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.

**Update** 1/29/14

I have about 100 votes on the poll and these are the results so far:




So it seems that a Warhound proxy is the way to go if you actually want to use your Leviathan. I'm going to close the poll out and then start a new one later. I will be interesting to see what happens if the GW offical Knights and Knight rules are released like the rumors.

I'm also posting the datasheet I made here in the first post in case anyone wants to use it:



From the first time I saw the Dreamforge Crusader Leviathan I wanted to try to do a 40k conversion for my CSM army. I am still a ways off from being finished, but wanted to see what people think so far. I thought about going with the Mortis version, but didn't really care for the head.





I'll try to post some more pics soon.

Let me know what you think

I see what you were trying to do with the legs but they are super skinny. Not sure. The painting is great though

BrotherVord wrote:
I see what you were trying to do with the legs but they are super skinny. Not sure. The painting is great though

I definitely see what you are saying about the legs, and though they are on the skinny side I think the angle of the camera makes them look much worse than they do in person.

Some more pictures of my slightly more Chaosy Knight Titan:
(sorry my camera kind of sucks)

The things on his shoulders are supposed to be removable Void shields (magnetized) in case anyone was wondering

Honestly that is probably my favorite leviathan so far! I think it is looking good and it looks nice and chaos like.

 UnCool Villain wrote:
Honestly that is probably my favorite leviathan so far! I think it is looking good and it looks nice and chaos like.

Thank you very much for the compliment, and some new pictures of different arms/weapons:

Personally, I think the legs are fine. Excellent job so far, I like it.

It looks ridiculously awesome, and I hate you for being able to make that ; p Warhound rules is probably best imo in general, unless GW release suitable knight rules, or your locals are happy with custom. Official rules are just easier in general.

It looks sick, just warhounds have 2 guns so it might be hard to represent with those rules

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
It looks sick, just warhounds have 2 guns so it might be hard to represent with those rules

Thank you all for the compliments. The CCW was the main reason I wanted to use custom rules, as I feel like a knight titan just isn't a knight without a CCW. If I did want to go straight warhound rules there is always this:



Also I'm waiting on parts to make custom Laser destroyer, plasma blaster, and vulcan in case I do decide to run straight warhound(or my opponent requests it)

I simply love this model. A shame it don't fit in my ork army.
Dont care for the Mortis either....

Someday maybe for my Marine army.....

I'd play against it in suitable battels of 3000p or over. Don't realy care with what rules, as long as it is fairly done.....

Nice paint job....

Nice army all 'round, fits in beautifully with your other awesomely painted chaos.

 Yonan wrote:
Nice army all 'round, fits in beautifully with your other awesomely painted chaos.

I appreciate all the compliments, and I'll post up some more pictures when I get my parts for the warhound-ish weapons I'll be making. In the mean time I'll try to post some pics of the rest of my army for visual interest.

Also from the poll it looks like making weapons to match up with the warhound was a good idea.

Great job man! Unfortunately, I'm in the "its not a warhound" crowd, having seen both of them next to eachother, in person, the size difference is more than noticeable. Its not an issue of 'rules' its an issue of suitability/fluff, its just too small to be a warhound, but i'd be more than okay with it being used as a knight (or just a lesser grade of titan).

Man, I love it!

I like the idea of leaving the armor off the legs- that's why I'm actually going to go with the Mortis version when it's released in 15mm, and just make a conversion for the head (as you say I don't care for the skull-head on the Mortis too much, either). I plan to actually 3d print a replacement for the head

The poll shows wide support for your using the model as either a Warhound or with a custom datasheet, so that is good . Rule of cool wins out!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Great job man! Unfortunately, I'm in the "its not a warhound" crowd, having seen both of them next to eachother, in person, the size difference is more than noticeable. Its not an issue of 'rules' its an issue of suitability/fluff, its just too small to be a warhound, but i'd be more than okay with it being used as a knight (or just a lesser grade of titan).

I actually agree with this and would prefer to use it as a heavy support/heavy knight titan. But it seems like most people are more comfortable with warhound rules as they are at least official. What would you guys say to same stat line as a warhound but with only 1 void shield and one of the warhounds ranged weapons and one Titan CCW for 550 pts?

