Who's interested in creating Xenos for Legions Imperialis?

[Black Cohort]

just grabbing stats from Imperial units seems like a very uninteresting way to handle any Xenos faction

[apologist]

On 11/18/2023 at 4:48 PM, Marshal Rohr said:

From the initial battle report, white dwarf article, and some of the reviews it looks like you can do a 1 for 1 switcharoo by cherry picking from the Legion and Solar Aux list to make orks. 
 

Legion Command - Warboss and Nobz

Contemptors - Deffdreads

Killa Kanz - Ogryns

Skarboys - Tacticals

Boyz - Solar Aux Lasrifles

Burnas - Solar Aux Flamers

Lungbustaz, Tanks, etc - Solar Aux tanks

Stompas - Knights

Various Sized Gargants - Titans with ballistic and missile weapons

 

I think counts-as like this is a very good way to start – as much for acceptance as anything else. Being able to point to your workings is useful in making it clear to people that you've tried to avoid making things unbalanced.

 

So, I think the suggestions above are good as a starting point for orks; perhaps we could look at potential proxies for Eldar, too? 

 

+++

Army building: Orks and Eldar

It's fairly clear that 2nd ed. Space Marine (SM2) is the basis for Legions Imperialis, (LI) so I've looked there for the differences. 

 

In general, armies were created by picking Company Cards, to which you could add 0–5 Support Cards and 0–1 Special Card. 

 

Fundamentally it's largely the same in LI – with compulsory detachments being the company card equivalent, and optional detachments taking the place of the support and special cards. 

 

 

 

Space Marines and Eldar used this system: the flavour difference coming in through Eldar HQ only being available as support cards – a flavoursome twist that we can import through the Formation designs.

 

Ork army building had a couple of additional bits:

 

 

The takeaway is that ork armies had a maximum of six Clans – they just got increasingly large. The advantage was obvious – you ended up with very powerful formations that were very hard to break (as the break point got bigger and bigger); and the disadvantages equally so – it got increasingly less manoeuvrable and harder for support formations to be close enough to the Nobz (see later). The concept of larger but less flexible formations than Imperials has remained in place ever since in Epic, so I'm keen to ensure it remains in some form.

 

My suggestion is that orks must have X number of Formations that are Clans (an equivalent to the Heart of the Legion rule), and each Clan is exclusive – so you can't have three Goff clans, for example.

 

Neatly, this can be built into the Formation system as-is – each Clan having HQ and Troops detachments baked in, but having essentailly infinite optional detachments. We'll obviously need to think more about the specifics, but are we happy to use the original cards as a basis?

 

Secondly, the ork command rule:

 

Again, I think this can be imported with comparatively little tweaking – an adjustment in the text of 'command unit' to 'HQ' (if we're using generic terms) would give us a way to test things.

 

Fundamentally, the ork command rule is very similar to the Solar Auxilia chain of command rule – which was itself inherited from the SM2 Imperial Guard rule of the same name. It's this that encourages me that the ork (and eldar) rules can translate across well to the new mechanics.

 

 

+++

[apologist]

Here are two examples of Clan cards (Company cards):

 

 

 

In LI terms, I'd suggest that 4 Nobz stands would constitute one HQ detachment, and 5 Boyz stands would constitute one Core detachment.

 

In comparison with the Legion Demi-Company example above, here's my initial suggestions. I've worked up two Clans so we can discuss the differences.

 

+++

Type: Xenos Ork Formation

Name: GOFF CLAN

Colour text: Goffs are the most aggressive of all Orks – which is saying something! The pride themselves on being the most orky of all the clans – carrying the most destructive weapons and fighting even harder than the rest. Goffs like to get to where the fighting is as quickly as they can and attack their enemies at close quarters. They prefer to wear black, which is the only proper orky colour as far as they're concerned, sometimes with red trim or black and white checks.  

___

Compulsory Detachments: 

• 2 HQ
• 3 Core

___

Ork Command Rule: [see post above – text to be worked out]

Backbone of da Waaagh: Compulsory HQ Detachment slots in this Formation must be filled with Ork Nobz Detachments. Compulsory Core Detachment slots in this Formation must be filled with Ork Boyz Detachments. 

