PDA

View Full Version : The Path of the Outcast: Youthful Rebels or Discovery?



Inquisitor Engel
29-08-2005, 03:06
This has arisen out of the new Rangers rumour, and the report of some kind of Pathfinder "Exarch."

This raises the question - Are those on the Path of the Outcast (as it is constantly referred to) or are they actually leaving the path?

My personal view is that when the Path was laid down, it was a given that not all Eldar would not wish to spend their entire lives on the Craftworld. The Path of the Outcast does in fact serve a useful purpose.

Those that are 'Outcasts' still retain their loyalties to the Craftworld, either being Pirates or Rangers. Were they simply leaving the Craftworld AND the Path would not wish to retain links to either.

The Rangers roam and report to the Craftworld's leaders, and the Pirates still provides fleet support to a large degree. If they hated the Path, why give benefits to the system you hate?

Anyway, I think it's designed to get that youthful rush from some Eldar who cannot find a better outlet. In a similar parallel, when an Amish child turns 18, they are allowed to spend a year in the real world, something in the region of ninety percent return to life on the farm, because it teaches them the rewards of hard work and restraint.

So yeah, Outcasts are on a Path. ;)

Khaine's Messenger
29-08-2005, 03:26
This raises the question - Are those on the Path of the Outcast (as it is constantly referred to) or are they actually leaving the path?

This depends to some extent on how integral you view the "paths" to be to (Craftworld) Eldar psyche. That is, whether they view everything as a path (and thus there would be a path or two that is basically "the path of not following the path"--eg, the Path of Damnation). As a great deal of Alaitoc's Ranger forces come from those seeking to escape the hardlining path-system practised there, it would seem to me that the Path of the Outcast is basically the Path of Getting A Breath of Fresh Air.


If they hated the Path, why give benefits to the system you hate?

Because most of them couldn't really serve a real purpose and/or survive for long outside the Craftworlds, and they know it. BTW, I also see this path not necessarily as a characteristic of Eldar youth, but Eldar disspiritment...it can be followed by young and old Eldar alike. And it's not so much they hate the Path, either....

Anyways. On the subject of a Ranger Exarch...well, there are the Pathfinders. I wouldn't be at all surprised if GW somehow weaseled them into the core list (not that I mind, from a background perspective, mind). ;)

Wiseman
29-08-2005, 04:01
i wouldnt like to see pathfinders part of the core list, itd be like making a seer council part of the core list, it shouldnt be done.

Although
29-08-2005, 09:59
This raises the question - Are those on the Path of the Outcast (as it is constantly referred to) or are they actually leaving the path?


Merely being called 'the path of' does not an Eldar path make; there is also the path of Damnation which only some Harlequins follow.

"Outcasts must bear the terrible burden of the heightened Eldar consciousness without the protection of the Eldar path."

"Outcasts must" do so because all Outcasts have left the Eldar path (They became Outcasts when they left the path)



Those that are 'Outcasts' still retain their loyalties to the Craftworld, either being Pirates or Rangers.


All Outcasts do not return to their Craftworlds:

"some fall from grace and become consumed by their dark passions, while others manage to exorcise their wanderlust and eventually return to their Craftworld." (3rd Ed Codex Eldar, description of the Rangers)

All Pirate Fleets do not remain loyal to their Craftworlds. (2nd Ed Codex Eldar)




Were they simply leaving the Craftworld AND the Path would not wish to retain links to either.


"They are not welcome aboard Craftworlds but briefly, for their minds are dangerously unbounded and attract predators from the psychic realms of the warp."

They leave the Craftworlds (or are forced to leave) because they have left the path.




If they hated the Path,


Because they, when they choose to become Outcasts, felt that the path was too tiring (but some might hate it).

"There have been many Eldar over the millennia who have tired from the Eldar path." (3rd Ed Codex: Eldar, description of the Rangers)

In that description it is very clear that all Rangers have tired of the Eldar path; your advice to them would be; "well, choose another path dimwits!"

They tire of the Eldar path system and choose (the only logical option) to leave the path system, thus becoming Outcasts. If they were not to leave the path system the whole quote above would be pointless to include in the description of the Rangers.



why give benefits to the system you hate?


They do not hate the Eldar path system; they only choose not to follow it. There are motivations for aiding your former society; the love for the people, to protect their racial heritage or that they see a future in which they will re-enter the Eldar path system (or the reasons provided by Khaine's Messenger).

Hating the system but loving the country seems to be very common approach in the real world.


