The possible future of the Druhkari

Yeah, i've been thinking for a bit now that Beasts/Beatmaster will go away, the court will still stay for 100% sure, they already made one of them in plastic.

So it's our annual "Squat-a-model festival" where we try to guess which model we'll lose this year?

I wouldn't be that worried. For the most part we have a strong range of pretty modern plastic models that are not going anywhere. I'd agree it's really just the beast units that are under threat, I don't really want to lose them but if something has to go, that's the best option.

Be really nice to have remade and better court of the archon models, but I'm not holding out on that happening.

It would be nice to get a list if "mercenary attributes" that work a lot like the Exarch powers or combat drugs where they effect the whole unit or at the very least have "Mercenary" have a rule like "Mercenary: A unit with this <Faction> gains the obsession of the <kabal>, <Cult>,or <Coven> they join" ... I find it weird in an edition where everything can be buffed by an aura or selectable special rule ... that we have units that don't fall into any of those buffable categories.

Archon_91 wrote:

It would be nice to get a list if "mercenary attributes" that work a lot like the Exarch powers or combat drugs where they effect the whole unit or at the very least have "Mercenary" have a rule like "Mercenary: A unit with this <Faction> gains the obsession of the <kabal>, <Cult>,or <Coven> they join" ... I find it weird in an edition where everything can be buffed by an aura or selectable special rule ... that we have units that don't fall into any of those buffable categories.

The only mercenaries that can't be buffed in any way are the scourges and mandrake.

Maybe at some point GW will realize that they made a mistake, just as they did with disallowing space marine vehicles to get chapter tactics until the most recent codex fixed that. Granted, they *still* haven't fixed that for chaos space marines, as far as I know, so who knows.

I don't really think GW made a mistake, the three mercenary units aren't amazing, but they aren't bad. I frequently use scourge, incubi and mandrakes in my lists, and they are nice for filling gaps if you're playing say, a pure cult army and you need some anti-vehicle fire support, take some scourge.

If we really want to talk about the unit that needs help in the DE range, I think the top two are hellions and cronos.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

I don't really think GW made a mistake, the three mercenary units aren't amazing, but they aren't bad.

They're not awful but I think the lack of any support really does hurt them.

Incubi have some support, they got Drazhar's nice little aura now. They could be a bit better as a unit on their own, but I'm content with them all having lethal precision now.

Mandrakes don't particularly need support. They function pretty well as a hybrid melee/shooting deep strike unit. A mandrake assassin sort of HQ that could support them would be nice, but again I don't feel the absolute need.

Scourge I think honestly work exactly how they should. Jump infantry with loads of special weapon options is a good role. Sure they die easily but we're talking about eldar here, what drukhari eldar unit lasts long against shooting besides grotesques.

The problem that Scourges have is less with the unit itself and more with the lack of buffs available to them. They just don't cut it in an environment where almost every enemy special or heavy weapons platform has access to rerolls for hits and wounds or other even stronger buffs.

Hell, even within Drukhari there's very little reason to take them over the Ravager battery.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

I wouldn't be that worried. For the most part we have a strong range of pretty modern plastic models that are not going anywhere. I'd agree it's really just the beast units that are under threat, I don't really want to lose them but if something has to go, that's the best option.

Why does anything have to go? You see other armies losing units?

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

Incubi have some support, they got Drazhar's nice little aura now. They could be a bit better as a unit on their own, but I'm content with them all having lethal precision now.

That's true, though I'm never keen on having to rely on a special character for anything.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

Mandrakes don't particularly need support. They function pretty well as a hybrid melee/shooting deep strike unit. A mandrake assassin sort of HQ that could support them would be nice, but again I don't feel the absolute need.

I have to disagree here. Mandrakes are okay in a vacuum but I think the lack of any support (including Obsessions) really is felt.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

Scourge I think honestly work exactly how they should. Jump infantry with loads of special weapon options is a good role. Sure they die easily but we're talking about eldar here, what drukhari eldar unit lasts long against shooting besides grotesques.

Again, I'll have to disagree here. Scourges have precisely one build that's functional (Haywire), everything else is either terrible (Splinter Cannons, Heat Lances), too expensive (Blasters), or just completely non-functional (Dark Lances). And even with Haywire they're just a poor-man's Skyweavers.

But weapons aside, I think it's a lot of little things - e.g. not being able to deep strike near an Archon to get the benefit of his aura, not being able to use stratagems like Masters of the Shadowed Sky (or indeed any of the other FS bonuses).


But setting aside power for a moment, the lack of support also means that there's very little you can do with these units. If I want a Mandrake-themed army I can include more Mandrakes . . . and that's really it. I can't choose an appropriate Obsession for them because they don't benefit from any of them. We have no psychic discipline and Mandrakes can't even be Ynnari, so that's out. I can't include any Mandrake characters because they don't exist, and the standard characters are only ever able to help models within their own subfaction.

Yeah we just have to agree to disagree on mandrakes. I've had a lot of success using them as a small assassin unit, waiting to deep strike until turn 3 and picking off exposed units/characters. Plus if they don't do well, it's only 80 pts lost. They are not dying to have some strat or character aura to make them worth using.

I'll give you scourge are very much a glass cannon, but I just don't see how that unit should be anything but that. They are eldar infantry with a +4 armor, I don't really see any reason they should be tougher. I also have some success using them with shredders, though I'll admit there they rarely live long enough to do much, and I do also like stock carbines since they are ignored more often and get more shots off. Again, a reroll 1s aura is not going to magically all of a sudden make them so much more effective or worth taking. Obsession bonuses would be nice, but o well, I'll keep using them.

