Imperial Knight, what format?

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.

**rigeld2**

Gloomfang wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
If you can handle a bunch of Leman Russes, you can handle these.

That I have to disagre with. Russes don't have an invul vs shooting

Russes can get a cover save pretty easily (with all the Chimeras around).
Russes are also 14 AV on the front, not 13.

or a WS4 I3. Or a D CC weapon.
That means taking things into CC with it is a bad idea and that is how Nids kill russes.

Also if you do kill it in CC everything takes aanother D hit when it explodes.

Sure - but Nids are pretty unique with that "requirement". Most anyone else can field enough AT weaponry to deal with these pretty easily.
About as easy as if your opponent was mech guard...

**Gloomfang**

nutty_nutter wrote:
if your really concerend about them, take 3 units of 30 gaunts, 3 spawn monsters and constantly tie them up in CC for the entire game.....the can only kill so many per turn even with stomp attacks and your not going to run away anywhere.

That would be great if it worked. Pg76. "Assaulting a vehicle". You can't assault a vehicle you can't hurt.

EDIT: And it doesn't feel good to have everyone else have at least a partial answer to these things except the army you play. If we still had pods it might not have been that bad. If they didn't have the stubber it might not have been bad either. At the Hive we are still trying to see about killing one let alone getting 3 of them off objectives. Hard to even contest with that big base.

**BaronIveagh**

It could be worse. They don't have inferno cannons and a D CC weapon.

**Slayer le boucher**

So i take it that no one in this thread saw these;

via Jes Bickham (who is the editor of White Dwarf) on GW Digital Facebook
Some clarification on the rules we presented in White Dwarf today for some folks here: the Imperial Knights don't occupy any force organisation slots, they are not Lords of War, they are an army unto themselves. Something we forgot to say is that all Imperial Knights are scoring units, and if you're playing 3-6 as a primary detachment, pick one as your Warlord.

via a Reader here on Faeit 212
Here's a reply I got from GW Customer Service regarding the key question, can Chaos ally with Knights?

From: UK Customer Services
Date: 24 February 2014
To:
Subject: Re: Imperial Knights

Hi
Thanks for the email, the rules printed in this week's issue of White Dwarf state that "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" As such any 40k army can take them as a allied detachment.

Perhaps the persuasive nature of Slaanesh has convinced a Freelance household to work for Chaos, or maybe they just pay better than the Forces of the Imperium.

As Tyranids are unable to Ally with any other armies, due to their natural desire to devour everything in their path, they cant ally with the Imperial Knights either.

We hope this helps and that you enjoy the new Imperial Knights.

**Happyjew**

Curses! There goes my hope for a House becoming a Genestealer Cult.

Though I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the love GW gives my Nids...

**Ghaz**

Slayer le boucher wrote:
So i take it that no one in this thread saw these;

via Jes Bickham (who is the editor of White Dwarf) on GW Digital Facebook
Some clarification on the rules we presented in White Dwarf today for some folks here: the Imperial Knights don't occupy any force organisation slots, they are not Lords of War, they are an army unto themselves. Something we forgot to say is that all Imperial Knights are scoring units, and if you're playing 3-6 as a primary detachment, pick one as your Warlord.

via a Reader here on Faeit 212
Here's a reply I got from GW Customer Service regarding the key question, can Chaos ally with Knights?

From: UK Customer Services
Date: 24 February 2014
To:
Subject: Re: Imperial Knights

Hi
Thanks for the email, the rules printed in this week's issue of White Dwarf state that "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" As such any 40k army can take them as a allied detachment.

Perhaps the persuasive nature of Slaanesh has convinced a Freelance household to work for Chaos, or maybe they just pay better than the Forces of the Imperium.

As Tyranids are unable to Ally with any other armies, due to their natural desire to devour everything in their path, they cant ally with the Imperial Knights either.

We hope this helps and that you enjoy the new Imperial Knights.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

YMDC tenet #2.

