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.

 mikhaila wrote:
I take "sold out" with a grain of salt, until I see all of the product disappear off my stores shelves, and can't get more. I will be very happy if I sell out of the Knights I brought in.

They're flying off the shelves of the FLGS (non-GW stores) in my area. I hope your store enjoys the same sales volume. Just be a tad cautious when you reorder.

 Breotan wrote:
Yea, iirc that's a pretty big change from the original fluff where the AdMech made these for the Knight worlds.

I'm imagining actual techs and ground crew in coveralls working on these instead of prattling idiots in red robes now.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
Not really...

Spoiler:

Wow. You found a picture of some converted models. Congratulations.

Hmmm, pictures of SM units converted to look chaotic...

I wonder, bear with me here, I wonder if someone decided to use the Vanilla book to represent a Chaos Warband, and therefore rendering these models as perfectly reasonable counts-as and totally legal within the scope of the rules?

Nah, must be the other thing.

There you go guys - an actual retailer providing actual information!

Thanks Mik!

*cough* house rules *cough* the rule book encourages house rules. H.B.M.C. you need to relax. These are not rules handed down by god.

 Musashi363 wrote:
*cough* house rules *cough* the rule book encourages house rules. H.B.M.C. you need to relax. These are not rules handed down by god.

House rules either don't work for pick up games, or require extensive pre-game negotiations. Either way, of they're necessary to play an ordinary one on one game, then the rules have failed.

This is quickly becoming the worst thread in the world.

"Hey, can I use this?"
"Sure,"

Wow, that was extensive.

Same thing we said earlier today at the store, if you want to give it a try or whatever, sure, go for it. No need to be a witch about it.

 Musashi363 wrote:
"Hey, can I use this?"
"Sure,"

Wow, that was extensive.

Hey can I use this?

Oh wow! When did *insert faction here* get the *insert unit name*

Well, they didn't, I just assumed that if I turned up with it then you'd feel obliged to let me play it..

Ah, well, the thing is, I'm not really that keen on playing against it, because it isn't really meant to be part of your army..

*awkward silence*

 azreal13 wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
"Hey, can I use this?"
"Sure,"

Wow, that was extensive.

Hey can I use this?

Oh wow! When did *insert faction here* get the *insert unit name*

Well, they didn't, I just assumed that if I turned up with it then you'd feel obliged to let me play it..

Ah, well, the thing is, I'm not really that keen on playing against it, because it isn't really meant to be part of your army..

*awkward silence*

This is one of those terrible conversations because everyone plays with different sorts of people and has different relationships with the people they play with.
For everyone that thinks it's fine that they should ask to use a Knight with their Chaos army there's someone that thinks you're being a dick for putting them in a position to have to turn you down or play against something they don't want to play against.

 Musashi363 wrote:
*cough* house rules *cough* the rule book encourages house rules. H.B.M.C. you need to relax. These are not rules handed down by god.

"Hey random person that I've never met at this random games store. Can I use my Knight in my Chaos army. My group totally house rules this, but that's ok right 'cause the rulebook says houserules are A-ok?"
"Can Knights ally with Chaos?"
"Well no, but we have a house rule..."
"No. I'd prefer we followed the rules."
"But the house rule..."
"I brought my army for some fun pick-up games. Do you have a army to use? One that doesn't break the rules?"
"But the house rule..."
"Hey, buddy, you with the Krieg army. Wanna game?"
"Sure!"
"But my house rules! Knights! Chaos! AHHHHH!!!"
"What's his problem?"
"No idea."

Rules are rules. Doing something contrary to the rules is breaking the rules. If your opponent is fine with that, then great and as I've said on numerous occasions the idea of Chaos Knights (or other non-Chaos units in Chaos armies) doesn't bother me personally but that's irrelevant to a discussion on what the rules are. On top of that, many people in this thread have been saying that they shouldn't need permission to fiend their Knight with whatever army they want or, worse, that people insisting that they play by the rules are somehow in the wrong. Neither of these things are true.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
"Hey, can I use this?"
"Sure,"

Wow, that was extensive.

