Fixing the DE codex - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Member Redtwin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Age
    37
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    12 (x1)

    Fixing the DE codex

    I've been thinking a fair bit about the problems with the current DE codex, and I think they can be resolved without a complete redesign. I'll try to explain my points in such a fashion that folks who don't have the codex understand both the problem and solution. The majority of these problems involve units that were poorly thought out, or became less effective after the release of 4th edition rules. Given the rather limited number of units available to DE, this leads to many lists looking very similar, and one of my goals here is to change that.

    Problem 1: Scourges
    Scourges are essentially the DE equivalent of a devastator squad, but they come with jump packs that double the cost of each model and can deep strike. They have two weapon choices, dark lances and splinter cannons. Splinter cannons are high rate of fire assault weapons, and work well as is. However, dark lances are heavy anti-vehicle weapons that do not work well with jump packs and the deep strike rule. You end up with a very expensive and very fragile unit which can only be used effectively in an anti-infantry role. The problem is compounded when you consider that using two troops choices instead nets you the same number of heavy weapons with double the model count for about the same point cost.

    My solution is twofold. First, make the jump packs optional, without them each model is identical in price to a dark eldar warrior. This allows the use of cost-effective four dark lance anti-vehicle units. Second, give blasters as a weapon choice at double the cost paid by our troops. Blasters are short-range assault anti-vehicle weapons, which would work well with a jump pack unit. These changes give scourges triple the number of roles scourges can fill: anti-infantry jump infantry, short-range anti-vehicle jump infantry, and long range static anti-vehicle unit.

    Problem 2: Hellions
    Hellions are one of our most gorgeous models, which is really a shame since they are almost never used. They superficially resemble assault marines, though to keep in line with the DE concept, they do a significantly more damage when charging but are too fragile for prolonged assaults. The primary problem here is that their armament, the hellglaive, is a rapid fire weapon. In third edition, this meant a hellion would take a free shot at a unit it was about to charge, but with changes to rapid fire rules the loss of that shot has significantly reduced the unit's ability to do damage when charging.

    The solution here is simple: make the hellglaive assault 1 and make its range 12". This makes the unit perform as it did under 3rd edition rules when Hellions were more often used.

    Problem 3: Incubi
    Incubi are heavily armoured elite warriors. If you imagine a more costly combination of a striking scorpion and howling banshee, you wouldn't be far off. The issue here is that they are only available as a retinue choice for an HQ model. Given that our HQ is, by and large, a horrifying CC monster in their own right, they rarely have any use for an incubi retinue. In addition, incubi have an upgrade character option that I have never seen used; the HQ leading the retinue is more than sufficient.

    I would resolve this by making incubi into a standalone Elites choice, while leaving the option of using them in a retinue.

    Problem 4: Mandrakes
    Mandrakes are a unique unit with special deployment rules. As a result, they are significantly more expensive than equivalent models. Most DE generals do not consider them to be worth their cost, and I tend to agree. Another problem with Mandrakes is that they do not have a character upgrade, and thus cannot have a weapon which ignores armour saves, a significant disadvantage in a unit purely intended for an assault role.

    Rather than having an unusual deployment rule, I would reduce the cost of mandrake squads and give them the Infiltrate skill instead. I would also add a character upgrade to them, but with the restriction that Webway Portals may not be deployed by mandrakes as this would be unbalancing.


    The last two problems apply to HQ wargear, and limit the DE general's ability to field consistently survivable HQ units.

    Problem 5: Shadow Fields
    DE suffer from miserable saves almost across the board, and this is true of their HQs as well. There is a piece of wargear to address this, but it is only available to a single model in each army. I also find it overly complex, as the current rules grant an extremely potent save that ceases to function when a save is failed. As a result, a second HQ added to a DE army is frequently extrordinarily fragile, more so than is typical.

    I would remove the "1 per army" restriction on shadow fields, and would reduce have them grant a 4+ inv save like similar pieces of wargear from other armies rather than using the current rules.

    Problem 6: Jetbikes and Saving Throws
    Both Eldar and DE armies have access to jetbikes as wargear, and the two are comparable in many ways. There are three differences, however: DE jetbikes are more expensive, grant a strength bonus, and do not confer an armour save bonus as eldar jetbikes do. This is likely an oversight, as a DE HQ mounted on a jetbike currently has a worse saving throw than a jetbike squad.

    A reaver jetbike should improve its rider's saving throw by 2, to mirror the difference in armour between a kabal HQ and a wych HQ (which is already mirrored by other wargear, specifically the hellion skyboard).


    So, what do you good folks think?

    Dark Eldar: Showing the Chaos gods how to do evil properly since 1998.

