Sneak Peek at New Drukhari Codex

to all those questioning the Raiding Forces, now it's just that you're not stuck to do 3 patrol detachment to refund the CPs, you can have only 1 or 2 patrol detachment, each costing 0, thus your warlord will in fact GAIN you 2 CPs.
Also worth noting now we can do 26 patrol detachment all at 0 CPs!! (if you were playing apocalypse lol).
Well, for my part thats the way i see it, and it fits with the ''easier than ever'' described in a recent reveal......am i wrong?

fisheyes wrote:

I personally hate soup. Didn't like it in 6/7th (was that when we had Taudar riptide wing?), didn't like it in 8th with the Loyal 32, don't like it in 9th.

I like having a restriction on cherry picking the best units from multiple books. You can put me in Team GW today

I also am not a fan of soup, but some exceptions I would actually like to see. For example Knights in an AdMech army or Harlequins in a Drukhari or Asuryani army. Both Knights and Harlequins always feel a little weird and one dimensional as mono codex armies for me.

Kalmah wrote:

to all those questioning the Raiding Forces, now it's just that you're not stuck to do 3 patrol detachment to refund the CPs, you can have only 1 or 2 patrol detachment, each costing 0, thus your warlord will in fact GAIN you 2 CPs.
Also worth noting now we can do 26 patrol detachment all at 0 CPs!! (if you were playing apocalypse lol).
Well, for my part thats the way i see it, and it fits with the ''easier than ever'' described in a recent reveal......am i wrong?

But is that really so much better/ smoother/ easier than just saying "You know what, you got one book, play as one army"

AzraeI wrote:

Kalmah wrote:

to all those questioning the Raiding Forces, now it's just that you're not stuck to do 3 patrol detachment to refund the CPs, you can have only 1 or 2 patrol detachment, each costing 0, thus your warlord will in fact GAIN you 2 CPs.
Also worth noting now we can do 26 patrol detachment all at 0 CPs!! (if you were playing apocalypse lol).
Well, for my part thats the way i see it, and it fits with the ''easier than ever'' described in a recent reveal......am i wrong?

But is that really so much better/ smoother/ easier than just saying "You know what, you got one book, play as one army"

knowing that we will start with 2 CPs more than every opponents.....yes its simply better for my taste. And btw, i love that we have like 3 armies in one, but thats my taste and i do understand people that hate that.

Kalmah wrote:

AzraeI wrote:

Kalmah wrote:

to all those questioning the Raiding Forces, now it's just that you're not stuck to do 3 patrol detachment to refund the CPs, you can have only 1 or 2 patrol detachment, each costing 0, thus your warlord will in fact GAIN you 2 CPs.
Also worth noting now we can do 26 patrol detachment all at 0 CPs!! (if you were playing apocalypse lol).
Well, for my part thats the way i see it, and it fits with the ''easier than ever'' described in a recent reveal......am i wrong?

But is that really so much better/ smoother/ easier than just saying "You know what, you got one book, play as one army"

knowing that we will start with 2 CPs more than every opponents.....yes its simply better for my taste. And btw, i love that we have like 3 armies in one, but thats my taste and i do understand people that hate that.

I get that, but dark angels have 3 armies in one and it's just so much simpler then this abomination

ho! something i've just read and wanna share to see if i'm wrong:
Raiding force again, first you select each detachment their identity, but they just say: all kabal units in a Kabal detachment gain a Drukhari Obsession, but the way it is written, it means i can put Coven units in my Kabal Detachment, only the coven units won't receive any obsession.......am i reading right?

Kalmah wrote:

ho! something i've just read and wanna share to see if i'm wrong:
Raiding force again, first you select each detachment their identity, but they just say: all kabal units in a Kabal detachment gain a Drukhari Obsession, but the way it is written, it means i can put Coven units in my Kabal Detachment, only the coven units won't receive any obsession.......am i reading right?

No, for a detachment to be a faction keyword detachment, all units of the detachment need to have this keyword. An Astartes Detachment could also not include guardsmen. At least in the preview Kabal is not bold, but for the Phoenix Rising preview they also forgot to mark Incubi as a keyword for the aura of Drazhar. I am pretty sure it will be also correct in the codex.

Kalmah wrote:

ho! something i've just read and wanna share to see if i'm wrong:
Raiding force again, first you select each detachment their identity, but they just say: all kabal units in a Kabal detachment gain a Drukhari Obsession, but the way it is written, it means i can put Coven units in my Kabal Detachment, only the coven units won't receive any obsession.......am i reading right?

