Sneak Peek at New Drukhari Codex

Heamy with healing powers like Apothecary = Yes
Succubus good vs characters = Yes
Archon...difficult. Should be good at fighting but doesn’t need to be amazing. Should be good at shooting but doesn’t need to be amazing. He/She needs to add something tactically I feel. To show cunning or sneaky ways. Something unique would be great.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

I think the problem is that our generic characters, in addition to lacking options, are all basically fulfilling the same role.

A Chaos Sorcerer plays differently from a Chaos Lord, a Warboss plays differently from a Big Mek, a SM Captain plays differently from a Librarian, a Tau Commander plays differently from an Ethereal, a Company Commander plays differently from a Commissar or Primaris Psyker etc.

But with Dark Eldar, all our characters are just doing the same thing. The Archon is a mediocre beatstick with a little support ability. The Haemonculus is a medicore beatstick with a bit of support ability. The Succubus is a mediocre beatstick with a little support ability.

As it stands, the main difference between them is one created through arbitrary fiat. If you removed the restrictions on which HQ could buff and be taken with which subfaction, I suspect at least one of them (probably the Succubus) would basically vanish from the table.  

And while the Archon's aura is different from that of the Haemonculus, neither of them bring any actual utility. The Archon just makes units ever so slightly better at hitting things. The Haemonculus makes already-durable units a little bit tougher. The only real utility they can bring comes in the form of artefacts, like the Helm of Spite and Vexator Mask.

In addition to needing more options, I think we really need for our HQs to become more focussed in their respective roles. e.g.:
- The succubus needs to be our melee champion, second only to Drazhar. She should be rocking 6 attacks with her weapon having Blood Glaive stats at the bare minimum. Also, drop her aura and give her extra benefits when duelling characters.
- The Archon should be a command character, possibly also leaning more towards mid-range shooting than melee. But his real utility should be in providing more global buffs - whether in the form of command points or with some other support ability.
- The Haemonculus should be a 'wildcard', being able to bring various support or debuff abilities in the form of different pieces of arcane wargear. He should also have some general utility with Coven, perhaps being able to heal them and/or bring back dead models.

This is a great idea.

This could be combined with some mobility options to be very flavorful. I think the succubus particularly lends herself to going on a bike or skyboard. If they gave the archon the ability to use his auras or powers from inside a transport this would also fit really well.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Heamy with healing powers like Apothecary = Yes
Succubus good vs characters = Yes
Archon...difficult. Should be good at fighting but doesn’t need to be amazing. Should be good at shooting but doesn’t need to be amazing. He/She needs to add something tactically I feel. To show cunning or sneaky ways. Something unique would be great.

Yeah, the Archon seems like he should be something of an all-rounder (or at least can be built to fulfil a few different roles, depending on wargear). But I definitely think he needs some sort of command ability, rather than just a generic aura.

I did wonder about a way to pull himself or another unit out of combat immediately after they attacked. Probably not quite the right theme for Kabal, if I'm honest. I just thought it was an appropriately dirty trick for DE.

Maybe more of a Mandrake thing?

GreyArea wrote:

This is a great idea.

This could be combined with some mobility options to be very flavorful. I think the succubus particularly lends herself to going on a bike or skyboard. If they gave the archon the ability to use his auras or powers from inside a transport this would also fit really well.

Cheers.

And yeah, I'd definitely like to see it embellished with some mobility wargear. I was just trying to focus on general roles for our HQs.

I did wonder if each of our HQs should have 2 of our 3 mobility options. e.g.:
Archon - Wings or Jetbike
Succubus - Jetbike or Skyboard
Haemonculus - Wings or Skyboard

Just a random idea, really.

I’m not sold on Archons with wings. I totally get the jet bike but in truth to be honest Archons are like the Mafia boss in the backseat of a limousine. Why get your hands dirty? You’re the boss!!!

It doesn’t help because you want them to be effective in a battle but I personally feel as though they should have a greater impact in more unique ways.

