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.

 Therion wrote:
Since this is the first supplemental codex that has strength D in it, and that the current rumour is that next summer's 40K revision is indeed called 7th edition (and will most likely integrate rules for D weapons and superheavies), I'd say the days are numbered for those who try to ban large stompy things.

On another note, this is also a return of the armoured company, as according to 40K radio, the Imperial Knights list is a primary detachment of 3 to 6 Knights.

Oh, a lot of people's days are numbered, make no mistake.

And a big "Ha!" to the unreasonable skepticism and "it's clearly photoshopped!" crowds. Better wipe that egg off your faces, friends.

 Therion wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So It's shorter than a Wraithknight, taller than a Riptide, and a bit bulkier than both.

I wish they hadn't made it a superheavy walker. I'd be much more inclined to buy one if I could actually use it in standard games.

Well, the current information from 40K Radio is that WD will have (or atleast announce for digital purchase) a supplement codex for the Knights.

Imperial Knight Titan Codex: Three armies in this book.
1st Army: Imperial Knights Army
2nd Army: Mechanicum Army
3rd Army: Freeblades Army (Mercs that can ally)

That would mean if someone is telling you that your Knight is illegal he's essentially banning a supplemental codex. It's the same as banning Farsight Enclaves or Iyanden, and I haven't seen anyone step that far yet.

Since this is the first supplemental codex that has strength D in it, and that the current rumour is that next summer's 40K revision is indeed called 7th edition (and will most likely integrate rules for D weapons and superheavies), I'd say the days are numbered for those who try to ban large stompy things.

On another note, this is also a return of the armoured company, as according to 40K radio, the Imperial Knights list is a primary detachment of 3 to 6 Knights.

TL;DR Knights are not Lords of War.

I will believe it when I see it. GW are crazy on lots of levels, but I still don't think they're THAT crazy... yet.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 Therion wrote:
Since this is the first supplemental codex that has strength D in it, and that the current rumour is that next summer's 40K revision is indeed called 7th edition (and will most likely integrate rules for D weapons and superheavies), I'd say the days are numbered for those who try to ban large stompy things.

On another note, this is also a return of the armoured company, as according to 40K radio, the Imperial Knights list is a primary detachment of 3 to 6 Knights.

Oh, a lot of people's days are numbered, make no mistake.

And a big "Ha!" to the unreasonable skepticism and "it's clearly photoshopped!" crowds. Better wipe that egg off your faces, friends.

For the last time, I always said I believed the photo but didn't believe the "This store manager at unnamed town got his WD early and did this legendary proxy game but we didn't take any pictures" anonymous 4chan post. I still don't feel wrong to have doubted that, because it was the kind of thing any troll could've farted out in an afternoon. There's no egg on my face, friend.

I'm also *still* doubting the legitimacy of this "knights codex" with an "admech list" in it. At best, that's a supplement with three lists in it, one of them being a vaguely-admech-flavoured knight house list that they've sexed up to "Admech list" to get clicks.

 azreal13 wrote:
People who have proven right on all else are saying bulkier Wraith knight, your comparison is off somewhere I think, or it's so long since I saw a daemon engine in a CSM lost that wasn't a hell chicken, it's bigger than I remember.

They're both on 120mm oval bases as far as I can tell, in the pic I posted the bases are at roughly equivalent size, oriented almost the same way, and are at almost the same angle +/- a couple of degrees. It's close enough. It isn't significantly larger than either the Riptide(-very- slightly more bulk in the torso, it may not even be that much taller now I look at some Riptide pics), or the Maulerfiend, and it's nothing close to the Wraithknight on which this looks to come up to roughly the waist.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
People who have proven right on all else are saying bulkier Wraith knight, your comparison is off somewhere I think, or it's so long since I saw a daemon engine in a CSM lost that wasn't a hell chicken, it's bigger than I remember.

