PDA

View Full Version : Should Codex:Tau field Gue'las?



Charistoph
09-11-2011, 21:11
There is a heated discussuin going on in another section of the boards here about wether Humans who have been incorprated into the Tau Greater Good should be be fielded as their unique unit in the next Tau codex.

From a fluff standpoint, they exist and are part of the defensive force of Tau-held Human worlds. There have been Chapter Approved articles written in White Dwarf for them.

From a gameplay perspective, there seems to be little need for them, as whatever they can do, Kroot or Fire Warriors already do better.

So what do you say?

ehlijen
09-11-2011, 21:14
If there is already a discussion on the matter, why open a second one?

Charistoph
09-11-2011, 21:16
It's not the post or the place for that discussion...

loveless
09-11-2011, 21:18
They don't need their own dedicated entry. Convert them if you want them.

Voss
09-11-2011, 21:18
No.

40k army lists are about fielding typical armies from a given faction, one that represent the major themes and nature of a given army. They don't (and don't need to) explore every little niche and corner case in a universe of billions of battles.

If someone wants to convert them and field them, that is perfectly acceptable. If they want special rules for them for outside the box games, thats fine too. But DYI is the place for that sort of thing, not intruding on the major themes (such as the upstart alien empire versus the static human Imperium) and balance of a codex.


If there is already a discussion on the matter, why open a second one?

Because that is happening in the rumour thread, which isn't really appropriate. A general discussion thread is much more appropriate for a discussion of personal preference on what 'should' or 'should not' be in a codex.

ehlijen
09-11-2011, 21:24
Fair enough then.

That said then, I say no. The Tau are supposed to be the upcoming alien threat, not the threat of human sedition. Leave the human traitors to the chaos factions and keep the Tau as they were created, as an alliance of nasty aliens, the embodiment of the Xenos threat to the Imperuim.

TheMav80
09-11-2011, 21:26
No need for them at all. If you want some you can just convert them up. Tau stats are not that far removed from Human stats.

From a rules/gameplay perspective I feel it would be too difficult to balance three very similar units Tau/Human/Kroot as three different unit entries. There would be too much overlap and the points system doesn't really allow for such minor variations.

Lord Damocles
09-11-2011, 21:26
No.

Codex: Tau [Empire] gives the opportunity for alied alien races. Cool Xenos stuff. So why add a modified Guard squad?

If people desperately want Gue'vesa, Imperial Armour 3 has rules for them.

grownassman
09-11-2011, 21:35
If people want to field Gue'la than take allied imperial guardsmen in apoc games or convert firewarriors. no need to waste a new codex slot on them

blackcherry
09-11-2011, 21:44
As much as I would like it...no. They don't have a place in the codex that couldn't be filled by another cooler unit. The chance to have a minor race in 40k with models and representation- or alternative humans that will really just be more IG- more xenos win out as it fits the Tau theme a bit more and justifys filling a requirement in the codex for heavy infantry killers in close combat/ at range.

Deadnight
09-11-2011, 21:47
you know my thoughts on this.

I like the theme of a tau army, with a diverse feeling of mercenaries. However, too many mercenaries diluted the feel from codex:tau empire to codex:assortment of random dudes under a tau flag. therefore, im against the idea of too many mercenaries to begin with.

but specifically to gue'vesa, i dont think there is any place for them in a tau codex. what can they do? in game terms, specifically. there is no new niche for them to fill. if you want shooty, go with fire warriors, if you want special/heavy weapons, go with suits, if you want numbers/cc ability, go with kroot (who also have excellent shooty). i cannot see a viable niche in a codex for the gue'vesa.

Now, also there has been 1 chapter approved article about them (index astartes iirc was a collection of Space Marine lore) where you had guard stats, a limited amount of doods could take pulse rifles, and a rule where imperials hit them on 3s. that was 2 editions ago, and im sorry, but counting that as a reason for them existing is like using the squat codex to justify their current place in 40k. One limited CA article at a time when every army had little white dwarf snippets with unique variant rules etc. thats all pretty much been done away with.

as you yourself say, there is little need for them. fluffwise, yeah, they exist, and im sure there are human colonies, but for the most part, i can see them relegated to backwater securitydetails on human worlds. the epic list also made a mention of them not being used in any decisive roles, but that they could be a nice addition. that sums them up as a very "meh" unit - even the tau arent sure what to do with them!

give them a viable, unique niche, and you might have something. but until then, really, there is no point.

