Dark Eldar: Trying out the Solitaire

  • Posted by
  • at
p.txt-37

Even though the Solitare is not the most cost-effective unit in the codex, he’s by far the coolest.  Let’s take a look at his stats really quick and see what he has to offer to the battle.

First thing’s first, the guy is 145 points so he’s not really cheap nor expendable.  For the same amount of points, you can buy yourself 2x Starweavers which is 4 HP worth of AV10 that comes with 12 S6 Shuriken Cannon shots.  That’s probably the best direct comparison because you’ll see in the list below, that’s exactly where I’m cutting points from.

The second thing to note is his beastly ass combat stats, minus the fact he’s still a T3 3W model with only a 3++ save.  He’s WS9 S3/4 on the charge due to Furious Charge, I10 and 6 attacks base.  Since he’s packing both Caress and Kiss, he technically has 8 attacks on the charge.  Once a game, he can Blitz for 12 attacks on the charge and move D6xTurn Number worth of movement.  This might not seem like much, but he can potentially move up to 24″ on Turn 4 to punch someone off an objective, or he can move 4″ because you rolled like ass.  Personally, I’m not banking on the movement too much since his 12″ natural move is enough to get the job done in most cases.  Most of the time, you really want to Blitz for the extra attacks since Harlequin’s Caress can do some serious work if you roll enough 6s.

For those folks that don’t know what caress and kiss does, it’s really quite simple.  Caress is basically old school Rending where if you roll a 6 to Hit, you automatically wound at AP2 and against vehicles, causes a Glancing Hit.  Kiss is a separate attack made by the Harlequin in which it’s automatically resolved at S6 AP2 with a chance for Instant Death on a 6 to Wound, but first you gotta hit.  Overall not all that bad, but the crux of the problem here is that he’s going to be very dice dependent if he really wants to take down 2+ armor save targets.  That’s why you probably shouldn’t throw him into anything too tough, especially since if the opponent rolls hot and forces enough wounds onto you, you’re going to die.  I would stick to killing Lictors or making Devastator teams cry.

As for upgrades, I would keep this dude dirt cheap, either stock or running with a solo Haywire Grenade.  Ideally, he never wants to engage vehicles and would rather hunt smaller prey, but occasionally you might need to force that extra hull point damage through and the Solitare can do that if he has Haywires.  This brings him to an even 150, still a little expensive for what he can do on the table but I’ll take it anyway.

So how do you run him exactly?  I would definitely consider the standard Masque detachment or The Heroes’ Path formation.  Masque’s Rising Crescendo makes it so you can Run and Charge in the same turn, which increases the overall threat range of your assault by a significant margin (especially when you have Fleet re-rolls).  The Heroes’ Path formation gives your Solitare Infiltrate (important), Stealth and Shrouded, but the downside is that you have to take the Shadowseer and Deathjester as well, essentially paying 120 tax if you only want the Solitare.  You can view this as either an offensive buff for your solo assassin, or a defensive buff for more survivability.  Either way, if he gets caught in the open, he’s going to die to any decent shooting so it doesn’t really matter.

I would play him very, very carefully and use him primarily as a defensive striker.  Use every single line of sight blocker as you can and keep him out of sight until he’s ready to strike.  Since he can ignore all forms of terrain, you really have to use that to your advantage since he’s a man-sized model and incredibly easy to hide.  He also has Deep Strike so it might be worth keeping him in reserve and running out of line of sight the turn he comes down, but that’s also really risky.  Play with his 22.5″ threat range under Rising Crescendo and punish anything that gets too close as a melee threat.  Hopefully whatever you assault will be WS4 or under, thus needing 5s to hit your dude and drastically reduce the amount of wounds he’ll be taking in return.  The less saves he has to roll the better the chances he’s going to live and fight another day.

They see my rollin’, they hatin’..

