Codex Drukhari is offical for the start of 2021

personaly i'd prefer the system to still be one where the boosts are army wide, not calculated unit by unit. first it makes it easier to keep track, it does not slow down the pace of the game, and overall, its just better!

I would like to get something off my chest.

I have taken a hiatus for a couple of years form 40k and I have had a love for Dark Eldar, now Drukhari.

My main gripe is that we have been lacking troop options in our Codex. The fact that they have basically split the Drukhari into three sub-factions has limited our troop choices to one per sub-faction.

Meanwhile the Space Marines have seen their range of models increased with a full compliment of Primaris variants, not only different infantry but also tanks and HQ choices.

The positive news is that we don't need to build in separate detachments anymore to benefit from the sub-faction bonusses.

The other positive news is that they have changed most weapon and unit profiles.

Yet they (GW) stated that the model line is in a good spot, which signals to me that they didn't add any new models to the range. Which is a shame as there are so many cool ways they could build on the range of models. Like an actual sniper unit, maybe a variant of Scourges.
The court of the Archon is a cool idea but it needs to be worked out better.
Another idea could be to build an actual Kabal close combat and/or elite unit, like the Trueborn and Hekatrixes.
Another thing I would like to see is more options for HQ choices, like Archites, Junior Heamonculus and the likes, which could have unit buffs. Something like an equivalent to the Chaplain for the Space Marines. Or something like a Apothecary which would allow for buffs/debuffs and wounds/model revival.

My personal hope is that they finally get the rules for Hellions to work. Those models look great but I haven't found any role that they actually can play on the battlefield.

My actual play experience is limited yet I have found that we could use a fast troop choice, like Jump Pack Marines. I have seen Blood Angels move up for 14" and than charge at +1". Which seems to make them a lot faster than what Drukhari can be.

So hopefully we get a great choice of Strategems and unit upgrades to build a fast army.

Kalmah wrote:

personaly i'd prefer the system to still be one where the boosts are army wide, not calculated unit by unit. first it makes it easier to keep track, it does not slow down the pace of the game, and overall, its just better!

Army wide bonus is great, but should me upgraded by more than just time passing on the battlefield.

El_Jairo wrote:

My actual play experience is limited yet I have found that we could use a fast troop choice, like Jump Pack Marines. I have seen Blood Angels move up for 14" and than charge at +1". Which seems to make them a lot faster than what Drukhari can be.

So hopefully we get a great choice of Strategems and unit upgrades to build a fast army.

To be fair, we can now use the Corsair Skyreavers in a detachment without losing our obsessions.

dumpeal wrote:

Kalmah wrote:

personaly i'd prefer the system to still be one where the boosts are army wide, not calculated unit by unit. first it makes it easier to keep track, it does not slow down the pace of the game, and overall, its just better!

Army wide bonus is great, but should me upgraded by more than just time passing on the battlefield.

I think an elegant way of doing this would be to tie PfP to objectives. Even if it would be only our unique secondary objectives. This would convey a sense of progression without having it tied to mere rounds.

Corsairs are legends now. Its really hard to play with legends outside of fun games.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

dumpeal wrote:

Kalmah wrote:

personaly i'd prefer the system to still be one where the boosts are army wide, not calculated unit by unit. first it makes it easier to keep track, it does not slow down the pace of the game, and overall, its just better!

Army wide bonus is great, but should me upgraded by more than just time passing on the battlefield.

I think an elegant way of doing this would be to tie PfP to objectives. Even if it would be only our unique secondary objectives. This would convey a sense of progression without having it tied to mere rounds.

I would prefer something that also works in Crusade. I also doubt GW would make a faction rule like power from pain dependend on specific mission packs. If they keep it seperate they can make bigger chances in upcoming mission packs without breaking whole factions.

And i also don't want a mechanic with killed units back, as that would be really hard to balance for all game sizes. And it is power from pain not strength from death, so if GW gets it done it will be more likely for Ynnari. They are devouring the souls of the dead, we grow with the pain of the living.

Something i could more likely see to happen is similar to necron command protocols, that only affect units around characters. Power from Pain could only affect instead units that are close to wounded models or units, which already took casualities and some weapons and in addition some equipments, that also create a bubble in which units are effected by power from pain, phantasm grenade launcher or tormentors for example. But i am not sure if GW would take the time to test such a mechanic for a xenos codex.

I doubt very much that PfP is going to change more than minorly. I only hope they make it useful for both shooting units and CC units.

That's the minimum effort level it needs, and I expect pretty minimal effort level from GW.

Well...if we analyze the work from GW since the 8th...I think we can expect something, in fact.