    Borrowed DH Combat Patrol 1W/0D/0L
    Dark Eldar 1W/0D/3L (partially assembled)
    Necron 1W/0D/0L (I got my 'Crons back!)

    Moo is my new personal hero. Click Undefeated Dark Eldar and DE? Good you say? to learn why.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member omegoku's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cork, Ireland
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,076
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    216 (x7)

    These are all good points.
    And could help a lot.
    This is the oldest codex still in use. And it really shows.
    The whole thing needs a redo, and soon.
    Along with a whole line of new models.
    They might lose some of their character in line of the dumbing down/streamlining of the current rules compared with older ones. But then again, that might not be the worst thing ever.

    We can only hope a new codex is not too far in the distance
    Arch Overfiend & Grand Despot
    I currently play:
    Doom Eagle Space Marines
    Hive Fleet Omega Tyranids
    Goff Ork Boyz(dead)
    Tau of O'me
    Inquisitorial Xeno Hunters

    and my attempted foray into fantasy
    'Dark Angel Green' Dark Elves in need of fluff

  4. #3
    Senior Member Sinjin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    New York
    Age
    43
    Posts
    823
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    43 (x2)

    I like all of your idea except for a couple.

    The reducing of the shadowfeild to a 4+ would really hurt our HQ's. I would leave it as is, it really makes DE unique (and our HQ's monsters)

    And I agree with the Mandrakes, except leave thier deployment and ditch the infiltrate. Again, this special rule makes them cool... if they were just a tad cheaper, and had a character upgrade, people would use them.

  5. #4
    Member Redtwin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Age
    37
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    12 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinjin View Post
    I like all of your idea except for a couple.

    The reducing of the shadowfeild to a 4+ would really hurt our HQ's. I would leave it as is, it really makes DE unique (and our HQ's monsters)

    And I agree with the Mandrakes, except leave thier deployment and ditch the infiltrate. Again, this special rule makes them cool... if they were just a tad cheaper, and had a character upgrade, people would use them.
    I only use a shadowfield for when I mess things up. If I pick my assaults properly, there shouldn't be anything left standing in the kill zone to hit my HQ back. It's a lifesaver when I get stuck in or when my lord gets stranded in the middle of a field with a squad of FW grinning at him.

    Fixing reaver jetbikes would make the 1 per army restriction on shadowfields less important anyway. You'd put one HQ on foot with a shadowfield and another on a jetbike.

    Heck, if Mandrakes stayed at the same price and were able to take a punisher or agoniser I bet more people would take them. I just see a trend in GW to simplify the rules, so making them infiltrate would be more likely from a GW standpoint.
    Dark Eldar: Showing the Chaos gods how to do evil properly since 1998.

    Borrowed DH Combat Patrol 1W/0D/0L
    Dark Eldar 1W/0D/3L (partially assembled)
    Necron 1W/0D/0L (I got my 'Crons back!)

    Moo is my new personal hero. Click Undefeated Dark Eldar and DE? Good you say? to learn why.

  6. #5
    Member Redtwin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Age
    37
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    12 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by omegoku View Post
    These are all good points.
    And could help a lot.
    This is the oldest codex still in use. And it really shows.
    The whole thing needs a redo, and soon.
    Along with a whole line of new models.
    They might lose some of their character in line of the dumbing down/streamlining of the current rules compared with older ones. But then again, that might not be the worst thing ever.

    We can only hope a new codex is not too far in the distance.
    I don't think a complete do-over is necessary, the codex is OK barring some glaring issues. Unfortunately, they're going to do a complete redesign rather than tweaking the existing codex in order to sell more books. It's really a business decision rather than a rules one.

    I like most of the DE model line. All I really want are plastic wyches.
    Dark Eldar: Showing the Chaos gods how to do evil properly since 1998.

    Borrowed DH Combat Patrol 1W/0D/0L
    Dark Eldar 1W/0D/3L (partially assembled)
    Necron 1W/0D/0L (I got my 'Crons back!)

    Moo is my new personal hero. Click Undefeated Dark Eldar and DE? Good you say? to learn why.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Age
    31
    Posts
    426
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    71 (x1)

    I really like the Dark Elf Witch Elf models. Hopefully there'll be more of a similarity if new wyches are released. I'm not at all a fan of the wyches we have now.

    Model-wise, of course. They're great units.

    I also think that the Wych Cults are going out with an update. It'll probably be more like Eldar, where you can take Wraithguard as troops (normally elites) but it has to be a large unit with a Spiritseer.

    So I'm thinking that we're going to have to field large (footslogging) wych units for a 'new' version of the wych cult.

    This is purely speculation, stemming from a comparison to other codicies. But isn't that all we have had for a while now anyway?

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts