Time for Craftworld specific characters?

[TorvaldTheMild]

I'm happy I got a Biel Tan character but I think its time that we at least get farseer and autarchs for the most popular Craftworlds.  Iyanden having a spiritseer character etc.  Although Biel Tan are probably going to rival Iyanden with wraith constructs now that they've practically been destroyed.

[Slasher956]

Erm.... only major craftworld without a named data sheet character is Saim han

[Doctor Perils]

Iyanden - Yriel

Ulthwé - Eldrad

Alaitoc - Illic

Saim Hann - none current (though Nuadhu might have had rules in the past?)

Biel Tan - ???

 

I hardly count Yvraine, since she's more Ynnari then Craftworld

 

I agree with the principle though.

Perhaps they could release Nuadhu alongside a new Vyper kit?

[Slasher956]

Bieltan has the character from BSF

[TorvaldTheMild]

Erm.... only major craftworld without a named data sheet character is Saim han

Erm.... yeah and compare that with SM's.   See where I said they need a'at least' a farseer and Autarch for the most popular craftworlds... SM's have a librarian character, a chapter master, a captain, a chaplain all for one chapter.  

Iyanden - Yriel

Ulthwé - Eldrad

Alaitoc - Illic

Saim Hann - none current (though Nuadhu might have had rules in the past?)

Biel Tan - ???

 

I hardly count Yvraine, since she's more Ynnari then Craftworld

 

I agree with the principle though.

Perhaps they could release Nuadhu alongside a new Vyper kit?

I meant we should at least get a farseer and autarch character for each craftworld.  We have a named character farseer, oh but every other battle forged craftworld doesn't have any and you can't use Eldrad.  Eldar have the most random selection of characters and 3 craftworld ones, that isn't sufficient.

[Slasher956]

Except we have the Phoenix lords as well.... only the UMs have more named characters....

[Captain Coolpants]

I fully agree. Sm have a million characters and we just have a few really. And can phoenix Lords really be classed as craftworld specific named characters? Considering they're really named characters for a unit type not army type.

[TorvaldTheMild]

Except we have the Phoenix lords as well.... only the UMs have more named characters....

So, they are in a complete world of their own, they aren't even Craftworlders and only answer to their own fates.  Its absurd to say 'we can't have any unique Craftworld characters because we have phoenix lords.'  If GW make them, they'll be bought, its a good business decision and there is nothing stopping them being added other than pettiness 'you have enough and you should be thankful.'  Each army have their on flavour and unique units etc.  Eldars is the phoenix lords but that shouldn't stop from having sub faction characters that other armies have.  I also collect Orks and we need more characters with their klans etc.  SM's have had a bloated amount and its time other armies got their share.

[Bryan Blaire]

All, remember, we are here for constructive discussion of the hobby. If discussion can only focus on the haves vs. have-nots, that won't be constructive and may be removed by the Mods.

 

It doesn't matter what others get, promote what you want to see without worrying about other factions, and if you want to talk about what other factions need to have, go to those sections, it's not part of the topic here.

 

I'm actually hoping that GW never touches too much on the craftworld I've chosen to paint, that way I can continue doing my own thing and make my own characters, or steal other -Worlds ones if I want to fight in the way they do - gives me more freedom in the stories I want to tel, and it's why I usually don't play anything that GW has made up - then they can't ruin/interefere in anything I've done.

[Legionnaire of the VIIth]

Saim Hann - none current (though Nuadhu might have had rules in the past?)

3rd Edition had rules for him.

[TorvaldTheMild]

All, remember, we are here for constructive discussion of the hobby. If discussion can only focus on the haves vs. have-nots, that won't be constructive and may be removed by the Mods.

 

It doesn't matter what others get, promote what you want to see without worrying about other factions, and if you want to talk about what other factions need to have, go to those sections, it's not part of the topic here.

 

I'm actually hoping that GW never touches too much on the craftworld I've chosen to paint, that way I can continue doing my own thing and make my own characters, or steal other -Worlds ones if I want to fight in the way they do - gives me more freedom in the stories I want to tel, and it's why I usually don't play anything that GW has made up - then they can't ruin/interefere in anything I've done.

But it does matter what the other factions get, there is an element of a. precedence and b. inequity.  

[Ioldanach]

I don't think that 1 autarch and 1 farseer for each of the (major) craftworlds is necessary or appropriate. Of course, I don't think that each chapter needs a special character, either, but we can see that GW doesn't follow that same philosophy.

Having an autarch and a farseer would quickly become repetitious and would singularly fail to represent the distinctiveness of each of the craftworlds. What I would prefer would be a return to the concept of Codex: Craftworld Eldar where each of the major craftworlds had unique units that were representative of its distinct warhost. In some cases, though, those unique units have been turned into units or detachments/formations that are now available to everyone (e.g., seer council, spiritseer), so I would be fine with a special character that represents the craftworld's nuances. In most cases, I think that an autarch would be appropriate if nothing else stands out.

• Alaitoc - This craftworld already has its signature unit type, the ranger, represented via Illic Nightspear, so I don't see the need for any more special characters.
• Biel-Tan - This, my favorite of the craftworlds, is the one for which a special character is the most difficult. The "signature" unit would be some sort of aspect warrior, but we already have the exarchs and the phoenix lords. The default here, then (to me), would be a special autarch - I'd love to see one that has a weapons/wargear combination that isn't available to the normal autarch.
• Iyanden - This craftworld already has Yriel, who is probably representative of the craftworld prior to the destruction it faced at the hands of Hive Fleet Kraken. He appears to have sided with the Ynnari, though, so might be replaced. I'd revert to a spiritseer as the signature unit, or perhaps a character ghost warrior (a wraithlord or wraithguard/blade). Previously, Iyanna Arienal had rules, and it would be nice to see her return. However, she, too, has aligned with the Ynnari.
• SaimHann - The wild rider chieftain, Nuadhu, seems like the obvious choice as an autarch(-like) character.
• Ulthwé - Since Eldrad Ulthran has left Ulthwé to join the Ynnari, I'd like to see a psyker replace him as Ulthwé's signature character (though I'd prefer some sort of exceptional warlock rather than another farseer).

Those, combined with the phoenix lords, would give sufficient representation in my mind. I don't think you can exempt the phoenix lords when considering the total number of special characters available to the asuryani. The asuryani don't work like the adeptus astartes. Where the adeptus astartes chapters are autonomous and independent, the asuryani share the phoenix lords. They do count for each of the craftworlds. Those 6 potent characters plus 1 or 2 unique to each craftworld should be more than sufficient.

With the revelation that the asuryani will have rules for creating your own craftworld as part of the Psychic Awakening event, it might be nice to see some of the pale courts represented with their own special characters. Only a few of these should be sufficient - those that best represent where lesser known craftworlds are noticeably divergent from the norm. Il-Kaithe is known for its talented bonesingers; Iybraesil is matriarchal and would provide a great female autarch; Yme-Loc makes extensive use of vehicles and titans. None of these (or other characters for other lesser craftworlds) is "necessary" - they're just my wish list if GW ever expands on the range of special/named characters available in the game.

Ultimately, I don't think that we're entitled to any equity across the various factions (or their sub-factions) in terms of the named/special characters that are available to other factions/sub-factions. Even if some standard were to be established across factions/sub-factions, the adeptus astartes should be considered exceptional. If anything, the baseline should be those chapters with the fewest special characters (not including those with 0, which is the majority).

I won't complain if GW exceeds my wish list above, but I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen (or complain if we get less than what I've wished for). 

[TorvaldTheMild]

I don't think that 1 autarch and 1 farseer for each of the (major) craftworlds is necessary or appropriate. Of course, I don't think that each chapter needs a special character, either, but we can see that GW doesn't follow that same philosophy.

