Xenos in 30k

[Varyn]

I've heard about some of the 30k groups using xenos armies in 30k, representing battles fought during the great crusade or chance skirmishes with xenos during the horus heresy and I wondered what the general consensus is for this type of thing.

 

Aus30k have written up books for Eldar and Necrons and it looks like a lot of time has gone into the books. It's great to see so much effort going into fan written 30k content.

 

I personally wouldn't have an issue with people playing these armies in a 30k event and it could be an interesting way to add some variety. I appreciate that they are not official rules and may not be to everyone's taste, but I am curious to hear what people think.

 

Aeldari Book:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TeowdsjMrX7vMl2QRL-0Z5PjiuQoz3tF/view?fbclid=IwAR01I5n6D-DeSA9h79A_mhJPMGGTwAYCpwKL2VBLGurFW9ZbvA-WLwITnVk

 

 

 

 

[Beren]

King Fluff also has minidexes for some of the minor xenos and non-compliant human civilisations mentioned over the course of the Horus Heresy series, over at http://unityb4heresy.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-great-crusade-enemies-of-emperor.html

 

According to the thread on the 30k forum, the necron book should be finished over the next few weeks and work has begun on the Ork one.

 

I also believe that King Fluff/Mournival Events are running a Great Crusade Event with xenos armies available in the near future.

[LameBeard]

I only have the Astartes red books, but I can see a lot of potential fun for some weapon options and rites of war that I’d like to use against orks and eldar (can I still call them that in 30k?) so I’d welcome more xenos in 30k. I get the feeling some rules were written in anticipation of them - but maybe that’s for things in the militia/mars/daemons lists I don’t have?

[Filkarion]

I want to thank this topic as I did not know of the King Fluff's books, and now I love them and I want an Interex army (that is probably an insane proposal )

[CajunJynx]

I’m definitely interested in the Ork book, got a buddy with an ork army mostly finished.

[Unknown Legionnaire]

The efforts are to be applauded and the e-books fit in nicely from a fluff perspective, but ... 

 

... those Eldar units presented therein are just totally OP in a gaming environment where Initiative 4 is the norm and Initiative 5 is considered to be hero- / champion- level, with 6 being extremely rare. So, I'll pass.

[Brofist]

I played the legion list way back when the first book came out. My friends at the time still played 40k. Provided you don't use formations and follow the AoD rules for scoring the legion list was somewhere in the upper middle of the pack. You could straight up just get the necron rules from 7th and play a decent game

[CajunJynx]

Oh man there is so much wrong with that codex.

 

First, no Eldrad, he is specifically mentioned in Fulgrim et all but no rules for him.

 

Have to buy sergeants as HQ choices and only then can you take the aspects? Awful mechanic.

 

Completely removing the Skyfire missiles from reapers, nullifying the factions only real AA.

 

Missing Pheonix lords that definitely where around at the time.

 

Includes the Wraithknights and allows for a wraithhost, which was a last ditch effort because of the cost in soul stones, and wouldn’t even be considered viable at the time of the heresy...

 

 

The more I read of the codex the angrier I got, it’s lore breaking in the worst kind of ways...guardian officers? Literally not a thing, guardians are Eldar that are walking different paths than the warrior and are basically handed a Shuriken rifle and given directions.

 

The Eldar absolutely exist see during the heresy, but this...this attempt is way off target.

 

Better served just playing 7th ed without formations.

[CajunJynx]

The efforts are to be applauded and the e-books fit in nicely from a fluff perspective, but ...

 

... those Eldar units presented therein are just totally OP in a gaming environment where Initiative 4 is the norm and Initiative 5 is considered to be hero- / champion- level, with 6 being extremely rare. So, I'll pass.

I mean, Eldar have always had high Initiative, that’s actually the least of my complaints. The lore ignoring/changing is a big negative.

[battle captain corpus]

I still think there is some solid work here....just needs a fair amount of playtesting and rebalancing?...

 

BCC

[Beren]

Oh man there is so much wrong with that codex.

 

First, no Eldrad, he is specifically mentioned in Fulgrim et all but no rules for him.

 

Have to buy sergeants as HQ choices and only then can you take the aspects? Awful mechanic.