I think the 8th was the "update" edition. New rulebook, completely new rules. And we saw Codexes that were kinda "flat" in flavour. Indexes, then Codexes that were merely an update from the indexes.
This, until the last 8th SM Codex (and Supplements) popped up. Did you remember the feelings about it? It was universally felt as "something like a new design of rules, a Codex for the new edition". SM was different from every other Codex in both pubblication and rules design too. It was the first one with a REAL new personality. With some rules rework into his foundations: no more just "And they shall know no fear"; GW rewrite the rule itself into the new "Angels of Death", which brings all the rules we know today.

Then there's the 9th edition. The new SM Codex is basically an update of the last 8th Codex which was already "new" in the Concept. But Necrons? GW wrote again another basic rule of the army: Reanimation Protocols are changed. Actually buffed, it works different from before and it feels way better. Then new models, new rules, we have more Crypteks, these new "relics-but-not-relics" for them, etc.
The new Codex Necron "feels" actually new.
Now Adam Troke says that Drukhari got a rework more than a simple upgrade. Nearly every profile is changed or buffed, and the army itself got some inner rework (and he never said the word "Obsessions" once).
Like Necrons in 9th. Like SM in late 8th.

I think the 8th was supposed to be something in preparation for the 9th.
8th was the "rulebook rework" edition.
9th should be the "codexes rework" edition.
SM have been just early on the road. They "felt" like 9th ed Codex, I don't know why GW anticipate them. But the feeling is that.




....just thinking.

for my part, i'm all in with you Cerve!
Marketing wise, it's simply what MUST be done!
At GW, they're not dumb, and they are treacherous succubus who only wants our money, and what better way to grab our hard earned money than to release from good to excellent codexes?
Is there truly someone who thinks that there are people at GW who are like: hum.... how could i downgrade my already not that good army?

Now, that being said, our soon-to-be codex will probably be good, but don't get me wrong, it probably wont be THE BEST codex of the entire game. And that's perfectly fine with me. The Competitive scene for every games has always been like that. There can only be one at the top after all
The ultimate goal for GW is for sure to find a good balance between each faction, they have everything to gain by doing so, after all, nothing sells more than good stuff!

We just don't want a power creep, that every codexes following ours always come out better and better.

Unfortunately power creep is inevitable as we know they are going to release more campaign type books like the Psychic Awakening series ... in which they promise new rules and such for an army meaning they have to come up with even better rules than what is in the codex or introducing a new model with more powerful rules to get people to buy it, and codexes that come out closer to the release of these are going to be closer to the power levels of armies after that release then armies release towards the beginning of the new edition ... at least that's what it felt like during Psychic Awakening (leaving us out of the power gain of course)

Cerve wrote:

Well...if we analyze the work from GW since the 8th...I think we can expect something, in fact.

I think the 8th was the "update" edition. New rulebook, completely new rules. And we saw Codexes that were kinda "flat" in flavour. Indexes, then Codexes that were merely an update from the indexes.
This, until the last 8th SM Codex (and Supplements) popped up. Did you remember the feelings about it? It was universally felt as "something like a new design of rules, a Codex for the new edition". SM was different from every other Codex in both pubblication and rules design too. It was the first one with a REAL new personality. With some rules rework into his foundations: no more just "And they shall know no fear"; GW rewrite the rule itself into the new "Angels of Death", which brings all the rules we know today.

Then there's the 9th edition. The new SM Codex is basically an update of the last 8th Codex which was already "new" in the Concept. But Necrons? GW wrote again another basic rule of the army: Reanimation Protocols are changed. Actually buffed, it works different from before and it feels way better. Then new models, new rules, we have more Crypteks, these new "relics-but-not-relics" for them, etc.  
The new Codex Necron "feels" actually new.
Now Adam Troke says that Drukhari got a rework more than a simple upgrade. Nearly every profile is changed or buffed, and the army itself got some inner rework (and he never said the word "Obsessions" once).
Like Necrons in 9th. Like SM in late 8th.

I think the 8th was supposed to be something in preparation for the 9th.
8th was the "rulebook rework" edition.
9th should be the "codexes rework" edition.  
SM have been just early on the road. They "felt" like 9th ed Codex, I don't know why GW anticipate them. But the feeling is that.




....just thinking.

RP was changed b.c GW broke them and they were unplayable (literally people didn't get to play with them), the Necrons book was just bad in so many areas (the same for Tau) that them getting a complete rewrite was expected. So i would not look at the Necron book to be the norm, we have seen many books out now, though its mostly SM's, but they all are mostly the same.

