1750pt Kabalite Raiding Party - all the Trueborn!

It's the only formation in our book, and I want to try it at least once (if I ever manage to get a 1750pt game, anyway). Here's what I have so far:

Spoiler:

It's primarily a shooting list, but with 3 attacks each on the charge I'm hoping the Trueborn might also be able to finish off units in combat, once the PfP buffs kick in. Ideally, I'd probably be using more Raiders, but these 3 are all I own. The Shredders are there partially because I wanted to try them and this seemed like an appropriate time, and partially because I ran out of points for more Blasters. In case you're wondering, Parasite's Kiss is there because it fits my Archon's fluff (also, since it's important he stay alive, every little helps   ).


Anyway, I'm looking for advice with the following:

1) What do do with the Archon? At the moment, I've kitted him out for combat (since most of the PfP buffs are melee ones), but I'm wondering whether it would be better to give him a blaster and try to keep him out of harm's way. Any thoughts?

2) Related, should I stick with the Shadowfield, or swap out for a Clone Field? I know it sounds like a stupid question (since the +1 PfP is lost if he dies), but on the other hand he's probably not going to be the model carrying the list. Hence, I'm wondering whether it would be better to spend those points on an extra meduase or a Night Shield or something, and rely on not letting the Archon take hits in the first place.

3) Where should the Archon go? I was planning to put him with the Incubi (or Trueborn if I swap to a blaster), but would it be worth swapping out the Medusae for Sslyth as a tough bodyguard unit?

4) Any thoughts regarding the allocation of transports? I prioritised the Lhamaeans and Incubi for Raiders, as both would be getting very close to the enemy (and the latter would probably need the extra capacity to include the Archon), but I'm open to alternate suggestions.

5) Should I give any of the Raiders Night Shields? If so, what should I drop to get the points?

Any other thoughts or suggestions?

Is it possible to upgrade all the Warriors to true born?

Am I in-correct in saying that you can't have more than 3 elites? other than that I kinda like the idea of the army, strangely.

Cheers,
sKP

CptMetal wrote:

Is it possible to upgrade all the Warriors to true born?

I believe so. It's an upgrade on their page, and the formation doesn't mention any restrictions on such.

skp wrote:

Am I in-correct in saying that you can't have more than 3 elites? other than that I kinda like the idea of the army, strangely.

Cheers,
sKP

It's a formation - there aren't any Troop or Elite slots to begin with.

It just specifies 6 warrior squads. And, since Trueborn are just upgrades for warriors now, I upgraded all of them.

i was wondering the same thing, really excited to try out 6 TB squads with blasters ;D

It's pretty clear that true born are elites...so this is regrettably not possible

daveyo wrote:

It's pretty clear that true born are elites...so this is regrettably not possible

I know they're Elites. What difference does it make?

doriii wrote:

i was wondering the same thing, really excited to try out 6 TB squads with blasters ;D

Indeed, could be interesting.

Any thoughts on my list?

Well the issue that I see is the fact that it states you must have Warriors, by upgrading them they turn into Trueborn so they don't meet the requirements, no?

sKP.

Agreed SKP. Warriors are not Trueborn

I thought "Warriors" referred to the "Kabalite Warriors" Dataslate - which also contains Trueborn.

Otherwise my Court of the Archon can't ever be legal because none of the models are called "Court of the Archon".

This is the huge grey area of RAW vs RAI.

It's pretty clear to me (in my opinion) that GW are simply being efficient in paper and pages in the Codex..and lumping 2 elite slots into troops pages as they are so similar (Trueborn and |Bloodbrides). Warriors are warriors and trueborn are not, if GW had copy/pasted the text to a second page we wouldnt be having this discussion.
THis is the same as the Retainers rule which we ALL know means no court if no Archon BUT the RAW fans seek to take any advantage. Forge the Narrative!

If the codex was to be re-written (I did a fandex btw!) then each of these units would have their own slate with subtle cool differences

Sorry to be argumentative but this could (and probably will) be argued forever!

daveyo wrote:

This is the huge grey area of RAW vs RAI.

It's pretty clear to me (in my opinion) that GW are simply being efficient in paper and pages in the Codex..and lumping 2 elite slots into troops pages as they are so similar (Trueborn and |Bloodbrides).  Warriors are warriors and trueborn are not, if GW had copy/pasted the text to a second page we wouldnt be having this discussion.

They're not being efficient in paper, they just can't be bothered making trueborn models - so they lump them together to stop anyone else making trueborn models.

In any case, the rules for this are clear. Just before the wargear prices page, there are a few pages that explain how to read the dataslates in the book. "Unit Name" is the name at the top of the page. So, even if you upgrade a unit of Kabalite Warriors to Trueborn, they're still a unit of Kabalite Warriors for all purposes.

daveyo wrote:

THis is the same as the Retainers rule which we ALL know means no court if no Archon BUT the RAW fans seek to take any advantage.