 

Having an autarch and a farseer would quickly become repetitious and would singularly fail to represent the distinctiveness of each of the craftworlds. What I would prefer would be a return to the concept of Codex: Craftworld Eldar where each of the major craftworlds had unique units that were representative of its distinct warhost. In some cases, though, those unique units have been turned into units or detachments/formations that are now available to everyone (e.g., seer council, spiritseer), so I would be fine with a special character that represents the craftworld's nuances. In most cases, I think that an autarch would be appropriate if nothing else stands out.

• Alaitoc - This craftworld already has its signature unit type, the ranger, represented via Illic Nightspear, so I don't see the need for any more special characters.
• Biel-Tan - This, my favorite of the craftworlds, is the one for which a special character is the most difficult. The "signature" unit would be some sort of aspect warrior, but we already have the exarchs and the phoenix lords. The default here, then (to me), would be a special autarch - I'd love to see one that has a weapons/wargear combination that isn't available to the normal autarch.
• Iyanden - This craftworld already has Yriel, who is probably representative of the craftworld prior to the destruction it faced at the hands of Hive Fleet Kraken. He appears to have sided with the Ynnari, though, so might be replaced. I'd revert to a spiritseer as the signature unit, or perhaps a character ghost warrior (a wraithlord or wraithguard/blade). Previously, Iyanna Arienal had rules, and it would be nice to see her return. However, she, too, has aligned with the Ynnari.
• SaimHann - The wild rider chieftain, Nuadhu, seems like the obvious choice as an autarch(-like) character.
• Ulthwé - Since Eldrad Ulthran has left Ulthwé to join the Ynnari, I'd like to see a psyker replace him as Ulthwé's signature character (though I'd prefer some sort of exceptional warlock rather than another farseer).

Those, combined with the phoenix lords, would give sufficient representation in my mind. I don't think you can exempt the phoenix lords when considering the total number of special characters available to the asuryani. The asuryani don't work like the adeptus astartes. Where the adeptus astartes chapters are autonomous and independent, the asuryani share the phoenix lords. They do count for each of the craftworlds. Those 6 potent characters plus 1 or 2 unique to each craftworld should be more than sufficient.

 

With the revelation that the asuryani will have rules for creating your own craftworld as part of the Psychic Awakening event, it might be nice to see some of the pale courts represented with their own special characters. Only a few of these should be sufficient - those that best represent where lesser known craftworlds are noticeably divergent from the norm. Il-Kaithe is known for its talented bonesingers; Iybraesil is matriarchal and would provide a great female autarch; Yme-Loc makes extensive use of vehicles and titans. None of these (or other characters for other lesser craftworlds) is "necessary" - they're just my wish list if GW ever expands on the range of special/named characters available in the game.

 

Ultimately, I don't think that we're entitled to any equity across the various factions (or their sub-factions) in terms of the named/special characters that are available to other factions/sub-factions. Even if some standard were to be established across factions/sub-factions, the adeptus astartes should be considered exceptional. If anything, the baseline should be those chapters with the fewest special characters (not including those with 0, which is the majority).

 

I won't complain if GW exceeds my wish list above, but I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen (or complain if we get less than what I've wished for). 

It wouldn't be repetitious, you'd still have default farseers and autarchs along with your named characters, you wouldn't have to use the named characters, but those that want named characters can use them.  I mean they are already in the lore anyways, all that's missing are the models.  And the lore is extremely important for me, I don't play competitively I'm more of a lore player.  Also we can get cool unique autarchs who use their preferred weapons and skills from whatever shrine like Mauryon who would be more fire dragony.

[Legionnaire of the VIIth]

There are two current issues that prevent us from making proper autarchs for our personal autarchs and those to properly represent the Autarch in the lore that doesn't currently have a miniature. First and foremost is the rules no longer allow for it (Some Autarchs are no longer playable with WYSIWYG as there isn't a data sheet that allows for that combination of wargear) and second the lack of plastic aspect warriors to mix and match the relevant equipment to reflect their unique path, and Second Plastic Aspect Warriors.