They're both on 120mm oval bases as far as I can tell, in the pic I posted the bases are at roughly equivalent size, oriented almost the same way, and are at almost the same angle +/- a couple of degrees. It's close enough. It isn't significantly larger than either the Riptide(-very- slightly more bulk in the torso, it may not even be that much taller now I look at some Riptide pics), or the Maulerfiend, and it's nothing close to the Wraithknight on which this looks to come up to roughly the waist.

Well looking at the picture that compared it to an Avatar, the Avatar is 4.7" tall, so that makes the Knight about 6" tall. A Wraithknight is supposedly about 8 to 9" tall (don't own one to measure). So it probably comes up to the chest of the Wraithknight, about the same height as Riptide.

So it's not really all that big.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
People who have proven right on all else are saying bulkier Wraith knight, your comparison is off somewhere I think, or it's so long since I saw a daemon engine in a CSM lost that wasn't a hell chicken, it's bigger than I remember.

They're both on 120mm oval bases as far as I can tell, in the pic I posted the bases are at roughly equivalent size, oriented almost the same way, and are at almost the same angle +/- a couple of degrees. It's close enough. It isn't significantly larger than either the Riptide(-very- slightly more bulk in the torso, it may not even be that much taller now I look at some Riptide pics), or the Maulerfiend, and it's nothing close to the Wraithknight on which this looks to come up to roughly the waist.

Looks to me like they are photographed at significantly different vertical angles, so the knight is more foreshortened and has it's large shoulders slightly contracted by perspective.

I'm also not convinced that the price of a miniature should be dictated solely by it's size. Things like anticipated demand, production costs and simply how good it looks seem like they should play some part. Like Forge World models, this thing is even more of a luxury item than regular 40k minis.

I'm thoroughly impressed by the looks of those Knights. After the atrocity they comitted with the Dreadknight, I did not expect them to actually be able to design a proper looking imperial walker ever again. They look old school, but in a good way. They simply look 40k.

 Perfect Organism wrote:
I'm also not convinced that the price of a miniature should be dictated solely by it's size. Things like anticipated demand, production costs and simply how good it looks seem like they should play some part. Like Forge World models, this thing is even more of a luxury item than regular 40k minis.

Personally I am happier to pay FW prices because of the quality, at least for the infantry stuff. GW prices are usually a tough pill to swallow because most models are "meh, that's ok".

At least that's my opinion.

 Therion wrote:
That would mean if someone is telling you that your Knight is illegal he's essentially banning a supplemental codex. It's the same as banning Farsight Enclaves or Iyanden, and I haven't seen anyone step that far yet.

Being officially legal for standard games according to GW hasn't stopped TFGs from banning FW, and that's just like banning the Farsight supplement. If it has D-weapons on it there will be a significant number of people who refuse to allow it, regardless of what book it was published in.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Therion wrote:
That would mean if someone is telling you that your Knight is illegal he's essentially banning a supplemental codex. It's the same as banning Farsight Enclaves or Iyanden, and I haven't seen anyone step that far yet.

Being officially legal for standard games according to GW hasn't stopped TFGs from banning FW, and that's just like banning the Farsight supplement. If it has D-weapons on it there will be a significant number of people who refuse to allow it, regardless of what book it was published in.

When a unit is as official as a Space Marine Tactical Squad I don't think we should focus or even care about TFGs fighting against the inevitable. Superheavies are going to be just as integral part of 40K as flyers, whether you or anyone likes it or not.

 Perfect Organism wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
People who have proven right on all else are saying bulkier Wraith knight, your comparison is off somewhere I think, or it's so long since I saw a daemon engine in a CSM lost that wasn't a hell chicken, it's bigger than I remember.

They're both on 120mm oval bases as far as I can tell, in the pic I posted the bases are at roughly equivalent size, oriented almost the same way, and are at almost the same angle +/- a couple of degrees. It's close enough. It isn't significantly larger than either the Riptide(-very- slightly more bulk in the torso, it may not even be that much taller now I look at some Riptide pics), or the Maulerfiend, and it's nothing close to the Wraithknight on which this looks to come up to roughly the waist.

