Sneak Peek at New Drukhari Codex

@Skulnbonz wrote:

Sadly, the only prediction of future events are past events.

When was the last time our army got something really well thought out, designed and thematic?
Third edition? The advent of poison weapons?

In case you are wondering, we are now approaching 9th edition.
Go ahead and put on those sunglasses... something tells me they are rose colored.

Lol, I could answer for me:

The last one? 8th Codex with the amazing Obsessions design.
Then 5th Codex, with all those Special Characters.
Then again the third, our born.

So, yeah, it's far from being bad.



Guys, I don't wanna be "that guy" but heck, I'd NEVER seen so much hate and ignorance about the game and our army as I saw in this community. Of course everyone that is complaing about this SNEAK PEAK must be someone that have no experience at all about the 9th ed and his Codexes design. Which is acceptable, a lot of us are not playing cause the Covid so, I completely understand the situation. No judging here.
I'll try to bring better PoV about this reveal.


First of all: this is a Sneak Peak. We basically got less than the 50% of a single datasheet. Everyone who played 9th ed and watched carefully every release, know that:
1- GW (almost) never reveal the real power of an army between his articles. Usually we know the first real competitive glance thanks to rumors and other unofficial releases;
2- EVERYTHING in 9Ed becomes competitive thanks to an intricate triggers of rules, special rules, auras, stratagems, relics, WL traits and rules again. "Multipliers" is the keyword of the 9th ed. We just saw the base of a single <core> unit. Base upon what will be triggered a lot of different rules.

Once we set these 2 points, now we can argue about the reveal. So let's begin:

1) Kabalites got 4+ save and +1A. Ok, cool. While 4+ save is straight foward good, I look at that +1A. Then I look at all those melee-oriented custom Kabals. Then I think about what GW says about us: more stabbiers. Then I think about how 9th works, which is all about conquering and stealing objectives.
Mmh...so. I definitely can figure out some Kabal/Obsession rule that will buff maybe in a melee oriented way our Kabalites. And I will add every future bonus thanks from Power From Pain. So try to think about this: they got +1A. So maybe EVERYTHING in this Codex got a +1A just straightfoward. Or almost other Core units (Wracks at 3 Attacks maybe? Wyches at 4 Attacks or 3 and new rules for their knifes? Sounds "more stabbier" definitely). Maybe some Kabal/Custom Kabal will buff the melee aspect of them, like PfP will do actually (usually it works on the "body" of the DE, I can figure any +1 to hit/streght, any reroll etc). What about a Kabal that start with 2A S3 and ends (with all these rules) with 3A S4? Maybe just charge, maybe only vs non-veichle, maybe at turn 3, everything is possible. But this view sounds viable, definitively.
Because in 9th you want to move into the objective, try to figure out about shooting, then charge and finish some other troop choice (you still a Kabal, of course you need to choose your enemy: Firewarrios, Guardias, Cadians, maybe the single Intercessors..) and actually being able to kill them off! Just with Kabals. In early game that's nearly impossibile, but in late game this can be what will change between losses and victories. And Kabals usually tend to be in game on late game (usually the oppo focus other choices).
And after that, you will try to survive with your Ts4+. Which, again, in late game can be usefull.

2) Splinter Cannons. They got better, hands down, no talk here. For how we works, we have a lot of anti infantry but kinda lack in antimeq. And yes, it is true. The last DE lists you will see since 3-6 months is a DT Venom spam(ish). Because you want that D2. 12 shots, no ap, but autowounds on yourself. Now you got 6 shots, ap-1 D2 and you're obsession FREE. Guys this last part is HUGE: This is the BASE stats of the gun! Is not an Obsession, not a rule, it is the base-statsline of the gun.
Do you really think we're not going to have no Obsession/Kabal/raid rule that will not buff poisons? What Flayed Skulls will do? What Dark Tecnomancers? In fact, will Obsessions still exist? There will be some Raiding force "obsession-style" rule? How our "chapters" will work?
I think our solutions against hordes will be the melee....which is great! Because in 9th you want to fight for the middle, and for objectives. The melee is a core mechanic of this edition, being more stabbier is a completely win/win for us.
Strengt 3......can't you figure out a custom Kabal that simply adds +1S to your poisoned weapons? Yes...you will wound T3 at 3+, and T7 veichles at 5+. Maybe. Maybe not. But I can figure out any new rule that will trigger on that Strenght value.


So...of course we have nothing sure in hands. Yes, it can be a disaster, or an amazing work. We will see. BUT what I'm going to say here is that watching only flaws in the article is not only a bad attitude: is actually blind and silly. Because that article is only shows us BENEFITS.
We KNOW that the 9th is a concentrate of multiple rules that buff the single choice. We know that, SM, Necrons, DeathGuard, every Codex of this edition has a lot of multiple multiplier-rules that brings a unit from "ok" to "stunning good". That article show the...yeah, the 50% of the Kabal datasheet. The stats line, and 1 single gun. Stop. We don't even know their special rules, not the army rules, etc. And just those stats are an upgrade of the Kabals and Splinter Cannons. Yes it too.

