better Power from Pain mechanism. I'd keep the existing table but add to it with a Tally of Pestilence style table that improves our abilities depending on enemy models killed. We could have increases to our poison strength, improved FNP, Regeneration and I'm sure there are plenty of other flavourful options.

I'd suggest just ditching the current table and moving entirely to one along the lines of Blood Points or Tally of pestilence (or, if we want to really push the boat out, PfP ).

I mean, if a particular buff is so important that we can't risk going an entire game without getting it, then how about we just start with said buff? You know, like every other army does.

Just spitballing here, but off the top of my head, I'd like to see something kind of like this for the PfP table:

1.  BS + 1
2.  Furious Charge
3.  FNP (5+)
4.  Poison 3 + for shooting and CC attacks
5.  Fearless
6.  FNP (4+)

Maybe change the order around a bit, I think something that improves our damage output earlier and our resiliency as the game progresses.

Has anybody played these homebrew rules, what do you all think?

Were pretty satisfied so far nothing glaring balance wise, currently the big book of space marines threw a wrench in our plans for them according to the leaks this ones gonna hurt

I appologize ahead of time if this ends up being too long. Im looking forward to playing with these rules, and have a bunch of questions/comments. I have read through the rules and have to say I am impressed: excited and impressed. I have some friends in my gaming group that will be down to let me try them out. When I read our 7th edition codex, I was left with feelings of confusion and disappointment. We have so much potential for cool fluffy rules and characters. After reading it however, it was like they cut so much out, as if they didn’t finish it. It was boring. When I read your revised codex, I am excited and content. The main reason for this was that  IT MAKES SENSE. Logic and common sense are important to me. One of the things I liked most about your version was that it makes me want to play an assault type army again, which is what I liked so much about Dark Eldar when I first started playing 12 yrs ago.  Thanks in advance for looking at this. Moving on to my questions and comments:

1. If my archon takes a skyboard or jetbike, does that replace the kabalite armour? If so, can he no longer take wraithplate/ghoastplate armour?
2. If one takes Klaivex Hierarch, and decides to take both “in the name of Khaine” and clone filed, it might start to get confusing. Maybe they can be mutually exclusive. What do you think?
3. Im having a difficult time understand how Hair trigger works. Is it just no pistols, all close combat weapons? If so, whats the advantage of that?
4. The Succubus has Uncanny Dodge, and the wyches have dodge, the rules seem the same. What makes it uncanny?
5. For the succubus, if I take a venom blade and also take the penetrating blade special blade, does that mean I'm wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour saves? Seems too good to be true.
6. It may just be a typo, but why does the Wrack Acothyst have initiative 6? doesn’t flow with wrack fluff, as they are at initiative 4.
7. Trueborn:
A) 1 point difference probably doesn’t matter too much, but dropping them to 10pts instead of 11 might flow better, since we dropped the kabalites to 7pts. Again, not that big a deal.
B) I hate to do it, but I always compare our tureborn with fire dragons. I know its not a fair comparison, but even after some of your changes, they are still pretty far behind. I think if you increased (or even didn’t limit) how many splinter weapons they could exchange, it would bring up their stock.
C) It seems strange that the Dracon cant take the same weapons the other trueborn can. he should be able to take a blaster
D) What do you think about giving the Dracon an upgrade that made him, and everyone in his unit the ability to increase their BS 1, to BS5. It would probably have to be expensive to be fair. Something like “shoot straight and true” 20pts. Plus 5pts per trueborn model. Dracon and everyone in his unit adds 1 to  their ballistic skill.
8 ) I always though that in the bloodbride category, the Syren would be worth taking. I noticed you gave her an additional wound, which makes sense, but what about adding 1 to her WS? She is supposed to be the most elite wyche, directly under the succubus
A) I dont know if I like  allowing her to take a Huskblade. Yes, its an awesome melee weapon, especially after you made it make sense and worth taking, but, its the Archon's weapon. I feel like he should be the only one with access to it.
9) How come you got rid of skilled rider on the reavers?
10) How come you got rid of close combat weapons on scourges? Not that they needed it. I also always wondered why they have plasma grenades, and no access to haywire grenades. For a category of fast attack that seem like weapon specialist, they should have haywire, not plasma grenades. thats just me though
11) It says the ravager can exchange all dissy cannons for a storm vortex project for 25pts. What is the storm vortex project? I cant find it anywhere.
12) Im having a hard time understanding how the voidravens tail weapons work. Its has to fire at the same target as the other weapons, yet it can fire at different targets than the rest of the unit? I think my dyslexia is causing me problems
13) How does contraband work? After rolling twice, do I pick the one I want, or do I get both?
14) The combat drugs rule states “no change to when/how many times you roll normally.” Does this mean I roll one time in the beginning of the game for all my units that have drugs, and they all have that drug effect?
15) Sentiant blade seems pretty fun. But just to clarify, if my archon decides to use it, he would get 4 additional attacks right? And if he rolls a 1 on any of the to wound rolls, he takes a wound?
16) The second part of vector hunter: “ignore the cover save from jink for a single shooting attack.” does his mean from the opponent? Ignore the opponents jink save?
Last question, I promise.
17) Have you decided on how the hexrifle is gonna work yet? I like arcane payload idea