No one has any thoughts on the points or custom rules?

I got the chance to use him in a game the other day, here are some pictures and info:

So I ended up getting to use him in a game the other day and wanted to give an update. This is how we played:

Planet strike deployment 1500 pts for defender and 2000pts for attacker but hers the kicker In the center of the defenders deployment zone will be a war hound. He will have to deploy 6 inc away from him at start. Then at the end of game turn 3 if he is within 3 in of the war hound it will become active and part of the game but the attack will be able to stop him if they any unit with in 6 in of the war hound to contest it. So in order to win the attacker to win they will have to stop the defender from uploading the war hound and the defenders win by destroying 2 random placed Web way portals of the attackers.
So that's about it any other suggestions or adds that should be made please let me know. Thanks for reading cheers


It was an awesome game and ended up being pretty balanced I thought and seemed it could go either way the entire time. I managed to hold him until turn end of turn 3, he became active at the beginning of turn 4, survived a barrage of attacks in the beginning of turn 4 from wave serpents, a falcon and Wraithknight, and got to shoot once (hit well with vulcan cannon, scattered on both turbo lasers) before being destroyed in the beginning of turn 5 and taking out most of what remained of my army in the explosion lol.

And now for a ton of pictures...















Another small update:
I added banners and received some of my weapon parts in the mail finally!

Excellent paint job! I bought the Mortis cause I didn't care for the crusader's head and I think the sword is one of the ugliest things I've ever seen. I would definately let you use it as a Warhound. That is why I bought mine. I don't think making a new datasheet for it is the way to go because there isn't a way to really 'balance' it. Now, I know GW doesn't really balance their game either, but they are the offical rule writers.

I think if your playing a game of apoc no one will have a problem with it.

 Davespil wrote:
Excellent paint job! I bought the Mortis cause I didn't care for the crusader's head and I think the sword is one of the ugliest things I've ever seen. I would definately let you use it as a Warhound. That is why I bought mine. I don't think making a new datasheet for it is the way to go because there isn't a way to really 'balance' it. Now, I know GW doesn't really balance their game either, but they are the offical rule writers.

I think if your playing a game of apoc no one will have a problem with it.

Thank you! You will have a lot of fun with it. The quality of the model is amazing. As for the rules, I understand what you are saying, as it is easier to use something that is at least approved by GW. Would would you guys say to something like the datasheet below, which is basically like a warhound but allowing the use of a CCW instead of 2 ranged weapons:

bladeiai wrote:

 Davespil wrote:
Excellent paint job! I bought the Mortis cause I didn't care for the crusader's head and I think the sword is one of the ugliest things I've ever seen. I would definately let you use it as a Warhound. That is why I bought mine. I don't think making a new datasheet for it is the way to go because there isn't a way to really 'balance' it. Now, I know GW doesn't really balance their game either, but they are the offical rule writers.

I think if your playing a game of apoc no one will have a problem with it.

Thank you! You will have a lot of fun with it. The quality of the model is amazing. As for the rules, I understand what you are saying, as it is easier to use something that is at least approved by GW. Would would you guys say to something like the datasheet below, which is basically like a warhound but allowing the use of a CCW instead of 2 ranged weapons:

Wow, I like this! The only thing that I might change is the WS to 3 instead of WS2.

Okay I am switching my answer to not a chance. Originally I thought "wow someone creative enough to make a custom data sheet for a unit that is in the fluff, and has no model or stats to represent it cool idea go for it" Having looked at the data sheet, all you have done is taken the Warhound data and made yours cost less and you want to increase its WS. So in other words you will be seen as just another guy wanting to field a warhound without having to pay for a warhound, and that thread has already been discussed ad nauseam. Your friends I am sure will be okay with....me personally would not. Just my 2 cents. I really hope you make a knight titan out it, as you will get cool points for the idea.


P.s. AWESOME paint!

 quickfuze wrote:
Okay I am switching my answer to not a chance. Originally I thought "wow someone creative enough to make a custom data sheet for a unit that is in the fluff, and has no model or stats to represent it cool idea go for it" Having looked at the data sheet, all you have done is taken the Warhound data and made yours cost less and you want to increase its WS. So in other words you will be seen as just another guy wanting to field a warhound without having to pay for a warhound, and that thread has already been discussed ad nauseam. Your friends I am sure will be okay with....me personally would not. Just my 2 cents. I really hope you make a knight titan out it, as you will get cool points for the idea.