This depends to some extent on how integral you view the "paths" to be to (Craftworld) Eldar psyche. That is, whether they view everything as a path (and thus there would be a path or two that is basically "the path of not following the path"


Just because you are following 'a path' does not mean you are following the Eldar path system. Humans are also following many different 'paths', some Harlequins are evidently following 'paths', but none of them are following the Eldar path system. If everything was to follow the Eldar path then there could be no possibility of any Eldar leaving it; and Eldar have left the path (all Outcasts).

Inquisitor Engel: I don't even know why you are wasting your time here; you should be spilling the beans on the new Codex: Eldar or debunking rumours about it! Do it! Do it now!

Wiseman
29-08-2005, 10:35
yeh engel start your debunking already!

Khaine's Messenger
29-08-2005, 17:49
Merely being called 'the path of' does not an Eldar path make

Of course not. On the other hand, the mere fact that they regiment their thoughts in such a manner suggests that they have Paths on the brains, imho. Much like human preference for seeing patterns in things that are not patterned. It's a lot like the concept of destiny; no matter what destiny you guide yourself towards, that is your destiny. Just because the Path of the Outcast does not regiment the mind in the same way as the other Paths does not mean that it is itself not a Path as far as other Eldar are concerned. This is what drives Outcasts utterly nuts, like it does to all runaways--at some point they realize they are going to serve their purposes in life whether they want to or not; those who go insane in that realization and utterly reject it are those that finally break all faith with the Path system, while those who accept it and act to find their purpose will eventually find their way back to their Craftworld (and the other way, to become lost to the Path of the Outcast).


Just because you are following 'a path' does not mean you are following the Eldar path system.

Of course. On the other hand, when "you" is an Eldar who has been indoctrinated from birth to put the word Path in uppercase letters and view everything as a permutation of the wending way, it's hard not to see not following the Path as yet another Path. It is not so much that it is a Path, but it is part of the Path system as much as deportation, immigration, and international travel are governed by our own laws.


Inquisitor Engel: I don't even know why you are wasting your time here; you should be spilling the beans on the new Codex: Eldar or debunking rumours about it! Do it! Do it now!

While I agree ( ;) ), I haven't seen Engel in this subforum for quite a while, and I think I miss the lug.... :(

Although
29-08-2005, 18:47
On the other hand, the mere fact that they regiment their thoughts in such a manner suggests that they have Paths on the brains, imho.


I don't understand where you've gotten a description of Outcast thought-patterns from. Would you mind giving a source from which one can learn about those though-patterns and how, in any way, they would be related to the Eldar path way of thinking?



Just because the Path of the Outcast does not regiment the mind in the same way as the other Paths does not mean that it is itself not a Path as far as other Eldar are concerned. This is what drives Outcasts utterly nuts, like it does to all runaways--at some point they realize they are going to serve their purposes in life whether they want to or not; those who go insane in that realization and utterly reject it are those that finally break all faith with the Path system


If you want to know if Outcasts are a part of the Eldar path system you have to read the Outcasts section on p19 of the 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar. There you will be greeted with a plethora of statements that could only be true if they actually leave the Eldar path.

Like this one:

"Outcasts must bear the terrible burden of the heightened Eldar consciousness without the protection of the Eldar path."



when "you" is an Eldar who has been indoctrinated from birth to put the word Path in uppercase letters and view everything as a permutation of the wending way, it's hard not to see not following the Path as yet another Path. It is not so much that it is a Path, but it is part of the Path system as much as deportation, immigration, and international travel are governed by our own laws.


Sure, it would be a path you can wander, but it would still not be an Eldar path of the path system as the whole point of the Outcasts is that they abandon the ways of the Eldar path system and do whatever they want, however they want.

I would want you to support your assertions, with official background, more then you do.

Khaine's Messenger
29-08-2005, 19:32
Would you mind giving a source from which one can learn about those though-patterns and how, in any way, they would be related to the Eldar path way of thinking?

--fact: Those who become Outcasts are generally born and raised as Craftworld Eldar, immersed in the concept of the Path.

--fact: Those who become Outcasts are those who have "tired" of the path system.

--supposition: Not all those who are thus "tired" are of a youthful nature, and are thus more apt to be "tired" of the Path rather than expressing a rebellious youthful urge against authority.

--supposition: The path system is not only a way of life, but a way of thought and philosophy, and its shackles and comforts are difficult to fully remove, even for those who become Outcast.

--supposition: A Path is not merely a mental block, but an overriding purpose in life that grants one the ability to focus.

--conclusion: Being an Outcast, while often viewed as an escape from the Path system, is still considered a Path because, philosophically, most CWE cannot see it as any other thing. Further, although Outcasts are tortured by the full brunt of the Eldar psyche, they generally come to protect themselves by finding a purpose or focus because of how they were taught to deal with such things ever since birth.

--corollary: This focus or purpose is a lead-in towards a small degree of self-realization and reflection, which is the entire point of being an Outcast.