Cerve wrote:

I think the 8th was supposed to be something in preparation for the 9th.
8th was the "rulebook rework" edition.
9th should be the "codexes rework" edition.  
SM have been just early on the road. They "felt" like 9th ed Codex, I don't know why GW anticipate them. But the feeling is that.

I can see that in a way that they simplified the game in 8th and added some layers back with Terrain in 9th.

In 9th the emphasis is heavily on Stratagems, IMHO.

With MEQ now being 2 wounds, the NEED to change weapon profiles, to keep weapons still relevant.

I do look forward to the Crusade part of the new Codex as narrative play always has been my favorite style. I was forced into points play because it's the 'official GW' and thus competitive play, yet 40k is a game that is a little too broken for that. The fact that there is no activation alternation or a initiative mechanic makes it so that first turn is really impactful. So unless you can hide behind obscuring terrain, you really need to make sure that you get first turn and punish the opponent.

The fact that you all of your units go at once makes buffing and death-star builds viable, which is IMHO one of the weaknesses of 40k.

I'm wondering, did Drukhari ever had such a thing? Because typically you need Psychers to lean heavy into buffing.

What I have seen from GW (I have been playing since the 3rd Ed Second version Dark Eldar Codex) is that there is always power creep, yet typically it's also within a Codex. They will buff units that were crap to push the sales of those models and from time to time they will drop the ball on a codex. Which is written not with power creep in mind and it ends up loosing bigly. The saving grace for Drukhari has always been that they have exotic rules and poison weapons. Yet with the wounds count going up, it seems that poison isn't effective, unless it get's changed.

So yeah, on that front GW did announce that most weapons are improved or changed in a big way.

What I personally would like to see is a way to viably attack Leadership, since Moral Check matters again.

Another wish of mine is Wyches and Succubi have a build-in ability that reduces that opponents WS. Like back in the day of 3rd Ed, second version: Wyches could tie up MEQ's all day without taking heavy losses. They wouldn't scratch the MEQ's (only the Agoniser provided one dead MEQ per turn) but they were hard to kill because they brought down the WS of the opponents.
Now they solely have to count on their Dodge save, which is not enough seeing how many attacks basic MEQ's pump out these days.

Another wish is that PfP get's a revamp to make it more relevant. Sure the 6+ FnP is nice on paper, but typically doesn't do much. Some battles it is clutch and in other battles it never mattered because your opponent plays smart and uses focus fire anyway and has redundant fire power.

Another beef of mine is that Dark Matter weaponry. Why on earth would you give it a d6 damage profile? If you hit and wound, there is still a chance that the dark matter will do as much damage as a punch to the face? Sure, it's AP has provided the break through armor, yet the risk of rolling 1 for damage is just dumb. I would rather see 2d3 but frankly, it needs to be 2d3 +1 or something like that. So at least you are guaranteed to kill an elite infantry if you hit and wound. Our Dark Matter weaponry doesn't come cheep. I long for the day that you would build a 10 man Warrior squad to park back in your deployment on an objective, just to pick off enemy vehicles that dared to show themselves.

Ah, the good old days, when people still were scared from Dark Matter Weaponry. IMHO Dark Matter weaponry should add a +1 to the explosion roll, just to amp up the scare factor.

'Fundamentally reworked from the ground up' is a direct quote from the stream. I guess it will come down to what that means to GW and what that means to us.

El_Jairo wrote:

The fact that you all of your units go at once makes buffing and death-star builds viable, which is IMHO one of the weaknesses of 40k.

I'm wondering, did Drukhari ever had such a thing? Because typically you need Psychers to lean heavy into buffing.

Drukhari had a few builds that were Death Star-ish:

1) Baron Sathonyx + Beasts. This one was somewhat popular in 5th, IIRC. Basically, the Baron conferred Stealth and Grenades to the beasts, and with the wound-allocation rules you could use different sorts of beasts to tank different wounds. Razorwing Flocks could take large numbers of basic rounds, Clawed Fiends could tank heavier munitions, and Khymera could tank low-AP weapons. I think a Haemonculus was also attached initially to give the unit FNP.

It wasn't amazing and didn't involve a whole lot in the way of buff-stacking, but it was the closest thing to a functional Death Star that the 5th edition book could do.

2) Dark Artisan. One of the formations in the 7th edition supplement, it let a Haemonculus, Talos and Cronos all merge into a single unit. Again, not a huge amount in the way of buff-stacking (the Haemonculus could bring a WWP to deep strike the unit and I think there was a warlord trait as well, but that was about it), and didn't hold a candle to the death stars other races could pull off in 7th, but it was about the best we could do.