Looks to me like they are photographed at significantly different vertical angles, so the knight is more foreshortened and has it's large shoulders slightly contracted by perspective.

I'm also not convinced that the price of a miniature should be dictated solely by it's size. Things like anticipated demand, production costs and simply how good it looks seem like they should play some part. Like Forge World models, this thing is even more of a luxury item than regular 40k minis.

We'll see soon enough, my estimation is that it isn't substantially bigger than a Riptide, in terms of height at least.

This model is not, as far as we know, any kind of "limited edition". It's made of the same material, will have similar levels of detail, similar numbers of parts, and is of similar mass to other cheaper kits produced by the same company. To address your points in reverse order: how good it looks is an aesthetic opinion, not an objective measure - some people really like the Maulerfiend, for example, while I would much rather have these Knights; given everything I listed in the sentence above, the production costs cannot be significantly different unless GW have suddenly decided to start paying their design staff a better wage and invested in slide-core tooling for their plastic kits, neither of which is particularly likely; they could have anticipated a great deal more demand with a reasonable price - at £50 direct-sale, these would have been around £40 from online retailers(even better if it is £40 direct-sale), and I would have bought an entire Household over the course of the year, but at £70-90 each? They can anticipate my middle finger.

As for Forgeworld models, the only thing they have in common is that they will sell comparatively few units(FW because of many factors, GW's big plastics because you don't need many), but GW's lower-unit-sales plastic kits already account for this in their inflated prices. FW use vacuum-cast resin, which is substantially more labour-intensive to produce than plastic kits, and resin kits are typically more detailed.

Your reasoning is like a bizarre pricing Moebius Strip of pricing logic; GW charge more because you're willing to pay more, you're willing to pay more because GW charge more and so the model is worth more because reasons, so GW charge more, so you pay more etc etc etc. An individual can place any value on an object they want, but for the price of a commercial product to be justifiable, it must have at least some relationship to the cost of production and the price of other directly comparable products from the same source, even if the product is a luxury good.

Having seen the DF Levi on Northstar for £40, I think I;ll get one of those instead. To be honest, the size isn't really an issue, as let's face it, you're not going to be hiding this thing easily, so a couple more inches can't hurt. I'll probably grimdark it up with some plasticard extras, like some extra plating on the armour and a scratch-build chainsword if I'm feeling ambitious.

I may well pick up a GW Knight at some point, as they do look seriously cool, but I've been after a Leviathan for ages but not had a use, now I do and on that kind of offer it's too cool to pass up.

Eventually, I'll hopefully expand to 3+, and I think that a small household of 2 GW Knights led by a Leviathan would look epic.

Looks pretty cool, but what I'm really interested in is the pricing. If it's priced as a Lord of Skulls (£95) that's a big hell no from me, no matter how much the fanbois can justify it.

Thud wrote:
Looks pretty cool, but what I'm really interested in is the pricing. If it's priced as a Lord of Skulls (£95) that's a big hell no from me, no matter how much the fanbois can justify it.

Why? DreamForge Leviathans are £95 RRP, and everyone keeps gushing about how amazing a value that is. Warmachine Colossals are even more expensive, and aren't even plastic.

I think the rules look good enough, and I'm really glad it is not a MC. Dreadnoughts are walkers, Titans are walkers and Knights should be walkers as well. Being a superheavy gives it survivability it needs. That shield is really nice and promotes actually using tactics. And while D pieplates are an issue in normal games D CC weapon is really not.

 Therion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Therion wrote:
That would mean if someone is telling you that your Knight is illegal he's essentially banning a supplemental codex. It's the same as banning Farsight Enclaves or Iyanden, and I haven't seen anyone step that far yet.

Being officially legal for standard games according to GW hasn't stopped TFGs from banning FW, and that's just like banning the Farsight supplement. If it has D-weapons on it there will be a significant number of people who refuse to allow it, regardless of what book it was published in.