**Angelic**

Not only that, it really doesn't matter if they say they can be taken as allies, since without the level of Alliance it's meaningless. To really be legal, everyone has wait 2 weeks for the Codex to release before actually using them in a game. It would also seem that the bit on the Digital page was removed. I didn't see it when I looked for it again.

**FlingitNow**

Angelic wrote:
Not only that, it really doesn't matter if they say they can be taken as allies, since without the level of Alliance it's meaningless. To really be legal, everyone has wait 2 weeks for the Codex to release before actually using them in a game. It would also seem that the bit on the Digital page was removed. I didn't see it when I looked for it again.

Given the RaW mess that is D Weapons I don't see the lack of clarification on level of alliance as a massive problem. You have to create house rules to work D weapons anyway why not just agree then on the level of alliance? (Personally I'm going tosuggest in my games that we follow the IG matrix as that makes the most sense with BB IG but hey).

They are entirely RaW legal they just break the game much like D weapons.

**DJGietzen**

FlingitNow wrote:
Angelic wrote:
Not only that, it really doesn't matter if they say they can be taken as allies, since without the level of Alliance it's meaningless. To really be legal, everyone has wait 2 weeks for the Codex to release before actually using them in a game. It would also seem that the bit on the Digital page was removed. I didn't see it when I looked for it again.

Given the RaW mess that is D Weapons I don't see the lack of clarification on level of alliance as a massive problem. You have to create house rules to work D weapons anyway why not just agree then on the level of alliance? (Personally I'm going tosuggest in my games that we follow the IG matrix as that makes the most sense with BB IG but hey).

They are entirely RaW legal they just break the game much like D weapons.

What mess do D weapons create withing the RAW/?

**FlingitNow**

Well they do wounds to models but to hit and to wound is done against units. So there's a total disconnect between the process that D weapons intercept at the to wound step then return to for the wound allocation step. Essentially If my D blast hits 4 Orks from a 30 man squad and I roll 4 x 6s to wound then 24+4d6 Orks are killed not the 4 that is the clear intention. Essentially they are missing the "1 hit = 1 kill" for multi-wound hits that Warhammer has.

**Daeghrefn**

This is a lot more simple than people are making it. If you are not playing with Escalation or Apoc, then there's nothing that defines "Super Heavy" - therefore making super heavies unavailable in "normal" 40k.

Unless the Imperial Knight book defines them specifically, then there's room for argument.

The fact remains that quite a few people do not want to play with super heavy units, D weapons, or the variant missions available from supplment books, no matter what GW thinks.
That is something which will have to be decided by your group.

**jeffersonian000**

I'm just looking forward to playing 40k scale BattleTech, been waiting literally 2 decades to be able to legally field Knight-class Titans in 40k, and I am going to field me some Knight/Mechs!!!

SJ

**Peregrine**

FlingitNow wrote:
Well they do wounds to models but to hit and to wound is done against units.

Actually they don't. D-weapons don't generate wounds that go into the wound pool, they reduce a specific model's wounds characteristic by a set amount. You determine which models are hit, then for each model you roll separately to see how many wounds (if any) it loses. And then if its wounds characteristic is reduced to 0 or less it is removed as a casualty.

**BaronIveagh**

Daeghrefn wrote:

Unless the Imperial Knight book defines them specifically, then there's room for argument.

This is incorrect. GW has specifically stated that these are for 'normal' 40k. This argument holds no more water than a SM codex failing to include a definition of 'heavy bolter' means that all heavy bolters are only allowed with opponents approval.

**PrinceRaven**

Heavy Bolters are defined in the rulebook, Super-Heavies are not.

**nutty_nutter**

PrinceRaven wrote:
Heavy Bolters are defined in the rulebook, Super-Heavies are not.

and escalation and stronghold are not optional rules (excluding the optional update tot he building rules) as defined within thier own pages.

the standard rulebook is no longer an all encompasing rulebook, and never has been, otherwise there would be no codex's.

**FlingitNow**

Actually they don't. D-weapons don't generate wounds that go into the wound pool, they reduce a specific model's wounds characteristic by a set amount. You determine which models are hit, then for each model you roll separately to see how many wounds (if any) it loses. And then if its wounds characteristic is reduced to 0 or less it is removed as a casualty.