 

Yriel is unique his unique weapons and aesthetics come from his time as a corsair not from being an Autarch. What actually makes Mauryon unique that would warrant an new Autarch miniature rather than just getting plastic aspects and mixing and matching the parts that would be relevant to creating the desired Autarch?

[Brother Tyler]

I would only count the characters as applying to a Craftworld if they have the name of that Craftworld as a keyword; and the Phoenix Lords also count (though none are limited to specific Craftworlds). Neither Yvraine nor Amallyn Shadowguide have the BIEL-TAN keyword. Yvraine is straight up YNNARI and Amallyn Shadowguide is an Outcast.

 

Characters that are named in the lore aren’t necessarily “special,” though as Yriel demonstrates, they are decent candidates for being turned into special characters. By and large, though, the vast majority of characters, even those that are known in the lore, should be represented (and representable) under the normal rules. Only those that are truly exceptional need to be special characters.

 

The desire for special characters has two components. First is the desire for additional/different models. It gets boring seeing the same Autarch model leading the majority of Craftworld armies. It would be nice to see some variation, both in terms of the flexibility in the rules as well as the physical representation on the tabletop. With GW's push to fixed kits, however, I think it's inevitable that we'll more of the variety implemented via different special characters. The second component is having exceptional characters that exceed or deviate from the norm (for their faction). The more flexibility there is in the norm, the less need there is for exceptional characters.

 

Using the example of Mauryon, we know very little about him other than what appeared in the Baran War articles. Within that lore there is an inconsistency with established lore. Baran starts as an Exarch of the Fire Dragons, then he "declares his Autarchy." Under the normal lore that predated the Baran War lore, being an Exarch means that one is lost on the Path of the Warrior and the only reprieve is death (unless one becomes an Avatar of Khaine). We can forgive that error, though, and assume that a correction to the lore would be that Mauryon was already an Autarch with previous experience (though not as an Exarch) in the Fire Dragons Aspect Warrior Shrine (and others) and was assigned (or assumed) control of the Swordwind in the Baran War. Epic Armageddon wasn't a game of special characters, though, so there were no rules for Mauryon in that campaign aside from the standard Autarch rules. Nevertheless, Mauryon provides an opportunity for an Autarch that differs from the current model, with some motifs reminiscent of the Fire Dragons shrine. As a true Autarch, though, he would also have elements from other shrines.

 

I expect that we’re going to see the number of special characters increase. It will be slow and incremental, but this will be the method by which GW gives us the flexibility and variation we desire. I wouldn’t bet on a huge number of special characters. One or two per Craftworld seems reasonable. In the aggregate, and with the other character models, we’ll be able to kitbash non-special characters. If the new Howling Banshee Exarch is anything to judge by, we’ll have sufficient bits for nice conversions. A few special character Autarchs for different Craftworlds would provide players with a range of options for customizing their own model, whether a special character or a pitiful normy.

 

What I would prefer over a horde of special characters (each limited to their own Craftworld) would be standard models with more flexibility (and rules to match). Such models would have the bits and what-not to give more choices in how a character looks. With the Asuryani, this means the Autarchs, for the most part. If the Autarch kit were as flexible as the old Space Marine Commander kit, I’d be happy. The kit could have a standard body, with different hands/weapons, different helmets, and any of three backs for infantry, Swooping Hawk wings, or Warp Spider jump thingy. Players desiring to change things up a bit could simply take the body of another model (e.g., for a female Autarch, use the Howling Banshees Exarch).

 

A few special characters here and there would be great, but they need to be kept limited in order to truly be special. To paraphrase Syndrome, “when everyone’s special, no one is.”

