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.

Hi guys, I think I know the answer to this question, but in case someone in my FLGS is trying to rules lawyer this, I wanted to double-check with you first.

The question - Does an Imperial Knights attached to an Iron Hands army get IWND?

The argument - I anticipate it's possible a player could debate it as follows:

1. The IH CT gives vehicles in the detachment IWND, even though vehicles do not have the CT special rule

2. Now Imperial Knights are LoW, so when it joins an IH army, it's a vehicle that's part of the detachment

3. Therefore, an Imperial Knight in an IH army gets IWND

The counter-argument - The Imperial Knight belongs to the faction "Imperial Knights", therefore by definition cannot be part of the IH detachment

For narrative/fluff reasons, I definitely feel an Imperial Knight would not benefit from Iron Hands, the adeptus astartes and titanicus are separate entities, but I'm actually not 100% sure if this is the right Rules As Written interpretation, nor if my counter-argument is correct. Please correct me if I'm wrong, thanks in advance.

The counter argument is correct. The Knight is joined as part of an Imperial Knight detachment. It does not get slotted into the Iron Hand's detachment. As such, it does not gain IWND.

Edit: didn't read Yarium's answer.

I do believe they removed the rule that allowed you to take an Imperial Knight in a Space Marine CAD (as all units in the Space Marine CAD must be of the Space Marines faction). You would be forced to use the Imperial Knights Oathsworn Detachment to field an Imperial Knight now if I'm not mistaken.

 Ghaz wrote:
I do believe they removed the rule that allowed you to take an Imperial Knight in a Space Marine CAD (as all units in the Space Marine CAD must be of the Space Marines faction). You would be forced to use the Imperial Knights Oathsworn Detachment to field an Imperial Knight now if I'm not mistaken.

That rule was only ever for the FW knights (which have not changed yet). You never able to take regular knights in a Space Marine CAD in the first place.

FW Knights (such as the Lancer, Casitgator, etc) have permission to be taken as a LoW for Space Marines. If you do as such then they are part of your Iron Hands army and get IWND.

Just goes to show how little I see Imperial Knights

 Kommissar Waaaghrick wrote:
2. Now Imperial Knights are LoW, so when it joins an IH army, it's a vehicle that's part of the detachment

3. Therefore, an Imperial Knight in an IH army gets IWND

2. Only applied to Forgeworld Knights, and it still does:

A Cerastus Knight-Lancer may be taken as a Lords of War choice for any faction that is a part of the Armies of the Imperium

3. Correct.

Now for your counter-argument, it is quite simple: If the Imperial Knight was of Faction "Imperial Knight", then this rule for the CAD would not allow you to use one:
"Restrictions All units chosen must have the same Faction (or have no Faction)."

This means that the Quote above from Forgeworld, letting you take a Lancer as a LoW for Iron Hands must mean that the Lancer is of Faction "Iron Hands" or "No Faction".
If "Iron Hands" everything is simple. If "No Faction" then i would have to argue that he is still part of the Detachment and the rule states "all Units in the Detachment" which includes the Lancer. Or is there something along the lines of "all Units of the Space Marine Faction" in the Rule? (Doubt it because it's a 6th Ed Codex)

Agreed. The current Codex: Imperial Knights doesn't give permission to take a Knight as a Lord of War choice for anything other than an Imperial Knights detachment or formation.

Hence, you can't take one of the standard, Codex: IK Knights in an Iron Hands detachment. You CAN take one of the Forge World Knights in an Iron Hands detachment as they have explicit permission to be taken as a Lord of War choice for, among other things, a Space Marine detachment. Taking a FW Knight this way would allow it to have IWND.

Thanks for the clarification, guys.

And you guys were spot on anticipating where I 1st came across that argument with the Cerastus Lancer, and I did find it's the same line with all FW Knights. While I think it's only a matter of time before that gets fixed or addendum'd, etc., I indeed acknowledge it is currently RAW.

What prompted this question in the 1st place was the new Imperial Knights codex categorising the GW Knights as LoW as well, y'know? So anticipating this was going to come up, I wanted me and my fellows to have some counter-point handy.

As such, thanks for preparing me with that. I can go in and say the restriction (due to factions) and clarify (it's the FW Knights have that loophole...at least for now).

 Kommissar Waaaghrick wrote:
the new Imperial Knights codex categorising the GW Knights as LoW as well, y'know? So anticipating this was going to come up,

Happy to help.

The above won't be possible, as LoW is "only" their battlefield role.

A Tyranofex is Heavy Support.

If marines can take a GW Knight as LoW, i'm sure they can take a Tyranofex as Heavy Support too. Unfortunately, the Detachment Rules make this impossible.
FW Knight are the only ones with the specification quoted

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kommissar Waaaghrick wrote:
the new Imperial Knights codex categorising the GW Knights as LoW as well, y'know? So anticipating this was going to come up,

Happy to help.

The above won't be possible, as LoW is "only" their battlefield role.

A Tyranofex is Heavy Support.