There you will be greeted with a plethora of statements that could only be true if they actually leave the Eldar path.

Hence I consider it to be mostly thought of as the Path of Not Following the Path. Not that it is per se a Path, but that the Eldar following it and those who have followed it still, philosophically, see it as a Path because it is a mechanism of CWE society, which as far as they are concerned is one and the same with the Path System.


I would want you to support your assertions, with official background, more then you do.

I'm afraid I can't do that, as it's been a while since I've been in contact with any of my sources, and because I carry around a lot of extra baggage in my head that says the official background, in a lot of circumstances, is just ********. ;) Take this as "KM-verse" if you like. It could also be that Kage2020's version of the Path system has taken root in the hind-regions of my brain. :)

Although
29-08-2005, 20:01
--fact: Those who become Outcasts are generally born and raised as Craftworld Eldar, immersed in the concept of the Path.

--fact: Those who become Outcasts are those who have "tired" of the path system.

--supposition: Not all those who are thus "tired" are of a youthful nature, and are thus more apt to be "tired" of the Path rather than expressing a rebellious youthful urge against authority.

--supposition: The path system is not only a way of life, but a way of thought and philosophy, and its shackles and comforts are difficult to fully remove, even for those who become Outcast.

--supposition: A Path is not merely a mental block, but an overriding purpose in life that grants one the ability to focus.

--conclusion: Being an Outcast, while often viewed as an escape from the Path system, is still considered a Path because, philosophically, most CWE cannot see it as any other thing. Further, although Outcasts are tortured by the full brunt of the Eldar psyche, they generally come to protect themselves by finding a purpose or focus because of how they were taught to deal with such things ever since birth.

--corollary: This focus or purpose is a lead-in towards a small degree of self-realization and reflection, which is the entire point of being an Outcast.


I can see what you mean; although I feel that speculating about how easy it is for CWE to distance themselves (mentally) from the Eldar path is a whole other topic ;) (which is not covered by the fluff). The only thing one needs to know is that those who do leave the path are called Outcasts.




Hence I consider it to be mostly thought of as the Path of Not Following the Path. Not that it is per se a Path, but that the Eldar following it and those who have followed it still, philosophically, see it as a Path because it is a mechanism of CWE society, which as far as they are concerned is one and the same with the Path System.


They might see it as a path of fate, but not an Eldar path; there is a difference.

I don't feel like speculating about what Eldar might consider correlated beyond what is written in the background.




I'm afraid I can't do that, as it's been a while since I've been in contact with any of my sources, and because I carry around a lot of extra baggage in my head that says the official background, in a lot of circumstances, is just ********. ;) Take this as "KM-verse" if you like. It could also be that Kage2020's version of the Path system has taken root in the hind-regions of my brain. :)

The first portion I quoted from your post was good enough, really. :)

Kage2020
29-08-2005, 23:32
This has arisen out of the new Rangers rumour, and the report of some kind of Pathfinder "Exarch."
As a Path, even the Path of the Outcast should have the potential of allowing for paramount practitioners. So nothing new there. The same applies to the other paths.


This raises the question - Are those on the Path of the Outcast (as it is constantly referred to) or are they actually leaving the path?
It seems fairly consistent to say that they are on the Path, not leaving them. As discussed in numerous threads before!


The Path of the Outcast does in fact serve a useful purpose.
Of course it does. Such is evident from the continued presence of the 'Outcasts' on the army lists. Their presence does not, however, preclude that craftwrold eldar have scouts, etc., as part of the established Path system.


If they hated the Path, why give benefits to the system you hate?
Please remember that the Outcasts were rebelling not against the Path but, rather, against the 'strictures' of craftworld eldar life. The synonymity of 'life' and 'Path' is the thing that people bring to the 'fluff' with their own interpretation. For me? It's not the same.


Anyway, I think it's designed to get that youthful rush from some Eldar who cannot find a better outlet. In a similar parallel, when an Amish child turns 18...
I don't think that the Amish example is particularly appropriate since it is not culture wide. Furthermore, one must (for me) necessarily question some of the simple 'fluff' when it says that 'such-and-such' a craftworld has a high degree of rangers or whatever.


This depends to some extent on how integral you view the "paths" to be to (Craftworld) Eldar psyche.
And, of course, KM raises this issue! :D (Erm, this is a compliment BTW!)


..."the path of not following the path"--eg, the Path of Damnation).
For me? That would be a misinterpretation. The Path is all about choice. Even when damning oneself.


Because most of them couldn't really serve a real purpose and/or survive for long outside the Craftworlds, and they know it.
That's a loaded approach. Survival? Why do they lack a purpose outside of the craftworld? Are eldar incapable of making up their own minds?