___

OPTIONAL DETACHMENTS:

• 3 Core
• 2 Support
• 2 Vanguard
• etc.

 

+++

Type: Xenos Ork Formation

Name: DEATHSKULL CLAN

Colour text: After a battle the Deathskull Boyz descend on the wreckage and salvage weapons, equipment, clothes, decoration, and anything else they can get their hands on. They are tremendously good at scrounging and looting (some would say stealing!) and as a result they carry all sorts of weapons they have 'found' They are also superstitious and often paint their skin bright blue as a good luck token. Their clothes are often patched and ragged – so as a mass they look light brown and dusty.  

___

Compulsory Detachments: 

• 1 HQ
• 2 Core

___

Ork Command Rule: [see post above – text to be worked out]

Backbone of da Waaagh: Compulsory HQ Detachment slots in this Formation must be filled with Ork Nobz Detachments. Compulsory Core Detachment slots in this Formation must be filled with Ork Boyz Detachments. 

___

OPTIONAL DETACHMENTS:

• 2 Core
• 2 Support
• 2 Vanguard
• 2 Transports
• etc.

+++

 

 

Notes:

Dedicated Transports is a long-standing Space Marine special rule, so there's no equivalent for the orks.

 

I think much of the flavour of the clans will come out through the Optional Detachments available to them. There were various special rules around this – some Support/Special Cards were specifically for certain clans (Evil Suns Bowelburnaz, for example), while others were universal. 

 

Does this seem like an avenue worth pursuing? If so, then I suggest we find a list of the support cards (some example below to give you a taste of the sort of thing I mean – they're the smaller ones) and work backwards from them.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by apologist

[Black Cohort]

wouldn't each Ork clan have a special rule like the ones each Astartes Legion has?

 

Also I am a bit confused about how the optional detachments should work, in your first post you say they should be essentially unlimited, then in the next one you say the flavour comes from the optional detachments available to each clan, those seem mutually exclusive options.

[apologist]

47 minutes ago, Black Cohort said:

wouldn't each Ork clan have a special rule like the ones each Astartes Legion has?

 

Special rules

Each ork clan could have a special rule – the Goff and Snakebite exceptions from SM2 are good starting points – but equally they could remain part of the overall Ork command rule. That's really up for discussion. Personally, I don't like how GW treats the Clans like Space Marine Chapters/Legions. Orks are not (or at least didn't use to be) separate factions from one another – rather a warband would include some Goffs, some Bad Moons, some Evil Suns etc., so they're not really direct equivalents.

 

In that way, the Clans are better viewed as equivalent to Space Marine Company specialisations: Assault, Devastators etc.; or Eldar Aspect tyles. Even these aren't precise equivalent – but that difference is what makes orks (or indeed any faction) 'feel' different. I think it's key to capture that 'ork experience' and feel.

 

 

Also I am a bit confused about how the optional detachments should work, in your first post you say they should be essentially unlimited, then in the next one you say the flavour comes from the optional detachments available to each clan, those seem mutually exclusive options.

 

Sorry, that is a bit confusing, isn't it! With the proviso that I don't know all the Detachment Types at this point, so it's hard to define specifically (i.e. we're talking in outline terms):

• The flavour for clans would come in having specific types of Optional Detachment. Traditional Snakebites, for example, might have no truck with Flyers, so would never have the Air Support type of Detachment as an option. Conversely, Evil Suns might not be able to select Bastions.
  • This could be further developed by having Clan-specific Optional Detachments only available to certain Clans – Squiggoths for Snakebites, for example; or Looted Predators for Blood Axes.
• The size of Ork clans would be reflected by having a greater number of Optional Detachments icons available – to take the Tactical Demi-Company example above; that has a hard limit of 9 Optional Detachments that you can add. Orks could have a rule that allows them to keep adding Optional Detachments (of a particular type). This could be kept in practical check by forcing the ork player to take an additional Boyz Detachment for each other Optional Detachment they want. 

