Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The release of the new GK codex is giving me a bit of trouble with the creation of my first army. I had wanted to make a WH army that used the GK as allies. after reading the new codex I went to both the game stores I usually observe 40k games at and got quite a few different answers I just want to know which is correct.

1. You cannot use the GK as allies as it is no longer in their codex.
2. You can use them as allies because they are still in the WH codex.
3. Witch hunters are no longer usable as the new GK codex replaces it.
4. You may only use the old GK codex as allies instead of the newer ones.
5. You never could use GK as allies since the allies list mentions them as allowed but never lists what squads could be used.

Help a new player out?

1 - Allies are out in the new GK codex

2 - Codex: Grey Knights do not appear in the Witch Hunter codex, Codex: Daemonhunters does appear but that codex does not appear to have been updated.

3 - Witch Hunters are a different codex that Codex: Daemonhunters (nominally the book replaced by Codex: Grey Knights) and are therefore still usable.

4 - This one is interesting. I supposed you are referring to Codex: Daemonhunters and it depends on who you are playing. I think most tournaments would frown on this/disallow it but that is up tot he TO.

5 - There are explicit rules for bringing an allied Daemonhunter or Witch Hunter detachmentwith another codex. Therefore, you could bring them in - the GW FAQ even addresses issues of the force org for Assassins, Daemonhosts and Orbital Strikes.

Calyposo; that wasn't a list of questions, it was a list of options.

The answer is #4(although replace "GK Codex" with "Daemonhunters Codex"). Although you would not likely be able to play that list in a tourney as they will be using the new GK Codex and not using Daemonhunters at all.

I figured it would be useful to explain why each one was correct/incorrect, especially since 'options'2 and 3 deal with the interactions with the WH codex and the others deal directly with the new/old Grey Knight Codex

Please correct me if any of my explanations were inaccurate.

My take is that you can use WH as allies in a GK force, as is is covered under the "SM variant" in who is allowed to take WH allies.

But GKs can no longer be taken as allies.

Here are your options once the GK codex hit shelves:

Standalone GK force
Standalone WH force
GK force with WH allies (assuming you have the paper WH codex)

Things that are not legal:
WH force with GK allies
WH force with DH allies
DH force


Also, keep in mind that rumors are circulating that WH is due to be updated soon. Probably within a year. At that point, everyone pretty much agrees that allies will be totally gone from 40k.

Came to put in my $0.02, but Grakmar got it first!

Grakmar wrote:
Things that are not legal:
WH force with GK allies
WH force with DH allies
DH force

Why would a WH force with DH allies be disallowed?

I own both the paper WH and the paper DH Codices and the WH dex absolutely allows DH allies and I haven't heard that either the WH or the DH dexes have been invalidated yet.

TOs are likely to remove DH from the list of allowed codexes come May, is why

Between friends, anything goes as longas you agree.

Because the DH codex was replaced by Codex: Grey Knights?

Name a unit in CH that doesn't exist in C:GK?

ISTs

ISTS = Henchmen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And don't try the 'Different BS' tactic, because under those kind of rules you could say 'GK'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although they should have made a 6 point upgrade or 10 pt Warrior that had BS4.

Going by the book.... Grey knights are NOT daemon hunters, per se. They're an entirely different codex (in name).

Common sense says "No, GK replace DH", but GW has said nothing of the sort. We can assume that until GW makes some sort of mention of it, DH are still a usable codex, therefore, you can use them as allies

I do not know what the codex says yet, but their website gives a pretty good hint.

Samus_aran115 wrote:Going by the book.... Grey knights are NOT daemon hunters, per se. They're an entirely different codex (in name).

Common sense says "No, GK replace DH", but GW has said nothing of the sort. We can assume that until GW makes some sort of mention of it, DH are still a usable codex, therefore, you can use them as allies

Umm, yeah. Good luck with that. Let me know how that works out.

I'm not saying I'd even believe it if someone told me... But it makes sense. Kind of

pretre wrote:ISTS = Henchmen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And don't try the 'Different BS' tactic, because under those kind of rules you could say 'GK'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although they should have made a 6 point upgrade or 10 pt Warrior that had BS4.

ISTs are not henchmen because the GK Henchmen(in entirety plus several options) are the same henchmen that C: DH had.

ISTs do not exist in the new Codex, Inquisitor lord Does not exist in the New Codex(or regular inquisitor depending on how you look at it), Daemon hosts and Deathcult assaissins got rolled into the henchmen; their individual unit entries as stand-alones no longer exist, the orbital Stike as a FOC selection no longer exists(it is now a Wargear-weapon option).