Charistoph
09-11-2011, 21:50
Now, also there has been 1 chapter approved article about them (index astartes iirc was a collection of Space Marine lore) where you had guard stats, a limited amount of doods could take pulse rifles, and a rule where imperials hit them on 3s.

Ah, thank you, it was before my time in the game, so I couldn't remember the name of the articles.

My own thoughts are: If it doesn't take up the slot of another race or another unit, they sure, why not? Otherwise, let the diversity commence, excluding the racist humans.

ForgottenLore
09-11-2011, 21:50
The Tau are supposed to be the upcoming alien threat,
but a major factor of their threat is the subversive nature of the Tau.

The main reason there are so many people clamoring for the inclusion of Gue'Vesa is because they were squatted. It is an element GW created and then dropped and people don't like that.

I can understand some of the objections to the idea, but I am honestly shocked at the number of people who don't think they should be included because there is no role for them in the codex. Are you really incapable of imagining a codex with more than 2 troops choices? To hear some of you people talk it sounds like your saying that no army needs more than 6 units, one for each "role". No one is talking about reprinting the existing codex but swapping out 2 pages of existing stuff with an entry for Gue'Vesa (although I would be happy to give up all the pages devoted to Aun'Va). We are talking about a completely new book, and judging from the last few codexes it will be a significant redesign. Are you honestly incapable of imagining a Tau codex with more units than we have now?


Now, also there has been 1 chapter approved article about them (index astartes iirc was a collection of Space Marine lore) where you had guard stats, a limited amount of doods could take pulse rifles, and a rule where imperials hit them on 3s. that was 2 editions ago, and im sorry, but counting that as a reason for them existing is like using the squat codex to justify their current place in 40k. One limited CA article at a time when every army had little white dwarf snippets with unique variant rules etc. thats all pretty much been done away with.

There is an old maxim in writing "Don't tell your audience something, SHOW it to them." in a wargame like 40K, you show people something by including it int he rules. The inclusion of Gue'Vesa would be an excellent opportunity to show that the Tau are not just a military threat but a social and cultural one. It could also be used to demonstrate how the Tau treat assimilated human colonies, based on the rules chosen.

Some of the very responses in this thread (or was it in the original?) show that lots of people don't even realize that assimilated humans make up a noticeable portion of the Tau auxiliaries. Including the unit fixes that.

Personally, I don't care much. Their inclusion would be a cool, flavorful addition but would make it harder to justify using the IG codex to represent an all auxiliary Tau army which is something I am working on at the moment.

edit:

Now, also there has been 1 chapter approved article about them

that was 2 editions ago, and im sorry, but counting that as a reason for them existing is like using the squat codex to justify their current place in 40k. One limited CA article at a time when every army had little white dwarf snippets with unique variant rules etc. thats all pretty much been done away with.
Yet that was enough for Harlequins to be put into the Eldar codex (and now the DE codex). They had a Chapter Approved article from even earlier. their popularity and pre-existence in the fluff was enough to justify including them. What role do they serve? The Eldar army already had multiple close combat specialists.

Bunnahabhain
09-11-2011, 22:42
Harlequins were in the 2nd ed Eldar book, and existed with a very strong connection to the Eldar back in RT era. Scarcely one little chapter approved article.

Voss
09-11-2011, 22:46
Indeed. The Harlequin army list predated any other sort of eldar army list (back during Rogue Trader in '89) and existed before the Aspect Warriors were even conceived.

Kakapo42
09-11-2011, 22:48
I rekon there should be a third option on this pole.

I don't mind having Gue'vessas as an option to field, I simply feel that fleshing out the Tau more would be a better use of the space in the codex.