When a unit is as official as a Space Marine Tactical Squad I don't think we should focus or even care about TFGs fighting against the inevitable. Superheavies are going to be just as integral part of 40K as flyers, whether you or anyone likes it or not.

Unless enough people dislike it that it never gets mainstream support, just like FW currently doesn't have mainstream support.

 Zweischneid wrote:

Thud wrote:
Looks pretty cool, but what I'm really interested in is the pricing. If it's priced as a Lord of Skulls (£95) that's a big hell no from me, no matter how much the fanbois can justify it.

Why? DreamForge Leviathans are £95 RRP, and everyone keeps gushing about how amazing a value that is. Warmachine Colossals are even more expensive, and aren't even plastic.

If by "everyone" you mean "a couple of people", and if you ignore that those people are either talking about the smaller 15mm Leviathan or the larger one being sold at a substantial discount, your comment is spot on. And who mentioned Warmachine? I know you're not overly fond of actually addressing the arguments other people have made, as opposed to the ones you think they've made, or arguing points they've never even mentioned, but at least make some effort.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

Thud wrote:
Looks pretty cool, but what I'm really interested in is the pricing. If it's priced as a Lord of Skulls (£95) that's a big hell no from me, no matter how much the fanbois can justify it.

Why? DreamForge Leviathans are £95 RRP, and everyone keeps gushing about how amazing a value that is. Warmachine Colossals are even more expensive, and aren't even plastic.

If by "everyone" you mean "a couple of people", and if you ignore that those people are either talking about the smaller 15mm Leviathan or the larger one being sold at a substantial discount, your comment is spot on. And who mentioned Warmachine? I know you're not overly fond of actually addressing the arguments other people have made, as opposed to the ones you think they've made, or arguing points they've never even mentioned, but at least make some effort.

If an etailer gives you discounts on the Leviathan, he might give you discount on the GW-kit too. Kinda strange to compare a discounted price to a RRP, no?

I don't need to make any "effort". I am simply giving my expression to a puzzling (and, at first glance, uninformative and misguided) comparison.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

Thud wrote:
Looks pretty cool, but what I'm really interested in is the pricing. If it's priced as a Lord of Skulls (£95) that's a big hell no from me, no matter how much the fanbois can justify it.

Why? DreamForge Leviathans are £95 RRP, and everyone keeps gushing about how amazing a value that is. Warmachine Colossals are even more expensive, and aren't even plastic.

If by "everyone" you mean "a couple of people", and if you ignore that those people are either talking about the smaller 15mm Leviathan or the larger one being sold at a substantial discount, your comment is spot on. And who mentioned Warmachine? I know you're not overly fond of actually addressing the arguments other people have made, as opposed to the ones you think they've made, or arguing points they've never even mentioned, but at least make some effort.

I didn't even make an argument. I'm not looking to convince anyone else, and in a couple of months I might have changed my mind, but £95 is more than I am willing to pay for it. Simple as that.

 Padre wrote:
I wonder why the designers went away from the powerfist on the original (Epic) Errant, and went for the "Reaper Chainsword" on both variants seen here? If you go back far enough, even the Paladin had the option for a powerfist...

Sprue design? Box size limitations?

Just a wild guess here, but maybe the "Codex" will have options for further upgrades on the Knights? (as opposed to the WD material we see here...)

I'll guess it's because a PF would not be able to reach any targets on the ground?

 Crimson wrote:
I think the rules look good enough, and I'm really glad it is not a MC. Dreadnoughts are walkers, Titans are walkers and Knights should be walkers as well. Being a superheavy gives it survivability it needs. That shield is really nice and promotes actually using tactics. And while D pieplates are an issue in normal games D CC weapon is really not.

