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.

So, I'm thinking about making a move (or possibly just a break) from Tau and making a pilgrimage over to IK. I've had a chance to look over the new codex and I like what I've seen. If I was going to start it up, this is kind of what I want to look at for a starting point.

Exalted Court (2195pts)

X1 Knight Paladin (440): Meltagun, Twin Icarus Autocannon, Ravager

x1 Knight Paladin (415): Meltagun, Twin Icarus Autocannon

x1 Knight Warden (420): Twin Icarus Autocannon, Thunderstrike Gauntlet

x1 Knight Warden (425): Twin Icarus Autocannon, The Paragon Gauntlet

x1 Knight Crusader (495): x1 Stormspear Rocket Pod, Mark of the Omnissiah

Any thoughts on this? Suggestions? Critiques?

Do not put the gauntlet on anything other than the knight gallant. It cripples their cc ability and will likely get another knight killed.


Trade out the2nd Paladin and the knight warden that has the paragon gauntlet for:

Knight gallant with Paragon Gauntlet AND Gerantius with Sanctuary.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Do not put the gauntlet on anything other than the knight gallant. It cripples their cc ability and will likely get another knight killed.


Trade out the2nd Paladin and the knight warden that has the paragon gauntlet for:

Knight gallant with Paragon Gauntlet AND Gerantius with Sanctuary.

I appreciate the response. I'll have to fiddle with it a bit and post a revision.

Is gerantius still legal? Can he take relics?

I have an that is painted up as gerantius, but I question if he is still legal following the new codex.

Gerantius is legal in the formations that allow any knight, but not the detachments that require LOW as he is not a LOW.

You could fill out the rest of your points with a small Inquisition or Skitarrii force maybe? And I agree with the Gauntlet comment.

Also, I think everyone is waiting on a ruling from GW for Gerantius.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:
You could fill out the rest of your points with a small Inquisition or Skitarrii force maybe? And I agree with the Gauntlet comment.

Also, I think everyone is waiting on a ruling from GW for Gerantius.

I was thinking about throwing some Skitarii in to supplement, yeah. Haven't had time to work on a revision yet. I was gone all night and didn't have access to my stuff.

Crazyterran wrote:Is gerantius still legal? Can he take relics?

I have an IK that is painted up as gerantius, but I question if he is still legal following the new codex.

FIXED. Bloody iPad's autocorrect feature is a pain in the...

DoomShakaLaka wrote:Gerantius is legal in the formations that allow any knight, but not the detachments that require LOW as he is not a LOW.

Hmm, I suppose that would be true. Have a Knight with a 2++ - even at 500 points - seems kind of crazy, though.

I have to say I disagree entirely on the Gauntlet, though for only 5 points more always take thge relic one if available. The things that are a threat in CC are largely I5+ (Wraithknights) or I1 anyway (Bloodthirsters, power fists etc). What the Gauntlet allows is that you always get your stomps as you never kill your target before you get to stomp. So charge that vehicle pull it apart with the gauntlet whilst jumping up and down on all other nearby targets before throwing the tank at another target.

I would swap the Paladins over to Errants, the things that can hurt your Knights generally have 2 plus saves. Gerantius is awesome in this formation give him Sanctuary for 3++ on 2 facings and 6++ on the others whilst Bs6 effectively twin links the melta. Make the Crusader your Commander so you gave 2 Bs6 knights both with 3++ rather than one with a 2++ that will never get shot at...

 FlingitNow wrote:
I have to say I disagree entirely on the Gauntlet, though for only 5 points more always take thge relic one if available. The things that are a threat in CC are largely I5+ (Wraithknights) or I1 anyway (Bloodthirsters, power fists etc). What the Gauntlet allows is that you always get your stomps as you never kill your target before you get to stomp. So charge that vehicle pull it apart with the gauntlet whilst jumping up and down on all other nearby targets before throwing the tank at another target.