[TorvaldTheMild]

There are two current issues that prevent us from making proper autarchs for our personal autarchs and those to properly represent the Autarch in the lore that doesn't currently have a miniature. First and foremost is the rules no longer allow for it (Some Autarchs are no longer playable with WYSIWYG as there isn't a data sheet that allows for that combination of wargear) and second the lack of plastic aspect warriors to mix and match the relevant equipment to reflect their unique path, and Second Plastic Aspect Warriors.

 

Yriel is unique his unique weapons and aesthetics come from his time as a corsair not from being an Autarch. What actually makes Mauryon unique that would warrant an new Autarch miniature rather than just getting plastic aspects and mixing and matching the parts that would be relevant to creating the desired Autarch?

I really don't see how you think that getting a named autarch would stop you using an unamed one.  There is nothing stopping them bringing out named autarchs and unamed ones or even upgrades with aspect weapons etc.  

 

You collect your home spun craftworld so, its kinda rich telling people they don't need a named character because there isn't much difference between them.  There is little difference between most captains and chapter masters and normal SM's, There is nothing special about Amallyn, yet she's a great looking model etc. so I really don't get your point.  Just because you choose your own craftworld doesn't mean people should do without their own unique craftworld characters.  If you admit its just something you want to benifit from that means you don't want them then that's fine but arguing that there shouldn't objectively is pretty silly.  

[TorvaldTheMild]

I would only count the characters as applying to a Craftworld if they have the name of that Craftworld as a keyword; and the Phoenix Lords also count (though none are limited to specific Craftworlds). Neither Yvraine nor Amallyn Shadowguide have the BIEL-TAN keyword. Yvraine is straight up YNNARI and Amallyn Shadowguide is an Outcast.

 

Characters that are named in the lore aren’t necessarily “special,” though as Yriel demonstrates, they are decent candidates for being turned into special characters. By and large, though, the vast majority of characters, even those that are known in the lore, should be represented (and representable) under the normal rules. Only those that are truly exceptional need to be special characters.

 

The desire for special characters has two components. First is the desire for additional/different models. It gets boring seeing the same Autarch model leading the majority of Craftworld armies. It would be nice to see some variation, both in terms of the flexibility in the rules as well as the physical representation on the tabletop. With GW's push to fixed kits, however, I think it's inevitable that we'll more of the variety implemented via different special characters. The second component is having exceptional characters that exceed or deviate from the norm (for their faction). The more flexibility there is in the norm, the less need there is for exceptional characters.

 

Using the example of Mauryon, we know very little about him other than what appeared in the Baran War articles. Within that lore there is an inconsistency with established lore. Baran starts as an Exarch of the Fire Dragons, then he "declares his Autarchy." Under the normal lore that predated the Baran War lore, being an Exarch means that one is lost on the Path of the Warrior and the only reprieve is death (unless one becomes an Avatar of Khaine). We can forgive that error, though, and assume that a correction to the lore would be that Mauryon was already an Autarch with previous experience (though not as an Exarch) in the Fire Dragons Aspect Warrior Shrine (and others) and was assigned (or assumed) control of the Swordwind in the Baran War. Epic Armageddon wasn't a game of special characters, though, so there were no rules for Mauryon in that campaign aside from the standard Autarch rules. Nevertheless, Mauryon provides an opportunity for an Autarch that differs from the current model, with some motifs reminiscent of the Fire Dragons shrine. As a true Autarch, though, he would also have elements from other shrines.

 

I expect that we’re going to see the number of special characters increase. It will be slow and incremental, but this will be the method by which GW gives us the flexibility and variation we desire. I wouldn’t bet on a huge number of special characters. One or two per Craftworld seems reasonable. In the aggregate, and with the other character models, we’ll be able to kitbash non-special characters. If the new Howling Banshee Exarch is anything to judge by, we’ll have sufficient bits for nice conversions. A few special character Autarchs for different Craftworlds would provide players with a range of options for customizing their own model, whether a special character or a pitiful normy.