Try to be more objective. If you think about how the 9th works, this SneakPeak is pretty nice.





PS: I'll make it simple. Cry for this review it's like who cried for Necrons after the new Repair Protocols were revealed. How much stupid that thing was....

Man, can't wait to see all these amazing DE models that are totally, definitely coming.

Good point, cerve!
Having not followed the 9ed codexes very closely, I appreciate to read your view of it ^_^

I am happily sitting on the fence for this. Been around long enough to be burned repeatedly by GW's hot teaspoon, but I am hopeful the codex in totality will be a well functioning and competitive book for now.

Having not kept up with 40k for a while I appreciate the range in views here

@Skulnbonz wrote:

Sadly, the only prediction of future events are past events.

When was the last time our army got something really well thought out, designed and thematic?
Third edition? The advent of poison weapons?

In case you are wondering, we are now approaching 9th edition.
Go ahead and put on those sunglasses... something tells me they are rose colored.

Sick burn.

Yes, I'm cautiously optimistic. As opposed to relentlessly negative, I'll take it.

[quote="sekac"]

@Skulnbonz wrote:

Sadly, the only prediction of future events are past events.

When was the last time our army got something really well thought out, designed and thematic?
Third edition? The advent of poison weapons?

In case you are wondering, we are now approaching 9th edition.
Go ahead and put on those sunglasses... something tells me they are rose colored.

Drazhar? When was he released? Very good rules (well thought out), Great looking model (design), and is a blender (thematic). But... I guess he doesn't count.

*Puts on rose-colored glasses*

@SCP Yeeman wrote:

@Skulnbonz wrote:

Sadly, the only prediction of future events are past events.

When was the last time our army got something really well thought out, designed and thematic?
Third edition? The advent of poison weapons?

In case you are wondering, we are now approaching 9th edition.
Go ahead and put on those sunglasses... something tells me they are rose colored.

Drazhar? When was he released? Very good rules (well thought out), Great looking model (design), and is a blender (thematic). But... I guess he doesn't count.

*Puts on rose-colored glasses*

The 5th ed codex, Reaper getting D3+3 wounds as opposed to D6. Neither of these happened either.

@SCP Yeeman wrote:

Drazhar? When was he released? Very good rules (well thought out), Great looking model (design), and is a blender (thematic). But... I guess he doesn't count.

His rules are fine but eh, agree to disagree on his model.

To me it's uninspired and looks completely out-of-character. Hell, it just looks like a Klaivex who just got done fighting a coral reef. Oh but it must be Drazhar because he's standing on two big pieces of rock. They only reserve those for the best characters.

Each to their own, of course, it's just that I always saw Drazhar as being almost a living weapon. A being that doesn't care about trophies (or, at the very least, who doesn't go covering himself in them). To say nothing of the ridiculous tassels he's sporting.

While I would like to make fun of the 2 attacks as well and complain that Splinter Weapons weren't remade from the ground-up, I think most people are underestimating the impact this will have.

I've had enough games where it all came down to a ditch effort from a few leftover Kabalites which I had to charge. It makes charging other T3 infantry in the last round of a game a legitimate option. And a Syberite with a Power Sword has the attack profile of our current Incubi. And if Kabalites only had one attack, I don't think they would be cheaper either. It's most likely a neat thing that they threw on top.

Is it what we were hoping for? Certainly not.
But the most determining factor will be our changes to weaponry, mostly Darklight and Splinter Weapons. And based on the Splinter Cannon we seriously can't draw conclusions about our more prevalent weapons.

And will the Splinter Cannon see less use than before? I very hardly think so.

@Soulless Samurai wrote:

His rules are fine but eh, agree to disagree on his model.

To me it's uninspired and looks completely out-of-character. Hell, it just looks like a Klaivex who just got done fighting a coral reef.

This part, I can totally agree with. Not a fan of his new model. It's also reminiscent of multiple other HQ models from other armies.

I still rock the old 3rd Ed praying mantis model. The purportions are a little cartoonish by their current standard, but the detail, movement, and concept make it much cooler.

I'm quite excited to see these changes. If you consider how common disintegrator cannons have been, a weaker version on a venom (probably our most spammed transport) seams like a great change. This basically makes venoms a mini ravager with a transport capacity.

In 8th edition, the argument was always "would I be better off with more kabalites instead?" and the answer was typically "Yes". I don't feel like it's the same answer when you can have spammable miniature dissi-ravagers.

@Cavash wrote:

I am happily sitting on the fence for this. Been around long enough to be burned repeatedly by GW's hot teaspoon, but I am hopeful the codex in totality will be a well functioning and competitive book for now.