 

So to put these things together, we look again at Goffs. Their choice of Optional Detachments might be quite broad in Type, but always require an additional Core Boyz choice to be bought at the same time. You'd end up with a big mass of non-nonsense footslogging orks no matter how you tried to build it. As an example:

 

• A player selects a Goff Clan Formation and starts with 2 HQ and 3 Core (boyz). He wants to take some Lungburstas, (Battle Tank Optional Detachment), some Gibletgrindas (Battle Tank Optional Detachment) and a Fighta-bomma squadron (Air Support Optional Detachment). This requires him to buy another three Core (Boyz) Optional Detachments,
• Conversely, the player's (e.g.) Bad Moon Clan Formation starts with 1 HQ and 3 Core (boyz). The ork player can happily add Lungburstas, Gibletgrindas and a Fighta-Bomma squadron to this Clan without having to buy additional boyz. 

In the example above, it's not exactly a tax for the Goff Horde, because more boyz is better – but note that there might be no way to add more HQ. This creates practical limits on the Clan because of the Ork Command rule.

 

Of course, this would require a lot of tweaking. We'd have to be careful to make sure that all of them are flavourful and equally appealing.

[Black Cohort]

ok that makes more sense.

 

I was thinking if there were special rules they would be at the formation rather than army level to differentiate the clans more.

[Pacific81]

Really like the direction you are taking this @apologist !  Think the formation and supporting units is a good way of composing a force; really Legions looks to have just taken a very similar route to SM/Titan Legions in this regard. 

 

I personally don't think there is a need to re-invent the wheel with the Xenos factions. From what I have seen the game looks like it is heavily influenced by 2nd edition/Titan Legions, but with some added granularity and distinction to help mitigate the fact that you have very similar units and troop types (at least within the variety available within the setting) fighting each other. The more I see of the rules, the more I think they have played it safe with the development (which is fine by me!)

As a next step I would like to see the full unit list/roster for the Imperial forces, it would then be possible to do a 'like for like' comparison to their 2nd edition counterparts, and work out how the shooting, movement, points value etc. have been scaled - we could then apply a similar ratio to the Ork forces, to try and keep a similar balance. 

 

The Ork Command rule worked really well in the original game (coincidentally I playtested loads of this over the last year preparing participation games) and it helps add a negative balance to a faction that are, if you just look at their stats, extremely powerful. So suddenly having a unit's nearby Nob stand destroyed can completely change the outcome of a battle over an objective, as suddenly the Evil Sunz decide their buggies need tuning and that's an awfully appealing looking open stretch of asphalt over there... Similarly the large break-point I think is very thematic for Orks; they appear as an unstoppable green tide, until suddenly there aren't enough boyz, and they decide to come back and fight another day. Have had a game which literally swung on a single stand of Boyz being removed, it is really a lot of fun. So I am all for keeping both the 'Ork Command' and 'habitual behaviour' special rules - they are characterful and serve a useful function within the rules. It also means that when you are painting Ork clans you get some variety.. the prospect of painting 50+ stands in the same colour would definitely put off potential players I think!

 

Another question is how much of the 'random explody stuff' to keep in the rules. I personally think Orks (and actually Chaos) are *so* much fun to play in SM 2nd partly because of the random nature. So much of that was lost with Armageddon, and are the reason I would never, ever play Orks in that game, as much as I like that system, because it's like putting on brown corduroys and a tank-top, and watching Antiques Roadshow, after you've just been on a weekend-long bender, partaking in various edibles, with your lunatic friend from college.  

 

[Marshal Rohr]

Apologists suggestion of taking the complete Marine list and doing a 1 for 1 comparison where possible then extrapolating it out into the new design philosophy will be the simplest and easiest way to creat Xenos lists AND “show your work” to justify the house rules - all of which will be necessary for convincing someone to use the house rules. 

We can also very easily reverse engineer Army wide rules as we see more And more rules for the official factions come out. I believe Pacific mention grot crews dousing fires in previous versions and if there is a form of servitor fire suppression in a Mechanicum list, that will be the perfect jumping off point to dig into the unique Xenos factions mechanics. 
 

as an aside I think all my stuff is the wrong edition. I’ve got Guard from the white dwarf 130s iirc, and the first marine books. That probably isn’t 2nd edition then. 

