HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in
Share | 
 

 Dark Eldar Fan Codex

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Tounguekutter
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 356
Join date : 2014-05-18
Location : Springfield, Virginia

PostSubject: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Mon Jul 28 2014, 21:44

Well, I hope this works! I have never done anything like this before, and I'm using google docs, so if somehow you can edit the file, please do not. I spent weeks on this codex and I don't want anybody messin' with it! Otherwise I submit my Dark Eldar fan codex for peer review. If you don't like it that's okay, I wrote it for me. If you do like it but have suggestions, please post here. Hopefully the doc will be openable/workable.

Dark Eldar Fan Codex

Enjoy!
Back to top Go down
Bibitybopitybacon
Wych
avatar

Posts : 574
Join date : 2012-07-01

PostSubject: Re: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Tue Jul 29 2014, 22:35

Interesting! Seems a little obsessed with Necrons though. Also the razorwing has no aa missiles and there were a couple of wargear options I couldn't find like advanced clone field. AA seems very weak still..
Back to top Go down
Squidmaster
Incubi
avatar

Posts : 1504
Join date : 2013-12-18
Location : Hampshire, England

PostSubject: Re: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Wed Jul 30 2014, 10:42

If I may....


Cover of Darkness: Oh, defvinitely a rule I'm sure we would all love, but its too over powered. You're essentially saying, in the majority of games, Stealth for all DE units. Even with the opponent choosing to end the game, both these abilities are too overpowered I think. You would be better off, if you want a rule like this, to say that you roll for Night Fight as normal, but then roll each turn to see if ends.

Hatred (Necrons): Why? There's no massive fued with necrons like you would get from other armies Hatred rules......

Preferred Enemy (Necrons): Again, why? Dark Eldar do not have any serious fued with Necrons.

Realspace raiders: You;ve only written in this rule to allow for turn one charging, havcen;t you. Its another rule I would love but is simply over the top.

Shadow Strike: Uh, seems a bit....well.....pop-up attack. I would nerf a little, and say this can only be used if the unit did not fire in the Shooting phase.

Trueborn: The combination of Shard grenades and Multiple Operations has clear intent. Divide into very small squads, and use them to charge against enemy units first to wipe out the overwatch before sending in the bigger combat unit.
Multiple Operations does need to be knocked down a bit, if kept at all. Even Space Marine combat squads count as seperate units for Warlord Traits, etc.

Reavers: The one unit that really needs improving, and you didn;t touch them.....

Scourge Sky Surgery: Nah, this just seems silly. For me, Scourge excell at Deep Striking right next to an enemy unit and laying heavy fire into them. Your rule here would wipe out their primary usefullness.

Mandrakes: YOu've taken away their shooting attack and replaced it with Plasma Grenades?! Worse, they're still armed with only a close combat weapon and are thus useless against most enemies. The deep striking directly into combat is amusing, but with no decent weapons they'll fall down too easily against anything but the smallest units.

Archon Nemisis: Too much. Being able to choose your Warlord Trait is too much in terms of power level, and would give too much of an advantage.

Advanced Clone Field: What exactly is this?

Medusae: If you're going the psyker route, I'd say less powers, and less offensive ones.

Haemonculi: The "Minor" Haemonculus seems incredibly pointless.

Venom Reversible Engines: Wishlisting, but pop-up attacks annoy EVERYONE.

Talos Increase Characteristic: Too much again. All I have to do is choose Strength of Toughness, and I have better than a 50% chance to end up as Strength or Toughness 10.

Razorwing: If the missiles types are the same, replacing Monoscythes with Shatterfields for free is too good. Adding the reversible engines

Voidraven: To balance the Silent Engines, I'd just give it the Outflank rule rather than give the choice.

Low-Orbit Raid: Too far for a Warlord Trait, and defeats the whole point of Duke Dlsicus.

_________________
Kabal of the Eternal NightModelling Blog
The Squidmaster DistractathonNotes on being an RPG Gamesmaster
Back to top Go down
http://www.escelionfilms.com
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6626
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Wed Jul 30 2014, 11:10

Squidmaster wrote:
Cover of Darkness: Oh, defvinitely a rule I'm sure we would all love, but its too over powered. You're essentially saying, in the majority of games, Stealth for all DE units. Even with the opponent choosing to end the game, both these abilities are too overpowered I think. You would be better off, if you want a rule like this, to say that you roll for Night Fight as normal, but then roll each turn to see if ends.