I would imagine that they are fully capable of both.


"Outcasts must bear the terrible burden of the heightened Eldar consciousness without the protection of the Eldar path."
Which is in contradiction to some of the other 'fluff' and conforms primarily to Rule of Cool. Of course, I'm also bringing out Rule of Cool since they otherwise seem to serve a function!


All Outcasts do not return to their Craftworlds...
No one said that they did. Amusingly the one 'Path' that is problematic is the one tht they have an overabaundance of 'paramount practitioners'.


All Pirate Fleets do not remain loyal to their Craftworlds.
No one said that they did.


They do not hate the Eldar path system; they only choose not to follow it.
With all the quotes that you're pulling out I'm really hoping that you're not associated with GW in an attempt to rewrite the eldar. If that is the case... Well, oh dear.

Oh god. I've just read Engels quote. :cries: Well, on the bright side GW might have finally created the death keen of Kage...


Hating the system but loving the country seems to be very common approach in the real world.
<grin> As is anthropomorhic writing...


...it's hard not to see not following the Path as yet another Path.
Yet you argued the tao approach above.

Right, that's enough for now.

Kage

Delicious Soy
30-08-2005, 06:56
"Outcasts must bear the terrible burden of the heightened Eldar consciousness without the protection of the Eldar path."

"Outcasts must" do so because all Outcasts have left the Eldar path (They became Outcasts when they left the path)One could argue that the problem is that the Path of the Outcast (more specifically the Ranger Aspect) results in its 'Paramount Practioners' (to borrow Kage's term) being loners as opposed to other Paths where there is guidance. Note that this is specifically for the Ranger 'Aspect'.

The Pirate aspect of the outcast would to my imagination be far more regimental (being the management of a fleet of raiders), with Pirate Princes being the paramount practioners, in that they return to the craftworld every so often to replace their losses before going out into the void again.

Of course the danger of Pirate Princes is that they might turn from the craftworld entirely, but given the fate of Ahra, that a possiblity on more than one Path.

Although
30-08-2005, 09:49
It seems fairly consistent to say that they are on the Path, not leaving them. As discussed in numerous threads before!


No, it being a path is inconsistent with many quotes that specifically say that all Outcasts have to survive without the protection of the path system. There has been no new fluff contradicting that position, either. You guys have to show me evidence that leads one to abandon the crystal clear notions in the 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar; that all Outcasts have left the Eldar path system. Your pure wish of it being otherwise is not good enough.



Please remember that the Outcasts were rebelling not against the Path but, rather, against the 'strictures' of craftworld eldar life. The synonymity of 'life' and 'Path' is the thing that people bring to the 'fluff' with their own interpretation. For me It's not the same.



Yes, you bring your own assertions to the table. There ARE many quotes that could NOT have even been written if not all Outcasts left the actual path system. Read the 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar and stop writing about your dreams of what the Eldar path should or should not include; back all your statements up with fluff.




The Path is all about choice. Even when damning oneself.


It's all about choice, yes; Restricted choice. Outcasts can choose to do whatever they want, thus not following the Eldar path system (becoming Outcasts).



Which is in contradiction to some of the other 'fluff' and conforms primarily to Rule of Cool. Of course, I'm also bringing out Rule of Cool since they otherwise seem to serve a function!


There has never been anything contradicting that; please show any quote that would contradict it (good luck).

Read the 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar

The Rule of Cool is the only legitimate argument; there is nothing contradictiong the fact that all Outcasts leave the path.



<grin> As is anthropomorhic writing...


Read the 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar.



No one said that they did.


Inquisitor Engel is not 'no-one'; "Those that are 'Outcasts' still retain their loyalties to the Craftworld."



With all the quotes that you're pulling out I'm really hoping that you're not associated with GW in an attempt to rewrite the eldar. If that is the case... Well, oh dear.


With all the baseless assertions that you're pulling out to try and contradict my actual quotes, I'm really hoping that you're not associated with GW in an attempt to rewrite the eldar. If that is the case... Well, oh dear.

You guys need to start and actually support your (huge) assertions. I am the only one who has shown, through the fluff, that my position is waterproof against your baseless assertions.

I can't even start taking you seriously until you back your stuff up.


One could argue that the problem is that the Path of the Outcast (more specifically the Ranger Aspect) results in its 'Paramount Practioners' (to borrow Kage's term) being loners as opposed to other Paths where there is guidance. Note that this is specifically for the Ranger 'Aspect'.


No Outcasts have ever been referred to as Aspects of anything at all. Support your assumption.



The Pirate aspect of the outcast would to my imagination be far more regimental (being the management of a fleet of raiders), with Pirate Princes being the paramount practioners, in that they return to the craftworld every so often to replace their losses before going out into the void again.