 

Completely removing the Skyfire missiles from reapers, nullifying the factions only real AA.

 

Missing Pheonix lords that definitely where around at the time.

 

Includes the Wraithknights and allows for a wraithhost, which was a last ditch effort because of the cost in soul stones, and wouldn’t even be considered viable at the time of the heresy...

 

 

The more I read of the codex the angrier I got, it’s lore breaking in the worst kind of ways...guardian officers? Literally not a thing, guardians are Eldar that are walking different paths than the warrior and are basically handed a Shuriken rifle and given directions.

 

The Eldar absolutely exist see during the heresy, but this...this attempt is way off target.

 

Better served just playing 7th ed without formations.

 

Going to have to contradict you on a few points here.

 

Firstly, there was an entire craftworld filled with insane wraith units, the craftworld of Magc'Sithrall, which is described in Inferno, so you're definitely off base on that one. Secondly, their fluff interpretation that the Wraith units are the same 'automata' that were used in the Aeldari's heyday, and were only later pressed into service as soulstone hosts. Also, the aspect mechanics are deliberately designed how the aspects would not be as far spread as they are in modern 40k, and the guardian officers are to show that they would have had other degrees of leadership before the Aspects became predominant. 

 

I would really suggest that you sign up to the Heresy 30k forum and give a look at their thread, as it showcases the thought and design process that went into this.

 

Such as:

 

 

 

Arhra is not included.

This was intentional, while the exact timeline of the fall of Arhra is not known we have made the decision to have made it occur about a century before the start of the Horus Heresy. This gives us the ability to keep the Striking Scorpions in a slightly different incarnation before Karandras took over as Phoenix Lord, but it also allows us to use Arhra in the Dark Eldar list as the progenitor of the Incubi.

 

Things looking to be added-

 

Craftworld Commander

A non Aspect HQ options, kind of like a senior Guardian Commander, either on foot or mounted on a Jetbike. This would allow people to play Craftworlds which have little to no exposure to the Aspect Shrines yet but don't rely on Farseers as HQ options.

 

[CajunJynx]

 

 

Oh man there is so much wrong with that codex.

 

First, no Eldrad, he is specifically mentioned in Fulgrim et all but no rules for him.

 

Have to buy sergeants as HQ choices and only then can you take the aspects? Awful mechanic.

 

Completely removing the Skyfire missiles from reapers, nullifying the factions only real AA.

 

Missing Pheonix lords that definitely where around at the time.

 

Includes the Wraithknights and allows for a wraithhost, which was a last ditch effort because of the cost in soul stones, and wouldn’t even be considered viable at the time of the heresy...

 

 

The more I read of the codex the angrier I got, it’s lore breaking in the worst kind of ways...guardian officers? Literally not a thing, guardians are Eldar that are walking different paths than the warrior and are basically handed a Shuriken rifle and given directions.

 

The Eldar absolutely exist see during the heresy, but this...this attempt is way off target.

 

Better served just playing 7th ed without formations.

Going to have to contradict you on a few points here.

 

Firstly, there was an entire craftworld filled with insane wraith units, the craftworld of Magc'Sithrall, which is described in Inferno, so you're definitely off base on that one. Secondly, their fluff interpretation that the Wraith units are the same 'automata' that were used in the Aeldari's heyday, and were only later pressed into service as soulstone hosts. Also, the aspect mechanics are deliberately designed how the aspects would not be as far spread as they are in modern 40k, and the guardian officers are to show that they would have had other degrees of leadership before the Aspects became predominant.

 

I would really suggest that you sign up to the Heresy 30k forum and give a look at their thread, as it showcases the thought and design process that went into this.

 

Such as:

 

Arhra is not included.

This was intentional, while the exact timeline of the fall of Arhra is not known we have made the decision to have made it occur about a century before the start of the Horus Heresy. This gives us the ability to keep the Striking Scorpions in a slightly different incarnation before Karandras took over as Phoenix Lord, but it also allows us to use Arhra in the Dark Eldar list as the progenitor of the Incubi.

Things looking to be added-

 

Craftworld Commander

A non Aspect HQ options, kind of like a senior Guardian Commander, either on foot or mounted on a Jetbike. This would allow people to play Craftworlds which have little to no exposure to the Aspect Shrines yet but don't rely on Farseers as HQ options.