Let me end by again saying thank you. I know this was a long post, with way to many questions. I really do like your new set of rules and fluff. The Archon, and Ancient Archon are perfect. I love the idea and execution of the clone field. Demiklaives, djinn blade, wyche weapons, husk blade all look awesome. Klaivex Hierarch is my new favorite character. How did you come up with IN THE NAME OF KHAINE? So great! Wyches are back in, incubi are in, haywire grenades in warriors are in. Wracks being troops is great, and makes sense. There are so many more things that you guys did that Im excited to try out. Thanks again

Ok...time to respond in order as much as possible xD
1.  Taking A Skyboard or Jetbike does NOT replace the Kabalite Armor, it adds the Wychsuit so a unit joined by an Archon does not loose the benefit of the Wychsuit (which is awesome now)

2.  It is possible to make them mutually exclusive...but the general idea is that the Shadow Counters are each considered a separate model, loosing one of them does not constitute loosing a wound (Think Infantry version of Void Shields).  Additionally, if there are no Death Mission Counters, since the model is removed as a casualty (No Wounds are done) there should be no issue here.

3.  The purpose of having the Hair Trigger special rule is to grant easy access to poison attacks in Close Combat...

4.  That was a Typo on my part.  Dodge only is functional in the Assault Phase (But throughout the entire thing)...sorry to dissapoint, but a 4++ all the time on a troops choice is very strong, even ones as squishy as them (although, don't think they don't have defense, look at what Wychsuits do)

5.  You're right...Venom Blade was supposed to be Mutually Exclusive with Penetrating Blade

6.  Again, a typo from overzealous copying of unit profiles, should be I 4 (thanks for catching those)

7.  A) Their points cost still leaves them competitive with that Elites slot in my opinion, unlike the Warriors who needed a reduction to still be competative with Wracks and neoWyches

B) General unit vs a Specialized one...while I know where you're coming from, I think the advantages provided by the Trueborn should be worth it, but that's just in what we've experienced, we posted them here to get this kind of feedback (and other people who could try them out).  Although I wouldn't see it breaking too much to have 2 out of every 4 (1 out of every 2 rather).

C) It's kinda traditional for the Seargeants to have melee options...I don't think it would be particularly game breaking though.

D) Point Taken...It doesn't break anything and it makes sense to have it base...but a full squad at BS5 I'm much more hesitant about

8 ) See above, but with WS

A) While I'm not sure if that's an artifact from something we where testing out or not...you don't need to take it if you don't want to...I'll check back with everyone else and see what they think.

9) They still effectively have the major advantages of Skilled Rider through their Wychsuit and Move Through Cover.

10) The CCWs weren't necessary on the unit (Except for the Sergeant).  The reason they don't have access to Haywire Grenades is because...reasons? Adding them to their options...but they need to be more expensive than normal because of their vastly increased threat range.

11) Storm Vortex Projector is part of a FW model, no profile listed to avoid any sort of issue with them

12)  I'm trying to update the wording...it can fire at a different target than the Voidraven itself, but both weapons on the mount must fire at the same target.

13) You get both results...FTW! (may need to up the point costs)

14) Roll for them just as the codex says you should, once for the whole army.

