Sneak Peek at New Drukhari Codex

I was going to ask how anyone could look at ALL the 9th codex releases and go "Nah we dont want options"

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Like I have said in the past. This is not a space pirate game. We have to expect DE to fit the mechanics of 40k rather than see 40k fit the theme of DE.

The strange thing is that I can think of multiple ways to make the new, objective-heavy game "feel" Space Piratey. Maybe give us a rule to let our ObSec models spend an Action to "loot" an Objective, giving a chunk of VP at the cost of no longer being able to earn VP from it for the duration of the game. Or letting our ObSec infantry confer that bonus to our transports. Or a stratagem that can be spent when an enemy unit is killed to place down an objective on it for us to take the wounded captive.
The problem is that "wracks sitting around on our home camp, pulling the wings off of flies all game" is the one version of objective-based play that just doesn't feel at all like "us".

As other posters have mentioned previously in the thread, perhaps it is not transport capacity that is the main issue here but that the HQ special rules were different.

If you look at the issues in a vacuum then...

No aura from open topped transport is an issue.

Taking an Archon with the Kabs he buffs is an issue as you’d be forced to field a 9 man squad and lose a heavy and special weapon.

Wyches in the same way lose two special weapons for fielding only 9 to make room for a Succubus.

Heamies for me this isn’t a problem. You shouldn’t really want those special weapons as they are garbage.

You don’t want to use court of the archon to mitigate the archon issue because he doesn’t buff them.

You don’t want to pay the points for a Venom because space marines just add a jump pack or bike for cheaper.

Is that about right?

For me personally there have always been choices you make when building your list that require some form of compromise.

You can take 10 Wyches with 3 spec weapons or take 9 with a Succubus. How big of a deal is this really? I wouldn’t be surprised if Wyches with Hek blades are the more optimal choice anyway...damage output per points cost.

The Kabs issue is a problem. You want those special and heavy weapons but you don’t want your archon sitting in the deployment zone all battle. I think it’s a case of GW having to make the Court of the Archon better so that you actually want to take them with your archon in a venom. Let’s be honest here...re-roll ones is only going to make a difference on special/heavy weapons and only very rarely. Not having your archon babysit your Kabs isn’t the handicap people are making out.

I think these issues are slightly annoying but they are not going to be the difference to you losing games. That’s just my opinion. It’s clear that’s differed to some other opinions...that’s ok. We all play the game in our own way don’t we.

For me the main problem right now is I don’t even want an Archon.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

For me personally there have always been choices you make when building your list that require some form of compromise.

While this is true, a lot of us play other armies as well and recognise that this is an issue which disproportionately affects Drukhari. If I want a Craftworlds HQ I can quite happily take a Farseer and shove them on a bike or in a Falcon or Wave Serpent alongside a full-sized squad. If I want a Harlequin HQ I can shove them into a Starweaver alongside a unit of Players that don't have their ability to take special weapons impacted at all (and if I really want I can give that Harlequin character a relic which gives an actual goddamned benefit to their transport and any unit embarked with them).

The awkwardness of characters really is a Drukhari specific problem. I don't mind having to make compromises in list building but not when it feels like we're unique in having to make compromises about something.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

As other posters have mentioned previously in the thread, perhaps it is not transport capacity that is the main issue here but that the HQ special rules were different.

If you look at the issues in a vacuum then...

No aura from open topped transport is an issue.

Taking an Archon with the Kabs he buffs is an issue as you’d be forced to field a 9 man squad and lose a heavy and special weapon.

Wyches in the same way lose two special weapons for fielding only 9 to make room for a Succubus.

Heamies for me this isn’t a problem. You shouldn’t really want those special weapons as they are garbage.

You don’t want to use court of the archon to mitigate the archon issue because he doesn’t buff them.

You don’t want to pay the points for a Venom because space marines just add a jump pack or bike  for cheaper.

Is that about right?

For me personally there have always been choices you make when building your list that require some form of compromise.

You can take 10 Wyches with 3 spec weapons or take 9 with a Succubus. How big of a deal is this really? I wouldn’t be surprised if Wyches with Hek blades are the more optimal choice anyway...damage output per points cost.