I would swap the Paladins over to Errants, the things that can hurt your Knights generally have 2 plus saves. Gerantius is awesome in this formation give him Sanctuary for 3++ on 2 facings and 6++ on the others whilst Bs6 effectively twin links the melta. Make the Crusader your Commander so you gave 2 Bs6 knights both with 3++ rather than one with a 2++ that will never get shot at...

I was planning on making the Crusader my commander, actually. I appreciate all of your other feedback. I'll take that into consideration while working on this list.

 FlingitNow wrote:
I have to say I disagree entirely on the Gauntlet, though for only 5 points more always take thge relic one if available. The things that are a threat in CC are largely I5+ (Wraithknights) or I1 anyway (Bloodthirsters, power fists etc). What the Gauntlet allows is that you always get your stomps as you never kill your target before you get to stomp. So charge that vehicle pull it apart with the gauntlet whilst jumping up and down on all other nearby targets before throwing the tank at another target.

I would swap the Paladins over to Errants, the things that can hurt your Knights generally have 2 plus saves. Gerantius is awesome in this formation give him Sanctuary for 3++ on 2 facings and 6++ on the others whilst Bs6 effectively twin links the melta. Make the Crusader your Commander so you gave 2 Bs6 knights both with 3++ rather than one with a 2++ that will never get shot at...

I understand what you are saying about the gauntlet, but I would consider it an optional sidegrade if anything. It gives a little more utility and potentially more stomps, but does lower the knight's durability vs many targets in melee. Depends on your meta.

I'd keep the paladins. They are superior to Errants.

I don't know if Gerantius can legally be taken in the formation, or use the new relics. Does an FAQ cover it? If not I wouldn't be comfortable allowing an opponent to do it. He is a unique character after all, rather than a specific type of knight.

Are FW imperial knights allowed in the formation? If allowed then a Lancer might make a nice warlord, especially if the increased save effects the shield in close combat.

I'm not convinced about wardens. Personally I'd stretch for more crusaders instead.

Presuming the lancer can be taken I'd go with:

Lancer - Sanctuary, helm, Blessing of the Omnissiah - Warlord

Paladin - meltagun, Icarus
Paladin - meltagun, Icarus

Crusader - Battlecannon, meltagun, Icarus
Crusader - Battlecannon, meltagun, Icarus

2235 points

It is a bit spammy of course.

Errants are far better than Paladins. Gerantius is legal in the Formations and thus can have relics, currently he is not legal in the detachments or to be fielded in any other way apart from the formations.

What targets do you lose survivability against? Sure I wouldn't always take the Gauntlet but I1 is a good bonus even ignoring the Hurl rule.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Errants are far better than Paladins. Gerantius is legal in the Formations and thus can have relics, currently he is not legal in the detachments or to be fielded in any other way apart from the formations.

What targets do you lose survivability against? Sure I wouldn't always take the Gauntlet but I1 is a good bonus even ignoring the Hurl rule.

You always say errants are better, but you are in the minority. The paladin is better vs most targets in the game. You have said that 2+ units are a threat to knights, but specifically? I don't see it.

I wouldn't allow Gerantius without an FAQ. He is a unique special character, rather than a type of knight.

You lose survivability against anything that would attack at initiative steps 1-3 because you can not kill it before it strikes, and you may also be killed before attacking by something at I4 (like another knight). What things as an example? Ork walkers, necron warscythes, characters with meltabombs/powerfists (the formation knights are characters, so would be able to challenge them out and kill them before they attack if using the chainsword), MC/walkers charging through cover and the Str D bloodthirster. Is that enough? There are plenty more out there.

Broadsides & Grav Cents are both big threats to Knights. Lots of units have a 2+ tank these days (e.g. bike star, Lychstar etc).

Gerantius is allowed RaW, how do you suggest he can be fielded?

Cool Orks Walkers? Take melta they never reach you. How many do you see in competitive lists?