Edited November 21, 2023 by Marshal Rohr

[Pacific81]

I've just had a check and issue 141 (September 91!) was the preview issue for the relaunched 2nd edition, so anything prior to that will be 1st edition.

[apologist]

@Pacific81; do you happen to have the army cards for orks and Eldar?

 

Having them here (with points cost redacted) would give us something to get our collective teeth into.

Edited November 22, 2023 by apologist

[Pacific81]

8 hours ago, apologist said:

@Pacific81; do you happen to have the army cards for orks and Eldar?

 

Having them here (with points cost redacted) would give us something to get our collective teeth into.

 

I have the Ork cards and PDF copies of them - is there anywhere public I can upload them? Think they come in just under 10mb

 

Eldar-wise I have the rulebook but not the cards unfortunately, will have to see if I can get them.

 

An alternative would be just to use the NetEpic cards, which are more or less identical but I think the points values have been 'corrected' following community playtesting (things like the dirty, dirty Windrider host were bumped up in price etc.)

[apologist]

NetEpic seems a good idea as a basis – SM2 with years of polishing! :)

[Splog]

Looking at existing units and adapting seems relatively straight forward (though probably contentious!). Here is a go at Guardians and Dire Avengers based off of Tactical Marines and Auxiliaries. Guardians are about the same as the Auxiliaries, lack their special rules, have their signature shuriken catapult and are a little more squishy. Aspect Warriors are comparable or a bit better to Marines in terms of combat power (at least in their specialist area), but are more squishy (lower toughness..), and the non-close combat Aspects have worse CAF than tactical marines.

 

Then the same sort of thing for Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees vs Tactical Marines.

 

Apologies for the formatting, I couldn't figure out tables....

• Tactical Marines
• Move: 5"
• Save: 5+
• CAF +2
• Morale 3+
• Bolters: 8", 1, 5+, 0, Light, Assault

 

• Auxilia Tercio
• Move: 5"
• Save: 6+
• CAF: 0
• Morale: 4+
• Chain of Command, Line
• Lasrifiles

 

• Defender Guardians
• Move: 5"
• Save: -
• CAF: 0
• Morale: 4+
• Shuriken Catapults: 8", 1, 5+, 0, Light, Assault

 

• Dire Avengers
• Move: 5"
• Save: 6+
• CAF: +1
• Morale: 3+
• Avenger Shuriken Catapults: 8", 1, 5+, 0, Light, Assault, Accurate

 

And..

 

• Assault Marine
• Move: 7"
• Save: 5+
• CAF: +3
• Morale: 3+
• Independent, Jump Packs
• Bolt Pistols

 

• Striking Scorpions
• Move: 5"
• Save: 6+
• CAF: +3
• Morale: 3+
• Infiltrate
• Shuriken Pistols

 

• Howling Banshees
• Move: 5"
• Save: 6+
• CAF: +3
• Morale: 3+
• Furious Charge, Dread (1") [for morale checks in close combat; the banshee mask]
• Shuriken Pistol

And in terms of formation and detachments, a fair bit of flavour can be brought out by the formation design and what goes into a particular slot.

 

So, for example, the Eldar might not have any bastion units, and their Support Slot can be filled by:

• Hornets
• Support Weapon Platforms
• Vypers
• War Walkers
• Wraithguard
• Wraithlord

Note some fast moving units can go in the support slot, which aren't the sort of support units existing factions get (I'm assuming Land Speeders etc. will go into Vanguard slots), and helps an Eldar force be more zoomy.

 

And Eldar strategic assets could be something like:

• Harlequins
• Phoenix Lord
• Avatar of Khaine (max 1)
• Wraithknights (including Skathach variants)
• Engines of Vaul (a mix of Cobras, Scorpions, Storm Serpents) (1-5)
• Vampire Hunter (1-3)
• Vampire Raider (1-3)
• Revenant Titans (1-2)
• Phantom Titan
• Warlock Titan

Shifting various things into the strategic assets (i.e. 1x choice per formation, max 30% of your points) changes the way you build an Eldar force. 