The Kabs issue is a problem. You want those special and heavy weapons but you don’t want your archon sitting in the deployment zone all battle. I think it’s a case of GW having to make the Court of the Archon better so that you actually want to take them with your archon in a venom. Let’s be honest here...re-roll ones is only going to make a difference on special/heavy weapons and only very rarely. Not having your archon babysit your Kabs isn’t the handicap people are making out.

I think these issues are slightly annoying but they are not going to be the difference to you losing games. That’s just my opinion. It’s clear that’s differed to some other opinions...that’s ok. We all play the game in our own way don’t we.

For me the main problem right now is I don’t even want an Archon.

Unfortunately, the compromise for "I want more minimum size units to cover more ground, and I want to be able to quickly back them up with HQs when they get into trouble" is either "sacrifice taking a unit so there is room on a barge, or sacrifice 2 units to fund a dedicated venom for the HQ, or sacrifice using the HQ to back up those units". Which pushes us towards the limited meta, which forces us either to play in a way we dont enjoy, or slowly lose enjoyment from the ways we like to play.

As Burnage says, other armies dont seem to have to deal with this as much. There is compromise, as in "I can take 2 razorwings but thats probably going to impact how many troops I can take" and then there is "Either HQs are useful, but my troops are diminished, or the other way around". And given the whole point of HQs over elites is that they synergise well with troops in every army, that seems a little like an oversight.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

For me the main problem right now is I don’t even want an Archon.

This. Exactly. And why would you? An Archon doesn't offer anything you can't let a bunch of Incubi do better, and for the same price.
A succubus can be somewhat nice, but only if you spend relics on her.
Haemonculi, and especially Urien are there for their +1T aura, but aren't that scary at all. But at least they are somewhat hard to kill.
This is exactly why most of us don't want to spend points to give any HQ their own Venom. They're just not worth it. And small things like their aura working outside of transports, or the transports simply having +1 capacity would go a long way in fixing this. Our HQ's might be worth fielding.

I want to ask you a simple question:
Have any of you ever seen a Drukhari Supreme Command Detachment? I'll bet quite a lot that the answer is "No.". Why do you think that is?

To find the strengths and weaknesses of our Dex, you simply need to ask:
What do our opponents fear in our army? what is their target priority?

They fear our speed, though we are now nowhere near the fastest.
they fear Incubi, though they are nowhere near the best in HTH or the most prolific fighters.
They fear our darklight weapons, though they pale in comparison to the new meltas, etc.
They fear the swath of OBSEC we can put out at a very low cost.

What our opponents DO NOT FEAR... Our HQ, wyches, hellions, wracks, beast packs, reaver jet bikes (now they are not 10 points that is) venoms, raiders, mandrakes etc...

Now for our new dex, we see:

NO increase in speed (as of yet) This keeps us where we are in 8th.
Our Dark lances are once again weapons to be feared, but they did not do the same for blasters or blast pistols. This is an improvement over 8th, but keeps us in line with other armies main anti tank weapons (meltas) so it puts us in 9th where we were in 8th.
Incubi do more damage, bringing them in line with the new, tougher opponents we face, balancing out to where they were in 8th, if not a tad bit better.
Our Obsec I do not think will change, allowing us to field a lot of them for no cost.

We do not have enough info yet to decide if wyches are survivable, and not just a gimmick that may or may not work.

Pretty much, this codex seems to be an "update" rather than a rework to get us in line with 9th edition. This will keep us bottom mid tier, simply off the backs of our cheap obsec and us spamming darklight. Pretty much exactly where we were in 8th.

We can all hope for a major rework, new styles of play and exciting synergies, but from the previews so far, we are being "Adjusted", not "reinvisioned"

I tend to feel as though Incubi when comparing each codex, have become a lot better.

If I compare the Incubi in my 8th Ed codex to that which we know we are getting...that’s a massive improvement. In the 8th Ed codex they were just about killing space marines on a 4+ to wound. They were terrible to be honest.

Before they were hitting on 3’s wounding on 4’s and half killing a Primaris.
Now they are hitting on 2’s wounding on 3’s and killing a Primaris.

I just feel as though, credit where it’s due these guys are now a cool unit to have. They have now been given a 215% increase in damage vs Primaris marines. Now yes that update came in prior to the new codex but that is still in my mind an improvement worth noting over our 8th Ed codex.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Yes I’m going to have to use a standard Incubi body. I will use the Drahzar head and pony tail and I will use the Drahzar blades but I’m going to have to shorten them because they are a ridiculous length. I’m going to remove the mid handle because I just hate that design. I will try and use the same base so that it’s recognisable as Drahzar.

