Quote: (Chroma @ 04 Jan. 2009, 19:12 )
I do have a "serious" question for you though: Why do you feel that Autarch should be mandatory?  Surely he/she wouldn't be at *every* battle.
That is the one aspect to this army list that I admit to taking some personal liberty with.
Back in the day I always wanted a Guardian Commander to emerge, but GW never developed one. It was all about Farseers and Exarchs.
If memory serves I believe the Autarch was first designed for Epic. Later on the Autarch fluff has come into its own. Even Farseers defer to Autarchs on matters of military strategy.
So the idea of fielding an Epic sized Eldar force based around Guardians with only Farseers or Exarchs to lead them didn't sit very well with me. Surely the Eldar wouldn't invest such a large portion of its citizens to the field without having the benifit of the best individuals the Craftworld had to offer leading them?
That's why I thought that a mandatory Autarch would be fitting.
Of course like I said, this is just
my interpretation and nothing that I've read in Eldar background suggests that this is so. I just thought it was cool and would be one more small thing to help differentiate between it and another Craftworld army.
Course if people have strong opinions on this I'd be happy to reconsider.
Edit: Note I am following the fluff laid out in the Codex Eldar 4th edition book instead of the Swordwind book.
In the Swordwind book it lists an Autarch as an Exarch taking up the mantel of Autarchy. In the Codex Eldar book it describes him as someone who has tread the path of the warrior, but never succumb to it. Instead he gets lost on the Path of Command, taking a "larger" view of the battle in a way that an Exarch, intent on only bloodshed, cannot.