P.s. AWESOME paint!

Haters gonna hate.....

 quickfuze wrote:
Okay I am switching my answer to not a chance. Originally I thought "wow someone creative enough to make a custom data sheet for a unit that is in the fluff, and has no model or stats to represent it cool idea go for it" Having looked at the data sheet, all you have done is taken the Warhound data and made yours cost less and you want to increase its WS. So in other words you will be seen as just another guy wanting to field a warhound without having to pay for a warhound, and that thread has already been discussed ad nauseam. Your friends I am sure will be okay with....me personally would not. Just my 2 cents. I really hope you make a knight titan out it, as you will get cool points for the idea.


P.s. AWESOME paint!

Actually, it is the same cost as a Warhound, someone else suggested increasing it's WS not me, and personally I have always wanted to run it as a Knight titan instead of a Warhound, but most peoples opinions seem to be that it will be better received if I just take the stats of a warhound.

My personal preference has been something more in the 550 point range with only one warhound ranged weapon, some kind of close combat weapon and one void shield, but I haven't been able to get any feedback on that. I plan to field warhounds as well and would like some kind of distinction between them.
And thank you for the compliment about the painting!

Awesome pics Bladeai! Sounds like it would have been a fun game! High points but low model count so should have been fairly fast and action packed. I'm glad 86% of people are happy for you to use it and only 3% are a flat out no.

 quickfuze wrote:
I really hope you make a knight titan out it, as you will get cool points for the idea.

These are more along the stats I would like to run:

And I personally would run a CCW and one ranged weapon on all of them.

Eventually I plan to have 3 knights, 2 Warhounds and my Reaver (Already on the way).

 quickfuze wrote:
So in other words you will be seen as just another guy wanting to field a warhound without having to pay for a warhound.

While you are right that this has been greatly discussed already, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I really don't agree with the mindset that the person that comes to the table with the most money should be the winner. I would have no problem playing with or against a Leviathan as Warhound.

I think its awesome, cool little batrep too

So... you want cheaper D weapons?

I don't get it.

I'd require a CCW and give the other arm an option.

rigeld2 wrote:
So... you want cheaper D weapons?

I don't get it.

I'd require a CCW and give the other arm an option.

First, I posted the list as a suggestion to try to work out something most people see as fair. I'm not looking for "cheaper D weapons" I'm looking for balance. Also this is the reason I was just giving it Warhound stats, as soon as you step away from something GW put out no one likes it.
So, Are you suggesting a mandatory CCW and then one of the ranged Weapons from the list? If so I agree that is totally fair, If not I'm not sure I understand.

720 warhound = 2 D weapons, 9 hp, 2 void shields
500 Knight = 1 D weapon, 6 hp, 1 void shields

That seems fair to me but if you have another suggestion I would like to hear it.

Yes, that's what I'm suggesting.
Because 500 points for 2 D weapons is insane.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, that's what I'm suggesting.
Because 500 points for 2 D weapons is insane.

That is a very good point... I thought about taking the Laser destuctor out of the list too... what do you think?

If you are looking around the 500 point level for the model, including a D weapon is going to be tricky.

To compare, the Shadowsword is close to that amount in points and only has one D weapon large blast. So adding the ability to have a void shield, shoot another massive titan level gun and be able to smash other titans and models in close combat for the same price needs some downside. The HP reduction to 6 does seem reasonable though, about %30 from the Warhound.

Honestly if you want to have the titan close combat weapon and void shield you will need to downgrade the weapons some. Go for Str10 Ap1 ignores cover large blast, or maybe Str D small blast. Something like that. I don't know all the other stats for the remaining guns.

Since you only have modeled CCW for the left arm make that weapon mandatory so no two ranged guns. Perhaps lower the BS to 3 so the WS can go up to 4.

Here is a summary of the imperial guard superheavies which are all around the point level you are looking at. So the Knight should be close to this level of dakka. http://cadiascreed40k.blogspot.com/2013/12/escalation-review-quick-one-for.html

Awesomely made rule sheet btw.