No Outcasts have ever been referred to as Aspects of anything at all. Support your assumption.

I'm actually getting tired of this. Please, please, pretty please support your assumptions with more then severely flawed opinion.

Although
30-08-2005, 21:40
"Rangers are Outcasts, Eldar who have chosen to leave the Eldar path and instead pursue a life of freedom an uncertainty in the wider universe." - Epic 40.000 (from 2005)

Kage2020
31-08-2005, 01:16
Oh dear... I wrote a rather large reply and decided that it was far too childish. I'm afraid that I cannot respond in depth to the above because, well, I found it quite rude. Bordering on the flaming and, well, it's probably best not to get too involved in that.

With all that 'fluff' acumen and, well, strong stance that you have are you sure that you cannot find 'fluff' that contradicts your stance. One could look at the 'fluff' on the Exodites for an alterantive approach and, further, the dubious quality of the 'source' of Czevak on Alatoic and... well, other stuff.

Oh, I've read 2E Eldar. It sucks. But then again it is a wargame codex!

Oh yes, and you might want to consider that you've "won". Whatever you want to do. I really don't have the energy (or ability, perhaps?) to reply to something like that.

/Kage

Delicious Soy
31-08-2005, 03:04
No Outcasts have ever been referred to as Aspects of anything at all. Support your assumption.

No Outcasts have ever been referred to as Aspects of anything at all. Support your assumption.

I'm actually getting tired of this. Please, please, pretty please support your assumptions with more then severely flawed opinion.Is it such a leap of logic to figure that if outcasts form ship crews and operate as scouts either alone or as a small group, that it would imply that there are various types, ASPECTS if you will, of the Path of the Outcast? You may find in time that GW leaves gaps in the fluff that are up to interpretation.

Inquisitor Engel
31-08-2005, 04:42
Is it such a leap of logic to figure that if outcasts form ship crews and operate as scouts either alone or as a small group, that it would imply that there are various types, ASPECTS if you will, of the Path of the Outcast?

There absolutely are. (And that quote from the Epic Codex is rehash from earlier publications) Ones that spring to mind are the 'Way of the Pirate' and the 'Way of the Ranger.'

I'm sure there's more I can't think of. ;)

Here's an example - Yriel. Forced to leave the Craftworld, he became the Prince of the Pirate Fleets of Iyanden. (Rather than generic 'Pirate Fleets', and yes, I am aware that many of his ships followed him, but he joined with the Pirate Fleet of Iyanden which was already formed.

He did not do so by choice, and was in fact forced to take this plan of action, and joined other outcasts in an organized system of military efficiency. (It can be argued that Rangers may sometimes group together and perform similar functions, simply to survive from time to time.) There were lots of them. All on the Path of the Outcast.

Were it simply "leaving the Path system" rather than "Leaving the Craftworld" there would not be the preordained options for those Eldar to choose. The fact that so many fall into one of these two categories, either by choice or force implies that there's structure.

As far as the Eldar are concerned, the structure is part of the Path, even if it may not have been originally, it was more than likely integrated into the Path to make it a more acceptable, and easier on the craftworld.

Which is going to be less disruptive to a society attempting to purge the majority of stress and emotion from their existence?

Eldar Mother 1: "How's Anarion doing?"
Eldar Mother 2: "Oh, he decided to take time on the Path of the Outcast, and return to the Craftworld when he is ready."

OR

Eldar Mother 1: "How's Anarion doing?"
Eldar Mother 2: "He ran away, he hates all of us, he doesn't love the Craftworld, he's left us! *breaks into tears, feeding She Who Thirsts a little bit more...*"

;)


You may find in time that GW leaves gaps in the fluff that are up to interpretation.

Yep, and nothing Although says is going to change my opinion on the subject. ;) And likely, nothing I say will change his mind, mainly because I'm working on theory (much like Kage, though not quite as involved) and he's working with quotes that I consider outdated, but if he doesn't, that's fine by me. :)

Wiseman
31-08-2005, 11:08
Eldar Mother 1: "How's Anarion doing?"
Eldar Mother 2: "Oh, he decided to take time on the Path of the Outcast, and return to the Craftworld when he is ready."

OR

Eldar Mother 1: "How's Anarion doing?"
Eldar Mother 2: "He ran away, he hates all of us, he doesn't love the Craftworld, he's left us! *breaks into tears, feeding She Who Thirsts a little bit more...*"


I can just imagine Eldrad bursting into tears like that as well. He should be to old to cry as well!

Bea IC
31-08-2005, 14:18
You may find in time that GW leaves gaps in the fluff that are up to interpretation.