 

Alright, now here’s the list I plan on messing around with:

1850 pts Darkquin Duck

DE CAD*

HQ:

Llama = 10

TROOP:

5x Warriors, Blaster, Raider, Lance = 115

5x Warriors, Blaster, Raider, Lance = 115

5x Warriors, Blaster, Raider, Lance = 115

5x Warriors, Blaster, Raider, Lance = 115

FAST:

Razorwing, Lances = 140

Razorwing, Lances = 140

HEAVY:

Ravager, Lances = 125

Ravager, Lances = 125

Ravager, Lances = 125

Masque Detachment*

TROOP:

5x Troupe, Starweaver = 165

5x Troupe = 95

5x Troupe = 95

FAST:

Starweaver = 70

Starweaver = 70

ELITE:

Solitare, Haywire = 150

HEAVY:

Voidreaver, Prismatic = 80

I start off the game by throwing lances, but now I understand that my overall firepower is less because I have the Solitare in the army.  No worries, I still win based on style points and I have great confidence that I’m going to caress and kiss my opponent’s army to death.  Check out HERO’s Gaming Blog for more Dark Eldar and Harlequin related stuff.

Who has good Solitaire battlefield stories to share?

  • Drew_Da_Destroya

    HQ:
    Llama = 10

    This maeks me crii everytim.

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      #cheesyspamnetlists

    • Anggul

      Ah yes, the fiendish Dark Eldar Llama, a more fearsome beast of terror has never been seen. Will the Haemonculi ever stop?

    • dubhgilla

      Be glad she can’t take a web way portal

  • Adam Richard Corrigan

    Take him in heroes path then take an Aegis defence line with weapon, man that for a few turns utilising his BS9 (2+ cover save) then blitz him out to take down a vunerable opponent or bag a vital objective.

    • Kace Us

      hey! that’s a quite expensive gun handler, but why not 🙂

      • Adam Richard Corrigan

        It is, would be funny to see your opponents face when your quad gun is hitting on 2’s. Stick the deathjester in the same defence line for more survivability if there aren’t ruins to infiltrate him into. It’s not like you want him to get stuck in too early, the numbers will take their toll; keep him back until you need to swing a combat or you get the kill the warlord objective.

    • Jason Brown

      Or destroy a line backer unit in your Zone

  • Damistar

    What’s a Llama (other than a south american pack animal)?
    Are you taking a court of the Archon without the Archon? I was unaware that was possible.

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      It’s the cheapest possible option from the Court of the Archon, which you are allowed to take as it’s own HQ unit (you can just get a slot-free one if you take an Archon as well). Shows up in a lot of cheesy spam netlists.

      • Damistar

        I suppose it’s possible, but seems to not really be in the spirit of the game. However, that doesn’t apply. Only what the rules say. My guess is that GWs writers didn’t consider that anyone would do that, and none of their playtesters thought of it either.

        • Drew_Da_Destroya

          I completely agree, and will add that I think people that do this are no-good gits.

          • MikeHollstrom

            hear hear!

          • Damistar

            I’ll have to open up my DE codex when I get home. Down the comments there seems to be a consensus that the above list might be cheating, or at least dodgy. If it is legal, I suppose I can’t blame the players for doing it, but it is…Gittish.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            The exact rule being argued over is:
            “Retainers: For each Archon included in a Detachment, the Detachment can include a Court of the Archon that does not take up a slot on the Force Organization Chart.”

            The Court appears in the HQ section, though, with the regular HQ symbol on their page, which at least implies that you can take one without an Archon.

            I think people are being tripped up by last edition, where you needed an Archon to take a court at all, and the old “Retainers” rule from 3rd edition or so. I’d argue that, as dumb as it is, you could take a Court sans Archon, much like you can now take transports as Fast Attack. And honestly, if you took a full Court (or at least more than just the cheapest possible option), it could be interesting (The Archon was killed, and the Court is ruling as a kind of stand-in ruling body?). Taking a single Lhamaean is just being a git, though.

          • Damistar

            Ok, so what about this: The above Dark Eldar CAD is the primary detachment. Therefore the HQ must be the Warlord, correct? So is a Llamean a character, so as to be chosen as Warlord?

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Technically, your Warlord does not have to be a character (nor an HQ unit, actually, so you can have an Ork list “led” by Boss Snikrot). They don’t get to pick a Warlord Trait, though they still count as a Warlord for the Slay the Warlord secondary.

            The only way to pick a non-Character Warlord, though, is to have no Characters in the list at all (such as we see in this list).