Warscythes and Characters with fists and bombs have body bags to die for them so your I4 is useless unless you have Character status to challenge (which granted you do in this formation) hence why you have a variety of Knights. If you need to kill characters have some with swords to challenge them out, have others with fists to wreck vehicles and everything nearby.

Your best bet against the Thirster is mutual destruction anyway as for MCs same as above applies. I'm not suggesting taking the fist on every Knight. I'm suggesting taking it on a few (about half) to up your damage output. Stomps win you games with Knights the more you make the better chance of winning.

Broadsides & Grav Cents are both big threats to Knights. Lots of units have a 2+ tank these days (e.g. bike star, Lychstar etc).

Gerantius is allowed RaW, how do you suggest he can be fielded?

Grav cents usually have a 4++ save, or at least some kind of cover. Even then, having 2W means that the melta cannon is still not great. Lychstar has a 3++ invulnerable save, meaning the paladin is just as effective as the errant. Bikes either have smashmaster or a 3+ cover. Again, the same as the paladin. So you named 3, and the errant is slightly better vs 1, and exactly the same against the other 2. anymore?

Gerrantius is not allowed in the formation RaW. He is not a type of knight, but a special character.

I also find it strange trying to give a unique character additional wargear.

He is a Knight just as much as any imperial Knight is. Why does Gerantius not count but say an Errant does.

 FlingitNow wrote:
He is a Knight just as much as any imperial Knight is. Why does Gerantius not count but say an Errant does.

Obviously he is an imperial knight.

However, he is a unique special character, and not a type of knight.

I would expect it to be explicitly mentioned if he were to be included.

Remember that the WD issue came out in 6th edition, so is now out of date.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
He is a Knight just as much as any imperial Knight is. Why does Gerantius not count but say an Errant does.

Obviously he is an imperial knight.

However, he is a unique special character, and not a type of knight.

I would expect it to be explicitly mentioned if he were to be included.

Remember that the WD issue came out in 6th edition, so is now out of date.

Lots of rules came out in 6th and are still relevant. Gerantius is one of them. So again you have no reason for Gerantius to not be included. It says any Imperial Knight. So why do you think this does not include Gerantius but does include an Errant?

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
He is a Knight just as much as any imperial Knight is. Why does Gerantius not count but say an Errant does.

Obviously he is an imperial knight.

However, he is a unique special character, and not a type of knight.

I would expect it to be explicitly mentioned if he were to be included.

Remember that the WD issue came out in 6th edition, so is now out of date.

Lots of rules came out in 6th and are still relevant. Gerantius is one of them. So again you have no reason for Gerantius to not be included. It says any Imperial Knight. So why do you think this does not include Gerantius but does include an Errant?

"Any type of imperial knight", actually. Gerantius is not a type. He is a special character.

Eldrad is a farseer, but he can;t be taken as a compulsory farseer in a guardian formation.

A Necron overlord must be taken in a decurion, but explicitly may be replaced by the named characters,

I would expect explicit permission to take gerantius.

"Any type of imperial knight", actually. Gerantius is not a type. He is a special character.

Eldrad is a farseer, but he can;t be taken as a compulsory farseer in a guardian formation.

A Necron overlord must be taken in a decurion, but explicitly may be replaced by the named characters,

I would expect explicit permission to take gerantius.

You're equating Gerantius to other Imperial knights with Eldrad to Farseers. Farseers are a specific unit, Imperial Knights are. A more similar analogy would Eldrad with an Eldar unit. If a formation said any type of Eldar unit it would undeniably apply to Eldrad. Just like any type of Imperial Knight includes Gerantius the only difference between Gerantius and any other type of Knight is he has the Unique special rule and is not a LoW. Neither of which matter to this formation.

I don't believe "any type" includes him.

I also think adding extra wargear to a unique special character is a big enough anomaly that it should requires explicit permission.

So, I wouldn't play with or against it until an FAQ.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
I don't believe "any type" includes him.

I also think adding extra wargear to a unique special character is a big enough anomaly that it should requires explicit permission.

So, I wouldn't play with or against it until an FAQ.