Hey can I use this?

Oh wow! When did *insert faction here* get the *insert unit name*

Well, they didn't, I just assumed that if I turned up with it then you'd feel obliged to let me play it..

Ah, well, the thing is, I'm not really that keen on playing against it, because it isn't really meant to be part of your army..

*awkward silence*

Or you can try "Hey, Can I use this? Daddy Matt Ward has decided that my poor khornate marines can't play with my imperial knight, and I wanna see how it plays together".

Rinse, repeat, try as often as you like until you find players that will let you do so. The worst they will do is tell you No. In which case play w/o the unit, or play with someone else. Its amazingly simple.

It just won't work in a Tournament or super-serious setting. But its not like you wanna play with all the tryhard tau/dar anyways, do you? =P

 azreal13 wrote:
I wonder, bear with me here, I wonder if someone decided to use the Vanilla book to represent a Chaos Warband, and therefore rendering these models as perfectly reasonable counts-as and totally legal within the scope of the rules?

Silence fool! We'll have none of that logic in here. Only one man gets to fight for truth, justice and the logical way, and his name starts with a Z. Your name on the other hand only has a lower case z in it, and that will not do!!!

 Breotan wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
Oh, and anyone making "knight" bases yet? Get on that 3rd party peoples.

I can imagine the 3rd party guys looking at that base and slowly shaking their head while they /facepalm.

Fenris Games cut a blank for such a base this afternoon so will probably have something soonish (they are very busy with stuff for their participation game at Salute 2014)

Let me "adjust" Azreal13's scenario to something a little more realistic.

Hey can I use this?

No. I really would rather stick to the rules as they are written.

Okay. Thanks anyway. I'll guess I'll just get a game with someone else then.

There, see? Far less stress and far more likely to be what you encounter at your local game store.

Edited to appease the Mods.

"FTFY" is a definite "no no" on Dakka.

That point, Breoton, continues to miss you every time it flies by.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
*cough* house rules *cough* the rule book encourages house rules. H.B.M.C. you need to relax. These are not rules handed down by god.

"Hey random person that I've never met at this random games store. Can I use my Knight in my Chaos army. My group totally house rules this, but that's ok right 'cause the rulebook says houserules are A-ok?"
"Can Knights ally with Chaos?"
"Well no, but we have a house rule..."
"No. I'd prefer we followed the rules."
"But the house rule..."
"I brought my army for some fun pick-up games. Do you have a army to use? One that doesn't break the rules?"
"But the house rule..."
"Hey, buddy, you with the Krieg army. Wanna game?"
"Sure!"
"But my house rules! Knights! Chaos! AHHHHH!!!"
"What's his problem?"
"No idea."

Rules are rules. Doing something contrary to the rules is breaking the rules. If your opponent is fine with that, then great and as I've said on numerous occasions the idea of Chaos Knights (or other non-Chaos units in Chaos armies) doesn't bother me personally but that's irrelevant to a discussion on what the rules are. On top of that, many people in this thread have been saying that they shouldn't need permission to fiend their Knight with whatever army they want or, worse, that people insisting that they play by the rules are somehow in the wrong. Neither of these things are true.

Then I wouldn't play with that guy. Diffeernt strokes for different folks I suppose.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I wonder, bear with me here, I wonder if someone decided to use the Vanilla book to represent a Chaos Warband, and therefore rendering these models as perfectly reasonable counts-as and totally legal within the scope of the rules?

Silence fool! We'll have none of that logic in here. Only one man gets to fight for truth, justice and the logical way, and his name starts with a Z. Your name on the other hand only has a lower case z in it, and that will not do!!!

I'm starting a new Chaos army this summer. It'll use the rules in the new Codex: IG and Codex: Imperial Knights and a lot of random IG stuff from FW, but it'll still be unmistakably a Chaos army.