          • Damistar

            I don’t have the book in front of me, but isn’t there some sort of leader in the Kabalite warriors unit? Or it could just be an upgrade to Sybarite. I know with the Harlies you get to roll on the Warlord Traits for the Troupe Leader (one of them named as Warlord anyway). So I can name the Sgt on in a Devastator squad as Warlord as long as there’s is no IC HQ type around?

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Nah, the Sybarite is an upgrade. Without one, there’s no character in the squad normally. The Troupe Master in the Harlies gets to pick a Warlord Trait because he’s a Character (he can also issue/accept challenges and do other character things).

          • J Mad

            HQ dont have ot be Warlords in 7th ed, there is a full write up in the BrB under Warlords.

          • Charon

            What makes you think the CAD is the primary detachment? It can (and most probably will) be the Harlequin Detachment too with a Troupe master as a WL (the only model in a harlie army which has access to the full WL table)

          • Damistar

            I made an assumption, since he doesn’t say. He has a DE CAD so I went with that as opposed to the Masque detachment

          • Jason Brown

            It can be argued that since it dose not take up a slot in the FOC, it’s not a proper HQ choice.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            It can definitely be argued that way, but I think it’s the wrong argument. If it was intended that way, the rule would be written more like the Ork Mek, or the Space Marine Techmarine, which explicitly states that they can only be taken in addition to another HQ.

            I don’t mind the idea of a Court being taken as an HQ choice, but I don’t like the idea of just taking a single Lhamaean because it’s the cheapest option, and I guess just leaving her to die somewhere.

          • Jason Brown

            you are assuming that the writers perseverate over the rules to make them clear and irrefutable? If ther is anything consistent about there rules,
            It would be the vague and speculative nature of their writing. My bet is that they wanted to let you take one with a succ or haemey. Whatever the case, within an ITC tourney it’s a no go.

          • Chris Ihle

            I think it fits quite well to dark eldar hierarchy to send an expendable character to command a less important raid. Why should an archon risk his life if it’s not absolutely neccesary?

          • deuce1984

            it is completely legal.

          • Damistar

            It is arguably legal, with a certain very specific reading of the entry. I suspect that GW meant the Court to remain as a unit addition to the Archon, but failed to make it clear when editing the new codex format. For example in the older codices there was an army list at the end where such rules as “For each space marine captain you may choose a command squad” could be found. I believe this was the intention for the Court of the Archon as well. However, the entry in the DE codex is unclear, so rules nit-pickers have found a loop-hole. I will not play this way, but others are free to do so I guess.

          • J Mad

            Why? its not an over powered book at all, I mean Heralds are what 40pts? And they actually can do stuff where a Llama is 10pts and does nothing at all. A DE playing Saving 30pts wont take anything away from your gaming experience.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Because it’s just cheesy. They’re saving 50 points (a naked Archon is the next cheapest at 60), which is just shy of the cost of another Raider or a min squad of Warriors with a Blaster. It runs counter to both the army’s fluff and the individual unit’s fluff. It smacks of min-max powergaming. And in the end, it’s just dumb. At least stick her in a Venom if you’re gonna be beardy about it.

          • Charon

            Powergaming with DE…wow… thats… the most amazing thing I have ever read here.
            Oh noez it is saving 50 points… GAMEBREAKING!

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            We’re not saying it breaks the game. We’re saying it’s cheesy, and counter to the way the army acts in the fluff. It’s min-maxing, and you know it.

          • Charon

            How does it counter the way it acts in the fluff? You can write up fluff for everything. the whole Codex counteracts how the army acts in the fluff.
            The Lhamaen could be an Observer for her Archon to report him back after battle if it was a trap designed by the Harlies or not. There could be a million reasons why an Archon decides to send a minion instead of coming himself. Archon Kraillach sent his Incubi Bodyguard (not possible with the Codex), a lot of Archons leave command to Dracons if they do not join in (not possible with the codex), Vect had his clone,… there are enough examples in the fluff.
            I do not see a lot of complaint when other armies are not built according to fluff… so what is it that makes people discuss so hard about DE?

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Because we’re the Dark Eldar and we’re better than those other fools.

            Also, I think everyone arguing against this finds it unlikely that the writers intended a 10-point HQ unit, especially one that does not contribute to the army in any way besides being the cheapest possible option.