 

Yes, inferno mentions one instance of a dying/dead craft world, while none of the other craft worlds use them regularly, you can read Fulgrim when a single wraithlord is a part of the Retinue of the missing-from-the-fauxdex Eldrad in Fulgrim. A single mention when the Horus heresy novels counter many rules used in the faudex doesn’t make it relevant.

 

Was the thought process “not any”? Because you can tell very little was put into the rules, the PDF looks great though.

 

And your point about “guardian officers” kinda says exactly what I said, it was made up. Especially given the paths where already a thing, I can point to Fulgrim against mentioning specific aspects being in use.

 

I mean, don’t try and pawn this off as being lore accurate when it’s not at all lore accurate.

 

I have no interest in joining another forum to learn about how they pulled a bad fauxdex from their fourth point of contact.

 

A 7th ed codex sans formations would be much better than this attempt.

 

None of the Pheonix lords where also Autarch’s, because an Autarch would be an Aeldari that had become an exarch from many warrior paths, that’s yet another example of the codex not only being incongruent to the lore, but counter to it, same with the guardian officers/commander idea.

[Beren]

First up, I have have never tried to say "this is the one and only definition of Eldar Heresy Lore", it is a singular interpretation extrapolated from the lore available, that tries to show a clear evolution from the Fall to modern day 40k. Secondly, just because you do not agree with the end product does not mean that they put 'not 'any' thought in it and deliberately maligned the lore. Frankly, I'm finding your abrasive tone more than a little aggravating.

 

In addition, I would like to point out that Wraith units also appear in the novel Angels Exterminatus. Would you care to cite not only the lore that states 'craftworlds did not use wraith constructs in battle', but also the source that states, 'no craftworld other than one was dead or dying or had cause for desperate action'?

 

Also, yes we know that paths were a thing, which is why Aspects are in the codex. We also know that at one point paths were not a thing, and that the aspects did not simultaneously appear into existence on every craftworld  but were spread though contact between them. Is it really so illogical or unfeasible that before a craftworld had contact with the Aspect Shrines, they might have appointed military leaders from among the ranks of their Guardians?

 

As for the Autarch rules I think you're referring too, I'm fairly sure that's nothing more than rules convenience rather an assertion of fluff.

 

You're perfectly free to decline to use the supplement if it doesn't align with your perception of the lore, but at least acknowledge what it is trying to do and that the writers have done research and come to certain conclusions rather than dismissing it out of hand.

[battle captain corpus]

Keep it friendly guys please... ;)

 

-unhooks Crozius from belt-

 

It does look as though a lot of work has gone into this and whilst it may not be everyones cup of tea I think we need to recognise this. :)

 

-thumbs activation rune on Crozius-

 

So keep it friendly & above all respectful.

 

BCC

[CajunJynx]

Keep it friendly guys please... ;)

 

-unhooks Crozius from belt-

 

It does look as though a lot of work has gone into this and whilst it may not be everyones cup of tea I think we need to recognise this. :)

 

-thumbs activation rune on Crozius-

 

So keep it friendly & above all respectful.

 

BCC

I’m absolutely being respectful, OP asked for opinions on a terribly done fauxdex, and my opinion is that it’s terribly done.

 

If he or the other people defending such a poorly thought out example didn’t want to hear negative comments, perhaps they shouldn’t have asked for opinions?

[CajunJynx]

First up, I have have never tried to say "this is the one and only definition of Eldar Heresy Lore", it is a singular interpretation extrapolated from the lore available, that tries to show a clear evolution from the Fall to modern day 40k. Secondly, just because you do not agree with the end product does not mean that they put 'not 'any' thought in it and deliberately maligned the lore. Frankly, I'm finding your abrasive tone more than a little aggravating.

 

In addition, I would like to point out that Wraith units also appear in the novel Angels Exterminatus. Would you care to cite not only the lore that states 'craftworlds did not use wraith constructs in battle', but also the source that states, 'no craftworld other than one was dead or dying or had cause for desperate action'?