 

Flavour in the design can be added by how and where special rules get allocated. So, for example Eldar pulse weapons could have the 'Pulse (deflagrate)' rule, but for Eldar that rule attaches to big/anti-tank weapons (i.e. the pulse lasers on Falcons, Lynx, Scorpion, and titans) as opposed to anti-infantry weapons.

[apologist]

All looking good, @Splog – I'm afraid my copy of the box has not yet arrived (aren't I glad I wasted half an hour three weeks ago to preorder direct?), so I'll hold off commenting directly on the stats beyond perhaps suggesting a 6in basic move for the Eldar infantry?

 

[Karhedron]

I also play Eldar and would love to revive them. 

 

The other faction I would like to try and develop would be my Squats/LOV. Bring back the Land Train! Choo choo, boom boom! 

[Pacific81]

Well it looks like someone has beaten us to the punch! This is absolutely incredible, I don't know how it could have been produced so quickly - and not exactly just some scribbled on the back of a napkin. I will say, only partly tongue in cheek, that it's better-designed than the official Legions book in that at least it actually has some artwork in it. :D 

 

Legions Xenos: Orks and Eldar

 

Had a quick glance through and it looks like many of the stats have been ported over from SM2 (as we had discussed doing), with things like movement values and weapon ranges adjusted - generally with the weapon range significantly reduced, as is the case with marine units in Legions. Extra special rules are at a minimum and seem to reference the official ones, which I like, and only new ones where necessary (Banshee masks etc.). 

 

Will have a proper look through - I did chat briefly with the chap on FB, he acknowledged he hasn't really had a chance to do any playtesting, and it's very much a living document that will get updated (with other units added etc.) as the feedback comes in. 

[Kleomenes]

Essentially the question to ask is: Are we trying to recreate 40k/SM2 eldar, or are we trying to make accurate 30k Eldar?  And if it is the latter, how long after the fall  are we assuming 30k is set? If the fall is literally right before the onset of the great crusade then we're talking a handful of centuries.

 

As you say that document is SM2 converted across. Unfortunately, and while the lore is a bit blurred, that is unlikely to be correct for the 30k setting. The Craftworlds are very new at this point and are fresh out of a period where the Eldar barely did war at all directly. Instead their battles were fought by psychically controlled automated constructs or more for fun/ritual. They have just lost 90% of their population and are adjusting to a new reality, along with fighting as troops for the first time in aeons. 

 

The aspect temples come into being after the fall and are supposed to have slowly been set up after Asurmen's pilgrimage and the slow spread of the aspect warrior system amidst the Craftworlds. They are thus still a work in progress during this period. There would therefore at best be proto-aspect warriors but they would be very unlikely to be forming large hosts and so would need a restriction of some sort in force composition. I mean we are talking about a time when the phoenix lords are probably still alive in their original incarnations, setting up their temples. Any alteration to what aspect warrior temples would be available would be speculation so perhaps we just stick with what exists in 40k for ease, or alternatively have a catch all "temple warriors" stat line that represents the small numbers available. Or just remove then entirely.  Alternatively in the interest of people using their models, perhaps simply there should not be an aspect host formation? We honestly don't know the situation but can be sure it is nowhere near as well developed as in 40k, so full 40k aspect warriors fighting in full hosts is going to be wrong.

 

This has a knock on affect for warlocks, as those are psykers formerly having walked the path of the aspect warrior. Seers and Farseers predate the fall, however, at least in function. They might have had different titles. 

 

it is quite possible there would be no wraithguard as they are a later response of the craftworlds to manpower shortages. That said, there's little information on what the Eldar war constructs looked like and whether any survived the fall as relics. Perhaps the wraithguard and wraithlords arise out of them. We could use wraithguard and wraithlords in that case but rename them and give them flavourful rule that represent their psychically controlled nature rather than their "last resort" nature. 

 

"Guardians" would exist, if not with the same names, and the tanks would all be something the old Eldar were quite capable of building. Bikes too.