 

What I would prefer over a horde of special characters (each limited to their own Craftworld) would be standard models with more flexibility (and rules to match). Such models would have the bits and what-not to give more choices in how a character looks. With the Asuryani, this means the Autarchs, for the most part. If the Autarch kit were as flexible as the old Space Marine Commander kit, I’d be happy. The kit could have a standard body, with different hands/weapons, different helmets, and any of three backs for infantry, Swooping Hawk wings, or Warp Spider jump thingy. Players desiring to change things up a bit could simply take the body of another model (e.g., for a female Autarch, use the Howling Banshees Exarch).

 

A few special characters here and there would be great, but they need to be kept limited in order to truly be special. To paraphrase Syndrome, “when everyone’s special, no one is.”

 

Amallyn does have the Biel-Tan faction keyword and she's not the only outcast to still fight for her Craftworld.  

[Brother Tyler]

I stand corrected then. I was looking at her rules in Kill Team and assumed (bad idea, I know) that her WH40K rules/keywords would match.

I stand by everything else I said, though. 

[Legionnaire of the VIIth]

 

There are two current issues that prevent us from making proper autarchs for our personal autarchs and those to properly represent the Autarch in the lore that doesn't currently have a miniature. First and foremost is the rules no longer allow for it (Some Autarchs are no longer playable with WYSIWYG as there isn't a data sheet that allows for that combination of wargear) and second the lack of plastic aspect warriors to mix and match the relevant equipment to reflect their unique path, and Second Plastic Aspect Warriors.

 

Yriel is unique his unique weapons and aesthetics come from his time as a corsair not from being an Autarch. What actually makes Mauryon unique that would warrant an new Autarch miniature rather than just getting plastic aspects and mixing and matching the parts that would be relevant to creating the desired Autarch?

I really don't see how you think that getting a named autarch would stop you using an unamed one.  There is nothing stopping them bringing out named autarchs and unamed ones or even upgrades with aspect weapons etc.  

 

You collect your home spun craftworld so, its kinda rich telling people they don't need a named character because there isn't much difference between them.  There is little difference between most captains and chapter masters and normal SM's, There is nothing special about Amallyn, yet she's a great looking model etc. so I really don't get your point.  Just because you choose your own craftworld doesn't mean people should do without their own unique craftworld characters.  If you admit its just something you want to benifit from that means you don't want them then that's fine but arguing that there shouldn't objectively is pretty silly.  

 

First of all I never said that I collect a home spun craftworld but that isn't important anyway. What I was addressing was that whether you are making a home spun one or having an Autarch that is named from the lore that is an Autarch the vast majority of them do not equip themselves with unique equipment. An Autarch who has been a Dire Avenger gets to choose one weapon from the same weapons, one that has been a Shining Spear gets to choose from the same weapons, one that has been a Fire Dragon gets to choose one from the same selection and so forth. They don't have unique equipment unless they are being given a relic to use, so in practice most characters who are Autarch wouldn't be distinguishable from another one that walked the same paths as they did and chose the same weapons.

 

Yes SM have character bloat in my opinion, they have tons of characters that are not that unique but yet they have extra figures for them. Obviously we are of different opinion as I don't know why it matters if there is a profile that says this guys name is X, this is his miniature that has extra frill to sell a lightly modified packaged kit when you can kit bash (if the kits and rules exist to do so) one to represent the same guy from the lore. What is so important about named Autarch X who was a Fire Dragon taking the fusion gun, was a striking scorpion taking a chainsword, was a howling banshee taking the banshee mask, and was a warp spider taking the Warp Jump Generator to any other non-named Autarch that did the same thing that they should have their own unique sculpt? I guess I'm fine with hobbying a character rather than just being told here one is so buy it.

