HARLEQUIN CODEX – First Look Review

  • Posted by
  • at

CodexHarlequins

Enter Stage Right. The Harlequins are here and from the looks of it, they may just shake up the 40k scene a bit.

At first glance, this new book seems to be one of the freshest ‘made from scratch’ new sets of rules for 40k since the Necrons and Tau debuted in 2002/03.

SnapShot(351)

The new book hits hard with about the normal number of pages for a ‘stand alone’ codex, and has a ton of surprises up it’s mutilcolored sleeve as well.

SnapShot(352)

Back again is a strange bestiary section that explains all the new units, before what the book once again calls their ‘datasheets’ or the place where their game options and points are contained.

There is also a neat section that contains all the colored markings of the various troupes, plus another explaining all their esoteric weapons and wargear as well.

SnapShot(349)

It was a fun read, not just from a game but also from a background perspective as well. I really love all the new hobby opportunities the new Harlequin Codex opens up, especially when paired with their sister Eldar books!

Start your own dance – Checkout the new Harlequin book below in our latest video review!

What’s your take on our latest codex?

  • benn grimm

    Massive disappointment, hate how limited the options for taking them are; take this formation or this formation or this other formation, no HQ(even though there are three prime candidates available that have previously been HQ’s).
    No limit on solitaires, (why not just take 7? oh yeah they only ever have one in a troupe or masque or whatever), Warlord traits out the wazoo , loads of silly charts to roll on, the voidweaver with its backwards guns…
    Why is it so hard to just give us what we want for a change? Paying attention to the latest gw releases is like that old unfortunately/fortunately story with the guy who jumps out the plane and lands near a pitchfork, just ever so slightly more disappointing.

    • wibbling

      What do you want? It’s Codex Harlequins. Play them as you’d like to. Field *what you want to*.

      Have *fun*. Enjoy yourself. Bloomin’ heck: you’re only here once and you’re going on about a game of toy soldiers.

      • benn grimm

        Ok, will do, you’ve convinced me, unbound from here on in…and i promise i will try to have fun.

        • duno

          honestly try unbound. Its so much more fun.

        • A.P.

          maybe try to get the sand out first before you expose any humans to this pity party your having on the Webz.

    • Craig Biddulph

      Solitaires are Unique, so you may only take 1. It makes perfect sense that Harlequins have no HQ, as they are a band of equals.

      Did you ever write GW and ask them for specific things ref a Harlequin army? If not, did you expect them to read your mind? I for one think this release is fantastic, and that’s as somebody who had almost given up on regular 40k as a lost cause.

      • benn grimm

        Eh, you make a fair point, i didnt write to them no, i figured it a waste of time, i guess there’s some irony in there somewhere…
        For me Harlies are what they were in 2nd, clearly defined, with the opportunity to create a whole army out of them, that they now have their own codex, but cant really do this, is disappointing. The models are awesome and i’ll probably grab some and play them anyway, but the ‘codex’ is for me, a big let down.

        • Chris. K Cook

          What’s stopping you making an Army out of them?

          In fact you know have a tank. you couldn’t do that in 2nd Edition.

      • benn grimm

        Oh and good catch on the solitaire, sorry missed that one.

        • synapris

          i like that you, even though seemingly rather upset and disgruntled at first, still had the decency to admit mistakes and made an effort to calm down.
          good on you, sir.

        • Matthew

          Ditto

    • mighty_pirate

      No HQ is a valid & interesting choice to prevent them using the CA or allied detachments. harlequins shouldn’t be relying on obsec – they’re not objective campers or contestors. They’re about continually moving & killing. Something that no HQ choice forces them to do.
      They have SIX formations to choose from. That’s fairly generous, there are actually a lot more options than back in their 2nd edition days. And they’re BB with Eldar & Dark Eldar, so you can mix them in as allies for crazy amounts of variety.
      Pretty good for a 1st codex I think. And if they’re popular they may well get a supplement & maybe some extra units down the road