Never had to shorten blades before so it could be a disaster! My biggest bug bear about the Drahzar model is his pose and the blades and they way they are being held...oh and the necklace and the way it’s positioned.

I'd agree with all of that.

I'm really not a fan of the handle-in-the-middle-of-the-blade aspect of Klaives. To me it just looks like the least practical way of using them - especially when it comes to wielding them exclusively with said handle.

I don't know if this is any help, but if you want shorter blades and no blade-handles could you maybe kill two birds with one stone? I notice that the blade-handle is on a bare (i.e. rune-less) part of the blade. Might it be possible to carefully cut that section out of the blade and then glue the remaining parts together?

Obviously you'd need to also do some mackling to get it to look like he's holding the weapon in a more traditional manner. e.g. by cutting off the central part of the handle and attaching the blade to one side of his hand and the pommel to the other part.

Anyway, just an idea.

Gelmir wrote:

Why is it that every time someone asks for more mobility options for HQ's, someone else replies that winged Archons are stupid. Who ever asked for a winged Archon?

Er, yes, who indeed? Haha, yes, whoever would want something so stupid, right?

Spoiler:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Yes I’m going to have to use a standard Incubi body. I will use the Drahzar head and pony tail and I will use the Drahzar blades but I’m going to have to shorten them because they are a ridiculous length. I’m going to remove the mid handle because I just hate that design. I will try and use the same base so that it’s recognisable as Drahzar.

Never had to shorten blades before so it could be a disaster! My biggest bug bear about the Drahzar model is his pose and the blades and they way they are being held...oh and the necklace and the way it’s positioned.

I'd agree with all of that.

I'm really not a fan of the handle-in-the-middle-of-the-blade aspect of Klaives. To me it just looks like the least practical way of using them - especially when it comes to wielding them exclusively with said handle.

I don't know if this is any help, but if you want shorter blades and no blade-handles could you maybe kill two birds with one stone? I notice that the blade-handle is on a bare (i.e. rune-less) part of the blade. Might it be possible to carefully cut that section out of the blade and then glue the remaining parts together?

Obviously you'd need to also do some mackling to get it to look like he's holding the weapon in a more traditional manner. e.g. by cutting off the central part of the handle and attaching the blade to one side of his hand and the pommel to the other part.

Anyway, just an idea.

Gelmir wrote:

Why is it that every time someone asks for more mobility options for HQ's, someone else replies that winged Archons are stupid. Who ever asked for a winged Archon?

Er, yes, who indeed? Haha, yes, whoever would want something so stupid, right?

Spoiler:

100% you’ve got it in one. The handles mid point need to go but I also want them shorter so that’s where I shall reduce the length of the blade. I’ve found two arms in the raider kit I’m going to use and replace daggers for the new shorted blades. The blades are cool looking but they look so impractical that they put me off. If there is ever a day I truly felt as though GW don’t give us enough attention it’s the day I saw the new Drahzar.

Is he taller than Incubi? No.
Is he slimmer? No.
Does him armour look ancient and different? No.
Do his blades look different? No.

So he’s a Klaivex on a fancy base with a good pony tail. Thanks.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Does him armour look ancient and different? No.

This begs a question I have had for a while. I get the point of the total rework when we went from 4th ed to 5th ed, but how did Drahzar's armour change? Isnt the armour kinda the point? Wasnt he, until recently, the last corporeal Phoenix Lord? Isnt he literally bonded to his armour? Or was, until he died for someone elses plot resolution (man am I mad about that!).

His finecast model was just a finecast of his metal one, right? That saw us through until PA, and I believe was rather liked.

And I get a more dynamic pose is nice, but they just made him an Incubus. And thats not right, as the Incubi imitate him, not the other way round.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Yes I’m going to have to use a standard Incubi body. I will use the Drahzar head and pony tail and I will use the Drahzar blades but I’m going to have to shorten them because they are a ridiculous length. I’m going to remove the mid handle because I just hate that design. I will try and use the same base so that it’s recognisable as Drahzar.