Sisters of battle have been given some very different rules that pretty much change the way they play the game. I’d like something unique like that. Do you want your archon killing 3 space marines or do you want his presence to literally impact on the course of the battle in a tactical way? I’m thinking shenanigans type rules.

Deployment tricks
Extra CP
Null Zone
Priority Target Sighted
Meticulous Planner

Just something less combative but still useful.

These are all nice ideas. We'll just have to wait and hope GW had some good ideas of their own!
I'm getting really excited for rules reveals. Cannot wait for our preview week to start!

[quote="Soulless Samurai"]

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

To be honest, though, Vect is the one DE model I have absolutely no interest in seeing return. I know that this is probably heresy, and that I'm almost certainly in the minority on this one. However, I just don't like seeing the major players of different races being made into characters. And it's not just Vect - I also dislike seeing stuff like the Silent King for Necrons.

I know some people like them, but for me it makes the 40k universe feel small. Characters like Vect, Abaddon, the Silent King etc. are ones that should be the end of a grand campaign - either fighting them on their home turf or else trying to stop their flagship or invasion force. Fighting these guys should be rare and apocalyptic events - not something that just happens in random skirmishes.

i know we are not always on the same page Soulless Samurai, but on this one, i'm all in with you! I was really surprised when i first found out that there were named characters for the tabletop game. I would personally have prefered that every model are nameless (unless you want to create yourself their names) and that HQ are simply regular captains or leaders, but never THE leader.
Personally i would have created the named character only for lore purpose and for the black library books. In the game, those named characters are either too strong in comparison to others, or, as mentioned by Samurai, don't live up to the hype created in the lore around those characters.

Personally, I'd rather see the henchman of Vect, Valossian Sythrac, than the man himself. But most of all, I'd prefer the Duke. He's such a colorful character and would allow for some awesome kitbashes/conversions (and who isn't envious of Dark Eldar Corsairs?).

Anyways, I think the Archon should be a force multiplier and allow surgical strikes. Instead of an aura, he could choose an enemy unit within 18", all <KABAL> units will re-roll 1s to hit against that unit. It works from transports, it's more fitting than an aura and gives him an actual purpose. Make the Huskblade expensive, but powerful so you can choose what role you want him for.

It's not unreasonable for us to actually want multiple new characters - in the ideal future we'd have Vect and other special characters and more generic characters and mobility options for some or all of our current character units.

You will literally hear no disagreement from me that the current situation we're in - where we actually have fewer HQs than our very first third edition Codex - is a sad state of affairs.

Valossian Sythrac would be amazing to have for sure. As soon as I read the Path trilogy I knew I wanted him specifically as a playable model.

Another thing I would like to see is something to reflect the fact that our Wych Cults are peerless gladiatorial fighters and lesser races would struggle to even hit them in close combat. Something like -1 to hit them in combat would be great. Succubus and/or Lelith could then additionally have a -1 WS debuff for all models that attack them, to effectively put them at -2 to hit. Comparative weapon skills in combat is something I wish hadn't been dropped from 7th to 8th edition.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I'd prefer the Duke. He's such a colorful character and would allow for some awesome kitbashes/conversions

Sadly I think it is our Massive kitbash potential that is preventing us from getting these new models ... the lawsuit that GW lost that generated the "no model, no rules" policy they now have hit us particularly hard as it seemed that from 5th ed our kits were specifically designed to be able to kitbash our way into all the named characters that didn't have models ... it was a way to give them models without having to create very expensive molds to actually produce them ... so now ... they just don't want to spend the money (yes I know they do it all the time for every other race ... including basically making brand new ones from the ground up)

Archon_91 wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I'd prefer the Duke. He's such a colorful character and would allow for some awesome kitbashes/conversions

Sadly I think it is our Massive kitbash potential that is preventing us from getting these new models ... the lawsuit that GW lost that generated the "no model, no rules" policy they now have hit us particularly hard as it seemed that from 5th ed our kits were specifically designed to be able to kitbash our way into all the named characters that didn't have models  

Honestly, I think GW just have their head up their arse with this one.