Remember previews are not full rules, there is always missing rules or rules from other places like Obsessions will most likely says the detachment has to be entirely of just either all Kabals, all Wyches, or all Coven with the exception of Blades for Hire.

now that's sad! That would have been cool! (no real gain there but a little bit more of freedom)

It also looks like we get a free Alliance of Agony when we put everything in a battalion/brigade

So hey all! I’ve wanted to read all your comments before I made a few of my own.

Couldn’t hold back my smile when reading the article today.

I read people wanting glass hammer. I read people asking for better archons. I read people asking for fast fast fast.

I think we got quite a bit of that! Very cool in my opinion.

I’m cool with pfp.

I’m looking forward to seeing the drugs chart. What will you choose? One specific chosen drug or will you roll the dice and get the 2 random results? I think if you’re kinda undecided on a unit then rolling and getting 2 drug buffs is cool.

I’m really pleased with the army composition rules. Just what I wanted. I always wanted an Archon, Succubus and a Heamy in my army. Now I know I can pick have 3 mini armies rolled into one picking the right special rules for each of them. Love it!

For me personally I never wanted the glass hammer crap. I think people get far too hung up on that description. So it seems we may be a little more fragile than before which I don’t want but at the end of the day, as I’ve always said, you have to expect to make compromises. What I see from the rules so far is a fun army to play but one that will certainly still require it’s tricky balance of risk and reward.

All in all I’m very pleased. Can someone explain to me what they read that suggests vehicles losing their 5++ as I missed that.

fisheyes wrote:

It also looks like we get a free Alliance of Agony when we put everything in a battalion/brigade

At the cost of requiring all 3 subfactions. You HAVE to take all 3.

Presumably, this means that 3 patrol raiding forces, which would allow 2 sub factions across 3 patrols, would not be able to tale Alliance of Agony. Which sucks.

Wych/Kabal armies are actively hurt by this change.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

All in all I’m very pleased. Can someone explain to me what they read that suggests vehicles losing their 5++ as I missed that.

It appears that Vehicles now benefit from power from pain.
That gives them a 6++ off the bat, and a 5++ turn 4.

Would be redundant to have the nightshields give a 5++

This would also mean our Talos, Grrots and other coven units lose their 5++, but as some suggested, the Haemi aura may now be +1 to invul save, or certain covens like Prophets may be +1 to invul save.

Worth noting that Raiding Force does not say that you need to take 3 Patrol detachments, only that if your whole force consists of Patrol detachments those detachments cost 0.  So, you could take 2 patrols and reap the full benefits of Raiding Force.

I saw some people complaining that old Raiding Force was unchanged, and that doesn't appear to be true.

Why would we lose Alliance of Agony? Most armies have the abilities to throw extra traits around, why would we lose that stratagem?

Skulnbonz wrote:

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

All in all I’m very pleased. Can someone explain to me what they read that suggests vehicles losing their 5++ as I missed that.

It appears that Vehicles now benefit from power from pain.
That gives them a 6++ off the bat, and a 5++ turn 4.

Would be redundant to have the nightshields give a 5++

This would also mean our Talos, Grrots and other coven units lose their 5++, but as some suggested, the Haemi aura may now be +1 to invul save, or certain covens like Prophets may be +1 to invul save.

Right ok so for now it’s just an assumption. I’d rather they kept the 5++ from turn 1 but if night shields give -1 to hit that may help.

WrackYourBrains wrote:

Why would we lose Alliance of Agony? Most armies have the abilities to throw extra traits around, why would we lose that stratagem?

Because it seems like its been rolled into realspace raiders instead of being a stratagem applicable to raiding force. At least, the 1 CP version of it is. The 3 CP version isnt mentioned. That could still exist?

EDIT: I am being a derp, its Prizes from the Dark City I am thinking about.

I was under the impression the wording of Realspace Raid implied that you could take your one(1) free Relic from Cult or Coven - despite the Warlord not having the Cult or Coven keywords, where normally your free Relic has to be from the same keyword as your Warlord.

So, not that you'd get two extra Relics free of charge. Could be wrong, though.

mynamelegend wrote:

I was under the impression the wording of Realspace Raid implied that you could take your one(1) free Relic from Cult or Coven - despite the Warlord not having the Cult or Coven keywords, where normally your free Relic has to be from the same keyword as your Warlord.

So, not that you'd get two extra Relics free of charge. Could be wrong, though.

It can be read that way. Frankly, I feel it SHOULD be read that way. But reading it that way makes no sense, as most relics replace an existing item. The rule doesnt say the Succi or Haemie can take the relic, so somehow the Archon has to trade his husk blade for an archite glaive to then upgrade to a blood glaive?

albions-angel wrote:

mynamelegend wrote:

I was under the impression the wording of Realspace Raid implied that you could take your one(1) free Relic from Cult or Coven - despite the Warlord not having the Cult or Coven keywords, where normally your free Relic has to be from the same keyword as your Warlord.