15) Roll the 4 Bonus attacks separately, if one of them rolls a 1, suffer a wound with no AP

16) Ignore any cover save gained by Jink (So the 4+)...for example, it you're shooting at a Tau Hammerhead with Disruption pods in the open and it Jinks, instead of the 3+ Cover it only has a 6+ against a Single Shooting Attack from a model with that special rule.

17)  Going to the rolling system, but having a Haemonculus in the unit allows you to select which one you want to encourage Covanite play using them

18?) IN THE NAME OF KHAINE came from a number of things...the effect is based on the old Eldar Death Mission Rune Psychic power that I thought was awesome...but no one ever wanted it (since you didn't exactly kit the Farseer out for the role it requires).  I was sad to see it go in 7th edition Craftworld...and figured it would be awesome to put on the Generic Drazhar, so we redid the rule to be a non-psychic power based thing.  The name of the rule is a C&C reference (as are most of the special rules...because KHAINE LIVES!)

Please Note: The Masterpiece is just something that someone insisted on putting on there, but it is still so much of a work in progress I don't recommend using it...and be on the lookout for things that just don't make sense...typos slip through still xD

Count Adhemar wrote:

I'm not sure that S or T 4 is really a good way to go with DE. There are other ways to represent our power but that should stem from a better Power from Pain mechanism. I'd keep the existing table but add to it with a Tally of Pestilence style table that improves our abilities depending on enemy models killed. We could have increases to our poison strength, improved FNP, Regeneration and I'm sure there are plenty of other flavourful options.

Noted, it's something we've been wanting to do...going back to the old way of "Pain Counters" and such as well in addition to different effects, but the units themselves need to be effective enough base in order to gain pain counters (or even survive turns in the 7th edition)

Ryu Takeda wrote:

Please Note: The Masterpiece is just something that someone insisted on putting on there, but it is still so much of a work in progress I don't recommend using it...and be on the lookout for things that just don't make sense...typos slip through still xD

No one forced this, IT CAME OUT NATURALLY, 1 UP THOSE CRAFTWORLDERS!!!!

There is a typo in the Trueborn description: "For Every Four models, One Kabalite Warrior May exchange their Splinter Weapon for one:"


Oh and here is something I've been thiking about lately:
What if you lower the price of trueborn to 10 pts but restrict their access to heavy wargear a bit.  Scourges already can have heavy long range stuff like Dark Lances and Disintegrators, so why you really make them more like diverse Fire Dragons?

In return I would just simplify the wording and say that every Trueborn has access to special wargear:  Shredder, Shard Longrifle, Shard Carbine, Blaster and a Heat Lance.

I especially like the thought of running around Transport Trueborn equipped with Heat Lances.

To make the Dracon interesting he could have access to heavy wargear (things like Lances or Disintegrators) to add some long-range capabilities (coupled with BS5). He but wouldn't be an auto take but surely could add some interesting possibilities.


Also, with about 10 points per Trueborn and additional 10 or 15 points for each weapon, they are roughly as expensive as fire warriors, but don't forget that they have a much worse save.



Btw. if Wracks are troops, what about an elite version of them similar to Trueborn? Coven now really has some interesting assets and I surely wouldn't mind taking a couple liquifier Wracks in a Venom.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

There is a typo in the Trueborn description: "For Every Four models, One Kabalite Warrior May exchange their Splinter Weapon for one:"


Oh and here is something I've been thiking about lately:
What if you lower the price of trueborn to 10 pts but restrict their access to heavy wargear a bit.  Scourges already can have heavy long range stuff like Dark Lances and Disintegrators, so why you really make them more like diverse Fire Dragons?

In return I would just simplify the wording and say that every Trueborn has access to special wargear:  Shredder, Shard Longrifle, Shard Carbine, Blaster and a Heat Lance.

I especially like the thought of running around Transport Trueborn equipped with Heat Lances.

To make the Dracon interesting he could have access to heavy wargear (things like Lances or Disintegrators) to add some long-range capabilities (coupled with BS5). He but wouldn't be an auto take but surely could add some interesting possibilities.


Also, with about 10 points per Trueborn and additional 10 or 15 points for each weapon, they are roughly as expensive as fire warriors, but don't forget that they have a much worse save.



Btw. if Wracks are troops, what about an elite version of them similar to Trueborn? Coven now really has some interesting assets and I surely wouldn't mind taking a couple liquifier Wracks in a Venom.