Given the amount of Ignores Cover that's available these days I think Stealth for all units is pretty far from overpowered.

Quote :
Hatred (Necrons): Why? There's no massive fued with necrons like you would get from other armies Hatred rules......

Preferred Enemy (Necrons): Again, why? Dark Eldar do not have any serious fued with Necrons.

Erm...the whole Eldar race was basically created to combat the Necrons.

Quote :
Realspace raiders: You;ve only written in this rule to allow for turn one charging, havcen;t you. Its another rule I would love but is simply over the top.

I'd have it count for shooting but not for embarking disembarking. That being said, I would also incorporate a rule that allows an I test to avoid any damage from an exploding vehicle that you're embarked on.

Quote :
Shadow Strike: Uh, seems a bit....well.....pop-up attack. I would nerf a little, and say this can only be used if the unit did not fire in the Shooting phase.

I agree and would remove it completely. I think Shard Grenades and the Wych Swift Strike rule adequately deals with this problem

Quote :
Trueborn: The combination of Shard grenades and Multiple Operations has clear intent. Divide into very small squads, and use them to charge against enemy units first to wipe out the overwatch before sending in the bigger combat unit.
Multiple Operations does need to be knocked down a bit, if kept at all. Even Space Marine combat squads count as seperate units for Warlord Traits, etc.

I'd remove Multiple Ops as I don't see any basis for it in the fluff or need for it in the rules. Shard Grenades I like.

Quote :
Reavers: The one unit that really needs improving, and you didn;t touch them.....

Other than a points drop I don't see a need for any change to Reavers.

Quote :
Scourge Sky Surgery: Nah, this just seems silly. For me, Scourge excell at Deep Striking right next to an enemy unit and laying heavy fire into them. Your rule here would wipe out their primary usefullness.

Only change I'd make to Scourges is give them Skyfire to represent them being able to duel enemy flyers.

Quote :
Mandrakes: YOu've taken away their shooting attack and replaced it with Plasma Grenades?! Worse, they're still armed with only a close combat weapon and are thus useless against most enemies. The deep striking directly into combat is amusing, but with no decent weapons they'll fall down too easily against anything but the smallest units.

I'd give them poison weapons and let them assault from deep strike but subject to the normal rules (on their own turn, overwatch etc).

Not got to the rest of the document yet. Might comment more later.

The one thing missing from this is the one thing, other than constant Night Fight, that I think would make DE a truly decent army, and that is the ability for our vehicles to fire at full BS after Jinking. I'd add that to any wishlist, fandex or codex that I can!

_________________

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
Barking Agatha
Wych
avatar

Posts : 732
Join date : 2012-07-02

PostSubject: Re: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Wed Jul 30 2014, 20:07

I've taken the liberty of linking your fan codex to the others in my Fan Codices thread... I hope you don't mind?

To be honest, I think that we can all sense a new official codex coming out soon, and everything that we hope to 'fix' with fan codices may well not need fixing. I would rather wait until we know what's what, and then maybe we can start making up fan supplements instead, like 'Codex: Kabal of the Poisoned Tongue', or 'Codex: Hellions', or what have you. Nice work, but you may soon find that some of the things that you thought were too OTT were actually too restrained! (I know, I'm too optimistic, yadda yadda Smile)
Back to top Go down
Tounguekutter
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 356
Join date : 2014-05-18
Location : Springfield, Virginia

PostSubject: Re: Dark Eldar Fan Codex   Wed Jul 30 2014, 22:50

A big thank you to everyone for their constructive criticism, I appreciate the help and the positive tones!  I will be updating the codex as I absorb the critiques.

Barking Agatha:  I don't mind in the slightest!

