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.

Hey dakka I'm looking at adding a second IK to my White Scars army and am wondering people's thoughts about what one I should get. I already have an errant and am debating getting a second one or a FW knight I'm considering both the look and the rules for them. Thoughts?

The Atrapos is a nice model with good rules. Personally I like the Lancer as well, its good if you face a other SHs otherwise its just a nice model

Aptrapos murders other SH. Heck, you can score a kill on a n enemy knight with half decent luck without charging.

If I did go with a GW one would I be able to take two without being unbound?

It's the same regardless of FW or GW. An oathsworn detachment is one to three knights.

Once you've got three then you've got a bunch more options.

Do note however that the FW knights typically have a restriction saying that you can not have more of them than regular GW knights, so if you want 2 Atrophos you also need 2 Wardens/Paladins/etc. in any combination.

Of course, the FW Knights also have the ability (last I checked, anyway) to be taken as LoW for Space Marines without requiring an IK detachment of some kind (which doesn't not have the restriction of being unable to have more of them as GW knights)

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Do note however that the FW knights typically have a restriction saying that you can not have more of them than regular GW knights, so if you want 2 Atrophos you also need 2 Wardens/Paladins/etc. in any combination.

Of course, the FW Knights also have the ability (last I checked, anyway) to be taken as LoW for Space Marines without requiring an IK detachment of some kind (which doesn't not have the restriction of being unable to have more of them as GW knights)

It's not more GW knights than FW, it's for each specific FW Knight you need to have a different Knight. In your example, if you take two Atrapos, you need to take two more non-Atrapos Knights be they FW or GW due to this restriction. But of course, you can take a single FW Knight as a LoW in any IoM army, unlike GW Knights.

SJ

As with everything. The forgeworld option is typically better.

BDal wrote:
Hey dakka I'm looking at adding a second IK to my White Scars army and am wondering people's thoughts about what one I should get. I already have an errant and am debating getting a second one or a FW knight I'm considering both the look and the rules for them. Thoughts?

I've got 5 Knights, three of the FW Knights. The GW Knights are generalists and the FW Knights are specialists.

The Castigator is the horde killer. He can kill 10-20 models a turn in combat. He's not great against GMC and he is limited to only one gun. That gun is pretty decent at taking down flyers, but then he can't charge anything. However his roll is as a horde killer. The Castigator can also get around invisible units by automatically striking them in combat.

Atrapos is the most durable of all the Knights and has special rules for targeting GMC. He is your only real source of ranged ap2 weapons of all the Knights. He's slightly better against vehicles than toughness. His D strength beam weapon can hurt invisible units and since it doesn't target anything, Warp Spiders can not jump away.

Archeon gives Knights the one thing they don't have, cover ignoring shooting attack. Like the Atrapos he will be limited in what he can damage (neither the Archeon nor the Atrpos can do much against flyers), but the str 7 giant flamer template will force the enemy to spread out. At Adepticon yesterday I lamented in 3 of my 4 games that I wished I had the Archeon on the table as my opponents in those games were rocking serious cover saves I had trouble getting through.

Lancer is just designed to get into close combat with other superheavies. I consider it the weakest of the FW Knights because it has the most limited roll on the battlefield of all of them. If there is no enemy LOW, then it doesn't do nearly as much damage as any other knight would.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Do note however that the FW knights typically have a restriction saying that you can not have more of them than regular GW knights, so if you want 2 Atrophos you also need 2 Wardens/Paladins/etc. in any combination.

Of course, the FW Knights also have the ability (last I checked, anyway) to be taken as LoW for Space Marines without requiring an IK detachment of some kind (which doesn't not have the restriction of being unable to have more of them as GW knights)

It's not more GW knights than FW, it's for each specific FW Knight you need to have a different Knight. In your example, if you take two Atrapos, you need to take two more non-Atrapos Knights be they FW or GW due to this restriction. But of course, you can take a single FW Knight as a LoW in any IoM army, unlike GW Knights.

SJ

Ah ok, I read that wrong then, whoops.