If marines can take a GW Knight as LoW, i'm sure they can take a Tyranofex as Heavy Support too. Unfortunately, the Detachment Rules make this impossible.
FW Knight are the only ones with the specification quoted

<cough>unbound<cough>

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kommissar Waaaghrick wrote:
the new Imperial Knights codex categorising the GW Knights as LoW as well, y'know? So anticipating this was going to come up,

Happy to help.

The above won't be possible, as LoW is "only" their battlefield role.

A Tyranofex is Heavy Support.

If marines can take a GW Knight as LoW, i'm sure they can take a Tyranofex as Heavy Support too. Unfortunately, the Detachment Rules make this impossible.
FW Knight are the only ones with the specification quoted

<cough>unbound<cough>

SJ

<cough>then it wouldn't be space marines taking the tyranofix as a heavy support choice<cough>

<cough>then it wouldn't be space marines taking the tyranofix as a heavy support choice<cough>

Yes it does, there are just no command benefits. You can legally paint the 'fex's armor black, give it a bionic left arm, and call it "Iron Lord Fritz".

SJ

Each faction is its own "detachment" in unbound, even specifically states this in the unbound rules.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

<cough>then it wouldn't be space marines taking the tyranofix as a heavy support choice<cough>

Yes it does, there are just no command benefits. You can legally paint the 'fex's armor black, give it a bionic left arm, and call it "Iron Lord Fritz".

SJ

You need to read up on the Unbound rules as you're evidently unclear as to how detachments work. At no point do you ever have a scenario where Space Marines are taking a 'Nid as a Heavy Support choice. You may have Space Marines as your Primary Detachment, but the 'Nid isn't a part of that detachment. It's no different from taking a Battle-forged list and simply allying Space Marines and 'Nids.

You may decide in your head that you're taking a Space Marine army and that the Space Marines have somehow "tamed" a 'Nid, but that's fluff. The rules maintain them as separate and just allied together.

Sometimes I feel like I'm the only poster here that actually reads the rules:

Unbound Armies
The Unbound method is the easiest way to organise an army: simply use whichever units from your collection you want. Besides being a quick way to get your models on the tabletop, the Unbound method also allows you to try out exciting combinations in your army, such as fielding a whole force of Tanks or Flyers, or even of special characters.

THE PRIMARY DETACHMENT
Every army has a Primary Detachment. If you organise your army using the Battle-forged method, whichever Detachment contains your Warlord is your Primary Detachment. If you used the Unbound method, then once you choose your Warlord, every model in your army that has the same Faction as your Warlord is considered to be part of the Primary Detachment for all rules purposes. Of course, in an Unbound army, these models are not bound by any Detachment restrictions and do not receive Command Benefits.

Forge the narrative.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only poster here that actually reads the rules:

Unbound Armies
The Unbound method is the easiest way to organise an army: simply use whichever units from your collection you want. Besides being a quick way to get your models on the tabletop, the Unbound method also allows you to try out exciting combinations in your army, such as fielding a whole force of Tanks or Flyers, or even of special characters.

THE PRIMARY DETACHMENT
Every army has a Primary Detachment. If you organise your army using the Battle-forged method, whichever Detachment contains your Warlord is your Primary Detachment. If you used the Unbound method, then once you choose your Warlord, every model in your army that has the same Faction as your Warlord is considered to be part of the Primary Detachment for all rules purposes. Of course, in an Unbound army, these models are not bound by any Detachment restrictions and do not receive Command Benefits.

Forge the narrative.

SJ

I read the rules too. Your contention was that Space Marines were taking a Tyranid unit as a Heavy Support choice. Not the case. If you take 9 Space Marines units with one being your Warlord and a 'Nid Heavy Support choice as an Unbound list... you end up with a Primary Detachment of Space Marines and an allied unit of 'Nids. You never have a 'Nid unit in a SM detachment. The rules don't support this ever.

You've made a poor assumption of my contention.

SJ

Its not that the detachment rules prohibit a Tyranid unit int he same detachment as a space marine unit, its that there are currently no detachments that allow this. Even an unbound army's primary detachment wont allow this.

SJ: detachment retrictions are a specific thing. Just like command benefits.

Having a different faction is not a "detachment restriction".

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
You've made a poor assumption of my contention.

SJ

What was your contention?

The comment was "If marines can take a GW Knight as LoW, i'm sure they can take a Tyranofex as Heavy Support too. Unfortunately, the Detachment Rules make this impossible. " You implied Unbound will allow this. My understanding is that you were contending that in an Unbound list, Space Marines can take a Tyranid Heavy Support Unit. Under an Unbound list, this is still an impossible situation.

It's also being needlessly pedantic.

 Kriswall wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
You've made a poor assumption of my contention.

SJ

What was your contention?

The comment was "If marines can take a GW Knight as LoW, i'm sure they can take a Tyranofex as Heavy Support too. Unfortunately, the Detachment Rules make this impossible. " You implied Unbound will allow this. My understanding is that you were contending that in an Unbound list, Space Marines can take a Tyranid Heavy Support Unit. Under an Unbound list, this is still an impossible situation.