And you think that this is such a gap because? You can speculate all you want about whether The Outsider is in fact The Laughing God, but it will remain speculation until GW makes it official.

To say that the Outcasts relation to the Eldar path is a gap open for interpretation is stretching the meaning of the term considering some of the quotes posted by Although.


(And that quote from the Epic Codex is rehash from earlier publications)

So? Are you implying that recycled fluff is not legitimate fluff? Can you even comprehend how hard it is going to be for GW to write fluff and unit descriptions for the new codex with that in mind?

Did you know that the fluff found in the 3rd Edition Codex Eldar is a rehash of the fluff found in the 2nd Edition Codex Eldar? Not to mention Rouge Trader. Woops.


Heís working with quotes that I consider outdated, but if he doesn't, that's fine by me.

So you consider the most recent quote on the Outcasts to beÖ Outdated? Could it be that it just did not coincide with your idea of Outcasts, making it, by default, outdated in you opinion?

It certainly seems like it.


And likely, nothing I say will change his mind, mainly because I'm working on theory (much like Kage, though not quite as involved) and he's working with quotes

Translation: I make my stuff up and base it on how I want the Eldar to be, and he uses the actual background as a basis to show how Eldar really are. If your name is Phil Kelly you have a point, if not, wellÖ

Donít you think it is weird that, in a thread discussing fluff, Although is the only one to actually quote the fluff? I donít doubt that no one could ever change your mind on this topic, but we wont know if Although would change his mind because the only one with a case is him.

Sephiroth
31-08-2005, 14:33
Personally, I'm of the opinion that if an Eldar is an outcast, they have left the Path, even if oddly it is called the 'Path of the Outcast/Way of Danger'.

That said, I think some of you need to calm down. There isn't any need to throw quotes around as if that proves anything. GW are nothing if not contradictory, and fluff does change or is sometimes misunderstood.

Khaine's Messenger
31-08-2005, 14:44
If you want to "talk canon," then have at it--
1) "These solitary beings have taken the Path of the Outcast, one of the many and diverse Paths that the Eldar follow to keep them from the predations of Slaanesh."

2) "The Path of the Outcast is possibly the least inflexible of the Eldar lifestyles; many Eldar assume it purely because they are tired of the strictly enforced traditions of their Craftworld."

3) "Unshielded by the rigid constraints of a conventional Eldar path, they are dangerously vulnerable to the malign influence of Chaos."

Spanish =][= Website (http://www.games-workshop.es/especialista/inquisitor/bestiario/eldar.html), Specialist Games =][= Website (http://www.specialist-games.com/assets/EladrInq.pdf)

Not that such was the basis of my assertions, as I outlined my (perhaps flawed) reasoning previously....

Bea IC
31-08-2005, 14:53
If you want to "talk canon," then have at it--
1) "These solitary beings have taken the Path of the Outcast, one of the many and diverse Paths that the Eldar follow to keep them from the predations of Slaanesh."

2) "The Path of the Outcast is possibly the least inflexible of the Eldar lifestyles; many Eldar assume it purely because they are tired of the strictly enforced traditions of their Craftworld."

3) "Unshielded by the rigid constraints of a conventional Eldar path, they are dangerously vulnerable to the malign influence of Chaos."

Spanish =][= Website (http://www.games-workshop.es/especialista/inquisitor/bestiario/eldar.html), Specialist Games =][= Website (http://www.specialist-games.com/assets/EladrInq.pdf)

Not that such was the basis of my assertions, as I outlined my (perhaps flawed) reasoning previously....

I applaud your initiative, maybe now there will be a real debate. But i let you Eldar players sort that out. Atleast now it will be enjoyable to read. Thank you.

Sephiroth
31-08-2005, 15:07
I applaud your initiative, maybe now there will be a real debate. But i let you Eldar players sort that out. Atleast now it will be enjoyable to read. Thank you.

What's to debate? There is Background that says it is a Path, and background that say it isn't. As I posted already, GW shooting themselves in the foot. Again.

The whole matter remains what it has been from the start: Entirely everyone's own opinion of how they want to see it.

Inquisitor Engel
31-08-2005, 15:13
And you think that this is such a gap because? You can speculate all you want about whether The Outsider is in fact The Laughing God, but it will remain speculation until GW makes it official.

Anyone worth their salt in this forum can in fact disprove the theory based upon simple logic and a couple of supporting facts from the Liber Chaotica and Necron and Eldar Codexes.


So? Are you implying that recycled fluff is not legitimate fluff?

No, I'm not implying that at all, but there's far more that outweighs the one quote from Specialist Games and some from 2nd Edition, which have since been contradicted in the 3rd Edition.