          • Charon

            I still don’t think that writers did intent a CSM codex without a single CSM but 2 min size squads of cultists. Or 2 spores as the main body of a tyranid army or a chapter master in a scout force,… still it is possible and nobody is crying about it.
            With the recent moves to open up all FOC to the point of making them nearly complete meaningless im not to sure what was intended.
            On the other hand it is telling a lot about the codex design that a 10 points model is prefered to a “proper” HQ Character.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            I agree with you that those options are also cheesy and not likely intended by the writers. I also don’t play those armies, so I don’t read listbuilding articles about them.

            I think it’s more telling about how poorly Assault fares in 7th, really, since most of the “true” HQ choices are CC-oriented (or are support-ish, Haemys and Urien).

            Another good example is the Ork Mek, which probably shares a lot of the same wording as the Techmarine.

          • Charon

            Yep. Same Wording in Orks and Grey Knights. Different Wording in Dark Eldar. Possibly because the rules are… different?

            No. A lot of armies do have “proper” assault HQs and do make use of them. Space Marine Bike Captain with Shield and stuff? This one is not gonna stay in the backine “supporting”. Grotesques? One of the best units in the codex.
            It is not assault, it is bad unit design.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Grotesques are awesome. I like using them as a bodyguard unit for my Succubus and watching them go through things like a lawnmower of death. Good times.

            The only thing hurting the DE Archon (in my opinion, obviously) is the lack of AP2. The only thing hurting the Succubus is the lack of a decent armor save/Eternal Warrior. And I think she can bypass that a bit by slaughtering whoever she’s fighting before they can move, really.

          • Charon

            So… comes down to the unit design. Not assault per se.
            The whole armory of all races would need a massive overhaul as it is extremely stupid to hand out Powerfists for Space Marines and imperial guard for the same price.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            I don’t disagree with you on that point

          • archied

            ” the whole Codex counteracts how the army acts in the fluff.”
            kudos! this really cant be repeated enough times

          • nobody

            No-good? Not in the spirit of the game?

            Scrubs, the lot of you. Some people don’t care about the fluff, and the ‘spirit’ of the game is contained entirely within it’s rules, it knows nothing more, nothing less. Don’t like the way they are written? Blame GW, don’t blame people who like to squeeze as much as they can out of them in terms of efficiency or efficacy. That’s as fun and rewarding a way to approach the hobby as any other, playing a game at it’s highest level without scrub restrictions is the most rewarding way to play for some people. It’s not about spam or netlists, it’s about finding what’s abusable and then finding counters to it, it’s about exploration, creativity and problem-solving.

            The only ‘no-good gits’ are people who try to stifle that creativity with calls of “but it’s unfair” or “I don’t like it”.

        • Koszka

          Kind of like how Mucloids are troop units. Aka its a 45 pt. tax to take 3 flyrants now 🙁

          • J Mad

            And it made nids playable in power house lists. I dont agree with it, I rather the Nids book be like the Deamons (A book I feel is the most balanced book atm).

      • The Basement Gamer

        We should hastag (that’s a verb these days right?) these boring articles as #cheesyspamnetlists

        We get it already guys, you know what Ctrl-V does

        • Drew_Da_Destroya

          Done and done.

        • Charon

          Funny… first time I see someone rating one of the weaker codices with not a lot of choice inside as “cheesy spam”.

    • ImpactUK

      As it reads in the codex, if you have an Archon then the court doesn’t take up a force organization slot. So it can be a HQ I guess unless someone can point to a FAQ that says other.

      • karandras

        That is an absurd rationalization.

        • karandras

          It slecifically says for each archon, you may field a court.

          • Vaseman

            Impact is right, you’re wrong karandras. Read the Dark Eldar Codex. I don’t agree that it SHOULD be able to be fielded on it’s own like that, but the rules as written very clearly allow it.

          • J Mad

            it doesnt say you MUST take a Archon, it doesnt say that AT ALL, it says “IF you take an Archon” it doesnt take up a HQ slot. It has the official HQ symbol as well.

  • Andrew Thomas

    No Characters in your Primary makes me sad, but hey, easy secondaries.