3) Corpsethief Claw. Another 7th edition formation, this one allowed 5 Talos to function as a single unit (I think? I didn't have enough to even attempt it, so I might be misremembering). No buff-stacking at all with this one, just a Death Star by virtue of being 5 monsters all joined together.

That's about it, I think. Though quite honestly I much prefer this style - where you can maybe stack a couple of buffs but you can't make a unit nigh-invulnerable.

I miss those 3 things you said so much lol.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

1) Baron Sathonyx + Beasts. This one was somewhat popular in 5th, IIRC. Basically, the Baron conferred Stealth and Grenades to the beasts, and with the wound-allocation rules you could use different sorts of beasts to tank different wounds. Razorwing Flocks could take large numbers of basic rounds, Clawed Fiends could tank heavier munitions, and Khymera could tank low-AP weapons. I think a Haemonculus was also attached initially to give the unit FNP.

It wasn't amazing and didn't involve a whole lot in the way of buff-stacking, but it was the closest thing to a functional Death Star that the 5th edition book could do.  

I think the main trick was to add a jetbike Farseer in that unit to cast Fortune, which let you reroll all failed saves, including the Baron's 2++ shadow field. So, in theory he could tank the first 36 wounds?

Oaka wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

1) Baron Sathonyx + Beasts. This one was somewhat popular in 5th, IIRC. Basically, the Baron conferred Stealth and Grenades to the beasts, and with the wound-allocation rules you could use different sorts of beasts to tank different wounds. Razorwing Flocks could take large numbers of basic rounds, Clawed Fiends could tank heavier munitions, and Khymera could tank low-AP weapons. I think a Haemonculus was also attached initially to give the unit FNP.

It wasn't amazing and didn't involve a whole lot in the way of buff-stacking, but it was the closest thing to a functional Death Star that the 5th edition book could do.  

I think the main trick was to add a jetbike Farseer in that unit to cast Fortune, which let you reroll all failed saves, including the Baron's 2++ shadow field.  So, in theory he could tank the first 36 wounds?

Without allies it was Baron, Haemonculus x2 to start, and a Shadowseer (b.c it became a characters so he no longer needs to be in the troupe unit), gave plasma grenades, and can not target them outside of 2D6x2 (average 14") by attacks. With max beasts it was literally a unshootable turn 1 unit, furious charge, 5+++, assault/defense grenades, fallback and charge, 15-25 dogs for that invula nd sweet save and then either 2-4 birds or 1 clawed fiend for rend/high strength (basically a backup unit). I just did 25 Khymera's at the time.

It was not till 6th that you could ally.

amishprn86 wrote:

Oaka wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

1) Baron Sathonyx + Beasts. This one was somewhat popular in 5th, IIRC. Basically, the Baron conferred Stealth and Grenades to the beasts, and with the wound-allocation rules you could use different sorts of beasts to tank different wounds. Razorwing Flocks could take large numbers of basic rounds, Clawed Fiends could tank heavier munitions, and Khymera could tank low-AP weapons. I think a Haemonculus was also attached initially to give the unit FNP.

It wasn't amazing and didn't involve a whole lot in the way of buff-stacking, but it was the closest thing to a functional Death Star that the 5th edition book could do.  

I think the main trick was to add a jetbike Farseer in that unit to cast Fortune, which let you reroll all failed saves, including the Baron's 2++ shadow field.  So, in theory he could tank the first 36 wounds?

Without allies it was Baron, Haemonculus x2 to start, and a Shadowseer (b.c it became a characters so he no longer needs to be in the troupe unit), gave plasma grenades, and can not target them outside of 2D6x2 (average 14") by attacks.  With max beasts it was literally a unshootable turn 1 unit, furious charge, 5+++, assault/defense grenades, fallback and charge, 15-25 dogs for that invula nd sweet save and then either 2-4 birds or 1 clawed fiend for rend/high strength (basically a backup unit). I just did 25 Khymera's at the time.

It was not till 6th that you could ally.

I was on Baron and the Beast immediately when that book dropped, the venom spam didn't interest me.

My setup was Baron, 2 Haemonculi, and 4 grotesques all stretched out in a line. First turn move up and toss out webway portals from the haemonculi (who were on the ends of the line). Turn 2, when the beasts arrive, jump Sathonyx into the squad with 1 or 2 pain tokens depending on need. Beasts themselves couldn't use the tokens, but 3 made Sathonyx fearless which conferred to the squad.

God I loved that book. I miss my WWPs...

