New Eldar Codex = New Eldar Questions

[DarkLink]

About the only thing that changed for Autarchs was Mantle of the Laughing God, really.

[-Tom-]

Fluff is not rules. It explicitly says that they only avoid scattering if the entire unit has the special rule. The Autarch doesn't have that special rule, so if he joins the squad then the entire unit doesn't have the rule and they will scatter. There's no ambiguity there.

Fair point that fluff is not rules, however in the case of ambiguity one might refer to fluff to try and resolve the ambiguity.

I was attempting to follow the format of the other FAQ sticky thread, rather than suggest any sort of educated guess (or attempting to bluff through some cheating) as I've taken a long break from playing since 2nd Ed, and only played 2 games with the 5th Ed. codex/6th Ed. BRB, none yet with the new codex... for me, there was genuine ambiguity.

[40kGamer]

DarkLink's right, though if you're about to say that it's stupid that the rules unambiguously come out the way ... yes, it is. And it's one of the many things people were hoping would get changed about autarchs that for some reason just ... didn't happen.

Apparently Autarchs get to keep some gear from the paths they walk but completely forget any of the skills...

[Nabterayl]

It's a dirty secret among the aspect shrines.

"Oh Khaine, here comes Carl again ... man, have you ever seen anybody so bad at - oh, hi, Carl!"

"Hi guys! So, what part of the Phoenix Lord's teachings are we studying today?"

"Yeah, uh ... about that. See, I've been exarch of this shrine for a long time, and ... today, Carl, I have nothing more to teach you. Take your ritual wargear. Go and pursue another path in peace, Carl."

"Wow, really? That's just what the exarch of my last shrine said! Well, thanks!"

<years pass>

"Hey guys! Seeing as I've successfully walked all of the warrior paths to completion ... guess who's your new autarch???"

[DarkLink]

Fair point that fluff is not rules, however in the case of ambiguity one might refer to fluff to try and resolve the ambiguity.

I was attempting to follow the format of the other FAQ sticky thread, rather than suggest any sort of educated guess (or attempting to bluff through some cheating) as I've taken a long break from playing since 2nd Ed, and only played 2 games with the 5th Ed. codex/6th Ed. BRB, none yet with the new codex... for me, there was genuine ambiguity.

There's a difference between ambiguity and misunderstanding. The Autarch doesn't get any special aspect rules.

[KINGS]

Can warlocks be taken in allied detachments? The wording refers to "primary detachments" so it would seem that you can not take them as allies... Annoying.

[DarkLink]

Yep. No allied Warlocks.

[daboarder]

I do like how GW is giving serious incentives to play lists as primary detachments.

[Hal]

Is it possible for an HQ equipped with the mantle of the laughing god to issue or accept challenges? Since the mantle says you lose the independent character I'm not sure if he should still be treated as a character?

[Finnegan]

Yes, it's possible, he is still a character.