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.

 ironicsilence wrote:

Tinqle wrote:
So is there any general consensus on whether or not the 15mm leviathan crusader would work as a good substitute for a knight because from the pics it would seem that with a bit of basing it should be a comparable size. Does anyone have a pic of the two side by side?

dont mean to derail everyone's arguing to answer an actual question...you can use the 15mm leviathan as a stand in provided you give it some extra bulk (its about 4.5 inches tall vs the GW knight in the 6-7 inch range) of course if your not at all bothered by it not being the exact same size height wise then your golden

The Leviathans are either too tall or too short, but not so much so that you are unable to use them. I plan on using the large one as my "Duke" and the other two as regular Knights. There's no distinction in the rules, it's just fun to call him that.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
I was really hoping that this would be a well planned and coordinated release on the part of GW. Instead we got...this. I mean small companies being run out of the basement are more efficient than this. How do you make so many mistakes in such a short period of time?

Remember back when they released the new Tau? Same thing mostly.

as a man I know the difference a few inches can make......in model size...and anything I can do to get MOAR use out of my dreamforge stuff is a win for me. I still bought a single knight just to have it on the shelf but ill keep using leviathans as stand ins

 Breotan wrote:
Still, it is interesting to see that some people on Dakka really dislike the Titan codex yet are very much liking the LotD one, myself included.

Uhh... that book's worse. At least with the Knight Codex it's a new unit. The LoTD Codex is a copy/paste job.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is it a mistake to launch a companion book for a release such as this? Again, you could argue that we'd prefer all the information be in the Codex and not spread out across two books, but again, is that a mistake, per se?

The only mistake is selling it for $75 in my opinion. $30 is much more appropriate for a "Uniforms and Heraldry"-style book, which is pretty much what it appears to be. Speaking of which, there was a time when I would have loved to see more armies get books like that, and personally I really wanted one for Tau in particular, but GW put out like two or three, all for WHF armies, and I guess they gave up after that...until now, I guess. At nearly $80 though they might as well not bother. I don't care if Tau ever do get one anymore because it'll be so hilariously expensive I can't justify buying it.

As for the codex there's really nothing you can do about that, a full-fledged codex with only two unit entries is a stupid idea no matter how you try to spin it. The only way it could have been acceptable is if the price was drastically reduced to make up for it; $25, maybe $30 at the most. It's barely 60 pages, and a regular codex is massively overpriced as it is with 100 pages and a full army within. GW knocks $9 off and says "Good enough!", what a joke.

 Breotan wrote:
Remember back when they released the new Tau? Same thing mostly.

Yeah, took me forever to get any new Tau models, but I don't remember as many people willing to admit that Tau were that popular, and were instead arguing that GW simply didn't produce enough for them. With the knight we have a delayed shipping container that seems to have mostly contributed to the lack of stock, and possibly the same issue with GW not producing enough (likely intentionally because consistently selling out of product makes them look good), but because it's an Imperial release we're all just going to gloss over that and go on about how insanely popular it must be and that GW must not be charging enough for their models.

 ironicsilence wrote:
I still bought a single knight just to have it on the shelf but ill keep using leviathans as stand ins

I would have bought a knight myself just because it looks cool, but not at $140. You would literally have to cut the price in half before I could justify it (which wouldn't really be that unreasonable, it would be almost on par with the riptide...which is also massively overpriced for what it is). Guess it wasn't meant for me.

Eldar had the same problem. Store I bought them from never got the stock, so refunded me the money (and sent me the psychic cards anway - nice folks at Milsims).

 ironicsilence wrote:

Tinqle wrote:
So is there any general consensus on whether or not the 15mm leviathan crusader would work as a good substitute for a knight because from the pics it would seem that with a bit of basing it should be a comparable size. Does anyone have a pic of the two side by side?

dont mean to derail everyone's arguing to answer an actual question...you can use the 15mm leviathan as a stand in provided you give it some extra bulk (its about 4.5 inches tall vs the GW knight in the 6-7 inch range) of course if your not at all bothered by it not being the exact same size height wise then your golden

Thanks for the input I just picked up a 15mm one off ebay and plan on creating an elaborate base for it, converting it up a little to fit into my imperial guard force.

I'd have zero problem with you using it as a knight as the rule of cool applies

My...God...!!!

I take a night off from following this thread, and come back to this!!!

What the hell happened in the last four pages?

Have we actually got anything new to say about the Knights?

Cause otherwise this really looks like most of it should be cut and pasted to a new thread in the "Rules" forum, re the inclusion of Knights in various armies...

I'm not sure if it's what GW is doing, but I think undersupply is a common method for drumming up hype. Make people think they missed the boat if they didn't preorder or get in to the store at 8am on release day and then convince them if they want one, they better preorder before the next batch sells out as well!