Therefore I'm in support of the idea for a WD entry. It means that Gue'vessa are an option, and doesn't use up codex space, making it an effective compromise between the two parties.

That way, there's still space in the Tau codex for the Tau, and we get our Gue'vessa (preferably with the option to be led by a Tau Shas'ui advisor!:D). A win-win situation.

witchunter180
10-11-2011, 00:19
I would like to see them as a "play them if you've got them" unit. As I'm sure they wouldn't be as well equiped as fire warriors, they could also, maybe, be used as skaven slaves are- a parallel unit that just looks different.

Charistoph
10-11-2011, 00:40
Saying something can happen because it happened in 2nd Edition, but others can't because it doesn't date back to an earlier codex is poor sport for an army that only appeared late 3rd Edition and can only grow from there.

Korraz
10-11-2011, 00:53
Anybody claiming that you could use Fire Warrior Counts As is plain wrong.
FW need an overhaul to remove them farther from your regular Guardsman anyway. They do the fluff no justice. And I don't see why there shouldn't be space for cannon fodder, between the Scouts, the Elites, and the Walking Fridges.

AlphariusOmegon20
10-11-2011, 01:03
I can see a place for Gue'vesa in the Tau book, with Tau weapons instead of "flashlights". I'd make them elites though to keep the cheese factor down though, to represent their rare nature.

Okuto
10-11-2011, 02:27
If Gue'la'vesa don't take away from development of other xenos I could care less......

I've already written them off for our next dex....it'd be a nice luxury if they showed up...

But I kinda think they're redundant.....I could easily count my Gue'la'vesa as firewarriors...

And mind you this is coming from the guy who has a Gue'la'vesa as his avatar!

witchunter180
10-11-2011, 02:37
I've already written them off for our next dex....it'd be a nice luxury if they showed up...

Thats kinda what I meant. I wasn't suggesting they count as fire warriors. That would be heresy, would it not? :evilgrin:

ForgottenLore
10-11-2011, 03:09
FW need an overhaul to remove them farther from your regular Guardsman anyway. They do the fluff no justice. And I don't see why there shouldn't be space for cannon fodder, between the Scouts, the Elites, and the Walking Fridges.
Exactly. It isn't that Gue'Vesa would be too close to fire Warriors, it is that Fire Warriors are too similar to guardsmen.


Harlequins were in the 2nd ed Eldar book, and existed with a very strong connection to the Eldar back in RT era. Scarcely one little chapter approved article.
But they were a supported element, then their rules got dropped from official support and they only existed in the fluff and then they were put back into the army list and no one is complaining that the Harlies are redundant, or fill no role in the army list.

ehlijen
10-11-2011, 07:16
but a major factor of their threat is the subversive nature of the Tau.




I disagree. The subversive threat is, to me, meant to be chaos in the 40k universe. The Tau are clearly meant to be an outside threat, a military threat.

Sure, they subvert civilians, but in 40k games there are no civilians. It as game about military conflict. We don't see chapter serfs in space marine armies, or fuel trucks in IG armies, yet I'd expect those to exist in the background.

If they become yet another 'seduce humans and use them as cannon fodder against humans' faction, they'll lose their unique status and be just jammed in with all the other 'evil cult' armies.

Aliarzathanil
10-11-2011, 07:32
^That.

We need options to run chaos traitors (which would be extremely common) before a non-xenos xenos unit.

Sircyn
10-11-2011, 10:04
Just convert the cool models and use them as an appropriate existing unit entry. I apply that simple philosophy to all of my armies and you can cram a load of character into a force without having to mess with the rules.

Korraz
10-11-2011, 11:23
For the Greater Good's sake, there are no appropriate rules to do that. Looking at the current trend to slap more rules on everything, the FW will fit even less than they do right now.

ForgottenLore
10-11-2011, 15:40
I have also been wanting to point out that it is likely the Tau will get around 10 new units (not counting special characters) in the codex this time around. The current trend has been to seriously up the size of the army lists and Tau have always had one of the smaller ones (only Necrons had fewer units than us, and now they just got around 15 new ones).

So, if all the "roles" are already taken, are all those new units going to be redundant?