The "Feel" of Dark Eldar

I'd take PFP over any Chapter Tactics.

@Jimsolo really? Why? Half of the power from Pain table is useless for Kabalite Armies...

stilgar27 wrote:

thenick18 wrote:

I'm a big fan of the Dark Elder, fluff, models, and "supposed play-style". However, unfortunately in this current iteration, there are other armies that are superior to the DE, in what is supposed to be what the DE are the masters of.

I was just saying in another thread that the new space marine scouts make a superior Venom style MSU army than our codex does.  They're literally the same price (55+40 vs 40+55) with no upgrades.  Essentially you're trading a flickerfield and PFP for much better troops with much better gear (not to mention serious role changing gear options) and the more flexible platform of the landspeeder.  It could easily be argued chapter tactics are better than PFP anyway, especially salamanders in this case as all the scouts in cover and in open top transports will attract the flamers.

I'd like to see how some battle reports between those two armies.  I'm going to guess not well for the dark kin.

I agree - 5 scouts with bolters in a land speeder storm with assault cannon as a troops choice is WAY better than 5 kabalites with blaster in a venom - by a considerable margin. Even the UM chapter tactic make them perfectly valid.

Massaen wrote:

I agree - 5 scouts with bolters in a land speeder storm with assault cannon as a troops choice is WAY better than 5 kabalites with blaster in a venom - by a considerable margin. Even the UM chapter tactic make them perfectly valid.

I never really liked UM, and the combat doctrines they get don't do anything special for scouts so even though they're good in general, I kind of ignored them.  Heavy flamers on infantry though should be more common after recent releases, and the dark eldar shall be even weaker for it

I suppose I could just proxy my venom/kabalites for scouts and wait to see if GW pulls it together at some future point.  Dark eldar painted up as salamanders might actually look pretty cool though with red eyes, black skin, and flames everywhere. Fluff-wise, you couldn't have two more opposite armies.

I've never actually fielded a (non-chaos) marine army, so I suppose that is one way to keep that record intact.

Quote :

I was just saying in another thread that the new space marine scouts make a superior Venom style MSU army than our codex does. They're literally the same price (55+40 vs 40+55) with no upgrades. Essentially you're trading a flickerfield and PFP for much better troops with much better gear (not to mention serious role changing gear options) and the more flexible platform of the landspeeder. It could easily be argued chapter tactics are better than PFP anyway, especially salamanders in this case as all the scouts in cover and in open top transports will attract the flamers.

I'd like to see how some battle reports between those two armies. I'm going to guess not well for the dark kin.

Ya I've done similar comparisons. Venoms are still slightly better anti infantry but scout ability is huge and the strength based weapon option of the storm allow for greater flexibility. Likewise scouts have far superior weapon customization including melta access. Then add atsknf, 4+ armour and chapter tactics like bolter drill.

If PfP wasn't so damn randumb I'd agree with Jimsolo. Imagine if ultras had to expend a combat doctrine before rolling to see which one applied. "Hmm my dev centurion army got the assault doctrine well that sucked now I know how DE feel rolling +1 initiative on their drugs.."
We're up there with orks and csm as one of the few armies that doesn't know half of what were gonna be capable of until the games half over.

Brom wrote:

If PfP wasn't so damn randumb I'd agree with Jimsolo. Imagine if ultras had to expend a combat doctrine before rolling to see which one applied. "Hmm my dev centurion army got the assault doctrine well that sucked now I know how DE feel rolling +1 initiative on their drugs.."
We're up there with orks and csm as one of the few armies that doesn't know half of what were gonna be capable of until the games half over.  

I wonder if it's even possible to re-write Power from Pain so that it benefits the entire Dark Eldar army instead of, say, benefiting mostly melee or mostly ranged. Most of the traits we could distribute are fairly underwhelming: move through cover, etc. Some have great use, but clearly favor melee warriors, like Zealot or Crusader. Come to think of it, most things that favor ranged units don't favor melee. I wonder if we should invent new ones?

Well... Actually feel no pain and fearless benefits every unit. But I'd prefer a similar system to the Deamonkin Codex. Like every failed leadership test gives us a point to spend. And weapons with whom we can actually force leadership tests even on space Marines!

Honestly there isn't much more that I really think could make us competitive if they'd just give us, somehow, the ability to negate all enemy leadership boosts and ld test immunities (like ATSKNF).

If we had those two things, we could do some serious damage. It wouldn't stop us from just being little more than WWP bitches, though.

If they gave us that in the next codex, then 2016 would be the year Freakshows came to rule the Earth. I would be SOOOOOOO happy.

You guys keep making me dip into my fandex I wrote up before 7th edition codex of suckiness, but here goes.

3 Simple ways to improve the PFP table and increase it's focus to all units:

First and least important I'd get rid of the turn where it does nothing at all.

6+ FNP on turn 1 might seem like a big racial bonus to you, but for perspective - Space marine player can now basically just decide to use iron hands chapter tactics when picking his army.  At which point all his units get fnp 6+ (or +1 to FNP), and all his vehicles/characters get "it will not die".  It's gonna be a lot of fun trying to kill regenerating land raiders full of FNP 4+ termies let me tell you.