Never had to shorten blades before so it could be a disaster! My biggest bug bear about the Drahzar model is his pose and the blades and they way they are being held...oh and the necklace and the way it’s positioned.

I'd agree with all of that.

I'm really not a fan of the handle-in-the-middle-of-the-blade aspect of Klaives. To me it just looks like the least practical way of using them - especially when it comes to wielding them exclusively with said handle.

I don't know if this is any help, but if you want shorter blades and no blade-handles could you maybe kill two birds with one stone? I notice that the blade-handle is on a bare (i.e. rune-less) part of the blade. Might it be possible to carefully cut that section out of the blade and then glue the remaining parts together?

Obviously you'd need to also do some mackling to get it to look like he's holding the weapon in a more traditional manner. e.g. by cutting off the central part of the handle and attaching the blade to one side of his hand and the pommel to the other part.

Anyway, just an idea.

Gelmir wrote:

Why is it that every time someone asks for more mobility options for HQ's, someone else replies that winged Archons are stupid. Who ever asked for a winged Archon?

Er, yes, who indeed? Haha, yes, whoever would want something so stupid, right?

Spoiler:

100% you’ve got it in one. The handles mid point need to go but I also want them shorter so that’s where I shall reduce the length of the blade. I’ve found two arms in the raider kit I’m going to use and replace daggers for the new shorted blades. The blades are cool looking but they look so impractical that they put me off. If there is ever a day I truly felt as though GW don’t give us enough attention it’s the day I saw the new Drahzar.

Is he taller than Incubi? No.
Is he slimmer? No.
Does him armour look ancient and different? No.
Do his blades look different? No.

So he’s a Klaivex on a fancy base with a good pony tail. Thanks.

I tend to agree. The new Drazhar model isn't horrible, but it was GW playing super safe.

He looks like a slightly fancier Kalivex, instead of an ancient unique being like a Phoenix Lord.

In terms of specific criticisms, his face seems a bit smaller than those of the other Incubi (which is unfortunate for what should be the focal point of the mini), the hair is really ropey and lacking in detail (compared to the Wyches), the multitude of tassels rather reminds me of a morris dancer, and the scenic base is over the top.

All of that said, the armour is pretty nice, and I'm sure he could be converted into something special. I was musing replacing the hair with some sort of scorpion's tail (to look like the old Striking Scorpion icon you get in the pack), but not sure what to use.

Recently, I saw someone on dakka talking about the philosophy of many special characters just being regular HQs but more so, with Vect being the HQiest of them all.

It was a sentiment that made me think very much of Drazhar, albeit in more of a model capacity. His new model just seems to be a Klaivex... but more so. Bigger swords! More soulstones! More decoration! Bigger... er... bigger rocks to stand on, even!

Makes you wonder if the modelling team even read his fluff/description or if they just assumed that Special Character = coral reef on legs.

What I sort of hope we could look forward to in the future is a buffing character for each unit type.

Archon buffs Kabs and Court
Succubus and Lelith buff all cult
Heamy buffs all coven
Drahzar buffs Incubi
Kheradruakh buffs Mandrakes

That would be sweet. Drahzar, Lelith, Rakarth and Kheradruakh could be our equivalent to Pheonix Lords.

i actually love the new drazhar model icluding the huge horns and hair and all... his stance as well
i think GW did a good job on him and the new inccubi but i despise the new Lelith with all my being...

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

What I sort of hope we could look forward to in the future is a buffing character for each unit type.

Archon buffs Kabs and Court
Succubus and Lelith buff all cult
Heamy buffs all coven
Drahzar buffs Incubi
Kheradruakh buffs Mandrakes

That would be sweet.

Would be nice if someone buffs the scourges too ^_^

about Drazhar, in fact, it's this model and the Incubis that made me want to play Drukhari first! So for my part i really love him (them).

But, i gotta agree that when putting Drazhar next to a regular Incubi (even more next to the Klaivex). if you don't take into account the base, they look close to be the same....at least its not shameful as i find the Incubis to be really bad ass! But i do get the point that some are raising.

About the way they hold their blades.....lets just pretend that they are FAR superior swordsman than any of us could even dream of, so yeah, i'll allow them to hold their blades the way they want to Its like martial arts but for swordplay if you ask me.