Actually, that's a blatant lie. We don't all know that this is what the Retainers rule means. Especially considering that the rule is worded differently to both the previous version *and* to other, similar rules which *do* restrict when units can be taken. Furthermore, let's not forget that this is the edition that practically scrapped the FoC with Formations, Super-Formations and Unbound - as well as making any and all units legal (so big stuff isn't limited to Apocalypse anymore, more's the pity).

Therefore, saying that this particular unit was obviously supposed to be restricted is laughable. Why, when all other restrictions in the game have been removed, is it so certain that this one unit would still have one?

And, saying that it's just RAW fans seeking any advantage is very insulting. I doubt you'd be happy if I said that the RAI crowd are all idiots who can't read.

I mean, if anyone was looking for a serious advantage, surely they'd be looking for it in the Eldar book?

Ouch.  No dount you are right on the models front.  I think that everyone has a different relationship with the codex (love/hate mainly) and with DE it is particularly challenging as there is a lot of poor content and ambiguous intent. Agreed on the Eldar advantage!

I am simply imagining the intention of the writers, and my view of it seems clear...I obviously spoke out of turn assuming that everyone else feels the same (though I am sure many do).

I can't wait for an update, and it seems laughable that GW as a business would not attempt to keep their products up to date, resolve ambiguities and clear up issues.  It would take a designer a couple of hours just to update the Errata and FAQ's

Frustrating

daveyo wrote:

Ouch.  No dount you are right on the models front.  I think that everyone has a different relationship with the codex (love/hate mainly) and with DE it is particularly challenging as there is a lot of poor content and ambiguous intent.

To be honest, I haven't had many problems with the DE book in terms of ambiguousness. Probably because the book has so few unique rules. 'Retainers' is the only one I can recall people arguing about (well, that and the Treuborn in this list ).

I think most of the threads I've seen aren't so much as result of ambiguous rules as utter disbelief. Stuff like 'surely Orbs of Despair can't be this useless - what am I missing?'

daveyo wrote:

I am simply imagining the intention of the writers, and my view of it seems clear...I obviously spoke out of turn assuming that everyone else feels the same (though I am sure many do).

I guess it just seems odd to assume that they intended to keep this restriction, despite 7th being the 'play whatever you want' edition.

Personally though, I think the problem is that a lot of people are still fixed on the restriction in the 5th edition book. I suspect that if the Court had made its debut in this book, the rule wouldn't be seen as ambiguous. I could be wrong though.

daveyo wrote:

I can't wait for an update, and it seems laughable that GW as a business would not attempt to keep their products up to date, resolve ambiguities and clear up issues.  It would take a designer a couple of hours just to update the Errata and FAQ's

Indeed. I think the Necron FAQ on their site is still the one for the old book.

It's also really not a good sign when a company brags about not doing market research (though apparently it still hasn't managed to link this to falling profits).

The Shredder wrote:

Indeed, could be interesting.

Any thoughts on my list?

well, i think 1750pt is a little tight on points for this formation... at least the way i'd do it.

but i like that you are kitting the archon out and 3 flamerdusas is also a neat trick to have.
i dont get why you put shredders on the trueborn, i think they are much more useful on scourges, as the 12" range of shredders suit them bc of 12" move.
would be hilarious if you would do a Shredders army of shredders though. Every unit that can take em would max out full retard

My list would probably be
archon with something, maybe left over points if there will be any
3 medusas in DL raider
6xblasterborn in venom
haywire scourges
lance ravager
3-5 incubis with klaivex in DL raider
hellions are just tax really, but would be fun to play them in 8-max with helliarch

This is completely legal. Trueborn is an upgrade for Warriors that makes their FOC slot change to elites. Formations don't care about FOC slots. This has been upheld several times as correct. We just don't have an FAQ finalizing it.

doriii wrote:

[well, i think 1750pt is a little tight on points for this formation... at least the way i'd do it.

Entirely possible. The thing is, my group rarely plays anything above 1500pts - so even this list is a stretch.

doriii wrote:

i dont get why you put shredders on the trueborn, i think they are much more useful on scourges, as the 12" range of shredders suit them bc of 12" move.

A few reasons:

1) Scourges are the only unit in the list with access to Heat Lances or Haywire, so I thought it would be better to use them for that.

2) The Shredders were there to save points. And, since Haywire and Heat Lances are both cheaper than Blasters, I gain more points by downgrading Blasters to Shredders, if you see what I mean.

3) With the PfP bonus, I'm hoping do actually pull off some charges with this list (probably once I get Furious Charge). And, since Trueborn have 2 attacks apiece, it made more sense to me to give them the anti-infantry weapons.

4) For variety's sake. I don't know if it could be called 'overpowered' with a straight face, but I know my group would appreciate my not bringing 6 units of Blasterborn.

doriii wrote:

would be hilarious if you would do a Shredders army of shredders though. Every unit that can take em would max out full retard

doriii wrote:

My list would probably be
archon with something, maybe left over points if there will be any
3 medusas in DL raider
6xblasterborn in venom
haywire scourges
lance ravager
3-5 incubis with klaivex in DL raider
hellions are just tax really, but would be fun to play them in 8-max with helliarch

That does look like a stronger list.

In any case, if I manage to get a game I'll let you know how the list performed.