 

 

[Black Cohort]

I think the challenge comes that GW is very inconsistent when it comes to the state of the Eldar in the great crusade/ Horus Heresy.  Though more recent material seems to suggest that by the Horus Heresy the Eldar are effectively what we see in 40k to the point that Eldrad is not just alive, but a fairly important Eldar.  Now I think this was a bad idea, and that the Eldar should still be sorting themselves out from the fall of the Eldar Empire.

 

Also I don't think adding a Psychic phase is needed, psychic stuff can happen in whatever phase of the game it is relevant for.

[Pacific81]

I think if at any point we end up talking a faction out of existence in a setting, then it's time to start slowly pushing that bit of logic off to one side

 

People will want to play Eldar in a 30k setting - hence rules for it should exist, so people can play with their miniatures in a worthwhile fashion. That's just my thoughts in the matter, even though what you are saying makes perfect sense Kleomenes.

 

I think in comparison to the changes that GW have made over recent years; of a destitute and struggling Imperium suddenly ignoring the heretical implications of plus-size super marines and finding the resource to build them in their thousands, and Primarchs returning resplendent from death wounds, the concept that the Eldar may have got their Aspect houses in order (or at least continued with them in some fashion) is a fart in a hurricane. 

[apologist]

Further to the concept of 'lore versus gaming', I'm planning on using things for 40k, rather than HH, so the Eldar and Orks I'll be using will refer mainly to the 2nd edition Space Marine (SM2).

 

...and speaking of which, here are some hulking orks to make trouble. My plan is to start off with an enclosed 'boardgame'-style with fixed forces to help playtest and balance.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by apologist

[Captain Idaho]

Good point actually. The rules we're playing for Legions Imperialis are based on Space Marine, so Xenos rules created can be too. We'll have to use their subsequent releases that came of course but the first ones that matched as closely to Space Marine as possible. 

 

(Nice pic by the way)

[Pacific81]

That image link isn't working for me unfortunately @apologist

 

The psychic phase is a funny one and previous versions of Epic themselves have flip-flopped on whether to have a specific phase for it. SM2 itself originally didn't have a phase, and instead you just use the psychic attacks themselves as a form of very powerful shooting attack (see the Weirdboy tower attack etc). It's definitely something that needs considering for Eldar in particular as so many of their extra attacks and efficacy comes from Farseer/Warlock special abilities and the like. I quite liked the NetEpic approach where they had some extra abilities beyond just shooting attacks; things like being able to change orders of units near psykers (from their prescience abilities), psychic storms which knocked units out of position and things like that, rather than just powerful extra shots. It made Eldar a lot more tricksy and annoying to play against, which has always been part of the character of that faction.

 

Will have a proper look at what this chap has done for these rules and see if it is along similar lines.

[General Zodd]

On 12/12/2023 at 6:01 PM, Black Cohort said:

I think the challenge comes that GW is very inconsistent when it comes to the state of the Eldar in the great crusade/ Horus Heresy.  Though more recent material seems to suggest that by the Horus Heresy the Eldar are effectively what we see in 40k to the point that Eldrad is not just alive, but a fairly important Eldar.  Now I think this was a bad idea, and that the Eldar should still be sorting themselves out from the fall of the Eldar Empire.

 

Also I don't think adding a Psychic phase is needed, psychic stuff can happen in whatever phase of the game it is relevant for.

I absolutely agree that the Craftworlds’ rate of development during the heresy is very inconsistent in the lore. However, I have dim recollections (I don’t now own all the relevant codexes and such to check) that the Craftworlds starting launching quite some time ahead of the Fall. In fact those who left it too late got destroyed by the birth of Slaanesh, so all the surviving Craftworlds had been going a while already. I think the concepts of the use of the various Paths to bring much needed discipline was being explored very early on. When that actually translated into the first Aspect Warrior shrines being created, I’m not sure has been explicitly stated. So there’s a bit of helpful ambiguity to play with to justify Aspect Warriors during the Heresy.