I would be so happy if those WWPs dropped by characters came back. My vehicle-less Dark Eldar relied on those. For me, it was a Haemie in the untargetable Harlequin/Shadowseer unit dropping a portal in the middle of the table and then having waves of Wyches and Talos' popping out.

Although nowadays having to roll to see if your reserves come in that turn seems unplayable!

I would love to see haywire greneade Wyches again...
WWP was good on paper, but kinda bad in game. When you consider that every smart opponent would surround the Portal, and then no one were going outside from that...well...

I remember 20 Hellions with Sathonyx, with 2 pain token at the start. That unit was amazing back in 5th.
I remember Vect with Khymerae blobs too.





Hey, do you all think that the rumors from 1 month ago can be actually true?
Wracks 2 Wounds
Wyches -1 to hit built in
Kabalites +1 to hit if stationary, -1 to hit (to the oppo) if moving



Just, please, makes dodge viable against pistols and shooting in melee!

Cerve wrote:

I would love to see haywire greneade Wyches again...
WWP was good on paper, but kinda bad in game. When you consider that every smart opponent would surround the Portal, and then no one were going outside from that...well...

Venom spam was definitely the more competitive way to run DE, but I literally never had both WWP portals surrounded once, and I played a LOT of games with them in tournaments and otherwise.

Smart players surrounding them was not really a thing.

Relying on the right reserves coming out at the right time was the bigger issue.

Cerve wrote:

Hey, do you all think that the rumors from 1 month ago can be actually true?
Wracks 2 Wounds
Wyches -1 to hit built in
Kabalites +1 to hit if stationary, -1 to hit (to the oppo) if moving

Could be. -1 to hit is not as powerful as it was.


If we are all wishlisting. Two things i would really like to see, not the onyl two, but i think the only two not already mentioned here.
Haemonculi getting the Cryptek treatment. I want Nemesines, Nadirists, Scarlet Epicureans,... not just generic Haemonculi.
And Talos and Cronos becoming part of the same unit. We don't need a whole Cronos unit, but two Taloi and one Cronos in one pain engine unit could be a nice option.

Cerve wrote:

Hey, do you all think that the rumors from 1 month ago can be actually true?
Wracks 2 Wounds
Wyches -1 to hit built in
Kabalites +1 to hit if stationary, -1 to hit (to the oppo) if moving

Just, please, makes dodge viable against pistols and shooting in melee!

Where were these rumours from?

Koldan wrote:

Cerve wrote:

Hey, do you all think that the rumors from 1 month ago can be actually true?
Wracks 2 Wounds
Wyches -1 to hit built in
Kabalites +1 to hit if stationary, -1 to hit (to the oppo) if moving

Could be. -1 to hit is not as powerful as it was.


If we are all wishlisting. Two things i would really like to see, not the onyl two, but i think the only two not already mentioned here.
Haemonculi getting the Cryptek treatment. I want Nemesines, Nadirists, Scarlet Epicureans,... not just generic Haemonculi.

I'd like all our characters to get the Cryptek treatment. Especially in the very likely event that we're not getting any more and so will still be stuck with the three stooges, each competing with the other two for who can have the worst selection of wargear.

Koldan wrote:

And Talos and Cronos becoming part of the same unit. We don't need a whole Cronos unit, but two Taloi and one Cronos in one pain engine unit could be a nice option.

Then all we'd need is a way to attach a Haemonculus to it.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

I'd like all our characters to get the Cryptek treatment. Especially in the very likely event that we're not getting any more and so will still be stuck with the  three stooges, each competing with the other two for who can have the worst selection of wargear.

Koldan wrote:

And Talos and Cronos becoming part of the same unit. We don't need a whole Cronos unit, but two Taloi and one Cronos in one pain engine unit could be a nice option.

Then all we'd need is a way to attach a Haemonculus to it.

I know it is unlikely GW will do it, but at least my wishes are reasonable. I am not trying to take a mile, i am asking for an inch GW will most likely not give.
Puting a Cronos inside a Talos unit is rulewise like puting a wych with shardnet and impaler inside a wych unit. One area of effect around that model and different weapons, nothing that exotic.

And for Cryptek treatment GW has already written the disciplines for Haemonculi. It is not asked that much to actually give us not one datasheet for all scientist, instead give us their specialities. For Necrons they have done it even though they had to actually create lore for them, for Haemonculi the lore is already there. And some disciplines are easy to map to stereotypes, Nemesines are damage dealers, Scarlet Epicureans should be really tanky, Black Cornucopians could be buffing their minions, so the Haemonculi of now, and Phoenex could be an excuse to give Ynnari access to Coven units.