On support for a "mandrake theme army" yeah ideal world, we'd have a mandrake character, some other mandrake like unit, any of the sort of stuff that shows up in the mandrake war that takes place in the Path of the Dark Eldar trilogy. In reality though there's just only so much focus on Dark Eldar to go around, we just can't expect every little subfaction and theme to get attention. I don't like it, but it's the reality we have.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

Yeah we just have to agree to disagree on mandrakes. I've had a lot of success using them as a small assassin unit, waiting to deep strike until turn 3 and picking off exposed units/characters. Plus if they don't do well, it's only 80 pts lost. They are not dying to have some strat or character aura to make them worth using.

Fair enough. All I can say is that I wish I shared your success with them.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

I'll give you scourge are very much a glass cannon, but I just don't see how that unit should be anything but that. They are eldar infantry with a +4 armor, I don't really see any reason they should be tougher.

I didn't say that they should be tougher.

What I'm saying is that they're unlikely to get more than a single turn of shooting. Hence, being able to benefit from (for example) an Archon's reroll 1s aura would at least reduce the chance of them wiffing that all-important turn of shooting.

Also, given that their entire purpose is to be a mobile weapons platform, it still seems ludicrous to me that they can't move and fire their Dark Lances without penalty.

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

On support for a "mandrake theme army" yeah ideal world, we'd have a mandrake character, some other mandrake like unit, any of the sort of stuff that shows up in the mandrake war that takes place in the Path of the Dark Eldar trilogy. In reality though there's just only so much focus on Dark Eldar to go around, we just can't expect every little subfaction and theme to get attention. I don't like it, but it's the reality we have.

But that doesn't mean I have to like out faction being given nothing but table scraps whilst even the most minor of marine subfactions is lavished not just with models and units but with its own unique book.

Seriously, I don't even know why GW bothers having Xeno armies at all at this point. Might as well just scrap the lot and turn the game into a Marine free-for-all.

Archon aura on scourges would be nice, as would move&fire with dark lances, but neither of those particular changes would I think really change how they work. Would anyone really take dark lances on them, even in that case? I have my doubts given they have better choices. What might help is some other there other options going down pts or improving, splinter cannon pts reduction and a heat lance improvement comes to mind in particular.

You don't have to like the the constant marine focus, but I think it's more productive to just live with it and make due with what we have, instead of just constantly being unhappy about it and being disappointed when GW doesn't focus on DE more. It's hardly nothing new either, even before this release wave marines already had essentially 5 extra full codexes of marine variant armies, it's just how it is. And without a doubt, Warhammer 40,0000 would be a dull setting without xenos.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Lord Asvaldir wrote:

I wouldn't be that worried. For the most part we have a strong range of pretty modern plastic models that are not going anywhere. I'd agree it's really just the beast units that are under threat, I don't really want to lose them but if something has to go, that's the best option.

Why does anything have to go? You see other armies losing units?

Nothing has to go, nor do I want to lose anything. If something had to go a few years down the road, that would be my guess though.

I know is not possible, but I would like this little cat for our Beastmaster :

And why not:


I could imagine them less armored than a talos, but more faster and stronger.

It would be sad to see beasts disappear. In their current form they aren't great. But imagine what they could do with say a plastic "hydra" like the old dark elves from WHFB. It could be the wych cults talos. Or if they release plastic khymera in a set of 10 and lower them to a reasonable cost, say 7 points? I just hope they see if sales are bad for beasts its because of the dumb "no force org stuff" as well as expensive monopose finecast.

They really should just make 1 plastic kit that has 2 Birds, 2 Dogs, 1 Fiend, 1 BM, and make Beasts a unit. Redo the datasheet like it was in 5th.

^ Not sure in would like that as a box. Not a big fan of the mixed units. Like deathwatch units, it slows down the game so much it becomes tedious imo. If I wanted 10 dogs I'd end up with 5 beast masters.

Serpent Fly wrote:

^ Not sure in would like that as a box. Not a big fan of the mixed units. Like deathwatch units, it slows down the game so much it becomes tedious imo. If I wanted 10 dogs I'd end up with 5 beast masters.

Yeah i can understand that.

amishprn86 wrote:

They really should just make 1 plastic kit that has 2 Birds, 2 Dogs, 1 Fiend, 1 BM, and make Beasts a unit. Redo the datasheet like it was in 5th.

I hated that unit composition, despite running a beaststar list! Much rather be able to pick a unit of each type rather than having to have them all in the same unit.

Count Adhemar wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

They really should just make 1 plastic kit that has 2 Birds, 2 Dogs, 1 Fiend, 1 BM, and make Beasts a unit. Redo the datasheet like it was in 5th.

I hated that unit composition, despite running a beaststar list! Much rather be able to pick a unit of each type rather than having to have them all in the same unit.

I guess i'm the only one that liked the Motley Crew version You had the birds with wounds and rend, the dogs to take high AP hits and the Fiends to heavy lift in melee. But i did had 2 birds, 8 dogs if i remembered from 5th, it felt really good.

I mean that sounds like the easiest way to get plastic beast models, I'd take that.

amishprn86 wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

They really should just make 1 plastic kit that has 2 Birds, 2 Dogs, 1 Fiend, 1 BM, and make Beasts a unit. Redo the datasheet like it was in 5th.

I hated that unit composition, despite running a beaststar list! Much rather be able to pick a unit of each type rather than having to have them all in the same unit.

I guess i'm the only one that liked the Motley Crew version  You had the birds with wounds and rend, the dogs to take high AP hits and the Fiends to heavy lift in melee. But i did had 2 birds, 8 dogs if i remembered from 5th, it felt really good.

Nope! I love my all metal mixed beast squad! I was all over Webway portals, wych blobs and a beaststar when everyone was running boring old venom spam. Even used Sathonyx to ferry a pain token to infiltrating mandrakes because they couldn't shoot until they got one! Oh how I loved those useless little bastards anyway.