My local GW guy told me that after the last one they had in stock went, the warehouse guy told him that there wasn't many left in the warehouse either so it could be a long wait if I didn't order.

 ironicsilence wrote:

Tinqle wrote:
So is there any general consensus on whether or not the 15mm leviathan crusader would work as a good substitute for a knight because from the pics it would seem that with a bit of basing it should be a comparable size. Does anyone have a pic of the two side by side?

dont mean to derail everyone's arguing to answer an actual question...you can use the 15mm leviathan as a stand in provided you give it some extra bulk (its about 4.5 inches tall vs the GW knight in the 6-7 inch range) of course if your not at all bothered by it not being the exact same size height wise then your golden

I'd like to see some comparison pics, 4.5" to 6.5" is big. That's like a 6'6 person standing next to a 4'6 person. A 44% difference in height. By comparison, this is only a ~40% difference in height...

Makes sense to me...kinda. Instead of hinting at the release a few months before it actually goes up for pre-order, and then taking pre-orders for a month like they did with Dark Eldar, and producing enough to cover pre-orders and have stock for stores, they produce a small amount and give everyone one week's notice so that it inevitably "sells out", and then they can pressure people into buying because "If you wait too long you'll never get one!" and brag about how popular their products are in the next financial report despite the price point.

Hmmm.... looks like I am with a lot of people, this time....

1.) The Knight is a very nice looking model.
2.) The Leviathan by Dreamforge is also a very nice looking model.
3.) The Colossals for WARMACHINE are also very nice looking models.

As for the difference in price....
...
...
...
It is tolerable. All look like reasonable value for money.

For me the Leviathan edges into the lead - but that is largely a matter of being able to change the weapon loadouts.

If you do not want to swap out the weapons... then any of them will do.

Mind you, I am only using the 'Ooh! Pretty' and 'This will be fun to paint!' scales - and all of them look pretty, and each of them look like fun to paint.

So... all look like reasonable value for money. (And folks thought that I would never have a positive thing to say about GW stuff....)

The Auld Grump

*EDIT*
Wow - a double post.

*EDIT 2* And editing the double post destroyed the original - I think that I am fairly close to the original here.

 Sidstyler wrote:
Makes sense to me...kinda. Instead of hinting at the release a few months before it actually goes up for pre-order, and then taking pre-orders for a month like they did with Dark Eldar, and producing enough to cover pre-orders and have stock for stores, they produce a small amount and give everyone one week's notice so that it inevitably "sells out", and then they can pressure people into buying because "If you wait too long you'll never get one!" and brag about how popular their products are in the next financial report despite the price point.

Yeah, either that or they genuinely underestimated how popular the thing would be. My local GW had I think 12 or 14 and all but 1 sold out in the first few hours of the store opening and the last one sold out midday the next day. Whether or not it was intentional undersupply, I think that shows it's a pretty popular item.

 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.

You know, for a guy that writes for RPGs, a format pretty much defined by outright making up the "rules" as you go along, you have a seriously closed, locked, barred, barricaded, razorwire-surrounded mind on this issue.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 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.

You know, for a guy that writes for RPGs, a format pretty much defined by outright making up the "rules" as you go along, you have a seriously closed, locked, barred, barricaded, razorwire-surrounded mind on this issue.

Writing as somebody else that also occasionally writes for RPGs...

No.

RPGs are not about making up the rules as you go along.

Any game that is shared across several venues needs to have rules that can be referred to in order to be fair - this includes wargames such as WH40K and RPGs such as Pathfinder.

For games in your own house - house rules are fine - but do not expect me to accept your house rules in my house.

Nor should I expect to be able to use my (obviously superior) house rules at your house.

And both of us can expect to be told to go pound sand if we expect to use either of our sets of house rules in an organized play campaign.

The Auld Grump

No he doesn't, he has a very clear, rational and totally consistent mind.

Breaking the rules is fine amongst consenting adults, but doing so with strangers, or worse, expecting strangers to be ok with it and putting them in a situation where they might feel awkward saying no, is not ok.

Also, playing an RPG without rules is just sitting around having a weird conversation.

Yeah. RPG’s aren’t war games. They’re inherently not adversarial in that there’s no “sides” attempting to “win”. There’s the GM who facilitates the story, the events within the narrative and rolls for the NPC’s, and then there are the players, working their way through the scenario and overcoming obstacles either individually as a team.

It’s not even a valid comparison.

On top of that I’m a stickler for rules consistency and believe in the sanctity of rules. I follow the rules in a game because I believe they’re there for a reason and not following the rules is not only cheating but removes the entire point of having rules in the first place. When creating rules I try to use existing rules to cover situations before inventing my own, because keeping the rules concise is a good thing (lest you end up in the USR minefield that 6th Ed has, or, worse, the quagmire of 3rd Ed where we had rules like True Grit that were different depending on which of the four armies that had it you were using). To that end, army lists exist for a reason, and ignoring them is to invite anarchy (or, I should say, Apocalypse).

In any case, this isn’t about not allowing house rules or doing things beyond the rules. This is… for the 6th time today, about how one should not expect that everyone will just ‘go with it’ when you suggest breaking the rules and one should not look down upon/mock/denigrate/get angry with those who are following the rules, because they’re doing nothing wrong.


[EDIT]: But as usual, that grumpy auld bastard has beaten me to the punch and I cannot exalt his post enough. So I'll just quote it, because this is the simple best summary anyone could give:

The Auld Grump wrote:For games in your own house - house rules are fine - but do not expect me to accept your house rules in my house.

Nor should I expect to be able to use my (obviously superior) house rules at your house.

And both of us can expect to be told to go pound sand if we expect to use either of our sets of house rules in an organized play campaign.

 azreal13 wrote:
expecting strangers to be ok with it and putting them in a situation where they might feel awkward saying no, is not ok.

This is why I think if you have something like a unit that breaks the rules, you should also have prepared an army list that actually follows the rules. So if you are presenting a stranger with your own "house rule" you can also tell them that if they aren't happy with it, you have prepared a separate list that is legal and so you aren't putting them in the position where they feel like a dick for having to tell you "no".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
expecting strangers to be ok with it and putting them in a situation where they might feel awkward saying no, is not ok.

This is why I think if you have something like a unit that breaks the rules, you should also have prepared an army list that actually follows the rules. So if you are presenting a stranger with your own "house rule" you can also tell them that if they aren't happy with it, you have prepared a separate list that is legal and so you aren't putting them in the position where they feel like a dick for having to tell you "no".

That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 Medium of Death wrote:
I wonder if GW have deliberately excluded them from allying Chaos because they are planning a large chaos kit equivalent to the Knight. I know the Lord of Skulls exists (sadly) but it doesn't really help people fielding any of the other 3 gods.

Has anybody had access to the Codex early? In all this back and forth I've gotten pretty lost.

KHORNE IS ALL! ALL CHAOS PLAYERS LOVE KHORNE! THERE IS NO NEED FOR ANY OTHER BIG THING.

MAYBE NURGLE, GDUBS LOVES PUS, TOO.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
expecting strangers to be ok with it and putting them in a situation where they might feel awkward saying no, is not ok.

This is why I think if you have something like a unit that breaks the rules, you should also have prepared an army list that actually follows the rules. So if you are presenting a stranger with your own "house rule" you can also tell them that if they aren't happy with it, you have prepared a separate list that is legal and so you aren't putting them in the position where they feel like a dick for having to tell you "no".

[Yoda]Following the road to wisdom, this is.[/Yoda]

The Auld Grump

Tinqle wrote:
So is there any general consensus on whether or not the 15mm leviathan crusader would work as a good substitute for a knight because from the pics it would seem that with a bit of basing it should be a comparable size. Does anyone have a pic of the two side by side?

Regardless, why would I allow my opponent to have a 4.5" model as his knight, and use the 4.75" to 5.75" buildings and scenery as cover, while my 6" (to 7" converted) knight is exposed? It is an unfair advantage (unless they add 1.5" on base). (Not to mention it can not be used inside a gw store or tourny.)

Could we stop talking about the validity of the rules? Officially Chaos can't have Knights, so in friendly games it is ok, but in Tournaments that follow the official rules no chaos knights.

Just wait until next month until the 5 chaos knights come out (4 chaos powers and undivided) for 180$ with a special limited codex bound in failed sales manager skin for a measly 500$

Still no comparison shot of a 15mm leviathan with a Imp. Knight?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Could we stop talking about the validity of the rules?

Why? I haven't had this much fun in a Dakka thread in ages.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Could we stop talking about the validity of the rules?

Why? I haven't had this much fun in a Dakka thread in ages.

But isn't it OT this thread is about Imperial Knights not Chaos knights.
But they have been released so on to the general 40k forum?

 Breotan wrote:
They had their own, I remember but I thought the Knight Worlds were originally a tight group of worlds out on the frontier somewhere and the AdMech built the Knights for the local lords who loved tournaments and jousting and stuff. I'm likely misremembering a lot and I don't have the old stuff available to look at so if someone has it, please correct me.

No, that was later fluff. When Knights were originally introduced, the Knight worlds were co-settled by humans and Exodites, and the Knights were built with the assistance of the Eldar... the Ad-Mech had no idea how they worked.

Humans and Eldar working together? Heresy!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah. RPG’s aren’t war games. They’re inherently not adversarial in that there’s no “sides” attempting to “win”. There’s the GM who facilitates the story, the events within the narrative and rolls for the NPC’s, and then there are the players, working their way through the scenario and overcoming obstacles either individually as a team.

And there is Our GM for DnD 4th..where is objective in all his scenarios, is to kill us in the most gruesome/stupid/frustrating ways, to the point that i quited the group because it became a pain in the arse to play with him, and his way of doing thing has influenced the others, so even when they where GMing in his place, its was no better or worse( lost 2 Chars, because they played them while i whas absent, when i specifically said to them to not play my Chars when i'm not here...)

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Still no comparison shot of a 15mm leviathan with a Imp. Knight?

Not that I know, but I have a feeling it would be about this...

(assumes Knight is 6.5" tall and 15mm Lev is 4.5" tall, though the images were clearly taken at slightly different distances and heights). Included the people just because I thought it looked funny

That picture is hilariously useless. Please tell me that was your intent, as that's a funny pic.

Ok, so the leviathan is about the same height as Steve, but you'd need Mike and Chad to stand on each others shoulders to use them as a Knight.
This is all really helping flesh out my insane ramblings journal.