Having not kept up with 40k for a while I appreciate the range in views here

One thing very much worth bearing in mind, amidst all this discussion: 40k's no longer a game where once a faction receives a Codex they're left on the shelf for the next five to ten years. New units being released that aren't in a Codex is very common, and our next batch of rules is dropping immediately after the Codex in Warzone: Charadon (which might lead to a different discussion about whether GW double-dipping on us so quickly is justified).

I accept that I'm clearly in the more optimistic side of this thread but even if the new Codex is utterly terrible (unlikely IMO) and gives us no new models outside of Lelith (almost certain) then that doesn't mean we're crap out of luck for the entirety of 9th edition.

I'm also in the position where I thought our 8th Codex was both fluffy and competitively strong, albeit with obvious issues like its treatment of characters. The Obsessions in particular were a welcome addition to our roster and were a really solid first attempt at injecting more flavour into our rules. A big part of my tentative excitement here is that I'm expecting them to iterate on a pretty damn good starting point.

@sekac wrote:

@Count Adhemar wrote:

@sekac wrote:

@Count Adhemar wrote:

@sekac wrote:

@Count Adhemar wrote:

@sekac wrote:

+1A is an upgrade full stop

In the same way as buying a car for someone who can't drive is an upgrade. Technically they're better off but they're really not going to get much use out of it.

Of course, they could always sell the car. Wish we could sell the Attack and buy something that would actually be useful instead!

Again, find out you're paying for it, THEN whine about it.

You're like a kid at a birthday party crying because the free toys you got aren't the ones you wanted.

Your parents would be so embarassed.

Leave the insults out of it please.

If you're happy that a shooting unit got a boost to it's attacks then I'm happy for you. I'd prefer something that is actually going to be useful for the unit.

Would you prefer to pay 8 points for 1 attack, or 8 points for 2 attacks?

We both know what the answer is.

I would prefer to pay 8 points for a shooting unit that actually shoots well. I genuinely don't care at all about +1A on Kabalite Warriors. It is not going to change my unit selection in any way, shape or form and is most likely going to be used to justify their points value, whatever that may end up being, whilst not making any significant contribution to their effectiveness as a unit.

Since you avoided answering the question, that's all the confirmation I need. We would both prefer 2 attacks for 8 points. I'm glad we can find common ground.

Still, you've only opened one of your birthday presents. I'm sorry it wasn't good enough for you. I would still wait to see what else you got before declaring the party a bust.

You seem to have misunderstood. To repeat, I don't care at all about +1A. To put it another way, if GW announced today that it was a typo* and we're actually not getting it, I still wouldn't care. It makes close to zero difference in almost all circumstances UNLESS there has been a total redesign of our weaponry, obsessions and power from pain; none of which I'm counting on. If there has been such a redesign, I still wouldn't be taking Kabalites for close combat because we've got Wyches and Wracks who would presumably be better positioned to take advantage of these massive changes.

*Wouldn't be the first bait and switch GW has pulled on us. Anyone remember power mauls on Wracks?

@Stea1k wrote:

I'm quite excited to see these changes. If you consider how common disintegrator cannons have been, a weaker version on a venom (probably our most spammed transport) seams like a great change. This basically makes venoms a mini ravager with a transport capacity.

But could they not at least have made it Assault 3? (Or, heaven forbid, Assault 4).

That way there might remain a glimmer of hope of it seeing play outside of Venoms. Plus it might feel less like a vastly-inferior Heavy Bolter.

I hope you guys are right, I really do.

But the fact remains, +1 attack on our shooty troops sucks.
Halving the shots and moving it to heavy for our splinter cannons sucks.

No matter how you look at it, these "improvements" are far and away sub par to other armies improvements.

When we were hoping for changes, we asked for the splinter cannon to be -1 ap 2 damage, but KEEP the rapid fire 3. Yeah, not so much.

Are we only seeing a part of the picture? Of course. Will there be good things in the dex? I sure hope so.
But what they have previewed already falls FAR FAR short of my hopes.

Now, I am left with just 1 more hope-
\that we get a total retooling of our army... how it plays, how it works, everything. I want to say "Oh. I get it now" about giving warriors 2 attacks. I want to say "oh, the splinter cannon also ignores cover and does mortal wounds on a 4+! "
But I wont hold my breath.

all in all, i gotta say that while i know that i am on the positive side of the trench, we do need those pessimists. First of all, the last 2 days been really entertaining here, isnt it? reading all the posts really made me smile and amused me, and, gotta say, they do bring some legit points (not all of them mind you!!). The tension rises sometimes, but overall, everything is said in a peaceful way with some respect. This lead to some instructive conversation.....after all, if everyone was on one side or the other.....the topic would have closed after 10 comments and we would have passed on something else (well....nothing for now and maybe the next week).

