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.

skycapt44 wrote:
Ya I guess that makes sense. I was saying it was a header simply because the text is actually bigger then the separate daemon rules so figured "Daemonic Alignment" Was special rule #1 which goes on to list the 4 alignments. Then the next rule which is the same text size as Daemonic Alignment is "Daemonic Instability". Therefore there are 2 special rules, not 6. I still think there is something to that. Why would the FW entry go on to state it is a daemon aligned to X if it didn't intend to reference the Daemonic Alignment special rules which look to include the 4 god types due to the print size.

You were right. It is a header. They do get the "Daemon of X " rules because they count as a Daemon aligned with X.

Nothing about it being a header confers Daemon of X to the knight. i don't know why you are assuming as such.

Fairly certain they are not Daemons of, merely daemons aligned with. That's the way I'd run it, and I'm a chaos player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's only there, because some models have rules against specific daemons, such as Hatred (Slaanesh)

 CrownAxe wrote:
Nothing about it being a header confers Daemon of X to the knight. i don't know why you are assuming as such.

I'm not assuming. FW clarified their rules to mean as such. The Daemon aligned with X "gains the benefit of that daemon lore from the chosen publication", I.e. the rules associated with Daemon of X.

Yeah, that's how I read it, that you would get the daemon of x rule in a daemon detachment(or Kdk) but not a CSM detachment.
But the fw response was still imprecise, and not really suitable for making a rules ruling I'm happy with.

Makes the Khorne option slightly less of an auto take but it still feels like the best one.

I dunno. If you want to use the knight as an assault unit, Daemon of Slaanesh is kind of filthy. Yes, it means not shooting, but a D6+3" run and fleet is a nasty combination when the thing running at you has a foe-reaper chainsword on one arm.

If we get other chaos knights (like the gallant or cerastus knights with Flank Speed!) it'll be downright terrifying.

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
Nothing about it being a header confers Daemon of X to the knight. i don't know why you are assuming as such.

I'm not assuming. FW clarified their rules to mean as such. The Daemon aligned with X "gains the benefit of that daemon lore from the chosen publication", I.e. the rules associated with Daemon of X.

No all we have is a email from customer service which isn't an actual rules source (tenat #2 of YMDC). Until they officially FAQ it, FW hasn't clarified it,

I'll be interested to see where they do actually publish it - it seems wierd that they brought out IA13 during the time that the Chaos Knight kits were being developed for Warhammer World.

I don't see when we're next likely to get a chaos-related Imperial Armour book....

They MIGHT do a knight book. There are what, nearly ten FW knights now? All with pdf rules outside of Heresy. Could even bundle the updated titan and warlord rules, which haven't been released for 40k.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
Nothing about it being a header confers Daemon of X to the knight. i don't know why you are assuming as such.

I'm not assuming. FW clarified their rules to mean as such. The Daemon aligned with X "gains the benefit of that daemon lore from the chosen publication", I.e. the rules associated with Daemon of X.

No all we have is a email from customer service which isn't an actual rules source (tenat #2 of YMDC). Until they officially FAQ it, FW hasn't clarified it,

Yes, it clarifies their intent. No, it isn't an official FAQ but there is no need for one. The Daemonic Alignment section in the Daemons Codex makes it clear that a Daemon aligned with X benefits from the Daemon of X rules. Daemon of X is the alignment to whichever is their Chaos God . It's really not complicated unless you make it so.
In addition, I'd place a lot more stock in an FW email response than an opinion from yourself on an internet forum regarding the intent of FW rules.

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
Nothing about it being a header confers Daemon of X to the knight. i don't know why you are assuming as such.

I'm not assuming. FW clarified their rules to mean as such. The Daemon aligned with X "gains the benefit of that daemon lore from the chosen publication", I.e. the rules associated with Daemon of X.

No all we have is a email from customer service which isn't an actual rules source (tenat #2 of YMDC). Until they officially FAQ it, FW hasn't clarified it,

Yes, it clarifies their intent. No, it isn't an official FAQ but there is no need for one. The Daemonic Alignment section in the Daemons Codex makes it clear that a Daemon aligned with X benefits from the Daemon of X rules. Daemon of X is the alignment to whichever is their Chaos God . It's really not complicated unless you make it so.
In addition, I'd place a lot more stock in an FW email response than an opinion from yourself on an internet forum regarding the intent of FW rules.

No, the email doesn't do anything. Their is no proof that the rules development team actually had any input on that email (and not just random customer service rep making up stuff to please the recipient) or the e-mail could be falsified. E-mails are as valid a 40k rules source as Dawn of War games are.

And Intent is 100% clear that they don't get Daemon of X. Why would they go through the effort of also listing that they have Hatred: Daemon of Y and Daemon special rules and write the vague "daemon aligned to x" INSTEAD of writing just Daemon of X? And they know what Daemon of X is they gave it to the Daemon Lords in IA13. There is no reason for them to give you a rules in a sideways convoluted way and then also redundantly list that it has rules from that rule.