If we're allowed to jump into conclusion, the Knights will finally shake the metagame up. I can't see any way for Jetseers or Screamerstars to get around a couple Knights with 12" moves being their kryptonite, especially seeing how resilient the Knights will be vs. the S6 and S7 that's spammed around. AV13, 6hp, 4+ save and being completely immune to everything except destroyed results will see to that. Riptides aren't going to do well in a shooting battle either, because the Knights will instakill them once they reach them, and while they're moving they'll still be taking out units here and there with the double battlecannons. Remember, full movement, shooting all weapons and split fire for the stubbers.

I'm also intrigued what kind of Knight armies you can make in 1.85K that can play vs all comers. They need some help vs. air so it'll be interesting to see who they can ally with. IG Infantry hiding behind behind an Aegis and a Quad Gun, supported by Sabre Defence Platforms, and 3 Knights? Necron Lord, 4x5 Warriors in Night Scythes and 3 Knights?

Will be getting two of these for sure! Will look awesome with my Vostroyans

I might buy a Knight Errant just to build and paint...

I love these models! May have to get one just to scavenge some bits... wondering how that admech looking head would look on a 15mm Mortis (which I'm hoping to use as a tall Ironclad). That's one thing GW kits are fantastic for- bits!

Or rather, hopefully buy that head from someone who uses the other one.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

 Padre wrote:
I wonder why the designers went away from the powerfist on the original (Epic) Errant, and went for the "Reaper Chainsword" on both variants seen here? If you go back far enough, even the Paladin had the option for a powerfist...

Sprue design? Box size limitations?

Just a wild guess here, but maybe the "Codex" will have options for further upgrades on the Knights? (as opposed to the WD material we see here...)

I'll guess it's because a PF would not be able to reach any targets on the ground?

Fair point...

I was also thinking it might be because the Chainsword is the only CCW variant that isn't available with the Dreamforge Leviathans, maybe?

Or am I giving GW too much "credit" for planning ahead?

So, how much do these cost?
They definitely look great!

If my Thunderwolf Riding Lord has s10 ap2 i think its more than reasonable to give a knight S: D in melee. It counters indomitable screamerstars for example and wont have a big impact on tau or eldar. Tau shoot it to shreds and eldar just slip away before it assaults.

If you run your melee star into it without a plan you will suffer.

Dont really know if its a good thing for the meta ... time will tell and a lot of tears will be shed for sure.

 Padre wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

 Padre wrote:
I wonder why the designers went away from the powerfist on the original (Epic) Errant, and went for the "Reaper Chainsword" on both variants seen here? If you go back far enough, even the Paladin had the option for a powerfist...

Sprue design? Box size limitations?

Just a wild guess here, but maybe the "Codex" will have options for further upgrades on the Knights? (as opposed to the WD material we see here...)

I'll guess it's because a PF would not be able to reach any targets on the ground?

Fair point...

I was also thinking it might be because the Chainsword is the only CCW variant that isn't available with the Dreamforge Leviathans, maybe?

Or am I giving GW too much "credit" for planning ahead?

There is a chainsaw arm for the Dreamforce models

 Padre wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

 Padre wrote:
I wonder why the designers went away from the powerfist on the original (Epic) Errant, and went for the "Reaper Chainsword" on both variants seen here? If you go back far enough, even the Paladin had the option for a powerfist...

Sprue design? Box size limitations?

Just a wild guess here, but maybe the "Codex" will have options for further upgrades on the Knights? (as opposed to the WD material we see here...)

I'll guess it's because a PF would not be able to reach any targets on the ground?

Fair point...

I was also thinking it might be because the Chainsword is the only CCW variant that isn't available with the Dreamforge Leviathans, maybe?

Or am I giving GW too much "credit" for planning ahead?

Sure it is.



And even if it's weren't, I doubt that would be a good reason to do a chainsaw. It's not like DreamForge could not just start making one, if they hadn't done so before

This is the best 40k release I've seen from GW in quite a few years. They've nailed the style properly instead of producing some ugly OTT abomination.