    • caldera02

      Each Warrior squad has a character….

      • Drew_Da_Destroya

        False, he didn’t take any Sybarites. They’re upgrades, not a default like a Space Marine Sarge. The list as it stands has 0 characters.

        • caldera02

          Oh I missed that. guy locally does this crap and he has sybarites. Nothing stopping the Troupe Masters from being warlord though.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Yeah, assuming the Harlies are the Primary Detachment, which Hero doesn’t seem to indicate.

        • Charon

          I count 4 characters, 3 of them with full access to the Harlequin WL table…

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Yeah, again, assuming the Harlies are the primary detachment, which Hero doesn’t really indicate one way or another. He wrote the DE part up first, though, so I guess I’d assume that’s the Primary.

            It doesn’t necessarily make sense, but that seems to be the way he’s written it.

      • J Mad

        The Warriors do not have a Character in them.

  • karandras

    Another illegal army list by Hero posted on BoLS. Please read the bottom of page 71 in the Dark Eldar codex and stop confusing the community. With the current speed of codex releases, not to mention the cost, there are a lot of people who may not own a codex. Even on a gaming blog, you have some obligation to journalistic integrity and should not be posting misinformation.

    • karandras

      Otherwise, good article though. Just make a legit list.

      • highwind

        The list is perfectly legit, it just seems you are unable to read properly…

    • Charon

      Can’t find anything illegal here. A stupid rule gap? Sure. But illeal? No.

      • Shatterclaw

        Out side the fact you need to take a Archon to unlock the Court of the Archon? Yeah, noo totally not Illegal, not Ilegal at all, unless condone cheating and ruler layering at all cost above game play and good sportsmanship.

        This is an Illegal list and abuse of fellow players, but that my opinion.

        A signal Llamas is not a Hq, and can not count as a Hq.. with out a Archon. You need to Buy the Archion and the free pian candy is you get some better choices to keep your Archon soul craving but alive for a bit longer. 40K still needs 1 Hq and two troops to play. In the codex, ( p.71 )Its states the Court of the Archon, Retainers: Dose not take up a force origination slot.Not, Retainers, acts as a Hq.

        on The Harlequin side they don’t have Hq’s

        • Charon

          Except that the DE codex doesn’ t say anything of what you stated and even the retainer quote is wrong.

          The Court clearly has the HQ Slot symbol and only becomes slotless if you take an Archon.

          • LordRao

            Charon is right. It’s a sad state of affairs that this list gimping (it’s not pimping, cuz it’s dumb) is technically legal, but there you go.
            By the by, the player community has gone over this argument a thousand times since the last DE codex dropped, so really no idea why we’re going over all of this again.

          • Me

            Because this is the interwebz, where rage abounds and reason hides whimpering in the corner.

        • Houghten

          How does the signal llama hold the paddles?

    • J Mad

      Yeah and its legal, it says that Courts dont take up an HQ slot if you take an Archon, but it is still an HQ. It doesnt say you MUST take an Archon, you can take a Haemi and still have a Court, or you can take a court all on its own.

    • This is the Internet. While I agree totally on integrity, there is no way to police it so its not worth sweating over. This site is just a buncha BalLs anyways.

  • karandras

    Here it is. It most certainly does not say that you can select a court without an Archon and choose to have it take up an FOC slot. It says if you have an Archon, you may have a court.

    • Charon

      Except that it doesnt say that.
      It says if you have an Archon the Court becomes slotless, which would be a useless addition if you could not buy them as HQ in the first place.

      • karandras

        But that really is not what it says. The thought could have been split into a seperate sentence to be clearer (i.e. – The Court does not use up a FOC slot). However, the opening of the sentence really is not open for interpretation and trying to focus on the end of the sentence to the exclusion of the beginning is simply trying to manipulate what is written.

        • MikeHollstrom

          For each Archon included in a Detachment, the Detachment can include a Court of the Archon that does not take up a slot on the Force Organisation chart.

          It’s one sentence. 1 archon = Court that doesn’t take up a slot. it’s not complicated.
          What I think GW should have done was impose a minimum of how many models the Court would need to take.