Which would be cool if there was a method of determining which models were hit. You follow the normal shoot process for to hit which generated exactly zero hits on models ever (but does generate hits on units), hence RaW D weapons don't actually do anything.

**PrinceRaven**

nutty_nutter wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:
Heavy Bolters are defined in the rulebook, Super-Heavies are not.

and escalation and stronghold are not optional rules (excluding the optional update tot he building rules) as defined within thier own pages.

the standard rulebook is no longer an all encompasing rulebook, and never has been, otherwise there would be no codex's.

The point is that if you already don't play with Escalation you aren't playing with the rules that allow Knights to function, regardless of how "official" these rules you aren't using are.

I mean, Mysterious Objectives are official, they're right there in the core rulebook, doesn't stop the majority of players I know from completely ignoring them.

Games Workshop stopped having the right to decide what "standard 40k" means when they stopped sponsoring tournaments, that right now lies in the community's hands.

**FlingitNow**

Well standard or normal 40k includes Escalation. If you take out Escalation or fortifications or the shooting phase or codexes or any other normal rules that is not normal 40k.

**PrinceRaven**

The definition of "normal" is "the usual, typical, or expected state or condition", so if the most common form of 40k played does not include the Escalation rules I would argue that normal 40k does not include Escalation.

**FlingitNow**

So you have the statistical evidence to support that I guess? It is also conforming to the standard. The standard here being what GW says it is. Discounting Escalation is no more a normal game of Escalation than discounting flyers (I know of lots of people who play without flyers) or discounting Tau or discounting Allies or discounting melta weapons or the movement phase...

Creating house rules that you and your group agree to is cool and up to you but it is not standard or normal 40k when you do that.

**nutty_nutter**

FlingitNow wrote:
Actually they don't. D-weapons don't generate wounds that go into the wound pool, they reduce a specific model's wounds characteristic by a set amount. You determine which models are hit, then for each model you roll separately to see how many wounds (if any) it loses. And then if its wounds characteristic is reduced to 0 or less it is removed as a casualty.

Which would be cool if there was a method of determining which models were hit. You follow the normal shoot process for to hit which generated exactly zero hits on models ever (but does generate hits on units), hence RaW D weapons don't actually do anything.

not true, blast rules cause hits based on models.

the only non blast D wepoan I can think of is the pylon for necrons which shoots as normal.

D weapons also have thier own rules governing how damage works, so while the hitting aspect is the same, the rolls for wounding are replaced.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

PrinceRaven wrote:

Games Workshop stopped having the right to decide what "standard 40k" means when they stopped sponsoring tournaments, that right now lies in the community's hands.

also untrue, they run thier own tournaments, they are under no obligation to support 3rd party tournaments at all, and since they create the game and set the rules for their own tournament (which at this time include escaltion, stronghold and imperial armour books) that is the definition of the 'standard'.

your personal preference does not in any way mean that your definition of what a normal game is, is correct, it is what it is. your preference.

**FlingitNow**

not true, blast rules cause hits based on models.

So you're saying you roll to wound against each model and only remove the models under the blast for normal blasts? Because that really isn't how the blast rules work. Just like any shooting attack they cause hits on units. You generate those hits by counting models but the models never receive hits. They only ever receive wounds and then only through the wound pool.

D weapons also have thier own rules governing how damage works, so while the hitting aspect is the same, the rolls for wounding are replaced.

And rolls to wound are done against units (hence the majority toughness rule) as the hits are on the unit. D Weapons roll against models but they never generate hits on models so there's literally no way to resolve D weapons RaW.

**PrinceRaven**

FlingitNow wrote:So you have the statistical evidence to support that I guess? It is also conforming to the standard. The standard here being what GW says it is. Discounting Escalation is no more a normal game of Escalation than discounting flyers (I know of lots of people who play without flyers) or discounting Tau or discounting Allies or discounting melta weapons or the movement phase...

Creating house rules that you and your group agree to is cool and up to you but it is not standard or normal 40k when you do that.