 

Some characters are unique, Yriel has unique aspects because he was exiled and spent time as a Corsair Prince, that is what makes him different than 99% of the Autarchs out there. For Saim-Hann Nuadhu would be a unique character but he isn't an Autarch, he is unique and stand out as he would have a modified Vyper that he uses as a chariot like mount leading his wild riders. Eldrad is iconic because he is so ancient in the lore going back to before the Fall. I'm not saying they shouldn't put in unique characters only that creating named Autarchs for the craftworlds would just be bloat when the vast majority of them are not unique enough to warrant unique models when they could just as easily be represented by proper plastic kit bashes and supporting rules like past editions had.

[TorvaldTheMild]

 

 

There are two current issues that prevent us from making proper autarchs for our personal autarchs and those to properly represent the Autarch in the lore that doesn't currently have a miniature. First and foremost is the rules no longer allow for it (Some Autarchs are no longer playable with WYSIWYG as there isn't a data sheet that allows for that combination of wargear) and second the lack of plastic aspect warriors to mix and match the relevant equipment to reflect their unique path, and Second Plastic Aspect Warriors.

 

Yriel is unique his unique weapons and aesthetics come from his time as a corsair not from being an Autarch. What actually makes Mauryon unique that would warrant an new Autarch miniature rather than just getting plastic aspects and mixing and matching the parts that would be relevant to creating the desired Autarch?

I really don't see how you think that getting a named autarch would stop you using an unamed one.  There is nothing stopping them bringing out named autarchs and unamed ones or even upgrades with aspect weapons etc.  

 

You collect your home spun craftworld so, its kinda rich telling people they don't need a named character because there isn't much difference between them.  There is little difference between most captains and chapter masters and normal SM's, There is nothing special about Amallyn, yet she's a great looking model etc. so I really don't get your point.  Just because you choose your own craftworld doesn't mean people should do without their own unique craftworld characters.  If you admit its just something you want to benifit from that means you don't want them then that's fine but arguing that there shouldn't objectively is pretty silly.  

 

First of all I never said that I collect a home spun craftworld but that isn't important anyway. What I was addressing was that whether you are making a home spun one or having an Autarch that is named from the lore that is an Autarch the vast majority of them do not equip themselves with unique equipment. An Autarch who has been a Dire Avenger gets to choose one weapon from the same weapons, one that has been a Shining Spear gets to choose from the same weapons, one that has been a Fire Dragon gets to choose one from the same selection and so forth. They don't have unique equipment unless they are being given a relic to use, so in practice most characters who are Autarch wouldn't be distinguishable from another one that walked the same paths as they did and chose the same weapons.

 

Yes SM have character bloat in my opinion, they have tons of characters that are not that unique but yet they have extra figures for them. Obviously we are of different opinion as I don't know why it matters if there is a profile that says this guys name is X, this is his miniature that has extra frill to sell a lightly modified packaged kit when you can kit bash (if the kits and rules exist to do so) one to represent the same guy from the lore. What is so important about named Autarch X who was a Fire Dragon taking the fusion gun, was a striking scorpion taking a chainsword, was a howling banshee taking the banshee mask, and was a warp spider taking the Warp Jump Generator to any other non-named Autarch that did the same thing that they should have their own unique sculpt? I guess I'm fine with hobbying a character rather than just being told here one is so buy it.

 

Some characters are unique, Yriel has unique aspects because he was exiled and spent time as a Corsair Prince, that is what makes him different than 99% of the Autarchs out there. For Saim-Hann Nuadhu would be a unique character but he isn't an Autarch, he is unique and stand out as he would have a modified Vyper that he uses as a chariot like mount leading his wild riders. Eldrad is iconic because he is so ancient in the lore going back to before the Fall. I'm not saying they shouldn't put in unique characters only that creating named Autarchs for the craftworlds would just be bloat when the vast majority of them are not unique enough to warrant unique models when they could just as easily be represented by proper plastic kit bashes and supporting rules like past editions had.

