Warhammer 40K: Harlequins Might Break Codex Aeldari

Are Harlequins too much of a good thing for the new Codex Aeldari?

The Eldar have a new Codex coming out. It’s a real doozy, and stacks up as one of the largest books yet.  This book delivers on the promise of a more combined Aeldari Codex, something I said we needed quite some time ago. Everything but the Drukhari are in this book. A combined book offers a lot of great bonuses, but also maybe a hidden downside.

The Book Makes Harlequins Easy To Use

The new book allows for very easy integration of Harlequins in your other Aledari armies. Not just Craftworlds, but also Dark Eldar can take them with ease. Thanks to travelling players you main army won’t lose any rules when adding them into your army. There are some restrictions of course, its not just a free-for-all. You can only take one patrol detachment and they gotta pay the CP cost of the detachment, but its an easy way to slot them in to the army.

The Book Wants To Make Aspect Warriors Better

The new codex has done a lot of work to try to make Aspect Warriors a key… well aspect of the army. They got some cool ideas here. All the aspects get a invulnerable save. Many of them got buffed to be better. Phonex Lords got a big buff, and give out nice buffs. Exarchs have cool powers again (in the core book) from Psychic Awakening. This is all pretty cool. Of course this does come with a price tag. The Aspects aren’t cheap. At the end of the day these are some expensive 1 wound T 3 models, but they are better. So you would hope they get used.

Why Take Aspects When You Have Harlequins?

This brings me to my worry with Harlequins in the book. Why would you take Aspect Warriors, at least combat ones, when you can take Harlequins? While close combat Aspect Warriors got better, overall Harlequins are still better in combat. For the same or even cheaper points Harlequins tend to out preform units like Striking Scorpions or Howling Banshees. Compared to these units, Harlequins are faster, have a better invulnerable save, can take anti-tank weapons and have D2 close combat weapons.

To make matters worse they are troops and get obsec for free. While Scorpions and Banshees do somethings a Harlequin can’t, overall as an assault units the killer-clowns are better. So we have to ask ourselves, given the ease of taking them, why would you not use Harlequins? For the same or less points you can get a straight up better unit. It’s a unit that wont’ take away from your rules. Indeed they get their own set of pretty great buffs. With their minus to be hit and better invulnerable saves they even tend to be more durable than the Aspect Warriors. It seems a bit of an issue.

A  Worrying  Sign

It’s going to be a real shame if after all the work to improve them Aspect Warriors, or at least close combat ones, get sidelined in this book. The issue is that I think they are just good enough.  Some people will still take melee Aspect Warriors who aren’t particularly bad. But Harlequins are a lot better and I think the competitive gang will gravitate towards them. A good book should have internal balance and I hate to see any really cool units like Aspects sidelined. Hopefully something can be done to fix it soon.

Let us know if you think Harlequins unbalance the book, down in the comments! 

Author: Abe Apfel

Abe is that rare thing, an Austin local born and raised here. Though he keeps on moving around, DC, Japan, ETC., he always seems to find his way back eventually. Abe has decades of experience with a wide range of tabletop and RPG games, from historicals, to Star Wars to D&D and 40K. He has been contributing to BOLS since almost the start, back when he worked at and then owned a local gaming store. He used to be big into the competitive Warhammer tournament scene but age has mellowed him and he now appreciates a good casual match. He currently covers 40K tactics and lore, as well as all things Star Wars, with occasional dabbling in other topics. Abe remains in mourning over the loss of WFB to this day.