Right, so basically they have everything from the old codex either as wargear or as part of henchmen. So what's missing?

And who wants to waste a FOC slot on an orbital? Seriously?

I'll give you Inq Lord though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait, I take back giving you Inq Lord. The new ones are cheaper and have more options. There's no junior inquisitor anymore, but the normal Inq are the price of the old Elite version with the stats of the Lord.

So I reiterate, everything was rolled into the new book except allies.

the DH codex is kaput, gone, destroyed, vanished, vaporized...


the WH codex still exists in its entirety.

now, it cannot use the new Gks as allies as Codex: GKs is not listed as an option for allies.


the correct answer from your list of options is #1

WH can be allies in a GH list. WH codex says all space marine variants can use them.

Pretre - ISts /= Henchmen, not in the slightest.

Lord Inq's have lost their ability to say "I pass!" to tests, so GK inq's arent the same

Samus - GW never, themselves "invalidate" a codex. If you want, and find a willing opponent, you could use your codex craftworld eldar with no issues.

What DOES matter is the de facto standard, which is what tournaments allow. And all tournaments i know of, including every single one our club runs, will not be allowing DH once the one month moratorium on GK is past. And once tournaments stop allowing a codex to be used, the number of people using said codex will drop dramatically.

So applying your 'filter':

So ISTS/= henchman because they aren't BS4? And Inquisitors aren't Inq Lords because they can't choose to pass/fail?

So GK's are not GK's because they don't have WS5 and Fearless?

Grey Hunters and GKs aren't grey hunters and GKs because they don't have true grit?

Assassins aren't assassins because they have better WS/BS now?

No, they are the same things with modified statlines/rules from one edition to the next.

"Modified statline" /= "complete removal as a separate unit, change of profile AND wargear (targetters ftw!)"

Apples to oranges, sorry

Dude, serious?

Targeters aren't in any 5th codex that I remember.

So again, change of profile and wargear is the same thing that went on for Grey Knights, Grey Hunters, BA, Imp Guard, Tyranids, etc.

Every codex got changes in profile and wargear with their new editions. Some of them got removal of some units. (Is the SW codex not valid because it doesn't have the Leman Russ variant anymore? Is the guard codex not valid because Solar Macharius isn't in it anymore?)

Do you still play the old versions of those as well?

Just stating that the GK codex and the DH codex are not the successors to each other, and refuting your assertion that it automatically "invalidates" the DH codex

What invalidates the codex is the fact tournaments will drop it. The same way that noone plays CW Eldar.

Sure, GW won't come out and say that it is invalidated until they make a tournament codex list, but I still don't get how you can say that it isn't the succesor to the DH codex since it is almost identical in army type (GK and Malleus Inquisitors with Xenos and Hereticus added in the new edition).

But, whatever.

DH is Inquisitors with GK
GK is GK with Inquisitors.

Entirely different focus.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Pretre - ISts /= Henchmen, not in the slightest.

Lord Inq's have lost their ability to say "I pass!" to tests, so GK inq's arent the same

Samus - GW never, themselves "invalidate" a codex. If you want, and find a willing opponent, you could use your codex craftworld eldar with no issues.

What DOES matter is the de facto standard, which is what tournaments allow. And all tournaments i know of, including every single one our club runs, will not be allowing DH once the one month moratorium on GK is past. And once tournaments stop allowing a codex to be used, the number of people using said codex will drop dramatically.

I still manage to find players that let me use my EOT codex. You're right. They never themselves invalidate anything. If you want to play 3rd edition, that's fine, just find a player

It's completely up to your group/ GW store/ FLGS/ Player. Personally, If someone wanted to use their old, underpowered codex, I'd have no problem with it. It's not like it's somehow more broken than the current one

nosferatu1001 wrote:DH is Inquisitors with GK
GK is GK with Inquisitors.

Entirely different focus.

Riiight. So different that they have nothing in common and are obviously different codexes that don't replace each other at all.

Gotcha.

What the hell is wrong with this thread?

Everyone is in agreement, but we're still able to get a heated argument going.


Can we all agree to the following:

1) GK and DH codexes are very similar, GK heavily draws on DH, but makes a few changes

2) The release of GK makes DH no longer the most recent

3) Most tournaments will not allow DH, but friendly games are free to do whatever they want (as always)