I like the way Incubi hold their weapons. I’m not a fan either the Klaivex or Drahzar. In fact you may have noticed that my profile pic is an Incubi holding his weapon like the new models do so yeah I’m down with them all day long.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Bigger swords! Bigger... er... bigger rocks to stand on, even!

That would explain Leliths feet.
Just like a wych, but has bigger feet and has to wear a size 16 double wide work boot.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

What I sort of hope we could look forward to in the future is a buffing character for each unit type.

Archon buffs Kabs and Court
Succubus and Lelith buff all cult
Heamy buffs all coven
Drahzar buffs Incubi
Kheradruakh buffs Mandrakes

That would be sweet. Drahzar, Lelith, Rakarth and Kheradruakh could be our equivalent to Pheonix Lords.

I'll be honest, I really don't want our army to be split up in this manner - especially when it comes to HQs. It's too limiting in terms of what we can do and it makes it feel like we're not even a proper army.

To my mind, it would be far better if instead different HQs provided different types of buff.

e.g. (revisiting my suggestion from earlier in the thread):
- 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.
- If we have a generic Mandrake HQ, I'd suggest that he should focus on movement/mobility buffs (letting units move twice or redeploying them). Alternatively, he could work more like Kheradruakh (see below) as a pure assassin.

All that said, I do think that there's potential to still bring out the fractal nature of the DE. But rather than outright banning characters from buffing units in other factions, what if they were instead able to buff their own units more efficiently? For example, a Mandrake HQ could redeploy 1 DE unit each turn or 2 Mandrake units (or he could deploy 1 Mandrake unit but let them ignore the 9" rule). A Haemonculus could heal d3 wounds to a DE unit or restore 3 wounds to a Coven unit. That sort of thing.

This way, there's still an incentive to have each HQ leading their respective factions, but you also have the option to use them elsewhere without their buffs being outright nonfunctional.

Finally, I wanted to talk about Drazhar and Kheradruakh because, honestly, I don't think either of these should have auras or buffs at all. Drazhar may be the lord of the Incubi, but he's not a leader - he's a killing-machine. He doesn't even speak, let alone issue orders. I guess you could argue that other Incubi are inspired by him? If so, fine, I guess. But at the very least, Kheradruakh should absolutely not have an aura. As with Drazhar, he is in no way a leader. He's certainly one of the more infamous Mandrakes, but that's precisely the point - his whole reputation is about him being a lone killer. He should be more akin to the Imperial Assassins.

But that's just my take on things.

DevilDoll wrote:

Would be nice if someone buffs the scourges too ^_^

After Dark Eldars in V7, with one useless faction's detachment (except Covens players), we are Drukhari in V8 with many units without detachment and HQ bonus.
I hope GW don't forget them in V9.
In this way we could add Poisonned weapons and a little lack of damage.

When I look new models of Drazhar and Lelith I think they would have been better in posture from each other.

I agree with Souless Samourai.
We are not enought HQ to split off their auras bonus in separate sub-faction.

i may be alone on my island, but for my part, i love the fact that we have 3 small armies in our main army. Personally i only play casual, so i love the fact that today i can play with a list of Coven and Wyches and tomorrow i'll bring to the table a Kabal and Wyches and on and on. One of my main goal when i play is to not repeat what i've already done before!
I love that we have to make decisions, sometime heartbreaking ones. As Dark Eldar Dave already mentioned, when we make a choice, it can't be ''choose this and everything is better'', but more like: ''if you choose that, you will be better at this but you will lack that''.

So for my part, i hope we will keep this fashion for building our list (don't throw stones at me lol).
That being said, i agree that we REALLY lack some proper HQ (and ones that do more than just rerolling some 1 there and there) if we are to keep it that way.

Is there not normally an article a day in lore week before a codex release?

I remember we got a reveal a day before our last one but I can't remember what happened in lore week.

I don't think we are at "lore week" yet. We are 3 weeks away. Yesterday was our third sneak peek, after the November one (Incubi) and the February one (Warrior + Cannon). It's being really slow, but we have a day already

Denegaar wrote:

I don't think we are at "lore week" yet. We are 3 weeks away. Yesterday was our third sneak peek, after the November one (Incubi) and the February one (Warrior + Cannon). It's being really slow, but we have a day already

oh, maybe you're right.

I thought it went lore week, reveal week ending in pre orders weekend then a week of nothing before the actual release weekend.