 

They do equip themselves with unique weaponry and secondly even if they don't that is irrelevant.  Lukas the trickster has just a lightning claw and plasma pistol, nothing sgt's or vets can't get, so I don't see your point.  If they don't have unique weaponry they'll have unique rules and GW would give them unique weaponry as many Eldar characters have.  Your argument is really bizarre.  Autarchs collect a weapon per shrine but that is his collection, he can use them or not use them at all, he can have all those weapons and a unique weapon again as eldar characters do.  Also even if they didn't have unique weaponry you can still have great looking unique characters and unique special rules.  Again there is npthing stopping GW bringing out new Autarchs with named characters.  You are assuming it has to be one or the other.  Also their are relic weapons within aspect shrines that are better than the bog standard stuff.

[Legionnaire of the VIIth]

Well I guess I just fail at expressing myself and views with words and phrases that you will understand so I will just leave the conversation as it is and bow out of any further attempts at explaining them. I have attempted to express my view and maybe it will be adequate for other to understand what I'm saying even if they do or do not agree with them.

[TorvaldTheMild]

Well I guess I just fail at expressing myself and views with words and phrases that you will understand so I will just leave the conversation as it is and bow out of any further attempts at explaining them. I have attempted to express my view and maybe it will be adequate for other to understand what I'm saying even if they do or do not agree with them.

Nope, I understood you.  You just have faulty logic.  

[Legionnaire of the VIIth]

 

Well I guess I just fail at expressing myself and views with words and phrases that you will understand so I will just leave the conversation as it is and bow out of any further attempts at explaining them. I have attempted to express my view and maybe it will be adequate for other to understand what I'm saying even if they do or do not agree with them.

Nope, I understood you.  You just have faulty logic.  

 

No I don't think that you really do, but that is do to my failure. My lack of ability to make it clear what I'm trying to say is at fault as the onus is on me to make my point clear and understandable not on someone else to understand.

[The Yncarne]

I think I'd prefer to have rules to make my own 'special character' out of base HQ units, or possibly an exarch (to represent Biel-tan before the recent background changes) and have the option to use multi-bit models to kit bash it.

 

The upside to most special characters are they're better than the generic HQ rules-wise. I understand that enables model sales, but I'd still prefer to have an option to build a 'hq unit+' in the rules along with models that support a custom model.

[Slasher956]

<snip>

• Alaitoc - This craftworld already has its signature unit type, the ranger, represented via Illic Nightspear, so I don't see the need for any more special characters.
• Biel-Tan - This, my favorite of the craftworlds, is the one for which a special character is the most difficult. The "signature" unit would be some sort of aspect warrior, but we already have the exarchs and the phoenix lords. The default here, then (to me), would be a special autarch - I'd love to see one that has a weapons/wargear combination that isn't available to the normal autarch.
• Iyanden - This craftworld already has Yriel, who is probably representative of the craftworld prior to the destruction it faced at the hands of Hive Fleet Kraken. He appears to have sided with the Ynnari, though, so might be replaced. I'd revert to a spiritseer as the signature unit, or perhaps a character ghost warrior (a wraithlord or wraithguard/blade). Previously, Iyanna Arienal had rules, and it would be nice to see her return. However, she, too, has aligned with the Ynnari.
• SaimHann - The wild rider chieftain, Nuadhu, seems like the obvious choice as an autarch(-like) character.
• Ulthwé - Since Eldrad Ulthran has left Ulthwé to join the Ynnari, I'd like to see a psyker replace him as Ulthwé's signature character (though I'd prefer some sort of exceptional warlock rather than another farseer).

<snip>

 

Alaitoc - agreed nothing needed..

so on to wish listing time :)

 

Biel-Tan - how about something round the Young King?  Either a super Exarch or a HQ unit of Exarch (you know the old court of the young king ala 3rd Ed) Or a version of the Avatar.

Iyanden - yep bring back Iyanna Arienal with a model!

Saim Hann - agreed bring back Nuadhu even though rules wise it would be very much like the 'quin unit starweaver (which when I first say it I though should have been saim hann.... :()

Ulthwé - like the idea of a super warlock .. almost farseer stats but with 2 or 3 warlock powers