          • Charon

            Which would defeat the purpose I guess.
            I think the point of the court is to have a unit that is capable of riding a Venom WITH the character.
            Wracks? 5 Minimum, so no Haemi + Wracks on the Venom.
            Bloodbrides? The same.
            Trueborn? The same.
            That basically leaves court and Incubi.

      • karandras

        And it is not at all a “useless addition” as it permits you to include another HQ, such as a Haemonculus, but still run your Archon with a Court.

        • Charon

          No because If you do not pick an Archon you would not be permitted to pick a Court and if you pick an Archon they do need no Slot. So in any case you can field an additional HQ.
          The court IS an HQ and I would bet the intend was to be able to field the court alongside another HQ like the Haemi.
          However another example is the Warlock Council which is not an HQ and is clearly worded as addition to the Seer.
          The court has no such wording. The court is an HQ choice. For every archon you can get a slotless court. If you really want to you could field an Archon with 2 Courts. One Slotless, the other one costing an HQ slot.

          • karandras

            It does not say that mate. I would normally understand that you are the “Well it doesn’t specifically say I can’t, so I guess I can” type rules lawyer/gamer… But in this instance, I would have to throw the proverbial “yellow flag” because you are trying to ignore the clearly printed verbatim free standing statement “For each Archon included in a detachment,…”. Warlocks are not a comparison because it is a different codex and unit entry. GW will not FAQ something that they understand to be clearly stated. There would be zero argument to even try to rationally suggest that is what they intended as in over 20 years in this hobby and 7 editions of the game, there has NEVER been a HQ that costs the same as a basic trooper. It most certainly was not and is not RAI and my stance is that it is not even RAW.

          • Charon

            It is RAW. There is ZERO possibility otherwise. I would even argue it as RAI as the intent to allow you to field them alongside other HQs seems reasonable.
            The fun thing with you is that you never quote the full rule but always just a part. Which points out that you KNOW the wording is in the favor of it beeing a HQ unit (also the Battle field role in the upper right corner clearly shows them as HQ).

            2. Battlefield Role: The unit’s Battlefield Role is shown here by a symbol. Units in this book have one of the following Battlefield Roles: HQ, Troops, Elites, Fast Attack, Heavy Support or Lords of War. The symbols for these Battlefield Roles are defined inWarhammer 40,000: The Rules

            Then the Retainer rule is added:

            Retainers: For each Archon included in a Detachment, the Detachment can include a Court of the Archon that does not take up a slot on the Force Organisation chart.

            So in short: It IS an HQ unit, that becomes slotless if you include an Archon.

            Just because you are not used to it, that doesnt mean it is not legal.

          • J Mad

            Your wrong.. It no where says you have to have an Archon.

            The Court is listed as an HQ choice. You can Yell no until your blue in the face, doesnt mean your right.

          • Guest

            For each Archon included in a Detachment, the Detachment can include a Court of the Archon that does not take up a slot on the Force Organisation chart.

          • J Mad

            Thats not how it is worded tho, It is a HQ choice that WHEN you take an archon it doesnt take up a HQ slot.

    • Blah

      Sorry bud. You are wrong. Go read it again.

      • karandras

        I posted it above earlier so we can all read it.. I also quoted it.

        • Charon

          You quoted a half sentence in a desperate attempt mo make a point.

        • karandras

          Here it is again

    • Jerin Price

      Except it does say you can take a court without an Archon. That little symbol up there that says HQ and then the section where it lists it’s cost; you know the same as any unit… I don’t need express permission on every sheet saying “you are allowed to take this”.

      From a fluff side, sometimes I like to bring sslyth but I like them to accompany my Succubus as bodyguards to an “honoured” ally. Now obviously this is not cheesy net listing because it takes up both my hq slots and isn’t super points efficient. (Which is exactly what the court was intended to do when an Archon is not present in your list or else it wouldn’t bother telling you a way for them to NOT take up an HQ slot). So if your opinion of the rule changes based on how much it helps your opponent you might want to check your bias.

  • mighty_pirate

    Even allowing the list, your Warlord choices are 1: Solitaire, who gets no Warlord trait, or 2: Llhamean, who will be the worst warlord ever & give away a secondary obj turn 1.

    • caldera02

      You know any character can be a warlord right? With harlies specifically, the Troupe Master is actually what is designed to be the warlord.