@Kalmah wrote:

all in all, i gotta say that while i know that i am on the positive side of the trench, we do need those pessimists. First of all, the last 2 days been really entertaining here, isnt it? reading all the posts really made me smile and amused me, and, gotta say, they do bring some legit points (not all of them mind you!!). The tension rises sometimes, but overall, everything is said in a peaceful way with some respect. This lead to some instructive conversation.....after all, if everyone was on one side or the other.....the topic would have closed after 10 comments and we would have passed on something else (well....nothing for now and maybe the next week).

exactly cant wait to have more stuff previewed so we can have more fun in here...!
Seriously i think i get invigorated reading through these posts its like im feeding on both tears and happiness its crazy ^_^

@DevilDoll lol now that's the Drukhari's spirit!!

My tin-foil-hat theory is the Venom and Raider change roles. Splinter Cannon Venoms become the long range support and the Raider goes for close range. Maybe Dissies become short range/high ROF?

Personally I am feeling pretty good about this. Stock market is making me happy, lets see if my luck transfers over to 40k

@Soulless Samurai wrote:

Oh, something I saw mentioned elsewhere, the change also makes the Splinter Cannon drastically worse against Death Guard.

I'm doubtful that this is a coincidence.

It is also worse against salamanders, valorous heart sisters, rotten constitution death guard warlords and the rise of ignore Ap 1 abilities in general that didn’t used to matter for poison.

@Kalmah wrote:

all in all, i gotta say that while i know that i am on the positive side of the trench, we do need those pessimists. First of all, the last 2 days been really entertaining here, isnt it? reading all the posts really made me smile and amused me, and, gotta say, they do bring some legit points (not all of them mind you!!). The tension rises sometimes, but overall, everything is said in a peaceful way with some respect. This lead to some instructive conversation.....after all, if everyone was on one side or the other.....the topic would have closed after 10 comments and we would have passed on something else (well....nothing for now and maybe the next week).

Are you seriously being positive about negativity?

Enough is enough! However positive you are, I'm negative double, so there!

@rtynd057 wrote:

@Soulless Samurai wrote:

Oh, something I saw mentioned elsewhere, the change also makes the Splinter Cannon drastically worse against Death Guard.

I'm doubtful that this is a coincidence.

It is also worse against salamanders, valorous heart sisters,  rotten constitution death guard warlords and the rise of ignore Ap 1 abilities in general that didn’t used to matter for poison.

Sorta. but not quite. It's still D2 vs 'ignore ap -1' abilities, so at long range, it's still better than it is currently against those types of targets. Now, against any death guard that also ignore the AP? That's where they really suck.

For me, the Splinhter Canon was a symbol of multiple shoots and mobility.
And now GW has changed it into a fire power weapon.

I agree that we really need more 2 or 3 Flat Damage
Perhaps I would prefer it for the shredder.

But I presume that GW has a plan about our codex

@fisheyes wrote:

My tin-foil-hat theory is the Venom and Raider change roles. Splinter Cannon Venoms become the long range support and the Raider goes for close range. Maybe Dissies become short range/high ROF?

Personally I am feeling pretty good about this. Stock market is making me happy, lets see if my luck transfers over to 40k

While I'm a bit more than disconnected from gaming nowadays and can't quite remember stats or strategies, couldn't it be that Venoms could act now as "softeners" for the units they transport to finish the softened units?
I mean, Venoms could be deliverers for HtH units like Incubi or Wyches goin' all for enemy 2W infantry while Raiders and Kabalites take care of standard infantry.
Guess then Ravagers and Scourges would be primary character/monster/vehicle hunters. And that still leaves room for Covens or Mandrakes, and doesn't take specific bonuses from army building etc.

Dunno, but agree a lot more has to be seen to even be suspicious/auspicious about how Drukhari fare in the new codex.

@krayd wrote:

@rtynd057 wrote:

@Soulless Samurai wrote:

Oh, something I saw mentioned elsewhere, the change also makes the Splinter Cannon drastically worse against Death Guard.

I'm doubtful that this is a coincidence.

It is also worse against salamanders, valorous heart sisters,  rotten constitution death guard warlords and the rise of ignore Ap 1 abilities in general that didn’t used to matter for poison.

Sorta. but not quite. It's still D2 vs 'ignore ap -1' abilities, so at long range, it's still better than it is currently against those types of targets. Now, against any death guard that also ignore the AP? That's where they really suck.

Unless Dark Technomancers is still a thing. Then the new venom cannon is indisputably better against Death Guard than its current incarnation.

People have talked endlessly about how ineffective poison is. So they change it up and people complain that poison is less good at the very few things it was good for, but is now more generally useful.

This is a bad thing, I guess. Give the people what they want! We want the poison weapons we always hated!