As far as Knights being sold out is concerned, it's comical of course for GW to claim that, but I'm sure the demand is really high. The model seems to appeal to hobbyists of all backgrounds.

 Therion wrote:
I'm starting a new Chaos army this summer. It'll use the rules in the new Codex: IG and Codex: Imperial Knights and a lot of random IG stuff from FW, but it'll still be unmistakably a Chaos army.

It'll be a Guard army themed as a Chaos force. It won't follow any Chaos rules nor use any Chaos units (other than counts-as/proxies). It will remain an Imperial Guard army, much like the wonderful Night Lords-themed army I fought a few weeks ago was still a Blood Angel army.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I wonder, bear with me here, I wonder if someone decided to use the Vanilla book to represent a Chaos Warband, and therefore rendering these models as perfectly reasonable counts-as and totally legal within the scope of the rules?

Silence fool! We'll have none of that logic in here. Only one man gets to fight for truth, justice and the logical way, and his name starts with a Z. Your name on the other hand only has a lower case z in it, and that will not do!!!

Ah, I've overstepped, please accept my humble apologies.

If anyone wants me, I'll be over there flagellating myself.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Therion wrote:
I'm starting a new Chaos army this summer. It'll use the rules in the new Codex: IG and Codex: Imperial Knights and a lot of random IG stuff from FW, but it'll still be unmistakably a Chaos army.

It'll be a Guard army themed as a Chaos force. It won't follow any Chaos rules nor use any Chaos units (other than counts-as/proxies). It will remain an Imperial Guard army, much like the wonderful Night Lords-themed army I fought a few weeks ago was still a Blood Angel army.

I think Games Workshop has been fairly open about their order of priorities.

(1) Miniatures > (2) Background > (3) Rules


If the first two are Night Lords, and only the least and last among them Blood Angels, it seems counter-intuitive to call it a Blood Angels army, no?

What you call it is irrelevant, the fact is it is legal within the rules as set out by GW.

Nobody I've seen has an issue with a well thought out counts as army that sticks to the rules of whatever faction they're using, the issue people have is when units that don't belong together are used in a non-Apoc list because the player feels they're entitled to do so, but has no rules permission to do so.

Irrelevant, Z (as usual). My point is - and has always been, since this whole shebang started - is that it doesn't matter what you do in your own little pond. The rules are the rules, and breaking them just ‘cause you have a nice new model or because the rulebook says house rules are fine isn’t something that you can just do whenever you feel like it. If your friends are fine with it, that’s great. If you find someone at a store in a pick-up game that’s cool to give it a try, then that’s wonderful.

But you should not expect everyone to be ok with breaking the rules (and that’s what it is – it’s taking something the rules say you cannot have) nor should you pretend that the guy wanting to follow the rules is somehow doing something wrong. That’s the key point people appear to be wilfully ignoring. Following the rules isn’t some sort of gaming faus pax; it’s the norm.

I own four armies that 40K either no longer supports or never even supported in the first place (Inquisitorial Army, Lost & The Damned, Deathwatch, Adeptus Mechanicus) and our group spent years developing and writing our own version of 40K and all its Codices. We’re very much on the side of ‘do what you want if it’s cool’, but I wouldn’t expect everyone to be as liberal with the rules as we are and I certainly wouldn’t look down upon or argue against someone who just wants to play by the rules.

Making sense yet?

 Breotan wrote:
Yea, iirc that's a pretty big change from the original fluff where the AdMech made these for the Knight worlds.

Wasn't the 'original' fluff that Knights were built by Eldar?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


But you should not expect everyone to be ok with breaking the rules

I never expect anyone to be anything. I always ask nicely, as should everyone. Always. Without exception.

But if you ask, and everyone agrees, what's the problem? Why stick to some idealistic rules-conformity "pre-emptively" before even bothering to ask?

Not to mention that quite a few people mentioned that "counts-as" is "ok" where "just adding a Knight" is not? Well, than do the former, if that is for some arcane reason more "palatable" and "acceptable". Same result, Chaos Knight on the table.