Also, their stats are wrong for daemons.


All daemon engines are WS,BS and I 3. The Knights have much better stats.

I already agreed that an email isn't an official FAQ. But it's not needed here anyway.

I'm interested to know how you are 100% clear on the intent here. Are you on the rules development team?

Also it's a fact of life that 40k rules are often vague and convoluted so that argument holds no water I'm afraid.

 Tonberry7 wrote:
I already agreed that an email isn't an official FAQ. But it's not needed here anyway.

I'm interested to know how you are 100% clear on the intent here. Are you on the rules development team?

Also it's a fact of life that 40k rules are often vague and convoluted so that argument holds no water I'm afraid.

Intent is 100% clear because is this about a very strait forward subject, if you have a special rule or not. If they wanted you to have a special rule, they would have just written the special rule. its that simple.

Yes, as with many instances of 40k rule writing it would have helped to be clearer, but what they have written means the same thing as giving them Daemon of X. They can't list the special rule in the profile as the exact rule depends on which upgrade you take.

CrownAxe wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:
I already agreed that an email isn't an official FAQ. But it's not needed here anyway.

I'm interested to know how you are 100% clear on the intent here. Are you on the rules development team?

Also it's a fact of life that 40k rules are often vague and convoluted so that argument holds no water I'm afraid.

Intent is 100% clear because is this about a very strait forward subject, if you have a special rule or not. If they wanted you to have a special rule, they would have just written the special rule. its that simple.

Tonberry7 wrote:Yes, as with many instances of 40k rule writing it would have helped to be clearer, but what they have written means the same thing as giving them Daemon of X. They can't list the special rule in the profile as the exact rule depends on which upgrade you take.

Alright guys let's just agree that whether or not Daemon Knights gain the "Daemon of X" is up for debate, and leave it for YMDC? As I already pointed out, the Daemon Knight of Khorne upgrade is probably the best WHETHER OR NOT the Daemon Knights gain the "Daemon of X" special rule and a Daemon Knight of Khorne stands nothing to gain from the "Daemon of Khorne" special rule.

So can we please just talk about how we're going to use the thing now?

Fair enough, I think that argument has run its course anyway, it's just something we're going to disagree on.

Back on topic, to start with I think the dirge caster is an auto take at 5 pts as other units could benefit from not having to face overwatch, and they won't necessarily need to be close to be close to the knight. With the option to gain the Daemon rule, I think there's a strong case for including the Grimoire and Cursed Earth in a list with a Chaos Knight. Invisibility is also an option to make them more survivable.

As for choosing an alignment, Khorne looks to be a pretty good all round choice making the knight generally a bit more potent in combat with a better chance of higher number of attacks and stomps.

The Slaanesh one could be worth a look if you know you'll be facing other knights or wraithknights etc. Making the opponent go at I1 removes the chance of them rolling a 6 on the D table at higher or equal initiative. There's no guarantee that they would fail their Ld test but there's a nice psychic power called Aquiescence on the Excess discipline that lowers Ld by 5 which would compliment the Knights ability here. Fleet would also help a bit getting into combat.

The Tzeentch one doesn't offer anything outstanding but there is the possibility of a rerollable 2++ making it fairly unkillable barring a 6 on the D table.

The Nurgle alignment doesn't really seem worth the points to me. IWND is ok. You could gain some decent 3+ or even 2+ cover saves thanks to Shrouding but given the size of the model you'd probably have to restrict your movement options to do so.

Thoughts on taking dirge casters and the screams of lugganath legacy? 12" overwatch proection with a 12" move is pretty good, cos tau.
Was looking for a good way of getting dirge coverage to combo with a fist of khorne.

If you were to play the Knight of Khorne in a Khorne Daemonkin list, could you take dirge casters or would you be stuck with the Daemonkin vehicle upgrades (meaning no dirge casters)? Having some nasty but fragile melee units (looking at you warp talons, possessed, bloodletters) near the knight and able to charge without fear of overwatch would be pretty good.

Can we please keep the YMDC rules arguments on the appropriate forum? You guys are fouling this otherwise worthwhile thread.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
If you were to play the Knight of Khorne in a Khorne Daemonkin list, could you take dirge casters or would you be stuck with the Daemonkin vehicle upgrades (meaning no dirge casters)? Having some nasty but fragile melee units (looking at you warp talons, possessed, bloodletters) near the knight and able to charge without fear of overwatch would be pretty good.

You get the options on the dataslate. Dirge caster is good to go. If you run it in a CSM detachment you can even take the legacy which doubles the range of the dirge caster to 12"! That sounds amazing.

Yeah getting the dirge casters into KDK and Daemon lists is a nice perk.

I think it's pretty much necessary. An actual delivery package for dirge casters on a durable platform is a big deal for KDK. Personally I refuse to run that army without Kharn so it'll be with my CSM or regular daemons and I think it's just as good for daemons, but not as necessary since their initiative is generally worse. And CSM have the grenades so what do they care?

Yeah for 5 points it seems like an auto-include.