I said "if". Standard simply means accepted as normal, so we have to go right back to the "what is normal?" discussion.

nutty_nutter wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:

Games Workshop stopped having the right to decide what "standard 40k" means when they stopped sponsoring tournaments, that right now lies in the community's hands.

also untrue, they run thier own tournaments, they are under no obligation to support 3rd party tournaments at all, and since they create the game and set the rules for their own tournament (which at this time include escaltion, stronghold and imperial armour books) that is the definition of the 'standard'.

your personal preference does not in any way mean that your definition of what a normal game is, is correct, it is what it is. your preference.

They get to decide the format for their own tournaments just like any other tournament organiser. Until they have an organised global format this matters as much as any other tournament when determining what is "normal 40k".

**nutty_nutter**

FlingitNow wrote:
not true, blast rules cause hits based on models.

So you're saying you roll to wound against each model and only remove the models under the blast for normal blasts? Because that really isn't how the blast rules work. Just like any shooting attack they cause hits on units. You generate those hits by counting models but the models never receive hits. They only ever receive wounds and then only through the wound pool.

not what I said.

you stipulated that hits are not caused on model basis, they are where blast weapons are concerned, it says so right on page 6 that a blast weapons number of hits are = to the number of models underneath the template. therefore the number of hits is = to the number of models underneath the template.

again however D weapons do not care about toughness, they have their own rules for dealing damage based on the number of hits.

it is actually crystal clear on how D weapons work within the confines of the rules on p17 of Escalation.

**Stormbreed**

PrinceRaven wrote:

They get to decide the format for their own tournaments just like any other tournament organiser. Until they have an organised global format this matters as much as any other tournament when determining what is "normal 40k".

No they decided on the rules they released and you decided to buy the models for the game they released. They encourage you to be creative and forge a narrative, but the normal game is what they released rules for. If two people agreed to a 1800 point game, and didn't discuss any house rules, when you get to the game you must expect all GW rules to be in effect.

**FlingitNow**

not what I said.

you stipulated that hits are not caused on model basis, they are where blast weapons are concerned, it says so right on page 6 that a blast weapons number of hits are = to the number of models underneath the template. therefore the number of hits is = to the number of models underneath the template.

again however D weapons do not care about toughness, they have their own rules for dealing damage based on the number of hits.

Actually it is exactly what you said and are still claiming. No hits from blast weapons are caused on models. Hits are caused on units read the blast weapon rules. Yes you count models to work out how many hits you cause ON THE UNIT.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
You think damage is done from D weapons based on hits who suffers that damage how and why?

**PrinceRaven**

Stormbreed wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:

They get to decide the format for their own tournaments just like any other tournament organiser. Until they have an organised global format this matters as much as any other tournament when determining what is "normal 40k".

No they decided on the rules they released and you decided to buy the models for the game they released. They encourage you to be creative and forge a narrative, but the normal game is what they released rules for. If two people agreed to a 1800 point game, and didn't discuss any house rules, when you get to the game you must expect all GW rules to be in effect.

What makes the official rules in all their horrible glory automatically the normal way of playing? Other games' communities have created their own formats, why can't we?

**FlingitNow**

What makes the official rules in all their horrible glory automatically the normal way of playing? Other games' communities have created their own formats, why can't we?

Because they are the standard way of playing. If you're playing Warhammer 40,000 you use the Warhammer 40,000 rules if you want to use different set of rules or a subset of those rules that is up to you and your opponent but you both have to agree to that claiming what you want to play is normal is a pretty ludicrous stance to take.

**BaronIveagh**

FlingitNow wrote:

Actually it is exactly what you said and are still claiming. No hits from blast weapons are caused on models. Hits are caused on units read the blast weapon rules. Yes you count models to work out how many hits you cause ON THE UNIT.

You think damage is done from D weapons based on hits who suffers that damage how and why?

IIRC, and I may be wrong in this, wounds can only be assigned to models under the template, regardless of how many models the unit has. Any excess wounds are effectively lost. This applies for Str D as much as anything else.