Can you even comprehend how hard it is going to be for GW to write fluff and unit descriptions for the new codex with that in mind?

Yes, mainly because I help them do it.


So you consider the most recent quote on the Outcasts to beÖ Outdated? Could it be that it just did not coincide with your idea of Outcasts, making it, by default, outdated in you opinion?

Clearly they're not the most recent quotes are they? ;)


Translation: I make my stuff up and base it on how I want the Eldar to be, and he uses the actual background as a basis to show how Eldar really are. If your name is Phil Kelly you have a point, if not, wellÖ

You'll have to understand that some of us who've hung around in this forum for some time have become far less concerned with the concrete facts that occur from day to day (which come in handy sometimes) and more concerned with theory based on implications both old and new?

What got me relatively "famous" around here was the correlation of the original Eldar Mythic cycles with the newly released ones regarding the C'tan. Was it 100% canon? No, but did it make sense of a brutally inconsistent set of half-written stories GW's released over the course of a decade? Yes it did.


Donít you think it is weird that, in a thread discussing fluff, Although is the only one to actually quote the fluff?

I find it weird that you're first post is hopping in and defending him though... And see my above points about this forum and quoting canon.


The whole matter remains what it has been from the start: Entirely everyone's own opinion of how they want to see it.

Yep, but that doesn't mean those who disagree and agree can't have a discussion refining their ideas, which is what I was going for. :)

Bea IC
31-08-2005, 15:17
[QUOTE=Sephiroth]What's to debate? There is Background that says it is a Path, and background that say it isn't. As I posted already, GW shooting themselves in the foot. Again. [QUOTE]

The question is not if it is a Path or not, rather, is it an Eldar Path that is part of the Path system. Are Rangers Aspect Warriors and should they have exarchs, that sort of thing. That it is called a "Path" is agreed upon in this tread, i think.

Sephiroth
31-08-2005, 15:22
Being part of the Path doesn't make you an Aspect Warrior. I'm sure their are roles within Eldar society such as Paths of the gardener and teacher, that doesn't mean I expect to see them on the battlefield! :D

Inquisitor Engel
31-08-2005, 15:30
Being part of the Path doesn't make you an Aspect Warrior. I'm sure their are roles within Eldar society such as Paths of the gardener and teacher, that doesn't mean I expect to see them on the battlefield! :D

Ah but they do, as Guardians. ;)

Bea IC
31-08-2005, 15:32
"Clearly they're not the most recent quotes are they?"

No, I'm not implying that at all, but there's far more that outweighs the one quote from Specialist Games and some from 2nd Edition, which have since been contradicted in the 3rd Edition."

Funny thing you did not mention any of this before in the tread... Itís almost as if you did not know it existed =)

About me defending Altough, well, up until Messengers post with the quotes, the tread was worthless, know it is interesting. That was my agenda, is it good enough? I think so.

Iím just happy you did not get emotional over my reply. Thanks.

Sephiroth
31-08-2005, 15:35
Ah but they do, as Guardians. ;)

True, assuming they'd had previous combat experiance, spent time as an Aspect Warrior, for example, before taking a role as a poet, teacher, gardener, etc.

My point was, you won't find a Gardener Exarch, for the same reason you won't get a Ranger Exarch. An Aspect Warrior was one of the most intense Paths and Eldar can tread, and thus they can be trapped upon it.

I don't see the Path of the Outcast having the same kind of intensity.

Inquisitor Engel
31-08-2005, 15:36
Funny thing you did not mention any of this before in the tread... Itís almost as if you did not know it existed =)

I knew it existed, I just didn't know WHERE. Being at College leads to the unfortunate circumstance of having to leave most of my GW books at home. :(

Although
31-08-2005, 16:38
are you sure that you cannot find 'fluff' that contradicts your stance. One could look at the 'fluff' on the Exodites for an alterantive approach and, further, the dubious quality of the 'source' of Czevak on Alatoic and... well, other stuff.


Yes, there is nothing contradiction it at all.

Most Exodites and Harlequins are not Outcasts as you have to leave the Eldar path to become an Outcast (and most Exodites and Harlequins never were on it in the first place).




Oh yes, and you might want to consider that you've "won".


That we are even having this argument means that everyone has lost.



Oh dear... I wrote a rather large reply and decided that it was far too childish. I'm afraid that I cannot respond in depth to the above because, well, I found it quite rude. Bordering on the flaming and, well, it's probably best not to get too involved in that.


Sorry about that, I got very frustrated with the lack of actual support your post contained, especially considering the response I gave to Khaine's Messenger advising him to support his assertions (which he later did to my satisfaction).



Oh, I've read 2E Eldar. It sucks. But then again it is a wargame codex!


Ok, but it is still the ultimate source of Eldar background information (alongside WD127).