 

The two things that we 100% know are tied to being post-Fall are;

 

1) soul stones, which are what allows the inheritance of Exarch armour, and thus the special abilities of the Phoenix Lords, and;

 

2) Avatars, seeing as they were created by Slaanesh fracturing Khaine in a fight with Khorne. Though that also happens in the Warp, so, you know, timey-wimey, wibbly-wobbly and all that.

 

And while I agree the Eldar were not in a position to take to the field in significant hosts, at LI scale we’re still not talking about enormous armies in the grand scheme of things!

Edited December 15, 2023 by General Zodd

[apologist]

Having (finally) received my boxed set, and having had a chance to chew through the Legions Xenos pack by Johanes Pilestedt (sterling effort!), I wanted to scribble down a few thoughts.

• Not sure on the introduction of a pyschic phase; I think such powers are better abstracted out to the relevant units.
• The addition of special rules seems almost inevitable, and while I disagree with a few of them (Jump Generator is a bit fiddly for my taste, for example. Could easily have been simply Nimble and high movement), lots also seem nice, sensible and clean, such as Holo-fields.
• I like a lot of the concepts, though I'd differ in execution for a number of things – stuff like Strength in numbers for the ork's morale.

Orks

• The ork formations approach is an interesting one. Having a specific Formation for each klan – rather than making klans work like Legions – seems a good idea. Allows us to have our cake and eat it, by allowing mono clan armies as well as varied-clan tribes.
• I think the Mek-boss is very open to abuse, and while all the options are fun on paper, I think they'd be awkward in practise.
• It seems odd to have so many things clan-restricted (Flash Gits, Kommandos), and I worry that this rather flanderises the differences. 
• The Boyz seem too modular. The option between shootas/sluggas and choppas might be better resolved by different detachments – or dropped entirely. You'll have a lot of Boyz in your army, so seems sensible to keep them simple. 
• I very much like how Gunwagons/Battlewagons have been treated – keeps the flavour but allows for mixed detachments.
• Seems a shame not to have anything like the old ork command rules. 

Eldar

• I'd very much like to more HQ out of Compulsory for old times' sake 
• I like the concept of Prescient Fate, but not sure on the mechanic. At the moment, as there's no limit, it could just as easily be done by letting the Eldar player simply look at the other player's orders first. I think this is likely to slow down the game quite a bit.
  • Perhaps combining this with the 'on-unit' psychics? A formation including a Farseer can attempt to change its orders somehow?
• I'd like to see greater differentiation between the fighty/inspiring Autarch and the commanding Farseer.
  • e.g. Master Tactician on Farseer, Inspiring on Autarch.
• The new shield platform seems like a shoe-in to include with the Storm Guardians; using the Shield Generator rule.
• Where could new rules be replaced with existing combinations?
  • Could Banshee masks be a combination of Phosphex and Reach, for example?
• Some odd choices on special rules – Ripple Fire on Rangers and Accurate on Dire Avengers jumped out; I think swapping these would be more fitting.
• Dire Avengers to Core? I think playing up their tactical skills rather than killiness (by adding Steadfast, for example) would be fitting, and help to compensate for the low numbers.
• I can see why Invulnerable Saves have been handed out to the Aspects, but think it's got the potential to create lots of dice rolling for not much effect.
• I wonder if Point Defence might be a fun mechanic for shuriken weaponry; allowing the low numbers of Eldar to fire to great effect in the opponent's turn...

 

Reading back over, that seems very critical! Not my intention – there's a lot of effort and thought been put into it, and certainly looks worth playtesting. I think my vision for the two factions is slightly different, but that's very much a taste thing, rather than an objection to anything general in Legions Xenos.

 

However, rather than pick apart this great effort, I'd rather concentrate on our own one. Some general questions:

1. I think it's inevitable that some new special rules will be needed, but as a ballpark figure, how many do you think is right? One or two Army-wide ones?
2. How different from Imperial forces should army-building be for Eldar and Orks?
3. On balance, do you prefer a more granular (e.g. weapon options for ork boys) or more abstract approach?

Edited December 20, 2023 by apologist

[apologist]

Did fredd now belongs to da orks