So, not that you'd get two extra Relics free of charge. Could be wrong, though.

It can be read that way. Frankly, I feel it SHOULD be read that way. But reading it that way makes no sense, as most relics replace an existing item. The rule doesnt say the Succi or Haemie can take the relic, so somehow the Archon has to trade his husk blade for an archite glaive to then upgrade to a blood glaive?

For me it sounds more like we are normally more limited on the relicts, maybe just the free relic associated with the warlord can normally be taken only from the subfaction of the warlord instead of their faction or there is a rule that disallows us to take any relic at all from a subfaction the warlord is not part of. Either way, I think that sentence is meant to override such a rule.

albions-angel wrote:

fisheyes wrote:

It also looks like we get a free Alliance of Agony when we put everything in a battalion/brigade

At the cost of requiring all 3 subfactions. You HAVE to take all 3.

Presumably, this means that 3 patrol raiding forces, which would allow 2 sub factions across 3 patrols, would not be able to tale Alliance of Agony. Which sucks.

Wych/Kabal armies are actively hurt by this change.

What? No they aren't.

Even if it is worded exactly the same, your Archon is the warlord and your succubus gets a warlord trait. Identical to how it is now.

The difference being you only need to take 2 patrols instead of 3. Kabal/wych armies have a cheaper entry point than now with the same amount of warlord traits.

They benefit from this.

Well im intrigued by the changes ... and have to say I love the return of trueborn, bloodbrides(?), and the edition of whatever elite wracks will be and that they ignore effects, like Be'lakors, where they have their hit rolls diminished...
In a paranoid reading between the lines of the PfP table, I think our weapons will lose the "weapon counts as assualt when mounted on a vehicle" because of the turn three of PfP where it says Monsters and Vehicles don't suffer penalties to shooting heavy weapons at targets within engagement range, I don't think vehicles suffer the penalty to moving and shootingnheavy weapons anymore anyway so it's not a loss.
The new PfP chart gives a very clear idea of what GW sees as the flow of battle for us:
T1 pick targets, move into position and shoot, then wait
T2 unload troops move + advance, shoot with what you can and charge, everything,
T3 everything that can stay in combat does so, vehicles shoot into what they charged, and round 2 of fighting commences
T4 more survivability to make it to turn five once the fighting starts dying down and both sides are looking to stick on objectives hard
T5 basically make it as hard as possible to remove what little is left and anything with a decaying profile now has new life to make that last ditch push to get the enemy off of points by gaining (in most cases) one profile higher than where it currently sits.
Combat drug effects look like they remain the same but I do like the new way of choosing them
I love the new poison tongue, always ran it anyway because I love the lore of Lady Malys,
I overall like what I've seen, but I do understand the gripes others have, I THINK GW has taken a step in the right direction for the Druhkari , a small step, and one that threatened to have them fall of a ledge to utter destruction of the faction, but a step none the less, hopefully they don't jump off the ledge with up coming reveals. Tomorrow might be specific units we haven't seen yet, and thrusday will be a look at our weapons and Friday will be lore/stratagems/crusade

My hunch is that our 6+++ will become a racial special ability (possibly just for non-vehicle units), thus giving everything a 6++/6+++.

I suspect Night Shields will give +1 to invul saves against shooting.

I suspect coven stuff will get +1 to invul in all cases.

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

fisheyes wrote:

It also looks like we get a free Alliance of Agony when we put everything in a battalion/brigade

At the cost of requiring all 3 subfactions. You HAVE to take all 3.

Presumably, this means that 3 patrol raiding forces, which would allow 2 sub factions across 3 patrols, would not be able to tale Alliance of Agony. Which sucks.

Wych/Kabal armies are actively hurt by this change.

What? No they aren't.

Even if it is worded exactly the same, your Archon is the warlord and your succubus gets a warlord trait. Identical to how it is now.

The difference being you only need to take 2 patrols instead of 3. Kabal/wych armies have a cheaper entry point than now with the same amount of warlord traits.

They benefit from this.

Yeah, i messed up and confused alliance of agony with prizes from the dark city. Prizes is now sort of rolled into Realspace Raiders, which requires all 3 subfactions. This likely replaces the old stragegem. Thus going for a raiding force instead of a realspace raiders would prevent you slapping the bloodglaive on the succi if the archon is your warlord.

But even that reading may be off. Guess I will have to wait for the codex

Its amazing how even native English speaking persons in here have no idea what the f is going on with realspace raiders ^_^