I hope an effective psycher doesnt end up as an elite lol, having the limitations of the elite class for the "most psychic faction" in 40k seems wrong IMO as far as I know yeah, warlock is our "support" class (support classes in EC being something I'm not completely sold on)
Warlocks are not "just" support, its an all-a-round class whats include destructive stuff and buffs, like some mixture of mage/priest in some fantasy game, as for Farseer is dedicated support? hell no, they are the "exarch" of warlocks, they do as warlocks do, just on a whole different level.
Thats not true my friend. Farseer's are not as dedicated to the path of war nor as focused for it as the Warlock. The Farseer is the leader in their society and the Warlock is it's Generals.
No that's Autarchs isn't it. Farseers are pretty much Exarchs seeing as Warlocks are normal Seers who find offensive powers easier because they used to be on the Path of the Warrior. Farseers are Seers trapped on the Path of the Seer.
Autarchs have been on multiple warrior paths eventually choosing the leadership path to combine them all except the major Psyker paths. Their main path becomes leadership, and they are very marshal leaders, that usually lead from the rear overseeing all tactics of the warhost. Farseer's usually have never been on any war path (aka aspect warrior) as the path of the seer encompasses so much. Their path covers many area's but it's focus is a visionary and leader. They can learn war Psyker powers but they are not as masters of it like the Warlock. Warlocks are actually very similar to Autarchs in lore, but they are your Psyker equivalent with a different leadership style. They are on the path of the Seer but have also learned at least one warrior path or more. It is also said they have been marked by Khaine, and possess a destructive aura that crackles in battle, and most importantly it's said very few can match the arcane might of an Eldar Warlock. In regards to offensive war powers, Farseer's would pale compared to them. A Warlocks farseeing ability would probably focus on tactics of the battlefield. Warlocks are visionaries of the Military that usually lead from the front of the warhost. So in your view, it is actualy the Warlock that is the equivalent of Psyker Exarch. Farseer's are the ones that shape everything else about Eldar society and are their wisest among them.
Well no because my view of being an exarch equivelant is that the most important part of it is that the Eldar can't leave the Path so Farseers would the Exarch still Although I see your point.
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Farseer http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Farseer You can read any of this, and you can see Farseers are formerly warlocks who is lost in the path of the seer/witch
Right, so we are technically both right. Both have had various descriptions over the codex's from being equal in position to Warlock being below Farseer. The current codex does not mention anything about the Farseer being formerly a Warlock, just fully stuck on the path of the Seer like an Exarch. (which your conclusion was right about). As well though it does mention they perform combat via psyker powers with ease. Though I much prefer the Lexicanum article of them being Warlocks first, which really adds oompf to them. But unfortunately they don't represent that at all in the stat line Actually it is the Warlock entry that lists them as being 'seers' but more focus on war because they were aspect warriors as well which makes war psyker powers come very naturally. Though the codex's have never given them justice in mechanics like the Autarch. Both should really be able to take their Aspects gear and function with them in TT. That my friend would be soo badass!
The latest codex says that farseers are seers trapped in the path, they don't mention warlocks, just seers.
Very true. That said, the only Farseers you'd ever see on the battlefield would be ones with appropriate training (e.g. former warlocks).