My contention was that via unbound, one could take a Heavy slot Tyranofex with an Iron Hand Space Marine list, pointing out that no command benefits would apply to the Tyranid. Pretty much what I wrote.

SJ

Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

No because it is not a vehicle and it does not have the Chapter Tactics special rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also correct me if I'm wrong but is the swarmlord a character?

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I do believe they removed the rule that allowed you to take an Imperial Knight in a Space Marine CAD (as all units in the Space Marine CAD must be of the Space Marines faction). You would be forced to use the Imperial Knights Oathsworn Detachment to field an Imperial Knight now if I'm not mistaken.

That rule was only ever for the FW knights (which have not changed yet). You never able to take regular knights in a Space Marine CAD in the first place.

FW Knights (such as the Lancer, Casitgator, etc) have permission to be taken as a LoW for Space Marines. If you do as such then they are part of your Iron Hands army and get IWND.

The above is correct.

The Forge World Knights with the rule that lets any IoM faction take them as a LoW will gain IWND in an Ironhands Detachment if taken as a LoW choice. Knights taken any other way will not gain IWND.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

No because it is not a vehicle and it does not have the Chapter Tactics special rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also correct me if I'm wrong but is the swarmlord a character?

1) There are no detachments in Unbound, and thus nothing gains the IH chapter tactics.

2) The IH chapter tactics doesn't require the vehicle to have the Chapter Tactics rule. In fact, no vehicle has this rule. Thats why the IH chapter tactic specifies that vehicles in the IH detachment gain the benefit, not that models with the chapter tactic rule gain it. Its so it applies to the vehicles as well. This causes a little loophole that Forge World Knights can gain CTs when normally no vehicle outside of the Space marine codex can, but that's how the rules work.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I do believe they removed the rule that allowed you to take an Imperial Knight in a Space Marine CAD (as all units in the Space Marine CAD must be of the Space Marines faction). You would be forced to use the Imperial Knights Oathsworn Detachment to field an Imperial Knight now if I'm not mistaken.

That rule was only ever for the FW knights (which have not changed yet). You never able to take regular knights in a Space Marine CAD in the first place.

FW Knights (such as the Lancer, Casitgator, etc) have permission to be taken as a LoW for Space Marines. If you do as such then they are part of your Iron Hands army and get IWND.

The above is correct.

The Forge World Knights with the rule that lets any IoM faction take them as a LoW will gain IWND in an Ironhands Detachment if taken as a LoW choice. Knights taken any other way will not gain IWND.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

No because it is not a vehicle and it does not have the Chapter Tactics special rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also correct me if I'm wrong but is the swarmlord a character?

1) There are no detachments in Unbound, and thus nothing gains the IH chapter tactics.

2) The IH chapter tactics doesn't require the vehicle to have the Chapter Tactics rule. In fact, no vehicle has this rule. Thats why the IH chapter tactic specifies that vehicles in the IH detachment gain the benefit, not that models with the chapter tactic rule gain it. Its so it applies to the vehicles as well. This causes a little loophole that Forge World Knights can gain CTs when normally no vehicle outside of the Space marine codex can, but that's how the rules work.

Yes I am aware. Notice my bolding

THE PRIMARY DETACHMENT
Every army has a Primary Detachment. If you organise your army using the Battle-forged method, whichever Detachment contains your Warlord is your Primary Detachment. If you used the Unbound method, then once you choose your Warlord, every model in your army that has the same Faction as your Warlord is considered to be part of the Primary Detachment for all rules purposes. Of course, in an Unbound army, these models are not bound by any Detachment restrictions and do not receive Command Benefits.

Only codex SM vehicles and SM LOW can benefit from IH tactics even in unbound.

And if you read the factions rules later you will see that all units retain their faction no matter which method you use to build your army(it is even helpfully bolded in the brb)


So yeah, no knight(other than the FW ones taken as a SM LOW) will be an IH vehicle, just like the tyranofex will not be an IH Tyranofex(outside of your armies fluff), and will still be CTA to the marines units.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

You're just being facetious, because the original point was answered. Attacking me over your assumption of my "contention" is pointless, if not antagonistic.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Let's say you take a swarmlord then.

Does your contention say that it gets IH chapter tactics?

Also at that point it is not a heavy support slot nid(from your example, not the swarmlord), it is a heavy support battlefield role(there are no slots in unbound).

You're just being facetious, because the original point was answered. Attacking me over your assumption of my "contention" is pointless, if not antagonistic.

SJ

Antagonistic or not, you were wrong. It's important to squelch these sorts of misconceptions because they can seriously mislead or confuse a new player. You and I may understand what you mean when you say you're making an Unbound Space Marines list, but the reality of the situation is that Unbound lists are really an "All Factions" list. If you select ten Space Marine units and one Tyranid unit in an Unbound list, you might be tempted to say "I've take a Tyranid choice in my Space Marines army", whereas the reality is "I've taken both Space Marines and Tyranids in my Unbound army". Subtle difference, but it avoids the implication that under the right circumstances you can take Tyranid units in a Space Marine list. That's an impossibility under the current rules.

For such a big proponent of Unbound (you bring it up quite often), I'll hope you understand what I mean.