      • benn grimm

        I personally don’t see how giving players less choice and less room to interpret the fluff in their own creative way is interesting, on the contrary, I would argue that its the complete opposite; dull as ditch water.
        Whether or not they hold/take objectives is kind of beside the point, and you could make that same argument for why half the units in 40k wouldn’t take objectives; wyches, bloodletters, gaunts, ‘stealers…i could go on but i wont.
        How is it generous to give me several different ways to take the models i want to take and the voidweaver as a tax and one way to take them which makes no sense whatsoever? What would be great is if i could just take them; just pay the points, fill the foc slot, and just field them in my army without having to remember a ton of cheesy rules which are random anyway.
        Of course they’re popular, they’re a great concept, with great models and they encourage good painting and creativity, extra models would be great and i hope it happens, but get it straight, just because they call it what they call it, doesnt mean thats what it is, this is a supplement in all but name, I wouldn’t spend much time waiting for a supplement to the supplement…

        • Jordan Cafolla

          Giving them less choice than NO CODEX? Were you able to play harlequins more fluidly without a codex?

          • benn grimm

            No thats true, another good point, should have thought of that really, my bad.

          • Jordan Cafolla

            It’s okay, I would be mad too if I got the least useful of all the fantastic four powers.

          • JamesD

            Being really stretchy?

          • Jordan Cafolla

            Not being able to walk around in public. We’ve all seen mall rats.

          • JamesD

            Because of being famous?

            Brenda would also rather have the rock hard girth of the Thing than the limp and thin Richards. Snoochies!

          • benn grimm

            Lol, bit of a low blow there…;) Tbh I think its more of an affliction than a power, but the Thing is still the most badas$ of the FF hands down, (imo)…

          • BruceCGordon

            Dude – this is the internet. Stop being so polite. You’re confusing everyone.

        • francis maybury

          sadly i cannot afford the codex atm but i think your complaint lacks any knowledge of the third ed codex the only way harleys ever work is by remembering a bunch of nifty lil tricks allowed by their rules. harlequins got me into 40k. im a total fanboy so dont hold it against me but third ed harleys supplements were the same way. i’m not a big fan of the new vehicles being basically standard includes for good formations but i remember the 3rd ed armie’s flaws too if u didnt have a few wraith units that didn’t totally make sense even at the time, the army lacked any staying power. the eldar codex provides a way to take a great harlequin by giving a model the harlequin’s mantle.
          personally the elder auto includes are kinda lame i haven’t seen the 7th de codex but, the archons court in 6th made me laugh needing at least one of the each body guard selection seemed really ridiculous. i always pictured the archon saying in a col klink type accent “these are the four guests required for inter dimensional decadence”.

          • benn grimm

            I never played much of 3rd, i pretty much quit in nerdrage (unbelieveble eh? 😉 ) 2nd was awesome(though not as good as they were in RT according to my cuz), I still have most of the Harlies from back then and they still look pretty great, though not quite as good as the modern era ones.
            Lol, Archon Colonel Klink…:)

    • mighty_pirate

      No HQ is a valid & interesting choice to prevent them using the CA or allied detachments. harlequins shouldn’t be relying on obsec – they’re not objective campers or contestors. They’re about continually moving & killing. Something that no HQ choice forces them to do.
      They have SIX formations to choose from. That’s fairly generous, there are actually a lot more options than back in their 2nd edition days. And they’re BB with Eldar & Dark Eldar, so you can mix them in as allies for crazy amounts of variety.
      Pretty good for a 1st codex I think. And if they’re popular they may well get a supplement & maybe some extra units down the road

    • Chris. K Cook

      Welcome to 7th edition. Won’t you join us?

      • benn grimm

        As long as I don’t have to be there for the psychic phase… 😉

    • John Harrison

      The Solitaire is unique…

  • Me

    Thank you for the short write up along with the video review! I don’t have the time to watch movies, but I can read tidbits here and there, so I get a lot more out of the write ups.

  • Koszka

    I prefer that this army can’t be allied in to suit people’s needs. It really annoys me when people want a unit from the codex, so they do bare minimum selections to get it ( im looking at you space wolf drop pod!)

    Codex harlequins has a very unique feel to it and will become difficult to play as a stand a lone force. I myself play tempestus militarum and know the feeling of playing a codex that doesn’t feel like a standalone force. At the 1k mark both codexes will function pretty efficiently, but as the games get bigger, they will need that allied support to run smoothly.

    I’m so excited to add that formation that allows you to hit and run back into transports. There will be a lot of fun with that!!