The rules are tools to have fun, not tools to spoil the fun.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Therion wrote:
I'm starting a new Chaos army this summer. It'll use the rules in the new Codex: IG and Codex: Imperial Knights and a lot of random IG stuff from FW, but it'll still be unmistakably a Chaos army.

It'll be a Guard army themed as a Chaos force. It won't follow any Chaos rules nor use any Chaos units (other than counts-as/proxies). It will remain an Imperial Guard army, much like the wonderful Night Lords-themed army I fought a few weeks ago was still a Blood Angel army.

Of course, but that's really just semantics. What else is an army except what it looks like? I've never felt any attachment towards a codex unit entry. I doubt many people do. You're attached to the theme and background of an army. The codex is just gameplay rules for what you want to play anyway. If those rules suck, you can keep the theme and the background and just pick your rules from somewhere else. That's why DIY Space Marine chapters have always had 5 codices to choose rules from, and why a traitor army big enough with enough unit options can play using as many as 8 or more codices.

Everyone's got a right to be upset about anything they want but in this light personally I can't get upset if I can't put a Heldrake and a Knight Paladin in the same army. I can have both on the shelf painted in the same colors and just field them at different events. The Chaos themed Knight can still have Chaos themed flyers in the same force, just not specifically a Heldrake, and to me that's a minor game balance issue not worth getting upset about.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


But you should not expect everyone to be ok with breaking the rules

I never expect anyone to be anything. I always ask nicely, as should everyone. Always. Without exception.

But if you ask, and everyone agrees, what's the problem? Why stick to some idealistic rules-conformity "pre-emptively" before even bothering to ask?

Not to mention that quite a few people mentioned that "counts-as" is "ok" where "just adding a Knight" is not? Well, than do the former, if that is for some arcane reason more "palatable" and "acceptable". Same result, Chaos Knight on the table.

The rules are tools to have fun, not tools to spoil the fun.

Counts as what? Lord Of Skulls?

 Therion wrote:
Of course, but that's really just semantics.

I don't disagree. I've always wanted to do a Tyranid army made up of Guardsmen. Running Guardsmen with double daggers for Hormagaunts, various Monstrous Creatures made up using Sentinels and whatnot. The expense of such a thing (and the fact that I already have a Tyranid army) has always stopped me, but I like the idea.

But at the end a Blood Angel army pretending to be Night Lords or a Guard army that calls itself “Renegade Guard” isn’t really the issue (it’s just semantics). The issue I’ve been talking about is taking something in your army that your army cannot normally have. That is breaking the rules and (I’m getting sick of typing this), not everyone is going to be ok with that and expecting people to be ok with that is wrong and and denigrating those that want to follow the rules is doubly wrong.

 Therion wrote:
That's why DIY Space Marine chapters have always had 5 codices to choose rules from, and why a traitor army big enough with enough unit options can play using as many as 8 or more codices.

My armies were structured in much the same way. My Ultramarines were always Ultramarines, but (when such things existed, before Chaos got Jervisified) my Chaos jumped between Iron Warriors, Alpha Legion, World Eaters and Word Bearers an awful lot. My Guard is set up to do all-infantry, Mechanised, mixed, armoured company and air-cav (and due to the size of my Guard army, can do several of those simultaneously, but that’s neither here nor there).

But a Chaos army, using the Chaos Codex, attempting to bring a Knight (or any other things listed under Come the Apocalypse) to the table is not the same thing. It’s a case of actually breaking the rules.

 Therion wrote:
Everyone's got a right to be upset about anything they want but in this light personally I can't get upset if I can't put a Heldrake and a Knight Paladin in the same army. I can have both on the shelf painted in the same colors and just field them at different events.

And that’s great, but as I’ve said, that’s not really the point. The point is (and now I’m just going to copy/paste this)… breaking the rules and (I’m getting sick of typing this), not everyone is going to be ok with that and expecting people to be ok with that is wrong and[/i] and denigrating those that want to follow the rules is doubly wrong.[/i].