Why the relationship with Necrons? I meant to give Preferred Enemy, not Hatred. It isn't that Dark Eldar have more bones to pick with the Necrons than they do with anybody else, it is simply that the ways Dark Eldar kill things just don't work with Necrons. They can't bleed, are immune to poisons, and have no fun squishy spots! Sad They also don't feel pain which deprives the Dark Eldar of one of their chief advantages. In order to combat the Necrons at all, the Dark Eldar train to fight them specifically. Rules-wise in games against Necrons Dark Eldar lose Power From Pain but gain Preferred Enemy against Necrons. I think that's a fair tradeoff, it will mean the Dark Eldar are especially delicate (The Haemonculi which really rely on Power From Pain are hit really bad) but they will be killier.

All flyers have the Skyfire special rule right? So Razorwing Dark Lances would be able to hit flyers on a 3+ like normal?

I've deleted the Shadow Strike special rule for now, but I want D.E. to have an equivalent to Battle Focus which isn't actually Battle Focus because that's too Craftworld-like.

I have added move through cover to Kabalite Warriors and Trueborn. I upped the cost of Warriors by 1 pt. (to 10) to pay for the special rule. I want it to be included in the Warrior units, but I am reluctant to make them equal to wyches in points cost. Is 1 point too cheap for Move Through Cover for Warriors if it isn't optional?

I'd have it count for shooting but not for embarking disembarking. That being said, I would also incorporate a rule that allows an I test to avoid any damage from an exploding vehicle that you're embarked on.

I'd remove Multiple Ops as I don't see any basis for it in the fluff

Quote :
Reavers: The one unit that really needs improving, and you didn;t touch them.....


Other than a points drop I don't see a need for any change to Reavers.

Quote :
Scourge Sky Surgery: Nah, this just seems silly. For me, Scourge excell at Deep Striking right next to an enemy unit and laying heavy fire into them. Your rule here would wipe out their primary usefullness.


Only change I'd make to Scourges is give them Skyfire to represent them being able to duel enemy flyers.

The one thing missing from this is the one thing, other than constant Night Fight, that I think would make DE a truly decent army, and that is the ability for our vehicles to fire at full BS after Jinking. I'd add that to any wishlist, fandex or codex that I can![/quote]

I have given these points some thought. I really like the suggestion for the Realspace Raider rule, but since it would basically be like an extra save during explosions, I added the -2 modifier. It was the realization that their just isn't enough fluff to back up the Multi-Op. rule, and that for 50 pts. you can just get a minor Haemonculus and have 3 more Elite Slots. I kept the Scourges the same except for taking out Shadow Strike and 2 points to their cost. The reason why is the fluff doesn't make the Scourges sound like a unit you would suicide with, and I wanted them to fly in a way that makes sense for a shooty unit. They are the Dark Eldar answer to the absolutely BROKEN Warp Spiders the new Eldar codex brought. I mean have you SEEN THOSE THINGS! I like the addition of Skyfire rule though, it makes sense fluff-wise (clearly I am the kind of gamer who wants a strong connection between the rules and fluff - it's just who I am). I really like the idea of firing at full BS after Jinking, but that is basically giving every vehicle a 4+ (often 3+ b/c Night Fighting) cover save, so I made it fairly expensive and only Raiders, Ravagers, and Venoms have it. The Dark Eldar flyers are already light and flimsy (they're flyers after all) and they're already expensive enough so I didn't give them the rule.

Clearly I haven't figured out the whole quoting system. Apologies.

4a. Please refrain from double posting. You may "bump" a post every 48hrs if you feel you are not getting responses. Double posts in project logs are acceptable. /Your friendly mod SS (Still, thanks for the apology.)

_________________
I love 8th edition, and I love Dark Eldar in 8th, but I still can't wait for fluffy Kabal rules to drop in our dex.  I have written multiple Dark Eldar fan codexes (3 and a "mini-fandex" which was totally ridiculous), the latest of which (for 7th edition) can be found here.  I also created a Blood Angels 7th edition fan codex for 7th (and I'm taking ideas for a Blood Angels chapter trait to fan-rule in while my girlfriend and I wait for a full codex), and I have used the Age of Sigmar Kharadron Overlords battletome to create a 40k squat army codex complete with a bunch of Stratagems.
Back to top Go down
 
Dark Eldar Fan Codex
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

OTHER DARK ELDAR DISCUSSION

 :: Rules Development
-
Jump to: