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.

After having a look I cannot find the format that these are designed to be fielded in.

Not standard 40k surely, it's Escalation or Apoc right?

It does say you can take three to six in a primary detachment, surely not of 40k though right?

It says Super-Heavy Walker as unit type, that means Apocalypse or Escalation.

Initially I thought that, though the only rule in print is you need a primary detachment.

It even states "this weapon is one of the best in Warhammer 40k" , no mention of Apoc or Escalation, just 40k.

its legal 40k... just as everything else now, only house rules prevent it from being uses in any normal 40k game

40k applies to the regular 40k as well as all expansions.

Obviously, "this weapon is one of the best in Warhammer 40k" is just silly fluff text, considering that for the same points you can get two defilers and fire the same two shots.

It says you can take 3-6 in a primary detachment.

If you actually read the WD it certainly comes across that they are intended to be used in regular games of 40k.

It mentions that they have rules found in the Escalation and Apocalypse rulebooks but doesn't mention those two variants again.

It also mentions being fielded as an allied detachment, if it were escalation this would instead say Lord of War right? As written they seem to be a Primary or Allied detachment for regular 40k.

Here's the actual wording from the WD

Imperial Knights can be fielded as an army in their own right, in a primary detachment of three to six Imperial Knights.
They may also be taken as allies; you can include up to three Imperial Knights as a single allied detachment for each
primary detachment in your army, you'll also note that Imperial Knights Use D weapons and the Invincible Behemoth
special rules - details of these can be found in both Apocalypse and Escalation.

Regular games of 40k a go go.

Yeah this is what struck me, the only requirement for fielding them is a limit of 3 per primary detachment.

So D weapons meet regular 40k?

D weapons are not as OP as every cries about...

boo hoo... we now have a counter to ++ saves and death stars... welcome to the rest of our world where there is at least one thing that takes our models off on a 2+ regardless

the super heavies them selves are laughable to kill for how many points they are, and while titans are just too big for normal games, they go down quite easy to any sustained anti armour fire, and especially in close combat. that plus the prohibitive pts cost make them actually decently balanced for normal 40k.

these knights fit in just fine, awesome models and in a good middle ground power level wise

D weapons are official 40k, that they no longer require a Lord of war slot is just fine... these are only CC D weapons anyways.

What if i told you the knights don't have the D (ranged that is)

Not sure how to answer this question.

Escalation and stronghold assault are not optional rules, they are as valid as death from the skies flyer rules, any codex, the rulebook..

so standard 40k format?

in the escalation book most Lord of War choices are 1 unit

the knights can come in units of 1, 3 or 5 so I am guessing they will either be an ally faction, or a dataslate.

Considering you can do something like drop 5 sternguard in a pod and fire 5 melta shots into its back, which will probably hit 4 times and with 8+2d6 pen rolls probably pen 4 times at less than half the cost of the knight, you will probably kill a knight pretty easily if you take about 2 minutes during deployment or movement to think about what to do. Just remember when they blow its usually a D explosion.

 easysauce wrote:
D weapons are not as OP as every cries about...

boo hoo... we now have a counter to ++ saves and death stars... welcome to the rest of our world where there is at least one thing that takes our models off on a 2+ regardless

the super heavies them selves are laughable to kill for how many points they are, and while titans are just too big for normal games, they go down quite easy to any sustained anti armour fire, and especially in close combat. that plus the prohibitive pts cost make them actually decently balanced for normal 40k.

these knights fit in just fine, awesome models and in a good middle ground power level wise

D weapons are official 40k, that they no longer require a Lord of war slot is just fine... these are only CC D weapons anyways.

Yup The D is in 40k regular now.

Ive been running my Stompa in a campaign my groups been doing for several weeks now....D slapped a Baneblade,krunched lots of Umies and just recently was taken down turn one by massed Necrons ...got too headstrong on that one and deserved it,lol

Melee D is fine in normal 40k pretty much all Superheavys seem to be fine...HOWEVER the Revenant Titan does not belong with its movement and shooting abilities it should be apoc only.

They are going to be their own kind of faction in fact 3 diffrent kinds.. according to the digital version facebook GW have.
they said something along the lines will you have a imperium, the mechanicum or a rogue freeblade?

blaktoof wrote:

Escalation and stronghold assault are not optional rules, they are as valid as death from the skies flyer rules, any codex, the rulebook..

From Stonrghold

"The following is therefore a list of optional rules updates that we recommend that you incorporate into your games of Warhammer 40,000 when using fortifications and buildings. You should agree with your opponent before the battle begins whether to use some, or all of these updates."

There is always a choice.

Uptopdownunder wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

Escalation and stronghold assault are not optional rules, they are as valid as death from the skies flyer rules, any codex, the rulebook..

From Stonrghold

"The following is therefore a list of optional rules updates that we recommend that you incorporate into your games of Warhammer 40,000 when using fortifications and buildings. You should agree with your opponent before the battle begins whether to use some, or all of these updates."

There is always a choice.

The quote you reference is only pertaining to the updated building rules, which regard moving into out of buildings, assaulting buildings, and shooting into out of buildings.

the actual rules for the fortifications, and their weapons are in different sections before and after and none of them are listed as optional.

There was another book in the past "Death from the Skies" contained in it was 1 section of optional rules, dogfighting. The weapons and rules for the fliers therein were not optional.


so yes you have a choice to optionally use the updated building rules in stronghold assault, but RAW the rules for the fortifications and weapons in stronghold are not optional.

Of course this is just a game and anything can be optional, we could say the rules for cover are optional because they take too long if we agreed to play etc.

IKs are legal 40k. Size wise they are around the eldar wraith knight level and only have a D str melee weapon, the reason they have those is primarily for antisuper heavy combat. They were in epic I believe and are essentially titan infantry. points wise they balance well for 40k. the weapons they boast are not grotesquely op like you see on larger units.

FW stuff is starting to get the Official stamp too, last I heard. So, brace yourselves, this may get crazy.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
FW stuff is starting to get the Official stamp too, last I heard. So, brace yourselves, this may get crazy.

There's no "starting" about it, FW has been official for years now. The only question is whether people will stubbornly fight to the death to defend their no-FW house rules. Which is the same situation as Escalation: RAW it is indisputably part of the standard game, but some people insist that their "no Escalation" house rule is actually GW's position no matter how obviously wrong they are.

The only Super-Heavy Walker rules we have are in Escalation and Apocalypse, so unless the Imperial Knight's rules include those rules they wouldn't be fieldable if you're playing a core rules only game.
I don't know where you're getting "years" from, Peregrine. Until Escalation there were no rules recognised by the rulebook to play FW exclusive units outside of the Apocalypae expansion.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
The only Super-Heavy Walker rules we have are in Escalation and Apocalypse, so unless the Imperial Knight's rules include those rules they wouldn't be fieldable if you're playing a core rules only game.
I don't know where you're getting "years" from, Peregrine. Until Escalation there were no rules recognised by the rulebook to play FW exclusive units outside of the Apocalypae expansion.

Because like a lot of people, you decided to ignore all those 'Official Rules' they're putting in FW books now. Don't worry, they started it on us over aft BFG and now it's spread to 40k.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
The only Super-Heavy Walker rules we have are in Escalation and Apocalypse, so unless the Imperial Knight's rules include those rules they wouldn't be fieldable if you're playing a core rules only game.

Escalation is part of the core rules, just like C:SM is.

I don't know where you're getting "years" from, Peregrine. Until Escalation there were no rules recognised by the rulebook to play FW exclusive units outside of the Apocalypae expansion.

Nope, not true at all. FW units have been part of normal 40k for years now, Escalation just added the ability to take FW superheavies. The "standard" units were already legal.

 Peregrine wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
The only Super-Heavy Walker rules we have are in Escalation and Apocalypse, so unless the Imperial Knight's rules include those rules they wouldn't be fieldable if you're playing a core rules only game.

Escalation is part of the core rules, just like C:SM is.

By "core rules" I'm simply referring to playing with only the Rulebook and Codices, in much the same way I use "core rules" in D&D to refer to playing with the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and DM's Guide. I'm aware that Escalation is part of the "official" rules, and until Games Workshop runs some sort of organised play format that means nothing to me.

I don't know where you're getting "years" from, Peregrine. Until Escalation there were no rules recognised by the rulebook to play FW exclusive units outside of the Apocalypae expansion.

Nope, not true at all. FW units have been part of normal 40k for years now, Escalation just added the ability to take FW superheavies. The "standard" units were already legal.

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that?

 PrinceRaven wrote:
By "core rules" I'm simply referring to playing with only the Rulebook and Codices, in much the same way I use "core rules" in D&D to refer to playing with the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and DM's Guide. I'm aware that Escalation is part of the "official" rules, and until Games Workshop runs some sort of organised play format that means nothing to me.

That's fine, but your "rulebook and codices" definition is purely your own invention. You're free to house rule yourself a special game like that, but it's not standard 40k. So please don't describe it as if it is, as doing so interferes with the purpose of YMDC and potentially confuses people.

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that?

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that only the 40k rulebook can tell you which rules are part of the standard game, and new books can't just say "this is now part of the game"?

 Peregrine wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
By "core rules" I'm simply referring to playing with only the Rulebook and Codices, in much the same way I use "core rules" in D&D to refer to playing with the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and DM's Guide. I'm aware that Escalation is part of the "official" rules, and until Games Workshop runs some sort of organised play format that means nothing to me.

That's fine, but your "rulebook and codices" definition is purely your own invention. You're free to house rule yourself a special game like that, but it's not standard 40k. So please don't describe it as if it is, as doing so interferes with the purpose of YMDC and potentially confuses people.

My original point still stands, if you've decided to not play with Escalation you don't have access to the rules that govern Super-Heavies.

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that?

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that only the 40k rulebook can tell you which rules are part of the standard game, and new books can't just say "this is now part of the game"?

I don't need to find denial of permission if you can't find permission in a permissive ruleset.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
My original point still stands, if you've decided to not play with Escalation you don't have access to the rules that govern Super-Heavies.

So what? This is like saying that you don't have the rules for tactical squads if you've decided not to play with C:SM. Obviously if you exclude certain rules you won't have them available, but I don't see what this has to do with normal games.

I don't need to find denial of permission if you can't find permission in a permissive ruleset.

The permission is found in each book that adds new stuff. You're the one assuming that GW has to issue that permission in the exact source that you want it in.

 Peregrine wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
My original point still stands, if you've decided to not play with Escalation you don't have access to the rules that govern Super-Heavies.

So what? This is like saying that you don't have the rules for tactical squads if you've decided not to play with C:SM. Obviously if you exclude certain rules you won't have them available, but I don't see what this has to do with normal games.

The original question was whether or not the Knights would be allowed in a format that didn't include Escalation, thus my answer.

I don't need to find denial of permission if you can't find permission in a permissive ruleset.

The permission is found in each book that adds new stuff. You're the one assuming that GW has to issue that permission in the exact source that you want it in.

Silly me for expecting rules to be in the rulebook.
Since any book from any part of of GW can have rules for standard 40k apparently, I'm gonna go get the guy who runs my local GW to make a Squats Codex.

FW are part of the GW studio. Is your local store manager?

Actually, Forge World's design studio is entirely separate from Games Workshop's.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

I don't know where you're getting "years" from, Peregrine. Until Escalation there were no rules recognised by the rulebook to play FW exclusive units outside of the Apocalypae expansion.

Nope, not true at all. FW units have been part of normal 40k for years now, Escalation just added the ability to take FW superheavies. The "standard" units were already legal.

Could you quote me the part of the 40k rulebook or FAQ that states that?

Page 108 of the BRB: The Army List

players are free to either adapt the army lists or use their own system as they wish.

If I wanted to I could field a 1500 pt army that consisted of Abbadon leading 95 Necron Warriors. I may not find an opponent, but it is perfectly legal.