Is it such a leap of logic to figure that if outcasts form ship crews and operate as scouts either alone or as a small group, that it would imply that there are various types, ASPECTS if you will, of the Path of the Outcast?

Well, when you use a capital letter in describing an "Aspect" you imply it being part of the Eldar path. If you also give Orks the chance to have "Aspects" of being an Ork then you were using the term without a leap of faith; and separating that aspect concept from the Eldar path system, as it should be treated.




Here's an example - Yriel. Forced to leave the Craftworld, he became the Prince of the Pirate Fleets of Iyanden. (Rather than generic 'Pirate Fleets', and yes, I am aware that many of his ships followed him, but he joined with the Pirate Fleet of Iyanden which was already formed.


1. People that leave the Path (Outcasts) can be how loyal they want. That they have to hate everything about the Craftworld they left is a strawman-argument which is not supported by anything.

2. He controlled the Fleets of Lyanden, not the Pirate Fleets of Lyanden. He created his own group of riders when they all left the path.




Were it simply "leaving the Path system" rather than "Leaving the Craftworld" there would not be the preordained options for those Eldar to choose. The fact that so many fall into one of these two categories, either by choice or force implies that there's structure.


The reason why most fall into either Pirates or Rangers is because those are quite broad definitions of Eldar; both pirates and rangers can choose to do whatever they want. Chaos Eldar are also Outcasts; you wouldn't call them followers of the Eldar path would you?



Eldar Mother 2: "He ran away, he hates all of us, he doesn't love the Craftworld, he's left us! *breaks into tears, feeding She Who Thirsts a little bit more...*"


How much the Outcasts love their Craftworld has nothing at all to do with how much they love the path system. They can love it and its people even more then Eldar on the path.



nothing Although says is going to change my opinion on the subject. ;)


It doesn't bother me, as I know that the studio understands to continue and support (they will probably even spell it out clearly in the new Codex) what they have written (and what they have not written).



There isn't any need to throw quotes around as if that proves anything.


Sadly, there is nothing else which could prove this issue.



GW are nothing if not contradictory, and fluff does change or is sometimes misunderstood.

Sure, but no quote has yet to contradict (only heavily support) the Outcasts to all having left the Eldar path.



If you want to "talk canon," then have at it--
1) "These solitary beings have taken the Path of the Outcast, one of the many and diverse Paths that the Eldar follow to keep them from the predations of Slaanesh."


Let my guess; this must have come from the Spanish site =) hehe. (UPDATE; hmmm, Phil Kelly wrote it, but later proclaims it to not be a conventional path. This is a very good qoute which one could build an argument from; thanks KM!)




"The Path of the Outcast is possibly the least inflexible of the Eldar lifestyles; many Eldar assume it purely because they are tired of the strictly enforced traditions of their Craftworld."


It is a lifestyle but it is not an Eldar path; all Eldar paths are lifestyles, but not all lifestyles are Eldar paths. That quote does not contradict them leaving the path.



3) "Unshielded by the rigid constraints of a conventional Eldar path, they are dangerously vulnerable to the malign influence of Chaos."


Yes, I've already posted something similar:

"Outcasts must bear the terrible burden of the heightened Eldar consciousness without the protection of the Eldar path. Daemons or other warp entities can home in to the mind of an Outcast..."

This is why they are not allowed to stay on any Craftworld but for short periods of time.



What's to debate? There is Background that says it is a Path, and background that say it isn't.


There is only fluff which calls it a path, there is nothing on it being an Eldar path.

The path of Damnation is not an Eldar path but it is still called a path.


Anyone worth their salt in this forum can in fact disprove the theory based upon simple logic and a couple of supporting facts from the Liber Chaotica and Necron and Eldar Codexes.


If that's the case I'm very perplexed as to why no one has even presented an argument. Please state what these facts are.



which have since been contradicted in the 3rd Edition.


Even the 3rd edition Codex: Eldar state that they leave the Eldar path; that passage (in the 3rd ed codex) would be worthless if it was a path (this is why I know that Gav Thorpe have no delusions as to what Outcasts are).



Clearly they're not the most recent quotes are they? ;)


It is from the new Biel-tan armylist (containing the Autarch) for Epic (2005), it should be very fresh indeed.

I have the Necron Codex, so I can look up any alleged contradictions from there.

Inquisitor Engel
31-08-2005, 18:43
That we are even having this argument means that everyone has lost.

Since you seem intent to simply cause trouble and disagree with anything we say, based upon an impossiblely immovable faith in written background (And even the studio doesn't go that far), this thread is going to devolve into a simple shouting match.

Thread closed.

If you want to discuss the Outsider VS Cergorach, open another thread for it.