Sorry, I get side-tracked easily^^

The second (and bigger) change would be to grant relentless on turn 3 or so.  This would give an obvious shooting bonus as it would allow us to move and fire heavy weapons like our cousins  do with weapon platforms (while explaining why we don't use platforms ourselves).  This would also give a reason to buy splinter cannons on infantry as they could be fired salvo 6 36" every round after that effect kicked in - even while moving in raiders or on foot.   Finally it would grant the less obvious melee bonus of allowing any troop to rapid fire, salvo, or heavy fire at a target and then still charge.

The biggest change though, which would sort of mimic our cousins bladestorm effect is just to grant all PFP units rending on turn 4 or so, maybe even replace furious charge with it.

I know rending shooting seems overly powerful, but remember that auto-wounding on a 6 describes nearly all our weapons versus nearly all toughness anyway.  Meanwhile, the extra d3 armor penetration would be useless on our poison or haywire weapons.  

In short granting rending via the PFP table would effect all melee attacks, possibly making melee viable again (and make lethal doses frickin awesome).  For shooting it would - 1) grant AP 2 on 1/6th of poison hits 2) wouldn't effect haywire 3) would add d3 penetration to our already ap2 lance weapons 1/6th of the time.

Remember too this rule would only be in effect for 2 or maybe 3 turns.  That said - they may be the most important ones.

But the dark Eldar are getting stronger the more pain they absorb. But not their weapons, what rending would clearly indicate.

Agreed CptMetal. PFP should manifest as increasing levels of crazed hyper aggression like the ultimate frenzy drug. The effects of the current tables are correct. The covens table works nicely too increasing their horror and resilience without duplications. This all goes back to the synergy argument that some of our best things are shooty but as they get more drunk on pain it doesn't help them directly. Screaming wyches, lethal incubi and ravening coven horrors should benefit...even Archons getting stronger like feeding vampires

If there were multiple flavors, like instinctive behavior, Counter Attack would be a nice replacement for Furious Charge on Kabal units.

Power from pain could be revised to compensate for our lack of psyckers. We could have a pain pool (already mentionned), we could tap during the psycker phase, by somes units and characters, that would give buff to our troops, or strike at opponents.

CptMetal wrote:

But the dark Eldar are getting stronger the more pain they absorb. But not their weapons, what rending would clearly indicate.

I do disagree, as rending would apply to the model and only by extension to their weapons.  This could easily represent a heightened state of awareness or speed, and play into our pointless night vision theme.  Perhaps our heightened state of awareness allows us to spot weaknesses any other race would miss, or perhaps our latent psychic awareness gives us some prescient ability to see which shot will be most effective.

I don't know if you've ever played a first person shooter (or a movie for that matter) which incorporates "bullet time", but needless to say the relative speed boost makes targeting vulnerable points such as head shots much easier.

But I don't think any fluff or background indicates the Dark Eldar gaining access to bullet time.

Rending maybe in Wych units, but not on Kabal units. (At least, not from PFP.) At least, that's my preference.

Jimsolo wrote:

But I don't think any fluff or background indicates the Dark Eldar gaining access to bullet time.

I remember a few instances in the fluff where DE, high on pain, move faster than the eye can follow. To the point where they seemingly disappear.

That sounds like it could easily pass for "bullet time".

Q: How do you want to feel when you're playing Dark Eldar?
A: Terrifying. Not in the ooohhh I'm scared of your models sense. A crushing alpha strike and dizzying speed on the first turn. I want to see the overwhelmed look on my opponents face. I want him to feel defeated before he even gets to react. I will know full well he'll shoot and chop me to haggis with my fragility shortly...but that initial terror...that's what I want.

Q: How do you want your opponent to feel when facing Dark Eldar?
A: I want them to enjoy themselves. I want them to sweat. To feel like their army is being raided. Like they've lost hope. Like their best options and opportunities have been taken away. Like they could only win by outplaying me.

Q: How do you feel the Dark Eldar army accomplishes, or fails to accomplish, this emotional feedback? How and where does it fail to provide the feeling you're looking for?
A: When accomplished, it's a fun game win or lose. The flavor of my army was realized in tactical application from a strategy based on fluff. When failing to accomplish, bored. Lame. Like I need to switch up my strategy? It only fails when a unit doesn't function as they do within fluff. Or when I feel like I've done everything right tactically and my best offensive strengths are nothing compared to my own weaknesses.

Late to the conversation, So I am just replying to the OP, and refinement on the first page. I want to feel like I am wielding a straight razor in a fight, At first doesn't seem that scary till you get cut a couple of times, and parts of your body aren't working and the horrid realization comes over you, the quick surprising blade you under estimated was your down fall, I would like to be able to strike from surprise. Out flanking, infiltration being wide spread, across our Kabal Cult army to show us attacking out of the webway, or ambushing while you a hunting down the monster frakenstein striding toward your city.

Rotten Deadite wrote:

I wonder if it's even possible to re-write Power from Pain so that it benefits the entire Dark Eldar army instead of, say, benefiting mostly melee or mostly ranged.

We could do by adopting the blood thide rules. Generate points to buy effects.
So you got to choose if you want to have 3+ poison that round or rending on melee attacks (for example) so you can build up with a focus on different playstyles and still use the same PfP charts.

in a victory i either want to be running the opponents army off the board surrounding them because i out positioned them, or i like being able to steal the win at the end of the game threw objectives or assassinations of warlords or high priority targets. in a loss i want to feel like it was my fault that i made the bad move that got my units destroyed and lefted them weak and open.