Author Topic: Harlequin Revision - EO! (Read 150509 times)

Rasmus · « **Reply #940 on:** January 22, 2009, 12:32:23 PM »

I will put a blurb in the 5th ed list when I work out the math.

Edit: Benathai are in, Masques are back, and I am working on some fluff. Should be up tomorrow if not my day goes wrong.

Edit: 1.1 is up, including some basic background, Masques, Benathai, and the lost weapon-options of the Solitaire.
THe Masques, if you didn't know, were part of GW playtest-codex before the #39-list, and I have had to tweak them a bit as some of the mechanics they used to modify are now gone. They have also been significantly toned down.

Farseer Amidas · « **Reply #941 on:** February 11, 2009, 06:01:55 AM »

Hi all.

I was looking threw the Harlequin army lists. In the 5th edition there is no mention to looting vehicles. Is this still an option?

Thanks

FA

Rasmus · « **Reply #942 on:** February 11, 2009, 06:56:17 AM »

Due to the way the rules have changed this option has been removed pending further testing. If you have a suggestion as to a working rule for it, please do post it.

Farseer Amidas · « **Reply #943 on:** February 11, 2009, 06:59:08 AM »

Not sure Rasmus. Was just looking forward to having a Lemon Russ, may get a looted one for Apoc anyway.

Rasmus · « **Reply #944 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:04:44 AM »

I have a loted Leman Russ myself, but it is better to get working rules for it rather than botch something togetehr just to field the model, no matter how pretty it is.
Like this.

Farseer Amidas · « **Reply #945 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:13:20 AM »

That is a cool model. Could you not field it in apoc with the breakdown table?? Sorry I don't really understand what didn't work about the rules.

Rasmus · « **Reply #946 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:15:47 AM »

Apoc rules are for... wait for it... Apoc games.
That means that while they may work they are not well suited for normal 40k games, just as little as Apoc blasts work really well in standard 40k.

Farseer Amidas · « **Reply #947 on:** February 11, 2009, 08:00:37 AM »

Sorry if I confused the issue. I know apoc and normal games are very different. I would not try to mix them.

2quiet · « **Reply #948 on:** February 11, 2009, 11:51:05 PM »

Brilliant list, I am really enjoying it.

The only issue I have is that it is not stated anywhere (unless of course I missed it), that neither the Solitaire or the Great Harlequin are 0-1 choices. Being able to field three solitaires straight out feels wrong, and same to for multiple Great Harlequins (despite how much I would love to stack the effects of multiple Masques- probably further reason to restrict it though).

The same thing may be said for the Shadowseer, but given the new Codex:Eldar ruleset, I don't feel these ought to be portrayed as that rare, at least if they can only grant one squad VoT.

Can't wait to playtest it. *Goes back to writing my list*

Rasmus · « **Reply #949 on:** February 12, 2009, 02:31:33 AM »

You are of course right. I will put those back. They are in my "full" list, but somehow it slipped when I edited out all the copyright-information.

Edit: 1.2 is up, has the limitation and fixed some other small errors.

Scyrex Deledras · « **Reply #950 on:** April 2, 2009, 02:10:31 PM »

I have a question on the existing 5th ed Harlequin rules:

1. Will we be creating an FAQ section for it?

If so, then...

2. How do we regard the Mockingbird's Sonic Cannon for Weapon Destroyed purposes? Is the entire thing lost, or does it just count as having 2 vibro-cannons?

And

3. The Masque of the Red Death gives all Harlies in 12" Furious Charge. Don't Harlequins automatically come with Furious Charge anyway?

Rasmus · « **Reply #951 on:** April 3, 2009, 03:42:14 AM »

1. It only has the one weapon - the Sonic Cannon. If it is destroyed it is destroyed. You cannot argue that a twin-linked weapon that gets a Weapon Destroyed simply becomes a single-type of that same weapon, either.

2. Odd. Will look into that.

Edit: Typos and tweak fixed. Uploaded new version.

Nileez · « **Reply #952 on:** April 17, 2009, 05:29:41 PM »

Quick question, is there a reason that VoT is a +0 point upgrade? If it were me I would just list VoT in the special rules and give the option to also take misdirection for +[whatever the number]points.

But then again I'm not the one writing the book

Nice job BTW

Farceseer Syranaul · « **Reply #953 on:** April 18, 2009, 02:24:21 PM »

The links are down. At least at this time.

Rasmus · « **Reply #954 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:31:39 AM »

Quote from: Nileez on April 17, 2009, 05:29:41 PM

Quick question, is there a reason that VoT is a +0 point upgrade? If it were me I would just list VoT in the special rules and give the option to also take misdirection for +[whatever the number]points.

But then again I'm not the one writing the book

Nice job BTW

It is just a way to straighten the bookkeeping, and not force anyone to have VoT. Of course, under normal circumstances it would not make sense not to get it (seince it is free) but still.

Quote from: Farceseer Siranaul on April 18, 2009, 02:24:21 PM

The links are down. At least at this time.

The 5th one is up at least.

faitherun (Fay-ith-er-run) · « **Reply #955 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:28:17 AM »

Once this is finished, is this going to be submitted to GW? I am thouroughly impressed with what has been done here, and would love to see this become offical.

Also, can we get Rasmus on the GW staff by any chance? Then we may actually get something done $:-\$

Rasmus · « **Reply #956 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:50:51 AM »

Quote from: faitherun (Fay-ith-er-run) on April 21, 2009, 06:28:17 AM

Once this is finished, is this going to be submitted to GW? I am thouroughly impressed with what has been done here, and would love to see this become offical.

Also, can we get Rasmus on the GW staff by any chance? Then we may actually get something done $:-\$

I have submitted several versions during 3rd and 4th ed, and of course nothing happened. The days of fanmaterial (in CJ or CA) are gone, I'm afraid.

and I will never make staff. I like the game more than I like making money off the game.

faitherun (Fay-ith-er-run) · « **Reply #957 on:** April 21, 2009, 07:39:03 PM »

Quote from: Rasmus on April 21, 2009, 06:50:51 AM

and I will never make staff. I like the game more than I like making money off the game.

Which is exactly why I would want you on staff - that is what we need, someone who cares about the game rather than the money. This was me at my old job - I taught Tae Kwon DO. I cared about the traditions and the art, my boss cared about the money and the buisness. I taught on the floor, and he ran the the business aspects of it. It worked out pretty well, although we did clash on some things (I was more willing to do things for free than he was).

This is my point, we need some people in the company to focus soely on the game aspect, and some soely on the gaming aspect.

Frost.fire · « **Reply #958 on:** April 26, 2009, 04:34:06 AM »

Some of the statlines and equipment are completely gone from some sections, mainly just Troupes. Was this on purpose to just fill it in with the CJ statline/equpiment by ourselves or is it not wholely finished yet

EDIT :: Ok, I got to the final paragraph. Knowing I need my Eldar. It's a very impressive list/codex. I got the ok to use it at my local GW

Rasmus · « **Reply #959 on:** April 26, 2009, 05:38:23 AM »

I have a version with all the statlines, but of course it would violate GW copyright, so the version I am publishing on the web is blank, and just referring to the Eldar Codex.
I am glad you get to play it. It is fun to play the list, I found, and if you find anything in playtesting I have missed, let us know.

ARMIES

Members Online

Author Topic: Harlequin Revision - EO! (Read 150509 times)