 

Also, yes we know that paths were a thing, which is why Aspects are in the codex. We also know that at one point paths were not a thing, and that the aspects did not simultaneously appear into existence on every craftworld but were spread though contact between them. Is it really so illogical or unfeasible that before a craftworld had contact with the Aspect Shrines, they might have appointed military leaders from among the ranks of their Guardians?

 

As for the Autarch rules I think you're referring too, I'm fairly sure that's nothing more than rules convenience rather an assertion of fluff.

 

You're perfectly free to decline to use the supplement if it doesn't align with your perception of the lore, but at least acknowledge what it is trying to do and that the writers have done research and come to certain conclusions rather than dismissing it out of hand.

I said wraiths would be rare and a wraithhost would be unheard of, which is true, even in Angel Exterminatus.

 

I also pointed out several times where the fauxdex completely disregards the lore and there is a lot of stuff just made up by the authors that isn’t in lore. No, the paths existed at the time of the heresy, in fact the codex itself makes several references to them, then ignores the fluff it previously mentioned. Again, this is referenced in Fulgrim and other early HH novels. No, guardian officers are a complete fabrication and don’t exist in any story about the Eldar.

 

Calling something that is not good quality, and is not congruent with the lore “lore accurate” is intellectually dishonest.

 

Like I said, I wouldn’t play with this codex, nor would I suggest people use this codex as a way to play Eldar in 30k, as it’s lore breaking. Regular 7th ed codex sans formations is much closer to how the Eldar would opporate.

 

If you or the OP don’t want to hear negative opinions, don’t ask for opinions on the internet.

[Beren]

It's become pretty clear that we've reached the point of going in circles, so this will be my last attempt at this. Hopefully when the necron codex or another of King Fluff's book as released it can be discussed without being caught up in this.

 

We have already established that wraithosts are not 'unheard of', because at the very least one craftworld used them. Even if you cannot accept that other Craftworlds may have been able to do tge same, or that the constructs may have once served another purpose, the 'modern' Eldar Codexes give you idiosyncronatic rules to represent specific Craftworlds, so why should this codex not allow you to play as Magc'Sithrall?

 

I have already acknowledge that the paths existed and that the guardian command squad is an invention of their own. However just because the paths exist does not mean that they are universally as accepted or as prominent as they are in 40k, especially if a craftworld is particularly isolated.

 

Again, guardian command squads are not an implausible concept. GW feels free to pull new units out of thin air with no previous mention whenever it likes (remember when Skitarii literally walked everywhere?) So can you really say that nowhere within the countless undescribed craftworlds of the galaxy and within the sparsely described or undescribed time periods for these Craftworlds, that such a unit could never have existed?

[CajunJynx]

It's become pretty clear that we've reached the point of going in circles, so this will be my last attempt at this. Hopefully when the necron codex or another of King Fluff's book as released it can be discussed without being caught up in this.

 

We have already established that wraithosts are not 'unheard of', because at the very least one craftworld used them. Even if you cannot accept that other Craftworlds may have been able to do tge same, or that the constructs may have once served another purpose, the 'modern' Eldar Codexes give you idiosyncronatic rules to represent specific Craftworlds, so why should this codex not allow you to play as Magc'Sithrall?

 

I have already acknowledge that the paths existed and that the guardian command squad is an invention of their own. However just because the paths exist does not mean that they are universally as accepted or as prominent as they are in 40k, especially if a craftworld is particularly isolated.

 

Again, guardian command squads are not an implausible concept. GW feels free to pull new units out of thin air with no previous mention whenever it likes (remember when Skitarii literally walked everywhere?) So can you really say that nowhere within the countless undescribed craftworlds of the galaxy and within the sparsely described or undescribed time periods for these Craftworlds, that such a unit could never have existed?

Yes, it’s plain that you don’t know the lore/ignore it for the sake of pushing the fauxdex.

 

Yes, given eldar society guardian officers etc are incompatible with how their society is set up.

 

If you would actually read the lore, you could avoid a lot of this argument.

[battle captain corpus]

I asked everyone to play nice and keep it civil. Plainly this cannot be done.

- Ignites Crozius and swings at Topic. -

If nothing else of merit is being added and we cannot have a constructive discussion then this thread is closed.

BCC