Aside from the fact that this policy is asinine and anti-customer at the best of times, they seem to be locked in this weird contradiction whereby "There's no point in us making new Dark Eldar models because Dark Eldar don't sell." but also "We can't give Dark Eldar wargear or unit entires without models because third-party companies will make models for them and steal all our revenue!"

So which is it?

Either Dark Eldar don't sell well enough to justify new models (in which case there would be no harm in giving us unit entries/wargear without models), or else they'll sell so well as to make it viable for 3rd party companies to profit from making similar products (in which case, surely they'd be sufficiently lucrative to justify GW making the models themselves?).

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Archon_91 wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I'd prefer the Duke. He's such a colorful character and would allow for some awesome kitbashes/conversions

Sadly I think it is our Massive kitbash potential that is preventing us from getting these new models ... the lawsuit that GW lost that generated the "no model, no rules" policy they now have hit us particularly hard as it seemed that from 5th ed our kits were specifically designed to be able to kitbash our way into all the named characters that didn't have models  

Honestly, I think GW just have their head up their arse with this one.

Aside from the fact that this policy is asinine and anti-customer at the best of times, they seem to be locked in this weird contradiction whereby "There's no point in us making new Dark Eldar models because Dark Eldar don't sell." but also "We can't give Dark Eldar wargear or unit entires without models because third-party companies will make models for them and steal all our revenue!"

So which is it?

Either Dark Eldar don't sell well enough to justify new models (in which case there would be no harm in giving us unit entries/wargear without models), or else they'll sell so well as to make it viable for 3rd party companies to profit from making similar products (in which case, surely they'd be sufficiently lucrative to justify GW making the models themselves?).

Exactly this.

I would be more than happy to kitbash an Archon on a bike, or with wings, or a Venom with a Blaster, or heaven forbid a Baron Sathonyx...GW could even do articles on how to do so with the stuff they already sell.

Archon_91 wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I'd prefer the Duke. He's such a colorful character and would allow for some awesome kitbashes/conversions

Sadly I think it is our Massive kitbash potential that is preventing us from getting these new models ... the lawsuit that GW lost that generated the "no model, no rules" policy they now have hit us particularly hard as it seemed that from 5th ed our kits were specifically designed to be able to kitbash our way into all the named characters that didn't have models ... it was a way to give them models without having to create very expensive molds to actually produce them ... so now ... they just don't want to spend the money (yes I know they do it all the time for every other race ... including basically making brand new ones from the ground up)

Yeah, I know. I was actually just thinking in terms of modelling, not rules.

It's incredibly frustrating that they have made exceptions. Psychic Awakening provided rules for The Eight for Tau, despite them not having official models and being slight conversions from existing kits. They basically added seven special characters into the game that you have to build yourself. I see no difference between that and all our old HQ characters that were removed.

Oaka wrote:

It's incredibly frustrating that they have made exceptions.  Psychic Awakening provided rules for The Eight for Tau, despite them not having official models and being slight conversions from existing kits.  They basically added seven special characters into the game that you have to build yourself.  I see no difference between that and all our old HQ characters that were removed.  

Wait really?! I thought they had models?

They did something similar with the GK baby-carrier. Basically giving GKs a new HQ with no model, justifying it by posting a conversion guide.

Cool. Great. Now why can't we have that?

[quote="Soulless Samurai"]
@Dark Elf Dave wrote:


To be honest, though, Vect is the one DE model I have absolutely no interest in seeing return. I know that this is probably heresy, and that I'm almost certainly in the minority on this one. However, I just don't like seeing the major players of different races being made into characters. And it's not just Vect - I also dislike seeing stuff like the Silent King for Necrons.