Thanks for pointing out the typo...

As for the points cost...well...to compare them to fire warriors, Trueborn are +2 WS, +1 BS, +1A and +2 Ld...a comparable gun (not quite the power of a pulse weapon for MEQ or lower, but poison is awesome), and Trueborn have Wraith-plate standard...giving them to same save, all for the bargain bin price of being 2 pts more expensive per model. they might need to go up in points slightly if you want to compare them to Tau Fire Warriors xD (not to mention Trueborn have weapons options).

Comparing Trueborn the Fire Dragons in the Anti-Material role, Fire Dragons are more efficient and durable...which they should be, Fire Dragons are kinda the aspect of the Melta-Gun...that's their one job, let Fire Dragons keep their hat. (Comparing a Generalist unit with a Specialist unit...)

While I wouldn't be opposed to Trueborn having access to Special Wargear on all models...I'm not sure about Heavy weapons (Dark Lances are a hell of a drug) available on all of them, nor am I sure eliminating heavy weapons options would be the best thing for the unit...I'll consult the rest of the team and see what they think, but that's just my initial reaction.

As for the Heatlance being added to their option list...Maybe? not particularly game breaking...but the weapon itself might need to be looked at in relation to the blaster to ensure that (if they are to be the same point cost) on is not objectively better than the other.

Ryu Takeda wrote:

Thanks for pointing out the typo...

As for the points cost...well...to compare them to fire warriors, Trueborn are +2 WS, +1 BS, +1A and +2 Ld...a comparable gun (not quite the power of a pulse weapon for MEQ or lower, but poison is awesome), and Trueborn have Wraith-plate standard...giving them to same save, all for the bargain bin price of being 2 pts more expensive per model.  they might need to go up in points slightly if you want to compare them to Tau Fire Warriors xD (not to mention Trueborn have weapons options).

That's really not a good comparison.

Firstly, the Tau codex is a 6th edition one - so I'm not sure you should be comparing them to the newer books - especially when all the 7th edition books from Necrons onward received massive buffs.

Second, Fire Warriors are troops, not elites.

Although, if we are doing comparisons with Tau, can we compare our 18" S6 melta to their 18" S8 melta?

Ryu Takeda wrote:

Comparing Trueborn the Fire Dragons in the Anti-Material role, Fire Dragons are more efficient and durable...which they should be, Fire Dragons are kinda the aspect of the Melta-Gun...that's their one job, let Fire Dragons keep their hat.  (Comparing a Generalist unit with a Specialist unit...)

But that's the thing - what else do Trueborn really do? It's not like they bring any unique weapons. Really, just about any weapon they bring can be done better by another unit. Ravagers are better Dark Lance platforms, Venoms are better for Splinter Cannons etc. Making a unit pay extra for roles it sucks at anyway seems a little counter-intuitive.

Ryu Takeda wrote:

While I wouldn't be opposed to Trueborn having access to Special Wargear on all models...I'm not sure about Heavy weapons (Dark Lances are a hell of a drug) available on all of them, nor am I sure eliminating heavy weapons options would be the best thing for the unit...I'll consult the rest of the team and see what they think, but that's just my initial reaction.

I'm not sure about eliminating heavy weapon options - mainly because I just don't see the point (Warriors can take them after all). As above, I don't think Trueborn are remotely worth it for their heavy weapons, but on the other hand I don't really see the point in removing them either.

Ryu Takeda wrote:

As for the Heatlance being added to their option list...Maybe? not particularly game breaking...but the weapon itself might need to be looked at in relation to the blaster to ensure that (if they are to be the same point cost) on is not objectively better than the other.

The problem there is that Blasters and Dark Lances have been made worse each edition. Hull Points made one-shot weapons a lot less useful, compared to mid-strength, multiple-shot weapons - and 7th edition went a step further and halved the chance for AP2 to explode a vehicle. Basically, there's a reason people want more access to Haywire/melta - lances just aren't good weapons.


Actually, going back to the heavy weapon thing for a moment, one thing I thought recently is that the PfP table seems in dire need of Relentless. Mainly because they seem to want our shooty units to jump into melee late-game, but then it seems silly that we have to sacrifice their shooting to do so. But then, I think PfP needs a complete change anyway. I just thought I'd mention it.