Why would you say that any type doesn't include him? Special Character is not a rules term so use actual rules. Again explain how you would field him? Why do you think Special Characters don't get formation benefits? Going back to Eldrad do you believe he doesn't manifest Warp Charge on a 3+ when taken in a Seer Council?

Why would you say that any type doesn't include him?

Because he is a special character, not a type of knight. The same can be said for the Obsidian Knight and Patriarch Tybalt too.

Special Character is not a rules term so use actual rules.

Any 40k player knows that special characters do not usually get to buy relics, so for it to happen I would expect something explicitly stating it.

So no rules just out dated terms and bluster. Got it.

Alright, how about this list:

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Ravager, Stormspear Rocket Pod

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Stormspear Rocket Pod, Mark of the Omnissiah

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Stormspear Rocket Pod, Banner

x1 Crusader: Twin Icarus Autocannon, Helm of the Nameless

x1 Crusader: Twin Icarus Autocannon

 the_kraken wrote:
Alright, how about this list:

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Ravager, Stormspear Rocket Pod

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Stormspear Rocket Pod, Mark of the Omnissiah

x1 Paladin: Meltagun, Stormspear Rocket Pod, Banner

x1 Crusader: Twin Icarus Autocannon, Helm of the Nameless

x1 Crusader: Twin Icarus Autocannon

I personally believe the paladin and the crusader to be the strongest knights, so filling your whole list up with them will be powerful.

I'd question your choice of carapace weapons however. You have 8 str 8/9 blasts a turn coming from the list's base weapons, as well as 24 str 6 rending shots. Why do you feel you need more str 8 shooting?

Personally in an all knight army I would take mostly/all icarus autocannons in case of flyers. The whirlwind launcher might have some use in dealing with units like Eldar jetbikes, who abuse LoS blocking cover, but this is more situational.

Regardinng relics, Why take the helm on a crusader? Giving it to a paladin gives you an extra D attack, over an extra str 10. All knights should be getting stuck in, but in your list the paladins should be doing it first.
With the mark I would probably take it on a crusaders, and make it my warlord. Maybe take sanctuary on it too, just in case.
The banner could be in the right place, but it depends on what allies you want to bring of course. Having it on a crusader makes for a more reliable backline, having it on a paladin will help units keep closing with the opponent.

So no rules just out dated terms and bluster. Got it.

You have provided no evidence that he can be taken, so please grow up and accept that some people won't accept your interpretation of the rules.
Not everyone thinks that you should be able to get Gerantius with santuary to get 2 2++ ion shield saves. Good luck keeping friends with the WAAC attitude.

You are mixing outdated rules, with your own poor rule interpretations, and then trying to force it on unsuspecting players. How badly do you feel the need to win?

At this point I'm still spitballing/semi-serious. But, in all honesty, the more powerful I can get this list, the better. Also, if anyone has suggestions on what Skitarii would make a good supplementary force, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

Why would you say that any type doesn't include him?

Because he is a special character, not a type of knight. The same can be said for the Obsidian Knight and Patriarch Tybalt too.

Special Character is not a rules term so use actual rules.

Any 40k player knows that special characters do not usually get to buy relics, so for it to happen I would expect something explicitly stating it.

Again explain how you would field him?

Unbound is the only way, because he was made using 6th ed rules which do not fit into the new codex.

Why do you think Special Characters don't get formation benefits?

I said nothing of the sort. Please read more carefully. Special characters not included in a formation cannot be taken in it. Simple as.

Not trying to derail the thread you are having up to now, but do you actually get casual games in with these? It seems like the kind of army you bring to tourneys and not so much friendly games.

 Orock wrote:
Not trying to derail the thread you are having up to now, but do you actually get casual games in with these? It seems like the kind of army you bring to tourneys and not so much friendly games.

Really? I feel the opposite. Go figure. I think a narrative game with this sort of list would be a blast, while a tourney it would get a lot of groans and cries of cheese, no matter the motivation.