I know some people like them, but for me it makes the 40k universe feel small. Characters like Vect, Abaddon, the Silent King etc. are ones that should be the end of a grand campaign - either fighting them on their home turf or else trying to stop their flagship or invasion force. Fighting these guys should be rare and apocalyptic events - not something that just happens in random skirmishes.



i know we are not always on the same page Soulless Samurai, but on this one, i'm all in with you! I was really surprised when i first found out that there were named characters for the tabletop game. I would personally have prefered that every model are nameless (unless you want to create yourself their names) and that HQ are simply regular captains or leaders, but never THE leader.
Personally i would have created the named character only for lore purpose and for the black library books. In the game, those named characters are either too strong in comparison to others, or, as mentioned by Samurai, don't live up to the hype created in the lore around those characters.


I absolutely agree with all of the above, but...
the fact that marines HAVE a primarch, Death Guard HAVE Mortarion, Necrons HAVE the Silent King,
leads me to conclude that if we are getting any kind of Lord of War (which a number of people on this forum have been crying out for) then it will likely be Vect mounted on his Dais. It shouldn't be. All of these models are just-a-bit-much when you face them on almost any size 40k game, but they are a thing now.
Of course, GW might stop making them if nobody buys them...

I have seen it said that the designers dont have a Drukhari player amongst them, and that the playtesters they get for Drukhari tend to be Eldar or Ynnari players.

How true is that? Do we even know the design team? Has anyone, you know, politely contacted GW on behalf of, say, this forum, or a tournament group, or anything? Did anyone get a response?

Not accusatory questions. Just stuff like:

Can you help us understand the limited HQ range?
Can you help us understand the limited special character range?
Is there a particular reason for the lack of mobility?
Have you considered this?

For a big, no-face corp, GW seem quite friendly in their PR. Is that just PR?

albions-angel wrote:

I have seen it said that the designers dont have a Drukhari player amongst them, and that the playtesters they get for Drukhari tend to be Eldar or Ynnari players.

How true is that? Do we even know the design team? Has anyone, you know, politely contacted GW on behalf of, say, this forum, or a tournament group, or anything? Did anyone get a response?

Not accusatory questions. Just stuff like:

Can you help us understand the limited HQ range?
Can you help us understand the limited special character range?
Is there a particular reason for the lack of mobility?
Have you considered this?

For a big, no-face corp, GW seem quite friendly in their PR. Is that just PR?

They removed the official 40k forums and sell products to you through a one way wall at warhammer community "4 strength 2 shots that aught to scare thse space marines!!!"

It’s absolutely untrue that they don’t have dark Eldar players helping with the rules now. It’s official that the Tabletop Tactics team have been involved in play testing and Spider aka Lawrence is a major Dark Eldar player. I’d be very surprised if there weren’t quite a few Dark Eldar players involved in play testing.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

It’s absolutely untrue that they don’t have dark Eldar players helping with the rules now. It’s official that the Tabletop Tactics team have been involved in play testing and Spider aka Lawrence is a major Dark Eldar player. I’d be very surprised if there weren’t quite a few Dark Eldar players involved in play testing.

They tend to look at things in a very goal-oriented way. As long as Drukhari can score points and win games they don't worry too much about how it feels to play them.

I don’t know how you can actually make a comment like that. Unless you are the person writing the codex then you simply can’t make a statement like that.

You can say it feels like they act in such a way, but you don’t know it to be the case.

Personally I don’t agree. A lot of the issues with DE exist today due to 8th edition and the way you needed to build armies and gain command points. That’s all behind us now and the new codex wont have the 8th edition handcuffs on.

DE are strong enough to win games with. Like with other armies there are some solid counters out there but everyone faces that in the game.

Of course they can report if the army feels not fun to play. It's a game test, after all.

I'm really excited and impatient. I don't expect much, so every little buff makes me happy.

The Codex has to be really awful to make me sad.

Deep down, I don't doubt that the new codex will offer some strong options, and I am reassured that TT were involved in the playtesting (why no Skari?).

That said, I am a bit worried that GW won't be able to make a 'glass canon space pirate' playstyle work, and that we will be still just be relying on resilient Coven stuff (which GW can write rules for in their sleep), and some Elites.