      • karandras

        Yes. That does not over ride the restriction on page 71 of the DE codex. Honestly, in regards to that section of the BRB if you read it a few times, I honestly get the impression. That GW simply overlooked the word “independent” and it was shoddy authorship. Perhaps not though. That’s an opinion based on the entirety of the section where “independent” is mentioned a few times.

        • caldera02

          Independent character and character are two different things entirely. I do agree about the needing an Archon, for the Court of the Archon though.

      • mighty_pirate

        I was actually thinking of the old Eldar dex Harlequin rules where Troupe Masters were an upgrade & assumed there weren’t any since none were listed.
        Thus without any other characters the 3rd option would have been the worst of 1 & 2: A crap warlord AND no warlord trait.
        But yes, a Troupe Master would be the obvious choice.

    • Charon

      One of the Troupe masters will be warlord. It is also the only Harlequin Character that gets access to the full table as Shadowseer and Deathjester only roll a D3.

      • karandras

        Actually I believe the warlord has to be from the primary detachment.

        • caldera02

          Why can’t the harlie detachment be primary? Maybe just list his “list” in reverse order?

        • Charon

          And the harlies can’t be primary because of… reasons?
          I can see why you are confused with rules…

          • karandras

            I stated that assumption based on the fact that the DE is listed first and is combined arms.

          • karandras

            Also, a lot of tournaments only allow one CAD (at least in my area). The DE here are not a formation or an ally detachment, so by process of elimination, I presumed that HERO intended them as primary.

          • Andrew Thomas

            And why is that first point relevant?

          • Charon

            Flashnews: Primary doesn’t have to be CAD. You could use any formation you want as primary.

  • Jason Brown

    ITC has voted to nix the Court as a viable HQ, so at any of those events you would need to change that. I would also bet at some point other TOs will go that way or it will get FAQed as its a pretty flimsy argument.

    • Charon

      Do you have a link?
      All I found is:

      “A Court of the Archon may be taken in an Detachment that does not include an Archon.”

      Which kinda contradicts what you wrote.

      • Jason Brown

        I’m referring to the ITC ruling (BAO, LVO, extra….) since it doesn’t take up a FOC slot, it’s doesn’t fulfill the nessisarry HQ in either a CAD, RSR, or ally detachment.

        • Charon

          Again… link please.
          The quote is from the ITC rules and it doesn’t state what you write here.
          Because if you can include a court without including an Archon, it clearly fills a HQ slot.

          • Jason Brown

            I believe that the 1.5 was left up for this years LVO, but it should be amended. I could be wrong but Frankie was a bit bummed. I’ll get in touch with our guy here and hit you back.

        • nobody

          Scrub rules for scrubs.

        • Andrew Thomas

          Since when have tournament rules been relevant outside of tournaments?

  • Wigz666

    Masque detatchment requires 2 fast attack. Each fast attack is at least 2 skyweavers. Your list is wrong.

    • winterman

      Starweavers, the transports, are fast attack as well as the bikes. So perfectly legal and efficient.

      • Wigz666

        ahhh, misread star and sky. ALways gets me :p

  • Wigz666

    Where did my post go?
    Ah well…
    as I already said, Masque Detatchemnt is 2 fast attack, each is 2 skyweavers at 100 base, so the list is incorrect.

  • RT

    What an ugly soulless list!

  • scadugenga

    It’s stupid crap like this that makes me glad I don’t play tournament 40k.

    The rampant lack of testicular fortitude used when designing such “but it’s RAW!!!” lists would lead me to continuously inquire when the list-writer expected their balls to finally drop. (and other such epithets that would likely fly over their heads)

    Funny how naught has really changed with this kind of paradigm since the leafblower days.

    • Andrew Thomas

      Doubt you’d understand their answers, what with that mechanical pencil lodged in your eye socket.

      • scadugenga

        Waacers are too little to be able to get near my eye sockets. At most they would be able to flap their dainty almost-human hands at me lamenting “you beast, you ravenous beast!”

        Before becoming overwhelmed by the moment and collapsing in a non-flattering fashion on the floor…to the staccato accompaniment of falling d6’s.

        • karandras

          That is hilarious!